Mapping out questions and laying out clear choices in advance helps leaders strategize and make the most out of shifting priorities.
Customer Journey Series: Jim
This article is part of a customer journey series following “Jim,” a VP of Research and Development in a multi-national pharma company navigating shifting organizational demands, rapid leadership changes, and pressure to adapt and keep his team functioning.
His journey explores leadership presence, empathy, decision making, managing low performers, and helping talented employees grow.
Each post explores a real coaching conversation or leadership challenge from that journey.
This is the second post in Jim’s series.
Jim’s organization was global. Beyond the normal complications that such a large organization required, there were constant leadership changes above. New leaders often brought in new perspectives and priorities. And teams often found themselves with projects that leaders who had moved on had left behind.
Early on, those changes had some real effects on Jim.
In one session, Jim wanted to make sense of the experience of one leader he had seen who had moved around a lot.
“We all have counterparts in Europe and Asia. Getting an international assignment is an important part of moving up in this organization, but it doesn’t always work out.”
Jim had watched as one person, Marie, had come from France to the US two years before. She assumed she would get a promotion on coming back to France. But she went back last fall, and the two people above her had changed. A new guy from a recent acquisition got the job she was expecting. She was furious. Now she was coming back to the US where her kids want to finish high school.
“What do you learn from your experience of watching Marie?” I asked.
“Well, I think two things,” he said thoughtfully. “First, if you get an international assignment, make sure it’s going to work for you and your family because you might end up there longer than you think. And second, even if you do get the international assignment, stay in close touch with your former team back at home. They are going to be key to you leveraging the experience, so you need to travel home at least once a quarter and know what’s going on.”
“Great lessons,” I said. “What are the changes that are affecting you now?”
As it happened, Jim was getting ready to make a trip to his team’s counterpart in France soon. The team there had a new leader, Pierre.
Overall his goals were to connect with Pierre, find out what his strategy is, and discover what he wants to change.
But the biggest thing he needed to do was resolve an external researcher contract. The contract was with a very prestigious professor in France. A couple years ago, when they signed the contract, they felt lucky to get him. But it hasn’t worked out well. He had missed deadlines and hadn’t produced anything they hoped for.
“At the moment,” said Jim, “we have 30 days until we make his next payment, and it’s up to Pierre to decide. I have to figure out whether to recommend that we cancel the project or keep paying him.
“How can you anticipate the questions Pierre will ask?”
“That is a good question. I’ll need to have answers for him.”
Jim started to break down the questions Pierre was likely to ask.
1. What are the financial implications?
Before I go, I’ll work with our budget specialist on scenario mapping. I’ll pull out the original agreement and find out what we’re responsible for if we pull out, and the bigger commitment we’ll be responsible for if we don’t pull out.
2. How will this impact our relationship with the research partner and university that we worked so hard to connect with?
Looking back, Jim said they should have made separate contracts with separate deliverables for the different parts of the contract. There are several researchers involved. But they were so eager to get in business with this university that the deal for this professor and the other ones were all in one contract.
“We’ve tried our best. At the end of last year, we got him to promise results in March, but he still has not delivered.”
Multiple instances had made Jim lose trust that this professor will ever deliver.
After some consideration, Jim decided to recommend to withhold payment because deliverables were not delivered.
“If we don’t pay, it will all go to legal and we’ll have to renegotiate to see what we can still get. It will be painful, but I think it’s the best way out.”
The worst-case scenario is that they lose what they paid and have to find another way to get the research done.
But the best-case scenario would be that they renegotiate and get an agreement with timelines and deliverables.
What’s your goal with Pierre?
“To convey that this is an important financial decision he must make in the first weeks of being at this company. We are all frustrated, but we have a glimmer of hope. If the researcher can deliver what he promised, it’s very valuable to us.”
Also, Jim wanted to be sure to convey that whatever Pierre decides, it will not be held against him. Ultimately, the choice is really to kick the situation back to legal and Business Development and get them to engage. It will be a collective effort.
“And if we do pull out, we need to make the call to the professor to make clear how much we want to work with him before we send the legal letter out. We don’t want him to be shocked, and we want to reassure him that it is a tactic to find a better way of working together.”
At the end, Jim said, “I think mapping out these questions and how I’m laying out his choices will be clear and compelling for Pierre. He’s new and I don’t want it to be confusing. It’s actually good that he’s a new person because the old leader was really frustrated with this professor. Maybe Pierre will bring fresh energy to the relationship, and we’ll find a better way forward.”
Continue the Journey
← Previous Post | Next Post →
Keep Learning
Return to Customer Journeys Hub
Explore the Leadership Framework
