Supply chain managers are often called upon to lead major change initiatives. But are we doing a good job teaching them the skills they need? Here are four techniques that could help.
Bruce C. Arntzen is the executive director of the supply chain management program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center for Transportation & Logistics.
When students graduate from top universities with a master of supply chain management or master of business administration (MBA) degree, they typically command a very high salary. And in our experience, hiring managers have equally high expectations. They want a "change maker," not just another cog in the organizational machine. Top graduates often get hired into a headquarters group, such as a "center of excellence," that focuses on driving best practices across the company. Similarly, if they are hired as a functional manager, they are expected to improve the process, not just run it. Even before they arrive, new hires are expected to be the rising star, to "go make change happen!"
But that's often easier said than done. Because the supply chain straddles facilities across the globe and is affected by almost every other function in the company, it is both the best place to make change happen and a tough place to make change happen. Bad business practices in those other functions cause poor performance especially in the supply chain. For example, engineers use custom-made, unique components in product designs. Marketing loves stock-keeping unit (SKU) proliferation. Sales piles up orders in the last three days of the quarter. Manufacturing wants 100-percent machine utilization. Planners love spreadsheets and shun enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. All of these practices can lead to an unoptimized supply chain. Furthermore different functions often have conflicting motivations and, of course, everyone has inertia, or a reluctance to change and adopt new ideas.
Other barriers to change exist in the corporate structure. In a multinational corporation, there is conflict between headquarters/centers of excellence and big divisions. There are many cultures, many functions, and many types of people. Many employees are not engineers or quantitatively focused business people, but are driven more by emotions, feelings, habits, attitudes, and tradition. Finally, in any large organization, there are many improvement programs and change initiatives all competing for support and resources.
So, top graduates are typically expected to "go make change happen" but without any funding, staff, or authority and among all types of people who they have never met before. Moreover, the divisions and remote sites really don't want a "youngster" from headquarters coming to tell them what to do.Â
It's a tough challenge, and to stand a chance of meeting it, graduates at least need to be equipped with skills and knowledge they learned at college or in corporate training programs that can help them to perform as leaders. Invariably, however, this is not the case.
Classrooms fall short
Every business-focused master's degree and MBA program teaches leadership in at least one course. And many corporations also provide internal leadership training for their best and brightest. But given the wide variety of leadership scenarios that managers can encounter, are we teaching the right ones?Â
Leadership comes in numerous forms: leading projects, leading teams, thought leadership, running operations, running organizations, leading troops up the hill, building coalitions, championing causes, leading by example of good work, and countless more.
As educators and corporate trainers, which type of leadership should be our target in the classroom?
One of the reasons why business graduates are ill-prepared for leadership challenges is that they are not learning the right skills in advanced degree programs.
Consider the master's-level supply chain curriculum. There are typically courses on logistics systems, inventory management, database analytics, supply chain planning, global supply chain management, sourcing and procurement, statistics, linear programming, operations research, finance and cost analysis, transportation management, simulation, information systems, and other technical and management topics. Some two-year programs include a summer internship at a company site working in a supply chain role. There are programs that include classes in public speaking, presentations, and writing. Communications courses often cover how to give an excellent PowerPoint presentation and how to tell your story in a job interview.
How much of the curriculum is devoted to teaching leadership skills? In reviewing the curricula of many of the top supply chain master's programs, we found that only 4 to 7 percent is devoted to any kind of leadership training. Most curricula have one course about leadership. We saw no internships devoted to learning leadership. We were delighted that at least one school offered a supply chain course on "change management," but that was the exception.
Conclusion: Although most supply chain master's students take at least one course on leadership, not much of that is targeted to "go make change happen." Likely, most leadership is learned over the years through "on the job training." Most people pick it up by osmosis and/or trial and error. Many companies offer leadership programs, but the feedback we receive on these programs suggests that they have similar flaws to those offered at the college level.
What are the current teaching approaches? In our research we found that the most frequent aspects of leadership courses focus on leading teams, self-assessment, personal leadership style, effective presentations, leadership and ethics, organizational processes, leadership theory and case studies, leading organizations, energizing others, and building high-performance organizations. Less frequent are courses on attributes of great leaders, leadership models for the C-suite, components of great leadership, and management psychology. It was uncommon to see a course on leadership and the implementation of change.
Closing the knowledge gaps
These types of leadership courses do not match the reality that many recent master's-level graduates face. Imagine the setting. With your new master's degree in supply chain, you are the new hire into a center of excellence in a multinational corporation. You are paid very well and report directly to the vice president of supply chain. You are an individual contributor with no staff, no budget, and no actual authority but are viewed as the new "whiz kid." Your boss asks you to do tasks such as:
Go visit the transportation managers in each of our distribution centers across the country and get those people to set up centralized procurement of transportation services.
Go visit the sales and finance organizations and get those people to start participating in the sales and operations planning (S&OP) process again.
Go to the plant in Cincinnati, Ohio, and get those people to start using the new planning software that we just paid US$10 million for.
Go to sales and get them to stop bringing in all their orders in the last week of the month.Â
Go convince design engineering to reign in their use of unique custom-built raw materials in their product designs.
Having had one class where a leadership technique is described will not help a new supply chain manager deal with these types of scenarios. How can educators (and corporate trainers) do better? We recommend that the focus should be on what students need right now—the day after graduation—not when they become CEO. Students need simple, practical down-to-earth tools to use immediately that they can easily remember.
Our dissatisfaction with current theory-based and self-assessment-based leadership classes led us to develop four workshops for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Supply Chain Management program that focus specifically on "go make change happen." We found that the self-assessment and personality-type training programs that are used in many leadership classes are hard to translate into tangible leadership techniques. Furthermore, students often times could not remember enough about their personality types for that to be the basis of their leadership plan. For that reason, we focused on role-playing exercises that could help students practice the necessary leadership skills many times.
Each of these two- to three-hour workshops follows a similar format of an initial introduction to the whole class, breaking into smaller teams (four to eight people) for role-playing, and then reassembling as the whole class for a discussion and team testimonials. A preview of these workshops is given below and will be described in more detail in four subsequent articles, which will appear on Supply Chain Quarterly's website.
The workshops we created to teach "go make change happen" are as follows:
The Human Element. This workshop teaches quantitatively trained students how to use the "Human Element" to connect with a large audience of "regular people" when they give presentations. Human beings like to look at other human faces and are programmed to do this from birth. If you pause in front of a large magazine stand and look at all the covers, you can see this theory in practice. The purpose of the cover is to make a person stop, want to pick up the magazine, and read it. For this reason, nearly all the magazines you see on a newsstand will have a picture of a human face. Our experience also shows that verbal or text statements connected to a face sink in better and are retained longer. By contrast, persuasion in math and engineering—and therefore in supply chain management—is done through graphs, charts, schematics, and proofs. No human element.
This workshop teaches students how to include pictures of people in their presentations and how to have their key messages appear to be statements coming from real people. Teams of students in breakout rooms are assigned opposing sides of a controversial issue and are given one hour to develop a convincing presentation using the Human Element. When the class reconvenes, each team uses their presentation to persuade the rest of the class to support their position.
More information on the human element can be found here.
"VELD" or Vision, Emotion, Logic, and Details. To drive a change program in a large organization, it is necessary to connect with and persuade all kinds of people—not just engineers and business types—to support the cause. It is human nature to try to convince other people using arguments that sound most convincing to ourselves. For quantitative people, this does not work so well. Think about the current rebellion against such scientific concepts as global warming, vaccinations, and genetically modified crops. It takes more than just quantitative righteousness to carry the day. The VELD method is inspired by Aristotle's three modes of persuasion (ethos, pathos, and logos). We realized that we and our students were stuck on logos (appeal to logic) as the only valid persuasive method. Therefore we invented VELD which adds both "appeal to a compelling future vision" and "appeal to emotion" to our existing tendency to "appeal to logic and details."
This workshop teaches science, engineering, and business students how to incorporate vision and emotion statements in their arguments. Traditionally, math-oriented curricula urge students to make recommendations and business cases by laying out the logic and the details. Appeals to compelling visions or appeals to emotion are scorned in quantitative settings. Yet the large majority of "regular people" are influenced more by a compelling vision and an emotional appeal than by logic and details. Think about some recent elections!
In the workshop, teams of students are assigned an imaginary audience such as the City Council, Department of Transportation, Cultural Committee, and NASA, among others. Each has a different VELD profile. Teams then proceed to create a pitch tailored to persuade that audience, which they then present and justify to the assembled class.
More information on VELD can be found here.
Logrolling. In a legislature, the act of trading votes behind the scenes to get your bill passed was (supposedly) first referred to as "logrolling" by Congressman Davy Crockett of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1835. To champion a cause, our usual gut reaction is to become an evangelist and convince the doubters and naysayers of the benefits and righteousness of our position. This is a lot of work and may not succeed. In very large organizations, especially a multinational corporation, there are always many change programs being promoted at any one time. Each key decision maker can be for or against or neutral on any of these initiatives. Logrolling can be facilitated by working quietly behind the scenes to understand the positions of each of the key decision makers on each issue. It is then possible to bring together people who are neutral on each other's issue and have them agree to support the other person's issue, thereby building enough support to ensure that your issue gets passed.
This workshop has two role plays. Initially, teams of six to eight students, ignorant of logrolling, try to persuade their peers to support their change program any way they can, usually by impassioned arguments. Later they see that they could have reached a deal faster and with less exertion through logrolling. In a final role play, they practice logrolling to quickly make deals.
Cialdini's Six Principles of Persuasion. Robert Cialdini, professor emeritus of psychology and marketing at Arizona State University, brilliantly laid out in his best-selling book, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, the six methods of persuasion: reciprocity, commitment and consistency, social proof, authority, liking, and scarcity. We see these every day since marketing firms are experts at using these principles to sell things. "Only two seats left at this price" is an example of scarcity. But it's not just marketing firms that use the techniques. Stop at a red light in the developing world and destitute people will rush out to wash your windshield in hopes of getting a tip. That's an example of reciprocity.
This workshop teaches students how to use these six principles in a very subtle, professional way in a large organization to build up support for their change effort. Teams of students practice the six techniques through role-playing and discuss which ones to use in each example scenario.
Helping change makers excel
Many of our top graduates are in greater need of leadership skills than analytical skills. Yet leadership training makes up only 4 to 7 percent of the curriculum of most supply chain programs. Furthermore the leadership training that is provided is often targeted at less important skills than "go make change happen." For our gifted graduates and new hires to "go make change happen," both educators and corporate trainers need to change their approach to teaching these vital skills. Simple, practical techniques to generate support across large diverse organizations are needed. Repeated practice through role playing is key to developing these skills.
The workshops described in this article represent a good first step but are relatively new and will no doubt be refined as we receive feedback from students and gain more experience in this new approach. We welcome feedback from academic and corporate educators.
The moniker of "rising star" is not given to the person who creates the best linear-programming model. It is given to the person who makes change happen. Let's give future leaders the tools they need to be effective change agents today and tomorrow.
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
Maersk’s overall view of the coming year is that the global economy is expected to grow modestly, with the possibility of higher inflation caused by lingering supply chain issues, continued geopolitical tensions, and fiscal policies such as new tariffs. Geopolitical tensions and trade disruptions could threaten global stability, climate change action will continue to shape international cooperation, and the ongoing security issue in the Red Sea is expected to continue into 2025.
Those are difficult challenges, but according to Maersk, a vital part of logistics planning is understanding where risk and weak spots might be and finding ways to dampen the impact of inevitable hurdles.
They include:
1. Build a resilient supply chain As opposed to simply maintaining traditional network designs, Maersk says it is teaming with Hapag-Lloyd to implement a new East-West network called Gemini, beginning in February, 2025. The network will use leaner mainliners and shuttles together, allowing for isolation of port disruptions, minimizing the impact of disruptions to supply chains and routes. More broadly, companies should work with an integrated logistics partner that has multiple solutions—be they by air, truck, barge or rail—allowing supply chains to adapt around issues, while still meeting consumer demands.
2. Implementing technological advances
A key component in ensuring more resilience against disruptions is working with a supply chain supplier that offers advanced real-time tracking systems and AI-powered analytics to provide comprehensive visibility across supply chains. An AI-powered dashboard of analytics can provide end-to-end visibility of shipments, tasks, and updates, enabling efficient logistics management without the need to chase down data. Also, forecasting tools can give predictive analytics to optimize inventory, reduce waste, and enhance efficiency. And incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) into digital solutions can enable live tracking of containers to monitor shipments.
3. Preparing for anything, instead of everything Contingency planning was a big theme for 2024, and remains so for 2025. That need is highlighted by geopolitical instability, climate change and volatility, and changes to tariffs and legislation. So in 2025, businesses should seek to partner with a logistics partner that offers risk and disruption navigation through pre-planned procedures, risk assessments, and alternative solutions.
4. Diversifying all aspects of the supply chain Supply chains have felt the impact of disruption throughout 2024, with the situation in the Red Sea resulting in all shipping having to avoid the Suez Canal, and instead going around the Cape of Good Hope. This has increased demand throughout the year, resulting in businesses trying to move cargo earlier to ensure they can meet customer needs, and even considering nearshoring. As regionalization has become more prevalent, businesses can use nearshoring to diversify suppliers and reduce their dependency on single sources. By ensuring that these suppliers and manufacturers are closer to the consumer market, businesses can keep production costs lower as well as have more ease of reaching markets and avoid delay-related risks from global disruptions. Utilizing options closer to market can also allow companies to better adapt to changes in consumer needs and behavior. Finally, some companies may also find it useful to stock critical materials for future, to act as a buffer against unexpected delays and/or issues relating to trade embargoes.
5. Understanding tariffs, legislation and regulations 2024 was year of customs regulations in EU. And tariffs are expected in the U.S. as well, once the new Trump Administration takes office. However, consistent with President-elect Trump’s first term, threats of increases are often used as a negotiating tool. So companies should take a wait and see approach to U.S. customs, even as they cope with the certainty that further EU customs are set to come into play.
Keep ReadingShow less
Attendees visit the CSCMP EDGE 2024 Resource Center.
As I assume the role of Chair of the Board of Directors for the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), I fondly reflect on the more than 10 years that I’ve had the privilege of being part of this extraordinary organization. I’ve seen firsthand the impact we have had on individuals, companies, and the entire supply chain profession.
CSCMP’s journey as an organization began back in 1963. It has since grown from a small, passionate community to the world’s premier association for supply chain professionals. Our mission—to connect, educate, and develop supply chain professionals throughout their careers—remains not only relevant, but vital in today’s world.
As we look ahead, the opportunities are vast. What stands out the most to me is simply this:We are stronger together. Every individual brings a unique perspective, and it’s through our collective wisdom and efforts that we will continue to advance the work we do. The road ahead is not one we travel alone. It’s a path we navigate as a community—one united in purpose and direction.
My vision for the year ahead centers around growth—growth in our global reach and, perhaps even more importantly, growth in how we engage and support each other. We have tremendous opportunities for international expansion, especially in Europe, the U.K., Mexico, Central and South America, and Canada. I’m happy to share that we're already seeing progress in our reach to these regions.
I'm incredibly excited about the potential for even more growth ahead. One of the initiatives I am most passionate about is our Centers of Excellence. These centers will provide members the space to engage deeply in key supply chain disciplines. I invite each of you to dive into these areas, share your experiences, and contribute to the innovative solutions we develop together. There will be plenty of opportunity to do so. These centers are not only academic spaces—they are hubs for innovation, where we can share best practices and work together to solve our industry’s biggest challenges.
Education and thought leadership will continue to be at the heart of what we do. By expanding our research capacity, we will offer cutting-edge insights that keep our members at the forefront of industry trends and innovation. Through our platforms, we will create even more opportunities for connection and collaboration—ensuring that every voice is heard. Your insights, curiosity, questions, and engagement will drive the transformation we seek. We all play a part in the advancement of our industry and our profession.
Our impact begins with membership. Expanding collaborations with public, private, and nonprofit sectors will give us new ways to drive progress. In a world where our ecosystem is even more interconnected than ever before, the ability to engage with diverse stakeholders will help us unlock new solutions and truly make a difference on a global scale. None of this would be possible without the strong foundation that has been built over the years by serving our supply chain community. Each of you holds the ability to shape the future of the supply chain, and I can’t wait to see what we will achieve together.
The concept of using a neutral third party to resolve conflicts between suppliers and customers is not new. Mediation and arbitration have long been considered as more efficient and less costly ways to resolve contractual disputes than litigation. In fact, 2025 marks the 100th anniversary of the Federal Arbitration Act, which allows for contract disputes to be resolved through a private resolution process instead of going to court.
Over the years, the concept of using a neutral has expanded to include more preventive techniques for keeping business relationships healthy and addressing potential contractual misalignments earlier. For example, the construction industry has been utilizing the concept of a dispute review board (DRB) since 1975 to solve issues that arise during major projects, such as cost overruns, schedule delays, and disputes over payment or the quality of workmanship. The DRB is typically a panel of three independent expert advisors who are immediately available to help resolve disputes that arise during the contractual relationship.1 The panel is formed at the beginning of the construction project with the goal of resolving any issues or differences before they become formal claims.
Recently the concept has evolved further into what is now known as a “standing neutral” and has been adopted by companies in many industries outside of construction. A standing neutral is a highly qualified and respected expert, selected by both parties in a business relationship to help them resolve issues and maintain a healthy relationship. This can best be described as a proactive approach where the neutral provides quick, informal, flexible, adaptable, and nonadversarial ways for preventing disputes.
The role of the standing neutral
Unlike a neutral third party used on an ad-hoc basis for dispute resolution in mediation or arbitration, a standing neutral is a readily available “fast response” technique. It is designed to prevent any issues from escalating into adversarial disputes that might otherwise go to mediation, arbitration, or litigation. A key feature is that the neutral is “standing,” meaning it is integrated into the parties' continuing governance structure. Another key concept is that the standing neutral supports the relationship itself and both parties equally; the goal is to ensure the success of the relationship.
Embedding a standing neutral into a contracting party's governance structure can have a powerful impact on the success of the business relationship. The standing neutral provides a helpful "dose of reality" to the parties and encourages them to be more objective in their dealings with each other. When differences of opinion arise, the parties can quickly use the standing neutral as an objective sounding board, obtaining a recommended course of action that is minimally disruptive to the business relationship.
While the classic role of a standing neutral is to serve as a “real-time” issue-resolver throughout a relationship, companies have begun to expand how they have used a standing neutral. The University of Tennessee’s research—which is detailed in the white paper “Unpacking the Standing Neutral”—reveals the creative ways that companies are using a standing neutral.2 For example, some companies are increasing the role of their standing neutral to support annual relationship health checks and even using neutrals as “deal facilitators” to help craft highly complex or strategic outsourcing agreements.
Today, there are many different variations of a standing neutral. Figure 1 shows some of the most common options companies can consider when designing the role and scope of their standing neutral. In the figure, these options are organized across nine design principles or considerations. For an example of how a standing neutral can operate in a real-world setting see the sidebar “Idea in action: EY case study."
Getting ramped up
If you think using a standing neutral would benefit one of your relationships, we suggest going through the following simple stages. It’s important to note that the cost and expenses of the standing neutral are absorbed equally by both parties.
1. Selection: At the outset of their relationship, parties select one person (or three) with whom they trust and have confidence to serve as standing neutral throughout their relationship. A single standing neutral should always be entirely independent. In most cases where there is a panel of neutrals, each party nominates one member, and the two nominated neutrals will select a third member; in such cases, it is typically required that every panel member be acceptable to both parties and that all panel members be independent and impartial, with no special allegiance to the nominating party.
As part of the selection process, the parties formalize an agreement with the standing neutral, which includes determining the standing neutral's responsibilities and authority. The nine design principles in Figure 1 can be used to accomplish this.
2. Briefing: The parties brief the standing neutral regarding the nature, scope, and purpose of the relationship or venture. As part of the briefing, the standing neutral is usually equipped with a basic set of contract materials and supporting documents.
3. Continuing involvement: A key part of designing a standing neutral program is embedding your standing neutral as part of your ongoing governance. For example, we recommend at a minimum that the parties have their standing neutral attend the parties’ quarterly business reviews and lead an annual relationship health check. This enables the standing neutral to meet regularly with the parties to review the progress of the relationship, even if there are no issues.
Alternatively, it is possible to have a
standby neutral (versus a standing neutral). In the case of a standby neutral, the neutral is merely available on an ad-hoc basis to be called on whenever necessary to give an advisory opinion.
Why standing neutrals work so well
Standing neutrals have had a remarkable record—especially for resolving issues before they become disputes. A study of the use of standing neutrals in the construction industry found that, in the vast majority of cases, the parties never look to the standing neutral to make any dispute resolution recommendations or decisions. (And in the small minority of cases where the standing neutral actually makes a recommendation, 95% of the recommendations are accepted by the parties without resorting to mediation, arbitration or litigation.
3)
It may seem counterintuitive that having a standing neutral reduces the likelihood of needing a third party to resolve disputes. But research has found that the presence of others causes people to behave more honestly and reign in unethical behavior such as cheating. These effects are amplified when the third-party observer is knowledgeable in the subject matter of the agreement and in the nature of the agreement.
The establishment of a standing neutral—which appears at first to be merely an efficient technique for quickly resolving disputes—creates a dynamic situation in which the participants change their relationship and their attitudes toward each other. The changes usually are an evolution, rather than a conscious effort. For example, at first it is common for contracting parties to feel they are simply choosing a neutral expert for resolving conflicts between them promptly. However, as the standing neutral interacts with the parties during ongoing governance forums, the parties develop a greater sense of confidence in the standing neutral's ability to quickly alleviate friction in the relationship. When this happens, the parties shift their view of the standing neutral from “dispute-resolver” to one of “sensible sounding board.”
The presence of a standing neutral also encourages teamwork and improved performance by all parties. The contracting parties become incentivized to concentrate on “fixing the problem” rather than “fixing the blame,” and use their mutual knowledge to solve the problem rather than relinquishing control to the neutral. A side benefit is when the parties construct their own solutions to problems, they often increase their trust and confidence in each other's abilities, which ultimately strengthens the relationship. For these reasons, the standing neutral serves as not only a standby dispute resolution process, but also as a remarkably successful dispute prevention process.
Notes:
1 For more information see A. A. Mathews, Robert J. Smith, Paul E. Sperry, and Robert M. Matyas, Construction Dispute Review Board Manual, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996): p. 10
The global consulting firm EY was looking to outsource the food services, cleaning services, and maintenance at its facilities to the provider Integrated Service Solutions (ISS). But the company wanted to do so in a way that was completely different from how it had approached outsourcing workplace services in the past. EY and ISS wanted to create an outsourcing agreement that was highly collaborative and beneficial for both parties.
To do so, they incorporated a standing neutral in the contracting process from the outset. Together the parties selected one standing neutral—Erik Linnarsson, a lawyer from Cirio Law Firm—as a deal facilitator. Linnarsson was trained as a certified deal architect (CDA) to craft complex outsourcing agreements.
Post contract signing, the parties continued to use a standing neutral, embedding Linnarsson into the outsourcing relationship’s ongoing governance. Linnarsson supported both mid- and higher-level governance forums. He also acted as both an expert coach and evaluator for issue resolution, providing advice as problems arose. If needed, Linnarsson had the authority to make formal, nonbinding recommendations. When Linnarsson decided to retire, EY, ISS, and Linnarsson ramped up one of Linnarsson’s colleagues, who now serves the role of standing neutral.
The parties also have tapped into their standing neutral for additional post-support services that are preventive in nature. These include ongoing performance management alignment and performance relationship health monitoring. For example, one role of the standing neutral is conducting an annual relationship health check, which includes measuring the level of trust and compatibility between the two partners.
The standing neutral also supports strategic reviews, including reviewing the contract for any misalignments. For example, when the parties initially created the agreement, they had decided to use a specific sustainability metric. However, since signing the contract, regulatory requirements around sustainability have become stricter. In addition, EY wanted to be a global leader in sustainability. As part of the proactive review, and with the help of the standing neutral, the parties worked together to revamp the metric.
Magnus Kuchler, EY’s markets leader and country managing partner for EY Sweden, believes that using a standing neutral has had a positive impact on the outsourcing relationship. “Simply having a trusting and credible standing neutral post-contract signing gives team members a sounding board that helps people make better decisions,” he said. “Using a standing neutral is truly a powerful tool to help contracting parties maintain a healthy relationship—which ultimately prevents costly disputes.”