Leveraging Leadership

Trust and Impact: Ethical Influence and Authentic Leadership in Business

• Jessa Estenzo • Season 1 • Episode 300

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 39:25

Judith Germain explains her Maverick Leadership philosophy, focusing on trust, influence, and leading through uncertainty during reorganizations. She shares practical tips for Chiefs of Staff, like building trust before a crisis, giving people real agency in decisions, and using "intelligent disobedience" to challenge bad calls. The episode covers the difference between being trusted and being trustworthy, and how to spot genuine leadership versus performative behavior.


Links Mentioned:
Maverick Leadership Influence Diagnostic

Judith Germain's Website

Connect with Judith Germain on LinkedIn


Get in touch with Emily:
Want to chat with Emily? Book a quick clarity call here.

 

Free Leadership Resources

 

LinkedIn

Website

Newsletter

 

Who Am I?
If we haven’t met before - Hi👋 I’m Emily, Chief of Staff turned Executive Leadership Coach. After a thrilling ride up the corporate ladder, I’m focusing on what I love - working with people to realize their professional and personal goals. Through my videos here on this channel, books, podcast guest spots, and newsletter, I share new ideas and practical and tactical tools to help you be more productive and build the career and life you want.

 

Time Stamps:
00:28 Meet Judith Germain

01:01 What Is Maverick Leadership

04:08 Predictability Builds Trust

07:13 Trusted vs Trustworthy

08:58 How to Demonstrate Trust

13:12 Spotting Performative Leaders

19:11 Influence and Agency

34:31 Intelligent Disobedience and Wrap Up

Welcome back to Leveraging Leadership, where we unpack the art of business leadership. I'm your host, Emily Sander, chief of staff to an executive leadership coach. This show is all about finding your points of greatest influence and leveraging them to better serve those around you.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Welcome back to Leveraging Leadership.

Meet Judith Germain

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

My guest today is Judith Germain, and she is a leadership consultant, trainer, and keynote speaker with over two decades of experience helping senior leaders and business owners cut through complexity and lead with real influence. She is the creator of Maverick Leadership, a philosophy that helps independent thinkers lead with clarity, courage, and strategic impact. Judith, welcome to the show

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Thank you

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

So let's jump right in. What-- tell us more about Maverick Leadership. I gave a brief explanation there, but please, uh, please do go into detail

What Is Maverick Leadership

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

All right, so I would say that Maverick Leadership is designed for complex times where we're uncertain of the variables. We have to be able to read patterns and not rely on what's gone before. So it's not... If you think about leadership, generally speaking over the years, it's been very manipulative, i.e., if you do whatever the theory is, magically do what you say, and it doesn't take into effect the actual leader. Is it somebody you want to follow? Is it somebody that's any good? So Maverick Leadership looks at not just what you do, but who you are when you're doing it as well

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Hmm. Okay. Gotcha. And so you speak about keynote speak, do workshops on a number of kind of set scenarios, I wanna say. So a lot of chiefs of staff will be part of a reorg, and sometimes they're brought in in kind of the aftermath of a founder exiting, or maybe they're leading the reorganization effort. But, um, afterwards, sometimes the dust settles and things are a little bit, little bit janky and a little bit unsure, and people are worried. So how, um, how does your maverick leadership go into having a smooth reorg process? 'Cause these things do happen, and you have to go through them sometimes, but what makes that, uh, a, a smooth process versus a more bumpy one?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Okay, it's two parts really. So if you think about in terms of maverick leadership, it's about not only being ethical, make sure that you execute well, make sure that there are the triple win so you win, they win, society wins. But the other thing is to look at is how it works with the human leadership system. And what that does, it diagnoses in real time whether something is working or not working, how it's distorting. So I would say bringing them two together, so one is the person and how they lead and how people follow, and the other is what's the systems doing with the leader, and how do you interact with both? Um, 'cause I would say I am an ex-chief HR, so I totally understand that scenario about a reorg. I'm like, "Yep, remember those." So I totally understand that, and what my experience has shown is quite often is that there's a whole level of uncertainty, and

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

know how to work with uncertainty. They unsure who to trust 'cause things have been broken. Um, and we don't know how to deal with leading under pressure, so a lot of my work is about how do you lead under pressure. And I think if we can do that, the org restructure will be fine

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Okay, so you mentioned a number of elements there, and in this scenario of org restructure, 'cause it's so, so common for chiefs of staff. So you mentioned a couple things, one of which was something like becoming the leader y- you need or want to be throughout a process. Was that, uh, one of the elements you mentioned?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Yes, that's a good way of looking at it

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Okay. And can you say more? Like, how do, how do we do that? People are like, "Oh, that sounds fantastic. What does that mean? How do I do that?"

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

All right. Okay.

Predictability Builds Trust

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So one thing that people hate the most is, is an unpredictable leader. And when I

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Hmm.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

not saying everyone needs to be predictable, but if something's gone wrong, I need to predict your response. So are

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yes

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

me, or are you gonna say, "What are we learning? How it works"? So we need to provide We need to provide, um, a methodology of how to make things more certain. So for example, with, with a reorg, there's a lot we don't know, But there's also a lot we do know. Now, so we might not know the whole picture, like how the final's gonna look like, but we know the first two months, three months. So let's say, right, this is the milestones. Things may change, but we do know that at this point we'll know X, and at that point we'll know Y. And if it doesn't look like it's gonna track, we will tell you beforehand so that our people can work with certainty. So they don't know. So in that situation they might lose their jobs and they don't know. But if they trust you and you're saying you don't know at this point, but you will know at X point, then you provide some certainty with it. think the things that people forget is that trying to build trust at the moment of pressure when trust needs to be built beforehand. So it's a lot

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Ah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

if you say, "Trust me, this is... I'll tell you when I know," if you've been proving that for the last year or plus. But if you're known for somebody who has a bad reputation or doesn't stand in the right place, then why should I believe you about something as important as my career?

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

It's almost like building that foundation or build, uh, raising the baseline so when those big moments hit, it's like, "Oh, okay, I can trust Judith when she tells me this is gonna happen," or, "She doesn't know yet, but she's gonna s- tell us next month at the all-hands meeting then what the other update is."

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Yeah, so for example, in situations I've been before, I've had senior leaders come tell me um, which may or may not end up getting them into trouble themselves. But they trust me to do the right thing let them know how things are. So they're still able to say, I really did the wrong thing here." this... But they'll, but they'll go, "This is what I did, and this is what I thought, and this is how it happened." And they'll know that I'll look at that in the round and go, "Okay, this situation..." If the situation means they get disciplined, they know it'll be fair, they'll know it's the right process, because they trust me. And that's, and that's the sort of thing we want with all the chiefs of staffs as well, so that you... So the idea is that you get notified of things when they are just beginning to be an issue or potentially an issue, not when they're an issue and you can't recover it

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah, when things have exploded and you're at DEFCON 1, and then you get brought in. It's like, "No, no, no. Bring me in a couple steps before this, then we can work on preventing these things."

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

That's right

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

yes. Okay. I love that. So building the, building up the baseline, so in this example, you're a trustworthy leader, and I've proven to be trustworthy, so when I say something, okay, it's a little bit of a relief,

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I just add something there?

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yes

Trusted vs Trustworthy

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

when you talk about trust, there's two things. There's trusted trustworthy, they're

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Ah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Right? So you can be trusted, so you can be trusted because you're competent. You've got a track record. You could be trusted 'cause you're the best person who does this job. It's not the same about being trustworthy. Now, trustworthy now talks about intention and character. So quite often, people in organizations are more focused, especially leaders, on whether someone's trusted. Can I trust her to do the job? But they're not looking at the fact that the employee's looking at you and going, "Are you trustworthy?" so from an employee perspective, they're not as concerned whether you're trusted. Are you the expert in the job? They wanna know if they can trust you with, with them and their work and their career. So that's something to think about when we're trying to build trust. We want to be trusted and trustworthy

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah, it's interesting, like trustworthy is, like you said, speaks to their character. And I remember a long time ago, I was the director of client management, and I said something to a group of people, and there was a, it was a large group of people, and basically s- uh, people were like a little bit hesitant to believe it. I was like, "Why?" Like, I was talking to someone one-on-one, I was like, "Why are they, like, so hesitant?" Like, I've done this, this, and this. And they're like, "They don't know you as well. Like, you've interacted with your direct team, and they know that you're trusted and trustworthy, but this other group that was in that, in that, um, hall, th- they don't know you as well." So they don't know if you're trustworthy or not. They hopefully wanna believe you, but they're not...

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

'cause you're there

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah. So how does one like, "I'm trustworthy, believe me. I have good character." I mean, anyone can kind of say that or toot their own horn, but how would you go about demonstrating

How to Demonstrate Trust

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

that?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So there is a kind of a little bit of a formula actually, um, in the sense that if you want to be trustworthy, one, you're vulnerable first.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

嗯。

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

often when you're talking about things, be free to say, "This is how I did it," or, "This is where it didn't work when I did it." And that doesn't weaken you, in fact, it, it strengthens you and builds credibility, as long as you're not doing it, like, all the time. Where relevant. Otherwise, it's a whole different thing going on. The other thing is being transparent. Um, showing integrity from both usages of the word. So integrity is, again, another character thing, but it's also about being coherent. So am I doing what I say I'm doing? When I say that, can you follow that through? Does that make sense? Um, way of being trustworthy is to give trust first. You have to extend trust, and then when you've extended trust, people will start to think that you're trustworthy

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Hmm. So is that in terms of y- y- you're in charge of this, you go own this part, come back and update the team, but I'm trusting you to make decisions and run this, or is it something else?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

but I

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Okay

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

what I would say I've got a thing where I teach people and I say, ever delegate beyond your ability to deal with the consequences of that delegation." All right? So one of the things people say, "I can't delegate," don't know if they can do it. It's like, "Oh, you've extended it too far." Right? So if, for example, so if for example, I don't know you, right, at all, so I don't know if you can dele- I can listen and I can look and think, "Yeah, you can," but I'm not sure. So what I would do is create milestones, and if it's somebody... 'Cause I'm looking for how somebody thinks. Right? So because if you, if you figure that out, you can delegate quite well. So I would say, "Right, this is what we want, this is what we want to do," as in this is the end, um, direction. This is the g- end point. I don't like to tell people what to do till we get there. then we'll make milestones, but the first milestones will be really short. So example, you'll tell someone to do something, go back to their desk and probably forget what exactly you said. And then if you don't do anything, they'll s- they'll get to the point where they can't ask you now 'cause it's gone too long, So I would, so I would then say like, "So a new task. Um, in two days," or whatever you think is appropriate, "we're gonna have a quick meeting to see how you're getting on with that." So then you, so you know. And as time goes on, the, the milestones get further apart. But also when you're delegating is ask the questions. So what would you do next? Or, or for example, you know the CEO is likely to kick up a fuss, for example, I would ask, "What would you do when Colin comes up to you and tells you, 'Ignore her, because this is what I want you to do'? What will you do?" And they'll probably go, "I don't know." 'Cause... And so you, so you role play it. "Well, this is what I want you to do." Sometimes you might say, "Just agree and then tell me immediately and I'll fix it." Other times it's like, "No, you stand your ground. It depends on who you are, what so and so and whatever." But you test it. And then you'd say, um, "Just talk me through the steps that you're gonna do now." So then you can hear, and it's like, and like another question I love saying is, "At what point of something going wrong will you tell me?"

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Ooh, that's a tricky one

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

you, do you know what I mean? 'Cause you... But it's n- but as long as you've framed it contextually is that you'll h- you'll help, you're working together to get to know each other. It's not like it's not a trust. And then they might say, "You know what? Tell me when you get to this point." Or, so what you're saying to them is you're providing predictability. If you can't do it or you don't know what to do, come and ask because I'm not gonna kick off, 'cause I'm demonstrating right now, I'm extending trust a- and that I believe you can do it. But I've also given you a way to come back without shame or pro- or problems.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

So you've given some really good examples of how to demonstrate trustworthiness and, and build those relationships across the org.

Spotting Performative Leaders

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

I've known some leaders, I will not name names, who have said all the right things and done all the proper whatever, and it's almost like they're putting on a show. It's performative leadership versus genuine leadership. So I mean, part of it's like, hey, at least you can, quote unquote, "play the game" to a certain extent, but people at some level can pick up on that, and it's not the greatest feeling when it's like, "I don't think she believes that. She's just saying what she thinks she should say." So how do you discern between someone who's acting in a performative way versus someone who's actually genuinely trying to put these things forward?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

It's a good question, and there's two ways of looking at it. Are they a peer somebody that you have actual formal control over or not? So like if you're the employee, it's a, it's a different response than if you're the boss. Even if you're, even if it's your boss, but as a boss you have certain level. What I would say is that the discernment is a really good way of saying it, and I think it's more of a case of, one, observation Um, because it's not sustainable. You can perform, but not for that long.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Not forever

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

if it is a long time someone's performing, then people are willfully allowing it to happen. 'Cause like you c- it, it... Do you know what I mean? It's like, and that's a different story if they're allowing it to happen, because you can't sustain it. Because if you think about integrity in terms of the coherence of a, of an action, it falls apart. If I'm gonna do this, I'm, I'm gonna do this w- on budget, on time, but secretly I'm gonna get you to do it, it's not gonna... 'Cause we've all had bosses that, we've all seen that happen. If you're paying attention, you can see it's not coherent. Or asking the questions like, "Okay, so when will we know that this is successful?" Or, um, "What are the first four things that you're going to do?" Or, "How can I help you?" You know, by show- and I think part of the thing is by showing that you're aware less likely for them to happen around you well, if you see what I mean. At the end of the day, whether we're managers or not, we have agency, we are, I say this when I was in, when I used to be in corporate, it's like, it doesn't matter if your boss told you to do this. At the end of the day, you're the one who's going to tribunal, and you're the one who has to say, "Yes, I did that despite you telling me not to." So saying, "My boss told me to," is not gonna stop you from having, like, legal liability. And that's whether it's in a court of law or not, that's the same. That's the same thing, isn't it? So if you're the one stands up and not d- do the thing that they're gonna do or are just performing, you're gonna pay a tax, aren't you? You're gonna ask people to do stuff and they're like, "Mm." Or someday you're gonna do something wrong, and they're not there to support and catch you. Maybe they'll see that something's heading your way, and they'll just get the popcorn to wait for it to happen, rather than going, "By the way, someone's gunning for you." So it's, I think people who do performance a long time and get away with it tend to be living on coercive power, you know, so the, "I'm the person that can sack you," or, "I'm the person who can cause you problems," or, um, you know. Or they are making money for the company, the company think that's okay. But that only lasts up until the first time they make a major mistake, and then they're gone so fast you can't notice it. So it's not really worth it, basically. It's not really worth it.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

It'll come back around in the end. It might take a while, and you might be, like, fine for a while, but it'll, it'll... The house of cards will crumble. And I like the point you made about w- when you can indicate to someone, like, people see through your performance. Like, they see what you're doing. That, that, uh, is troubling for people. So you mentioned it's a different story when you're talking about your boss versus a peer versus your direct report, and in corporate I've, I've had all those scenarios where it's like, "Mm, that's not, that's not genuine leadership." And as soon as you kind of allude to the fact, like, "Hey, you didn't look great in that meeting because they kinda saw through this," basically, they go, "Oh. Oh, no," and the whole thing kind of dissolves. So I think that's an interesting... When you call someone out on it and you're like, "You- people see through that," they just, they just shrink back.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I remember many years ago before I was a, a manager, um, I was relatively young. My boss, we w- he was very well-loved, he did some work and his boss put his name on the report. So he like, he took the other guys... And all the- and that, and it got out as those things tend to do, and he found it very hard to lead anybody because he had a huge kind of, you know, even for months afterwards it- people would be just like, so far behind you over there" because they just didn't respect him and, and you can't lead without respect.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

It might be, they might, somebody might not respect you as a person, but they respect your work. But if there's like no respect, it's gonna be very difficult

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

And on the flip side, I've, uh, there's, there's this boss who had a temper and would have outbursts, and he was known for these outbursts, and it would just, he would just tear people apart. And at one team meeting, he was like, "I am working on my anger issues. I'm working with a professional, and please help me with this, so if I start to do something, please indicate," and we kind of talked about, and changed the entire dynamic, dynamic of that relationship. Everyone who was like, "This a-hole," like, "Oh my gosh," was like, "Oh, no, no, no, no. We're gonna help you." Like, "No, no, no. Thank you." Like, he's working on it. And I'm like, that, with one fell swoop, he changed the whole dynamic.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Yeah. Power and vulnerability, 'cause that was a

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

courageous thing to do.

Influence and Agency

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

And I think as well, especially for chief of staffs, done a lot of work in that area around influence. Because at that point, you, you can't rely on legitimate authority really. Um, so you need to start thinking about how, how do you influence others? How do you demonstrate that you're someone to follow? How do you deal with stakeholders? people talk about stakeholder management, which I think is, is a silly idea. I'm all about tech lead- leadership. your stakeholders. They're not items of grocery people. you can only lead, but you need to understand what it is that you're doing. And I talk about, so, um, influence saying, I see influence as calibrated motion, and there are four influence drivers: capability, which has eight items in it, and you got, um, decisiveness, power, and impact, and you need all four. And,

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

first one?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

um, the first one was, capability.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Capability. Gotcha

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

And you've got to, you've just got to make sure that all four of them are, are actually working So one of the things I have is like this diagnostic that helps look to see where you're, where you are, and then what you need to do. So for example, sometimes people have got a very high index on power, but if it's, if they've got high index on power, for example, but low in capability, then they're more likely to be manipulative and coercive because they can't do a thing without forcing you to do the thing. Um, so yeah, so you don't want to rely on, on any one base. need to look at all four of them.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

And is this, uh, towards your core leadership identity? Is that part of the maverick leadership apparatus?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I have a lot of frameworks, as you can imagine. My, my, my frameworks and stuff comes from actual lived experience plus theory, if that makes sense. Like, they all, they all work because they're in organizations. But anyway, the core identity looks at, if you look at your leadership identity, this is more than values and stuff like that. It, it's three parts. It looks at what is your leadership proposition? So what is it that you do in terms of leadership? What's your proposition? what are your processes that you follow? So for mine, it's strategize, innovate, execute. I do that at home. I, I do that everywhere. So I, so that's the way my brain works. I'm like, where we need to go. How's it gonna work? Da da da da. What's new? How do I make a new... How do I make... How do I innovate whatever was there before?" And then I go, "Right, es- es- like, all about the execution." I don't like the yap-yap if it's not done. So I'm like, "Gotta be done." and knowing what your processes are important. Um, then the next thing is your leadersha- leadership impact. So are you someone whose idea is driven? Are you a strategy person? What kind of person are you and how does that link? And then the final one is your leadership talent. And I, and this is more, I look at it from a base of ever since childhood we've been doing one thing that made us super successful, but we don't know what that is. Like, because 1) so we can't keep recreating it. So, like, mine is, um, seeing truth, and what that really means for me is that I'm just hyper, hyper insightful, so I tend to hear the problem and see the solution almost immediately, which is kinda cool for me as a consultant because it kinda works out quite well. But, um, I'm like, I'll hear a problem and immediately go, "Right, this is what needs to happen to go forward." But knowing when you integrate all three elements, you get a really good idea of what your leadership identity is, which enables you to influence other people, be able to say what you stand for. It just makes you lead in a way that others want to follow, and you also execute well.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

And how is that different from all the other myriad of Myers-Briggs and DISC and StrengthsFinder and all of, all of those, all of those frameworks?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

so leadership identity is not a psychometric as such. It, it fuses three perspectives. So you, leader, and how you work against the organization that you're in. Who are you, and this, this bit has a little bit of psychometric. Who are you in terms of how you have impact and your energy for impact? And the third one, which makes it very different, is that it's The first two parts come cognitively, and the third part subconscious. So it's

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Ooh

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So it's really kind of cool actually, 'cause I don't know what it's gonna be. So I, I ask you questions, which you respond in stories. From those stories, see the common thread through those stories, from that we come up with your leadership talent. It is kinda really cool. And then all three aspects, perspectives are integrated into, into one thing. So that's how it differs, I suppose. It differs because it's from your real It's not It's from your real life. So when we're doing a proposition that I'm like, "Tell me a time when you've done this. Tell me a time when you've done that. Tell..." then I'll be like, "Oh, I see. It sounds to me that this is how you do X. Does this, how does that work?" Whereas pure psychometrics are theoretical in the sense that they, they don't come from what you've done before

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

It's the difference of like here's a multiple choice and here's what you maybe sh- feel like you should say versus tell me a story about when you did this. Those two things produce different outcomes. Yep.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

And the less And you can't really direct it because you don't know what's coming out as such.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yes, yes, yes. Yes

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

to you, say chief of staff, you know, "Right, we're gonna look at your leadership proposition. Tell me how you do this," and you're just talking. "Okay, tell me how you do that." And then just, "Right, okay, this is what's common." And by the time you've done like you've, you've started to go through real examples, you can't fake them because you can't, you can't retain them all in your head.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So it's more real. And I have worked with people before have, for some reason or another, decided they're not gonna tell you everything, and then they start ta- and then they stop and go, "This isn't gonna work unless I actually tell you the truth." You're like, "That is true."

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Oh.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

"Okay, let's just start again." I'm like, "Fine." So like they might get five or six minutes into it then, and then they just stop and go, "Actually, let me just tell you." 'Cause sometimes

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

I'm not gonna be able to keep up this performance. I'm not gonna be able to keep up

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

think

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

this image

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

from the environment that they've been in. So if you've come from an environment where it's very blaming and very toxic, it's hard to ch- it's hard to trust somebody new with quite intimate information in a sense. 'Cause I, I think it's in- when you talk about how you think, I think that's quite intimate.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Oh, yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

intimate thing. Um, but the people soon find quite trustworthy and trusted, so it's okay.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Well, you mentioned chiefs of staff, and they often are, are leading through influence, not direct authority. And influence is a tricky thing, and I liked how you talk about it. Um, a, a lot of people, I know at least, have equated influence with, "I'm just the loudest person. I'm gonna speak the loudest, and I'm gonna be the most influential. I'm gonna, like, speak the most eloquently or to the most people." A- and perhaps that's one element of influence sometimes, but to me, that's not influence on whole. So how would you distinguish between, "I'm, I'm the loudest, and so peop- I, I kind of have a bullhorn in my hand, so I'm most influential 'cause people are hearing me," versus maybe s- maybe more genuine in- influence?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Yeah, so I think those loud people making a lot of noise, which they, we are discerning and just like, "Mm, this is just noise." They are indexing quite high on, on the power driver. Um, and they're not even indexing on the good part of the power driver, 'cause they're, they're indexing on sort of using their charisma and things like that. Um, which again, is quite a shaky power base to, to rely on. it, you know, when you lose- when you lose legitimate power, um, or even if you're just using charisma, it requires me to agree with you to have you have authority over me. And if I don't, uh, I might look at you charismatic and go, "So?" Then the, then you've got no ability to influence me now because I've just gone, "I'm not

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

You know, so it's, so it's very shaky. It's not very, it's not very good. So those who are very performative in, in that way aren't truly influential because it's easy to not to be influenced, right? So when we're talking about people with true influence, we're looking at those four influence drivers, and when they're all working, then you're gonna be influential. So I'll give you, um, I'll give you an example. If someone... And under decisiveness, there are a few things to look at, like how determined is somebody? Um, what reputation they have, how are they in terms of their influence? How versatile you are. So it's, it's not as simple of going, "Oh, it's just decisiveness. They can make a decision," or, "They're capable." They're actually, it's actually quite nuanced and broken down in that way

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Interesting.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I don't know

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

answer your question

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

yes. Yeah. I'm just, I'm, I'm fascinated by influence 'cause it's such a multifaceted dynamic piece of being chief of staff. And I was also recounting, uh, at a previous company, there was this person who, um, w- was not trustworthy. He would overpromise things. He was in sales. He was a founder. He was charismatic for days. Just could... He exuded and oozed out charisma, and he looked kind of like George Clooney as well, so I mean, that didn't

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

hurt things either. But he was not trustworthy. Like, people knew this. But still, like, I knew this, and he would be talking to me and he would just look in my eyes and I'd be like, "Oh, like, maybe. No. No, you're not right. No. Oh my gosh." And it was, it was crazy 'cause charisma goes a long way. When someone has it in spades, it's, it's powerful. I mean, it's strong. But it's also like, ugh, when you see them for what they are, the, the gap between the charisma and, like, you're not trustworthy, you always overpromise things is, is-

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

yeah, I think if you, if you understand how things are made up, you can't be f- you can't be fooled as easily because you see what's missing. And I would say that if, if you're ever working with somebody and you don't feel good, then you're not being influenced. It's, it, you know, if you're starting to f- do you know what I mean? If you're like, "Something's not right," or, they've gone and you just feel a little bit icky, that's not influence. 'Cause real influence comes from... that the triple win, you know, I'm gonna influence you, so I want to make sure that you have agency so you agree to do what you're gonna do because you want to do it, not because I forced you. You really need to be committed to doing it. and I need to be in the win, and it, the greater good needs to be happy. And I think that's probably the difference with maverick leaders is that really need to have agency, so I'm not gonna force you to do anything. Now, I might say, "If you don't do this, the consequence is that." So consequence might be your discipline because you're supposed to do your job. I'm not gonna force you to do your job, but you need to recognize there's a consequence for not doing it, and you're not saying it in any way that it's coercive. It's just this is just the facts of life.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

know, you... And you can do that as a parent with your children. You know, it's like I'm not saying you, like unless it's really unsafe, you're not necessarily saying no, but Consequences are good and consequences are bad. You just need to decide which one you want. And I think that's, that helps with the being trustworthy and integrity as well because you're not, you don't have a hidden agen- influencers don't have hidden agendas.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

agendas, but they'll tell you what it is. It's not hidden. Whereas someone who's manipulative is gonna manipulate you. They're gonna... They want something, and they think somehow they're cleverer than you so they can hide the fact that they want something. But all that does is leave you feeling something's not quite right, so then the trustworthy score goes down. I want to, if I want you to do something, I'll tell you why, because I want you to have, I want you to honestly want to do it. So like when I'm talking to people like I say don't go for compromising, you compromise you feel bad, right? The other person feels bad and resentful. So what you want them to do and you to do is to be happy with what they've committed to do, that can only come with full agency and understanding and informed consent. They might be like, "I'd rather not" but the, but it might be, "I can live with it though." And wouldn't you want that as a leader? That your staff can live with it in the ha- like, "Okay, it might not be exactly what I wanted, but that's okay" because you've, you've con- you've told them why. You've, you've, um, explained the need, understand the consequences, understanding what you need to do, and then you make a... You know, we're all adults. Make a decision. I can live with it or I can't.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

I think that's a really important thing for chiefs of staff to keep in mind, 'cause they're, they're almost always, like weekly, daily, hourly influencing people and, um, maneuvering them is probably the wrong word. It has the wrong connotation, but they're getting people in place, in positions to be able to make decisions. They're informing them, providing context, because you're gonna have to basically speak up at this leadership meeting if you're for this or against this. And it's very easy. I mean, I, I'm guilty of this, and I was like, "Ooh, I shouldn't have done that," where I manipulate the situation to get them to do one thing, and of course, I thought it was the right thing, 'cause it was m- my idea and my opinion. But I was like, "Mm, they didn't really have a high degree of agency in some cases," and I just kind of forced them into, or peer pressured them into doing it. Um,

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Okay, let me just clarify. It's agency in the decision-making process. All right?

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

the, they, somebody might be in a very narrow job and you can only go left or you can only go right. Um, but you can choose not

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yes.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

So it's agency in the decision-making rather than agency and the freedom to do whatever I like. Do

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Ah, okay. Okay. So I might, I might say, "Hey, the choices are A and B," and I'm defining those, but I'm giving you a choice between A and B.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

A real

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

are both in the direct-

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I've done a certain way that, you know, you really

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

bad thing. Do you know

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

unless you do A, then like you're a bad person. But anyway, anyway, moving on. A, A- A or B is your choice. But if you do A, like y- you're manipulating or coercing

Intelligent Disobedience and Wrap Up

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

intelligent disobedience?

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

No. Intelligent disobedience

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

how do I describe it? So... 'Cause maverick leaders do this all the time. So if you can imagine a traditional hospital, and you've got, like, the nurse and the doctor. So in the, in that situation, the doctor's in charge, and the nurse has to do what the doctor says. But quite often the nurse knows more than the doctor, certainly, 'cause they've got a wider span, right? So you've got a nurse there, and they see, um, the doctor's about to prescribe something the nurse knows he shouldn't prescribe. right? So what do they do? Do they follow the rules and agree with the doctor and prescribe something that's gonna hurt someone, do they tell the doctor that what they're gonna do is the wrong thing to do, knowing that socially this is a bad idea to do? So what do they do? So, um, in a situation, they're intelligently disobedient. So what they would do is probably ask the question, "Do you want to give, um, the dose at that level or at this level?" than saying, "You sure you wanna do that?" I mean, obviously, if they're about to do something that's gonna kill someone, obviously you, you do. And it's the same as, like, a guide dog, right? So you train the dog to do... I think you call them seeing eye dogs, don't you? So you train the, so you train the dog to do whatever the person says, right? And then once you've trained them to do that, you then train the dog to think for itself. So for

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

ஆ.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

I'm blind, I can't see, I wanna cross the road. I can't see the car coming. The dog can see the car coming. So the dog's intelligently disobedient, so he'll stand in front of the, the person so they can't walk forward. So it's that ability... So we want staff who can be intelligently disobedient to us, because you want them to be able to say, "No." And that's

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

and that's

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

mean by agency. That's like you need, they need to have the agency to say, "Bad decision, boss." Wouldn't you prefer your staff did that or your boss told you that?

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Absolutely. Chiefs of staff do that to their principals all the time. CEO says, "We're going this way," and chief of staff's like, "Ooh, like around that corner, I've seen what's around that corner. Let's go that way instead." So

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Or, you

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

not do that

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

like, "Okay, so can you just talk me through h- how you got to that decision?" Or, "What is it that... What's the end result you're looking for? Oh, we could get that by doing it this way."

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Hmm. Yeah, yeah, yeah

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

it's lots of different ways of building trust so you can have those direct conversations. But

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Gotcha.

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

intelligent disobedience is one of my favorite terms.

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Love it. You've given us a glimpse of Maverick Leadership and all the other frameworks that you, that you bring to bear. Anything else you wanna leave folks with in terms of, "Oh, I really wanna say this," or, "I always wanna leave people with that"? Any final words of wisdom or advice?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Put it into words. I would say that As chiefs of staff, we have to be able to influence well. We need to be able to predict the future. We need to be better at diagnosing things. So what tends to happen with individuals and organizations is that they react emo- and when you react, you're emotional. And organizations are also emotional. They're still living, breathing things. And what we really want to do is respond. So we need to find, uh We need to be able to diagnose, the emotion things out, look at things objectively so we can respond. Another thing I would say, that my, my bit of advice would be seek to respond rather than react. And if you're in your organization and you're not sure where the gaps might be in terms of influence leadership, you can take a diagnostic that I have, which you can find on maverickparadox.co.uk/leadership-influence-diagnostic, and that will help you look at where you are and where your organization is

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Beautiful. React versus respond. Yes. Well, Judith, thank you so much for imparting all this wisdom. And, uh, you mentioned the, the website for the diagnostic there. If someone wants to reach out to you or connect with you in any way, what is the best place for them to do that?

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Uh, you could, you could follow me on LinkedIn under my name, Geoff Germain, G-E-R-M-A-I-N. you can, uh, me at, the website would be good, marriageparadox.co.uk

emily-sander_1_07-14-2026_110249

Beautiful. We will have all of that information in the show notes. Judith, thank you once again

judith-germain_1_07-14-2026_190249

Thank you. It's great to be here

Please give this episode some love by liking and sharing. It's like sprinkling digital fairy dust on the algorithms and it is scientifically proven to make unicorn smile.