What do you do when tough, complex challenges are in front of you, and the pressure is increasing to resolve them? Your supply chain is unpredictable at best, inflation is eroding margins, the new drug you are developing did not pass the most recent trial, you are worried about a recession, and your team wants to continue to work from home despite signals of waning productivity.
Issues like these have plagued leaders for some time, but especially in the past twelve to eighteen months given the challenges of the external environment. The COVID pandemic has brought about immense changes and challenges for organizations, and these challenges are lingering today. Leaders are running out of ideas to address them, yet pressure to perform continues to build.
These are the exact conditions that require leadership to do something! And that something must be new and different so that you can get different results. You are being called to act!
One pattern I see among many leaders when faced with this call to action is to exert more control. Their thinking includes snippets like this:
We must have underperforming people because we are not making the results we expect.
The people in R&D (or procurement or IT or…..choose your function) must not have a handle on the situation or we wouldn’t have these challenges.
People just want to work from home so they don’t have to work eight hours a day.
People are not being held accountable for their results.
The underlying belief is: “People are not doing what they should do and/or are not committed to the company results. Since I am doing what is needed, and am committed, the only way to fix this is to push harder and control more.”
That control is exerted in many ways. For example, some companies are returning to forced distributions in performance management so that the underperformers are identified and action is taken. Other companies are requiring a return to office with no flexibility, so they can keep a closer eye on employees. And in other situations, leaders are diving much more deeply into the “what” and “how” people are accomplishing work (micromanaging) so that they can make sure it is being done right.
The tendency to control when under pressure is understandable: a leader has often walked in the shoes of their employees and succeeded, so clearly they must know what to do. And, if the employees are not successful, neither will the leader be. Pressure and accountability are high, so controlling feels like a low-risk way to make things better.
The challenge, however, is that the underlying belief that “people” are underperforming, and the associated action to root out all underperformers has the unintended consequence of disengaging those who ARE doing well. Let’s assume for a moment that 20% of your employees are underperformers and not meeting the expectations of their role. This means 80% are meeting or exceeding expectations. When a company institutes a forced distribution in performance management and/or monitors that everyone is in the office during work hours and/or a boss begins to micromanage – what happens to this 80%? At best, they become very cautious to make sure they are doing what you want and tell them to do (even if they may know more about their particular area than you do). This caution, however, results in a lack of initiative and proactivity on their part. More likely, they totally disengage, “quiet quit”, or leave because they don’t feel valued and trusted. The tendency to control in order to “fix” problems ends up creating even more problems.
There is an alternative to control: Lead so you engage. Ignite the 80% in new and different ways to inspire them to give their all in solving the problems with you. Invite them into the process by being transparent about challenges, allowing them to partner with you to address them, encouraging them to set ambitious/stretch goals, and creating a culture of shared accountability. Definitely still tackle the challenges associated with the 20% who are underperformers, but don’t do it at the expense of the 80% who can help you achieve what you want to achieve.
Do you trust yourself enough as a leader to focus on engagement rather than control? If not, what will it take to get you there?
In future blogs I will address more about engagement. But for this one, I encourage you to reflect on what you do under pressure. If you tend to jump to control, take the opportunity to acknowledge the downsides of that approach.
Comments