===============================================

The other night I was reminded how stubborn I can be at times. Yep. Really.

I was watching the evening news with my husband and he asked me to change the channel so he could watch the national, rather than the provincial news.  I said, “This is the National News”.

He said, “No it isn’t. Lloyd Robertson is on the national news and I prefer listening to him over the other guy on channel three”

I said, “ Well, this is Lloyd Robertson’s program.

He said, “ No it isn’t but if you think so, you must be right”

Suffice it to say, after a few more seconds of an “It is so! It is not!” kind of exchange, I discovered I was wrong, but not before I had dug in my heels and clung to my view of things until it sounded somewhat reminiscent of this:

Of course our “discussion” was not quite as strident as the one portrayed, but the point is, I believed I was right and clung to that belief as if it were a baby cub and I, a mother lion.  Luckily, this kind of intractability does not happen in our house too often, but when it does, everything seems to shut down until we discover where the error in thinking lies. And, until a correction, and an apology, is made.

Stubbornness is an insidious thing.  It can creep up on you and before you know it there is an enormous barrier between you and another person, or you and a bunch of other persons.  In leadership, it is also a destructive thing that closes the door on creativity and serves to frustrate and exclude people whose potential contribution is often ignored or discounted.

Let’s face it; we all like to be right.  If it were possible, we would all like to be right all of the time…but it’s not.

So, what to do?   Well, a good place to start is by looking in the mirror.  All of us are stubborn at some time or another.  It’s not that rare.  But, here’s the thing.  If we are leaders of people we cannot afford to luxuriate in the illusion that we are always right.  Getting married to our own ideas to the exclusion of others is an appalling waste of everyone’s time and talent.  And really, failing to tame the inner mule comes with the high cost of lost opportunity and damaged relationships, which could be more than we are willing to pay.

So on those occasions when we notice ourselves digging in for a session of  “Yes, it is. No it’s not” Let’s do three things.  Stop…even if it is in mid-sentence.  Step Back…create some space in the dialogue long enough to take a breath. And Listen…focus on really understanding what is being said and pretend, for a moment that the other person actually might know what s/he is talking about.

By doing things as simple as that, our chances of discovering a plethora of useful and creative perspectives that will serve the collective purpose will be that much greater.

That’s what I think anyway. What do you think?  When was the last time you dug in your heels and started braying?

===============================================

** Please note the use of this video clip is meant only as a learning tool to compliment the text of this post and is in no way intent to infringe on copyright.

=======================================================

When I first came to Vancouver to take up my new role as a Human Resources Consultant with a major bank, my boss and I agreed that I should go on a road trip and meet with as many corporate banking employees as possible.  It was sort of an orientation thing for me and provided a chance for everyone else to give me the “once over”. Coming from Toronto, it seemed I was automatically not to be trusted.

On one occasion, I was to talk with a number of Corporate Account Managers.  My objective was to get to know them as individuals; to learn about their ambitions; their challenges; and how we might better support their efforts.  It is entirely possible though that I did not adequately declare my intent, because the first person I encountered, pulled his chair very close to mine; stared sharply into my face and said, “I make money for the bank.  What do you do?”

Aside from the obvious attempt to intimidate me, his question was meant to suggest that as a person who made no direct contribution to the bottom line, whatever my function, I was an expense to the organization and thus a liability.

This is not an uncommon perspective to take, especially in large organizations.  But at the time, I couldn’t help but think that there was something gravely missing from this outlook.

It occurs to me now that “making money for the bank”, while an admirable outcome, did not tell me anything about what this fellow saw as his purpose.  And, for me at least, there is something lost when a person seems to view his primary raison d’être as making money.

Please don’t misunderstand me.  I like money as well as the next person and there is a primal need to earn it and manage it prudently.  But, the purpose of most jobs, even most businesses, is probably not principally about money.  It is more than likely something else, something that has to do with providing a service, with making money as an outcome of that. The amount of money earned is usually determined by the quality and consistency of the service delivered and the ability of those who deliver it, to build loyal business relationships.

But sometimes I think we forget.  We take our eye away from our fundamental purpose and allow ourselves to get fixated on the dollars.  That’s when we risk running afoul of ourselves.  We get greedy.  We get miserly. We get our priorities out of order. And then we get into trouble.

So to me, helping people understand and believe in the organizational purpose is Job One. And, part of this is ensuring they know why their jobs exist; whom they are there to serve; and how what they do fits with the overall vision of the organization.

Here are a few of the benefits that can be realized from taking a purpose-driven approach:

It helps us make good decisions and prioritize appropriately. If we train ourselves to ask the question, how will doing this, (or not doing this) help me serve my purpose? The answer will often give us the information we need to move forward.

It helps us resolve problems.  Often problems can build on each other and become so complex that we get lost in them. When this happens, it sometimes helps to get back to the basic questions like, what is my main purpose and who am I here to serve?

It gives value to every role in the organization, not just a few. If you nurture a culture that identifies the purpose and value of each job in relation to the overall vision and to each other, everyone in the organization has an opportunity to feel part of something important.  When that happens people are more likely to do their best work.

It promotes good stewardship. If we are clear about our purpose, it is that much easier to recognize and fulfill our responsibilities to those we serve.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

====================================================

Oliver Wendell Holmes has been credited with saying; “Science is a first-rate piece of furniture for a man’s upper chamber, if he has common sense on the ground floor.

 Just lately, I’m thinking that our “ground floor” is beginning to suffer from termites.  Perhaps it is that in this age of information, litigation, and personal rights, we have stopped trusting our deeper instincts about what is right.  And, in many circles, we fail to acknowledge the value of common sense in our decision-making practices.

In 1998, Lori Borgman wrote an article called The Death of Common Sense. Here is an excerpt

Common Sense, aka C.S., lived a long life, but died from heart failure at the brink of the millennium. No one really knows how old he was, his birth records were long ago entangled in miles and miles of bureaucratic red tape. 
Known affectionately to close friends as Horse Sense and Sound Thinking, he selflessly devoted himself to a life of service in homes, schools, hospitals and offices, helping folks get jobs done without a lot of fanfare, whooping and hollering. Rules and regulations and petty, frivolous lawsuits held no power over C.S. (Read more…)

Like me, you may have read this passage and nodded reverently at its wisdom.  And yet it seems so many of us continue to ignore its message and devalue the power of trusting ourselves, and each other, to come up with ideas and solutions that transcend tight-fitting structures, intractable thinking and rules that serve only to strangle growth and creativity

But, in the midst of this rather gloomy outlook, there is hope.  Common sense, at least in the corporate world, may only be in a coma.  There are some very smart people out there who see something greater and more meaningful than the structures we create.  They are people who champion the notion that neither ideas nor humans can be corralled into little boxes of rules or stereotypes for very long.  They value, promote and initiate change that invites collaboration, creativity, engagement, happiness and yes, common sense into the workplace.

It would be wiser to listen to them, and to our own instincts more often than to seek solutions from books of rules or complicated business models.

If you are a leader, the answers you seek are often inside you.  You will not find them in the detail of anyone’s position description.  You will not find them in complicated competency models that not even a super-hero could fulfill.  You will not find them in sophisticated performance evaluation processes.  They are available to you through your intrinsic sense of what is right and your willingness to listen to others and the collective voice of common sense.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

=============================================

Anyone who has ever been in a leadership role for longer than, oh, five minutes, knows that leadership is not a prescriptive thing.  As simple as we try to make it with lists of the ten top things to do here or the best five things to do there, it remains rife with complexity.

Part of this complexity lies in the many roles leaders must undertake that, while necessary, seem incompatible with one another.

Here are some examples:

Being conceptual and Tactical

As a leader, it is important for you to be able to rise above the day-to-day mechanics of your operation so you can see where it is all going. This is about having a vision and ideas that give purpose to the work.

There is, however, a limit on the amount of time you should spend at thirty thousand feet without coming down to the ground and working with people to ensure that plans are developed in line with the vision and specific actions are taken to bring it to life.

Leaders who dwell in the land of ideas too long tend to accomplish very little. Alternately, those who keep their noses to the grindstone and never get off the ground might accomplish a lot but chances are, it will be a lot of the wrong thing.

Being a Leader and a Manager

Some people believe that leadership and management are two separate jobs. From where I sit, they’re not.  Both roles belong in the leader’s virtual backpack. Confusion often raises its quizzical head, though, when deciding what to manage; what to lead; and when.

A simple rule of thumb is that you manage things and lead people. However, to add complexity to the mix, you also manage events and happenings that involve people. And that means you must be prepared to manage conflict and other situations that could potentially get in the way of accomplishing the work.

Being a Leader and a Follower

Opportunities for people to show leadership, regardless of their formal status in the organization, are everywhere.  It is a wise leader who will recognize this and make room for it when it serves the organization and supports its goals.  The trick is in knowing when it is appropriate to stand down and become a supportive follower.

In general, allowing someone else to take the lead is a good idea when:

S/he knows more about the specific work involved than you do or;

S/he has demonstrated more skill in a certain area than you have.

This doesn’t mean you abdicate your position.  It does mean that you are leading for a time, by following and supporting someone who can by leading, accomplish the goal better, faster or more efficiently than you can.

To do this effectively, you must first know your own strengths and limitations and also make it a priority to know the capabilities of the people who work with you.

Controlling and Empowering

We all know that empowering others to express themselves and make contributions to the organizational goals is key to creating vibrant, engaged, working environments. And, while this is a leadership responsibility, it is also the job of the leader to create a controlled atmosphere that connects to the demands and goals of the business.

This means finding a fine balance between being autocratic and being liberal. It is where having a fully activated set of organizational values and a comprehensive, well-articulated vision of the future come in handy. They form a framework within which people can be empowered to use their creative abilities and make contributions on their own terms.

There are many other situations where leaders are required to make choices between seemingly contradictory activities.  For instance, when would you encourage individual effort over team development? Under what circumstances might you favour an arbitrary decision over a democratic one?

What comes up for you?

====================================================

My son has been helping me learn more about Social Media.  He is the one who turned me on to the joys of blogging.  He helped me get started on Twitter too.   As a person with a degree in New Media, he is almost evangelical about the advantages and benefits of social networking. It is the way of the future, he says.  I believe him.  And, I know there is so much more that he can teach me.

Thinking about this more, and in the context of leading organizations, there is a lot to be said for learning from younger people. While we veterans can teach the invaluable lessons of the past, they can teach us the path to the future.  And that is worth paying attention to.

For instance, people of my generation often grapple with the wonders of technology with varying degrees of success.  Some of us are totally immersed and intrigued by what can be accomplished in a wireless world, (including all the cool toys that come along with it). Others of us are hard pressed to know how to turn on our computers, if indeed we even own one.   But, no matter where we are on the technology learning curve, the one thing we know for sure is that to learn it, we have to consult those who have the skill and it’s highly doubtful that we will find this expertise in people older than ourselves.

That’s why I like the idea of mentorships in organizations working both ways.

It should be pretty simple really.

Take young Person A, who knows about something and put him or her together with older Person B who doesn’t know much at all about that particular something. Then let the learning begin.

All right, so it’s not that simple

People of the older generation… well, we have our pride.  We like the idea of mentoring someone younger because it seems to us to flow with the accepted order of things…  you know, the Master and Grasshopper type of relationship.   However, when it is the Grasshopper doing the teaching, it can make us feel somehow redundant, even stupid and that’s not something one willingly puts a hand up for.

Alternately, people of a younger generation may not see the benefits of slowing down to help us older ones learn things that are, to them, elementary my dear Watson. They may also feel they are carrying a load for someone who might even make more money than they do and from whom they see no reciprocal reward.  There’s not much fun in that either.

So to begin with, I think that a successful Young master/Old Grasshopper relationship needs to begin with an attitude check on both sides.

And you spell that R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

Of course along with that has to come a certain measure of empathy that allows the older to appreciate the skills and knowledge of the younger; and the younger to give credence to the lessons that only an older generation can teach.

With that established, I can think of a few practical steps that might help the Young Master/ Old Grasshopper set off on the road to building a mutually rewarding relationship.  Here they are:

Determine a skill base line

There is nothing more counterproductive, or annoying, than making assumptions about what a person knows or does not know.  Spending a little time determining current skill levels within the context of the subject matter is a good use of time.

Take time to set some goals

Technology, for instance, encompasses a huge body of knowledge.  To make some headway and avoid being overwhelmed, discuss what you want to be able to do and how it might benefit your work before you start tackling applications that may, or may not, move you in the right direction.  Goals will also give you benchmarks against which you can monitor progress.  There is something very satisfying about that for both parties in the relationship.

Establish good communication habits

For the most part this means speaking plainly; being truthful; and regularly checking for understanding.

Have Fun

Working with someone to learn something new and seeing that new thing being applied in real time is exciting!  Enjoy the journey and the person with whom you are taking it and my hunch is, you will both profit from the experience.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

=====================================================

Once upon a time, there was a Boss who was very sure of himself.  He was strong and competent.  He had built some admirable relationships with his peers and was well liked by his customers and the community at large.  But he was also puzzled.

He was puzzled because it seemed, to him anyway, that every time he walked into the same room as his employees, the place went from being lively with conversation to something that was subdued and controlled.  And, when he attended meetings with his team and a question came up, they all looked at him before even attempting to address it.  Similarly, when they talked about problems, the team members always looked his way before, or while, giving their opinions.

On the one hand the Boss kind of liked it.  It made him feel, well, in control and more than a little powerful.  But, on the other hand, he found it irritating and unproductive.  Surely these people were fully capable of drawing conclusions and deciding on courses of action without waiting for his blessing all the time.   Did he have to do everything? What was wrong with them?

Then one day, a Brave Soul approached him and said, “You know, you can be pretty intimidating sometimes”

The Boss looked at Brave Soul with eyes cold enough to freeze mercury.

He said, “What?  What do you mean?  All I did was walk into the room and sit down for heaven sakes!”

Slightly shaken but undaunted, Brave Soul went on.  “Well” she said, “It’s not just that you walked into the room but how you did it”

“Okay”, he said, “Now that really is ridiculous.  How could that possibly make me intimidating?  I’m interested in what people have to say.  I want some healthy discussion and debate about the issues we face.  I need them to be fully present when we are together so that we can work together and get things done.  Don’t they get that?”

Brave soul replied,  “I’m pretty sure that’s what they want too but the effect your body language and behaviour has on the team makes it difficult for them to participate”

Unconvinced but intrigued now, the Boss said, “Okay then, tell me more”

“Well, when you came into the room this morning, you didn’t acknowledge anyone.  You probably had a lot on your mind and so you were frowning too.  You walked straight to your chair at the head of the table and sat down without looking at anyone. You looked at your watch instead. You opened your book; peered over your glasses at the assembled group and said, ‘Okay, let’s get to it.  We have a lot to do and, I’ve got another meeting to go to after this’

“After that, I imagine it seemed to the team that the goal of the meeting changed from one that involved sharing ideas and making productive decisions to coming up with enough “right answers” to keep you from getting too impatient and ensuring that you got away in time to get to your next meeting”

“ But that’s not what I intended at all!” said the Boss. “I didn’t realize I could have such an effect on people. ”

Brave Soul smiled and said, “I don’t think any of us knows how we affect others unless we take some time to think about it and ask.  Sometimes how we are can get in the way of things, that’s all.  Just thought you should know.”

As Brave Soul walked away, the Boss began to make a mental note.  He had learned something today, about himself.  He didn’t like it but, if what Brave Soul had said were true, it would certainly explain the behaviour he saw and felt in others whenever he was within earshot of them.

So what could he do differently to become more aware of his impact on others without pretending to be someone other than himself?  Here’s what he came up with:

I will make an effort to become aware of the clues that people are sending me when we are in each other’s company.

It seems reasonable that if people can pick up and act on clues from my body language and behaviour, I can pick up clues about how I affect them by paying better attention when we are together

When in doubt about my impact on others, I will ask someone I trust to tell me the truth.

I get that I will not always be able to see myself as others see me.  So, I guess I will ask someone like Brave Soul to watch me from time to time and let me know how I’m doing.

I will be conscious of my moods and do my best to manage them in a way that does not negatively affect those around me.

I realize that when I am deep in thought, or worried about something it isn’t difficult to convey it, through my body language, to those around me. So, either I must explain myself or I must discipline myself to convey a more open posture.

Not bad for a start.  What would you add to the Boss’s list?

=========================================================

Failure. I don’t like it.  And, I defy anyone to put up a hand and volunteer if asked, “Okay, so who wants to fail today?”

The fact is though, unless we live in a bubble and do nothing, we are going to fail at something.  Failure is a part of living and, often, the very thing that makes success so exhilarating, if only by contrast.

Leaders experience failure all the time. Indeed, it is often failure that gives them the fuel and determination to succeed in the end. So, if you are new to leadership, know that to be a good leader, sometimes you’re also going to fail.

Some people will say that however you look at it, failure is failure.  But I can think of two kinds of failure, the glorious kind and the pointless kind.

The late Randy Pausch, author of The Last Lecture, talked about glorious failure. As a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh PA, he regularly put out challenges to his students and then gave an award to the team of students that failed to meet their stated objectives.  He gave the award in acknowledgement of their dedication to new ideas; to their willingness to take risk and; to the effort they made toward achieving something that no one else had dared to try.

To me, glorious failures are also those that come from genuine effort.  These are failures that are used as springboards to something else.  They represent a piece of a larger puzzle and are used for learning, growth and exploration.

But, failures become pointless when we don’t pay attention to the lessons they teach.  I expect we do this for a number of reasons.  It can be embarrassing to try something and fall flat on our faces.  So the temptation to pretend it didn’t happen or to find someone to blame is often very strong.

Indeed, in some organizations, there is little tolerance for failure, at least in my experience.  Time is spent, and wasted, in rationalizing and blaming. The lessons that come from failure then become lost and useless.  And, people are less and less willing to explore new possibilities.

When it comes to trying new things I believe that good leaders do two things.

First, they focus on success.  That means they will do whatever they can to anticipate potential pitfalls that could get in the way of achieving their goal and work on mitigating these obstacles so that the way to the goal becomes less onerous.

Second, should they fail to meet their intended objective, they focus on learning. That means they will examine the outcome and circumstances  as dispassionately as possible with a view to squeezing as much juice out of the situation as possible.  To me, it goes something like this:

• Determine what worked and keep it for use at another time
• Acknowledge what didn’t work and determine what might be done differently next time.
• Take corrective action as required
• Remember the lesson and move on

And, if looking for someone to blame, good leaders look in the mirror first.

Oh, and just in case you want more evidence that failure can indeed lead to success consider this:

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

I think it happens because of the very human tendency to jump right into action without employing the critical thinking required to ensure it will lead to a good solution.

For example, many moons ago I was part of a team-building course in Toronto.  At one point, we were divided into groups and marched outside to tackle a project that involved climbing poles and traversing from one to the other with only the aid of ropes and some safety tackle.  Our goal was to successfully overcome the obstacles and complete the course in the best possible time.

We failed miserably. Not only did we not complete the course, we failed to overcome most of the obstacles as well.

With booby prize shamefully in hand, we reviewed what we might have done differently. And, in thinking about it now, apart from doing just about everything wrong, we simply didn’t spend enough time in “O”.

“O” stands for observation.  It is part of a mental process thatEdgar Schein refers to as ORJI in his book Process Consultation- Lessons for Managers and Consultants.

Here’s how it works.

Typically, when faced with a predicament, the human psyche follows a pattern.

We Observe and get a picture of what is going on.

We React emotionally to our understanding of what’s happening.

We Judge, and draw conclusions based on our understanding and how it makes us feel, and then:

We Intervene, making decisions and taking action based on what we see, feel and conclude.

In the case of our deplorable “team” effort, we spent perhaps a nano second really looking at the challenge ahead or trying to understand it.  We asked no questions of either the coordinators or each other.  We did not inspect the obstacle course or make any kind of effort to evaluate the resources available to us, human or otherwise. The loudest voice took the lead.  The action oriented ones chomped at the bit to get out in the field and DO something. And, the reflectors, being completely overwhelmed by the noise and confusion registered what can only be described as insipid protests about making a plan first, an offering that, not surprisingly, fell on completely deaf ears

So, instead of looking like this: “ORJI” our process looked more like this: “oRJI”

Having said that, not surprisingly, staying in Observation is hard. When problems are pressing, emotions can work in opposition to rational thought, often wanting to take over at the most inadvisable times.

So, here are a few thoughts about how we might delay a move to action long enough to establish that the information we are working with is accurate.

Gather factual data about the nature and scope of the problem

This means suspending our feelings about what’s going on long enough to get some solid information.

Ask questions and, when finished asking, ask some more.

If the problem is particularly perplexing it’s important to go deeper and wider asking questions of people who are, or will be, affected by it.

Determine what we might be assuming about the situation and the people involved in it.

Giving some time to validating our assumptions is never a waste.  Assumptions almost always hinder the process of getting at the true nature of a problem.

Make room for dissenting views.

This is simply about listening to every voice, be it soft or loud. And, often it is the dissenting view that holds the clue to a solution.

=========================================================

I guess the bottom line is this. We are always going to experience problems.  Spending a little more time in “O”bservation will help us to address them in a way that provides the best chance of coming up with the best solution.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

================================================================

I’ve been thinking about change lately, mostly about what it is that separates a person who seems to be able to influence change in a positive direction, from a person who might have the authority and the technical skill to do the work, but seems unable to pull it off.

The word credibility comes to mind.  The Thesaurus suggests that credibility is synonymous with trustworthiness, integrity and sincerity. I think that if these basic values are present, the chances of arousing the interest and respect of other people are pretty good. And, I believe too, that change agents come in many forms, manifest themselves in a variety of ways and at a variety of levels.

Thinking about that reinforces for me, the notion that it is credibility not title, position, role or authority that makes the difference between an effective change agent and an ineffective one.

So, if you are with me so far, the big question seems to be ” How do I prove my credibility to others?”

Here’s what I think it takes to earn credibility:

I do what I say I’m going to do… and I do it, when I say I’m going to do it.

Reliability is an important ingredient in establishing credibility.

There’s nothing more infuriating or counter-productive, than when someone makes a commitment to do something and then fails to follow through.

I represent myself honestly and do my best to be candid and open with my colleagues and bosses.

I think that to gain credibility with others we must simply find the courage and confidence to be ourselves and make our contributions without pretense or bravado.

I show that I’m open to learning and trying new things

Nothing puts holes in our credibility more than conveying the impression that we have all the answers. And, it is arrogant to think that we can influence change in others without feeling the need to change something in ourselves as well.

After all, change is a learning experience in itself. If we believe that it is for everyone but us, we are likely not asking the right questions, enough questions, or paying attention to what is going on around us.

I demonstrate respect for the experiences and knowledge of others.

One of the best ways to build credibility is to observe those who have gone before us and learn from their experiences.  If we want to be heard we must first listen.

When I challenge the status quo, I offer feasible and thoughtful alternatives.

To me, presenting a problem without considering a solution is not supporting change.  It is simply complaining.  This doesn’t mean that we have to have a solution for every problem.  But if we want to earn credibility, we have to consider not only the problem, but also the possibilities and questions that will stimulate further exploration.

I own up to being human and making mistakes. And, when I make mistakes, I apologize and then do my best to make amends.

Making excuses for the mistakes we make is simply unproductive and, well, not very attractive either. In general, we do not adversely affect our credibility when we make mistakes. We adversely affect our credibility when we try to cover them up, rationalize them away, blame them on someone else or otherwise pretend  they didn’t happen.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

I think this week’s post kind of speaks to that.

============================================================

In leadership, one of the things we are always being reminded of is the importance of delegation, and with good reason. It not only ensures an even distribution of work and authority, it also provides important opportunities for individual exploration and growth.  I expect we can all agree on that.

However, there are times when leaders, regardless of their level in an organization, have to rely on their strength of character to call upon the backbone and take charge.

So here are some situations where I think delegation is not an option:

• When you have to deliver bad news or make a change that you know will not be well received.

Let’s face it, everyone likes to be popular but leadership is not about popularity.  It involves making tough decisions, sometimes decisions that affect jobs and the futures of those who do them. It means not only delivering tough messages personally but also staying around to respond to difficult questions and participating in the process of making hard and sometimes upsetting transitions.

• When the objectives of an assignment are unclear or people don’t have the tools they need to get the job done.

Delegating an assignment that is not well thought out or does not include the tools necessary for implementation is pretty much guaranteeing failure. And, it does little for the people charged with carrying it out, apart from adding to their frustration level.

It is the leader’s job to ensure clarity around what is to be achieved and to provide the resources necessary to promote success. Turning a concept into an assignment while it is still in its formative stage makes everyone’s job harder.

• When something goes wrong that affects the entire department or company

So let’s say that things are motoring along nicely in your domain.  People are attending to their responsibilities and you are delegating assignments in accordance with your knowledge of their capabilities. Great.

And then, something goes wrong. Someone makes a big mistake that reverberates beyond your sphere of control, affecting other areas of the organization and its reputation.

While you might have delegated the work assignment, the responsibility for the outcome of it rests with you.  That’s why you get paid the big bucks, as they say. It is your job to find out specifically what went wrong and why.  It is your job to work with the person or people involved in bringing the mistake about and taking whatever corrective action is deemed appropriate. And, you are the one that must be accountable. ‘Nuff said.

• When you are trying something new and the risk of failure is high

In any enterprise, innovation is crucial to growth and sustainability.  As such, risk is an inherent part of business life.  If a project being contemplated carries with it a high risk/reward ratio, it also requires full involvement by the leader. To some extent, this will mitigate the risk and send the message that, while you asking others to “go where no man has gone before” you will be right there with them, to share in the glory…or the blame.

People often say that leadership is not for the faint of heart.  I have described only four situations where a leader must stand up and be counted.  There are no doubt countless others.

What comes to mind for you?