TBM 40/52: Drivers vs. Fixers

You are trying to move something forward in a thoughtful way. You hit a roadblock. What do you do? We either:

1. optimize for what we can move forward ourselves

2. continue to try to fix the underlying mess (that makes holistic work hard)

With #1, there's forward progress. We have "wins" to share. But our pragmatism and drive may exacerbate the underlying mess and create more debt and confusion. #2 feels noble. We're motivated to address the underlying problem. But it is easy to burn out, go in circles, and get nothing done.

Both approaches can lead you astray.

#1 has a habit of feeding into itself. As debt and confusion increase, so do the incentives to go it alone and do whatever it takes to move forward. "There's too much consensus here; you just need to GO!" says the #1.

Poor #2s get mired in even a bigger mess—their "fixer" tendencies firing on overtime. Meanwhile, their #1 colleagues are getting promoted and hiring like-minded ambitious pragmatists. "Those #2s are just bogged down in analysis paralysis and have no wins to show for it!" says the #1s. #2s burn out and leave—along with knowledge of the mess. Mess accumulates. #1s get ahead. More heroics. On and on. 

It is a wicked (and oh so familiar) loop further complicated by stereotypes (which I purposefully accentuated so far). Where did your mind go with the examples above?

• #1 is a sociopath mercenary, running roughshod over everyone! #2 is doing glue work, and that gets no respect whatsoever!

• Ugh, #2s are all talk, no action—those angsty systems thinkers. I hate people offering no solutions! #1 is just getting their work done; why the hate?

In most cases, neither is true. There's more to it. But it's easy to go there. Some people are allergic to #1s. And others to #2s. To top it all off, we've probably all been #1s and #2s, sometimes in the same week.

 I swear I've heard #1 and #2 arguing in my head this week:

• That's not reasonable. Just push ahead and deal with the downside later.

• But nooooo! If I can fix this now, I'll save myself the pain of fixing this in the future.

My key point is that this mix of pragmatism, idealism, optimism, skepticism, pessimism, collectivism, and individualism is a feature of any organization. We need deep operators and deep thinkers. We need it all. The problems start when we let one worldview (or pattern) dominate and kick off a wicked loop of exclusion, stereotypes, and mono-culture.

When we let this happen, self-reinforcing loops kick in. We don’t want that!

Leaders play a huge role in making sure this doesn’t happen. 

You'll have a problem if a leader predominantly rewards the #1s and dismisses the #2s. The gardeners, city planners, mess un-ravelers, and thoughtful strategists will leave. Flip it around, and the same is true. The get-it-done folks will feel stifled. Progress and resourcefulness-under-duress are often precisely what you need to break the logjam.  This starts with self-awareness. Many leaders are where they are precisely because they have over-developed #1 or #2 strengths and corresponding allergies.

Leaders need to send the right message, in spite of that bias.

When forming teams, balance and partnership are critical. 

• #1s supercharge and operationalize the work of the #2s.

• #2s add nuance, perspective, and holistic thinking to the work of the #1s. 

Pit these groups against each other: asking one team to police and temper the other, and you'll run into trouble. Running the org too hot, and expecting the #2s to come to the rescue? Watch out; they might have checked out or left. Running the org too cautiously, and expecting the #1s to jump into action on the dime? They may have checked out or quit.

Create an environment where they can partner and form strong bridges of trust, and amazing things can happen.