Facing the Organization’s To-Do List

In the face of trying to tackle our organization’s to-do list and our hyper-focus on multitasking in today’s world, we often attempt to do everything at one time. We focus on “how much” vs. “how well.” We think that more is better. We believe that we “should” be able to accomplish many things at one time.

The problem isn’t that we can’t do more, but that the focus on “more” ironically keeps us from accomplishing more. In Franklin-Covey’s The Four Disciplines of Execution (4DX), they state that the more goals a person or team has to achieve, the less focus they have and that many organizations simply have too many competing priorities or initiatives to be truly effective. Consider this from your own experience. How many times have you tried to accomplish a list of things and succeeded in all or most of them? Chances are that you were less focused, spread too thin, froze, lost track, became overwhelmed, or didn’t achieve the results that you were after.

Now consider the depth and complexity of a typical organization’s to-do list and all of the people, resources, time, and energy that are needed to even complete one item successfully. Yet, when we consider only focusing on one or two things, we dwell on what else we won’t get done or that we’re somehow failing. Then, in hindsight, we don’t recognize how our approach to tackle everything ultimately did lead to failure.

By contrast, if we focus on one or two things at a time, we’re more likely to both do them well and see them to completion. Then, as we come away with a greater sense of accomplishment, motivation, and focus, we can fully dive into the next thing on our list.

Fixing the Weakest Link

Given the many items on our to-do list, how do we decide where to focus? Ultimately, we’ll get the greatest leverage by identifying the weakest link.

The weakest link is typically the item that is causing the greatest negative impact. In an organization, areas of significant impact generally connect to key business areas such as quality, productivity, finances, safety, and infrastructure. In our personal lives, they connect to whatever we most value. Once we identify these areas, often through data and metrics, we can focus on the initiative, process, cultural element, or behavior that most impacts the business area.

One organization I worked with struggled with trying to do too many things at one time. Prior to our work together, they tried to implement numerous processes and goals with no success in any one of them. Leadership was focused on so many things that they had no time for accountability and follow-through. Employees were confused and overwhelmed. The organization didn’t stick with anything long enough to get buy-in, traction, or comprehension. In the face of ambiguity, no one really knew what or how to change to achieve the goals (which weren’t even clearly defined, another symptom of being spread too thin). As a result, almost nothing changed except for higher frustration, lower morale, and increased cynicism.

In our work together, I had them pick one approach with two goals around safety and quality and only focus on that for at least six months. This forced them to become clear and focused. They not only defined the goals with measurable outcomes but also created plans with timelines to achieve them. We incorporated change management approaches that included more hands-on engagement from leadership, training, and quality control checks. Previously, when trying to do too much, they didn’t have time to be strategic, thorough, and intentional. Now they did, and the results showed. Within six months, they achieved an increase of over 33% towards their goals.

Even though fixing the weakest link involves focusing on one or two things at a time, we’re much more likely to solve for what’s most important. With those big rocks taken care of, we can then move on to what’s next on our list. Ironically, in the time it takes to fully complete the initial one or two goals and then complete the next one or two goals, we’ll almost certainly achieve more than if we’d tried to focus on four goals at one time.

For an additional tool to help identify the weakest links, check out Lewin’s Force Field Analysis.

Key Questions to Tackle Your Organization’s To-Do List

• What keeps you caught in the trap of trying to do too many things instead of just one or two at a time?
• What are your top values, and where might the biggest gap be in living in alignment with those values?
• In your organization, what data and metrics can help you identify the weakest links?
• What would it look like to focus on depth vs. breadth as you work towards your goals?
• What helps you maintain focus?

While there are many change models such as ADKAR, Kotter’s model, and McKinsey’s 7-S Framework, it can be easy to get so focused on the model that we overlook the fundamental key to change: people. Even then, we can overlook a fundamental key to helping people change: relationships.

Consider a change you’ve made or been part of. Perhaps it was learning a new piece of software, getting a new boss, or following a new rule. Next, think of the people who either mandated the change or helped you implement or adapt to it. Were they people who you trusted, respected, and made you feel cared for? Or, the opposite? Chances are that the change was easier to embrace if you viewed the people behind the change positively and had good relationships with them.

Good relationships are crucial to making change successful. If we believe someone has our best interest at heart, if they genuinely want to see us succeed, and if they know and treat us as a person instead of an object, we’re much more likely to want to change.

I recently met with a work team located in another country that faced resistance for years in trying to implement new programs. It didn’t matter to the recipients how great their programs were, what data they could provide to demonstrate their effectiveness, or how smart the team was. What made the difference was the team making the effort to build relationships, understand their culture, and demonstrate genuine care. Through their continued efforts to build relationships they developed trust, and this trust led to recipients embracing the team’s ideas, programs, and recommendations. It opened a window that would have otherwise remained closed and resulted in both parties working together on opposite sides of the glass.

On the contrary, I also recently witnessed a professional, multi-million dollar consulting firm try to implement process changes on behalf of senior leadership. Their approach was to make some quick assessments, tell people what they should do differently, and implement a “thou-shalt” approach. This approach was mirrored by senior leadership, who just made a few token appearances during implementation. As you might assume, the recipients felt objectified and resisted the change. All they had to do was nod and wait it out for things to return back to normal.

Building relationships takes time, and there is no shortcut. It also has to be genuine and without agenda. For example, waiting until you need something from someone before getting to know them will likely backfire. Instead, we can start getting to know the people who work with, for, and above us. For senior leaders, this means getting out of the office and visiting employees. For managers, it’s things like building coalitions with other managers. For individual contributors, it’s asking leaders for things like informational interviews.

That said, building relationships doesn’t need to involve hours of bearing one’s soul or being best friends with everyone. Learning and using people’s names, smiling when passing people in the hall, asking people for their ideas and recommendations, or a genuine “how are you doing?” can go a long way. And, things like asking questions and listening are always helpful. Then, when it comes time to change, we’re much more likely to say “yes.”

In exploring ways to build relationships that support change, consider the following questions:

• When you reflect on times when you’ve wanted others to change, how did the quality of your relationship affect the outcome?
• What gets in the way of you building relationships with people at work?
• What kinds of change are you wanting to implement, and how can you leverage your relationships to support that change?
• What are some approaches you can use to increase trust and connection with other people, both professionally and personally?

• Relying on one approach such as training, coaching, meetings, or imposing rules as the go-to answer to just about every problem (regardless of the problem)
• Looking for the latest “new and bright shiny object” or trend to solve problems (flavor-of-the-month)
• Focusing on symptoms instead of root causes

When taking such approaches, organizations get caught up in superficial solutions and a neverending fascination with tools. In other words, they focus on how to go about solving a problem instead of determining exactly what they’re solving for. In order to find sustainable solutions, we need to reverse this approach. We need to determine if, in fact, it’s actually a nail or something else like a screw, thumbtack, piece of tape, or block of wood. To do so, we need to emphasize the “what,” not the “how.”

Hammers vs. Nails

Organizational “nails” often get reduced to generalizations, symptoms, or assumptions. For example, a need for leadership development, issues around diversity, or challenges with turnover or production.

As those issues like those are reduced to nails, the organization whips out its go-to hammer and starts whacking away. The hammer could be implementing training, hiring a consultant, or imposing rules and policies.

The same approach can be used when creating new programs or initiatives. People get excited about using the latest trends such as personality assessments like Meyers-Briggs, processes like Lean Six Sigma, or management approaches like “Who Moved My Cheese?” and try to incorporate these “hammers” into organizational training. The hammer then becomes a toy that doesn’t even need a purpose – it’s just fun to swing around. These hammers aren’t necessarily bad – they just not might be the right tool for the job.

Beginning With the End in Mind

The key to creating change is to identify what the “nail” actually is using approaches like research, analysis, and/or dialogue. This helps uncover what it is that we’re trying to solve for. We need to answer questions like:

• Is there really an issue? And, if so, is the issue actually what we think it is or something else?
• What is behind the issue?
• What are people’s challenges in dealing with the issue, and what do they need to solve it?

Asking these questions helps reveal the true nail. For example, instead of leadership development, the “nail” could be about limited access to career development resources. Issues around diversity might actually be about fear of conflict rather than getting more facts or tools through training. Production problems could be related to outdated technology versus people needing to work harder. Through deeper inquiry, we might realize that the nail is actually a staple, screw, or splinter.

Now that we know the “what,” we can figure out the “how.” Instead of relying on our trusty hammer, we can use the staple remover, screwdriver, or pliers to solve the problem more quickly and effectively. The same principle applies when creating programs, training, or initiatives. By knowing what outcomes we want (based on our “nail”), we can incorporate the right approaches.

Expanding Our Toolbox

Knowing the “what” opens up endless possibilities around the “how.” We can use creative, customized, and tailored approaches instead of off-the-shelf or one-size-fits-all solutions. The more tools we have at our disposal, the more options we have to solve the problem.

Organizational “nails” are rarely as straightforward as a screw or a tack, so they typically require multiple tools. Sometimes those tools are used simultaneously, sometimes in sequence, and sometimes they’re all rolled into one. Sometimes we need to invent new tools. The bottom line, however, is that once we know what we’re solving for, we no longer need to rely on or force the hammer. By expanding our toolbox, we create solutions that produce impactful, dynamic, and sustained results.

When emphasizing the “what,” not the “how, some questions to ask might be:

• What are my go-to tools?
• What tempts or distracts me from getting to the “what” and causes me to get sidetracked by the “how”?
• How can I incorporate more tools into my toolbox (or, even better, collaborate and leverage other people’s tools)?
• What indicators tell me that I’ve discovered the true “what” around a given problem?
• What are some current situations in which I’m too focused on the “how” without being clear on the “what”?

The Pink Elephant Phenomenon

We’ve all heard the phenomenon of what happens when someone tells you NOT to think of a pink elephant. You’ll probably think of a pink elephant! However, what we don’t talk about is what to do instead of not thinking about the elephant. Ironically, not knowing the alternative defeats the purpose of the concept in the first place.

The “pink elephant” concept doesn’t just apply to our thoughts. It applies in our daily lives in ways such as:

• Creating goals based on outcomes we don’t want
• Speaking out against people, ideas, or policies we don’t like
• Thinking about what could go wrong
• Spending energy on circumstances, people, or situations we can’t change
• Giving instructions that emphasize what not to do
• Doing things we dread

Much like the pink elephant, focusing on the negative keeps us stuck in that state. Even more importantly, it becomes difficult for anything else to show up. There is no room for change to occur, or at least not the kind that gets us more of what we want.

Learning to Ski

I’ve only gone downhill skiing a few times, but I still remember the fundamentals of turning. One of them is to simply focus your attention on the direction in which you want to turn. You’ve probably also had this experience when driving and turned to look at something, only to have your car start to move in that direction (sometimes with unfortunate results).

The same principle applies when trying to change something. As we saw earlier, it’s both hard and confusing to try to not do something. Could you imagine telling a skier to not look at the direction in which they don’t want to turn? Yet, we take the same approach in our everyday thoughts, habits, and behaviors.

When figuring their goals, many of my coaching clients start out by framing their goals around what they don’t want. For example, when clients want to work on their public speaking goals, they’ll say things like, “I don’t want to forget what to say,” “I don’t want to be nervous,” or “I don’t want people to laugh at me.” Typically, they spend so much energy not trying to do these things that they end up doing them anyway! And, they’re much more miserable in the process.

The alternative: shifting your attention to what you do want instead of what you don’t want.

What Do You Want?

To shift your attention to what you want, try these approaches:

Create goals with the outcomes you actually want to experience. Using our public speaking example above, your goals could be to remember all your talking points, remain calm and relaxed, and maintain eye contact with your audience.

Propose ideas and solutions that you’d prefer instead of the current reality, and make clear requests and suggestions. If you don’t like a particular meeting, what would you like to happen in that meeting instead? If someone makes bad decisions, what decisions would you like them to make? If someone is loud and obnoxious, how would you like them to behave?

Think about what could go right. We have a 50/50 chance of something going right vs. going wrong. However, focusing on what could go wrong sways the odds in that direction. Instead of worrying about the reasons why you couldn’t get the promotion, what are some reasons why you could get the promotion? Instead of anticipating something bad happening, anticipate something good happening (even if you don’t know what it might be).

Spend energy on things you have control over. You can’t change the weather, your parents, or most of our leaders. Yet, these types of topics take up a huge space in our lives and typically don’t create good feelings. In place of such topics, which topics would bring you more joy? What things can you readily change that are under your influence or control and that would bring you more fulfillment or make a difference?

Give instructions with what the person should do. Telling someone to stand up straight is clearer than telling someone not to slouch. “Be on time” is more direct than “don’t be late.” “Keep the card in your pocket” provides a specific solution compared to “don’t lose the card.”

Change dread into desire. Instead of resisting going into work, what could you do at work that would make it more fulfilling? Rather than dieting, what things could you do to experience greater health?

Your Positivity Toolkit

To expand your positivity toolkit, experiment with using the concepts from the previous examples:

• Find the opposite of what you don’t want and move towards it
• Think of your ideal outcome and work towards creating it
• Replace something you don’t want with something you do want (this can apply to people, behaviors, or situations)
• Start doing something else in place of anything you want to stop doing
• Move towards something you want instead of away from something you don’t want

Questions for action:

• Think of emotions you frequently experience that you don’t want. What emotions would you prefer, and how can you experience more of them?
• Reflect on some things you frequently complain about. What would you like to experience instead of those things?
• What does your ideal end state look like in a given situation? Consider areas such as in your organization, around social issues, in specific relationships, or in your daily life. How can you achieve that state?

Mistake #1: Quickly Making Changes

When stepping into a leadership role, you may have ideas or a plan for changes they’d like to make right away. Perhaps these ideas worked in previous positions, or you have some “go-to” tools or methods you like. If you’re new to leadership positions, you may have read some books around leadership and want to implement those ideas. Or, you may have heard or seen behaviors, processes, or ideas in the organization that you want to change. The problem is that you’ll end up making changes in a vacuum because you won’t really know what’s going on. Instead, you’ll rely on false assumptions and pre-conceived ideas that may have nothing to do with the current reality or what’s really needed.

How to avoid this mistake: Take time to sit back and observe what’s going on. Be patient and go slow in order to later go fast. Sit in on meetings. Notice interpersonal and team dynamics. Pay attention to both what is working well and what isn’t. You wouldn’t want a doctor to operate on a patient without first doing lots of diagnostics. Similarly, resist making changes until you know what’s really going on.

Mistake # 2: Being Too Directive

When people step into leadership roles, they often take on the role of the boss instead of the role of leader. You may quickly implement new rules, give orders, and make decisions. The issue with this approach is that you’ll end up being the bull in the china shop. You’ll come across as though you know what’s best instead of respecting the wisdom that already exists within the organization.

Relationships are the key to success. The people who work for you have likely been in their roles for some time and have a better understanding of what’s going on than you do. They can provide context and history that can help you connect the dots. They can explain how things work, articulate the interpersonal dynamics within the organization, and give you tips and suggestions. If you come in as the boss, you increase the chance of losing trust and burning bridges. You won’t get buy-in or support for your ideas, and your job will be an uphill battle.

How to avoid this mistake: Build relationships with everyone around you. Assume the people who work in your area know more than you (because they probably do). Just because you’re technically their boss doesn’t mean you need to act like one. Learn about the people and processes around you. Seek instead of telling. Listen to people’s complaints, suggestions, and ideas. Understand why things are the way they are, including the different systems, procedures, and ways of doing things. Be curious about the unique culture in order to best serve and create appropriate changes.

Mistake #3: Trying to Impress

Being in a new role can be vulnerable, especially when the role is more visible. As such, you may want to prove that you deserve to be in the role or get people’s approval. You may want to make a big change or start a new initiative to get people’s attention.

If you’ve avoided the first two mistakes, such moves could be beneficial. If you haven’t, it could cost you trust, respect, and effectiveness. For example, if you are trying to impress the boss by making a splash, your team will likely lose respect and trust for you because they’ll see you as a “posterior-kisser.” If you try to please and appease your team, your boss may also lose respect and trust because they’ll see you as a pushover without the integrity to do the job right. Either way, you end up overcompensating and ultimately pleasing no one, including yourself.

How to avoid this mistake: As a leader, your ultimate responsibility to do what’s best for the organization, not for specific people within the organization. That means being true to yourself while being in service to what will help the organization, including the people within it, thrive.

People may question and second-guess you and your approach. They may not like your plans, decisions, or choices. However, if you’re taking the time to get to know people and the organization, assessing what’s working well and what could be improved, and creating out a unique strategy suited to the organization’s needs, culture, and dynamics, you’ll likely take actions that will be in everyone’s best interest.

The key is to stand strong by pushing back appropriately to leadership should they question your approach and making decisions that serve the team instead of pleasing them. In some cases, this could mean eventually letting people go, cracking down on and eliminating waste, and stopping unproductive behaviors. It could mean saying no to certain things and yes to others. It could mean taking people through uncomfortable change. Impress yourself by reflecting upon what’s right and doing what you believe is in the organization’s best interest (which typically will also serve the people within the organization).

Stepping Into a Leadership Role

Note that all of these mistakes relate to each other. Jumping in by trying to impress people, making changes, and telling everyone what to do is a recipe for disaster. Doing so will erode trust, strengthen resistance, and drain your energy.

Avoiding all three mistakes requires patience, observation, and people. By coming in with an open mind, a sense of curiosity, and a willingness to build relationships, you’ll increase your chance of success. The changes, decisions, and strategies you do implement, whether large or small, will be much more effective and sustainable. And, you’ll likely get the respect and impact you wanted in the first place.

Although there are numerous side effects of getting caught in the trap of “one-and-done,” the most significant is that there are zero long-term results. The effort fails to create any sustainable change and becomes another casualty in the “flavor-of-the-month” bin. Therefore, we must avoid the “one-and-done” trap and learn to leverage these initiatives for sustainable change.

The Trap of “One-and-Done”

“One-and-done” initiatives are often best business practices that become misused. Because these practices are popular and well-known, organizations that are looking for a quick and easy fix for a problem jump at them. The problem is that we aren’t taught how to effectively use them.

Think of the following scenarios:

• People attend training and come back inspired. They might even try out some new behaviors. Within a short time, the training is forgotten and behavior defaults to where it was before. Not seeing results and/or behaviors modeled by or supported by leadership, they resist the next time they are mandated to attend training.
• A manager has a performance conversation and gives feedback to the direct report. No follow-up conversation happens, and over time both parties forget what was discussed. The direct report reverts to the initial behavior and thinks it must have not really been that important in the first place.
• Leadership drafts standards and expectations that are given to all new employees. However, after initially reading them, the employee puts them in a drawer and they are never discussed again. Over time, they are forgotten. No one even references them when they are broken.

Like any tool, if we don’t know how to use it we won’t get good results. In the case of these initiatives there is a widespread belief that, just by using the tool, the problem will go away. However, just like with tools, these practices take time to learn to use properly. And, they must be used properly in order to get the desired result.

Ironically, “one-and-done” strategies can create more harm than good in the long run. Consider some of the side effects when these approaches are implemented and fail to create any visible, long-term result:

• Wasted time
• Wasted money
• Cynicism
• Lack of trust in leadership’s direction
• Skepticism around future efforts
• Lower morale
• Confusion
• Poor performance

Fortunately, by learning to properly use these tools, we can escape the trap of “one-and-done” and create sustained changes.

The Power of Repetition

Simply enough, the antidote to “one-and-done” can be achieved by inverting the words to “many-and-ongoing.” Put another way, by frequently revisiting, practicing, and integrating behavior, the initiative gets results. Returning to the above scenarios, “many-and-ongoing” could look like:

• People, including managers, attend training together. Afterward, managers sit down with their direct reports and discuss key takeaways. They then help their direct reports set goals to integrate what they learned and have regular, ongoing check-ins to track progress and course-correct as needed. Even better, leadership creates communities of practice to reinforce learning and practicing together.
• After giving feedback to their direct report, a manager identifies what behaviors need to change and works with their direct report to create a development plan. They then set up recurring meetings in which the manager continues to acknowledge success, provide constructive feedback, coach, and offer support.
• On a regular basis, leaders meet either with individuals or teams to review standards and expectations. They have a discussion around how they are being upheld (or not) and look for ways to bridge any gaps in behavior. Leaders and employees also self-assess their behavior, and explore opportunities to exceed standards and expectations or even raise the bar by setting new ones.

The key in each example is having recurring touchpoints while, in between, having planned strategies for practice, growth, and integration. When used successfully, these practices eventually become part of the “new normal” for employees and embedded in the organization’s culture.

Creating Sustainable Change

This approach applies to any change initiative. For best results, formulate an ongoing integration plan before rolling something out. Identify roles and responsibilities for implementation, create a timeline (ideally for at least a year out), and hold each other accountable by following up regularly.

You may encounter resistance at first if you’ve habitually fallen in the trap of “one-and-done” in the past. However, by sticking to the plan, reaffirming your commitment, and following it all the way through, the resistance will eventually fade. By this time, the change will have taken hold, and people will know that you’re for real the next time around.

To assist you in creating these changes, reflect on the following questions:

• What was the result of “one-and-done” approaches that you’ve tried in the past?
• Using some of the above ideas, what would a sustainable plan look like around a current or recent initiative?
• How long do you think it would take for a permanent change to take hold? What might keep you from sticking to that timeframe, and what would it take to ensure follow-through?
• How might you counter cynicism and/or inspire engagement around a proposed initiative?
• What problem are you trying to solve for, and is there a better approach to solve for it other than a standard initiative?

The Impact of Silence

On a given day, there are many opportunities to use your voice. Consider some common scenarios:

• An employee has a co-worker who frequently interrupts them with questions and personal stories. Instead of talking to the co-worker, the employee complains about the person to other co-workers, who commiserate and laugh. The employee puts up a wall with their co-worker, but underneath feels ongoing resentment and irritation.
• Managers are required to conduct ongoing tasks that they think are inefficient and unimportant. Although they have some great ideas on how to both improve upon and reduce the tasks, they just vent to each other, make sarcastic comments, and go through the motions.
• A team thinks their meetings are a waste of time. Their boss, who leads the meetings, doesn’t stick to the agenda, monologues, and doesn’t seem to have a purpose for the meeting. When the boss asks for feedback, people are either silent or just say that everything’s good. Afterward, however, the team gets together to gossip about how bad the meetings are.
• An employee is late to work almost every day, but their boss is afraid to address the issue directly. Instead, they make jokes and indirect comments like “Guess you had more important things to do this morning” or “Gee, thanks for showing up today.” Both the boss and team are resentful, but the boss seems to think that things could be worse and that the employee will eventually get the message.
• A leader is excited about a new policy change that they believe will make customers happy. However, the people on the front lines, who have direct experience, know better. Instead of saying anything, they undermine the policy and have a negative attitude, which results in increased reprimands and conflict with management.

In each of the scenarios, the outcome is the same: nothing changes. Whether the consequences are major or minor, people experience an ongoing baseline of negativity that makes their lives worse, not better.

The “Buts” of Silence

Before talking about what we can do to speak up, the first thing I often hear are the “buts” that justify not saying anything. Reasons such as:

• “It doesn’t make any difference”
• “I’ll get in trouble”
• “No one will listen”
• “It’s easier not to say anything”
• “If I do, they’ll just ____”
• “I already know what’s going to happen”
• “I don’t want to rock the boat”
• “It’s not my place”
• “They won’t like me”

In some cases, such as in toxic work environments, these reasons could be justified. In these instances, getting some objective perspectives from people you trust can help you discern what action to take. However, more often than not, these “buts” are reasons to avoid putting ourselves out there. Not only that, our negative experiences are typically not reflective of the fact that we spoke up – they are reflective of how we spoke up. With practice, however, we can both cultivate the courage and the skill to use our voice effectively.

Finding Your Voice

When we choose to speak up, we create opportunities for things to change. However, the keyword is choice. If we do nothing, nothing is likely to change. By being more proactive and making the choice to use your voice, you step into leadership. Here are some tools you can use to find your voice:

• Not live with deficiencies. One of the principles in the Nuclear Navy to ensure safety, developed by Admiral Hyman Rickover, is not living with deficiencies. This principle applies to all aspects of our lives. Whether it’s tolerating someone who bothers us, tolerating having our time wasted, or tolerating meaningless tasks, we can choose to not live with these deficiencies and make the choice to do something about them. Be honest with yourself and acknowledge the impact of not saying anything.
• See the possibilities. When people consider speaking up they imagine all the things that could go wrong instead of what could potentially go right. Considering positive outcomes can help us be more courageous. We also tend to focus on what we don’t like or want instead of what we do want. Getting clear on the desired outcome helps us, and others, move towards something new.
• Assume ignorance. We tend to think that people are deliberately behaving in ways to annoy us. Yet, most of the time, they are simply unaware. Do leaders set out to hold boring meetings? To waste time and money? To take ineffective approaches? Typically, no. Think of times when someone has pointed out something in yourself that you were completely unaware of.Unless someone tells us otherwise, we have no reason to think we’re doing anything wrong and will continue the behavior. Therefore, it’s our job to help them become aware. When approaching them, however, if you think someone is intentionally behaving in a particular way and approach them with this attitude, the conversation is unlikely to go well. If, however, you assume they are unaware, you can approach them with more empathy, which makes it much more likely that they’ll receive the message.
• Use questions and suggestions to manage up. When communicating with leaders above us, it’s wise to consider our approach. Instead of direct confrontation or giving direction, we can speak up by using questions or suggestions. For example, it probably won’t go over well to tell your boss that a meeting is a waste of time. However, using questions (in a neutral, curious tone) such as “What is the purpose for our meeting today?”, “Can I share an idea I’ve got?”, or “What are some actions we can take between now and the next meeting?” are non-threatening and still address the topic. Additionally, sharing the why can help others understand where you’re coming from.

I also suggest taking advantage of books like Crucial Conversations and Difficult Conversations, both of which include great suggestions. In addition, here are some questions to consider:

• What are your reasons for not speaking up? What is the impact of not doing so?
• What are some positive outcomes that could come from speaking up?
• When speaking up, what outcome would you like to see? How can you share that outcome with others?
• What would it take for a situation to become painful enough for you to speak up? How can you hold yourself accountable to keep it from getting to that point?

Accountability Is Not a Dirty Word

Holding people accountable means accepting responsibility for their actions. Unfortunately, we sometimes view this as a form of punishment, being too harsh, or micromanaging. Although in some cases people go to these extremes, this is not accountability. Instead, it literally is punishing, being too harsh, or micromanaging. Unfortunately, people then may react and flip to the other end of the spectrum, which looks like being too lax or simply checking out. Whichever strategy we choose, the results are the same:

• Tasks don’t get completed
• Agreements aren’t honored
• Items fall through the cracks
• Trust gets broken
• Commitments become empty, meaningless words
• Credibility is shaken
• People can’t depend on other people

Accountability means either making sure that we do what we say we’re going to do, or what we should be doing based on agreements that have already been established. If we need to be able to accomplish work, move towards goals, and build trust, accountability isn’t an option – it’s a must-have.

Learning the Language of Accountability

Interestingly, many of us never learned how to hold people accountable. Instead, we observed behaviors such as badgering, belittling, shaming, punishing, or imposing rules for the sake of rules as examples of accountability. Or, we may have seen behaviors such as making excuses, shying away from aspirations, goals, or dreams, avoiding commitments, dropping the ball, or tolerating mediocrity. Regardless of which end of the spectrum you move towards, neither is effective. Typical examples of these behaviors that I observe in my clients include:

• Pestering people over and over again around actions they haven’t completed
• Failing to set standards and expectations, or setting them without any follow-up
• Taking steps towards reaching an agreement, then giving up when met with resistance
• Passing off difficult situations or people and making them other people’s problems
• Making wishy-washy commitments without any plan of action
• Continually saying things like “we’ll get to it later,” and then never getting to it
• Making lofty or pseudo-spiritual statements like “it’s all good”, “just trust the flow”, or “it’ll all work out”
• Moving quickly to disciplinary actions or firing people

The problem with this language is that it doesn’t get results. Instead, we need to learn a new language that supports success, change, and results. Three pillars of this language? Clarity, persistence, and coaching.

Three Pillars of Accountability

Let’s look at three core pillars that you can use to hold people accountable:

Clarity: In order to hold people accountable, both you and they need to understand exactly what the agreement is. This includes elements such as being time-bound, detailed, and behavior-specific. In other words, what exactly should the person do, what does it look like, and when should they have it completed? Both you and they need to be on the same page of understanding and, as a leader, you need to have a way of confirming their understanding of your expectations.

The second part of clarity is getting clear agreement. Someone else may understand what you want, but understanding doesn’t equal agreement. Ultimately, anything less than a clear “yes” or “no” is not agreement. And, if it’s anything less then a “yes,” you’ll need to go deeper into the other two pillars to get clarity.

Persistence: A clear “yes” isn’t enough. Many a “yes” has been spoken, only to be never revisited again. We need to follow-up around the agreement. Ideally, you’ll establish a plan for follow-up up front, but there needs to be some kind of ongoing check-in to see how things are going, offer support, and course-correct as needed. Unfortunately, many people don’t make these agreements and then resort to pestering and micro-managing. Instead, work out a plan for ongoing check-ins that supports both of you.

You’ll also need to use persistence when you hear anything less than a clear “yes.” I often tell clients that they need to make the other person either say “yes” or “no,” but nothing in between. You don’t have to be a jerk about it – you just need to stay engaged in the conversation for as long as it takes. Staying with questions like, “When will you complete this?”, “Will you do x?”, and “What exactly will you agree to?” will help get that clarity from the first pillar. Or, simply restating the agreement and asking directly, “Will you agree to this?”

When you persist, people will squirm, evade, avoid, and talk in circles. You may have to repeat these questions several times until you get an answer. It’s your job to stay engaged until you get the clear “yes” or “no.”

Coaching: Two of people’s biggest obstacles around accountability are either lack of motivation or lack of skill. As leaders, it’s our job to help people move past these obstacles. Sometimes people do say yes and then get stuck. Other times, they need help in order to get to yes because they don’t understand the “why,” lack confidence, or need support.

As a leader, you’ll need to diagnose what the obstacle is and then work with the person to move past it. This could involve focusing on potential benefits to following through, providing tools for learning, or just offering ongoing support.

There are often deeper reasons behind people’s inability or unwillingness to be accountable. When we can uncover those reasons and find a way forward, accountability not only becomes easier, it becomes more meaningful.

Practicing Accountability

Applying these pillars requires you to practice them yourself around the topic of accountability. You’ll need to become clear on how you’d like to hold people accountable, establish a plan and stick to it, and move past your own obstacles. Here are some questions to assist you:

• What are some potential benefits to holding people accountable?
• What are your challenges around holding people accountable?
• What do you need to move past those challenges?
• Which of the three pillars would be most helpful to practice, and how can you practice it?
• What support do you need around practicing accountability?

Again, these ideas don’t just apply to holding others accountable – they also work for holding yourself accountable. Whether you want to lose weight, complete a project, or achieve a dream, the principles still apply. For additional support, share your experiences in the comments below!

Safety Amongst the Choir

There is comfort in preaching to the choir. We seldom have to risk opening ourselves to rejection, ridicule, or conflict. We get to be right about our ideas and have that righteousness validated by our peers who already agree with us.

Being in the choir means not having to change and step into the unknown. We don’t have to change our thinking, our identity, or our perception of the world. Although at times it’s important to seek solace and support amongst the choir, all too often people use it as a place to hide out and stay safe. Over time, people, organizations, and communities become stagnant, speaking to hear themselves talk while judging others on other sides of the fence.

This is common in organizations and shows up in ways such as:

• Hiring primarily like-minded people
• Rejecting ideas that challenge the organizational culture
• Pigeonholing people with different points of view
• Blending into the status-quo to gain acceptance or approval
• Saying or doing the “right” things
• Punishing mistakes and/or attempts at innovation
• Nepotism and the “good ‘ol boy club”
• Staying in your comfort zone

What changes when we only hang out with our choir? Unfortunately, not much.

Stepping Across the Divide

Stepping out of our comfort zone and not preaching to the choir can be terrifying, but it can also take us to new places. These places are full of untapped possibilities, potential, and rewards. The trick is being willing to take that step. Steps such as:

• Having a conversation with someone who thinks differently than you (and actually listening to what they have to say)
• Reaching out to strangers or people who you don’t know well, even if it’s just saying hello or meeting for coffee
• Discussing an idea with a diverse group of people
• Including people on your team who you know will bring different perspectives to the table
• Asking questions and tapping into curiosity to discover why people feel, think, or act the way they do
• Taking the risk to express an unpopular opinion or propose an idea

These actions likely won’t feel comfortable for you. They’ll require you to get out of your comfort zone and try new things, experience new people, and expose yourself to alternative ideas. They involve taking risks that challenge your identity, self-worth, and security.

Instead of resting in the comfort of your judgments and preconceived ideas of who other people are, you’ll actually have to find out the truth about other people. This might mean realizing how wrong we often are and how many assumptions we make that keep us separate and stuck. It’s no wonder we don’t try these strategies more often! Yet, this is where the power of not preaching to the choir comes into play.

Life Beyond the Choir

As I mentioned, there is life waiting beyond the choir. Consider some of the possibilities:

• A senior manager had many ideas that ran counter to her executives and the company culture. For fear of being ridiculed and judged, she remained silent, went along with the status quo, and found many “reasonable” ways to rationalize why it wasn’t worth speaking up. When she realized that she’d want her people to share their ideas with her, even if they ran counter to her ideas, she saw how she was doing the company a disservice by not speaking up. The more she took the risk and stood strong to speak her mind, the more people began to consider alternatives to the norm. This opened the door for other people with similar viewpoints to come forward, and little by little the culture began to change.
• I had an idea for a course I was developing and felt confident in the direction and content. Before moving too far forward, I presented my ideas to a diverse group of colleagues, who proceeded to come up with all kinds of different ideas and opinions. I resisted at first, unconvinced that they were right. As the conversation continued, however, I stayed open and engaged and eventually was able to see their points. In the end, the finished product was infinitely better than what I’d originally envisioned and could have produced on my own.
• A colleague with strong viewpoints refused to consider any viewpoints that ran counter to his own around political and cultural issues. Instead, he made assumptions and judged people with opposing views, labeling them and putting them in an imaginary box. When I challenged him around his thinking, including presenting facts and stories that ran counter to his experience, he was surprised at possibilities that he hadn’t even considered. This opened him up to having actual conversations with people he usually kept at a distance, and even more to his surprise discovered a level of compassion, empathy, and likeness that he’d never thought possible. He was then able to form alliances by finding common ground and focusing on points of alignment instead of differences. These partnerships led to engaging a wider spectrum of people and coming up with ideas that actually made coming to work more fun and engaging.

Mingling With Other Choirs

Exposing yourself to new choirs is like building any muscle. It takes practice, persistence, and learning from mistakes until it becomes habit. Here are some questions to help build those muscles:

• What fears, beliefs, or stories keep you from engaging with people who aren’t like you?
• What are some of your strongly-held beliefs or opinions, and what are three alternative perspectives for each one that could also be true?
• Who is someone you encounter regularly but hardly know, and how could you get to know them a little better?
• Who wouldn’t you normally consider bouncing ideas off of that you could engage?
• What group of people do you have opinions about but seldom interact with, and how can you connect for a conversation to learn more about someone in that group first-hand?

This is not an indictment of any particular group. Unfortunately, however, by default, people of any group tend to make rules, decisions, and policies that serve their own personal interests and benefit those who are like them. Thus, when looking to create a culture of DEI, we need to ask the question: who makes the rules?

The Impact of Homogeneous Rule-Makers

I recently saw a post from a major company proudly announcing their company’s guidelines around how they communicate, both internally and with their customers. These guidelines were rather rigid and primarily focused on syntax and style, leaving little room for one’s personal style, creativity, or depth. Clearly, there was a clear “right” and “wrong” way to communicate in this organization.

In organizations like this, people who may communicate quite differently (but just as, if not more, effectively) have two primary choices: conform or leave. Hardly “diverse” options. Companies then become stifled, robotic, and lifeless. Interestingly, the comments on this post reflected these kinds of sentiments about the organization.

Looking at rules within other systems, consider those within our legal system, government, law enforcement, service agencies, and large-scale industries such as real estate and manufacturing. The rules of such agencies can literally mean the difference between life and death, imprisonment or freedom, employment or unemployment, or housing or homelessness.

Again, in many cases these outcomes are unintentional. In other cases, rules are created to maintain power and control over other people. In either case, however, the impact is the same.

The Spectrum of Rules

Too many rules, strict rules, rules aimed towards particular groups of people, black-and-white rules, and subjective rules are the antithesis of DEI. They punish some people while rewarding others. They enforce norms that people must comply with, or else. This doesn’t just apply to rules; it applies to decisions, policies, initiatives, programs, and systems.

Questioning rules isn’t about advocating for anarchy or that there shouldn’t be any rules at all. It’s about asking a few questions to determine the effectiveness and benevolence of the rules. Questions such as:

• Who gets to make these rules (and who doesn’t)?
• Why do certain people have the authority to make them and others don’t?
• Who do the rules benefit (and who don’t they benefit)?
• What is the impact on those who don’t have a say in creating the rules?

When we can take the time to explore the answers to these questions in-depth, we can create rules that are equitable, just, and supportive instead of punitive, divisive, and harmful.

Changing the Rules

As you answer the above questions, it becomes more obvious who benefits from the rules and who suffers from them. This becomes even clearer by noticing who feels threatened at the idea of changing the rules when they are brought into question.

Charts such as these can help you evaluate just how diverse the decision-makers and rule-makers are. Tools, such as the City of Seattle’s Racial Equity Toolkit, can also help with this process. From there, you can start seeing who is not included in making decisions and rules and find ways to include them. This could look like everything from asking for feedback, taking polls, conducting surveys, holding focus groups, or simply revamping the decision-making and rule-making process to directly include other people.

Good rules are more liberating than confining. They establish baseline expectations and boundaries that don’t discriminate or exclude any particular group. Good rules are behavior-based instead of subjective, consistent in their application, clearly understandable by everyone, and well-communicated. They emphasize bottom-line needs while allowing for different approaches by focusing on the “what,” or desired outcome, and less on the “how.”

Fortunately, when we include diverse groups, perspectives, and approaches in the process, the end result will naturally achieve these goals. We just need to take that step instead of going through the motions.