Get Rid of the Wrong People – Fast! Why a Three-Month Grace Period Can Cost You Three Years Today, I want to discuss a truth that many entrepreneurs, managers, and HR professionals are aware of but often don't take to heart: Having the wrong people on your team costs money, time, energy, motivation, and, in the worst-case scenario, the future of your company. And no, I'm not talking about someone having a bad day or dealing with an exceptional situation. I'm talking about the people who fundamentally don't fit in: In terms of performance, culture, or character. It is exactly during economic downturns that problems worsen. The markets are uneasy, interest rates are high, budgets are being cut, projects face delays, and investments are on hold. Customers take longer to decide. Meanwhile, competition for orders becomes fiercer than ever before. At the same time, companies are under immense pressure to stay profitable and control costs. In such times, every mistake, poor decision, and especially every bad personnel choice, becomes twice as costly! The tragedy is that it is exactly during these times that many companies fail to lead with clarity. Why? Because uncertainty causes paralysis. Because they are afraid of making wrong decisions, they prefer to do nothing at all. Because they hope that problems will solve themselves "on their own". Because they think now is not the right time to replace someone. The truth is: There is no better time to remove the wrong people from the team than right now! Every day you keep the wrong ones is a day you can't work effectively with the right ones. And no one will get this lost time back for you. Or to paraphrase Adorno: "There is nothing right in the wrong." Cost of Goods and Personnel In most companies, I keep seeing the same patterns: The two largest cost blocks are the cost of goods sold and personnel expenses. Depending on the industry, the cost of goods typically makes up 40 to 50 percent of the sale, and staff costs account for another 20 to 25 percent. Added together, this is up to 70 percent of the total costs. The material that a company needs for its products or services is, of course, indispensable. Without raw materials, there is no production; without goods, there is no revenue. However, there is a significant difference when it comes to personnel: materials are ordered, delivered, processed, and then the process is complete. Staff remains. And that can be either your greatest advantage or your biggest slowdown. The Principle of Hope is Sabotage of One's Own Company! And this is exactly where one of the biggest and most underestimated problems lies: Too many companies have become accustomed to mediocrity. They simply allow weak or unsuitable employees to continue to work as if the issue would somehow resolve itself. This is the leadership version of the "Principle of Hope". And hope is not a strategy, especially not in leadership. It is sabotage of one's own company! Anyone who seriously believes that a weak runner will miraculously become a sprinter at some point should ask themselves: Have you ever experienced in a sports club that the last person on the track suddenly became the first without training, without effort, and without change? Hardly. And yet this is precisely how many managers act: They hope that performance will increase on its own just because time passes. It's like turning the weakest link into a coxswain in Olympic eight-man rowing. No coach in the world would allow such a thing! It would be the assured end of the competition. However, in everyday business life, this is exactly what happens every day: The slowest person sets the pace unnoticed, the strong have to adapt involuntarily, and overall performance decreases. The team is still moving, but no longer at full speed ahead; in the best case, it is just moving in a circle, so that it doesn't sink. And this is the exact moment where it is decided how quickly a company reacts or whether it reacts at all. The hardest, and simultaneously most effective determining factor, is the probation period. Ulvi's Law: Shorter Probation Periods Many people in Germany confuse probation periods and protection against dismissal – and in practice, this leads to expensive mistakes. The law states that legal protection against dismissal only takes effect after six months of service with the company. This means that within the first six months, you can usually part with an employee much more easily. But what do most companies do? They also set the probation period at six months, "because that's just how you do it," or because that's what it says in the standard contracts. It may seem logical at first glance, but it's a massive leadership mistake! Because what happens? A new employee knows: "I now have six months to prove myself." That sounds reasonable, but psychologically, something else happens: He postpones his own performance standards. The first few weeks are more of a warm-up than a real sprint. My tip, therefore, may seem counterintuitive, but it is remarkably effective: Shorten the probation period to three months! Why? Because it sends a crystal-clear message. It forces both sides to deliver quickly. The employee must immediately demonstrate their capabilities, and you, as a manager, must judge them just as quickly to determine whether they are a good fit. This takes the "Let's wait and see" approach completely out of the game. And now we get to the crucial point: With an experienced employee (and I'm talking about individuals with five, six, or seven years of professional experience), you don't need six months to determine if they are performing. After a week, you'll have to see if they bring power to the game. After a week, they should have reached 80 to 90% of their performance level. The remaining 10 to 20 percent is fine-tuning, which they can work on over the next few weeks. However, you immediately recognize the basic dynamic: Whether someone shows initiative, takes responsibility, networks internally, and actively seeks solutions. If he is still waiting for someone to write him a to-do list after a week, if he remains passive, if he delegates every responsibility upwards, he will not suddenly turn into a top performer in the fourth month. That doesn't happen. I call this Ulvi's Law: After four weeks at the latest, you know whether the new person is a self-starter or whether they are hiding behind excuses, meaningless coordination phrases, and "We should..." sentences. And if you're still unsure after these four weeks whether you want that person next to you in the trenches, then it's a no. This applies to both emergencies and everyday life. Imagine the litmus test: You have a crucial customer appointment, but you can't go yourself. Would you send this employee alone with complete confidence that he will rock the appointment and strengthen your position? If your answer is no or "I don't know", then that's already a no. No long hesitation, no further grace period. Get rid of him or her! Immediately! Clear Metrics instead of Gut Feeling The problem with grace periods is that they create habituation on both sides. The employee thinks the pace is normal. The management thinks he will develop. But development without pressure is like fitness without training: You tell yourself that you'll "keep at it", but your belly doesn't get smaller. The wrong people don't just stand still; they drag the rest of the team down with them. The good ones see this, get frustrated, and leave at some point. And the company loses not only the weak ones, but also the top performers. Hallelujah! So, what to do? It's simple: Set clear expectations! I like to work with a simple 10-point system, tailored to the role of each employee. Sales, for example, is about personality, representation of the company, verbal and written communication, following up with customers, product knowledge, and reliability. Accounting is about getting the money in. Period. Whoever pays discount invoices first saves money. Those who consistently address defaulting customers improve liquidity. This is measurable. And the surprising thing is that if you go through this review openly with people, many will thank you for it. Finally, they know where they stand. It is finally clear where they are strong and where they have to step up. Translation of the graphic: Employee Evaluation – 10-Point System (Example) Reliability Product Knowledge Follow-Up with Customers Written Communication Verbal Communication Representation of the Company Personality Evaluation (1-10) And here, we are not only talking about salary and benefits, when we talk about costs. You also pay in lost opportunities: Customers that are not won, projects that are not completed, processes that drag on. If you give a sales representative a car, a laptop, and training on top of it, the costs quickly add up. The real disaster, however, is the opportunity cost, i.e., the missed opportunities that no one will be able to give back to you. Conclusion: Get Rid of the Wrong People! Therefore, my crystal-clear plea: Remove the wrong people as quickly as possible. No months of stalling tactics, no "He just needs a little more time", no waiting for the miracle that never happens. Every week that you leave a weak performer in the team is like a leak in the boat: In the beginning, it only leaks a bit, but at some point, the water is up to your neck. And then it's too late. The rule is simple: After a week, a professional must perform at 80 percent. Those who are not yet visibly in the game will not be in it in the third month either. After four weeks, the decision has to be made: Does he stay or does he go? Anything less than that is nothing more than wasting time and money! Beware of Backfire! And don't underestimate the chain reaction: Anyone who doesn't deliver drags the team down with him. The good guys have to make up for what the bad guy didn't get done. The mood changes, the level of service drops, and the customers notice it. The truly exceptional ones eventually leave. And you end up sitting with exactly those who should have left you long ago. The costs are not only salary and benefits. You also pay with lost projects, missed customers, and missed opportunities. The sum of these opportunity costs is often ten times the actual salary. And the longer you wait, the greater the damage will be. Three months of a false grace period can cost you three years. Not only financially, but also strategically.
*
Minuten
Get Rid of the Wrong People – Fast! Why a Three-Month Grace Period Can Cost You Three Years
Today, I want to discuss a truth that many entrepreneurs, managers, and HR professionals are aware of but often don't take to heart: Having the wrong people on your team costs money, time, energy, motivation, and, in the worst-case scenario, the future of your company. And no, I'm not talking about someone having a bad day or dealing with an exceptional situation. I'm talking about the people who fundamentally don't fit in: In terms of performance, culture, or character.
It is exactly during economic downturns that problems worsen. The markets are uneasy, interest rates are high, budgets are being cut, projects face delays, and investments are on hold. Customers take longer to decide. Meanwhile, competition for orders becomes fiercer than ever before. At the same time, companies are under immense pressure to stay profitable and control costs. In such times, every mistake, poor decision, and especially every bad personnel choice, becomes twice as costly!
The tragedy is that it is exactly during these times that many companies fail to lead with clarity. Why? Because uncertainty causes paralysis. Because they are afraid of making wrong decisions, they prefer to do nothing at all. Because they hope that problems will solve themselves "on their own". Because they think now is not the right time to replace someone.
The truth is: There is no better time to remove the wrong people from the team than right now! Every day you keep the wrong ones is a day you can't work effectively with the right ones. And no one will get this lost time back for you. Or to paraphrase Adorno: "There is nothing right in the wrong."
:devider:
Cost of Goods and Personnel
In most companies, I keep seeing the same patterns: The two largest cost blocks are the cost of goods sold and personnel expenses. Depending on the industry, the cost of goods typically makes up 40 to 50 percent of the sale, and staff costs account for another 20 to 25 percent. Added together, this is up to 70 percent of the total costs. The material that a company needs for its products or services is, of course, indispensable. Without raw materials, there is no production; without goods, there is no revenue. However, there is a significant difference when it comes to personnel: materials are ordered, delivered, processed, and then the process is complete. Staff remains. And that can be either your greatest advantage or your biggest slowdown.
The Principle of Hope is Sabotage of One's Own Company!
And this is exactly where one of the biggest and most underestimated problems lies: Too many companies have become accustomed to mediocrity. They simply allow weak or unsuitable employees to continue to work as if the issue would somehow resolve itself. This is the leadership version of the "Principle of Hope". And hope is not a strategy, especially not in leadership. It is sabotage of one's own company!
Anyone who seriously believes that a weak runner will miraculously become a sprinter at some point should ask themselves: Have you ever experienced in a sports club that the last person on the track suddenly became the first without training, without effort, and without change? Hardly. And yet this is precisely how many managers act: They hope that performance will increase on its own just because time passes.
It's like turning the weakest link into a coxswain in Olympic eight-man rowing. No coach in the world would allow such a thing! It would be the assured end of the competition. However, in everyday business life, this is exactly what happens every day: The slowest person sets the pace unnoticed, the strong have to adapt involuntarily, and overall performance decreases. The team is still moving, but no longer at full speed ahead; in the best case, it is just moving in a circle, so that it doesn't sink. And this is the exact moment where it is decided how quickly a company reacts or whether it reacts at all. The hardest, and simultaneously most effective determining factor, is the probation period.
!AYCON ⎜Ulvi I. AYDIN ⎜www.aycon.biz
Ulvi's Law: Shorter Probation Periods
Many people in Germany confuse probation periods and protection against dismissal – and in practice, this leads to expensive mistakes. The law states that legal protection against dismissal only takes effect after six months of service with the company. This means that within the first six months, you can usually part with an employee much more easily. But what do most companies do? They also set the probation period at six months, "because that's just how you do it," or because that's what it says in the standard contracts. It may seem logical at first glance, but it's a massive leadership mistake!
Because what happens? A new employee knows: "I now have six months to prove myself." That sounds reasonable, but psychologically, something else happens: He postpones his own performance standards. The first few weeks are more of a warm-up than a real sprint. My tip, therefore, may seem counterintuitive, but it is remarkably effective: Shorten the probation period to three months! Why? Because it sends a crystal-clear message. It forces both sides to deliver quickly. The employee must immediately demonstrate their capabilities, and you, as a manager, must judge them just as quickly to determine whether they are a good fit. This takes the "Let's wait and see" approach completely out of the game.
And now we get to the crucial point: With an experienced employee (and I'm talking about individuals with five, six, or seven years of professional experience), you don't need six months to determine if they are performing. After a week, you'll have to see if they bring power to the game. After a week, they should have reached 80 to 90% of their performance level. The remaining 10 to 20 percent is fine-tuning, which they can work on over the next few weeks. However, you immediately recognize the basic dynamic: Whether someone shows initiative, takes responsibility, networks internally, and actively seeks solutions. If he is still waiting for someone to write him a to-do list after a week, if he remains passive, if he delegates every responsibility upwards, he will not suddenly turn into a top performer in the fourth month. That doesn't happen.
I call this Ulvi's Law: After four weeks at the latest, you know whether the new person is a self-starter or whether they are hiding behind excuses, meaningless coordination phrases, and "We should..." sentences. And if you're still unsure after these four weeks whether you want that person next to you in the trenches, then it's a no. This applies to both emergencies and everyday life. Imagine the litmus test: You have a crucial customer appointment, but you can't go yourself. Would you send this employee alone with complete confidence that he will rock the appointment and strengthen your position? If your answer is no or "I don't know", then that's already a no. No long hesitation, no further grace period. Get rid of him or her! Immediately!
Clear Metrics instead of Gut Feeling
The problem with grace periods is that they create habituation on both sides. The employee thinks the pace is normal. The management thinks he will develop. But development without pressure is like fitness without training: You tell yourself that you'll "keep at it", but your belly doesn't get smaller. The wrong people don't just stand still; they drag the rest of the team down with them. The good ones see this, get frustrated, and leave at some point. And the company loses not only the weak ones, but also the top performers. Hallelujah!
So, what to do? It's simple: Set clear expectations! I like to work with a simple 10-point system, tailored to the role of each employee. Sales, for example, is about personality, representation of the company, verbal and written communication, following up with customers, product knowledge, and reliability. Accounting is about getting the money in. Period. Whoever pays discount invoices first saves money. Those who consistently address defaulting customers improve liquidity. This is measurable. And the surprising thing is that if you go through this review openly with people, many will thank you for it. Finally, they know where they stand. It is finally clear where they are strong and where they have to step up.
And here, we are not only talking about salary and benefits, when we talk about costs. You also pay in lost opportunities: Customers that are not won, projects that are not completed, processes that drag on. If you give a sales representative a car, a laptop, and training on top of it, the costs quickly add up. The real disaster, however, is the opportunity cost, i.e., the missed opportunities that no one will be able to give back to you.
Conclusion: Get Rid of the Wrong People!
Therefore, my crystal-clear plea: Remove the wrong people as quickly as possible. No months of stalling tactics, no "He just needs a little more time", no waiting for the miracle that never happens. Every week that you leave a weak performer in the team is like a leak in the boat: In the beginning, it only leaks a bit, but at some point, the water is up to your neck. And then it's too late. The rule is simple: After a week, a professional must perform at 80 percent. Those who are not yet visibly in the game will not be in it in the third month either. After four weeks, the decision has to be made: Does he stay or does he go? Anything less than that is nothing more than wasting time and money!
Beware of Backfire!
And don't underestimate the chain reaction: Anyone who doesn't deliver drags the team down with him. The good guys have to make up for what the bad guy didn't get done. The mood changes, the level of service drops, and the customers notice it. The truly exceptional ones eventually leave. And you end up sitting with exactly those who should have left you long ago. The costs are not only salary and benefits. You also pay with lost projects, missed customers, and missed opportunities. The sum of these opportunity costs is often ten times the actual salary. And the longer you wait, the greater the damage will be. Three months of a false grace period can cost you three years. Not only financially, but also strategically.
No items found.
!AYCON Blog
August
15
,
2026
2026
ERSTE WAHL STATT ZWEITE REIHE – EIN POSITIONIERUNGSRETREAT AM LAGO DI GARDAManchmal braucht es Abstand, um klarer zu sehen.Du verfügst über enorme Erfahrung und Kompetenz. Du hast Projekte geführt, Krisen gemeistert, Unternehmen verändert und Verantwortung übernommen.Und trotzdem passiert etwas Merkwürdiges:Die besten Mandate gehen oft an andere.Nicht, weil sie besser sind.Sondern weil sie sichtbarer, verständlicher oder klarer positioniert sind.Genau darum geht es an diesem Wochenende.Warum werden manche Experten zur ersten Wahl, während andere in der zweiten Reihe bleiben?Gemeinsam arbeiten wir an deiner Positionierung, deinem Profil, deiner Geschichte und deinem persönlichen Geschäftsmodell.Dabei nutzen wir Methoden, die wir sonst in Strategieprojekten, Transformationsvorhaben und Beratungsmandaten einsetzen.Unter anderem:RessourcenanalyseJobs-to-be-DoneValue Proposition CanvasSABS Sales Model CanvasDesign Thinking & Proof MappingExecutive StorytellingMDS-PositionierungslogikEntwicklung deines persönlichen 90-Tage-PlansDer besondere Vorteil:Diese Werkzeuge helfen dir nicht nur dabei, deine eigene Positionierung zu schärfen.Du lernst gleichzeitig Methodiken kennen und anzuwenden, die du anschließend auch in deinen eigenen Beratungsmandaten und bei deinen Kunden einsetzen kannst.So investierst du an diesem Wochenende nicht nur in deine Positionierung – sondern auch in dein methodisches Repertoire als Berater, Interim Manager, Unternehmer oder Führungskraft.:devider:AGENDA:Samstag, 31.10.2026, 19.30 UhrAnkommen. Kennenlernen. Gemeinsames Abendessen am Lago. Sonnenuntergang, Wein und gute Gespräche.Wer möchte, lässt den Abend bei einem privaten Grillabend am Haus ausklingen.Sonntag, 01.11.202609:00 Uhr bis 16:00 UhrArbeit an Ihrer Positionierung und Ihrer PDL Strategie.Anschließend gemeinsames Abendessen direkt am See.Montag, 02.11.202609:00 Uhr bis 15:00 UhrVertiefung. Persönliche Sales Strategie & Ihr neues Geschäftsmodell. Umsetzungsplanung. Masterclass.Mittags gemeinsames Essen bei Umberto, Wanderung, Reflexion und Ausblick.ZIELGRUPPE:Für Beiräte und Aufsichtsräte.Für Executive Beraterinnen.Für Interim Manager.Für Unternehmerinnen.Für Führungskräfte.Für Menschen, die fachlich längst mehr leisten, als der Markt derzeit wahrnimmt.:devider:VERANSTALTUNGSORT:Brenzone sul Garda mit Blick auf den Gardasee.Der genaue Ort wird bei der Anmeldung bekannt gegeben.:devider:INVESTITION:Exklusiv zur Bucheinführung1.450,- € inklusive MittagessenAnfahrt und Hotelbuchung exklusive.Alle Preise zzgl. MwSt. 19%Hier geht es zur Buchung.
*
Minuten
PRIVATE POSITIONING RETREAT
ERSTE WAHL STATT ZWEITE REIHE – EIN POSITIONIERUNGSRETREAT AM LAGO DI GARDA
Never let anyone define your limits. Never. Ever. By fucking no one.
Your life. Your vision. Your rules.
If you truly want something, go after it with everything you’ve got. Believe in yourself when no one else does. Push beyond the boundaries others try to set for you.
Because your only real limits are the ones you accept.
Dream bigger. Aim higher. Stay relentless.
You can achieve anything — if you want it badly enough and are willing to fight for it.
*
Minuten
Never let anyone define your limits.
Push beyond the boundaries others try to set for you.
Profil Vincent Ulvi AydinRevenue Leadership für B2B-SaaSVincent Ulvi Aydin ist Strategic Advisor für Revenue-Skalierung und Go-to-Market- Transformation in B2B-SaaS- und datengetriebenen Geschäftsmodellen - mit über 10 Jahren nachweislicher Erfolge in operativer Führung und profitablem Wachstum.Als VP Enterprise Sales bei einem AI SaaS Scale-up treibt Vincent derzeit die internationale Enterprise-Expansion voran, führt strategische Key Accounts und skaliert ein Account-Executive-Team. Als Managing Director eines Construction Intelligence Providers führte Vincent ein €35 Mio. P&L (€15 Mio. EBITDA) durch kommerzielle Transformation, CRM-Rollout und erfolgreiche Post-Merger-Integration. Bei einer Top-10 weltweiten Messegesellschaft entwickelte Vincent den digitalen B2B-Vertrieb von null auf siebenstelligen Umsatz und leitete das Digital-Sales-Team in einem Corporate- Innovation-Setup mit klarem Fokus auf Entwicklung innovativer Geschäftsmodelle undschneller Marktdurchdringung.Vincent verbindet strategisches Go-to-Market-Denken mit operativer Umsetzungsstärke und klarer Abschlussorientierung im Enterprise-Vertrieb.Akademisch ist er ausgebildet in London (M.Sc. Management & Organisational Innovation, Queen Mary University), München (B.Sc. BWL, LMU) und den USA (UC Riverside).
Der beste Aufsichtsrat ist nicht der größte Branchenexperte – sondern derjenige, der die richtigen Fragen stellt.
Ein wirksamer Aufsichtsrat muss nicht das bessere Produkt entwickeln können. Er muss beurteilen können, ob das Unternehmen richtig geführt wird. Aufsicht bedeutet nicht operative Mitarbeit. Aufsicht bedeutet, die richtigen Fragen zu stellen, Risiken frühzeitig zu erkennen, Managemententscheidungen kritisch zu hinterfragen und vor allem: unabhängig zu bleiben. Genau deshalb halte ich vier Eigenschaften für unverzichtbar.
Erstens: Unabhängigkeit.
Ein Aufsichtsrat darf weder wirtschaftlich noch emotional abhängig sein. Wer in erster Linie Loyalität gegenüber Personen empfindet, wird kritische Entscheidungen vermeiden. Gute Corporate Governance beginnt dort, wo persönliche Beziehungen enden.
Zweitens: Fachliche Exzellenz.
Die Anforderungen an Unternehmen verändern sich rasant. Digitalisierung, Künstliche Intelligenz, Cyber Security, Finanzierung, internationale Märkte oder Go-to-Market-Strategien sind heute keine Randthemen mehr. Deshalb sollte kein Aufsichtsrat versuchen, alles zu können. Viel wichtiger ist ein Gremium, dessen Mitglieder unterschiedliche Spezialgebiete einbringen und sich gegenseitig ergänzen. Ich selbst würde jederzeit einen Experten für Finance, einen Spezialisten für IT oder Cyber Security, einen KI-Experten oder einen Vertriebsexperten einem Generalisten vorziehen. Nicht weil sie alles wissen, sondern weil sie auf ihrem Gebiet Entwicklungen erkennen, Risiken bewerten und Managemententscheidungen fundiert hinterfragen können.
Drittens: Erfahrung.
Komplexe Entscheidungen lassen sich nicht aus Lehrbüchern ableiten. Sie entstehen aus jahrzehntelanger Führungsverantwortung, aus Erfolgen und ebenso aus Niederlagen. Wer selbst Restrukturierungen begleitet, Wachstum verantwortet oder internationale Märkte aufgebaut hat, erkennt Zusammenhänge schneller und bewertet Situationen realistischer. Interim Manager bringen dabei einen besonderen Mehrwert mit: Durch ihre Erfahrung aus zahlreichen Unternehmen und Branchen erkennen sie Muster, Chancen und Risiken schneller und denken konsequent über den Tellerrand der eigenen Industrie hinaus. Sie bringen bewährte Lösungen aus unterschiedlichsten Märkten mit und bewerten Herausforderungen unabhängig von internen Denkmustern. Genau diese Außensicht ist für moderne Aufsichtsgremien von unschätzbarem Wert.
Viertens: Kontinuierliche Qualifizierung.
Professionelle Aufsicht ist längst ein eigenständiger Beruf. Wer Verantwortung für Unternehmen übernimmt, sollte sich regelmäßig weiter qualifizieren und idealerweise zertifiziert sein. Governance, Compliance, Haftungsfragen und regulatorische Anforderungen entwickeln sich kontinuierlich weiter. Ein Aufsichtsrat darf sich nicht auf seinen früheren Erfolgen ausruhen – er muss fachlich auf dem aktuellen Stand bleiben.
Der Aufsichtsrat der Zukunft braucht deshalb weniger Status und mehr Kompetenz. Weniger Bekanntheit und mehr Urteilskraft. Weniger operative Detaildiskussionen und mehr strategische Klarheit.
Nicht das tiefste Produktwissen entscheidet über die Qualität eines Aufsichtsrats. Sondern seine Fähigkeit, die richtigen Fragen zu stellen, unabhängig zu urteilen und Management wirksam besser zu machen.
„Wer gehört eigentlich in einen Aufsichtsrat?“ Diese Frage wird häufig mit den falschen Kriterien beantwortet. Gesucht werden Branchenkenner, ehemalige Vorstände oder Persönlichkeiten mit einem großen Namen. Das klingt plausibel, greift aber zu kurz.
Ulvi Aydin ist CEO von !AYCON Management Consulting. Er begleitet Unternehmen in Transformation und Wachstum, unterstützt Gesellschafter in Beiräten und Aufsichtsräten und ist Experte für Performance- und Strategiefragen im Mittelstand.
– Ulvi Aydin
Wenn Sie auf "Alle Cookies akzeptieren" klicken, stimmen Sie der Speicherung von Cookies auf Ihrem Gerät zu, um die Navigation auf der Website zu verbessern, die Nutzung der Website zu analysieren und unsere Marketingmaßnahmen zu unterstützen. Weitere Informationen finden Sie in unserer Datenschutzrichtlinie.