“You’ve seen some stuff!” a client exclaimed as we were unpacking a challenging problem they were facing.
This triggered a montage in my head of the dozens and dozens of ideas that I’ve had the privilege to work up over the years with great colleagues. Each of them passed muster with us finding evidence of a real customer pain point, strong economics, the ability to produce and the ability to take the idea to market. Narratives were written and spreadsheets were scrubbed with care.
Yet, as the montage came to a close, the truth was that only a small fraction of those solidly worked up business cases and ideas moved forward. It wasn’t the best analytics, deepest customer need or strongest alignment that made them work.
It was the last thing a cross-functional team thinks of.
The Tension Between Macro & Micro
In working with teams on their projects, I see them pull together the “story” with tools that are common to the craft. These include “canvases” of all sorts, market and client discovery work, the ever-present proforma balance sheets, P&Ls, and many more. The first bulleted deck gets completed, then condensed to the 10 slide summary, then the one-pager. The logic for the offering is compelling and well established.
Usually, much of this work is done as a sprint, away from the oversight of the larger firm, or under the eye of someone who is skilled in the art of incubation. Once completed, it’s then time to engage the core ops team of the larger firm.
Unfortunately, many of these early encounters with the firm’s gatekeepers end with this great work and investment being sidelined.
While there may be many reasons, the most pervasive one I see in my work is a failure to translate the great analysis and synthesis work into something that is equal parts consumable and influential for those who are charged with making directional decisions for the firm.
The implications for the firm are substantial. Rather than getting both teams on the same side of the table, this approach creates a build-then-sell dynamic, which is really inefficient and deprives the firm of its best asset – joint insight and problem-solving on behalf of the client.
The (3-Part) Secret is Moving From Push to Pull
In reflecting on those business cases that were successful, the truth is that they frequently weren’t the best, and honestly would have earned only passing grades in an MBA class. The “secret” is that the business leaders that moved forward did one more essential piece of work:
They worked together to carefully build the offering and anticipate friction the new opportunity would face and planned specifically and carefully how to position themselves for success.
#1: Perspective
Successful teams co-create the offering, using the best insight from the client and the operations team who build the firm’s products and solutions every day. By having this unified perspective it breaks the “push and sell” cycle by assuring that there were cross-functional stakeholders present at the birth of the offering.
Then they took the time to both look at each senior gatekeeper’s roles and goals in the approval chain as well as to truly see what they were asking for from their perspective. This involves carefully unpacking the mission and context of that leader and then doing the homework of understanding the risks and rewards (gives and gets) of what you are asking of them. To have success here, you must understand the measurements they are compensated by, the vocabulary of their craft, and their interests and talents. This work isn’t completed until you have developed a compelling reason for them to pull this project into their operation.
#2: Picture
Successful growth leaders understand that even the most pragmatic human on the planet makes decisions emotionally, then rapidly develops objective reasons why they made that call. The business opportunities that get funded are not the most perfect, but presented in a picture that is carefully layered. It always includes their specific role and contribution at its center. It must not have a hint of manipulation, but be fully authentic and empathetic of the work that the leader is doing on behalf of the firm.
The picture is not complete until the internal value chain picture is as complete as the external value chain. Including the product and operations, architects from the beginning will not only assure a crisper win for the client, but assure that you have a complete picture of how the offering comes to be.
#3: Price
Most teams work very hard to come up with a big compelling financial outcome for the work they are presenting – but that is not enough. To be influential, you need to drill holes in your own boat – that is, you need to present the upside and downside cases in a balanced way. Yes, there must be a strong case that if we win, we win big, but most importantly, we have carefully examined the downside risks and carefully evaluated and mitigated them. One of the quickest ways programs make it into the ditch is to have missed a threat to the core business – and not have a good answer when the question is raised.
The Work
To get this work done, you need to have a two-stage process to move from insight to a successful project. The first cycle is to generate a coherent hypothesis, using the smallest cross-functional team possible. The second stage is to secure a small number of resources to allow the learning needed to de-risk this hypothetical product or service.
Both of these stages pivot on the presence of voices from the entire internal supply chain (creative, ops & distribution). These voices will help to make sure that when you get to the larger gatekeeping meetings, your plan is coherent, written in a way that’s easy for everyone to assimilate, and has an objective view of both the upside and the downside.
I frequently help leaders and their teams develop these all-important front running and micro-influence skills for their firms. If that’s an area you’d like to explore, please reach out to me at 847-651-1014, or set up an appointment directly using this link.
Related posts you can benefit from…
