Action Audit, Step 2 - Closing the Gaps

My previous blog on Action Gaps ended with the suggestion that efforts to close the ones you find in yourself can be a bit trickier than they might seem at first glance. I’ll try to offer some observations on what common issues come up in the process of trying and go through my 3-step CAR process for working around them in this piece.

However, before digging in, I want to simply point out that millions and millions of words have been written about losing weight, getting control over one’s finances, and a myriad of other topics where “closing the Action Gap” has proven to be extremely challenging. It logically follows then that my 500 words below aren’t really going to move the needle here, right? Maybe, but maybe not.

I’ll start here by clarifying that my focus here is NOT at all on helping you reach whatever goal you have in mind that requires you take the missing Action step in your situation. THAT is a whole ‘nuther topic. My only focus here is helping you get greater internal integrity by asking you to track and identify where you have these Action Gaps, and then offering a simple mechanism to help you close them. In other words, this isn’t about goal accomplishment but rather about integrity enhancement.

To unpack this critical distinction between goal accomplishment and integrity enhancement, let’s go over the main difference between Actions and Goals. Actions, as I am using the term here, are 1-time events. “Go to bed early tonight,” “Have a lite salad for lunch tomorrow,” and “Spend $50 or less for my brother’s birthday gift,” for example. These Actions are all singular, concrete events, occurring now or soon, and usually have very limited impact on our overall current state of being.

Goals, on the other hand, are usually all about some distant state of being. They exist in some nebulous, far off space of “eventually” and are often entirely imaginary or vaguely quantified. “Richer,” “thinner,” “happier,” etc. are all common goals I hear coming up for my clients. And they’re all invisible, immaterial, and reaching them requires steady attention and intention. Paradoxically, they often have enormous impacts on our mental health and wellbeing. It’s no wonder they can seem to feel so big, yet impossible to achieve!

The problem many people face is they correctly appreciate that Actions lead to Goals, but then incorrectly mix up all the messiness of Goals into the simplicity of the Actions. For example, they may have decided that the pathway to reaching their Goal of being “thinner” is built by taking certain Actions like eating a lite salad for lunch instead of a bacon double cheeseburger. So far, so good. But then they bring all kinds of personal drama from the past that may or may not be related to that Goal into the mix, both when planning the Action and again when it comes time to follow through. This messy mix often turns what should be a simple Action into a whole dramatic story and process, putting both one’s goal accomplishment and integrity enhancement plans into the trash.

So what’s the best way to keep things simple?

By keeping our focus entirely on the integrity enhancement part of the equation.

Remember, Action Gaps come about due to first making a plan or promise to ourselves and then not actually following through on them when the time comes to do so. This lack of connection between thought and behavior is the ONLY issue we are discussing here, and only due to the fact that it undermines our own integrity, which in turn weakens us in countless other ways.

Therefore, the solution to closing these Action Gaps comes down to doing what I call the CAR process:

1)    Commitment: Take an honest and clear-eyed look at yourself when you find yourself making those plans or promises to yourself about tomorrow. Be real here. Are you simply expressing a hope or interest? Or are you making a commitment? If it’s just a hope or interest, then force yourself to clearly move it off the table entirely or over go all in on it and turn it into a hard commitment. You may find this first step surprisingly difficult, but clear honesty here is the main point.

If you indeed want to make it a commitment, then the trick is to make the follow through Action about you keeping your word to yourself rather than it merely being a vague effort to reach some vague goal. Self-commitment is a much more powerful force than is the idea of a vague effort. 

2)    Action: When it comes time to follow up on your commitment with the required Action, take a moment to pause and clarify what this Action means to you. Framing things here primarily as a means of building trust and confidence in yourself is a much healthier motivator than trying to shame or blame your way into vague goal setting behavior compliance. This Action is all about follow through on your previous commitment, and not about some nebulous distant goal. Again, it’s not about goal accomplishment, it’s about integrity enhancement.

3)    Recognition: This third and final step is perhaps the most important part of this process. Once you have completed the Action that you committed to completing, pause just for a moment of recognition and compliment yourself on your follow through and completion of the Action. It may sound a bit trite, but I can’t overestimate the power of this step of acknowledgement and gratitude. This third step is where you are consciously bringing intention and awareness to your newly enhanced integrity. The more you can demonstrate that integrity to yourself, and then use this acknowledgment step to bring it more fully into your awareness, the more it will shine through the next time you are making a commitment to Action to yourself.

 Every time you complete a CAR integrity enhancement exercise your personal integrity increases by a small amount, and each increase begets more strength and focus you can bring to bear on the next opportunity. This increased trust in and respect for yourself can’t help but show up in your personal and professional relationships as well. All good things, right?!?

*As an aside, I like the CAR acronym because it’s fun to imagine this process kind of like a video game where each success gives you an upgrade in ability or weapons, but in this case, it can be fun to visualize each success giving you an upgrade to your actual car. Like, you can imagine starting with whatever car you currently have, but then imagine that each successful CAR exercise completion lets you upgrade it a bit to the next model, newer version, or even going up brand or more sporty, rugged, or whatever else feels like an upgrade for you. Having some fun with this process is helpful, and visualizing these integrity enhancements as having real world impact is a helpful way to see how it can connect with your everyday experience.  

Next week we’ll continue to explore the Action Audit framework and introduce the much riskier second step – asking your friends, family, and colleagues where they see gaps between your words to them and the actions that may or may not follow. And while this may seem a bit scary at first, it’s helpful to remember that all journeys of self-improvement begin with the “bad news” of seeing our current state more honestly.

Action Audit, Step 1 – Self Audit

Last week we talked about Action Gaps and how important it is be mindful about making sure our words and actions are fully in alignment when it comes to building trust and credibility in both our personal and professional lives. Sometimes, like in my initial example from last week, these gaps can be inadvertently created due to differences in communication styles and how we use and understand certain words and phrases. But other times these gaps are more intrinsic to how we function in general and point to deeper issues about our integrity with ourselves.

 Regardless of where they come from, these Action Gaps are costing us our social reputations to various degrees, and therefore our opportunities for growth and future success. Which brings us to the real questions - How can we start to find out where these Action Gaps might lie, and perhaps more importantly, how can we begin to close them?

 One option to address this question is by running what I call Action Audits to see where we are expressing interest in or even commitment to do something, but then don’t actually follow through when it comes time for action.

 It’s a good idea to start small here with a Self-Audit. By this I mean simply check in with yourself to see where your “present self” made a plan for your “future self” to do later. But, when later eventually comes, no actual action happened - creating an Action Gap. No need to seek any changes at this point, just be mindful of where and when you aren’t following through on a plan or promise you made to yourself, no matter how big or small it might seem.

 Often times these Action Gaps show up in our aspirations for self-care or self-improvement, such as going to the gym, skipping dessert, or staying focused on a work project during certain time frames. Yet, when it comes time to follow through, we find ourselves sleeping in instead of going to the gym, eating the dessert, and fucking around on the internet instead of focusing on our work project. It's easy to view one-off events like these as no big deal and something to “try again” tomorrow. But tomorrow comes and goes, and we still don’t follow up with external actions that match our internal plans.

 Other times these Action Gaps can create much larger and impactful problems in our lives. One example here could be in personal finances, such as saving up a certain amount of money or paying off some debt by a certain date. Another could be in your relationship, like wanting to bring up a difficult topic but then veering away when the time comes or even vowing to stay faithful only to stray as an opportunity to do so arises.

 For some people, promises like these seem trivial or minor and they break them without a second thought. For others, they are tied up in messy histories and deeper issues. However, and no matter how big or small, any and all Action Gaps have bigger costs associated with them, well beyond the simple calories burned or gained and money saved or spent.

 The much more important dynamic in play here is the issue of one’s deeper integrity. What many people fail to realize is that their trust and confidence in themselves greatly impacts the trust and confidence that other people will have in them too. In other words, self-trust creates the strong foundation necessary for other people to place trust in you. Therefore, nurturing/nourishing your confidence in yourself will naturally lead to you gaining trust and credibility in the minds of your peers and colleagues as well.

 Identifying some of your internal Action Gaps by running a fiercely honest Action Audit can be a very difficult process. Mapping and tracking your behavior can be tricky enough, but the harder part of this process really comes down to facing these truths openly and honestly. You might be surprised at how scary it can be to simply sit down with the basic facts of your broken promises and not give in to the tempting litany of bullshit excuses, rationalizations, and other defense mechanisms. But this first step of running an accurate Action Audit is the necessary prerequisite to beginning the real work of closing those Action Gaps to build up your integrity and trust in yourself.

Once you have identified where and how these Action Gaps tend to pop up in your life, then you can begin the harder work of closing them. This sounds very simple in theory. You either stop making plans and promises you consistently can’t keep, or you start being more intentional about tracking those plans and promises so that you can follow up with the right action when the time comes. Ideally, you do both, right? More effort and attention placed on both ends of the deal will indeed build up your internal integrity quickly. But… reality is never as simple as the ideal.

We’ll circle back to Action Gap closing next week to explore some of the factors that make it much harder than it seems and offer up a 3-step process to help you in your efforts.

Action Gaps

Back when I lived in Philly, I had a buddy I would often invite into town to join up with the rest of our friends for all kinds of activities. He only lived a short distance away, but far enough that it was more effort and planning for him to meet up for a fun dinner out, a show, or other group activity. Therefore, I would try to plan things a few days out to make it easier for all of us. Here’s how that would go:

 Me: “Hey, we’re planning on getting together on Sunday night to check out this new Thai place that opened up, do you want to join us?”

 Him: “Yeah man, that sounds good.”

 Me: “Cool, the reservation is at 6, see you then.”

 Him: “Great, thanks for the call.”

 However, when the rest of us met up at the agreed upon time and place, he often wouldn’t be there. I would then call or text to see when he was going to arrive, I would often get something like “Uh, yeah, uh, no, I don’t think I’m going to get down there tonight.” This happened with enough frequency that I began to expect him to not show up and began to preemptively call him an hour ahead of time to clarify whether he was actually going to be there or not. Sometimes he would confirm, but most often he would opt out in their “Uh, yeah, uh, no...” style. This dynamic frustrated me to no end,, and the rest of us too. It got to the point that we all joked about him always bailing out, and eventually I stopped inviting him altogether. More importantly, I also began to think less of him as a friend and began to view him with less trust and confidence.

 In spite of this particular planning dynamic, we would still see each other fairly frequently and always had a good time together. So I was confident that the underlying issue wasn’t about him simply not liking me and being too conflict avoidant to come out and say so. But what would explain this habitual yes-to-no fade over the course of a few days?

 Rather than stew indefinitely there, I eventually decided to simply ask him to help me understand how a “yeah man, that sounds good” on Thursday would morph into a last-minute cancellation or no-show. He was startled at my question, and a bit defensive at first. But once he paused and saw the pattern that I described, he responded, quite sincerely: “Well, I guess when I hear the initial offer, I am truly excited and interested in the idea of hanging out, but then I don’t really take it past that point until late Sunday afternoon rolls around. Then, if I haven’t forgotten about it or when you call to touch base, I check in with myself to see if I want to muster up the energy to drive into the city for the evening.”

 Ahh, that was quite revealing to me!

In my mind the actual question I was asking on Thursday was this: “Hey, are you able to commit right now to this plan for Sunday?”

 But to him it was more like: “Hey, what’s your general interest in this idea?”

So when he said “Yeah man, that sounds good,” I would get off the phone and mark him down as a hard yes. But he, on the other hand, would simply hang up with “maybe I’ll see those guys this weekend,” with no commitment at all in mind.

 In short, I learned that for him (and for many other people too) interest does not at all mean action. The missing piece in these conversations was bridging that gap with clarification for commitment.

 I started inviting him again after this realization, but after he would say “Yeah man, that sounds good” I would follow up with, “Cool, can you commit to this plan now or would you rather me check back in with you on Sunday?” Sometimes he would commit on the spot, but most of the time he would ask for a Sunday confirmation call. I was happy either way with this new clarity, and his Sunday decision no longer affected his credibility with me, and in turn, our friendship as a whole.

 Where in your life do you see interest being confused with commitment? Where have you downgraded folks in your circle who do the same, where their initial “yes” response to an idea or request ends up as a “no”? More importantly, where might you be answering with a “yes” at first only to show up as a “no” when it counts?

 These Action Gaps are costly – to friendships, to professional relationships, and to reputations as a whole. In short, action gaps negatively impact one’s integrity and credibility with others. Tune in next week when we introduce the concept of the Action Audit as a way to get more clarity around hidden action gaps in your life and suggest a few ways to begin to close them.

Responsible FOR vs Responsible TO

Getting increased clarity around complex, messy topics and/or situations is one of the most important focal points of my Coaching work with my clients. One of the best tools I use here is to ask them to carefully examine their thinking and see where they might find some sticky points. To click down further, where might we be able to make some helpful distinctions that will serve to both untangle the stickiness and to open up more space for better informed action?

Some previous examples of how making helpful distinctions can be found in my previous posts on “The Boss” vs Leader, Complex vs Complicated, and Fundamental vs Significant. All three of these posts do similar things – illustrate how what seems to be one sticky thing is better understood as two similar but separate things that are better appreciated independently. In other words, similar but different, with the emphasis on different.

Responsible FOR vs Responsible TO is another distinction that parses out a critically important differences that simply using “responsibility” as a blanket term misses. More appreciation on how FOR and TO are different might help you see the situation in front of you more clearly, understand your choices more thoroughly, and then act with more intention according to a clearer sense of “responsibility” in int actual definition as “ability to respond.”

Responsible FOR is what we hear about all the time, but upon closer examination, is much better reserved for only very specific occasions where there are clear and obvious capacity limitations for other folks involved. For example, you are indeed responsible FOR the vast majority of your children’s needs such as food options, screen time exposure, and dental check-ups. You may also be responsible FOR supervising people and/or projects at work, ranging from onboarding the new hire all the way up through project management and into the C-Suite for full company performance. These are all examples where you have obligations of control and accountability that come with FOR.

Responsible TO, on the other hand, is very different. Here the dynamic is less reactive and instead calls for more autonomy and allows more freedom of action in choosing HOW to respond. For instance, your partner’s challenges at work, your employee’s struggles to perform at the required level, and your boss’ push for an unrealistic deadline are all things you are responsible TO, but not necessarily responsible FOR. You are indeed obligated to “show up” in these situations, and perhaps do something in response, but you aren’t the one that can, or should, be the one to “fix” it. I know this distinction in inherently sticky, so I’ll unpack each of these examples a bit to try to further disambiguate them.

Say your partner comes home from work really frustrated with her coworkers’ lack of meaningful contribution to a project. She’s upset about multiple things here and vents to you for a full 20 minutes about all the facets of the issue. If you mistakenly imagine that you are responsible FOR her problems with her coworker, her team, or even her current emotional state, then you might err and try to “fix” these things.

These '“fixing” attempts will not only fail, but will probably make things worse.

If, on the other hand, you correctly understand that you need only be responsible TO her in the moment, then you proceed differently. At a minimum, you could simply empathize and validate her emotional state of being, something like “Wow, that sounds really frustrating, I can totally see why you’d be upset about that.” Often, that’s all you need to do. You are simply seeing her reality and responding TO it with an appropriate degree of care and understanding. See the difference? No fixing, no efforting, no 20 questions to analyze the details.

With the employee that is struggling to perform to expectations it’s very similar. If you think you are responsible FOR their success, then you might start all kinds of unhelpful interventions like making underinformed suggestions, assigning more training, or even issuing warnings. And sure, those things might have some degree of effectiveness. However, if you see through the lens of responsible TO then you might schedule a chat where you simply state “I notice you are struggling in your performance. What can I do to help you here?” They might just ask for suggestions or additional training like above, but here you are responding TO them directly, and will likely get better results much quicker and with greater respect and rapport getting built along the way.

Finally, with the example of the boss pushing an unrealistic deadline, things might feel a bit more intense but the same principle applies. If you make the wrong choice and reflexively imagine you are responsible FOR meeting it at all costs then you might unfairly push yourself and/or your team to work much harder than would be reasonable. Additional costs will be born by your team here, icluding more stress and frustration with the boss, with the company, and with you too.

However, if you approach this through the responsible TO mindset then you have other options open up in front of you. You could circle back to your boss and ask them which of the other existing priorities they want to sacrifice in order to fast track the one they are currently pushing. You could check in with your team to find the absolute soonest realistic deadline and bring that to your boss as the best you can commit to under the current circumstances. You might even be savvy enough to simply say “Sure, but we’re going to need 2 more people on the team and additional bonus monies or overtime approval to make that happen.” The point here being that you can still take what’s given but then respond TO it with a range of reasonable options for trying to work with it.

The responsible TO framing is all about increasing your autonomy in the moment, and increasing your agency over your future. In other words, increasing your “ability to respond.”

And of course, the boss may reject all of that and tell you to get it done as they slam the door. But that just gives you a new question to consider – how do you want to respond with more autonomy and agency TO a boss that treats their employees this way?

Better is Better

I started messing around with the game of golf back when I was a kid, and got good enough through my efforts to be a starting member of my high school’s golf team for 3 years. I wasn’t quite good enough to play at the college level and soon drifted further away from the sport as college turned into grad school. However, as time passed, I was able to reconnect to my game and spend enough time playing and practicing that I got pretty good at it. I was routinely shooting in the mid-70’s by this point, and it became a point of pride for me that I had developed and refined my skills to that high a level without ever taking any professional lessons. I felt really proud about being able to get so good by applying my own effort and attention to my game.

 One day I was out at a local course and got paired up with this older guy, Steve, who was also quite good. We were enjoying our afternoon playing together and each did our part to have fun while also spurring on some friendly competition. After we finished the first 9 holes I was up by a few strokes, and had been able to pull off a few pretty tidy saves with some good shots along the way. As we teed off on the 10th hole Steve turned to me and asked where I had learned the game. I replied, “Oh, nowhere, I’m self-taught. I’ve just spent a lot of time trying to get a better sense of how to get the ball going where I want it to.” Usually that type of comment would get some compliments or accolades, but Steve simply turned to me and said, “Oh, that’s really too bad.”

 Somewhat taken aback, and slightly confused, I replied, “Too bad? How so?”

 Steve paused, turned to face me directly, and simply asked “Well, how much better do you think you could have been if you had just taken some lessons along the way?”

 That simple question, accompanied by the immediate obviousness of my folly of having taken pride in my rough skills, literally stopped me in my tracks.

 “How much better do you think you could have been if you had taken a few lessons along the way?” echoed in my head for the rest of the round.

 That single, simple question also changed my life.

 At the time, I was 2 years into the Good Karma Café chapter of my life, and had been taking a similar amount of pride in the success of my nascent business coming from my efforts as a self-taught entrepreneur. Steve’s question clearly applied to my business as much as my golf game. I realized that I did not want to make the same silly error of continually missing development opportunities in my professional life that I had been making in my golf life for almost 25 years.

 From that point forward I intentionally shifted fully into what Carol Dweck calls a Growth Mindset and got more intentional about “getting lessons” when it came to running my business. I began to read up on everything related to growing from a single store operation to a multi-store business. I initiated a wholesale reframing of my business operations to allow me to spend more time working ON the business rather than IN the business. My total mindset shifted from “rely on your strengths” to “build on your strengths,” and my successes rapidly increased as I began to implement all kinds of better practices gleaned from the “lessons” I sought out.

 Oh, and I got some golf lessons along the way too, tidying up some loose parts of my game and straightening out my tendency to hit too many draws.

 Where in your life have you done really well through your own efforts? And more importantly, where do you think you can shift your thinking towards a Growth Mindset to open to the possibility of seeing how much better you could be with the benefit of a few lessons?

“The Boss” vs A Leader

My Executive clients understand that developing their Leadership skill set is the most important factor for their ongoing and future success. Our initial sessions focus on unpacking the highlights of their journey to their current success and how their understanding of Leadership may have evolved along the way. A common theme often emerges out of these discussions that’s worth sharing here. Namely, the key differences between the “Leader OF” mindset vs the “Leader IN” mindset.

The smartest path that opens us up to better Leadership of people and projects is one where you search for opportunities to embody better qualities of Leadership IN your existing team or organizational leadership. In other words, from individuals to teams, and from projects to organizational outcomes, the key factor is consistent application of the Leadership IN mindset to your immediate challenges.

 There are several important distinctions to be made here between being a Leader OF (aka, The Boss) and being a Leader IN (a true Leader) your situation. For this short piece I’ll cover 3 ways that Leaders OF are more focused on themselves (and their image) while Leaders IN are more concerned with total team performance and their role in fostering it. Your total Leadership Effectiveness Quotient (LEQ) can be quickly improved to the degree that you can start to move the slider of your current Leadership style from the OF end towards the IN one.

 1)    The first one I’ll mention is the titular difference between “The Boss” and A Leader. Bosses aspire to Leadership through a “power over” mindset, and often imagine themselves as superior to their colleagues and teammates. They want to sit in the back, apart FROM the team, and crack the whip as needed to drive their teams forward. Leaders IN, on the other hand, understand the “power with” mindset and appreciate that the whole team’s concerted effort is what drives success. They want to be a part OF the team and often head to the front to articulate the vision, chart the course, and lead by example.

 2)    A second distinction between Leader OF and Leader In is the focus on external reference points like titles, degrees, or previous gigs. Leaders OF are the folks whose credibility comes from the plaque on their door or diploma on their wall. These are easy things to point to, so these Leaders often relate FROM them and utilize their titles and/or credentials as a crutch or shorthand when giving orders or articulating policy. Leaders IN may have these same external reference points but relate TO them very differently. These Leaders actively avoid games of title- and degree-dropping silliness and instead invest their energy in effectively communicating directives and talking through policy. Again, they understand that their responsibility to the team often comes down to effective communication of the Why’s and How’s of new directives, not just shouting out the What’s.

 3)    The final distinction I’ll share here is the different relationship to Challenge & Support that you’ll see in those that embody the Leader OF mindset vs those with Leader IN. Most Leaders OF provide a lot in terms of Challenge to their teams, but much less Support. For example, these folks shout a lot about margins, deadlines, and goals. But how often do they ask where they can provide Support in terms of clarification, prioritization, or task delegation?

 The greatest irony here is that these same people behave the EXACT OPPOSITE way when it comes to receiving Challenge & Support! These types of Leaders bristle when challenged on important specifics, policy issues, or even simple contradictions. Yet, when it comes to Support, they constantly ask for it in all kinds of ways - like requesting that the team stay late at the last minute, answer emails off hours, or take job-risking shortcuts. For example, these folks might announce “Looks like you’re staying late tonight!” at 4 pm on a Tuesday or “I expect a reply within the hour” to end an off-hour email.

 Leaders IN, on the other hand, do things 100% differently. They provide necessary Challenges to keep the team motivated and moving, and sterner direction as needed for lower performing members. However, these Challenges are almost always accompanied by some version of “what can I do to help you succeed here?” This explicit pivot to Support is what characterizes this Leadership style when it brings Challenge energy into play.

 And the same holds true for how they receive Challenge & Support. These Leaders are always seeking a better way of succeeding and actively solicit critical feedback. They know that they have blind spots, under-developed backhands, and areas where they can improve, and will often check in with trusted teammates for signs of slippage and progress here. When they do ask for Support, it is framed in language that understands the size and scope of what’s being asked, and appreciates the sacrifices that might be needed to accomplish it. They’ll say things like “This project is time-sensitive, can anybody stay a bit later this evening to help me get it out the door?” and will end that rare off-hour email with “No reply needed, just wanted to set this idea on your desk for tomorrow AM.”

 Regardless of your current position, these characteristics of Leadership IN your team, project, or division, etc. are all helpful examples of ways it’s possible to devote more constructive effort into helping your team succeed. And when it comes time for recognition or promotion, your name will end up higher on the list because of it.

3 Tips for Going Pro

Many people tend to think of athletics when the term “Pro” comes up, like Pro Football or Pro Baseball, where the very best at the game are rewarded handsomely in money, fame, and prestige. However, the very idea of being a “Pro” at anything simply comes from the notion of “professions” being a skill, trade, or activity where folks of sufficient abilities could charge other people money for their services. In fact, getting “paid to play” through salary, winnings, and/or sponsorship is usually the main criteria separating out amateurs and hobbyists from professionals such as seen in golf, tennis, and poker. But once you cross the “getting paid” barrier and can be considered a professional, what does really excelling – “Going Pro” - look like within your field?

 Every profession has its own internal comparisons that separates the true “Pros” out from the “pretty goods,” and this dynamic holds true from Plumbers and Electricians to Politicians and Engineers. It’s the commonality of these internal standards across professions that I want to focus on here. Even in everyday usage a person who develops a high enough skillset in almost any activity is often considered a “Pro,” precisely to the degree that they embodying certain standards and principles. Let’s take a quick look at a few of these that you can borrow to help you “Go Pro” in your career field, and your personal life as well.

 1)    Professional vs Personal – This first distinction is perhaps the most crucial one to make. At the core, what marks a Professional? Most simply, it’s not personal! For example, professional poker players work very hard to focus on just the hand in play, and same for professional golfers focusing on just the shot at hand. How you personally feel about what just happened or who was involved is indeed important. But it shouldn’t unduly impact your ability to focus on the immediate task at hand.

 How you react/respond to a situation with a lot emotional energy in play? How you decide to approach a dilemma with an annoying coworker? How you “show up” for a meeting, interview, or review when there is a lot at stake? How present are you for your partner when things get a little heated? Rarely will you do well in any of these if you have a lot of personal feelings-based energy in play like anger, fear, resentment, or jealousy.

 What personal stuff might be holding you back from showing up like a Pro?

 2)    Going Pro also requires you to be aware of and understand the basic objective metrics of evaluation that are relevant. What are the “industry standards” that you will be measured against? Are there clear goals or data points that are commonly used to determine who is a “Pro” and who isn’t? What external reference points should be checked or consulted in decision making here? Ethics and code compliance are obvious examples, but even such basics as common courtesy, attention to detail, and cleanliness are commonly mentioned in the context of professional standards.

 What are the standards of professionalism in play for you in your career field that separates out the true Pros? What about in your personal life? How are you measuring up to them? What could you change about your behavior and/or attitude to improve your performance as measured against them?

 3)    Perhaps most importantly, Going Pro requires dedicated attention and effort on improvement. Professionals understand that the game is always changing and that complacency leads to failure. Therefore, they spend a lot of time on training and development. Pro Football players watch film and run practices each week in preparation for the next week’s game. Professional poker players play lots of hands of online poker and study the habits and tells of other professionals in preparation for the next tournament. Professional actors rehearse the lines and facial quirks of their next role for months leading up to when the filming begins.

 What are you doing to prepare for your next opportunity to show up like a professional? How are you training to improve your craft? What are you already doing to take action here? Are you getting the results you want? Why or why not?

 Hopefully these 3 Tips for Going Pro land for you in a way that clarifies some next steps in front of you if you want to level up in your work place or better connect in your relationships. Putting some more effort in developing your professionalism by gaining more awareness of how you show up and what you’re being measured against are great actions to take in any event. Striving to improve in both areas can be hard, but the benefits of Going Pro will certainly make it worth your efforts.

3 Keys to Conflict Resolution

From the bedroom to the Boardroom, and everywhere in between, interpersonal conflict will inevitably occur from time to time. Minor disagreements at home and petty turf wars at work can be annoying and costly in different ways, in both emotional and energetic capital. The bigger skirmishes and open hostilities that often characterize divorces and HR lawsuits can exponentially increase all the TME costs for those involved. For these reasons, and countless others, it behooves us all to learn more about healthy approaches to conflict management and resolution.

 First things first, I recommend focusing on intentionally cultivating your personal resilience as an Agent in the world in order to buttress your inner conflict management skills. Contrary to current popular cultural trends and ideologies, you aren’t merely a passive and helpless recipient of whatever the Arena exposes you to. “Safe spaces”, virtue-signaling pins, and social isolation are all instances of approaches that echaracterize this unhelpful victim-of-circumstance-so-control-the-Arena model. Instead, our approach is to recommend taking as much ownership as possible over your ability as Agents to improve what you can control or influence. In other words, your own terrain – physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual.

 For example, exercise, physical fitness, and a healthy diet are 3 keys to more robust bodily health. For stronger mental health the cultivation of solid critical thinking skills, engaged learning, and growth mindset are 3 activities to invest in. Similar keys and practices exist for both emotional health and spiritual health as well. In fact, our full-spectrum Ecology of Practices Coaching model here at Catalyst takes just this Agent-focused approach to action. It specifically includes the development of increased resilience so as to avoid being drawn into unnecessary interpersonal conflict whenever possible. We even go so far as to suggest that almost all interpersonal conflict can be avoided through cultivating said resilience, decreasing emotional reactivity, and increasing your efforts to “go pro” whenever possible.

 However, despite our best intentions and most deft deflections, some instances of interpersonal conflict are inevitable. Once we find ourselves ensnared in such, there are additional skills that we need to bring to bear on the situation to increase our chances of creating a best-for-all resolution. Among these skills, the one I want to speak to here is a top priority – a clear focus towards outcomes and future implications. More of a stance than practice, this view to the horizon and beyond can be cultivated by asking yourself 3 distinct questions regarding any solution proposed to resolve the conflict.

 1)    Is it Fair? Fairness is a primary human motivation, and one that extends down into other species such as monkeys, dogs, and corvids. Sometimes fairness is relatively easy to ascertain and ask for in a conflict scenario. For example, let’s say that certain year-end bonus monies were paid out according to questionable and opaque processes, leading many to question the methodology of management and stoking claims of favoritism and other team-wrecking, morale busters. A fair resolution to this type of conflict could be to ask that all bonus-determining criteria be agreed upon and published at the beginning of the year, and then publicly tracked and updated regularly so that all interested parties know where they stand at any given time so as to prevent similar conflict next year. *Note - See the how this approach orients to future outcomes rather than past “problems”?

 Other times fairness can be much harder to determine. Let’s go with the above example of employee bonuses again, but turn up the complexity. How do you fairlyreward full time employees’ efforts over the year vs part time employees? Surely, it wouldn’t be fair if part-timers got the exact same year-end bonus as full-timers, right? Now add to the mix the ideal of rewarding time served. Certainly it’s fair to reward those with 5 years of service more than those with 2 years, right?? Now what about position in the company? Shouldn’t the team leader position get a larger piece of the bonus than the night janitor? Now what about the full-time night janitor with 10 yrs. of service vs the part-time team leader with just 1 year. What’s the fair way to allocate bonus monies here where multiple variables intersect? 

 The goal here is to seek to identify a solution that can be considered to acknowledge as many differential factors as possible, and to do so as fairly as possible. However, this is but Step 1 of the process.

 2)     Is it Reasonable? At first glance this concept seems very similar to fairness described above. However, often times what seems to be a very fair solution to a conflict is actually quite unreasonable, and therefore, should not be implemented. Many of King Solomon’s parables play up this distinction for effect, like his suggestion to cut a baby in half to be shared equally between 2 women who claimed to be its mother. Obviously the 50% split part was a nod to fairness, but the proposed distribution method was entirely unreasonable.

 More likely situations in your life where the fairness/reasonableness divide should be closely examined might be in relationship breakups where property and other asset disputes need to be settled. Should you cut the car in half to split it, or should you look for equitable trade-offs among all the assets? We can draw from the bonus pool example above for another example. If bonuses were rewarded somewhat unfairly this past year, would it be fair to reward them equally disproportionately in the other direction next year for fairness? Or would that be an unreasonable solution that introduces more problems into the mix?

 3)    Is it constructive? This is perhaps the most important factor to consider, especially where there are future relationships and other implications to consider. For example, many times we can come up with what appears to be a both fair and reasonable prospective solution to a conflict and imagine we are finished. But we’re not there yet. Let’s take a deeper dive into this final point to bring it all home.

 Say a regional manufacturing facility with over 1000 employees was improperly disposing of waste into the local aquifer for 10 years. This waste eventually leaked into a community lake and killed a bunch of wildlife, which ultimately led to its discovery and legal action. The company soon settled with the EPA and paid some appropriate fines. The previous shady CEO was fired, and a new CEO was brought it to take the company into full compliance and move the business forward. So far, so good.

 However, the community was still rightfully upset over the damage to its water and to its trust in the company. It therefore decided to sue the company for enough money to clean up the lake, but also for additional larger sums in punitive damages. The total amount of the lawsuit was generally seen as both fair and reasonable, especially given the amount of damage done to the community and the company’s earlier attempts to deny and deflect responsibility for it all.

 Yet, from the “is it constructive?” angle things looked a bit different. The financial impact of this lawsuit on the company would be extreme, and might push them into closing the facility entirely, thereby jeopardizing 1000 jobs in the community. The suit also failed to consider the longer term relationship damage that might come from it, most likely creating ongoing resentment flowing freely in both directions. In this scenario, the small community might have won the battle of the lawsuit, but risked losing the war of economic survival if 1000 jobs disappeared and losing the value of relationship as any remaining mutual good will disappeared.

 Instead, the lead attorneys from both sides got together and crafted a settlement that included sufficient funds to fully restore and restock the lake as requested, but eliminated the punitive damages request and substituted in much smaller, but sustainable, community investment funding for the next 20 years for a senior center with pickleball courts, continuing education, and other support activities. Finally, they also secured commitment to fund an additional training program at the local community college that would lead to employment opportunities at the company in some capacity for all graduates.

 Adding this constructive angle to the question changed the whole dynamic and provided some helpful, longer term perspective into the total solution conversation. The past-oriented, retribution focused solution that put fairness at the top and reasonableness on the side would have given the community a large short term win, but one that also incurred long term costs.

 Instead, adding in the future-oriented focus on constructive allowed a solution to be negotiated that repaired the initial problem of the poisoned lake, preserved the community’s economic interests via ongoing employment, secured additional community investment for senior support, and provided additional paths of opportunity for the community’s younger members. These additional concessions were still going to cost the company quite a bit of money, but much less than the punitive damages would have, and also spread the money out over many years ahead and into programs that would also benefit the company over time. Win-win-win.

 Next time you find yourself party to a conflict, or perhaps even in a position to mediate one amongst other folks, turn to these questions to guide your solution finding.Is it fair? Is it reasonable?And most importantly,is it constructive?This third part is critical when solving conflicts with friends, family, and/or coworkers whom you are partnering with in working towards a better tomorrow.

Charting the path to win-win-win isn’t always easy, but it is always worth it.

Stepping Up & Stepping In

I recently wrote about how unconscious commitments or fears can leak into our decision-making process and really hold us back from our true Leadership potential. These underlying emotional currents are powerful forces that can hold us back, either by slowing us down or by pushing us to look for safer routes forward. On the other hand, these deeper energetic forces can also add energetic oomph into our decision-making. In fact, many times they are required to push us over a hump of indecision or to firm our resolve to commit to a course of action we are otherwise conflicted about.

 A good example here might be getting angry enough about poor customer service that you are finally incentivized to go through the hassle of lodging a formal complaint. Or alternatively, you might be so deeply appreciative of great customer service that you are willing to sit down and take the time to write them a positive review or send in a personal note of gratitude. Both of these examples illustrate where the opportunity to act was always there, but that extra push of strong emotional energy was needed to overcome inertia or other resistance and actually generate the action in question.

 We previously saw how unconscious resistance is often not the ally it pretends to be, and in fact, often acts against our better interests. Further examination of this flip side of things, where we rely upon emotional energy to inspire us into action, reveals an equally problematic dynamic. But wait, isn’t getting angry enough to complain about customer service, or appreciative enough to compliment it, actually helpful? Sure, of course it is! But what happens that eruption of anger causes us to overreact to the actual facts of the present situation? Or when a touching moment leads to a tearful “thank you,” but then leaves us a bit embarrassed with the messiness of it all?

 What if you could provide simple and effective feedback, both positive and negative, without needing all that internal oomph to actually make it happen? How much more effective could you be, both in Leadership and in life in general, if you were consistently and easily able to make an impact in the world around you, without needing a big rise of energy to come up for you to turn “should” into “am”?  How can you more easily “Step In” when things aren’t going well, and more quickly “Step Up” to compliment and connect when positivity is warranted?

 I’ll share here with you a simple exercise that I often use with my clients who are looking to increase their Leadership Effectiveness Quotient in the categories of Connectedness and/or Competence. The easy part about this exercise is that it can be practiced in all sorts of low-risk, low-reward situations and that confidence and skill in delivering feedback can be quickly increased after only a few weeks of practice.

 Most people find the “Stepping up” to compliment exercises substantially easier, so we’ll begin with this one. Seek to notice those small moments where gratitude or appreciation arises, and then gently give voice to them without making a big deal about it. You want to speak directly to the actions that occurred and calmly deliver your message of appreciation with sincerity and warmth. The power of these messages can be amplified by doing them publicly so that the recipient can get an extra boost of social recognition by those who happen to witness them.

 For example, let’s say that your morning latte at the café is served with a perfect florette design in the foam on top. Instead of simply smiling to yourself, take 10 seconds to thank the barista. Say something like “Hey, I know you guys are busy back there, but I just want to let you know how much I appreciated seeing this beautiful latte art on my drink just now. I know it’s a simple thing, but it brought a smile to my face, so thank you.” Again, no big deal, no extra buck in the tip jar, just a simple and direct positive acknowledgement to the person on the other side of the counter.

These mini “practice sessions” of Stepping Up can easily be extended to friends, family, and coworkers, and I bet you’ll be pleasantly surprised at the general vibe-raising impact they have on your internal and external environment. The key component to focus on is small acts of sincere gratitude.

 Now let’s look over at the much more challenging exercise of practicing your “Stepping In” skills. So many people struggle with these, primarily because they have developed a lot of habits oriented towards conflict avoidance, but also because so many of their previous “step ins” have come from a place of high emotional agitation – a place that does not often lead to measured, constructive responses.

The whole point of these exercises is to practice delivering critical feedback in low risk scenarios and from a place of low energy. You’ll be more effective when less agitated, and much less likely to create further complications in your desire to resolve things. And to be clear, these messages should be delivered discretely or in private when possible.

 First, I want you to look for any and all opportunities to “Step in” and deliver a critique, a challenge, or otherwise negative feedback. Don’t pick one that feels too risky or one that you feel strongly about as your practice opportunity. You want to start with some really easy ones. In fact, the lower your *actual* feelings about it, the better. The whole point of the exercise is to get more comfortable recognizing a negative emotion in very small doses, and then to act in a calm and reasonable manner that directly connects to this emotion but isn’t powered by it.

 Restaurants and cafes are great places to practice this skill, primarily because the business model is based on giving you what you want. For example, let’s say that your burger at lunch tomorrow comes out slightly overcooked. No need to send it back or demand a refund, but you can easily say something like “Hey, I just want to let you know that I ordered my burger medium rare but it came out medium well. I’ll happily enjoy my lunch, and I don’t want a new burger or for you to take it off the check. But I would appreciate you letting the kitchen know that they sent out an overcooked burger. Maybe they’ll pay a little more attention for the next guy.”

 This message can be delivered to your server with a smile, and in a light-hearted, friendly, and discrete manner. There is no need to actually express any of the frustration or anger that was the original response to the overcooked burger.

That is the point of this practice – to speak to the behavior but not from your emotional response. Again, the goal is to identify things that are less than correct in principle, and then speak directly to them from a place of calmness that is not dependent on your emotional energy coming to a boil to move you to a place of expression.

 Ideally, you’ll find several opportunities throughout each day over the next few weeks to practice both Stepping Up and Stepping In. These moments of opportunity should get easier to identify, which will help you cultivate a finer sense of your internal emotional landscape. Also, and more importantly, you should begin to develop some skill and savvy in delivering these messages from a place of warmth and calmness, especially the critical Stepping In ones.

 Effective Leadership can be measured in many ways, but having good communication skills where you can meaningfully connect with those above and below you in the hierarchy will always serve you well.

Stepping Up and Stepping In opportunities are always available, so be sure to look for them today and lean into practicing your skills there. Being able to consistently spot and reward moments of appreciation will increase morale and rapport, and being able to simply correct and challenge people as needed from a place of grounded calmness will inspire commitment and loyalty from those on your team.

All of these combine together and support your efforts of increasing the overall effectiveness of your Leadership.

Playing Small & Playing Slow

Sound judgement is one of the most critical ingredients of effective Leadership. At its heart, judgement is simply the comparing and contrasting of options and alternatives, exploring perspectives that yield clear value distinctions between choices. Which choice is better or worse? Buy, sell, or hold? Which option has the higher probability of success, given the givens? What about when we tweak each of the variables this way and that, how do those probabilistic outcomes change?

Often times the representational algorithm of this process can have perhaps a dozen variables, all mutually interdependent and inherently unforeseeable. This complex decision making can get extremely tedious and feel overwhelming, leading to less than optimal outcomes and suboptimal coping strategies.

 Many Leaders tend to instinctively shy away from such imposing complexity, and instead of seeking the best way forward tend to orient instead towards finding the safest way forward. Finding a path that definitively avoids the imagined “Big Miss” outcome becomes the driving goal for them.

Occasionally this is precisely correct, like when managing a financial portfolio where long-term security is explicitly prioritized over aggressive short term growth. However, many other times this pursuit of safety creeps in unconsciously, and can easily overshadow the more explicit stated goals. In my work I call this tendency “playing small.”

 Other Leaders’ first reaction is to simply not decide at all. They may ask for more details, more information, another perspective, or just for a little more time. And again, sometimes those are real concerns that yield fresh data that changes the equation in a meaningful way. But much more often they are simple delaying tactics, only meant to alleviate the pressure of making the decision now from a place of discomfort.

A similar move is to “make” a decision, but not actually implement it in any meaningful way and therefore still create a safety space of inaction in which to rest. This move is just a slightly more sophisticated form of delay, but one that allows some self-serving wiggle room when asked about it. Either way, in my work I refer to this as “playing slow.”

 How do you know if you are falling into one of these unconscious traps of playing small or playing slow? When working with clients on these challenges I almost always recommend that we begin by seeking more clarity on what’s really going on underneath the hood.

A helpful approach that can bring more awareness is to explore a form of gentle interrogation that looks more deeply into your process of deciding. I play the role of gentle interrogator with my clients here, but you can also easily do this on your own without a Coach too. You can role play both parts - the part of you that really wants to make the best decision possible as the interrogator and the part of you resisting it as the person in the hot seat. The point is to explicitly embody each perspective 100%, and make fully conscious both the parameter and goals of the best decision and the reasons and rationales for any resistance to aiming high and/or getting there quickly.

 If you suspect you are erring too far towards safety and playing small, then you can begin to ask yourself to explicitly lay out the full range of probabilistic outcomes you have generated, especially the negative ones. Really get into the details here. What are each of the potential outcomes, and what is your best guess, to the decimal, of that outcome actually occurring. What outcomes are more preferred, and why? What are possible bad outcomes, and how bad are they actually?

You might be surprised to see that your best guess odds of those bad things coming to pass are much lower than you “felt” them to be, or that the circumstances of *really bad* aren’t really that bad after all.

 If you are concerned about the delay mindset of playing slow creeping in, ask yourself to fully articulate what additional information you are seeking and how, exactly, that new information might impact the decision to be made. Be as specific as possible here. What information are looking for? What would you need to see to change the circumstances in a meaningful way? How much more time do you think you need? And what exactly are you going to do with that time that will change the variables?

You have to demand explicit details here, hence my choice of the word “interrogation.” Again, you’ll probably find that the role of “hotseat you” can’t fully articulate a coherent rationale here.

 So many clients report to me their initial surprise, and then frustration, at how weak the answers to these questions can be. “David, why do I feel such strong resistance in one moment, but then under direct interrogation, I really can’t articulate anything resembling a solid perspective to support it?”

And to these questions I simply say, “Good, you’ve simply identified that your “reasons” for shying away aren’t conscious, nor are they objectively real. That doesn’t mean they aren’t true or powerful, but it does mean that they might have a lot less to do with the facts of the decision itself and much more to do with YOU and your unconscious fears around accountability or self-confidence.”

 This move to reframe decision-making away from the imagined concerns with concrete outcomes and over to the unconscious fears holding the decision making process back through either playing small or playing slow opens up some great opportunities where Coaching for more effective Leadership can be quite impactful.

Where are you holding yourself back? And what does the “hotseat you” have to say about that? 

“Bloom Where You’re Planted”

This pithy expression is thrown around fairly commonly in the Air Force, especially amongst high performers like my wife and her fellow Officers in Executive Service. I say “pithy,” because it is most often heard or used in the context of acknowledging the challenges of bureaucratic inertia, outdated and inefficient processes, or other systemic obstacles that must simply be acknowledged rather than overcome. It’s used as a kind of a weird combination of “know your place,” “stay in your lane,” and “keep trying anyway.” However, underneath the soft smirk and resigned irony there is some real value in this phrase that shouldn’t be missed.

 First, let’s clarify the obvious intentions in this metaphor. Just like with Air Force assignments, most corporate positions are somewhat “assigned” as well in the sense that you have been put there by those above you and shall remain there until they decide otherwise. So, much like our flower, you have also been “planted” somewhere and are there for the foreseeable future. Obviously, this inability to easily uproot or even change pots can lead to feelings of frustration, resentment, and /or apathy – all very unhealthy and unhelpful places to dwell any longer than minimally necessary.

 From there the admonition is to instead seek ways of “blooming” as the better path forward for healthy and adaptive coping. Acknowledge the limitations, clarify the expectations and opportunities, and invest your energy in growing in the directions that are available instead of complaining about the ones that aren’t. Seems easy enough, right?

 But this challenge is precisely where so many people get hung up. They fundamentally don’t want to bloom where they are planted, and instead stay grounded in their strong preferences to be someplace else. They can’t get unrooted from their own emotional state, and that pool of dissatisfaction is what fuels their expressions. They then imagine, falsely in most cases, that complaining about their predicament is a good strategy for getting pulled out of it and moved over to where they’d rather be. Their main failure here is forgetting to factor in the view from their supervisors, managers, directors, or whoever else in a position to move them. Why would those above reward low-energy slouchers or high-energy whiners from the ranks below?

 And here is where the real message of Bloom where you’re planted can shine through. Which coworkers get promoted? Which colleagues get approached about the new position with greater responsibility and the pay that comes with it? Which associates get made into Partners? Not the whiners, the complainers, and the early-outers. Nope. The shiny apples get picked, and the bright, blooming flowers get noticed.

 So “Blooming where you’re planted” is more than just a dry expression of condolences. It’s in fact a great short-term strategy for better mental and physical health, and more importantly, the best long-term strategy for getting opportunities to uproot yourself and find a better place to truly grow. The fastest way out is up, so double your efforts in “blooming” if you want to moved up the hierarchy rather than out the door.

How best to evaluate Leadership?

First things first, what EXACTLY are we trying to evaluate in the first place?? Getting a good handle on what we mean by “Leadership” is the real crux of the challenge.

The underlying perennial dilemma here has always been of how best to define and measure what we mean by “Leadership.” Is it a quality or function of inherent, innate potential that can simply be unlocked and developed? Is it a learned fluency in practiced skills and techniques? Or should it be considered in a similar fashion to athletic or musical aptitude where raw, inborn talent can be intentionally cultivated, but where one’s fullest expressions often have real limits, well short of one’s aspirations?

Some facets of effective leadership have gained consensus. For example, having a sufficiently high IQ, or G-Factor, is commonly understood as an important component in most recipes for Leadership success in today’s VUCA world.

A high EQ, also known as emotional intelligence, has more recently come to the forefront as equally necessary for Leadership success. Many voices now suggest that EQ is in fact much more important than IQ when evaluating or predicting effective Leadership.

Traditional Leadership 360 evaluative methods attempted to simplify matters, but there is broad disagreement across them on how to best define the most basic qualities in play. Even getting some initial alignment on working definitions only gets you to the next dilemma – how to then consistently measure them in ways across your organization that are both meaningful and actionable?

We knew that Coaches could do better, could be more comprehensive, deliver more impactful results, and truly give all parties involved clear assessments and workable prescriptions for improvement. The results of our work, and our clients’ elated response to it, were the proof-of-concept we needed to push on.

Out of this iterative process we developed the concept of the Leadership Effectiveness Quotient, or LEQ. Much like IQ and EQ mentioned above, the LEQ aspires to quantify complex phenomena in a simpler framework that organizes and simplifies things in ways that provide more clarity and direction for meaningful engagement.

A single LEQ score gives you a numerical rating to measure and quantify the effectiveness of your leadership, similar to how an IQ score can be used for general intelligence. Equally important, it highlights the specific areas where you most need improvement and follows up by providing clear directions forward for growth and development.

This LEQ terminology came to fruition when helping my good friend and colleague, David Zeitler, with his new Leadership 360 Assessment & Reporting method. Zeitler had spent several years applying various assessments in his Executive Coaching work and realized that there were three main areas that – taken together – could provide leaders with a more accurate and useful set of perspectives: Capacity (their level of discernment); Character (their perceived integrity); and Culture (the trust of colleagues). He had created something practical and insightful, but had not found a way to put them all together. It was holistic but not integrated.

In his work, Capacity covers the basic G-Factor of general intelligence, but more importantly, seeks to uncover how base aptitude manifests through the complexity of one’s worldview. It looks at one’s depth of meaning-making, as well as the span of a leader’s application of that meaning-making. Beyond this, it has built-in avenues for constructive coaching recommendations to help guide their efforts in increasing capacity, which translates into greater Leadership effectiveness.

Character covers the important issues of integrity and confidence, as measured by a leader’s ability to “walk their talk” when it comes to core values. EQ is touched upon in here, but transcended to allow room for the qualities of judgement, expertise, and significant interpersonal relationships to rise to the forefront. Accurate assessment and diagnosis here can lead directly to prescriptive, proactive Coaching to improve performance along this critical metric.

Culture is so often missed by more traditional Leadership evaluation approaches because they often tend to myopically focus on the individual Leader rather than the complex web of relationships that form the substrate of a company’s identity. Here, interpersonal trust is the main factor – as Zeitler notes throughout his report, “The Leader IS the Culture.” The “trust” focus of this quality highlights their importance as a figurehead and embodiment of the company culture. In other words, how goes the leader, so goes the culture. Again, clarity on the strengths and weaknesses here leads directly to actionable strategy for improvement.

We realized that what was missing from his analysis and reporting was an integration of his 3 Leadership Qualities in a way that would be immediately digestible and recognizable. So together we created a “Leadership Effectiveness Quotient” scoring system. This allowed each of his 3 Qualities to stand alone with their respective category scores, and then also be combined and averaged to generate an overall total LEQ score.

The single scoring metric of the total LEQ allows us to compare individual scores across teams of people and also, and perhaps most importantly, compare any singular leader’s current LEQ score against a previous one to track development and progress. We were able to collaborate together and combine our different areas of expertise to create a better way for leaders to see where they are, and perhaps more importantly, where they have room to grow.

In sum, the true power and utilty of the LEQ is 3-fold. First, it is a powerful diagnostic tool that cuts right to the heart of what all companies are looking for at every level of their operations – Effective Leadership. Second, it follows up this accurate diagnosis with a thorough assessment of each leader’s relative strengths and weaknesses in the core components of Capacity, Character, and Culture. Finally, and most importantly, it delivers actionable Coaching prescriptions tailored directly to each individual’s blind spots that chart a clear path forward for improvement.

 Clarity, Purpose, and Direction - What more could you ask for?

David Arrell & David Zeitler

TME vs ROI

Is it worth it?

How many times have you asked yourself some version of this question, or had it asked of you? A few months into a new relationship, and some red-ish flags start to show up. Do you continue to invest in the relationship? Several weeks with your new hire and they just aren’t getting up to speed. Do you persist in trying to train and develop them? Your job continues to ask for more and more from you, yet refuses to reevaluate your pay. Do you continue to over-deliver in hopes of an eventual pay-off? Ultimately all these kinds of scenarios come down to one question – is it worth it?

 As important as this question may be in your personal life, it is even more critical in your professional life. Decisions have outcomes, actions have consequences. And not deciding or not acting are often way more costly in the long run. As discussed in my previous OODA Loop piece, making good decisions quickly and then pivoting over to the next issue to do the same, are stairs that lead directly to the C-Suite. A handy way to cut through noise in these moments is to look through the lens of TME vs ROI and see how things look from that perspective. Put in simpler terms, is the juice worth the squeeze?

 In this equation T = Time, M = Money, and E = Energy. Sometimes people prefer to use E = Effort here, but I prefer the broader term of Energy as that captures the “carrying costs” of rumination, stress, and other forms of ongoing passive engagement. Time is listed first as that is often the most important of these resources for busy Executives looking to optimize this equation. The point is that each of these things all have real value, incur real costs, and should be considered as real investments or expenditures of finite resources. Your resources, to be precise. How much of your resources across all these domains are you spending into the situation at hand?

On the other side you have ROI, or Return On Investment. I’m sure you’re all familiar with this term and use it quite a bit in your work, especially in all the usual financial and investment realms. However, as you can see from the left side of the equation, we aren’t just looking at money here. The Time and Energy elements broaden things out considerably and reflect the need to look more globally at your total “costs,” including the emotional, mental, and even existential ones. Back to our initial question, what is the total ROI you are getting out of this situation when you compare it to the previously mentioned TME costs? Is it truly worth it?

Upping your total Leadership Effectiveness Quotient (LEQ) is critical to your future success in the ever complexifying business landscape. An often hidden aspect of this score is your ability to judiciously track your ongoing TME vs ROI across the full spectrum of your day and the things that fill it. Success is often not just about doing more, getting up earlier, or being more efficient. Instead it is about knowing when to pivot away from low ROI situations and how and where to deploy your limited TME more wisely into more interesting opportunities.

Remember the Asymptote

Finding the optimal ROI on time, money, and energy (TME) expenditures and investments is one of the most important skills of effective leadership, especially when it comes making meaningful progress in more complex goals like improving “efficiency,” “profitability,” or even “office culture.” One helpful tip for finding some balance in the mix is to pause from time to time and Remember the Asymptote.

As a rough refresher from your 7th grade Geometry course, an Asymptote is a curve that perpetually approaches but never reaches an axis on a graph. The inherent unreachability element here is indeed the central factor of what I call Asymptotic Goals like “improve X.” However, just because these goals are ultimately unreachable in any absolute fashion doesn’t mean that there isn’t tremendous value to be gained by striving for them. The key challenge lies in finding the optimal relationship between the striving and what is actually realized by so doing. Therefore, for our purposes here Remember the Asymptote embodies two further concepts beyond simple “unreachability” that help anchor our ideal aspirations firmly into the hard ground of reality when searching for that nebulous optimal balance.

The first additional thing I want to point out via the Asymptote metaphor is that we often make a LOT of progress towards our goals early on in the process. Simply bringing focus onto the goal, crystalizing our intent, and putting TME into action can accomplish a great deal in a short amount of time. This high ROI in the early stages should be expected, and the feast of rewards that follow should definitely be enjoyed and celebrated. However, the curve of TME expenditures vs ROI returns will surely bend more and more, and soon enough it gets tricky to measure how much more TME investment is “worth it,” especially as other lost opportunity costs start to mount up.

A good example of this process can be seen with the development of the jet engine. It came on the scene in the early 40’s, but had totally taken over almost all military and commercial airline production by the late 60’s.

This brings us to the second concept, the Law of Diminishing Returns. Simply stated, at some point the absolute value of TME invested in something, be it a goal, project, or even relationship, fails to yield correspondingly higher returns. At this point, additional TME is just a bad investment, period. This is especially true for Leaders who face almost limitless possibility, but only have finite TME available. Identifying these tipping points and stopping short of them is the difference between long term success and sudden, catastrophic failure.

Continuing with the jet engine example, it soon became apparent that the early increases in speed, range, altitude, and efficiency that jet engines provided over piston-powered propeller engines were not limitless. The hard reality of material science, atmospheric forces, and even human pilot needs began to require exponential costs for limited to negative gains. It can be argued that the high point of this push past the tipping point of TME vs ROI was the supersonic Concorde which could cruise along at 1,350 mph. For comparison, commercial flights now operate very comfortably in the much slower yet optimally balanced zone of about  550 – 600mph.

Effective Leadership in today’s VUCA world is becoming increasingly rare. A great way to stand out from your peers and colleagues is to manage your total TME investments and expenditures wisely by tracking the resulting ROI against them. Prioritize the identification of those tipping points of diminishing returns, and then back up a step or 2.

Finding the optimal balance between TME and ROI is a smart move, and establishing a portfolio of work characterized by these moves will truly set you apart. A key to getting there is to Remember the Asymptote.

Clarity is Just Step 1

Pushing for Clarity has long been a cornerstone of my personal learning process. Whether through a lightning flash of insight or the slow creep of a dawning realization, I find great value and satisfaction in seeing finer distinctions and greater resolution emerge in my ideas, thoughts, and concepts. This push for increased clarity is also a central part of my Coaching work with clients. But this Push for Clarity is not just an end to itself, but only the 1st step in an important loop of growth and change.

Step 2 is what I call the Integrity Check. Where can newfound clarity on a situation reveal previously hidden glitches? Or places where one’s actions aren’t in complete alignment with one’s goals? Where is our walk diverging from our talk? Where does our behavior not, in fact, lead to making progress towards our stated goals? Time and time again in my life I’ve seen stark differences in all these things come into sharper contrast with increased clarity regarding my motivations, resistances, and other shadow areas of my psyche. And I see the same things happen in my clients from time to time too.

Step 3 follows almost automatically from the 2nd one above, and that is Setting Intention. The integrity gaps that emerge from increased clarity easily command our attention, but it is up to us as Agents to decide what our intention will be going forward. Will we adjust our talk? Our walk? Or even both? Where do we want to put effort into making change in our lives to create greater alignment in those places that need it? Where do we want to increase harmony and decrease friction in our total energy and effort outputs?

Step 4 is my favorite step. Our actions are where the proverbial rubber hits the road, for without them our insights and intentions are impotent. What are some simple, safe, and immediate steps we can take to close the gaps that our Integrity Checks have revealed? Where can we move the slider a bit in a way that is designed to help us show up in the world as the angels of our better selves demand? And once we start to take some of these actions, how does the world look from the new perspective afforded? What new clarity now emerges, starting the loop over again?

North What?

Goals and guides are big part of our lives these days. Getting clarity around what they are and how we relate to them can be the crucial difference between achieving success or ending in failure. This can be particularly important when embarking on a change or growth trajectory, as often times we have a lot at stake and are marshalling significant resources to apply to our work. A question I often ask my clients here is simply “North what? North Carolina, the North Star, or the North Pole?”

North Carolina is simply a stand-in for a specific destination, with clear boundaries and tangible benefits that come with arriving there. It can be well defined in advance, and the required action plans for getting there can be fairly well articulated. Good examples of North Carolina goals include “make Partner in 18 months,” or “increase net profitability by 20% in Q4.” These are concrete goals. They are specific, measurable, and framed with clear benefits in mind.

The North Star, on the other hand, is not a destination but instead a point of reference. For our intents and purposes here it is fixed, stable, and always visible. One can look to it for directional assist and as a way to vector check the tracking of progress over time. Good North Star examples include checking your year-to-date personal sales against year-end bonus benchmarks or tracking your company’s ongoing performance in key metrics against industry standards and averages. The point here is that having a North Star guidepost in place allows you to make both course and strategy corrections if and as needed.

The North Pole is a different story. It sounds like a tangible place, like North Carolina, but the amount of “there” there is unclear. Perhaps the arrival point or actual final destination is inherently vague, or maybe its defined in multiple ways that don’t necessarily align or connect with each other and instead create confusion. Examples of common North Pole goals I hear include “getting recognized” or “making it big.”

I use “North Pole” to describe goals like these for three reasons. #1, they sound good, but much like the geographic North Pole, what does getting there actually mean? The precise geographic North Pole is a chunk of ice somewhere near the top of the world upon which the Earth’s axis rotates, but how to precisely measure that with any degree of certainty is difficult. Even if you get in the right ballpark, a quick look around for 100 miles in every direction reveals the exact same landscape and vista. Unlike North Carolina, there aren’t tangible benefits to be realized upon arrival, or even a clear border in place to let you know that you’ve arrived.

Reason #2, the magnetic “North Pole” is a whole different phenomenon, inherently dynamic and not at all confined to any particular place. In fact, it was as far south as 70 degrees North Latitude in Canada in 1900 before moving back closer to the geographic North Pole in 2017 (90 degrees) and is now racing back south towards Russia. What does “getting there” even mean, and how can you actually know where you are when the very compass you are using functions less well the closer you get? And how to coordinate with another team if they nod when hearing “North Pole” but are thinking geography instead of magnetism? Compared to the obviousness and objectivity of North Carolina, the magnetic North Pole is volatile and subject to variable interpretations.

Finally, #3 North Pole goals are the kind that can involve massive amounts of time, energy, and money. Countless early polar explorers perished in the cold darkness, unprepared for the rigor of the trip. And aside from imagined prestige, what’s really the bigger point? Sure, it’s good to have internally justified goals in play in your life, the kind that exist for their own reasons. But these absolutely should not have a high probability of catastrophic risk tied to them, nor should they have anything that resembles “visiting Santa Claus” as their starting rationale.

In sum, seek to refine your thinking around your goals and guides. Get your North Carolina goals clarified and plot out your plans and timelines for getting there. Figure out your North Star points of internal and external reference and chart your progress accordingly from time to time. Be quick to course correct and adjust strategies as needed.

Finally, uncover and identify anything that slightly resembles a North Pole goal and either refine into a North Carolina destination, reimagine it as a North Star guide, or simply chuck it entirely.

Stars & Constellations

The Big Dipper is probably the most well recognized constellation for us moderns living here in the US. However, other cultures in other times have looked at the exact same chunk of sky and seen instead a bear (Greek), a stretcher (Pawnee), a chariot (Celt), and a coffin (Arabic). The same phenomenon applies to Orion and his belt, another constellation commonly known around the Northern Hemisphere. Some ancient Egyptians viewed the 3 stars of his “belt” as the crown of Sah, father of the gods, while certain Native American cultures viewed them as footprints of the god of the flea people.  

The important thing to consider for us here is that while the particular stars in play are bright and obvious, the constellations are much less so. Like many socially constructed “truths”, a culture’s commonly understood constellations may not be readily obvious to the eye. They have to be actively pointed out, and are often discussed or explained in terms of stories, myths, and legends tied to local flora and fauna. In fact, the mythos that informs the mental construction of constellations is usually much more important than the actual geometry of the figures. Only after going through the process of “learning” the constellations and the stories that inform them do they then jump out as figure to the trained eye, more easily discerned amongst the ground of the rest of the night sky.

This new clarity does come with a cost though. Being trained to spot and identify the constellations of one’s own culture makes it more difficult to identify different constellation patterns that other cultures have identified using some or even all of the same stars. Next time you see the Big Dipper check to see if you find the “obviousness” of it being a “big dipper” an impediment to seeing it instead as a big bear, coffin, or chariot. The exact same stars are being looked at, so why the apparent blindness to another pattern?

This tradeoff that occurs between clarity and blindness is common in many other areas where cultural framing occurs, and is often a large source of friction in communication. Next time you are struggling to either impart or intake information, pause and remember that facts and interpretations emerge from the same dark realm as stars and constellations. What are the obvious stars that we can all see? What are the apparent chunks or groups of them? How are we trying to connect them to other stars around them to create a meaningful pattern via story? And perhaps most importantly, what might we need to “unlearn” so that we can see what’s being offered more clearly and on its own terms?

Moving the Slider

“You need to be more _____!”

I hear this phrase a lot. Most of the time it’s my own voice in my head with the blank being things like “patient with the kids” or “focused during your workouts at the gym.” Other times it’s what my clients are relaying to me from their annual review at work or even just from a casual sidebar conversation with a colleague. Regardless of where and how we hear this phrase, rarely, if ever, does it magically lead to immediate and direct change, much less so to lasting improvement.

However, there is in fact a very simple strategy that can be employed in these situations that will provide immediate benefits, increase your power as an Agent and more importantly, translate over time to lasting, long term benefits. This strategy has 5 short steps:

1)    Notice when this phrase occurs internally or when it is shared with you as advice, and then pause for a single breath.

2)    Get clarity on what is being asked, and then fully frame it in relationship to its direct opposite or another alternative choice. For example, if you are being asked to be more assertive at work then a possible full framing would be Passive vs Assertive, or maybe Reflective vs Assertive. The specific polarity isn’t as important here as is the framing it in a binary choice.

Reflective vs Assertive

3)    Once you have a binary relationship in play then the next step is mentally place this binary out along a spectrum of engagement with your goal quality as 10 and its opposite at 1.

Reflective 1.....2.....3.....4.....5.....6.....7.....8.....9.....10 Assertive

4)    Now try to imagine how you normally show up on it, or at least how you imagine that the people who are giving you the constructive feedback generally see you, and assign yourself a number somewhere in the middle.  

Reflective 1.....2.....3.....4.....5..X...6.....7.....8.....9.....10 Assertive

5)    Now comes the hardest part. What could you do, either right now or at the next available opportunity, to show up just 1 number higher on your spectrum? Not going all the way to 10, but just moving the slider a bit?  

Reflective 1.....2.....3.....4.....5.....6...X..7.....8.....9.....10 Assertive 

The goal here is to take concrete action in the real world at first chance you get, but only in a low risk, bite-sized fashion. No need to barge into your boss’ office and demand a raise here, but how about simply saying “I see things a little bit differently there” when a colleague offers a random opinion on something that differs from yours rather than nodding along in silent disagreement?

 You might find yourself surprised at how powerful these tiny little steps of intentional engagement by can be in effecting real and lasting change in how you show up in the world. With time and effort, you’ll soon find it remarkably easy to simply move the slider in response to a call for change.

Complex vs Complicated

I hear these two words being used interchangeably quite often, but the differences between them are very stark and important to keep in mind in any kind of strategic thinking situation. No more so than when facing important choices in our VUCA world that have real consequences in your life and those who depend on you.

 We’ll begin with “Complicated,” as that one is much simpler. The Dictionary definition is as follows: composed of elaborately interconnected parts; complex: and difficult to analyze, understand, explain, etc.:

 See? Even the good ol’ Dictionary is a bit confused here in that it puts “complex” in there as part of the definition. Perhaps true enough in ordinary parlance, this combination is inadequate for higher order thinking.

 For our purposes here we’ll keep this definition, but add an important caveat. A “complicated” thing or system is one that ultimately has a blueprint. Parts therein can be changed out, you can take it apart and put it back together again, and it is largely adaptable to further modification with predictable results. A Boeing 777 airplane is a great example of a complicated situation The “blueprint” for this airplane is not a one-page document but rather a binder 6-inches thick. Parts can be substituted in and out at will, and further improvements and modifications can be easily integrated. It’s complicated, but simple enough over all.

 Complex is the opposite of this. One of my favorite contemporary philosophers, Edgar Morin, worked extensively with Complexity Theory. His favorite, go-to definition of complexity was just “it isn’t simple.” Witty and short, but more helpful than appears at first glance. The Dictionary definition is a bit longer, but less helpful: composed of many interconnected parts; compound; composite: and characterized by a very complicated or involved arrangement of parts, units, etc.:

 Sooo.... “very complicated”? As if throwing the very in there is helpful? Again, this is the basic definition for regular conversation, but ultimately unhelpful for bigger picture thinking.

 The crucial element I want to suggest is to see “complex” in contradistinction to “complicated.” Complex systems DO NOT have a blueprint. You CANNOT simply remove or change components and study them in isolation with hopes to see how they function in the system. They may adaptive, but are often entirely UNPREDICTABLE. All living things are complex systems, as are larger systems composed of living things. You are a complex system, and so is an ecological ecosystem, so is a weather system.

 Let’s flesh this out just a bit further, using you as human vs Boeing 777 as the example. Can a you be built? Is there a blueprint? Can we simply change out your arm with a stronger one? Can we pull out your heart and lay it on the table to see how it works, and then reattach it later with no ill effect? Most importantly, are you 100% predictable? You are complex, the airplane is just complicated.

 Another good point of reference is hurricane forecasting. It’s 2022 and the newest computing network dedicated to this task brings 42 petaflops of computing power to bear on it, yet is still left to shrug as each storm continuously defies predictions and does what it will. See how Morin’s “not simple” is ultimately very accurate?

 I imagine your strategic thinking capacity, like mine as well, is more than a few bits short of 42 petaflops. So rather than burning it out trying to predict the unpredictable, a better first step might be to see where you can parse out the complicated from the complex. Complicated things are worth grinding on to clarify the blueprints and break down the parts. Done well, this process can yield solid predictions.

Complex ones are trickier. Like hurricanes, they require more vigilant observation, tracking, and flexibility to deal with sudden changes. Even when done well this process at best yields contingencies and hedges, and disaster can still strike. People are depending on you not to confuse the two.

Tackling Debt, pt 2

Last week in Tackling Debt, pt 1 we did a walk-through exercise using the Fundamental vs Significant distinction from 2 weeks ago in planning out an approach to Debt Management. We went through a brief exercise of the first 3 steps of the process. First, tracking our spending, then building out a budget, and finally getting into a stable place with it that reliably yields a good sum of “extra money” to dedicate each month to our Debt Management plan. We are now ready to begin Step 4 with our resulting extra $500 per month in hand per the example. Obviously this is a simplified scenario, but the general principles will hold true for any complex priority landscape. Again, fair warning that this example/topic is pretty specific, so get off the bus now if it’s not of particular interest to you.

 Bringing the Fundamental vs Significant lens to bear on things is where we begin this step as well. A distinction that most financial advisors would seek to clarify when looking at Debt Management is to separate out the “good debt” from the “bad debt.” In simple terms, “good debt” is the kind where your money is out there “working for you” with the idea being that these are things you owe money on that will build wealth, increase income, or otherwise improve your long term financial prospects. Student loans and mortgages are generally considered “good debt” for these reasons. “Bad debt,” on the other hand, is all the other types of debt that are incurred when purchasing rapidly depreciating assets or general consumption of nonessentials like fashion and entertainment. Auto loans are considered “bad debt” here as new cars considerably depreciate the very second you drive them off the lot. As are all other purchases like clothes, consumables, and home goods where you keep adding costs to the original purchase price through ongoing interest payments.

 This first pass in identifying the Fundamentals at this step has yielded the two categories of “good debt” and “bad debt.” Let’s move the “good debt” items off to the side and leave them there for now. “Bad debt” is our next focal point, so let’s again do a quick pass over this pile with our Fundamental lens to see how we can further parse them out. For this example we’ll imagine a simple scenario where there is a single car loan and 3 credit card accounts. The car loan is on fixed terms, both in amount due and payment schedule, and is on track to be paid off in less than a year. Let’s move that off the table and just focus on the 3 remaining credit card accounts as the Fundamentals we want to work with for now.

 Now we run a third pass for Fundamentals to set up our next step in the process. Simply write out the total amount due for each of these 3 accounts as well as the interest rate tied to them. Don’t worry about minimum payments or credit available or anything else for now, those aren’t critical to this process. Lay the 3 cards out in a row, left to right, with the highest interest rate card on the left and the lowest on the right. This is one roadmap for where to apply that extra $500 each month. From a strictly rational point of view you want to pay off the highest interest rate card first and then move on to the next highest and so forth as that “saves” you the most money over the timeline of paying all 3 of them down to zero. The math can get tricky to illustrate this point more clearly, so just trust me on this one here. But math and rationality are only part of the equation, and the smaller part for most people.

 Now is a good time to circle back to the Significant goal of “succeeding at this and feeling good about it” to see if how these credit card accounts stack up against each other from a feeling point of view. Do any of these cards represent or connect to purchases made that evoke negative feelings? Is there one card that was leaned on for more impulsive purchases with higher emotional energy, like expensive clothes that remain unworn on hangers in the closet with their tags still on them? If the cards are all seen equally then simply line keep them lined up as they are in the horizontal row based on interest rates. If they rank unequally from an emotional perspective, any emotional perspective, then let’s arrange them into a vertical column with the most negatively charged card at the top and least at the bottom.

A third approach is to line them up by balance size, smallest to largest. Paying them off in this order is referred to as the Debt Snowball and is a great way to build momentum by racking up some clear wins early in the process. Another benefit of this process is that the amount of money applied to each subsequent debt grows as the previous minimum payment amounts are freed up.

 From here the choice of “where to start?” has been greatly simplified, and mostly answered. You started by separating “good debt” from “bad debt”, and within the “bad debt” category you separated out the credit cards from the car loan. Now the final action plan can be determined by checking back in with your Significance goal of “succeeding at this and feeling really good.” Rest in the question for a few minutes. What feels “really good”? Paying off the highest interest card first knowing you are saving money in the long run, paying them off in the Debt Snowball method, or paying them off according to how you feel about the card and its charges? Which account’s rapidly shrinking balance brings the biggest smile to your face? Which card’s “New Balance =$0.00” brings up the emotional energy that fuels your motivational engine?

 This alignment between the Fundamental facts clearly considered and Significant emotion-based goals clearly articulated is a powerful engine for driving the change you want to see in your life. And most importantly, you’re in the driver’s seat making it happen through clear conjoining of intention and action. Your “bad debt” will slowly roll off your balance sheet as the months tick by, and eventually you’ll have the complex priority landscape in front of you that defines the “where do I invest?” space.

This new financial freedom creates its own set of problems, but I assure you they are much better ones to have than dreading your monthly credit card statements.