REAL RESULTS

What changes when a company adopts CVM? We asked the CEOs and COOs who lived it.

Three companies. Each surveyed twice, on the same 20 questions — once before working with Insights7, once after — scored by their own senior leadership. Here is what changed.

THE HEADLINE NUMBER

An average jump from 1.9 to 4.9, out of a possible 5

This comes from the Work-to-Value Quarterly Performance Survey: 20 statements across six categories of organizational alignment — whether teams share a clear picture of their direct customers and stakeholders, whether they can see current performance against target, how well decisions get made, how productive meetings are, and whether people feel like valued contributors to the outcome. Each statement is scored 0 to 5. Three companies took it twice: once before adopting CVM (Corporate Value Management), once after.

1.9 4.9

Average score across three client engagements, out of a possible 5

Equivalent to capturing roughly 60% of the total possible improvement on the scale — calculated as points gained against the full 0–5 range, not a percentage increase over the starting score.

WHO ANSWERED THESE QUESTIONS

Not a survey panel. The leadership team who lived it.

These scores did not come from a broad employee survey. They came directly from each company's CEO and COO — in one case, the CRO — the executives most directly accountable for, and most exposed to, the shift from their prior way of operating to Corporate Value Management. A small number of respondents, and exactly the right ones: nobody sees a company's true before-and-after more clearly than the people who ran it, both times.

THE THREE ENGAGEMENTS

Before and after, company by company

Individual results vary, as they should — every company starts from a different baseline. All three moved substantially.

Client A
Q3 2025 engagement
1.404.85
out of 5
71% of full-scale improvement captured
Client B
Q1 2025 engagement
2.254.95
out of 5
52% of full-scale improvement captured
Client C
Q1 2025 engagement
2.154.80
out of 5
56% of full-scale improvement captured
WHAT ACTUALLY IMPROVED

Six areas of alignment, tracked before and after

Averaged across all three engagements. The gains are not concentrated in one flattering number — they show up across how teams understand their customers, how they work together, and how they decide.

Value Delivery TeamsRoles, collaboration, prioritization, course-correction
70%
Direct CustomersShared understanding of who they are and what they need
64%
Impacted StakeholdersSame clarity, extended to stakeholders beyond the customer
63%
MeetingsTime and productivity
62%
Decision-MakingQuality and speed
51%
You as a Value CreatorA single self-perception item, not a team measure
43%
HOW THIS COMPARES

In line with what we typically see

Based on patterns across Insights7 engagements, companies starting from a similarly low baseline typically capture around 72% of the total possible improvement. Client A started from one of the lowest baseline scores in this group and landed at 71% — in line with what we would expect for that starting point, not an outlier result.

The numbers move because the people closest to the work say they do — not because of what the platform reports about itself.

See how this gets built

The value chain construction sequence, how health gets scored, and where AI fits — the mechanics behind these results.