Cuando un programa de transformación pierde a su sponsor y el alineamiento de los stakeholders se fractura, las herramientas de recuperación habituales, escalamiento, replanificación, más comunicación, prolongan el daño en vez de repararlo. La negociación de crisis ofrece tres principios que se transfieren directamente: desescalar antes de resolver, separar las posiciones declaradas de los intereses que hay debajo, y secuenciar acuerdos pequeños y verificables antes de cualquier gran pacto.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Tuesday, July 21, 2026
When a transformation program loses its sponsor and stakeholder alignment fractures, the standard recovery tools, escalation, replanning, more communication, extend the damage rather than repair it. Crisis negotiation offers three principles that transfer directly: de-escalate before resolving, separate stated positions from the interests beneath them, and sequence small verifiable agreements before any grand bargain.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Monday, July 20, 2026
The Australian Securities Exchange possessed every structural advantage typically associated with successful transformation: monopoly funding, universal regulatory support, and a decade of runway. The first CHESS replacement ended in a AU$255 million write-off, and the second cycle has produced a 2024 outage and a 2025 regulatory letter. The structural explanation sits beneath the vendor and the technology, in the absence of competitive consequence that monopoly position permanently removes.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Steering committees approve strategic initiatives while leaving the trade-offs underneath them unresolved, and the unresolved trade-offs migrate downstream to directors and program leads who lack the authority or information to handle them. This article examines why program governance is architected for approval rather than negotiation, and what a forum that admitted what it actually does would require.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Monday, April 27, 2026
In regulated industries, compliance programs don't just consume resources. They pull strategy toward what regulators can verify, which is rarely the same as what the business actually needs. This is how organizations end up technically compliant and strategically underprepared, having optimized for the audit without building for the future.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Monday, April 6, 2026
Most transformation dashboards are accurate. The initiatives are real, the adoption rates are genuine, the milestones were met. And yet the organization finds itself, twelve months later, in the initiation meeting for the next major transformation. The measurement system didn't lie. It reported faithfully on the wrong phenomenon.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Monday, March 9, 2026
Muchos proyectos tienen éxito sobre el papel, pero fracasan en su propósito. Este artículo explora por qué los modelos tradicionales de gestión de proyectos resultan insuficientes y cómo redefinir la ejecución como una capacidad estratégica puede abrir la puerta a una transformación sostenida y una alineación real.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Friday, May 16, 2025
Projects that deliver on time and on budget can still fail at their actual purpose, and frequently do. When organizations treat project management as a coordination function rather than a strategic one, they optimize for the wrong thing: outputs over outcomes, delivery schedules over lasting capability. The reframe changes what leaders measure, resource, and hold accountable.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Friday, April 4, 2025
The strongest predictor of project success often has nothing to do with the project itself. Teams that consistently benchmark against external patterns, draw from adjacent industries, and interrogate their own assumptions against outside evidence build a structural advantage that internal reviews cannot replicate. Most organizations understand this in principle and skip it in practice.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Tuesday, March 11, 2025
The metrics most organizations use to track transformation come from a world of discrete projects with clear endpoints. Applying them to continuous change creates a persistent mismatch: leaders grade teams on deliverables while the actual behavioral shift goes unmeasured until it fails. Getting the measurement right is not administrative work; it's strategic.
Adolfo M. Carreno · Tuesday, February 4, 2025