Lead with trust, #2

Note: as my blog’s address hints, I do not believe there’s a right or wrong way; one can achieve great satisfaction and results while still being a jerk. For me personally, the path below works best.

Being the father of little children, I’m regularly presented with the dilemma of when to go with the fast path. Basically, your child wants to eat/do/play with something which you disapprove of. The methodical path typically involves explaining your objection, and laying out the reason behind it – not always trivial with a 2 year old. The fast path is anywhere between granting the wish and saying “we’ll do it later/tomorrow”, or using some distraction to “just get on with it”.

I hope that I consistently choose the methodical path.

Managing others frequently raises a similar dilemma: what to do when one of your employees ask a tough question, or when you have to deliver potential not-so-great news? There are many such cases:

  • Promotions. If your employee’s not promoted since he just doesn’t make the cut yet, wouldn’t telling him that demotivate him? You can just say there were not many promotions this year, or that politics got in the way.

  • Salary and bonuses. Employees aren’t expected to discuss their salaries with each other. Therefore, you don’t have to straight-out tell them they’re getting the smallest bonus this year, or that the actual meritocratic factor ends up being that the top performer gets only 10% than the bottom one.

My experience is that choosing the fast path ends up having a detrimental long-term impact, mainly due to the following:

  • While the methodical path of having the hard conversation up-front requires more effort and may be more stressful, it is the only one providing a real long-term path forward for both the employee and the team.

  • People know more than you think. Grades, salaries and bonuses are common knowledge, and people will quickly cross-reference and figure out your bluff; I have seen this happen time and again.

  • This approach does not scale. If your manager and his manager are doing the same thing, it becomes impossible to build a robust organization; especially in engineering, where nature does not conform to anything accurate data and truth.

  • Avoiding the hard discussions lets you avoid/delay tough calls, which ends up damaging the long-term business.

The trust of your people and partners is a strength multiplier, and will propel you together forward during the worst and best times.
The above examples typically happen once or twice a year, but the chance to be honest and fair.

Be honest, consistent and fair with your people.
If nothing else, you’ll get a good night’s sleep.

Cheers,

Yair

Lead with trust #1

Most people tend to avoid conflict.

As a manager, this means the inputs you’re getting may be skewed, typically towards the best possible interpretation.
This is especially true for personal inputs – how people perceive you and your leadership.

A few tools to help mitigate this:

1. Give less weight to positive feedback/news. “We have it working” may mean only the first test is passing. “Overall, our company is great” may mean the person has specific points in mind where it is not.

2. Give more weight to negative feedback/news. “I think we may have a problem in my feature X, still investigating” may imply there’s already a significant concern this is a big issue. “There’s something small that’s troubling me” typically means it’s already large enough to warrant an uncomfortable discussion with one’s manager.

3. Build trust. More than anything else, people will provide more accurate information the safer they feel. you, as a manager, have their best interest at heart. That will allow them to move from trying to present themselves in the best possible light, to sharing their most honest feedback.

4. Dig deeper. Make sure you understand the feedback given to you in detail by asking for details and examples. This will help you create an informed opinion about how great/no-so-great things actually are.

Cheers,

Yair