Sanjay Kumar Mohindroo

Executive Alignment Scorecard for Technology Investment. A seven-question executive alignment scorecard to test business outcomes, capital discipline, accountability, and risk before technology investment. The Executive Alignment Scorecard I Use Before Technology Gets Funded Seven questions. Fourteen points. Less than 11, and I would hesitate before committing serious capital. That may sound harsh. But after decades of sitting in executive meetings where everyone appeared to agree, I have learned that agreement is one of the weakest tests of alignment. The conventional wisdom says that if the CEO, business leaders, technology team and finance team are all supportive of an initiative, the organisation is aligned. I disagree. I have seen rooms full of intelligent executives nod to the same proposal while carrying completely different assumptions about what success meant, how much disruption was acceptable, who owned the result, and when the organisation should stop spending. That is not ...

When No Makes Room for a Better Yes Rejection can redirect us toward better opportunities when we treat it as information, not a verdict on our worth. A refusal can close one path while quietly making space for a stronger one. The Moment After No The hardest part of rejection is believing the story has already ended. “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been given a no. Only to find that a better, brighter, bigger yes was right around the corner.” Arlan Hamilton’s words capture a tension that most people know very well. Rejection feels immediate and personal, while opportunity often arrives much later. That delay can distort our judgment and make one refusal feel permanent. The real risk is allowing one no to define our ability, value, or future. Rejection Is a Decision, Not a Definition Someone can reject an option without defining the person behind it. A job application can fail because the timing or internal priorities changed. A proposal can miss because the decision-maker wanted ...

The Quiet Value Hidden Inside Failure Success feels rewarding, but failure often gives the clearest insight for better choices, stronger leadership, and personal growth. Celebration marks a moment. Reflection turns experience into better judgment. The Lesson Behind the Result The moments that hurt often reveal the information we most need. Success is easy to enjoy because it confirms our effort, judgment, and direction. Failure feels different because it interrupts the story we hoped would continue. “It's fine to celebrate success, but it is more important to heed the lessons of failure.” — Bill Gates The idea is not an argument against success. It reminds us that success and failure provide different kinds of value. Success can strengthen confidence, while failure can sharpen awareness. One feels rewarding in the moment. The other can improve the choices that follow. Success Deserves Celebration, Not Complacency A good result can still hide weak assumptions. Celebrating success ma...

Dignity Without Conditions Arthur Ashe’s words invite us to pair firm boundaries with dignity, respect in conflict, and steady personal values. The quality of our character becomes clearest when respect is hardest to give. The Standard We Keep Conflict reveals more than agreement ever can It is easy to be gracious when people support us. The harder test comes when they challenge, disappoint, or oppose us. Arthur Ashe captured that test with unusual clarity: “We must reach out our hand in friendship and dignity both to those who would befriend us and those who would be our enemy.” The emotional force of this idea lies in restraint. Ashe does not ask us to ignore harm, erase disagreement, or trust everyone equally. He asks us to protect our own humanity while facing another person’s hostility. That distinction matters in life, relationships, and leadership. Respect Is Not Agreement Civility can exist beside firm boundaries Many people treat respect as a reward. They offer it when others ...

Shared Accountability for Technology Outcomes Technology value is not the CIO's job alone. A practical framework for making business leaders accountable for technology outcomes and ROI. Making the Business Own Technology Outcomes After nearly three decades around enterprise technology, I have seen the same sentence end too many difficult meetings: “IT needs to fix this.” Sometimes the problem was a delayed platform. Sometimes adoption was poor. Sometimes the investment had delivered the system everyone asked for, but not the business result everyone had promised. The conventional wisdom is that when a technology programme succeeds or fails, the CIO should be accountable. I disagree. The CIO should be accountable for technology delivery, resilience, architecture, security and technology economics. But if the intended outcome is higher revenue, lower operating cost, faster fulfilment, improved customer retention or reduced business risk, then the business must own that outcome. Other...

Perspective Changes the Picture A reflection on perspective, reframing, and choosing a more useful response to life’s challenges. A different lens can change the meaning of the moment before the moment itself changes. The story around the facts Some moments feel permanent because the facts around them appear completely fixed. A rejection arrives, a plan fails, or a trusted person disappoints us. Our experience, however, is never built from facts and events alone. We interpret each moment through memory, expectation, fear, confidence, and hope. “If you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.” — Wayne Dyer Dyer’s line points toward a quiet but powerful form of personal agency. We may not control every event, yet we can examine its surrounding frame. A changed frame can create a healthier emotional response and a clearer next step. Perspective Is Part of the Experience Events matter, but interpretation gives them emotional weight Two people can face similar circu...

How to Run a Technology Investment Committee Most technology committees review more than they decide. Use the DECIDE framework to improve capital allocation, accountability, and technology outcomes. How to Run a Technology Investment Committee That Actually Decides A technology investment committee that ends with “come back with more detail” has usually not exercised prudence. It has postponed accountability. Across three decades in enterprise technology, I have seen this pattern in different industries and different boardrooms: capable executives, substantial investment at stake, a detailed presentation, sensible questions, and no actual decision. The conventional wisdom is that technology investment committees need better information. I disagree. Most already have more information than they can use. What they lack is a decision system. A technology investment committee should not be a review forum for IT proposals. It should be a capital allocation mechanism that decides where the en...