1 VP problems vs 2 VP problems vs n-VP problems

Read this story without a paywall

In big companies, the difficulty of a problem often has less to do with the work itself, and more to do with how many VPs it touches.

Single‑VP Problems: Execution Risk

One org. One mission. One set of incentives. Decisions are fast because everyone agrees on what “good” looks like. If these efforts fail, it’s usually due to execution, not politics.

Two‑VP Problems: Coordination Risk

Two orgs means two priorities, two roadmaps, and two leaders who may agree on the goal but disagree on the path. Alignment becomes the real work. Teams feel the friction immediately: shifting timelines, unclear ownership, meetings that exist just to sync interpretations.

n‑VP (aka 3+) Problems: Political Risk

Now you’re in coalition territory. No single owner. Everyone owns a slice. Progress depends on sponsorship, timing, and whether the initiative fits neatly into each VP’s quarterly narrative. The work can be excellent and still stall if the story loses momentum.

The more VPs involved, the less the challenge is about execution.

The more VPs involved, the less the challenge is about execution and the more it’s about alignment and politics.

Most high‑impact initiatives at big companies are n-VP problems.