Send us a text

Boards do not approve confidence. They approve understanding.

This briefing explains why confident executives lose authority in the boardroom, and what directors are actually testing when they push back on proposals.

Using a real CFO case and a one-slide decision framework, this video shows how boards evaluate risk, downside ownership, and financial consequences before approving major technology and capital decisions.

This is for CEOs, CFOs, and COOs who are responsible for the decision, the risk, and the explanation.

Send us a text

CIO and CFO alignment does not break because of personalities, communication style, or leadership maturity. It breaks because governance never forces the real tradeoffs to be defined.

In this briefing, Jayson Hahn explains why CIO–CFO conflict is structural, not personal, and how misaligned incentives quietly destroy execution, cost control, and board confidence. When IT leaders optimize capability and finance leaders optimize capital without a shared decision structure, alignment meetings multiply, decks grow longer, and decisions stall.

You will hear what actually happens inside these meetings, why “alignment” becomes theater without forcing functions, how shadow IT grows when leadership decisions take too long, and where accountability truly breaks down. Most importantly, this briefing introduces the three questions that must be answered before any material technology spend if alignment is to become structural instead of negotiated.

This is not a technology discussion. It is a governance discussion for CEOs, CFOs, COOs, and business leaders who are responsible for outcomes, not just approvals.

This briefing is part of the ROI & Governance series focused on board-defensible decision making, capital discipline, and restoring executive control over technology spend.

01uOFlHxd8XsKkZF7Z6T

Send us a text

Boards are not confused by IT metrics. They are unconvinced by what those metrics fail to explain.
In this briefing, I break down why clean dashboards, green uptime, and precise financial tracking still fail to earn trust, and why pushback from directors is not skepticism but a signal that the numbers are disconnected from how the business actually operates.

This is not an IT execution problem. It is a governance and translation failure between IT activity, financial cost, and business impact.

What this video covers
• Why boards reject accurate numbers that lack business causality
• The disconnect between IT dashboards, financial statements, and board decisions
• The three traits trusted board-level numbers always share
• Why more data increases internal confidence but reduces board confidence
• A real manufacturing board case where trust returned without improving performance

The core insight
Boards do not fund platforms or reports. They fund decisions, predictability, and accountable outcomes. When numbers fail to explain what changed in the business, credibility erodes quietly, meeting by meeting.

Who this is for
CEOs, CFOs, COOs, private equity operating partners, and business leaders who are tired of defending technology spend that looks right on paper but fails in the boardroom.

01uOFlHxd8XsKkZF7Z6T

Send us a text

Most companies approve technology investments that look sound on paper, track cleanly in finance, and deliver exactly what was promised, yet still fail when the board asks a single question.

What did we get for the money.

This is not an execution problem.
It is an IT governance failure.

In this briefing, former Global CIO Jayson Hahn explains why IT ROI collapses in the boardroom, even when projects are delivered on time and on budget. You will see how misaligned definitions of success between executives quietly break the capital story, and why CFOs are left defending value that was never economically defined.

This episode covers:

• Why IT ROI fails in translation, not execution
• The difference between delivery metrics and economic outcomes
• Why ROI must be agreed before capital moves, not after
• The three questions boards expect answered, and why most organizations cannot answer them
• How governance restores capital discipline and board confidence

This is for business leaders who are tired of approving technology spend they cannot clearly defend in a board meeting, an audit, or a strategic review.

Send us a text

Most CFOs approve technology investments that look sound on paper, align with leadership expectations, and receive board approval, only to find themselves defending outcomes they never controlled. When strategy decks and financial results diverge, boards do not blame systems or process. They look to finance.

This is not an execution failure. It is an IT governance failure.

What the Podcast delivers

In this briefing, former Global CIO Jayson Hahn explains why IT governance consistently fails CFOs, how misaligned definitions of success between CEOs, CIOs, and finance create hidden exposure, and why boards uncover these gaps months after capital is committed.

You will hear:

Why alignment is not governance

How capital moves before economic logic is agreed

The three questions boards expect CFOs to answer, and why most governance models fail to provide them

A practical framework CFOs can use to regain control, credibility, and board confidence

This Podcast introduces the Command, Control, Confidence governance framework, designed to ensure capital decisions are tied to business outcomes, ownership, and board-level metrics before dollars move.

If you want clarity before your next board conversation, subscribe for the next briefing, where we break down how boards evaluate IT return, and the three numbers CFOs must have ready.