The Blind Leading the Blind – Emotional Intelligence and the Unaware Leader

"The Blind Leading the Blind" by Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1568)

File:Brueghel Blinde.PNG. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

Fifteen years ago, my oldest son sat in front of the mirror looking at the little person staring back at him from the glass.  The baby in the mirror mimicked his every move.  He looked quizzically at the other child, then reached up and pulled his hat off.  Up until this moment, he had played with his reflection as if it were another baby, but now he had made a life-changing discovery.  He become aware of himself, taking the first step in becoming aware of those in the world around him.  This self-awareness is the first step in learning to interact with others – of learning to influence those around us. 

Recently, a reader asked what I considered the ten most important leadership traits.  The question has been on my mind since.  I repeatedly listed the defining characteristics of a true leader, but each list was a duplication of hundreds of others I have read.  I didn’t feel that adding to the already substantial and extensively studied genre would be as beneficial as taking a road a little less traveled.  Therefore, I decided to expand upon a factor I see as essential in any interpersonal relationship.

This came to me as I tossed and turned in bed trying to get my biological clock to figure out where I was and what time it was after another trip half way around the world.   As happens in the state between consciousness and unconsciousness, I experienced a moment of clarity.  Maybe it was a result of my overwhelming fatigue or because I sympathized with my wife’s efforts to sleep through my nocturnal gymnastics, but it occurred to me how important awareness is in our relationships with others.

A leader must influence others to contribute their time, efforts, and passions to achieve a vision.  Leaders can approach this one of two ways.  They can force or motivate.  While the former can work provided the leader has the brute force or authority to enforce their will, it is far from the most effective method.  In this environment, devotion to the cause is low and resentment to the leader high.  A beaten dog will lash out at its oppressor at the first opportunity.  People are no different. 

On the other hand, while motivating others to contribute their efforts to your cause willingly is much more nuanced and at times difficult, it is much more effective since it builds devotion and enthusiasm for the leader and their vision.  Motivated people are more willing to sacrifice and go the extra mile to reach the organizational goal.  However, motivating others requires that you understand yourself and the other stakeholders in the process.  It requires awareness on multiple levels.  It requires emotional intelligence or EQ.

British journalist Russell H. Ewing explained the difference between these two approaches.  He explained:

“A boss creates fear, a leader confidence. A boss fixes blame, a leader corrects mistakes. A boss knows all, a leader asks questions. A boss makes work drudgery, a leader makes it interesting. A boss is interested in himself or herself, a leader is interested in the group.”[1]

Dr. Travis Bradberry,[2] coauthor of Emotional Intelligence 2.0, divides emotional intelligence into two categories:  Self-awareness and social awareness.  These describe how we perceive ourselves and those around us.  This, in turn, determines how we manage, first ourselves and then others. 

Our ability to influence others is predicated on our understanding of their needs, preferences, strengths, and weaknesses.  However, to understand others, we must first understand ourselves.  Hence, self-awareness is the first step.  Psychologist, scientist, and journalist Daniel Goleman wrote:

“If your emotional abilities aren't in hand, if you don't have self-awareness, if you are not able to manage your distressing emotions, if you can't have empathy and have effective relationships, then no matter how smart you are, you are not going to get very far.”[3]

Self-awareness ensures we understand our own strengths, desires, and limitations.  Without this, we cannot possibly lead anyone else. 

Knowing what we are and are not capable of is only part of the equation.  We also must have a vision of where we want to go and why.  If we don’t know where we are going and have a compelling reason why others should follow us there, how can we lead them?  We are merely blindly leading the blinded.  Carl G. Jung said: 

“Your visions will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.”[4]

Self-awareness is even more vital in a team environment where we must mobilize individual talents and manage the inevitable conflicts.  Until we know who we are, what makes us tick, our strengths and weaknesses; we cannot begin to understand and effectively manage ourselves, let alone others.  Until we know and are able to admit what we can and cannot do, we cannot begin to see the value others can contribute to our vision and goal accomplishment.  No amount of education or number of honorifics after our name can possibly ensure we know everything.  We need others to fill in the gaps. 

Furthermore, no one wants to work with someone who insists they have no faults and cannot see beyond his or her own ego.  If you are not able to acknowledge your limitations and recognize the relative strengths of others, those with better insight, the ones you really need on your team, will refuse to follow.  Even if you happen to be charismatic enough to attract people to your cause, you can only berate them or lead them into a ditch so many times before they stop following.  On the other hand, a climate that fosters respect for the contribution of others breeds devotion and cooperation.  The late co-founder of Hewlett-Packard David Packard pointed out:

“A group of people get together and exist as an institution we call a company so they are able to accomplish something collectively that they could not accomplish separately – they make a contribution to society, a phrase which sounds trite but is fundamental.”[5]

As part of a team, we need to feel needed – to feel we can make a real contribution.  We also need to feel that our opinions matter – that even the leader is open to feedback and advice even if it questions their decisions.  Only a truly self-aware person can take critical feedback without taking offense.  Even unjustified and malicious criticism has the potential to help us improve. 

Once we have a fair and unbiased awareness of ourselves, we can begin learning to understand others.  Knowing what motivates every member of our team can unlock the enormous potential contained therein.  Motivation is highly personal.  Some are motivated by material rewards while others by praise or accomplishment, but most people will give their all to be part of a winning team, even if the fiscal rewards are higher elsewhere.   Simon Sinek, the author of Start with Why explains how different rewards motivate.  He says:

“When people are financially invested, they want a return. When people are emotionally invested, they want to contribute,” [6] furthermore, he also pointed out that, “We follow those who lead not because we have to, but because we want to.”[7]

How do we make people want to follow us?  Effective motivation is relationship based not transactional.  While earning a paycheck is one of the main reasons we work, the non-monetary rewards of working on a great team that accomplishes great things often has more influence on where we choose to work, how long, and how much effort we are willing to expend for that employer.  

For example, Fortune ranks Google as the best company to work for in 2015.  They write that while employees consider its famous perks a plus, employees most often point to the opportunity to work with great people and accomplish great things as the greatest perk of all.  In fact, Google goes to great lengths to facilitate interactions between its employees.  The free food and fun are engineered to create opportunities for employees from all over the organization to interact, building a strong corporate team.  The cafeteria lines run just slow enough that one has to stand in line, giving an opportunity to chat with others around you.  The tables are long and set close together causing strangers to sit near each other.[8]  These factors cause people to interact with others outside their own circle.  The result?  A cross-pollinization throughout the organization that breeds enthusiasm and innovation and a company that attracts and utilizes the best and brightest.

Similarly, a leader must get to know their people and learn what motivates them.  This is a vital first step in getting the most out of the team.  When we take time to know them and let them know we are interested in them as a person their devotion and motivation increases.  My father recently retired from Swanson Enterprises.  He fondly tells of corporate leadership visits to his machine shop.  The CEO and head of human resources would spend a significant amount of their time wandering around the shop floor talking to the workers.  He said they knew each of them including details of their families.  My father felt part of the team, he felt his leaders knew him and cared about him. Even in retirement, he is still a company advocate.

As Dr. Bob Nelson, an expert on employee motivation said: 

“An employee's motivation is a direct result of the sum of interactions with his or her manager.”[9]  

As with motivation, this interaction can be positive or negative.  Positive motivation results from the employee feeling valued and the leader helping them succeed by effectively utilizing their talents and abilities.  When in touch with his or her people, the leader speaks to what is important to the employee and sets them up for success.

Leaders’ awareness does not end with those they lead.  It extends up, down, laterally, and outside the organization.  John C. Maxwell’s The 360° Leader explores this concept in depth. He points out that:

“Ninety-nine percent of all leadership occurs not from the top, but from the middle of an organization.”[10]

This means that leaders must be aware of the needs of all stakeholders and be able to influence people above, below, lateral, inside, and outside their organization.  Ignoring any one of these groups could leave them without the knowledge and resources they need to succeed. 

Those above us set the vision, but not usually in a vacuum.  Being aware of their desires and needs not only helps us align our efforts to their vision, but also helps us to shape that vision.  People are more likely to listen to those who listen to them.  When we take time to understand our leader and their vision, we tell them we care about it and want to help achieve it.  This does not mean we blindly accept their vision but we rather try to understand it so as to be able to align our efforts to the leader’s and framework our proposals to fit it.  This puts us in a position to improve the joint vision. 

This concept applies to those below us.  When we are aware of the needs and desires of our subordinates as well as what they are able to contribute, we can assimilate this into our vision and ensure those above us are able to do the same with theirs.  This applies to our lateral relationships.  Knowing the resources and needs of those in other parts of our organization allows us to marshal their resources as well as support their efforts in achieving organizational goals.  In this way, all in the organization are pulling in the same direction.

The success of an organization, however, is not independent of external factors.  We all have customers, suppliers, government regulators, and those impacted by our operations.  While it is impossible to know everything, being aware of the needs and potential contributions of all these players is vital to our own and our organization’s success.  Products flop because companies ignored the voice of the customer. Expenses spiral out of control because companies fail to keep abreast of what is going on with their suppliers. Businesses lose access to markets or bases of operation when locals, upset at exploitation or negative environmental impacts on the population, rise up against the company as happened after the Union Carbide disaster in India in 1984, which killed almost 4,000 and injured over 550,000.

Being aware of all these stakeholders allows us to take their needs, opinions, and desires into account when setting goals and working towards them.  Managed correctly, we can mobilize the assets they have to offer in pursuing mutually beneficial goals while minimizing negative impacts, which increase their opposition to our operations.  It is said that a rising tide lifts all boats, but this is not necessarily good if the rising tide is a tsunami.  While steamrolling the opposition can work in the short term, it often blows back on us down the road.  Those we steamrolled may be our future employees, suppliers, or customers.  Cultivating good relationships will rarely backfire.

When we swallow our pride and look try to become aware of others, our horizons expand, our resources increase, and our vision of what is possible becomes clearer as we include more and more perspectives and points of view.  None of us made it this far alone and our continued progress depends on our ability to marshal those around us to our cause and help them make it theirs as well.  Myopia will only lead to the ditch of disaster, a broad view puts us on the pathway to success.

---

[1] Font Stream Admin. Font Stream. 20 January 2014. Webpage. 5 April 2015. <http://www.frontstream.com/30-inspirational-employee-engagement-quotes/>.

 [2] Bradberry, Dr. Travis. Why You Need Emotional Intelligence To Succeed. 12 January 2015. 4 April 2015. <https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-you-need-emotional-intelligence-succeed-dr-travis-bradberry?trk=object-title>.

[3]Goleman, Daniel. Brainy Quote. 2001-2015. 3 April 2015. <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/jwCJZcZVpbHRyy0W.99>.

[4] (Jung) Jung, Carl G. Good Reads: C. G. Jung Quotes. 2015. http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/38285.C_G_Jung. 18 April 2015.

[5] Font Stream Admin. Font Stream. 20 January 2014. Webpage. 5 April 2015. <http://www.frontstream.com/30-inspirational-employee-engagement-quotes/>.

[6]  (Font Stream Admin)

[7] Sinek, Simon. "TED.com." September 2009. Simon Sinek: How great leaders inspire action. 5 April 2015. <http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action?language=en#t-11422>.

[8] Colvin, Jeff. "Fortune 100 Personal Bests - The 100 Best Companies to Work For." Fortune 15 March 2015: 32-36. Print.

[9] Nelson, Bob. Brainy Quote. 2001-2015. 5 April 2015. <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/bobnelson194814.html>.

[10] Maxwell, John C. The 360 Degree Leader: Developing Your Influence from Anywhere in the Organization. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 2005. E-book.

My Leadership Crucible: Caring Enough to Correct

Photo from Ancient Wessex Network

In the barren deserts south of the Dead Sea is a wasteland covered with ancient piles of slag.  Khirbat Hamra Ifdan was one of the industrial centers that fueled the early Bronze Age.  Copper ore was extracted from nearby mines and brought to this site where ancient metallurgists crushed the ore-laden rock, sorted out the ore-rich pieces, and placed them in a cup-shaped clay crucible.  The crucible was then superheated until the copper separated from the rock and other impurities.  The small amount of pure copper was collected, mixed with tin, and formed into bronze tools, ingots, and jewelry; while left-over material or slag was discarded.  This purification process was painstaking and labor intensive, but the end product turned the Kingdom of Moab and later, Israel, into regional powerhouses. 

Due to its ability to turn the ore-laced rock into something valuable by removing impurities, the crucible and the fiery smelting process became symbolic of personal purification in religious and philosophical circles.  Hence, a crucible in a person’s life denotes a time of extraordinary suffering that results in personal a purification that would have been otherwise impossible without that “trial by fire.” 

Most successful leaders have passed through formative crucibles – seeming purgatories, where we suffer, our weaknesses are purged, and, if not broken by the trial, we emerge on the other side better, wiser, and more effective leaders.   I have endured several such transformative periods.  The first occurred over fifteen years ago.

Through a lot of luck and a bit of persistence, I had made it into an interpreters’ program that I had pursued for two years.  I had made it through two thirds of the nine month course, when I was called in to meet with the human resource manager who would determine where I would go after the program.  Rather than telling me that I would be going on to an exciting new assignment, he explained that the teachers didn’t think I had what it takes to be an effective interpreter and recommended I be dropped from the program.  It was perhaps one of the darkest days of my career. 

Because I knew I was not the most capable student in the program and was acutely aware of my shortcomings, I frequently asked my instructors for feedback and suggestions on what I could do to improve.  Each time I was told, “Don’t worry, you’re doing all right.”  These false reassurances made the news all the more devastating.  It wasn’t the truth that I was inadequate that hurt but the possibly well meaning, but nonetheless misleading reassurances, followed by the unexpected revelation of my real standing in the course.  Honest feedback was what I needed most to succeed or at least prepare myself for the inevitable.  That is what I didn’t get.  It hurt that no one had cared enough to counsel and correct me until I was almost beyond help. 

Fortunately, I was able to convince the manager that he should give me a chance to prove myself.  I asked for an evaluation on an interpreting excursion the next day.  To my relief, based on my performance, the manager told me I would finish the program and be assigned to the agency’s overseas office. 

Although I had made it through this trial, my crucible was still not complete.  It continued, but this time with a leader who cared enough to correct.  Within a month, I found myself in Germany interpreting for arms control inspections throughout Europe.  I was assigned to a team lead by a man I still consider one of the most influential people in my life.  He made it clear he demanded the best from his people and would not settle for less.  Despite my experience at the interpreters’ school, I was still young, immature, overconfident, and under-qualified.  Consequently, I made some critical mistakes. 

In contrast to my earlier experience, each and every time I failed to rise to his high, but fair standards, he immediately and plainly pointed out my shortcomings, informed me of the consequences for continued substandard performance, and then provided me ample training opportunities to remedy my shortcomings.  By the time he left our team a year and a half later, I had been able to rise to the standards he demanded.  His praise for my abilities meant much more to me than the empty praise of those who were afraid to point my deficiencies for fear of hurting my feelings.  The foundation he helped me build was the basis of my current success.

As often happens as we progress from follower to leader, I had to learn this lesson from the opposite perspective.  I was placed in charge of a team of extremely talented specialists, one of which, while a phenomenal analyst, struggled in some key areas.  However, despite my desires to never subject someone to what I had gone through, I too hesitated to confront those behaviors that were bringing down the team’s effectiveness in fear of hurting his feelings.  This led to not only personally suffering the consequences of my inaction, but also to my analyst and my entire team failing to reach their full potential.  As his leader, I should have cared enough to set standards, insist they be met, identify where those standards were not met, and impose consequences and remedies for failure.

Since that time, I have learned the value of clearly setting out expectations, tactfully identifying deficiencies, and mentoring those willing to change and capable of rising to the necessary standards.  Those who repeatedly prove themselves unwilling or unable to adapt must be let go or moved to where they can succeed. 

As many leaders, I enjoy praising and awarding excellence in my subordinates but dislike confronting them and meting out discipline when they repeatedly fail to meet stated standards.   From the above crucibles, I have learned the value of clear and achievable standards, paired with fair and predictable consequences for failing to meet them.  I have learned that I must force myself to move outside my comfort zone by identifying and correcting deficiencies clearly and immediately but then afterward, showing an increased concern for their progress by providing the training and guidance they need. 

While a good leader never relishes confronting their team members, they nevertheless do not shrink from identifying and rectifying substandard situations by clear feedback, equitable discipline and caring remediation.  A leader who ignores or tolerates substandard performance and fails to correct shortcomings while issues are still manageable is more destructive to team effectiveness than the despotic manager who, it seems, relishes the opportunity to criticize and belittle.  While the latter frustrates and irritates, the former sabotages progress and development by refusing to take upon themselves the most vital leadership roles of guide, teacher, and mentor.

In his science fiction classic Starship Troopers, Robert Heinlein illustrates the importance of confronting signs of non-compliance early.  He points out that the leader that truly cares about his people doesn’t tolerate noncompliance and incompetence.  The true leader points out shortcomings unambiguously and corrects not out of malice, but with the aim of teaching correct principles.  Failing that, he removes those who repeatedly show themselves unable or unwilling to perform to required standards.  Nevertheless, even firing a subordinate is done out of concern for them and the rest of the team.  The incompetent or unrepentant can thus succeed elsewhere or at least no longer jeopardize the team’s success. 

In my life, the most memorable and effective leaders were not those that coddled me or ignored my shortcomings, but those that first of all, set and enforced a standard and then either rewarded success lavishly or imposed fair and consistent consequences for failing to meet those standards followed by giving me the tools I needed to not fail again.

While confronting non-conformance is difficult for an engaged and caring leader, we must not lose sight of the value of frank, fair, and consistent feedback.  While rewarding success builds our people up and reinforces good behavior, this one vectored approach must be balanced with caring but consistent feedback and discipline.  Neglecting this key function, we sow the seeds of failure, complacence and incompetence in us, our teams, and our people. 

Similar to a furnace and crucible, a leader’s main goal should be to take the potential-laden team member and help them purge the limitations holding them back.  This does not have to be unpleasant to those we mentor, but all too often, change requires we endure some discomfort if we are to come reach our true potential.  The principle of “caring enough to correct” calls for us to help those we lead get through this discomfort and to reach the success on the other side.