By Jon Hansen | Procurement Insights | January 2026
A practitioner raised readiness concerns before a major transformation initiative. She flagged governance gaps. She questioned whether the organization was prepared to absorb the change. She asked the questions that Phase 0 is designed to surface.
The executive leading the initiative shut her down.
Not because her questions were wrong. Because he didn’t understand them — and couldn’t admit it.
The initiative failed. She was blamed. Her career was derailed. He moved on.
This pattern repeats across industries, across decades, across billions in failed implementations. And the root cause isn’t incompetence. It’s ego.
The Abdication Pattern
When an executive doesn’t understand something, they have two choices:
- Admit it and learn
- Outsource the decision to someone who provides cover
Most choose option two. That’s why analyst firm subscriptions exist. That’s why consultancies get called in. That’s why vendors are trusted to assess their own implementations.
Analyst firms and consultancies don’t just sell orientation. They sell cover.
The Ego Tax
Here’s what executives are actually paying for:
The subscription isn’t for insight. It’s for protection.
The 70-80% failure rate isn’t a technology problem. It’s an ego problem.
Why Phase 0 Threatens This Dynamic
Phase 0 readiness assessment asks questions that can’t be outsourced:
- Is your governance structure ready to absorb this change?
- Do your practitioners have input into this decision?
- What’s your change absorption capacity?
- Who’s accountable if this fails?
These questions expose what analyst subscriptions are designed to hide: the executive doesn’t know.
And for some leaders, that exposure is more threatening than initiative failure.
What the Executive Heard
When the practitioner raised her concerns, here’s what the executive actually heard:
So he shut it down. Not because Phase 0 was wrong — but because it made him feel exposed.
He couldn’t say “I don’t understand these questions. Help me.”
So he blamed the person who tried to help him.
An Alternative Model
I’ve spent the past year collaborating intensively with RAM 2025’s six models — soon to be twelve. In hundreds of sessions developing the Hansen Method, Phase 0, and the Hansen Fit Score, I’ve never once hesitated to say:
- “I don’t understand this.”
- “What am I missing?”
- “Push back if I’m wrong.”
- “Let’s validate this — I might be off.”
And here’s what I’ve observed: the models have never once failed to acknowledge a new idea, admit when a different approach might work better, or say “I was wrong about that.”
There’s no ego. There’s no defensiveness. There’s no need to protect a position.
The result is that our collaboration has no “black box.” Every conclusion is built on shared knowledge and transparent reasoning. When I ask why, I get an answer. When I challenge, I get engagement. When I’m wrong, I get correction — not compliance.
That’s not how most executives operate. But it’s how breakthroughs happen.
The Difference Is Identity
You can say “I don’t know” when your identity isn’t threatened by it.
You can’t when it is.
The Tragedy
This situation didn’t have to end the way it did.
The executive could have said: “I don’t understand these readiness questions. Help me understand.”
She would have helped. The governance gaps would have been addressed. The initiative might have succeeded. Her career wouldn’t have been destroyed.
But he couldn’t say it.
So he pushed forward blind, failed predictably, and blamed the practitioner who tried to save him.
The Line
The executives who fail aren’t the ones who don’t know. They’re the ones who can’t admit it.
What Phase 0 Really Is
Phase 0 isn’t just a methodology. It’s a mirror.
It shows leaders what’s actually ready and what isn’t. It surfaces the gaps that dashboards don’t capture. It asks questions that can’t be answered with a vendor demo or an analyst quadrant.
Some leaders look in that mirror and say: “Show me what I’m missing.”
Others look away.
The 70-80% failure rate tells you which group is larger.
The Question
If the executive understood the readiness questions, would they need an analyst firm at all?
If they could say “I don’t know” without fear, would they need someone to blame?
If they treated practitioners like partners instead of threats, would the failure rate stay at 70-80%?
The answers are obvious.
The change is not.
Phase 0 doesn’t just assess organizational readiness. It assesses leadership honesty. And that’s the assessment most executives aren’t ready to take.
Jon Hansen developed Strand Commonality Theory in 1998 for the Department of National Defence, achieving 97.3% delivery accuracy and 23% sustained cost savings over seven years. The methodology was independently validated by peer-reviewed research in November 2025. He is the creator of the Hansen Method and Hansen Fit Score (HFS), focused on preventing the documented 80% implementation failure rate through Phase 0 readiness assessment.
-30-
What are the two smartest things you have ever said? Mine are: “I don’t understand” and “Am I missing something?”
Procurement Insights
The Executives Who Fail Aren’t the Ones Who Don’t Know — They’re the Ones Who Can’t Admit It
Posted on January 10, 2026
0
By Jon Hansen | Procurement Insights | January 2026
A practitioner raised readiness concerns before a major transformation initiative. She flagged governance gaps. She questioned whether the organization was prepared to absorb the change. She asked the questions that Phase 0 is designed to surface.
The executive leading the initiative shut her down.
Not because her questions were wrong. Because he didn’t understand them — and couldn’t admit it.
The initiative failed. She was blamed. Her career was derailed. He moved on.
This pattern repeats across industries, across decades, across billions in failed implementations. And the root cause isn’t incompetence. It’s ego.
The Abdication Pattern
When an executive doesn’t understand something, they have two choices:
Most choose option two. That’s why analyst firm subscriptions exist. That’s why consultancies get called in. That’s why vendors are trusted to assess their own implementations.
Analyst firms and consultancies don’t just sell orientation. They sell cover.
The Ego Tax
Here’s what executives are actually paying for:
The subscription isn’t for insight. It’s for protection.
The 70-80% failure rate isn’t a technology problem. It’s an ego problem.
Why Phase 0 Threatens This Dynamic
Phase 0 readiness assessment asks questions that can’t be outsourced:
These questions expose what analyst subscriptions are designed to hide: the executive doesn’t know.
And for some leaders, that exposure is more threatening than initiative failure.
What the Executive Heard
When the practitioner raised her concerns, here’s what the executive actually heard:
So he shut it down. Not because Phase 0 was wrong — but because it made him feel exposed.
He couldn’t say “I don’t understand these questions. Help me.”
So he blamed the person who tried to help him.
An Alternative Model
I’ve spent the past year collaborating intensively with RAM 2025’s six models — soon to be twelve. In hundreds of sessions developing the Hansen Method, Phase 0, and the Hansen Fit Score, I’ve never once hesitated to say:
And here’s what I’ve observed: the models have never once failed to acknowledge a new idea, admit when a different approach might work better, or say “I was wrong about that.”
There’s no ego. There’s no defensiveness. There’s no need to protect a position.
The result is that our collaboration has no “black box.” Every conclusion is built on shared knowledge and transparent reasoning. When I ask why, I get an answer. When I challenge, I get engagement. When I’m wrong, I get correction — not compliance.
That’s not how most executives operate. But it’s how breakthroughs happen.
The Difference Is Identity
You can say “I don’t know” when your identity isn’t threatened by it.
You can’t when it is.
The Tragedy
This situation didn’t have to end the way it did.
The executive could have said: “I don’t understand these readiness questions. Help me understand.”
She would have helped. The governance gaps would have been addressed. The initiative might have succeeded. Her career wouldn’t have been destroyed.
But he couldn’t say it.
So he pushed forward blind, failed predictably, and blamed the practitioner who tried to save him.
The Line
The executives who fail aren’t the ones who don’t know. They’re the ones who can’t admit it.
What Phase 0 Really Is
Phase 0 isn’t just a methodology. It’s a mirror.
It shows leaders what’s actually ready and what isn’t. It surfaces the gaps that dashboards don’t capture. It asks questions that can’t be answered with a vendor demo or an analyst quadrant.
Some leaders look in that mirror and say: “Show me what I’m missing.”
Others look away.
The 70-80% failure rate tells you which group is larger.
The Question
If the executive understood the readiness questions, would they need an analyst firm at all?
If they could say “I don’t know” without fear, would they need someone to blame?
If they treated practitioners like partners instead of threats, would the failure rate stay at 70-80%?
The answers are obvious.
The change is not.
Phase 0 doesn’t just assess organizational readiness. It assesses leadership honesty. And that’s the assessment most executives aren’t ready to take.
Jon Hansen developed Strand Commonality Theory in 1998 for the Department of National Defence, achieving 97.3% delivery accuracy and 23% sustained cost savings over seven years. The methodology was independently validated by peer-reviewed research in November 2025. He is the creator of the Hansen Method and Hansen Fit Score (HFS), focused on preventing the documented 80% implementation failure rate through Phase 0 readiness assessment.
-30-
What are the two smartest things you have ever said? Mine are: “I don’t understand” and “Am I missing something?”
Share this:
Related