"*" indicates required fields

Step 1 of 8 - Welcome

12%

Launch Excellence Health Check

How well positioned are you for launch success?

This self-assessment benchmarks your organization across Lumanity's 5 Launch Excellence fundamentals.

It will take 15-20 minutes to complete. You will receive:

A personalized report showing where you are strong and where you are exposed.
An optional, free, no-obligation 30-minute call with Lumanity Launch Excellence experts to review your results and discuss practical next steps to strengthen your organization's launch capabilities.

Your responses are confidential. We may report trends in results in aggregate only.

Questions? Contact us at contact@lumanity.com

Getting Started

Please provide a few basic details about yourself

First Name*

Surname*

Email*

Company*

Role*

Role Scope*

Function*

Country*

Consent

Yes, I want to hear more from Lumanity

By selecting this box, I consent to receive Lumanity marketing communications by email.

Fundamental 1: Robust ambition and strategy

For the questions below, select the option that best describes what is in place in your organization today

Actionable Market and Stakeholder Insights: To what extent does your organization have a shared, current, and forward-looking evidence-based view of the market, stakeholders, and competitors? And use these insights to guide launch decisions?*

Market, stakeholder, and competitive understanding is mostly assumption-based, fragmented, or outdated and rarely informs decisions.

Some current and future-looking insights exist, but the view is inconsistent and not widely shared, so decisions are only sometimes insight-led.

Insights are validated, shared, and routinely used to guide key launch decisions and plans, including a clear understanding of the competitive set and how the market is likely to evolve.

Insights are continuously refreshed and predictive, anticipating competitive moves and market shifts and shaping decisions early to create sustained advantage.

Insight-Led Strategy: To what extent is your organization’s launch ambition and strategy integrated, insight-led and translated into explicit strategic choices and priorities that differentiate and will drive success?*

Strategy is not integrated across functions, and is generic with few explicit choices or trade-offs and not clearly insight-led.

Strategy is not consistently integrated across functions or markets and only reflects some insights. Choices are not sharp, trade-offs are often implicit or inconsistently understood.

A coherent, cross-functional strategy grounded in robust insights that clearly defines where to play and how to win, aligning teams on key priorities and desired outcomes.

The strategy is a single integrated north star. It makes decisive choices that clarify what will and will not be pursued, actively guides investment, and is sharpened as new insights and evidence emerge to sustain competitive advantage.

Prioritized Tactics: To what extent are launch tactics linked to strategic objectives and prioritized to the highest-impact actions, balancing proven tactics with targeted test-and-learn innovation?*

Tactics are not clearly linked to strategic objectives, largely checklist-driven and not meaningfully prioritized.

Tactics are broadly aligned to strategy but prioritization and a balance of proven tactics versus innovation are inconsistent.

A focused set of prioritized, high-impact tactics linked to strategic objectives, with periodic optimization based on performance signals.

Ruthless focus on the few tactics that matter most, with disciplined test-and-learn and trigger-based pivots that rapidly stop, scale, or reallocate resources based on evidence.

Fundamental 2: Fit-for-purpose launch process and governance

For the questions below, select the option that best describes what is in place in your organization today

Launch Governance and Readiness Review Process: To what extent does your organization have a structured launch governance and readiness review process, tailored to launch priority and archetype, to make timely decisions and optimize outcomes?*

Governance and readiness reviews are ad-hoc and unstructured, so decisions are late and gaps are identified too late to address effectively.

Governance and readiness processes exist, but application and follow-through are inconsistent, so decision impact and gap closure are uneven.

Governance and readiness reviews are consistently executed and decision-led, tailored by launch priority and archetype, and drive timely go/no-go decisions and disciplined gap closure.

Launch governance and readiness reviews operate as a proactive decision system, tailored by launch priority and archetype and guided by early indicators and triggers, enabling decision-led response cycles that release resources and course-correct in time to accelerate and optimize outcomes.

Team Activation and Planning Process: To what extent does your organization have and consistently use a team activation and planning process, (tailored by launch scope and archetype), that mobilizes the cross-functional team early enough and enables high-quality planning using a clear blueprint rather than teams starting from scratch?*

Team activation and planning are late and inconsistent. There is no clear blueprint or standard process, so teams largely reinvent activation and plans and lose time on planning mechanics.

Some activation and planning guidance and templates exist, but use and tailoring by launch scope and archetype are inconsistent, so timing, quality, and completeness of plans vary across teams and markets.

A clear activation and planning process is consistently used. Teams mobilize on time using a blueprint tailored by launch scope and archetype, enabling faster, more complete plans without unnecessary admin burden.

Activation and planning are embedded and scalable. Mobilization timing and blueprint depth are calibrated by launch scope and archetype, onboarding is repeatable, and plans are routinely rebaselined quickly when assumptions, priorities, or scenarios change, without losing alignment or execution pace.

Scenario and Risk Planning: To what extent does your organization anticipate uncertainty and manage launch risks and opportunities with scenario planning, triggers, and response plans?*

Launch plans assume a single scenario and likely uncertainties are not considered, so teams react late when risks or opportunities materialize.

Some scenarios and risks are identified, but they are not consistently prioritized, owned, or linked to triggers and response plans.

A small set of prioritized scenarios and key risks and opportunities are defined, with owners, triggers, and response plans that are monitored and used to guide decisions.

Scenario and risk planning is continuously refreshed and trigger-driven, with response plans ready to activate so teams can shift plans and resourcing early to protect downside and capture upside.

Fundamental 3: Winning organizational culture and alignment

For the questions below, select the option that best describes what is in place in your organization today

Global-to-Local Accountability and Collaboration: To what extent are global, regional, and local roles, and decision rights clear, with effective two-way communication and collaboration principles?*

Global-to-local roles and decision rights are unclear or misapplied. Communication and collaboration are inconsistent, causing friction, rework, and uneven execution.

Some clarity exists, but application is inconsistently applied and depends on individuals (rather than process design), so communication, collaboration, and execution quality vary.

Global-to-local roles and decision rights are clear and consistently applied, and timely two-way communication enables fit-for-purpose execution.

A trust-based partnership model enables structured communication and collaboration that support fast decisions and consistently strong execution across launches and markets.

Winning Culture and Mindset: To what extent does your organization define and reinforce winning launch behaviors that drive a resilient learn-and-adapt, outcome-focused mindset and high performance culture?*

Winning behaviors are not defined or reinforced. Accountability is weak, issues are identified late, and execution and continuous improvement are slow, reactive, and inconsistent, reducing impact.

Winning behaviors are defined, but reinforcement is inconsistent. Accountability, productivity, and outcomes vary by team and leader.

Winning behaviors are clear and consistently reinforced. Teams hold each other accountable, surface issues early, make timely decisions, and operate with the right sense of urgency, focusing on outcomes over activity.

A high-performance culture is embedded and actively role-modeled by leaders. Teams sustain urgency, learn fast, and adapt under pressure by stopping low-value work and scaling what drives impact.

Continuous Improvement: To what extent does your organization capture, share, and apply launch learnings throughout the lifecycle to improve ways of working, organizational process and performance for current and future launches?*

Launch learnings are captured infrequently or on an ad-hoc basis, so the same issues are commonly repeated.

Some learnings are captured, but sharing, and follow-through improvements are inconsistent, slow and person-dependent (rather than by process design).

Learning routines are embedded and translated into owned actions that improve execution and ways of working during the launch, not just after it.

Continuous improvement is systematic and scaled across markets and launches. Learnings are used as standard and improvement actions are tracked to implementation, strengthening the launch operating model over time.

Fundamental 4: Launch-ready capabilities and team effectiveness

For the questions below, select the option that best describes what is in place in your organization today

Launch-Ready Capabilities: To what extent does your organization assess current and future capabilities needed and take steps to ensure the right skills and launch experience are in place in time to deliver launch ambitions?*

Key capabilities are missing or not assessed early enough, creating gaps, delays, and reliance on heroics.

Some capabilities exist, but gaps and seniority-mix issues are not addressed early or systematically.

Core capabilities for priority launches are identified early and staffed in time through a repeatable process (build/buy/borrow), with only minor gaps that do not materially constrain delivery.

Capabilities are a competitive advantage. The organization runs a portfolio-led capability engine that forecasts future launch demand, builds and retains a strong talent bench, and redeploys specialists dynamically so the right skills are consistently in place ahead of need across launches.

Cross-functional Integration: To what extent do functions operate as one team, with joint accountability, clear decision rights, psychological safety, and a shared commitment and energy for the launch mission?*

Teams operate in silos with unclear decision rights, low trust, and low shared commitment, so strategy is diluted, work is duplicated, and execution is fragmented or slow.

Integration exists in pockets, but accountability, commitment and psychological safety vary by leader, so conflicts linger, decisions slow down, and execution is inconsistent.

Teams operate with joint accountability, strong shared commitment, clear decision rights, and psychological safety. Routines enable timely decisions, constructive challenge, and coordinated execution against shared launch objectives.

Teams operate as one high-performing unit with strong trust, shared commitment, and energy to act. They consistently translate strategy into aligned execution and sustain excellent performance across functions and markets.

Effective Plan Management: To what extent does your organization execute the launch plan effectively using a single shared, integrated global-to-local plan that is actively managed to keep delivery on track?*

Plan execution is reactive and inconsistent. There is no single shared integrated plan that is actively managed, so issues surface late and milestones slip.

A shared integrated plan exists, but it is not consistently maintained or actively managed, so cross-functional coordination and course correction are uneven and delivery often drifts off track.

A single shared integrated global-to-local plan is actively managed with regular cross-functional reviews and disciplined follow-through, enabling timely course correction to protect the critical path and deliver key milestones on time.

A single shared integrated plan operates as a living management tool, with disciplined cadence plus event- and signal-triggered updates, enabling proactive escalation, rapid resequencing, and consistently on-time delivery across markets.

Fundamental 5: Timely, right sized go-to-market model

For the questions below, select the option that best describes what is in place in your organization today

Go-to-Market (GTM) Investment and Resourcing: To what extent does your organization plan and flex launch resourcing and investment based on launch priority and archetype, scaling support at the right time so capacity and funding are in place when needed to deliver launch outcomes?*

Resourcing and investment are reactive / set late and are hard to reallocate when scenarios change, constraining execution and impact.

Some resourcing and investment planning exists, but it may start late. Sizing, phasing, and scaling are not consistently aligned to launch priority and archetype, and reallocation when scenarios change may be slow.

Resourcing and investment are planned early enough and scaled at the right time by launch priority and archetype, with a reliable mechanism to reallocate so teams can mobilize capacity and execute in time, in line with launch needs and growth drivers.

Resourcing and investment are treated as a strategic lever, linked to launch scenarios, triggers, and signals. Support is scaled up or down at the right time and reallocation is managed dynamically across the portfolio, flexing rapidly based on needs and performance signals to protect critical outcomes and capture upside.

Infrastructure and Adoption: To what extent does your organization have fit-for-purpose infrastructure and change management in place so new launch capabilities, operating models, and ways of working are adopted in practice?*

Infrastructure, change management and adoption support are missing or immature, so teams rely on workarounds and execution is slow and inconsistent.

Some infrastructure and change management exist, but adoption is uneven and execution varies by team, function, or market.

Infrastructure and change management support are fit for purpose, enabling consistent adoption and execution across teams and markets.

Infrastructure and change management programs are continuously improved and scalable, enabling sustained performance and competitive advantage at pace across launches.

KPIs and Course Correction: To what extent does your organization use a focused set of early signals and KPIs across the launch lifecycle to make timely decisions and course-corrections to maximize launch outcomes?*

KPIs are mostly lagging and reviews are ad hoc, so early warning is limited and course correction is late or absent.

Some KPIs exist, but there is no shared standard and reviews are inconsistent or siloed, leading to slow and/or unreliable course correction.

A focused set of readiness and performance signals and KPIs are reviewed regularly cross-functionally and used to trigger timely decisions and actions, across pre-launch and post-launch phases.

Early signals and KPIs trigger fast, coordinated decisions and action. Priorities, resources, and investment are reallocated in time to optimize launch readiness and outcomes across the launch lifecycle.

What do you perceive to be your three biggest barriers to launch excellence today (what keeps you up at night)?

Optional

What are your top priorities (that you currently plan) to take forward over the next 6–12 months?

Optional

Which specific launches are you accountable for / working on?

Optional