From Strategy to Execution: Why Mid-Market Companies Struggle to Scale

In the business world, designing a strategy is almost a ritual. Executives, consultants, and leadership teams spend weeks—sometimes months—drawing up plans meant to define the path to growth. Yet reality often tells a different story: a large percentage of these strategies are never fully implemented, or they are executed in a fragmented and ineffective way.

This challenge is particularly visible in mid-market companies: organizations that have already overcome the survival stage, built a solid foundation, and developed the ambition to grow, but that lack the unlimited resources of large corporations. They sit in that middle ground where the pressure to scale is intense, but the capacity to do so with discipline is limited.

The strategy–execution dilemma

Studies from sources such as Harvard Business Review and McKinsey estimate that between 60% and 70% of strategies fail in execution. The issue is not usually a lack of vision, but rather the difficulty of translating that vision into concrete, sustainable actions.

The causes are strikingly common:

• Too many priorities. The organization tries to do everything at once, spreading talent and energy too thin.
• Limited resources. Unlike large corporations, mid-market firms cannot finance multiple initiatives in parallel without losing focus.
• Constant changes in direction. The pressure to “not fall behind” pushes leaders to reset priorities every quarter, creating instability.
• Lack of accountability. Teams are unclear about who is responsible for what, and results get lost in silos and hierarchies.

The outcome is predictable: unfinished projects, exhausted teams, and growing frustration, as strategy lives in PowerPoint decks instead of daily operations.

How the gap shows up

The gap between strategy and execution is not always obvious at first. Often, it hides behind intense activity. Meetings, plans, new initiatives—everything seems to be moving, but tangible impact remains scarce. Common symptoms include:

• Strategies that change so often teams cannot internalize them.
• Projects that launch with enthusiasm but quietly fade after a few months.
• Leaders who share objectives but fail to connect them to clear metrics.
• A culture of “doing a lot” without being able to show how much of that effort creates value.

This pattern erodes trust and creates a vicious cycle: leaders lose faith in execution, and teams lose faith in strategy.

Keys to closing the gap

• Ruthless prioritization: having the courage to say no to projects that are attractive but not strategic.
• Clear metrics: moving from inspiring narratives to indicators that track real progress.
• Explicit accountability: not just assigning a team, but ensuring there is a leader with authority and KPIs.
• Adopting execution frameworks: systems such as the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS) provide structure by linking strategy to operations through clear goals, structured meetings, and shared metrics.
• A culture of follow-up: not as bureaucracy, but as a ritual of continuous learning, with regular reviews and timely adjustments.

A realistic example: when focus changes the outcome

Imagine a mid-sized technology company based in Europe, seeking to expand into the United States. Its leadership team had a clear vision: open the U.S. market, diversify products, and double revenues within two years. The ambition was real, and the energy was high.

Yet the first year was frustrating. In every quarterly meeting, priorities shifted: one quarter the emphasis was on launching a new product, the next on opening offices in Miami, and then on hiring talent in Silicon Valley. Teams worked tirelessly, but efforts were scattered. Salespeople didn’t know whether to prioritize local alliances or global clients; the product team was torn between improving existing offerings and pursuing innovation. The result: a lot of motion, little progress.

The turning point came when the company decided to implement the EOS framework. Leadership identified three key annual objectives and tied them to a system of weekly and quarterly meetings to review progress, adjust priorities, and maintain alignment. Each team understood exactly how its work contributed to the bigger picture, and the discipline of the system reduced dispersion.

The results were clear: within six months, the company had closed a partnership with an integrator in Texas, adapted its software to meet local regulatory requirements, and doubled the productivity of its sales team.

The strategy itself had not changed from the year before. What changed was the way it was executed: with focus, accountability, and a framework that turned meetings into engines of progress.

Conclusion

The story of this company highlights an uncomfortable truth: a brilliant strategy does not guarantee growth. What makes the difference is the ability to turn strategy into daily execution. For mid-market firms, operating with limited resources and constant pressure to scale, mastering this step is what separates those stuck in the gap from those achieving sustainable growth.

At Levare, we believe strategy without execution is just intention. That’s why we help ensure vision doesn’t remain on paper but translates into tangible, measurable, and impactful results.