Leadership Today Update

How Does a Focused, Credible Leader Handle Complex Problems?

The less than elegant and yet predictable departure of BP’s Chief Executive Tony Hayward is a real-time reminder of how today’s leaders are in a fishbowl – and rightfully so. No recent problem has proven more complex and resistant to a swift effective solution, it seems, than the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion and oil spill. 

One thing this debacle has shown us is how thorny it can be to lead in the face of disaster. Neither BP nor the Federal Government has demonstrated particularly credible or trustworthy leadership that can respond aptly to the complex challenges of this devastating situation.

So how does a leader even begin to approach such complex crises? I believe it starts with responding rather than reacting – and there is a big difference between the two. For example, let’s say that an apartment building is on fire. The building residents react – by fleeing the building. While this action quite clearly saves lives, it does not extinguish the fire. Fire fighters, on the other hand, respond.  They quickly assess the situation, get the right resources to the scene, and then take the necessary steps to put the fire out.  Their response is based on priorities, skill and action. In other words, first things first.

Leaders and their teams need to respond rather than react. I believe Peggy Noonan touched upon this in her Declarations column when she wrote about the Obama Administration’s leadership, “When your most creative thoughts in the middle of a disaster revolve around protecting your position, you are summoning trouble. When you try to dodge ownership of a problem, when you try to hide from responsibility, life will give you ownership and responsibility the hard way.”

The Obama Administration reacted to the disaster by trying to protect its image, disengage and show blame. The response would be to go in and fix the leak – first things first. Now we know Mr. Obama’s expertise is not in petrochemical engineering or deep water drilling, so he wouldn’t be out on the Gulf fixing the leak personally. But when a leader focuses on the mission and its priorities – and not on placing blame – the right questions are asked and the right people take action.

How does a leader respond with the right questions? Who are the right people to ask?  Who are those trusted resources that will give the straight answers that get closer to the essence of the problem?  What are the priorities?  This is where leadership moves from rhetoric to action.

In your leadership roles, how do you deal with complex problems? How do you prepare to respond?  Do you find yourself reacting?

Leaders and Teams: Who Owns Decision Making?

Leaders, teams, committees, task forces. With so many organizational resources involved, why can't anything get done? Whose decision is it anyway?  

General Motors CEO Edward E. Whitacre Jr. is working hard to transform GM's culture.   He expects executive teams to make decisions without going through the traditional GM process of multiple committee approvals before things get done.  (Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2010, GM's Plodding Culture Vexes Its Impatient CEO, by Sharon Terlep).  Mr. Whitacre has it right - it's the team's responsibility to make the decision, not just look for approval. 

GM hasn't cornered the market on an historically cumbersome decision making process. For many executives owning a decision is not easy - it's safer to get approval.  How effective is that?  Especially when there are fewer people doing more things and individual responsibilities continue to expand.

Establishing expectations - encouraging and requiring a more efficient decision making process - takes getting the right people in the right place where contribution and collaboration are welcomed by the leader. Then it becomes the team, not just the leader, who owns the decision. 

I have heard executives say that "their bosses are command and control people who need to make the final decisions themselves."  Really?  Has anybody talked to the boss and clarified what the expectations are for the team?   I've heard bosses say that "they wish their executive team would make the final decision and move on."  Really?  What's holding them back?  Does the team feel they have the responsibility and the authority to make and implement decisions?  

I recently commented on Dan Rockwell's blog post about "Bottlenecks", that "when people and teams are empowered to move things forward, they need to gather the right intelligence and be willing to make and own decisions. Sometimes the best decision is unpopular but must be made. If the bottleneck is a result of an individual, process or practice holding up the decision, then my suggestion is to identify and address the real issue head-on, in a practical and always respectful way."

In my view, leaders have an obligation to accurately communicate what decisions need to be made and the value that will result from the decision; and sincerely endorse the ownership of others.  When that happens, I believe that people will be inspired to take responsibility, make decisions and act.

How have you seen a decision making process slowed down? Tell us about it in the Comments section below.