In my last post, I described the differences between partner and vendor relationships.

Although most of us prefer partnerships with our sponsors, this is not always possible. Sometimes, all the sponsor wants is a vendor-type transaction in order to accomplish a narrow change objective. What is most important is to avoid a rapport breakdown (i.e., operating as a partner when the client wants a vendor, or the reverse). You can accomplish this by establishing a clear “line-of-sight” understanding with your sponsor regarding what you should expect from each other.

Establishing clear expectations with sponsors about the nature of our working relationship (partner/vendor) is not, however, always an easy thing to accomplish. Part of the challenge is that sometimes either we or the sponsor lack a proper grasp of what is involved.

As change practitioners, we’ve probably all developed guidelines to help our clients understand what’s involved when establishing expectations of each other. The following is a list of principles I use early in the relationship-building process with sponsors.

1. All relationships operate with expectations—some are just more explicit and better negotiated than others.
2. With important relationships, expectations are always expensive. We’ll either pay the price for securing the clarity around what we’ll each look to the other to do or we’ll pay for not having the precision and transparency of our expectations that is needed for us to operate well as a team. One way or the other, we’ll pay.
3. Clarifying expectations requires: a) knowing what we each want to accomplish, b) committing ourselves to do our part, and c) trusting that each other will deliver on his/her commitments.
4. Effective expectation setting can unfold only in situations in which both sponsor and agent have proper access to relevant information and the option of declining unacceptable offers.
5. Don’t ask for something the other party doesn’t influence, or offer anything you don’t deliver on.
6. Expectations are not fully clarified until an agreement has been reached regarding the consequences associated with fulfilling or not fulfilling them.
7. When difficulties arise, we have two choices: comply with the terms of our agreement or renegotiate the expectations.
8. Once expectations are agreed to, there may be reasons why they are not fulfilled, but there are seldom excuses. That is, external events or contributing factors may affect a person’s ability to live up to the agreement, but very rarely do these release or “excuse” him/her from delivering on the obligation that was incurred.
9. Once agreed to, unilaterally changing expectations is unacceptable.

10.  Expectations are originally negotiated with incomplete information; therefore, agreements are reached during “uninformed optimism.”

11.  As such, once agreed to, expectations may be opened up again for renegotiation at any time as long as it is acceptable to both parties.

12.  Any request for renegotiation must be made early enough so that if the newly proposed expectations are not accepted, the original obligations can still be met.

13.  Because we’re dealing with the integrity of our word, we’ll treat all expectations as equal—not in their content, but in their implications for our trustworthiness. If either of us doesn’t live up to even a small expectation, the other could begin to doubt other commitments that have been made.

Which of these principles are you most comfortable with? Which is hardest for you?

Next: How to Address Sponsor-Agent Relationship Issues (with free download)

Go to the beginning of this series.