Hidden Agendas and Vertical Power Structures—How to Secure Your Mandate as an Interim Leader
In the previous part, Building Trust at a Rapid Pace, we discussed how an interim leader builds psychological safety under time pressure. Now we’re shifting our focus from the team to the organization as a whole. Every organization has its own political dynamics. Anyone who comes in from the outside to implement change finds themselves in the midst of a system of formal and informal power balances. We continue the conversation with Mats Reidler, Director at Interim Search, whose MBA thesis at Stockholm University focuses on successful interim leadership.
Understand the policy, but don't get bogged down in it
A clear pattern emerges from Mats’ interviews with experienced interim leaders. They do not challenge the organization’s internal politics and do not allow themselves to be drawn into it. They assess it and navigate through it. This is where the external leader has an advantage. Without a history within the company, it’s easier to view the situation objectively and focus on what’s best for the business.
Mats, how does the political landscape differ for an interim leader compared to a permanent leader?
– Power structures exist regardless—upward, sideways, and downward. The difference is that an interim leader has much less time for backroom politics. You can’t spend months building alliances. Instead, you need to quickly understand who influences what and who is for or against the change. What works is transparency: say what you think and stand by it. It’s not about challenging every hierarchy. Several of the people I interviewed consciously choose to work within the existing structures, as long as it’s possible to move the organization forward.
Mandates and frameworks from day one
The most important safeguard in a complex mission is management’s approval. Without a clear mandate from above, every decision becomes open to negotiation.
What needs to be in place before work begins?
– A clear mandate and a clear scope of work. Management and the interim leader need to agree on what the assignment is intended to achieve, what decisions may be made, and how the results will be measured. When the framework and goals are established and communicated from the outset, you also have something to fall back on when resistance arises. Then the discussion is no longer about what you or anyone else thinks, but about what the organization has already agreed upon.
Build broad support through a steering committee and an advisory group
A mandate from the top goes a long way, but it doesn't go all the way. For a change to be sustainable, it needs support at more levels than just the leadership team.
How can you get more people on board besides management?
– Several of the respondents work with both a steering committee and an advisory group, in which management, the union, and other key stakeholders are involved from the outset. This ensures that the change is accepted throughout the entire organization, not just at the top. It also continues after the interim leader has left, since there is a host organization that can carry the work forward.
HOW TO DO IT: Three protective measures for your mandate
- Secure a mandate and approval from top management: Do not embark on a complex assignment without a clear mandate from above and a measurable scope of work.
- Establish a broad steering or advisory group: Involve management, unions, and key stakeholders early on, so that the change receives support at multiple levels.
- Set clear and measurable guidelines from day one: The goals will serve as an objective foundation to fall back on when personal agendas try to slow down the process.
The ability to manage relationships and power dynamically, both vertically and horizontally, is one of the competencies that the study highlights as crucial for interim leaders.
This article is based on Mats Reidler's MBA thesis at Stockholm University on interim leadership.
