Latest / Executive Careers with Fexingo: VP, C-Suite, and Senior Leadership Career Strategy / How Senior Leaders Use Pre-Meeting Influence to Shape Decisions
Transcript
- Lucas: There is a quiet skill that separates senior leaders who consistently get their initiatives approved from those who get picked apart in the boardroom. And it does not happen during the meeting itself. Luna: You are talking about the conversations that happen before the conversation. Lucas: Exactly. Pre-meeting influence. The informal one-on-ones that set the stage for a decision before the formal vote or discussion ever starts. I have seen this done brilliantly, and I have also seen it done so clumsily that it backfired completely. Luna: Give me a specific example of brilliantly. Lucas: A CFO I know was trying to get sign-off for a four hundred million dollar ERP transformation. That is a massive, multi-year bet. The board committee was skeptical—previous IT projects had gone over budget and under-delivered. Instead of presenting a polished deck in the meeting and hoping for the best, she scheduled twenty-minute coffee meetings with each committee member individually, over two weeks. Luna: What did she actually say in those meetings? Lucas: She did not pitch the project. She asked each person: 'What would make you comfortable saying yes to a large technology investment?' And she listened. One member was worried about integration with existing systems. Another was concerned about the vendor's track record. Another wanted to see a phased rollout with clear milestones. She took notes—literally wrote down their concerns on a notepad—and then addressed those specific points in her formal presentation two weeks later. Luna: So when she stood up in the boardroom, she was not answering generic objections. She was talking directly to the concerns she already knew they had. Lucas: Exactly. The meeting felt like a confirmation of shared understanding rather than a sales pitch. The vote was unanimous. And the best part—one of the committee members later told her, 'You really listened to us.' The work happened in the coffee meetings, not the boardroom. Luna: I love that. But I also think there is a fine line between pre-meeting influence and manipulation. How do you cross it? Lucas: The line is intent. If you are gathering information to genuinely understand concerns and improve your proposal, that is influence. If you are cherry-picking allies to steamroll opposition or create a false sense of consensus, that is manipulation. People sense the difference. Luna: And manipulation usually backfires eventually, because the people you sidelined remember. Lucas: Right. A friend of mine in a different company tried a version of this where he met with three board members before a vote on a strategy shift. He convinced them individually by downplaying the risks. When the full board met, the other members who had not been pre-briefed felt ambushed. They dug in, asked tough questions, and the proposal got tabled. He lost trust. Luna: So you have to be transparent about the process. You cannot make people feel like they are being played. Lucas: Yes. And there is a structural difference. In the CFO case, she met with everyone, not just the sympathetic ones. She invited dissent. The other executive only met with people he assumed were allies. That asymmetry created resentment. Luna: So rule one: meet with all key stakeholders, not just the friendly ones. Lucas: Absolutely. Rule two: be explicit about your goal. You can say something like, 'I want to make sure our meeting next week is productive, so I would love to hear your perspective beforehand so I can incorporate it.' That frames it as respect, not scheming. Luna: And rule three: actually use what you hear. People can tell if you just went through the motions. Lucas: That is the hardest part. If you listen and then ignore the input, the pre-meeting does more harm than good. The CFO did not just nod—she changed her presentation structure, added specific risk mitigations, and cited the committee member's own language in her slides. That is how you build lasting influence. Luna: You know, this topic runs through a lot of episodes we have done. And it strikes me how much of this show is about making a real difference in people's careers. Lucas: It is. And we are able to keep these conversations going without any advertising or sponsor pressure because of listeners who find them useful. A couple of dollars a month at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo genuinely keeps us going. Luna: If this show has ever helped you think through a career move or decision, that is a great way to say thanks. And it really does make a difference—every single contribution adds up. Lucas: Alright, back to the strategy. Let's talk about when pre-meeting influence is not appropriate. Certain decisions should be debated openly in the room. Luna: Can you give me an example of a situation where pre-meeting influence is a bad idea? Lucas: Yes. If the decision is meant to be genuinely deliberative—like a strategic direction where you want creative tension—pre-meetings can kill the diversity of thought. You want people to challenge each other in real time. Another case is if you are the most junior person in the room and you try to influence senior executives before a meeting, it can come across as presumptuous. Luna: So context matters. You have to read the culture and your position in the hierarchy. Lucas: Exactly. And there is a specific technique that works well for senior leaders: the 'pre-mortem.' Before a big meeting, ask a trusted colleague to poke holes in your proposal in private, so you can address weaknesses before they surface publicly. Luna: That is a form of pre-meeting influence where you are influencing yourself, essentially. Lucas: Right. And it shows humility. When you stand up and say, 'One concern that came up in my preparation is X, and here is how we address it,' you look thoughtful, not defensive. Luna: I want to get tactical. If someone is preparing for a critical decision meeting next week, what should they do starting today? Lucas: First, map the stakeholders. Identify who will be in the room. Second, rank them by influence and likely stance—supportive, neutral, skeptical. Third, schedule brief one-on-ones with the key ones, especially the skeptics. Fourth, ask a version of the same question: 'What would need to be true for this to work for you?' Fifth, incorporate that feedback visibly. Luna: And if you cannot get a meeting before the big one? Some people have very full calendars. Lucas: Then use a five-minute hallway conversation or a quick email that says, 'I am presenting option A next week. Does anything jump out as a concern?' Even a brief exchange signals that you value their input. But the face to face is much more powerful because you can read body language and tone. Luna: I have also seen leaders use a 'pre-read' tactic—sending materials a few days before and then following up with each person individually. Lucas: That works well if the material is concise. A ten-page deck sent forty-eight hours before with a note saying, 'I would love your thoughts before the meeting' is effective. But if you send thirty pages, people will not read it, and then the pre-meeting becomes about catching them up instead of influencing. Luna: So brevity is respect. Lucas: Yes. And one more thing—timing matters. Do not do all your pre-meetings the day before. Space them out over a week. That way you have time to adjust your approach based on what you learn. If you do them all on Wednesday and the meeting is Thursday, you have no room to iterate. Luna: That is a good concrete takeaway. Let's talk about the risk of overdoing it. Can you pre-meeting yourself into a corner? Lucas: Absolutely. If you pre-negotiate every single point, the actual meeting becomes a rubber stamp. People feel like their presence does not matter. Over time, engagement drops. The best leaders use pre-meetings to surface concerns, not to lock in votes. Luna: So there is an art to leaving some space for real discussion in the room. Lucas: Exactly. You want the meeting to feel like a conversation where people can still influence the outcome, even if you have done the groundwork. If the outcome feels predetermined, you damage psychological safety. Luna: I am thinking about a CEO I know who does this very well. She calls it 'pre-wiring.' She will say to someone, 'I am leaning toward option B, but I want to understand your perspective before I finalize my thinking.' That is honest and invites input. Lucas: That is a great phrase—'pre-wiring.' It signals that you have a direction but are open to adjustment. People respect that. Compare that to a leader who says, 'I have already decided, but let me hear your thoughts anyway.' That is insulting. Luna: What about when you are on the receiving end? Someone tries to pre-influence you before a meeting. How should you handle that? Lucas: First, recognize it for what it is. Then engage genuinely. Ask clarifying questions. And if you disagree, say so directly in the pre-meeting. It is better to have that disagreement privately than to blindside them in the formal meeting. And it builds your reputation as someone who is forthright. Luna: So pre-meeting influence is not just a tool for the presenter. It is a tool for everyone in the room. Lucas: Exactly. The senior leaders who are most effective at this treat every interaction as a chance to build alignment. They do not see meetings as the decision point—they see them as the ratification point. The real work happens before. Luna: I think that is the core insight of this whole episode. The meeting is the tip of the iceberg. The influence is below the surface. Lucas: And that is a skill that can be developed. It starts with being intentional about the conversations you have before the conversation. Next time you have a critical decision coming up, ask yourself: have I spoken to everyone who matters? And have I actually listened? Luna: That is a question worth carrying into the rest of our week.