Don’t Hold That Thought

OK, yes, you can hold onto a thought. But don’t hold off on thinking.

We should care that people do not spend enough time thinking. We tend to focus on the actions, the tactics, before thinking about the strategies and objectives they’re supposed to support. What passes for thinking is often unfocused busywork, a churning of un-prioritized activities.

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair spoke of one of the best pieces of advice he ever received about strategic thinking; it was from former President Bill Clinton. The president said, “Scheduling.” In a Stanford Graduate School of Business seminar a few years ago, Mr. Blair talked about how he both used and passed along this tidbit. “Where’s your thinking time? Where am I going? What am I trying to do? You have to create the space to be thinking strategically all the time,” he said.

It’s another example of how process and creativity are not mutually exclusive. As a fan of the Arthurian legends, I was taken aback by a comment made in The Once and Future King about the king’s style of thinking toward the end of his life: “The old man had always been a dutiful thinker, never an inspired one.” Again, it was a poor characterization and sets up a false choice. We need both varieties. A dutiful thinker is one who is habitually observing, searching for solutions, and attempting to anticipate the future.

The creative spark is precious but dutiful thinking, steady and stepwise – hand-in-hand with research and analysis – is a virtue of its own. Sometimes we can get to the goal line in one play. More often, though, progress is made in important, incremental steps that ultimately add up to the win.

Friedrich Nietzsche observed the interplay of thinking behaviors in 1878. "Artists have a vested interest in our believing in the flash of revelation, the so-called inspiration... shining down from heavens as a ray of grace. In reality, the imagination of the good artist or thinker produces continuously good, mediocre or bad things, but his judgment, trained and sharpened to a fine point, rejects, selects, connects... All great artists and thinkers are great workers, indefatigable not only in inventing, but also in rejecting, sifting, transforming, ordering."

There are many ways to think and in any number of combinations, including:

•       Concrete

•       Narrow

•       Creative

•       Analytical

•       Visionary

•       Critical

•       Ideological

•       Radical

•       Logical

•       Ordered

•       Groupthinking

And now we can add “unsafe thinking” to the list. In a new book by the same name, Jonah Sachs places the “unsafe” label on what is actually an amalgamation of vision, bold moves, measured risks and follow-through. I don’t think Sachs is lobbying for ideas that are literally unsafe. Unsafe is clever and attention getting in the same way the profiles in the book showcase inspired, double take moments created by smart thinkers.

Smart thinkers and good leaders also ask probing questions and seek a variety of inputs. But some, especially in the public relations, marketing and advertising realms, seek seclusion so they can develop “the big idea” on their own. Then, they present their campaigns as a fait accompli like Athena bursting out of Zeus’s head fully armored and ready for battle.

While there is a clear need for individual thought, creativity is no one’s personal domain. You want and need exceptional thinkers but they must know how to leverage a team. Beyond using other minds to reality check, pressure test and sharpen concepts, we should be accessing ideas from across the organization. If not, we risk wasting, alienating and demoralizing a most precious resource.

I invite you to follow me here and on Twitter @pauloestreicher.

Toxic Team Treatment

-->

Many of us work and communicate in team settings, at least some of the time. And we know what happens when one or more team members are unhelpful, unresponsive or unethical. The dysfunction and frustration can lead to resentment, anger or worse, all of which can be vented on social media outlets. And there’s the potential damage to trust, reputation, productivity, recruitment, etc. So, what to do?

Writing about toxic coworkers in the Harvard Business Review, Abby Curnow-Chavez says, “…the single most important factor in team success or failure is the quality of relationships on the team.” Her four steps to address this are:

1. Have an honest, candid conversation with the person.
2. Raise your own game and don’t stoop to their level.
3. Talk with your boss.
4. Take care of yourself and don’t let the toxic behavior damage your emotional and physical health.

Good advice but let’s explore the relationship aspect a bit more. Baseball Hall of Famer Casey Stengel had it right when he said, “Getting good players is one thing. The harder part is getting them to play together.”

Minimizing negative behaviors and interactions starts with a well-articulated organizational culture. I say minimize because, let’s face it, we’re human. Thinking we can have a perfectly harmonious organization is like believing in the tooth fairy.

We don’t always get to choose our teams. Some members are there by default or because of a special skill. Some people simply won’t do the work and find ways to take a free ride. A dictator can take over the team and, before you know it, this person is delegating without any consultation. Others will perform the work if assigned but they simply will not communicate.

But having a set of operating principles and setting expectations are not enough; the consequences for bad behavior must be clear. There are few things more destructive in the workplace when passive, aggressive or passive aggressive behaviors are tolerated.

I believe there is tolerance because 1) there is usually little fear of being penalized and 2) people want to avoid confrontations and be liked. Waiting and hoping things will improve will not make it so.

We know it’s hard for most people to articulate their feelings, especially around sensitive issues. Few go looking for a confrontation but it’s a critical part of working in teams, and supervising and leading others. Having the courage to take some action is not the same as “making waves.” Making waves connotes stirring up trouble and creating new problems. This is about airing and addressing the issues by asking questions, and seeking clarifications while showing respect for different views.

Working remotely in virtual teams tends to exacerbate any unsteady team dynamics. There are many advantages to accessing talent across geographies but it helps to have at least occasional face-to-face contact. In person interactions allow us to observe all the nuances and evaluate the visual cues. With these additional inputs, we’re able to assemble a more accurate picture of the particular circumstance and how to address it. James Surowiecki noted in The Wisdom of Teams that “A successful face-to-face group is more than just collectively intelligent. It makes everyone work harder, think smarter, and reach better conclusions than they would have on their own.”

I invite you to follow me here and on Twitter @pauloestreicher.

Camelot Wisdom: 10 Leadership Lessons from King Arthur’s Court

I am sharing 10 bits of “Camelot Wisdom” to commemorate the publication anniversary of Camelot, Inc.: Leadership and Management Insights from King Arthur and the Round Table. Not all of the actions and words from Camelot were examples we should follow, of course; there were many instances of what not to say or do. But this collection of 10 quotes from the legends (of the 150 in the book) holds strong relevance for us today. As Winston Churchill said, “The further backward you look, the further forward you can see.”

“He favours the young knights, and tries to help them win the spurs.”¹ Help others realize their potential. Coaching, teaching and mentoring must not be an optional activity for leaders.

“Learn why the world wags and what wags it.”² Having empathy - understanding and feeling what others feel - delivers competitive advantage. People want to advocate, work or vote for those who take an interest in them, and feel their pains and successes.

“But when men be hot in the deeds of arms oft they will hurt their friends as well as their foes.”³ Without maintaining calm and perspective in times of crisis, a lack of clear, considered thinking leads to poor decision-making and unintended consequences.

“I didn’t want to be conscious of it. I hoped that if only I was not quite conscious of everything, it would come straight in the end.”⁴ We must confront the hard, awkward issues. Denying reality may sometimes be required to maintain sanity but move past the anticipation and anxiety to address problems and opportunities.

“The destiny of Man is to unite, not to divide. If you keep dividing you end up as a collection of monkeys throwing nuts at each other out of separate trees.”⁵ It can’t always be all-or-nothing; we should celebrate incremental advances. Communicate and engage with others to find common ground and compromise.

“I don’t think things ought to be done because you are able to do them. I think they should be done because you ought to do them.”⁶ There is importance in declaring your Mission, Vision, and Values; define and articulate objectives, direction, and principles. We can do well AND do good.

“Merlin made the Round Table in tokening of the world…”⁷ Round was more than a shape; the Table became a brand. It was a symbol of excellence. It enhanced communication and collaboration, and hosted a diversity of old and new – those with institutional knowledge and fresh ideas. Value was placed on the "roundedness" of people and teams.

“…many speak behind a man more than they will say to his face.”⁸ Behavior matters. Gossip leads to rumors, which lead to a breakdown in trust and organizational culture. Ensure the flow of good, timely information. Set an example and have the character and ethics to correct others.

“…you couldn’t get unless you gave. And you had to give without wanting to get.”⁹ One must not think of helping, contributing or doing good as a zero-sum game. We need a mindset, a culture of helping others to succeed – it strengthens everyone.

“Only fools want to be great.”¹⁰ Greatness is not an objective; it’s an outcome of planning, doing, giving and achieving. Leaders know the audiences/stakeholders they serve are the judges. They further those agendas above their own, and must have the vision to unify purpose and people.

There’s much more in the book, of course, but it’s clear that the trials and tribulations of Arthur and his court have much to teach the people, corporations, institutions and governments of today.

This article also appears in Medium. I invite you to follow me on Twitter @pauloestreicher.

1.     T.H. White, The Once and Future King, (1939-1958); Ace Edition (1987), p. 554.

2.     Ibid., p. 183.

3.     Ibid., p. 416

4.     Ibid., 579.

5.     Ibid., p. 231.

6.     Ibid., p. 246.

7.     T. Malory, Le Morte D’Arthur, (1469); Modern Library Edition (1999), p. 691.

8.     White, The Once and Future King, p. 347

9.     Ibid., p. 464.

10. Ibid., p. 180.

What Was Communicated by Yahoo!’s Work-At-Home Reversal

This article also appears in odwyerpr.com.

We have to expect information leaks. Some are intended as part of a communication plan; some are unintended and, thus, may need a communication plan. Yahoo! is experiencing the latter.

A few days ago, AllThingsD reported that the company will no longer allow telecommuting. In a leaked memo from Jackie Reses, EVP of People and Development, employees were told that, “Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home. We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.”

It’s hard to say how big, what kind or how many problems are caused by the remote workforce. (“Only several hundred” employees work remotely, though thousands “might be at home one or two days a week.”) Whatever those problems are, the new issue for Yahoo! is explaining its move. In the absence of a planned roll-out, here’s how stakeholders might be interpreting Yahoo!’s surprise announcement: 

• Some employees abused the work-at-home policy, which necessitated some unequivocal action.
• Employees working at home were not performing as well as those in the office and/or don’t know how to manage their time at home.
• Yahoo! leaders don’t know how to guide or train their work-at-home employees. They can’t trust what they can’t see.
• Some competitors appear to be able to keep their employees on-site; in order to speed a turnaround, Yahoo! feels that they have to be more like them.
• They seem to be “throwing the baby out with the bath water” – Yahoo! believes a one-size-fits-all solution is best.

The list can go on – we can keep imagining until the source of the issue give us reason to stop.

As it happens, I’m a big believer in face-to-face communication but not necessarily in the 24/7 variety. I wrote in Camelot, Inc.: Leadership and Management Insights from King Arthur and the Round Table, “The continued cohesion of a team can be helped by having at least occasional face-to-face contact. Let’s take the elevator, the car, or the airplane and get back to our base, our Camelot, every now and then and sit around the Round Table for a discussion.”

King Arthur knew that his knights would be gone for weeks or months at a time while they implemented his plans. Yet, he demanded that they all return at the same time once a year to share their stories, hear updates and reaffirm commitments.

Perhaps Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer and Ms. Reses can take some cues – some Camelot wisdom – from the past:

• Hire people you can trust, which starts with a thorough vetting process.
• Train your people adequately, and ensure expectations are set and followed.
• Communicate as often as is reasonable, practical and appropriate.
• And, allow for flexibility. One size does not fit all.

Clearly, working at home can be challenging both for the employer and employee; it’s definitely not for everyone. But in a world of increasing customization and personalization, they should take the time to understand what kinds of people doing what kinds of jobs can work for how many days away from the office. It’s possible that Yahoo! could increase its fortunes by finding the right talent, not just the talent who can be in the office five days a week. 

Addendum:

Four days after news broke about Yahoo!'s policy reversal, the company issued a statement: “This isn’t a broad industry view on working from home. This is about what is right for Yahoo right now.” In response to a NYT request for elaboration, a company spokeswoman declined, saying, “We don’t discuss internal matters.”

What a missed opportunity. True, it's an internal matter but it's an issue that has much broader, external implications -- look at what's being communicated about leadership, decision making processes, and corporate culture and reputation. Why not address the stakeholders? Talk about your vision, ideas and plans. Cite some research that helps to justify the decision. Take control of the message.

Between blog posts, I invite you to follow me on Twitter @pauloestreicher.