Sometimes the other party just isn’t that enlightened despite your best efforts. In this case, you need to invoke some guile, or artistry, to ease your way on down the road.
If the first technique works about 50 percent of the time, this one works about 25 percent of the time. You need to make an unrebuttable excuse to meet the true buyer.
My favorite is this: “Ethically, as you can imagine, in order to provide a proposal for any project I must speak to the person whose fiduciary responsibility includes evaluating the return on their budgetary investment. I must hear from his or her lips what expectations they have to ensure they are not being unreasonable or underestimating the return. Once that’s established, I’m happy to work with you on the implementation of whatever project emerges.”
Picture a “comma” after “ethically” when you say this. The statement truly gives people cause for pause. Here are some likely follow-up statements.
“But no other consultant has asked us to do this.”
“Frankly, I’m shocked that you’d consider any consultant who doesn’t want to fulfill this ethical obligation, and that’s why you need me.”
Or:
“Sandy Jones is very busy and has tasked¹ me to evaluate resources.”
“I’m very busy, too, and my intent is to evaluate whether Ms. Jones and I can work as partners on this project.”
Or:
“I can tell you everything you need to know and then take your proposal to Sandy Jones.”
“My experience over the years is that the buyer always has objectives that others aren’t privy to and/or that we end up developing together. If this project is under- taken, and Ms. Jones feels she’s been misinformed or the direction isn’t consistent, she’s going to react poorly to you, not to me. It’s not my retirement plan that’s vested here.”
You may feel that these are strong statements and they are, but you have nothing to lose when the gatekeeper keeps sitting on the gate. You should always point out: “We have three options before us. The two of us can go to Ms. Jones as a team, which is fine with me. However, if there is the chance of any backlash, I’m happy to go alone and take the hit, after your introduction. The third option is your going alone, and that’s not on the table because it’s unfair of me to expect you to do my marketing for me.” (Which of course they won’t do very well or passionately in any case.)
This is useful to remember when you’re faced a few times a year with the rubric: “The committee makes the decision, and I have to present to them.” Very, very few committees decide. The members usually recommend to the person who formed it, who may be a part of it or may not be. So you’re still better off trying to find the true buyer. But the same guile can be applied: “The committee will ask you questions that you won’t be able to answer, so why don’t we simply arrange for me to appear in front of the committee with you?”
This may all seem as if they are merely alternate appeals to self-interest, but they are “after the fact.” That is, they are used when the gatekeeper refuses original appeals to self-interest, which are positive (look good, take credit). These art forms are really based on fear (you’ll be asked questions you can’t answer, what if the buyer is unhappy with the project) and propriety (there is an ethical necessity).
The points you make with this language are perfectly valid. I’m not talking about “guile” in the sense of trickery or persiflage. I’m simply suggesting that you can find a side door to the fortress when the drawbridge is up and the moat seems active with large reptiles.
Bear in mind that for years consultants have educated gatekeepers incorrectly and have bestowed on them pseudo-power—the power of means over ends, which is commonly known as bureaucracy. You have to overcome that by introducing new learning and new facts.
The point is that only a true, economic buyer can provide the relationship, conceptual agreement, and approval to create the partnership you need.
Any proposal that does not go to an economic buyer is pointless. Even if accepted, it will be changed, altered, and often ignored by underlings, minions, and functionaries. If you’ve arrived at this point, where a representative from a legitimate prospect is communicating with you, then don’t give up the ship by allowing low-level people on board who promise to pilot the craft into the harbor.
You’ll wind up on the rocks.
Here are the key points to bring to bear when a gatekeeper is not amenable to self-interest to introduce you to the buyer:
- Ethics: It’s a professional responsibility, and one of mutual respect.
- Precedent: What’s probably been the case in the past is no longer appropriate.
- Fear: What if something goes wrong after you take responsibility for vetting and accepting the proposal?
- Ignorance: All buyers have both personal and professional objectives they likely have not shared with subordinates.
- Partnership: You are evaluating the organization as a client, so there is a reciprocity here. (Most consultants walk in as supplicants rather than potential partners.)
- Speed: If you want to get this done then I must talk to the person who can approve it instantly.
- Clout: Inevitably, the buyer will have to champion this at the outset and perhaps through the implementation. That has to begin now.
- Credibility: This project cannot be seen as a human resources or training program or it will not receive proper support from line management. (If they don’t believe that, firmly pull their heads out of the sand.)