The new job begins. Expectations are high\u2014yours and everyone else\u2019s. You want to prove that choosing you was the right decision. So you get started: analyses, measures, first changes. Activity as proof of competence. <\/p>\n\n
Six months later: the quick measures have created resistance<\/a>. Key relationships have been damaged. The organisation has categorised you as someone who does not listen. <\/p>\n\n The first 100 days do not decide everything. But they shape how you are perceived\u2014and how much trust you build for later. You start with a full account of goodwill. Every ill-considered action is a withdrawal. Every genuine act of listening is a deposit. <\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n Michael Watkins, whose book “The First 90 Days” has become the standard reference for managers in new roles, puts it succinctly: the most common cause of failure in new leadership positions is not a lack of competence, but a lack of understanding of the context.<\/p>\n\n A division head I supported in his new role did everything right\u2014from his perspective. In the first three weeks, he identified the obvious inefficiencies, reorganised two teams, and cut a project that, in his view, added no value. The analysis was correct. The outcome was catastrophic. The cancelled project was the CEO\u2019s favourite, the reorganised teams had a close informal collaboration he could not see, and he had never spoken to the most important person on the team in person. Six months later, he was job hunting again. <\/p>\n\n “Quick wins in the first 100 days” is one of the most quoted\u2014and most dangerous\u2014pieces of advice for new managers. It is based on the premise that activity equals effectiveness. <\/p>\n\n Quick wins can be expensive because you do not yet know the informal structures, the unwritten rules, the history behind things. What looks like an obvious improvement can be a minefield. They often signal the wrong thing: “I know better than you. I do not need to ask you.” That may not be your intention, but it is often the effect. And they consume credit you will need later for the truly important decisions<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n The right question is not: what can I change quickly? The question is: what do I need to understand before I change anything? That does not mean passivity. It means the right sequence: understand first, then act. <\/p>\n\n Many new managers confuse listening with doing nothing. Strategic listening is the opposite: one of the most demanding tasks in the first few weeks. <\/p>\n\n It means active exploration, not waiting for someone to come to you. Hold systematic conversations with your team, with peers, with stakeholders, with clients, with people at different levels. Ask the right questions: not only “What is going well, what is not?”, but “What would you change if you could?” and “What does nobody talk about here even though everyone knows it?” This last question opens doors to the elephants in the room. Watch for patterns: individual statements are data points; it becomes interesting when the same issues are named by different people or certain topics are consistently avoided. <\/p>\n\n Looking back, a managing director told me about her most successful transition: “For the first six weeks, I did nothing but have conversations. 47 conversations, each at least an hour. At the beginning, some were irritated about why I was not yet ‘doing’ anything. In the end, I was the only person in the company who had a complete picture. When I then acted, I had backing because everyone felt they had been heard.” <\/p>\n\n Managers who are successful in the long term resist the pressure to deliver quickly. They know: the first few weeks are for understanding, not for changing. <\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n The most important investment in the first 100 days is relationships. Get to know your team properly\u2014not just the function, but the person: what drives them, what frustrates them, what they can do, and what stands in their way. Treat your peers as partners, not competitors, because your colleagues at the same level can become your most important allies\u2014or your biggest obstacles. Map your stakeholders: who influences your success? Whose support do you need? This is not a political game; it is realism. <\/p>\n\n Respect your predecessor, even if you were brought in to do things differently. The people on your team worked with your predecessor; some valued them. Blanket criticism of your predecessor is criticism of those who worked with them. And do not underestimate informal sources of information: assistants and executive offices often know more about the organisation than many a manager. They know the history, the unwritten rules, the informal networks. <\/p>\n\n Relationships you build in calm times will carry you through difficult times. Those who only look for allies in a crisis<\/a> will not find any. <\/p>\n\n Certain mistakes recur among new managers with remarkable regularity. The most common: judging too quickly. The first assessment is often wrong\u2014or at least incomplete. The employee who seems difficult at first turns out to be the most honest. The project that seemed hopeless has a background you did not know. <\/p>\n\n Almost as common: bringing your own solution. “At my previous employer, we did it this way” ignores the context. What worked there does not have to work here. A solution that ignores the culture<\/a> will be eaten by the culture. <\/p>\n\n Then there is forming the wrong alliances. In the first few weeks, people will approach you\u2014some with genuine interest, some with agendas. One important nuance: those who knock on your door first are often those with the least influence in the organisation, or those who are frustrated and looking for an ally. The real opinion leaders often wait and see. If you align yourself with one faction too early, you make the others your enemy. Do not bypass middle management<\/a>; a direct line to the team may feel democratic, but it undermines the managers in between. And promise less than you can deliver, because every broken promise damages your credibility. <\/p>\n\n The first 100 days follow a natural arc. The first month is about understanding: holding systematic conversations, observing the organisation (how decisions are made, how information flows), understanding the history (what was tried, what worked), and clarifying expectations (from above and from below). <\/p>\n\n The second month is about making sense of it: identifying patterns from the conversations, developing and testing initial hypotheses, distinguishing real quick wins from presumed ones. The third month is about alignment: setting a few priorities, aligning with the team and stakeholders, clarifying resources, and communicating what you will do\u2014and what you deliberately will not do. And from the fourth month onwards, act: implement initial changes, measure progress, adjust if necessary, and keep listening, because that never stops. <\/p>\n\n Balancing listening and acting is not a formula. If the team becomes impatient and asks when something will finally happen, you have listened for too long. If you have to reverse decisions and do not understand the resistance, you acted too early. It requires attentiveness: what does the organisation need right now\u2014more direction or more understanding? <\/p>\n\n Take five minutes and answer three questions:<\/p>\n\n First: Who have I not yet spoken to, even though I should\u2014and what is stopping me?<\/p>\n\n Second: What do I believe I have understood, and have I validated that assessment with someone who would honestly disagree with me?<\/p>\n\n Third: What would my team tell me if it were truly honest\u2014and how do I create the conditions for it to do so?<\/p>\n\n If you cannot answer the third question, that is your next project.<\/p>\n\n The first 100 days are not a sprint after which you have won. They are the start of a long journey. What you build in these days\u2014understanding, relationships, credibility\u2014will carry you through the years that follow. What you damage, you will have to laboriously repair<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n The first 100 days do not show how fast you are. They show how smart you are. The best outcome after 100 days is not a list of measures. It is an organisation that trusts you because you listened to it. Have a conversation this week with someone you have overlooked so far. Not with an agenda, but with a question: “What should I understand that I do not yet understand?” <\/p>\n\n From expert to manager<\/a><\/strong> \u2013 The 100 days are particularly critical when you are leading for the first time. Why the role change is harder than expected. <\/p>\n\n\n
The myth of quick wins<\/h2>\n\n
Listening as a strategic leadership responsibility<\/h2>\n\n
\n
Build relationships before you need them<\/h2>\n\n
The mistakes almost everyone makes<\/h2>\n\n
The right sequence<\/h2>\n\n
Reality Check<\/h2>\n\n
The Uncomfortable Truth<\/h2>\n\n
Further Insights<\/h2>\n\n