leadership dot #2979: reach out

“There is a great paradox that points to the hopeful path ahead,” writes thought leader Margaret Wheatley in her essay When Change is Out of Our Control. “It is possible to prepare for the future without knowing what it will be. The primary way to prepare for the unknown is to attend to the quality of our relationships, to how well we know and trust one another.”

Wheatley writes that the key to cultivating these relationships is by doing meaningful work together. In this new era of Zoom, it’s easy to divide the work in ways that allow us to conquer it individually instead of as a group but we must fight the urge to do so. She outlines several strategies for strengthening relationships and they remind me very much of the same principles that Daniel Coyle outlines in The Culture Code. It comes down to what he terms as (psychological) safety, vulnerability and purpose.

In Wheatley’s language, the list looks like this:

  • Focus people on the bigger picture – bringing people together so they can look beyond the urgent and prevent inward spiraling
  • Demand honest, forthright communication – information helps alleviate stress
  • Prepare for the unknown – practice with others through scenarios or simulations
  • Keep meaning at the forefront – articulate how the work contributes to meaningful outcomes
  • Use rituals and symbols – encourage shared expressions to celebrate or mourn
  • Pay attention to individuals – take the time to reach out to support and care for each other

Even Wheatley admits that none of her strategies provide new organizational advice. The key is actually implementing some of them – making the time to enhance your culture and the wellbeing of your team – even when chaos is swirling around all of you. Bottom lines may be brutal, hearts may be heavy and the virus may seem never-ending, but the bridge to the other side is built with trusting relationships. Don’t stay on your side of the chasm alone.

For Part 1 of this concept, see yesterday’s dot here.

leadership dot #2978: uncertainty

Thought leader Margaret Wheatley wrote an essay entitled “When Change is Out of Our Control.” She writes: “Uncertainty leads to increased fear. As fear levels rise, it is normal for people to focus on personal security and safety. We tend to withdraw, become more self-serving, and more defensive. We focus on smaller and smaller details, those things we can control. It becomes more difficult to work together, and nearly impossible to focus on the bigger picture.”

Sounds very timely, doesn’t it? Only she wrote the piece in July 2002 when the world was still reeling from the effects of 9-11.

At the time, the terrorist attacks were the greatest disruption that most of us had seen. Whole industries were impacted, the economy took a big hit and 3000 people died. Now we long for that level of outcomes.

But amidst all the gloom, in her signature style, Dr. Wheatly provides a recipe of hope for individuals and organizations: “In order to counter the negative organizational dynamics stimulated by stress and uncertainty, we must give full attention to the quality of our relationships. Nothing else works, no new tools or technical applications, no redesigned organizational chart. The solution is each other. If we can rely on one another, we can cope with almost anything. Without each other, we retreat into fear.”

I thought of her admonition when I had a phone call with my project leader last week. She scheduled it just to chat – no business to conduct and no agenda, just an “I miss you check-in.” It was good for the soul and helped me reconnect to the purpose of what I’m doing for them.

We’re all “COVIDed-out,” but unfortunately, the virus isn’t finished with us. To persist and prevail in these times of uncertainty we need to reach out and nurture our relationships rather than retreat from them. More on her specific strategies tomorrow…

leadership dot #2977: variation

When I worked at a university, we received an order of notecards that were printed in the wrong color. If you did not know that the official brand palette was a certain gold you may not have even noticed the slightly-orange-ish ink, but those of us in the marketing area were adamant that they be destroyed. I remember distinctly someone in a leadership role saying that they would “just use them on campus” rather than waste them, but we knew that if they left the delivery box there would be no control of the brand. The gold would morph into all variations of orange-ish as other things would be printed using the notecard color as the standard.

Although that was years ago, I thought about the incident recently when I was cleaning out some supplies of my own. I found a box of notecards with my name – embossed in all capital letters. At the time I purchased them, having anything be both personalized be affordable was a rarity and so I went with it, even though all-caps were the only option. Now, I was staring at a box of high quality, perfectly functional notecards that were totally “off-brand” and I thought about the previous debacle on campus – and cringed as I proceeded to cut them in half to use as scrap paper!

Everyone plays a role in adhering to standards. You can either preserve your visual identity with rigor or let it go. “Sort-of” isn’t a viable option.

leadership dot #2976: a discipline

One of the many tributes to civil rights leader and Congressman John Lewis came from activist Packnett Cunningham. In Time she wrote:

“Any observation of John Lewis’ life, from his early years to his many terms in Congress, communicates a simple truth: courage is a discipline. In order for courage to change the course of history, as Mr. Lewis’ did, it cannot be episodic – it must be unwavering. We should count ourselves blessed to have witnessed a case study in the continual practice of the discipline of courage from a master teacher in our lifetimes.”

Those words really spoke to me: “Courage is a discipline.” I tend to think of courage as an act, a one-time thing, a momentary decision whether or not to be brave right now – not as a lifelong way of being. But maybe that has been the problem with all of us – we stand up or speak up for something that arouses our passions, and then our ire and voices fade away. We don’t practice the discipline of being courageous continually; of persisting until the wrong is right, and instead retreat or divert to the next crisis at hand.

John Lewis offered many lessons throughout his life. Maybe this is one you can adopt to make it part of who you are going forward.

Source: Marching Orders by Brittany Packnett Cunningham, Time, August 3/August 10, 2020, p. 43

 

leadership dot #2975: bravado

If you’ve ever wondered why new hires or young whippersnappers approach the world as if they know everything, it could be because of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This theory plots confidence vs. experience and knowledge and the resulting graph resembles a roller coaster.

In the beginning, people are low on experience but very high on confidence (they don’t know enough to be otherwise) but soon they peak and plummet, losing confidence as they gain knowledge and realize that there is more depth than they first understood. Despair follows, when confidence is at its lowest, but rather than hitting bottom, the curve returns upward as confidence returns as knowledge increases. Ultimately, there is a measure of both confidence and experience that results in an expert knowing the complexity of a subject, but being secure in her mastery of it.

Those who are unaware of Dunning-Kruger enter a new arena with a false sense of bravado. Novice political candidates are often in this realm where they boast about making sweeping changes without understanding the difficulty and complexity of actually governing. Incumbents, on the other hand, may hedge their answers in realism as their confidence wanes based on the challenges they have experienced in their earlier terms or their understanding of the depth of the issues. It’s the difference between being a good candidate and a strong public servant – they aren’t the same.

If we are to elevate new voices, it pays for everyone to be cognizant of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Those who come into interviews or volunteer for projects may project high confidence, but it could merely be a reflection of their oblivion to the true complexity of the task. You may do better to bet on someone further along on the curve who acknowledges there are things they don’t know and isn’t blinded by their own cognitive bias about their skills.

u/ GroundbreakingBlood7

 

leadership dot #2974: representation

A record number of women are leading Fortune 500 companies thanks to the recent appointment of Linda Rendle as Clorox’s CEO. What is the record? A paltry 38. It’s less than 8% of all the chief officers, all of them white. Overall, women are less than 20% of the C-suite officers in the 500 companies, even though women comprise nearly half of the workforce.

The female gap in government was really brought home to me during the Hillary series. Before a record-breaking 1991 election that resulted in a whopping total of four female Senators, there had never been more than two at a time. In the 244 years of our democracy, only 57 women have served in the role – with 26 of them serving now, and 11 being elected since 2017.

Even more astonishing to me, women did not have a restroom off the Senate floor until 1993, literally 200 years after the Capitol was constructed. Female House representatives had it even worse, with no facilities off the House floor until 2011, causing them to be out of range for announcements about upcoming votes.

We’ve got to do better. Take a hard look at your organization and your community and find a way to elevate some new voices. Tap someone on the shoulder to encourage them. Create programs to advance emerging leaders from multiple constituencies. Survey your building and ensure it meets the needs of different groups (e.g. lactation room, prayer space, etc.)

There are many talented, kindhearted and dedicated men out there, but they are not the only ones who can lead. Representation – and restrooms – matter.

a Latina woman and Black woman

leadership dot #2973: machete

The Hulu mini-series Hillary takes a fascinating look at the woman they term as “one of the most admired and most vilified” women in the United States. It shows huge crowds cheering for “H.R.C.” and also large gatherings chanting “Lock Her Up.” Just to understand the reasons behind the polarization made for very stimulating television.

What stuck with me the most is a comment made by Cheryl Mills, one of Hillary’s advisors. “We are never ready for the person who has to blaze the trail,” she said. “We’re ready for the person who comes after them because they don’t have to shrink to fit – there’s plenty of room now for them to walk in all their glory.”

Take a moment to think of those who forged a path that you eventually followed, probably without realizing the effort and sacrifice that went into those who went before you with the metaphorical machete. Perhaps it was the previous person in your position who fought the political battles to lay down the infrastructure that now allows you to succeed after they were fired for causing “trouble.” Maybe it was an older sibling who set the example by figuring out how to be the first to go to college. It could have been the woman before you who called out harassment and led the fight to change your workplace for future women although she was shunned herself. Or maybe you benefit from the citizen who showed up and spoke up to change a policy, even after many failed attempts.

If you have the opportunity to appreciate someone who blazed a trail, do so, even if it’s well after the fact. Being a change leader is downright hard and the hurt it causes stays in your bones for years. It’s never too late to say thank you to those who went first.

leadership dot #2972: a lot

Wells Fargo was fined $185 million because of employees opening up millions of fake accounts to meet their numbers. Citigroup lost a $158 million lawsuit by the Department of Justice due to fraudulent loan practices. GlaxoSmithKline needed to pay $3 billion for misleading safety information on their drugs.

All of these sound like massive sums – until you put them in context.

In the Infinite Game, Simon Sinek reports that Wells Fargo’s fine was less than one percent of their total profit of $22 billion the year they were fined and only 0.2 percent of their total revenues of nearly $95 billion. It’s the equivalent of someone who makes $75,000 in annual salary being fined $150.*

Citigroup’s judgment was 1.4 percent of their net income of $11.2 billion, and consider GSK’s $3 billion fine against the $25 billion in sales for those prescriptions.

I thought of this when our local grocery chain hung a big banner proclaiming that they were donating “1 million dollars and hours” to support racial equality and unity. I wondered if it was a significant step in response to the negative PR the chain received for boarding up all of their stores after George Floyd’s death – even though the closest violent protest was over an hour away. But $1 million seems modest in comparison to last year’s $10.6 billion in revenue.

Put the numbers you see in perspective – especially big numbers that are hard to grasp. Millions and billions aren’t always that significant in the overall.

leadership dot #2971: deadline

I have a friend who left on a major road trip at 7:30pm when he wanted to leave at 5:00. He got involved in a project that he needed to finish which resulted in his delayed departure.

I have no doubt that if he had a plane ticket for 3:00pm, he would have been in his seat. All those things he “had” to do suddenly wouldn’t have seemed as important. We’ve all been there.

Driving and flying represent two different kinds of deadlines – soft and firm. If you set for yourself a target where it doesn’t really matter if you hit it or not, it’s best to use language that indicates it’s not a hard stop. If you set “deadlines” that you repeatedly ignore, over time your brain (or your staff) registers that “deadline” means more of a “wish” than a hard endpoint.

Both kinds of deadlines have their place. Be clear on which one you are imposing.

 

leadership dot #2970: splinter

There used to be a time when, for Christian families, nothing happened on Sunday morning except for religious services. It was the traditional time to attend church and to ensure that people could observe the day of worship, “blue laws” were even enacted to restrict other activities and commerce.

While 28 states still have some form of blue laws on the books (most often limiting alcohol sales), Christian religious experiences are no longer confined to Sunday mornings. Churches offer some sort of gathering on almost every night of the week, and now provide multiple options to participate in the weekly service. It’s like the news broadcasts: instead of everyone watching network news on one of three channels at 6pm or 10pm as they once did, now the offerings are 24/7 through hundreds of outlets.

Intentionally or not, we made a tradeoff between convenience and a common experience. It is great that people have options and can arrange church attendance around practices, sports, work, etc. and it is unfortunate that we’re able to have less of a shared community by doing so.

Think of what this means for your organization. Is there an offering that was considered sacrosanct that perhaps you could rethink? Maybe your work hours don’t have to be 9-5. Or your awards program only annually. Or football only under the Friday night lights.

And, if you provide more options and minimize one central time for all to gather, what can you do to intentionally foster that connection to the whole instead of affinity just to the subgroup? Splinter your options, not your loyalty.