Stakeholder alignment

Every artifact so far can be perfect and the program still dies — because AI strategy is, operationally, a change program wearing a technology badge. The portfolio asks hundreds of people to work differently; whether they do is decided in conversations, not documents. Alignment starts with an honest map:

• Sponsors — the CEO who asked the question, the board member who champions it. Their job isn't cheerleading; it's sustained air cover through the messy middle (month four, when the first quick win hits integration mud and the skeptics circle). Brief them for the middle, not just the launch — a sponsor surprised by a setback becomes a skeptic with a title.
• Skeptics — often your most experienced operators, and often right in the specifics. The dispatcher who says 'the ETA model doesn't know about the Route 9 construction' is doing free QA. Recruit skeptics into pilot review roles; a converted skeptic is worth ten enthusiasts, because everyone knows what their approval costs.
• The fearful — the people doing the tasks your inventory listed. They saw the same headlines you did, and they're reading your pilot announcements for subtext. Fear doesn't block programs loudly; it blocks them through quiet non-adoption, data hoarding, and 'the tool doesn't work' (unfalsifiable, fatal). The only counter is the jobs conversation, below, had early and honestly.
• Middle managers — the actual deciders. Above them, strategy; below them, tasks; in the middle, the people who translate one into the other — or don't. A middle manager who feels done-to rather than done-with can stall any initiative indefinitely without ever objecting to it. They co-design the rollout in their unit, they get the training first, and their team's wins get their name attached. This paragraph is where AI transformations succeed or fail; nothing in Modules 1–4 outranks it.
• Peer executives who contest ownership — the CIO who believes AI strategy is his, the GC who wants a veto, the budget-owning CFO. Left unmanaged, a peer who feels routed-around becomes a quiet blocker with a seat at the same table you present to. The concrete moves: co-opt the CIO onto the governance/review board early (Module 4's board is the vehicle) and give IT visible early wins so the program is with them, not around them; bring the GC in at the tiering pass, not after; and align with the CFO on the funding envelope one-on-one before the board meeting, so the number is pre-agreed rather than debated live.

The jobs conversation

Say what's true, specifically, before the rumor mill says something worse generically. For Alder's portfolio, the truth is: tasks change, headcount doesn't — this year. Triage AI removes the worst 40% of CS's inbox and the two planned hires; it doesn't remove agents. The honest formula: name the tasks that shrink, name the work that grows (review, exceptions, the judgment layer), state the headcount plan for the horizon you can actually promise, and commit to skills investment as the hedge for what's beyond the horizon. What you must not do is promise 'AI will never affect jobs here' (a promise everyone knows you can't keep — it converts trust to zero) or say nothing (the vacuum fills with the worst version). Credibility on this one topic is the currency the entire change program spends.

Drafting task: the stakeholder map + jobs message (your capstone will quote these)

Do this now, on one page — the capstone's change section quotes it verbatim, so produce the real thing here rather than gesturing at it later. First, the stakeholder map: for each of the five categories above, name the actual people (or roles) for your program, mark each as accelerator/blocker/undecided, and write the one concrete move that shifts them. Second, the jobs message: draft the two or three sentences you'd say to the most-affected team, applying the honest formula (tasks that shrink, work that grows, the headcount plan for the horizon you can promise, the skills commitment). Use the prompt below to pressure-test the message, then keep the revised version — it becomes the quoted line in Module 5's capstone.