It certainly goes without saying that the camaraderie at the top minimizes mistrust and friction very well. In any case, who has time to waste arguing when targets need to be met and you have rainmaker status in the company with all your social obligations? Surely if you set the example and really talk to your teammates, your team will do the same to each other at all levels? All the management textbooks tell us that superior relationships drive business, and after all, you are part of the nerve center behind business strategy and implementation.
However, how often do you find a strong bond at the couple level? Partners don’t always see themselves as part of a team and power struggles are frequent, especially at the end of the year. Personal alliances are forged and some feel very territorial with hard-earned client accounts and thus arguments become inseparable from major business decisions. The partners will articulate their positions against an equally articulate opposition. This is against the backdrop of the high expectations placed on them to master a large number of complex materials in a short period of time and provide effective solutions with clear answers for demanding clients. Consequently, difficult relationships with peers can be a deep source of frustration for many at the top.
Is this discomfort inevitable with the high stakes involved and strong personalities? This point of view may be tempting, but it may not actually be an accurate snapshot of the situation at the top. From personal conversations, most of my client partners have very good relationships with their peers, but it’s clear that there are some unavoidable risks associated with this peer-to-peer leadership relationship. One partner said that because every action he takes has a significant business effect, he feels that his fellow partners are watching him all the time. He is not always in the mood to justify every decision he makes and he feels that his precious autonomy is threatened. A sense of isolation is also sometimes magnified when there are darkly motivated politics and personal gain manifesting in a highly motivated and competitive environment. Creating open deals at the partner level is arguably the most demanding challenge from an organizational standpoint. Why are some partnerships so prone to failure and others phenomenally successful?
© Shilpa Unalkat – 08/16/2006
When I asked several of my clients about this, I got some interesting feedback. Among the usual and predictable responses of open door policies, blue sky days, and invitations to fun corporate entertainment parties, one explanation stood out. Mark, an equity partner in a magic circle firm, candidly described how he has carefully cultivated relationships with his co-workers that are straightforward, unemotional, and based on a means to an end. The value lies purely in getting what is needed from the other person and giving something back. You don’t have time to develop a relationship based on shared hobbies, acquaintance with your spouse, or children. Everything he talks about with his teammates is factual and impersonal, and he finds that this gets things done fast. Management gurus would call this a utilitarian approach, and I wondered if there was something else behind this convenient and, some would say, possibly contrived interaction with coworkers. When investigated further, he revealed that there was an underlying lack of mutual trust, and he often had strong reservations about competition and even the motives of others on a couple level. It’s interesting how keeping your distance from others in this way builds an invisible wall of self-protection. However, this works for him on a pragmatic level and is far from a win-win situation. The people at his firm just get on with it. Maybe this way of being: a bit of detachment comes with the territory here. Partner personalities combine a cocktail of strong opinions, powerful intellect, and ambition—all ingredients that make for outstanding leadership performance. This does not lend itself naturally to relationships based on shared feelings and mutual support.
To be sure, this type of one-dimensional interaction has its uses, but we must recognize its limitations. Loyalty, friendship, discretion, mentoring and collegiate style connection are not expected and that in itself can lead to territory protection and hostility in some cases.
At the center of this relationship is the phenomenon of trust, but is this a complete fantasy, since many companies exist without this ideal management manual? Think about the practical aspects of building trust. It takes time, personal interaction (a better method than email), and a willingness to take risks. One misstep and your hard-earned confidence is gone. Compare this to typical dating relationships, which are built on the fly, often using impersonal means like blackberries, and often subject to doubt and misperception. On top of that, relationships are inevitably political and backstabbing is not unknown.
By no means all partners want or have this type of relationship with their partners. One customer said it was very comforting to be able to call colleagues to test ideas, exchange honest opinions about the workplace, and make time to discuss non-work related things. This is the human connection that makes work more fulfilling and rewarding. Laughing a lot with colleagues was a huge factor in her work-based values and she was drawn to this particular firm because the staff knew how to relax and were encouraged to express themselves in a less commercial way outside of the presence of the manager. customer. These well-chosen personal relationships can greatly benefit the company and represent what is sometimes called social capital. Companies must consider their value to business because of what can be achieved through them. However, they come with their own risks, and when the going gets tough, breaking up can be very damaging and could even lead to spectacular business ruin, as we’ve seen companies dissolve entirely due to the breakup of a partner. .
There can be no doubt that peer relationships need a measure of commitment and maintenance that may be too high a price for some. It may be fine to foster family relationships, but doing the same at work may be too hard for some people. Perhaps there is an argument that one should decide early on what kind of relationship to create with individual peers and then stick with it so that there is no confusion and expectations are clear. While companies may continue to hold the view that anyone is indispensable, there is ample evidence that strong and powerful relationships based on trust between people within the company are the gel that holds them together and influence the way they that business is done and, therefore, ultimately. your success
For partnerships to work effectively, individual partners must be able to clearly communicate their ideas, listen, and be willing to disagree. Although it is not always easy, learning to appreciate each other’s differences reflects a couple’s ability to manage conflict. When conflict occurs, those in leadership positions must be able to accept it rather than turn their backs on it and hope it will go away. The successful partner welcomes conflict or at least tolerates it, knowing that if managed well it can be a source of change and innovation. Conflict management coaching or training is a useful starting point and can speed up this process.