---
id: "contrarian-ignore-skeptics"
type: "contrarian-insight"
source_timestamps: ["§ Frontstage Work: Managing Tensions in the Spotlight"]
tags: ["change-management", "stakeholder-management"]
related: ["action-back-believers", "claim-skeptic-focus-backfires"]
challenges: "The conventional change-management instinct to address and convert detractors early to ensure broad organizational buy-in."
sources: ["ecosystem"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-ecosystem"
originDay: 11
articleStem: "hbr-cl-81-corporate-vc-funds"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/03/what-successful-corporate-venture-capital-funds-do-differently"
sourceTitle: "What Successful Corporate Venture Capital Funds Do Differently"
---
# Ignore internal skeptics initially

## The contrarian insight

A common instinct for new corporate initiatives, including CVCs, is to identify the biggest internal detractors and try to win them over — to prove the unit's value and ensure *fairness* across the organization. The authors argue this **backfires**. CVCs should actively **ignore skeptics at launch** and allocate scarce resources exclusively to **believers** to generate rapid, visible wins ([[action-back-believers]], [[claim-skeptic-focus-backfires]]).

## What it challenges

The conventional change-management instinct to address and convert detractors early to ensure broad organizational buy-in.

## Enrichment / where experts push back

Supported by Kotter's *guiding coalition* and Safavi's own summary (*start with believers, not skeptics*). **But** classic stakeholder-management doctrine recommends mapping stakeholders and addressing powerful detractors early to avoid entrenched resistance. In highly political or centralized organizations, ignoring senior skeptics with formal budget/strategy authority can produce a **delayed but decisive backlash** — budget cuts or closure. The balanced expert view: keep **operational focus** on believers for quick wins, but do the **political/relationship work** to identify, listen to, and at least partially neutralize key skeptics with decision rights.