Earlier this month Alberta underwent one of its infamous generational changes in government. A new NDP government was formed after 44 years of Progressive Conservative government who had in turn ousted a Social Credit dynasty that had been in place for decades before. In fact, Alberta has only had 5 governing parties hold power since coming into being since 1905. When Alberta holds to a party it holds on to them for a long time. Similarly, when a party is ousted from power it goes into political oblivion. To this date - with the jury currently out on the Progressive Conservatives - no party has ever returned to power, and two have been wiped away completely never to return.
Leading up to this transition in power and since, the level of hyperbole from some commentators, business people, federal politicians and Joe Q Public in respect of the transition from a "conservative" government to a "socialist" government has been extraordinary. Dire predictions have been made of wholesale cancellation of oil and building projects, flight of capital, and departure of major segments of our population. The province has now even been referred to as Albertastan in some quarters.
The predictions and prognostications were so over-the-top as to cause others to worry about creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Concern developed that continued negative commentary would start to make too many believe that now was the time to pull up stakes or freeze further commitments with the result that the provincial economy - already dealing with a precipitous drop in oil prices - would in fact slip into recession or worse. A group of five prominent Alberta businessmen (sometimes derogatorily referred to as the "Monopoly Men") in particular warned of the consequences to Alberta's competitive advantage if the "socialists" were voted to power.
In my time as a manager/leader starting some twenty-five years ago,
I've had the opportunity to work with and observe many leaders,
managers and staff. They have all helped me grow and develop my own
leadership philosophy and style. Sometimes I've learned great tools and
techniques from them as they have navigated normal and not so normal
situations. But there have been just as many opportunities - and maybe
more - where the lesson learned has been "I'll never do that!"
One
of the areas of greatest learning has been in the experience of seeing
how managers and leaders react to "adverse" events. Those events have
covered a spectrum of circumstances - poor (to deadly) service to
clients, the out-of-the-blue call from a prominent political leader
looking for action, a staff crisis, a building or equipment malfunction
impacting service delivery, or media showing up without warning at your
doorstep. The set of circumstances is largely irrelevant other than in trying to convey that something bad has happened that
needs to be addressed. More importantly for me, is the range of
leadership reactions these situations have engendered - which has been
nothing short of extraordinary, educational and (in a perverse sort of
way) highly entertaining.
For
the intent of this blog and to highlight my point, I am going to focus
on what I consider to be the negative side of these reactions. In many
cases, I write from direct experience or have otherwise observed the
leadership response as it has unfolded. Namely, a leadership reaction
that actually
becomes part of or creates the crisis it purports to want to avoid or manage. Rather than providing stability, strength and vision through a challenging time, some leaders react with fear, panic and threats. All too often the reaction is far more a testament to their true skill level or fear of lost alliances and entitlements enjoyed in "better" times.
All too often, and for too many in leadership positions, there is a tendency to lose one's head during a real or
perceived
crisis. I emphasize perceived because I believe that in
many situations leaders may overplay a set of circumstances and never
step back for long enough to evaluate whether in fact there is a real
crisis in need of management. Up-front evaluation is an important first
step. Otherwise you are going to be expending a lot of unnecessary
time and energy that probably could be put to better use.
Beyond
this initial evaluation, it appears that for some leaders running
around, crying out that the proverbial sky is falling is somehow an
effective way of ensuring that immediate, decisive and
effective action
is taken. That's where I believe some leaders miss the point about
what effective leadership is and should be about. Too many react to a
negative scenario by confusing
immediate action or any action with
effective
action. They seem to believe that only by providing an immediate
response in a situation will they be perceived as being in control,
responsible and competent. The reality is often far different. More
often the sense they convey to staff and others around them is that they
are in panic mode. Rather than being a leader that manages the
situation their reaction more often generates fear, stress and anxiety
to everyone unfortunate to be caught up in the vortex of activity.
Aside
from the mental distress that the leader is subjecting themselves and
their team to, a "decisive" yet hasty reaction is just as likely (or
more likely) to lead to the wrong decision as to the right one. In most
situations we rarely have 100% perfect information. In crisis
situations this is even more the case. Therefore, crisis demands
disciplined leadership, an ability to remain calm, and the strength to
keep yourself and your team focused in order to solve the problem at
hand. In my experience, panic and performance excellence rarely go
together. A panicked reaction can often lead to more problems to solve.
A leader
in crisis (versus a leader who manages through crisis) also creates
a number of other negative impacts that may not be understood at the
time or even later. First, in your haste to make a decision, you many
not even be solving the right problem but merely papering over
symptoms. Second, by making a hasty decision you may inadvertently
compromise your ability to achieve other more important objectives.
Third, rather than creating an effective and productive team you are
more likely creating fear, reduced productivity, risk aversion and
indecisiveness amongst your staff. Ultimately, you are also doing
damage to the perception of your leadership capacity - you are not
creating an image of a confident and competent leader amongst your team,
peers, superiors, or other stakeholders that can be looked to for
strength in times of challenge.
So
Keep Calm and Carry On! I'm convinced that we don't see or experience
as many crisis situations as we think we do. Take the appropriate time
to assess the situation. And even when you do experience a true
crisis, taking a deep breath before taking action is still a good tactic
and a sign of confident, disciplined leader. Your reaction will calm
others, help them focus on doing the right things, and ensure
understanding of all impacts of your actions. I'm convinced that by
taking a more measured and less panicked approach that you will make
better decisions and the confidence in your leadership will be enhanced.
Leadership excellence means more poise and less panic.
______________________________
Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca
Helping
leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve
their potential through the application of my leadership experience and
coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients.
I AM their Force Multiplier.
