.jpg)
The Reload with Sean Hansen
The Reload with Sean Hansen
Enhancing Teamwork through Structured Decision Frameworks - 220
Curious about how to turn your team's creative chaos into clear, effective decision-making? Discover the key strategies that can transform your brainstorming sessions from endless discussions to decisive actions. This episode reveals the vital influence of emotional intelligence in leadership and how even the most rational leaders can benefit from understanding emotional dynamics. By setting clear expectations and timelines, you'll learn how to guide your team through productive and focused discussions, ensuring everyone understands their role and the importance of recognizing time constraints.
Explore the nuanced world of leadership responsibility and how genuine leaders can uplift their teams by sharing success and shouldering failures. We unravel the challenges faced by leaders at the top, like the intense scrutiny of being a CEO, and how to skillfully balance accountability with team recognition. You'll gain insights into the importance of training or replacing team members who aren't meeting the mark, all while maintaining integrity and handling corrective measures constructively behind the scenes.
Dive into the complexities of decision-making and team dynamics, especially in the face of resistance. Learn how active listening and communication can reduce misunderstandings, helping team members feel valued even when their ideas can't be fully implemented. We'll discuss the importance of a structured decision-making framework for revisiting past decisions, ensuring that moves are made thoughtfully and not reactively. If you're eager to foster a successful team environment and make confident, informed decisions, this episode is your guide. Don't forget to like, subscribe, or share if you find value in our conversation.
Are you an executive, entrepreneur, or combat veteran looking to overcome subconscious blind spots and limiting messaging to unlock your highest performance? Feel free to reach out to Sean at Reload Coaching and Consulting.
Welcome to the Reload, where we help unconventional leaders craft the life they truly want by questioning the assumptions they have about how life works. My name is Sean and I'll be your host on this journey. As a performance coach and special operations combat veteran, I help high-performing executives kick ass in their careers while connecting with deeply powerful insights that fuel their lives. All right, here we are one more time. Today we are going to be looking at what are we going to be looking at? We're going to be looking at this notion of how to transition from ideation mode to decision mode in teams. Now, as it turns out, apparently I've been sitting on this episode for gosh I don't know four months or so, but if I recall correctly, one of my clients noticed that in team meetings, specifically in the senior leadership team meetings that they were having, that there is a difficulty that they experience in trying to shift between those two modes and that sometimes they get stuck in this kind of perpetual kicking the tires you know well, what about this, what about that and then they notice they struggle to get into go time and then alternatively well, not alternatively, but alternately. That's the same thing, but in other instances let's put it that way, there is this tendency to perhaps jump too quickly into making decisions or to do so in a very abrupt or abrasive manner, and by that they're usually looking at the team leader of that team. So this is something that's really, really common.
Speaker 1:I hear it from so many different clients, across industries and across countries, and I think what it reflects is a dynamic that occurs between humans, and I mean, if I think about it, you know so many of the topics that I talk about. Yes, they are being conveyed in a leadership context. However, the reality of the matter is that it is so frequently an element of human nature, and part of the reason why I advocate so strongly for emotional intelligence, emotional awareness, emotional literacy, is because, yes, understanding the technical aspects of your business, understanding how markets work, understanding finance and financial projections, and where is it that the company ought to be five years from now all of that is absolutely essential to running a successful business, and sorry to double stack you here, but and as a team leader, you are a human being who has emotions, who has physiological needs for sleep, proper hydration, proper nutrition, et cetera, et cetera in order to perform your best and all of those physiological inputs and the other stressors that you have in your life affect how you show up in your emotions. You are unable to get away from them. Even my most rational, engineering, scientist brained clients are still subject to emotion, and when their stressors get the better of them, they end up in a place where their emotions often bubble over or boil over, I guess, might be a better way of saying it and then that affects the team also made up of humans that have emotions, right? So I know I'm kind of beating this drum, but oftentimes people, I think, give it too little attention and they focus more on the numbers or something like that, because, in all honesty, it's easier, at least for my type of client.
Speaker 1:Navigating emotion can be very slippery, it can be very fuzzy, and so the numbers feel much more definite and objective. But when we are transitioning from modes, ideation mode to decision-making mode, we're going to be dealing with emotions. Now how can we do this so that we make that transition as effectively as possible or at least as close as we can get, least as close as we can get? So I think part of it is people tend to operate better when they have a clear understanding of what they're getting into. Now that's not just for your planner types, I think, even those individuals who tend to be more free-flowing or more prone to playing it by ear when it comes to managing relational dynamics, people generally do better when they understand what they're getting into. And so, looking at it from the perspective of a team or looking at it from the perspective of a team leader, if you know that there is a tight timeline on something, communicate that up front so that nobody is shocked when the team leader says okay, it's time for us to pull the trigger on this and let's go. Everyone has an understanding like oh yeah, I get it. And that also applies to mundane things like you only have so much time for a phone call, or you only have so much time for a meeting, or what have you.
Speaker 1:And this little piece, although it sounds simple and actually is simple, doesn't necessarily mean that you are going to be great at maintaining that discipline. And that's something that, as a coach because I do sessions with people and those sessions don't always have the capacity to just run for hours and hours and hours so I've gotten into this disciplined habit of trying to understand what is the timeframe that I have or the client has up front front, and some instances that I faced I guess that might be relevant as an example are if the client only has, let's say, 30 minutes on a particular day, oftentimes they feel that that's not really enough time for them to get into heavier topics, more challenging topics in terms of, like, emotionally challenging, and so what I've noticed over time is that they often will self-regulate. They'll know, okay, yeah, maybe today's not the day for me to go into the deeper, darker stuff. That is going to leave me feeling pretty taxed, because not only do I only have 30 minutes today, but right after this I'm headed into a pretty crucial conversation, and so the way that I structure my engagements are long enough that we have the flexibility to, on those days when there's not sufficient time to deal with things that are I guess, I don't know more tactical, a little bit closer to the surface, don't require quite as much emotional fortitude, et cetera, et cetera. So this is just one example of like how it is that we factor in the amount of time that we actually have. Now, another piece here that I think is relevant is, as the team leader speaking again as the team leader letting your team members know that you may not select their idea, but that it is valuable in helping the leader think through the issue and various angles of that issue.
Speaker 1:When team members are on a team that they really like and that they want to contribute to and that has a team leader that they really respect, they want to be valuable and I think generally at least most of the people that I've come in contact with in my life they want to be valuable. They want to offer things that are appreciated. To me, this is an element of our sort of tribal background. We want to be able to contribute. Now, are there free riders out there? Of course, yeah, and maybe they are. I don't know. Maybe they've been raised in a different way that leads them to behave in that way, or maybe they're just feeling overwhelmed in a certain chapter of life and therefore they're trying to ride on the work of other people. I don't know.
Speaker 1:Right, this episode is not really about that. We do acknowledge that they exist, but, for the most part at least, the people I know, like I said, want to add to the improvement of the whole or the unit or the team, and so it can be a bit demoralizing sometimes when the team leader does not pick your idea, and so recognizing up front that, yeah, even if the team leader doesn't choose your idea, and even if the team leader has certain, I guess, critiques about your idea or certain challenges to your idea, that it is still adding value as an element of sometimes, comparison, right, like, let's choose between options or contrast, hey, why would this plan moving forward be different than the other one that we had? Or the status quo that we're currently working with different than the other one that we had or the status quo that we're currently working with? But, in either case, it helps to create that ideation phase and it helps to deepen or, in some cases, deepen and broaden our understanding of the circumstances that we're facing, and that, in and of itself, is still quite valuable, even if it's not the go forward option.
Speaker 1:Now, another piece to this is letting the team members know that, as the leader, you are the one who bears ultimate responsibility. And why is that useful to say? And you don't have to, I don't think you have to say it every single time that a decision is coming up for review or for action, but periodically reminding folks, yeah, hey, I mean, ultimately, whether this team succeeds or fails is my responsibility. We all contribute, we all have accountability in different ways, but I have the ultimate responsibility for whether we are successful or not. And again, drawing on instances where I've been the team leader and then also instances where I've been the team member, as the team member, there were times when I again got so wrapped up in sort of my view and my desire to be valuable and my desire to be viewed as a key contributor that I lost sight of the fact that at the, at the end of the day, wasn't my ultimate responsibility.
Speaker 1:And I've been very fortunate over the course of my life that for the most part, I've had leaders who were actually leaders. They were individuals who would not throw me under the bus if the team failed. They were individuals, men and women, who were of pristine character, at least in how they led the team who knows what was going on at home? But in terms of how they showed up to take care of their team, they were amazing. Care of their team they were amazing. They bore the responsibility for the failures and they shared or, in many instances, passed over or passed on to the team the credit for success. And that engendered a great deal of loyalty in me, but recognizing that I lost sight in certain instances of the fact that I wasn't the one bearing that responsibility.
Speaker 1:And so then I would find myself kind of in this very myopic, egocentric position as the team member of well gosh, why didn't you pick my idea, which is what I was just talking about a second ago? And in some instances I felt that the team leader was wrong, that they weren't seeing all the information, that they weren't factoring it in correctly, their analysis was off, and that the team as a whole was going to be less successful. And that the team as a whole was going to be less successful. And when I was in Iraq in my combat deployments that could have been very, very dire in terms of getting people killed. So we were dealing with some pretty high consequence decisions.
Speaker 1:And so, again, looking at it from the perspective of the team leader, communicating that hey, ultimately this is on me, it's not on you. What I think that does is it helps your subordinates, it helps your team members remember that, hey, ultimately we're able to contribute. Hey, ultimately we're able to contribute, but this individual that's in charge of us and in charge of the organization, they're the ones that actually has the burden on their shoulders, the spotlight is on them and ultimately they get to make the decision because they ultimately bear that full responsibility. And it's not so much that we're not attempting to put our subordinates sort of in check, you know, like that's not really the goal of this observation, it's to remember that, okay, yeah, we're all playing a role here and what is the best way for me to contribute to the entirety within the scope of the role that I'm in? And it is interesting because I've had a number of clients who eventually took the top spot in their organization and they started to recognize like, oh, this is different, this is harder.
Speaker 1:And it's not to say that, you know, being a chief operating officer or being a vice president of sales or what have you is not stressful. It is. It's certainly stressful and it carries with it its own challenges. And I have noticed that, with the individuals that have taken that CEO spot, for instance, there is a heightened level of pressure, there's a heightened level of scrutiny. Everyone is paying attention all the time, from board members to the lowest ranking individual in the company. Everyone's watching. They're watching what you say, they're watching how you walk in the building, what is your body language saying, and so the pressure is ramped up significantly.
Speaker 1:Now, one caveat to what I just said about you know, letting people know that, as the team leader or as the organizational leader, you're the one that bears the ultimate responsibility. What I think will give you more credit to draw on in that instance, when you say hey look, I appreciate that you want to contribute to this and I want you to continue to contribute, and I need you to remember that I'm the one that ultimately bears responsibility here, not you, is that, first, you are a leader who has demonstrated that they take care of their people, that when things do go south, you are not the leader who then pins the blame on others, because you actually are the one who bears ultimate responsibility. You know there have been any number of leadership authors, especially ones with military backgrounds, because this is, I think, stressed more frequently in the military than in the civilian context. But, yeah, if you were the person with the most authority, the most power, then the ultimate responsibility is yours. If you have someone on your team who's not performing, it is your responsibility to train them to perform, or to coach them, or to mentor them or to whatever right, and if you've done everything that you know how to do. You know you've tried personally. You've maybe brought in somebody from another team or outside of your organization or outside of your industry in order to mentor them and to try to give them some new tools or new ways of looking at things, and your subordinate is still not meeting the performance standard, and that's been clearly communicated, and both of you understand what that standard actually is, and each of you know, respectively, that the other person understands, and so on and so on, and so on, and maybe you've even brought in a coach and the person's still not getting it. Well in case, it's your responsibility to replace them, and maybe it's not so much about their value, maybe it's they're a bad cultural fit, they don't get along well with the rest of the personalities on the team and it's a big enough Delta that it's not going to get closed, in which case, yeah, then it's still your responsibility. But anyways, to try to get back on track here, this notion of being that leader that takes care of their people.
Speaker 1:When there is a major success, recognizing that your team is a major, if not the ultimate element of the success that was had by the organization, it was not your personal success as the leader of that team and then, when things go wrong, that you step forward. And again, stepping forward to take responsibility for when things go wrong does not mean that after the fact, behind the scenes, that you start doing some corrective action. Because maybe part of the reason why, or a big part of the reason why things went sideways is because maybe you do have a team member that's not up to snuff right now. And I say right now because, again, I believe in training people, I believe in mentoring them, coaching them, but creating that track record of being the person that protects their people and that honors their people, passes on the accolades and recognizes their people, you give yourself more credit in the long run for the times when you do tell people hey, right now I am making a little withdrawal from my credit bank here and I'm telling you that I'm the team leader and I bear ultimate responsibility, so I'm doing it my way in this case.
Speaker 1:Now, another part of the credit building process is creating a track record of soliciting inputs. What do I mean by that? Well, I've been in environments where the team leader was very authoritarian. We're doing it my way, we're doing it this way. I see the right way of doing it, with the implication being that only I see the right way of doing it. And what I've generally noticed is they see a right way. I mean, normally the team leader is not stupid and they usually have a great deal of experience, so they do see a right way of doing it doesn't necessarily mean it's the only right way, and that's kind of the big sticking point is, so frequently they adopt this mindset of my way is the only way I would say very rarely.
Speaker 1:Is that true? Is it possible? Yeah, sure, it's possible, but most of the time there are any number of ways to get to a good solution and in most businesses things are changing frequently enough that what the good solution is changes rather rapidly anyway. So by creating a track record of soliciting inputs from people, with some of the caveats mentioned earlier about communicating time frame up front, et cetera, et cetera, then I think you generate a lot of goodwill and you also recognize, or they begin to recognize, your team members begin to recognize that in instances where immediate action is required, which is probably rare in the corporate setting, they'll begin to recognize that it's likely an anomaly based on exigent circumstances, because they know that. Oh well, you know usually so-and-so comes to us and asks us for ideas. And how do we contribute to that? Now, how do you move into decision mode though Decision mode?
Speaker 1:I think part of it, as I mentioned in the intro, is this notion of avoiding the abruptness or, in some cases, even abrasiveness. So the timeframe up front applies not just to how long we have to talk about an idea, but it also applies to how long before we have to pull the trigger. And forgive my, I guess, military expression there. But I really like it, as you can tell, cause I use it in all kinds of different episodes. But the reason I like it is it's a very visual metaphor.
Speaker 1:When you commit to pulling a trigger, you are sending a bullet down range and once you've pulled that trigger, you can't pull the bullet back and you can't adjust its course. It's going where it's going to go. It back and you can't adjust its course. It's going where it's going to go. And so you want to have a fair amount of confidence before you pull the trigger. Quote, unquote and helping people recognize hey, we have this long before we need to pull the trigger on this, or we have this long before I'm going to pull the trigger on this right. Maybe we do have more time technically, but in order to move the organization forward and to make sure that we don't get bogged down, I'm going to operate in a mode that says that done is better than perfect, and once we get to the 80% solution that we know is not going to create catastrophic failure in our company and is not going to gum up the works in some major way in some other part of the company, then we're going to move forward. So part of switching into decision-making mode is letting team members know that you have heard them, that you furthermore understand the implications of what they're saying and that it has factored into your decision-making.
Speaker 1:So often when team members resist a decision or resist the decision-making process that is, I think, most of the time what I've observed personally, and then also heard through clients of mine, is that there's a sense that you haven't seen all the information or you're not hearing it right, because if you understood this, then you would make a different decision. This is like coming from the team members perspective. You know, if you, if you better understood what I was trying to tell you right now, you would see that the decision that you're leaning to has too much negative impact for us as an organization or as a group, and then you would choose differently. And this is, I think, an area where the team member probably benefits from taking a step back. And that may also be the time where the team leader says well, hey, actually, ultimately, I'm the one that bears responsibility for this and I'm making my decision based on what I think is going to be the best path forward. So there are going to be times where there's going to be disagreement there, most definitely, there are going to be times where there's going to be disagreement there most definitely. But I think you will lessen the number of disagreements that you get into by letting them know that they've been heard.
Speaker 1:And again here I'm switching back to the team leader perspective Let your team members know that they've been heard. Let them know yeah, I get it and practice some active listening. What you are telling me is dot, dot, dot, and you repeat back in your own words the significance of what they just told you. And, as far as I understand, what you're trying to tell me is you team member believe that the impact of what you're telling me has such and such X, y, z impact on our team, our business, our organization, whatever. Is that correct? And then if the team member says, yes, that's what I'm saying, then it's like okay, cool, I get it, I get you, I hear you, I get you, I am going to factor this into the process here. I'm not ignoring this, or I am ignoring this Ooh, what did we just stumble upon?
Speaker 1:There will be times again, based on time constraints or whatever other factors, that you cannot factor in every single piece of data out there, and having one more perspective leads to analysis, paralysis, and it's so challenging because we want to have that certainty. Oh, give me more. If only I have enough information, if only I have enough data, well then, then I'll be able to make perfect decisions. That's not happening. That is not a thing in real life. That's something you see in movies or read in books. In real life, with flawed mortal creatures that we all are, we do not make perfect decisions Ever, and so that certainty data seeking behavior becomes very counterproductive in terms of how it slows down the organization.
Speaker 1:Now the tricky point here and no podcast is going to be able to tell you the exact formula for how you implement this in your own work. But the tricky part is sure you don't want to make reactive decisions where you're just not taking any information on board, to make reactive decisions where you're just not taking any information on board. So there's this balancing act. What is enough information and part of that is going to be okay. Well, what's the risk of this decision? If it's a relatively low risk decision, especially if it's a relatively low incidence, meaning likelihood well, yeah, you probably shouldn't spend all that much time thinking about it. But if it's high likelihood and low consequence, hmm, yeah, maybe that does require a little bit more diligence. Maybe it's a thing that's going to, you know, to death by a thousand paper cuts kind of thing. And one sweet process improvement up front could alleviate all that.
Speaker 1:Great, but certainly, I would say most of the time, individuals spend the bulk of their bandwidth on decisions that they think are going to sink the company or the organization in some way. But here again you know, low likelihood, high consequence. It's a judgment call how unlikely is the consequence? And there are times when you can't allocate sufficient resources in terms of time, in terms of mental acuity, in terms of personnel hours Again, imperfect situations that happen all the time in business and many other different circumstances, and yet you still get to I was about to say have to you still get to make a decision.
Speaker 1:So, holding a team together over time, a successful team together over time, part of it is respecting their contributions. Part of it is making them feel, or inviting them to feel, like they are valued contributors, especially if you are not going to take their idea on board. And so that's why this element of letting people know that you heard them is so important, and letting them know hey, we're moving to decision mode. I have heard you, you have understood that, I get it, you understand that. I'm going to factor it into my final decision here and we're moving to finality. You're communicating openly that you are moving to finality and then you are making that final decision.
Speaker 1:Now, is it that an organization can never pivot or adapt to new circumstances or adapt to new circumstances? No, that's not the case. However, if we are going to pivot, if we're going to renege the decision that we made, how do we establish firm guidelines that help us better understand when it's worthwhile or when it's justified worthwhile or when it's justified? Because if you're flip-flopping all the time, that sends a very shaky signal to the company at large or the organization at large, and it sends a signal that we don't, as a leadership team and as a ultimate leader of the organization, that we don't know what we're doing team and, as a ultimate leader of the organization, that we don't know what we're doing. People have a better time with maintaining their confidence in the leadership when there is an understanding of hey, things have changed in a significant way, such that we are now going to remake our procedures or restructure ourselves.
Speaker 1:But in so many instances and I was just having a conversation with a buddy of mine a few days ago about this in so many instances companies will restructure as some sort of fix when a restructure isn't really the solution, and so they end up restructuring, and then they have the same problems on the back end of that restructure, except they've added to it with the chaos of a restructure, instead of really digging into the weeds of where is our problem and how do we address the root cause of our problem. So, likewise, can you pivot? Can you adapt? Yes, of course, can you rehash decisions that you've made? Yeah, you can. I mean, ultimately you can do whatever you want, right? I'm just trying to give you some well, I guess advice based on some of the conversations that I've had with clients and things that I've experienced in my own corporate journey.
Speaker 1:But my recommendation there is that, yeah, if you're going to pivot, if you're going to rehash a decision, that you actually have real significant variables that have changed and that you're not doing it just from a lack of confidence and how do you know? If it's just a lack of confidence, I think you have to ask yourself well, why am I trying to rehash this decision? And that's part of the discipline of leadership is getting into a mode where you are asking yourself these questions. So, if you have had let's say you've had a 360, and part of the feedback is that you rehash a lot of your decisions, well, for myself, if I was that person receiving that feedback, what I would do is, anytime I was about to reopen a matter that had been decided, I would attempt to discipline myself, to have a very firm conversation with me about am I doing this out of fear, or am I doing this because truly significant variables have changed? And I would hope that you know in your respective lines of business, dear listener, that you would be able to identify what those significant thresholds would be.
Speaker 1:And so then, if you have a certain decision-making framework for when you rehash things that have already been closed, then you're going to have a process at least that lets you know if I'm going to reopen this matter, it's not just because I'm afraid or I'm uncertainty. I'm uncertain, excuse me. So again, it's not that you can't rehash or reopen closed matters, it's more how do you do it in a way that's not reactive, a way that's not reactive, and how can you assure yourself that you have some process to try to vet when you reopen something? All right, I hope that helps. If you are enjoying the show, I would love it. If you would like subscribe, follow, share. You know all that stuff or not, it's totally up to you, and until next time, take care of each other.
