Case Study: Robert, COO
A case study on how a COO went from not able to obtain executive buy-in to gaining constant support for his requests and initiatives, through specialized executive communication and persuasion coaching.
Menu
A case study on how a COO went from not able to obtain executive buy-in to gaining constant support for his requests and initiatives, through specialized executive communication and persuasion coaching.
This case study presents the process and results obtained through a 6-month communication and persuasion coaching program with Robert, COO of a Fortune 500 healthcare company.
It details the initial approach, situation evaluation, solution proposal, execution and results obtained.
Robert was a newly-minted COO. He was brought in to replace a previous COO, taking care of all operational matters within the company, as well as some financial ones.
However, Robert was facing several challenges in his first 90 days. The most serious ones included:
From the standpoint of persuasion and communication, this seemed like a great fit. Although there was a minor component of impostor syndrome that could be addressed with some sessions focused on personal development and identity reinforcement, the executive relations component seemed easily addressable with persuasion techniques.
Therefore, my first considerations were that Robert’s situation could be greatly improved by simply focusing on some easy and practical influence tools that could be used both to gain influence in the short-term, but also to cultivate powerful alliances in the long-term.
In terms of actual persuasion and communication techniques, multiple ones were contemplated, including the application of:
The first few sessions with Robert were focused on auditing the current situation. Knowing who his biggest “fans” and his biggest detractors were. We immediately identified a problem with the Chief Revenue Officer, who had a fairly aggressive personality type and was siloing important information Robert needed as COO.
This conflict was tackled by identifying the CRO’s influence archetype and tailoring Robert’s language to best connect with him. Combined with empathy, this helped disarm the CRO and make him more open, helping focus on how he could win and what he would gain.
Soon, Robert started moving beyond assessing the current situation in operational terms and actually suggesting changes. And for this, obtaining buy-in from the board for his initiatives was crucial. We worked on how to optimize facts using the “UP” model, as well as training Robert in objection handling for when these came.
Aside: A more personal issue manifested here, in the form of fear and cynicism on Robert’s part. Due to some aggressiveness and hostility by some other executives, Robert had become conditioned to think that he would not be listened to, creating a kind of “trauma”.
Besides persuasion itself, we took a break to deal with the “inner game” component, visualizing success scenarios but also drilling for negative situations so that Robert could more easily deal with the possible negative feedback from other execs.
After some months, the situation had improved. Many executives already trusted Robert and supported his initiatives, but things still weren’t being executed on time or consistently.
Therefore, we moved the focus of our sessions to closing. Using techniques such as implementation intention and trial closing to help drive compliance in other executives, and immediately tease out the objections they may have to properly deal with them.
We not only extensively rehearsed answers for the most common objections and blockers, but also compiled them in a shortlist that Robert could easily have at hand, to have a ready answer for multiple scenarios. Also, we focused on how to guarantee compliance for different scenarios.
At the end of the initial 6-month coaching program, Robert was able to perform multiple optimizations as a COO, but more than that, he was able to consistently obtain support for his initiatives and requests from the rest of the executive team.
Robert noted specific improvements in aspects such as: