In the quest to rationalize franchise relationships, the starting point should always be metrics. You don't know if what you want is rational until you know its metric performance - even if in some competent pro forma. Part of the problems I so frequently see in relationship management is that the advocates for positions have not calculated the metrics properly. Often, what seems a loss to them would, if competently evaluated, yield at least a marginal positive. When what you claim as your central position is metrically adverse to your intereests, you lose in every forum. Lawyers cannot overcome metrics.
In the quest to rationalize franchise relationships, the starting point should always be metrics. You don't know if what you want is rational until you know its metric performance - even if in some competent pro forma. Part of the problems I so frequently see in relationship management is that the advocates for positions have not calculated the metrics properly. Often, what seems a loss to them would, if competently evaluated, yield at least a marginal positive. When what you claim as your central position is metrically adverse to your intereests, you lose in every forum. Lawyers cannot overcome metrics.