Several years ago I was in a meeting with a new outsourcing client with executives from both the client and my company. This was the first contract governance meeting for that relationship. Objectives of the meeting included setting the standard agenda and agreeing to the ways of working for managing the contract, including contract changes. The testosterone level in that meeting was so high that at some point I thought the meeting room would soon explode. Ultimately that did not happen and we were able to agree on a way forward, but it was a bad omen for the future relationship that was indeed not particularly positive.
During a meeting with another client, with which my company had recently signed an outsourcing master agreement worth a lot of money, I experienced verbal abuse. The meeting was intended to reach agreement on a relatively important statement of work. A senior executive of my company and I met a senior client representative. The latter was apparently so upset with the draft contract sent to him in advance that he started swearing. The meeting concluded with an agreement, but afterwards I felt quite offended by the way this person vented his dissatisfaction.
At that same client I even faced a threat of physical abuse by one of the client’s program managers. Luckily and coincidentally, the client’s European HR director was in the meeting room to intervene. This HR director was as shocked as I was by the outburst of aggression by this normally calm person. His “excuse”: he was unhappy with a contract draft.
An obvious question to ask is: what was your role in these situations? Don’t worry, I have thought about that and have definitely learned my lessons from these wondrous encounters.
The key message here is, however, that one can dedicate a vast amount of time and energy on the formal aspects of an outsourcing relationship, such as contract, finance, legal, governance, and still fail. If you do not include human/ego elements, such as uncertainty, aspirations, loss of status, in your approach to outsourcing you will miss vital information that could support a successful relationship.
These are three extreme examples of unprofessional, even inappropriate behavior, but they may be just the tip of the iceberg. It may be true that less vocal professionals working in outsourcing relationships experience the same feelings of uncertainty, loss of control etc., and are trying to find their bearings and new role in such changed work context. Not paying attention to these “soft” elements of outsourcing may come with a cost of suboptimal results. Fortunately, these three examples are rare exceptions. The vast majority of people I have come across have been exemplary professionals. Especially one client I have worked with recently has shown great leadership skills, driving teams to excel, focusing on the big picture and common interests rather than differences, and leaving his ego at home. I would be tempted to identify this person, but I am not doing that as it would embarrass him, since he is not focused on his ego.
Outsourcing relationships are complex, especially at the beginning when the teams of both companies start to engage with one another and try to become productive (see graph below; Morgan Chambers ©). In such context it would be great if people come to work with compassion, patience and empathy and leave their ego back home. It would also be helpful if the leaders of both companies are mindful of these human elements of outsourcing and take appropriate measures to address these.
If you find this tip useful, consider subscribing to our newsletter with more practical tips like this one.
Comments