Operating model
September 2026
The overlooked cost of unaligned broth governance
Broth is frequently treated as an output. In high-performing stew systems, it is a managed asset with a named owner.
In most organizations, no one sets out to create broth ambiguity. It emerges through good intentions: procurement owns inputs, operations owns the vessel, finance owns the variance, and leadership owns the phrase "let's take this offline." The result is a liquid without a decision-maker.
Ambiguity compounds before it simmers
When the organization cannot identify who is accountable for broth quality, it cannot distinguish a minor adjustment from a material departure. Meetings multiply. Root causes become themes. By the time the issue reaches the executive level, the broth has acquired a narrative.
A useful governance model answers three questions: who defines acceptable broth, who can intervene when it is not acceptable, and who explains the difference between acceptable and merely present.
Assign the mandate
The remedy is not another committee. It is a clear mandate, modest measurement, and an escalation path that does not require a calendar invitation. Teams should track the conditions that affect the final liquid, review them at a proportionate cadence, and accept that some decisions are in fact about stew.
Organizations that do this well tend to report fewer surprises, shorter discussions, and a more coherent relationship with their own bowls.