Have you ever noticed there is no game called Leadership Trivia. Oh, there might be a version with the question, “Which company featured in the Jim Collin’s book Good to Great eventually went on to file for bankruptcy,” but, that would be more of a historical question.
In issues related to leadership, there are no answers that can be posted on a card, placed in a card deck, and pulled at random to delight its players around the table. There is often no right answer to the question.
“You are still going to use the team to solve their own problem, but you are going to provide leadership to make it happen,” I said.
“So, how am I supposed to pull them out of their malaise,” Rory asked.
“First, you have to be crystal clear with the work instructions.
People will follow general direction with general responses.. If you need specific output, your work instructions must be very specific.”
“So, this is on me,?” Rory clarified.
“Yes,” I said. “That is who I am talking to. You are the leader, this is on you.”
“Okay, what does it sound like?”
“First, does the way that you state the problem have any bearing on the way we approach the solution?” I smiled.
Rory nodded.
“Be crystal clear about the goal. The first step is to make sure there is no ambiguity about what the solution looks like. Then announce there may be several ways to get there. And, it is up to the team to generate those ideas. In that declaration, you have silenced their inner critic and opened the door to explore new paths to solve the problem.”
“I’m listening,” Rory said.
“With only one idea, everyone is a critic. With multiple ideas, we can discuss the merits, workability and effectiveness. Your team will not get there without you. That is your role.
Rory stared. “You are right, it’s not which method is the best method. Does the team have the confidence to figure out the best method? As long as they are afraid to make a mistake, they will never generate more ideas to solve the problem.”
“And, where is that shift in mental state going to come from?” I asked.
Rory knew exactly where I was going with this. “I see,” he said.
“You want me to get involved?”
“You are the manager,” I smiled. “In what way could we move the team to generate more alternatives, debate those alternatives and then agree on the best one for today?”
“I was hoping they would figure this out on their own,” Rory replied.
“Well, you could wait,” I smiled. “Or you could move things along as the leader.”
“But, if I get involved, it’s going to slow things down,” he protested.
I nodded. “I would rather spend some time to figure out a committed direction, than wonder about a half baked idea that may or may not solve the problem.”
So, I left Shannon to ponder why. Why was she drawn to be a manager? I asked you the same question.
Shannon was promoted to manager as the next thing in her career. It was different than she thought it would be. She thought being a manager would make her more important (it does). Being a manager provides authority to tell people what to do (prescribing authority).
The additional compensation doesn’t last. Being important may stroke a manager’s ego, but that ego trip wears thin very fast in the face of accountability. It’s not about the manager. It’s about the relationship between the manager and the team member. Shannon’s report –
“But you were right. It wasn’t for the money. It wasn’t so I could order people around. I just want to make a difference. A difference for the company, a difference for the people on my team and to make a difference for me.”
It seems that Shannon has a cause. But having a cause is not enough. To be a truly effective manager, Shannon has to be had by the cause. And it take some time to understand the cause, to be had by it.
Shannon was staring at her desk. She didn’t look depressed, but certainly not happy.
“What’s up?” I asked.
“Not much,” she replied. “I was really ready to come back to work from the holidays, but yesterday was a barn burner. Ever since I was promoted to manager, things have been different around here. It was so much simpler when I just came to work and punched a clock.”
“So, why did you want to become a manager?”
Shannon furrowed her brow. “I don’t know. I just got promoted.”
“Why didn’t you turn it down?”
“I never thought about. It was a promotion, I got a raise.” I could see in her face that she had never explored this question before.
“That’s the reason most people become managers,” I said, “for the money. But if that’s the case it never lasts. The second reason is ego, you know, all the authority to push people around. But that doesn’t last very long either. Management is hard work, times get tough and if you are going to survive, you have to discover why you are drawn to be a leader.”
And so I left Shannon to struggle with the same question I am asking you. Why are you drawn to be a leader?
“I know I need some help,” Ellen explained. “I am in a new role, I have to step up my game. I know you and I know that many people trust you to help them. I need you to teach me, so that I can become a better manager.”
“I am flattered,” I replied, “but I must tell you a story.”
There was a young woman searching for the meaning of life. She had heard of a wise man who lived at the top of a mountain, who, by all reports, could help in her quest. So she made preparations for the journey.
It was a long journey, traveling by foot. Many overnights before she arrived at the mountain. The mountain was not particularly dangerous to climb, but the path was another two days journey into a higher elevation.
Finally, she arrived, and sat with the wise man she had heard so much about. After explaining the reason for her travel, she asked the question. “Sir, what is the meaning of life?”
To which, the wise man quickly responded, “My child, Life is a River.”
The young woman was clearly taken aback. “I heard you were a wise man, so I traveled many days to arrive at your mountain, then traveled two more days into the clouds to speak with you about the meaning of life, and all you have to say is that Life is a River?”
The wise man looked directly at her, “You mean, it’s not a river?”
From the Ask Tom mailbag-
Continued from yesterday –
Question:
I recently had a conversation with a leadership guru that stated that you don’t need formal structure in a small business, if you have good leadership. He indicated that you don’t need documentation, role descriptions, or even much for KPIs.
Response:
The problem with “good leadership” is that it becomes person dependent. We are juggling three balls in the air.
Leadership
Leadership vested in a single individual, is person dependent. It may work in a small business because there aren’t that many people. A handful of people can follow a single individual, because if there is any doubt as to who has the authority to make a decision, the team can just ask the leader. That also means the leader must be available (proximity). But, if all decision making must go through the leader, as the company grows larger, what happens to the speed of decision making. Slows down, or stops.
Small Business
All decisions going through the leader is a hallmark of a small business and assures that the business will remain small. If all problems have to be solved by the leader, as the company grows larger, what happens to the speed of problem solving? Slows down, or stops.
Good Leadership
Good leadership requires competent management skills. Good management requires competent leadership skills. You can’t have one without the other (please, no discussion about leader vs. manager). Effective leadership, among other things requires clarity. Poor leaders will be uncertain in their decisions and communicate ambiguity to the team. Good leadership requires clarity. So, if your leadership guru says all you need is good leadership, I might agree, but only if that definition requires the formalization of things like role descriptions, documentation and KPIs. That’s what good leadership is, it’s clear.
From the Ask Tom mailbag –
Question:
I recently had a conversation with a leadership guru that stated that you don’t need formal structure in a small business, if you have good leadership. He indicated that you don’t need documentation, role descriptions, or even much for KPIs.
Response:
If life were only that simple. Let’s break this down over the next couple of days.
You don’t need a formal structure.
You have a structure. Every company has a structure. Structure, or organizational structure, is simply the way we define working relationships between people. Org structure is a mental configuration, usually starting with the mind of the founder (or current CEO). But, everyone else in the organization also has a mental configuration of those working relationships as well.
We translate that mental configuration to a piece of paper, with boxes, circle and arrows and call it an organizational chart. It’s a two dimensional representation of that picture we have in our heads. Important in that org chart is the way we define two things –
In the working relationship between two roles in the organization, what is the accountability and what is the authority (to make decisions or solve problems the way we would have them solved)?
So, on the face of the statement made by your leadership guru, I would disagree. It is important to define the working relationships and to put them on a piece of paper so we can discuss them. The purpose for the discussion is to ensure that what the founder, or CEO, thinks is pretty close to what everyone else thinks. Without that agreement, friction occurs in the form of personality conflicts or communication breakdowns.
“So, how long could they keep that up?” I repeated. “As long as nothing changed, how long could your team simply repeat what they did the day before?”
“Well, forever,” Nathan exclaimed. “But things do change.”
“Bingo!” I said. “Things do change and that is what management is all about. Customers change, technology changes, raw materials change, processes change, even our people change. Management is all about change. Change is your guarantee of a never-ending employment opportunity as a manager.”
I smiled, but Nathan didn’t appreciate my jovial attitude.
“I think I am tuned in with that. So, why am I having so much trouble with my team. They don’t listen to anything I have to say.” Nathan’s head swirled as if his thoughts were making him dizzy and he was trying to stabilize.
“Here is the problem,” I replied, waiting until Nathan’s eyes were settled. “Everyone talks about managing change, as if it is the prime directive. We manage this and we manage that. Here is the clue. People don’t want to be managed. People want to be led. Oh, there is still plenty to manage, processes, systems and technology. But try to manage people and it will be a bit like herding cats.”
“You look like you have a question,” I said.
“I have been studying leadership, but it is a bit confusing,” Maria replied. “So, many books, so many perspectives. You would think if I read all the books, I would know what traits I should possess to be an effective leader?”
I nodded. “So, it would seem. Any study of leadership rarely considers the context of leadership, so the discussion appears jumbled and confused. Leadership never stands alone, it is always in a context.”
“Okay?”
“Was Churchill considered a great leader?” I asked.
“Yes, for those of us who have seen the movie,” Maria chuckled.
“Yes, in wartime, but not so much in peacetime. To truly understand leadership, first you have to understand the context. Connect the context and things make more sense. Most often, I speak about managerial leadership. But, there are other contexts, parental leadership, political leadership, military leadership, spiritual leadership, academic leadership. The context will demand the qualities necessary for effective leadership in that circumstance, and eschew those characteristics that detract.”
Maria nodded, so I continued. “Before we look at the person (qualities and traits), first we have to look at the context. The biggest mistake most companies make in hiring is to look at the candidate without understanding the work in the role. It’s all about the work.”