Effectively Influencing Decision Makers: Ensuring That Your Knowledge Makes a Difference

Marshall Goldsmith

“The great majority of people tend to focus downward. They are occupied with efforts rather than results.  They worry over what the organization and their superiors ‘owe’ them and should do for them.  And they are conscious above all of the authority they ‘should have’.  As a result they render themselves ineffectual”.  -  Peter Drucker

Peter Drucker has written extensively about the impact of the knowledge worker in modern organizations.  Knowledge workers can be defined as people who know more about what they are doing than their managers do.  Many knowledge workers have years of education and experience in training for their positions, yet they have almost no training in how to effectively influence decision makers. 

As Peter Drucker has noted, “The greatest wisdom not applied to action and behavior is meaningless data.”

The eleven guidelines listed below are intended to help you do a better job of influencing decision makers.  In some cases, these decision makers may be immediate or upper managers – in other cases they may be peers or cross-organizational colleagues.  I hope that you find these suggestions to be useful in helping you convert your good ideas into meaningful action!

1.      Every decision that impacts our lives will be made by the person who has the power to make that decision – not the ‘right’ person, or the ‘smartest’ person, or the ‘best’ person – make peace with this fact.

As simple and obvious as this statement may seem, I am amazed at how few (otherwise intelligent) people ever deeply ‘get’ this point.  When your child comes home from school and complains, “It’s not fair!  The teacher gave me a ‘C’ and I really deserved an ‘A’!  We, as parents, should say, “Welcome to the real world, kid!  In life you have to accept the fact that decision-makers make decisions – and that you are not always the decision maker.”  Once we make peace with the fact that the people who have the power to make the decisions always make the decisions – and we get over whining because ‘life isn’t fair’ – we become more effective in influencing others and making a positive difference.  We also become happier!

2.     When presenting ideas to decision makers, realize that it is your responsibility to sell – not their responsibility to buy.

In many ways, influencing ultimate decision makers is similar to selling products or services to external customers.  They don’t have to buy – you have to sell!  Any good salesperson takes responsibility for achieving results.  No one is impressed with salespeople who blame their customers for not buying their products. 

While the importance of taking responsibility may seem obvious in external sales, an amazing number of people in large corporations spend countless hours “blaming” management for not buying their ideas.  Former Harvard Professor Chris Argyris pointed out how “upward feedback” often turns into “upward buck-passing”.  We can become “disempowered” when we focus on what others have done to make things wrong and not what we can do to make things right. 

If more time were spent on developing our ability to present ideas, and less time were spent on blaming others for not buying our ideas, a lot more might get accomplished.

A key part of the influence process involves the education of decision makers. 

To again quote Drucker, “The person of knowledge has always been expected to take responsibility for being understood.  It is barbarian arrogance to assume that the layman can or should make the effort to understand the specialist.” 

The effective influencer needs to be a good teacher.  Good teachers realize the communicating knowledge is often a greater challenge than possessing knowledge.

3.     Focus on contribution to the larger good – and the needs of the decision maker  – not just the achievement of your objectives.

An effective salesperson would never say to a customer, “You need to buy this product, because if you don’t, I won’t achieve my objectives!”

Effective salespeople relate to the needs of the buyers, not to their own needs.  In the same way effective upward influencers relate to the larger needs of the organization, not just to the needs of their unit or team.

When influencing decision makers, focus on the impact of your suggestion on the overall corporation.  In most cases the needs of the unit and the needs of the corporation are directly connected.  In some cases they are not.  Don’t assume that executives can automatically “make the connection” between the benefit to your unit and the benefit to the larger corporation.

4.     Strive to win the “big battles” – don’t waste your energy and “psychological capital” on trivial points.

Executive’s time is very limited.  Do a thorough analysis of ideas before “challenging the system”.  Don’t waste time on issues that will only have a negligible impact on results.  Focus on issues that will make a real difference.  Be willing to “lose” on small points. 

Be especially sensitive to the need to win trivial non-business arguments on things like restaurants, sports teams, or cars.  People become more annoyed with us for having to be “right” on trivia than our need to be right on important business points.  You are paid to do what makes a difference and to win on important issues.  You are not paid to win arguments on the relative quality of athletic teams.

5.     Present a realistic “cost-benefit” analysis of your ideas – don’t just sell benefits.

Every organization has limited resources, time, and energy.  The acceptance of your idea may well mean the rejection of another idea that someone else believes is wonderful.  Be prepared to have a realistic discussion of the costs of your idea.  Acknowledge the fact that something else may have to be sacrificed in order to have your idea implemented.

By getting ready for a realistic discussion of costs, you can “prepare for objections” to your idea before they occur.  You can acknowledge the sacrifice that someone else may have to make and point out how the benefits of your plan may outweigh the costs.

6.     “Challenge up” on issues involving ethics or integrity – never remain silent on ethics violations.

Enron, WorldCom, and other organizations have dramatically pointed out how ethics violations can destroy even the most valuable companies.  The best of corporations can be severely damaged by only one violation of corporate integrity.  Hopefully, you will never be asked to do anything by the management of your corporation that represents a violation of corporate ethics.  If you are, refuse to do it and immediately let upper management know of your concerns.  This action needs to be taken for the ultimate benefit of your company, your customers, your co-workers and yourself.

When challenging up try not to assume that management has intentionally requested you to do something wrong.  In some cases, a seemingly inappropriate request may merely be the result of a misunderstandings or poor communication.  Try to present your case in a manner that is intended to be helpful, not judgmental.

7.     Realize that powerful people are just as “human” as you are – don’t say, “I am amazed that someone at this level…”

It is realistic to expect decision makers to be competent; it is unrealistic to expect them to be anything other than normal humans.  Is there anything in the history of the human species that indicates when people achieve high levels of status, power, and money they become completely “wise” and “logical”?  How many times have we thought, “I would assume someone at this level…” followed by “should know what is happening”, “should be more logical”, “wouldn’t make that kind of mistake”, or “would never engage in such inappropriate behavior”? 

Even the best of leaders are human.  We all make mistakes.  When your managers make mistakes, focus more on helping them than judging them. 

8.     Treat decision makers with the same courtesy that you would treat customers - don’t be disrespectful.

While it is important to avoid “kissing up” to decision makers, it is just as important to avoid the opposite reaction.  A surprising number of middle managers spend hours “trashing” the company and its executives or making destructive comments about other co-workers.  When reviewing summary 360° feedback on leaders, the item, “avoids destructive comments about the company or co-workers” regularly scores in the “bottom ten” on co-workers satisfaction with peers.  

Before speaking it is generally good to ask four questions:

·        Will this comment help our company?

·        Will this comment help our customers?

·        Will this comment help the person that I am talking to?

·        Will this comment help the person that I am talking about?

If the answers are no, no, no, and no – don’t say it!  There is a big difference between total honesty and dysfunctional disclosure.  As we discussed earlier, it is always important to “challenge up” on integrity issues.  It is inappropriate to stab decision makers in the back.

9.     Support the final decision of the organization – don’t say, “They made me tell you” to direct reports.

Assuming that the final decision of the organization is not immoral, illegal, or unethical – go out and try to make it work!  Managers who consistently say, “They told me to tell you” to co-workers are seen as “messengers” not leaders.  Even worse, don’t say, “those fools told me to tell you”.  By demonstrating our lack of commitment to the final decision we may sabotage the chances for effective execution.

A simple guideline for communicating difficult decisions is to ask, “How would I want someone to communicate to their people if they were passing down my final decision and they disagreed with me?”  Treat decisions makers in the same way that you would want to be treated if the roles were reversed.  For example, if you stab your boss in the back in front of your direct reports, what are you teaching your direct reports to do when they disagree with you?

10.           Make a positive difference – don’t just try to “win” or “be right”.

We can easily become more focused on what others are doing wrong, than how we can make things better.  An important guideline in influencing up is to always remember your goal – make a positive difference for the organizations.

Corporations are different than academic institutions.  In an academic institution, the goal may be just sharing diverse ideas, without a need to impact the bottom line.  Hours of acrimonious debate can be perfectly acceptable. In a corporation, sharing ideas without having an impact is worse than useless.  It is a waste of the stockholders money and a distraction from serving customers.

When I was interviewed in the Harvard Business Review, I was asked, “What is the most common ‘area for improvement’ for the executives that you meet?  My answer was “winning too much”.  Focus on making a difference.  The more other people can “be right” or “win” with your idea, the more likely your idea is to be successfully executed. 

11.           Focus on the future – “let go” of the past.

One of the most important behaviors to avoid is “whining” about the past.  Have you ever managed someone who incessantly whined about how bad things are?  When people consistently whine, they inhibit any change they may have for impacting the future.  Their managers tend to view them as annoying.  Their direct reports view them as inept.  Nobody wins.

Successful people love getting ideas aimed at helping them achieve their goals for the future.  They dislike being “proven wrong” because of their mistakes in the past.  By focusing on the future you can concentrate on what can be achieved tomorrow, as opposed to what was not achieved yesterday.  This future orientation may dramatically increase your odds of effectively influencing decision makers.  It will also help you build better long-term relationships with people at all levels of your organization.

In summary, think of the years that you have spent “perfecting your craft”.  Think of all of the knowledge that you have accumulated.  Think about how your knowledge can potentially benefit your organization.  How much energy have you invested in acquiring all of this knowledge?  How much energy have you invested in learning to present this knowledge to decision makers – so that you can make a real difference?  My hope is that by making a small investment in learning to influence decision makers, you can make a large, positive difference for the future of your organization!

Compare your company

Learn if your organisation is outperforming its competitors in the use of data and analytics in big decision making, or where resources or investment may be needed.

PwC's Big Decisions™ Sophistication & Speed Matrix

Our diagnostic tool features sophistication and speed indices that can help your organisation with big decision making. What do we mean by sophistication and speed?

Sophistication

• Clarity on critical decisions
• Creative use of new data sources
• Effective analytics to assess options and estimate value
• Combined intuition and data driven analysis
• Clear accountability from decision to action

Speed

• Opportunistic and reactive decision making
• Quick sourcing and experimentation with new data
• Efficient analytics to assess options and estimate value
• Test and learn approaches
• Monitoring of decision results and adjustments

Reid Hoffman’s Two Rules for Strategy Decisions

• Ben Casnocha

MARCH 5, 2015

Reid Hoffman — the co-founder and chairman of LinkedIn and partner at the venture capital firm Greylock — is a preeminent Silicon Valley strategist. I recently ended mytour of duty as Reid’s chief of staff and wrote a long essay about that experience —“10,000 Hours with Reid Hoffman: Lessons Learned on Business and Life.” These are the two major strategic decision-making lessons that I learned from working so closely with him.

Reid’s first principle is speed. One of his most popular quotes is, “If you aren’t embarrassed by the first version of your product, you shipped too late.” Another is, “In founding a startup, you throw yourself off a cliff and build an airplane on the way down.” Practically, Reid employs several decision making hacks to prioritize speed as a factor for which option is best — and to speed up the process of making the decision itself.

When faced with a set of options, Reid frequently will make a provisional decision instinctually based on the current information. Then he will note what additional information he would need to disprove his provisional decision and go get that. What many do instead — at their own peril — is encounter a situation in which they have limited information, punt on the decision until they gather more information, and endure an information-gathering process that takes longer than expected. Meanwhile, the world changes.

If you move quickly, there will be mistakes borne of haste. If you’re a manager and care seriously about speed, you’ll need to tell your people you’re willing to accept the tradeoffs. Reid did this with me. We agreed I was going to make judgment calls on a range of issues on his behalf without checking with him. He told me, “In order to move fast, I expect you’ll make some foot faults. I’m okay with an error rate of 10-20% — times when I would have made a different decision in a given situation — if it means you can move fast.” I felt empowered to make decisions with this ratio in mind — and it was incredibly liberating.

Speed certainly matters to an extreme degree in a start-up context. Big companies are different. Reid once told me that the key for big companies like LinkedIn is not to pursue strategies where being fastest is critical — big companies that adopt strategies that depend on pure speed battles will always lose. Instead, they need to devise strategies where their slowness can become a strength.

Reid’s second principle is simplicity — simplicity enables speed.

Making the complex simple does not mean ignoring complexity. Reid is a nuanced thinker who does not shy away from detail, second order effects, exception cases, and so on. But especially in a group decision-making process where there are various points of view, it’s important for the leader to distill and frame the option set with simplicity. Wrestle with complexity, yes, but frame and commit to a decision that’s simple enough for everyone to understand and act on.

In situations with many paths, Reid frequently groups the possible options into “light, medium, heavy” or “easy, medium, hard.” For example, we debated different ways to publish and promote the LinkedIn Series B pitch deck we created. We could simply click publish, share it on LinkedIn and Twitter, and see how it spreads. We could reach out to journalists in advance and give someone an exclusive, early look. We could write a series of supplementary essays that appear simultaneous with the deck. We could audio record his oral commentary on each slide. Reid bucketed the options into three categories: basic, intermediate, and advanced. “How intensively do we want to go after this?” We decided on a level of intensity and executed on the relevant set of actions.

When there’s a complex list of pros and cons driving a potentially expensive action, seek a single decisive reason to go for it — not a blended reason. For example, we were once discussing whether it’d make sense for him to travel to China. There was the LinkedIn expansion activity in China; some fun intellectual events happening; the Chinese edition of The Start-Up of You was launching. Together, these constituted a variety of possible good reasons to go, but none justified a trip in and of itself. Reid said, “There needs to be one decisive reason. And then the worthiness of the trip needs to be measured against that one reason. If I go, then we can backfill into the schedule all the other secondary activities. But if I go for a blended reason, I’ll almost surely come back and feel like it was a waste a time.” He did not go on the trip.

If you come up with a list of many reasons to do something, Nassim Taleb once wrote, you are trying to convince yourself — if there isn’t one clear reason, don’t do it.

Reid is not someone who can recite Clay Christensen or Michael Porter verbatim. In fact, Reid has never formally studied strategy and he rarely references the famous gurus. Instead, his views on strategic decision-making are hard won through experience and specific to entrepreneurial contexts: situations where the overall battlefield is foggy, the ground underneath you is shifting, and death is assured if your next step is not the right one. And yes — this increasingly describes the battlefieldall organizations are fighting in, not just start-ups.

Strategy is one of the most written-about topics in business, but much of it is interesting when you’re reading it but rarely remembered or acted upon. The heralded “strategy frameworks” are either too complicated or too context-dependent or too abstract. What I love about Reid’s principles is they are short and pithy — thus, memorable — and yet they are nonetheless ideas with teeth: they really can distinctively shape the pattern of one’s decision making.

Make It Easy for Decision Makers to Approve Your Deal

by Paul V. Weinstein

Imagine you’ve been offered a way to purchase $1 lottery tickets for a penny each. How many would you buy? If you were operating based on rational self-interest one could argue that you would buy as many tickets as possible. How could you refuse an opportunity with so much upside and so little downside? Similarly, the role of the dealmaker is to find a way to drive the “cost” of the deal down to as close to zero as possible — so the decision maker can’t possibly refuse to buy that ticket.

It’s harder than it sounds. In order to make it happen, you need to understand the dynamics of the cost of the deal. In my experience, this is where people go wrong — they misinterpret the nature of the cost to the person sitting across the table. Getting to yes requires knowledge about the decision maker, but it’s not necessarily the knowledge you’d think.

In the first of now four pieces I’ve done for HBR, I outlined the stakeholder types you will encounter in the effort to close a big deal. Next, I went through a more detailed examination of the motivations of two of those stakeholders, thechampion and the blocker. Now, I’d like to close the loop and talk about thedecision maker, the final gatekeeper in the triumvirate. Based on many years as a business founder, executive, and advisor, I would argue that getting the deal closed requires an appreciation for one key principle about decision makers that many of us get wrong.

It’s as simple as this: Getting the green light on a deal is more about mitigating professional risk for the decision maker than it is about accentuating the business benefits of what you are offering. In other words, addressing the downside is more important than touting the upside.

Our understanding of how organizations think and act doesn’t always make this distinction between the interests of the enterprise and its managers. For example, The Wall Street Journal might typically report something like the following: “Exxon Corporation has announced that it is moving forward with development of oil fields in Kazakhstan in order to meet the world’s demand for oil.” Fair enough: Exxon does want to find and sell more oil. But the statement also seems to imply that Exxon is a “person” that makes such decisions purely rationally in its interests. News flash: There is no Exxon-level decision maker, there are only the people running Exxon and making the decisions based on their professional interests.  Corporations don’t make decisions, people make decisions.

When you or I decide (or even a billionaire decides) to make a personal investment, the thought process is very focused on the desired return. Will I get good value for my money? In a corporate decision, however, the decision maker is playing with the house’s money, not his or her own, so the financial and/or opportunity cost is almost irrelevant. The risk that looms largest is not about losing money; it’s about losing your job or shedding prestige.

So how do you reduce professional risk for the decision maker and get your deal done? By understanding three different levels of deciders and what motivates each of them at a personal level.

CEO, President, COO (Top Dogs):  These highest order decision makers are the big picture thinkers. They care about pleasing boards and shareholders. Public perception and legacy are what is important to them. In order to reduce a Top Dog’s risk profile, think about the individuals to whom they turn for advice and validation. These include:

Advisors—Top Dogs rarely know much about the details of the deal, so they rely on their lieutenants for counsel. Getting these individuals, who attend to the Top Dog, on your side is a crucial step one. Cooperate with them, show them respect, and give them the ammunition they need to look good to the big boss.

Shareholders—External credibility and public recognition is what helps Top Dogs shine around investors and customers. If a close competitor is doing a similar deal, for example, or others in the industry are aligned with the strategy or direction, it will help Top Dogs bring shareholders on board.

Board members—In the end, this is who Top Dogs really aim to please. If the deal goes south, the questions the board will always ask is: Did you do your due diligence? Two things: First, create a story or narrative that will help Top Dog’s position the deal and feel good about public perception. Second, create a strong case that will enable them and their lieutenants to say yes to the deal. (Remember it’s not about eliminating the risk of failure, it’s about providing a strong narrative for the Top Dog so that if something goes wrong, their decision can be defended.)

CSO, CFO, CIO, IT, Ops (Practice Leaders): Typically, these decision makers run cost centers as opposed to generating revenue. Practice Leaders care about avoiding mistakes, looking smart within their domain, and maintaining internal credibility. These are the people who have been hired to make sure things don’t go wrong. In general, they tend to be the most conservative and apt to say no to deals. How do you reduce downside risk for a group so attuned to potential loss? Provide them with voluminous documentation to make sure that they have a protective paper trail behind them. Your job is to think of everything that could go wrong and create solutions to address each of those scenarios. As with Top Dogs, Practice Leaders have lieutenants with deep domain expertise. These domain experts are where you should be cultivating your champions — get them on your side and not only will they advocate for you, but they will also help insulate the Practice Leader should the deal go wrong.

Sales, Marketing, GMs, Product (Business Leaders):  These decision makers are directly involved in generating revenue and they are judged based on the numbers. One the one hand, meeting budget projections is make-or-break for Business Leaders because it impacts their compensation and upward mobility. On the other hand, they have the latitude to fly below the radar and experiment. Timing is what dealmakers need to think about when they sit across the table from Business Leaders. Most Business Leaders have P&L goals that were established in the prior year — and anything that puts those projections at risk is a tough sell. If things are going well for the business leader, then he/she may be inclined to take a risk. Sometimes Business Leaders need to do a deal in order to make their year look better, other times they are out scouting for a new venture to help them start their new fiscal year off right. As long as the decision is contained within their fiefdom, business leaders are the easiest group to convince. They are always looking for ways to break out from the pack and become the next Top Dog.

Whether you are dealing with a Top Dog, Practice Leader, or Business Leader, getting a decision maker to say yes is all about building a platform of credibility that minimizes their professional risk and allows them to feel good about the deal. It is not necessarily that the platform improves the deal’s potential for success (although that is certainly part of it), but it gives them something to point to in case things go south. Remember, for a person in a position of power, it is more about protecting them from what can go wrong than it is about what can go right.

You May Not Be In Charge, But You Can Influence the People Who Are

11 Guidelines to Being an Influence

“The great majority of people tend to focus downward. They are occupied with efforts rather than results. They worry over what the organization and their superiors 'owe' them and should do for them. And they are conscious above all of the authority they 'should have.' As a result they render themselves ineffectual."—Peter Drucker

You can make a positive difference, even when you do not have direct line authority.

Here are 11 guidelines that will help you do a better job of influencing decision-makers, whether these decision-makers are immediate or upper managers, peers or cross-organizational colleagues.

1. Accept the Facts: Every decision that affects our lives will be made by the person who has the power to make that decision, not the "right" person or the "smartest" person or the "best" person. Make peace with this fact. Once we make peace with the fact that the people who have the power to make the decisions always make the decisions and we get over whining that "life isn't fair," we become more effective in influencing others and making a positive difference. We also become happier.
2. Realize You Must Sell Your Ideas. When presenting ideas to decision-makers, realize that it is your responsibility to sell, not their responsibility to buy. In many ways, influencing ultimate decision-makers is similar to selling products or services to external customers. They don't have to buy—you have to sell. No one is impressed with salespeople who blame their customers for not buying their products. While the importance of taking responsibility may seem obvious in external sales, an amazing number of people in large corporations spend countless hours blaming management for not buying their ideas. A key part of the influence process involves the education of decision-makers. The effective influencer needs to be a good teacher.
3. Focus on contribution to the larger good—not just the achievement of your objectives. An effective salesperson would never say to a customer, "You need to buy this product, because if you don't, I won't achieve my objectives." Effective salespeople relate to the needs of the buyers, not to their own needs. In the same way, effective influencers relate to the larger needs of the organization, not just to the needs of their unit or team.
4. Strive to win the big battles. Don't waste your energy and psychological capital on trivial points. Executives' time is very limited. Do a thorough analysis of ideas before challenging the system. Focus on issues that will make a real difference. Be willing to lose on small points. Be especially sensitive to the need to win trivial non-business arguments on things like restaurants, sports teams, or cars. You are paid to do what makes a difference and to win on important issues. You are not paid to win arguments on the relative quality of athletic teams.
5. Present a realistic "cost-benefit" analysis of your ideas—don't just sell benefits. Every organization has limited resources, time, and energy. The acceptance of your idea may well mean the rejection of another idea that someone else believes is wonderful. Be prepared to have a realistic discussion of the costs of your idea.
6. "Challenge up" on issues involving ethics or integrity—never remain silent on ethics violations. The best of corporations can be severely damaged by only one violation of corporate integrity. I hope you will never be asked to do anything by the management of your corporation that represents a violation of corporate ethics. If you are, refuse to do it and immediately let upper management know of your concerns. Try to present your case in a manner that is intended to be helpful, not judgmental.
7. Realize that powerful people also make mistakes. Don't say, "I am amazed that someone at this level…" It is realistic to expect decision-makers to be competent; it is unrealistic to expect them to be anything other than normal humans. Even the best of leaders are human. We all make mistakes. When your managers make mistakes, focus more on helping them than judging them.
8. Don't be disrespectful. Treat decision-makers with the same courtesy that you would treat customers. While it is important to avoid kissing up to decision-makers, it is just as important to avoid the opposite reaction. Before speaking, it is generally good to ask one question from four perspectives. “Will this comment help 1) our company 2) our customers 3) the person I am talking to, and 4) the person I am talking about?” If the answers are no, no, no, and no, don't say it!
9. Support the final decision. Don't tell direct reports, "They made me tell you." Assuming that the final decision of the organization is not immoral, illegal, or unethical, go out and try to make it work. Managers who consistently say, "They told me to tell you" to co-workers are seen as messengers, not leaders. Treat decision-makers the same way that you would want to be treated if the roles were reversed. If you stab your boss in the back in front of your direct reports, what are you teaching them to do when they disagree with you?
10. Make a positive difference—don't just try to "win" or "be right." We can easily become more focused on what others are doing wrong than on how we can make things better. An important guideline in influencing up is to always remember your goal: making a positive difference for the organization. Focus on making a difference. The more other people can be "right" or "win" with your idea, the more likely your idea is to be successfully executed.
11. Focus on the future—let go of the past. One of the most important behaviors to avoid is whining about the past. Have you ever managed someone who incessantly whined about how bad things are? Nobody wins. Successful people love getting ideas aimed at helping them achieve their goals for the future. By focusing on the future, you can concentrate on what can be achieved tomorrow, not what was not achieved yesterday.

In summary, think of the years that you have spent "perfecting your craft." Think of all of the knowledge that you have accumulated. Think about how your knowledge can potentially benefit your organization. How much energy have you invested in acquiring all of this knowledge? How much energy have you invested in learning to present this knowledge to decision-makers so that you can make a real difference? My hope is that by making a small investment in learning to influence decision-makers, you can make a large, positive difference for the future of your organization.