Trust - A Leadership Cornerstone

Most of us in leadership positions expect or need to have confidence in the abilities of those that work with or for us.  We want to trust that our subordinates have the skills and abilities to perform their duties capably if not at an exceptional level.  Even more importantly we endeavor to be assured that our team members are committed to our shared objectives, will in fact put forward their best efforts, and will communicate with us honestly about their achievements and challenges.  There are a whole lot of assumptions built into this little vignette - that we have properly defined the jobs we have hired peopled into, that our expectations are clear, that our hiring process are robust enough to pick the best candidates, etc. - but fundamentally, we believe that once we have hired on a subordinate that they can be trusted to perform.

But how does your leadership build - or destroy - that expectation of trust on your team?  I suggest that the performance you are getting and the trust that exists within a team is largely based on the example you set and the environment you create as a leader.

Patrick Lencioni identifies trust or the lack of trust as the fundamental building block of team performance - good or bad.  He suggests that truly great teams have a high level of trust that allows them to be comfortable with one another, to be able to admit their individual weaknesses and mistakes, to be able to confront without fear the weaknesses of the team, and ultimately have open, unguarded communication.  Without that level of trust, the team underperforms as it lacks the ability to engage in constructive conflict, lacks commitment to common goals, is unaccountable for individual or team performance, and ultimately fails to achieve results.

Lencioni's perspective on trust is a deeper concept than most of us as leaders typically define for ourselves and our teams.  Too many of us believe that commitment, accountability and results are simply the result of a transactional equation - I Pay You and You Do What I Want/Need.  Failure to achieve (sometimes ill-defined expectations) means that you lose a bonus opportunity or run the risk of being fired outright.  No touchy feely approach to leadership and accountability for you!

In my view, as I believe with Lencioni's perspective and that of other leadership gurus, this basic equation of trust and accountability far too easily lets individual leaders off the hook for setting the stage for a trust-based environment and for the the level of results obtained as a result.  One of the fundamental principles that Lencioni espouses in this regard is that there must be leadership by example.  The leader must show the way by demonstrating vulnerability, being prepared to admit weaknesses and mistakes, and thus sets the stage for the team to do the same and creating an opportunity for honest assessment, improvement opportunities, and better performance.

I suspect that for most of us that definitely smells too "new age" and akin to sitting around the campfire singing Kumbaya.  So let me give you some very specific and tangible steps to help you - as a leader - build trust within your team.  First, start with setting very clear expectations for individual and team performance.  Simple to say and yet almost unfailingly difficult to operationalize.  Without specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-limited objectives and expectations most team members will be tentative in their efforts and guarded in their communications not knowing or trusting as to whether they can meet their leader's expectations.  Expectations must not only be clear for the individual team member but the leader too must explicitly define expectations for themselves that are visible to the rest of the team.

Second, there must be demonstrated commitment on the part of the leader to working towards achieving these expectations.  At a basic level this is the integrity check, walking the talk, having your leadership actions match your leadership rhetoric.  Too often team members are accustomed to developing a perspective on their leaders more like "Do as I say, not as I do."  Your leadership actions and words must be aligned.  The leader must similarly demonstrate commitment to the achievement of team objectives through resource allocation, time management (e.g., priority setting) and recognition of results.  Failure to do so is the surest way to diminish trust and attendant effort.

Third, communication must be ever present - at the beginning of the team-building and expectation setting process, as progress is made towards goals, as barriers to success are encountered, as environmental circumstances change and as success is achieved.  This is not about micro-managing.  Rather, this is about maintaining two-way, open communication, ensuring clarification of expectations, supporting efforts as required, encouraging, and redirecting as necessary.  Communication in this regard can be compared to the feedback we get from our car's dashboard - speed, distance, fluid levels, warning lights - all of which give us confidence as to appropriate progress towards our final destination.

Finally, building trust with the leader and within the team is also being clear about consequences related to both good and bad performance.  This closes the loop on expectation setting discussed earlier.  Ultimately the leader is the enforcer, referee, and ultimate arbiter on performance standards.  If, as a leader, you fail to appropriately award or discipline team members - and self - based on results or adherence to agreed-upon team norms then the trust that you might have worked so hard to establish can be erased in an instance.  The standard of performance you pass by is the standard of performance that you accept.  The consequences and the standards of performance become the pre-established and transparent benchmarks against which decisions are made.  There is no "nice" or "mean" about it.  It just is.  This helps support consistency and supports decision-making on the part of the leader.

One last piece of advice in this regard.  Creating an environment of trust is not a one-off event.  If you haven't already come to this conclusion from the discourse above let me emphasize that the effort you make in creating a trust-based (and high-performing) environment requires steady effort and energy.  It's very much like building up your personal line of credit with your financial institution.  Small steps every day that can be negatively impacted with one default, large or small.  If you've built up a decent level of trust and admit to your mistakes and weaknesses you are certainly more likely to whether any small or short-term setback.

Leadership by example creates the trust you've been looking for and expecting all along. 
______________________________

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.

Toxic Leadership - Part Two

Just over a month ago I published a post entitled "Toxic Leadership". At the end of that post the question of not just simply identifying a toxic leader but effectively working or managing in such an environment was left open.  The article that I drew from at the time seemed to imply that the only effective strategy in dealing with a toxic boss was to simply cope with that reality.  A less polished way to put it would be "suck it up buttercup."

So I put it to you - the reader of this blog - to ponder alternatives to managing a toxic leader and surviving the personal angst and chaos that ensues.  Unfortunately, even with time and discussion and feedback what came back to me were two relatively harsh alternatives.  The first commonly stated alternative was in fact to merely accept this as an inevitable consequence of a working life.  In this harsh assessment it is clear that those who shared their thoughts (or despair) with me were not alone.  Gallup research seems to consistently bear out a common theme of poor leadership and lack of engagement of staff in literally all industries.  Common terminology used to describe such poor leaders includes - self-oriented, stubborn, overly demanding, and impulsive.

The second most common response I received back was that the (best/only) way to manage a toxic leader was to accept defeat and move on to another role in another part of the organization or to leave altogether.  The challenge with that alternative goes directly back to the Gallup research just noted above.  Most industries, sectors, and companies all seem to suffer from poor leaders.  So you might just be moving from the frying pan to the fire in your attempt to escape a bad situation.

I did get some other insights from my readers and I've expanded upon those kernels below.  Perhaps these are more practical then simply resorting to the alternatives of self-suppression and flight noted above.  The first solid piece of advice to provide is to clearly understand yourself.  While that may seem like an odd place to start when trying to think about dealing with a bad boss it's crucial in making sure you know what's important to you and what your boundaries are.  What this understanding of self positions you to do is more effectively pick your battles.  You can then better evaluate whether a "compromise" is morally and ethically defeating versus simply being annoying and inconvenient.  Essentially you can determine which one of the options for coping - management or flight is the best option.

It was also clear from the responses I received that while I might have focused on the more malicious type of leader in my first post, a number of you are dealing with a different varieties of poor leaders.   Hence you have some specific "solutions" to provide in that context.  The broader array of poor leadership included the micro-manager (short on vision, long on telling you how to do "everything"), the grand visionary (long on vision, unable to comprehend or frustrated by the work required to achieve the vision), the "analyst" and risk manager (every contingency and piece of data mapped out), the self-centred leader (it is all about me) and finally the truly incompetent leader (
More than a few of us have dealt with a leader who is short on "vision" but long on the ability to fixate on the smallest detail of any initiative.  The result for you is a high degree of frustration at best or intense feelings of inadequacy at worst. 

While these are all very different types of scenarios and leaders there are some common techniques and strategies by which you can perhaps more effectively manage - and perhaps even succeed - in these environments:

• Be prepared.  Unfortunately you are going to have to put in more time into this "relationship" than your boss will.  Regardless of what type of bad boss you have none of them have as much at stake as you do.  Understand yourself and your boundaries, prepare in advance for each meeting, and map a plan/objectives for each meeting or initiative.  As a leader yourself you can manage the relationship.  In some ways it's important to think of your boss as your most important customer.
• Don't assume.  As a corollary to "Be Prepared" don't make the mistake of assuming anything about what your boss will want, knows, expects or will do.  In any of these scenarios you don't have the luxury of not planning for or anticipating a variety of circumstances.  Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
• Don't try to be right.  This is a hard one to swallow but in the "battle" you're in you are going to have to decided whether you want to be right or get the right thing done.  They are not necessarily the same thing.  Be clear about your ultimate goal for the particular project or initiative and be prepared to alter tactics to ensure success.
• Understand your boss.  I found with one of my worst bosses that I really had to make an effort to get into his head.  I certainly would never lead the way he did, but I did try to anticipate what might set him off (e.g., one too many chairs for the Board meeting!) and resigned myself to many agonizing minutes of silence as he "visioned" the next big thing.  This meant being disciplined in my work habits and approach.  I also tried to emulate his language.  Explaining things my way was not as successful as explaining things his way.
• Support your boss.  Several of my readers reflected on a boss who has clearly been promoted too quickly, had an awesome interview that belied a lack of substance, or was the best of a bunch of poor candidates.  Now what?  For most of us, if we are committed to our organization, our staff or our customers, it means we do our level best to deliver great service regardless or in spite of the leadership handicap we labor under.  Our satisfaction comes from succeeding despite that handicap.
• Engage a team.  Most times, despite the strength and validity of your arguments, the strength of your position, or even your own personal credibility and history as a leader you won't be in a position to effectively counter a poor leader one-on-one.  You may need to engage like-minded allies.  I'm not suggesting fostering a mutiny.  That's a dangerous road.  Rather, you need more than one voice offering alternatives, respectfully questioning direction or decisions, and otherwise offering other solutions.  If you become the lone voice within you could soon be the lost voice without.

It often takes more energy and effort to lead up than it takes to lead a team of subordinates.  Your team has less choice about whether to follow you.  This is also true of a CEO who is trying to work with a Board of Directors, a Board Chair or a group of shareholders.  Leadership is not just about working with those who recognize your authority because you are one or more levels up the ladder from them.  Leadership is also about how you can manage others above you.

Success in managing a poor leader takes a lot more strength, discipline and emotional maturity than feels reasonable but it can be a harsh reality.  I certainly can't say that I've always passed my own personal tests but then continuous learning and growth should always be part of what being an effective leader is all about.
______________________________

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.