You decided A. The organisation produces B. The question is not who is responsible. The question is: where exactly did the trajectory stop being governed?
A drifting trajectory does not disappear abruptly. It is escorted, conditioned, reformulated, displaced. Always rationally. Always in the name of an identifiable risk.
Not a compliance audit. Not an HR audit. Not an internal political mission. A reconstruction: document by document, validation by validation, arbitration by arbitration — finding the moment when the decision ceased to be explicitly governed.
We look for which norm is being read, how it is interpreted, how it is applied, what effect it produces on the trajectory, and at what level it ceases to be arbitrated. Organisations very often confuse two different things: what is genuinely prohibited, and what has simply become impractical through normative inertia.
What we generally discoverA normative reading has progressively replaced the executive trajectory without explicit arbitration. We thought we were applying a strategy. We were applying a frame of reference.
The decision is not deviated but rendered impractical by an accumulation of incompatible prudences. Everyone was protecting something. No one was governing the crossing.
The problem is not the norm. It is the absence of intention sufficiently formulated to orient expertises. Power was simply not exercised.
The organisation applies as obligatory a custom, an old fear, an interpretation never revalidated. The constraint was producing legal effects without genuine normative necessity.