Hello Friends,

Signing on a major client is mostly good news - bigger paycheck, consistency of revenue, increased credibility etc. The downside may be having to interface with more layers in their corporate structure.

What's wrong with more layers you ask?

Let's explore Eliza's situation below.

If you want your issue to be considered for an upcoming Newsletter, just fill out this anonymous form.

The Situation:

Eliza is psyched about having a major brand commit to a big order for her customized cups. The order is significantly larger than anything she has ever done. It also requires a series of processes and checks before the order can be completed. The client has insisted that she work closely with their in-house team to ensure that all details are taken care of.

Their trusted in-house manager, Billy has a lot on his plate. In addition to managing Eliza's order, he also has 5 other vendors to work with.

On Eliza's end, she makes it a point to send in her deliverables to Billy ahead of any deadlines for internal approvals. However, Billy never gets to them on time, resulting in a pushed back timetable and a displeased client.

Eliza received a strong-worded email from the client about her unprofessional work ethic and a thinly-veiled warning about a possible contract termination.

Eliza feels maligned and is convinced that Billy has not been giving his boss / her client a neutral and objective account.

She has to figure out the best path forward in this situation.

THE HOLLYWOOD TAKE

Here is Malcom Tucker from The Thick of It. He is the Director of Communications for the Prime Minister. His entire job is to control information flow and the narrative.

While Billy might not be the equivalent counterpart of the character, Malcom Tucker, he is definitely employing the same techniques.

SOCIAL SCRIPT:

"I don't want to go over Billy's head, especially since he is so trusted and relied on by the client. I'll trust the process and speak to Billy directly about it so that he can manage the client and keep our contract secure."

INNER SCRIPT:

"I'm being judged on information that I cannot correct and didn't generate. If I keep quiet, I'm doing myself a disservice. The client deserves to know the truth and I have receipts.

If I do so, I'll be throwing Billy under the bus. But then again, that's where he's thrown me."

ACTUAL SCRIPT:

Eliza has decided to take action - carefully, not aggressively or impulsively.

She drafts a reply to the client.

"I wanted to reach out personally. I am aware of the bumps in the project and it will be good to understand your perspective on the progress. I can also show you our activity which Billy might not have covered so that you have the full picture. Would you be open to a meeting this week?"

This does three things:

1. Gives the client an experience of Eliza as someone who faces up to challenges and difficult conversations
2. Signals ownership and transparency
3. Gets Eliza into the room with the key decision maker

Eliza is not going around Billy, the intermediary to undermine him. She is performing her role as a founder who is ultimately responsible for the client relationship regardless of who sits in between.