Bringing Out The Best In Us

As we struggle through a difficult time of turmoil and division, I’m reminded that one of the least tangible yet most important responsibilities of leaders is to bring out the best in others. When we think about business leadership, we often think about strategy, alignment of goals, proper resource allocation, facilitating healthy debate around key issues, and maintaining team focus on high-impact initiatives that matter despite the noise.

Sometimes we lose sight of a more important task: inspiring others to reach the full potential of their talent. While the verb “inspire” is about as amorphous as it gets, another version of it might be coaching, or encouraging, or shaping, or mentoring. These days as a boss, I think more than half the battle is keeping people cooperative and positive, guiding them to circumvent negativity and work together even where differences in viewpoint creep into conversation.

Going deeper, I think about the best bosses I’ve worked under, and how their very different styles brought out the best in me.

While the input and output of these great bosses were different, their intentions were the same. Their goal was to get me to achieve things I wouldn’t have achieved without their direction. They wanted me to do the best work of my career with their guidance. They never took credit for my work, they got it as a macro by default. Like a baseball coach, each saw talent on the playing field and wanted to see more wins than losses.

Consider a tale of two bosses.

One was relentless in expecting the most of me. He was extremely competitive and wanted me to be more competitive. He was highly creative and wanted me to be more creative. He was troubled by mediocrity and wanted me to refuse it at every turn. He was perpetually prepared for a crisis and wanted me to embrace the mandate of rising above obstacles without excuse. He wanted me to expect more of myself. The notion of being indefatigable comes to mind.

The other was a master of collaboration and consensus. He wanted constructive dialogue and insisted I encourage it. He believed teams were stronger than individuals and wanted me to suppress all the egos in a room. He believed in building the best products in the world, but reminded me no end that if a product burned out a team, losing the team wasn’t worth it. He wanted me to be open to unusual or counterintuitive ideas. The notion of being empathetic comes to mind.

These two role models held commonalities, particularly of character. Neither of them ever lied to me. Both of them were ceaselessly demanding of my results, never satisfied, yet they never berated me even with the toughest feedback they offered. Both were tolerant of honest mistakes and noble failures, yet I knew that well wasn’t bottomless. They were happy to be proven wrong with data and facts (well, maybe not happy, but they welcomed it as important learning). They each displayed a unique sense of humor, entirely different in tone, but pointedly more pronounced in darker moments that required lightening.

Both of these bosses applied correct approaches in my mind, and while if ever put together they would have ardently disagreed on style, their synthesis lives in me. I believe they saw bits of themselves in me, chances to fix wrongs in their own failings. They knew I could do better, be better, and they took personal reward in seeing my potential realized.

I believe all of us are complex combinations of the conflicting inputs we receive over time, positive and negative. In that evolution, we come to form our own unique style of leadership. The key point here is to remember what we are trying to do is help others realize their own significance in the brief time we share with them.

To bring out the best in others may be the hardest thing we do. Like all difficult things, when we see the result we know it was worth it. We also learn repeatedly that style is content, how we lead in troubled times is as or more important than our intentions. Integrity is as contagious as its opposite. When we aspire to a higher purpose, we can lift each other to an otherwise unimaginable shared vision.

_______________

Photo: Pixabay

What Does Winning Look Like?

If you’ve ever been in a planning meeting with me, you are familiar with this question: What does winning look like? This is how I like to frame decisions around initiatives we are considering. If we can define success in advance, we will know if we achieve it. If we have no idea what winning looks like before we commit resources to a project, how do we know if it was worth it once we deliver the work product?

We all know what winning looks like in sports. If one team has a higher score than its opponent, that team wins. Simple enough, but is it also winning if there were so many injuries in the latest game that half the team can’t play in the next game? What if the team’s coach coach delivers the win, but on a series of controversial decisions that damage team morale for the rest of the season? What if someone cheats? Some of winning is straightforward, but not all of it.

Let’s consider a working example in business.

Let’s say we have an idea for a new set of features we think we want to create for our e-commerce platform. One way to decide what winning looks like is a simple ROI (return on investment) calculation. Suppose the project cost is a million dollars. The first thing we want to do is get back that million dollars through incremental profits. Remember always that revenue is not profit. We have to take all our fixed and variable costs out of sales before we achieve a contribution to earnings. A million dollars of revenue does not pay back a million-dollar investment, but if our contribution margin on those sales is 20%, then we need an incremental $5m of revenue to produce $1m of incremental cash (presume that general and administrative costs are unchanged to simplify things).

Let’s say then we’ve articulated the minimum payback to break even we need on $1m of investment is $5m of incremental sales (that is, revenue we would not have received without the new initiative). Of course, no one wants to break even in business, we want a multiple of that investment back. Do we want 5x, 10x, or more? A lot of that depends on the scale of the business, but let’s say we want 5x our investment to call it a win. That’s $25m of sales generating $5m of cash for a 5x return.

The next question we might ask is how soon do we want that return. Some of that will depend on the numerous initiatives competing for investment. If two potential initiatives are evaluated to deliver the same 5x return, but one can do it in six months and one can do it in a year, I’d say we go with six months. So the cash we produce is important, but so is the time we have to wait to get it back.

Does winning end there? Is selecting an initiative solely based on return on investment and time? Seldom are those the only factors in play. We need to think about the strategic value of our initiative. Does it lift our customer count? Sometimes that is even more important than the incremental cash we are producing, particularly if we are focusing on the lifetime value of a customer. In this case we might set a goal that the new initiative increases our customer count by 5% in no less than a year. If we know what those customers are worth to us in the long run, we might go back and pick the initiative with the one year return on investment over the six month time frame if the additional customers we are acquiring are all the more valuable.

Another factor in winning might be market positioning in the competitive environment. Let’s say we’re convinced the feature we’re considering is something our customers have been requesting in customer service feedback, because no one else does it very well. Winning in this instance might be about acquiring market share above other metrics. When we launch the feature, if we see our online orders increase by 5% while a competitor’s volume stays the same or declines, we might call that winning, particularly if we can translate that gain in market share into higher customer count or improved lifetime value.

The point here is not to enumerate all the ways we might factor winning, but to force a robust dialogue ahead of committing to an initiative that builds a consensus around the work we will do together. If we collect data in advance, set goals for the improvement of key performance indicators (KPIs), ardently debate the relative merits of the various initiatives before us, and then make an informed choice, we can clearly measure the success or failure of the initiative. If we just reach to heaven for inspiration, how can we know if we won or lost?

Wise business leaders know that if we discuss upfront what winning looks like and then fail to achieve it, there is no blame to be assigned. We haven’t failed at all, we have learned in an experiment that mattered and held consequence. The argument is for better process management, to spend the time in advance discussing what winning looks like so we know it when we see it or don’t see it. Failure to invest that time ahead of committing resources to an initiative is indeed a form of failure, even if the initiative happens to succeed (how you know it succeeded when you didn’t address that in advance is another story entirely).

Don’t move forward without deciding what winning looks like. Crafting a thesis of the change you are trying to affect and the benefits you intend to bring establishes a benchmark for measurement. Insisting on this step early in product development will not only improve the odds of success, it will improve the teamwork and ability to share in the success a team creates together.

_______________

Photo: Pixabay

Why We Focus

There’s a theme running through our workplace this year. It’s as simple as it is profound. It’s not revolutionary; it’s more of a reminder.

It’s all about focus.

Focus matters. Focus works. Focus wins.

The “what” and “how” of focus are somewhat obvious. We need to set clear priorities, narrow our agenda to initiatives that significantly elevate performance, add resources to projects that will have an impact, and let go of distractions that dilute our effectiveness.

The “why” of focus might be less obvious. We focus out of necessity. To the extent we choose to believe this is not a necessity, we either overwhelm ourselves in the endless regression of task lists or we embark on so many things with so little precision that we risk accomplishing little at all.

Focus requires us to make critical choices, to sort our many priorities into real priorities. When we ask why we are forcing ourselves to focus, the answer becomes clear. It’s the best chance we have of testing a bold thesis against a data-driven outcome. When we have evidence something works, we can double down on it. When the data shows otherwise, we can comfortably move on and reallocate always-limited resources.

When talking to musicians, you often hear there is as much importance in the notes that aren’t played as those that are. A composition is a series of choices. It even encompasses a structured use of rests. Poetry and rhetorical speech are similar. There are words left in and words extracted in the creative process to keep the emphasis on the words that remain.

Work is similar. We have endless choices for tasks, but time is forever in short supply. Not focusing is the same as not applying discipline to our business plans. It’s somewhat ironic that working oneself to exhaustion can be a reflection of lazy planning. Pick the wrong projects, pick too many of them, put in endless hours, and you might come up with nothing.

That’s another reason why we focus  — to have confidence that the hours we invest are in fact invested for a prescribed return and not squandered on trivial contributions.

When we fail to focus, we nibble around the edges.

When we focus, we apply editorial selection to our competitive obsession.

I recently corresponded with a colleague on how easy it is to get lost in the day-to-day. Yes, a text will pop up every few minutes, email is without end, the phone will ring with the latest crisis when we least want to be interrupted. If we start the year with focus and then look back on the year with an evaluation of that focus, it becomes clear if those interruptions derailed us from critical focus. We have to anticipate interruptions — they are unavoidable — but if we did the hard work of applying focus upfront and then did the even harder work of staying focused on those priorities, the interruptions are unlikely to derail us.

I say it all the time: Do less, do it better.

How sure am I? Very, very sure. Each year I compel a process of goal-setting with our teams where we actively debate what things matter more than others. Throughout the year, we periodically stack rank these priorities as technology quickly evolves and business pressures change. Leaders in the company have the freedom to motivate their teams as they will, but once we have agreed on areas of focus, it is expected that those tasks will be accomplished with as much detail as necessary to equal or exceed the expected results.

At the end of the year, we look back on what got done and the impact it had. Of course, priorities shift in real-time due to current events and market forces, but I have never ended a year with a totally derailed team and no significant impact on our success.

It is true we can’t do everything and no one should believe we can. We do get a lot done. We improve processes. We align data with suppositions. We help each other get better at our jobs. We mandate exceeding the expectations of our customers.

A lot of people talk about focus. A lot fewer make it religion. If you look at the prized cohort of companies moving ahead of the competition, you are likely to see the embrace of focus.

Bring focus to bear and the year ahead will be clearer, brighter, more satisfying, and more rewarding. The alternative is often burnout and unmeasurable results. Think about next year’s review cycle and make the right commitments now. It’s not too late to get going on a breakthrough, just focus on that breakthrough and don’t let it get away from you for anything less.

_______________

Photo: Pexels