David A. Fields Consulting Group Good news! You’ve struck up a relationship with the decision-maker at a prospective client. Let’s call her Denise, the corporation’s CUO (Chief Unspecified Officer).
Bad news: Denise asks that you chat about the project with Elliot Intheweeds, the SVP of Unspecified Stuff.
Elliot is a particular type of influencer, called a “breaker.”
He’s not a gatekeeper—you already reached Denise. And he’s not the decision-maker—he can’t sign your contract or cut a check.
As a breaker, he has the potential to say “No” and shut off your chances of winning the engagement.
Elliot’s first email to you demonstrates his intention to dictate every nitty-gritty detail of your approach.
Sigh. If Elliot knew how to solve the problem, his company wouldn’t have the problem, would they? (Keep that thought to yourself.)
You also sense Elliot is feeling threatened by having the smart cookies from your consulting firm treading on his turf.
Nevertheless, Denise works closely with Elliot and respects him.
Your next meeting with Denise is on Friday and you’ve set up a call with Elliot for Thursday.
How should you handle the call with Elliot so that his considerable influence swings your way while you retain your peer-level relationship with Denise?
Hit all three points of the Trust Triangle with Elliot directly.
In other words, show him that you’re thinking about his interests, you want to help him, and your consulting firm’s work won’t harm him.
During your call with Elliot, conduct a light, slightly modified version of the Context Discussion. Start off by complimenting him, because:
1) a little bit of sincere flattery never goes awry, and
2) putting yourself in a positive mindset is crucial.
Frame your conversation as teammates working together to support Denise … and to benefit him.
For instance, when discussing Desired Outcomes you might say,
“From your perspective, what do you think would make this project successful for Denise? What do you think would make it an absolute grand slam?”
Similarly, approach Perceived Risks and Concerns this way:
“I know you’re in a great position to protect Denise’s interests. What are your key concerns about this initiative? From your perspective, is there anything that could go wrong?”
Skim or skip the Value section unless Elliot is the keeper of all financial data.
Your biggest challenge will be keeping the conversation as concise and high-level as possible, which entails raising Elliot’s focus back up to the 20,000-foot level when he wants to whip out his microscope.
Finally, supplement the standard Context Discussion questions with a few queries that speak directly to Elliot’s needs. For instance:
“What could my consulting team do in our work with Denise that would be helpful for you?”
“Do you have any concerns about how this initiative could affect the work you’re doing?”
The Elliots of the world can be viewed as frustrating barriers to winning projects. That outlook rarely helps, though.
You want Elliot on your side.
Even the most resistant breakers, when handled respectfully, may become ardent, internal champions for your consulting firm.
Turning breakers and other influencers into allies is a sound, long-term strategy
After all, you never know when Elliot’s going to be promoted to CNO (Chief Nebulous Officer).
How else do you influence breakers like Elliot?
Text and images are © 2026 David A. Fields, all rights reserved.
Awesome article as always. I used “what is your concern” question at times. One feedback I received from a colleague in my team listening was that asking this question make the conversation into negative thinking. Concern=negative. Any thoughts on this feedback?
Perfect question, Tony. Your colleague is right that the question raises negative thinking. That’s a good thing! Here’s why:
Whether or not you probe for concerns and reveal the negative thinking, those concern and misgivings exist. The only question is whether you get to hear them, acknowledge them (which makes you an ally not an opponent), and address them. You can stay in the world of talking solely about all the upsides of your work, but then you’re only viewed as a vendor and fair-weather friend, not a true partner and problem solver.
If you’re insecure in your offering or you legitimately should not win a piece of business, then negative thinking is scary. On the flip side, if you know your offering will help your prospect, then negative thinking is welcome.
Okay, stepping down from the soapbox now. I’m so glad you shared your colleague’s point, Tony!
I’ve experienced influence breakers – especially when a “team member” feels threatened by my presence. Your approach is exactly right: focus on the priorities of the decision maker (i.e., Denise) – because Denise grants the authority for me to act.
Spot on, Loraine. Plenty of people can say No, but since only the decision-maker’s Yes can authorize a project, the decision-maker’s needs must take priority.
Thank you for sharing your experience for others to see, Loraine!
David, What a great and timely article. I happen to have an Elliot at one of my clients and I’ve been struggling with how to manage the interactions with him (particularly when his ideas aren’t 100% aligned with “Denise”)! I’ll be incorporating these ideas into my next conversation.
JW
Perfect, John–well, not perfect that you have an Elliot, but perfect that you now have a path forward. Please keep me apprised of how your Elliot management works out.
I’d try to make Elliot feel part of the success of the project. Frankly, you need Elliot to be successful at the client. Be excited about the opportunity to work with Elliot. Use the term “we” when talking with Elliot. Make sure Elliot is talking during the meeting vs. you presenting to Elliot. Listen to Elliot’s concerns and validate them. Shared success is a key message when working with Elliot.
Very fair points, Joe. Co-opting a breaker is definitely a more consistent path to success than trying to run roughshod over them. As you suggest, the question “What could my consulting team do in our work with Denise that would be helpful for you?” is particularly powerful because you’re acknowledging Elliot’s importance and finding ways to create wins for him too.
Thank you for your smart additions to the article, Joe!
Excellent lesson! What do we do if Elliot is not on side and we’ve been working with this person for a month or two? In our case, Elliot is not a detractor but is in the very firm habit of critiquing details in such a way that feels at times adversarial. Enjoy Marjorca!
Interesting situation, Steven. Internal critics and naysayers can be difficult. Often, it’s just a personality characteristic–they’re very good at noticing problems and their strength is in pointing out flaws.
One way to handle individuals like that is to show appreciation for their ability to critique (after all, they actually are quite good at improving the ultimate outcome), create with them a rubric of sorts to judge which critiques are worth reporting vs. which are legitimate but low-value (because they often see all problems as equally worth reporting), and request they come to you directly and privately with their critiques rather than airing them publicly (because they may not realize that public critique can reduce the project’s effectiveness).
Let me know if that helps, Steven!
Thank you David. Very helpful! Going to start applying that today
Excellent, Steven! Let me know how it goes.