Today’s Tuesday Reading is from Joe Nasal, Group Lead for Project Management at The Energy Sciences Network. Joe is also a MOR program alum. Joe can be reached at [email protected].
Engineers think in systems and structures, seeing complexity not as chaos but as layers of interconnection. The OSI (Open Systems Interconnection) model, one of the most elegant and trusted frameworks in data networking, describes how distinct communication layers interact to deliver a coherent message. Applying this same layered logic to organizational planning provides a perspective for visualizing strategy, execution, and individual contributions as components of a unified network.
In network engineering, each layer has a clear purpose, dependencies, and protocols that define how information flows. A misalignment in one layer affects the integrity of the entire system. The same principle holds for organizations. When leadership treats annual goals, project execution, and individual work as interdependent layers rather than isolated efforts, clarity and connection replace confusion and drift.
The Physical Layer anchors the system: the annual organizational plan. This is where leadership defines the environment, what must be accomplished and why. The Data Link Layer represents quarterly objectives, forming structured connections between strategic intent and measurable progress. An organization’s PMO ensures that these “links” are strong and consistent.
At the Network Layer, cross-organizational projects focus on collaboration, much like network routers direct traffic to ensure packets traverse as intended. The Transport Layer contains departmental work packages, translating shared goals into reliable delivery adapted to local context.
The next three layers embody the human side of the system. The Session Layer represents group-level coordination, where teams manage collaboration boundaries and focus. The Presentation Layer deals with how work appears. Tasks and task designs at this layer ensure consistency in how information is shared, measured, and understood. Finally, the Application Layer is the human interface: the individual contributor balancing priorities, fulfilling commitments, and keeping the system running.
In marrying the OSI model and strategic alignment, no layer can succeed on its own; each depends on the clarity and health of the layer below it. The same is true for leadership. Effective leaders don’t merely broadcast strategy without acknowledgement. They maintain the integrity of all layers, ensuring that each is functioning and healthy with purpose and connection to the whole. We can understand this as the framework for an organization’s culture. Leadership, in this sense, is a stewardship of alignment: tuning the organization so that every layer, from enterprise vision to individual action, transmits meaning without loss.
This analogy is a reminder that leadership is not about commanding every packet of work; it is about enabling clear communication across the whole so that every signal, every goal, effort, or innovation, arrives intact at its destination.
In considering the OSI model and strategic alignment, how well aligned are annual goals, quarterly goals, projects, team, and individual work in your organization?
Last week, we asked how your institution is shifting university IT for strategic leverage.
- 39% said cutting costs tactically
- 34% said integrating services across the university
- 19% said another approach
- 8% said currently not experiencing financial pressures
How we choose to respond is a strategic choice. That strategy is unique to each of our institutions, yet shares commonalities across institutions. As these numbers clearly show, you are not alone if your institution is shifting IT for strategic leverage. In addition to clearly understanding stakeholder needs across the institution, there are opportunities to learn from your peers’ experiences and how those experiences may inform your own approach.