An executive extends project sponsorship to people who have helped them before, openly and as part of a working relationship, while the formal review still decides on merit.
Borderline: whether this move is justified depends on the situation, and only the person in it can judge.
An example
In a commercial real estate services firm, a senior vice president had been helped through a difficult leasing system rollout by two property managers, who trained their own teams on it before anyone asked. The next spring each submitted a proposal to the firm's investment committee, one for tenant analytics and one for a maintenance contract model. He sponsored both: he lent his name, presented them to the committee, and said why he trusted the people behind them. Both still went through the committee's scoring. The analytics proposal scored well and was funded. The maintenance proposal scored below the line, and he told its author what the committee wanted to see next time. He also sponsored a proposal from an analyst he had never worked with.
Why it works
Sponsorship brings real benefits, such as funding, visibility, and an advocate in the room, and offering it to people who have helped is an ordinary way of returning help. It makes helping the executive more rewarding, and staying apart from them less so. The formal review keeps the arrangement honest: the sponsor's backing gets a proposal heard, and the committee still decides on the merits. It weakens when sponsors rotate or when merit can be checked from outside, which is also what keeps it from hardening into a closed market.
The thinking behind it
Robert B. Cialdini Cialdini's Influence (1984) describes reciprocity: people feel obliged to repay what others give them. Sponsoring the proposals of people who helped is a natural way to return help, and it gives others a reason to help in future. Cialdini's account also explains the risk: once sponsorship becomes the main currency, people who do not reciprocate are left out, whatever their proposals are worth.
Jeffrey Pfeffer Pfeffer's Power in Organizations (1981) locates power in control of resources and the decision process. An executive whose sponsorship is needed to get a proposal heard controls part of the process. Keeping the formal review as the real decision keeps that control from absorbing the process entirely, which is what separates sponsorship from a closed market.
When it fits
Executives with sponsorship authority, allies who have helped in real ways, and a formal review that still scores proposals on merit are in a position to use it. It suits organizations where sponsorship is an expected part of getting projects funded and sponsors are known by name.
How to use it well
Sponsor openly, and say why you are backing a proposal.
- Send every sponsored proposal through the formal review, and accept the score.
- Give honest feedback when a sponsored proposal loses.
- Sponsor some proposals from people with no history with you.
- Keep your sponsorship decisions on the record, so others can see the pattern.
Return help in the currency of advocacy, and leave the funding decision to the people who own it. If a sponsored proposal is weak, say so privately before it goes forward; backing it anyway spends your credibility with the committee.
What it costs and where it backfires
Others may see a closed circle around you, and people without a history with you may stop submitting. Your backing loses value if it goes to weak proposals. Turning the formal review into a rubber stamp while presenting it as the real decision, or penalizing people who do not reciprocate, would be deception and retaliation.
When it is used on you
Track funded proposals against merit scores across several cycles, and if funding follows alignment to a sponsor more closely than the scores, ask in writing for the reasons behind each decision. Find a second sponsor or a rival funding channel, and take a clear pattern to finance or internal audit.