Written by: William Lee, Executive Contributor
Executive Contributors at Brainz Magazine are handpicked and invited to contribute because of their knowledge and valuable insight within their area of expertise.
Most of us can agree that in the real world, there aren’t many things that are purely black or white, right or wrong, good or bad. When we interact with it, the better question is:
How do we pick the right information to be positively influenced by – to fulfill our personal needs and desires while contribute to general good and prosperity – without losing the overall picture.
The answer lies in the Way of Adequacy and Practicality 中庸之道.
The Business Organics
Mr K inherited a three-way commercial partnership between two global competitors – a German multinational, and an American multinational – and a local agency. These competitors competed globally and fiercely, except where the said partnership was formed, which began at a strategic region, and over time, shank to one key customer that was big and influential enough that both wouldn’t give up. Losing it would shut their doors to that lucrative market. And that would be disastrous for both especially when the industry tectonic plate was shifting from the West to the East among market deterioration against emerging technologies and social changes.
Things got even more messier, when he was arranged to take up a regional sales director role for one of the competitors. Consequently, he was leading the local agency without owning it (not at first), who was also a senior manager for one of the competitors for the whole of the said strategic region, and then also represented the other competitor at that key customer.
So, he was the common denominator between at least 4 parties including the customer, but he really belonged to no one. Each of the partners saw him having the possibility to get too close to at least one of the others. Without the slightest hint of hallucination, Mr K was fully aware that each of the global competitors would have preferred to take the whole of that key customer and dissolve the partnership as soon as possible. And when that happened, the agency could be terminated and there was a possibility everyone in that agency had to look for jobs collectively or independently, including Mr K. Those competitors would have benefited from reduced commission payments and greater control etc, if they did not lose out to the other competitors in doing so.
Somehow, Mr K not only managed to grow at a neck-breaking speed, but he was also able to sustain that partnership to achieve a joint market share of at least 95% for 12 consecutive years at that key strategic customer.
Elsewhere, he supplied 9 out of the top 10 and 21 out of the top 30 customers in the region, achieving at least 50% market share to 85% of them, increased regional gross margin by 26%, reduced manager overtime by 23%, slashed travel and accommodation costs by 37%, and improved employee work-life balance and retention.
The competitor he worked for as a senior executive enjoyed the best market reputation in quality, consistency and ability to troubleshoot. Yet, Mr K remained little known across the market except at that key strategic customer where he had to be at the forefront on regular basis, to ensure a balance between participating partners including the customer.
Questions of Adequacy and Practicality
Key to Mr K’s success rested on a deep understanding of the relevant key (hidden) stakeholders’ individual as well as collective needs and desires; strategised, planned and organised activities as follows; built relevant capabilities and implemented plans to satisfy those needs and desires while continuously harnessing the collective talents, knowledge and drive of multiple organisations of East and West, private and public, centred on Good Faith.
From early on, it was clear to him that, for the partnership to function, the main questions would boil down to:
What was the common goal amongst all the stakeholders including Mr K;
What were the individual goals of each stakeholder;
Were these goals aligned and produced (or intended to produce) congruent outcomes? What could have been the missing pieces and how could that gap be closed;
What could Mr K bring to the existing organisation and how was he going to affect people around it in the future, especially commercially and emotionally? Was he going to be able to add value and how? Could he have done so better than anyone else?
Could Mr K’s shortcomings be closed by others’ strengths, when they worked as a well-functioning team? How could that functionality be implemented?
What if the partnership broke down? How would each of the stakeholders react? Could someone proceed to take unfair advantage? What could have been done now to minimise future risks of bad separation?
If these could all be answered directly with clarity, the solution(s) would be rather straightforward. Unfortunately, it’s not to be.
Mr K could understand why – people have different backgrounds and priorities, and those priorities change with varying circumstances. If these were put out there in black and white, there was no way the partnership would work. But they all needed it to work. So raises the Question of Adequacy – what are the information and resources that they should share like one well-run organisation; and what should they guard like commercial secrets and kept at arm’s length from each other.
With so many stakeholders involved, a full alignment would be near impossible. So, fit was the next best thing. That is, the Question of Practicality – when no one would be 100% happy as a result of compromise, they should at least all be satisfied with what they’d got as a group, and that was more than they could have achieved individually.
And that’s where Mr K truly excelled.
He made sure the Wheels of Fortune of that partnership’s key stakeholders were connected. When there wasn’t enough fit in any of the capabilities, emotions and commercials in each other’s constitutions, he devised and manufactured a connection mechanism to turn their Wheels of Fortune together balancing adequacy and practicality (Chapter 5 — Day And Night (brainzmagazine.com), until he decided to stop for family reason.
The Good and the Bad decisions are separated not by external deeds or information – the Yang 陽. They are separated by the intentions – the Ying 陰, or the central belief. They may show many external similarities, but they diverge, eventually, in Adequacy 中 and/or Practicality庸 to circumstances. Only time can tell.
And time did tell. Mr K’s decision to leave was just the beginning of the eventuality.
Good Faith Protection
The good thing for Mr K is, his love and his responsibility towards his (bigger) family(ies) – Good Faith 仁 – constantly reminded him of reassessing and controlling risks. And that protected him and all the organisations he represented from doing something out of sorts, or exceeding his/their collective capabilities. Even in the face of an ugly breakup, people around him were still able to walk away with pride and a deep belief that, together, they had achieved something special, with Adequacy and Practicality.
William Lee, Executive Contributor Brainz Magazine William Lee, a business coach and expert in connecting people’s wheels of fortune together, excels at producing positive results in complex multi-stakeholder engagement, end-to-end customer experience satisfaction, and remote team management. Frustrated by years of conflicts and external negativities, William dug deep to understand how our minds work, how we interact with one another, and how good faith can improve our connected world together. Through a process called CentriFusion, William’s methodology and system provide an easy first step to vastly improve team empathetic capability. With increased presence and engagement, as a result, fertile mental grounds are sown to enable organic and spontaneous growth, aligned to a shared common purpose. William provides the way to attain TRUE and SUSTAINABLE COMFORT in your businesses. Enjoy life without complacency!
