Get Rid of the Wrong People – Fast! Why a Three-Month Grace Period Can Cost You Three Years Today, I want to discuss a truth that many entrepreneurs, managers, and HR professionals are aware of but often don't take to heart: Having the wrong people on your team costs money, time, energy, motivation, and, in the worst-case scenario, the future of your company. And no, I'm not talking about someone having a bad day or dealing with an exceptional situation. I'm talking about the people who fundamentally don't fit in: In terms of performance, culture, or character. It is exactly during economic downturns that problems worsen. The markets are uneasy, interest rates are high, budgets are being cut, projects face delays, and investments are on hold. Customers take longer to decide. Meanwhile, competition for orders becomes fiercer than ever before. At the same time, companies are under immense pressure to stay profitable and control costs. In such times, every mistake, poor decision, and especially every bad personnel choice, becomes twice as costly! The tragedy is that it is exactly during these times that many companies fail to lead with clarity. Why? Because uncertainty causes paralysis. Because they are afraid of making wrong decisions, they prefer to do nothing at all. Because they hope that problems will solve themselves "on their own". Because they think now is not the right time to replace someone. The truth is: There is no better time to remove the wrong people from the team than right now! Every day you keep the wrong ones is a day you can't work effectively with the right ones. And no one will get this lost time back for you. Or to paraphrase Adorno: "There is nothing right in the wrong." Cost of Goods and Personnel In most companies, I keep seeing the same patterns: The two largest cost blocks are the cost of goods sold and personnel expenses. Depending on the industry, the cost of goods typically makes up 40 to 50 percent of the sale, and staff costs account for another 20 to 25 percent. Added together, this is up to 70 percent of the total costs. The material that a company needs for its products or services is, of course, indispensable. Without raw materials, there is no production; without goods, there is no revenue. However, there is a significant difference when it comes to personnel: materials are ordered, delivered, processed, and then the process is complete. Staff remains. And that can be either your greatest advantage or your biggest slowdown. The Principle of Hope is Sabotage of One's Own Company! And this is exactly where one of the biggest and most underestimated problems lies: Too many companies have become accustomed to mediocrity. They simply allow weak or unsuitable employees to continue to work as if the issue would somehow resolve itself. This is the leadership version of the "Principle of Hope". And hope is not a strategy, especially not in leadership. It is sabotage of one's own company! Anyone who seriously believes that a weak runner will miraculously become a sprinter at some point should ask themselves: Have you ever experienced in a sports club that the last person on the track suddenly became the first without training, without effort, and without change? Hardly. And yet this is precisely how many managers act: They hope that performance will increase on its own just because time passes. It's like turning the weakest link into a coxswain in Olympic eight-man rowing. No coach in the world would allow such a thing! It would be the assured end of the competition. However, in everyday business life, this is exactly what happens every day: The slowest person sets the pace unnoticed, the strong have to adapt involuntarily, and overall performance decreases. The team is still moving, but no longer at full speed ahead; in the best case, it is just moving in a circle, so that it doesn't sink. And this is the exact moment where it is decided how quickly a company reacts or whether it reacts at all. The hardest, and simultaneously most effective determining factor, is the probation period. Ulvi's Law: Shorter Probation Periods Many people in Germany confuse probation periods and protection against dismissal – and in practice, this leads to expensive mistakes. The law states that legal protection against dismissal only takes effect after six months of service with the company. This means that within the first six months, you can usually part with an employee much more easily. But what do most companies do? They also set the probation period at six months, "because that's just how you do it," or because that's what it says in the standard contracts. It may seem logical at first glance, but it's a massive leadership mistake! Because what happens? A new employee knows: "I now have six months to prove myself." That sounds reasonable, but psychologically, something else happens: He postpones his own performance standards. The first few weeks are more of a warm-up than a real sprint. My tip, therefore, may seem counterintuitive, but it is remarkably effective: Shorten the probation period to three months! Why? Because it sends a crystal-clear message. It forces both sides to deliver quickly. The employee must immediately demonstrate their capabilities, and you, as a manager, must judge them just as quickly to determine whether they are a good fit. This takes the "Let's wait and see" approach completely out of the game. And now we get to the crucial point: With an experienced employee (and I'm talking about individuals with five, six, or seven years of professional experience), you don't need six months to determine if they are performing. After a week, you'll have to see if they bring power to the game. After a week, they should have reached 80 to 90% of their performance level. The remaining 10 to 20 percent is fine-tuning, which they can work on over the next few weeks. However, you immediately recognize the basic dynamic: Whether someone shows initiative, takes responsibility, networks internally, and actively seeks solutions. If he is still waiting for someone to write him a to-do list after a week, if he remains passive, if he delegates every responsibility upwards, he will not suddenly turn into a top performer in the fourth month. That doesn't happen. I call this Ulvi's Law: After four weeks at the latest, you know whether the new person is a self-starter or whether they are hiding behind excuses, meaningless coordination phrases, and "We should..." sentences. And if you're still unsure after these four weeks whether you want that person next to you in the trenches, then it's a no. This applies to both emergencies and everyday life. Imagine the litmus test: You have a crucial customer appointment, but you can't go yourself. Would you send this employee alone with complete confidence that he will rock the appointment and strengthen your position? If your answer is no or "I don't know", then that's already a no. No long hesitation, no further grace period. Get rid of him or her! Immediately! Clear Metrics instead of Gut Feeling The problem with grace periods is that they create habituation on both sides. The employee thinks the pace is normal. The management thinks he will develop. But development without pressure is like fitness without training: You tell yourself that you'll "keep at it", but your belly doesn't get smaller. The wrong people don't just stand still; they drag the rest of the team down with them. The good ones see this, get frustrated, and leave at some point. And the company loses not only the weak ones, but also the top performers. Hallelujah! So, what to do? It's simple: Set clear expectations! I like to work with a simple 10-point system, tailored to the role of each employee. Sales, for example, is about personality, representation of the company, verbal and written communication, following up with customers, product knowledge, and reliability. Accounting is about getting the money in. Period. Whoever pays discount invoices first saves money. Those who consistently address defaulting customers improve liquidity. This is measurable. And the surprising thing is that if you go through this review openly with people, many will thank you for it. Finally, they know where they stand. It is finally clear where they are strong and where they have to step up. Translation of the graphic: Employee Evaluation – 10-Point System (Example) Reliability Product Knowledge Follow-Up with Customers Written Communication Verbal Communication Representation of the Company Personality Evaluation (1-10) And here, we are not only talking about salary and benefits, when we talk about costs. You also pay in lost opportunities: Customers that are not won, projects that are not completed, processes that drag on. If you give a sales representative a car, a laptop, and training on top of it, the costs quickly add up. The real disaster, however, is the opportunity cost, i.e., the missed opportunities that no one will be able to give back to you. Conclusion: Get Rid of the Wrong People! Therefore, my crystal-clear plea: Remove the wrong people as quickly as possible. No months of stalling tactics, no "He just needs a little more time", no waiting for the miracle that never happens. Every week that you leave a weak performer in the team is like a leak in the boat: In the beginning, it only leaks a bit, but at some point, the water is up to your neck. And then it's too late. The rule is simple: After a week, a professional must perform at 80 percent. Those who are not yet visibly in the game will not be in it in the third month either. After four weeks, the decision has to be made: Does he stay or does he go? Anything less than that is nothing more than wasting time and money! Beware of Backfire! And don't underestimate the chain reaction: Anyone who doesn't deliver drags the team down with him. The good guys have to make up for what the bad guy didn't get done. The mood changes, the level of service drops, and the customers notice it. The truly exceptional ones eventually leave. And you end up sitting with exactly those who should have left you long ago. The costs are not only salary and benefits. You also pay with lost projects, missed customers, and missed opportunities. The sum of these opportunity costs is often ten times the actual salary. And the longer you wait, the greater the damage will be. Three months of a false grace period can cost you three years. Not only financially, but also strategically.
*
Minuten
Get Rid of the Wrong People – Fast! Why a Three-Month Grace Period Can Cost You Three Years
Today, I want to discuss a truth that many entrepreneurs, managers, and HR professionals are aware of but often don't take to heart: Having the wrong people on your team costs money, time, energy, motivation, and, in the worst-case scenario, the future of your company. And no, I'm not talking about someone having a bad day or dealing with an exceptional situation. I'm talking about the people who fundamentally don't fit in: In terms of performance, culture, or character.
It is exactly during economic downturns that problems worsen. The markets are uneasy, interest rates are high, budgets are being cut, projects face delays, and investments are on hold. Customers take longer to decide. Meanwhile, competition for orders becomes fiercer than ever before. At the same time, companies are under immense pressure to stay profitable and control costs. In such times, every mistake, poor decision, and especially every bad personnel choice, becomes twice as costly!
The tragedy is that it is exactly during these times that many companies fail to lead with clarity. Why? Because uncertainty causes paralysis. Because they are afraid of making wrong decisions, they prefer to do nothing at all. Because they hope that problems will solve themselves "on their own". Because they think now is not the right time to replace someone.
The truth is: There is no better time to remove the wrong people from the team than right now! Every day you keep the wrong ones is a day you can't work effectively with the right ones. And no one will get this lost time back for you. Or to paraphrase Adorno: "There is nothing right in the wrong."
:devider:
Cost of Goods and Personnel
In most companies, I keep seeing the same patterns: The two largest cost blocks are the cost of goods sold and personnel expenses. Depending on the industry, the cost of goods typically makes up 40 to 50 percent of the sale, and staff costs account for another 20 to 25 percent. Added together, this is up to 70 percent of the total costs. The material that a company needs for its products or services is, of course, indispensable. Without raw materials, there is no production; without goods, there is no revenue. However, there is a significant difference when it comes to personnel: materials are ordered, delivered, processed, and then the process is complete. Staff remains. And that can be either your greatest advantage or your biggest slowdown.
The Principle of Hope is Sabotage of One's Own Company!
And this is exactly where one of the biggest and most underestimated problems lies: Too many companies have become accustomed to mediocrity. They simply allow weak or unsuitable employees to continue to work as if the issue would somehow resolve itself. This is the leadership version of the "Principle of Hope". And hope is not a strategy, especially not in leadership. It is sabotage of one's own company!
Anyone who seriously believes that a weak runner will miraculously become a sprinter at some point should ask themselves: Have you ever experienced in a sports club that the last person on the track suddenly became the first without training, without effort, and without change? Hardly. And yet this is precisely how many managers act: They hope that performance will increase on its own just because time passes.
It's like turning the weakest link into a coxswain in Olympic eight-man rowing. No coach in the world would allow such a thing! It would be the assured end of the competition. However, in everyday business life, this is exactly what happens every day: The slowest person sets the pace unnoticed, the strong have to adapt involuntarily, and overall performance decreases. The team is still moving, but no longer at full speed ahead; in the best case, it is just moving in a circle, so that it doesn't sink. And this is the exact moment where it is decided how quickly a company reacts or whether it reacts at all. The hardest, and simultaneously most effective determining factor, is the probation period.
!AYCON ⎜Ulvi I. AYDIN ⎜www.aycon.biz
Ulvi's Law: Shorter Probation Periods
Many people in Germany confuse probation periods and protection against dismissal – and in practice, this leads to expensive mistakes. The law states that legal protection against dismissal only takes effect after six months of service with the company. This means that within the first six months, you can usually part with an employee much more easily. But what do most companies do? They also set the probation period at six months, "because that's just how you do it," or because that's what it says in the standard contracts. It may seem logical at first glance, but it's a massive leadership mistake!
Because what happens? A new employee knows: "I now have six months to prove myself." That sounds reasonable, but psychologically, something else happens: He postpones his own performance standards. The first few weeks are more of a warm-up than a real sprint. My tip, therefore, may seem counterintuitive, but it is remarkably effective: Shorten the probation period to three months! Why? Because it sends a crystal-clear message. It forces both sides to deliver quickly. The employee must immediately demonstrate their capabilities, and you, as a manager, must judge them just as quickly to determine whether they are a good fit. This takes the "Let's wait and see" approach completely out of the game.
And now we get to the crucial point: With an experienced employee (and I'm talking about individuals with five, six, or seven years of professional experience), you don't need six months to determine if they are performing. After a week, you'll have to see if they bring power to the game. After a week, they should have reached 80 to 90% of their performance level. The remaining 10 to 20 percent is fine-tuning, which they can work on over the next few weeks. However, you immediately recognize the basic dynamic: Whether someone shows initiative, takes responsibility, networks internally, and actively seeks solutions. If he is still waiting for someone to write him a to-do list after a week, if he remains passive, if he delegates every responsibility upwards, he will not suddenly turn into a top performer in the fourth month. That doesn't happen.
I call this Ulvi's Law: After four weeks at the latest, you know whether the new person is a self-starter or whether they are hiding behind excuses, meaningless coordination phrases, and "We should..." sentences. And if you're still unsure after these four weeks whether you want that person next to you in the trenches, then it's a no. This applies to both emergencies and everyday life. Imagine the litmus test: You have a crucial customer appointment, but you can't go yourself. Would you send this employee alone with complete confidence that he will rock the appointment and strengthen your position? If your answer is no or "I don't know", then that's already a no. No long hesitation, no further grace period. Get rid of him or her! Immediately!
Clear Metrics instead of Gut Feeling
The problem with grace periods is that they create habituation on both sides. The employee thinks the pace is normal. The management thinks he will develop. But development without pressure is like fitness without training: You tell yourself that you'll "keep at it", but your belly doesn't get smaller. The wrong people don't just stand still; they drag the rest of the team down with them. The good ones see this, get frustrated, and leave at some point. And the company loses not only the weak ones, but also the top performers. Hallelujah!
So, what to do? It's simple: Set clear expectations! I like to work with a simple 10-point system, tailored to the role of each employee. Sales, for example, is about personality, representation of the company, verbal and written communication, following up with customers, product knowledge, and reliability. Accounting is about getting the money in. Period. Whoever pays discount invoices first saves money. Those who consistently address defaulting customers improve liquidity. This is measurable. And the surprising thing is that if you go through this review openly with people, many will thank you for it. Finally, they know where they stand. It is finally clear where they are strong and where they have to step up.
And here, we are not only talking about salary and benefits, when we talk about costs. You also pay in lost opportunities: Customers that are not won, projects that are not completed, processes that drag on. If you give a sales representative a car, a laptop, and training on top of it, the costs quickly add up. The real disaster, however, is the opportunity cost, i.e., the missed opportunities that no one will be able to give back to you.
Conclusion: Get Rid of the Wrong People!
Therefore, my crystal-clear plea: Remove the wrong people as quickly as possible. No months of stalling tactics, no "He just needs a little more time", no waiting for the miracle that never happens. Every week that you leave a weak performer in the team is like a leak in the boat: In the beginning, it only leaks a bit, but at some point, the water is up to your neck. And then it's too late. The rule is simple: After a week, a professional must perform at 80 percent. Those who are not yet visibly in the game will not be in it in the third month either. After four weeks, the decision has to be made: Does he stay or does he go? Anything less than that is nothing more than wasting time and money!
Beware of Backfire!
And don't underestimate the chain reaction: Anyone who doesn't deliver drags the team down with him. The good guys have to make up for what the bad guy didn't get done. The mood changes, the level of service drops, and the customers notice it. The truly exceptional ones eventually leave. And you end up sitting with exactly those who should have left you long ago. The costs are not only salary and benefits. You also pay with lost projects, missed customers, and missed opportunities. The sum of these opportunity costs is often ten times the actual salary. And the longer you wait, the greater the damage will be. Three months of a false grace period can cost you three years. Not only financially, but also strategically.
No items found.
!AYCON Blog
September
16
,
2026
2026
The Will to Win
Everybody talks about goals.
I care much more about something else: What are you willing to do to achieve them?
Goals are easy. PowerPoint is easy. Analysis is easy. Explanations are easy.
Execution is hard.
Over decades in management, I have seen brilliant people explain perfectly why something went wrong. They analyze. They rationalize. They produce another slide deck.
And then?
Nothing happens.
I have far more respect for the person who says:
“I got it wrong. I underestimated it. I’ll fix it.”
And then gets to work.
Because in the end:
Discipline beats talent.
Consistency beats occasional brilliance.
Execution beats analysis without action.
Commitment beats excuses.
You don’t need to be the smartest person in the room. You don’t need the most impressive degree. You don’t need perfect conditions.
But you need something that cannot be taught easily:
The will to win.
I call it the Hunting Spirit.
That inner drive that makes you get up again. Attack the problem. Find another way. Make the call. Visit the customer. Take responsibility. Do today what others postpone until tomorrow.
Business can sometimes feel like a battlefield. And battlefields are not always won by those with the most resources.
They are often won by those with courage, discipline, speed, resilience, and the determination to keep moving.
Weak leaders explain endlessly.
Strong leaders take responsibility and act.
Kobe Bryant embodied this mentality: get up early, put in the work, repeat it relentlessly. No excuses. No shortcuts.
And listen carefully to the language people use:
Strong people say: “I will.” “I will do it.” “I will deliver.”
The moment responsibility disappears behind “we will,” “we should,” “we must,” or “we shall,” be careful. Collective responsibility too often becomes no responsibility at all.
Accountability is individual. It cannot be socialized.
Your goals don’t define you.
Your actions do.
And without the will to win, everything else is just decoration.
The AYCON Principles of Interim Management Excellence
Ulvi Aydin, one of the most experienced interim managers in the industry, lives by a simple principle: Love and knowledge are wonderful things—they double when you share them.
Drawing on 21 years of experience, approximately 25 assignments, and 15 industries, he shares these principles as inspiration, guidance, and a legacy for young and new interim managers.
Personality & Mindset
Take ownership from day one.
No one hires an interim manager to sit on the sidelines.
Remain independent in your judgment.
Your loyalty is to the success of the company, not to individual people.
Tell the truth, even when it is uncomfortable.
Diplomacy matters. Clarity matters more.
Earn trust through performance, not through titles.
Always maintain integrity and confidentiality.
Confidentiality is the currency of interim management.
Always act in the best interest of the company.
Not in the interest of individual stakeholders.
Selecting Assignments
Only accept assignments you are qualified to handle.
Experience cannot be improvised.
Critically assess every assignment before signing the contract.
Not every problem can be solved.
Turn down assignments when there is no realistic chance of success.
Integrity before revenue.
Define the objectives with absolute clarity before you start.
Clarify expectations, roles, and responsibilities early.
Never allow yourself to be drawn into political power games.
Starting the Assignment
Listen first. Act second.
Understand the numbers, the processes, and the people equally well.
Build an objective picture of the situation within the first 20 days.
Identify the three biggest levers for impact.
Deliver quick wins without falling into action for action’s sake.
Create transparency based on facts, not opinions.
Leadership & Execution
Lead by example, not by hierarchy.
Make decisions when others hesitate.
Focus on results, not activities.
Being busy is not progress.
Build structures that work without you.
Build ownership instead of dependency.
A good interim manager ultimately makes himself unnecessary.
Change processes, not just people.
Connect strategy with operational execution.
Consistently deliver on deadlines, quality, and budget.
That is simply part of being a professional.
Exit & Legacy
Measure success by sustainable results.
Ensure knowledge transfer before you leave.
Leave behind a stronger company than the one you found.
Your greatest success is when they no longer need you.
Interim management is not a permanent solution. It is about enabling the organization to succeed on its own.
Ulvi: The Essence in One Sentence
“An excellent interim manager creates clarity, trust, results, and sustainable structures in a short period of time—without creating dependency.”
*
Minuten
Clarity! Trust! Results! Executions!
Create Clarity! Create Trust! Deliver Results! Create a good and efficient Structure! Execute!
LOCAL EXCELLENCE MUST BECOME GLOBAL EXCELLENCE!
One of the biggest mistakes in global corporations is surprisingly simple:
Headquarters believes it knows best.
The strategy comes from headquarters.
The processes come from headquarters.
The standards come from headquarters.
And the countries are expected to execute.
That thinking is outdated.
Because headquarters does not own the truth.
The market does.
And the people closest to customers, competitors, projects, and opportunities often know things that headquarters simply cannot know.
That is why I believe global companies need a fundamental shift in mindset:
Stop treating countries as execution units. Start treating them as sources of intelligence.
During my current global assignment, I have spent considerable time in different countries and regions. And again and again, I see the same thing:
There is enormous competence out there.
India does things exceptionally well that Europe can learn from.
The Middle East has approaches that should influence global thinking.
Asia brings speed, ambition, and different ways of building relationships.
North America brings its own commercial logic and customer orientation.
South America operates successfully under conditions that require flexibility and entrepreneurship.
Italy may have solutions others have never considered.
And Germany recently provided another excellent example: instead of looking primarily at historical customer revenues, the team started looking at customer potential.
A small change in perspective.
But potentially a massive change in how sales resources are allocated.
That is exactly the point.
Great ideas do not carry headquarters ZIP codes.
If something works brilliantly in India, why shouldn't Germany learn from it?
If a sales approach succeeds in the Middle East, why shouldn't Europe test it?
If Germany develops a better way to identify customer potential, why shouldn't Brazil, the US, or South Korea use it?
A global organization should not be a one-way street where headquarters sends knowledge outward.
It should be a global learning machine.
Knowledge must travel in every direction.
Country to headquarters.
Country to country.
Region to region.
Market to market.
The role of headquarters is therefore not to have all the answers.
Its role is to create the system that identifies the best answers — wherever they emerge — and makes them available to everyone.
That is what real global leadership means.
Of course, we need common standards. We need common systems. We need common KPIs, processes, and a shared strategic direction.
But standardization must never destroy intelligence.
One strategy does not mean one answer.
India is not Germany.
Japan is not Brazil.
Saudi Arabia is not the United States.
South Korea is not Italy.
The cultures are different. The competitive environments are different. Customer expectations are different. Decision-making processes are different. Market maturity is different.
Pretending otherwise does not create alignment.
It creates blindness.
We therefore need more India in our headquarters DNA.
More Asia.
More Middle East.
More South America.
More North America.
More Italy.
More Germany.
Not because one region is better than another.
But because each of them knows something the others don't.
That is the power of diversity in a global organization.
Diversity is not primarily about having different nationalities around a conference table.
Diversity creates value when different experiences, market realities, ideas, and ways of working actually influence decisions.
When the best local idea becomes a global capability.
When one country's success becomes another country's shortcut.
When we stop asking:
“How can headquarters make the countries better?”
And start asking:
“What can each country teach the entire company?”
That changes everything.
Because the strongest global company is not the company with the smartest headquarters.
It is the company that is best at collecting, connecting, and scaling the intelligence of its entire organization.
The British eventually had to learn that looking at the world from the top down creates enormous blind spots. Global corporations should not need history to teach them the same lesson again.
Go into the markets.
Listen to the people.
Find what works.
Challenge your own assumptions.
Take the best from everywhere.
And make it available to everyone.
Local excellence must become global excellence.
Because in a truly global organization, the whole should not simply be the sum of its parts.
It should be stronger because of them.
*
Minuten
The Power of Diversity in a Global Organization.
When one country's success becomes another country's shortcut.
Companies spend an astonishing amount of time looking at themselves.
They discuss processes, structures, responsibilities, CRM systems, presentations, forecasts, budgets, approval loops, and organizational charts. They hold meetings about meetings and create reports about reports.
And eventually, they start believing that all of this represents reality.
It doesn’t.
The inside world of a company is always theory.
The outside world is the truth.
The truth is in the market.
It is with the customer.
It is with the people who sell, deliver, install, service, and negotiate every single day.
That is where reality happens.
And that is why great companies must learn to think from the outside in — never from the inside out.
Get Out of the Building
You cannot understand a market from a PowerPoint presentation.
You cannot understand customers from a CRM dashboard.
And you cannot understand your own organization by sitting in headquarters.
Data matters. Processes matter. Reports matter.
But they are representations of reality.
They are not reality itself.
The moment leaders confuse the map with the territory, organizations become dangerous to themselves. Decisions start being based on internal assumptions rather than external facts.
The antidote is surprisingly simple:
Get out.
Go where customers are.
Go where your salespeople are.
Go where your products are being used.
Watch.
Listen.
Ask questions.
And, most importantly, observe what is actually happening.
Reality Starts at the Bottom
Four Seasons understood this remarkably well.
Executives were temporarily required to perform some of the most basic jobs in the hotel: carrying luggage, washing dishes, inspecting rooms, and experiencing the daily operation from the ground up.
Why?
Because a management report can tell you that hotel operations are running smoothly.
Reality may tell you that a guest has been waiting 20 minutes.
A KPI can tell you that room quality is excellent.
Reality may show you a bathroom that is not properly cleaned.
A presentation can tell you that processes are efficient.
Reality may show you an employee struggling every day with a process designed by someone sitting hundreds of miles away.
The spreadsheet shows the theory. The hotel floor shows the truth.
Once executives experience the business from the bottom up, their questions change.
They stop discussing abstract processes and start asking about waiting times, bathrooms, workflows, customers, and employees.
They have seen reality with their own eyes.
Stop Looking From the Inside Out
This is where many companies go wrong.
They develop a product — and then ask how to sell it.
They create a process — and then force the market to follow it.
They define a strategy — and then expect customers and countries to fit into it.
That is backwards.
Do not start with what you have. Start with what is happening outside.
What is the customer trying to achieve?
What is changing in the market?
Where is the customer frustrated?
What are competitors doing better?
What do our people in the field see that headquarters does not?
Only then should the organization turn inward and ask:
What do we need to change?
That is outside-in thinking.
And it requires discipline because organizations naturally gravitate toward themselves. Internal topics are comfortable. They are controllable. They create calendars full of meetings and the comforting feeling of being busy.
The market does not care.
Focus on What Is Real
Leadership therefore also means concentration.
Concentrate on the few things outside the organization that actually determine success.
Customers.
Markets.
Competitors.
Value.
Execution.
Everything inside the company should serve those realities.
Processes are not the purpose.
Organizations are not the purpose.
CRM is not the purpose.
Meetings are certainly not the purpose.
They are tools. Nothing more.
The moment the tool becomes more important than the outside-world result it was created to achieve, bureaucracy begins.
And bureaucracy is nothing more than an organization becoming increasingly fascinated with itself.
The Market Always Has the Final Word
There is one brutal advantage to the outside world:
It does not care about our explanations.
Customers do not care how difficult our internal processes are.
Competitors do not care about our organizational restructuring.
The market does not care how beautiful our strategy presentation looks.
At the end of the day, there is only one question:
Did we create enough value to win?
That answer will never be found exclusively inside headquarters.
So stop staring into the corporate mirror.
Go outside.
Observe.
Listen.
Understand.
Then come back inside and change whatever needs to be changed.
Because the inside world is theory.
The outside world is the truth.
Wenn Sie auf "Alle Cookies akzeptieren" klicken, stimmen Sie der Speicherung von Cookies auf Ihrem Gerät zu, um die Navigation auf der Website zu verbessern, die Nutzung der Website zu analysieren und unsere Marketingmaßnahmen zu unterstützen. Weitere Informationen finden Sie in unserer Datenschutzrichtlinie.
