A Transformation Success Story Rooted in Alignment
When executive leadership mandated the shift to a new operating model, clarity was in short supply.
With engineering and production teams pulling in different directions, we led a four-phase framing study to translate ambiguity into action—surfacing hard truths, designing scenarios, and co-building a decision-making framework that supported smart, confident choices at the top.
This case study explores how a structured, human-centered approach helped break silos, foster trust, and accelerate strategic alignment in one of the most complex environments there is: aerospace.
The Challenge
Mandated transformation with misaligned realities.
In the context of a key product line, the executive team of a leading Aerospace & Defense organization set a bold direction: implement digital continuity between Design Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering through the generalized use of digital Standard Operating Instructions .
The ask was straightforward—but the operational reality was anything but.
On one side, production teams needed tangible efficiencies and clear visual documentation to streamline their work. On the other, engineering teams saw only friction: more workload, disrupted routines, and unclear returns. What was meant to be a unified improvement quickly looked like a tug of war between departments.
The challenge: surface the real issues, find a viable path forward, and support executive-level decision-making with facts, consensus, and clarity.
The Journey
A Structured Approach to a Complex Puzzle
As the lead consultant, I designed and facilitated a four-step framing study that brought structure to uncertainty—and people to the table.
Our Method:
- Capture Requirements
We conducted targeted interviews with contributors across Airframe, Electrical, and Process Method & Tools (PMT) teams to understand what production truly needed from design. - Gap Analysis
Mapped the current state of capabilities versus the new demands—highlighting bottlenecks, risks, and blind spots. - Impact & Effort Assessment
Analyzed cross-cutting impacts across methods, tools, data, and organizational flows. - Prioritization & Roadmap
Facilitated collaborative workshops to align on quick wins versus long-term needs—building scenarios and trade-offs that supported informed decisions.
Throughout, I worked hand-in-hand with stakeholders from both Design and Production, ensuring each perspective was heard, challenged, and integrated into a shared understanding.
What We Delivered
A Decision-Ready Framework Grounded in Reality
From a fragmented set of needs, expectations, and fears, we delivered a cohesive strategic package that enabled action at the executive level.
Key Deliverables Included:
- 26 formalized requirements translated into
- 10 challenge statements
- A distinction between quick wins and long-term needs
- 4 strategic scenarios with trade-off analyses (value, effort, risk, cost)
- A phased roadmap to pilot, validate, and evolve the solution
- A common language and structure that unified teams across functions
We also developed a custom decision-making framework—giving executives the tools to evaluate direction based on impact, feasibility, and operational readiness.
The Impact
From Distrust to Alignment—and the Green Light to Move
Despite early resistance—particularly from engineering teams overwhelmed by daily pressures—we saw a marked shift in mindset.
By involving all parties in the process, building transparency, and providing space for objections, we built trust. The Process Method & Tools team, initially met with skepticism, became a facilitator of solutions rather than an enforcer of change.
Results:
- Executive Go-Ahead: The pre-deployment phase was approved for a validated use case—complete with method development and training kickoff.
- Operational Buy-In: Contributors from both Design and Production felt seen, empowered, and motivated to engage in the next phase.
- Strategic Clarity: Decision-makers gained a clear, credible view of what success could look like—and how to get there.
Reflections
Turning Conflict Into Collective Strategy
This mission taught me the quiet power of framing. When you give people structure, language, and space to participate—especially in moments of pressure—you unlock alignment that sticks.
It was also a lesson in trust: mine in my own process, and the client’s in my ability to guide them without pushing an agenda. I wasn’t there to impose a solution but to create the conditions for one to emerge—anchored in logic, empathy, and clarity.
In the end, we didn’t just plan for change. We prepared people to own it.
Meta Description
Explore how a strategic framing study enabled executive alignment and cross-functional buy-in in a complex Aerospace & Defense transformation initiative. A real-world change management case study by The Transformist.