> Alignment is a bit more nebulous. For small teams, it may be unnecessary. But as orgs grow, there's room for mission creep and contradictory goals and efforts

> Alignment is a bit more nebulous. For small teams, it may be unnecessary. But as orgs grow, there's room for mission creep and contradictory goals and efforts. In my experience this is the single biggest thing that trips up organizations which have grown, or been acquired. It also seems to be the thing that people can't wrap their heads around because it feels difficult. If whole divisions aren't aligned then it doesn't really matter how well your team performs because the lowest common denominator division becomes the limit. This is especially noticeable around acquisitions where the incoming team naturally wants to operate as if nothing has changed, but they may be really out of alignment with the acquiring company. With enough time and management pressure alignment might occur, but it's normally a painful process of the acquiring company taking over aspects of the acquired company. Rarely, if ever, are acquisitions comfortable, but the other other results can be a bit better.