Many people believe that leaders instinctively make the best decisions based on past experience, almost like muscle memory. But Carol Kauffman, assistant professor at Harvard Medical School and the founder of the Institute of Coaching, challenges this view. She explains why falling back on automatic behaviors can lead to poor decisions, especially when the stakes are high.
In this episode, Kauffman outlines her framework for sound decision-making in high-pressure situations. She also shares real-life stories of leaders she has coached through difficult decisions and offers insights into how to navigate high-stakes challenges effectively.
Key episode topics include: leadership, leadership styles, strategy, decision making and problem solving.
HBR On Leadership curates the best case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, to help you unlock the best in those around you. New episodes every week.
- Listen to the original HBR IdeaCast episode: Why Leaders Should Rethink Their Decision-Making Process (2023)
- Find more episodes of HBR IdeaCast.
- Discover 100 years of Harvard Business Review articles, case studies, podcasts, and more at HBR.org
HANNAH BATES: Welcome to HBR on Leadership, case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, hand-selected to help you unlock the best in those around you.
Many people believe that leaders instinctively make the best decisions based on past experience, almost like muscle memory. But Carol Kauffman argues that falling back on automatic patterns of behavior is often wrong — especially when the stakes are high.
Kauffman is an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School and the founder of the Institute of Coaching. And she’s coauthor of the book Real-Time Leadership: Find Your Winning Moves When the Stakes Are High.
In this episode, she explains her framework for sound decision-making in high-stakes situations. She also shares real-life stories from leaders she has coached through making difficult decisions.
This episode originally aired on HBR IdeaCast in February 2023. Here it is.
CURT NICKISCH: Welcome to the HBR IdeaCast from Harvard Business Review. I’m Curt Nickisch.
When it comes to making tough decisions, leaders often draw on their experience, whether they’re a consensus builder or a pacesetter, it makes sense for them to do what has worked before. Don’t we all? But today’s guest says, in reality, many leaders fall into traps when they manage problems the same way each time. Because each situation is different.
Organizations evolve and what got you here isn’t necessarily what’s going to get you there. Instead, she argues that successful leaders take a more expansive view of situations at hand. They reevaluate those problems across a broader set of possible solutions and dynamically adapt their management to each problem.
Carol Kauffman is a professor at Harvard Medical School and founded the Institute of Coaching and with David Noble of View Advisors, she wrote the HBR article, “The Power of Options,” and the new book, Real-Time Leadership, Find Your Winning Moves When the Stakes Are High. Carol, thanks for being here.
CAROL KAUFFMAN: Thank you.
CURT NICKISCH: Conventional wisdom is that leaders are great at solving problems because they’ve done it before. Isn’t that why experience counts?
CAROL KAUFFMAN: Absolutely. You can say maybe 90% of the time, 95% of the time. But when the world is topsy-turvy, what you need is massive agility and the capacity to make space to make a smart choice.
CURT NICKISCH: This is where modus operandi gets its name, your MO, we know what we like to do. People also know how we like to do things, and that helps with predictability. If that works 90% of the time, that actually sounds pretty good to some people.
CAROL KAUFFMAN: Well, that’s true unless your life is on the line or your company is on the line, a curveball gets thrown at you. One of the things that really helped us think about this is the Viktor Frankl quote that, “Between every stimulus and response there is a space, and in that space is our freedom.” What we try to do in Real-Time Leadership is help people know to make that space, but then what to do in that space. And pattern recognition and default options work a lot of the time, but you have to really be mindfully alert when you got the biggest opportunities- what are the greatest risks facing you.
CURT NICKISCH: You use this term, “Make the space for thinking about this,” people like to get to the response quickly. Why do people always fall back on solving problems the same way? What’s the benefit to that?
CAROL KAUFFMAN: Fallback is the perfect word. When we are under stress and high stakes, we become exaggerated versions of ourselves. So if you’re someone who leaps into action, you’re going to immediately leap and you might leap in the wrong direction. But if you’re someone who thinks a lot, you may actually lean back and rely on data for too long and take too much time. And if you’re a natural nurturer, you will take care of people first, and that may be exactly the right thing to do. It’s how do you overcome that automatic default, again, particularly under stress.
CURT NICKISCH: We recognize that it’s handy, but it is a trap, right? Let’s talk a little bit more about creating that space and taking a more expansive view. How do you start to do that?
CAROL KAUFFMAN: In our book we have an acronym and we have an acronym because particularly under stress, we can’t remember things. And this will help. It also helps me remember it. One is when you’re in a situation, how can you make space by being mindfully alert? Then how can you make space by being an options generator? Then to really validate your vantage point, because we tend to believe ourselves too quickly. And then E is how you actually engage and effect change.
CURT NICKISCH: And those spell MOVE – the MOVE framework.
CAROL KAUFFMAN: Exactly. So the first one, how to be mindfully alert? That’s noticing. How do you just create a space by noticing? And then noticing what? Most people are one dimensional leaders and we think about three-dimensional leaders. There’s the one who just gets things done and we know those, they’re really brilliant, but they run rough shot over their people, et cetera.
The first dimension of leadership is, what do I need to do? The second one that’s often overlooked is, who do I need to be? What about my inner resources so I can make space and choices? And then the third one is, how do I relate to other people?
And we tend to get it wrong, that one, with the golden rule, treat others as you would want to be treated, as opposed to the platinum rule, treat others as they would want to be treated. So for that to expand your leadership question one, what do you need to do? Question two, who do you need to be? And question three, how do people need me to relate to them?
CURT NICKISCH: Okay, what’s an example on how might you answer those questions then?
CAROL KAUFFMAN: One of the stories that we really love is Matt. Matt was the shoo-in candidate to be a CEO of an organization and he’s in front of the board, those two-day things you do in front of the board. The first dimension of leadership would be what is he going to accomplish? His understanding of what was being demanded of him was to be super smart, show how much he knew the business. He was the guy. He’s doing that he’s watching the board look bored. Then he is watching them, he’s lost them, but he only has that first dimension in mind and he hasn’t really thought it through. He just tries harder and it gets worse. He finally, with his dignity intact, just leaves.
He then calls me and David going, “Help.” So we started talking to Matt, and first we looked at, “What was your first dimension of leadership? You decided that was what it was, but were you right?” He then got to the point where he realized that what he needed to accomplish wasn’t so much to wow them with information, but to communicate to them to act like a CEO rather than a supplicant. That was the first dimension of change.
The second dimension of change in leadership was what was going on inside of him. What happened is he wasn’t able to be flexible in the moment he saw what was happening, he panicked. But another thing is he had decided that he had to be this sort of tough guy and hide his caring. In reality, he was a very caring person. That third dimension of leadership, he actually had screened out of the interview rather than brought it in.
And when he did, he showed up the next day not thinking about, “What is it that I have to say?” But, “How can people absorb? How can I create an environment where people feel safe and interested and safe with me at the helm?” And by making space and thinking about those things, the board was able to see that they would be in safe hands with him.
CURT NICKISCH: It’s good he had a two-day interview, he was actually able to step back. He had that time to reflect and then make space. A lot of leaders have time for this. Problems may come up or crises come up, but it’s not like it has to be done right away. We often have more time than we realize. How many options do you need to come up with when you’re facing something and you’re trying to just get beyond what you would normally do?
CAROL KAUFFMAN: When I work with my leaders, what I want them to do is to be able to have four options available to them. What I say is, “I don’t care which option you pick, but I want you to be able to do any of them.” Let’s say you’re at a meeting and somebody sneers at you during the meeting. That sneer is the stimulus, and your response may be whatever. But what I want a leader to be able to do is have four responses, and we call this way power. Someone makes a snide remark. Do you lean in and talk to them about it, confront it, take it on? That’s one option.
It may be someone makes that snide remark, and you may be aware that if you don’t cut this off at the pass, things are not going to work out. You want to be able to make that choice, but you don’t want it to be driven by anger or frustration. Now, the other choice you could have would be to lean back and perhaps think, “Okay, what’s the data here? I don’t think this is going to be really impacting anyone.
I might just make one comment about the information and move on.” But you also may want to lean with, “What’s going on with this person that he or she is being snarky?” And remember they’re having a really bad day or things going on in their life. You can actually be empathic to that person and perhaps say something supportive.
Or the hardest one is to not lean at all. You can lean in and engage, lean back, go to the data, lean with and connect or worry about the emotional personal consequences or not lean, which is the hardest. And not lean is your capacity to truly be able to not be triggered. Pause