FEATURE: Choosing the Right Management Style for Corporate Clients

by Christopher Hart, May 30, 2008

When working to achieve buy-in across a large corporation, managers must overcome indifference that often exists between different operating silos. In most cases, the key to success will rest on your ability to define the stakeholders within the corporate environment. These are the people who will have an impact on the projects outcome. Once the stakeholders are defined, it is your job to craft a message to show the tangible benefits and meaningful opportunities that will be realized with their department’s involvement. Finally, you must carefully select your tactics. There are many battles in a project’s life and not all are planned for in the same fashion.

It should also be noted that there is no specific order for defining stakeholders, projects goals and tactics. This must be determined through an iterative process throughout the life of the project as discoveries from one task will often lead to more accurate questions and solutions for others. As the search engine optimization project begins to take on a life of its own, the project manager must step in to effectively modulate its progress and lead at all costs. Truly effective managers do not lead as an assumption of their personality, but make strategic decisions and choices to address a specific challenge or situation.

The modern business environment is always fluid and changing. To achieve SEO buy-in across the multi-siloed environment a manager must use many different abilities and styles.

The manager’s styles must reflect how the organization’s culture can influence a project’s result. In turn, different emotional intelligence competencies dovetail with the selection of the management style that is the best fit. For the purpose of our conversation, fit can be defined as the connection between different parties. For small companies this can be the connection to one person that wears all hats, or for large companies this can be the connection to the many different people across operating silos.

Emotional Intelligence is an individual’s ability to use self awareness, self management, social awareness and social skills to manage ourselves. These terms can be defined as follows:

• Self Awareness: The ability to understand ones emotions and their impact on the work environment. An accurate view of your strengths and weaknesses are essential to develop a strong measure of self-worth.
• Self Management: The ability to keep your emotions and reflex reactions under control. When we maintain control, we can develop our honesty, commitment to our responsibilities, adaptability and initiative to drive towards our own standards.
• Social Awareness: Your ability to sense others emotions and perspectives. We use this skill to feel the ebb and flow of an organization’s life current to recognize and meet a projects needs.
• Social Skills: Viewed as ones leadership ability to develop others around them through proper communication. In most cases we can properly initiate change to channel conflicts so as to build bonds through collaborative teamwork.

Understanding one’s emotional intelligence enables us to define the proper management style for each situation. The six (6) management styles have been clearly defined over time as Coercive, Authoritative, Affinitive, Democratic, Pacesetting and Coaching.

• Coercive: When a manager will demand immediate compliance to their will. An example is when a manager will yell that you will do what they tell you, not for any other reason than because they told you so. In almost all cases this should only be used in a crisis, since the long term effect on a team/group or project is very negative.
• Authoritative: When a manager engages and mobilizes their staff. This is when a manager is saying, “Come with me, I have a vision.” This will build confidence through the entire scope of the team and project. It’s viewed as the most positive managing style.
• Affinitive: When a manager tries to build emotional bonds through sympathetic communication. With an affinitive management style, the people that are part of the manager’s team always come first. This is a positive style, especially when trying to heal or motivate people during times of stress, both in their work and personal environments.
• Democratic: When a manager tries to build consensus because almost everyone has a vote. You seek out buy-in and input from all levels of the team. It is a positive style, but can also paralyze a team when a manager does not stand up and make the hard decisions.
• Pacesetting: When a manager has very high performance expectations. There is an overwhelming internal drive to get results fast. This is a style that is best used with strategic decision, and only with the proper team. If you always try out pace your team or peers, it can have a negative impact. When properly used on projects with ‘stretch goals’ or very complex projects this is an effective way to facilitate a solution and that will have a positive impact on the team and project.
• Coaching: When a manager sets developmental steps so as to mature their staff for the future. You help your team improve their performance through developing long term strengths. This is a positive style, but can only be implemented over time.

So in final, we can see that clearly defining the stakeholders, goals and tactics are only part of a cross corporation projects success. You must also have well-developed emotional intelligence and the ability to select from any of the six management styles depending on the environmental conditions. During the life cycle of the project you must keep re-evaluating the stakeholders, goals and tactics and your management styles for your interactions with the different business silos. Priorities and resource allocations change on a regular basis and the effective manager must have vision into these possibilities so as to alter their strategy.

For permission to reprint or reuse any materials, please contact us. To learn more about our authors, please visit the Bruce Clay Authors page. Copyright 2008 Bruce Clay, Inc.

BACK TO BASICS: Dealing With Client Buy-In

By Dærick Gröss, May 30, 2008

As a search engine optimization service provider, we see clients of all sizes and complexities. One and two-man operations are just as likely as large international corporations to begin a project with us, and each needs to be serviced with the same level of attention and concern. Every client is different; each has a unique structure and a unique way in which things get done. But across all these clients there is one very important component that never changes, the need to get buy in.

For this article, I will be addressing the question of achieving buy in from clients who have a relatively simple model for getting changes / recommendations approved and done. Generally these tend to be smaller companies, where decision makers are relatively easy to access or may even be among the direct players in the project itself. In companies like these, we find that we have the potential to move very quickly (depending on available resources) and that getting things done can be a relatively simple process. One of the biggest things a service provider can do in cases like this is cultivating a comfortable level of trust and buy-in.

In smaller companies or departments where there is a “simple approval” model in place, getting the core team fully on board is crucial. These are the people who either have the authority to get things done or are often merely one step removed from that process. In a situation like this, having to continually spend time and energy to convince a person or “sell” them on a recommendation is an unnecessary burden and from a project management perspective is an inefficient use of resources.

It would be nice to believe that merely hiring a search engine optimization service provider for the task would indicate that a client on board and ready to jump at every idea and suggestion but that's simply not the case. On some level however, every client needs some convincing or some explaining to get things done. Bruce Clay, Inc requires that all of our clients attend our SEO training. We find that when the client understands the basics of how we're trying to accomplish the service for which we were hired, it removes many barriers as to why we're requesting that certain things be done.

Most accounts are going to run into problems every now and again, but they can be dealt with if you keep your cool and work through it patiently. Let’s say your agency is brought on board to help with market expansion but the VP you will be dealing with for this critical endeavor isn’t necessarily sold on your agency specifically as the strongest candidate for the job. In short, every idea, suggestion, and even completed deliverable is likely to be questioned at every step or at least put under the microscope every time. So, what is a service provider to do?

The short answer of course is do your best. Thorough research, sound advice, professional presentation, these are all a given. In and of themselves however, these points will not alleviate the fact that the relationship is developing a “prove it to me” culture or possibly even outright distrust. This might even just be a localized issue, with a single person or on a particular facet of an otherwise smooth-running ship.

One way to approach the issue is to really define what is happening. Is this a result of a specific person and his personality (he are always like this)? Is this the result of a mistake that has put you behind the proverbial eight-ball? Isolate the issue that seems to be the root of the matter and see what might be done to address it. Perhaps a direct conversation is in order to help put the person at ease or explain the impact on the project the issue is having. In many cases, a simple conversation explaining how the constant need for whatever procedure a cautious client has in place (extra meetings, detailed slide presentation, redundant data reports, etc.) ate up valuable project resources and time. Sometimes that’s all it takes.

On the other hand, some clients simply will always have some level of confidence problem, even to the extent an exasperated service provider may find themselves pulling their hair out and asking why there is even a project to begin with. Fortunately extreme cases like this tend to be very rare, the vast majority leaving room for improvement.

Remember that a healthy client/vendor relationship has good communication. This is absolutely the first place to start when there is a problem of any kind, and buy-in issues are no different. Good communication is one of your greatest assets and best weapons. In our experience even the most stone-faced and expressionless of clients are open to two-way discussions and are willing to listen to you as the resident expert at what you do. They are investing money in a service after all; they will want to know if there are any issues or impediments to success. Give them that courtesy and respect.

If directly calling out that there is a confidence issue would lead to a potentially delicate or compromising situation, consider offering potential solutions as simply as project improvements without mentioning there is even a problem to begin with. By proactively suggesting ways to streamline a process, you simultaneously demonstrate investment in and competency with the project and potentially build a client’s confidence as well.

The bottom line in any situation where your expertise or quality as a service provider are questioned on a regular basis is to let the results speak for themselves. You may not ever be able to circumvent the regular “prove it to me” emails or calls with some clients, but as an agency your integrity and professionalism will still come out on top.

For permission to reprint or reuse any materials, please contact us. To learn more about our authors, please visit the Bruce Clay Authors page. Copyright 2008 Bruce Clay, Inc.