The Executive Voice

Rules of Engagement: Build Authority or Lose It

The power of setting clear rules and the cost of getting them wrong.

No surprise: ‘Rules of Engagement’ is a military term. From that standpoint, rules establish what people may do and what they must avoid.

The term has seeped into the corporate world. It’s a strong phrase that implies the authority of an accepted principle or instruction about the way things are done or should be done, and what you’re allowed or not allowed to do.

‘Rules of engagement’ can elicit compliance or resistance, depending on whether people think the rule is valid.

Even saying, “the rules of engagement are …’ can trigger an intense emotional response. It’s a term you should and can use effectively. It’s psychologically powerful, but it has its limits.

The point I’m making is that as a leader, it’s important to always be intentional and about ‘the rules of engagement’. What are they? And what would be the basis for adjusting or changing them?

Even in the military, rules of engagement are reviewed and amended when circumstances change.

In the corporate world, ‘rules of engagement’ also refer to how you communicate with the other party. Sometimes it’s about etiquette and culture; sometimes it’s about setting boundaries to avoid nasty conflict, or it’s about avoiding conflicts of interest.

If you say, “Here are the rules of engagement,” make sure you’re clear about what’s required, why it matters, and whether non-compliance has legal consequences, breaches ethical standards or contradicts the organisation’s values.

If it’s a suggestion or guideline, avoid using the term ‘rules of engagement’.

Unspoken Rules

On a deeper level, are your silent rules of engagement causing misunderstanding, fear, strife or behaviour that may be getting in the way of business success or growth?

Some examples of accepted ‘rules of engagement’ that probably need to be reviewed:

“Don’t bring me a problem without a solution.” This can discourage early warnings from people who see a risk but can’t yet solve it.
A more useful agreement: “Raise material risks early. Tell me what you know, what’s uncertain and what help you need.”

“We’ve decided, so discussion is closed.” New evidence may emerge after a decision.
A more useful agreement: “We’ll proceed. These are the conditions that would reopen the decision.”

“Don’t contradict your manager in front of others.” It can allow flawed assumptions to go unchallenged when the team most needs to examine them.
A more useful agreement: “Challenge my reasoning respectfully, including in meetings. Focus on the issue and explain what I may have missed.”

“Stay in your lane.” It can discourage people from sharing insights or flagging problems beyond their immediate remit.
A more useful agreement: “If you see something that affects our work, raise it, even if it sits outside your role. We’ll involve whoever needs to act.”

Outdated or misguided rules of engagement with employees and the marketplace can damage trust and undermine smart business decisions.

It’s therefore important to regularly examine and adjust your rules of engagement across everyday business conversations, formal communication guidelines and importantly, across commercial arrangements and contracts.

Scroll down to the Something Extra section for a prompt that helps you assess your rules of engagement with the aim to improve business relationships or protect your commercial interests.

Communication That Earns Influence

Rules of Engagement: Is Your Sales Playbook Costing You Deals?

Keep chasing. Secure the meeting. Control the conversation. Always get a next step.

These familiar sales conventions put the seller’s progress at the centre. But when does dogged persistence turn into stalking? And who agreed that the buyer should follow your process?

Gartner’s 2025 survey found that 73% of B2B buyers actively avoid suppliers who send irrelevant outreach. Buyers prefer independent research for general information, but (as mentioned in last week’s issue) buyers want seller input when assessing whether a solution suits their business. Your expertise earns attention when it helps them make that judgement.

Influence also begins before the meeting. In 6sense’s 2025 study of more than 4,000 buyers, 94% of buying groups had ranked preferred vendors before first contact. They bought from their preliminary favourite 77% of the time. By the time you start your discovery questions, the buyer may already have substantial knowledge and a preference.

You may be well aware of the above research but are you adjusting your sales and marketing activities to engage with B2B buyers in the best way?

Here are some sales ‘rules of engagement’ that you may want to reconsider and change:

“Keep following up until they respond.” Repeated contact without fresh relevance gives the buyer another reason to avoid you.
A better agreement: “Each contact must offer something useful. When we connect, agree the purpose and timing of follow-ups.”

“Discovery starts with our questions.” Making buyers repeat information they’ve already provided, or could reasonably expect you to know, can make your process feel like an obstacle.
A better agreement: “Start with what we understand. Ask what’s recently changed, what’s unresolved, what’s a top priority, and where our expertise could help.”

“The account lead owns the customer relationship.” Ownership can become a bottleneck when technical, delivery or commercial expertise is needed.
A better agreement: “Coordinate contact through the account lead. Agree who joins which conversations, what they contribute and how insights are shared.”

“Once the pursuit strategy is agreed, everyone falls into line.” A cohesive bid still needs people to challenge unsupported claims, delivery assumptions and emerging risks.
A better agreement: “Challenge internally before we commit externally. Set clear approval responsibilities and a route for urgent concerns.”

“Marketing generates leads. Sales takes over.” That handover mentality overlooks the continuing influence of content, campaigns and customer evidence. Gartner found that 69% of buyers reported inconsistencies between website information and what sellers told them.
A better agreement: “Sales and marketing share buyer insights, coordinate outreach, collaborate on messaging and agree the claims and evidence we use for both prospects and existing customers.”

If your rules make life easier for your organisation but harder for the buyer, whose interests is your sales process serving?

Before your next buyer conversation, question one habitual rule of engagement: does it help them decide, or simply help you tick a box?

OpenAI Pledges to Rebuild Trust

On 29 September, OpenAI apologised after an experimental AI model gained unauthorised access to Australia’s Medicare statistics portal during training in June. The company acknowledged shortcomings in its response and pledged support for affected agencies. OpenAI said its review found no evidence that medical records were accessed.

My POV
In line with this week’s major theme: ‘Rules of Engagement’, OpenAI obviously failed to engage at the appropriate time and, in my opinion, its apology rings hollow and is a little late. I can understand holding off for a few days or a week to figure out exactly what happened, but months later? This suggests a clear lack of an engagement protocol, or a deliberate flouting of the unspoken rules of engagement for these situations: come clean ASAP.

For leaders, this is a reminder to establish rules of engagement for difficult news before you need them. Agree on what triggers escalation, who must be contacted and who owns the response. Then make sure those arrangements work beyond your own organisation.

If the people affected don’t know how you’ll communicate when something goes wrong, they may stop engaging with you entirely.

Phrase of the Week

Terms of Reference (ToR) refer to a foundational document that defines the purpose, scope, structure, and responsibilities of a project, committee, or assignment. ToR sits alongside your rules of engagement: one defines the work; the other shapes how you work together.

Improve Business Relationships, Set the Right Boundaries, and Protect Your Commercial Interests

Constant disruption and change means it’s important to examine rules of engagement from time to time. See the prompt below to help with that:

PROMPT

Help me examine the rules of engagement in this situation: [describe the relationship, context and desired outcome].

Ask me one question at a time to explore:

Challenge whether my expectations are necessary, fair and appropriate or simply personal preferences. Identify what’s non-negotiable, what needs discussion and where my approach could provoke resistance.

Finish with a brief assessment of what I need to clarify, with whom, and whether ‘rules of engagement’ is appropriate language here. Don’t draft the rules.

If this helped you think differently about communication, forward this newsletter to someone who leads, sells or explains complex ideas in tech.