After finishing business school, he landed several leadership positions and was fast-tracked into the executive level of his organization. But he’s been struggling to find his footing in his new leadership role, especially when he doesn’t agree with his boss. Host Muriel Wilkins coaches him through how to come to terms with leadership decisions he doesn’t agree with while staying true to himself.
Further reading:
- Why We Should Be Disagreeing More at Work
- 3 Ways to Live Out Your Values at Work
- How To Respectfully Disagree With Your Boss
- The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World
MURIEL WILKINS: I’m Muriel Wilkins, and this is Coaching Real Leaders, part of the HBR Podcast Network. I’m a longtime executive coach who works with highly successful leaders who’ve hit a bump in the road. My job is to help them get over that bump by clarifying their goals and figuring out a way to reach them so that hopefully they can lead with a little more ease. I typically work with clients over the course of several months, but on this show we have a one-time coaching meeting focusing on a specific leadership challenge they’re facing.
Today’s guest is someone we’ll call Adam to protect his confidentiality. He began his career on a pretty typical trajectory in the business world: working for a few years, getting a business degree, and then on to the next best opportunity.
ADAM: I’ve always had a major love for finance, and I’m very ambitious. School gave me the opportunity to then make a pivot, and that pivot is what then took me overseas. And going overseas, what I discovered was culturally I was much more connected, I felt much more purpose-driven in picking up that role. It’s much easier for you to navigate that corporate ladder being overseas, especially in a small market. I was able to successfully get promoted into my current role, which is C-suite level.
MURIEL WILKINS: When Adam started his most recent role, he had a plan to help him realize his ambitions.
ADAM: I think at first, I was very optimistic about what I could achieve. In much of my career, I’ve kind of been a change agent. So, I approached it more so from the standpoint of there were some big-ticket things that we needed to do around culture, there were some things that we needed to do around the operating performance of the company. I had a number of things that I wanted to do, but key among them was the trust part, was a little bit more difficult for me to accomplish with my boss. I was able to build relationships with my colleagues, but I think it’s just breaking the barrier with my boss is a little bit more difficult than I expected. It’s less about the dynamic with my boss. It’s really just how I approach the dynamic taking an effect on me, and really how I showed up in certain interactions as a result of that dynamic. It surprised me that I didn’t have more courage to say some of the things that should have been said.
MURIEL WILKINS: Adam has always been on a quest to learn more, and that’s helped him succeed. But now he’s finding himself in a place where relationships matter more than ever, and he wants to work on how to improve communication with those above him. I wanted to get more clarity on where he thinks he needs the most work, so we’ll start there.
ADAM: For me at least the further up in my career I go, I have to move away from this notion of trying to please people either above me or below me, and essentially either learn or get the maturity needed sometimes to make difficult decisions, sometimes to confront situations I think with kind of a head-on perspective as opposed to more of a passive position where I look at the big picture and say, “Well, this thing is temporary and it will pass.” But I think I need that maturity in my career to essentially deal with difficult situations, but also just to ensure that I am not allowing, I suppose, myself, to fall into this trap where sometimes I choose not to confront situations that I need to.
MURIEL WILKINS: And so, is that the trap that you’re in right now?
ADAM: I think so. My career advancement has moved so rapidly that I am now trusted into some of these positions where I have to also make sure that my maturity level gets up to that point as well. And in certain situations that I think at the core of me, I should have acted better or should have acted different, I’m not seeing that for myself. So, it is a trap.
MURIEL WILKINS: Got it, yeah. So, great that you are recognizing that there’s a dissonance between maybe what the situation requires of you and what you are bringing to it or not bringing to it. But we’ll test that out and see whether it is actually a maturity issue or maybe it’s a cultural issue, or in terms of the organizational context that you’re in, who knows? So, I sort of said is that the trap you’re in, but you tell me what brought you to coaching today?
ADAM: I think for me, the main thing was I recently was appointed to a senior executive role within my organization. Essentially, it required me to take on a very expansive portfolio. And unfortunately for me, the support system that typically you would get with such an appointment and the relationships that you need ultimately to culture and to develop with my boss, it wasn’t there.
I was really questioning whether or not that was me, something that I was doing, whether something I lacked, I wasn’t showing up in meetings or overall, whether it was just maybe a matter of style. And I’ve had relationships with my bosses before that weren’t a hundred percent, but you still managed to do the work. But in this new position, there were certain responsibilities that were trusted upon me. And I was required to be a certain person in some of those situations with this dynamic around me and my boss not necessarily having a good relationship.
But I should have put that aspect aside and still showed up. And the fact that I didn’t show up made me reflect and think, “Well, why is it that you’re acting different in this situation? What ultimately is causing you not to show up?” It felt like The Wizard of Oz and I’m the lion who’s chasing courage or trying to understand where his courage is. Because in that moment, I would’ve pegged myself to be more courageous.
I think for me, one of the things I have to figure out is does the context here matter. Is that something that’s deep within me that I need to work on to figure out that? Or is it just more contextual in the sense that there were other things at play here that really kind of played on the way that I showed up, and that’s a part I’m hoping that I can uncover.
MURIEL WILKINS: So, the lion is my favorite character, especially in The Wiz.
ADAM: Yes, yes.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay, so let me make sure I grasp the situation. It sounds like up until sort of this chapter in your career, you’ve been able to manage relationships with your bosses, even if they weren’t the best of relationships. Now you’re in a situation, senior role, have been accelerated in your career quite quickly, and there seem to be some rough patches with your boss. And at the same time, what you’re experiencing is that you’re not showing up in certain situations in the way that you would expect yourself to show up.
ADAM: Yes.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. And so the question is are those two things correlated, right? Are you being impacted by the relationship with your boss in the way that you’re now leading? Which would be new for you because in the past you felt like you weren’t impacted, you were sort of able to go on and do what you do.
ADAM: Yes.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. And then the question also for you is, am I the problem? Is something happening with me that’s causing me to show up the way, and we haven’t gotten into yet how you’re showing up, but to show up the way that I show up as the lion, right? Or is it because of what’s happening around me that is causing me to do it that way?
ADAM: Yes.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. So, let me give you a little preview before we kind of unpack it because you said is it context. Well, context always matters. You’re not leading in a vacuum. And what might make you effective in one context isn’t necessarily what’s going to make you effective in another context. And so, yes, does context matter? Absolutely. Is context the only thing that matters? No, because you are in that context. Other people are in that context.
And so there’s a saying, I didn’t make this up, but I will repeat it, which is every dynamic is co-created. Everything is co-created. But you’re the one sitting in front of me, not your boss, not your peers. I don’t have the whole organization here. We’ll take that into consideration. But you’re the one sitting in front of me, so what we’re going to deal with is what is the part that you own in whatever dynamic is happening.
ADAM: Okay.
MURIEL WILKINS: All right? So, do you own the whole thing? Nobody really owns everything. You are operating within a context and you are probably reacting to it, but that is probably part of what you can manage. Okay?
ADAM: Okay.
MURIEL WILKINS: So, you said what didn’t meet your expectations is how you showed up in certain situations. What is it about the way that you showed up that didn’t align with what you would expect of yourself?
ADAM: So, the way that I typically process information is really to see different angles. So, key decisions, I kind of run them through these three different scenarios, obviously your optimal scenario, your base case scenario, and then your worst case scenario. And I always make sure that I kind of think about maybe some of the small things. You think about the big things, but then you narrow in on the small things. And then really kind of run those things through, again, maybe another set of scenarios.
So, what I was finding was that decisions were being made around me. I was part of that decision-making process. And I couldn’t influence the process in a way that would help the entire room to benefit from looking at these different scenarios, or I didn’t influence it. I would interject and rarely say a few things that would give some of that perspective, but I never really … I typically will stick to my gun and make sure that, okay, guys, you understand we’re doing this. This is what we’re doing, this is what are the potential blowbacks. Tell me how could we deal with this? And that was not happening in these situations. And they were impacting people’s lives, they were impacting the organization. And I just felt that I was not really putting my best foot forward leading. I was almost being influenced either by the process or just didn’t really show up as I typically would really to allow the best decisions to be made.
MURIEL WILKINS: And why is this, before we get into it further, why is this bothering you now?
ADAM: Well, it’s bothering me primarily because we were dealing with people’s lives. Some of these decisions that we made impacted my staff, and that weighs on me more than anything else. The numbers, if we excel one year and we don’t excel the next year, I can always pull myself from off the ground. But one of the things I struggle with is either disappointing people or people being, I suppose, jaded by the type of leader that I am or the leadership team that I form part of. So, that to me played a significant role on my psyche because I felt like I could have influenced the decisions a lot more.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. And so, you felt like you could have influenced the decision a lot more. Let’s be a little bit more specific. What do you think would have happened if you had acted differently, shown up differently than what you did? What’s the different ending to the story?
ADAM: I think the Hollywood version, it’s that everyone would just come to my perspective and maybe some of those things would’ve been incorporated. But I see your point.
MURIEL WILKINS: I didn’t make a point. I just asked you a question, Adam.
ADAM: I was hopeful that in some of those situations, maybe human element could have been factored into the decisions, and ultimately maybe decisions were either more incremental or more employee-centric, more thought about the impact of the employee. So, in the ideal world, I was hoping that maybe the decision could have been altered in such a way to centrally allow for less of an impact on the employees.
MURIEL WILKINS: And so, that would’ve been one possibility, the Hollywood version, that you would’ve shown up the way that you expected yourself to you. We haven’t again gotten into the tactics, but you would’ve done whatever magical influencing you think you should have done. And there would’ve been a happily ever after ending, and nobody would be disappointed, everybody would be happy, et cetera. Okay, so that’s one version.
Is there a version where you could have done the same magical influencing act and there would have been a different ending?
ADAM: Yes, absolutely.
MURIEL WILKINS: What could that ending be?
ADAM: The same exact ending that ended up happening.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. All right. So, I’m pointing this out because I think that it’s important not to confuse whether it’s the outcome that you’re disappointed in, which you’re disappointed in the outcome for sure. But whether it’s the outcome that you can control or whether it’s your way of influencing that you can control. And I think what’s happening is you jumped from if only I had shown up a certain way, and then you went from that to if I had shown up that way, then X would’ve happened, the magical happily ever after ending. And that’s not necessarily true. It could have, but it also could have not. You don’t have that much power.
ADAM: Yeah.
MURIEL WILKINS: Sorry, I hate to say it to you. If you do, tell me because then I’ll have you influence everybody I know.
ADAM: No.
MURIEL WILKINS: You can’t guarantee the outcome.
ADAM: You’re absolutely right. And it’s funny because I think the latter outcome, I could see that happening much more than the version that I hoped for. Because like you said, it’s essentially influencing the room.
MURIEL WILKINS: When first approaching this coaching conversation with Adam, it seemed like a large part of his challenge was about the dynamic between him and the leaders of the organization. Whenever I start a coaching session that seems to center around interpersonal issues, I like to make it clear all dynamics between people are co-created. But when I’m only coaching one person, that’s the only set of the equation we can work on and try to change.
This seems like something Adam already understood as he freely spoke about disappointment and regret around his own behavior at work. Without focusing too much on the specific circumstances, it’s clear that Adam wishes he had handled certain situations differently. So, the first distinction to make was about whether he was disappointed in his own actions, his ability to influence, or the outcome. That distinction is important because it helps us focus on what is and isn’t in his control. I wanted to dig into how he views influencing a bit more, so we went down that path as I asked him to define the word.
ADAM: I suppose for me it’s presenting your arguments, your arguments being essentially crisp, data-driven, but also having the conviction and the belief in the arguments that I’m making, and essentially convincing my peers to go along with something that I’ve laid out for them.
MURIEL WILKINS: And so, how do you know if you have been successful at influencing or not?
ADAM: In the work context, it typically redounds to committee then makes a decision. So, does the committee kind of move in a direction, let’s say for example, opposite to the view that I was proposing? So, typically, if the committee decides that they’re going to go opposite to me, I kind of feel like I missed the mark. If they’re convinced by my arguments, I’ve convinced them.
MURIEL WILKINS: All right, so let me offer a little bit of a different way or maybe parse apart different responsibilities. One responsibility can be influencing something, influencing the outcome or the process, let’s talk about the process that will get to an outcome. Then there’s another responsibility, which is the decision-making responsibility. The decision-making responsibility has how much control over the outcome?
ADAM: I think a significant portion, yeah.
MURIEL WILKINS: Yeah, right? Whoever decides, they’re the ones saying we’re doing this or we’re doing that. The influencing responsibility has how much control over the outcome?
ADAM: Significantly less, probably definitely in the minority.
MURIEL WILKINS: Definitely less. To what degree? I don’t know, but less than the decision-maker. So, what I’m hearing is you weren’t the decision-maker.
ADAM: No.
MURIEL WILKINS: You were the influencer. And yet you are placing the same success criteria on what I would see for a decision-maker. Did I make the right decision or not? It’s pure, I can see it. If I say yes, then that is a hundred percent. If I say no, then it goes in the other direction. Versus influencing, which is more about increasing the chances that someone or people will go in your direction. It’s more about the effort that you place in that process rather than the actual outcome. So, is there a scenario where you have been able to look at yourself over the span of your career where you said, “You know what? I believe I did the best that I could in terms of influencing the outcome, even though it didn’t go my way.”
ADAM: Yeah, I have plenty of examples like that.
MURIEL WILKINS: You have plenty of examples, okay.
ADAM: Yeah.
MURIEL WILKINS: So, what is the difference here?
ADAM: I suppose it’s the seniority in my level. I worked as an analyst where my decisions, essentially I would have to take my recommendations to committee. I would essentially make recommendations. I would work long hours and make my case, but ultimately, many times portfolio managers would go the other way. But in this instance, it just kind of feels itself to me like there was a lot more riding on my ability to influence.
MURIEL WILKINS: All right, which is fine. I think it’s just let’s be clear, you didn’t own the decision though.
ADAM: No.
MURIEL WILKINS: All right. So, now let’s go back to the if there was room, if you feel like I actually could have done more, there was more to be done in influencing that maybe would’ve swayed the decision, let’s go back to that to see what that is. So, you said earlier on that I couldn’t influence the decision and then you said I didn’t influence the decision. Which one do you believe it is? Is it that you couldn’t influence in the way that you think you should or that you didn’t influence in the way you should?
ADAM: I would say definitely didn’t. Because couldn’t would mean that there was no discussion, no forum. That wasn’t what I was trying to say. Certainly is that I didn’t. So, there was a forum where, like you said, decisions were being discussed, but I didn’t.
MURIEL WILKINS: Okay. And when I hear the difference between couldn’t and didn’t, you tell me if that resonates with you. When I hear I could not do this, I think about I don’t have the capability to do it. I couldn’t ride that bike because I don’t know how to ride a bike. I didn’t ride the bike, inherent in that to me is a choice. It’s I know how to ride a bike, but I didn’t do it. For whatever reason, I didn’t ride the bike today. In this particular case, what is it that you recognize you didn’t do that you could have done?
ADAM: Yeah, so I think for me, certainly I feel like I wasn’t passionate about why I felt there should hav