Thrive In Construction with Darren Evans
'Thrive in Construction' is the only podcast that delves into the personal journeys of sustainability leaders and innovators in the construction industry across the UK. Our show differentiates by offering unscripted, passion-fueled conversations that go beyond the buzzwords to the heart of what's driving the industry forward. It's tailored for aspiring professionals, seasoned experts, and anyone with a keen interest in the sustainable evolution of construction. We're here at a time when the call for sustainable development is not just a trend, but a societal imperative, empowering listeners to build a career that contributes to a greener future.
Thrive In Construction with Darren Evans
Ep. 58 Most People Get Leadership Wrong – Here’s What Actually Makes a Great Leader
This week Darren sits down with Stephen Shedletzky, leadership expert and author of Speak Up Culture, to uncover the essential qualities of great leaders, how to foster a culture of open communication, and why decisiveness, compassion, and confidence are must-have traits for leadership success. He also delves into lessons that can be taken from large corporations and utilised in your company to create an environment where employees thrive.
Stephen Shedletzky is a leadership speaker, coach, and author of Speak Up Culture: When Leaders Truly Listen, People Step Up. He has previously worked alongside Simon Sinek, helping leaders create environments where people feel heard, valued, and empowered.
Key topics discussed:
-Overcoming public speaking fear & building confidence
-Leadership vs. visionary leadership – what’s the difference?
-The three essential leadership attributes: decisiveness, compassion & confidence
-How to create a speak-up culture in your organisation
-The impact of toxic leadership & burnout in the construction industry
-Lessons from Apple, Boeing, and Toyota on leadership & decision-making
🔔 Subscribe for more insights on construction careers, leadership, and industry innovation!
LINKS
Stephen Shedletzky: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenshedletzky
Stephen's company: https://www.linkedin.com/company/shed-inspires
Instagram: @shedinspires
TikTok: @shedinspires
Darren: https://darrenevans.komi.io/
I have a grandfather who's a Holocaust survivor and he survived by leading a group of seven in hiding. So he fought in 39 with the Polish infantry when Germany invaded Poland. That invasion lasted a number of days until Germany took Poland. Then he was in a prisoner of war camp for a couple of years, escaped, walked home and then led a small group of seven which became five by the end of the war in hiding, and so his story of survival was in hiding and so he. His story of survival was kind of on his own terms, because his parents and younger sibling went off into a train and he went nah, I'm not going to do that Because he intimately knew what an SS guard meant. And so he was a leader, literally saved lives, and so that was sort of one like huh. That's interesting and meaningful to me.
Speaker 1:The other was my first day of my first corporate job ever. A thousand people were let go post-merger, and so I walked in as many more folks were walking out, and I just became fascinated with what are the behaviors of leaders and how do the behaviors of leaders impact people? Of course their, their productivity and their results, but also their health and well-being, either positively or negatively and being in this sort of petri dish of tumultuous time for an organization, I got a front row seat to a lot of it and so that was sort of it was the beginning of like this stuff is interesting to me. I was grateful it was my first job and not something I had been in for 35 years, like the person whose desk was next to me and she was scared that her pink slip was going to come next. And then I was introduced to Simon's work and so I was being moved in a role in that organization, to a marketing role.
Speaker 1:And I said to someone who quickly became a friend and mentor I had been introduced to him and we met for dinner and I said to him I'm afraid to move into a marketing role for an organization that I don't believe what they sell and how they sell it. And he said watch this TED talk from Simon Sinek. That's how great leaders inspire action. The whole start with why thing.
Speaker 1:So I successfully procrastinated for two months, didn't watch it and then did and my experience is, I'm sure, similar to many others who've watched that Golden Circle talk was just like aha. Everything this guy says to be true. I just hadn't thought about it or communicated it that way, which is part of Simon's genius and yeah. So sort of right time, right place. I met Simon and his team really early on and joined early on, so had a chance to be on their team for 10 years and still do some work with them as a speaker and facilitator. So yeah, that was the leadership itch and then I've learned so much and grown a ton from being able to be on his team.
Speaker 2:Lots of people use the phrase visionary leader and there's an intermingling between those two. I'd be interested to know your thoughts on that, because the example that you gave of this organization letting a thousand people go is that leadership the fact that you've identified that you don't hold the same values of the organization that you were working for?
Speaker 1:Sure, yeah, maybe.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that said, enough discrepancy there may be a leader here, but I don't want to follow Sure Yep. And then you picked up with Simon's approach to leadership and you said I want to be a part of that. So I'm interested to see if you think that there is a difference. Between visionary leadership yeah, yeah, and if you think that they should be used in the same sentence, yeah yeah.
Speaker 1:So talk about myths. I'd like to bust. There's one. So visionary and leader to me, are two separate words, for good reason. You can be a leader without being a visionary. You can be a visionary without being a leader and in some instances, you can be a visionary leader. What a visionary is able to do is articulate a future state that others go ooh, that's compelling, I want to be a part of it. But just because you can articulate vision doesn't give you a hall pass to be a leader.
Speaker 1:So I've developed and I'm working on a definition of leadership, because I think we get leadership wrong. I think often we promote who's the highest performer, who's the most responsible, who do we like the most, who's the most extroverted, charismatic, whatever, who's the best at the job. Let's just promote them to lead others. Well, it's a different set of behaviors, a different skill set and a different attribute set, as we have discussed in the past as well. So if we are to have better organizations, we need to have better leaders. If we're to have better leaders, we ought to have a definition of what we mean by the term, and so I think we actually I've come to what I'm going to share with you. I want to see what you think about it.
Speaker 1:A definition of leadership.
Speaker 1:I do think organizations ought to define it for themselves, if it looks a little bit different or nuanced, as well as if leadership isn't a title and leadership is a set of behaviors or a disposition.
Speaker 1:What are the fundamental must-have and even nice-to-have leadership behaviors or leadership attributes? So the definition, the going definition of leadership we have is the attempt to leave people and the world around us better than when we found it, and the word the attempt is really key because it's intent and we're never done. You know, we can have enduring leaders, people that we choose to follow for many, many, many years, and we can have temporary or even transactional leaders, someone we follow for a particular project, but maybe we don't want to follow them again, but they still could do a fine job in that, one sort of finite project. But yeah, I think these enduring leaders show up to serve, show up to make people and the world around them better, and talking about sustainability and talking about leadership. You know that's the definition. So I want to hear what you think about the definition before I share more things about the behaviors.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think that that sounds really good to me, really clear to me.
Speaker 1:So the leadership behaviors that we got to and this is work we did with my friend, rich Devaney, who's a retired Navy SEAL, wrote the book the Attributes and the Masters of Uncertainty Brilliant, brilliant, great guy, great leader. So we agreed on the definition as well, he and I on that, and then we went to okay, what are the requisite leadership behaviors? Because visionary, being a visionary, is not a leadership requisite. There are plenty of people that I followed who have devoted themselves to a cause or vision or something bigger than profit or themselves, but they're not visionary. So you don't need to be a visionary to be a leader. It can help, can also get in the way, predispose us to picking narcissists for leaders More on that later perhaps but that we've got to three behavioral attributes that all leaders must have.
Speaker 1:And then there's a bunch that are sort of nice to haves and we use the wheel as an analogy, that on the inside of the wheel or the inside of a tire, of a wheel and tire, there's sort of the metal hub or wheel and then you have rubber and a tire around it. The wheel is the must-have, the tire are some of the nice-to-haves and if you have a lot of the nice-to-haves, you have a smooth ride. If you have some but not others, it might be a bit bumpy, or you might be for some people but not all people. So in the middle the must-haves, the essential attributes, are we've put forth as decisiveness, compassion and confidence, and then everything else is a nice to have. So decisiveness is a key leadership attribute. Decisiveness is the ability to make a decision effectively and efficiently, sometimes with limited data, and it includes not making a decision at all. So long as it's communicated, we're not making a decision yet. Right, that's still a choice. Decisiveness is interesting because we can evaluate someone's values based upon their behaviors and their decisions. So decisiveness is tangible.
Speaker 1:Compassion is different than empathy. Empathy is, I feel, what you feel Can be an effective leadership attribute, but it isn't a must have. It also can get in the way because if you're really high on empathy, you end up taking a lot on and there can be empathy burnout, especially in service-oriented jobs teaching, healthcare, list goes on. Leadership, which is a service-oriented job. Too much empathy can actually get in the way. Compassion is my ability to make you feel that I can see how you feel. It's more cerebral, but think of a leader who's able to articulate. I know how you feel and now I can even make decisions with the knowledge of how you feel in mind, so I can best serve you.
Speaker 1:The third is confidence, and like the best version of confidence, not arrogance. That's not confidence. Arrogance is confidence derailing into insecurity. But it's a humble confidence where I know my strengths, I know my limitations, I own those, I wear them on my sleeve. Confidence is a student mindset rather than an expert mindset. Yeah, it's owning. Here's where I'm secure, here's where I'm great, here's where I'm secure, here's where I'm great, here's where I need help. And I think you know an insecure leader is a dangerous leader and a secure leader is someone who is easier to follow. So those are the three that we got to, and then there's a whole bunch of others that you can add on as nice-to-haves, but we're arguing, not must-haves.
Speaker 2:And would you say that those three are needed in equal measure?
Speaker 1:I don't know yet. Again, these are things that are hard to measure. My colleague, Rich Devaney, likes to think of attributes as if you can think of a soundboard with like levers up and down. So I would say that strong leaders are high on decisiveness, compassion and confidence. We did put them in an order that decisiveness is first, compassion is second and confidence is third. But yeah, that's something we haven't nailed down on as one more important than the other, but working on it.
Speaker 2:I love. The point that you made with reference to decisiveness is that people are able to make a decision even when they are not in possession of all the information.
Speaker 1:Yes, yeah, which is, and especially when stakes are high or in a crisis, you got to move, you got to make a call, or you feel as though you have to make a call. You make the next best right decision until the next best right decision becomes clear.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And again, decisions are tangible, so it's very easy. You know, we can evaluate someone's character and values based upon their decisions and their behavior, so it's a lot easier to choose if you want to follow someone based on the decisions that they make.
Speaker 2:So following this through then in my mind I'm wondering if you were to create a course, university, college, on leadership? Yes, Would they be the three modules that you would take to become a leader?
Speaker 1:That's a great question. I would do it a little differently. So in all of the leadership development programs that I've taken part in, which have been a few, that I've spoken or facilitated, in which have been many, like all of the ones that I've seen in my near 20 year career in this stuff, I've noticed a trend, and the trend is every single leadership development program starts with a module on self, and so that's the first module, a module on self-awareness. That leadership is about. Okay, what's my instrument, what tones can I play, where do I cruise at an altitude where I'm really comfortable, which includes what are my strengths and where are my limitations, how am I going to be awesome and what's my genius and where am I going to let people down? And I've seen some really great leaders create sort of like baseball cards or these, like one or two page documents of this is my purpose, these are my values, here's my disc assessments or insights or Myers-Briggs or whatever. Here's where I rock and here's where I suck. This is why I need a team, and to even build that on a team, because then I think the work of leadership is not just understanding your own instrument, it's how to best harmonize with others. And then even the work of leadership is helping others go on that journey to figure out who they are at their best and worst and how they can best harmonize with others and how they can go on to build leaders, and so on and so forth.
Speaker 1:So I think the first module is around know your instrument. Then it's around how do you develop that instrument to the best of your ability, and I'm a big believer that leadership is. It's a set of skills and attributes. Skills are typically learned, attributes are developed. So I don't think that we can sit in a classroom and say this is the definition of decisiveness. Please fill out this multiple choice test and you will become more decisive. It doesn't work that way. Or, you know, let's teach you about compassion. If you want to become more compassionate, you need to work on your emotional intelligence. You need to put yourself in situations where you're able to label your own emotion and help identify and speak to the emotions and experiences of others. There are certain things that you can't. It's more valuable to experience than it is to simply learn. And so, yeah, I would do the first module on self-awareness know thou instrument, and then the second module of great.
Speaker 2:Let's double down on your forehand and then let's figure out what are your backhands and how can we help you level up If someone wants to become more decisive because they recognize in themselves that they struggle with making decisions, and it may be that they've identified that the reason that they struggle with decisions is because they just absolutely hate making mistakes. And the feeling that they've identified that the reason that they struggle with decisions is because they just absolutely hate making mistakes and the feeling that they get when they make a mistake is just one that they are not happy to sit with at all, so they'd rather pass that element to someone else. What types of things would you suggest that they could experiment with in order to improve that skill of decision making?
Speaker 1:Yes, modest, reasonable tests. I mean, the only way to get better at it is to do it. And so how can you even start small, with lower stakes, and rewire and retrain your brain and your experience that mistakes or failures can be lessons, you know, so long as it's a bullet hole above the waterline and not a bullet hole below the waterline, a bullet hole below the waterline, you've sunk the ship, you know, and it's hard to recover from that one. But the only way to get better at being decisive is by making decisions and learning and owning and even saying if you're a formal leader or if you're part of a team and you're developing, you're working on developing this.
Speaker 1:Be clear with it hey, team, I'm really not great at making decisions. I'm afraid of making decisions, I'm afraid of the accountability and the pressure I have. This complex where I like to be a high achiever and if I don't make the right decision quick enough, like it just doesn't work well for me, and so I'm working on this, and so I'm probably going to be awkward and uncomfortable because I'm in my teenage phase or my awkward 13 year old phase of making decisions. I ask for your kindness, I ask for your feedback, I ask for your grace, and my hope is, in six months time or a year time or in two years time, I get better at this and I can keep leveling up my decisions so that I can become the best possible leader possible. I love that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, start small and allow that to grow.
Speaker 1:I love that. Yeah, start small and allow that to grow. Yeah, yeah, and take, you know, growing up with a stutter, as we shared before. I was terrified of public speaking, absolutely terrified of it. But I kept putting myself, kind of by accident, at first, in positions where I had to do it. In university I became a president of a fraternity. Oops, turns out I have to do a lot of public speaking there and I was terrified of it.
Speaker 1:But I just kept on taking modest, reasonable tests, like volunteering to talk about a philanthropy event, a charity event we were doing, and my chemistry teacher said sure, and so I had to do a commercial for 30 seconds in front of 450 students and I didn't breathe and my right leg started shaking. I had to hit it for it to stop and I literally did this, felt the voice in my ears Like I'm like wow, that sucked, I think I failed. And I walked back up toward the top of this big, huge auditorium, sat next to my friend, alan, who was a part of the fraternity, a fraternity brother of mine, and I was literally about to say, well, that sucked, like I just failed, that was awful right. And I sat down and I was about to say that and he said great job, the girls. I'm sitting next to thought that your voice was sexy and I'm like, what right I? I had convinced myself and they were cute, by the way, I had convinced myself that I that was.
Speaker 1:I was an abysmal failure, but I I did a modest reasonable test. I got some feedback that my subjective experience wasn't as bad as the objective experience of others. But just that modest reasonable test and fortunately, getting feedback that that wasn't so bad in fact that was actually decent gave me more confidence. So it's just modest, reasonable test, not dying. Modest reasonable test, not dying, I think helps us grow.
Speaker 2:And it seems like the element that you're speaking to then as well, about other people being involved in that growth seems to be really essential in the experience that you've just shared, and also when you're saying that if I want to grow my confidence in decision-making, I sit down and I'm open with a group of people and say, look, this is the journey I'm going on. I actually need you as well.
Speaker 1:Yes, I mean that's accountability and that's community. I mean, like you know, I have struggled as a parent to be as patient and calm as I thought I once was. You know, if you want to become more patient, just have kids, because it'll push you. And so it's something that A I've even shared with my kids. When I've in the past, when I've lost my temper or yelled or raised my voice or become impatient, I've owned up to it pretty quick. I've apologized, even to a three or four-year-old. I now have a nine and six-year-old but I said, hey, you know, daddy showed up less than perfect. I'm not proud of the fact that I lost my temper or whatever. I'm sorry. I'm working to improve.
Speaker 1:And even with my wife like it's something that we've spoken about both of us, because kids are frustrating. That's why you create little, you know, 50% versions of you. They're gonna push your buttons and in the same way that your partner pushes your buttons, they push that, those same buttons. But then it's the. To your point, it's the, the feedback that you get from a trusted friend, partner, community member that says you've really grown right. Oftentimes it's through reflection or retrospect or feedback from another that says you've really gotten a lot better at being decisive and owning it, or being more patient with your kids or the team, or whatever it might be. So, yeah, I don't think we should rely solely upon external validation, but it can help, and it can help us measure how we're doing with any of these qualities.
Speaker 2:What about the same scenario with compassion? If I struggle to be compassionate because I see that what people are doing or how they're feeling as a blocker to where I want to go, or if I'm just seeing it as I don't know why the person just doesn't suck it up and just get on with it. I don't know if you've seen TikTok clip that's come out, where you get someone that was born in the 80s walk into a door I don't know if you've seen it and they kind of they walk into the room and they bash their shoulder on the door and you know, know, child in the 80s, kind of just look at it. Kind of walk on child in the 90s, do it, hit the door back and walk on child in the 2000s. Kind of stumble back, give it like this, and walk on child that was born in 2010. Uh, hit it and then fall on the floor and start crying, you know.
Speaker 2:So someone that was born in the 80s would look at someone that was born maybe in 2010 and say, what are you whinging about? You know, you just bumped yourself while you led on the floor. So if I'm struggling with compassion when I see that type of behavior, what types of things. Would you suggest that a potential or a leader can look at in order to turn that dial up in that area?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I thought you were going to say child born in the 2000s is on their phone and walks into the door. You can probably add that one too. So I think one of the best things you can do is an education on the fact that emotions are data. So none of us are Spock. We all are human beings. All human beings have emotions.
Speaker 1:Now, some human beings are more emotive than others. It means that we show or wear our emotions on our sleeves and others aren't. Some of us show our emotions by lashing out or shrinking. Some of us show our emotions by being very vulnerable or tearful or whatever it might be. But I think, first and foremost is, I'm a big believer that emotions aren't something that we should tell ourselves get in the way.
Speaker 1:Emotions are something that are giving us data, inclusive of fear, right. So one of the things we describe here's our fearless leader. Do me a favor like take that out of your vernacular. Fearlessness should not be the goal, because it's inhumane. If you truly come across a fearless leader, run far away from that leader, because they're gonna get you hurt, right, they're destructive. Fear is data. Fear is an emotion going up in cortisol. Something's up. I don't feel right. You know, maybe there's a physical safety issue here, maybe there's a psychological safety issue here, something's off. This sort of bubbling of fear or anxiety is data and we should pay attention to it.
Speaker 1:I was taught in a leadership development program, speaking of those, of a methodology of how to work with emotion to get people to move with you, and it's three steps Meet, point, dance. If you want to move people to where you think you should go as a team, you first need to meet them where they are. If they're resistant to change, if they're uncertain, if they're concerned, if they don't know why or don't believe in it or don't buy into it, you need to join them and meet them. In that you know which is compassion and it's the exercise of training ourselves on. We don't need to be mind readers, but we need to ask questions.
Speaker 1:Curiosity is a superpower. How are you feeling? What do you need? What's going on? You know what's getting in the way, what's going great, what could go better, right. And that curiosity opens the space for someone to share how they're doing right. Oh, interesting, right? Once I can join you in your emotional state without having to take it on, but at least me understanding where you are. That's compassion. I can then point to where I want us to go and I can say why I think it's valuable or how I think it helps us accomplish our goals, how to make sure that you still feel good about your place in that change or where we're going and then dance together to make it happen as a team. So, yeah, I think the retraining that emotions are data, not inconvenience. Use emotions as the powerful data that they are, meet people in that emotion without having to take it on, and then point to where you want to go and go and dance as a team.
Speaker 2:And then when you meet someone in that emotion, I guess meeting is very different to agreeing. You don't have to agree with their point of view, you don't have to agree that this is the best place for them to be, you just meet them there.
Speaker 1:You meet them there and I think you strive to do the work of what is the most generous interpretation to make their emotion valid, even if it's not your emotion, even if you see it or feel differently. But can you get curious enough to have them share how they're seeing or feeling or thinking about a situation and then find an opportunity for them to be right, even if you vehemently disagree? A friend of mine, juliana Tafur, did this brilliantly in the US. She's a first generation Colombian immigrant and she wants to create more bridge building. She wants to create greater humanity in a world and country that needs a lot of it. And so this she did this before the pandemic, but, you know, in Trump's first term, and she said huh, there's a lot of division in this country. How do I create more unity? And so she invited and there's a documentary on this called Listen Courageously, and it's mind-blowing for all the good reasons she invited two people who were on polar opposite viewpoints on like hot button topics. I think they were gun control, abortion and immigration rights. Right, yeah, how's your Thanksgiving dinner going? Right. And so she invited folks to say hey, I'm making a documentary, I want you to come on. You know I'm going to film it. We're going to do an exercise or activity and I want to see if you can actually have a conversation.
Speaker 1:And everyone who agreed agreed for one reason, which was I get to convince the other person and have a platform to share why my point of view is the right point of view. But it was fascinating to see what happened In one circumstance. She had two people who were on opposing views on abortion rights draw a picture to explain their experience and to explain why they hold the viewpoint that they hold. They had a similar I forget if it was art or it was something, but they created the space to say this is why I have the viewpoint that I have.
Speaker 1:The one that didn't work was immigration rights.
Speaker 1:They showed up to some bar or something and started trying to talk about it and a second generation immigrant to the US was for immigration rights and first-generation immigrant was against it and they just they could not see eye to eye and it was a destructive conversation and it just blew up and it ended.
Speaker 1:But the other two abortion and gun rights they left the experience saying my viewpoint hasn't changed. I still hold the view that I have, but I've gained a friend and I can understand, even if I disagree, why they are valid in their experience and their viewpoint and they ended in tears and a hug and a willingness to hold a version of an experience that's completely opposite of theirs. That's a muscle we need to grow is the ability to both disagree with someone and respect them at the same time, and I'm really proud. I have a lot of friends that are very different from me different political views, different religions, different genders, great diversity of experience and thought but we share enough values that I love them. They're dear friends and we make it work and we can talk about all the things in a really productive way.
Speaker 2:So, listening to you speak here, the question that's going through my mind is is leadership about being right? And it seems to be. That seems to be what you're saying. Yeah, not just no, it's like absolutely categorically not yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think leadership is about being better.
Speaker 2:Now there are certain so it's about you being better, not about making other people better.
Speaker 1:Well, you can't make someone else better. You can strive to show up in a way that allows someone to take themselves on and better themselves, and that's what.
Speaker 2:I think that that experiment did is that people showed up in order to be right and to convince other people that they are right, but they ended up. The success was appreciating what the other person thought and what they felt and their perspective that they were coming from and them, seeing them as human and meeting them. Going back to what you were saying, where they are. Then. They then left with a friend and that, by definition, was leadership, because they both became better, because they had one another after the experience that they didn't have before the experience.
Speaker 1:Yes, and I'm now taking this into business and team and construction. You know, how can you have a meeting where you're, you know, architect is meeting with engineer and they're viewing something differently. But how can we have a productive disagreement where, okay, explain why you have the viewpoint that you have here and you go? Huh, hadn't thought of that. That's really interesting. Ooh, that now changes how I'm viewing this and you can actually form a speak up culture and have productive debate and disagreement and dialogue to get to the best decision possible. So, yeah, I mean, there are certain things that I think we can hold near and dear, that we can choose not to sacrifice or budge on, but I do think a great leadership attribute is open-mindedness and a willingness to go.
Speaker 2:Huh, I think I got that one wrong then, when you are in a situation where you do need a decision, you do need uniformity, and you do need uniformity and you do need to move forward, and you need to do that within a short time space the things that we're talking about here it sounds like the stakes are fairly low in terms of people's opinion, but when you start to bring that into a project that has a deadline and a decision that needs to be made, because there's money involved and when the hole goes in, it's going to go in below the waterline, yep, how do we expedite that? How do we get to a point where we can do that in a time frame which feels short?
Speaker 1:Yes. So a story comes to mind, and it's that of Steve Jobs. So this is a well-documented story in his biography that Isaacson did. In 1979, jobs took a tour of xerox park with his team and they were exposed to something called gui graphic user interface. Right, xerox was showing off its newest sort of invention that they ended up doing nothing with. Um, and jobs saw this technology. He had a clear mission. His mission was to have the personal computer become a home appliance. Now we just have them in our pockets. Right, mission accomplished.
Speaker 1:And Jobs had this vision of challenging the status quo, thinking different, helping people realize they're more powerful than they think. And so he takes this tour, comes across this technology, he goes whoa, I've just seen the future, can't unsee it. That's where we need to go. Goes out to the parking lot, says to his very trusted team, where there is a speak-up culture hey, team, we're doing that. Right, that's totally a chairlift up the mountain to where we were climbing anyway. To which his trusted team says Steve, you're an idiot. We've already invested millions and thousands of hours into this project called the Lisa, which became an utter failure. We're going to implode our own company, to which Jobs famously said better we do it to ourselves than somebody else does it to us. So, because Jobs was clear on the vision and articulated to the team, what success is the fact that we came across something that's way better at accomplishing that we can't unsee it? It's better that we cannibalize ourself than somebody else does.
Speaker 1:Contrast that to Kodak. Kodak was the very first company to invent digital photography in 1975. An engineer by the name of Steve Sasson, very much inspired by their founder, george Eastman, who existed to help people's special moments in their lives last forever, turns out. Digital was a good job or a good idea to do that, but he shared it up to the senior ranks and they went suppress the technology out of fear. They made a short-sighted I don't want to sacrifice my bonus to reinvent the company and that was an awful decision. They said no one wants to look at a photo on a screen. I think it's the appropriate response there. So I think the steeping the decision in what's our definition of success here? Like what do we clearly know we're about and how can we make decisions that help us advance that? So that's just a couple stories that comes to mind. Stakes are high, yeah.
Speaker 2:So in those situations, would you class those as leaders or visionaries? Because I would maybe look at someone like Steve Jobs and maybe lean more towards the visionary than the leader. I would agree. So if you're to lead a group of people there, are you saying that the leadership is picked up by someone else and you have the visionary that pushes that through? But in that scenario there, if Steve Jobs was more of a leader than he was a visionary, would that have happened?
Speaker 1:I don't know, but I do think you pointed a really interesting thing, because I agree with you. I would describe Jobs and even Musk as visionaries. Yeah, musk is a really yeah.
Speaker 1:Even more relevant and stark, I would say yes, they probably I don't know if they're diagnosed, but would probably both be on autism spectrum, and no individual person should have that much power. You shouldn't be able to sit in a toilet seat, tweet something or X something, whatever out and change the world Like. None of us should have that much power. And probably both of them are narcissists too. So, you know, watch out. But I would describe Jobs and Musk as visionaries, not necessarily leaders. So let's put it through the definition. The definition is the attempt to leave people in the world around us better than when we found them.
Speaker 1:I genuinely think that both Jobs and Musk are striving or, in the case of Jobs, was striving and, in the case of Musk, is striving to leave humanity better when they found them. I do believe that, and I've even listened to some long-form interviews of Musk around Tesla and SpaceX and some of the things that he's doing. I mean, he's trying to get us to survive on another planet, with the belief that if we continue to go down the path we're going on, our time here is finite. The time in our universe is finite as well, once the sun burns out black hole. But you know, hey, that's inspiring. But I do believe that they have positive visions. I don't think, though, that they are particularly nurturing easy people.
Speaker 2:So are you talking about the compassion dial there? If you go back to the analogy that you gave of the wheel with the hub. It seems as though that the compassion element is not dialed up as high, Maybe Because decision making seems to be super good Decision, making high Confidence.
Speaker 1:I don't know, there could be a lot of insecurity potentially there Compassion. So, again, the only thing you need to be a leader is followers. Are people following them? You know of jobs. People said ride of my life, like it was hard, didn't like how I was treated all the time. But I had the ride of a lifetime. You know, learned a lot, grew a lot, sometimes in spite of them, but we changed the world, we accomplished a lot. I grew, I felt proud, didn't like how I felt all the time or how I was treated.
Speaker 1:But what I think you're pointing to is if someone is high on vision but isn't necessarily a strong, robust leader, what do they do A? I think there's always opportunity to build more self-awareness and take themselves on and grow if they can. If someone's a legitimate, diagnosed narcissist, it's very hard for them to have any self-awareness or grow, but there still could be a role for them as visionary. They then need to surround themselves with people who keep them in their lane and, in all honesty, help clean up all the damage that they've done psychological damage often to still allow us to work as a team and move forward, and I've seen this before really visionary leader who had low self-awareness, likely a narcissist, also likely on autism spectrum, has no idea the impact that they have on people and can't own it. But they've surrounded themselves with some really great people that creates healthy boundaries, keeps them in their lane and has a team that functions. They just have to make sure that they don't burn themselves out in all that work to keep the visionary in their lane.
Speaker 2:One of the things that is prevalent in the construction industry and it has been for a long time rates of suicide. There's also been a number of people that have made comments on toxic leaders. Historically, there have been a number of conversations I've had with people talking about how leadership has changed over the years and it needs to improve and get better moving forwards. So the thing I'm interested to get your view on is this whole concept of culture and how cultures change. Your book, speak Up Culture, I think, has got two elements to it, whether it was intentional or whether I'm just thinking of it the wrong way. One is speak up. Do I have the courage and do I think it's worth it to speak up? And culture, which is different than speaking up.
Speaker 1:Yes, yes, yes, absolutely. So, yeah, there's the courage it takes to speak up, and speak up in a way that you think can be heard. But speak up isn't an instruction. I can't say, Darren, speak up and do it now. I have to look at what's the environment that I'm creating. Is it psychologically safe and worth it to speak up when it comes to suicide and toxic culture? So a couple things come to mind. So one a place where we can find innovation is look to where else has this problem occurred and how have they meaningfully solved it.
Speaker 2:So you're talking where else, as in what other industry?
Speaker 1:Yeah, Okay. So I look at one which is military. I look at one which is military Suicide rates for veterans with untreated PTSD, mental health challenges, homeless issue as well, or unhoused issue, so a meaningful. We know that a way to beat suicide is meaningful relationship, and oftentimes someone will reach out to one or two close people before they make that ultimate choice. But they've made that choice because all other avenues of choices have been rendered useless, and so that's the final choice that they make. I will be less of a burden to myself and others and I will choose this act, which is awful and depressing and sad, but they'll often do one sort of last reach out. And so the way to prevent, a way to prevent suicide, is community, is relationship.
Speaker 1:And so you know, there's the cliche we are the average of the five people we spend the most time with. It's actually not a cliche. According to a psychologist, Robin Dunbar, we spend 60% of our time with five people. And so the question is do we have open, trusting, vulnerable relationships with those people to say I'm really struggling with this? Are we getting the type of help that we need? Oftentimes, especially men who are struggling with mental health, it's not in our culture to often reach out and say I'm struggling with this. We keep it inside, and so I think a way to combat it is community, is tight relationship, and is the types of relationships in communities where we can speak about our emotions and how we're feeling and what support that we need to get better and to feel stronger. Yeah, and then couple that on top of a toxic workplace culture that prioritizes performance over well-being. That's a compelling recipe for just disaster. Those are a few thoughts. I wonder if that's helpful.
Speaker 2:So definitely. The industry has got an underlying belief that it's about the performance, it's not about the person, it's not about creating an environment where you develop and you grow all the time. There are those organizations that I've heard of and those people that I've spoken to that have said I'm just burnt out. Nothing I do is ever good enough. The amount of hours I'm putting in is really significant. I'm having interactions with my boss or my leader that I'm coming away in tears with and I'm starting to lose my self-worth and my confidence.
Speaker 1:Yep. So leadership and leadership trickle down right. It's really hard to perform well if we're not being well-led or supported. It's hard to be a good leader if we're not being well-led and if we have a boss or a leader or an investor or a shareholder or someone who's coming down our neck and providing pressure, and then we cascade and provide that pressure down right.
Speaker 1:So there's a shift. A great way to perform better is prioritizing people, their well-being and their growth, because it's not all robots doing it or AI doing it all, yet it's human beings doing the work, and I think there will forever be a piece of this industry that human beings do, and the better the human being feels, the better they'll show up and perform and innovate and form bonds of trust and cooperate and all the good things. So it's the reason why lean management doesn't work, but Kaizen, or continuous improvement, does, because Kaizen and continuous improvement values the input and the process, of which one of them is people first. But when we only talk about lean, which is the output and the outcome of it, but we aren't honoring all the inputs that get us the appropriate output, we end up cutting it at the knees and it all falls down. I like that.
Speaker 2:Can you just, for those people that are listening and watching that aren't familiar with lean and Kaizen, can you just explain briefly those two?
Speaker 1:models, Sure, and if you know more but better or different as well, bring it to. I know a little bit. So Kaizen is a Japanese word and philosophy that is about continuous improvement. That's the philosophy. And there are one of the greatest organizations that does as well is Toyota and the Toyota manufacturing line. They have something called an Andon cord that anyone, any person on the factory line, they have something called an and-on cord that anyone, any person on the factory line, even if you're the most junior, is allowed to pull the cord if there's a significant safety issue or they see an opportunity to make something better, and it's celebrated. Even if you pull it and your idea was wrong or whatever it might be, you're still celebrated for it.
Speaker 2:So this is the opposite of what was experienced at Boeing. Yes, when they tried to and continues to be experienced at Boeing, I would argue yeah, there is no celebration when anyone pulls that cord. If there was a cord, at Boeing.
Speaker 1:If anything, you're punished or fired or reprimanded, yep. So lean is the same stuff, but they talk about the output of it. So when you do Kaizen and continuous improvement properly, you end up getting more effective, more efficient processes, operations and a high functioning, high trust team. When you only talk about lean, you are pushing the performance without the inputs to get you that performance. So that's how I view it, differently.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, that's good. There's definitely more lean in the construction industry as we try to get to net zero than there is Kaizen.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:There's definitely more emphasis on these are the numbers. We need to get the numbers right, as opposed to these are the people we need to help the people get right. Yeah, because everything that we do within the industry is all people centric. Buildings are built for people and they're built, designed. The imagination or the vision is all created by people, and so it figures to me that it needs to be more people-centric than what it does need to be number-centric. Yep.
Speaker 1:And when we put the people first, the numbers tend to do better anyway. So absolutely.
Speaker 2:So talk of the culture. We've spoken with reference to Speak Up and it does bleed into culture. But I'm interested, just from your book, is how those two bleed together and the premise of the book and the invite really that we're left with at the end of it.
Speaker 1:So I was saying to you before that speak up shouldn't be an instruction. Speak up is a culture, it's an environment. What I mean by a speak up culture is that it's an environment where it feels both psychologically safe and worth it to speak up, to share what we see, feel and know, to bring our ideas, even if they're half-baked, to share feedback with one another, to help each other grow, to share concerns sort of the proverbial smoke before it becomes fire, to disagree and debate. The true test of a speak-up culture is how productive are our debates and our disagreements. And to admit mistake, believing that on the other side of that mistake is improvement, not being ignored or not being punished. Yeah, and it is so much both about the person speaking up as well as the people who are supposed to listen to what is being shared.
Speaker 2:So how is that different, then from something around kind of the psychological? Oh, what is it called Psychological safety? Psychological safety, that's right. How is that different to psychological?
Speaker 1:safety. So when I first started writing the book, I fully admit I thought I was rebranding psychological safety. So psychological safety is a well-known body of work. It was first written about in 1960. A scholar, amy Edmondson, who endorsed the book. Amy is wonderful. She really helped to amplify this work and there were a couple sort of major pivotal moments and studies with it.
Speaker 1:One was in the late 90s that Edmondson was involved in and she studied emergency rooms in hospitals and the emergency rooms that had high psychological safety. There were more medical errors reported than those with lower psychological safety, which is confounding to the researchers. They went well. There is confounding to the researchers they went well. There can't be more errors occurring and that's the key distinction reported not occurring Inside of the hospital room environments and the emergency rooms. Where there's high psychological safety, more folks would willingly raise their hand and say we messed that up. We need to improve upon it. Where there wasn't psychological safety, there were actually more errors occurring, but fewer reported because more people were spending time hiding the mistakes from each other, sweeping them under the rugs. That didn't exist inside those hospitals.
Speaker 1:2004, project Aristotle at Google identified psychological safety as the number one determinant of a high-trust, high-performing team and so I'm a big fan of the body of work. But I've got a couple bones to pick with where it has been. One is psychological safety is a mouthful hard to access and to remember as well. For me, sure, right as well. The label on the jar doesn't describe the contents. To me, you know, to me it sort of puts an academic lab coat on top of a very real human emotional experience. Edmondson herself said not my favorite term, it's just been around since 1960.
Speaker 1:I wrote a paper early on in my career. The reviewer of that paper said oh, you're talking about psychological safety, and her response is will it get me published? They went, yeah, she went, ok, great. So I leaned into good old Zig Ziglar. People don't buy drills, they buy holes. And so if the work is highly academic, hard to access, hard to action upon, I went into. Well, if the drill is psychological safety, then the hole. What you get is a speak-up culture. Right, let's market that.
Speaker 1:But as I delved into the work I realized and formed this two-by-two matrix of the questions we will ask ourselves, either consciously or subconsciously, before making the choice to speak up is is it safe to speak up Absolutely, and is it worth it. Because if it's psychologically safe but not worth it, let's say you and I go back 35 years and we're best of friends and you see that I'm behaving in a way that is getting in the way of my success, my health, my fulfillment, whatever it might be. You intervene, you share feedback with me. I'm so grateful, couldn't have gone better. It ends in a hug and tears. I'm like Darren, I'm going to get better, thank you so much. And I successfully do nothing over the next three months to do anything different. And you're like maybe it was me, maybe I didn't speak up properly. I'm going to enlist friends and family and I'm going to do it again, but in a different way and it couldn't have gone better. And then over the next six months I don't do anything different. Still psychologically safe. You can tell me anything but your belief that I'm going to do anything different. It's not worth it. So apathy or futility sets in. So this two by two matrix that I've created it's safety to danger, psychological safety to psychological danger, and it's apathy or futility to a high perception of impact that it's worth it. My choice to speak up, I believe, will actually lead to me feeling that I matter that I belong, that my voice matters and that even some change will occur because of my choice to speak up.
Speaker 1:And there are even instances at Boeing, as an example where Ed Pearson, who's one of the best known whistleblowers he didn't feel psychologically safe to speak up, but he felt that the stakes were too high. The perception of impact for him was I'm willing to lose my, my job here. He even retired early because he couldn't take the culture anymore. But he spoke up to the gm of the facility that was making the 737 max to say stop the line, this is not safe. To which the gm said this is not a military operation. Pearson came for the military. This is for profit. Right, I got to keep the line moving To which he's like, what Like? Why should the standard and ethics be lower and for profit than it is in military? So yeah, that was Ed where it didn't feel safe to speak up, but it still felt worth it and you see courageous leadership there.
Speaker 2:Yeah, because that's true leadership. Isn't it Him speaking up in that regard?
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, and he was sacrificing his own safety, security, well-being to do what he felt was right and unfortunately, he was right, I'm just thinking now.
Speaker 2:does that mean that if someone's in that type of environment in the construction industry here and we've had disasters that are quite similar in terms of scale to the Boeing one for sure Is that what people need to do? They need to be almost a sacrificial lamb in order to get change. But it's not great for you, but it's fine for everyone else, because you're the and I can't think of a different phrase than a sacrificial lamb.
Speaker 1:Well, there's power in numbers. So this is why unions have formed. If you look at the origins of why unions formed, unions formed, I think, in this country, what of the turn of the 20th century, sort of like what? Late 1800s, early 1900s, I think, and, yeah, maybe earlier, but it was the birth of the Industrial Revolution. And then, all of a sudden this is the conversation we're having the output of people was more important than the people themselves, and workers were being exposed to unreasonable working conditions, low light, low air quality, unreasonable hours, unreasonable pay. And so what did they do? They self-organized into a movement, a union, a labor party, whatever it might be, and they fought for their rights, for their own rights and also, I think, for the betterment of the products they were creating as well, the services they were creating as well.
Speaker 1:Perhaps I've had a chance to become friends with Ed Pearson, who's the whistleblower at Boeing, and he's like I wish I could have done more. You know he puts a lot of pressure on himself, he puts a lot of guilt. He still is doing a lot of aviation safety work for both Boeing and beyond, but my sort of counsel to him of what he could have done different was not be the only one to speak up, and there were others as well, and more and more have come out of the sort of the woodwork. But there's power numbers. So what would have been possible if hundreds or thousands of employees at those facilities said we're not doing this? And they've now done walkouts more recently, and it's been around union contracts and contract negotiations and whatnot.
Speaker 1:But there's power in numbers. So I think if you're on a job site and you go, this ain't right, we're about to make a big mistake. This can be better. You can see, are you the only one who views that, or can you find others who also view that? And can you speak up collectively in a way to say we want to do this different? There are serious issues here, you know. Sure, it's a risk, you can fire us all, replace us with an agency, whatever it might be. But you know what are we willing to stand for and not stand for?
Speaker 2:And so the principle that you're talking to here exists in a physical sense, as in if you're on site, but also if you're in the office, and the danger is more psychological, mental and emotional. Yeah.
Speaker 1:I mean, I'm aware that what I'm about to say is a privileged point of view, but we can vote with our feet, so we are always allowed to vote with our feet, whether we're showing up to a remote place of work, a physical space like a construction site or an office.
Speaker 2:But I believe that that's always the case. It may not feel like it. It may feel like this is the only option. I have Yep, but the reality is there are other options.
Speaker 1:Yeah hopefully, but I definitely think there are. So I think, yeah, a is if you want to speak up and create change, how can you find at least one buddy? So I did this successfully on a team where I was. It was a team of 20, 25 people.
Speaker 1:Me and another member of the team saw that someone on the team wasn't being well led and they were, they just weren't being set up to succeed, and we didn't think it was right.
Speaker 1:And so we spoke up to the leadership team around it and we the two things to create a speak up culture one is encourage folks to speak up and the other team around it and the two things to create a speak-up culture one is encourage folks to speak up and the other is reward them when they do. And so, though it felt like a big risk, we spoke up and we shared what we saw and it was met with compassion. It was met so well and it made me and my colleague who spoke up feel great to the fact that we encouraged more people to speak up to create change as well, because we felt that we were heard and listened to and that we mattered and our point of view mattered. My sort of counsel to Ed was if you were to do it again, do it with more than one person Should everybody aspire to be a leader Is leadership for everybody.
Speaker 1:No. In our organizations we often say individual contributor I don't love that term. I do think that we all have the choice and opportunity to lead our own lives and careers and be the authors of our own life and career, and so I like calling, instead of individual contributors. You can have lowercase L leaders. You don't have the title, but you can still lead your work, you can lead your relationships, you can show up with the behaviors of leadership. Then you have leader of a team and then leader of leaders, and so, based on season of life, based on your skills and your attributes, some of us you know.
Speaker 1:My favorite quote on leadership comes from my friend, Rich Devaney, who says leaders aren't born. Leaders aren't born. Leaders aren't made. Leaders are chosen based upon the way that they behave. Leadership is in our behavior, decisiveness, compassion, confidence, and so there are moments in our lives and careers where we don't want to lead and there are moments in our lives and careers where it is time to lead. We have the capacity and we want to do it, or we can't help it. People follow us because of the way that we show up, so do I think that folks can choose to develop as a leader. Absolutely Is leadership for everyone at all times? No, not necessarily, and I think that's okay. But yeah, I think we're constantly this notion of growth mindset and internal locus of control. I think we always do have some sort of influence on what's happening to us and around us.
Speaker 2:Stephen, I have loved speaking with you and listening to your wisdom. Thank you, sir. I wonder if we've got some time really quick to go to the demolition zone.
Speaker 1:Yeah, let's do it, Stephen.
Speaker 2:we are now in the demolition zone and you have created this low level tower, I would say based on two kind of pillars, of foundation, which goes up into a single column. What does this represent?
Speaker 1:I've attempted to. This conversation has been about leadership, so I've attempted to. This is my stick figure attempt at a human being Two legs, a pelvis and then a body and this I attempted to go real big arms, but didn't quite work. And then a head. And to me, what this is about is that I think a myth is that leaders believe that they have to be in charge. Leaders believe that they need to be the one with all of the answers, and that's not the case. Leaders are the ones who set the condition that they and the team can find the best way forward together. Yes, leaders need to own it and be decisive, but they don't need to know everything. In fact, the strongest leaders lean into their team and tap into the genius of their team to make the best decision possible. Leaders aren't the ones who are in charge. Leaders are the ones who are responsible for the people who are in their span of care.
Speaker 2:I love that.
Speaker 1:You put that perfectly. I agree with everything there.
Speaker 2:So now you can just get rid of that myth. However you feel, in England we call it a backhand. Yes, that's my backhand. In England, we call it a backhand yes, yes, that's my backhand too. Good, good, I just wanted to touch on a couple of things before we leave. One of them is your book? Yes, where can we get it from and is it available?
Speaker 1:now? Yes, it is. So the book came out in October 2023. We just did a third reprint on it and actually changed a little bit of some things that we think we've got more accurate now. So if you have an old version of the book, it's still relevant. We've just changed in the matrix. It used to be safety to fear, and we changed it from psychological safety to psychological danger, because fear can still be present when we speak up. It's not about fearlessness, as we discussed. So the book is available at all retailers, some fine and some not, but wherever you get your books, it should be there, and you can always get it on an online retailer as well, and hopefully a library too. And who's the book for?
Speaker 1:Ooh the book is for both capital L and lowercase l leaders. It's for folks who already have an established role of leadership and want to lead better. It's for folks who already have an established role of leadership and want to lead better. It's for those who might be those middle managers, those leaders in the middle of organizations, where change goes to live and die. And those middle managers are ones that have multi-directional influence within an organization, and so it's very much for them as well, and it's for anyone who wishes to lead, who wishes to exhibit the behaviors of what it means to be a leader.
Speaker 2:We've put the link to purchase this book at the bottom of the podcast. But just for clarity, we're not getting any backhanders for the book. This is just a straight. I think that this is great. You sent me the. I don't know if you remember, but you sent me the manuscript of this before it actually went out, so I've had a read through that and it was great. Thank you, I remember that. So yeah, for anyone that wants to have it, there's a link down at the bottom. Thank you very much, I appreciate it. So the other thing to cover off is you have got a podcast coming out, yes, or?
Speaker 1:has landed already. We're striving to get it out spring of 2025. So whenever this comes out, it might be out or it might not be out, but it's called Shed Some Light and the very conversation we have had on the definition of leadership and the attributes of leadership. That's the first podcast episode. It's great because it's a petri dish to help develop some more work and thoughts on leadership development, team and culture development as well.
Speaker 2:Right and what's the premise going to be? Is it a podcast where you invite guests on and you have a conversation, or is it you speaking more in depth on leadership and methods to improve?
Speaker 1:Yeah, so it is a practical focus podcast to help leaders grow and develop. We're trying to democratize access to leadership development that we don't want folks to have to, you know, hire a firm for hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop their leaders. We want to give them this to just get started and do something positive. It will be a topic-driven rather than a guest-driven show, but we will have guests. So, as an example, rich Devaney is our guest for the first episode, but it is predominantly conversations between me and my co-host, alejandro. So, yeah, we're just testing it out and seeing if we can find a format that lands and resonates and adds value to folks and their development as leaders. I'm excited for that. Thank you, same here.
Speaker 2:Well, stephen, or Shed, as your friends call you, it's been really an honor of mine to have you come on the podcast today, as we've mentioned before off camera, the work that you were involved with and still are involved with now has impacted me in my life, and that's one of the reasons why I'm doing what I'm doing in terms of the podcast, in terms of the consultancy that we do and just trying to help people to get access to building better buildings in a way which resonates with them, and we're supporting them and helping them in doing that. And so for all you've done for me, I'm grateful, and especially being here.
Speaker 1:Thank you so much. I'm glad that this worked out on this London visit. Cheers, Darren, Good thanks.