Managers and people in leadership positions are only strong when it comes to encouraging, but not when it comes to demanding. Let’s find and implement ways to change this and create a culture of positive performance community.
Not everyone who leads is a manager. Managers are usually equipped with authority to issue instructions, but not always. In many organisations, for example, there are team leaders and supervisors, but only one of these roles has authority to issue instructions. In matrix organisations, it may also be the case that both roles have authority to issue instructions. In this case, a person has two superiors, depending on the structure of the matrix, for example, one for a specialist topic and one for a field or area.
However, many people who have leadership responsibilities in their jobs do not have authority to issue instructions. For example, a project manager must lead their sub-project managers and also manage cross-project stakeholders, i.e. maintain interactions with them, “pick up” on their expectations, etc. So let’s take the term leadership not as a disciplinary task, but rather in its literal sense.
But what is expected of someone who is supposed to lead other people? Let’s break away from our usual working day for a moment to get our creativity going.
For example, when we book a city tour, we want someone to guide us through the city. If this tour guide only cared about how we were doing, whether we were wearing the right clothes, whether we had enough drinks with us, then this tour guide would take good care of us. She would encourage us to have the best experience possible on the city tour.
But would she also challenge us? What do we expect from a city guide who challenges us? For example, she could ask us what we expect from the city tour, whether we value culture more or architecture more. She could suggest different routes, which we could then book according to our preferences. And above all, she would offer us guidance: she would lead us through the city, we would see which route we were taking, what we wanted to achieve and could achieve on the tour, what we wanted to see, what we wanted to experience… and we would go along with it. We would not just be there, we would be right in the middle of it. We would become an active part of the group. We would not just walk along, we would ask questions and make suggestions.
Then another dynamic comes into play: we don’t experience the tour alone, but together with other people. For example, if we go on a tour through the mountains, the mountain guide will instruct us to help each other, and we will agree at the beginning who has to do what and when. The equipment will be checked. The mountain guide will challenge us, even urging us to reach the summit. She will point out where there will be obstacles and challenges, but that we will overcome them together. Because it is worth taking advantage of the unique opportunity to stand on the summit and enjoy the panorama, this unique moment that we then imagine, even anticipate.
She will then tell us where we should take breaks, how best to recover during the break, she will praise us after each milestone we reach, she will also point out risks, she will show us techniques to keep these risks at bay and successfully complete our stages (milestones) on the hike. If something extraordinary happens, she will intervene with all her experience. In emergency situations, she will act with the necessary urgency, giving quick instructions on who should do what and when. This will enable her to deal with the emergency situation quickly. For example, if someone has twisted their ankle or suffered a serious injury and mountain rescue is required, she will arrange for this. She will also prepare the group for this, and above all, the injured person.
These two examples of leadership make it clear to us what our task is in the everyday management of people. In one of my other articles, I described how leadership begins when two people want to accomplish something together. For every topic, for every aspect, one of the two takes the lead – usually the person who is most familiar with the topic.
So we can say that many people lead in different situations. And, of course, they support the people they lead. But do they also challenge them?
In my daily work with people and a wide variety of organisations, I am constantly struck by how uncomfortable many people are with demanding something from their fellow human beings.
Demanding a result. An action. Cooperation. The leader often does not demand any of this, but quietly expects that the others will do it on their own. After all, they are reasonable people. They have taken on a certain role and will want to fulfil that role, right? This is exactly wher ‘ leadership often fails. And by fails, I don’t mean that it fails forever, but that it fails at that precise moment on that precise day.
The person being led – perhaps a manager or an employee – thinks that she hasn’t managed it yet, or that she is struggling with the task. So the leader, e.g. a department or regional manager, thinks: “I have to ask what’s wrong with him, I have to support him (and the others), spur them on, I have to challenge them, I have to appeal to them.
This cycle repeats itself and often results in increasing overload for managers. Often, it is not because there are too many tasks to support and motivate others. Rather, it is because managers feel overwhelmed by having to constantly pay attention to others. Having to listen to complaints over and over again. Having to repeatedly counter the phrase, “That won’t work because…”. Having to constantly counter negativity with positivity.
This takes energy. A lot of energy. For some people, so much energy that they slowly burn out. By this I mean that they have fewer and fewer psychological and physiological reserves to fulfil their role with joy.
What can we do? We need to start talking again about how it is okay to demand things and results. That this is not asking too much of others, but is a matter of course. Because cooperation is about achieving something together, and that is why each of us depends on the others.
In my early years, I had a lot to do with employees who were suffering from overload or who found it difficult to meet demands. This still happens from time to time, which is why I would like to write about it in another article.
But today, I notice that the tide has increasingly turned: overload and excessive demands are now primarily occurring on the part of managers.
This is precisely for the reasons I mentioned above. People who are tasked with leading and guiding others, for example in a team, project group or department, to achieve project or annual goals together, are dependent on cooperation with others. However, the manager is responsible for ensuring that the entire group achieves its goals. And those who bear responsibility should also be equipped with the authority and competence not only to empower the group, but also to challenge it to achieve the expected results of the department or team.
This is precisely where the problem lies. At this point, managers increasingly feel overwhelmed. And their creativity suffers as a result. People who feel under such pressure that they believe they cannot fulfil their role or even believe that they are not good enough cannot achieve the mental freedom they need to fully develop their inner creativity.
Every day is a new opportunity to do what you want (Friedrich Schiller)
In workshops with a wide variety of managers in a wide variety of companies, it is possible to observe how team processes are restarted when managers are able to exchange ideas and develop possible solutions together without reservation and without restrictions on their thinking.
I repeatedly notice that blocked body postures give way to a more relaxed demeanour. Faces that previously showed signs of stress gradually soften into quiet smiles, and language becomes increasingly positive and constructive. The next steps arising from the conceptual work become more and more focused: clearer, more constructive and more positive.
When we talk openly and freely about what we can and want to achieve, not only with our heads but also with our hearts and all our emotions, we gain direction. We sense that certain actions and steps are simply necessary if we really want to realise our plans. That cooperation is indispensable and that the commitment of each individual is essential to this cooperation.
At this point, it is important not to settle for platitudes. Almost every brochure about initiatives and programmes in companies and organisations emphasises how effectively and positively everyone involved works together. This is certainly the case for many participants. But equally, I have noticed time and again in such programmes and projects, and of course also in line functions, departments, etc., that this is not at all the case for many participants. The commitment is simply not there.
Many people feel alienated from their job or their tasks. The daily pressure to earn the necessary income for their own lives and those of their families and other people also leads to certain instructions, programme objectives, activities and projects simply being accepted with a shrug of the shoulders. This attitude corresponds to an inner resignation when it comes to the extreme. Instead of commitment, this leads to disengagement. Instead of identification, it leads to alienation. Instead of joy in one’s own work and achievements, there is a feeling of being on a treadmill, e.g. in the form of enterprise software with thousands of tasks, also known as epics, tasks or issues in agile management. You are faced with more and more tasks to work through – and as soon as you make progress, the funnel fills up with more tasks – often in greater numbers and with greater complexity.
How do we get out of this? How can we get back to a place where we can all contribute our own strengths – the things we are passionate about doing – to achieve top results for the company or organisation?
This is where we come full circle. When managers or project managers feel comfortable demanding activities and results. When they recognise and understand that demanding is a matter of course, that employees are open to effective collaboration, and that we can therefore work together effectively, i.e. achieve positive results.
Not just finding solutions, but innovating, implementing and completing them
Once this has been established and a common understanding has been reached, opportunities arise to demand these contributions from each individual to the company, the project or the department. And that is something positive for everyone. It then becomes easy to ask about interim results and to explore together why these results may not have been achieved so far. To determine why mistakes were made, how to learn from these mistakes and how to do better. Without assigning blame. Without pillorying anyone. But through responsible cooperation. Through a mixture of demanding and encouraging.
All of this is then possible. And if it is possible, then it can be done. And if it can be done, then we do it. Hesitantly at first, taking small steps, testing the waters. After initial positive results, more and more intensively. And after an encouraging start, permanently: habits that have shown positive effects are increasingly repeated and finally internalised, i.e. used and implemented routinely on a daily basis.
What exactly am I talking about here? Depending on the corporate context, these can be very different things in technical terms. Methodologically, for example: a target agreement meeting that really deserves its name. Really agreeing on something and not just prescribing it. A review or – as it is called in agile terms – a retro, in which mistakes made and ways to improve the process are truly disclosed together. Without concealing mistakes or fear of blame. Without scepticism about what others might think of the suggestions.
Making a difference together – one of the fundamental motivations of human beings
Does that sound naive? I don’t think so. Of course, we could say that this is just the way the corporate world is today. What is said publicly often does not correspond to what actually happens in collaboration.
But we shouldn’t do that. We should focus on our direct reports, our direct employees, and ask ourselves how comfortable they feel about demanding interim results, openly discussing statuses, and not only writing down the necessary next steps, but also implementing and completing them with focus and energy.
We should encourage our managers to do just that. We should support them and regularly ask them what obstacles they have encountered in the implementation process and how they intend to overcome them. We should also keep an eye on how managers work together, because they often do not work as a team. On paper, they do, but in reality, everyone pursues their own responsibilities.
This often means missing out on opportunities to achieve a much greater impact together, for example through the creative collaboration described above, in order to find joint solutions and implement them rigorously. And the emphasis here is on implementation. After all, awareness of the challenges is often already widespread. But when it comes to investigating the causes, the first obstacles arise because, ultimately, no one wants to assign blame. Because people fear the possible consequences. Because they may also fear that the other person could perceive this as an attack and retaliate. None of this is written down anywhere. It is not said publicly. But it emerges when we talk openly about our obstacles and how we can overcome them.
Implementing solutions together – Jens Möller
Suppression does not help. What moves us forward is consistently addressing the cause of a problem and getting to the bottom of the issue. Then, working together to develop possible solutions that not only remedy the cause, but also find a new possibility, a new solution, where the cause cannot arise in the first place.
Because we can no longer stand still when it comes to fixing errors and weaknesses. In the age of artificial intelligence, we want – indeed, we must – constantly ask ourselves how we can use product and process innovations to render the former causes irrelevant. We need to move away from simply eliminating disruptive factors, errors, causes and so on, and instead move towards innovative processes, procedures, products and solutions that are new to us.
All of this requires trust. Because without trust, no one will open up and address where the causes really lie, where the blockages prevent people from doing what is necessary. To achieve the results we want to achieve. This trust can only be built if we have people in our organisation who take the first step and “take others with them” with their positive and constructive openness. This, too, is of course a management task.
Once we have built this trust, we need the courage, focus, freedom of thought and energy to consistently implement what is so clear to us in our minds.
We need the courage to argue with people on professional grounds and to be able to do so without fear of personal animosity – psychological security.
We need the focus to drive implementation forward in a concentrated manner with the mindset of completing the necessary tasks and actions instead of extending them indefinitely.
We need the mental freedom to find new, creative solutions, both alone and in collaboration with others – and also to find and pursue ways of implementation in order to achieve results. Because it is only from the results that we can really learn. To do better.
We need the energy to consistently implement the necessary steps and activities within clearly defined time frames and to move towards our expected results.
If you have read this far, then I have a big request for you:
Perhaps you are thinking, “There are many other aspects to this.” Perhaps you are also thinking, “How true, how true.” In any case, something is going through your mind right now. Don’t stop there. Keep going. Ask yourself now: What are the three most important tasks that I or we want to complete today in order to achieve our desired results?
Because we all have our habits. These have developed from actions repeated daily and we are often not even aware of them. In any case, it is our habits that are most likely to prevent us from doing what is necessary and which then give us the results we want.
We may have read something or watched a video on the subject, which has given us an understanding. The understanding that we cannot and do not want to continue like this. That we want and need to change something, at least if we want to achieve what we have set out to do.
This understanding is in our heads and perhaps even in our hearts. We associate something with it. We may even imagine what it would be like if we had already done what we now want to do.
Strength does not come from physical power, but from an indomitable will (Gandhi)
And this is exactly where our existing habits come into play. The working day begins and we find over 100 new emails in our inbox. Our colleague from the steering committee calls to discuss an important issue here and now. The resignation of one of our best managers is on the table. A key customer is threatening to terminate their contract. And suddenly our attention is focused on these issues – and only these issues. We put out fires, we jump from one issue to the next. While we are doing this, new issues often arise. We have appointments, not only online, but also face-to-face appointments with travel and meetings. We have to prepare documents and presentations for these. We can delegate much of this – but ultimately we have to check and implement the corresponding results.
We give our full attention, our entire focus and our energy to the challenges that arise in the short term.
And what happens to the activities we have set ourselves? The ones we planned not only to really fix the causes this time, but also to develop innovative new approaches, implement them consistently and evaluate the results in order to learn from them. What happens to them?
They remain unfinished. There are urgent fires to put out. There are urgent trips to make, for which urgent documents must be prepared. And the other things, the things we say we have to do to achieve results, we believe we have to put on hold. They are put “on hold”.
In short, our habits often prevent us from implementing what we have understood and want to do with urgency, energy and focus. ly, until we have a result that we can evaluate. To identify and close the inevitable target/actual gaps contained therein. By doing better, learning from our mistakes and, beyond that, introducing innovations so that the causes become irrelevant.
We know that our managers need our attention, energy, challenge and support to demand results and the implementation of the necessary activities.
But we often don’t do it.
Or we don’t do it often or intensively enough.
Because we have other issues, projects, challenges and fires that we believe are more urgent.
We chop wood by hand.
Because we believe we don’t have the time to buy a chainsaw.
Write down now what you want to do or initiate in the next 48 hours.
My request: don’t do that. Do now what came to mind while you were reading. Don’t let up until it’s done. If you don’t have the time, get the support you need.
Stay tuned.
Why shouldn’t we as managers be able to achieve this today? What do you think? I look forward to hearing your opinion. Feel free to write to me at info@jmoellerconsulting.com or on www.jmoellerconsulting.com.
