When we advocate strongly in a team discussion, we offer the group our best thinking and our preferred path forward. When we engage in a debate on the topic, we examine everyone’s advocacy from all sides, exposing the flaws and the strengths of each and every argument. Debate takes time, energy, and trust and we reserve it for those issues and decisions we have to get right or suffer extreme consequences.
If you're new to a team that's weak in this area, one tactic is to advance a faulty idea or argument yourself and see if gets challenged. If not, then find somone on the team to challenge your weak idea and show the rest of the them that (a) what a healthy debate and acquiesence looks like, and (b) that nobody's ideas are beyond challenging. I've seen it termed in defence circles as "Good ideas out-rank everybody."
Sometimes debates will reveal questions that need answering in order to find the best way forward. These questions can allocated so as to challenge individual team members causing them to grow in their effort to find answers.
And I'll take my Pepsi straight ThankYouVeryMuch. :)
That also is helpful in that you are modeling that 'challenging the leader’s thinking' will be received in a productive way.
If a leader is notorious for shutting down debate over their own ideas, and is determined to change that reputation, a season of being openly self critical might accomplish the same.
Do you think your Pepsi loyalty says anything about your age or geographic origin, Tim? :)
Apr 10, 2022·edited Apr 10, 2022Liked by Admired Leadership
I'm not so comfortable on being openly self-critical because a leader needs to maintain their reputation both for themselves, their position, and their team. In particular, the team needs to have confidence in who they are following, and if the leader is openly self-critical, it's not too far of a step for the team to start criticizing the leader too.
If an existing leader has been shutting down debate over their ideas and wants to change to a healthy way of leading, it'll take a lot of time & training to change the underlying attitude that resulted in that behavior. In that case I'd suggest a change of venue where the leader is working under a coach or mentor to help the leader change their attitude and form new, healthy habits of leading.
In the case where a new leader is following an authoritarian leader, I'd suggest some thinking out loud sessions where the leader posits a problem and thinks out loud while working through it. As long as the leader engages the team in the process they'll learn how to approach the problem and how to make their own contributions. While it'll take time for the team to learn to trust the new leader, it can be done if the leader is consistently open and fair.
As for Pepsi - that's a big maaaaybeee..... I've lived in a few places so odds are I've picked things up along the way. :)
If you're new to a team that's weak in this area, one tactic is to advance a faulty idea or argument yourself and see if gets challenged. If not, then find somone on the team to challenge your weak idea and show the rest of the them that (a) what a healthy debate and acquiesence looks like, and (b) that nobody's ideas are beyond challenging. I've seen it termed in defence circles as "Good ideas out-rank everybody."
Sometimes debates will reveal questions that need answering in order to find the best way forward. These questions can allocated so as to challenge individual team members causing them to grow in their effort to find answers.
And I'll take my Pepsi straight ThankYouVeryMuch. :)
That also is helpful in that you are modeling that 'challenging the leader’s thinking' will be received in a productive way.
If a leader is notorious for shutting down debate over their own ideas, and is determined to change that reputation, a season of being openly self critical might accomplish the same.
Do you think your Pepsi loyalty says anything about your age or geographic origin, Tim? :)
I'm not so comfortable on being openly self-critical because a leader needs to maintain their reputation both for themselves, their position, and their team. In particular, the team needs to have confidence in who they are following, and if the leader is openly self-critical, it's not too far of a step for the team to start criticizing the leader too.
If an existing leader has been shutting down debate over their ideas and wants to change to a healthy way of leading, it'll take a lot of time & training to change the underlying attitude that resulted in that behavior. In that case I'd suggest a change of venue where the leader is working under a coach or mentor to help the leader change their attitude and form new, healthy habits of leading.
In the case where a new leader is following an authoritarian leader, I'd suggest some thinking out loud sessions where the leader posits a problem and thinks out loud while working through it. As long as the leader engages the team in the process they'll learn how to approach the problem and how to make their own contributions. While it'll take time for the team to learn to trust the new leader, it can be done if the leader is consistently open and fair.
As for Pepsi - that's a big maaaaybeee..... I've lived in a few places so odds are I've picked things up along the way. :)