The mandate: making demanding projects more effective

No standard programme for every project, but seniority where it really makes a difference.

We work for demanding, complex or critical project situations. Not every project needs us. If a standard approach is sufficient or the task can be solved just as well internally, we are not the right ones. We work where experience, judgement, leadership ability and consistent implementation create recognisable additional value.

In doing so, we do not start from the assumption that something is broken at your end. We meet competent people and organisations in which much already works. Our contribution consists of strengthening existing strength, making blind spots visible, sharpening decisions and bringing demanding undertakings to a higher level of effectiveness.

What distinguishes a mandate

A suitable mandate is demanding enough in subject matter or leadership that additional seniority is justified. It may be under pressure, but it does not have to be. What matters is that clarity, leadability, decisions, stakeholders, dependencies or implementation are so demanding that an experienced sparring partner makes a difference.

We do not work as a repair shop. A project may already be well led. As in top-level sport, additional support can make sense precisely when good people want to become even better.

Our work is radically honest. For us, radical means going to the root of a situation. We clearly name relevant observations, risks, contradictions and consequences. We do so respectfully and without belittling people.

Radical clarity does not automatically mean radical change. A deliberate “we will leave it as it is” can be a good result if the consequences are understood and accepted. Our job is not to produce as much change as possible, but to enable better decisions.

We see ourselves as sparring partners and enablers. We take responsibility for our work, but not the leadership responsibility of our clients. Decisions that are tied to leadership stay where they belong.

We choose mandates deliberately. Money alone does not make a project suitable. If the task is too simple, too standardised or not challenging enough, we decline it.

The goal always remains the same: after our work, the undertaking should be clearer, more leadable and more effective, and the organisation should be left with more capability of its own than before.

What we require

We only work with clients and leaders who are willing to look closely, endure tension, make decisions and take responsibility. If this willingness is lacking, we do not accept the mandate. We do not come to compensate for a lack of willingness to lead or to take difficult decisions upon ourselves permanently.

What the Office is not

These limits are part of the value promise. They apply in conversation, in communication and in every later offer.

No commodity service and no arbitrary interim project management.
No method training, no certification preparation and no method implementation as a product of its own. Method competence is background knowledge, not the offering.
No free or artificially cheap checks, assessments or potential analyses as door-openers for later consulting.
No bait prices or discounts as a sales mechanism. Every service must have independent economic value from the outset.
No mandates just because budget is available. If the task is not demanding enough, we decline it.
No substitute for your leadership responsibility. Preparation can be delegated; the decisive responsibility cannot.
No producer of culture. The Office presupposes a fundamentally sound culture as well as the ability to handle conflict and to decide.
No guarantee of project success independent of leadership, participation, framework conditions and implementation.
No artificial dependence. A follow-up project only makes sense if there is an independent new need after completion.
No comprehensive knowledge management solution for the entire company. The focus is on the leadership and steering information that makes an undertaking traceable and leadable.
No software and no single tool. Technology is only part of the solution if it makes sense for the specific situation.
No arbitrary domain knowledge. Where deep subject-matter knowledge is required, we only work alone where the necessary experience is present, or we bring in suitable specialists.

We come, the knowledge stays

Knowledge transfer and exit are not follow-up work but part of the mandate. Approach, decision logic, relevant documentation and insights gained should stay with you. Our mandate is successful when you need us less afterwards than before.

Clarification is work, not bait

If a situation needs to be clarified first, this clarification is itself a full, paid service. It does not serve to sell the next project as quickly as possible. A good result can also be that nothing further needs to be done at the moment, that you continue working yourself or that another specialist is a better fit. Follow-up services only arise from an independent, genuinely identified need.

Domain knowledge and supplementation

For demanding project work we consider domain knowledge relevant. Our own base of experience comes from real projects and is used to select suitable mandates. We therefore do not communicate an artificially narrow industry positioning, but neither do we take on undertakings arbitrary in subject matter. Where additional specialist expertise is needed, suitable people from our network can be brought in. Their fields of service do not thereby become fields of service of the Office.

We come, the knowledge stays. We came in order to leave.

Arrange an orientation conversation

A first conversation serves to get to know each other and to find orientation. It is not a free check and not an analysis of your organisation. If a situation needs to be clarified first, this clarification is a full, paid service.