Execution risk doesn’t yield to annual plans or quarterly reviews. In 2026, CEOs are reducing execution risk in disciplined 90-day cycles—long enough to matter, short enough to govern.

RISK5 is a practical checklist CEOs can use this week to spot five execution risks that quietly erode margin. It’s not a diagnosis—it’s a way to decide where to look first.

Execution rarely fails outright. It erodes through drift—small changes in ownership, priorities, and handoffs that go unnoticed until results suffer. In 2026, CEOs are treating always-on execution as continuity infrastructure, not automation.

Most leadership debates stall because execution risk is discussed without a shared baseline. In 2026, CEOs are using narrow, decision-grade baselines to replace belief with focus and move faster.

In 2026, boards are no longer debating whether execution matters. They are interrogating where the risk sits, how large it is, and how leaders intend to govern it. This article outlines the six questions shaping execution-risk conversations in boardrooms today.

Execution risk has long been mislabeled as “soft.” In reality, it behaves like a priced exposure—eroding margin through decision latency, fractured handoffs, ownership drift, and talent friction. In 2026, leading CEOs are reframing this risk as Margin-At-Risk from Talent & Execution (MAR-T), using bounded ranges and governance discipline to focus action where it matters most.

Execution risk rarely announces itself. It accumulates quietly—through delayed decisions, fractured handoffs, drifting ownership, hiring friction, and fragile knowledge. In 2026, with tighter margins and higher complexity, these execution failures are no longer tolerable or defensible. This article outlines the five execution risks most likely to erode margin—and how CEOs can spot them early, before they compound into financial exposure.

Execution risk is now priced as margin-at-risk.

Not because leaders suddenly care more about “soft issues,” but because boards care about risk reduction and returns — and execution is where margin quietly leaks:
• decision latency
• cross-functional handoffs
• ownership drift
• hiring friction
• knowledge fragility

The shift in 2026 is simple:
We’re moving from anecdotes to decision-grade exposure—often expressed as a floor / most-likely / upper-bound margin-at-risk band.

That doesn’t replace leadership judgment.
It makes priorities defensible.

What’s the biggest execution risk you see quietly eroding margin right now: decision velocity, handoffs, or hiring friction?

Most organizations can show you the inputs of transformation—training hours, completions, participation, feedback scores. But when a CEO or CFO asks the only two questions that matter, the room often goes quiet:

Are people actually behaving differently at work?
And is that behaviour change showing up in business results?

That gap—between “we ran the program” and “we can see the impact”—is where change fatigue grows, credibility erodes, and real value quietly leaks out of the P&L.

Frameworks like ADKAR® and the Kirkpatrick Model are still the right foundation. They help you design the journey and define what “impact” should mean. The hard part is operating confidently in Kirkpatrick Level 3 and 4—where behaviours show up in the messy reality of handoffs, decisions, rhythms, escalation, rework, and cross-functional execution.

That’s the space Navetra™ was built for: making system behaviour visible (Level 3) and connecting it to business consequences (Level 4)—so leaders can reinforce what’s working, unblock what’s stuck, and steer change with clearer eyes.

We’ve now run Navetra™ across 25 industrial assessments in energy, construction, manufacturing, and biosciences.

The result? An estimated $100M+ in potential execution-driven margin risk that traditional ERP, BI, HR, and reporting never priced — driven by leadership drift, hiring friction, silos, knowledge fragility, and human-system variability.

Navetra™ converts a small set of signals into priced risk ranges, a focused 90-day action slate, and always-on agents that watch for new drag. It doesn’t expose your data or our engine logic — but it does give leaders a CFO-ready, decision-support lens on where execution and AI will actually move the margin needle.

Traditional leadership models focused on stability, but today’s leaders need emotional intelligence, resilience, and systems thinking. We help organizations identify and develop leaders capable of thriving in uncertainty, ensuring a sustainable leadership pipeline that drives long-term success and growth.

Empathy isn’t just a “soft skill”—it’s a profit-driving force. Leaders who listen, understand, and connect with their teams create more engaged workplaces, higher retention, and stronger business results. But how do you lead with empathy without losing authority? This article dives deep into real-world leadership stories, research-backed insights, and practical strategies to help you transform your leadership style and drive success.

At Purple Wins, we believe that the best leaders are those who continuously learn from history and apply those lessons to their leadership practices. Whether you're navigating complex challenges or seeking to empower your team, Purple Wins is your partner in building a future where leadership is synonymous with fairness, innovation, and excellence. Join us on the journey to transformative leadership.

Difficult conversations are a true test of leadership, often shaping the dynamics of an entire team. Drawing from my experiences as an early-career leader who broke barriers, this guide offers practical strategies to navigate these challenging discussions with confidence and empathy.

Accountable leadership is the cornerstone of organizational success, particularly at the senior level where decisions shape the future. At Purple Wins, we guide leaders through the challenging process of embedding accountability, transforming established mindsets into a culture of excellence that permeates every level of the organization.

Reflecting on Boeing’s leadership troubles, I feel let down by a company I once trusted with my life. The 1997 merger with McDonnell Douglas drastically shifted Boeing's culture from engineering excellence to profit-driven priorities, leading to catastrophic failures like the 737 MAX crashes. This article explores how Boeing's leadership missteps highlight the critical need for leaders to adopt a learning mindset and prioritize soft skills.

As a metacognition coach, I help leaders navigate significant changes by starting with personal growth. We embrace a mindset that ensures self-correction and objectivity when reconsidering beliefs for important decisions. Metacognition—the ability to “think about one’s own thinking”—builds solid leadership character, especially in unknown situations or new challenges. Reflecting proactively on pitfalls, metacognitive approaches define leadership styles when stakes are high.