Project Management

What do you do when the CEO makes a costly decision for political reasons, and there's no one above them to take it to?

Adrian Bear Managing Director| ThorApps Gawler, Australia

I've seen a case recently where a costly vendor choice was made by the CEO. The people doing the work could see it was the wrong call, and the alternative was a vendor they trusted and had worked well with for years. The CEO wasn't spending their own money, sat above the project sponsor, and there was no access to the board. When the cost was raised, the answer was "politics". I'm interested to hear how others handle it when there's nowhere left to escalate. Do you keep the cost visible, put your concerns on record, or accept it and move on?

Posted: Oct 30, 2026 4:05 AM

Sort By:

Md. Golam Rob Talukdar

Community Champion

Project Manager| AWR Development (BD) Ltd. Cox's Bazer , Bangladesh

Hi Adrian, such a tough political scenario to navigate! When escalation isn't an option, the best path is to document the cost variance and risks objectively in the risk register. Keeping impacts visible through standard reporting maintains professional transparency without being adversarial. Once the executive decision is set, our role shifts to mitigating those known risks and protecting project outcomes as much as possible.

...

1 reply by Adrian Bear

Oct 30, 2026 4:38 PM

Adrian Bear

...

Thanks Golam. That works when the decision is about something the reporting covers. In this case it's the choice of platform the reporting runs on. Once that's picked, the comparison with the other option isn't something anyone keeps tracking, so the cost never becomes visible later. Has anyone found a way to keep a comparison like that alive after the decision?

Posted: Oct 30, 2026 2:31 PM