The Challenge
Your Brussels office reports to regional headquarters in another European city. Your supervisors lack EU institutional understanding necessary to evaluate Brussels staff performance, set appropriate priorities, or appreciate Brussels engagement value. Regional managers focused on multi-country commercial operations can't assess: Whether Brussels policy work is effective Whether staff deploy effort appropriately Whether organisational Brussels investment delivers value proportionate to costs The dysfunction: Expertise gap leads to inappropriate performance metrics measuring activity volume rather than policy influence, unrealistic expectations about Brussels engagement timelines European legislative processes can't satisfy, and resource allocation decisions underfunding priorities while supporting activities Brussels understanding would deprioritise. Brussels staff possess expertise their managers can't evaluate—creating misalignment between Brussels activities and regional priorities.
Why It Happens
Brussels offices report within geographic hierarchies to regional leadership whose expertise is commercial operations, not policy engagement. Regional managers evaluate Brussels staff using metrics appropriate for operational functions—meeting attendance, stakeholder contacts, report production—without understanding policy influence depends on: Relationship depth Strategic positioning Influence on specific legislative files activity metrics fail to capture The expertise asymmetry: Brussels staff can't effectively advocate for priorities delivering policy value because regional managers lack evaluation context. Managers impose expectations based on commercial operations, not Brussels engagement realities. Frustration on both sides: Brussels staff feel misunderstood. Managers question whether Brussels operations deliver the value investment requires.
Our Solution
Brussels strategy advisory services helping regional management understand EU institutional realities and develop appropriate oversight frameworks: Educating regional leadership about Brussels engagement timelines, success metrics, and resource requirements effective policy influence demands Developing performance evaluation frameworks appropriate to Brussels operations rather than applying commercial metrics to policy functions Facilitating Brussels-regional dialogue ensuring alignment despite expertise differences We optimise Brussels reporting structures through management capability development rather than accepting misalignment from regional leadership lacking EU institutional understanding necessary for effective Brussels office oversight.
The Outcome
Brussels office management aligning regional leadership oversight with EU engagement realities through education and framework development rather than accepting misalignment from expertise gaps. Regional managers gain sufficient EU institutional understanding to: Evaluate Brussels staff performance appropriately Set realistic expectations about policy engagement timelines Make resource allocation decisions reflecting actual Brussels priorities rather than misapplying commercial operation frameworks to policy functions
How We Deliver
Brussels office management advisory services developing regional leadership EU institutional understanding: Educating regional managers about Brussels engagement realities Developing appropriate performance metrics for policy functions Facilitating Brussels-regional alignment ensuring effective oversight despite expertise differences The result: Brussels office management enabling effectiveness through appropriate supervision—not creating misalignment when regional oversight lacks EU institutional expertise necessary for evaluating policy engagement performance and priorities.