 |
|
|
|||||
In 2001, Antoni was working at a business that was underperforming and facing layoffs. People didnt know who would be cut or when. You could tell by peoples behavior that anxiety was at an all-time high. Managers were networking in the right corridors, colleagues started to crowd meetings to look indispensable, and teams were slowing down because nobody wanted to make the wrong move. One leader chose a different tactic. Every day, at the same time, he stood in the same spot where anyone could walk up to him. He shared what he actually knew (not what he guessed), answered questions without theater, and ended with a concrete direction for today. People still didnt like the situation, but the atmosphere changed. Not because he shared more information than everyone else. Because he paired transparency with clarity. That pairing is the point. Leaders talk about being transparent as if its the whole job, but it isnt. Transparency and clarity are different muscles. Transparency builds trust, while clarity builds focus. When you confuse them, you end up paying twice in lost time and diminished credibility. The myth: more transparency automatically creates clarity Transparency in a company setting typically means more dashboards, more all-hands, and more context. It feels responsibleespecially in uncertain momentsbecause it signals you arent hiding anything. But facts dont organize themselves. People still have to decide what matters, what they need to ignore, and what to do next. When leaders dont provide that structure, they leave teams confused, and teams will fill in the blanks with rumor and gossip. In the end, this leads to more insecurity and more internal politics. How transparency can coexist with confusion This is why radical transparency can coexist with mass confusion. You can be open and still leave people directionless. In some instances, transparency can even backfire. David De Cremer summarizes research showing that complete transparency can trigger predictable side effects: blame cultures (because you see who erred without understanding why), distrust (because being constantly monitored feels like suspicion), and even resistance and reduced creativity in highly exposed environments. In our decades of experience working with leaders and organizations, this oversharing is one of two extreme communication modes that companies can slip into. Its worth taking a closer look at these two and their costs before we examine how leaders can avoid them. The following are two traps that many leaders often fall into (but should stop doing). 1. Transparent but unclear: the ‘information dump’ organization This is the leader who shares everything: forecasts, board slides, Slack threads, meeting notes. They hide nothing, but execution continues to drift. Thats because you highlight nothing when you share everything. People dont know which metrics are heads up versus background. They dont know which risks are actionable. The natural response among workers in this scenario is to hedge and wait. Worse yet, when incoming data exceeds what people can process, information overload is the inevitable result. And according to research, this overload can lead to worse decision-making, higher stress, and lower productivity. Yet productivity isnt the only area that suffers. Ambiguity has measurable psychological and performance costs. Meta-analytic research on role ambiguitya close cousin of organizational unclear-nessfinds it too is associated with worse outcomes, including strain and reduced performance. Transparent-but-unclear leaders often misread the feedback from their workers. They hear, Were confused, and respond by adding more information. But in doing so, theyre trying to fix traffic jam by pouring more cars onto the road. 2. Clear but opaque: the ‘because-I-said-so’ organization The second mistake looks better on paper but is just as costly. Leaders succinctly present things, set firm deadlines, and outline whos accountable for what. As a result, everyone knows what to do. But (and this is the critical bit) the why is missing. This is important. As Nancy Duarte points out in a Harvard Business Review article, when you ask people to change behavior, their first question is rarely how. Its why. If people dont recognize the why, they can become suspicious of a leaders motives. What leaders should do instead So how do you know if youre missing transparency or clarity? Start by listening to the reactions you already get. If people say, What are we supposed to do with this?, Why are we doing these tasks? or Whats the point? you are not being clear. If people say, We feel out of the loop, or Decisions come out of nowhere, you are not being transparent. By paying attention and listening to what they express, you dont even need a survey to detect the gap. Your people are already telling you what your company needs to do. From there, we recommend a three-step process that weve seen numerous successful leaders intuitively adapt, as a way of ensuring the proper balance of transparency and clarity: Start with transparency. This is what we know, and what information we still miss. Add clarity. This is why you need to know. End with direction. These are the short-term goals we pursue, the reasons for them, and how we follow up. This is a simple yet impactful framework that brings transparency and clarity together. It eliminates unnecessary confusion and frustration, so that your people can be more productive and generate better results. And thats exactly what Antonis boss in the hallway was doing.
Category:
E-Commerce
Theres a new epidemic sweeping companies worldwide: unhappiness. According to recent research, only 51% of employees frequently feel happy at work. Being happy is not just a “nice to have” in the workplace. The same research found that happy workers are 42% more likely to feel productive or motivated, meaning that employee happiness is directly linked to business outcomes. While many organizations have introduced initiatives such as “duvet days,” mindfulness classes, and wellbeing apps, recent research from the University of Oxford has shown that these have no discernible effect on employee mental wellbeing. So, what is the answer to curing this unhappiness epidemic? It lies in your management approach. Unlocking happiness with questions As a manager, you play a crucial role in your employees’ happiness and mental well-being. Gallups State of the Global Workplace 2025 report found that those who work in companies with poor management practices are nearly 60% more likely to be stressed than those in companies with good management practices. Add to this the fact that managers have the same impact on peoples mental health as their partners, doctors, or therapists, and you can see that staff happiness, perhaps unsurprisingly, is contingent on how theyre managed. Implement effective people management, however, and the results speak for themselves. If workers feel seen and understood, and believe that their strengths, values, and contributions are noted and celebrated, engagement, trust, and retention all improve. Once an employee is empowered by their manager to know and use their strengths daily, theyre nearly six times more engaged. Businesses with highly engaged staff experience 78% less absenteeism and significantly lower turnover rates. When employees feel that managers care about their well-being, theyre 73% less likely to feel burned out and 53% less likely to be actively seeking a new job. If youre a manager wondering how you can better motivate your team and reap these benefits for your organization, its time to consider a new style of management called Operational Coaching. Practitioners of this new approach learn to use an enquiry-led approach, asking purposeful questions intended to engage others’ thinking. At the heart of developing an Operational Coaching style is learning to apply the STAR model in everyday situations: Stop: When an employee comes to you with a problem, as their manager, you must learn to stop, take a step back, and overcome your natural inclination to step in and solve the problem for them. Think: This gives you the space to think about whether the situation an employee has presented offers a coachable moment. Ask: Mastering the art of asking powerful, thought-provoking questions and then actively listening to your employees allows you to ditch the “fix and solve” response and instead presents the other person with a learning opportunity to become independent, solution-driven problem solvers. Result: Work with the employee to secure commitment to an action from this coachable moment, that theyll see through. You may need to ask a few more questions to agree on the appropriate follow-up, increasing the likelihood that action will be taken and providing a future opportunity to give appropriate feedback. By learning how to ask purposeful questions and actively listening to what your team members are saying, youre supporting them on a journey of continuous performance improvement. Enabling and empowering employees to take action establishes a more equitable relationship and advances their skills, capabilities, and prospects. An important part of Operational Coaching is also offering appreciative feedback to your staff. This is crucial for motivation, which, as weve already established, is whats needed to banish workplace blues, boost morale, and ensure employees feel valued. Learning to apply the STAR model also has benefits for you as a manager. Chances are, your responsibilities already mean youre overstretched. In fact, you may be one of the 82% of people who have ended up as an “accidental” manager on top of your actual role. So learning to use an Operational Coaching style of management enables you to have “in the moment” daily coaching conversations with your employees and achieve great results, without the need for lengthy coaching-style sessions that drain your time and energy. This means youll likely be happier and have improved morale, too. Reframing the purpose of management The benefits of Operational Coaching in action have been clearly established. A large-scale randomised controlled trial, funded by the U.K. Government and conducted by the London School of Economics (LSE), showed statistically significant results across 62 organizations in 14 sectors. Managers who undertook the STAR Manager program went on to spend 70% more time coaching their team members in the flow of work than before adopting an Operational Coaching style of management. Intervention group organizations also recorded a sixfold improvement in employee retention, and 48% of reported successes were related to increased engagement and productivity. The robust results of the study show the benefits that await managers who learn how to adapt their management style to an enquiry-led approach. It clearly demonstrates that when managers are better trained to handle the people side of their roles, everyone feels happier and more motivated. By reframing management’s purpose and intention to enable others to develop, empower them to act, an motivate them through appropriate appreciative and developmental feedback, you can ensure your organization is a place where employees feel motivated, supported, and able to grow. And this is exactly the type of workplace we desperately need in the U.S. and around the world.
Category:
E-Commerce
Three weeks into her new role as VP of operations, Maria got an 11:47 p.m. Slack from her COO: Where are we on the Q3 supply chain numbers? She had sent him those numbers that morning. She sent them again. By 6 a.m., Marias boss had changed the entire project scope based on a board conversation she didnt know had happened. By noon, hed ccd the CEO on a complaint about delaysdelays caused by his own shifting priorities. Maria didnt push back: She absorbed the burden. She reframed his abrupt messages before forwarding them to her team. She stayed late recalculating projections to match his latest mandate. She deflected her teams frustration with careful explanations about strategic pivots. The work was exhausting, and it was invisible. Her team saw a supportive leader. Her boss saw smooth execution. No one saw the toll. Many managers find themselves in this position: absorbing friction from above while protecting those below. Gallup research finds that managers account for at least 70% of changes in employee engagement, yet many of those same managers report feeling crushed by contradictory demands from their own bosses. McKinsey research confirms that the quality of the relationship with a direct manager is the single most important factor in employee satisfaction. The message is clear: The friction you absorb doesnt just affect you. It reverberates through everyone below you. In my executive and team coaching work with senior leaders, I see this pattern repeatedly: A C-suite leader creates destructive organizational friction through a chaotic style, lack of personal accountability, and unchecked reactivity. And managers are left to absorb it. Its an unsustainable dynamicbut one managers can counteract. Here are four strategies for navigating friction without burning out or compromising your effectiveness. 1. Name the Friction, Then Decide Whats Worth Absorbing The first step is getting honest about which type of friction youre dealing with. Constructive frictiona boss who raises the bar, questions your logic, or forces you to confront underperformanceis uncomfortable but valuable. This is what I call healthy friction. If your boss is pushing you to eliminate inefficiency or rethink a flawed process, thats worth leaning into, not absorbing. Destructive friction is different. Its energy lost to misalignment, rework, and emotional labor. Stanford management professor Bob Sutton identifies several types of destructive friction: unnecessary complexity that adds steps without adding value, ambiguity when goals keep shifting, emotional volatility that forces you to manage up constantly, and micromanagement that erodes autonomy. Liz Wiseman, author of Multipliers, calls leaders who create destructive friction diminishers. They drain capability through behaviors like jumping in with answers or involving themselves in every decision. To separate signal from noise, seek to understand whether this unnecessary interference is actually your boss managing real constraints you dont see. A sudden pivot might reflect CEO pressure. Increased scrutiny might follow a compliance issue. Research on the hidden realities of leadership shows that senior leaders frequently operate under pressures that are invisible to their teams. Use these criteria to assess the situation: Comprehension: Have you had a candid, vulnerable conversation with your boss to understand the origin of the friction? What specific behaviors create it? Duration: Is this temporary or chronic? You can absorb friction during a crisis. You cant sustain it indefinitely. Impact on outcomes: What is your role in creating or enabling the behavior? Does absorbing the friction improve results or just create an illusion of progress? Cost to you and your team: What does it cost in time, energy, and team morale? Are you protecting your team or just delaying the impact? If talented people are leaving, youre not absorbing effectively. Marcus, chief of staff at a healthcare startup, learned this the hard way: I spent three months resenting my CEOs constant questions about our hiring pipeline. I thought he was micromanaging. Then I learned we were six weeks from running out of runway, and he was trying to slow spending without panicking the team. I wish Id asked, What are you seeing that Im not? sooner. 2. Create Systems That Reduce Friction Once youve diagnosed the friction, build systems to reduce itsystems that dont require you to be the constant intermediary. The instinct is to work harder, absorb more, and hope conditions improve. But research consistently shows that individual effort cannot compensate for structural dysfunction. A Deloitte study finds that when productivity tools and ways of working lack clarity, they create more work rather than less. And Gallups engagement research shows that only 46% of employees clearly understand what is expected of them, a 10-point drop from 2020. When the system around you generates confusion, the solution is not to absorb faster. Its to redesign the system. Four structural changes can reduce your role as the constant go-between. Establish clear decision rights. Much friction comes from unclear ownership. When roles blur, decisions stall and accountability weakens. Bains RAPID framework (recommend, agree, perform, input, decide) can help. When Maria finally had this conversation with her boss, they discovered he wasnt trying to micromanage. He genuinely didnt know she had authority to approve vendor contracts under $500K. Create predictable communication. Random check-ins create constant interruption. Your operating rhythm is a signal of how you leadit sets the tempo for decision-making, collaboration, and accountability. One director of product management I coached solved her bosss just checking in problem by instituting a Friday afternoon dashboard: three metrics, three decisions pending, three risks. He stopped asking because he knew hed get answers Friday, she said. Document and share context. When priorities shift, capture the change and its rationale. A simple decision log helps everyone see how you got here and why yesterdays plan changed. Build buffers into your processes. If your boss routinely changes direction, dont commit your team to immovable deadlines. Build in review points. Use phased rollouts. 3. Have the Conversation Sometimes systems arent enough. You need to name the pattern directly. Your boss likely doesnt see themselves as creating friction; they see themselves as ensuring quality or responding to pressure from above. Research on managing up suggests framing it as a shared problem, not an accusation. Try the following scripts: Frame it as shared: I want to make sure Im giving you what you need without overwhelming the team. Can we talk about how decisions are flowing right now? Come with data: Weve reprioritized three times this month, which has added about 40 hours of rework. I want to understand whats driving these changes so we can build more flexibility into the plan. Focus on impact, not intent: When requests come in after 9 p.m., the team feels like they need to respond immediately, which is creating burnout. Can we establish core hours for urgent communication? Propose experiments: What if we tried a two-week sprint where priorities stay locked unless something is genuinely on fire? Andrea, a senior director at a media company, used this approach when her bosss conflict-avoidant style created constant mixed messages. I told him, I think we both want the same thing: happy clients and a sustainable pace. Right now, were getting requests from three stakeholders who think they are all top priority. Can you help me understand how to sequence these? He didnt love the conversation, but he did start having clearer conversations with stakeholders. 4. Know When to Stop Absorbing, And Protect Your Own Leadership Sometimes friction stops being fuel and becomes rot. Drawing on insights from organizational psychologists like Adam Grant, you can watch for three warning signs that conflict has crossed into dysfunction: Its chronic rather than tied to specific crises, its driven by ego or insecurity instead of real business concerns, and its starting to show up in exit interviews and the loss of your strongest people. At that point, continuing to quietly absorb the damage is not noble leadership. Its enabling a toxic culture. You have three options: Escalate. Share what youre experiencing with a skip-level leader or HR business partnernot as gossip, but as a risk flag. Weve lost three senior people in six months, and the exit interviews all mention the same concerns about unclear priorities. Set boundaries. Let some friction flow downward or upward. If your boss demands weekend work for nonemergencies, say no. If they change priorities daily, push back: I need three business days to reallocate resources. If its truly urgent, tell me what were deprioritizing. Leave. If the friction is chronic, youve tried to address it, and nothing changes, staying may be costing more than its worth. Make an exit plan. James, former VP of Sales at a SaaS company, eventually chose to leave. After two years, I realized this is the job. And the job was making me someone I didnt want to be: short-tempered with my team, anxious on Sunday nights, too tired to be present at home. Leaving felt like giving up. Six months later, I can see it was the smartest thing I did. The bigger risk, though, is what happens if you stay and dont change course. Deloittes research on leadership sustainability shows that burned-out leaders transmit their stress directly to their teams, creating a cascade that damages performance at every level. You become reactive instead of strategic. You model anxiety instead of steadiness. You teach your team that success means managing up rather than delivering value. The Fallout from Friction With time, Maria also realized this. I thought I was being a good boss by shielding my team. But I was teaching them that last-minute fire drills were normal. When one of my best people resigned, she said, I just want to work somewhere that feels calmer. I wasnt absorbing the friction. I was transmitting it. So as you navigate friction from above, ask yourself regularly: What kind of leader am I becoming? What norms am I creating? What am I teaching my team about how work should feel? Being a buffer matters. But being a buffer shouldnt require you to lose yourself in the process.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||