Commercial Excellence 
The strategy was sound. The business case was compelling. The board approved it. The town hall was inspiring.
And yet, eighteen months later, the results weren’t there.
This pattern is so common that researchers have put a number on it: approximately 70% of large-scale change initiatives fail to achieve their intended results. The failure isn’t usually in the strategy itself. It’s in what happens between the strategy deck and organizational reality.
This is the execution gap. And in life sciences organizations facing constant transformation—from commercial model redesigns to merger integrations to market access restructurings—closing that gap determines whether strategic investments pay off or become expensive lessons learned.
Why Strategies Fail in Execution
When change initiatives fall short, post-mortems typically surface the same culprits:
- No clear implementation cascade. The strategy is announced, but the operational pathway from vision to execution is underdeveloped. Senior leaders assume that once the vision is communicated, execution will naturally follow. It rarely does.
- Leaders aren’t equipped to lead the change. Harvard professor John Kotter, one of the most cited experts on organizational change, has acknowledged this gap directly, noting that change leadership is essential but “almost nobody is very good at it.” Middle managers and first-line leaders receive the PowerPoint, not the playbook.
- The change is addressed at only one level. Strategy is set at the organizational level. But change doesn’t actually happen until teams adapt how they work and individuals change what they do.
- Communication is treated as an event, not a process. A single town hall or email announcement doesn’t create understanding, much less commitment.
- No mechanism for calibration. Initiatives launch with energy but lack the ongoing measurement and adjustment needed to stay on track.
The 30 Percent That Succeed
Organizations that successfully execute large-scale change share common characteristics. They work at three levels—organizational, team, and individual—rather than assuming announcements translate into behavior change. They proactively identify and mitigate business risks before they escalate. They equip leaders at all levels with specific guidance and tools. They monitor progress and recalibrate when needed. And they address culture deliberately rather than hoping it will follow strategy.
The difference isn’t luck or better strategies. It’s disciplined attention to what happens after the strategy is approved.
A Framework for Execution
Closing the execution gap requires giving leaders a structured approach they can actually use. The 5C’s of Transition Leadership framework—Commit, Construct, Create, Coach, and Calibrate—provides this structure, focusing on what individual leaders must do to personally lead the business, address risks, build high-performing teams, support direct reports through transition, and ensure ongoing success.
The framework operates at three levels simultaneously: organizational, team, and individual. This matters because change doesn’t happen when strategies are announced. It happens when individuals change what they do on a Monday morning.
Execution in Practice
When a large division of a global pharmaceutical company needed to integrate following a merger, leadership applied these principles systematically across all levels of the organization. The consistent framework created common language. Leaders at all levels knew what was expected of them. Team members understood not just what was changing but how the change would be implemented.
Outcomes included faster adoption of the change, mitigation of business risks including customer transitions, and teams aligned around goals and priorities. Leaders reported relief at having something practical to follow, rather than being handed a vision and left to figure out execution on their own.
The Leader’s Role
The execution gap isn’t primarily a strategy problem or a communication problem. It’s a leadership responsibility.
Middle managers and first-line leaders are the bridge between strategic intent and organizational reality. Most individuals get their cues on how to act from their direct manager. When those managers are equipped and supported, change flows through the organization. When they’re not, it stalls.
The strategy deck is the beginning, not the end. What happens next determines whether the organization achieves its intended results or joins the 70% that don’t.
WLH Consulting has helped pharmaceutical organizations close the execution gap for over two decades. To explore how the 5C’s of Transition Leadership can turn your strategy into organizational reality, contact us at wendy@wlhconsulting.com.
References
1. Heckelman, W. L. (2020). Change and Thrive: A Modern Approach to Change Leadership. WLH Learning Solutions.
2. Heckelman, W. L. (2020). “The 30 Percent Success Club.” In Change and Thrive: A Modern Approach to Change Leadership.
3. Kotter, J. P. (1995). “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail.” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1995.
4. Heckelman, W. L., Unger, S., & Garofano, C. (2017). “Five Critical Principles to Guide Organizational Change.” OD Practitioner, 49(4), 13-21.
5. WLH Consulting, Inc. The 5C’s of Transition Leadership Framework. Change and Thrive, www.changeandthrive.org.
