Sunday, March 15, 2015

Do the Facts Speak?

In the middle of last year I was fortunate enough to renew acquaintances with some business associates in the US.  As part of developing a partnership with the firm I was invited down to one of their regional customer summits which in this case was being held in Las Vegas.  The location is somewhat irrelevant as I suspect that some of my experiences could have been similar regardless of location in North America.  One of the more interesting experiences I had was with a cab driver who seemed to come directly out of some past episode of the X-Files - The Truth is Out There! and government is hell bent on one form of deception or manipulation or another.  One of the more prominent subjects on our all too long ride from airport to hotel that day was how Ebola was mutating into an airborne virus and how, when combined with illegal immigration, it was going to bring the nation to the zombie apocalypse.

Fast forward to the March 2015 issue of National Geographic and the cover story about "The War on Science".  Pick your favorite subject and this issue touches on it - vaccines and autism, evolution versus creationism, climate change or not.  Aside from the fascinating reality we live in of such strongly held views it got me thinking about how these types of mindsets play out in our leadership forums on a day-to-day basis.  No less than in the large scientific "debates" of today, business leaders often tout their reliance on the "facts" and the "evidence" to drive their business decisions.  Just as often, however, as we Monday morning quarterbacks dissect another failed business venture it is clear that facts were mostly ignored and even actively suppressed as the cliff of doom rapidly approached.

What makes highly educated, experienced and qualified business leaders, Presidents and CEO's hold on to directions, decisions and initiatives that are clearly unsupported by facts and evidence?  They often tout their reliance on the "hard cold facts" as the cornerstones of their leadership.  One of my takeaways from the National Geographic article is that all too often rather than continuing to be open to the "facts" or new evidence, leaders become personally entrenched and invested in a position.  This positional stance is only enhanced or strengthened when it comes under attack from someone else with whom they don't identify or believe is personally antagonistic to them.  The choice to change or be open to the evidence becomes confused by the fact that they feel personally under attack and become resistant to giving into the evidence being presented by others whom they don't like or can't respect - board members, executive team members, external advisers.  Ego is an Achilles heel of many a leader.

What about being open to new perspectives and evidence brought forward by one's team?  Surely our team, with whom we go to battle every day, is respected and trusted enough to help move our position and thus help the leader and the organization avoid an embarrassing or even a catastrophic failure?  Perhaps, but as the National Geographic article points out in respect of believing in science fact or not, a stronger impetus may be at play which prevents individual team members from bringing new information to light or supporting new perspectives.  At the end of the day, members of an executive team have powerful inducements - both tangible and intangible - to remain and be seen as strong members of the "tribe".  In the short-term in particular, there is often no up-side to disagreeing with a strongly held belief of the leader and far more disagreeable downside related to being "outside of the circle of trust".  Keep your head down, maybe the worst won't happen, maybe the leader will figure it out before it's too late, and at the end of the day maybe I'll escape any negative consequences in any event.

One final insight on why it's so hard to get the evidence and facts to speak.  While we may consider ourselves to be rational beings it is far more likely that we are going to be persuaded to a course of action or a change in direction by  charismatic appeal than through a balance sheet.  Some of history's most effective leaders have never been much bothered by the facts but they sure could ignite action through their own passionate commitment to a cause (however misguided).

As for the rest of us we have to decide whether the tribe is more important than the truth or whether the truth is more important than the tribe.  In either case there may be a price to pay.  Nobody said leadership was easy.  Leadership - good leadership - is about making hard choices, staying humble and being able to admit to and learn from mistakes.  It's about being open to the facts and the evidence.  It's about being open to change.

Do the facts speak to you?
______________________________

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.

No comments:

Post a Comment