Workable partnerships

As an interim manager, one has the opportunity to see and compare a number of clients - either simultaneously or at least within relatively short time-intervals. It provides a person with many valuable insights and experiences on how management ticks; different styles in different situations, for different branches of industries, and the like. No schoolbook is able to provide such a rich baggage to a professional.

When getting better acquainted with a new business, one always discovers the overall functioning of the place. In fact, the role of the interim manager implies that (s)he blends in as smoothly as can be - and not only with regard to the designated portfolio. The (short-term) duties and responsibilities require a very pragmatic but most of all a very critical point of view, which should avoid falling into hidden trap that could lead to a grave problem.

The expectation nowadays in general is that candidates are team-players, and taken from experience, this is usually dangerously misinterpreted as a jolly get-along-well conformist attitude. It reminds me sometimes of a teen-age couple, who fully infatuated dream of days of wine and roses. When two business partners get together, like in private life, one should be equally accepting the fact, that even the most "beloved" partner will have a flaw, and maybe especially the apparently less ideal types will turn out to be the most loyal and contributing most to the business. 

In real life, businesses will always have weak links, and this is a reality, which we all need to accept. These weaknesses, are not exclusive for any level; they do occur even at the top. Therefore, assuming that the 'perfect' stereotype profile exists in a candidate; when looking around, I sometimes wonder about the congruency of a company's expectation and the existing culture inside. And yet, this rich variety of profiles is more efficient in the long run than the opposite, as it makes the business more flexible and able to yield external threats. Yet, why do so many managers require the latter instead? Though I know the answer, I leave it as a purely rhetorical question for now.

Understanding (and accepting!) each other's position, input and skills is very important. A team member (down or up), not getting sufficient room - to expand either skills or talents - will soon become a drop-out risk, which is always a drain for the company. Business only succeeds, when both company and a team-member/candidate find a workable partnership A workable partnership is based on mutual acceptance, and especially accepting the enriching variety. Sadly enough, we focus too much on too many irrelevant details, and are no longer able to see the overall strategic objective. Learning to re-gain this ability is the only way towards a win-win situation. And believe me; happy people make happy bosses.