More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
January 16 - January 21, 2022
“If you could get all the people in an organization rowing in the same direction, you could dominate any industry, in any market, against any competition, at any time.”
She then asked everyone to spend five minutes deciding what they believed were their single biggest strength and weakness in terms of their contribution to DecisionTech's success or failure. “I don't want you to give me some generic weakness, and I don't want you glossing over your strengths because you're too modest or embarrassed to tell us what you think you're really good at. Take this simple exercise seriously, and be willing to put yourself out there.”
You see, we are going to make our collective results as important as the score at a football game. We aren’t going to leave any room for interpretation when it comes to our success, because that only creates the opportunity for individual ego to sneak in.”
“No. But I’m sure that Mikey can. I can tell you what our product development dates are, though.” “Okay. Then just tell me how we did in terms of public relations activity?” She directed the question at Martin again, making it clear that he ought to know the answer. He seemed puzzled. “Hell, I don’t know. I assume that Jeff and Mikey talk about that stuff. But I’m also assuming that we didn’t do very well, given our sales numbers.”
Seeing that they weren’t going to cede the obvious point easily, Kathryn decided to shift back toward a more questioning approach. “How often did you all talk about moving resources from one department to another in the middle of the quarter in order to make sure that you could achieve a goal that was in jeopardy?”
“Politics is when people choose their words and actions based on how they want others to react rather than based on what they really think.”
“If we don’t trust one another, then we aren’t going to engage in open, constructive, ideological conflict. And we’ll just continue to preserve a sense of artificial harmony.”
Kathryn was ready for the reaction. “I’m talking about committing to a plan or a decision, and getting everyone to clearly buy in to it. That’s why conflict is so important.” As smart as he was, Martin was not afraid to admit his confusion. “I don’t get it.”
“Consensus is horrible. I mean, if everyone really agrees on something and consensus comes about quickly and naturally, well that’s terrific. But that isn’t how it usually works, and so consensus becomes an attempt to please everyone.”
“Someone tell me what the single most important arena or setting for conflict is.” After a pause, Nick took a stab. “Meetings?” “Yes. Meetings. If we cannot learn to engage in productive, ideological conflict during meetings, we are through.” Jan smiled. “And I’m not joking when I say that. Our ability to engage in passionate, unfiltered debate about what we need to do to succeed will determine our future as much as any products we develop or partnerships we sign.”
“Let me assure you that from now on, every staff meeting we have will be loaded with conflict. And they won’t be boring. And if there is nothing worth debating, then we won’t have a meeting.”
I will be encouraging conflict, driving for clear commitments, and expecting all of you to hold each other accountable. I will be calling out bad behavior when I see it, and I’d like to see you doing the same. We don’t have time to waste.”
“No, trust is not the same as assuming everyone is on the same page as you, and that they don’t need to be pushed. Trust is knowing that when a team member does push you, they’re doing it because they care about the team.”
That means everyone here will be interviewing candidates and pushing to find someone who can demonstrate trust, engage in conflict, commit to group decisions, hold their peers accountable, and focus on the results of the team, not their own ego.”
“You are fighting. But about issues. That's your job. Otherwise, you leave it to your people to try to solve problems that they can't solve. They want you to hash this stuff out so they can get clear direction from us.”
They trust one another. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas. They commit to decisions and plans of action. They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans. They focus on the achievement of collective results. If this sounds simple, it's because it is simple, at least in theory. In practice, however, it is extremely difficult because it requires levels of discipline and persistence that few teams can muster.
Unfortunately, vulnerability-based trust cannot be achieved overnight. It requires shared experiences over time, multiple instances of follow-through and credibility, and an in-depth understanding of the unique attributes of team members.
Team Effectiveness Exercise This exercise is more rigorous and relevant than the previous one, but may involve more risk. It requires team members to identify the single most important contribution that each of their peers makes to the team, as well as the one area that they must either improve upon or eliminate for the good of the team. All members then report their responses, focusing on one person at a time, usually beginning with the team leader.
But teams that engage in productive conflict know that the only purpose is to produce the best possible solution in the shortest period of time. They discuss and resolve issues more quickly and completely than others, and they emerge from heated debates with no residual feelings or collateral damage, but with an eagerness and readiness to take on the next important issue.
It is also ironic that so many people avoid conflict in the name of efficiency, because healthy conflict is actually a time saver. Contrary to the notion that teams waste time and energy arguing, those that avoid conflict actually doom themselves to revisiting issues again and again without resolution.
That's because they understand the old military axiom that a decision is better than no decision. They also realize that it is better to make a decision boldly and be wrong—and then change direction with equal boldness—than it is to waffle.
Regardless of whether it is caused by the need for consensus or certainty, it is important to understand that one of the greatest consequences for an executive team that does not commit to clear decisions is unresolvable discord deeper in the organization.
The worst enemy of a team that is susceptible to this dysfunction is ambiguity, and timing is one of the most critical factors that must be made clear. What is more, committing to deadlines for intermediate decisions and milestones is just as important as final deadlines, because it ensures that misalignment among team members is identified and addressed before the costs are too great.
In emergency services professions like these, team members live and work together, developing bonds of trust that only families can rival.
