ATD Footer Logo

Stan Heard

ATD Links Archive - ATD Links

Selling Sales Training in a Recession

 Whether you are a Mom-and-Pop operation or one of the larger talent development firms, you probably have some sort of strategy guiding you. Hopefully, this strategy has been documented and is the outgrowth of input from key people in the organization. But even if the strategy is only in your head, it is still waiting for action.Unfortunately, many strategic plans, which are key to the future of our businesses, are rarely executed fully—if at all. In the previous blog on strategic growth planning, I mentioned that some 80 percent of strategic plans fail to get executed. (I know I have read or heard this stat enough times to think it is true. But if truth be known, I don’t have a source to share with you to validate this alleged finding. Nonetheless, there is good reason to believe that most strategic plans are not fully executed as designed.)There are myriad reasons why this is the case, not the least of which are the normal changes to a business model or that leadership demands a different direction than originally proposed, deeming the original strategy moot. More importantly, in the ever-evolving talent development industry, one could even argue that sticking to a growth strategy could be counter-productive.  But what about strategic plans that are not subject to major interferences in the business model or competitive landscape? Why aren’t they  implemented? Execution Best PracticesA March 2015 Harvard Business Review article, “Why Strategy Execution Unravels—and What to Do About It,”  by Sull, Homkes, and Sull spells out several likely culprits, highlighting the myths many business leaders adhere to about strategy execution. Their research found that several practices actually get in the way of effective execution, including:inadequate alignment across business unitsundying commitment·one-way communicationstoo much of a performance cultureexecutive-only leadership.While the authors studied very large multinational organizations across many industries, these strategy execution lessons that apply to any organization.  Let’s take a closer look at each practice. Alignment:  To execute a strategic plan in a typical three- to five-year time span, senior leadership must be in total agreement about the direction the business is driving toward. Without this sort of alignment, major departments  and functions will continue to do their own “thing”—working at cross-purposes of the overall business.Interestingly, the research pointed out that while 40 percent of managers note alignment (or lack thereof) as the main cause of poor execution, the second major reason was failure to coordinate across units, noted by 30 percent of participants. Apparently, alignment alone doesn’t necessarily equate to execution—albeit it is a significant influencer.  So, while one of the primary goals of any strategic planning process is to achieve senior leader alignment, it also is important to align across all business units.Commitment: Most business leaders believe that alignment requires commitment to the strategic direction. But in my experience, alignment can exist (on the surface) without total commitment to the strategy. In this case, leaders agree with the overarching direction and some elements of the strategy, but not with all of it. In fact, unswervingly sticking to a strategic plan may impede its execution, given that many intervening factors and changes will surface over time. While commitment to the plan is initially necessary, ignoring the environmental changes taking place will undoubtedly result in leaders executing the wrong plan.Communications: The most likely reasons organizations fail to execute strategic plans:Leaders don’t provide communication to the rest of the business.Leaders provide communications that are unclear, foggy, and lack any inspiration for moving forward.Simply communicating the strategy from “on high” is too little to achieve a well-executed strategy. Instead, communications must create a dialogue that enables employees to offer input and questions so they can truly understand their role in the execution process. If a rational business case for the strategic direction isn’t offered to—and accepted at—the individual level, it will be difficult for employees to internalize the plan and their role in its execution.Performance Culture: Possessing a culture that is committed to performance is critical to execution. Organizations must establish a culture that recognizes and rewards practices like teamwork, experimentation, and flexibility, which may appear at times to slow down performance.  Although a high-performance culture values and demonstrates continual accountability, this head-down and all-hands-on-deck approach doesn’t allow organizations to slow down in the short term so they can move faster in the long term.  Indeed, the right delays—yielding the right results—should be perfectly acceptable.Executive Leadership: We often hear that true change must start at the top. But top-down involvement can impede the achievement of sustainable results. Certainly, the CEO and C-level team must lead the initial charge for execution, and even monitor its progress. However, the sooner frontline employees can internalize a strategy, the sooner they can rightfully execute it. Once the organization feels it must wait for executive approval, the process slows, engagement wanes, and innovation falters. In other words, it takes a village to effectively execute, not just a team of senior leaders who decide when and how execution should take place.Bottom LineThese execution practices are logical enough and, at some level, seem relatively simple to enact. Regrettably, they become more complicated in their actual operation. Perhaps, though, this is just the nature of most businesses that are growing—with growth comes frequent change and even alterations to the corporate strategic direction.Maintaining flexibility around strategy is a dual-edged sword, because sometimes flexibility can become an easy excuse for not following the original, well-thought out plan. Other times, flexibility makes complete sense and is, in fact,  necessary for the business to move forward. In either case, executing a strategic plan is a critical element of both the short- and long-term success of any business, including those in the talent development space. What’s more, minding these best practices can help any organization execute their strategy with success.How have you experienced poor to no execution of a strategic plan? Whether you were the leader or the follower, what were the reasons for this in your business? What were the real business consequences of the failed execution? How could the execution have been specifically improved? Share your experiences in the Comments below.  To learn more, check out my book The Complete Guide to Building and Growing a Talent Development Firm.

Growing Talent Management Firms: Strategy and Execution

We’re living in a world where remote work and remote meetings are here to stay. In fact, remotely may be the only way meetings take place these days. Meeting virtually may be a part of the “new normal,” but how can we make sure it’s time well spent? According to meeting expert Steven Rogelberg, our time in meetings has grown 500 percent in about a 40-year period. Some of the casual conversations we used to have next to the coffee machine have morphed into official meetings. It’s safe to say we are spending more time in meetings than ever before, and now that most meetings are remote because many teams no longer work in offices, new challenges make it even harder for meetings to be effective. The leaders managing remote employees are also facing new hardships when it comes to leading virtual communication.What Are the Challenges of Leading a Remote Team?As a leadership consultant, I spend a lot of time talking to leaders about the challenges they are facing with remote leadership. What I hear most is, “How can I keep my remote team engaged?” and “How can I maintain visibility and maintain a connection with my remote workforce?” If you look at those questions, it all comes back to communication. And how communication happens now is through virtual channels like Zoom, Teams, Google Meet, and more. Most communication is virtual, and a lot of it happens in meetings.What Goes Wrong With Virtual Meetings Today?The biggest problem with remote meetings—the amount! It’s quick and easy to set up a virtual meeting because there’s no need to book a conference room, arrange for travel, or so on. The downside to this is that we become overloaded with these meetings. With more than we’ve ever had in the past, we need to start asking, “Is that meeting really needed?” So, before you set up a meeting, ask, “Do I need input from others? Do things really need to be discussed?” If your answer is, “Yes,” set up that meeting. But if you find yourself thinking that the meeting is more about sharing information or giving an update after a decision has already been made, then maybe you should skip the meeting and send out an email instead.What else goes wrong with virtual meetings today? It’s easy to forget the human aspect. Communicating screen-to-screen makes it easier to forget that there is a physical person on the other end. As you would in a face-to-face context, think of what personal and practical needs the person may have. Spend some time thinking about leadership essentials such as empathy, support, and involvement, and listen and respond authentically. People still need to feel that their perspectives are heard and valued. They need to know they have been understood and respected. This is a universal truth, no matter the channel of communication. Learn more about other best practices for leading remote meetings here.How Many People Need to Be Involved in Virtual Meetings?Everyone knows we should keep meeting attendees to a minimum. But what does this mean for virtual meetings?Our tools make it so easy to add additional people to a meeting. This can happen with a simple click. However, as for a face-to-face meeting, you shouldn’t ask a person to join your meeting if you are not looking for their input.The idea is that for every selected attendee, you should ask: Does this person need to be in the meeting? If a person is “just” listening in without providing input or asking clarifying questions, consider recording the meeting or sending follow up notes to those people. Every meeting attendee should know why they are there and what they are expected to contribute. Concepts such as “social loafing” still apply in the virtual world. And the rule of keeping attendees to a minimum to ensure maximum engagement still applies to virtual meetings. For more about how to effectively hold remote meetings, check out DDI’s blog.

Remote Meetings Are Here to Stay, So Make Them Effective

Resilience is the capacity not only to survive life's challenges but to learn and grow from them. While stress, trauma, adversity, and dramatic change are rarely welcome, your personal resilience enables you to find a way to move beyond the challenge and toward a stronger self.
Using the concept of biomimicry, this program offers you six tips we learn from nature about how to stay afloat in challenging times. You may have heard the saying, “Let it roll off you, like water off a duck’s back,” but did you know that ducks aren’t always waterproof? Yes, even a duck can drown.
This program will help you:

· Identify key characteristics that enable resilience.
· Explore how to develop resilience in yourself and others.
· Discover the simple and memorable Stay Afloat model.
  

Build Your Resilience: Six Strategies to Help You Stay Afloat Throughout a Crisis

In every organization, decisions get made every day; some major, some minor. Yet, leaders often overestimate how much buy-in they actually have for those decisions. They announce a new direction, outline the plan, maybe even explain the logic, and still encounter resistance. Why?Buy-in doesn’t start when the decision is made. It starts when people feel heard.As opposed to what we call first or second leaders, third leaders don’t just make the right decisions, they build the right foundation for those decisions. That foundation is trust, and trust is built through voice, clarity, and shared ownership. Let’s break down how to earn real buy-in, not just compliance.People Support What They Help ShapeA core principle of the third leadership model is this: voice ≠ vote. Your team doesn’t need to make the final call in order to support a decision, but they do need to feel like their perspectives were considered. That’s what separates top-down directives from shared direction.When people feel like decisions happen to them instead of with them, they disengage. When they feel like they had a voice (especially early in the process), they are more likely to invest in the outcome, even if it wasn’t their first choice. Before announcing a tough change or strategic shift, ask:“Who will be affected by this decision? What context or insights do they have that I might be missing?”Then actively invite that insight. Set clear boundaries:“We are moving in X direction, but I want your input on how we execute it best.”This approach builds both clarity and commitment. You’re not outsourcing leadership, you’re deepening engagement.Listening Isn’t Slowing DownThere’s a misconception that involving your team in decision making slows everything down. Sure, if you poll everyone about everything, you lose momentum. However, third leaders don’t confuse urgency with autonomy. They know that a little bit of listening up front can prevent weeks of rework and resistance later.Think of listening as part of the decision-making process, not a delay. It’s how you test for blind spots, uncover risks, and build solutions that actually work in practice, not just on paper. Ask these questions before you move forward:“What’s missing from my view?”“What’s likely to get in the way of this working?”“What would make this feel more workable to the team?”When leaders take time to sense before they solve, the team moves with them, not against them.Tie Decisions to Purpose, Not Just ProcessOne of the fastest ways to lose buy-in is to explain what is happening without clarifying why it matters. This is where so many leaders stumble—they focus on the tactical shift and forget to anchor the change in meaning.We teach leaders to connect decisions to team key results (TKRs) and broader organizational goals. When people understand how the decision supports the mission and how their role connects to that mission, it changes the emotional calculus. Even tough changes feel purposeful. For example:Instead of“We’re cutting back this initiative,” say, “To stay aligned with our TKR around profitability, we’re focusing on what creates the most impact. This move supports that focus, and it helps protect the jobs and priorities that matter most.”Purpose gives people a reason to stay on board, even when it’s hard.Feedback After the Fact Still Builds TrustEven after a decision is made, it’s not too late to engage the team. Third leaders create space for reflection:“What went well?”“What could we have done differently?”“How did this affect your ability to focus or deliver?”When people are invited to debrief, even retroactively, they feel respected. Over time, that consistent practice of listening builds a culture of trust and accountability.The Bottom LineBuy-in doesn’t come from charisma. It doesn’t come from having the perfect plan. It comes from building the kind of leadership relationship where people feel seen, heard, and respected. In a world where teams are stretched and strategy can shift overnight, your greatest asset isn’t just your clarity, it’s your ability to bring others with you. At the end of the day, the best decisions don’t just look good on paper. They move people forward, and people only move when they feel like they matter.

Building Trust Through Better Decisions

Young professionals, particularly Gen Z, are rethinking leadership. “Conscious unbossing” is an emerging trend where many are opting out of management roles in favor of flexibility, personal growth, and work-life balance.For talent management professionals, conscious unbossing threatens already fragile talent pipelines. Without intervention, organizations face growing leadership shortages. It’s time to look closely at leadership culture and the systemic issues that could be pushing talent away.This four-stage framework will help you uncover where change is needed—before your future leaders opt out.1. Evaluate Your Leadership CultureBefore you can make effective changes, you need a clear picture of your current leadership culture.Start by observing leadership behaviors. Ask yourself:How do leaders spend their visible time? Are they constantly in meetings or firefighting mode? What behaviors are rewarded? Are leaders celebrated for strategic vision and collaboration or for grinding through long hours? Do leaders openly discuss the challenges and responsibilities that come with leadership?Assess work-life balance among current leaders. Do they model sustainable practices or reinforce burnout culture? Do they take uninterrupted time off and set appropriate boundaries? Consider how leadership is framed internally. Is it portrayed as an opportunity for growth, or as “wearing many hats” with overwhelming workloads? These cues shape how younger generations perceive leadership—if leading means sacrificing well-being, many will opt out. To mitigate conscious unbossing, talent development professionals must take an honest look at what leadership means in their organization—and what message it sends to the next generation.2. Examine Structural BarriersNext, identify institutional roadblocks that discourage leadership ambitions. If leadership feels out of reach or not worth the trade-off, it will be challenging to motivate younger, high-potential employees to fill these positions.Review promotion pathways. Do leadership roles require rigid prerequisites? Are career paths flexible enough for non-traditional career trajectories? If employees can’t see themselves advancing, they won’t try. Consider whether leadership roles are realistically designed, including workloads. Could you offer alternative models like job-sharing or rotating leadership?Evaluate compensation structures. Does the risk-reward ratio acknowledge the added stress and responsibility and make leadership appealing? Beyond salary, what incentives signal that stepping up is worth it?By removing these barriers, you can create a leadership path that young employees want to follow.3. Assess Development PracticesStrong development practices must align with what future leaders value and what will prepare them for success.Evaluate how you identify leadership potential. Do your criteria recognize non-traditional leadership styles, or are they outdated and misaligned with the behaviors that drive success? Narrow or inaccurate definitions may cause you to overlook high-potential talent. An evidence-based framework increases confidence in succession and promotion decisions. Assessments add objectivity and reveal how employees align with key high-potential factors—and where development is needed.Examine where growth and development investments go. Do programs address modern leadership challenges and teach skills young employees value? What feedback have you heard from participants? Are there opportunities to improve the programs?Audit coaching quality. Are managers equipped to guide employees toward leadership roles, including through non-traditional career paths? When young employees see that leadership comes with support, not just added pressure, they’re more likely to pursue it.4. Act on Your FindingsAn audit is only valuable if it leads to action. Based on your findings, create a plan that ranks issues according to their importance. Then, balance quick wins with long-term fixes. Making small, immediate changes first can build momentum, but strategic, systemic changes will have the biggest impact on attracting younger talent to leadership roles and strengthening your talent pipeline.Define specific interventions, like redesigning leadership roles to be more balanced, creating flexible career pathways, or reframing internal leadership narratives.At this stage, HR must act as organizational change agents. Frame conscious unbossing as a business risk affecting succession planning, rather than a talent development issue. Use data from exit interviews, engagement surveys, and pipeline metrics to build a compelling case, then partner with colleagues to turn insights into action.ConclusionTalent management professionals stand at a critical intersection between organizational needs and individual aspirations. Conscious unbossing isn’t just a trend—it’s valuable feedback about how leadership roles must evolve.The future of your leadership pipeline depends not on convincing young talent to accept outdated models, but on rebuilding leadership roles that people genuinely want to grow into. Learn more in our blog, Conscious Unbossing: Rebuilding the Leadership Pipeline for a New Generation.

Is Your Organization Driving Younger Talent Away From Leadership?

Among the most challenging recent workplace trends affecting talent retention is revenge quitting—when employees abruptly resign out of frustration or retaliation. But why is it becoming more common?Employees today value connection, work-life balance, and flexibility—and they know it’s possible to find those things in a workplace. When their current role denies them these basic benefits, frustration builds. Add in factors like mounting stress and return-to-office mandates, and the balance between what employees give to a job and what they receive in return tilts negatively, making revenge quitting a more attractive exit strategy for many.The impact on organizations is significant, from impossible workloads and spiraling performance to costly turnover and cultural instability. But here’s the good news: L&D has the power to create a culture that avoids these destructive patterns. Here are four strategies to prevent revenge quitting and build a more engaged workforce.1. Get Serious About Supporting Employee Well-BeingLeadership has never been more demanding. According to DDI’s Global Leadership Forecast 2025, 71 percent of leaders report higher stress levels since stepping into their current roles, and 40 percent have considered quitting leadership to improve their well-being. However, leaders in supportive work environments are:10 times more likely to excel in their roles.3 times less likely to experience chronic stress.2 times more likely to have energy at the end of the workday.DDI also found that only 30 percent of leaders feel they have enough time to execute their responsibilities effectively, making workload a major source of stress. While stress may seem inevitable, organizations can take meaningful steps to improve employee well-being. Start by creating work-life balance initiatives that lighten workloads, offering flexible work arrangements where possible, and providing stress management training. Finally, establish processes that help leaders balance priorities, delegate tasks, and focus on what truly matters.Improving well-being isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s essential for retention and cultivating the environment your workforce needs and expects.2. Create a Culture of Respect and FeedbackIn a startling finding, DDI found that only 29 percent of leaders trust their manager to do what’s right. In the context of such low trust, patterns like revenge quitting suddenly seem less surprising. But while trust is complex, regular feedback can be a powerful way to strengthen it. Employees who receive feedback are 9 times more likely to trust their manager.Trust begins with open, two-way communication, and L&D must equip leaders to give and receive feedback effectively. Transparency around company goals and decisions further strengthens trust, helping employees feel connected to a greater purpose. By making feedback a regular practice and prioritizing transparency, organizations create a culture where employees feel heard, respected, and invested in the company’s success.3. Train Leaders to Be Effective CoachesManagers play a critical role in preventing revenge quitting, but only if they’re effective coaches. High-potential leaders and individual contributors are 2.7 times more likely to leave in the next year if their manager lacks coaching skills, according to DDI. But when managers excel at coaching, leaders are twice as likely to want more, and 9 times more likely to build trust. Regular one-on-one check-ins give employees dedicated time to discuss their wins, challenges, resource needs, and career growth while receiving direct coaching from their managers. Managers must lead with emotional intelligence to help employees feel understood, validated, and engaged—making them far less likely to revenge quit.4. Provide Development OpportunitiesHigh-potential leaders and individual contributors crave opportunities to learn and excel. In fact, DDI found that they are 3.7 times more likely to leave if their manager doesn’t regularly provide growth opportunities and 3.1 times more likely to leave if their advancement is too slow. Yet, when managers actively support employee development, trust skyrockets, and employees are 11 times more likely to trust their manager.This signals a mandate for L&D leadership. They must reinforce continuous development through opportunities like internal mobility programs, mentorship opportunities, and high-potential programs to prepare future leaders. Employees who envision a clear path for growth are more likely to stay, contribute, and thrive.ConclusionThe rise of revenge quitting signals a pressing need for L&D professionals to rethink not only engagement and retention strategies but company culture, too. When employees feel undervalued, unheard, or stagnant, they start looking elsewhere.The long-term benefits of preventing revenge quitting far outweigh the initial effort: a healthier workforce, more engaged leaders, greater performance, and a sustainable talent pipeline that makes for a resilient organization.

4 Strategies to Prevent Revenge Quitting: A Guide for L&D Leaders

Rare is the workplace where you don’t have one or more sensitive coworkers. The reasons for such sensitivity are endless, and some are even valid, but when such sensitivity is combined with emotional displays, they can especially be a challenge! Such reactions are one of the main reasons people don’t hold others accountable. As we discuss how to work with sensitive, emotional employees, there are two questions I want to address: Why do people get defensive? What can you do? When I teach or coach leaders, I find that many of them believe that employees get defensive because they simply don’t want to hear “the truth.” As far as the manager is concerned, the employee got caught in their mistake and their guilt is driving them to emotion. So, their response sometimes is to get tough and say unhelpful things like, “Let’s not get emotional, let’s keep this professional,” or “No need to get defensive, let’s stay on topic.” While it may be true sometimes that people get emotional because they feel guilty, our experience suggests something else. When people get defensive, it’s because they don’t trust your intent. They’re leery that you either don’t respect them or don’t respect what they care about (shared goals). When one or both are lacking, or the other person perceives a lack of respect, you see a spike in emotional responses. See, our brains are always scanning our external environment for threats. The moment we perceive a threat, our fight-or-flight response is triggered. We react. Defensiveness is the attempt to restore safety in response to a perceived threat. And some employees may have been shut down, mistreated, or disregarded by previous bosses, contributing to extra sensitivity that needs to be considered. So, what do you do about it? You need to make it clear to the other person that you DO respect them and care about their goals. This can’t be accomplished with trite phrases when you’re in a bind. You’ve got to truly care. The way you treat them outside of crucial moments may do more for your Crucial Conversations than how you respond during them. I love what the late Stephen Covey said. “You can’t talk your way out of something you’ve acted your way into.” If you don’t show respect for their time, their work, or their unique personality, no amount of flowery language will ease their defensiveness. I think you could have a conversation with this person to address this dynamic between the two of you. You might begin, “Hey Gabriel, I’ve noticed a pattern between us that I want to talk about. When I bring up a concern about a commitment you didn’t complete, you often raise your voice or start crying. I’d like us to be able to talk about things in a way that allows both of us to feel heard and find a solution. But I’m wondering if I’ve done something—or not done something—that’s provoking your response. How do you see it?” That may not be a perfect opening statement, so adapt it to work for you. But please see the principle in the details. Be honest about the issue. Don’t let them off the hook because they get emotional. Show them you care AND address the issue. Ask how you can show you care. Keep talking. 

Working With Sensitive, Emotional Employees

One of the most critical questions talent and learning professionals need to answer to close an identified performance gap is whether to build or to buy the expertise needed to design, develop, and deliver the most effective learning experience. This is not just an either-or decision. There are many variations, ranging from completely outsourcing to partnering with an external source for just some of the components. The decision not only affects the solution, but also the budget, personnel, support efforts, time involved, the results for the employees and ultimately the success of the organization. What do you need to know before the conversations start? What research do you need to do? What questions do you ask? Where do you start?Situations like this are a common part of the talent leader’s portfolio. Your starting point might be different depending on your industry, your size, your market position, the maturity of your learning function, and other factors. However, if you are part of a benchmarking consortium, such as the ATD Forum, there is a known pathway–ask your peers!Forum members have a variety of methods to gain information from a diverse group of peers, including sending a simple member-to-member survey, asking others at a small group cohort meeting, hosting a virtual roundtable for members to share and ask questions, and holding deep dives at interactive labs.At the 2023 Spring Lab in San Diego, members focused on the build-or-buy conundrum and took it a step further to collectively develop ideas, checklists, and questions to enable a perfect fit between a provider and customer, regardless of whether the provider is internal or external. Context was provided by a member and its external strategic partner sharing a case study. This included an overview of the challenge, the case they developed for using an external supplier, and the many techniques employed over the years to work together to enable success for the real customers—the employees.Using this scenario, the collective peer group of talent leaders from 19 companies developed a list of reasons for using external versus internal suppliers, used the Value Proposition Canvas tool to dive deeper into clarifying needs, heard from an expert on using burden rate (the cost to an organization of hiring and maintaining an employee beyond their wages) when cost is a primary factor, and, finally, developed a list of elements to consider when selecting an external provider.Reasons for considering an external supplier:Diversity of thought and known expertise related to solving the challenge lends credibility on the issue that might be missing internally.A partnership can expand the company’s network for ideas, people, and solutions; this might include mentorships.Time to market can be much faster.Processes established to easily show metrics and ROI if the supplier has a model or tool designed for that purpose.Content maintenance capability is a huge factor, and the supplier may have a dedicated team.Reasons for not using an external supplier:An external person or group not understanding the context of the organization, the need, or similar factorsChallenge of getting executive buy-inCost, especially when burden rate is considered a sunk costRisk factors if internal leadership changes, the vendor gets acquired by another company, or other unforeseen circumstancesInitial time investment to set up the contract, especially if it involves legal, compliance, contracts, IT, or other departmentsLack of specificity based on industry—for example, experience from banking not applicable to constructionThe group then developed a list of elements to consider when selecting an external supplier. As the small groups reported their ideas, there was large group discussion and experiences shared from the rest of the peer group. The host team with the case study, along with the strategic partner, supplemented the conversation by providing real-life examples.With this list of elements clarified and expanded, the teams brainstormed how to determine whether these elements were present. A sampling of the elements and response includes:Element: How might we know if the supplier’s offering will really meet our need?Suggestions generated:Ensuring internal clarity on the problem and need by using a tool like the Value Proposition Canvas or Cathy Moore's action mapping prior to engaging with themRequesting demos and asking for a pilot or examplesAsking what they would change from their standard format for your organizationAssessing how they engage and ask questions of you as a client (Do they probe to dive deeper?)Element: How do you know if the external supplier can serve as a thought partner within your context?Suggestions generated:Asking for a list of other clients the supplier has worked with and interviewing themWorking through a scenario you provide and seeing how the supplier respondsAsking broad, open-ended, what-if type questions and focusing on what is referenced, especially noting other thought leaders and researchAsking, “What in our relationship, as you understand it now, might incur extra work and therefore additional fees?”Asking for examples of times when the supplier has provided thought leadership and the results garnered (Is there a regular cadence for sharing experience and current thought leadership? For example, does the supplier have a regular web conference or blog or gathering of clients to share forward-thinking ideas?)Asking for a list of the books, articles, whitepapers, or blogs the supplier has published for the industry at large and a list of conferences or other venues where they have shared experiencesThe build-or-buy decision is huge. However, if the decision is to buy, it takes continued effort from both parties—the customer and the supplier—to build an ongoing strategic partnership that results in a perfect fit which in turn makes an impact on the organization. Connecting, collaborating, and sharing with industry peers is an excellent start.

Search results for 'Stan Heard'

Categories

Refine By

Search results for 'Stan Heard'

Categories

Refine By

Role

Topic

Industry