If They’d Just Do It My Way!

When working with our opposites, it can be easy to focus on the negatives and get frustrated with each other. Sometimes we’re frustrated because they’re not taking on enough of our load. Other times they aren’t focusing on the things we think they should be focusing on. And, we might just be flat-out annoyed because they don’t do things the way that we do them.

Consider some common opposite work styles:

• Big-picture vs. detail-oriented
• Fast-paced vs. methodical
• Process-driven vs. outcome-driven
• People-focused vs. process-focused
• Logical vs. emotional

We’ve all probably had to work with our opposites throughout our lives. Unfortunately, we sometimes end up getting frustrated by our differences instead of finding ways to complement them. These missed opportunities result in wasted time, power struggles, and a lack of focus. Alternatively, if harnessed, they could be leveraged to create even more powerful results compared to working with people who are just like us.

Aligning Opposites

When opposites align, our collective capacity increases. Picture two halves of a circle. Halves that are identical overlap and only form a half-circle. Yet, halves that are opposite complete a whole circle. They offer much more because they’re bringing two completely different things to the table. Now put this in the context of a team and how many types of opposites are likely working together. Yikes!

Now, imagine two detail-oriented people working together compared to a detail-oriented and a big-picture person working together. The former might feel more familiar and comfortable, but it limits possibilities and potential. The latter, however, doubles your skillsets even if it might be more outside of your comfort zone. Together, it has the potential to create something greater than the whole.

To begin to tap into this potential when working with your opposite (or opposites when on a larger team), practice the following strategies:

1. Notice your differences and name them, both to yourself and your opposite. This helps make it easier to recognize and talk about them.
2. Recognize the value in your opposite. What can they do that you can’t? What’s easy for them that’s hard for you? What do they bring that adds more value compared to what you could do on your own (or with people who are only like you)?
3. Leverage your styles. Make a plan for how you can work effectively together while focusing your energy on your strengths. If you’re detail-oriented and your opposite is big-picture and you are working on a project together, have them focus more on the goals and objectives while you focus more on putting together the plan to get there. Get creative around how both of you can contribute towards the bigger goal.
4. Make light of your differences. Finding humor in your styles, such as by giving names to your opposite styles or outing yourself when you are getting too caught up in your style, can reduce the tension. Look for ways to appreciate your differences instead of anyone’s style being right/wrong or good/bad. This also helps to not take your differences too seriously.
5. Serve each other. Much like my teasing in the previous strategy can be a way to serve the other person to find balance, so can finding ways to contribute in ways that they can’t. For example, if you’re people-focused and they’re process-focused, offer to step in more to handle customer meetings, networking, and getting buy-in. Support them to do what they do best instead of expecting them to handle those types of situations. Connecting back to #3, make this part of an intentional plan between both of you instead of making assumptions or overstepping your bounds.

On a larger scale, these polarities can show up in systemic issues individualism vs. collectivism, liberal vs. conservative, or people vs. profit. I recommend checking out Barry Johnson’s work around Polarity Management for ways to navigate these types of polarities both in your organization and within your collective team.

Fortunately, that gap is closing. However, despite women’s physical representation, the rules of the game that everyone must play by are by and large the same: the mold of masculinity.

The mold of masculinity transcends gender: it is a default set of standards typically followed by people in leadership positions around how they engage, communicate, make decisions, relate to others, and create change. Unfortunately, the rigidity and limitations of the mold results in leaders with lopsided range, skills, and abilities to lead effectively. And, because of the predominance of men in influential leadership positions, the mold is perpetuated and reinforced. Too often, these leaders harm those people and organizations that they are supposed to be serving. In order to achieve more balanced, effective, and revolutionary leadership, we need to break the mold of masculinity in leadership.

The Mold of Masculinity

Social scientists Deborah David and Robert Brannon describe four standards of traditional American masculinity that make up the mold:

1. Anti-femininity or “no sissy stuff”: distancing self from femininity; homophobia; avoiding emotions
2. Achievement or “be a big wheel”: striving for achievement and success; focusing on competition
3. Self-reliance or “be a sturdy oak”: avoiding vulnerability; staying composed and in control; acting/being tough
4. Aggression or “give ’em hell”: acting aggressively to become dominant

These standards are imposed in boys from birth, including what colors, toys, emotions, hobbies, and behaviors are acceptable. They are part of the cultural water we swim in, in many ways unconsciously. Although aspects of these traits can be positive, they often become rigid rules that are taboo to break. And, breaking the rules typically means being seen as weak, vulnerable, soft, or feminine (along with other much more negative words and consequences).

This isn’t about shunning masculine traits entirely or comparing them to feminine traits. As with many human qualities, each has its positive and negative aspects. The problem is that for many men, these traits are a default rather than a choice. The idea of choosing other options is either not on the radar, or undesirable. We must follow the rules, or else. This limits who men can be and not only causes harm to others, but also to ourselves. Not only that, women who are able to get past through the hurdles into senior leadership positions by playing by the rules must also continue to comply in order to stay in those positions.

The Mold of Masculinity in Leadership

The standards above are part of the mold of masculinity that many men either try to fit in or react to. They affect our relationships, health, connection, passion, purpose, and fulfillment. They also influence how we lead. The mold of masculinity in leadership, including organizations and social systems, shows up in ways such as:

Disempowerment: Blaming others and refusing to take accountability for mistakes

Power-over: Dominating, intimidating, and bullying others

Self-reliance: Dismissing and minimizing other’s ideas, feedback, or help; leading in a vacuum without considering the needs of or impact to others; excessive speaking

Distraction/fragmentation: Being disconnected from or unaware of reality, both internally and externally

Numbing: Operating on auto-pilot, workaholism, and excessive focus on completing tasks and output

Competition: One-upping, making others look bad, success at the expense of others

Mental intelligence: Dismissing anything that isn’t rational, logical, or fact-based

In the extreme, these traits manifest in attitudes such as “my way or the highway,” “there’s only one right way – mine,” “do what you’re told, or else,” “show ’em who’s boss,” “teach them a lesson they’ll never forget,” “no fear,” and “might makes right.”

Leaders become confined to this mold and are unable to be flexible and responsive. There is little to no room to choose other behaviors; doing so breaks the rules of masculinity and can result in shaming, ridicule, judgment, doubting, or being perceived as weak.

The consequences of the mold can be severe. Male leaders’ power and status, trapped within the rigid and reactive mold, influence major decisions, policies, laws, and behaviors that greatly impact others. They can lead to organizations being dysfunctional to the point of being run into the ground and perpetuate abuse, illness, corruption, poor morale, in-fighting, and bullying. With such a limited range of leadership capacity, organizations and systems become weak, unstable, and ineffective. People’s lives, especially those with less power, can be altered in severe ways.

Essential Shifts: Breaking the Mold of Masculinity in Leadership

The first step to creating more flexibility, choice, responsiveness, and possibilities for men in leadership is becoming aware of the often invisible mold. We first have to notice its existence and its hold on us. We also need to notice the ways in which we are afraid or uncomfortable (both of which are taboo emotions within the mold) of breaking the mold and begin to move towards that fear or discomfort. We must challenge the status quo and cultivate the strength and courage to expand who we can be as leaders.

Referencing the standard leadership traits above, we can consciously choose to shift our behaviors:

Disempowerment becomes Leadership/Ownership: Taking full accountability for our choices, behaviors, and mistakes

Power-over becomes Power-with: Motivating, supporting, recognizing, and lifting others up

Self-reliance becomes Relating: Asking for help, listening, seeing the bigger picture, noticing and considering other’s feelings and needs

Distraction/Fragmentation becomes Presence: Noticing what is happening within ourselves, others, our environment, and our organizations/systems

Numbing becomes Feeling: Slowing down, finding a work-life balance, and balancing people with process

Competition becomes Co-Creation: Collaborating, seeking and incorporating input and feedback, looking for win-win opportunities

Mental Intelligence becomes Emotional, Spiritual, and Physical Intelligence: Considering emotions, intuitions, experiences, feelings, and other data when making decisions and implementing changes

As I mentioned earlier, this is not about dismissing “traditional” masculine traits entirely. Doing so creates other reactive molds that limit our leadership capacity in other ways. There is a time and place to be aggressive, fact-based, competitive, or self-reliant. However, when we can also be gentle, emotional, cooperative, or interdependent, we have more options to choose from and can be stronger leaders. One of the keys is also learning to discern what type of leadership is needed, which I’ll cover in a future blog.

As leaders, the point is to have the freedom to choose how we want to lead instead of acting on auto-pilot or out of fear. Having a wider range of behaviors, styles, and approaches makes us more effective, powerful, equitable, and trustworthy. We can then respond and adapt to current situations and needs, make better decisions, and serve rather than harm. Again, this transcends gender: it requires reimagining the paradigm of what leadership can look like for everyone, at all levels of our organizations, systems, and society.

A New Model of Leadership

To begin to shift behavior and break the mold, consider the following questions:

• What are some of your default behaviors that fall within the masculine mold?
• When you think of breaking the mold, what are your fears and discomforts?
• Of the essential shifts above, which shift would make you a more effective leader? What behaviors would support that shift?
• What are some benefits you see in breaking the mold? For yourself? For others?
• If you are in a position of power or influence, how can you break the mold for others?

On one hand, words are cheap and do little to express the outrage, pain, and sadness I feel about these events, as well as how I feel about some people’s responses to these events. They’re even cheaper when attempting to use words to empathize with people whose everyday suffering merely because of the color of their skin is far beyond what I experience in my own life. Compounding this with trying to express and discuss anything meaningful within the gutters of social media only seems to make it more trivial.

On the other hand, silence can be worse.

So, to my friends, colleagues, acquaintances, and millions of other people of color who I don’t even know personally, I am truly sorry for the pain, anguish, injustice, and immorality that our culture, system, and society has and is causing you. There is no excuse. No justification. No rationalization. It is unacceptable. Rather than try to share, focus on my feelings, and water down what can’t really be expressed with words, I’d rather listen to how you are feeling, hear your stories, and support you however I can. Should you want to reach out and talk, I am here to support you. Should you choose to process in other ways, I respect and appreciate you taking care of yourself, however that may look.

What I do want to speak to is how we, as white people, engage in conversations, situations, and systems involving race. Not just now, but moving forward. Not just in social media or with friends, but also in our communities and our organizations. Whether it’s because we feel ashamed, guilty, ignorant, nervous, uncomfortable, or defensive, too often our behaviors unconsciously perpetuate racism instead of eliminating it. Good intentions aren’t enough. Diversity trainings aren’t enough. Even speaking out isn’t enough. We need to cultivate the humility and courage to confront ourselves and the institutions we participate in if we want to address racism and injustice at its core.

Although there are no quick fixes, the following are some actions we, as white people, can take to begin addressing racism. I offer them not from a place of having it all figured out or making anyone wrong or bad, but of sharing what I’ve learned and what I’ve found helpful to begin making a difference. If you are a white leader who wants to create change, I encourage you to take these actions.

Listen

If you only choose to do one thing, choose to listen. Too often, white people talk to avoid facing our pain, discomfort, shame, or guilt. Talking typically includes:

• Justifying: “Well, what that person really meant was …”
• Minimizing: “It’s not really that bad – look how far we’ve come!”
• Denying: “Are you sure that’s what really happened?”
• Advising: “Well, you should look at it this way (my way) instead.”
• Equalizing: “We white people have problems too!”
• Disowning: “I’m not racist because …”
• Rationalizing: “Well, not everyone is bad!”
• Diverting: “But what about …?”

Not only do none of the above responses resemble anything like listening; they also reinforce racism by prioritizing our “message” above someone else’s experience, implying that our perspective is more accurate, and putting the focus on ourselves. A core element of racism is a dominant group seeing themselves as superior. Both prioritizing our message above a person of color’s experience and implying that our (white) perspective is more accurate (“see it MY way, not yours”) are forms of superiority that reinforce racism. By listening, we can get a more accurate understanding of how racism shows up and actions we can take to support people of color and take action.

There are many ways to develop your listening, some of which I wrote about in this post. We don’t need to fix, educate, or solve anything. We can simply listen.  (And by the way, listening doesn’t just apply when talking about race – it applies when having conversations around just about anything.)

Educate yourself

Thirty years ago there were far fewer resources and means by which to educate oneself about racism. Now, between the abundance of books, videos, training, articles and other resources that are widely available, there is no excuse to not be able to educate ourselves. A simple Google search with keywords such as “books about racism” or “movies about racism” will bring up plenty of resources. Instead of looking to people of color to educate us (which again makes the conversation about us), we can do some research and use what’s already available. As part of this research, we can also learn about what racism really means (spoiler: it’s not just about using racial slurs or actively disliking people of color). Additionally, go beyond current events to learn about racial issues that are buried under the table (for example, despite the many injustices that Native people have and currently face, Native people and issues are often left out of the conversation and ignored by mainstream media, which is another form of racism).

Lastly, when people of color are sharing their experiences, histories, or information, they ARE educating us. Often, we just choose not to listen because the information isn’t delivered in a way that makes us feel comfortable.

Confront your biases

As white people who hold more power in our society (whether we want it or not, or regardless of how much we may also suffer) and being humans with biases, having racially-biased thoughts, ideas, or perspectives isn’t a matter of IF – it’s a matter of HOW. As humans, our brains are wired for bias (as my colleague Deena Pierott says, “If you have a brain, you have a bias.”). Because racism isn’t necessarily a matter of hate or dislike, but also of superiority or “rightness,” there are often subtle, unconscious, and unintentional ways our racial biases show up. If we want to create change, our job is to recognize and counteract these biases. Some examples of often unnoticed racial biases include:

• Talking in ways that resemble the above examples in the section about listening
• Valuing statistics or external “evidence” over someone’s experience
• Believing there is a right or better (typically in ways that align with white values) way to speak, parent, dress, protest, engage in conflict, express sexuality, dance, eat, socialize, etc.
• Assuming that our legal, educational, law enforcement, organizational, and other institutional systems treat people of color the same as white people, or focusing on the exceptions
• Being more outraged or bothered by how we’re impacted instead of how people of color are impacted (being more upset by looting than the fact that innocent people of color were murdered by police officers, being more annoyed that a football game was “interrupted” than learning about everyday injustice that literally results in people being killed)
• Being put out by conversations about race (“I don’t want to have to talk about it all the time,” “Enough already,” “Can’t we just move on?”)
• Making yourself out to be free of racial bias while pointing the finger at other white people (assuming others are the problem, but not you; perpetuating a good/bad or right/wrong dichotomy; believing that any political party is free of racism)

Although it can be difficult to both recognize and acknowledge our racial biases, addressing them within ourselves instead of pointing the finger at others is far more impactful. We must, as Gandhi’s oft-quoted saying goes, be the change.

Own your shame and guilt

I believe that shame and guilt are two of the biggest barriers for us as white people to address and work towards eliminating racism. We often take people of color’s feelings, statements, or facts about racism personally or as anti-white (again, making it about us) instead of listening to what’s being said, empathizing, and being allies. We believe we are somehow directly responsible, bad, or imperfect, and this triggers our shame and guilt. At this point, it becomes impossible to take in anything that’s being said or look at ourselves objectively.

In general, someone expressing anger towards you doesn’t make you a bad person, or necessarily even mean anything about you. It simply means that the other person feels angry. Instead of talking, focusing on your shame or guilt, or getting defensive, these are great opportunities to stop talking, become present, and listen. Listen to empathize. Listen to understand. Listen to learn. Listen to support. (Again, these are good skills to use in most conversations.) And, if there is a follow-up action to take, take it.

For better or worse, based on how our human brains are wired, it’s “normal” to have a certain degree of biased thoughts, beliefs, or behaviors (this applies to any type of “ism” such as sexism, classism, ageism, etc.). These biases don’t make us inherently bad – they make us human.

The real issue is when we deny, avoid looking at, dismiss, defend, or minimize our biases. This is especially true when someone points them out or shares a way they’ve felt harmed by our words or actions. Our existence as white people isn’t the problem – our resistance to hearing and acknowledging what’s true, our unwillingness to look at ourselves and our systems, and our avoidance of speaking up and taking a stand for what’s right are some of the problems. That doesn’t mean it’s easy or comfortable to see our biases (and we may feel shame or guilt about them), but uncovering and counteracting our biases as best we can is essential in order for us to learn, grow, and create meaningful change. We all make mistakes – what matters is how we respond to them.

Challenge racism

There is no shortage of examples of how racism shows up in everyday life and organizational culture. Whether it’s around who gets hired or promoted (and who doesn’t), who gets arrested and receives more severe sentencing for the exact same crimes (or even when crimes weren’t committed), who gets to make the decisions around laws, policies, and rules, or whose voices are heard, we can start to name these inequities and take action to change them. This is especially true if you are in a position of power (such as a manager), have influence, or hold decision-making authority.

This isn’t about shaming other white people, looking good, or “saving” people of color – it’s about speaking the truth and doing the right thing in order to create a more equitable, just, and fair world – for everyone. I believe that most white people want this kind of world; however, making it a reality requires moving towards the places that feel uncomfortable and taking a hard look at ourselves, our culture, and our systems.

____

These actions aren’t meant to be taken alone. As white leaders, we can support and challenge one another to confront racism and look at our part in perpetuating it. We can come together to address injustices and inequities in our systems and, as people whose voices are more likely to be heard and as people with relatively more power to change these systems, take collective action. Whether individually or with others, the following are some questions for reflection:

• How do you respond to conversations around racism? What feelings and thoughts arise?
• What are some ways you believe your ways to be right or better in areas such as speaking, dress, parenting, or other everyday behaviors? How many of those so-called right ways align with the values of white and/or European culture?
• How can you improve as a listener?
• How can you address racist behavior in ways that supports awareness, growth, and action without shaming, one-upping, or making other white people wrong or bad?
• What would it mean for you if every story, fact, or piece of data about racism and people of color’s experiences were completely true?

The problem with this expression, however, is its self-contained irony. We’re supposed to be looking at how others may benefit, but somehow still manage to include the “me.” Although one could argue that it’s a matter of semantics, time and time again leaders with good intentions fail to get past the “me” and miss out on who they are trying to serve. Even in guessing at what someone else might need, they do it from a “me” place and likely project their own assumptions. Therefore, to apply this mindset and be of service, we need to shift from the WIIFM to the WIIFT and ask a different question: “What’s in it for them?”

Whiffing the WIIFM

There are many instances in organizational life for us to apply the WIIFT, including:

• Meetings
• Training
• Assigning work
• Career development
• Mentoring
• Benefits
• Scheduling

We sometimes wonder why people aren’t engaged, why they don’t seem to care, why they aren’t more self-directed or self-motivated, why morale is low, or why turnover is high. In many instances, one underlying reason is a lack of focus on the WIIFT. Instead, leaders look out for their own interests over other’s interests. Consider some common examples:

• When leading a meeting, the leader sets their own agenda that serves the outcomes they want
• When designing training, the facilitator emphasizes topics that are exciting and meaningful to them
• When exploring benefits or work schedules, the company figures out how they can get the most amount of productivity for the least cost
• When mentoring or discussing a direct report’s career, the manager looks at how they can keep the employee from leaving
• When giving a PowerPoint presentation, the presenter includes all the brilliant insights they think they have and cram them into an hour-long talk with tons of slides and non-stop talking

Although the above examples may provide short-term benefits for the individual or organization, over time they erode trust, security, and growth. In the end, the approaches create the opposite result. The WIIFM lives up to its name and benefits the leader or the company, not the employees.

The Shift from the WIIFM to the WIIFT

Instead of either focusing on how we can benefit or trying to put ourselves in another’s shoes while still thinking of “me,” we can ask a different question: “What’s in it for them?”

Asking this simple question gets us thinking about other’s needs and desires. It helps us shift our thinking from what we can get to what we can give. And, paradoxically, it often results in everyone benefitting.

How do we discover the WIIFT? It’s simple: ask.

Of course, there are different ways to ask. Depending on the audience and situation, some approaches include:

• Surveys
• Focus groups
• 1:1 interviews
• Polls
• Feedback forms
• Casual conversations

Going back to our earlier examples, here’s how finding the WIIFT might look:

• Prior to the meeting, the leader asks meeting participants what would create value for them and plans the agenda accordingly
• The facilitator surveys the organization to discover areas of weakness and designs training to strengthen those areas. They also inquire about preferred learning formats and incorporate them.
• The company has managers set clear outcomes but allows for flexible work schedules so long as the outcomes are met
• The manager asks what direct report’s goals are and provides support on how they can achieve them, knowing that they will be much more inspired and engaged during the time they work for them (and may want to stay longer because a frequently “hidden” but significant job benefit is a supportive manager who cares about their people)
• The presenter polls their peers on things they’d want to know related to the topic and breaks up their PowerPoint presentation to ask questions of the audience, use audience-related scenarios, and create simple slides that are easy to read and follow

The Power of the WIIFT

The great thing about using the WIIFT is its simplicity and ease of use. It takes very little time, minimal effort, and gets maximum results. In short, the ROI is significant.

A manager was struggling to engage people at their meetings. When they started focusing on what the participants wanted to talk about, inquiring about their ideas, and offering tools to help make their jobs easier, the participants started taking initiative both in and out of the meetings. This, in turn, took a huge load off of the manager’s plate.

When conducting a training in an industrial organization, the trainer used examples and scenarios that related directly to the worker’s day-to-day work instead of the more commonly used and standard office-based scenarios. The participants were more easily able to apply what they learned, engage in the training, and follow-through (and were more motivated to attend future training).

An organization wanted to find ways to keep their employees and attract new ones. They put out a survey asking what benefits would most appeal to people and make them want to stay with the company. They took the top two ideas and immediately found ways to implement them. In addition to reaping the benefits, the employees also felt heard and valued. This not only helped with retention, but employees spoke much more highly of the company and were more intrinsically motivated to help the company succeed.

These are just a few examples. Even the WIIFT is a misnomer because asking the question ultimately results in the WIIFW, or “What’s in it for we?” By asking the WIIFT, everyone wins.

To begin using the WIIFT, reflect on the following questions:

• How often do you ask what would provide value for others? What are some situations in which you could ask?
• What are some situations in which you wish others would consider how you could benefit? What are similar situations in which others might feel the same way?
• What keeps you from considering how others might benefit? When you do, what keeps you from acting accordingly?
• What do you assume you might lose by focusing on how others could benefit and providing those benefits?
• How do you feel and what do you experience when serving others?

Although some workplaces have employee recognition programs and rewards for successes, few manage to make people feel truly seen. Typically, a few employees are recognized while the majority aren’t. Even those who are recognized are more rewarded for what they do, not who they are.

This narrative is infused throughout the majority of organizations I’ve worked with. Employees are expected to perform, produce, and achieve. Although these expectations are reasonable within a work environment, the problem is that they take precedence over recognizing the humanity in each person. Employees become objectified and part of a machine. People’s gifts, feelings, strengths, and experiences are minimized or ignored altogether. Employees feel like numbers, cogs in the wheel, expendable pawns who are supposed to sacrifice who they are for the benefit of the organization.

Again, my point is not that organizations shouldn’t expect results or performance. My point is that they shouldn’t come at the expense of their people’s humanity. And, ironically, when people’s humanity is recognized, they will be more likely to produce results and perform at a higher level.

The participants in my coaching groups have this experience when doing the above activity. Many have never had anyone tell them what their strengths are, including their colleagues who work with them every day, sometimes over a period of years. Although these exchanges might be part of a performance review with a manager, most performance reviews are exactly about that – performance. Managers will praise accomplishments, outcomes, and products. Few recognize the unique strengths that each person offers.

Participants in these groups also share how awkward and uncomfortable it can be to hear their colleagues acknowledge their strengths. They’re used to hearing criticism or how they can improve. Noticing this discrepancy is often eye-opening for them, and comes with a degree of sadness at how focusing on the negative is actually more comfortable than being acknowledged for the positive. However, their gratitude and the impact on their self-esteem ultimately outweighs their discomfort. Many come away feeling a level of fulfillment that they rarely experience in the workplace. They then leave with palpable energy that they bring back to their work.

Even more ironic is how adults spend one-third of their lives at work but almost never make the time for these conversations. Think about how many hours each week, each month, each year we bear witness to the people around us but don’t take the time to acknowledge them. We witness their growth, their struggles, their successes, their breakthroughs, their triumphs, and their failures but rarely reflect what we see in them. Instead, we act like they are invisible, that who they are doesn’t matter, that their value is solely in what they can do for us or how successful they make us look. We go through the motions, without taking time to truly connect and appreciate one another.

Instead, we have the opportunity to bear witness to our co-worker’s humanity. We can share what we see, what we appreciate, and how they impact us. Many clients, after doing this activity, recognize how they seldom, if ever, do this for their people. After experiencing the power of being witnessed, and having the opportunity to witness their colleagues, they see the potential in making these conversations part of the “new normal.” And, when they do start having these conversations, notice how the effects begin to ripple throughout their organization. For those who might be skeptical or wonder if this “soft, touchy-feely” stuff would actually work in your organization, the answer is yes. Whether it’s in a non-profit, government, or military-industrial organization, I’ve seen the impact and success first-hand.

We all have this opportunity. You likely see the strengths of the people around you. The difference comes when you move from seeing to sharing. Doing so takes minimal effort but provides maximum reward. We all have strengths – even the co-workers I’ve felt the most challenged by have strengths. Talking about them lets in a ray of light that can open the door to new possibilities.

That is the invitation: to take a moment to acknowledge the people you work and see almost every day. To affirm the humanity in each person. To not pretend that, just because you’re at work, your humanity should be checked at the door. This is how we begin to revolutionize leadership – by daring to create the “new normal” that we’d like to experience.

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.

Notice a theme here?

Keys to strong leadership include seeing things from different perspectives, thinking outside of the box, and going beyond conventional norms. Yet, how do we become proficient in those abilities when all the so-called experts are homogeneous: older, white, and male?

Expanding Our Ideas of Who Leadership Experts Are

Yes, I fit into two of those categories as well. It’s not a knock on any individual, race, or gender. It is, however, a call to look beyond the status quo. In doing so, we can seek out leaders who we aren’t exposed to through mainstream media or re-think our preconceived images of leaders.

Too often, leaders pay more attention to those who look like them, think like them, and act like them. Although they typically don’t do this consciously, the impact is still the same. People who are different are ignored, treated as second-class (if they’re lucky), or devalued. I see this all the time in organizations in terms of who is promoted, who’s ideas are heard, who gets the boss’s ear, who’s in the know, who gets paid more, who is chosen for special projects, and so on.

Redefining Leadership Experts

Based on my search above, this mentality is embedded in our culture. Look at people like Maya Angelou, Victor Frankl, Black Elk, Oprah Winfrey, Billy Frank, Jr., Nelson Mandela, Indira Gandhi, Ho Chi Minh, Tank Man, Brené Brown, and The Dalai Lama. Why don’t their names come up when searching for leadership experts? In fact, the only time they might show up in a search of “leadership experts” is if you put an adjective before the term “leader” (i.e., Asian, female, Native American, young, etc.). Ironically, if you compare some of these people to the men who appear in the search above, notice whose leadership has been powerful enough to literally change culture versus just teaching leadership. The people in the list above do leadership.

Redefining Diversity in the Workplace

Look beyond the people who represent the dominant culture if you want to innovate, if you want to be inclusive, if you want to demonstrate that you truly care about your people. Not just in popular culture, but within your own life and organization. Ask these questions to expand your perspective:

• Who are the people in your everyday life who embody leadership but don’t fit the dominant culture’s mold of leadership, and what can you learn from them?
• When you think of different demographics (age, race, physical ability, ethnicity, religion, gender), what are some groups who you have not been exposed to and could learn more about through books, videos, or in person?
• When you look at leaders of different backgrounds throughout history, what can you learn through their example that might run counter to what you’ve been taught about leadership? How can you incorporate that learning into how you lead?

Notice people who you might typically overlook to redefine your perception of leaders, whether it’s a colleague, employee, community member, or person on the street. Leaders are everywhere if we are open to seeing them.