Speaking Social

Young leaders have an advantage over me. They are fluent in social.

What I mean by that is they can communicate as easily on Twitter, Snapchat, or whatever the new thing is that I haven’t even heard of yet. That’s an advantage, because every year a larger slice of the workforce communicates that way. Already nearly a third of our team members are Millenials or Gen Z. They may not use social media for everything, but they use it for enough things that you’re going to miss something if you don’t.

More critical, though, is the mindset behind it. They use social media because they want to always stay in touch. They fear missing something, and four hours is too long to go without an update.

Being fluent in social doesn’t just mean understanding social media. It means feeding that desire to always be connected. You have to start being just as chatty about your expectations and their workload as they are on Hangouts.

You can choose not to, but you’re going to lose the people who are your future.

How Do You Know What They're Thinking?

There’s a big challenge every leader faces: how do you know what people are thinking?

The problem is, some of your team have ideas you need to hear. Others have objections you don’t know about. You think you have it all because you have meetings. You discuss things. You solicit input.

In any group, there are vocal people and silent people. There are introverts and extroverts. There are articulate people and people with simple vocabularies. And the chances are, what you think you know about your team’s opinions came from the vocal, articulate extroverts.

I once hear then-CNN Anchor Soledad O’Brien say, “True leadership starts in the conversation. You have to get the truth on the table. You have to give a voice to everyone.”

That’s your job. At some point, quiet the vocal people and ask the silent ones. Calm the extroverts and draw out the introverts. Give the folks who aren’t fluent time and space to form their thoughts.

Until everyone speaks, you don’t know everything you need to know.

Teams of Equals

There’s some new research that has some interesting implications for leaders and teams. Researchers found that mixing up students by capability when assigning group projects doesn’t work well for any of them.

The smart kids resent it because they think they’ll carry most of the load. The slowest kids expect to be carried, and odds are good at least one of the average kids will decide to skate. As a teaching technique, those teams taught a lot of the bad stuff we see on teams.

Now the smart folks are suggesting a better way: teams of equals. If you put together a team of high achievers, they’ll spark each other; this is where your innovative leaps will come from. A team of average workers will get a lot done, because there won’t be a “smart kid” to lean on. And a team of less experienced people may not get as much work done, but they’ll learn faster because they’ll all be engaged in noodling through it together.

It’s natural to want to put your sharp people with the new guys when assigning group work, but next time try teams of equals. They won’t all perform the same, but I’ll bet overall your team does better, and they’ll enjoy their work more too.

Let Your Team Set the Standards

I once heard an outstanding talk by Mike Krzyzewski, legendary men's basketball coach at Duke University. Krzyzewski also coached a couple of men's basketball teams for the Olympics. He talked about getting all those superior athletes, the leaders of their own teams, to play as a team and accept roles that sometimes were relatively minor.

His technique? At the very first meeting, he asked the whole team, "What are our rules?" And they'd hash out expectations for practices, attending meetings, being on time, behavior during free time. All the rules a team has to have.

The magic here, Coach K says, is that the team decides, and then the team has ownership and the team holds each other accountable. "Hey, look, guys. We all agreed that if we're going to meet our goal of Olympic gold, this is what we have to do." Krzyzewski rarely had to say anything.

I've tried this on a couple of different teams, not always successfully. If you have anyone in your group who's prone to skate, who just wants to do the minimum to get by, this will lead to a lot of conflict. But when all of your team members want to grow and achieve, it works like a dream. And it takes the ego out of things, because rather than following you they're keeping standards they set themselves.

When Good People aren't Team People

I remember one of the best workers I ever had. I fired him.

This guy was a barn-burner. He was at work every day, early most of the time. He worked every minute he was there, and he was fast and accurate. On top of that, he took short breaks and got back to work fast. I never checked, but it wouldn't surprise me if he got as much work done as two other people, and his work was good work.

The problem was, he was disruptive. You know the term "loose cannon?" It comes from the days the Navy used sailing ships, and cannons mounted on wheels. Those cannons were controlled by men pulling on ropes. If a cannon got away from its crew, you had hundreds of pounds of iron and wood crashing around the deck, wherever the roll of the ship took it. You can imagine the chaos and damage.

My guy was a loose cannon. He knew he was good, so he thought he was essential. He was contemptuous of everyone else. He wouldn't listen to his supervisor. He didn't care what another team member might need from him at the moment. He didn't even care what company policies or government regulations said, he did his job his way. In then end, he broke my team back into a bunch of individual workers. No cooperation, no shared goals, and a lot of back-biting. Everyone was looking out for number one.

When you have a person like that, send him or her down the road. The longer you wait, the more work and time it will take to rebuild the team afterward. And the sooner you do, the more powerful the message that being a team player is more valuable than being an outstanding loner.

Generations Take 1

I kind of want to call baloney on all the recent hype on the differences between generations, because your team members are people, not statistics. All the studies are data-crunching that yields some trends that may or may not be true of your people.

That said, there are some things that seem to be true more often than not. Younger employees are more social, more likely to use social media, and more concerned with knowing why. Older employees are more likely to be nose to the grindstone, and less happy about someone telling them what to do.

The lesson here: your employees all have different goals, and want different things from you and your organization. It’s your job to know each team member, know why they work, what they value, how to set them up for success, and what makes a good experience for them.

Yes, that means you have to spend time with them, you have to talk, you have to observe. But that’s what leaders do. We’re a long way past treating them all like identical cogs in the wheel. If you don’t want to put in the time, then you don’t really want to lead, you just want followers.

The 2nd Rule of Presence: Wherever You Are, Be All There

The best advice I got from the outgoing commander when I took command of my company was the Three Rules of Presence. 

The second one was this: Wherever you are, be all there. Be present in more than just body.

He said soldiers are used to being overlooked by officers. They're used to brass who really aren't interested. You dilute the power of the first rule (leverage your location) if you obviously are mentally elsewhere.

So look at people. Turn away from the computer. Keep your Blackberry in your pocket. Set aside the last thing you did, and the next thing you have to do. Give yourself 100% to the conversation or activity you're participating in right now.

Do this, and you'll learn more, people will be motivated by your interest, and you won't miss information because it passed through your ears without contacting your brain.

Don't do it, and your decisions won't be as good, you'll know less, and your people will peg you as just another seagull manager: You fly by, and what you leave behind is, well . . . crap.

Obvious advice, you've heard it before, but ask yourself: what percentage of the time do you have your boss's complete, unfocused attention? If it's so easy, why doesn't he/she do it more? And, be honest, why don't we? Give your people what they deserve: Your focus.

Take Charge

No one wants to be in an out-of-control meeting, or on a project team that's spinning its wheels. That happens a lot, though, often because the leader doesn't want to be bossy.

The first thing the military teaches young leaders is this: When in charge, take charge. If you're the leader, do your job. That doesn't mean bark orders like a tyrant. Taking charge means a few simple things that anyone can do, but until someone does them the team is going nowhere:
1. Set the focus - here's what we're working on right now.
2. Keep everyone on task.
3. Draw out opposing viewpoints - ask for objections.
4. Give everyone a chance to be heard.
5. After all input is on the table, make the decision, if one is required. You're the tie-breaker.

Symbolism helps a lot. Take the head seat at the table, or stand. You've been put in charge, so let them see you take charge, not for your benefit, but because every team needs a leader.