The Trust Bank

Recently I was asked to work with a large department of 55 employees divided into five intact teams. The assignment was to develop and deliver a workshop to build trust between teams, that is, across organizational boundaries.

The problem is trust isn’t built across, by or between teams.

Ok, yes, you are probably aware of a team you trust. But if you explore why you trust them, it boils down to trusting the individual people on the team.

You don’t build trust between teams, you build trust between people.

Building trust is not a team sport; it is a game of one-on-one.

One of the things we teach our workshop participants is that “Trust is like a savings account.” You establish a savings account so you have money on hand when something unexpected arises. Once a week or so, you add a little to your savings account. Over time it grows and compounds. It is your security against the unexpected, ready when you need it.

A Trust Bank works in a similar way: you make small, regular deposits of trust with other people.

These don’t need to be large deposits, but you should make them regularly. Like money in a savings account, trust deposits also compound and grow.

And the similarities don’t end there. The value of a trust bank lies in knowing that when something unexpected happens – you say the wrong thing or forget a commitment – you can make a withdrawal. If you made regular trust deposits, you will have a positive balance even after a withdrawal – that is, you will retain a trusting relationship.

Make no mistake: most trust deposits are small and a single withdrawal can often be significant. That’s why it is so important to make regular deposits, not only with your regular contacts, but also people you may work with in the future.

The great thing about Trust is that that is there is always plenty to go around. Strive to make trust deposits daily with everyone you meet.

It’s Not About YOU

Last week I was speaking to a fellow board member. We were evaluating a controversial recommendation and as an expert in the field, her feedback was critical. For twenty minutes she shared some great insights. But as our discussion wrapped up, the conversation suddenly changed directions. She began complaining that our board did not approach her first before undertaking the task. Her final comment was “This made me look bad.”

As the line clicked dead I was stunned. Wait! What? Did she really say that?

Darned if it didn’t happen again two days later! A friend called to volunteer his time on an upcoming project. I barely uttered the words “Thank you” before he interrupted to tell me that he was personally offended that he wasn’t asked to participate in a similar project last year.

What? Come on, really?

I wanted to tell the both: It’s not about YOU!

A subtlety of leadership is that effective leaders focus on their team not themselves. As Jack Welch wrote in Winning

Leadership is not about you. It’s about the people that work for you.

Although you may end up in the spotlight, a leader continually redirects the attention to their subordinates and followers. Making it about you, as my two friends did, diminishes your leadership role.

While I don’t work for either of the two people mentioned, leadership isn’t simply about hierarchy. You don’t become a leader just because people work for you any more than you become a car because you walk into a garage. John C. Maxwell said it best in The 360 Degree Leader

The true measure of leadership is influence – nothing more, nothing less.

My two friends were both in leadership roles during our conversations. As a subject matter expert, the board member was in a position to influence our decision. By volunteering, my other friend placed himself in a position to influence the direction of the project. Unfortunately, by shifting the focus to them, both completely diminished their role as a leader and thus their influence.

As leaders, you control the spotlight. Focus it on your team and try to stay out of the limelight. Influential leaders know; It’s not about you!
* * * * *
Subtleties of Leadership is on Twitter: @SubtleLeader

The Abilene Paradox - Validation

Over the last few weeks I have been addressing a style of group think called The Abilene Paradox. The Paradox occurs when a group makes a decision that is contrary to the actual desires of the group members. In Jerry B. Harvey’s original description, a family drives to Abilene for dinner and after returning four hours later realizes that no one really wanted to go!

In my first Abilene article I addressed why people fail to voice their disagreement. Most often members hesitate to disagree out of some type of fear. Dennis Gillan commented

I have been in groups that went to "Abilene" and if someone would have clearly stated what was in their heart, we could have saved a trip.

In the second article I described how leaders can avoid a trip to Abilene by setting the proper TONE. The best decisions are those made in an environment in which healthy disagreement is encouraged for the good of the team. Effective leaders work to set the right tone knowing it will pay off, particularly during important decisions.

Despite best efforts, a group may still detour to Abilene when making a decision. If you sense it happening, stop to VALIDATE the decision. You can plan validation in advance or it can be spontaneous. Either way, the key is to confirm that everyone actually agrees with the decision and isn’t just “going along.”

The first step is to begin team meetings by giving members the authority to validate decisions. This is not a free pass for members to delay or fight a decision. Rather, it is permission for members to call time-out if it appears Abilene is just over the horizon.

A simple, proactive technique is to use brainstorming and make sure everyone contributes. Note: As the leader wait until the end to add your suggestions. It works because using a brainstormed list requires critical thinking to eliminate some options while embracing others.

Another way to validate is asking team members to write their ideas prior to group deliberations. Later, as the team discusses the issue, periodically ask participants to share their written thoughts. Since these ideas were crafted before the discussion they will be unaffected by the group opinion.

Using good facilitation skills is another way to keep the group off the road to Abilene. For example, when a fresh idea or a dissenting opinion is offered be sure to fully acknowledge it and draw the group’s attention to it. Also, try to avoid letting one or two vocal members dominate the discussion. Make sure everyone is involved.

When the group begins moving toward a decision validation becomes crucial, particularly for difficult decisions. If you fear the group is on the outskirts of Abilene, don’t ask “does everyone agree?” Instead consider alternative decision making techniques such as the Fist to Five Method or a simple written vote.

Finally, if despite your best efforts, the team seems to be “going along” rather than actually agreeing, flip the discussion. To flip, ask the team to assume the opposite or alternative viewpoint and have them explain why it could be a better choice. Flipping helps validate the decision because when everyone is forced to consider an alternative you create a safe zone for the ‘silent dissenters’ to voice their opinions.

Whether on a charitable board, a task force, a work team and just with friends, Abilene beckons you! Practice the two ways to avoid an unnecessary trip. First, encourage healthy disagreement by setting the proper TONE. Second, look for warning signs of Abilene and VALIDATE the team’s decisions along the way. Abilene may be a great place to visit, but you don’t want to make decisions there!

The Abilene Paradox - Setting Tone

In my last post, I described a common form of miscommunication called The Abilene Paradox. The Paradox is a problem that arises not from conflict, but from agreement. It happens when a group makes a collective decision that is in direct opposition to the actual desires and beliefs of individual members. A common example is when someone suggests a place for lunch. No one really wants to go there, but they are unwilling to voice opposition. So everyone just goes along.

Following the last blog, I asked readers how they would keep groups from traveling to Abilene. Those suggestions helped form two broad solutions. The quotes below are from some of those contributors.

Everyone involved in decisions that are made in “Abilene” shares responsibility for those decisions. But ultimately, the leader’s role is to avoid that decision-making flaw. Whether formally leading a team or simply organizing an evening out, as the leader, you must guard against the Paradox in two ways. First, discourage road trips to Abilene by setting the proper TONE. Second, if you feel the team is detouring to Abilene, stop and VALIDATE the group’s decision.

TONE
The best decisions are those made in an environment that fosters healthy disagreement. The leader’s role is to set that tone for all team interactions. Becky Cates posted this comment:

When a barrier exists, either real or perceived, there can be no open exchange. It takes a confident person to project a sincere desire to listen, receive and value the opinions and feelings of others—whether they agree or not.

Confident leaders know that the best decisions are those reached through an open exchange and they constantly encourage it.

Encouraging open exchanges and healthy disagreement begins long before a meeting. To set the proper tone you must model it all the time. Denise Dunn was succinct:

Lead by example -- not just when there are decisions to be made, but always.

One way to set the tone is to ask team members for their thoughts before expressing your own. If someone is reluctant to comment, reiterate her responsibility to the team and remind her that regardless of her views, you value her thoughts. Modeling the proper tone of open exchange demonstrates that team members have a voice and that exercising that voice will not have negative consequences.

It is important to restate the proper tone at the beginning of decision-making meetings. Explain that each team member brings a unique perspective to the decision-making process. As members of the team, they each have a responsibility to help determine the best course of action. Remind them that there may be instances when being responsible means voicing concerns. As Mike Hawkins wrote

Leaders should never fear well-intentioned dissent.

To that I add – and they should set a tone that supports it.

Setting the proper tone will help prevent trips to Abilene. However, despite your best efforts, occasionally the team will venture down that road. In the next post, I will explain how to abort The Abilene Paradox by VALIDATING team decisions.

Until then, set the proper tone: Tell your team members it is OK to constructively disagree. Make sure your friends know to speak up if they don’t like the lunch plans. Ask for your spouse’s opinion before expressing your own. Setting the proper tone is a Subtlety of Leadership that will help you stay off the road to Abilene.

The Abilene Paradox - Causes

Have you visited Abilene? You probably did and didn’t know it. Many groups take this ‘trip’ but don’t realize they are in route until it is too late. Abilene, Texas may be a great town, but as a leader, make sure your team never goes there.

The Abilene Paradox is an allegory describing a common form of miscommunication called group think. It was originally coined in the 70’s by Texas native Jerry B. Harvey, a professor of management science at George Washington University.

In his book The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management, Harvey described a family experience in which four relatives agreed to drive an hour to Abilene for dinner. Four hours later, after enduring 100+ degree heat, no air conditioning and a not-so-great meal, his mother commented that she only went along because everyone else wanted to go. A second relative snapped that he only agreed, because he thought everyone else wanted dinner in Abilene. The conversation quickly dissolved into a full-blow family argument when it became evident that while everyone had agreed to go no one actually wanted to go.

The Abilene Paradox describes a unique problem that arises not from conflict, but from agreement. It is what happens when a group makes a collective decision that is in direct opposition to the actual desires and beliefs of individual members. The irony is that often team members agree privately about the best possible decision. Yet, when convened as a group, they fail to publicly voice their opinion, passively accepting the decision of the group.

The Abilene Paradox:

When organizations take actions in contradiction to what they really want to do and therefore defeat the very purposes they are trying to achieve.

Do not think The Paradox is limited only to business. The need to “effectively manage agreement” as Harvey calls it, is needed in non-profits, family interactions, sports teams – anywhere people need to make decisions as a group. In fact, Harvey suggested that “the inability to manage agreement is a major source of organizational dysfunction.”

There are a number of reasons for passive agreement in teams. Occasionally, silence is a form of loyalty to, or support of, the leader. In another situation one person may be driving the entire team to Abilene by dominating the discussion with his strong opinions.

Most often the paradox happens when individuals fear the repercussions of speaking up in a group setting. Typically, that fear reflects a concern for job security or retaliation from the leader. Others may hesitate to speak up out of fear of being ostracized from the group or being seen as different. In either case, the result is not only a poor decision, but also a lack of grassroots support for the decision. Together these are a recipe for disaster because

agreeing TO something is vastly different than agreeing WITH something.

Do you have thoughts about how effective leaders can avoid a trip to Abilene? Next week, I’ll explain my solutions and include your ideas as well. Leave your comments below or email me at SubtletiesofLeadership@gmail.com

WE versus ME; Part 2

Success and failure begins and ends with the leader. How you, the leader, handle it is a subtlety of leadership. In my previous post “We vs. Me” I described how important it is for leaders to use ‘we’ and ‘our’ when discussing team successes. The old axiom there is always enough credit to go around is true. Strong leaders shine the spotlight on their team in times of achievement. If instead the leader speaks in terms of ‘my’ team, he turns the light on himself and shifts the focus from We to Me. If that happens, you lose credibility as a leader.

While the focus should be on 'We' following successes, there are other times when leaders should shift it to ‘Me’. Effective leaders publicly shoulder the responsibility when the team is not successful. The simple rule is to use We when describing success, but shift responsibility to Me when things go wrong.

Don’t misread this. Hold your team members accountable. But accountability occurs in private, behind closed doors. Publicly, leaders take the responsibility. Your peers and superiors expect it, so shift the focus from We to Me.

Why take the blame for a team member’s failure? There are many reasons, but the most important is because you are the leader. When you accept that role, you also accept responsibility for all of the decisions, all of the actions and all of the results. Great leaders know this and embrace it as part of being an effective leader.

Taking the heat off the team is also a sure-fire way to build loyalty. There is no greater way to create ardent followers than by shielding the team from the consequences of best efforts that did not win. In fact, Steve Ross Late CEO of Time Warner wrote:

In this company you’ll be fired for not making mistakes.

If you want a cohesive team of followers, shift the focus to ‘Me’ during difficult times.

Deflecting criticism also gives the team confidence to continue. Knowing that you publicly “have their backs” encourages the team to take needed risks, to think outside the box and to avoid fear of failure. As Babe Ruth famously said:

Don’t let the fear of striking out get in your way.

Keep your team swinging for the fences by assuming responsibility. When things go wrong, it is Me not We.

The answer to who gets the credit for success and failure is in the language you use. It is the subtlety of knowing when to use We and when to use Me.
- When the team succeeds, give them the credit and brag on the team. Use We and Our.
- When the team isn’t successful, step up. You are the leader. Take the heat off your team and put the focus on Me.

We versus Me

Who gets the credit for success and failure? Is it the team or the team leader? Is it We or Me? Regardless of what you believe or what you intend, the answer lies in the language you use every day.

Effective leaders know that there is always enough credit to go around. They have no fear of casting a wide net when it comes to sharing success. Knowing that top performers are more motivated by praise and recognition than tangible rewards, leaders intentionally spread the credit. They pepper their language with plural pronouns such as ‘we’ and ‘our’ to describe the positives of a team and ensure that everyone is included in successes.

WE tried something different to win this contract

or

OUR team is great at analyzing complex situations.

On the other hand, consider the impact of self-centered ‘managers’ who shift the focus from We to Me. When followers hear him say “I tried something different…” he is no longer a leader. When team members hear her say “MY team is great at…” they are not part of ‘your’ team at all.

Referring to your employees as ‘my’ department, ‘my’ team, or ‘my’ group crushes any hope of creating a team environment. While they may in fact be your employees, calling them ‘my team’ doesn’t encourage followers, it produces subordinates. If you want to manage, subordinates are great. If you want to lead, people must choose to follow you.

We vs. Me is even more important when you are away from your team. It is easy to remember ‘we’ around the team. The difficulty lies when you are away, speaking to others, particularly bosses. Those are the times when ‘me’ can sneak back into your language. That is when it is also the most damaging. When a leader takes personal credit for her team’s success and word gets back to the team, your credibility is lost.

Compounding the problem, most ‘Me’ managers think putting the spotlight on themselves will help their career. That couldn’t be further from the truth. Focusing on ‘Me’ gives others, particularly superiors, a poor impression of your leadership ability. Kendra Ready of the Financial Post agrees:

I hear people put too much emphasis on themselves (I led this, I launched that, I managed the project) and not enough on the "we". The potential implications? Yes, people may see you as capable and a ready-to-step-up-to-the-plate leader; or you may be seen as someone who is taking an over-generous portion of the credit.

We vs. Me seems so obvious. Yet many potential leaders never achieve greatness because of the subtleness of knowing when to use We and when to use Me. Using ‘We’ is important to build a cohesive team. Yet there are times when using ‘Me’ is essential. Next week, I will explain when to use ‘Me’.

Assume Positive Intent – Part 2

Assuming positive intent is great in theory but difficult in real life. Overlooking what could be construed as an insult requires a high level of emotional control; one that doesn’t come easy. But, effective leaders are willing to make difficult changes because they know that “nothing in life worth doing is ever easy.”

Last week I explained that the first step to assuming positive intent is acknowledging that others are not deliberately trying to anger you. In a report on assuming positive intent in The Business Journal, Robert ‘Dusty’ Staub wrote “When we assume positive intent we can focus more clearly and communicate more crisply and efficiently because we have taken off the table any sense of personal attack and are instead focusing on specific things that were done or not done and upon outcomes.”

Once you understand and believe that most people are not intentionally trying to incur your wrath, assuming positive intent becomes a matter of managing your emotions. Most negative reactions to communications are just that, emotional reactions. Don't let your emotions dictate your leadership style. Instead to be effective, learn to harness, to manage, and ultimately, to leverage emotions.

Indra Nooyi, Chairman and CEO of Pepsi learned to assume positive intent from her father.

“When you assume negative intent, you’re angry. If you take away that anger and assume positive intent, you will be amazed. Your emotional quotient goes up because you are no longer almost random in your response. You don’t get defensive. You don’t scream. You are trying to understand and listen because at your basic core you are saying, ‘Maybe they are saying something to me that I’m not hearing.’”

In practice, leaders should always work to assume positive intent. But, there is one caveat. A colleague once told me “assume positive intent…until proven otherwise.” Unfortunately, those are wise words. Despite research showing that most people do not have a malicious intent, there are exceptions. If you uncover one of those rare exceptions, keep your guard up when communicating with him in the future. But don’t let an “exception” taint your effort to view others through the eyes of positive intent.

One way to begin assuming positive intent is a bit counter-intuitive. The next time you feel insulted, instead of lashing out take time to be introspective. Ask yourself these questions before you rush to judge someone's negative intentions:
1. Do I KNOW that the insult was intentional?
2. Would someone else interpret it as insulting AND view it as deliberate?
3. Is it possible that my initial message was misinterpreted?
4. Do I have a bias that could be coloring my interpretation?

Asking yourself these questions will help you view the situation from a different perspective. . .and help your blood pressure return to normal! It takes practice, but over time it will be easier to stop thinking the worst and assume positive intent.

Assume Positive Intent

It happens a lot. You receive an email with a snide comment that questions your skills, motives or beliefs. The insult makes you angry. Your emotions begin taking over. As your blood pressure rises, you mentally draft a stinging response.

Yes, it happens a lot...and it happened to me while researching this topic! That’s why I know that it is much easier to write ‘Assume Positive Intent’ than it is to do it. But that is precisely why it is so important. Effective leaders know they should not let emotions dictate responses. Learning to assume positive intent is one way to keep those emotions in check.

Unfortunately, human nature often causes people to interpret information through the negative goggles of bias or prejudice. It happens with all forms of communication, but is particularly evident with written materials and especially emails. As you know from a previous post, most emails lack the proper tone to convey emotions and nuances, leaving a huge void for reader interpretation.

One way to tame these negative emotions is to prepare in advance. Think back to those situations in which you felt slighted. In hindsight, you are probably amazed by the complexity and subtleness of the attack. The lesson here is that people are not normally subtle when they attack. When someone attacks, you usually know it.

Assuming positive intent works by discarding the possibility that the other person is deliberately trying to screw things up. It is important because the opposite approach, making negative assumptions, can lead to unnecessary anger, stress and worry. And that can create nonproductive behavior or lost productivity.

According to a study in the International Journal of Psychology, the effects of anger can last seven days. If being disappointed by others’ actions immediately makes you see red, then imagine the cumulative impact on your attitude and therefore, on your organization, if you are always on a continuum of getting angry to staying angry to getting over being angry - about something that might not be based on reality!

The true reality is that most people, particularly co-workers, are not trying to alienate you or others in the office. It is unlikely they are devious or conniving enough to figure out how to insult you so subtly. The ‘insult’ is most likely someone doing what they think is best and doing it for the right reasons.

As Patti Digh wrote in Life is a Verb

This isn't about being a Pollyanna and unrealistic. It's about eliminating opportunities for anger in your life - and sometimes it's about opening the door for dialogue.

In next week’s blog I will tell you how to open that door and how you can make assuming positive intent part of your daily routine.

Say ‘Thank You’ with Your Pen

‘Saying’ thank you is good; ‘Writing’ thank you is better. In a world that uses email, texting, and instant messaging to communicate immediately, hand-written thank you notes are fast becoming a lost art. Mastering this lost art will help your reader understand the value of what they gave you.

Marshall Goldsmith devotes an entire chapter of his book What Got You Here Won’t Get You There to the topic of thanking. He restates an obvious but often overlooked belief that “Saying ‘thank you’ is a crucial feature of etiquette and being mannerly.”

Beyond etiquette, expressing gratitude is an important aspect of effective leadership. A Subtlety of Leadership is that you cannot succeed alone. Good leaders understand that success is dependent on many other people and they regularly express their gratitude. A thank you note is a written acknowledgment of another person’s role in your success and will encourage him to help again in the future. Jaceson Maughan of Life123 agrees:

Everyone needs praise, acknowledgment and appreciation for a job well done. Because thank you notes are increasingly rare, the positive impact is far stronger when one is received.

When should you write and when should you simply ‘say’ thank you? Always write when the effort was special, unique or out of the ordinary. The website Lifescript suggests

A written thanks is appropriate when someone goes out of his or her way to give you a gift, service or time. Even if you are able to thank the giver in person, you should still follow up with a written thank you.

Emailing a thank you note is better than not sending one at all, but it is not as effective as a written note. Because an email is easier, faster and less expensive, an emailed thank you will never have the impact of a handwritten note and often lacks the intended sincerity. Sending a hand-written thank you demonstrates that you made the effort to purchase a card, locate the address, hand-write the note and sent it with an actual stamp through the mail. This effort never goes unnoticed.

The beauty of writing a thank you is that you can’t go wrong. While a note may not be needed or even expected, they are always appreciated and are seldom inappropriate.

The best way to commit to writing thank you notes is to keep a supply readily available. To get started, buy a small package of thank you notes at a local greeting card store. Better yet, order a box of customized thank you cards from a stationary store embossed with your initials or name. Vistaprint.com is a good online source. Either way, choose a card style that is subtle so you can use them in both professional and less formal situations.

When it comes to writing the message, remember that thank you cards are small for a reason; your message should be short and to-the-point. Speak from your heart, but be specific about why you are grateful.

You cannot succeed by yourself and you cannot lead unless others follow. If you are a good leader, you already tell others how much you appreciate their help, their work and their effort. You already tell them how their contribution made a difference. Next time, tell them with your pen.

I'm Right Here! Don't Email Me!

You cannot lead through email. You may be able to manage electronically, but you cannot lead. Leaders empower employees, share their vision and help others feel engaged. To do that takes more that a hastily written email. Effective leaders communicate in-person, not behind an @ sign.

Unfortunately, as email has become entrenched in most organizations, the temptation to use written words instead of face-to-face leadership is greater than ever. According to InformationWeek, business users in the United States send and receive, on average, over 300 e-mails a day. This pervasive use of email has made it the default means of communicating, even when the employees are right outside your office!

Let me be clear; I am not suggesting you stop using email. Used properly, it is an efficient means of communicating when you need to attach documents, create a written record or communicate the same message to a large number of people. But those are managerial functions, not leadership. More importantly, just because something is efficient, such as email, doesn’t mean it is also effective (a Subtlety of Leadership). Instead, I am suggesting that when you lead, do not use email.

As a leadership tool email is ineffective for a number of reasons. First, it is virtually impossible to incorporate your ‘tone’ in an email. Conveying tone in a written document is a skill most leaders sorely lack. Writing in their book Send, Schwalbe & Shipley caution that “a message written without regard to tone becomes a blank screen onto which the reader projects his own fears, prejudices, and anxieties.” Without the proper tone, your words can be easily misconstrued or misunderstood.

Another reason email (or any written communication) is ineffective for exerting leadership is that you cannot receive important non-verbal clues about your message. Nathaniel Lewis explained it this way

“When you take away the visual cues, facial expressions, sighs and pauses that are noticeable in a face to face conversation something is lost in the translation and understanding of the thing being said. The ability to adjust or change the course of a discussion or conversation is only possible when you have facial expressions that either show acceptance or doubt.”

As a leader you need to be able to adjust your delivery to your audience based on feedback; both what is heard and what is seen. Richard Garlikov described it like this: “In spoken conversations there is normally more proximity in time and/or space between the participants than there is in written communications. This allows more immediate, helpful feedback and audio or visual cues about what needs to be said next.” By communicating in-person you will know if your employee ‘gets it’.

There is an easy way to decide between the efficiency of email and the effectiveness of verbal communication. Before clicking ‘New Email’ ask yourself three simple questions:
1. Do I ‘need’ (not want) a written record of the message?
2. Is the message for more than two people?
3. Is another document essential to my message?
If you can answer ‘yes’ to any of the above, an email may be an appropriate tool.

If you answered no, get out of your chair and be a leader!

Your Desk – Your Barrier

Your desk is a barrier to effective leadership. Yes, that hunk of furniture holding all those papers, pictures, and your computer is a barrier…if you try to lead from behind it.

Where you place your desk in your office is truly a Subtlety of Leadership. In fact, it is so subtle that most corporate leaders never think about the impact it may have on employees entering your office.

Your office is a direct reflection of you. It reflects your likes and dislikes. It shows your style and it tells your story. In fact, salesmen are taught to form an early bond with customers by quickly surveying a client’s office to find clues about things the customer likes.

Since your office is a reflection of you, what does it say to employees when you place a large, solid object between you and them? As Hunt & Weintraub wrote in their book, The Coaching Manager,

“It takes more than open-door management. It takes an awareness of the fact that as a leader, you’re always sending signals. Does your behavior signal that you’re interested in the employee, or not?”

Like it or not, when you sit across a desk from an employee, the physical structure creates a barrier that you must overcome to effectively lead. Good communication is already difficult. Creating artificial barriers makes it even more so. When there is a desk between you and another person, the desk may imply that you are "above" them. The discomfort that arises can impede the communication process and erode your ability to lead.

Sitting across a desk from your employee also shows a general lack of decorum. That’s not just my opinion. Read what Cynthia Grosso, the Founder of the Charleston School of Protocol and Etiquette wrote:

“I suggest that you do not sit across the desk from your guest, but rather put him/her next to you on the same side of the desk. This means your office needs to be set up with two chairs on the same side of the desk. This positioning eliminates the desk as a barrier between you and your guest.”

The topic of a desk-as-a-barrier is nothing new. In fact, clinical studies conducted almost sixty years ago demonstrated that positioning a desk between a doctor and a patient increased the patient’s anxiety five-fold! The 1953 study at Mount Sinai Hospital measured how cardiac patients reacted when they were seated across from a physician with and without a desk between them. The results were staggering: 55.4% were judged ‘at ease’ when no desk was present versus only 10.8% when a desk was between them.

A good leader doesn’t lead from behind a desk. She knows that she will look at emails or start glancing at whatever is on her desk. Don’t kid yourself. People know when you aren’t focused on them or what they are saying. M. Scott Peck said it best "You cannot truly listen to anyone and do anything else at the same time."

Good leaders strive to create a sense of commonality or common ground. If your desk is situated correctly, there will be open space between you and your employee when he enters your office. This puts you in a powerful position in which you can turn to face them. This subtle act of moving ‘toward’ the person indicates an openness and willingness to communicate. On top of that, researchers at University of Northern Iowa determined that individuals using open body positions are perceived more positively and are considered more persuasive than those with closed body positions.

To know whether your desk is situated properly, stand in your office doorway. Can you walk directly from your door to your chair without going around your desk? If not, it is likely that anyone walking into your office will be forced to communicate across the barrier you created with your desk.

There is one caveat to this rule; don’t place your desk so your back is to the door or entrance. This is less welcoming, could be misinterpreted as disinterest and may make you appear unapproachable.

While the method described above is ideal, there are plenty of situations in which the desk as a barrier cannot be overcome. A prime example is a cubicle or office in which the furniture is attached. Office size may also restrict your ability to situate the desk properly. In addition, desk placement is not usually an issue in home offices or offices in which you don’t have visitors.

If you cannot avoid a “barrier desk”, try one of these options to minimize its impact on your ability to communicate your message:
- place a chair at the end of your desk
- always move around and sit next to your employee
- ensure that all meetings and extended discussions are conducted over a round table (rectangular tables always have a ‘head’)

To Lead or To Manage?

What is the difference between Leadership and Management? Recently a colleague wrote me that she had never really thought about it until she read a quote from Bob Lewis in his book Keep the Joint Running, A Manifesto for 21st Century Information Technology.

“If people are following then you’re leading. Otherwise you aren’t. That’s what leadership is about – setting direction, and getting others to head in that direction without your having to drag them along. Management, in contrast, is about getting things done – about defining good processes and producing quality results efficiently. If you accept this segregation of responsibilities then make sure you master management before you master leadership.”

Grasping the subtle differences between leading and managing is crucial for anyone with employees. Most definitions are similar to Lewis’ above. Management is typically about processes, procedures and control, whereas leadership is often comprised of much more intangible skills. Mastering management is easier. If you make sure people follow the processes and procedures, you are managing. Learning and using the nuances of leadership is much more difficult. If management is a science, leadership is definitely an art.

Interestingly, many of today’s writers, including Lewis, tend to separate the two disciplines as if they are distinct and unique skills. Jack Welch, retired CEO of General Electric often said that he wants his top people to lead not manage. In an interview with a San Francisco newspaper, Welch said “Managers control, they don't facilitate. Managers complicate things, they don't simplify them.” He uses the analogy that managers tend to keep their feet on the brakes rather than on the gas.

While I have great respect for the wisdom of Jack Welch, I disagree with his “either/or” approach. I believe management is part of Leadership, not a separate discipline.

In my experience, effective leaders exhibit advanced skills such as communicating, empathizing, coaching, and adapting to change. Management should be viewed as another skill of a good leader. Generally speaking, you cannot be an effective leader without also being a good manager.

So, while Lewis’ suggestion that we “master management before you master leadership,” may be correct, it is also a bit misleading. It would be more accurate to say “master management as part of mastering leadership” because you cannot be a great leader without also knowing how to manage. Mark Shead said it another way: “A leader is someone who knows where to go. Management skills are how they actually get there.”

While the differences may be subtle, they are significant. Effective leadership is important because it is impacts your employees and the success of your organization. Studies have shown that most employees, regardless of their role, responsibilities or position will produce more, and the results will be of higher quality, when they feel empowered and engaged in their job. If you are “managing” your employees to get things done, you will achieve much more by “leading” them.

To know whether you are leading or just managing, consider this perspective from David Straker at ChangingMinds.org:

“The biggest difference between managers and leaders is the way they motivate the people who work or follow them. By definition, managers have subordinates. Leaders do not have subordinates - at least not when they are leading. Many organizational leaders do have subordinates, but only because they are also managers. But when they want to lead, they have to give up formal authoritarian control, because to lead is to have followers, and following is always a voluntary activity.”

The answer to whether you are leading or managing is whether your employees are followers or subordinates. If you depend on processes and procedures to accomplish your objectives, you are managing. If you are sharing your vision and empowering your people, you are leading.

Leadership Subtlety: Before leaving your desk for an interaction with employees, try substituting the word Leader or Leadership in your title in place of supervisor, manager or vice-president. Now decide; are you going to “manage” or “lead”?

Introduction

Are leaders born or made? Can you lead from below? What does it take to be a leader? These and many other questions have been debated for years and will be for years to come. That is what makes leadership so complex.

The concept of leadership has fascinated me for as long as I can remember. I have participated in leadership training, read countless books and articles on leadership and attended more leadership workshops than I can remember. I’ve had the opportunity to test and try most of these concepts during my four distinctly different careers. And yet, I think I just now really “get it”.

By “get it” I am referring to a recent epiphany about leadership. (By the way, I normally believe if a word has more than three syllables, you are probably using the wrong word!) But I love this one! Merriam-Webster defines an epiphany as “a sudden awareness of the essential nature of something.”

My epiphany came while reading about Winston Churchill and his leadership style. It occurred to me that most of what is written about leading is based on historic observations of great leaders such as Lincoln, Patton, Reagan, etc. That makes perfect sense - It usually takes a historical perspective to judge great leaders. But it got me thinking “why can’t we learn something today by observing today’s leaders?

The answer to that question was my epiphany. Yes, it takes historic context to pass judgment on significant leadership traits; those great decisions and bold moves that prove to be a major turning point. In fact, these significant traits comprise much of what has been written and taught about leadership.

The answer to “what can we learn today?” lies not in those big things, but in the small aspect of leadership which I refer to as: The Subtleties of Leadership. I believe these subtleties are just as important as the larger, significant traits for two reasons.

1. Without exhibiting Subtleties of Leadership, you may never rise to a role in which you can exhibit the more significant traits.
2. Second, without a focus on these leadership nuances, they are often violated without even knowing it!

That is why I started the Subtleties of Leadership blog; to point out those small, but critically important aspects of leadership that crop up each day in everyone’s lives. By paying attention to these subtleties, you will begin exhibiting the qualities of leadership that will put you in a position to take make “great decisions” and make “bold moves” and know that those around you will rally to your cause.

So what can readers expect from this blog? Each post will address one simple leadership subtlety. They will be easy, straightforward commentaries based on leaders that surround us today, not just supposition. These short lessons are taken from real experiences, mine and other readers, that you can use immediately. And, they will help you regardless of whether you lead a Fortune 500 company or exert leadership from within a cubicle farm.