The plight of the change agent who is often a consultant (ahem, yes, very familiar with this hat):
"...enablement roles often facilitate activities with diverse formal roles and interests. You are in a high-profile position but not a high-formal authority position."
About a year ago, while I was a FTE, a VP told me to be the change. Yes, I'm unemployed now because #layoffs.
Oh heck yes. I've just witnessed this with a colleague and also experienced it directly (I'm in a non-top-tier consultancy that runs more like a staffing agency) . A VP who I admire for speaking their mind spoke their mind, and...got reassigned from their client because the client VVIP thought the VP's thoughts were 'interesting.' And, I have just been reassigned after trying to introduce change because the turnaround scenario that I was asked to helicopter into needed a 'go to green' plan. I spent 3 weeks assessing and then the first week's worth of 'experiments' as I positioned them, landed well with my team but not with my client. So, onto the exit strategy...
To continue the tennis metaphor (of unforced errors): when you are having a bad day and hitting lots of shots in the net, there is a need to adjust the process to improve the percentage of success. For example, compensating by aiming for me next clearance or consciously selecting more comfortable shots. And indeed mental preparation comes in, to have a strategy for when the time inevitably comes.
In business terms, to me that means following a process, even if it's just about having conversations, over having to improvise; recognise when the problem is too big for the day; match the challenge to a team's energy levels and morale.
We can do real harm to the frontlines on a bad day by having a confusing or botched conversation, regardless of what the CEO thinks.
I can just see myself with a giant turd in a paper bag, holding it up to everyone (smiling from ear-to-ear) exclaiming, "Look everyone, it's just a Snickers bar!" while people run screaming out of the room.
It's painful to see things go haywire and to silence the humanity inside John..but offlate the realisation is "speaking up for the change" or be the change etc only burns one down. Companies portrays the values in theory through Scenario based assessments to uphold the values of the company. Once you are in, just play the game is the realisation. It hurts but survival mode is on.
I think there's another path, but it's the path of the consultant: earn the ear, be the canary, and always be prepared to exit (somewhat) gracefully if you step on the landmine.
It's especially true consulting into those integrator roles, because the "interesting" response often earns additional conversations where the real work can begin. And, there're often "swing and miss" meeting where you don't hit it off but no real harm is done, and there are definitely the strikeout moments where you lose your ability to influence entire and it's time to walk away. The nice thing about being a consultant is that while I won't know directly which meeting I had, my sponsors will often hear very quickly and can help me navigate the next steps.
I think "always have an exit strategy" is likely applied to everyone, not just the consultants. Always saved me good when I was IC or manager. Now, as founder and c-level, that's the hardest part. The ultimate exit (just quitting) comes at the highest price: the one that you have failed to get your company into the direction you want. You have no excuse there, unless you're fighting the board or your investors (which is also a failure, since you have choose them supposedly).
Also, similar to what John mentioned, as a founder, you are often going to be at multiple levels at the same time, especially during the first years. People will look up to you to set the direction, but at the same time, will also be very critical if such direction is not the want they wanted you to go with. But they will rarely tell you that in your face. The amount of emotional work to do to convince, redirect, explain, compromise, discuss and overall align everyone on both the vision and the means (budget, initiatives, strategies, culture... Not how everyone should do their work already) are kind of crazy and exhausting.
I felt so pessimistic reading this because you described my previous (and I hope last) job.
I wasn't a VP or high-tier executive — I was a team leader of a medium engineering team. But it was a similar feeling, maybe because I was attending high-tier meetings.
As your friend said: "Once you get to VP or above, you learn that even the slightest gasp or eye-roll could be used against you.".
I got laid off for similar reasons — I wanted to make a productive, high-performance team, but bullshit that was running here and there blocked any change, any initiative, if it didn't come from HIPPOs.
And literally, an eye-roll or gasp was provoking "negative feedback."
"Once you get to VP or above, you learn that even the slightest gasp or eye-roll could be used against you."
This brings to mind a quote from Venkatesh Rao's great piece on "Posturetalk, Powertalk, Babytalk and Gametalk":
"What distinguishes Powertalk is that with every word uttered, the power equation between the two speakers shifts just a little. Sometimes both gain slightly, at the expense of some poor schmuck. Sometimes one yields ground to the other. Powertalk in other words, is a consequential language."
> Sometimes, the best strategy is to let things implode and burn to the ground. Do nothing. Save your energy. This can be incredibly difficult if you care about people.
If only this would get easier over time. The only realization that helped me was that I would let myself down even more than the people I cared about.
You listed 1-5. I am saying that not all executive know 1-5. Example: "When we have a bad day, we attribute it to our environment. When someone else has a bad day, we attribute it to their character (fundamental attribution error)" - I've seen this done many many times.
Very true, and I recently saw someone on LinkedIn make the Fundamental Attribution Error, get called out on it, and get angry and defensive. He claimed he wasn't making the error and claimed that the person calling him out didn't understand what the error was (ironically making the Fundamental Attribution Error a second time!).
Sometimes when we know about a heuristic or bias, it simply makes us better at justifying it when we do it.
The plight of the change agent who is often a consultant (ahem, yes, very familiar with this hat):
"...enablement roles often facilitate activities with diverse formal roles and interests. You are in a high-profile position but not a high-formal authority position."
About a year ago, while I was a FTE, a VP told me to be the change. Yes, I'm unemployed now because #layoffs.
"be my human shield to say I was a key enabler if it goes right, and get sacked if it goes wrong"
Oh heck yes. I've just witnessed this with a colleague and also experienced it directly (I'm in a non-top-tier consultancy that runs more like a staffing agency) . A VP who I admire for speaking their mind spoke their mind, and...got reassigned from their client because the client VVIP thought the VP's thoughts were 'interesting.' And, I have just been reassigned after trying to introduce change because the turnaround scenario that I was asked to helicopter into needed a 'go to green' plan. I spent 3 weeks assessing and then the first week's worth of 'experiments' as I positioned them, landed well with my team but not with my client. So, onto the exit strategy...
This post is full of female eldest child energy. Always judged on failed perfection. I love it.
To continue the tennis metaphor (of unforced errors): when you are having a bad day and hitting lots of shots in the net, there is a need to adjust the process to improve the percentage of success. For example, compensating by aiming for me next clearance or consciously selecting more comfortable shots. And indeed mental preparation comes in, to have a strategy for when the time inevitably comes.
In business terms, to me that means following a process, even if it's just about having conversations, over having to improvise; recognise when the problem is too big for the day; match the challenge to a team's energy levels and morale.
We can do real harm to the frontlines on a bad day by having a confusing or botched conversation, regardless of what the CEO thinks.
I can just see myself with a giant turd in a paper bag, holding it up to everyone (smiling from ear-to-ear) exclaiming, "Look everyone, it's just a Snickers bar!" while people run screaming out of the room.
It's painful to see things go haywire and to silence the humanity inside John..but offlate the realisation is "speaking up for the change" or be the change etc only burns one down. Companies portrays the values in theory through Scenario based assessments to uphold the values of the company. Once you are in, just play the game is the realisation. It hurts but survival mode is on.
Humanity is still there :)
I think there's another path, but it's the path of the consultant: earn the ear, be the canary, and always be prepared to exit (somewhat) gracefully if you step on the landmine.
It's especially true consulting into those integrator roles, because the "interesting" response often earns additional conversations where the real work can begin. And, there're often "swing and miss" meeting where you don't hit it off but no real harm is done, and there are definitely the strikeout moments where you lose your ability to influence entire and it's time to walk away. The nice thing about being a consultant is that while I won't know directly which meeting I had, my sponsors will often hear very quickly and can help me navigate the next steps.
I think "always have an exit strategy" is likely applied to everyone, not just the consultants. Always saved me good when I was IC or manager. Now, as founder and c-level, that's the hardest part. The ultimate exit (just quitting) comes at the highest price: the one that you have failed to get your company into the direction you want. You have no excuse there, unless you're fighting the board or your investors (which is also a failure, since you have choose them supposedly).
Also, similar to what John mentioned, as a founder, you are often going to be at multiple levels at the same time, especially during the first years. People will look up to you to set the direction, but at the same time, will also be very critical if such direction is not the want they wanted you to go with. But they will rarely tell you that in your face. The amount of emotional work to do to convince, redirect, explain, compromise, discuss and overall align everyone on both the vision and the means (budget, initiatives, strategies, culture... Not how everyone should do their work already) are kind of crazy and exhausting.
I felt so pessimistic reading this because you described my previous (and I hope last) job.
I wasn't a VP or high-tier executive — I was a team leader of a medium engineering team. But it was a similar feeling, maybe because I was attending high-tier meetings.
As your friend said: "Once you get to VP or above, you learn that even the slightest gasp or eye-roll could be used against you.".
I got laid off for similar reasons — I wanted to make a productive, high-performance team, but bullshit that was running here and there blocked any change, any initiative, if it didn't come from HIPPOs.
And literally, an eye-roll or gasp was provoking "negative feedback."
"Once you get to VP or above, you learn that even the slightest gasp or eye-roll could be used against you."
This brings to mind a quote from Venkatesh Rao's great piece on "Posturetalk, Powertalk, Babytalk and Gametalk":
"What distinguishes Powertalk is that with every word uttered, the power equation between the two speakers shifts just a little. Sometimes both gain slightly, at the expense of some poor schmuck. Sometimes one yields ground to the other. Powertalk in other words, is a consequential language."
> Sometimes, the best strategy is to let things implode and burn to the ground. Do nothing. Save your energy. This can be incredibly difficult if you care about people.
If only this would get easier over time. The only realization that helped me was that I would let myself down even more than the people I cared about.
“ Seasoned executives know all this, of course.” You sure about that? My experience is that much of this is worse bc many don’t.
Curious what they don't know, just to clarify... they don't know how to do extreme self-regulation and suppression?
You listed 1-5. I am saying that not all executive know 1-5. Example: "When we have a bad day, we attribute it to our environment. When someone else has a bad day, we attribute it to their character (fundamental attribution error)" - I've seen this done many many times.
Got! Apologies, I missed that.
Very true, and I recently saw someone on LinkedIn make the Fundamental Attribution Error, get called out on it, and get angry and defensive. He claimed he wasn't making the error and claimed that the person calling him out didn't understand what the error was (ironically making the Fundamental Attribution Error a second time!).
Sometimes when we know about a heuristic or bias, it simply makes us better at justifying it when we do it.