It requires a transformation of attitude/attitude/attitude towards the action partner, the goal and oneself (task, oneself, others). Instead of being trapped in individual or organizational narcissism, focusing only on one’s own needs, goals and missions, and in doing so violating the boundaries of others, the path to excellence requires consideration and appreciation of the person, his or her limits and also his or her development. Only then is there the basis for a lasting bond. Every imbalance on the one hand has a destructive effect on the relationship and on the other hand robs the connection and unity which is necessary to be able to solve really progressive and excellent problems.

The stronger the solidarity, the stronger the unity, the ability to act together, in which the secret of genuine excellence lies hidden. Everyone gives their best – together for the customer. When all parties are in open dialogue and learners with each other, they are on the common path to excellence together.

A person and also organizations that want to be successful in the long run should therefore strive for a transformation in the thinking and acting of their members, away from narcissism towards solidarity by preserving the boundaries of their employees, suppliers, customers, partners of all kinds. Integrity can actually be trained. However, it must be firmly and bindingly anchored in the basic values of the organization. First-level managers in the company in particular must want, live and specifically promote integrity. This is the only way to internalize integrity at all levels and lead to sustainable relationships – inside and outside the company.

Many business relationships suffer from a lack of sustainability. What is the reason for this? In short, our observation and research show that this phenomenon can be traced back to one cause: business relationships ultimately break down because one person wants to exploit the other or even exploit him one-sidedly – in other words, still seeks his personal profit even when the other person is already on the ground. Being made a loser involves a loss of face.

In some contexts, it can be experienced how the limits are maintained for a certain period of time, for example, to study the system or the other person. After the system or counterpart has been recorded and access to its system has been created, border observation is abandoned and only one’s own advantage is sought. The partner is therefore used as a stirrup for the personal success that is sought. After initially possibly good and successful cooperation, a perceived or actual imbalance arises. The relationship is doomed to failure from the moment the imbalance occurs.

It lacks a solid foundation: integrity. To be integer means to be connected in the relationship and not isolated. Many problems of our time can be traced back to individualization. This affects individuals as well as organizations. Connectedness arises from the fact that the boundary of the other is preserved. If this happens, then the feeling of appreciation is preserved. If the border of the other is (repeatedly) violated, then the person whose border is violated feels a lack of appreciation and distances himself from this intruder.

Only if both sides are permanent winners and also feel this way, will the basis of a lasting bond remain. The foundation is laid for real excellence to have a chance. Excellence only develops when everyone gives their best and this requires a positive motivation. Both parties give their utmost to the task since they are winners.

“We must do something urgently…” – in this or a similar way one hears more and more managers, emphasize more and more often and more strongly! Causes? Increasing and ever faster external influences, which demand lived flexibility and innovation from people and organizations.

Flexibility means being able to meet challenges quickly and safely (with the right form of work). However, specialists and managers have not learned enough how to use change effectively. Flexibility and innovation (innovation = ability to solve problems) are in many places not among the virtues of the working world and are certainly even less so in the first place of German culture. On the contrary: stabilizing, preserving, perfecting, preserving, maintaining, traditionalizing – this corresponds to us, gives us joy and support. The accompanying sobering statement of our time:

There are too many people who are professionals at preserving the old and amateurs at trying the new!

Even if the first step, the insight into the necessary change, is done, many organizations fail in addition, technical and high-level personnel in the next step: the experience and tools of practical change know how´s are missing. A sure instinct and the right procedural strategy are the decisive success factors. Mistakes are punished with lacking readiness for change and resistance – the largest hurdles with changes in organizations.

In an unhealthy company, employees, customers, suppliers, and their representatives are just resources that have to work. This corresponds to a long outdated image of men from scientific management and Fordism, which, however, is unfortunately still and felt in practice in recent years again strongly increasingly to be found. The tendency to reform is not a necessity, but a means to an end at the expense of the quality of the partnership in order to increase one’s own profit. The motto: The collaborating, supplying, buying person must adapt to the system and function. If he does not function, he is replaced.

In the Human Resources and Human Relations approaches that will follow later, the motivation of people has been recognized as a business success factor – but it is still only a means to an end. The motivation of the human being must, therefore, be exploited as optimally as possible in order to achieve one’s own selfish corporate goals. The logical consequence of this attitude is often the attempt with and without cheap tricks to exploit the motivation of employees, suppliers, and customers for one’s own advantage. This does not really mean that something is gained in the interests of the stakeholders. Thus a self-generated togetherness arises, which is a game of losing between exploitation, submission, hypocrisy, and camouflage in both directions. The result is neither professional quality nor excellent results and successes, a large part of the energy goes into the “strategic management” of relationships, instead of creating high product and service quality and optimal result achievement. Actually, there is no friendly solidarity with mutual esteem and common goals, but only an exploiting community of convenience. True integrity (connectedness) does not exist in such cooperation, but it can be found wherever top performance is required.

What would happen if the key to releasing authentic motivation were to lie in seeking and recognizing the real benefits for the employee, the supplier and the customer? A real bond, a real wholeness (integrity) as a starting point. The consequences of such a claim attitude towards the action partners would be that one would truly turn one’s attention to the successful participants and consider how they can really be integrated in order to become better themselves, as it were. This means that the partners do not merely have to function, but that they form a unity with each other (integrity). It is no longer primarily a matter of exploiting the other for one’s own advantage, but of developing further in partnership through mutual respect and esteem.

Coaching is a type of employee training and support that is becoming increasingly popular across all hierarchical levels. It offers people support, e.g. in change processes, but also in general everyday work, and serves personality development. Coaching is individual training and therefore probably the most intensive form of employee support. It is no wonder that coaching has the greatest effect on all consulting instruments.

Theoretical knowledge is important, for example about how a conflict discussion with a project employee can and should be conducted. But all theory is only useful if it gets from the “head into the hands”. Coaching is, among other things, an excellent instrument when it comes to putting what is theoretically known into practice.

Only those who know themselves well are able to change themselves. During the coaching process, the employees check their own behavior towards others and in the team. The central concern is to positively develop leadership quality and thus leadership success and/or teamwork.

The occasions are as varied as the coachees are. The following table shows possible occasions:

The constantly increasing scope of standardization, as well as high legal requirements, rules, conditions and duties, mean that specialists and executives in the company have less and less room for maneuver in technical questions. In this difficult and constricting initial situation, employee motivation and commitment become even more relevant to success. If they are left on the sidelines, it is difficult to think of safeguarding the company in times of decreasing employee retention periods.

The most important internal adjustment screw for intrinsic (inner) employee motivation and the daily commitment is the lived management culture in the company. It is the central control instrument for the behavior of the employees. The management culture is therefore of enormous importance especially in times of crisis:

Leadership culture – the sum of the (pre-)lived leadership competencies – arises from specialist knowledge, social skills, and experience.

In the past, many medium-sized industrial companies attached more importance to professional training than to executive development. There is no cluelessness when it comes to creating or promoting team spirit, for example. Managers also have question marks in their faces when it comes to annual employee appraisals or when a conflict is about to arise. The leadership competency that is absolutely necessary today is, therefore, a current field of work and includes topics such as self, goal and time management, leadership styles and leadership instruments as well as change management.

Conventional leadership development generally follows a technocratic approach: leadership instruments are trained that a manager “should” master. The basic leadership training focuses on universally valid insights, which leads to a processing of the topic of leadership in the company. Often contents pass by with this proceeding at the actual needs of the participants, whereby the learning effect is equal to zero and the high-level personnel regard it as a waste of time. The readiness for further development measures decreases. BUT: The success of each enterprise stands and falls with the guidance. Customers, suppliers, and banks judge the efficiency and the reliability of an enterprise increasingly after training and knowledge conditions of the human capital. This is why it is important to attach particular importance to executive development.