When Did Confidence Becomea Substitute for Evidence?
Your 2027 plan may look convincing. But have you challenged what it’s built on?
You know what I’ve noticed about business meetings?
Sometimes the decision is practically made before the discussion even starts.
The presentation looks good.
The numbers make sense.
Everyone seems comfortable with the direction.
And then somebody asks:
“Are we all aligned?”
Yep. Looks like we are.
But I’ve learned something over the years.
A room full of confident people can still be wrong.
Not because they aren’t experienced.
Not because they didn’t do their homework.
Sometimes it’s because everyone is working from the same assumptions.
And nobody thought to challenge them.
When the forecast starts looking like a fact
Let’s say a company is planning for 2027.
- Sales is projecting 8% growth.
- Operations says capacity is available.
- Finance builds the numbers.
- Leadership approves the plan.
Sounds reasonable, right?
Maybe it is.
But here’s where I’d start asking questions.
- How much of that growth is supported by actual customer demand?
- Are customers buying differently than they were six months ago?
- Are we accounting for changes in ordering patterns, project timing, or customer priorities?
- What are we assuming will continue simply because it happened last year?
I’m not suggesting the forecast is wrong.I’m suggesting we should know what makes it right.
There’s a difference.
Let’s talk about the money
Imagine a business generating $25 million in annual revenue. Its 2027 plan calls for 8% growth. That’s another $2 million in projected revenue.
Now suppose actual growth comes in at 5%. That’s a $750,000 difference between the plan and the result.
- Annual revenue
- $25 million
- Planned growth
- 8%
- Actual growth
- 5%
- Revenue gap
- $750,000
A hypothetical illustration, not a forecast of any particular company. The revenue gap is not lost profit — the actual financial impact depends on margins, costs, and how the business responds.
This is a hypothetical example, not a forecast of any particular company.
And no, that doesn’t automatically mean $750,000 in lost profit. The actual financial impact depends on margins, costs, and how the business responds.
But think about the decisions that may have already been made around that original number.
Inventory.
Staffing.
Capacity.
Capital investments.
Maybe even customer commitments.
Now we’re having a different conversation.
Because the concern isn’t just whether the forecast was accurate. It’s what the organization committed to based on that forecast.
That’s where assumptions can get expensive.
The information was probably there
Here’s another thing I’ve noticed.
Sometimes the information that should challenge a decision is already somewhere in the organization.
- A customer has started changing its ordering behavior.
- Someone in operations knows a particular commitment is going to be difficult.
- A frontline employee has noticed a pattern that hasn’t made it into a report.
But the information hasn’t been connected to the larger business decision.
So the plan moves forward. And months later, we’re asking why the results didn’t match expectations.
Well, maybe the question isn’t why nobody saw it coming.
Maybe it’s why the people making the decision never saw what others were already seeing.
That’s a very different problem.
And one worth solving.
What I’d ask before approving the 2027 plan
I’d want to know three things.
Which assumptions have the greatest influence on the financial outcome?
What evidence supports those assumptions, and what information might challenge them?
What would change in our revenue, margins, costs, or investment decisions?
Not because I expect the plan to fail. Because I’d rather understand the exposure before we’re dealing with the consequences.
And I’d want to know which early signals should trigger another look at the plan.
This is where organizational intelligence matters
I’ve spent years working where customer expectations, operational decisions, and business performance meet.
One thing has become very clear to me.
The information that matters isn’t always sitting neatly in one report. Sometimes it’s spread across customer conversations, changing demand, recurring exceptions, and decisions made by different teams.
Individually, those signals may not look particularly significant. Together, they may tell us something important.
That’s the thinking behind PRISM SignalWorks™. Looking at the patterns, risks, instability, signals, and movement that help us understand what’s really happening inside an organization.
Not to create another report. To help leaders recognize what deserves attention before it affects performance.
One question for 2027
As organizations prepare their plans for next year, I wouldn’t start by asking whether everyone feels confident. I’d ask:
“What would have to change for us to realize this plan isn’t going to deliver what we expect?”
And then I’d want to know how quickly we’d recognize that change.
Because confidence is valuable.
But confidence supported by evidence?That’s what I’d want behind a business decision.
“What would have to change for us to realize this plan isn’t going to deliver what we expect?”
Share what you're seeing. Every response is read and approved by Rhonda before it appears.
Loading responses…
Your 2027 Targets Are Taking Shape.
Have you tested the assumptions behind them?
Before committing to next year’s growth, investments, and operating costs, take a closer look at the signals that may influence your results.
A free, two-minute starting point for examining potential organizational risk and operational friction.