"They need to be more commercial"

It's a refrain I've heard many times over my career.

• The legal team needs to be more commercial.

• The procurement team needs to be more commercial.

• The commercial team needs to be more ... commercial.

And it's not said in a monotone either. It's expressed with a sense of pent-up frustration. Like the energetic parent on the sidelines who can't help but voice their disappointment.

But what does "being commercial" really mean? 

It's been a conversation that I've been having over the last six or so months.

Recently, a procurement leader said to me that being commercial is "knowing what matters". Another leader told me in Melbourne that the answer was easy: "It's being a custodian of value."

Both answers speak to something that is more than technical competence.

A spreadsheet jockey does not a commercial professional make.

Internal clients want partners who are "commercial", but unless we put some meat on those bones its becomes an empty complaint rather than a useful invitation. And we can be tempted to think that the assertion “be more commercial” is the strategic nudge that’s required. It isn’t. 

Being commercial is a blend of capabilities that go beyond the technical. At the risk of a sporting analogy, being commercial involves:

▶ Insight - seeing the field of play (commercial judgement)

▶ Influence - shaping the game (commercial traction)

▶ Impact - playing to win (commercial results) 

I'm exploring whether to release a series of Masterclasses, or perhaps more practically, labs focused on building these capabilities.

Curious to hear your perspective. When you say, "be more commercial", what are you really asking for?