The new CEO was hired to strengthen operating discipline. But all the sales leader heard was: “You do not trust me.”
Consider this scenario.
The founder was outgoing, persuasive, and quick to pursue opportunities. He built the company's success through strong relationships and by uniting his leadership team around his vision. His longtime sales leader worked similarly, valuing direct access, talking ideas through, and flexibility. Often, they relied on a quick conversation to turn opportunities into commitments.
When the founder stepped back, the PE firm selected a CEO with the knowledge, skills, and experience to scale the business. She, too, was driven and fast-moving, but she was more private, serious, and reserved. She communicated directly, challenged assumptions, and expected clear, evidence-backed recommendations.
During her one-on-ones, she asked about margins, delivery capacity, and exceptions.
The sales leader felt he was defending his judgment that had helped build this company over the past 20 years. And she was left wondering why he kept going around her to the founder.
Decisions stalled or were repeatedly reopened. Customer commitments bypassed the new review process she put in place. The founder also remained involved in issues his successor was supposed to own.
She believed she was testing the proposal. He felt she was questioning his competence—something needed to change.
Their PI Behavioral Assessments created the foundation for change by giving them a common language to understand how they naturally communicated, made decisions, and interpreted each other’s intentions.
They created a new communication and working agreement. She explained her decision criteria and distinguished exploratory questions from approval requirements. He brought recommendations and raised disagreements directly with her. They clarified where he could act independently and where things needed to be escalated.
They followed through on their commitments, and decisions started moving faster. They followed the new operating process, and exceptions went directly to the CEO. She also got buy-in from the founder, who started redirecting leaders directly to her, strengthening the new decision authority.
Without that work, the friction could have been treated solely as a performance issue—or contributed to preventable turnover, taking the sales leader’s two decades of customer relationships and institutional knowledge out the door.
PI did not determine whether the leadership team had the knowledge, skills, and experience required for the next chapter. It helped them examine working differences alongside performance evidence and agree on how to work together under the new CEO to execute the value-creation plan.
For PE, the transition does not end when the successor is selected. That is just the beginning—and the time to address friction before it leads to missed milestones.