I can see how you would glean that from this conversation, and that's a fair response. But this particular KO is a completely"black-and-white" rule reader; inflexible and downright obstinate. I do NOT have a personal dislike for her so my professional opinion is not driven by emotion. I'm often given directives like this without any explanation at all. And while I agree with all said on this forum, our internal policy strongly suggests that we should focus on the primes analysis, if any(there is). So I was given a directive contrary to policy and without explanation (after requesting one). Repeated practice of this kind of leadership has produced frustration in me and others, and we often find ourselves searching for the wider boundaries to do a better deal instead of slavishly following unexplained directives. Maybe that is disloyal, but if so, it's in response to unwarranted distrust of any opinion other than her own in spite of evidence to the contrary. Is that disloyal, or a natural response?
I get it, she's the KO and it's her discretion, not "ours." But I also think a seasoned specialist should be allowed to present alternatives and create solutions that lead to what might be a better deal. This is how great deals are done and how contracting teams develop, imho. I'm (and others) not given the professional respect of even a dialogue, so here I am, with "attitude." So sue me. Or her actually...she's the KO right?
i wasnt here to vent, but in light of the suggestion that I might be "disloyal" I'm forced to defend myself with context. You can't plant seeds of distrust and expect loyalty in return.
This style has had an incredibly negative impact on my organization. We have some customers paying outside shops to buy for them.