What’s the key?

Two leaders from the High Impact Mentor program spoke to me about AHA moments this month. 

Both of them saw something in a new way and it changed everything. Both were frustrated and dissatisfied in their work and were finding their focus with staff getting dragged into more and more unnecessary detail. They felt overwhelmed. They felt they were not getting the best from their staff. They wondered if leadership was for them. 

The key for both of them was shifting their mindset from trying to control the people around them, to getting better at influencing the people around them. The work load hasn’t changed, but both are feeling lighter. One of them looked physically less tired and more relaxed than he had just a few weeks earlier. When I asked him what had changed, he said, “ I just changed how I was looking at everything, and now everything has changed”.

Moments like these are why I do the work I do. When leaders raise their capacity, the capacity of everyone around them also rises..

If you or someone on your team could use a change like that, send me an email. I’d love to help.

Which direction and how?

Direction over detail is well and good if you know where you are going. Alice (in Wonderland) asked that cat which way she should go. She didn't care where she would end up. The cat reckoned in that case, direction didn't matter. Quite right!

I facilitated a conversation recently where big changes are afoot for an organisation with a long, proud and effective history. The conversation was about creating an ideal future within the inevitable changes.

The leaders and team did a great job of looking forward. They:

• Acknowledged and celebrated past success.

• Identified aspects of their organisation/work that they did not want to lose or compromise in the change.

• Articulated the likely limits to their future, including considering what is happening for their stakeholders.

• Laid out a high level plan for their future, which adds value and insulates from irrelevance.

• Framed their propositions thoughtfully, highlighting value to stakeholders rather than just making a wish list.

There’s a lot of detail to be added, but in less than 2 hours they have the bones of a solid future.

The risk in such a conversation is people getting stuck in the past rather than looking forward. They could have lamented the situation, complained, pushed back against inevitable shifts and fought over irrelevant detail. They did not. It was a great working example of Direction over Detail.

Direction over Detail

If you’ve navigated by topographic map in complex terrain, at some point you’ve stopped making forward progress while you try to work out exactly where you are. I’ve done it many times, and almost every group on our survival courses did it at least once. There’s two ways it happens:

1. We feel uncertain about where we are and attempt to regain certainty by pinpointing our exact location.

2. We feel certain about where we are (but are wrong), and bend our reading of the map to suit our perception.

Forward progress either slows or stops entirely, and the focus shifts to ever finer detail. I see the same thing happen to teams and leaders (and yep, I’ve done that version too). We burrow into detail to justify current effort, or make ourselves busy trying to perfect things that will never be perfect. Busyness goes up, progress goes down.

In the map scenario, direction is often the answer. On one challenging walk in the Pilbara, we spent ages going slow trying to justify our position and getting more exhausted and frustrated by it. If we had just walked East, we would hit a North/South water course that was unambiguous and unmissable. East was the way we were going and we were planning to follow that water course!

In teams and workplaces the answer is the same. Get clear on direction and favour progress in that direction over nailing the detail. The detail becomes clear as you make progress. It feels much more enjoyable too.

P.S. This is not a reason to avoid or gloss over detail when it is important. Listen to your specialist communications, risk, compliance and audit teams. Just be sure to keep moving.

Well Worn Path

This week I have spoken to 3 leaders who are creating something genuinely new. Innovative ways of addressing some of the deepest challenges of their sectors. It’s exciting work and I love spending time with people who are explorers at heart. They want to venture over the nearest hill, motivated by deep curiosity. The conversations reminded me of a piece I wrote in my first book “Thrive and Adapt” exploring situations when breaking a new trail is the best option.For those of us who like to explore (myself included) it’s helpful to avoid unnecessary expenditure of effort or resources. It maximises our exploratory range. Here’s that piece, lightly edited for context.

A decade ago, I was on a cross-country walking trip in the Pilbara with my Dad who was 76 at the time. There were no paths or markers to follow, no guidebook. We were reading a map of the area and taking the country as we found it. It was a great journey!

In situations like that, I’m always on the lookout for game trails –the paths taken by cattle or wildlife between one water hole and another. They are sometimes counter-intuitive. They don’t always follow the shortest route. Sometimes they head into hilly or rocky territory and seem to wander a little aimlessly. Over the years, experience has always shown that the animals know the easiest and best route between points. Their trails are sometimes ancient – even wearing into solid rock surfaces. From a walking point of view, finding a game trail is gold. The going is easier because the animals have smoothed the way. The large rocks and obstacles have been shifted off the track over the years and, at times, it’s as good as walking on a footpath. The alternatives are never as easy. Often, they involve struggling through dense bush or over rough and broken ground. Without a game trail, forward speed is slower and takes more effort. Despite the extra effort, sometimes I choose to walk off the game trails. The walking is harder but if there is something in the landscape worth exploring, the game trails won’t always get you there.

In business, it’s similar – finding and following a well-worn path frequently results in easier and faster forward-progress than ‘reinventing the wheel’. Business systems, mentors and proven systems are all examples of ‘game trails’ in the business world. It’s smart and sustainable to follow them whenever you can. But there’s also times when you may want to blaze a trail yourself, to define a new path, and be a pioneer. I use four filters to determine if trailblazing is the best approach.

1. No one has done this before – I need something in my business that is not currently available.

2. I can offer something new – there is a need in the marketplace which is currently unmet.

3. I can refine something existing – making it better or more applicable than the original.

4. I’m seeking to learn, understand or explore – sometimes the harder road yields great insights and personal progress.

If none of those conditions exist, go for the pre-existing ‘path’ that gives maximum sustainability and minimum effort for the return.

Look Again

Photo by Kaori Yokochi, Roberta Bencini, CC BY 4.0 eativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

“Possums are rare on hilltops and in open forest. They are mostly found in the creeklines.” This was an ‘obvious’ conclusion from a scientifically conducted survey of a vast area of forest to determine possum behaviour and ideal habitat. The multi-year surveys large areas with cameras, on foot and non lethal trapping programs.

For several years, possums were rarely seen outside the creek lines. Then one year, none were seen in the creeks. Researchers wondered if the possum population had been decimated. But then, there they were, on the hill tops. That year, possums were rarely found in creek lines.

One of the researchers described the challenges of ensuring conclusions drawn from evidence are valid. “Correlation is not Causation” is one of the mantras to avoid jumping to conclusions. Almost everything we investigate has some bias built in. How we ask, what we ask, and what we think the answers mean can all add up to assumptions that may not be valid.

Take the research about goal setting. There’s heaps of it, and generally it concludes goal setting (done well) equates to greater success. I often wonder how many people or companies have epically failed despite having well thought through goals. The ‘proof’ given are all highly successful people or businesses and the ‘obvious’ conclusion is goals equate to success.

Here are some of the researched down sides of goals:

• At all costs - the goal is focussed on to the exclusion of all else resulting in missed opportunities, rushed or fudged work, exhaustion.

• Inability to adapt - The goal adds to perceived difficulty of changing direction when circumstances dictate.

• Assumed Control - The goal assumes a far greater level of control over variables than is reality.

• Wrong Target - The wrong things are measured resulting in a different outcome than what was really being aimed for.

• Unmeasurable - some things don’t readily yield to a defined target. E.g. What goal can be set for improving a close relationship? When is it done?

• Uncertain Environments - When variables are unknown/unknowable, setting goals based on them is a folly. For example a farmer may set a goal for a particular crop yield, only to be faced with a drought. Her skill may improve the yield, but a lower yield than the goal does not make her a ‘failure’.

As we enter December and January, a period when we often review and reset goals, consider if they are the most effective methodology for what you are trying to achieve. If you’d like to explore some alternatives, let me know.

Into the unknown…

Image by Tracy Peltier from Pixabay

“So much depends on the outcome of … [insert your process, enquiry, application, etc here]”

I met with three CEO’s last week who echoed a theme. Much of the short to mid term future in their organisations depends on the outcome of things outside of their control. In each case, the outcome/s will require their organisation to change. The outcome/s will also dictate how palatable those changes will be. Whatever happens, there will be change and it will be reactive in nature.

“People are uncertain,” they told me.

Uncertain environments make detail difficult to map. Forecasting various probable outcomes is important work, but can add even more uncertainty.

Maybe you can relate. I know I can.

It's worth remembering that humans have always faced uncertainty. It is uncomfortable and we are pretty good at it. Like those 3 CEO’s you’ve got this.

Here are few things we can do in uncertain times to inject certainty for ourselves and those around us:

• Big picture - Where detail is lacking focus on the big picture. What direction are we heading in? What’s our Why? Is our purpose clear? Are there non-negotiables and principles to bring into focus? When detail is lacking, big picture guidance adds certainty. It gives clarity about what will guide future decisions. Focus on elements that fundamentally won’t change regardless of outcomes and future changes.

• Best Behaviour - Double down on how you treat each other. Focus on and reinforce the best of how people interact with each other in your organisation. When the going gets murky at our house, my partner and I call each other to kindness and integrity. Regardless of what happens, we at least have some certainty about how we will ‘be’ with each other.

• You know how to weave! One CEO, calling on her Maori heritage, likened the situation to being in a place where you don’t know what plants to gather to find the fibres to weave the mat. I reminded her that even if she didn’t know the plant, she could recognise a weavable fibre, and still knows how to weave. Whatever happens next, you know more than you think you do. Bring your deep knowledge and experience with you. The details of execution may be up for change, but you still know how to weave.

Reflections on Perception

I’m foolishly recovering from a fortunately small and easily removed metal fragment in my eye. Reflection number 1 is “all the gear, all the time, no matter how short or quick the job is”.

I work a lot on my own in my shed, and have a pretty high standard on safety gear. And I took a “shortcut” which has taken a lot longer to resolve than slowing down for the couple of minutes to get my safety specs from where I used them last. Working in company, we can keep an eye on the safe practices of others around us. Alone, not so much. If you work alone a self prompted review (preferably without a GP) is well worth it.

The perception of shortcuts and too busy pop up regularly in the coaching work I do with leaders. Themes like:

• It’s faster to do it myself

• I haven’t got time to give people the reasons for what I'm asking, they just need to get on with it.

• I know I should do more about health, exercise, sleep, food, etc, but I don’t have time.

There are many like these, and I can relate to all of them. The short term may show a tempting illusion of being faster, but ultimately all these “shortcuts” involve do-overs or repairs of some kind. A couple of useful questions are:

• How can I build capacity and strengthen relationships as I do this? While doing so may take a little longer, in the long run the trust and capacity built will speed us up.

• What are the negative consequences of this “shortcut”?

• What are the actual risks of rushing this?

Not surprisingly, today I’m feeling more one-eyed about this than I might otherwise…And I’m counting my blessings.

A bit of ‘No’ makes a better ‘Yes’

Saying 'Yes' means we are agreeing to something.

We say 'Yes' many times a day. What are some of the things you say 'Yes' to on a typical day? Note them down.

We say 'Yes' for a variety of reasons:

• It’s part of our job

• We can add value

• Moving towards goals and objectives

• Opportunity to do something we enjoy

• Obligation

• Feeling pressured

• No alternatives

• Repercussions if I say “No”

'Yes' implies a commitment. Each commitment we make occupies time and energetic space. Even if we will never deliver, it occupies time and thought. Sometimes we add guilt or anxiety as well. Consider the cost of that commitment (especially if delivery will be difficult) as well as the cost/benefit of saying 'Yes'. Sometimes ‘No’ would be a better response:

• If we say ‘No’ sometimes, it makes our 'Yes' more valuable.

• It makes it more likely that when we do say 'Yes', we will deliver.

• We avoid commitments that we are not willing to keep

Are there times you said 'Yes', but should have said 'No’? What was the cost/impact? Should you be saying ‘No’ more often? What would it take to do that?

Clarity is often missing in our agreements. The clearer you can be about what you are saying 'Yes' (or no) to, the higher the quality of your 'Yes'. Eg. I’ll get back to you soon is less clear than I’ll get back to you by COB. Clear agreements set clear expectations and are easier to deliver and/or manage.

Clarity = tangible agreements

Have you ever said 'Yes' when timing, quality, scope, responsibility, resources (or other details} were unclear? What impact does lack of clarity have on you, your team and others?

For this week, focus on improving the quality of your ‘'Yes'’. When asking others for a ‘'Yes'’, be clearer about what you are asking.

Expedient?

How much pressure are you under to get things done?

Many leaders are experiencing increasing transactional cadence. The rate that things pop into the “to-do’ list is intense. It has us asking ourselves what the most expedient way to deal with each item is. I reckon it’s the wrong question. The quickest way to a result sometimes creates second or third order consequences that consume more time, energy and resources than a little more initial effort might have.

In my front yard right now there’s a large messy hole. The team that installed soak wells and paving did a great job. It looked awesome. But through winter there’s been issues with drainage. Today they dug part of it up to find the problem. A quick compaction job to finish the original job, rather than return another day, left a hollow air space under a pipe. The pipe slumped into the hole and no longer ran freely. It will be a full day to fix, and a fair bit of mess to clean up afterwards.

Some of the leaders I work with are either doing similar, or people in their teams are.

Sending a text rather than meeting about a critical tweak got things moving immediately, but the team is now redoing a heap of work because it was misunderstood.

Assuming someone had been included in a major project briefing, rather than directly checking now has a team buried in contentious stakeholder management, because residents were not informed of a major project nearby.

A customer issue has escalated to a major complaint and standoff after a rushed approach to finding out what the real issue was.

A colleague's motivation has dropped because she wasn’t included in the celebration of a piece of work she majorly contributed too.

These are all examples of time, energy and resource waste because something was done in what appeared to be the expedient way, only to cause more consequences. Most of them could have been avoided with a bit more though before rushing to the desired end point.

Sometimes we have to slow down to go faster. It’s a lesson I find myself learning more often than I’d like. How about you? Where could you slow down to go faster?

The View from Here

How clear is the strategic view in your organisation? Most of the leaders I am working with are experiencing 3 factors clouding the view:

• Staff shortages - For many this means time off strategy and on tools to keep up. It means employing people you might not employ in different times. It means pressure on induction and training processes as people try to get staff up and running in the shortest possible time. It often means frustration as the combination also makes for low engagement and lack of clarity = do overs, or new people leaving before they are even up to speed.

• Fatigue - the cadence has been high for ages. To-do lists grow so fast you know some items will die there, never seeing the light of day. People are worn down.

• Short horizons - some have got into a habit of reacting to whatever comes up. It started with COVID when Friday’s plan was torn up on Monday because the rules had changed - reactivity was the only choice then. Combined with staff shortages and fatigue it’s leaving many feeling as if they are perpetually chasing their tail.

It all obscures the view. How do you know that your business is delivering on what it promises? Are you experiencing a greater than usual gap between front line efforts and high level strategy and planning?

If you answered yes to either of the above, sing out. I have some solutions that are working well across a number of sectors.

Mark the Boundaries

Image by StockSnap from Pixabay

One of the reasons sporting games work so well is the crystal clear boundaries. Everyone knows what defines the field of play. What’s in and what’s out. How to score. Even when there is technical complexity, the rules are clear, and create the conditions for clear decision making (notwithstanding the perpetual armchair critic who can always clearly see how the ref got it wrong!). These clear constraints are what make games work. 

Lack of clarity creates ambiguity and often the result is uncertainty and/or stress. As a leader, we can contribute to clarity via regular discussion about the boundaries. Unlike a ‘field of play’ where the boundaries are clearly marked, work often has boundaries marked only in our collective understanding. If the collective understanding is fuzzy, so are the boundaries.

A simple framework for the discussion is:

• IN - what’s clearly ‘in’? Why? What purpose does it serve? How does it help us deliver? When is it important?

• OUT - What’s clearly ‘out’? Why? How does it detract or distract us from our important work? What are the consequences if we are ‘out of bounds’? How can we stop or reset ‘play’ when we are ‘out’?

• DISCUSS - Some areas of our work are open to discussion or judgement and creativity. What constitutes ‘good enough’? What’s our appetite for risk? How do we decide when we disagree, and there are sound reasons for each position? How will we innovate if it hasn’t been done before? What do we do when we are caught by surprise or disrupted? How should we use our judgement? Discussion in the fuzzy territory between clearly in or out results in greater clarity of the boundaries.

This approach can be applied to specific roles, delegation, projects, decision making process, team norms/expectations, delivery against metrics and more.

Where could you clarify boundaries today?

Goals?

“The biggest casualty of COVID will be goals and plans”. So said Jason Clarke, Mindworker when I interviewed him right back at the beginning of the pandemic.

I reckon he hit the nail on the head. Many of my goals and plans got sidelined, and no doubt yours did too. During that period we all experienced this together, but that kind of disruption happens all the time on a smaller scale.

Factors outside our control make a mockery of our plans. Consider some of these scenarios, any of which could leave your plans in a smoking pile. Some of them might be familiar:

• War breaks out in your region

• Interest rates climb, changing your financial reality

• New technology threatens or removes your job

• You or someone close to you becomes seriously injured or ill

• A competitor out-paces you

• Your entire worldly goods are lost in a natural disaster such as a fire or flood

• A funding program changes its costing model destroying the margins for your not for profit

• Your business is unable to source mission critical supplies

• You cannot find enough staff to run your business

I’m sure you know people who have been impacted by such realities. Maybe you are currently directly experiencing them yourself.

In the face of these kinds of disruption a typically constructed SMART goal may not stand up.

On survival courses we taught 5 priorities for survival. The priorities give clear focus to make a flexible plan that you can adapt to the reality you face.

Some of the sectors I work with find “Areas of Focus” a great way to handle uncertainty.

Regardless of how much duress you are currently under, being clear about your top priorities and key areas of focus is part of creating a psychologically safe environment that withstands disruption.

What are you focussing on in 2023?

If you’d like a conversation about planning for/in uncertainty, I’d love to hear from you.

Bulls and Boardrooms

I stood on the sideline of the auction yards, hoping to buy a bull that (in my opinion) was the finest animal on the lot. It would be a great addition to the farm breeding stock. Two bids later, I stepped back and watched the price climb. Maybe I was right about it being the best bull. It sold for the top price. I eventually secured a lesser bull. I made the decision without supervision and using someone else's money. The farmer I worked for was a master of delegation. He had given me a signed blank cheque and sent me to the annual sale alone. His instructions were simple. “Buy the best bull you can. Don’t spend more than $1500.” When I got back I told him about the best bull, and together we admired the one I had purchased.

I’ve often thought of him when I lead others and work with leaders. One of the most significant roles of a leader, all the way to the boardroom, is delegation. Despite delegating all the time, there’s often unnecessary friction because we don’t always do it well.

What that farmer did very well was define the task or territory - Best bull possible at or below $1500. My task was epic for my age and experience, but the parameters were crystal clear. I knew precisely what was in and out of my authority that day. He also backed the decision I had made.

When we are delegating, we can reduce friction significantly by clearly discussing what is in and out of the territory. Sometimes there will be grey areas, in which case discuss the triggers to refer back for more information or support.

And get really good at accepting the outcomes of delegated territory. Questioning or criticising decisions and actions makes it much less likely that people will want to act for you next time round.

How and where could you improve your capacity for delegation?

Break Back to Back

Guess what! Back to back virtual meetings cause elevated stress levels. Recent research from Microsoft confirms it, but none of us are surprised. Anyone who has leapt from one “Brady Bunch” screen to another has felt it.

Microsoft scanned the brains of 14 people as they went back-to-back, compared to taking a 5 to 10 minute break between meetings. Back to back = elevated and sustained stress levels (Red/Yellow scan). Short breaks = minimal stress (Blue scan).

And while the research focuses on virtual meetings, I reckon it would hold true for face to face ones as well (although at least there is a short decompression as you move from one to the other.)

Elevated stress smashes our ability to think, decide, solve, communicate, and collaborate. Most of those meetings require one or more of these from us. As a survival instructor, creating ‘task saturation’ was a really easy way to create duress for a team on a survival course. Impose a tight deadline, swamp them with information, ask for clear decisions and plans, hit them with distractions and before long the stress levels are through the roof and mistakes are made. That adds even more pressure, as now the team has to solve problems it has created for itself. Now add conflict (or at least friction/tension) as people get shorter and sharper with each other. Does this sound familiar?

We can do better. And we need to. This stuff has a direct impact on bottom line. In Australia there have also been recent changes to Work Health and Safety that put greater responsibility for workplace mental health and wellbeing on employers. This stuff has a pretty clear cause and effect chain. There are known health consequences of sustained levels of unhealthy stress. Back to Back environments may well end up in similar territory of allowing employees to operate in dangerous environments when fatigued. In a tight recruitment market, being a better place to work will also be a competitive edge. Proactively addressing this problem makes sense on many fronts.

Potential system solutions:

• Set calendar systems to make meetings 25 min rather than 30, or 50 min rather than 1hr.

• Set 2 or 3, 15 to 20 minute break blocks per day where none can book anyone for anything.

Potential style solutions:

• Have some meetings standing up/walking, and outside.

• Lead by example. Take mini breaks. Encourage others to do the same.

Potential working solutions:

• Give people greater say in the meetings that they attend, or at least ask ‘why do we need this meeting?’

• Get clear about what the meeting is for. If it’s not clear, can it.

People are generally experiencing higher than normal levels of fatigue, stress and burnout. “Push Through!” is a valid answer in short burn situations. It doesn’t work in longer burn ones.

Let’s create an environment where we all scan ‘Blue’.

A Killer Checklist

I use and recommend checklists widely as a highly effective Capacity raising tool. A question I often get, especially from busy leaders who are implementing them for the first time is “How do I create a truly effective checklist?”. If you are making one for the first time, brain dump as many things as you can think of in appropriate detail. Then refine using these 4 elements.

1. Use it - The best checklists are the ones you use. A brilliant one left on the shelf is no use at all.

2. Storage - I store mine in a separate notebook in OneNote. Each has its own page. This means I can use it on any device and it updates to all of them.

3. Aide Memoire - the pre takeoff checklist I use is HTMPFFIC. It’s easier to remember that than the separate elements. (More on that checklist later). Is there a way you can make it more memorable?

4. Evolution - As you use it, notice how effective it is. Does it need evolving? Evolution could be simplified by grouping together or adding more detail. When I was instructing survival I simplified by adding “Survival Belt” to my list, rather than the 50+ individual items in the belt. When I pack for a presentation I separate Computer, Power Cables, and Adaptors because each is mission critical and they are stored in different places. I also evolve checklists by updating them on the spot if there are gaps or unnecessary steps. Over a few uses they become highly refined and effective.

The process seems slow when you are building a checklist, but they speed you up and reduce stress later. Well worth the investment.

I find the holidays a great time to practise. You can build checklists for relatively low consequence events and test them out. Planning/packing for holidays is a great one, because it's enjoyable.

Decision-Making Capacity

Have you ever reached a point where you can’t even make a simple decision? End of a long day, fatigued and asked to choose between 2 simple food options. It’s a strange feeling not being able to bring your decision making ability to bear, even though it's not a difficult decision and consequences are low. It’s called decision fatigue. And while there’s still debate about whether it comes from making too many decisions and running out of capacity, or from mental exhaustion and stress is unclear. Either way, it seems we have our limits. Like the VO2 max we looked at here, we need to either increase our capacity via skills, tools and exposure, or clear capacity somehow.

Some examples of clearing capacity…

Former US President Barack Obama was said to have a whole wardrobe of identical suits in blue or black. It meant there was no need to decide what to wear each day. It was going to be a suit, and the occasion dictated or blue or black.

A speaking colleague, Shil Shanghavi, pre-decides and prepares most of his food for the week, eliminating food decisions during the week.

One of my mentors, Peter Cook, has a pre-decided work routine when he flies. Rather than trying to decide what movie to watch, he meditates until the seatbelt light goes off and then gets into some writing. He describes it as a decision he made once and then sticks too, so he doesn't have to make it every time.

Are there decisions you could unload by making them in advance or once rather than often?

Frontloading for Capacity

I’ve had a small store and ready room added to my office. My business had outgrown my office space. Even when I was relatively ordered and organised, it was cluttered. The store means I have spaces designed for frontloading.

Front loading = Removing future controllable stress.

An example is a shelf dedicated to the equipment I need for live, face to face experiences. There are 3 shelves. One holds equipment that I often use but not every time. One is essential equipment. One holds consumables I use in my presentations.

I recently flew to Sydney at short notice for a conference keynote. The shelf eliminated packing stress. I could quickly and easily see everything I needed, and load it into the carry on bag that is now stored under the shelf. Along with a refined checklist (more on this later), packing was quick and stress free.

When I’m done, I replace items on the shelf and restock what I used. This takes discipline. I’m not always great at that part, but it’s an easy investment now, for a future benefit. The better I frontload, the more Capacity I have to deal with high cadence periods of work.

What/how could you front load to increase your capacity?

Taking Responsibility

What’s the biggest mistake you’ve ever seen at work? What about the biggest version of someone acting against the interests of the business or their team?

I once joined a team replacing someone who had been instantly dismissed. For almost a year, he had used company money and vehicles to run his own business. It was made worse because the company was a not-for-profit, and much of the misappropriated money was government funding and charitable donations.

The place was in disarray. Trust was low in the team and we were rightly subject to rigorous scrutiny from government and charitable trusts. This is an extreme situation, but we face micro versions of it, sometimes daily. Something happens, it’s not your fault, often it’s not fair either. We have two choices in moments like these. We can find fault, or assume responsibility. Finding fault usually ends up in endless finger pointing, and defensive action. It rarely sorts out the problem. Assuming responsibility creates forward momentum and solutions. Even when it’s not your fault, and it’s not your actual responsibility, I reckon it's a high value mindset to hold. We are more likely to find a way to deliver good value to our customers, team and organisation.

It wasn’t my fault that the previous person had acted fraudulently. It wasn’t my fault that we were under scrutiny. It wasn’t fair that I (and others) had to clean up the mess he left. While that was all true, the only way forward is to take responsibility.

In a situation like the one I’ve described, ‘fault’ has to be addressed. I’m not suggesting we cover for poor performance or fraud, just that we get on with high value work, bringing our best contribution even when it’s not fair and it’s not our fault.

Slow Death of an Option

Our leader from last week had decided to ‘kill off an option’. It turned out the decision was quickly and easily made when examined in the light of Capacity and her intended direction.

Implementing the decision will take longer. It’s tempting once a decision has been made, to rush toward the end state. Sometimes we can and it’s the best thing to do. Sometimes we have to move slower.

Her decision executed well will require some planning time, pitching her most preferred alternative to her current boss, plus recruitment and training time in a tight market. All up, that may take 8-12 weeks.

She’d love to rush forward, but the higher value comes now from doing it well. That will set her up for longer term success.

Do the options you need to kill need a quick death or a slow one?

Decide - Choosing Leadership Capacity

I was coaching a dynamic younger leader who has some ambitious goals for herself and business. The biggest barrier she faces is Capacity. Her week is filled to bursting point with highly focussed activity. We mapped the week, and there is very little space. She is very efficient as well, so the gains from doing things better are small and far between.

What really stood out was one massive commitment she has. It’s important, but not aligned with where she is heading. I asked what is stopping her from moving on from it. It is a potential opportunity. It’s aligned with her values and she feels she could make a difference by following it. I was reminded of advice from one of my mentors Matt Church. Matt, unpacked the meaning of the word decide for me - it literally means “To kill off options”. For me, that insight was liberating.

Every day as leaders and in life, we are faced with more options than we have capacity to deal with. Many of them are exciting, interesting and valid.

The young leader said, “I’m just spreading myself too thin”.

Can you relate to that? I know I can from time to time, although I’m getting better at it.

“Killing an option” is a useful frame. It doesn’t mean that it’s a bad option, in fact it’s only a challenge if it’s a great option. If it’s not 100% aligned with our primary direction and highest order priorities then kill it off (at least for now). Doing so liberates time, energy and headspace which all = Capacity.

Are there options you need to kill?