I recently led a project to implement a new cybersecurity solution for a client of mine. The challenge was coordinating multiple teams from different departments, each with its own priorities and concerns. I had to find a way to get everyone working together effectively, even though I didn't have formal authority over all team members.

The main issue was influencing these diverse teams to collaborate toward a common goal. To address this, I used the "tactician" style, relying on rational persuasion by presenting data, logical arguments, and evidence to show why our proposed solution was the best option for the organization and why the timeline was crucial. I also used the ingratiator style by building good relationships, recognizing each team's expertise, and highlighting how their contributions were essential to the project's success.

Despite this, some team members were still hesitant to fully commit, especially those from departments with conflicting interests. I realized I needed to adjust my approach. Drawing from the readings, I see the value in using a "consultation" tactic. I could have involved these team members more actively in decision-making, asking for their input, and showing that their concerns were valued, I could help them feel more invested in the project and shift from mere compliance to genuine commitment.

If I were to coach myself in this situation, I would say: "You're doing well by using data and building rapport, but to overcome the remaining resistance, try involving the hesitant team members more. Ask for their feedback, listen to their concerns, and show that their opinions matter. This will likely create more engagement."

Write a responds on this work