Blog Posts - Agile Leadership Journey

The Messy Middle: Leading Between Decisions and Destinations

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 23:42:09 GMT

KEY INSIGHTS

Most leadership is tested not in the bold decision or the crisis response, but in the long, uncertain stretch that follows — between what was decided and where it ultimately leads. When leaders across industries were asked how much of their work involves navigating decisions they didn't make, nearly two-thirds said often or almost always — and named the gap between what's expected and what's possible as their most frequent and draining tension. The messy middle isn't a detour from real leadership; it is real leadership — and navigating it well requires less focus on finding the right answer and more on developing the people, trust, and culture that make progress possible when the path isn't clear.

Why Most Leaders Aren't Prepared for the Messy Middle - We Were Trained for the Wrong Weather

Most leadership development is built for one of two conditions. The first is clear skies: stable, predictable environments where you can plan carefully, execute with discipline, and optimize for efficiency. The second is stormy weather: crisis and chaos, where decisive action is what the moment demands.

Both conditions are real. But as Pete Behrens, founder of Agile Leadership Journey and author of Into the Fog , observes, most of leadership doesn't happen in either of those places.

"I describe most of leadership somewhere in between these two states — in the fog. This murky, uncertain space where change is happening beneath our feet. And we're not really trained for this."

Geopolitical upheaval. AI reshaping entire industries. Reorganizations, mergers, layoffs, and shifting strategies landing on teams who didn't ask for any of it. If it all feels foggy right now, that's not a personal failure of clarity. It's the landscape most leaders are actually living in, whether they have language for it or not.

This is the messy middle.

The Decision Is Just the Beginning

To open a discussion with a gathering of global alumni leaders, Pete read from the Resilience section of Into the Fog — a passage grounded in his own experience leading a team through an across-the-board layoff he had fought against, lost, and eventually resigned himself to. By the time the decision was implemented, he had processed it. He was ready to move on.

His team was not.

"After the layoff, I was ready to move on. But my team? Those who remained after the layoff? Their journey had just begun. They were only just entering the fog, hiking the trail, watching to see if I was too."

His cost: being emotionally spent precisely when his team needed him most. The end of his journey was the start of theirs — and he had nothing left to give.

This is the hidden toll of the messy middle. Not just the difficulty of navigating it, but the way it depletes the very resources leaders need to show up for others. When participants were asked what it costs them to support a decision they didn't agree with, the answers came quickly: cognitive dissonance, lost trust, credibility, a sense of worth and integrity, internal peace.

Five Types of Messy Middle Leaders Experience Most

One of the most clarifying things a leader can do in the fog is name specifically what kind of messy middle they're in. Pete shared five recurring forms that show up across industries, organizations, and levels of leadership:

Between senior leadership and your team — being the shock absorber between those who make decisions and those who must live with them
Between a decision and the destination — the long hike after the adrenaline of a major choice fades
Between competing needs or priorities — holding the tension when legitimate demands point in different directions
Between what's expected and what's possible — managing the gap between what stakeholders want and what is actually achievable
Between your own commitment and delivering on it — the stretch between having said yes and figuring out how

When participants ranked which they experience most, the top result was the gap between what's expected and what's possible — the chronic pressure of being held to a standard that available resources, time, or conditions may not support. Close behind: competing needs or priorities, and sitting between senior leadership and their teams.

Richard Dolman , an ALJ Guide and leadership coach who works with leaders and organizations navigating complexity, named his own most pressing middle: right now it's between his own commitment and delivering on it. But what he finds frustrating professionally is something different — a pattern he observes repeatedly in the leaders he works with.

"Leaders understand the challenge in front of them when making decisions, but they often choose a shortsighted or less disciplined decision rather than seeing the long-term effects."

The decision gets made. The leader moves on. The people living with the consequences navigate a transition that was never fully considered. It's a reminder that the middle you're personally in and the middle you're creating for others aren't always the same — and awareness of both matters.

The pattern worth noting: the messiest middles aren't the dramatic ones. They're the structural ones — chronic tensions built into what it means to lead in complex organizations. Not crises to resolve but conditions to navigate, repeatedly, often without resolution.

What the Messy Middle Actually Costs Leaders

Leaders rarely talk openly about what the messy middle costs them. The professional expectation is to absorb it, adapt, and keep moving. But beneath that surface, the toll is real — and it shows up in ways that matter for the people depending on those leaders to show up.

Some leaders describe the experience of being so consumed by a change that was out of their control — trying to hold things together, backtrack where needed, protect the people around them — that they lose sight of their own limits. "I was inundated. I was drowning. When you're drowning, you don't realize it sometimes because you're just trying to keep everybody else from sinking." The self-blame that follows — "Why didn't I stop this? I could have stopped this" — often misses the reality that when you're submerged, stopping isn't always a visible option.

Others find themselves navigating decisions made far above them, watching the consequences ripple through their organizations in ways the decision-makers never anticipated. The frustration of seeing the same patterns repeat — of being close enough to see what's going wrong but not positioned to change it — accumulates over time into something heavier than any single incident. Pete observed that the bigger the organization, the more likely a leader is to spend significant energy defending decisions they didn't make, while the people who made those decisions have already moved on to the next thing.

Leaders who try to fix what's broken and find their efforts ignored or dismissed face a particular kind of middle: the gap between knowing what's needed and having no path to implement it. One participant connected her experience to something John Maxwell calls the leadership lid — the principle that an organization can only rise to the level of its leadership. She had found the concept clarifying after going through Maxwell's certification program: when the leader at the top is operating with a limited view, that lid is felt most acutely by everyone working beneath it. "In order to be a leader, you need to have followers. And no one was following him."

Rashmi Fernandes, an ALJ Guide and leadership coach, named an insidious cost that compounds quietly over time. When leaders are repeatedly exposed to these dynamics, she observed, something begins to shift internally.

"You stop feeling what used to affect you. You become numb. It thickens your skin but it also makes you emotionally unavailable for your people — because you've lost trust. Your words don't feel as valuable for yourself anymore."

When a leader stops trusting their own voice, they become less able to offer the support, clarity, or direction their teams need. That erosion of self-trust doesn't announce itself. It accumulates — until the leader who was once most present for others finds they have less and less to give.

How to Navigate Leadership Transitions: The Language That Helps

Having words for what you're in doesn't make it easier to bear, but it does make it easier to navigate.

A clarifying distinction is one William Bridges draws in his work on managing transitions — and one Pete returns to throughout Into the Fog : the difference between change and transition. Change is organizational — the decision, the reorg, the acquisition. It happens at a point in time and is relatively clean. Transition is personal — the internal, psychological process each individual goes through as they let go of what was, move through the uncertainty, and gradually arrive at what's next. It's slow and it's messy. And it doesn't happen on the same timeline for everyone.

"Change is organizational. Transitions are personal."

A leader who spent weeks processing a difficult decision before it was announced has already traveled a significant distance by the time their team receives the news. Expecting others to be where you are is one of the most common ways leaders fail the people they lead. The decision may feel finished. For everyone else, it may be just beginning.

"Change only kicks off the journey, quick and clean. Transition is everything that follows, slow and messy."

Several other concepts are worth keeping close. Bridges calls the in-between the Neutral Zone — the wilderness where what was no longer exists and what will be hasn't yet arrived. Kegan and Lahey's Immunity to Change names the inner resistance that keeps people from becoming who the situation requires. Tim Arnold's Power of Healthy Tension reframes the polarities leaders navigate — assertive and accommodative, strategic and tactical, hands-on and hands-off — not as problems to solve but as tensions to manage. Michael Fullan's Implementation Dip names the performance drop that is a predictable feature of any genuine transition: you get worse before you get better, and that's not a sign something is wrong. It's a sign you're in the middle of something.

These concepts share a common thread: most leadership challenges aren't problems with a solution. They're terrains that require navigation. That distinction matters because how you frame the challenge shapes how you show up for it.

How to Start Navigating the Messy Middle

If you are currently somewhere in a messy middle, the most important work isn't finding a quick solution — it's developing the catalyst leadership orientation required to navigate the terrain. That means making fundamental shifts from relying on your own expertise or driving results through personal authority toward building the people, trust, and culture that make results possible when the path isn't clear.

As Pete Behrens writes in Into the Fog , a catalyst leader fosters change first in themselves, then in the organizations around them. The internal shift comes first and it begins with how you show up right now, in whatever middle you're in.

Here are seven ways to begin that shift while holding space for others:

1. Name the messy middle you're in.

The first and most underused act of leadership in the fog is simply acknowledging that the fog exists. Vague overwhelm is harder to navigate than a clearly identified tension. Not passing the fog forward means being honest about uncertainty while still holding steadiness for the people around you. When leaders pretend the middle isn't happening, people feel the gap between what they're being told and what they're experiencing — and they fill it with their own conclusions. Naming the specific kind of middle you're in, and inviting others to do the same, gives people something real to orient around.

2. Distinguish the change from the transition.

The decision may feel finished. For everyone else, it may be just beginning. Change is organizational — it happens at a point in time. Transition is personal — it unfolds inside people, on timelines no one controls. Where are you in this transition? Where is your team? The gap between those two answers is often where the most important leadership work lives.

3. Communicate through it all — especially when things are going well.

The instinct to communicate more in crisis and less in calm is understandable but costly. Trust is built in the quiet periods — through check-ins that didn't need to happen, updates that weren't urgent, conversations that happened before anything went wrong. When disruption arrives, people who already feel seen and heard can process it faster and show up more fully. As Lupe P. put it, drawing on years of experience working with families through difficult transitions: "You don't stop checking on your kids when things are going well."

4. Create space for the human experience.

People cannot engage with what comes next until they feel their current reality has been acknowledged. This means creating room for frustration, grief, confusion, and uncertainty — not as a distraction from the work, but as part of it. Pete describes a leader who, ahead of a round of layoffs, gave his team an hour to vent about everything they were hearing and feeling — against company policy. "I know you're talking about this. I know it's bothering you. Take an hour, vent with your team, hash it out." What followed was genuine engagement rather than performed professionalism. Permission to be frustrated is permission to be human, and it can be a precondition for genuine engagement.

5. Notice the wallflower.

People navigating personal difficulty rarely announce it. They show up differently — quieter, less engaged, off their usual rhythm. The leader who notices and acts on that noticing creates a different kind of safety than any policy can. Valynn W. carried a lesson from her Marine Corps days on this: "Be aware of the wallflower. They might be an introvert, but they might have something going on." Ask how people are doing and mean it. Be aware of who has gone quiet.

6. Celebrate endings.

Every transition requires letting go of something, and letting go deserves acknowledgment — not just as grief, but as recognition of what was built, accomplished, or learned. When endings go unmarked, people move on without closure. When they are celebrated, people carry the accomplishment or the closure forward. Recognize what is ending before rushing to what comes next. Honor the work, the culture, or the chapter that got you here. Small rituals of celebration and closure matter more than most organizations acknowledge.

7. Take care of yourself first.

Resilience isn't infinite, and it erodes fastest under sustained pressure. The capacity to pause, to notice, to respond rather than react — these are the foundation of effective leadership in the fog, not a peripheral concern. That means different things for different people: a consistent mindfulness or meditation practice , regular exercise, adequate rest, honest conversations with trusted peers, or simply protecting time to think and recover. What you don't replenish, you eventually can't give.

Learn more about catalyst leadership — the mindsets and behaviors most suited to navigating the messy middle. Explore our upcoming leadership development programs to develop the capabilities that matter most in complex, fast-moving environments.

Clear Skies, Stormy Weather, and the Fog in Between: A New Way to Think About Leadership

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 23:34:58 GMT

Key Insights

Most leadership thinking prepares people for two conditions: stable environments where you plan and optimize, and crises where you act fast and decisively. But the terrain most leaders are actually living in — uncertain, unsettled, no clear path forward — is neither. Pete Behrens calls this the fog, and in a recent interview argues it has become the permanent landscape of leadership. The leaders who navigate it best aren't the ones who speed up or freeze — they're the ones who slow down deliberately, build the internal self-awareness to recognize their own blind spots, and treat development not as a program to complete but as an operating system that runs continuously.

Most Leadership Training Prepares You for Weather That No Longer Exists

Pete Behrens, founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey and author of Into the Fog , recently joined Business RadioX's High Velocity Radio for a conversation with host Lee Kantor that reframes something most leaders think they already understand: what it actually means to lead through uncertainty.

Listen to the full interview here.

Three Terrains. Most Leaders Are Only Trained for Two.

Pete opens the conversation with a deceptively simple model. Leaders operate in one of three terrains.

Clear skies is stability — set a plan, execute, optimize. Most leadership development was built for this.

Stormy weather is crisis — decisive, fast action is required. Leaders are trained for this too, even if imperfectly.

Then there's the fog — the terrain in between, where the path isn't obvious, there's no immediate emergency, but nothing feels settled. No clear data. No obvious next move. This is where Pete argues most leaders are spending most of their time today — and where most of them are least equipped.

"The concept of clear skies is almost negligible in today's business environment," he says. "The fog is becoming the landscape of leadership."

The Instinct That Makes It Worse

The natural response to fog is to either freeze or accelerate. Pete suggests a third option, drawn from the most ordinary of experiences.

"Think about what we do best when driving in fog. We slow down. Not stop — that won't achieve our goals. And not speed up, which is the natural instinct. Slowing down creates the clarity that's most scarce in uncertainty."

That reframe — treating fog not as a defect to fix but as an environment to navigate — changes what leadership requires. Observation over reaction. Movement that generates feedback rather than movement that assumes a destination. And enough patience to let clarity emerge from action rather than waiting for it to arrive before acting.

The Fog Between Your Ears

There's an external fog — markets shift, competitors move, disruptions compound. But Pete makes a point in the interview that tends to land hardest with leaders who hear it: the most dangerous fog isn't external. It's internal.

"The most dangerous fog happens between our ears. It's the ego, the assumptions, the biases, the blind spots we have as leaders — that lack of self-awareness that impacts all of us."

Organizations, he argues, mirror their leaders. If something feels off in the culture , in team dynamics, or in execution, the source is often closer than leaders want to look. The willingness to hold up that mirror — and act on what it shows — is where real leadership development begins.

Development Isn't a Program. It's an Operating System.

One of the most practically useful ideas in the interview is how Pete reframes leadership development itself. It isn't something you do once and move on from. It's an operating system — something that has to run continuously, inspecting and adapting in an ongoing cycle.

"This is not a one-time mode. Think about this as your operating system, not a one-time event. The inspect and adapt can't happen a single time. It has to happen over and over."

The leaders who build genuine resilience aren't the ones who had a breakthrough and moved on. They're the ones who built the habit — repeatedly, across every level of the organization.

Hear the Full Conversation

This summary captures some of the highlights, but the interview goes deeper — including Pete's thinking on why movement creates clarity, what self-awareness actually requires of leaders, and how to know when your organization is signaling a problem before the data shows it.

If these ideas connect with challenges you're navigating in your own organization, we'd welcome the conversation . And for more stories from leaders working through exactly this terrain, Pete's book Into the Fog is a good place to start.

What is Catalyst Leadership?

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 22:44:58 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Most leaders are trained to have the answers — catalyst leaders are trained to ask better questions. Grounded in decades of research on how leaders develop, catalyst leadership represents a fundamental shift in how a leader sees their role: from driving results personally to developing the people and culture that produce them. Understanding this shift is one of the most clarifying — and challenging — steps a leader can take.

Catalyst leadership is an orientation — a way of seeing and approaching your role — in which your primary focus shifts from driving results through your own expertise and authority to building the people, teams, and culture that make great results possible. Catalyst leadership is most needed when the path isn't clear — where complexity makes control an illusion, uncertainty makes expertise insufficient, and the instinct to take charge is often the very thing that slows everything down. It's less about what you personally produce and more about what you make possible for others.

That's a meaningful distinction, and for many leaders, an uncomfortable one. Most of us built our careers on knowing things, solving problems, and executing well. Catalyst leadership asks you to hold those strengths more lightly and develop a different set of capabilities — ones that are harder to see but ultimately more powerful in complex, fast-moving environments.

Where Does the Term Catalyst Leadership Come From?

The word "catalyst" comes from chemistry. A catalyst is an agent that enables or accelerates a reaction without being the reaction itself. It's a useful metaphor for leadership — with one important caveat.

In chemistry, a catalyst remains unchanged by the process it initiates. In organizations, that's not how it works. As Pete Behrens writes in Into the Fog (2025) , a catalyst leader "fundamentally is a leader who can and does foster change in themselves and their organizations." The internal shift comes first. The organizational shift follows.

The concept is grounded in the research of Bill Joiner and Stephen Josephs, whose award-winning book Leadership Agility (2007) drew on a multi-year study examining the behaviors and thought processes of hundreds of managers. Joiner identified a developmental progression of leadership orientations — Expert, Achiever, and Catalyst — each representing a greater capacity to lead effectively under conditions of complexity and change. Agile Leadership Journey's programs draw directly on this research as a core foundation.

Why Is Catalyst Leadership So Relevant Right Now?

Behrens grounds the relevance of catalyst leadership in a specific context: the leaders and leadership teams navigating complexity and uncertainty – where the old maps don’t work, the path isn’t clear, and the instinct to take control is often the thing that slows everything down. That’s the terrain where catalyst leadership isn’t just preferable. It’s necessary.

Every major shift in how we organize and lead work over the past century has been pointing toward catalyst leadership — and yet most organizations have yet to fully realize it.

Each wave of progress asked leaders to extend more trust, cede more control, and invest more deliberately in the people around them. Each time, organizations that fully made the shift gained a real and lasting advantage. And each time, many leaders adopted the surface behaviors without changing the underlying mindset that drives them — copying practices without internalizing the philosophy.

We are now in the middle of another wave. As Behrens observes in Into the Fog, generative AI is not just changing how work gets done; it's changing what work is. And as he puts it: "the real challenge isn't the next wave of technology. It's the new leadership mindset required to leverage the wave effectively."

That mindset is catalyst leadership. Not because it's new, but because the conditions that make it necessary have become unavoidable. High complexity, rapid change, and work that requires coordination across boundaries are no longer occasional challenges — they are the baseline for leaders across industries and at every organizational level.

A Quick Look Back at the Management Shifts That Brought Us Here

Frederick Winslow Taylor's scientific management — the dominant model of the early 20th century — was built on a clear premise: put thinking in the hands of managers, execution in the hands of workers, and optimize every step. At the time, it produced extraordinary efficiency but also led to worker disengagement, quality failures at scale, and organizations too rigid to adapt as complexity grew.

Lean manufacturing, pioneered by Toyota and shaped by the principles of W. Edwards Deming, was the response. Built on the belief that workers closest to the work — knowledgeable, respected, empowered — would outperform a management-driven system. As Behrens writes in Into the Fog , there was a recurring catch: "managers had to let go of control for it to work. Many didn't."

A generation later, Agile emerged to solve the same problem in a growing field of software development. Rigid, plan-driven approaches couldn't keep pace with the speed and complexity of building digital products. Agile handed more control to cross-functional, collaborative teams — and again produced compelling results where genuinely adopted. And again, as Behrens notes, "managers had to let go of control for it to work. And once again, many didn't."

For a deeper dive, check out How Did Agile Leadership Emerge?

How Does Catalyst Leadership Differ from Other Leadership Mindsets?

To understand what's distinct about catalyst leadership, it helps to see what it builds on. Joiner's leadership agility research identifies three orientations (combinations of mindsets and behaviors) that account for the leadership levels of the vast majority of leaders in today's workforce.

The Expert Leader

The Expert leads through knowledge and authority. This is a tactical, problem-solving orientation — leaders earn respect through expertise and direct their energy toward making things work within their area of responsibility. Expert leadership is well-suited for relatively stable environments where success comes through incremental improvement. It's where most leaders start, and it's genuinely valuable. Every organization needs people who know their craft deeply.

The Achiever Leader

The Achiever leads through strategy and results. This is a strategic, outcome-focused orientation — Achiever leaders motivate others by connecting them to larger objectives, work to align stakeholders across functions, and excel at cross-functional execution. Achiever leadership performs well in environments with moderate complexity and episodic change. It's the dominant orientation in most organizations, and for good reason: it produces results when the direction is reasonably clear.

The Catalyst Leader

The Catalyst leads through vision and empowerment. Joiner describes this as a visionary, facilitative orientation — Catalyst leaders articulate an inspiring direction and bring together the right people to pursue it. Their focus is on developing empowered organizations and teams capable of sustained success, ones that foster both personal and professional growth. The Catalyst orientation, Joiner's research concludes, is the most effective for today's rapidly changing, highly complex environments.

As Behrens puts it:

"Expert leaders focus on the work itself. Achiever leaders focus on the coordination of people and work, performance, and results. Catalyst leaders focus on the health of the whole system — the culture, the growth, the long-term resilience of the organization."

Each orientation builds on the previous one rather than replacing it. A Catalyst leader retains their expertise and drive for results — what changes is where their primary energy and attention live.

Joiner describes Expert and Achiever leaders as operating from a "heroic" mindset — assuming primary personal responsibility for setting direction and managing performance. Catalyst leaders operate from what he calls a "post-heroic" orientation: they retain ultimate accountability, but they create environments characterized by high involvement and shared responsibility.

How Is Catalyst Leadership Different from Servant Leadership?

The two share important common ground. Servant leadership, as Robert Greenleaf introduced it in 1970, places the growth and well-being of others at the center of a leader's purpose. That intent is genuinely aligned with a catalyst orientation. If you identify with servant leadership, you're likely already working from some of the same instincts.

The distinction lies in balance and scope.

Behrens differentiates the two:

"Servant leadership asks you to put others first — and that instinct is good. But catalyst leadership asks you to do that and still show up fully yourself. Stepping back feels humble. But sometimes your team needs you to step in, hold the tension, and lead. The best catalyst leaders I've worked with don't choose between serving and leading. They've learned to do both."

There's also a difference in scope. Servant leadership focuses on the relationship between a leader and the individuals in front of them. Catalyst leadership extends to the broader system — the culture, the conditions for learning, and the organization's long-term capacity to grow and adapt.

What Does the Shift Toward Catalyst Leadership Actually Require?

The transition toward catalyst leadership can be disorienting. Not because the concepts are hard to understand, but because they ask you to loosen your grip on the very things that made you successful — the skills, instincts, and identities that got you here. That's not a learning challenge. It's a personal one.

Moving toward a Catalyst orientation involves genuine shifts in how you see yourself, how you see others, and how you see the scope of your role. Moving toward a Catalyst orientation isn't simply a matter of adding new techniques. It involves genuine mindset and behavioral shifts that develop over time.

From Unintentional to Self-Aware

This is where the shift begins and without it, none of the other shifts are possible. Catalyst leadership requires the ability to see yourself clearly: to notice the mindset you’re operating from in a given moment, recognize when your default instincts are serving the situation and when they aren’t, and make deliberate choices rather than habitual ones. Behrens maintains that situational adaptiveness – the ability to flex across leadership orientations – depends entirely on self-awareness. Without it, there is nothing to adapt from.

From "I" to "We"

Expert and Achiever leaders often function as the hub that information and decisions flow through. Catalyst leaders deliberately move off that hub – and this goes deeper than communication style. Behrens suggests that it represents a reorientation of a leader’s relationship to power. Mary Parker Follett, whose work on organizational dynamics has influenced leadership thinking for a nearly a century, drew a distinction between “power-over” and “power-with” – the difference between power used to direct and control, and power generated through genuine collaboration. Drawing from Follett, Behrens holds that catalyst leaders relate to power differently; they learn to shift from the “power-over” to “power-with”. They build environments where teams connect directly with each other, share information broadly, and solve problems without routing everything through the leader.

From Immediacy to Resiliency

As leaders develop from Expert to Achiever to Catalyst, their time and focus shifts by expanding more broadly like a wide-angle camera lens. Expert leaders naturally focus on what needs to get done: the immediate task, the urgent problem. Achiever leaders extend that focus to strategic goals and outcomes – where are we headed and how do we get there? Catalyst leaders extend it further still, to the broader horizon: what kind of organization are we building, and will it still be healthy and capable five years from now? This shift in focus and time is one of the most practical expressions of a Catalyst mindset. As Behrens points out, this shift is one of the hardest to make in organizations that reward this quarter’s results over long-term health.

From Duality to Multiplicity

Expert and Achiever leaders tend to work in binaries: right or wrong, on budget or over, winning or losing. That's an efficient way to navigate clear-cut decisions. Complex challenges, though, rarely fit neatly into two options. Catalyst leaders develop the capacity to hold competing perspectives simultaneously, look for possibilities beyond the obvious two, and actively seek out diverse viewpoints rather than converging too quickly. As Joiner notes in his research, Catalyst leaders seek stakeholder input not simply to gain buy-in, but because they genuinely believe diverse dialogue improves the quality of decisions — a meaningfully different orientation than consultation as a formality.

From Protecting What's Right to Exploring What's Wrong

Expert and Achiever leaders are often invested in defending the approaches that brought them success — which makes sense, because those approaches earned them credibility. Catalyst leaders cultivate a different habit: genuine curiosity about what isn't working, including within themselves. As Behrens puts it, expert and achiever-oriented leaders are often consumed with protecting what is right, while catalyst-oriented leaders are open to exploring what is wrong. That kind of vulnerability is harder to practice than it sounds, particularly for leaders who have built their identity around having answers.

From Compliance to Commitment

Behrens asserts that one of the clearest signs of the difference between an achiever and a catalyst orientation is what happens when a leader leaves the room. Expert and achiever leaders often generate compliance — people do what's expected because of authority, accountability, or the desire to please. Catalyst leaders work toward something harder to build and harder to measure: genuine commitment. People act because they believe in the direction, feel ownership of the outcome, and have been genuinely developed to do so. Behrens notes that mistaking compliance for commitment is one of the most common — and costly — leadership blind spots.

How Common Is Catalyst Leadership — and Why?

Joiner's research found that only about 10% of leaders operate primarily from a Catalyst orientation. That figure has held consistent across multiple studies and contexts, including Agile Leadership Journey's own assessment data from more than 250 leaders in complex organizational environments.

That figure surprises some people. It shouldn't suggest that only 10% of leaders are capable of catalyst-oriented thinking — most leaders demonstrate some catalyst characteristics. What it reflects is how few have developed that orientation as their primary, default mode of leading.

Part of the explanation is structural. Most organizations inadvertently reward Expert and Achiever behaviors. Metrics like on-time, on-budget, and requirements-met are easy to track and directly tied to how leaders are evaluated and advanced. Culture, team development, and psychological safety are harder to quantify, and their absence often doesn't surface in the numbers until well after the fact. Organizations get the leadership they measure for.

Part of it is developmental. Joiner is clear that leaders grow through these orientations in sequence — and the transition genuinely requires shifts in how you see your role, not just behavioral adjustments layered on top of old assumptions. That kind of development takes sustained self-awareness, honest feedback, and guided experience over time.

What Catalyst Leadership is Not

Catalyst leadership is sometimes misunderstood as soft, passive, or hands-off. Leaders hear “empower others” and picture someone who avoids hard decisions, delegates everything, and floats above the work offering vision without accountability. That’s not catalyst leadership. That’s what happens when someone tries to lead at a Catalyst level without having developed the Expert and Achiever foundation beneath it – what Behrens refers to as “hollow leadership.”

A genuine catalyst-oriented leader is not anti-expertise. They draw on deep competence – they've simply learned when to deploy it and when to step back. They are not indecisive. They hold productive tension and invite diverse perspectives precisely. They are not aloof. The shift from managing work to developing people requires more presence, not less – just a different kind.

What changes is not the leader's willingness to engage. It's the nature of how they engage.

Catalyst leaders balance tensions that lesser-developed leaders tend to collapse into one side or the other: tactical and visionary, hands-on and delegating, decisive and curious, directive and empowering. The ability to hold both sides of those tensions – and move fluidly between them based on what the situation actually needs – is precisely what makes catalyst leadership difficult to develop and easy to misidentify from the outside.

Done well, it doesn't look soft. It looks authentic and respectful.

Is Catalyst Leadership Only Relevant for Senior Leaders?

Catalyst leadership is not reserved only for senior leaders. Joiner's research explicitly notes that leadership agility is increasingly needed not just in the executive suite, but throughout the organization. The conditions that make catalyst leadership valuable — complexity, rapid change, the need for broad collaboration — exist at every level of most organizations today.

Behrens shares, “I’m often asked by clients, ‘Well, how many catalyst leaders do we need in an organization?’ That’s not the right question. We want everyone operating from a catalyst mindset. So, how do we create an environment where catalyst leadership thrives at every level?”

A team lead who creates genuine psychological safety, invites dissenting views, and actively develops the people around them is exercising catalyst-oriented leadership. So is a mid-level manager who builds bridges across organizational silos rather than protecting their own territory. The orientation is relevant wherever there are people to lead and problems too complex for one person to solve alone.

How Can I Become a More Catalyst Leader?

Catalyst leadership doesn't develop through a single program or a change in title. It develops through sustained experience, reflection, and honest self-awareness accumulated over time. Here are a few practical starting points for the journey:

Notice your instincts. When a problem lands on your desk, do you solve it or redirect it? When a team member struggles, do you step in or coach? Neither answer is always right — but the pattern over time reveals a great deal about your default orientation.

Ask for honest feedback — and make it genuinely safe to give. Catalyst leaders understand that their self-awareness is more partial than they assumed at earlier stages. Structured 360 feedback, paired with coaching, is one of the most reliable ways to see what others actually experience in working with you.

Invest time in developing people, not just managing output. This is a deliberate reallocation of attention. It won't feel urgent — but it's one of the highest-leverage investments a leader can make over time.

Practice sitting with complexity a little longer. Catalyst leaders develop a tolerance for ambiguity that Expert and Achiever leaders often lack. The discipline of staying curious longer before moving to conclusions is something that can be practiced, incrementally, every day.

Catalyst leadership isn't a destination you announce or a credential you earn. It's an orientation you develop — gradually, honestly, and in ways that tend to be visible to the people around you.

Understanding where you currently lead from is the starting point. The journey from there is one of the most meaningful a leader can take — not just for the organization, but for the leader themselves.

Gary Hamel, writing on the future of leadership, reminds us that there is no such thing as "sustaining" leadership; we must reinvent it repeatedly. Behrens shares that catalyst leadership isn't the final answer to that challenge. It's the orientation most suited to meeting it — adaptive, reflective, responsive, and genuinely focused on what makes organizations and the people within them capable of sustained growth.

That's the work Agile Leadership Journey is designed to support. Our programs for individual leaders and for organizations develop catalyst leadership through structured education, experimentation, peer engagement, and professional leadership coaching.

Want to know where you currently lead from?

A 360 assessment of your leadership agility is a good place to start.

References

Behrens, Pete. Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty. Louisville, CO: Agile Leadership Journey, LLC, 2025.

Deming, W. Edwards. Out of the Crisis. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2000.

Follett, Mary Parker. The Essential Mary Parker Follett: Ideas We Need Today. 2nd ed. Edited by François Héon, Albie Davis, Jennifer Jones-Patulli, and Sébastien Damart. Published by François Héon (Inc.), Albie Davis, Jennifer Jones-Patulli, and Sébastien Damart, 2017.

Greenleaf, Robert K. "The Servant as Leader." Essay. Newton Centre, MA: Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1970. greenleaf.org

Joiner, William B., and Stephen A. Josephs. Leadership Agility: Five Levels of Mastery for Anticipating and Initiating Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2007.

Joiner, William B. "Leadership Agility: From Expert to Catalyst." ChangeWise White Paper. ChangeWise, n.d.

Ohno, Taiichi. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity Press, 1988.

Taylor, Frederick Winslow. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1911.

With special thanks to Christina Carlson for the hand-painted expert, achiever, and catalyst wooden nesting dolls she made for Pete Behrens for illustrative use in his workshops.

63: Changing Culture From Within: A Schneider Electric Change Agent on What It Actually Takes

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 18:04:00 GMT

EPISODE 63

About This Episode

Schneider Electric is one of Agile Leadership Journey's clients — a global industrial technology company with more than 160,000 people and one of the most complex supply chains in the world. In this episode, Pete Behrens sits down with Paul Stonehouse, who works inside that organization not as an outside consultant, but as an internal change agent trained and licensed through Agile Leadership Journey and embedded in the culture he's working to shift. Paul's candor about the tension and complexity of real transformation — and his gift for making the invisible visible through vivid metaphor — make this one of the most honest conversations of the season about what culture change actually takes.

About Your Host

Pete Behrens

Founder & CEO, Agile Leadership Journey

Pete Behrens is the host of the Relearning Leadership podcast , author of Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty , a sought-after keynote speaker , and Founder/CEO of Agile Leadership Journey. With over three decades of guiding leaders through uncertainty, he has worked with Fortune 500 companies, including Salesforce , GE Healthcare, Google, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, impacting 15,000+ leaders worldwide.

Pete's journey from engineer to CEO to coach revealed a fundamental truth: the most complex challenges aren't technical—they're human. This insight shaped both his personal approach and the foundation of Agile Leadership Journey, which transforms organizations by developing leaders equipped to navigate complexity and change.

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn

ABOUT OUR GUEST

Paul Stonehouse

ALJ Internal Guide & Lean-Agile Transformation Coaching & Development Lead, Schneider Electric

Paul Stonehouse works at the intersection of leadership development and organizational transformation inside one of the world's most complex supply chain operations. Based in Grenoble, France, Paul serves as Schneider Electric's GSC Transformation Coaching & Development Lead — a role he has held since 2021 — and is a trained and licensed Guide through Agile Leadership Journey.

Paul's work spans coaching, facilitation, community building, and large-scale transformation across Europe, India, China, North America, and Southeast Asia. He has trained more than 7,000 professionals in lean-agile mindsets, Catalyst Leadership, design thinking, systems thinking, and coaching and facilitation skills. His core focus is helping leaders and teams find more effective, human, and sustainable ways of working — adapting his approach to the cultural and organizational context of each environment.

Paul's driving ambition: empowering people to find meaning and pleasure in their work by modeling and enabling better collaboration and problem-solving.

Connect with Paul on LinkedIn

Relearning from This Episode

Culture Is the Water You're Swimming In

Most people inside an organization don't notice the culture they're in — they're living it every day. Making it visible, naming it, and creating a shared language around it is often the most powerful first move. Once you shine a light on a problem, you can't stop looking at it — and that shared awareness becomes the foundation for change.

Empowerment Without Clarity Is Just a Blindfold

Telling people they're empowered means little if the structural, metric, and policy boundaries around them remain invisible. People will keep running into fences they can't see — and eventually, the safest strategy becomes simply to stop moving. Real empowerment starts with making the boundaries visible.

You Can't Cut a Flower Off Someone Else's Plant and Expect It to Grow

Scaling culture change by importing solutions from the outside — or copying what worked elsewhere — rarely produces lasting results. Real transformation has to be cultivated from within, rooted in the local culture and context, and tended over time. Shortcuts produce compliance, not change.

Fewer Targets, Better Decisions

One of the most meaningful shifts inside Schneider Electric has been reducing the number of KPI targets — distinguishing between what needs to be driven and what simply needs to be monitored. When everything is a target, siloed behavior follows. When leaders focus on fewer, better measures, teams are freed to think and work horizontally.

Explore Recent Episodes

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

Welcome to Relearning Leadership, I’m your host Pete Behrens.

In our last episode , we talked about disruption. The forces reshaping global supply chains.

Geopolitical risk, decarbonization, the pace of AI.

And the argument I made is that these forces aren't fixed through better planning.

They're demanding a different kind of leadership. Catalyst Leadership.

Which leads back to a common question.

What does that actually look like?

Inside a real company.

With real pressure.

Real politics.

Real quarterly targets.

That's where this episode comes in.

I sat down with Paul Stonehouse.

Paul works inside Schneider Electric — about 160,000 people globally, one of the biggest players in electrical distribution and energy management.

And Paul isn't someone who was brought in to run a transformation program.

He's one of their employees, working to shift the culture from the inside.

What I didn't expect was how vivid Paul is.

Paul thinks in pictures.

He describes culture as a reef — as if you're a fish swimming through it every day, and you don't even notice the water until someone asks you how it is.

He talks about empowerment as being blindfolded in a field surrounded by an electric fence. Where you get zapped by the system if you make a wrong move. So after awhile, the smartest strategy is just to stop moving.

And then there's this image of a flower, which I’ll tease up for you to listen for.

So, without further ado, here’s my conversation with Paul Stonehouse.

I’m Pete Behrens, thank you for listening or watching.

Interview

Pete Behrens:

Thanks for joining me today. this is a really interesting point to maybe reflect and plan. Maybe just give us a picture of who Schneider Electric is and this global supply chain group that you work with.

Paul Stonehouse:

Okay. So Schneider Electric, one of the global leaders in electrical distribution from everything from a very small breaker or light switch all the way up to applications on the cloud and control systems. I think it's around 150, 160,000 people globally. Global supply chain is around 50, 60% of that.

One of the big things that we have now for Schneider Electric is that with the, the decarbonization efforts and the increase in electrical usage, this is a big growth factor for us. One of the other things that we have now is just the complexity and interdependence of a lot of our supply chain.

You have local regulations, you have government and geopolitical risks. As we're speaking right now, there's wars going on and there's war starting, which is creating supply chain risks.

So we've built a lot of capabilities that allow us to deal with these changes. We have an end-to-end control tower, which helps visualize this. But what we're noticing as well is that as you go into these problems with decarbonization, as you go into electrification, in addition with the augmentation on demand and data centers and AI, all of these things are meaning that there's a huge amount of interdependence and flows, which means that we need to be more resilient.

And resiliency means that we need to have people who understand better, who are able to sense the problems and detect them quicker. This combined finally with the speed of change and the rate of change in the markets means that our ability to be resilient and respond to change more effectively is the the driving factors right now for Schneider Electric.

Pete Behrens:

So big company. Big problems. One of the things that you described there is disruption. And I think if there's a common trend of why agility is necessary globally today, it feels like disruptions are increasing globally. Whether that's climate, geopolitical, social, technology.

When we first came into Schneider, I think it was a couple years ago now we took a snapshot of your culture. And we brought it to some of your senior leaders and it provided an interesting view and I'm wondering if you'd describe that in your terms, what resonated with the senior leaders?

Paul Stonehouse:

I think one of the things that we see is that as a culture is a macro, mega thing that's you encounter day to day. Like one of the visualizations I always think of as like a small fish and a reef. You're going in and out every day and you're living on the reef and you don't realize until someone asks, how's the water that you've been swimming the whole time.

And so what this did is this asked everyone to stop and say, how's the water? Is the water toxic? How's the visibility? And I think the cultural values framework was the first time when everyone knew what it was, but it helped create that discussion point to say this is where we are, this is where people want to be.

And more importantly, there's a collectiveness to it, it's that idea of shining a light on a problem. Once you shine the light on it, you can't stop looking at it. We now know that we need to clean up the reef together and it's visible.

Pete Behrens:

Interesting. I always love your stories of metaphors and pictures, imagery of description. One of the things you're describing is a shared language, which we find to be incredibly valuable for leadership alignment.

The other thing is focus, we often call this a north star. It doesn't tell you what to do. It just points in a direction of where we can get better. And one of the things I heard from your senior leadership team is your cultural map indicated a very driven culture. What problems were you seeing in that over-reliance on a control compete culture?

Paul Stonehouse:

One of the things we talk a lot about is, how do we start to break the silos? Or I try to say, before we break them, let's try to bridge them first. 'Because silos are important because they bring efficiency, but bridging them allows us to go horizontally to deliver value.

And I think one of the things that's really important is that it allows us to still manage this top down culture, because we still need to have hierarchy in such a large company. But at the same time, how do we have this sort of dual operating model where we can see things horizontally and top down?

So it's more about shifting and adapting rather than doing a cultural transformation.

Pete Behrens:

Interesting. We call this tweak the system versus open heart surgery. And that leads us to our next stage. So as we work with leadership teams through the change process, we work in two dimensions. There's one dimension, which is mindset. Which is working with leaders on a new way of thinking and new way of behaving. We call that the micro culture journey. We get hundreds of leaders, thousands of leaders, starting to change, it changes culture.

Today in this session, we're gonna focus a little bit more on the macro journey. The macro culture, the macro levers. Let's talk a little bit about these levers and what are you seeing?

Paul Stonehouse:

The really nice thing about this bottom half of the compass and focusing on the culture is it aligns with what you said. It's about getting business results. And at the end of the day, we need to get those results. Now, it's how do you shift the experience internally to start to shift these things?

I was working with one leader and during a workshop they were mentioning that this is the first time in their career in Schneider, and that they're senior leaders, so they've been here quite a long time, it's the first time in their career that they actually have fewer KPIs to deliver.

And we're trying to delineate between targets and indicators. And making sure that indicators, we still need them because they maintain the health of the system and in the event something goes wrong, they help us roll that back. But the idea of trying to reduce the number of targets and moving that to an indicator, because we want to know the health, we don't necessarily need to drive siloed behavior.

Going back to my topic of silos is sometimes these KPIs that become targets, they create that siloed behavior. And that's part of the interesting thing is that as we talk about growth mindset, as a culture, how can I make sure that my planning departments, that’s talking to my logistics department, that's talking to my supply chain department, that's talking to procurement. How do we start to create this horizontal view?

Pete Behrens:

I think you're bringing up a really interesting point. We often talk about policies and metrics. And the difference we talk about is metrics are really just data points. Policies are governance around some of those. And what you're indicating here is a tendency is to take anything we measure and it becomes a KPI or a target as you say, which in a sense is adding governance to it. It's putting pressure on that, on the indicator.

What you're talking about here is a really interesting one, which is what are the ones we really wanna focus on that are gonna be driving certain behaviors? And when we pick too many, that becomes a problem itself. I just wanted to pause on that one and have you reflect on it.

Paul Stonehouse:

Yeah. Like just another visualization is, I've got the silly watch. I used to get stressed out about my sleep score so I wouldn't get a good night's sleep. So, so it, it is exactly that, but I have another KPI for my health, but it's actually causing a detriment in your health.

In France, we have this word called infobesity, this idea that we're just overwhelmed with information. And we have too much of it so we're obese with the amount of information we have. And I stole this idea from Russell Ackoff, he had this idea that there's data, information, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. The value chain.

The data and the information has become very commoditized. The information age and digitization has made this easier and easier to come to. So that's why we have so much information is it's easy to produce.

Now we go up to the next level of understanding, AI is making this a commodity. It's very quickly going to commoditize all the knowledge work that we have. So now we're going to focus on understanding and wisdom. And I think understanding and wisdom requires a lot more involvement of people understanding people, making sure they understand system thinking and network effects.

And I think that's where the agile leadership journey and understanding where our culture is, that allows you to focus less on getting more data points, less on getting more information and going more towards wisdom. And I think that's the global aspiration for the company is that we're gonna move more towards wisdom and having people being more effective rather than focusing on the commoditization that AI and the information you just brought us.

Pete Behrens:

Awesome.

Paul Stonehouse:

I had three leaders and they followed the idea of the three amigos. One was focused on more delivering projects, one was focused more on the IT, and one was focused more on the data and the data governance side. And what these three leaders did is they formed their own squad or league or team. And they started to work together and they asked, whenever the project team has problems, rather than you coming to us one by one, you're gonna come to us together as a collective.

And what they reported was not necessarily that the work sped up a lot, but actually they had to make fewer small decisions. And fewer low value decisions about escalations. The escalations were reduced because now the people know that the managers are aligned.

If we're going to bring them a problem, we have to be aligned before we bring it to them. And this small micro structure change has created a big impact for the team. When I talk to them on a day-to-day basis, they're happier because they know their boundary.

Pete Behrens:

I love that construct. And it reminds me of, it was a similar organization in healthcare, where we were doing this and they developed that leadership council to make decisions at speed. And that is a key thing to be able to get access to all the key decision makers at the same time, to bring the problem and discuss versus the back and forth that often happens with all these individuals. That's an awesome example.

So, as we're thinking about change through this system, Schneider's huge, pervasive across different regions, product sets, technology areas. What are some of the biggest challenges you're running into as you're starting to propagate change or try to scale?

Paul Stonehouse:

If I go back to my first example of us being the fish on the reef it's very easy to try to outsource the problem, for example, big consultancy. And basically they're a shark on the reef and you're gonna outsource it, then they're gonna eat some of your problem. Right? But if you keep outsourcing that for sure, they're gonna take care of part of your problem, but it's not a systemic change. They're just scaring everybody else into compliance.

It's one of those things where to change at scale, you need lots of small changes. You need all the fish to get together rather than just trying to outsource it and make a transformation program.

Pete Behrens:

What I'm taking from this and bring it back into business. We could come in with change. But we don't, because we know that change often isn't native. It's not natural. It doesn't always stick. It can be quick, but not always effective. One of our approaches is to guide leaders to drive change themselves. Get the organization itself, the education it needs to drive and manage this change process.

So, what I'm hearing number one is that's a challenge, but also you're seeing that people taking ownership and starting to be empowered. Are you seeing any of that? Are you seeing any positive response in terms of leaders taking that?

Paul Stonehouse:

There's a lot of change in the language and there's a lot of change in the way that we're talking about the change. Mm-hmm. Sometimes that leads to that hypocrisy of people saying stuff, but not to necessarily doing stuff. So if you want, I can share one more, but my empowerment story.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah.

Paul Stonehouse:

So I have the story about empowerment is this idea of empowerment is a bit like telling someone that they're empowered by it, by giving them a blindfold and putting them out in a field. So, where I live in France, we have, we have lots of fields out here where the cows roam. And so you can imagine that you have this electric wire around the field and you're walking around, but you're blindfolded and you've been told you're empowered and you need to achieve your goals.

So, of course you walk and the, because it's a cow, it's a big beast. These, these electric wires, they're very powerful and they give you a good zap. Once they give you the good zap, of course you stop and you try to go another way and after a while your best strategy is just to stop moving.

And so your empowerment has led to you going up against the structural electric fence. It's led you going against the metric electric fence. It's led you to go against the policy electric fence, because you keep getting slapped for all the things that you've been touching that you didn't know. And I think this idea of empowerment is how do we make sure that things are visible? How do we know where we are so we can start removing the blindfold to know where we can change and where we can't? So, I think this is one of those ideas.

The same with collaboration. One of the things that we've seen from collaboration is when you look at it through the different mindsets of expert achiever and catalyst, the idea of collaboration is very different than expert leader when they see collaboration, bcause they're very good at one-on-one. They're going to say, “I'm collaborating,” because Pete and I are talking. The achiever leader's gonna say, well, I'm collaborating 'cause I've told them all to get on the bus and we're all going somewhere. So we're collaborating. And the catalyst leader realizes that they have to release the chains and release the reins and release control.

And that feels very uncomfortable to go from that achiever to catalyst. It's a big jump. So I think the language is changing, but it's going back to the idea about how do we know that hypocrisy, that's part of our natural phases of changing the language. But follow that with the behavior change as well.

Pete Behrens:

What you're indicating is all of the interconnections between the leadership mindset and the structure and policies and metrics. And most of these structures, policies, metrics, have been built with a mindset in mind. And to try to pull them apart is impossible.

This is why we have both sides of our compass, we talk about the mindset and if we can't change the mindset. We're not going to be able to change the policies because the policies are a reflection of it. And I think what you're reminding me and reminding why we do what we do is to recognize that in order to get access to these new levers, we've got to start changing the way people are thinking and, and believing and behaving.

Paul Stonehouse:

Yeah. And to change at scale it's that idea of how do we emerge the change. So, I don't know if we have time, but I can finish with my final, final mental model. But if you can imagine for the people they're listening, it's, it's this idea that, you know, I'm trying to plant a flower and I have this beautiful pot with all the, the soil inside. I plant my seed. And the idea is that if you water it and take care of it, of course it's gonna start to grow leaves. It's gonna start to grow a plant. If I continue to take care of it, it's gonna grow this beautiful flower. When you try to do things at scale, and when you try to go things very fast, you just see the flower and you try to cut off the flower and put it on your plant, and of course it dies, right?

So the idea is how do I start with leadership and cultivate the plant towards what I want it to be? Rather than just trying to do the open heart surgery where I cut off the flower and put it on my own plant.

Pete Behrens:

We want the end result without the work it takes to get that end result, which is a patience problem. And I think one of the challenges we have with many organizations, and you even talked about it earlier, do we have time to do this kind of change. There's so much disruption going on, so much change happening so quickly. We've gotta respond to the market.

Do we have time? Isn't it quicker just to, you know, have somebody else cultivate the flower, we'll cut it off, we'll put it over here and just use it for a while. It's interesting because I think this journey, this agile leadership journey, is one that does take time.

Do we have time? Does Schneider have time? I'm putting you on the spot here.

Paul Stonehouse:

I'll go back to Deming. I think Deming said adaptation isn't mandatory, but neither is survival. It's this idea that if you don't make the time now, maybe you won't have the time later either, because you just won't be around.

So, for me being adaptable, hitting our goals, especially as we have huge amounts of growth. Resiliency requires a growth mindset, because if you're resilient with a fixed mindset, you're just going to try to do the same old tricks. Resiliency and using a anti-fragile patterns means you're gonna grow the organization, you're gonna grow capability.

And with the advent of AI and the commoditization of knowledge work, we have to change. So I think it's a survival instinct. And I think my company, I'm in the fortunate position where our back isn't against the wall yet. We're not facing a crisis. Our leaders are very forward looking and so I have a lot of energy and optimism for the future.

Pete Behrens:

It's a great message. For those companies that only do to this change because their backs are against the wall, it's often fraud. That it's when you can start to do this ahead of that curve, I think that's really critical.

The other thing you mentioned, which I think I just wanna highlight here is, you're talking about all these little micro results, These little bits of where this project, this leadership team, this group, these silo bridging, these are all micro things. I call this marginal gains. We don't transform overnight. We don't transform in a year or three years. We transform because we do a dozen, two dozen, 10 dozen micro transformations. And then all of a sudden it looks like this brand new plant. And I think what you're describing is exactly that. All these small little things that are happening that are changing.

Paul Stonehouse:

Yeah. It's the idea of emergence, things are emerging. You try to make things more fractal and you look at things more as, um, a system rather than a bunch of independent initiatives.

Pete Behrens:

Awesome. Well, I want to say thank you for allowing us to share your story.

Anything else you want to add in closing?

Paul Stonehouse:

Enjoy the journey. One of the quotes I had was, yesterday I was smart, so I tried to change the world today and wise so I changed myself. I probably got the quote wrong, but of that nature. It is that idea of, start with yourself, start internally. And then try to bring people along for the journey because doing a journey together is a lot more enjoyable than being alone.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. And it's not easy. Thank you, Paul.

Paul Stonehouse:

Thank you.

Pete Behrens:

I’m Pete Behrens, thank you for listening or watching.

Relearning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. To learn more, visit relearningleadership.show.

Narrator:

If you enjoyed this episode, it's drawing from one of the dozens of stories in Pete's debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty. Available in hardcover, paperback, ebook, and soon to be released audio. Get your copy today from Amazon.

Supply Chain's Hardest Problem Isn't Complexity. It's Leadership.

Wed, 01 Apr 2026 22:10:29 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Global supply chains are facing disruptions that no amount of technology can manage alone — and the leaders running them were largely developed for a more stable, predictable world. Research and real-world experience from large industrial organizations consistently point to the same gap: leaders trained on operational mastery are increasingly ill-equipped to navigate ambiguity, develop their people, and sustain change across complex, dispersed organizations. The path forward requires treating leadership development with the same rigor and investment as technology — starting at the top, tying it directly to real business challenges, and measuring whether the culture is actually shifting, not just whether training has occurred.

What one of the world's most complex supply chains revealed about the gap between operational excellence and the leaders needed to sustain it.

Something has shifted in global supply chain — and the leaders who feel it most know it is not a logistics problem. Over the past several years, our work with senior supply chain leaders at some of the world's largest industrial companies has brought this into sharp focus. The disruptions keep coming: geopolitical shocks, tariff volatility, labor shortages, sustainability mandates, and AI-driven transformation. And yet, the most candid conversations we have with these leaders are never about technology platforms or network design. They are about people — specifically, whether their leaders are equipped to handle a world where the variables never stop changing.

The honest answer, more often than not, is no.

Not because supply chain leaders lack intelligence or experience. The gap is something subtler. Most were developed, promoted, and rewarded for mastery: mastery of process, of metrics, of execution under defined conditions. That worked when conditions were stable enough. It works less and less now.

What global supply chains need today is a different kind of leader—one who can operate effectively in ambiguity, build their teams' capabilities rather than simply direct them, and sustain momentum when clarity is a luxury. We call this catalyst leadership.

If you're new to the concept of catalyst leadership and how it fits within the broader spectrum of leadership development, our overview of leadership agility provides useful grounding.

When Technology Outpaces the Leaders Running It

Supply chain leaders have been investing heavily in digital transformation—AI, machine learning, real-time visibility, and automation. Many of those investments are paying off. But the companies pulling ahead recognize that technology does not run itself. People do. And the capability of those people—specifically their ability to lead through continuous change—determines whether any technology investment actually delivers.

Few supply chain leaders articulate this more clearly than Mourad Tamoud, Chief Supply Chain Officer at Schneider Electric, who oversees a supply chain spanning 160 factories, 75 distribution centers, and 80,000 employees worldwide. ( Supply Chain Digital, July 2025 ) Tamoud describes the shift plainly: the CSCO role "used to be more operational, focused primarily on efficiency and cost management; now it's a much more strategic role." Today's supply chain leaders are expected to contribute to broader business decisions—navigating disruptions, driving innovation, and supporting sustainability goals.

Schneider Electric recognized this when they conducted an organizational alignment assessment of 300 supply chain leaders in 2023 as part of their Catalyst Leadership Program, finding that many were operating in a command-and-control mode—effective in stable conditions, but limiting in a rapidly changing environment. (Gilone, LinkedIn Pulse, April 2025)

In today's supply chain environment, effective leaders need to be flexible, adaptable, and resilient…But most of all, they need to know how to articulate our strategy and get the most out of their team, help them be inspired and motivated about their work and the future.”

— Mourad Tamoud , Chief Supply Chain Officer, Schneider Electric

Gilone, LinkedIn Pulse, April 2025

That is not a description of a manager who solely optimizes processes. It goes beyond that to describe a leader who develops people, builds trust, and creates the conditions for a team to navigate problems they have never encountered before.

This kind of honest organizational self-assessment —a willingness to look at the culture you actually have, not just the one you aspire to—is where real change begins. It is also among the hardest things for organizations to do. In our experience working with global industrial companies, the leaders and teams willing to hold up that mirror and act on what they see are the ones who make lasting progress.

What Supply Chain Leaders Are Actually Up Against

In partnering with supply chain leaders at large, complex industrial companies, we consistently encounter the same pressure patterns—regardless of industry or geography.

Competing priorities with no clear owner.

Supply chain organizations sit at the intersection of nearly every other function—procurement, finance, operations, commercial, sustainability—and each has legitimate demands. Leaders who cannot navigate that ambiguity confidently tend to either over-control (slowing everything down) or under-lead (leaving teams without enough guidance). One of the most significant early wins we see with leadership teams is building a shared language for naming and working through these tensions—so they become productive conversations rather than escalating friction.

A workforce in transition.

The supply chain workforce is changing rapidly. Laure Collin, SVP of Human Resources for Global Supply Chain at Schneider Electric, cited a World Economic Forum estimate that more than 10 million manufacturing positions are currently unfilled globally, driven in large part by the growing demand for digital skills. ( Collin, Supply Chain Strategy Media, May 2025 ) She notes that Schneider Electric itself increased digital talent across its supply chain organization by 67 percent between 2021 and 2023.

Tamoud reported that the trend continuing with an increase in digital talent over several years, doubling the number of experts in AI, machine learning, and robotics. ( Supply Chain Digital, July 2025 ) Tamoud is direct about why:

A technology-driven supply chain is only as strong as the people who use it, which is why we view investing in talent as a critical priority.

— Mourad Tamoud , Chief Supply Chain Officer, Schneider Electric

Supply Chain Digital, July 2025

Building that workforce requires leaders who know how to develop others, not just direct them—a capability that can be cultivated deliberately, but only if organizations invest in it.

Sustaining change across dispersed organizations.

It is relatively easy to launch a leadership initiative. It is much harder to sustain the behavioral and cultural shifts that make it real—especially across dozens of sites, multiple languages, and varying regional contexts. Schneider Electric's supply chain spans more than 160 factories across multiple continents — a useful illustration of just how hard this is. Initiatives that do not start with the executive team and build a shared language from the top almost always stall. When senior leaders do not visibly model the behaviors they are asking of others, the effort becomes a program rather than a transformation.

This is fundamentally a culture challenge, not a program challenge. How leaders shape organizational culture — the norms, behaviors, and environment they create — determines whether change takes hold or stalls.

The pull toward withdrawal — and over-control

Beneath all of the above is a pattern that we see in our client work and that clinical psychologist and executive advisor Merete Wedell-Wedellsborg recently documented: as volatility compounds, many leaders begin quietly withdrawing — pulling back from decisions, deferring commitments, oscillating between passivity and over-control. ( Wedell-Wedellsborg, Harvard Business Review, March 2026 ) What they are missing, she argues, is what psychologists call negative capability: the capacity to hold uncertainty and unresolved tension without forcing a premature resolution. Leaders with this capacity are steadier not because they have more answers, but because they can function effectively while the answers are still forming–what I often describe as leading through the fog.

This is precisely the territory where operational mastery — the skill set most supply chain leaders were built on — runs out. And it is where a different kind of leadership development has to begin.

That different kind of leadership is not a personality trait or a natural gift — it is a developable capacity. Rooted in the research of Bill Joiner and Stephen Josephs on leadership agility , catalyst leadership represents a distinct stage of leadership development: one defined not by technical mastery, but by the ability to build culture, navigate complexity, and develop the people around you.

What Catalyst Leadership Looks Like in Practice

The leaders who hold up best in complex, fast-moving environments have made a fundamental shift in how they think about their job. They’ve moved from being the person with the right answers to being the person who creates the conditions for others to find them.

Tamoud describes his own approach in terms that reflect this directly:

To me, leadership is about building a strong team, giving them the tools and support they need to succeed and fostering an environment where innovation and continuous improvement thrive…I also believe in being present and accessible as a leader. Communication is key, especially in a field like supply chain where challenges can arise unexpectedly. Being able to connect with people at all levels of the organisation helps us stay agile and aligned.

— Mourad Tamoud , Chief Supply Chain Officer, Schneider Electric

Supply Chain Digital, July 2025

Note that this is not the voice of a command-and-control leader. It is the voice of a catalyst leader—one who sees their role as creating conditions, not issuing directives.

In practice, as I shared in a recent podcast episode , we see three specific shifts that define catalyst leaders:

From directing to developing.

Catalyst leaders invest in their own growth and the growth of the people around them, not just their task performance. They ask more questions than they give answers. They coach rather than correct. In a complex supply chain, this matters enormously—the pace of change means leaders cannot possibly stay on top of every domain. They need teams that can solve problems together, without waiting for direction.

This shift is harder than it sounds for leaders whose credibility was built on knowing the answers. In a stable environment, having the answer is efficient. In a complex, fast-moving one, it creates a bottleneck. When a leader becomes the required input for every significant decision, the organization's speed of response is capped at that leader's bandwidth. Developing others isn't a soft priority alongside the real work — it is the real work, because it is what determines whether the organization can move without waiting for direction from above.

From controlling to enabling.

Traditional supply chain leadership has often relied on a clear hierarchy with tight delegation—perhaps appropriate when operations are predictable. But when the environment shifts rapidly, centralized control becomes a liability. Catalyst leaders distribute decision-making to those closest to the work, providing clarity of purpose with guardrails rather than prescribing solutions.

The practical challenge here is that control feels like competence — especially under pressure. Tightening oversight, requiring more sign-offs, centralizing decisions: these moves feel decisive. They are often the opposite. In a supply chain operating across dozens of sites and time zones, the leader who insists on being the decision point for everything is not ensuring quality — they are ensuring delay. Enabling means doing the harder upstream work: establishing clear intent, aligning on priorities, and building enough shared understanding that teams closest to the problem can act without escalating.

From reacting to resiliency.

The leaders who create lasting impact do not sprint heroically from crisis to crisis. They build the organizational capacity to perform consistently over time—the habits, the common language, and the environment where people feel safe enough to surface problems early, try things that might not work, and learn from both.

This shift also requires something that doesn't come naturally to leaders trained on operational performance: psychological safety. Not as a culture buzzword, but as a practical operating condition. If people are afraid to surface problems early — because the organizational response to bad news is blame rather than problem-solving — disruptions stay hidden until they become crises. Resiliency isn't built in the moment of crisis. It's built in the thousands of smaller moments where leaders create or destroy the conditions for honest communication.

Catalyst leadership is adaptive, dynamic, and situational. It’s not a destination to reach, it’s a competency to develop—one that must be continuously developed, practiced, and applied. And like a muscle, it atrophies without use. The goal is to build it in yourself and in your team together, because a leader with high personal agility who has not built it in the people around them creates a dependency rather than a capability.

Developing these capacities is the foundation of our leadership development workshops — the same programs that anchored Schneider Electric's multi-year development effort.

Culture doesn't easily flow upward — and that's exactly the problem

The most common mistake organizations make in leadership development is starting with middle management—a high-potential program here, a manager cohort there. The result is islands of capability that fail to connect because of a lack of a common foundation between them and with the leaders above them.

In our work across global industrial organizations, the engagements that produce lasting change share one consistent characteristic: they begin with the executive team. Not because frontline and middle managers do not matter—they matter enormously—but because culture flows downward. Organizations mirror their leaders. Without alignment, a common language, and demonstrated behaviors among senior leaders, development efforts below them will hit a ceiling.

We think of this as the cascade principle. When an executive team builds genuine shared language around how they lead—how they make decisions under uncertainty, how they handle competing priorities, how they develop the people below them—that language spreads. Not because it is mandated, but because it becomes visible.

Tamoud recognizes this dynamic explicitly, noting that having leaders who understand supply chain dynamics across the C-suite "makes us more agile and better prepared to tackle challenges." (Supply Chain Digital, July 2025) The same is true for leadership culture: what’s modeled at the top is what gets replicated throughout.

Catalyst leadership efforts are most successful when started with the global supply chain leadership team, then extended to regional teams and central functions—repeating the leadership and organizational alignment assessment to track progress on whether the culture is actually shifting, not just whether training had occurred.

The Catalyst Leadership program is in fact an ongoing cultural change effort rather than a series of training events.

— Mourad Tamoud , Chief Supply Chain Officer, Schneider Electric

Gilone, LinkedIn Pulse, April 2025

Training events produce awareness. Cultural change produces results. The gap between those two things is where most initiatives get lost—and where consistent, visible leadership makes all the difference.

Agility as a Competency, Not a Destination

One of the first things we tell supply chain organizations is this: agility is not a destination. It’s a competency.

Organizations often pursue agility as a state to achieve—something that, once reached, delivers resilience and speed. But agility does not work that way. It is a capability that must be continuously developed, practiced, and applied. Leaders either have the muscle for it or they do not. And like any muscle, it atrophies without use.

Tamoud frames his vision for supply chain’s future around three principles: resilience, sustainability, and adaptability. "My vision is one where supply chains not only operate efficiently but also contribute meaningfully to environmental goals and empower the people behind them." ( Supply Chain Digital, July 2025 ) That vision requires leaders who can hold all three in balance simultaneously—not just optimize for the metric in front of them.

In our work with supply chain leadership teams, we focus on two things that have to develop together: a leader’s own agility—how they make decisions, respond to uncertainty, and grow the people around them—and the organization’s agility, meaning the team’s capacity to recognize when a shift is needed, pivot without losing momentum, and execute in a new direction.

These reinforce each other. A team with strong change agility but weak leadership at the top will struggle to sustain it. A leader with high personal agility who has not built it in their team creates a dependency rather than a capability.

The goal is both. And achieving it requires treating leadership development not as a program to complete, but as an ongoing practice connected directly to real business challenges. When leaders can point to a specific decision, a supplier relationship, or a cross-functional initiative that went better because of how they led it, the development becomes real—and it sticks.

The Human Side of Digital Transformation

There’s an irony in how many supply chain organizations approach digital transformation. They invest significant resources in building data infrastructure, AI capability, and automation—and then underinvest in the leaders who are supposed to harness those tools and guide the people using them. Tamoud puts it plainly: "Supply chains are, ultimately, built and managed by people. Their creativity, expertise and commitment drive innovation." (Supply Chain Digital, July 2025)

Laure Collin captures the people side of this directly:

The volatility and uncertainty we have seen over the last few years has revealed the new skills, capabilities, and mindset needed for success. Our new world requires new ways of working, and it’s crucial to create a culture that values continuous learning, creative problem-solving, and innovation.

It’s important for leaders to encourage curiosity and open-mindedness, recognise and reward behaviors that demonstrate learning and innovation, and offer flexible learning opportunities that accommodate individual needs. This way, both organisations and their employees can adapt to new technologies and changes in business operations at their own pace, ensuring a smooth digital transformation. Our Catalyst Leadership program gives our people managers the skills to be more agile leaders and support their teams in their development.

— Laure Collin , SVP Human Resources for Global Supply Chain,

Schneider Electric

Collin, Supply Chain Strategy Media, May 2025

Tamoud is equally direct about what technology deployment actually requires: "It's not enough to implement these tools; they need to be deeply embedded into operations to deliver meaningful value. This takes a clear roadmap, investment in digital skills and a culture that embraces change." ( Supply Chain Digital, July 2025 ) A culture that embraces change comes from leaders who model it.

Schneider Electric addressed this by connecting digital upskilling with leadership development on a significant scale: connecting approximately 40,000 employees across 175 factories and distribution centers to a common digital communication platform, ( Collin, Supply Chain Strategy Media, May 2025 ) Simultaneously, they engaged in a catalyst leadership program to develop the leadership culture required to sustain that kind of organization-wide change.

We find that the organizations that get the most out of their technology investments treat leadership development with the same seriousness.

Where to Start, If You’re Ready to Start

If you’re a supply chain leader reading this, here’s what we actually recommend:

Start with the culture you have,

not the one you want.

Culture is what happens under pressure, not when things are running smoothly. What leadership behaviors are actually showing up in your organization when things don’t go according to plan, when the forecast is wrong, when a key supplier fails? That is your real leadership culture, and understanding it clearly is the necessary first step before any development investment will pay off.

One offsite will not

change a culture.

A two-day offsite may be a good starting point, but it will not foster a leadership transformation. Real change requires consistent reinforcement over time—new habits practiced repeatedly, feedback given in real situations, and senior leaders who visibly model what they are asking of others. Organizational development goals must run in parallel with, and carry equal weight to, operational ones.

Development that's disconnected from real work rarely survives contact with it.

Abstract leadership development rarely sticks. The most effective efforts connect directly to the problems leaders are trying to solve right now—integrating a new digital tool, rebuilding trust with a supplier network, driving execution on a strategic initiative. When development is tied to outcomes people care about, the investment pays off faster, and the learning lasts longer.

If it doesn't start at the top,

it won't reach the bottom.

Leadership culture in a supply chain organization flows from the top. Start with the people who set the tone, let the change cascade, and put measurement in place early—so you reinforce what is working and course-correct what is not.

Taken together, these four steps form a clear starting point: look honestly at your actual culture, treat leadership development as an ongoing practice rather than a periodic event, connect that development directly to the work that matters most, and start at the top where culture is set. None of this is complicated in concept. All of it requires sustained commitment in practice.

The Sustainable Supply Chain Is a Human Achievement

The supply chain challenges ahead—sustainability mandates, near-shoring pressures, AI-driven automation, workforce transformation—are genuinely complex. There is no map that covers all of it. Leaders will need to navigate conditions they have never encountered before, make decisions under uncertainty, and bring their teams along through the discomfort.

The organizations that handle that well are investing in the people doing that work—developing leaders who can be flexible when the situation calls for it, decisive when urgency demands it, and steady when their teams need something solid to hold onto.

Tamoud puts the aspiration clearly:

The progress so far has been encouraging, but we know this is an ongoing journey. Each improvement we make aligns with our larger goal: to build supply chains that not only meet today's needs but are ready for the challenges of tomorrow.

— Mourad Tamoud , Chief Supply Chain Officer, Schneider Electric

Supply Chain Digital, July 2025

About the Author

Pete Behrens is a globally recognized leadership coach, consultant, author, and keynote speaker. As the founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey, he has built a curriculum and global community dedicated to helping organizations improve leadership that drives sustainable change. Pete has led agile transformations for dozens of Fortune 500 companies and non-profit organizations, improving organizational health and performance through education and coaching.

An influential speaker , Pete has shared his insights at various global conferences, and he hosts the Relearning Leadership podcas t, where he engages with industry experts and leaders to explore the evolving landscape of leadership and organizational development. Most recently, he published his debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty .

Follow Pete on LinkedIn.

62: Navigating Disruption: Why Supply Chain Leadership Must Change

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 18:48:02 GMT

EPISODE 62

About This Episode

Global supply chains have never been faster, more complex, or more fragile. In this episode, Pete Behrens examines the widening gap between the technology powering today's supply chains and the leadership required to manage them — and why that gap has become the real bottleneck. Drawing on firsthand experience with senior supply chain leaders around the world, Pete introduces three critical leadership shifts that separate leaders who merely react to disruption from those who build organizations capable of navigating it, and shares what it looks like when an organization commits to making that change.

Pete Behrens

Founder & CEO, Agile Leadership Journey

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn

Relearning from This Episode

The Real Bottleneck in Your Supply Chain Isn't Technology

Billions have been invested in making supply chains faster and more intelligent. But as technology accelerates, the leaders managing it are being left behind — still operating with mindsets built for a slower, more predictable world. Closing that gap is the leadership challenge of this moment.

Disruption Requires a Different Kind of Leader

When all plans fail — and in a disrupted world, they will — top-down, command-and-control leadership is too slow to respond. The leaders who are making a difference are those who have learned to develop others, enable decisions closest to the work, and build organizations that absorb disruption rather than buckle under it.

Catalyst Leadership Is a Cultural Shift, Not a Training Event

The most forward-thinking supply chain organizations have recognized a fundamental shift: effective leaders need to be flexible, adaptable, and resilient — and building that capability requires ongoing cultural change, not a series of training events. Organizations that have made this commitment are seeing it show up in hundreds of documented positive impacts across their people, their operations, and their business results.

Investment in People Must Match Investment in Technology

Organizations that pour resources into digital capability while underinvesting in leadership development are building a faster engine with a less capable driver. The organizations getting this right treat leadership development as a strategic imperative, not an afterthought.

Explore Recent Episodes

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

Welcome to the Relearning Leadership podcast.

I'm your host, Pete Behrens.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the compression of time—

how it squeezes us as individuals and as leaders.

Nowhere is that pressure more visible than in our global supply chain.

As customers, we’ve come to expect next day, or more likely same-day, delivery.

But have you ever stopped to wonder about the engine that makes that possible?

In today’s episode, I’d like to lift up the hood, and peek inside at that engine,

to help shed some light on the toll it takes to keep it running.

Supply Chain is not only managing the logistics from your website order to your delivery at home.

It also manages the innovative design and manufacturing process,

regulatory and compliance governance,

the sourcing and supply of materials,

and the warehousing and staging.

It’s a digital matrix.

A technology marvel.

High-def monitors,

automated movers,

and AI systems analyzing, tracking and predicting every movement

and every delay.

All tuned to make the next delivery more efficient than the last.

Just how efficient?

Only a decade ago, we were impressed with two-day shipping.

Then, next day.

Today, same day.

But it doesn’t stop there.

The last time I visited India,

I was the fortunate dinner guest of my colleague Rashmi Fernandes.

She treated me to a beautifully home-cooked Indian meal,

where I got a chance to meet and dine with her family.

Both the meal, and her family, were a gift to me.

OK. Why am I sharing my visit to India?

Well, little did I know, but Rashmi was out of an ingredient she needed for dinner.

But rather than running down to the market to get it,

she ordered it.

And it arrived at her door in 10-minutes!

With no delay to our dinner.

This is a rapidly growing industry called Quick Commerce, or q-commerce: 10-minute delivery!

Groceries, snacks, household items — ordered on your phone and delivered to your door in a blink.

As a dinner guest, and to my host, it helped to shape a beautiful meal.

However, as we discussed after dinner, it’s a problem.

In fact, my visit to India that week was to visit with a senior leadership team of one of our supply chain clients.

I’ve spent the past few years with senior supply chain leaders all around the world.

And for decades, they’ve been rewarded for a very specific kind of excellence: operational mastery.

Leaders are trained and rewarded to optimize speed and cost.

Reduce variance,

drive efficiency,

and increase predictability.

And technology has been there, at every step, to help them achieve this.

Billions of dollars have been spent on making supply chains faster and more intelligent.

But here’s the problem.

Technology is advancing faster than leadership that manages it.

And what many organizations are discovering is that the real bottleneck isn’t the supply chain engine itself. It’s the people responsible for operating it.

Amid this technical symphony you’ll find people at every stage. Planning, designing, moving, measuring and managing. Supply chains are, ultimately, built and managed by people

And so, as each part of the engine undergoes technology evolution

it’s creating a digital divide, indeed a gap, to the people required to run it.

The World Economic Forum estimates more than 10 million manufacturing positions are currently unfilled globally —

driven largely by the demand for digital skills that the current workforce hasn't yet developed.

That's not a recruiting problem, that’s a leadership problem.

Furthermore, as each link of the chain is dialed up to 10, it’s stretching the workforce to it’s breaking point.

Negative impacts on worker safety and respect are well documented,

from the warehouses at Amazon

to the streets of Bangalore, where our courier rushed our missing dinner ingredient that night.

And it’s not only the factory floor workers.

The leaders are under just as much, or more, pressure.

They too are tired,

exhausted,

and feeling that the entire system has become a blur:

too fast,

too interconnected,

and too unpredictable.

And customer demand is only one side of this equation.

There’s an equally challenging supply side.

Geopolitical disruptions and wars.

Tariff pivots.

Increasing climate events.

And a global competitive landscape that has removed all regional barriers to entry.

Foreign factories from halfway around the world are now on their customers’ doorstep.

So while customer expectations are growing, the disruptions to meeting those expectations are also growing.

And supply chain leaders are pinched between them.

They no longer feel they’re out front.

They’re behind, and racing just to keep up.

One company who saw this trend early is Schneider Electric.

Their supply chain spans more than 160 factories and more than 80 thousand people worldwide.

They too have, and continue to, invest heavily in digital capability —

dashboards, robotics, and AI.

They too have become extremely good at driving performance.

Execution, speed, and efficiency.

And they too have been experiencing this gap between technology and their people.

Schneider’s Chief Supply Chain Officer, Mourad Tamoud,

recognized the shift in leadership required to meet this moment.

In a 2025 LinkedIn Pulse Report, he said, and I quote, “In today's supply chain environment, effective leaders need to be flexible, adaptable, and resilient…”

Notice the shift in his language.

He’s not emphasizing operational efficiency.

Nor reducing cost and time.

Although those are still critical.

He’s pointing to flexibility.

Adaptability.

Resiliency.

Why?

Because in a disrupted world, all plans fail.

And top-down leadership is too bureaucratic and slow.

In its place, innovation, collaboration and responsiveness rise to the top.

In fact, three years ago, Schneider Electric held up a mirror and realized that while their technology was futuristic,

their leadership was stuck in the past—

still operating in a "command-and-control" mode that worked well enough when time wasn’t so compressed but now had become their bottleneck.

Now, it’s one thing to say it.

It’s another altogether to do something about it.

Schneider Electric put money on the table and invested in a multi-year Catalyst Leadership program to prepare leaders for this moment.

Tamoud said it well in that same Pulse Report, “Our Catalyst Leadership program is in fact an ongoing cultural change effort rather than a series of training events.”

So, what exactly is catalyst leadership?

And how is it helping address this gap?

To simplify complex human behavior is risky,

but let me try by sharing just three leadership shifts.

Shift #1: From Directing to Developing.

Most leaders direct and coordinate work.

That’s management 101.

Driving task performance to achieve organizational goals.

In a more stable business world, this is often enough.

Yet, in a dynamic and disruptive world? It’s not.

Catalyst leaders take this a step further.

They don’t presume stability.

And they’re not just focused on today’s performance and goals.

They’re seeking to position the organization to address the inevitable disruption to those goals.

This means investing in their own personal growth and the growth of the people around them.

It’s a shift of priorities and focus.

You’ll find catalyst leaders asking more questions than giving answers.

Coaching more than correcting.

In a complex supply chain, this enormously critical—the pace of change means leaders cannot possibly stay on top of every domain.

They depend on others to solve challenging problems together, without requiring direction from above.

This means catalyst leaders live at every level of the organization.

Shift #2: From Controlling to Enabling.

Traditional supply chain leadership has often relied on a clear hierarchy with tight delegation.

Controlling through structure, process and oversight.

That’s how consistency and efficiency are achieved.

Again, in predictable environments, this works.

But as variability increases, control breaks down.

Catalyst leaders gain more control by distributing it.

They don’t remove structure—they redefine it.

Instead of controlling decisions, they create the conditions for better decisions to happen without them.

This means setting clear intent, aligning priorities, and establishing guardrails—

then trusting teams closest to the work to act.

The speed of problem solving and decision making must match the speed of technology.

Shift 3: From Reacting to Resiliency.

Leaders are often rewarded for saving the day.

Playing the hero in stepping in when something breaks.

Yet, this signals a lack of foresight.

Catalyst leaders shift their time perspective towards the horizon.

This means building systems that surface issues sooner.

Which means creating environments where issues are raised without hesitation.

That requires safety. Not physical safety, psychological safety.

Safety to contribute new ideas, and indeed to challenge authority when necessary.

In a complex supply chain, disruptions are inevitable.

Resiliency doesn’t come from avoiding them,

but from building an organizational muscle to respond, adapt, and improve from them.

Again and again.

In a nutshell?

Catalyst leadership is flexible, adaptable, and resilient.

Just as Tamoud stated.

OK. Nice theory, show me the numbers.

Just as I was visiting India, a fire at one of our client’s supplier plants disrupted a critical component.

And in the U.S., a port strike created a similar challenge.

In both cases, catalyst leadership showed up through rapid cross-functional collaboration,

creative contingency planning,

and fast action to minimize business impact.

And these are just two of more than 400 positive impacts of catalyst leadership that one of our clients experienced in a single year.

How do we know this? We ask. Employees from around the world share examples of how catalyst leadership is positively impacting their people, their plants, and their business.

Unfortunately, catalyst leadership is rare.

Bill Joiner’s research, and confirmed by our in-the-field data,

indicates that only 10% of leaders operate predominantly in a catalyst mindset.

The rest remain behind, operating in a mindset suitable for an older, slower, and more stable time.

Schneider Electric, along with other clients we engage with, are seeking to change these metrics.

In our next episode, we will hear from Paul Stonehouse,

one of the difference makers at Schneider Electric.

He shares some incredibly candid—and funny—stories about the reality of shaping a global culture. Including metaphors about ocean reefs and electric fences. You’ll want to listen.

What can we take away from this?

First, complexity isn't your enemy—

it’s your environment.

So, stop trying to eliminate complexity

and start building an organization capable of navigating it.

Second, success is equal parts technology and leadership.

Investment in your people must match investment in your technology.

And finally, a reminder that a transformation of this magnitude doesn’t come from a single event or initiative.

It requires ongoing investment,

something we call "marginal gains"—

dozens of micro shifts in how we talk,

how we measure,

and how we show up for our teams,

All compounded over time.

So, the next time you order that same-day delivery,

Share some gratitude.

Not only for the technology that makes it possible,

But the people as well.

And, if you’re feeling exhausted by your high-performing engine,

Know this.

There is a path forward.

A journey to navigate this Fog.

Thank you for listening.

I’m Pete Behrens.

Relearning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. To learn more, visit relearningleadership.show.

Practice Is Perfect: A Leader's Guide to Building a Mindfulness Practice

Fri, 20 Mar 2026 00:07:08 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Mindfulness for leaders isn't about achieving a calm, clear mind — it's about learning to notice when attention has drifted and choosing to return to the present moment, repeatedly and without judgment. A consistent practice, even just three to five minutes a day, builds the capacity to pause between impulse and action — the space where better decisions live. The single most important factor isn't how long you meditate, but whether you do it at all.

The Benefits of Mindfulness for Leaders

Mark Flanagan will be the first to tell you he's no guru.

When Pete Behrens jokingly bestowed the title, Mark deflected with a story about his morning walk with his new puppy, Jasper. "The new puppy who doesn't necessarily want to go the way I want to go," he said. "I was seeing if I could pause. I don't always pause with the new puppy."

Mark is a certified meditation teacher and longtime practitioner. He came to facilitate a session for our alumni as someone who has lived the practice imperfectly for more than 20 years, found his way back to it when life demanded it, and now helps others do the same.

That session brought together ALJ alumni for something a little different: not a discussion about leadership, but an experience of one of its quieter foundations. The premise was simple. We are all navigating a chaotic world. Decisions come faster, the noise is louder, and the space between stimulus and response keeps shrinking. It's in that shrinking space that leaders often get into trouble.

When we react rather than respond — when we fire off an email, snap at a colleague, or make a call before we've fully processed what's in front of us — the cost is real. Not just to relationships or culture, but to the quality of our thinking and the outcomes we're responsible for.

Mark's message wasn't about achieving some transcendent state of inner peace. It was far more practical: a consistent mindfulness practice gives you access to a pause — a moment of choice — that most of us could use more of. Over time, that pause builds into something leaders consistently report as genuinely useful: reduced reactivity, greater presence, and the capacity to respond to what's actually in front of them rather than what their stress is telling them is there.

What Is Mindfulness?

Before leading the group through practice, Mark addressed one of the most common misconceptions about meditation: that the goal is to banish thought.

It isn't.

"You're never going to banish your thoughts," he said. "Your mind is constantly spinning." He described the typical unattended mind as a hamster wheel — not productive, just running. Thoughts about the past, worries about the future, judgments, plans, mental to-do lists. Spaghetti, as he put it. The practice doesn't eliminate the spaghetti. It helps you notice you're in it.

Jon Kabat-Zinn, who developed the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction program in the 1970s, offers a widely used definition:

Mindfulness is awareness that arises by placing your attention in the present on purpose, non-judgmentally.

Each word carries weight. On purpose means you know what you're doing — you're choosing to pay attention. Non-judgmentally matters because the moment we start evaluating our meditation, we've added another layer of thought on top of the thoughts we were already having.

This is also where Mark shared Viktor Frankl becomes relevant. The Austrian psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor — whose work explored meaning, choice, and human resilience — described what a consistent practice makes possible: a space between impulse and action. "That was something I definitely knew I needed when I started meditating," Mark said, "this idea of non-reactivity, of being able to respond to something rather than react." For leaders navigating high-stakes decisions and real pressure, that space is where better judgment lives.

Rashmi F. shared that for her, meditation is what helps her "find my centre — an opportunity to disconnect from the chaos." That framing resonated throughout the session. This isn't about retreat from the demands of leadership. It's about developing the inner steadiness to meet those demands more effectively.

How to Practice Mindfulness:

A 3-Step Exercise for Busy Professionals

Mark walked the group through a deceptively simple three-step approach. No special equipment required. And, as he demonstrated when he couldn't find his phone and simply substituted the word "ding" for a bell, no perfection required either. The spirit of the practice, it turns out, is built right into how it's taught.

Step 1: Take Your Meditation Seat

More intentional than simply sitting down. Find a position that's comfortable but alert — what Mark described as "upright but not uptight." Chair, floor, standing, or even lying down if you can stay awake. The posture, rooted in 2,600 years of teaching, comes in four recognized forms: sitting, standing, lying down, and walking. Head, neck, and back in alignment; shoulders relaxed; jaw unclenched. Eyes open with a soft downward gaze, or closed — whichever works for you.

Step 2: Place Your Attention on a Meditation Object

In this practice, that object is the breath — not a deep, theatrical breath, but the ordinary one that's always there. "It's not something contrived or expanded. It's not extra deep. It's not extra long. It's just the ordinary breath," Mark said. The breath works as an anchor because it's always available. You're holding yourself to this moment rather than some other one.

That said, the breath isn't the only option. As the group discussed, different anchors work for different people. Kumaresh R., an experienced practitioner, uses mantra — silent, mental repetition of a phrase — because it keeps his intellect more engaged. Randy H. has found body scanning, systematically bringing awareness to physical sensations from head to toe, to be a grounding daily reset. Tracey W. came to meditation through yoga and finds focused breathing, combined with movement, her natural entry point. The anchor matters less than the consistency of returning to it.

Step 3: When Your Mind Wanders, Notice It and Return

Not if — when. When you realize you've drifted into a story — planning tomorrow, replaying a conversation, working through your to-do list — you simply notice it, label it as "thinking," and gently come back to your anchor. No judgment, no frustration with yourself. Just return.

Mark reminds us, "The practice is not to banish thought. The practice is to just keep coming back. That's it."

Every time you notice your mind has wandered and bring it back, you're building something real. The returning is what matters.

What to Expect When You Start a Mindfulness Practice

After a 20-minute guided practice — led with what Pete described as a beautifully calibrated pace, "you ramped down, popped in, and then pulled back" — the group reflected on what had come up. For leaders who tend to bring achievement orientation to everything, several themes surfaced quickly.

The Self-Judgment Loop

Dave B. described what he called "second arrow moments" — the additional suffering we create by judging ourselves for having the experience we're having. In meditation, that sounds like this: "You start thinking about something and then you're like, 'Oh crap, I shouldn't be thinking about something.' And then you start feeling bad about thinking about, you know, the thing." He laughed, adding: "I can tell I'm out of practice."

Mark noted: "Now you're even judging yourself about judging yourself."

Pete recognized the same pattern in himself, if slightly differently dressed: "I'm not judging. I'm more analyzing. It's like, stop analyzing yourself, Pete." For many leaders, the tendency to evaluate performance doesn't switch off easily — even when the practice is explicitly about letting go of outcomes. Noticing that tendency is, itself, the practice.

Watching Your Own Mind

Randy H. connected the session to something from a program he'd attended years ago — an image that had stayed with him: "It's like a door. If a thought comes through the door, notice the thought and let it go." Mark extended it with a metaphor of his own: the thoughts are people coming through the door, and the doorman holds the door for them — "but he doesn't follow them to the bathroom."

The goal isn't to prevent thoughts from arising. It's to stop following them down the hall.

The Power of Practicing Together

The group reflected on how meaningful it felt to practice together, even across time zones and through a screen. Mark confirmed that this sense of shared presence is real, adding that in-person practice amplifies it further — but something genuine is present even in a virtual room full of people choosing to pause together.

Different Paths to the Same Place

Not everyone in the room came to stillness the same way. Kumaresh R. uses mantra rather than breath, finding it better suited to how his mind works. Josh F. described briefly drifting off during the practice, then waking to a feeling of unexpected clarity: "My thoughts are there, it's all happening — but there are some nice moments of stillness that I really appreciate." Randy H. has a daily phone alarm set to remind him to do a body scan. Pete B. finds active meditation — cycling, hiking — more natural than sitting stillness, and is honest about the struggle. Rashmi F. offered a reframe: "The thing to remember is that we are training awareness, not control."

What the session made clear is that there is no single correct path. There is only the practice of returning, whatever form that takes for you.

Why Consistency Matters More Than Duration

Rodrigo C., joining the session from São Paulo, candidly shared that he used to practice regularly, but since becoming a new father, the time has simply disappeared. It's an honest admission that most busy humans recognize in some form — the value of the practice is clear, but life has a way of crowding it out.

This connects directly to one of Mark's central messages: how long you meditate matters far less than whether you do it at all.

Mark started with three minutes a day. Before apps, before meditation timers, he found a three-minute MP3 file online — just audio with a bell at the end — downloaded it to his iPod, and pressed play each morning. "This is how nerdy I am," he said. That was the whole practice. Three minutes and a bell.

"The amount of time is far less important than consistency," he told the group. "Consistency brings the benefit into the rest of my day. It brings mindfulness to the rest of my day."

Pete echoed this from his own experience and from coaching others in building leadership habits: "It's consistency over time — whatever it is you're doing, you're practicing, you're trying to get better at it."

For those of us drawn to achievement — who measure progress, set goals, and push toward outcomes — meditation can feel almost counterproductive at first. There's nothing to complete. No level to unlock. As Pete put it at the close of the session: "I need an achievement. I need a goal. And to me, the biggest thing here is: no. Just settle down."

That settling — practiced steadily, imperfectly, consistently — is the purpose.

How to Build a Daily Mindfulness Practice

Whether you're new to this or returning after a long gap, here are practical ways to begin:

Start absurdly small. Three to five minutes is enough. You're building a habit, not hitting a performance target. Make it easy to show up again tomorrow.
Use a guide if silence feels impossible. Apps like Waking Up or Headspace offer structured beginner series that gradually introduce silence over time. Guided instruction is a legitimate on-ramp, not a shortcut. As Kumaresh R. noted from his own experience: "Once we catch up a bit, we are able to make sense of it and are able to guide our own minds."
Find an anchor that works. Breath, mantra, body scan, focused breathing — any of these can work.
Expect your mind to wander. A lot. This isn't a sign that you're bad at meditation. It's the practice. The returning is the whole point.
Bring micro-moments into your day. Three conscious breaths before a difficult meeting. Feeling your feet on the ground before a high-stakes conversation. Pausing before you respond when you feel reactive. These small moments reinforce and extend what you build in formal practice.
Miss a day? Begin again. There's no streak to protect, no starting over from scratch. There's just today.

Mindfulness Resources and Guided Meditation

Listen: Guided Meditation with Mark Flanagan

Mark led our alumni through a 20-minute guided mindfulness practice during the session. You can listen to it here and practice on your own or share with your team.

Download: A Simple Guide to Continuing Your Mindfulness Practice

A concise, practical reference from Mark that you can keep on hand as you build your practice.

Closing Reflection

Leadership has always required clear thinking, sound judgment, and the ability to stay steady when things get uncertain. What's changed is the pace and volume of everything pressing against those capacities.

Mindfulness doesn't promise to simplify what's genuinely complex. It offers something more modest: the ability to notice what's happening — inside and around you — before you react to it. That noticing, practiced steadily, imperfectly, consistently, is what creates the conditions for better leadership.

Near the end of the guided practice, Mark offered a closing wish to the group — one that extended the practice beyond the individual and into the world each person would return to:

"I just want to end with a wish that the qualities that we realize in doing this practice that benefit us also benefit those we come in contact with today — and then radiate outwards from there."

For leaders, that's not a small idea. The steadiness you build shows up in the meeting where you pause before reacting, the conversation where you actually listen, and the decision where you respond rather than fire back. It radiates.

About Mark Flanagan

Mark Flanagan is a certified meditation teacher and longtime mindfulness practitioner who facilitates community and workplace meditation sessions centered on stress resilience and grounded presence. His teaching is clear, accessible, and grounded in the belief that mindfulness is developed through steady, imperfect practice. He supports individuals in cultivating sustainable meditation habits that foster clarity, equanimity, and a more balanced relationship with the challenges of daily life.

Mark also contributed to the final editing of Into the Fog by Pete Behrens, and we are grateful for his insights.

Learn more about his work and upcoming sessions at practiceisperfect.com .

Frequently Asked Questions About Mindfulness for Leaders

61: Peak Leadership: When Leadership Appears Effortless, It's Rarely by Accident

Wed, 11 Mar 2026 19:26:57 GMT

EPISODE 61

About This Episode

There's a certain kind of leadership that doesn't announce itself. It shows up as a team that feels clear, confident, and capable — and when it's working at its best, the leader almost disappears into the experience.

In this episode, Pete Behrens draws on a memorable helicopter ski trip in the Canadian Rockies to illustrate what peak leadership actually looks and feels like. By comparing three guides with three very different approaches, he unpacks the dynamic balance between authority and respect that separates good leaders from truly effective ones.

Pete Behrens

Founder & CEO, Agile Leadership Journey

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn

Relearning from This Episode

Effortless Leadership Is Never an Accident

When leadership is working at its best, it tends to go unnoticed — not because nothing is happening, but because everything is. What appears natural is almost always the result of deep awareness and deliberate practice.

Authority and Respect Are Two Sides of the Same Tension

Every leader faces the pull between exercising authority and extending respect. Lean too hard on control and you stifle the people around you. Give too much freedom without guidance and people feel unsure and unsteady. Neither extreme serves your team.

The Peak Is a Moving Target

Finding the right balance between authority and respect isn't something you do once and sustain. Conditions change, pressure builds, and your team's needs shift. Staying at the peak requires ongoing awareness, humility, and the willingness to adjust — moment by moment.

You Don't Always Recognize Great Leadership Until You Experience Its Absence

Sometimes we only appreciate the quality of leadership we've had by experiencing something less effective. Pete's first guide stood out only in contrast to the two that followed — a reminder to look for the leadership behind the experience.

Explore Recent Episodes

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

Welcome to the Relearning Leadership Podcast. I'm your host, Pete Behrens.

Today I want to talk about peak leadership. Not hype, not heroics. Leadership in action. When leadership appears effortless, it's rarely by accident. This is effective leadership. This is adaptive leadership. This is leadership under pressure. It works so well, you barely even notice.

In fact, some of the best leadership I've experienced, I barely noticed, that is, until I experienced something different. It was natural. Instinctive. Invisible. Almost too easy. But here's the thing. Here’s a truth that I've learned. When leadership appears effortless, it's almost never so.

Peak leadership is a choice.

It's intentional, and it's reachable by everyone, regardless of your role or your title.

Years ago, I had the opportunity to go helicopter skiing in the Canadian Rockies. It was a dream come true. To leave the groomed terrain, the mountain resorts of Colorado, to the untracked wild mountains of Canada was a gift. But that kind of opportunity comes with risk. Not just from the unmarked terrain, but the helicopter as well. Serious injury is a real concern. Our ski guides were not just there to show us the way they were critical to keeping us safe.

Even before we put on our skis, we underwent avalanche and helicopter safety training. Only then did we huddle into the helicopter and ascend to the mountain for the very first time. Now stepping out of the helicopter that first time, I plunged into thigh-deep powder. And then I froze. Not because I was cold. But the view, it just captivated me. The mountain vistas, the range in front of me was incredible.

And I literally froze because I was stuck in the snow. I felt like I had 50 pound weights strapped to each leg. Just heaving a boot forward and pushing to the next step to get my skis on, just swallowed it back down. It was a big effort just to get away from the helicopter. And the skiing, of course, was amazing. The mountain vistas of just beautiful s-turns that our group could make. You could look back up and see what we did. And the tree-lined glades where the snow looked like pillows and it just puffed through them. And of course, top it off, each day we would visit the hot springs to soothe our sore muscles and swap stories from the day.

Sorry, I'm making you jealous and I'm getting a bit ahead of myself. The story I want to share today, skiing is secondary to the leadership that I experienced on the mountain slopes. One of my joys in life is to witness leadership outside of the office, and this helicopter ski trip did not disappoint. Neither in the skiing nor in the leadership.

Let me explain.

If you were to ask me on that day how effective was our guide, I'd say she was great. She offered us instruction, she kept us safe, she gave us room to ski. She was memorable. But to be honest, I didn't think much about her leadership. I simply had the most awesome day on the mountain ever. Seriously.

But here's the thing. Her leadership didn't show up to me until I experienced our next two guides. You see, each day the guides rotated groups. So, over three days we had three different guides. On day two, our guide was very different. He shared little instruction and basically just took off down the mountain. And within two turns was out of sight, leaving us perhaps just a bit uncomfortable. Not unsafe, I would say, but unsure or perhaps unsteady. He just made it difficult for us to follow him. Now, our guide on day three was quite the opposite still. He over-instructed us. He broke up beautiful runs into short segments. And it didn't just slow us down, it negatively impacted our experience.

Now, neither of these two guides were bad. They too kept us safe, providing a positive experience. We had a good time. They each demonstrated leadership. However, each created an atmosphere that reduced our enjoyment to a degree. But it wasn't until I experienced these other two guides that I began to see how beautifully our first guide had led us.

And that's the thing about truly effective leaders, you don't even notice it in the moment. It's beautiful. But it disappears, it's invisible, it's almost effortless. Perhaps it looks unnecessary. On that day, it was as if no one was leading, or perhaps we were all leading. She simply became one of us. And I realized that she found something special: a peak. Not a mountain peak, a leadership peak. A performance peak, and also I would say an elusive peak because that peak is hard to find and it's even harder to stay on top. She created an optimal experience and the other two guides just hovered off that peak to one side or the other.

Effective leadership lives at this peak, I'm talking about the peak between authority and respect.

As a leader, we have the authority to enforce the rules. We also have the respect as a leader to trust us followers with them. Our first guide, she delicately balanced her authority to keep us safe and allow us to follow. Our second guide perhaps trusted us too much, giving us too much respect. He failed to exercise enough authority. Perhaps he's uncomfortable with it, unaware he even needed to use more of it. Our third guide lived on the opposite side. He gave us too little respect, overplaying his authoritative hand, seeking to control our group. Perhaps he didn't trust us or maybe he didn't trust himself.

Effective leadership lives in this balance. Not rigid control, not hands off freedom, dynamic adjustment. Adaptive. Authority and respect live, let's say, on two sides of a tension. All leaders face this tension. And here's the thing, both sides matter. Both sides are required to be an effective leader. Yet lean just a bit too far one way or the other, and you create an atmosphere that's less impactful.

The best leaders balance this tension. Not statically, that doesn't exist. Dynamically, situationally. Some situations are going to call for more authority. Other situations are going to call for more respect. Think of it not as a place to sit, but maybe a behavior to learn. Effective leadership lives in this balance.

What looks effortless from a distance is actually the result of deep awareness, intention and practice. I'd say this is what separates transformational leaders from average leaders. Leaning on authority or avoiding authority appears to be the easier path. And sadly, sometimes we need to experience these less effective leaders to know what great leadership actually looks like.

Authority and respect are not personality traits. They're choices.

Moment by moment, conversation by conversation, decision by decision.

So, if you want to lead at a peak level, start paying attention to the atmosphere around you. If your team appears tense, perhaps you're leaning too hard on authority. If your team appears confused, maybe you're leaning too far on respect. And if your team appears confident, clear, capable, maybe you're closing in on that peak.

But here's the truth, this mountain too will change. Conditions will shift, and the pressure you feel will grow. So finding that peak, staying atop that peak, requires awareness, humility and adaptation. Not once, but again, and again, and again.

Balance isn't something you find. It must be practiced.

So, the next time you experience something beautiful, don't just look at the situation, look at the leadership. If it appears effortless, it's not likely an accident.

That's peak leadership and it's available to you right now, regardless of your title or your role.

Thank you for listening.

Woman's voice:

Relearning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. To learn more, visit relearningleadership.show.

If you enjoyed this episode, it's drawing from one of the dozens of stories in Pete's debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty . Available in hardcover, paperback, ebook, and soon to be released audio. Get your copy today from Amazon .

Working on Purpose Podcast Interview: You Don’t Feel Ready—Good. That’s Where Leadership Begins

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 17:25:24 GMT

The Fog Isn't Waiting for You to Feel Ready

"Leaders we see today weren't raised in the particular fog we're facing now. They grew up in a time before and are experiencing this fog for the first time, just as you and I are. The fog is dynamic, it's fast, and it's not waiting for us."

Dr. Alise Cortez opens this Working on Purpose conversation by reading this passage from Into the Fog —immediately surfacing the challenge every leader faces today. In the discussion that follows, Pete Behrens unpacks why uncertainty isn't a defect to fix but a landscape to navigate.

The Fog Doesn't Mean You're Broken

One of the core tensions Pete explores is how leaders are conditioned to have all the answers. From school forward, we're taught there's a right and wrong, good and bad, grades that measure effectiveness. "As a leader then I start to feel responsible not just for myself but for others that are following or others that I'm responsible for in the organization. And so that burden we carry becomes a burden of I've got to be right. I've got to have the answer."

But the best leaders counter that narrative. "It's more about I've got a vision but I can't get there without you. That's this weird mix of ego but also humility—that you can name a better future and then also be vulnerable to say but I can't do it alone."

Movement Creates Clarity

One of the most compelling insights Pete offers in the episode is this: "Clarity doesn't come from standing still. Clarity comes from movement."

Unless we create movement, we don't get feedback. We can't see what's working. Vision doesn't preclude agility—it serves it, helping us know whether our steps are leading us closer to where we want to go or away from it. The Fog doesn't mean waiting for perfect information. It means taking steps and learning. As Pete puts it, "Movement creates clarity is a critical construct when we start thinking about the fog."

The Inner Fog: When the Problem Is Inside Your Head

While we often think of fog as external—market uncertainty, organizational chaos—Pete introduces the concept of the "inner fog." This represents our ego, blind spots, and assumptions. "It's kind of like on a humid, rainy day, the windows from the inside fog up. So what we're seeing, we're not actually even seeing."

The biggest challenge? Leaders who think they're collaborative when they're really just having people agree with them. Pete shares candidly: "These blind spots in my career have only shown up when others have the courage to say something like 'The emperor has no clothes' to me."

The solution? Create the psychological safety for those moments to occur. Give people permission to tell you the truth.

Elusive Peaks: Why Leadership Is Trickier Than You Think

Dr. Cortez asks Pete about his use of climbing and mountain metaphors throughout the book. Pete explains the concept of "elusive peaks"—false summits that seem like the destination but turn out to be more complex.

"I want to shift into being a strategic leader. Sure. So is strategy a peak? Well, yes and no. Strategy we realize is useful. But if I go there and I get aloof to the tactics, if I become disconnected from the real work, strategy becomes useless. So it is a peak but it's an elusive peak because it only comes in concert with something else."

Strategy and tactics. Expertise and openness. Authority and respect. These aren't either/or choices—they're tensions to manage.

When Hair Stands on Edge

Pete shares a harrowing story from his early twenties, co-leading teenagers on a multi-day mountain hike in Colorado. The goal: summit two 14,000-foot peaks in one day. When they arrived late to the first peak and storms started rolling in, he faced a choice.

"I didn't want to look weak. I wanted to look fun. I wanted to look courageous. And so I'm like, 'Yeah, let's go.'" They descended to the saddle and started up the next peak. "Before I knew it, our hair is literally standing on edge. It's a feeling, if you've never had this feeling, is scarier than anything I've ever felt before. It means electricity is about to charge and strike."

In that moment, real leadership showed up. "I realized looking back on that, the initial decision to move on wasn't leadership. It was cowardness. I was afraid to look vulnerable in front of these teens."

Leadership Without a Title

After the Marshall Fire destroyed 1,000 homes in Boulder in 24 hours, a neighbor stepped forward to thank the first responders. With no official role, this person collected donations, tracked down 13 fire departments through diligent detective work, and coordinated personal visits to firehouses.

The impact? Firefighters who'd never been personally thanked after a fire. Videos and stories shared from one of the most intense events of their careers. Connections that both sides desperately needed.

The leadership lesson? "My neighbor did not have a title. There's no community organizer title that she held. She just saw a gap and chose to fill it, invite us on the journey."

The Real Challenge Isn't the Next Wave

Pete closes with a reminder about technology and leadership: "The real challenge isn't the next wave of technology. It's the new leadership mindset required to leverage the wave effectively."

Technology waves will keep coming. What matters isn't the wave itself—it's how we show up and the mindset we bring to navigate it.

Ready to navigate Your Own Fog?

Into the Fog explores leadership through real stories from Pete's journey—moments on mountain peaks, in corporate boardrooms, and in neighborhoods recovering from disaster. Each story reveals how leadership shows up in unexpected places when nothing is comfortable or clear.

Whether you're facing your own inner fog or navigating uncertainty in your organization, these stories offer a different way forward.

Blog: Beyond Silos—How Strategic Partnerships Transform Stuck Initiatives

Fri, 20 Feb 2026 01:35:38 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

When technically sound initiatives remain practically stuck, the breakthrough isn't found in working harder—it's found in working together differently. This piece reveals how an external coach and internal leader transformed a Fortune 500 division plagued by conflict and zero visibility into a psychologically safe, high-performing team. Their partnership reduced customer escalations by 90% and enabled $100M in business growth—in just 10 months—through three partnership principles: Practice, Perspective, and Progress.

"Most organizational problems are not technical problems. They are human partnership problems."

This insight from Rashmi Fernandes and Kumaresh Ramaswamy opened a masterclass for alums and set the stage for a powerful exploration of partnership as a leadership practice—not just a nice-to-have, but an essential capability for navigating complexity.

When Good Strategies Meet Bad Dynamics

The session began with a deceptively simple question: "Write down one initiative in your organization that is technically sound but practically stuck."

Pete B. immediately identified one of Agile Leadership Journey’s own programs—solid content, proven results, but challenged by organizational budget constraints. The pattern was universal across participants: strategies failed not from poor design but from human dynamics that no amount of technical excellence could overcome.

Rashmi and Kumaresh then presented their case study—a scenario so familiar it drew audible recognition from participants.

The Context : A software R&D division at a Fortune 500 organization, 75+ team members, 1M+ lines of code, sales in 150+ countries.

The Challenge : Teams in constant high-conflict mode, working in silos, radio silent in meetings. Management had zero visibility into ground-level issues while customer escalations threatened revenue. Anxiety, burnout, and blame culture drove high turnover.

"If you were in a position of power, what would you do?" Rashmi asked.

Pete B.'s first response? "Run."

But three participants offered instincts that proved prophetic. Paul S. mentioned the five dysfunctions of a team and surfacing the inability to have conflict. Josh F. emphasized starting with interviews to understand different perspectives. Sally T. focused on visibility as the essential first step: "If you can't see it, how do you address it?"

"That's exactly what we did," Rashmi confirmed.

The DARE Approach: Creating Conditions for Change

Rashmi and Kumaresh developed what they call the DARE approach—Discovery, Alignment, Rhythm, Enablement. The approach wasn't planned from the start; they reverse-engineered it after the work succeeded.

Discovery:

Explore & Understand

Their discovery included interviews and surveys across all levels, from SVP to entry-level, to understand perceptions and identify trends.

Alignment:

Set Shared Vision

They shared their findings with senior leadership, understood their vision, and co-created goals for an "Adaptive Leadership Squad" (Squad).

Rhythm:

Iterate & Execute

The Squad operated iteratively and like a scrum team with rotating roles (product owner, scrum master, developers) to ensure equal opportunity and shared ownership.

Enablement:

Empower & Support

All Squad members completed the Agility in Leadership™ training to establish a common language, mindset, and approach. Education was paired with one-on-one and group coaching to develop each individual.

A Working Agreement that Made All the Difference

Perhaps the most striking element was the Squad’s working agreement that enabled the DARE approach’s success—requirements so demanding that participation became a privilege, not an obligation:

Prioritize Squad work over all other work items
Challenge yourself to experiment and take actions beyond your comfort zone
Commit to learn something new daily and dedicate 8-10 hours weekly for learning and sharing
Operate with the highest integrity and treat every person with deep respect
Express genuine curiosity about others' perspectives with a learning/serving mindset
Deal with conflict head-on with a win-win mindset

"If you're not ready to follow these, you can't be part of the Squad," Rashmi explained. Leadership agreed: if people don't fit, don't force it.

Some left midway. But nine remained—coachable, groomable leaders who became the transformation catalysts. The Squad members were open to learning, willing to get out of their comfort zone, and committed to delivering their best to the cause.

Tom D. captured what resonated: "The commitment. You prioritize this above all else, and if you don't agree, you're not part of the group. It's voluntary, so you get buy-in, then you've got commitment."

Pete B. compared it to a special ops military team: "You have such a high bar of entry that it's elite and privileged to be part of it. Don't make it easy, make it hard—which might attract the right people."

That's exactly what happened. As results became visible, people came asking: "How can we join? What can we do to be part of this transformation?"

The Three Principles of Partnership

The DARE approach created structure, but a coaching partnership made it work. Rashmi and Kumaresh distilled their learning into three principles:

Principle #1: Practice (pIE: Performance + Image + Exposure)

Partnership requires more than collaboration—it demands co-creation built on credible internal leadership and trusted external coaching.

The pIE model emphasizes that image and exposure must be founded on performance. "We start with performance," Kumaresh explained. "The internal leader and external coach challenge each other for good performance. Once there's performance, there's scope for image and exposure—not the other way around."

The caution : Beware the "inverse pIE"—leaders with high visibility but low performance who appease leadership, showing up for audits but absent during customer crises.

Rashmi and Kumaresh exemplified this principle through complementary strengths. "I don't care about image and exposure—I just do my work," Rashmi admitted. "Kumaresh cares about image and exposure. Every time I did something that changed even a small thing, he would talk to SVPs and other leaders, giving me exposure. And when leaders asked me about coaching, I'd put Kumaresh on top, saying he's supporting me. We were constantly backing each other up across all layers of the organization."

Pete B. recognized the power: "What's surprising is each lifting up the other—the external lifting up the internal, the internal lifting up the external. That's the power of this partnership."

Principle #2: Perspective (External Insight + Internal Context = Meaningful Action)

External coaches bring insight undiluted by organizational politics. Internal leaders bring context about what's actually possible. Neither alone creates transformation.

"Insight becomes meaningless when it doesn't mix and match with organizational context," Kumaresh explained. "For insight to spark meaningful action, it must be contextualized."

The caution : Off-target and out of context. Without partnership, insights can get taken out of context.

Pete B. reframed it practically: "We have expertise as consultants that we bring into the company. The leader has expertise of what's inside. We're asking for a growth mindset from both to check expertise at the door—not leave it home, but put it aside enough to be open to how that expertise might apply."

Rashmi described enforcing this in Squads meetings: "We had a thing on screen that said 'leave your titles at the door.' We had senior leaders and entry-level people working together.” She shared that part of her role as coach was to “call them out when power dynamics emerged and say 'you can't say that—we are all equal here.'"

Principle #3: Progress (Working IN + Working ON the System = Holistic Transformation)

The transformation backlog must balance working in the system (value delivery) with working on the system (cultural transformation).

"At any point in time, the backlog must reflect what the organization needs," Kumaresh explained. "Sometimes there's urgency to deliver value this quarter—more 'in the system' elements. Next quarter with less urgency provides mind space to focus 'on the system.'"

The caution: Dropping either ball creates disaster—but differently. "If you drop the ball on working in the system, it's like a rubber ball that hits back immediately and hard. If you drop the ball on working on the system, it's like dropping a glass ball—it breaks, and it's very difficult to mend."

Steve O. appreciated the metaphor's severity: "I never thought of it being that disastrous if you let one strongly out of balance. The severity of letting one really be lost—I appreciate that emphasis."

Pete B. noted how coaches often overemphasize the system side: "What I'm seeing from leaders and employees is we don't have time—that pressure is growing every month to just get stuff done. I appreciate you bringing balance, helping them focus on delivering in the system, not just improving it."

The Transformation: Three Major Impacts

Within 10 months—a timeframe that struck Tracey W. as remarkably fast for organizational change—they achieved:

Culture of Mutual Respect - Direct feedback became encouraged, appreciation given openly, psychological safety established, and zero visibility transformed to complete transparency.
90% Reduction in Customer Escalations -The team shifted from "who has to handle this?" to working as one team focused on customers rather than internal conflicts.
On-Time Major Release Without Quality Issues - Improved accountability enabled launching a significant feature release to market that helped the business grow by $100M.

The Individual Impact: Career Transformation and Organizational Ripple Effects

Beyond team results, the Squad members experienced profound personal growth that accelerated their careers and spread throughout the organization.

More than 50% of squad members received promotions. However, Kumaresh emphasized the deeper transformation: "We spoke about all of them carrying the Russian dolls within them.”

This concept of leadership agility that reflects that within the Catalyst leader remains the Achiever leader and the Expert leader. Being a Catalyst requires the ability to situationally adapt.

Kumaresh explained “They'd say 'in this situation I must be more Achiever than a Catalyst. No, I think in this situation I need to be a Catalyst. Now I need to wear my Expert hat.' You see the language evolving with the team—how they were making it more of a day-to-day choice. That was, I think, the key transformation which we could see with the team."

The self-leadership capabilities they developed became portable assets. Those who weren't promoted found better alignment—some moved from developer to product owner roles, others transitioned to positions that fit their evolved leadership identity.

One participant left the organization specifically to practice her new leadership approach: "I'm not able to practice what I'm feeling right now, and I want to be a better leader." She stayed in touch with Rashmi, reflecting that "those nine months were so crucial in their leadership journey.” The Squad members “feel if they hadn't done this exercise, they would have missed being better leaders."

Kumaresh himself was promoted twice.

This created a powerful ripple effect. As Squad members moved to new teams and contexts, they carried forward what they learned—language shifts like "team member" instead of "resources," normalization of conflict, psychological safety practices, and the win-win mindset. Leadership capabilities developed in the Squad became seeds planted throughout the organization, with potential to multiply the impact far beyond the original 75-person division.

The Human Details That Made It Work

Beyond the structure and principles, small practices created safety and spread change:

Language shifts: They normalized "conflict" as "disagreement"—no longer taboo. "People were saying 'oh we're going to have conflict.' We said 'no, it's just a disagreement—let's talk about it,'" Rashmi explained.

Humanizing language: Every time someone said "resources aren't doing the work," Rashmi and Kumaresh corrected: "Say team member." The nine squad members spread this across the organization. "When somebody used 'resources,' they'd say 'no, say team member.' It spread like wildfire."

Normalizing team development: Rashmi and Kumaresh introduced Tuckman's stages of group development, which explains that as teams develop in maturity and ability, relationships are established and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership. These stages are commonly known as Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning. Using the model, the Squad made it safe to acknowledge observed stages: "Oh you're forming, you're norming right now, so it's okay to fight with each other." When someone left and someone new joined, "you're back to forming—you're going to have conflicts, and it's okay, talk about it."

The Challenge: It Can't Be Replicated Without Partnership

Rashmi was candid about limitations of the approach without solid partnership: "It's not like this is a book you can just go back and apply. We tried with another department—it didn't work because I didn't have a leader like Kumaresh who was as committed."

Sally T. asked if the partner could be in any position. "Yes, anybody," Rashmi confirmed. "Kumaresh wasn't an agile excellence leader. He was scrum of scrums master first. But he had influence because he'd been in the organization a long time and had connections. He used those to build image and exposure for me, to get buy-in, remove obstacles, make paths."

The partnership equation proved essential: Credible Internal Leadership + Trusted External Coaching = Powerful Partnership.

Pete B. captured the essence: "What I love about this story is the transformation of empowerment. An external comes in and what grows is these leaders inside the organization who create a difference. However small sometimes, it's personally transformative as well as team-level, department-level transformative—leaving something behind that's better than when we came."

What You Can Do Tomorrow

If your technically sound initiative is practically stuck:

Name the human problem. Stop treating it as only a technical challenge. What partnership dynamics are missing?
Assess your partnerships. Do you have complementary strengths? Are you lifting each other up? Is there mutual challenge and respect?
Check for balance. Are you focused only on insight (external view) or only on context (internal reality)? Transformation requires both.
Look at your backlog. Are you working only in the system or only on it? Both balls must stay in the air.
Raise the bar. Consider making participation harder, not easier. Elite commitment attracts the right people.
Start with discovery. Before jumping to solutions, understand perceptions across all levels.
Create working agreements. Make expectations explicit. Let people opt out if they're not ready.

As Rashmi and Kumaresh concluded: "Approaches may guide the work of change, but it is partnership that carries it across the line."

Join the Conversation : The Agile Leadership Journey community continues to explore these challenges in monthly alumni masterclasses. If you're navigating initiatives that are technically sound but practically stuck, you're not alone. The breakthrough often emerges not from having the right answer, but from engaging the right relationships

Interested in developing partnership as a leadership practice? Explore our l eadership development programs to build the capabilities that enable learning, shared accountability, and progress in complex systems.

Executive Briefing: Are People Following You—or Just Complying?

Tue, 17 Feb 2026 23:34:39 GMT

The Question That Keeps Senior Leaders Up at Night

In this article for CEOWORLD Magazine, Pete Behrens explores a moment most senior leaders recognize but rarely discuss: You make a decision. The room goes quiet. Heads nod. The plan moves forward. And later, alone, you wonder: Did they agree because it was the right call… or because I'm the one who said it?

Authority vs. Respect: The Elusive Peak

That unspoken question reveals leadership's most elusive peak—the narrow ridge between authority and respect.

Authority is positional . It comes with the role and answers one question: Who decides?

Respect is relational . It's earned—slowly, inconsistently, and repeatedly—and answers another: Whose judgment do we trust?

When leadership leans too heavily on authority, people comply but commitment thins. When leadership avoids authority altogether, clarity erodes and decisions stall. The elusive peak is the space between: where direction is clear and dissent is safe.

The Most Dangerous Mistake

The irony? The more a leader relies on authority, the less they learn whether people actually trust them. The most dangerous mistake is mistaking compliance for credibility—believing you've earned trust when people are simply being cautious.

Pete offers a simple diagnostic: Pay attention to what happens after you speak. Does conversation continue or cease? Does dissent surface or disappear? Compliance is silent. Respect speaks—but only when you've proven it's safe to challenge you.

Listen to Pete Behrens on the Mission Matters Business Podcast: Courage, Clarity, and Leading Through Uncertainty

Thu, 05 Feb 2026 23:53:41 GMT

Leadership Begins With Courage, Not Clarity

In this conversation with host Adam Torres on the Mission Matters podcast (Episode #764) , Pete Behrens opens up about the 10-year journey to write , Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty —complete with multiple rewrites, moments of doubt, and one perfectly timed photograph .

The Book That Almost Wasn't (Multiple Times)

When Adam asks about the writing process, Pete's answer is both hilarious and humbling: "I've written more versions of this book unpublished than I care to remember."

The engineering side of Pete—or maybe the perfectionism—meant the book went through countless iterations over a decade.

Then came the breakthrough: What if the whole book was just stories? What if he put his favorite metaphor—the fog—at the center of everything? Once that clicked, everything cleared up. The fog represents the uncertainty we all feel today: in business, geopolitically, socially, economically, and even internally. It's that discomfort and lack of clarity that leaders must navigate.

From Engineer to Leadership Coach

Pete shares how his career evolved from optimizing technical systems to focusing on the most complex system of all: human organizations. "What does an engineer do? Engineers look at systems and optimize them for better outcomes. And I look at leadership and what is more complex of a system than an organizational human system?"

The pattern that kept emerging? Organizations mirror their leaders. That realization became the foundation of his work here at Agile Leadership Journey.

Three Hopes for Readers

Pete wrote Into the Fog with three key intentions:

Reinstall humanity in leadership : In a world where leadership is over-influenced by politics and technical culture, Pete has a clear mission:

"I want everyone to see themselves as capable of leadership. Not the position. Not a badge. Not a title. Whoever you are, whatever position you hold, you have the ability to influence others towards a common goal. That's leadership."

Show that leaders aren't alone : Leadership is a team sport, not a solo activity. When you invite others on the journey, it becomes not only more effective but more fulfilling.

Inspire movement into uncertainty : Clarity doesn't come through planning. It comes through movement. Leadership begins with courage in the absence of clarity.

Ready to step into the fog?

Listen to the full conversation on Mission Matters to hear more about Pete's journey, the humor and humanity behind the writing process, and why leadership in uncertainty requires grounding yourself in your values and personal vision.

Also available on Apple Podcasts and Spotify .

Into the Fog spans Pete's entire career—from childhood to roles as an engineer, director, VP, consultant, and leadership coach. Each of the real stories reveals the simplicity and humanity of leadership in situations where nothing is comfortable or clear.

Pete Behrens Published in SmartBrief: How Great People Managers Lead When the Fog Rolls In

Sat, 31 Jan 2026 02:30:35 GMT

Leading Through the Fog

When uncertainty settles into an organization, people managers feel it first. They're the frontline interpreters, absorbing confusion while being expected to provide clarity. In this piece for SmartBrief on Leadership , Pete Behrens explores how the Fog—that swirl of shifting priorities, competing strategies, and underlying doubt—impacts teams and those who lead them.

Five Shifts for Navigating Uncertainty

The answer isn't eliminating uncertainty. It's learning to navigate it. In the SmartBrief article, Pete shares five practical approaches that help managers keep teams grounded and moving forward:

1. Reward Leadership as an Act, Over a Role

Recognize truth-telling and courage over hierarchy. The most meaningful leadership often comes from those who speak up when silence would be safer.

2. Replace Comfort With Confidence

Embrace "heat moments" that foster growth. Discomfort is often where development begins, and your job is to help people see themselves as capable of navigating hard things.

3. Coach Decisions in Motion

Keep teams moving through learning, not after learning. Break choices into smaller steps and normalize feedback as part of the process.

4. Make Connection a Core Part of the Strategy

In uncertain times, connection isn't a perk—it's a performance requirement. Create purposeful interaction and meaningful collaboration.

5. Stop Pretending Leaders Need All the Answers

Employees don't expect perfection—they expect honesty. "I don't know yet, but we'll find our way through this together" builds more engagement than any single right answer.

Organizations that successfully navigate the years ahead will be those with leaders skilled at navigating ambiguity and teams confident enough to keep moving when certainty disappears.

If you've ever felt caught between what your people need and what the job demands, this perspective offers a way through.

Explore more from Pete Behrens in his debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty . Available now in print and Kindle.

Video: Pete Behrens Presents Shaping Culture for Agile Ways of Working at Santander Agile Days

Thu, 29 Jan 2026 23:29:43 GMT

You Don't Need to Be the CEO to Shape Culture

In this talk at Santander Agile Days, presented with the Business Agility Institute (BAI), Pete Behrens tackles a question many change agents face: How can I make a difference when I'm not the CEO or business unit owner?

The answer might surprise you.

Leadership Is the Key to Business Agility

Research from BAI reveals that 60% of the characteristics that influence business agility are directly attributed to leadership—and the remaining 40% are highly influenced by leaders. Yet most organizations struggle because leadership development doesn't connect to agile transformation.

The result? Agile initiatives run into roadblocks, momentum dies, and teams revert to old ways of working. It's easier to change agile than to change the organization and its leaders.

Three Leaders Who Changed Culture Without Permission

Pete shares stories of leaders who shaped culture from the middle:

Amanda : Changed nothing about Scrum but flipped sprint reviews upside down. Instead of presenting to users, users now use the product while teams watch and learn. She calls it the "reverse sprint review."
Lars : Invented "flash swarms" to break research scientists out of their silos, bringing material scientists, computer scientists, and chemical scientists together to solve critical challenges in half-day to two-day intensive sessions.
Travis : A middle manager who influenced not just his teams but the CEO and executive team—earning recognition as "the yeast that can leaven an entire loaf." (Learn more about Travis' story in our "Leading from the Middle" podcast episode with him.)

Hardware Without Software

Pete explains why focusing solely on systems and processes isn't enough. You can shape culture by changing a decision, a conversation, or a meeting—these are micro culture moments. Or you can work on macro culture through value streams and delivery systems. But without changing leadership mindsets and behaviors, frameworks become hardware without software.

The key insight: Organizations are human systems. If we don't change the humans, we don't change the organization.

His challenge to leaders? Don't wait for senior leadership. Be the Robin Hood of power—challenge those above you and empower those below. Start shaping culture today.

Watch the full session below:

Ready to Shape Culture in Your Organization?

Want to learn more about the research behind business agility? Check out the Business Agility Institute's library for in-depth reports and insights.

Ready to take the first steps toward shaping culture in your organization? Reach out to us for a free consultation and discover how leadership development can unlock business agility at every level.

Video: Pete Behrens Presents 6 Lessons I Wish I Learned Sooner at Agile Austin

Thu, 29 Jan 2026 22:29:20 GMT

My Leadership Journey–Six Lessons I Wish I'd Learned Sooner

In this talk at Agile Austin's Evolving with Agility conference, Pete Behrens takes us back through his leadership journey—from a kindergartener challenging authority to a VP of engineering who didn't realize his heavy hand was stifling his team. What he discovered along the way changed everything about how he approaches leadership.

The Pattern That Changes Everything

Through stories of mentoring (badly), running a team intervention, and watching leaders struggle with direction and priorities, Pete reveals a powerful pattern: the biggest challenges leaders face aren't problems you can solve—they're tensions you can only manage.

Leadership Tensions You Can't Solve

Expertise vs. Openness : You were hired for your experience, yet you're expected to stay open to everyone else's ideas. How do you honor both?
Authority vs. Respect : Authority is given. Respect must be earned. Great leaders understand the difference—and know when they're leaning too heavily on their whistle.
Planning vs. Adapting : This isn't an either/or switch. It's a dial that needs constant adjustment based on uncertainty.
Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up : The answer isn't choosing a direction—it's creating what Pete calls "inside out" leadership through co-creation.

The Shift From Problems to Tensions

Pete shares why most leaders get stuck: they approach these challenges with a "duality mindset" (right or wrong, black or white, empower or control) when what's needed is an "and-based mindset" (quality and speed, autonomy and alignment, strategic and tactical).

The talk includes live demonstrations with audience volunteers, real organizational data showing tension in action, and practical insights on how to shift from problem-solving to tension management. If you've ever felt caught between competing demands or wondered why your expertise sometimes gets in the way, this perspective offers a fundamentally different way forward.

Watch the full session below:

Need support in managing your organization's tensions?

Every day, Agile Leadership Journey helps our clients improve business performance through developing leaders and aligning teams.

Our approach is about developing team cohesion and working together—a shared learning experience that reverberates throughout the organization long after our initial engagement ends!

Blog: When Priority Management Becomes a Game You Can't Win

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 17:10:48 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Are you playing ping pong or dealing poker? Leaders from our January masterclass described priority chaos through vivid metaphors—arm wrestling, Clue, whack-a-mole—with real costs to organizations. The breakthrough? Shifting from decision-maker to decision-facilitator, bringing stakeholders together with transparent constraints to negotiate priorities peer-to-peer. Discover eight actionable techniques that transform hidden priority battles into visible, collaborative decision-making.

Insights from the Ping Pong or Poker Masterclass

Sometimes how a decision is made is more important than what that decision is. This insight emerged as the central theme of our January 2026 alumni masterclass, where leaders from around the globe gathered to explore one of leadership's most persistent challenges: managing competing priorities in complex organizations.

In our pre-event post , we shared Amy's story from Pete Behrens' book Into the Fog —an IT leader who felt like a ping pong ball being whacked between competing stakeholders. This masterclass took that story deeper, exploring how participants navigate similar challenges in their own organizations.

The Priority Paradox: Why This Game Can Never Be Won

Prioritization will never be "solved." It's an elusive peak in leadership—a persistent tension you can learn to navigate more effectively, but never eliminate.

Sonny M. captured what many leaders feel when reading Amy's story: it’s relatability. Many leaders feel themselves constantly being pulled in different directions with different business line priorities vying for that first place position.

That recognition— I'm not alone —led to participants describing their organizational dynamics through vivid metaphors:

Arm wrestling – where political leverage and hierarchical power determine what gets attention
American football – where plays change constantly based on how the game progresses
The game of Clue – where everyone agrees in meetings but does their own thing behind the scenes, creating a perpetual mystery of "who broke what"
Bartering and deal-making – the "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" approach to getting work done
The business value game – where every request comes with inflated benefit projections that are never measured afterward
Whack-a-mole – the bright idea syndrome, where nothing gets finished because new priorities constantly emerge

These aren't just colorful descriptions. They represent patterns of dysfunction with measurable costs.

The Hidden Costs

As Pete shared during our session, recent research reveals the impact:

Health : 71% of leaders report significant stress due to priority management, with 40% considering leaving their roles ( DDI Global Leadership Forecast 2025 ).

Trust : 68% of employees lack trust in senior leadership, with priority inconsistency as a primary driver ( SurveyMonkey 2025 ).

Alignment : The "85/85 gap"—85% of leaders have confidence in their own direction, yet 85% don't believe the broader team is aligned ( Mural Survey 2025 ).

Strategic drift–the gradual misalignment that occurs when different parts of an organization pursue competing or uncoordinated priorities, causing the organization to lose focus and veer away from its intended strategic direction–has real costs. Participants identified additional impacts, including disengagement, project delays, missed outcomes, firefighting mode, and organizational paralysis.

A Linguistic Insight: Priority Was Singular

During our masterclass, Steve O. observed: "Priority is not plural."

We fact-checked this live and discovered something fascinating. The word "priority" comes from Latin prior, meaning "first." For roughly 500 years after the word entered English (14th century), it was used almost exclusively in the singular. When you could only do one thing at a time, there could logically be only one priority.

The plural "priorities" became common during the Industrial Revolution (1760-1840) as work complexity increased. The pluralization marks when we collectively accepted that everything could be urgent at once—though some argue this diluted the original meaning.

Jörk H. concurred: "Priority means to me a sequence," adding that when everyone insists everything is priority one, nothing actually is.

Eight Actionable Techniques

1. Make Priorities Visible

Katherine B. emphasized transparency: "Even if it's wrong, showing what they're working on helps rebuild reputation. Now that conversation can be data-driven." Public priorities create accountability.

2. Use Participatory Approaches

Charles F. observed that Amy's chips felt like participatory budgeting: "You step away and relinquish control of the decision to get a decision." Whether chips, tokens, or "Buy-a-Feature" exercises (from Luke Hohmann's Innovation Games ), giving stakeholders limited resources forces real prioritization through peer negotiation.

3. Focus on "Now" and "Later or Never"

Zuzi S. suggested simplifying: "Let's do this now, get feedback, and adapt. Remove fixedness and focus on what to do now." Rather than high/medium/low, use two categories: now, and later-or-never. This diplomatic framing helps stakeholders accept their work might never happen.

4. Reinforce That Priority Is Singular

Constantly remind teams (and yourself) that priority means a sequence (1, 2, 3...), not multiple items all labeled priority one.

5. Establish Governance Councils

Eric K. described using councils for strategic domains: "We have an AI council, user experience council, data governance council. They provide a way for departments to communicate at the appropriate level." Unlike communities of practice, councils are explicitly decision-making bodies with authority.

6. Create Co-Ownership Through Shared Facilitation

Several participants replicated Amy's approach—bringing stakeholders together to make collective decisions rather than individual lobbying.

7. Assess Time Horizons and Crisis Context

Charles F. distinguished when collaborative approaches work: "When the boat is filling with water, it's not time to play poker. It's time to bail water." Pete agreed: "Crisis management is different than complexity management—recognizing what system we're in." In genuine crises, as Charles F. noted, command-and-control may be necessary. These participatory techniques work best for ongoing operational priorities, not emergencies.

8. Accept That Changing the System Takes Time

Shifting from individual lobbying to collective prioritization requires cultural change. It's not a quick fix but a fundamental transformation in how decisions are made.

From Decision-Maker to Decision-Facilitator

Amy's story reveals something essential: you don't always need to have the answer. Sometimes your role is to create better conditions for answers to emerge.

This requires a mindset shift:

This is particularly challenging without positional power. Amy had to convince higher-status stakeholders to convince each other, not her. It took courage, political savvy, and persistence.

But it worked because it addressed the root problem: priorities negotiated in dozens of separate conversations create inconsistency and confusion. By bringing everyone into one room with transparent constraints and a shared process, she transformed how decisions got made.

What You Can Do Tomorrow

If you're feeling like a ping pong ball, start here:

Name your game – Is it arm wrestling? Clue? Whack-a-mole?
Ask yourself – "If I could change the game, what game would I play?"
Map hidden negotiations – Where are priorities being competed for privately?
Experiment small – Bring two competing stakeholders together for one conversation
Make constraints visible – Transparency about capacity is powerful
Create scarcity – Give stakeholders limited resources to allocate
Set expectations – Be clear about how priority decisions will be made going forwar d

The Deeper Truth

Priority management isn't a time management problem. It's a leadership problem about how decisions get made in complexity.

You can't win the priority game by being smarter or working harder. You can only change how the game is played.

Amy didn't solve prioritization. She created better conditions for prioritization to happen—transparently, collaboratively, with shared ownership.

That's adaptive leadership: recognizing that in complex environments, your role isn't always to have the answers. Sometimes it's to create conditions where better answers emerge from collective wisdom.

The tension will remain. But when that tension is shared openly, facilitated well, and navigated together, organizations become dramatically more effective. As Jörk H. observed: "Bad management regarding priorities results in very low productivity." The inverse is equally true: when priority decisions are made well—transparently, collaboratively, with clear accountability—trust increases, alignment improves, and productivity soars.

Ready to dive deeper? Amy’s story is just one of many leadership journeys in Into the Fog. Each chapter explores a different tension leaders face—from letting go of control to navigating blind spots to building resilience through uncertainty.

Join the Conversation : The Agile Leadership Journey community continues to explore these challenges in monthly alumni masterclasses. If you're navigating priority chaos, you're not alone. The game may never be won, but it can be played much, much better.

Interested in developing your ability to navigate leadership tensions, such as prioritization? Explore our leadership development programs .

Ping Pong or Poker? How Competing Priorities Overwhelm Leaders (and What to Do Instead)

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 03:07:56 GMT

If you’re a leader today, chances are you’ve felt a pretty consistent pull of competing priorities, urgent requests, and stakeholders who all believe their work matters most. Calendars fill up fast, progress creeps along, and no matter what you do, someone is frustrated.

So, are you playing ping pong or are you dealing poker?

No, ALJ isn’t getting into the sports gambling industry! Ping pong or poker is a metaphor that comes from our founder and CEO Pete Behrens’ book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty , and it captures a leadership trap that many of us don’t even realize we’ve fallen into.

Amy’s Story: When Leadership Feels Like Getting Hit From All Sides

From the chapter “Ping Pong or Poker?” in Into the Fog .

Amy didn’t need perfection. She just hoped for clearer priorities. She felt pulled in every direction. Torn. Tugged. Unable to make meaningful progress on anything.

When we met, her team was responsible for supporting multiple business units. They maintained and enhanced essential IT systems that employees and customers relied on daily. Their work was invisible, but absolutely critical.

Amy led a small, capable, and committed team. She prided herself on their health and productivity, but they were stretched thin. Tired and frustrated. Every week brought more requests than they could handle.

She met with stakeholders, gathered feedback, collected enhancement requests, and tried to make it all fit … but it didn’t. It simply couldn’t. And every time she attempted to prioritize one need over another, someone pushed back. Loudly.

The stakeholders weren’t aligned, each one believing their needs were more essential than the others. Every conversation added more conflict.

Multiple times, she had requested additional help to ease her team's burden. Each was denied. “Make it work,” was the message she received.

In fact, when we first spoke, Amy described her role as playing a game of organizational ping pong. Only she wasn't playing. She was the ball.

Ouch.

That image stuck with me. Each stakeholder held a paddle. Her team held a paddle. And Amy? Amy got whacked back and forth between them. The stakeholders didn't accept “no,” so the back-and-forth continued.

That’s not leadership. But it’s the lived reality for many who serve the business, trying to contribute while caught in a constant crossfire of competing priorities.

Amy’s experience reveals something critical that many leaders miss: she wasn’t just dealing with too much work. She was caught between two different tensions at once.

Two Tensions That Trap Leaders

Pete makes an important distinction here. It’s not just that leaders are overwhelmed; it’s that they are often navigating two tensions simultaneously:

Demand tension : The gap between what the organization wants and what it can realistically deliver.
Priority tension : The conflict between multiple, competing demands—each backed by different stakeholders, incentives, and definitions of value.

When these tensions aren’t surfaced and shared openly, leaders quietly absorb them. That’s when every day feels like chaos instead of clarity—when you become the ping pong ball.

But here’s what Amy discovered: The solution wasn’t to work harder or find the “right” answer. It was to change the game entirely.

The Breakthrough: From Ping Pong Ball to Poker Dealer

Continued from the chapter “Ping Pong or Poker?” in Into the Fog .

So I asked her, “If you could play any game instead of this one, what would it be?”

She paused. Thought for a moment.

Then said: “I don't know the game … but I wish the stakeholders had to play each other, rather than me.”

There it was. Amy didn’t just want to stop being the ball; she didn't want to be a player in the game at all. She was beginning to imagine her own shift, from player to referee, or perhaps a role on the sidelines. A facilitator. A dealer.

“That's it!” I offered. “What about a game of poker? But not a game you play. You’re the house, you hold the chips, you deal the cards.”

Amy’s eyes lit up. “I love it,” she said. And just like that, a new game was born. Instead of chasing down each stakeholder one by one, she invited them into the same room. She laid out the team’s available capacity, and she asked all of them to propose how best to fill it.

She anticipated a fight. Not just in the meetings themselves, but in the culture shift required to make this happen. Behind closed doors, she jokingly named her meeting Battlezoid. A cage match where egos would collide.

To the stakeholders, she was clear: If you want work prioritized, you must attend the meeting. No more back-channel lobbying. No more “who yells loudest wins.” You must make your case to your peers, not to me.

It wasn’t smooth. It wasn’t quiet. But it worked.

What Changed? The Power of Decision Facilitation

So what actually shifted when Amy moved from ping pong to poker? Three things:

The tension became visible . Instead of Amy absorbing competing priorities privately, everyone saw the constraints and trade-offs together.
Stakeholders faced each other, not Amy . They had to defend their priorities to peers, not just push harder on Amy.
Amy’s role transformed . She went from being squeezed between demands to creating the space where decisions could be made collaboratively.

This is what Pete calls decision facilitation —and it’s one of the most underutilized leadership skills today.

Better Decision Making Matters More Than Perfect Decisions

One of the most powerful ideas in the ping pong versus poker approach is that leadership isn’t about making the “right” decision. (After all, there often isn’t a single right answer.) What matters is how decisions get made.

Decision facilitation means creating space for multiple perspectives, surfacing tension instead of hiding it, and enabling shared understanding—even when not everyone gets their first choice. This approach doesn’t eliminate tension. It puts it to work.

More voices won't always bring alignment. But with better facilitation, they often bring wisdom, expand conversations, deepen empathy, and increase commitment—even from those whose priorities don't win out.

Hit Pause, Then Change the Game

Before trying to squeeze one more productivity system into your day, consider pausing to ask yourself these questions:

First, reflect on your current reality:

Where in my leadership am I acting like the ping pong ball?
Whose priorities am I absorbing without making them visible?
What tensions am I carrying alone that should be shared?

Now, imagine a different game:

What would it look like to step into the role of dealer instead?
Who needs to be in the same room together to actually see the trade-offs?
What decision-making process could I facilitate rather than own alone?

How’d that go? Any a-ha moments or small acknowledgements? Either way, simply noticing how you’re showing up and how priorities are moving around you is enough for today.

Tomorrow, you can consider shuffling the deck and making bigger changes.

About the Author

Betsy Piland is an ALJ alum and a marketing and communications professional. She has spent the bulk of her career working in higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofits—always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Reflection: The Quiet Engine of Human Leadership

Thu, 18 Dec 2025 00:02:33 GMT

“Reflection is not a break from leadership; it is how one stays human in leadership.” — Pete Behrens

If you’re feeling the relentless rush of modern leadership—with a calendar bursting at the seams and the “fog” of uncertainty as a constant companion—reflection is often the first thing we sacrifice. We treat it as a luxury or a break from the “real work.”

However, as explored in a recent ALJ Alumni Global Masterclass, reflection is not a departure from leadership: It is how leadership stays human.

Led by Pete Behrens, author of Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty , this session moved beyond academic definitions to frame reflection as a survival tool. Pete approached the session with an “Ebenezer Scrooge” framework—guiding the group through their past, present, and future—exploring how intentional pauses can transform overwhelming noise into actionable insights.

Redefining the Mirror

Leadership often begins at the boundary between the familiar and the unknown. Pete opened the session by challenging the standard definitions of reflection:

Self-perception : The literal image we see in a mirror.
Consequence : An “echo” or the objective impact our actions leave on the world.
Serious consideration : Focused thought with a specific intent.

For a leader, these three definitions combine to answer a singular question: How am I showing up, and what is the consequence of that posture?

Ghosts of the Past: Learning from the Teacher

Pete reminds us that, “The past isn’t a verdict; it’s a teacher.” In Into the Fog , Pete refers to these high-pressure, transformative moments as heat experiences—challenges that define our character. However, looking back often triggers a harsh inner critic.

To ensure the past remains a partner rather than a judge, the Masterclass participants shared several techniques for objective analysis:

Context, not immersion : Pete referenced NeuroLeadership Institute founder David Rock to explain that leaders should go into the past just enough to get context, but not so far that they get lost in the emotional repeat of a mistake.
The stories we tell ourselves : Drawing on Brené Brown’s work , Pete noted that we often create narratives of anxiety or failure when we lack information.
Data over emotion : Andy S. suggested an analytical approach, viewing past results as objective data, much like a scientist.
Positive self-talk : Tom D. shared a practice of justifying past actions with grace, acknowledging, “I did the best I could at that point in time.”
The growth mindset : Allison F. emphasized approaching the past with curiosity rather than judgment, focusing on a positive path forward to let go of negative feelings.

Tools for the Journey:
A Leadership Reflection Exercise

To help you clear your own “inner fog,” walk through this brief Reflection Exercise based on the guided practices and meditative exercises from the Masterclass.

Phase 1: The Past | Learning from the Teacher

The past is not a verdict; it is a source of context and data. Revisit recent events without falling into the perfection trap or excessive self-criticism.

Moment of strength : Recall a moment from the last 48 hours where you felt steady, connected, or courageous. What values were you honoring in that moment?
Moment of friction : Identify a moment you felt you rushed past, avoided, or would like to do over.
Data vs. verdict : Approach it like a scientist: What objective data can you extract? If you were to give your past self permission to let go of one authoritative voice or judgment, what would it be?

Phase 2: The Present | Presence as Posture

Leadership is less about power and position than it is about presence and posture. Presence turns experience into useful information.

Scanning the body : Close your eyes and take a deep breath. Where are you holding tension (jaw, shoulders, etc.)?
Feelings as signals : What is that tension trying to communicate to you right now?
The "WAIT" check : In your current interactions, ask yourself: WAIT: Why Am I Talking? or WAIST: Why Am I Still Talking?
Meta-conversation : Is there an "elephant in the room" or a feeling you need to name out loud to bring your team into the present moment?

Phase 3: The Future | Intentionality over Drifting

Visualization is not about predicting the unknown; it is about preparing your internal compass so you do not drift.

Setting the dial : Look ahead to the next 48 hours. Who do you need to be when you show up to your most challenging meeting? (e.g., coach, peer, decision-maker).
If-then planning : If a specific stressor occurs (e.g., a plan goes wrong or a teammate is silent), what is your pre-decided “off-ramp” or response?
Choosing what matters : What one thing needs your absolute attention? What can you intentionally let go of to avoid being spread too thin?
The “how” state : Instead of focusing on specific tactical details, envision how you want your team to be during this next phase.

Next Steps

Identify one small behavioral shift that you can practice today.
Who can you talk to this week who can help you gain a fresh perspective on your inner fog?

Living in the Present: Presence as Posture

Leadership is less about power and position than it is about presence and posture. Being present allows us to recognize feelings not as distractions, but as signals that something requires our attention. Pete observed that we often rush through interactions because we are too focused on the project, forgetting there is a human in front of us.

Alumni shared tactical micro-behaviors to maintain this grounded posture:

Who Do I Need to Be?: Rudolf G. prepares for situations by asking himself, “Who do I need to be there?”—shifting his intent before he even enters the room.
The Meta-Conversation : Andy S. found value in naming it in the moment, calling out group tension to bring everyone into a shared, honest meta-conversation.
Body Cues : Kumaresh R. uses “if-then” planning (a concept Pete notes is supported by David Rock’s research); if Kumaresh notices his anxiety building, he takes a pre-decided off-ramp, such as taking a break or getting water.
Slowing Down to Speed Up : Allison F. uses tools like fidget toys in retrospectives to physically slow the group down, helping them to “be here now.”

Crucially, Charlie F. introduced two vital acronyms for self-monitoring in real-time: WAIT: Why Am I Talking? and WAIST: Why Am I Still Talking? These checks help leaders move from reacting to responding, ensuring their voice adds value rather than just volume.

Looking to the Future: Intentionality Over Drifting

“Without intent, we drift,” Pete noted. In the “fog,” perfect prediction is impossible. Visualization is not about making a plan that will likely be wrong; it is about choosing what matters and preparing for the uncertainty ahead.

Courage over Certainty : Andy S. observed that preparation for uncertainty may be impossible; instead, one must find the “source of courage” to move forward regardless. Pete defines courage not as the absence of fear, but as stepping forward in the presence of it.
The “Plan” Tension : Tom D. shared a quote from boxer Mike Tyson: “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face,” which serves as a reminder to set expectations while remaining flexible.
Leading by Principles : Kumaresh R. likened leading through the fog to playing chess. When calculations end and surprises occur, you must rely on secured principles—like keeping your king safe—to guide your actions.
Envisioning the “How” State : Allison F. envisions who she wants to be rather than tactical details. If a team self-organizes toward a shared vision of how they want to work, the details often work themselves out.

Conclusion: Staying Human

Ultimately, reflection is the bridge between where we are and who we need to become. It is how we manage the inevitable tensions of leadership—balancing authority and respect, or expertise and curiosity. As Pete summarizes, reflection isn’t a break from leadership; it is the very practice that allows leadership to remain effective, empathetic, and human.

Join the ALJ Alumni Community

These monthly Global Masterclasses are designed for continuing education, practice, and peer support for those who have completed any ALJ workshop or program. If you have taken a workshop or program through ALJ and would like to join these monthly sessions, please contact us to receive your invitation to future sessions.

Pete Behrens Featured in Inc. Magazine: Why Human-Centered Leadership Matters Now More Than Ever

Thu, 11 Dec 2025 02:50:59 GMT

We’re excited to share that Agile Leadership Journey Founder & CEO Pete Behrens was recently interviewed for an article in Inc. Magazine exploring the future of leadership—and why the leaders who succeed next will be those who show up as humans first and executives second.

In 4 Things CEOs Must Do Differently to Lead With Clarity and Purpose , author Marcel Schwantes highlights Behrens’ perspective on “the fog”—the uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity leaders navigate every day.

Behrens’ insights are rooted in more than two decades of coaching leaders at every level and form the foundation of his book Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty . In the interview, he shares why clarity, connection, trust, and courage have become non-negotiables for modern leadership.

Key Themes From the Inc. Magazine Article

1. Lead From Humanity, Not Hierarchy

Behrens reflects on the “armor of certainty” many leaders feel pressured to wear—and why real trust and performance only emerge when leaders step out from behind titles and invite others into the process.

2. Build Trust Before You Build Strategy

Drawing from a story on a heli-skiing trip, Pete illustrates how leadership is less about control and more about balancing direction with respect. Transformational leaders inspire commitment—not compliance.

3. Embrace Vulnerability as Strength

Through a personal story of community recovery after wildfire, Pete highlights that influence often comes through connection, not command. Vulnerability, he explains, is not weakness—it’s honesty.

4. Choose Courage Over Control

From engineering to executive coaching, Pete has seen teams stall when perfection becomes the goal. Learning to build “small sandcastles”—simple, testable wins—is what unlocks progress and growth.

Schwantes’s article reinforces what we see every day in our work with organizations: Traditional command-and-control leadership is no longer sustainable—human-centered leadership is. This philosophy is the core of the Agile Leadership Journey: helping leaders build the mindsets and practices to navigate uncertainty, strengthen culture, and create healthier, more adaptive organizations.

Beyond the Urgency Trap: How Leaders Build Organizational Resilience That Lasts

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 22:40:29 GMT

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Building Organizational Resilience Beyond Constant Firefighting

If your leadership team constantly battles fires instead of building for the future, you're not alone. Many leaders describe their days as an endless sprint between quarterly pressures and operational crises—postponing the organizational capability building that would prevent the next crisis.

Like athletes who fail to train between competitions, organizations lose strength when they’re perpetually reacting. The true cost becomes apparent when competitors manage similar disruptions with greater ease and better results.

The goal isn’t to eliminate urgency—it’s to build the resilience to keep moving strategically while navigating disruption. That requires three key practices:

Strategic focus to align and simplify priorities
Capability building through intentional leadership development
Structured rhythms to reinforce alignment and learning

Leadership teams that model these practices don’t just survive disruption—they use it to gain a competitive advantage.

The Culture and Costs of Chronic Urgency

Why Leaders Feel Overwhelmed By Constant Firefighting

If your leadership team constantly battles fires instead of building for the future, you're not alone.

Many senior leaders I work with describe their days as a blur of meetings, messages, and constant motion. They’re running from one urgent matter to the next—quarterly goals, market shifts, personnel changes, customer escalations. Urgency has become the default operating system. Leadership has begun to feel less like a marathon and more like an endless sprint.

This urgency addiction is deceptive. It provides a sense of momentum and control. But the deeper costs—fragmented focus, burned-out teams, and weakened alignment—undermine the very systems needed for long-term performance.

When everything is urgent, nothing is strategic.

I've seen leadership teams exhaust themselves treating every issue as an emergency. I've witnessed change agents burn out when organizational resilience becomes secondary to more immediate demands. Eighteen months later, those same organizations wonder why competitors handle disruptions with less chaos and better results.

The Hidden Cost of Chronic Urgency

Chronic urgency isn’t just a scheduling issue—it’s a strategic erosion that depletes organizational capacity. It pulls leaders into short-term execution at the cost of long-term capability. Organizations caught in constant urgency spend more time reacting than directing. Strategic priorities get diluted. Reflection becomes a luxury. Leadership development and alignment fall to the margins.

Chronic urgency depletes organizational strategic capability.

Like overtrained athletes without recovery, organizations operating under constant pressure begin to break down:

Focus erodes. Every initiative feels urgent; none feel clear.
Energy scatters. Too many priorities stretch teams thin.
Execution weakens. Fatigue and chaos replace alignment and clarity.

The problem isn’t that leaders don’t care about strategy, development, or alignment—they do. However, in the whirlwind of urgent demands, the important work gets displaced. Reflection becomes a luxury. Growth becomes a future project. Strategic planning and alignment get postponed. When organizations are always racing, they deplete the very systems—organizational and personal—that make sustained performance possible.

The Result: Even strong strategies collapse when organizational capacity is depleted.

What Leaders Can Do to Fight Chronic Urgency

To move from firefighting to strategic resilience, leaders must shift how they lead and structure their organizations.

That shift starts with three critical practices, which we’ll explore:

Strategic focus to align and simplify priorities
Capability building through intentional leadership development
Structured rhythms to reinforce alignment and learning

Strategic Focus: Aligning Priorities and Energy

Focus isn’t a personality trait—it’s a leadership capability that can be developed and scaled across organizations. Like any skill, it requires intentional practice: consistently returning attention to strategic priorities, again and again, even when urgent distractions arise. When leadership teams develop strategic focus, they create the bandwidth for sustainable performance.

Practices That Build Strategic Focus

Leaders who train their organizations to develop focus treat every distraction as strategic data—building organizational resilience by distinguishing between genuine priorities from the noise.

Leaders must help their teams by:

Starting with priorities, not problems. Anchor meetings in strategic objectives.
Simplifying metrics. Track fewer indicators that drive true outcomes.
Protecting strategic time. Block space for strategy, not just operations.
Modelling focused leadership. When leaders stay focused, teams do too.

Strategic focus transforms distractions into data.

The Result: Organizations that develop strategic focus gain clarity, coherence, and energy. They stop mistaking busyness for progress and start aligning action to purpose.

Alignment Multiplies Focus: Doing Less, Better

Most organizations don’t fail for lack of effort or intelligence. They fail because energy gets scattered across too many competing priorities, depleting leadership bandwidth and team capacity. Every quarter brings new projects, new initiatives, and new “must-win” goals. The result? A slow erosion of focus that undermines sustainable performance. Teams become overloaded and disconnected. Leaders mistake busyness for progress.

Alignment isn’t consensus or agreement–it’s everyone aiming in the same direction. Alignment means shared purpose, goal transparency, and collective accountability. Strong alignment is the strategic focus multiplier: fewer priorities, better results, and stronger adaptation. It creates organizational coherence that reduces noise, strengthens cross-functional trust, and channels collective energy and resources toward measurable outcomes.

Alignment multiplies clear strategies into great execution.

The Result: Organizations with stronger alignment achieve more with fewer initiatives, adapt faster, and sustain performance under pressure.

Leadership Development: Building Organizational Capability

Strategic focus tells you where to aim—but without leadership capability, you're aiming at targets you can't reach. Organizational capability is like muscle—it weakens without use and grows with consistent challenge. The quality of leadership directly determines organizational resilience, adaptation speed, and execution effectiveness.

Development isn't overhead—it's infrastructure.

What Leadership Development Actually Builds

Leadership development creates critical organizational capabilities:

Navigation capability: Leaders gain the skills to guide their teams through complexity and ambiguity, making better decisions under pressure.
Alignment capability: Leaders learn to align to a “north star” and build cross-functional collaboration, breaking down silos and improving coordination across the organization.
Adaptation capability: Leaders develop the capacity to learn from both successes and setbacks, continuously improving performance.

These aren't abstract benefits. Research from the Center for Creative Leadership demonstrates that companies that protect leadership development during downturns consistently outperform competitors when markets recover. They move faster, collaborate more effectively, and execute strategic priorities with greater precision.

Organizational capability can't be outsourced, downloaded, or purchased—it must be developed.

How to Build Leadership Capability Systematically

Building organizational capability requires embedding developmental practices into business operations, including:

Leadership reflection and strategic planning sessions that create space for leaders to step back and think strategically
Structured learning from both successes and setbacks that turns experience into capability
Cross-functional collaboration opportunities that build alignment and shared language across teams
Intentional leadership development programs at multiple organizational levels, not just the executive suite

The World Economic Forum's report Risk Proof: A Framework for Building Organizational Resilience demonstrates that organizations investing systemically in capability building significantly outperform their peers. Companies with stronger resilience had survival rates nearly twice as high as those with weaker capabilities.

Why? They proactively built the internal capability to handle disruptions before they needed it.

The ultimate measure of leadership isn't tactical speed—it's strategic stamina.

The Result: Organizations with strong leadership capability don't just survive challenges—they emerge stronger and more competitive.

Structured Rhythm: Reinforcing Alignment Through Predictable Practice

Strategic focus and leadership capability are essential—but they need reinforcement. Without structured rhythms to sustain them, even the clearest priorities and strongest leaders drift under pressure.

Building a Structured Rhythm

A structured rhythm is the regular, predictable cadence of practices that keep organizations aligned and learning. Think of it as the organizational equivalent of an athlete's training schedule—you don't build strength randomly, but through consistent, scheduled practice.

High-performing organizations don't just set priorities once. They reinforce them over time through deliberate operating rhythms:

Quarterly recalibration. Step back, check for drift, realign.
Cross-functional coordination. Keep execution connected across teams.
Leadership development cycles. Build skills through intentional programs.
Structured reflection. Learn from both wins and setbacks.

These aren't bureaucratic requirements—they're how strategic priorities become embedded in daily operations. Resilience isn't built during crises; it's built between them through the muscle memory these rhythms create.

Resilience can't be outsourced or purchased—it must be built systematically through deliberate preparation and consistent practice.

The Result: Structured rhythms transform strategic intentions into operational reality. They create the consistency that allows organizations to sustain focus and alignment even under pressure.

Shifting From Chronic Urgency to Strategic Resilience

Urgency is inevitable. Firefighting will happen. But you get to choose whether your organization stays reactive—or builds the capacity to respond strategically.

Strategic focus, long-term capability building, and structured rhythm aren’t optional extras. They are the foundation strategy—the one that makes every other strategy executable.

You can't eliminate external pressures and urgent demands. But you can develop your internal capability to handle them with strategic clarity, operational balance, and coordinated action—enabling sustainable performance under pressure.

Leading the Rebuild: Three Strategic Actions for Senior Leaders to Activate Each Capability

Conduct a Strategic Priority Audit. Identify all active initiatives across your organization. Then apply this filter: which ones directly advance our core strategic objectives? Which can be delayed? Which should be stopped entirely? Organizational resilience begins by reducing competing priorities that fragment leadership attention and team energy—freeing up resources and focus for sustainable performance.
Protect and Invest in Leadership Development. Reserve dedicated time, budget, and executive attention for leadership capability building. Treat this as critical operating infrastructure that enables all other business outcomes–not optional overhead that gets cut when pressure increases. When markets tighten and pressure increases, protect these investments. Organizations that maintain leadership development during downturns consistently outperform competitors when conditions improve—they've built the capability to move faster and execute better when it matters most.
Establish Operating Rhythms. Create regular touchpoints for strategic recalibration, quarterly leadership alignment sessions, cross-functional coordination meetings, and structured reflection periods. Build spaces for reflection and shared direction. Strong alignment emerges through consistent practice, not one-time announcements. Demonstrate sustainable intensity rather than unsustainable urgency. Celebrate strategic preparation as much as tactical performance. Leadership’s pace and focus patterns set the organizational rhythm for everyone else.

When leadership teams consistently implement these practices, organizational alignment shifts from something you command to something that becomes embedded in how the organization naturally operates. It becomes your organizational culture.

Leadership isn’t about winning every urgent battle–it’s about creating the organizational resilience and capability to compete consistently over time. By developing the strategic capabilities of focus, systemic leadership development, and structured operating rhythms, leaders ensure their organizations don’t just survive the next challenge—they emerge stronger and more competitive through sustainable performance.

Strategic resilience doesn’t happen by accident. It requires deliberate action by leaders.

About the Author

Pete Behrens is a globally recognized leadership coach, consultant, author, and in-demand speaker. As the founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey, he has built a curriculum and global community dedicated to helping organizations improve leadership that drives sustainable change. Pete has led agile transformations for dozens of Fortune 500 companies and non-profit organizations, improving organizational health and performance through education and coaching.

An influential speaker, Pete has shared his insights at various global conferences, and he hosts the Relearning Leadership podcas t, where he engages with industry experts and leaders to explore the evolving landscape of leadership and organizational development. Most recently, he published his debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty .

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn.

60: Into the Fog with Pete Behrens

Wed, 05 Nov 2025 18:39:49 GMT

Welcome to Season 5 of Relearning Leadership

In this special episode of Relearning Leadership, host Pete Behrens shares the story behind his new book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty .

Through personal reflection and honest storytelling, Pete reveals how uncertainty, community, and courage have shaped his 20-year leadership journey—from losing his corporate role to founding Trail Ridge Consulting and finally, founding Agile Leadership Journey.

Hear how the “fog” became his most enduring metaphor for leadership and why no one makes it through alone.

Pete Behrens, Founder & CEO,

Agile Leadership Journey

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

Leadership is a team sport.

True growth happens in community—not isolation. Pete shares how his “traveling companions” lifted him through moments of doubt and helped him discover that leadership is as much about connection as it is direction.

Stories connect where frameworks can’t.

After years of teaching models and methods, Pete realized the most powerful learning comes from story. Into the Fog trades formulas for humanity—inviting readers to feel, reflect, and find their own meaning in the messy middle of leadership.

The fog is where we learn to lead.

Uncertainty isn’t a signal to stop; it’s a space to grow. Pete’s journey reminds us that leadership happens between what exists today and what’s needed tomorrow—and that courage, presence, and community light the way forward.

Explore:

Related Episodes

47: How To Be An Agile Leader

In the Season 4 premiere, Pete explores the four key competencies that define an agile leader—including finding clarity in the fog.

3: The Future Leader

Jasmine Keel, Head Research & Insights at Swiss Re joins Pete to discuss the mindset and behaviors of the future leader. Jasmine and Pete explore what the research says about which leadership traits drive success in today’s global disruptive economy and the emotional and behavioral derailers that limit it.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

Where have I been? Welcome to another episode of Relearning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today we're going to explore—well, find out, really—what I've been up to. And I'd like to start with a story.

My bold leap from corporate leadership to solo entrepreneurship wasn't entirely my own idea. It was prompted by a single sentence. I was halfway through a much-needed vacation at our family's cabin when the email arrived from my boss: “Come see me when you return from vacation.” Vague and ominous, yet unmistakable. I knew what it meant. I was being let go.

It wasn't personal. In four years, our startup went from zero to 60—from concept to market readiness, from hustling for seed funding to securing $20M in venture capital. We had built something real.

But our investors weren't satisfied with 60; they wanted 90, or possibly 120. We had taken the company this far. Now they felt it was time for someone else to take it the rest of the way.

I was at peace with the decision. I saw it coming and was prepared for when it arrived.

So there I was—a lake breeze in my hair, our boys splashing in the water, registering a new LLC from the dock. Trail Ridge Consulting was born before the layoff paperwork even arrived.

I'd been part of startups before, but this one was different. This time, I was truly solo. No co-founders. No clients. No safety net. Just an idea, a laptop, and a six-month, self-funded runway. Oh, and a wife and two kids who relied on me.

Jana didn't just support my leap; she joined me. She slashed our family budget to the bone. Nights out? Gone. Subscriptions? Paused. Lessons? Cancelled. Matt still jokes that my consulting career ended his shot at being a concert pianist. Sorry, Matt.

My family bootstrapped the business. Not just financially but emotionally as well. It was a whole-family sacrifice. They were my first collaborators; my first traveling companions. They joined me in the Fog.

It's been 20 years since that leap of faith to the consulting world from leadership. 20 years of serving clients and working with leaders. 20 years of trying to make companies just a little bit faster, a little bit better. You know, a little bit more human. But this isn't about that 20-year anniversary. This is about another milestone that's been on my bucket list for about as long. In fact, it's been a project I've started and stopped so many times that it's become a meme in our household and on staff. And a year ago, I paused this podcast to focus my attention on this project one last time. One last time to shape and to complete something that I've struggled with. And I'm proud to say that—mission accomplished.

My debut book, Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty , is now published. It's a project that was not easy. In fact, it wasn't even the book that I thought I would write. If you've been to our programs and seen me teach, you'll recognize that I often teach in models and methods. And, you know, my engineering background is, you know, biased towards, you know, formulas and frameworks and things that are tangible and tools and techniques. This is a book of stories.

And it was through this past year as I was writing the book—or the book before the book—using that mode of how I teach. And we got to about halfway through. And I was in February, and I was reading the draft I had created. And much of the book was in place, and, sure, there were stories in the book. And yet, as I read it, I thought, “I'm not inspired. I'm not motivated. I'm not connecting to the learning.” And I thought, “How can a reader possibly do the same?” And so once again, we scrapped the project. Once again, I—the project was at the verge of ending.

Yet, there was a thread that was pulling at me. One story that had connected to me. One way of writing that stood out to me. And it was with that thread that I pulled, and I said, "What is it about this particular story, this particular chapter that makes a difference?" And of course, it was story-based, but it was the energy, the connection, the emotion that the story was built upon. And from that moment forward, I thought, “What would a book look and feel like if it was entirely made up of stories?” The story I just read was the opening to Traveling Companions, just one of the stories in the book Into The Fog. The entire book is a collection of stories of leadership, both my own personal journey and the leaders I've been fortunate enough to meet along that journey. And as I reflected on the stories, I started to realize that when I speak, it's the stories people remember. It's the stories that create the motivation and the energy and the inspiration. It's the stories people remember. So, back to our story, Traveling Companions.

I gave myself six months, but in truth, I only felt I had three. Three months to land a paying client or call it off to look for a more traditional job.

Month one was a whirlwind of branding, blogging, and buying lunch. Lunch was my business model: “Let me buy you lunch for your insights.” Those early conversations with peer consultants, trainers, and entrepreneurial leaders weren't just informational. They were bridges. Each one reaffirmed my choice and opened new doors. They gave me traction, perspective, and hope.

But by week six, the bank balance wasn't the only thing dipping. My confidence, clarity, and sleep—all slipping. I began questioning my decision, as well as my ability. In the quiet times (and there were plenty), I began to wonder why anyone would pay for what I had to offer.

My fatigue was growing along with my anxiety. So, to quell my nerves, I began brushing off the résumé, just in case. Preparing plan B as plan A was faltering.

It was then…in the depth of the Fog, where my traveling companions pulled me through. Jean Tabaka invited me to speak on a conference panel. Neil Harrison partnered with me to offer two free organizational assessments.

At the conference where I spoke on the panel, Mike Cohn vouched for me with a potential client. And from the free assessments, one of the client leaders was intrigued enough to enlist my services.

Just as my runway was ending, I signed not one, but two, paying clients. The Fog hadn't lifted, but I was progressing through it. I'd love to tell you that I never looked back after that, but I'd be lying. It wasn't nearly that easy. For the next three years, I found myself looking over my shoulder…just one client away from failure. But I was never alone.

I'd found my community—communities, in fact. A Venn diagram of intersecting circles—agile, organizational development, project management, and leadership—each with traveling companions sharing ideas and values. And at the center? Me.

I wouldn't be here without you. Leadership is not a solo activity. That's more of an adventure. Leadership's a team sport. And that's what makes it so incredibly challenging and, yet, so rewarding. It takes us to places we've never been before. It’s, you know, that place between what exists today and what's needed tomorrow. You know, once I refocused on the Fog, suddenly the book became clear. An oxymoron, for sure. And, you know, Jana will tell you that the Fog was always the most powerful metaphor. She's mentioned for decades that, you know, this book could be about the Fog.

So, why this book? There are too many books on leadership than, you know, we could count, right? It doesn't make those books wrong. It simply says how incredibly challenging, situational, and complex leadership truly is. You know, my editor for this round, Christopher Ruz, said something to me in the editing process towards the end, as I was getting towards this final version of the book. And he said, "Pete, people don't need books anymore for knowledge. That's free and accessible anywhere in the world today. But what they don't get is you. They don't get your experience. They don't get your voice." And he said, "That's something that only you can produce and you can create." And so, that's what I did. I centered the book not just on my personal stories, but on leaders that I've been fortunate to engage with through my career. There are personal stories and professional ones from every decade of my life. From childhood to early adulthood, to me as an engineer, to me as a leader, to me as coach and trainer.

I wanted, though—and I was very explicit: it's not a memoir. This book is not about me. What I'm hopeful for is that the stories and the lessons come through me in my experiences, the things I've faced. And, you know, one of the things I hear from people is—they say, “Pete, you're able to make complex things seem simple.” I love that! That warms my heart. You know, as an engineer who works on complex systems, you know, I find that that can be a superpower. And what I'm hopeful for is that these stories do the same thing for leadership. They bring complex human dynamics forward in a way that provides meaning and, potentially, learning. But I explicitly tried to avoid this book to teach, right? I hope it connects. I avoided the preach. My dad was a preacher. My hope is that it provides presence. That it shares situations, dilemmas, decisions. And both from success and failure. And that's what I find to be the most valuable, is—learning through these situations what others have faced and how they progressed. So, I want to conclude the story for you.

Community propelled my growth. I started as a member. Then a contributor. Then a leader. I would not be where I am today without community support, not only in my career, but in how I feel about my career. The more I gave, the more it gave back. I offered time, energy, and ideas. It returned something much more valuable—belonging, purpose, and meaning.

Community became my home away from home—the place I felt most welcome, safe, stretched, and supported. Colleagues became co-creators. Co-creators became friends. Companies came and went. Titles changed. Logos faded. But my traveling companions have stayed by my side.

I even created a few communities of my own—personally with friends seeking adventure, professionally with peers seeking a support group, and organizationally to expand our business. They weren't always formal, and they didn't always have staying power. They just required a bit of structure and an invitation—from a passionate person with a purpose.

Decades later, I can trace nearly every business opportunity to a connection. Business is relational. Period.

Leadership can feel lonely, but it doesn't have to be. Through community, we find mirrors—people who reflect us back to ourselves. People who remind us of who we are when we forget. People who challenge us, champion us, and walk beside us. Some of my deepest development didn't come from books or workshops. It came from companions. Colleagues. Clients. Friends.

Some companions walked with us briefly; others for decades. Some we lead; others lead us. But none of us make it through the Fog alone.

So build your circles, tend your relationships, and lean on companions. Because as the landscape changes and the path fades, your traveling companions will help you keep walking. Especially when you feel you can't.

You know, I wrote this book for the senior executive, but not only—I also had in mind the senior citizen and, in fact, seniors in high school. And, to be honest, one of the key reader personas that I had in mind as I was writing was my children and nieces and nephews. I wanted them to experience leadership in a way that was stripped away from all of our technical language or tools or models or frameworks and just to expose the humanity of what leadership looks like at its core. To bring out the essence, not in leader as title or position, but as those who demonstrate the act of leading—we call that leadership, the act of leading—from wherever they stand.

The book is available right now on Amazon in hard-copy format. Yes, we will produce a paperback. We will produce an ebook and, yes, I will be recording an audiobook. But I encourage you to pick up a copy today. Read it, share it, give us some feedback, put a review on Amazon. You know, that's how this world tends to work. I want to hear your thoughts.

And what we're going to be doing with the podcast this season is—starting in the new year, we're going to be bringing you stories behind the stories. I'm incredibly excited to bring forward leaders and colleagues, some of whom are the leaders highlighted or the leaders personified in these stories. Some people I haven't, you know, been with for three decades. Bring them forward—a childhood friend, a peer when I was an engineer. One of my mentor leaders or two. Leaders that I've walked side-by-side with early in my consulting career and later on. Colleagues who have joined me in various situations. So, what we're going to be doing is zooming in on some of the stories. But, no, we're not going to read the stories like I did today. I wanted to do that to share with you a feeling of what the book feels like. And the entire book is stories like that. And I'm hopeful that you will find inspiration. I'm hopeful you'll find some motivation. And I'm hopeful that you will find some opportunity to demonstrate leadership from wherever you stand.

You can learn more about the book at IntoTheFogBook.com . But I want to say, for now, thank you for listening. Thank you for watching. And thank you for being one of my traveling companions.

Book | Leading the Agile Transformation: A Novel About Leading Change in Work and Life by Scott Dunn

Thu, 30 Oct 2025 23:58:22 GMT

Every leader has the power to shape culture and outcomes by first transforming themselves.

ALJ Guide Scott Dunn ’s book, Leading the Agile Transformation: A Novel About Leading Change in Work and Life , follows a senior manager thrust into a sweeping organizational shift. Through moments of leadership, resistance, and self-doubt, he discovers that true transformation isn’t just about adopting Agile practices—it’s about changing mindsets. Guided by an experienced Agile Coach, he learns that successful change requires more than new processes; it demands self-awareness, humility, and a willingness to grow alongside his team.

Drawing on Dunn’s real-world experience coaching and training leaders, the book reveals the emotional side of transformation—the fears, frustrations, and insecurities that surface when people are asked to change. Dunn reminds readers that personal and professional lives are inseparable and that authentic leadership comes from congruence between the two.

"The first step in this process is the belief that you can change things, beginning with how you show up, how you lead, how you listen, how you approach risk, and how you open up—in your personal life as well as at work." – Scott Dunn

Book | Unlocking Momentum: The CIO's Keys to Accelerating Change and Becoming a Strategic C-Level Partner by Aaron Kopel

Thu, 30 Oct 2025 23:41:05 GMT

C-suite leaders, particularly CIOs, seek to collaborate with peers and create innovative solutions that deliver increasing customer value.

Yet, each year, regulatory demands grow more complex as you implement and maintain more systems, manage risk and budget, and stay on top of relevant trends that now change by the minute.

Your teams are lagging behind, constantly shifting gears, and putting out fires while working to satisfy the relentless demands of the business. You’re feeling stuck, locked down, and pulled in fifteen different directions. You need a way to break free and build momentum.

Business agility expert Aaron Kopel believes what you need actually starts within you. In Unlocking Momentum, he offers you a way to get moving again by taking your rightful place as a pivotal force for innovation and adaptability within your organization.

"A CIO who is able to lead change effectively is also uniquely situated to become a change leader throughout the organization, creating a culture of collaboration and innovation." – Aaron Kopel

Book | Untapped Agility: Seven Leadership Moves to Take Your Transformation to the Next Level by Jesse Fewell

Thu, 30 Oct 2025 22:27:53 GMT

This balanced guide to agility gets past the hype and frustration to help frustrated leaders transform their agile transformations.

Agile transformations are supposed to make organizations modern, competitive, and relevant. But in the well-intentioned effort to move into the future, change leaders find themselves frustrated by pushback, limited impact, poor practices, and unfair criticism. What's going on?

ALJ Guide Jesse Fewell' s book cuts through the "quick-fix" hype of agile theory and explains a recurring transformational pattern that unpacks what holds organizations back. The boost is the initial gains from logical first steps; the barrier is the unavoidable roadblock that must come next; and the rebound is the way forward to further gains by leaning against the concept of the original boost. With these counterintuitive rebounds, Fewell identifies seven leadership moves that can be used to unblock stalled agile transformations.

"Your transformation is not a failure. It turns out the buy-in, talent, alignment, and growth you need to break through are already in front of you. It's simply under the surface—undiscovered, unutilized, and untapped." – Jesse Fewell

ALJ Case Study | InterSystems: Navigating Complexity in Healthcare IT Through Building Leadership Agility

Thu, 23 Oct 2025 19:41:33 GMT

What happens when technical excellence isn’t enough?

For InterSystems, a company long recognized for hiring some of the brightest minds in healthcare technology, the growing complexity of the industry revealed an important truth:

Expertise, strong products, and excellent customer service are necessary, but no longer sufficient. Success increasingly depends on internal leadership—specifically, on shaping a culture that values collaboration as much as expert individuals.

By investing in leadership agility, InterSystems began to unlock new ways of aligning its culture, retaining top talent, and delivering value to customers in a rapidly changing world. Like a crew boat, where strength alone won’t win the race, performance came from the combination of strength and alignment.

In partnership with Agile Leadership Journey, InterSystems committed to developing leaders who can see, adapt, and respond to challenges at both the team and organizational levels.

The Challenge: Beyond Technical Excellence

For decades, InterSystems built its reputation on hiring action-oriented experts capable of delivering solutions and solving customer problems in high-stakes environments. But as complexity increased, technical excellence alone was no longer enough.

InterSystems' Inner Struggles

Collaboration bottlenecks: Highly talented individuals worked well independently, but struggled to align across teams. Bottlenecks emerged as coordination demands grew. 
Talent retention: With a highly selective hiring process and significant investment in employee development, the company sought to reinforce its retention efforts and safeguard against the challenges of replacing top talent. 
Slowed product cycles: Release timelines were increasingly weighed down by cross-team dependencies and coordination challenges.
 Uneven leadership capability: Many managers excelled at directing and delivering, but fewer were skilled in guiding, aligning, and inspiring.

InterSystems leaders had envisioned a culture where individuals follow guidelines instead of processes. Ross Hughes , a Leadership and Organizational Agility Coach with Agile Leadership Journey, described, “It was this mentality that facilitated their shift to agile values with empowered teams implementing Scrum.”

While this improved some product delivery challenges, it wasn’t enough to address issues that would require a different leadership approach to resolve.

“Many organizations try to solve human system problems with technical solutions,” explains Pete Behrens , Founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey. “But sustainable transformation requires leaders who can navigate the space between structure and flexibility, between individual excellence and collective impact.”

The Approach: Leadership Through Three Lenses

Rather than delivering a predetermined solution, Hughes and Behrens guided InterSystems leaders around the globe—from executives through individual contributors—through a leadership evolution that broadened their perspective, shifted their time horizons, and deepened their self-awareness.

The transformation wasn't about adopting new tools or processes; it was about developing the internal capacity to navigate complexity with greater clarity.

“Real leadership development happens when people stop looking for the right technique and start expanding their ability to see what each situation actually requires,” notes Pete Behrens.

Continue reading below...

Download the Complete Case Study

1. Broadening the System Perspective: Reimagining Structures

Organizational structures can unintentionally limit human capacity. Siloed divisions and rigid roles often slow progress. InterSystems was no different—until 2019, when Head of Global Healthcare Solutions Don Woodlock ran an experiment to shift his division’s “human system.”

By replacing siloed, hierarchical structures with empowered, cross-functional teams, leaders removed internal information barriers and delegated more decision authority. This improved collective intelligence and decision-making—aligning the human system more closely with the company’s solution system.

2. A More Adaptive Time Horizon: Balancing Short- and Long-Term Goals

Like many organizations, InterSystems struggled to navigate urgent disruptions alongside long-term strategy. Historically, product updates were released annually.

As complexity grew, delays mounted. By shifting from predictive planning to empirical, iterative cycles, the company increased both release predictability and value delivery.

Yet the real differentiator wasn’t just the adoption of agile practices—it was the development of leaders capable of stewarding both short-term delivery and long-term organizational change.

Woodlock, drawing from the leadership development he received while at GE Healthcare, believed that management alone couldn’t solve the hardest problems. True leadership meant guiding teams into uncharted territory—requiring more leaders to step forward.

3. A Deeper Self-Awareness: Building Adaptive Leaders

Through Agile Leadership Journey’s engagement, InterSystems leaders reflected on their own styles and learned to adapt them to the needs of the moment. Instead of defaulting to “providing answers,” leaders began balancing directive decisions with curiosity-driven coaching, enabling solutions to emerge organically from teams.

As Woodlock explained, “Improvement doesn’t just come from the top.” This mindset led to intentional investment in leaders at every level: senior executives in 2019, directors and managers in 2020 and 2021, and then, emerging team leaders in 2023 and 2024.

The Results: Cultural & Organizational Shifts

The transformation at InterSystems demonstrates how leadership development directly drives organizational performance. Rather than treating people development and business results as separate objectives, the company discovered they were fundamentally connected. By prioritizing leadership development, InterSystems began to see measurable improvements in outcomes amongst employees, customers, and business.

The most compelling results InterSystems reported include:

Lower attrition : Turnover dropped even further below industry averages. Leaders attributed this to employees feeling invested in, supported, and given opportunities to learn and grow.

Stronger organizational agility: When COVID-19 disrupted demand for a new product, leaders and teams adapted quickly to changing market needs.

For Woodlock, this proved that “the word agile means something”—that it’s not just a process, but a mindset and leadership response.

ALJ Guide Ross Hughes, notes, “The real measure isn’t just improved metrics. It’s whether leaders can sustain this agility when the next disruption arrives. InterSystems proved they could adapt their leadership response, not just their processes.”

The Path Forward

InterSystems experience reveals an important truth for technology leaders: in an industry built on solving complex problems, the most persistent challenges are often human ones.

“What we see is that this truth applies universally for most complex organizational problems—really regardless of industry,” Hughes reveals. By developing leaders who could see systems more clearly, balance time horizons and competing priorities more dynamically, and respond to uncertainty with greater self-awareness, the company didn't just improve its metrics—it built the internal capacity to thrive amid whatever changes come next.”

The journey continues, but InterSystems has proven that when organizations invest in developing leadership agility at all levels, they create something more valuable than improved processes: they build resilience that becomes part of their competitive advantage.

Will your organization's success story be ALJ's next case study?

InterSystems' story isn't about software or structure—it's about what happens when leaders commit to rethinking how value is delivered.

If your organization is facing stalled growth, siloed teams, or cultural tension, Agile Leadership Journey can help.

Book | Into the Fog: Leadership Stories from the Edge of Uncertainty by Pete Behrens

Thu, 23 Oct 2025 16:31:39 GMT

Discover why the best leaders don't wait for clarity—they create it in the midst of uncertainty.

The fog is rolling in on modern leadership. Projects stall despite clear plans. Teams resist despite good intentions. Markets shift faster than strategies can adapt. If you're feeling this uncertainty, you're not alone—and you're exactly where real leadership is needed most.

Leadership coach Pete Behrens challenges the fundamental assumption that leadership requires certainty. Through raw, vulnerable stories from his three-decade journey from engineer to executive to organizational coach, he reveals that leadership isn't about having all the answers—it's about having the courage to step forward when the path isn't clear.

The fog is here. The question isn't whether you'll encounter it, but how you'll choose to lead within it.

What You'll Discover in Into the Fog

Real Stories, Real Leadership: From a neighborhood organizer rallying a community after a devastating wildfire to boardroom moments where courage means speaking truth to power, these authentic accounts illuminate the daily choices that define great leadership.

Navigate Your Inner Fog: Learn to recognize and clear the internal barriers—blind spots, biases, and limiting beliefs—that skew our perspective and inhibit our ability to lead effectively.

Manage Leadership Tensions: Discover how to balance competing demands like authority and respect, expertise and openness, speed and reflection—tensions that can't be solved, only skillfully managed.

Resilience for the Journey: Understand the importance of marginal gains to transformation and that the real work of leadership is needed most in the messy middle, between the decision and the destination.

Lead Regardless of Title: Recognize that leadership is a choice available to anyone, in any role, willing to step into uncertainty and invite others to join them.

This Book Is For You If ...

You want to lead in a way that feels authentic, human, and real
You think your current leadership style isn't sustainable or future-ready
You hesitate to lead because you don't feel "ready"
You're navigating organizational change, team challenges, or rapid market shifts
You believe there's more to leadership than command-and-control approaches

What Makes This Book Different

This isn't another abstract book filled with frameworks and formulas. Behrens shares his failures alongside his insights—from mismanaging early team dynamics to missing crucial feedback about his own blind spots. The result is a practical, honest companion for the complex human challenges we all face.

Through five progressive sections—The Approaching Fog, Entering the Fog, Our Inner Fog, Navigating the Fog, and Resilience in the Fog—you'll journey from recognizing uncertainty as opportunity to building the skills needed for sustained leadership in an unpredictable world.

About the Author

Pete Behrens didn't set out to become a leadership expert. His journey began as an engineer solving technical problems, but over three decades, he discovered that the most complex challenges aren't technical—they're human. As Founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey, international speaker , and host of the Relearning Leadership podcast , Pete's willingness to share his own stumbles reminds us that great leaders aren't born—they're built through experience, reflection, and the courage to keep growing.

From Knowing to Growing: Turning Lessons Learned Into Lasting Change

Tue, 09 Sep 2025 16:40:47 GMT

Here’s something you should know about me: I’m a chronic project starter, always excited to chase the shiny new thing, but the number of projects that wind up unfinished? Yikes.

If your New Year’s resolutions fizzle by March, all of your projects lurch forward in fits and starts, or you’ve been inspired by an eye-opening workshop or self-betterment book, but forgot about those “life-changing” lessons just a few weeks later, you might be that way, too!

As a leadership coach who is on their own growth journey, I know it’s not always easy to apply learned lessons and change our behaviors—but it is possible. Here are a few of the approaches I use, personally and professionally, to grow sustainably, without making it so burdensome that I abandon the effort entirely.

Start With Your “Why?”

For better or worse, our behaviors define us. The problem is that most of us are so focused on our actions that we skip over how it shapes our identity. Try using this sentence as an exercise; it should help you shape your “why.”

Because I am the kind of , when , I will .

For example, “Because I’m the kind of leader who grows people, when a teammate brings me a problem, I will ask one open question before offering advice.” Framing it this way turns a vague intention into something that can be acted on in the moment. It offers insight into who you are, why this change in behavior matters to you, and what, if any, urgency there is around it.

Discover What’s Blocking Your Progress

This can be the hardest part of changing behaviors, so be patient, but honest, with yourself! It will take time, and you’ll likely encounter some setbacks. That’s okay. Every behavior sits at the intersection of three forces: capability, opportunity, and motivation (aka the COM-B model).

Take a few minutes to ask yourself:

Capability: Can I realistically do it?
Opportunity: Does my environment make it likely?
Motivation: Do I want to do it right now?

I’m a beekeeper. (Stick with me here—it’s relevant, promise!) I sometimes get intimidated by the work I know is necessary to keep my hives healthy. I’ll avoid doing a hive inspection by telling myself that I don’t know what I’ll find, I won’t know what to do, or I won’t have the supplies I need to fix the problem.

This wasn’t a capability problem. This was a motivation problem triggered by fear, so I broke down the task into steps that don’t feel so scary. Step one: Put on the bee suit. But wait—that’s not a small step because the next step is to go out and do the inspection!

The smaller step was making a checklist of the tools I would need. If I didn’t have what I needed, I wouldn’t do an inspection. But if I did have everything I needed, my brain no longer had anything to argue. My roadblock was gone, and my motivation and confidence were restored.

Look to the “EAST”

One way to make behavior change less overwhelming is to approach it via the behavioral insights acronym EAST: easy, attractive, social, and timely. Once you identify your obstacles, you can get creative on how to minimize them.

Make it Easy

Maybe you’re finding it difficult to set aside time to journal. A way to minimize this barrier could be to end the last meeting of your day just two minutes early and write two sentences—only two. Or perhaps you’re learning how to play an instrument and know you need to practice more. Try physically putting the instrument on the sofa. If you have to pick up a guitar to sit down, you’ll be more likely to strum a few chords.

Make it Attractive

Kids are much better at this. They might turn their nose up at a salad but a plate of cut up veggies sorted by color is a different story! As adults, we can make our behavior tracker fun and colorful; maybe use a Canva template to make something that fits your aesthetic.

Make it Social

I’m one of ALJ’s facilitators for the Applied Agility in Leadership program , so I’ve seen firsthand how valuable it can be to have a support and accountability group to both cheer you on and support when you slip. This support can come in many forms: Maybe it’s a formal group like ALJ’s, a daily text with an accountability buddy, or teaching someone else to adopt a habit you’ve mastered. I know for a fact that being on the other side of the table offers an invaluable perspective on your own behaviors.

Make it Timely

With behavior change and habit building, time is a tool, not an enemy, so use it to your advantage. Use “if-then” to give yourself a cue and response system. It’s not a script, but a reminder of what you promised to yourself earlier. For example, “If I’m feeling frustrated, then I will tie a knot in a piece of string to help me stay calm. Bonus: At the end of the week, you’d have a visual of how many times you kept your temper under control. Also, use those naturally occurring fresh starts (a new week, month, etc.) to review, revise, and reaffirm your goals.

Whatever you do, be sure to celebrate small wins. Give yourself a pat on the back or even a little dance break. Bonus: Your body will tie those dance-induced endorphins to the successful creation of your new habit. I’m a huge Game of Thrones fan, but only allow myself to watch it while on my stationary bike. None of us are above gentle bribery when it’s used for good!

Catalyst Canvas: A Tool to Help Behavior Change Stick

When it comes to behavior change and new habits, I admit that I hold myself to a different standard than my team. When they’re learning something new and building new habits, I offer grace when they make mistakes and congratulate them for taking risks. However, I judge myself harshly for the same things. ALJ’s Catalyst Canvas™ has helped me take the emotion and blame out of my goal-setting—just the facts, ma’am!

We’ve found our “why,” we’ve removed obstacles, we’ve applied the EAST framework: These have laid the groundwork for the Catalyst Canvas, one tool that captures all the pieces. My advice: Treat the Canvas as an operating system, not a poster. Update it with a timely review/revise/reaffirm cadence. The paper doesn’t judge. It just keeps you honest and gives you new data about your next small step.

A Real-World Behavior Change Example

A leader I recently worked with—we’ll call her Maya—her if/then identity statement was “Because I’m a leader that helps my employees grow their skills, if they bring me a challenge, then I will ask for their ideas before sharing mine.”

First, Maya applied the EAST model:

Easy : At the top of her 1:1 agenda, she added a bright green reminder, “Ask questions before sharing.”
Attractive : She keeps a sticky note right next to her keyboard so she can add a tally line when she lets others speak first in meetings. Checkboxes are so satisfying!
Social : On Fridays, Maya and a fellow manager share a highlight from their favorite conversation that week to their team chat.
Timely : She has a calendar reminder at the end of each month to review her goals with an accountability buddy.

Then, Maya took her goals to the Catalyst Canvas:

Goal : Let go of having the answer and let my employees make more decisions.
Why Now : I have a team member that’s looking to be promoted, but they need more practice making strategic decisions.
Obstacles : They aren’t used to making these choices, and they will wait for me.
Measures : Leading, tally marks; lagging, team members start bringing ideas or solutions forward instead of just problems.
Small Steps : Share conversations with my peer manager. Adjust my 1:1 template. Keep a tally.

None of this required heroics or hours of commitment. It required cues she would actually see, a version small enough to do on a bad day, and a micro-reward that arrives now—not at the end of the quarter. Over time, new obstacles would arise and Maya spoke up; we revised her canvas and kept going.

Commit to Blameless Reflection

If you take nothing else from this, remember: It takes courage to commit to change, to be introspective, and to be vulnerable with yourself. The best way I’ve found to reflect is through journaling. I know it’s a fraught topic for many leaders! Some think it means pages of handwritten feelings, diary-style. Let me clarify: Journaling is shorthand for reflecting.

I am an only child, so growing up, journaling was my way of venting and processing the challenges of adolescence. As I got older, journaling evolved into a way to remind myself of memorable moments with my step-daughter when she was little. (She used to say “chickapino” instead of “cappuccino.” So cute!)

When I started leading and coaching, it shifted again, and journaling has become a way to look back at how far I’ve come, at goals that I abandoned, and goals that are now deeply ingrained habits. I see my Applied Agility cohort members look skeptical when I talk about journaling, and I see them give up before they see the benefits. I remind them: The goal is to reflect, not write a memoir.

However you journal—whatever medium you use, whether you write one sentence or a paragraph—do what works for you. Lately, I’ve switched to making audio recordings. My phone is always with me, so I don’t have to worry about my pen or my journal. I can make a 30-second voice memo while I make tea between meetings. After a few weeks, I can upload the recordings into an AI/LLM and ask it to create a summary, observations, and patterns from the past week.

Whatever blameless reflection looks like for you, don’t make it difficult. The key is to review how your experiments are going, process how to adjust going forward, and look back into history to see how far you’ve come.

Change doesn’t require you to move mountains—or become a beekeeper! You just need a clear reason, a realistic read on your blockers, and a world that quietly nudges you in the direction you want to go. Create this space for yourself, and before you know it, your knowing will turn into growing.

Ready to Dive Deeper?

Here are several books, papers, and teachings that can support your knowing-to-growing journey.

Atomic Habits , a book by author James Clear, discusses the laws of habit building (cue, craving, response, reward).
The EAST framework helps us make choices that are easy, attractive, social, and timely.
Daphna Oyserman’s research on Identity-Based Motivation explores the link between who we think we are and what we actually do.
Switch , by Chip Heath and Dan Heath, explains how our minds are ruled by two different systems—the rational mind and the emotional mind—that compete for control.
Look to the COM-B & the Behaviour Change Wheel (Michie et al.) for a practical checklist that can guide your behavior deconstruction work.

About the Author

ALJ Guide Katharine Bodan imagines a world where business leaders spend the bulk of their time on strategy and vision, in organizations where employees are fulfilled by the work they do and feel safe with both success and learning.

She draws upon experience from her own CTO and VP roles and brings it into her coaching and consulting. She helps team members and executives improve their practices, processes, and goals to achieve sustainable growth.

Connect with Katharine on LinkedIn .

ALJ Case Study | From Frustration to Flow: How Geonetric Rebuilt its Culture and Capabilities

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Thu, 31 Jul 2025 22:49:42 GMT

In the early 2000s, Geonetric was a growing company navigating the chaotic realities of early success.

The Cedar Rapids-based digital marketing agency had carved out a successful niche helping hospitals build web solutions, but a combination of success and rapidly advancing technology was straining the company’s internal systems. “We were stumbling from problem to problem,” said Geonetric founder Eric Engelmann.

What followed was a bold, organization-wide experiment in leadership, agility, and cultural reinvention—one that still shapes how Geonetric operates more than a decade later.

The Situation at Geonetric

Founded in 1999, Geonetric started as a small web development firm but quickly evolved into a successful digital marketing agency serving the healthcare industry. With this rapid success came serious growing pains. What once worked—quick-response, high-touch, client-specific solutions—began to break down.

Engelmann’s team became buried in a backlog of redundant code and fragmented systems as their client list grew. Clients and their requests for customizations kept coming; they were hooked on personalized service. And because their needs kept shifting, the platform was always a step or two behind. “It wasn’t scalable,” recalled Engelmann. “It was a disaster.”

Engelmann and the Geonetric leadership team knew it wasn’t just a technical issue—it was a strategic and cultural one. They attempted to right the ship for nearly two years, with little success. “Something had to change,” said Engelmann.

Finally, Engelmann was encouraged to contact Pete Behrens, Agile Leadership Journey founder and CEO, for help.

“Eric didn’t lack vision. He didn’t lack talent,” said Behrens. “But like many leaders, he struggled to say no to his stakeholders. He was trying to please everyone, keep every promise, and avoid the hard conversations.”

After their initial connection, Behrens traveled to Geonetric’s Iowa headquarters to meet the team, and together they embarked on their comprehensive agile transformation.

The Solution

Behrens spent his first days with Geonetric assessing where the organization needed to focus its efforts.

“When I met Eric, Geonetric had been on a path for two years, repeatedly stumbling while trying to build a platform for its customers. When I came in, we started at the beginning: What’s going right? What’s the current state of things? Where are you, but more importantly, where do you want to be?”

Continue reading below...

Download the Complete Case Study

Behrens facilitated a deep dive with Engelmann and the Geonetric leadership team, enabling them to identify and make sense of the core organizational challenges.

“In my head, I envisioned two lines on a chart,” explained Behrens. “I saw the line of the platform getting developed, a velocity line, and I saw the line of new work being requested by clients. Unfortunately, the lines weren’t coming together; they were diverging. I shared with Eric that he was losing ground because one line was going up faster than the other. I knew we needed to help him visualize it, so we put everything up on the wall. Suddenly, the mountain they were trying to climb came into focus.”

Seeing a conference room practically wallpapered in index cards full of backlog items was overwhelming. But it was time to get to work and do the most difficult thing: say no to clients. As Engelmann redirected Geonetric’s full focus toward building a new platform, he worked with Behrens on building internal awareness, visibility, and the capability to manage complexity in new ways.

First, Behrens made sure that the Geonetric team knew that this would be a co-created journey, not a dictated step-by-step process. Everything from larger shifts, such as a restructuring to a flatter organizational structure, to more pragmatic approaches like implementing Scrum to manage the company’s backlog of projects, would be done collaboratively.

As he deepened his work within the organization, Behrens introduced the Geonetric team to new ways of thinking about leadership, systems, and value delivery. He worked not just with software teams, but with everyone, including sales, marketing, and operations.

“Everybody needed to understand this. It couldn’t just be a tech thing,” Engelmann said.

As the transformation continued, Geonetric’s previously siloed departments began doing multidisciplinary work. This not only changed how people worked but also how they worked across teams and disciplines. Instead of pointing fingers, errors were now problems to solve together.

“[Mistakes weren’t] a secret that you had to desperately prevent someone from knowing. It became normal for the team to say, ‘Yeah, we screwed up. Let’s figure out how to get past that,” Engelmann said.

Previously, Engelmann had been the one to provide company-wide status updates, but realized how much more impactful it would be to hear the employees share their own work.

“They don't have to be a showman or showwoman. They just have to be able to tell a story that says, ‘Here’s what we did, here’s what worked, here's what we learned from it, and what we're going to do differently next time.” Engelmann noted. “Further, the onus [to hold each other accountable] moved from being on me to being on the team. They got better just by doing retrospectives and talking about the work they were doing. That was important.”

Those retrospectives, along with standups and sprints, became more than just calendar events—they became vehicles for self-accountability, learning, and trust. Employees began presenting outcomes directly during company all-hands meetings, including those related to financial performance and customer impact.

The Results

Geonetric and Engelmann’s story is one that many can probably identify with—the struggle around choosing different strategies and, in this case, the fear of what happens when no choices are made at all. Leaders end up letting both things happen, and then nothing happens.

Some clients and team members were initially reluctant, but Engelmann’s newfound clarity paid off. The platform launched, clients adapted, and the company emerged stronger.

The most compelling results Geonetric reported include:

Post-transformation client satisfaction scores were the highest in company history .
Development speed increased, with software releases becoming more frequent and predictable, at twice the speed of previous efforts.
Communication improved, workplace politics declined, and teams learned to self-correct without managerial intervention.
Decision-making became faster and more aligned with customer value .
Team ownership increased, with employees embracing transparency , peer feedback, and continuous improvement.

While Behrens spent the bulk of his time working with Geonetric’s teams, he had regular check-ins and one-on-one coaching sessions with Engelemann.

“Eric was more than happy to stay engaged and involved and took responsibility. I don’t see that with every C-level leader. Really, there are two success stories here. I look back on it as the Geonetric story—and the Eric story. Yes, ALJ aligns teams to work differently and reach goals, but we simultaneously nurture the individuals involved along the way. Transformations are inspiring, at any size or scope.”

“The results showed themselves. That platform they wanted to build? They did it successfully, and the organization grew substantially from there, which is great! But beyond that is what Eric came away from Geonetric with,” Behrens said, referring to Engelmann’s path after Geonetric, where he was able to step away from his CEO role and launch New Bohemian Innovation Collaborative, a startup incubator and tech education hub for local high school students.

A Legacy of Lessons Learned

While ultimately Geonetric’s transformation was a success, it wasn’t without missteps. “We pushed the pendulum too far at times,” Engelmann acknowledged. Conflict resolution was sometimes difficult without a traditional managerial hierarchy, and some highly skilled but risk-averse employees chose to leave. But Engelmann believes it was worth it.

“We learned that when you give people the tools and visibility they need, they can do really great work,” he said. “But you also need to support them through that change.”

Geonetric continues to thrive even after Engelmann stepped away to pursue new ventures, but he remains a member of Geonetric’s board—evidence that agility has become ingrained in the organization’s culture. It continues to serve hospitals across the country, delivering software and marketing services with the same spirit of transparency and autonomy.

Engelmann credits what he learned from Behrens for much of his success and current work as a startup investor and advisor. “The spark Pete lit is still burning,” he says.

Will ALJ's next case study be your organization's success story?

Geonetric’s story isn’t about software or structure—it’s about what happens when leaders commit to rethinking how value is delivered.

If your organization is facing stalled growth, siloed teams, or cultural tension, Agile Leadership Journey can help.

Tension Isn't the Problem—It's the Point: How to Lead In Challenging Times with Pete Behrens

pete@agileleadershipjourney.com (Pete Behrens) — Wed, 23 Jul 2025 20:06:56 GMT

Inevitably, leaders will face competing priorities, with no clear right answers, and pressure coming from all sides. These are the moments that test us and define our approach to leadership.

Pete Behrens, founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey, held a provocative session on the real work of leadership in navigating unsolvable problems. He shared stories of his own leadership journey, as well as important insights that can help you manage the pressures that come with modern leadership—without losing yourself in the process.

Watch the full webinar replay below:

Need support in managing your organization's tensions?

Every day, Agile Leadership Journey helps our clients improve business performance through developing leaders and aligning teams.

Our approach is about developing team cohesion and working together—a shared learning experience that reverberates throughout the organization long after our initial engagement ends!

Language Creates Reality: How Words Transform Organizations

tracey@agileleadershipjourney.com (Tracey Wilson) — Thu, 05 Jun 2025 16:00:14 GMT

One of the most consistent pieces of feedback we receive from our clients surprises people.

It's not about the specific leadership skills they've developed or the strategic insights they've gained. Instead, they tell us how much they value having established a common language within their organizations—a shared fluency that helps teams find common ground, define shared meaning, shape culture, and navigate organizational tensions together.

This feedback touches on something I'm deeply passionate about: how we collectively create meaning in our lives and organizations through discourse. It sits at the intersection of education, sociology, and organizational culture—areas where my curiosity naturally gravitates.

In a recent alumni masterclass, Pete Behrens, founder of Agile Leadership Journey, made an observation that perfectly captured this phenomenon: "While the models and approaches we teach haven't changed, the way we talk about them continues to evolve."

Words come in and out of favor. Some become exhausted, losing their power and relevance in the current moment. Others, gaining in favor and meaning, become more relevant and motivational.

What Pete identified—and what our clients experience—reveals something profound about how human organizations function. The words we use don't just describe our reality; they actively shape it. For business leaders accustomed to focusing on tangible metrics and strategic frameworks, this isn't merely a "soft skill." The deliberate shaping of organizational discourse is a strategic asset that directly influences innovation, employee retention, market adaptability, and ultimately, the bottom line.

The Foundation: How We Construct Our Realities

This principle has deep roots in research spanning over a century. Jean Piaget's groundbreaking work in the 1960s revealed that learning isn't about passively absorbing information, but actively transforming our understanding through engagement with our environment. His research showed that we don't simply copy reality—we actively construct our knowledge through interaction and interpretation.

Maria Montessori's observations of children reinforced this understanding, demonstrating that meaningful learning happens when people have agency in constructing their own understanding rather than passively receiving instruction.

Building on these educational foundations, sociologists Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann developed the theory of social constructivism, showing that what we consider “reality” is actually created through our shared language, meanings, and social interactions. Kenneth Gergen later expanded this thinking to demonstrate how our understanding of the world is actively shaped by how we talk about and interpret our experiences.

The critical insight is that language doesn't just communicate reality—it creates it. The words we choose, the stories we tell, and the conversations we have construct the social world we inhabit. But this construction isn't neutral—it both reflects existing power structures and has the potential to create new ones.

From Theory to Practice: Language in Organizations

This principle becomes particularly powerful when we examine how it plays out in organizational settings. Organizations operate as what sociologists call "discourse communities"—groups of people who develop shared ways of talking about and approaching their work together. But these aren't egalitarian spaces where everyone's voice carries equal weight. They reflect and reinforce hierarchies, with some voices amplified and others marginalized.

Consider how different organizations might describe identical situations. One company talks about "alignment challenges," while another refers to "coordination opportunities."

One team discusses "failed experiments," while another focuses on "learning iterations." These aren't merely stylistic choices—they reflect fundamentally different power dynamics and reveal whose interests are being served.

The language choices made in organizations often serve those in positions of authority. When leaders speak of "buy-in," they reveal an assumption that their vision is correct and others need to be convinced. When "collaboration" is mandated from above, it may actually represent sophisticated control rather than genuine shared decision-making.

Yet within these constraints, language also holds tremendous potential for authentic transformation. This raises a crucial question: Are we using our understanding of how language shapes reality to become more effective manipulators, or are we creating space for genuine change that serves everyone in the organization?

The Human Reality Behind the Words

Behind every organizational communication pattern are real people experiencing real emotions—fear about job security, frustration with feeling unheard, excitement about possibilities, or anxiety about change. Yet much organizational discourse systematically ignores or suppresses these emotional realities.

When leaders focus solely on crafting the "right" messages without acknowledging the feelings underlying organizational tensions, they create what humanistic psychologist Virginia Satir called "incongruent communication"—situations where words, emotions, and actions don't align. This incongruence breeds cynicism and resistance, even when stated intentions are positive.

Authentic organizational transformation requires leaders to acknowledge not just the cognitive aspects of language change but the emotional courage it takes to speak differently about difficult topics, the vulnerability required to admit when current approaches aren't working, and the emotional labor involved in genuinely listening to perspectives that challenge existing power structures.

Why Common Language Transforms Organizations

What our clients experience when they develop shared organizational language goes far beyond improved communication—it becomes the foundation for collective meaning-making. When leadership teams can articulate organizational tensions using common vocabulary, those tensions transform from persistent frustrations into workable challenges. When employees across different functions share a vocabulary around culture and leadership, they can actively shape both.

This shared fluency serves multiple strategic functions:

It creates psychological safety by ensuring everyone understands what's being discussed.
It builds trust by making implicit assumptions explicit.
It enables more sophisticated problem-solving because teams can build on shared concepts rather than constantly clarifying basic terms.

But the power of common language goes deeper than efficiency by establishing shared ways of thinking about and approaching work together—critical for lasting cultural transformation.

Practical Applications for Leaders

Understanding how language shapes organizational reality opens up significant possibilities for leadership. Here are key areas where leaders can apply these insights while grappling with deeper questions of power and authenticity:

Personal Leadership Practices: Start by examining your own language patterns. What assumptions are embedded in how you typically frame challenges? Whose voices are absent from your usual decision-making conversations? Question your motivations: Are you seeking to communicate more effectively to achieve predetermined outcomes, or are you genuinely open to having your perspective changed through dialogue? Practice what Satir called "congruent communication"—ensuring your words align with your emotions and actions, even when it's uncomfortable.
Organizational Assessment : Analyze the power dynamics in your organization's communication patterns. Who gets to speak in meetings? Whose ideas are consistently implemented? How are dissenting voices treated? When your organization describes challenges and solutions, whose perspectives are centered and whose are marginalized? These questions reveal whether your discourse serves transformation or simply reinforces existing hierarchies.
Creating Authentic Change : Move beyond "listening sessions" that extract input toward conversations that genuinely influence decisions. If language shapes reality, and those in power control much of organizational discourse, creating genuine transformation requires distributing the power to shape that discourse more broadly.

This means creating structures and processes where multiple voices can genuinely influence the language used to describe organizational realities. It also means leaders must be willing to have their own perspectives fundamentally challenged, not just refined.

The Courage to Lead Differently

Real change requires emotional courage alongside intellectual understanding. It means being willing to name tensions that others prefer to ignore, to ask questions that challenge comfortable assumptions, and to create space for voices that have been systematically excluded from organizational discourse.

This isn't just about being more strategic with language—it's about being more human in our organizations. It requires acknowledging that behind every "alignment challenge" are people who may feel unheard, that every "coordination opportunity" involves individuals navigating complex relationships and competing priorities.

When we recognize that organizational transformation requires leadership transformation, we're acknowledging that changing how an organization functions may require changing who has the power to help define what that organization is and could become. The organizations that will thrive in our rapidly changing world will be those that master not just the technical aspects of their business, but the fundamentally human art of creating meaning together through language.

About the Author

Agile Leadership Journey COO Tracey Wilson has more than 20 years of experience in operational leadership in organizations ranging from small startups and service providers to large financial institutions.

Tracey lives in the Joshua Tree, California area with her partner, Dave, and a small menagerie of four-legged and feathered critters. Her background is in sociology and education, which she draws from in her work at Agile Leadership Journey and in the local youth development program she co-founded and co-chairs, the Yucca Valley Antlers.

When she's away from the office, she can be found camping, hiking, tending her garden, reading a book, or spending time with family and friends.

Quit Playing the Blame Game and Build a Culture of Learning

Tue, 06 May 2025 17:03:11 GMT

We’ve all heard it before: “We’re a learning organization!”

But then a mistake happens, and suddenly it’s less about learning and more about finding a scapegoat. That whiplash should trigger a serious question:

How can we claim to value learning if we punish the process that enables it?

Mistakes are Inevitable, Growth is Optional

Whether at work, at home, or on a random Tuesday when you realize you’ve been on mute for the entire meeting, we’re human, and mistakes are inevitable! While it would be great if we could avoid mistakes altogether, it’s just not realistic. Instead, let’s consider how we respond to them.

Sure, we can waste time pointing fingers, asking, “Whose fault was it?” Or we can get serious about growth and ask a better question:

“What can we learn from this?”

That shift from blame to curiosity isn’t just feel-good talk. It’s the foundation of an environment where people actually want to take smart risks, stretch, and improve—because they know they won’t get clobbered for it.

Small Story, Big Lesson

When my son was deep in the post-college job hunt, I made a conscious choice. After every interview, instead of the anxious parental interrogation (“Did you get it? How did it go?”), I simply asked: “What did you learn?” It shifted the whole tone. Reflection replaced self-judgment. Curiosity replaced anxiety. Imagine if organizations approached mistakes with the same lens. (We might even get a little better at hiring, too.)

Psychological Safety Isn't a Luxury—It's a Responsibility

Creating a culture that normalizes learning from mistakes isn’t just a warm, fuzzy leadership goal. It’s a strategic one. Research by the Boston Consulting Group showed that leaders who cultivate psychological safety will, among other benefits, see their employee retention improve significantly. An organization that nurtures a psychologically safe culture isn’t just nice to have; it’s a critical part of organizational success.

Four Practical Ways to Build a Learning Culture

Lead first. Share your own stumbles and lessons learned. Show that learning is valued at every level. 
Reframe mistakes. Errors aren't final verdicts. They're starting points! Train your teams to see the opportunity inside the stumble.
Create safe spaces. Build regular forums for teams to surface challenges, lessons, and ideas without fear of blame. 
Recognize the process. Celebrate not just successes, but the hard-earned learning behind them.

One Small Shift With a Huge Impact

If we want resilience, innovation, and engagement, we have to stop seeing mistakes as career-ending events and start seeing them for what they are: Essential waypoints on the path to mastery.

Next time a mistake happens—whether it’s your own, a teammate’s, or your kid’s—try asking: “What did you learn?” You might be surprised at what opens up when blame leaves the room—and learning steps in.

About the Author

ALJ Guide Randy Hale is deeply experienced in enterprise lean-agile transformation and product development strategy. Based in Colorado, Randy has been working with clients, such as Nike, CenturyLink, Charter Communications, and Petco, for 25 years.

Connect with Randy on LinkedIn.

How to Nurture Your Professional Network

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Thu, 17 Apr 2025 01:13:02 GMT

The Power of Reaching Out — Without an Agenda

How many times have you thought of reconnecting with a former colleague, manager, or even someone with whom you spoke briefly at a conference, only to talk yourself out of it?

Maybe you weren’t sure what to say. Maybe it felt awkward. Or maybe it just slipped down your list of priorities. Regardless of the reason, these small moments of hesitation can quietly chip away at one of the most powerful tools we have in our careers: our network.

During a recent ALJ Alumni Masterclass, Amit Parihar offered a fresh, practical perspective on why—and, importantly, how—to reconnect meaningfully with the people around us. He explains, “We need to possess a networking mindset.”

Making a Genuine Connection

A networking mindset prioritizes curiosity, generosity, and long-term relationship-building over transactional outcomes. Rather than viewing networking as a means to an end, approaching networking as a mindset rather than an approach reframes it as an opportunity to grow, share, and support.

Further, the group realized that nurturing your network in low-pressure moments makes it easier and more natural to lean on it during challenging ones.

Barriers to Reaching Out

Even the most outgoing professionals can struggle with maintaining their network. Fear of rejection, concerns about poor timing, assumptions that someone is too busy or uninterested, or the belief that a connection should always serve a specific purpose. These barriers, real or not, often prevent meaningful reconnection.

A Real-Time Experiment in Networking

During the session, Parihar urged participants to list a few people in their networks they’d been meaning to contact—and then asked them to reach out to one of those people in real-time, via call or text, without any agenda. The purpose? Simply to check in, say hello, and express genuine interest in how the other person is doing.

The result? A simple but powerful experience that showed how small gestures can have big emotional payoffs. Whether it was a returned message, a voicemail, or a brief chat to schedule a lunch soon, this exercise in reaching out often led to warm responses, renewed dialogue, and a surprising sense of satisfaction.

It's time to challenge yourself ...

In the LinkedIn comments of this post , tag someone you’ve been meaning to reconnect with!

About the Author

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

AI Won’t Fix a Broken Business—But It Will Expose It

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Thu, 06 Mar 2025 00:04:18 GMT

New Business Agility Institute Report: AI is a Leadership and Tech Challenge

AI is often touted as a game-changer for business, promising faster decision-making, enhanced productivity, and breakthrough innovation. But here’s the catch: AI doesn’t operate in a vacuum.

According to new research from the Business Agility Institute, From Constraints to Capabilities: AI as a Force Multiplier , AI’s potential is often undermined by organizational constraints like slow decision-making, rigid budgeting cycles, and outdated workflows. Instead of solving business problems outright, AI ends up amplifying them—meaning that unprepared organizations may find themselves struggling rather than thriving.

ALJ Founder and CEO Pete Behrens contributed to this report as a member of the Business Agility Institute's Expert Panel.

AI as a Force Multiplier—For Better or Worse

The report highlights AI’s role as a “force multiplier,” capable of delivering business improvements ranging from modest gains (20%) to transformative leaps (320%). However, achieving these benefits isn’t just about adopting AI—it’s about creating the right conditions for AI to succeed. Organizations stuck in bureaucratic decision-making or siloed workflows often fail to capitalize on AI’s potential, while those embracing agility, dynamic funding, and a learning culture see much greater returns.

Leadership Matters More Than Ever

One of the report’s most critical findings? Leadership plays a significant role in unlocking AI’s benefits. The study points out seven capabilities that separate winners from under-performers:

Cultivating a learning organization : Leaders who encourage continuous learning and adaptability ensure their teams evolve alongside AI.
Prioritization : Without clear priorities, AI initiatives risk becoming distractions rather than strategic assets.
Dynamic funding : Traditional budgeting processes slow down AI innovation—organizations need more flexible, real-time resource allocation.
Creative workflow optimization : AI thrives in environments where workflows are designed for speed and integration, rather than constrained by silos and inefficiencies.
Balancing governance and risk : Striking the right balance between AI oversight and innovation ensures AI is used ethically and effectively.
Sensing and responding proactively : AI provides predictive insights, but leaders must be prepared to act on them quickly.
Realizing people’s potential : AI isn’t here to replace employees—it’s here to enhance their capabilities. Organizations that invest in upskilling their workforce unlock the greatest value.

AI Alone Won’t Drive Business Outcomes—Leadership Will

The research makes one thing clear: AI’s success is a leadership challenge, not just a technology challenge. Organizations that treat AI as a plug-and-play solution will likely see disappointing results. But those that rethink leadership, structure, and decision-making can harness AI to drive unprecedented business impact.

So before investing in AI, let’s ask ourselves: Is your business designed to operate at the speed of AI? If not, AI won’t solve your problems—it will simply expose them.

Interested in learning more about the intersection of AI and leadership? Visit the ALJ AI Leadership Lab!

About the Author

Betsy Piland is an ALJ alum and a marketing and communications professional. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofits—always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audie nces into action.

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Beyond the Promotion: Finding Success in a Leadership Role

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Wed, 05 Mar 2025 20:01:02 GMT

Insights from Pete Behrens on the Agile Mentors Podcast

ALJ Founder and CEO Pete Behrens sat down with Agile Mentors podcast host Brian Milner to talk about leadership agility in today’s organizations and how old-school “leadership” (aka top-down marching orders) is no longer effective—if it ever was.

What Got You Into Leadership Won’t Help in Leadership

In his discussion with Milner, Behrens explained that organizations are still promoting people into leadership roles based on their technical skills rather than their ability to lead. Too many new leaders are thrown into the deep end without the training or support to develop those skills.

This isn’t just frustrating for the leader; it’s frustrating for the whole team. When leadership struggles, innovation stalls. People disengage. And instead of helping the organization grow, things slow down.

Leadership is a Team Sport

We tend to think of leaders as individual change agents, pushing their organizations forward. But real change doesn’t happen because of one person—it happens when leadership becomes a shared effort.

“The construct of leadership, we think of often as an individual sport, but truly the only way change starts to take hold in an organization is when we catalyze a choir—not just a soloist.” – Pete Behrens

In other words, if you’re the only one singing a new tune at work, people might just tune you out. But when leadership teams work together—aligning their efforts, reinforcing change, and supporting each other—that’s when organizations start see a shift.

Agile Leadership Matters More Than Ever

The workplace isn’t what it used to be. Change is constant, complexity is increasing, and the old “set a plan and follow it” approach just doesn’t work anymore. “You need to sense and respond to make appropriate decisions. It’s no longer available to us to simply follow the plan.”

The best leaders aren’t the ones with rigid five-year plans. They’re the ones who can adapt, course-correct, and help their teams navigate uncertainty.

About the Author

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

How AI Can Affect Bias in Leadership

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Tue, 25 Feb 2025 00:28:22 GMT

Insights from a Year of Experiments

Whether you’re streamlining tasks, summarizing meeting notes, making grocery lists, or planning your next getaway, AI can likely lend a helping hand. But beyond acting as a virtual assistant, is AI able to notice the subtleties that come with human interaction?

That was the question asked over a year-long experiment conducted by three members of our AI Leadership Lab: Sonny Mendoza, Katharine Bodan, and Nino di Chiara. They wanted to know:

Can AI reveal our cultural blind spots?
Can it support leaders’ decision-making?
But mainly, can it call out the hidden biases baked into our thoughts, actions, and systems?

Katharine, Sonny, and Nino recently led an ALJ Global Masterclass to share their experiment outcomes, and we’re summarizing some of their key findings here.

AI Reflects and Amplifies Human Biases

One of the biggest revelations from the experiments was that AI models are only as unbiased as the data they are trained on. Nino, an Italian ALJ Guide, noted that different AI models—such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot—demonstrated biases when tasked with evaluating a complex business decision involving multinational teams.

The AI avoided making a final decision and recommended that a report be created for human decision-makers. Nino concluded that AI can be a useful tool for structuring decision-making but cannot independently resolve issues influenced by cultural, social, or financial complexities.

AI Can Be Trained to Recognize Cultural Differences, But It Has Limits

Vermont-based ALJ Guide Katharine’s experiment simulated leadership interactions across different cultural contexts. Initially, AI-generated personas lacked cultural nuance—defaulting to generic professional responses rather than reflecting the diverse perspectives of leaders from different regions. However, when trained with specific prompts about cultural differences, AI became more effective at predicting how leaders from various backgrounds might react to decisions.

The outcome? AI has the potential to enhance leadership self-awareness but it can also run the risk of reinforcing stereotypes if not properly trained—especially if you don’t explicitly prompt it to challenge you on that.

AI as an Augmenting Tool, Not a Decision-Maker

Sonny’s experiment wondered whether AI could understand the challenges of underrepresented leaders in the workplace. He found that AI, much like our human colleagues, often fails to recognize the depth of emotional and cultural barriers faced by leaders from minority backgrounds. This led to the realization that AI can offer broader perspectives and surface potential biases, but it still lacks the emotional intelligence and lived experience necessary to fully grasp the nuances of leadership.

How We Can Proceed—Ethically

Nino, Sonny, and Katharine’s experiments confirm that AI mirrors the biases of its creators and the data it is fed. If leaders are using AI to guide their decision-making, they must remember to embrace critical thinking of the output. Leaders cannot expect the latest AI bot to solve any bias that may exist; instead, they should use it as a tool to enhance their awareness, challenge their assumptions, and make more inclusive decisions.

Attend a Future ALJ Global Masterclass!

You’re invited if you’ve ever participated in any ALJ workshop or program! Sign up for the alumni mailing list to receive calendar invites for future events, newsletters, and other resources to guide your leadership journey.

About the Author

Betsy Piland is an ALJ alum and a marketing and communications professional. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofits—always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

12 Days of Leadership: An ALJ Holiday Season Special

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Wed, 18 Dec 2024 23:38:55 GMT

Love it or hate it—whether you celebrate Christmas or not—you likely know the song.

“On the twelfth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…”

record scratch

This festive holiday season, we couldn't resist putting a leadership twist on a classic tune that inspires gift-giving. Instead of partridges and pear trees, we bring you the 12 Days of Leadership—a festive way to celebrate the skills, mindsets, tools, and resources we spend our days creating to help you become a better leader.

(And because we’re on the nice list, we’ll spare you from our singing.)

12 Blog Articles

There are many more than 12 to choose from, but if you’re the type to love a “greatest hits” album of your favorite band, you might enjoy some of our most-read and shared articles:

Cultivating Culture to Enable Business Agility by Brad Swanson
Agility is a Necessity for Effective Leadership by Pete Behrens
The Disease to Please by Rashmi Fernandes

11 Podcast Episodes

Choosing just 11 episodes out of nearly 60 is a challenge, but here are three you can listen to more than once and still discover a new nugget of wisdom every time:

Strategic Thinking with Christina Carlson
Influence Without Authority with Brad Swanson
Gen Z in the Workplace with Tammy Dowley-Blackman

10 Catalyst Conversations™

If you’ve ever witnessed one of those spirited discussions on a hot-button issue around the holiday dinner table, you know that true communication can be complicated. Strong feelings can come with misunderstandings and missed opportunities to truly connect—to share and receive information the way it was intended.

This holiday season, conduct an experiment: See if you can have 10 Catalyst Conversations™ with friends and family, maybe while sipping some hot cider with Uncle Ralph. You just might be able to discuss complex issues—without the drama.

9 Ways to be More Persuasive

Whether you’re a plus-one at a holiday party or new hire at work, persuasion can be tricky, especially when you don’t hold formal authority in a situation.

The ability to influence others can help build consensus and create positive outcomes—like convincing Grandma to leave her raspberry-and-mayonnaise Jello® mold off the holiday menu.

ALJ Guide Brad Swanson put together a comprehensive list of nine strategies and tactics— backed by research and practical experience—to help you expand your influence in any situation.

8 Alumni Masterclasses

If you’re an alumnus of our leadership workshops —or more in-depth applied agility programs —you know that our monthly Global Masterclasses are the gift that keeps on giving. These events are an opportunity to deepen your skills, share insights, grow your network, and tackle new challenges with your peers. Share this experience with your colleagues! By inviting them to attend a workshop, you’re not just giving them a chance to learn; you’re building a stronger, more aligned team that grows together all year long.

7 Practice Cohorts

ALJ has undoubtedly hosted more than seven cohorts of our Applied Agility in Leadership program at this point, but this list wouldn’t be complete without mentioning how transformative this six-month program can be. As the year comes to a close and those professional development funds are lingering, make an investment in yourself. Don’t just take our word for it: Listen to some recent participants share their experiences!

6 Classroom Flipcharts

Yes, flipcharts. The paper kind. On easels.

At ALJ, we do everything we can to avoid the dreaded “death by PowerPoint,” and for good reason. Researcher Adam Grant recently shared , “We learn more from reading on paper than on screens. 54 studies, 171k people: we process print more deeply than digital content—as long as it’s informational rather than purely narrative.”

5 Mistakes Leaders Makeeeeeeeeee

We all make mistakes—particularly when it comes to how we lead. While these slip-ups can make us feel defeated or disappointed, they provide important learning experiences.

Download the free ALJ ebook, 5 Mistakes Leaders Make & How to Fix Them , and learn how you can address missteps, enhance your awareness, and sharpen your leadership skills.

4 Culture Values

Culture values at the office can look a bit different than the ones we face while celebrating the holidays at home:

Collaborate (on building Legos with the kids).
Create (snowmen).
Compete (over who gets the last cookie).
Control (over the TV remote).

But once you’re back in the office, take a stab at the ALJ Culture Values Quiz and see what areas are vying for your team’s attention.

3 Leader Mindsets

Leaders don’t progress in steps; they build upon layers of capacity—like a delicious holiday trifle! Whether you find yourself in an expert, achiever, or catalyst mindset, you’re contributing to your organization’s goals in a specific way.

The real trick? Learning how to apply agility and shift between these ways of thinking and behaving.

2 Power Styles

Are you assertive or accommodative? And how is your power style reflected in how you lead? We’ve created a Leadership Power Style assessment; just fill out the form and we’ll send you a personalized report that provides the results of your assessment, additional insights into agile leadership, as well as ongoing actionable content to help you improve your leadership.

And a Growth Mindset … in a Pear Tree?

Stay out of trees, especially this time of year. It’s cold out there. (In most regions across the world, at least. If you’re in Australia, enjoy your summer—just don’t touch anything that bites, stings, or punches.)

Jokes aside, having a growth mindset is at the core of all we do here at ALJ. Whether it’s the growth of an individual looking within or a team striving to improve value delivery, this attitude of optimism is part of our lifelong journey that extends into all aspects of our lives, both personally and professionally.

From everyone here at Agile Leadership Journey,

we wish you a happy holiday season and joyful New Year!

About the Author

Betsy Piland is the Marketing and Communications Manager at Agile Leadership Journey. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofit industries—always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Building High-Performing Teams: Introverts and Extroverts

Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:49:17 GMT

Finding Balance Among Introverts & Extroverts in the Workplace

Imagine this scenario: a team meeting where the atmosphere is buzzing with energy and the discussion is fast-paced. The team leader kicks things off with an overview of the agenda. Her enthusiasm sets the tone, and she quickly opens the floor to suggestions for an upcoming campaign. Another team member immediately jumps in, presenting his idea for a marketing approach. He speaks quickly and confidently and dominates the conversation. Naturally, the extroverts are taking center stage.

While all of this is happening, the more introverted team members are listening intently but struggle to find an opening to share their thoughts. They scribble notes and wait for a pause. When they try to interject with data points, they are talked over. Another person nods, indicating agreement but rarely speaks unless directly addressed.

As you may have witnessed in your own workplace, this scenario is more the norm than the exception. In general, the business world embraces outspoken, charismatic people who command attention while unintentionally discounting input and perspectives from the more introverted team members.

Are You an Introvert or an Extrovert?

You likely have a good idea of where you fall on the introvert-to-extrovert spectrum, but just in case you’re unsure, let’s cover the basics. The concept of introvert versus extrovert was popularized by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung in the early 20th century as part of his theory of psychological types. Jung described it as a continuum, with most people falling somewhere between two extremes.

Jung said that introverts tend to derive energy from solitary or low-stimulation environments, preferring reflection and internal processing. They often thrive in quiet settings and are more comfortable engaging deeply with a small number of people. On the other end of the spectrum, extroverts gain energy from external stimuli, such as social gatherings and more dynamic environments. They are more comfortable engaging with larger groups and are invigorated by new experiences and collaborative activities.

Since many of us demonstrate a blend of both tendencies, it makes it even more important to consider the range of personalities when discussing these traits in the workplace.

Author Susan Cain built on this idea in her speaking engagements and books; she pushes us to think about why outgoing people are often considered smarter, better looking, and more interesting when introverts are just as effective and efficient—maybe even more so—than extroverts when allowed to thrive in the right environment.

Understanding the Risks Associated with Extroverted-Dominated Teams

For better or worse, there is risk associated with teams that are dominated by extroverted people, but there are ways to mitigate those risks. If they make the effort, leaders can tap into the strengths of both introverts and extroverts to generate the best results from everyone. Here are a few common risks and their impact on team effectiveness:

1. Overlooking Introverted Contributions

Risk: Introverted team members may feel overshadowed or unheard in discussions dominated by extroverts.
Impact: Valuable insights and creative ideas from quieter members might be missed, leading to less innovative solutions. Cheese ipsum on toast airedale the big cheese. Danish fontina cheesy grin airedale danish fontina taleggio the big cheese macaroni cheese port-salut. Edam fromage lancashire feta caerphilly everyone loves chalk and cheese brie. Red leicester parmesan cheese and biscuits cheesy feet blue castello cheesecake fromage frais smelly cheese.

2. Groupthink and Inefficient Decision-Making

Risk: When extroverts dominate the conversation, there can be a tendency to conform to the opinions of the most vocal members. Further, extroverts' enthusiasm for quick decision-making can sometimes lead to hasty, less thought-out choices.
Impact: This can stifle dissenting views, critical thinking, and attention to detail, resulting in less robust decision-making and suboptimal results.

3. Imbalanced Work Dynamics:

Risk: Extroverted members might take on more visible roles or responsibilities, while introverted members may feel sidelined. Further, extroverts are often credited with the work done by the team since they can be more visible.
Impact: This imbalance can lead to frustration and disengagement among introverted team members, affecting team morale and productivity.

4. Communication Overload and Misunderstanding

Risk: Extroverted teams may favor frequent meetings and constant communication, which can overwhelm introverted members. Differences in communication styles between extroverts and introverts can also lead to misunderstandings and conflicts, such as interpreting quietness as a lack of confidence or disengagement.
 Impact: This dynamic can result in burnout and decreased productivity for introverted individuals, while conflicts and misinterpretations may hinder collaboration and create a tense work atmosphere. Addressing these challenges is critical for fostering an inclusive and effective team environment.

5. Overemphasis on Presentation Skills

Risk: Extroverted teams may place a higher value on presentational and verbal skills, sometimes at the expense of other important competencies.
Impact: Introverted members with strong analytical or technical skills might be undervalued or overlooked for leadership roles.

Building Inclusive High-Performing Teams

By being aware of the aforementioned risks, leaders can experiment with the following strategies to create a team that leverages the strengths of both introverts and extroverts.

Encourage Diverse Communication Styles

Leaders can employ a mix of meeting formats, such as structured round-robin discussions, to ensure everyone gets a chance to speak. Additionally, they can encourage those who may prefer to articulate their thoughts in writing to provide their input before or after meetings. Further, brainstorming sessions can be held as a group exercise that includes individual idea submissions. This ensures extroverts can discuss ideas openly while introverts have the time and space to reflect and contribute their thoughts.

Recognize and Value Different Strengths

Regardless of how your team members make their contributions, acknowledge them! Highlight the value of thoughtful analysis just as much as enthusiastic ideas. This recognition can also allow leaders to assign roles and tasks that play to individual strengths. For example, introverts may excel in detailed analysis, while extroverts might thrive in roles that require frequent interaction.

Foster a Culture of Listening

Apply the strategy of “ Three Then Me. ” This guideline, one originally cited by educators, can be used to promote balanced participation and ensure that everyone has a chance to contribute. For example, before someone speaks again (“me”), at least “three” other people should have spoken. This encourages active listening, reduces the likelihood of domination by a few voices, and fosters a more inclusive and collaborative environment.

Another helpful approach leaders can use is WAIT, which stands for “Why Am I Talking?” It’s a useful reminder to pause and consider whether your contribution is necessary or valuable before speaking, especially in meetings or discussions. This can help ensure that everyone has a chance to participate and that the conversation remains focused and productive.

Tap Into Your Team’s Potential

Creating a high-performing team isn’t just about navigating the differences between introverts and extroverts—it’s about celebrating the unique strengths both bring to the table. By fostering inclusivity, valuing diverse communication styles, and encouraging balanced participation, leaders can build teams that are not only effective but also deeply collaborative and innovative.

So, the question is: How can you start tapping into the hidden potential of your team today? Whether it’s tweaking how meetings are run or simply listening more intentionally, small changes can make a big difference.

Tell us in the LinkedIn comments: What’s one step you’ll take to ensure everyone’s voice is heard?

About the Author

Karen Kemerling, PhD, is an Agile Leadership Journey Guide and founder of K2 | Leadership Development, specializing in leadership coaching and organizational development. With 35+ years of leadership experience, including roles as CEO, President, COO, and CIO, she has worked with diverse organizations, from global corporations to non-profits. Karen holds a PhD in Organizational Development, with her doctoral dissertation focusing on the productivity of remote teams. As a Certified Agile Leader, Neuroscience Certified Brain-Based Coach, and Psychological Safety Certified Trainer and Coach, she helps leaders develop growth mindsets and build psychologically safe, high-performing teams.

Connect with Karen on LinkedIn.

Feasting on Gratitude for Our Leadership Community

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Tue, 26 Nov 2024 20:45:06 GMT

If you’ve been following us here at Agile Leadership Journey for any amount of time, you might have noticed: We love a good metaphor!

With that, as those of us in the United States begin our Thanksgiving celebrations, we’re full of gratitude for the leadership journeys we’re privileged to witness every day throughout the year.

Just as each dish at the Thanksgiving table contributes its unique flavor to the meal, every member of our community brings something invaluable to the table. Let’s dig in!

Turkey: The Centerpiece

Every feast needs a centerpiece—something that anchors everything else. In leadership, that’s growth. This year, we’re incredibly thankful to the organizations that embrace growth— in their leaders and subsequently their outcomes and success—whether that means stepping into challenging situations, trying something new, or reimagining what leadership looks like in their teams. Growth isn’t always easy, but like a perfectly tender, seasoned bird, it’s worth the effort.

Stuffing: Blending Skills and Values

Stuffing (or depending on your region, dressing) is a little bit of everything—a blend of flavors and textures that somehow come together perfectly. Leadership, too, is a mix: empathy paired with decisiveness, strategy balanced with flexibility, and vision grounded in values. We’re grateful for the way our community demonstrates this mix, showing their colleagues how powerful the right combination can be.

Mashed Potatoes: The Comfort Food

Life, like leadership, isn’t without its challenges—and sometimes you just need some comfort food. This year, we’ve watched our leaders, clients, and partners rise to the occasion, leaning into resilience to find solutions and offer stability where it’s needed most. Until then, bring on the mashed potatoes!

Cranberry Sauce: Sweet and Sour

Our journeys are complex; a mix of sweet moments of success, the tangy challenges that sharpen our skills and perspectives. Cranberry sauce reminds us that both are essential to our growth. Let’s celebrate the way our community embraces the full spectrum of leadership experiences, turning even the toughest moments into opportunities for growth.

Green Beans: Nourishment Through Teamwork

Green beans might not get the spotlight, but they’re a vital part of the meal—just like those times projects go just right but might not get all the applause. We’re thankful for those we’ve worked with this year, who’ve shown us how collaboration nourishes results and relationships.

Pumpkin Pie: The Sweet Rewards

Finally, there’s the pumpkin pie—or maybe sweet potato pie; let’s duke it out in the LinkedIn comments ! Either way, it’s the sweet, satisfying reward at the end of the journey. Leadership doesn’t happen overnight, and our journeys are never truly over, but the results of hard work, collaboration, and commitment are worth celebrating.

Gratitude and Looking Ahead

As we savor this season of gratitude, we’re reminded that our leadership feast would not be complete without each of you. Our partners, colleagues, leaders, and clients have all brought unique ingredients to our ALJ community. For that, we are profoundly grateful.

We’re excited for the next course—whether that’s tackling new challenges, growing teams, or redefining success, we’re here to support and celebrate alongside you.

About the Author

Betsy Piland is an ALJ alum and a marketing and communications professional. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofit industries—always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Human-Centric Organizations Drive Revenue: 2024 Business Agility Report

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Mon, 25 Nov 2024 21:28:02 GMT

Volatile. Uncertain. Complex. Ambiguous. VUCA.

It’s a term long-cited within the ALJ community, and it just might be the most accurate way to describe the world today, and within it, the human-centered organizations we lead.

So how are leaders guiding teams through constant change today? Further, how will they keep them engaged and motivated as we tip-toe into the unknown that 2025 will bring?

The recently published 2024 Business Agility Report might give us some clues. It highlights what’s working and where leaders will need to focus in the coming year as they continue to build agile, resilient organizations.

“One key trend in 2024 is the renewed focus on customer-centric, human-centered operations. Top-performing companies are making agility a core business practice, not just a one-time transformation project. More organizations are also improving their entire business, rather than focusing on a single division or department.

For me, one standout finding is the 35% average improvement in organizations’ ability to prioritize —a critical skill in today’s demanding environment, where time and resources are limited.”

— Laura Powers, CEO, Business Agility Institute

From fostering trust and psychological safety to empowering teams with accountability, this year’s report shows that creating an environment where people can thrive is key to handling disruption. Here’s a closer look at how leaders can use them to strengthen their teams and drive meaningful change.

People-First Leadership and Employee Engagement

Despite People-First Leadership being the smallest area of growth, there was upward movement in fostering authentic relationships and realizing people’s potential—these saw improvements of 12% and 11%, respectively, over the previous year.

If you’re wondering why this modest increase is important, there is a good reason: These areas are shown to significantly impact CEO approval ratings , which in turn correlate with improved employee engagement . Further, the presence and balance of empowerment with accountability creates high-performing environments where employees are motivated and engaged .

Culture of Transparency and Psychological Safety

The report reveals that capabilities tied to an Engaged Culture saw substantial improvement, particularly in transparency and psychological safety. Acting as One, a key aspect of organizational unity, rebounded with a remarkable 28% increase from 2023 , underscoring the power of collaborative problem-solving in agile teams. Engaging Transparently and Courageously saw a 23% rise, reflecting the growing importance of open communication.

The Role of Leadership in Shaping Culture and Mindset

Outdated leadership capabilities continue to be the most cited obstacle to achieving business agility. Leaders who fail to model desired changes or demonstrate commitment to the agility transformation tend to perpetuate resistance and traditional mindsets within their organizations. The report suggests that leaders must align their actions with organizational agility goals to avoid undermining transformation efforts and to inspire broader cultural shifts.

Notably, organizations that excel in Flexible Operations—especially the ability to Fund Work Dynamically and (Re)organize Structures Fluidly—saw these areas improve by 16% and 18%, respectively—suggesting that leaders who champion flexibility inspire more adaptable, cohesive cultures.

Still a Struggle: Change Fatigue and Clear Transformation Goals

New this year saw many organizations sharing that unclear, contradictory, or missing goals were significantly hindering their journey toward business agility. Successful transformations are often led by the Board or C-suite rather than isolated departments, with the most successful organizations (42% of respondents) reporting transformation across all functions. One respondent said succinctly, “[Leaders don’t] understand this means change for everyone, not just ___ department.” Having clear, organization-wide transformation goals helps unify efforts across functions.

Benefits of Human-Centric Agility

Organizations that adopt human-centric agility report tangible benefits, including increased revenue, customer satisfaction, and higher employee engagement. For example, companies with strong business agility saw a 31% year-over-year increase in revenue per employee , as well as a higher percentage of employees recommending their organization. 0This underscores that people-focused agility drives not only cultural benefits but also financial and operational success.

Organizations with Increasing Business Agility Experience a Higher Revenue Growth Rate

Organizations that increased their business agility maturity saw revenue per employee increase by 31% year-over-year (on average).

While those organizations whose maturity in business agility decreased over that period, saw a much smaller 8% year-over-year (on average) increase in revenue per employee.

Putting people at the center of leadership isn’t just good for culture—it’s good for business too. By building trust, encouraging transparency, and staying flexible, leaders can keep their teams motivated and resilient while driving meaningful results like higher engagement, innovation, and revenue.

For a more in-depth look at the data, download the complete 2024 Business Agility Report here.

About the Author

When not at work, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Haunted Leadership: Scary Stories of Trust, Empowerment, and Culture Gone Awry

Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:57:28 GMT

Welcome to a collection of bone-chilling stories, shared by ALJ Guides, which reveal what happens when vision fails, trust crumbles, and empowerment becomes a mere shadow of what it should be. Let these stories serve as cautionary reminders of the perils lurking in the shadows of leadership. Will you rise above, or will you, too, be caught in the grip of fearsome missteps?

Read on … if you dare.

Pandora's Box of Revelations

By Brad Swanson

Gather close, friends, for this is a tale of tension, mistrust, and the dreaded Box of Revelations. It was the moment everyone feared—a gathering that could unravel the fragile threads of a team or mend them anew. What dark secrets would be unleashed? What festering grievances would emerge from its depths? Would the team descend into chaos, consumed by conflict?

But let's rewind a few weeks before that fateful day. Frank, the Director of IT, came to me as his leadership coach, with a simmering frustration. "I have to keep nagging the team to get anything done on time. There's no sense of urgency," he said, his voice thick with impatience. "I want them to be empowered, but honestly? I don't trust them."

His words described a creeping problem—one that slithered beneath the surface of the team. I asked Frank what he'd done to address the issue so far. "Well, I keep telling them that they're empowered, but…" His sentence trailed off.

I asked the team what they thought about Frank's leadership. Their response? Bone-chilling. "He's always micromanaging us," Darren muttered, looking over his shoulder as if Frank might materialize out of the shadows. Bonnie, her voice tinged with frustration, added, "He keeps poking his head in, asking for status updates."

It was clear that the team felt stifled under Frank's ever-watchful eye. Their trust was brittle, ready to shatter at any moment. "Would you be comfortable sharing this with Frank one-on-one?" I asked, but the team recoiled in unison, shaking their heads as though the very thought might summon disaster. No trust, no honesty. The misalignment was glaring.

I approached Frank again, gently asking if he might be playing a role in the team's lack of engagement. He refused to acknowledge it—his self-awareness was as elusive as a ghost in the mist. But one thing was certain: tension was thick in the air, and something had to give.

That's when I had the idea: a box—an unassuming little thing that would collect anonymous feedback from each team member. No names, no fear of retribution, just honesty sealed away until the day of reckoning. We'd collect these slips of paper in the break room, and then, in a face-to-face retrospective, we'd finally unveil the truth.

And so, that fateful day arrived. We all gathered around, the box sitting ominously in the center of the room. I could feel the tension swirling like a dark fog, the fear of what might be revealed hanging heavy in the air. With a deep breath, I opened the box and began to read the anonymous slips of paper aloud, one by one. The room was silent, save for the nervous shifting of feet. Would this be the moment everything fell apart?

But as I read the feedback, a strange thing happened. The fears began to fade, replaced by a cautious calm. No monsters lurked in the words—just honest, constructive criticism. People squirmed at first, but slowly, they began to breathe easier. There were suggestions for improvement, not accusations. And with that, the team realized that the box held no horrors—only the truth they'd been too afraid to speak.

With everything out in the open, we addressed the issues together, not as adversaries, but as adults, as colleagues. What had been feared as a fright-fest turned out to be something else entirely: a chance to rebuild trust and realign. And in the end, the scariest thing of all wasn't what was in the box—it was the fear of opening it in the first place.

So remember, sometimes the things we fear most are the very things we need to confront … lest they haunt us forever.

Empowerment: Trick or Treat?

By Katharine Bodan

One crisp autumn evening, a team of leaders embarked on a mysterious journey through an intricate project. Their leader approached the team with a seemingly sweet request: "How long do you think this will take?" After careful deliberation, the team estimated their journey would take nine months. Pleased with their answer, the leader took the estimate like candy from a bowl and sealed a deal with a powerful customer. The deadline was set in stone—no tricks, only treats—or so they thought.

But as the days grew shorter and the shadows of the project lengthened, eerie surprises lurked around every corner. Scope crept in like ghosts on the foggy horizon, and unforeseen technical challenges rose from the dark, slowing their progress. What had once seemed a straightforward path now twisted and turned through a haunted forest of complications, and the team realized they needed more time.

With nerves rattled, the team approached their leader, hoping for a treat—a bit of understanding, maybe even a helping hand. Instead, the leader's expression turned sour, filled with blame. "You picked this date, not me!" they snapped, eyes glinting with frustration. The team stood there, unable to escape the deadline they'd once confidently chosen.

With no extra time and no outside help, the team was forced to stumble forward, haunted by the scope they hadn't anticipated and the growing weight of unrealistic expectations.

The leader, once appearing so supportive, now stood at a distance, watching as the team struggled. Empowerment had been a mere illusion—a trick masked as a treat, now gone with the cold autumn wind.

And so, the team trudged toward their deadline, knowing they were doomed to fall short, yet bound by the fate they had unknowingly sealed for themselves. Beware of leaders who offer sweet promises of power and autonomy, only to snatch them back when the journey becomes difficult.

After all, you never know when you might be the one left holding the bag ... empty of treats, filled only with tricks.

The Haunted Expert

By Pete Behrens

On a cold October night, under the dim light of flickering monitors, Jon found himself alone in the office. Or at least, that's what he told himself. The team had long since logged off, but Jon's hands hovered over his keyboard. He stared at lines of code not his own, heart racing, feeling a creeping sense of unease.

Jon had built the product from the ground up—every line of code. But as his team grew, something strange started happening. As he delegated more responsibility to his team, he noticed an eerie presence lingering around him—a shadow that whispered doubts into his ear.

"Are they doing it right?" the voice hissed. "How can you trust them?"

Jon knew he had to let go—his team's growth depended on it. But every time he tried, a chill would run down his spine, as if some malevolent force was waiting to seize control the moment he stepped away. The first manifestation came when he stopped reviewing every line of code. That night, he dreamed of faceless developers, their hands frantically typing, their work spiraling into chaos. He woke in a sweat, feeling it all unraveling.

Jon dismissed his dream (nightmare) as exhaustion. But the signs didn't cease. He received messages from clients reporting mysterious bugs that vanished when he tried to replicate them.

His Slack channel filled with seemingly double entendres, believing his team was seeing right through him like a ghost. The more he relinquished control, the more disconnected he felt, as if his very soul was slipping away.

It wasn't long before he heard the voice again, more insistent this time. "This isn't delegation—it's abdication! They need you, Jon. They just don't know it yet."

Jon could almost see the shadow now, lurking in the corners of the office, growing larger with every decision he didn't make. He felt trapped—if he held on too tightly, he'd stifle his team. But if he let go completely… he'd just be a ghost of the past.

One night, desperate for clarity, Jon decided to confront the source of his fear. He logged into the system, ready to fix the code himself. But as his fingers hovered over the keyboard, the screen flickered—and a message appeared, seemingly typed by invisible hands:

"Trust them… or be haunted forever by what you cannot control."

The lights dimmed. The air grew thick, and the shadow at the edge of his vision coalesced into a shape—his own reflection, hollow-eyed and hunched over, chained to his computer. This was the fate that awaited him: a ghost of a leader, doomed to wander the halls, forever trapped between doing and delegating. In that moment, Jon understood. The real terror wasn't in letting go—it was in holding on too tightly, becoming a prisoner of his own expertise. With a deep breath, he shut the laptop, stood up, and walked away from his desk, leaving the phantom behind.

The next morning, Jon awoke to messages from his team—updates, solutions, progress made without him. They were thriving. And the shadow? Gone. But the lesson lingered like a ghostly whisper: To truly lead, one must step back and trust… or be consumed by the fear of letting go.

And so, the moral of this eerie tale for leaders: Beware the expert's shadow. For the scariest thing about leadership is not the act of letting go—but the fear that if you don't, you'll never escape your own haunted mind.

As you reflect on this story, here's a thought: How might the things you fear losing control over actually be the very things holding you back from true growth?

The Tale of the Masked Catalyst

By Paul Stonehouse

In the quaint town of Eldridge, there stood a modest company that prided itself on progressive values. A key leader in this company was Victor, a figure admired by many. Victor spoke the language of modern leadership fluently—he preached about collaboration, growth, and the power of feedback. He painted himself as a champion of change, and he truly believed it. But did his own leadership confidence blind his competence?

Victor made efforts to embody what he called "catalyst leadership." He spoke with conviction about the importance of vulnerability and shared growth. His demeanor suggested a perfect blend of determination and humility—except for those moments, fleeting but telling, when he subtly shifted the conversation back toward his agenda.

With no extra time and no outside help, the team was forced to stumble forward, haunted by the scope they hadn't anticipated and the growing weight of unrealistic expectations.

It wasn't that Victor openly dismissed others; his mask was much harder to detect. He would encourage feedback, but somehow, each piece would end up validating his original plan. His reactions were polished—never openly critical, just gently reframing, steering the team back toward what he had already envisioned. If someone brought up an idea that challenged his own, he would respond thoughtfully, even complimenting the perspective. But somehow, in the end, the action plan would still revolve around his concepts, his solutions.

Victor didn't see this as manipulation. He believed he was guiding his team, helping them refine their thinking. But as weeks turned into months, the team grew weary. They spoke less freely, began to mirror Victor's language without adding their own thoughts. They learned to give him the kind of feedback that affirmed his beliefs, because that was what seemed to move things forward.

It was during one of Victor's hallmark Open Feedback Nights—an event he was especially proud of—that something began to unravel. The meeting took place in Victor's home. The atmosphere was relaxed, almost festive, with candles flickering in every corner, casting long, shifting shadows that seemed to move with a life of their own. The wind outside howled, rattling the windows, and the creaking of the old house added an eerie undertone. Victor moved about, filling glasses, making light jokes, encouraging people to share openly. The room was filled with a gentle hum of conversation, but beneath it was a tension that only those outside Victor's perspective could feel.

One of his team members, Emily, eventually spoke up. She had hesitated for weeks, trying to find the right words. "Victor, you always ask us for feedback, and I appreciate that. But sometimes it feels like our ideas don't really change anything. We end up back where we started—with your plan."

Victor's smile faltered for just a moment before he caught it. He leaned forward, his tone still warm, "I understand why you might feel that way, Emily. But you have to remember, I have a responsibility to see the broader strategy. It's not that your feedback isn't valuable—it's just that sometimes, there are factors that maybe aren't obvious."

The words were gentle, almost kind, but there was an edge to them, a subtle closing of the door. The rest of the room went quiet, and Victor moved on, asking if anyone else had something to add. No one did. The shadows on the walls seemed to grow darker, creeping closer as silence fell over the room, the candles flickering as if sensing the unease.

Later that night, after the team had left, Victor stood alone in his hallway. The large mirror near his front door caught his reflection—still in his host's attire, still wearing that practiced, confident smile. But something in the reflection made him pause. He saw the echo of Emily's expression as she sat back in her chair, the resignation in her eyes. He looked closer at himself, and for the first time, the confident mask he wore didn't quite fit. He realized that all this time, he had been playing a role, one that kept him safely in control, even while pretending to share it.

Victor reached up, as if to touch his face, and the mask slipped. The horror wasn't in the mask itself, but in what lay beneath—a deep fear of losing control, a fear that others' ideas might mean stepping into the unknown, where he wasn't the sole navigator. He had been leading, not with others, but through them, using their voices to amplify his own.

Suddenly, the house seemed to groan, the wind outside rising in a mournful wail. The candles flickered wildly, casting Victor's distorted shadow across the walls. The mask lay at his feet now, and he stared at his reflection, unsure of what came next. The story didn't end there, and neither did Victor's journey.

He stood in his empty house, the night air chilling against his skin, faced with a question he had never truly asked himself: Could he lead without the mask?

About the Authors

Brad Swanson is an ALJ Guide and leadership/organizational coach who guides organizations across the globe to achieve sustainably better results with Catalyst-level leadership and Lean-Agile practices.

Katharine Bodan is an ALJ Guide who provides people-first coaching for team members and executives, helping businesses sustain growth by elevating the company’s collective intelligence.

Pete Behrens is the Founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey. For over three decades, Pete has been guiding leaders and their organizations for improved business performance and health.

Paul Stonehouse is an ALJ Guide and a Lean-Agile Transformation Coaching & Development Lead for Schneider Electric, a global industrial technology leader.

Navigating Change: How Agile Leadership Can Drive Organizational Transformation

Tue, 15 Oct 2024 23:37:40 GMT

Markets shift. Customer demands change. Technology evolves. For organizations that want to stay relevant, transformation isn’t a choice; it’s a necessity.

We live in a world where change is the only constant. Leaders must strike a balance between addressing immediate needs and setting a vision for the future – building resilience in the face of uncertainty and ensuring their organizations can thrive no matter what challenges lie ahead.

Let’s break down what leaders must embrace in the face of change.

Organizations must continuously improve performance and adapt to changing market conditions.
Optimal performance requires the alignment of people, processes, systems, and culture that enable it to execute efficiently, like a well-tuned engine.
Organizational resilience evolves over time, by fine-tuning performance, through challenges and setbacks.
Balancing performance and resilience requires a deft, adaptive leadership mindset and approach – agile leadership.

The Need for Organizational Transformation

Organizational transformation is often driven by several factors:

Market Dynamics and Competition

Globalization and technological advances are breaking down traditional barriers, intensifying competition. Organizations must constantly adapt strategies to stay ahead of new competitors and shifting market conditions.

Changing Customer Expectations

Today's customers demand personalized experiences, quick responses, and seamless, value-driven interactions across all channels. Organizations must transform to meet these expectations or risk losing market share.

Technological Advancements

Emerging technologies are disrupting traditional business models, product development, and service delivery. Companies need to integrate these technologies to improve efficiency, gain competitive advantage, and offer new value propositions. For example, traditional banks are facing increasing competition from fintech startups that offer faster, more convenient digital services. These institutions must adopt technologies like AI-driven chatbots and on-demand, self-service capabilities via mobile banking platforms to stay relevant.

Challenges in Organizational Transformation

Research shows that only 12% of companies achieve their objectives with major transformation initiatives. On top of that, only 12% of transformation efforts that do produce results manage to sustain them over a period of three years or longer.

Resistance to Change

Change is hard. It’s unsettling. It’s not uncommon for employees, whether middle managers or individual contributors, to be reluctant and resistant to new processes, technologies, and change itself. Leaders must manage this by engaging employees in the change process, openly addressing concerns, communicating the benefits and necessity of change, balancing flexibility with accountability, and ensuring alignment with organizational values and needs.

Overcoming Organizational Inertia

Long-standing habits and norms create inertia that can hinder transformation efforts. Significant friction often arises as well-established processes or policies, generally intended to manage risk or provide important controls, are challenged. Leaders must create a safe environment for employees to challenge the status quo, fostering experimentation and continuous learning that inspires others to embrace change.

Overburdening an Already Overloaded System

Organizations taking on a transformation inevitably face the challenge of competing priorities, often creating a situation where employees are expected to take on additional responsibilities without any relief of their existing workload, putting a strain on the organization and diminishing effectiveness. Leaders must make strategic sacrifices, invest resources wisely, and have the discipline to decide what can be paused, reallocated, or even stopped entirely.

Balancing Short-Term Goals with Long-Term Vision

Focusing solely on immediate results can hinder long-term success. While short-term wins build momentum, leaders must balance them with strategic goals to ensure sustainable growth. Achieving sustainable change takes time. Leaders need to continually balance a sense of urgency with patience and pragmatism.

In practice, this might look like a manufacturing firm facing the need for expanding automation at scale to keep up with growing demand. There may be resistance due to high upfront costs, workforce implications, or concerns over disrupting operations. Agile leaders can overcome this by creating a compelling vision, supported by an implementation strategy that provides incremental changes combined with upskilling programs, aligning long-term benefits with immediate operational needs.

Understanding the Role of Leadership in Change

Traditional Leadership vs. Agile Leadership

Traditional leadership tends to focus on stability, control, and top-down decision-making. While this approach may provide clarity of focus and ownership, it often results in rigid, slow-to-adapt systems and lacks the insight and flexibility needed to respond to change.

By contrast, agile leadership emphasizes flexibility, collaboration, and quick decision-making. Agile leaders partner with employees as co-creators, providing autonomy for teams to be creative problem-solvers. They foster a culture of continuous learning and shared ownership and are open to changing course based on feedback and new information. Agile leaders understand that transformation isn't just about changing processes but also about shifting mindsets and the organization’s culture.

Importance of Leadership in Driving Organizational Transformation

The shift from traditional to agile leadership marks a significant change in how organizations manage transformation.

Let’s say that a major transportation company needs to transform its antiquated technology, infrastructure, and operational support systems; it requires overhauling traditional software delivery models to more advanced, cloud-based solutions. Under traditional leadership, this shift might be hampered by entrenched processes, rigid hierarchies, and a patchwork of projects competing for resources. Agile leadership, however, would encourage new approaches, promoting cross-hierarchical alignment, creating cross-functional teams, experimentation, and responding quickly to feedback, reducing complexity and risk incrementally to accelerate and sustain the transformation.

Organizations are complex human systems that often require a forcing function to create alignment, focus, and drive toward something new. Leadership, in this case, is the catalyst for change, focusing on aligning people, processes, systems, and cultures to execute shared goals.

Agile Leadership increases transformation success by enabling and empowering employees to participate and share ownership of the new system. Agile leaders encourage autonomy and accountability. They understand that successful transformation isn't simply about changing processes, but more about shifting mindsets and fostering a culture of learning that sustains the change.

Key Characteristics of Agile Leadership

Agile leaders embody and actively model several core characteristics that enable successful transformation:

Flexibility and Adaptability : Agile leaders quickly adjust strategies in response to evolving circumstances, embracing uncertainty as an opportunity for growth and innovation rather than a threat. They discourage rigid plans that can hinder progress and are open to new approaches to achieve goals.
Empowering and Trusting Teams : Trust is a cornerstone of agile leadership. Agile leaders avoid micromanaging, in favor of delegating authority, and trusting teams to make decisions. They intuitively leverage empowerment and trust to tap into the collective intelligence of the organization, fostering shared ownership, engagement, and creativity, resulting in faster problem-solving, higher quality, and innovation needed for transformation.
Open Communication and Transparency : Agile leaders maintain open communication channels and encourage radical transparency, sharing critical information with teams and stakeholders, to build trust, improve alignment and reduce ambiguity. Agile leaders promote open dialogue and robust feedback while ensuring teams have the information needed to adapt to changes and challenges.
Focus on Collaboration and Innovation : Agile leaders recognize that the best solutions often come from collective efforts. Agile leaders break down silos and promote cross-functional collaboration, fostering an environment where diverse perspectives lead to innovative solutions.

These qualities and behaviors, when modeled consistently, allow agile leaders to guide their organizations through the complex and often unpredictable journey of transformation.

Agile Leadership Strategies for Successful Transformation

To drive a successful organizational transformation, agile leaders can implement several key strategies:

Establish a Clear Vision and Purpose : A compelling vision provides direction and motivates teams. Agile leaders ensure everyone understands their role in achieving goals and aligning with the broader transformation efforts. Vision clarity enhances agility in execution as new information or roadblocks surface.
Strategic, Disciplined Prioritization : Leaders must make strategic sacrifices to avoid overloading the system further, by redistributing efforts toward the most impactful areas, ensuring that both short-term operational needs and long-term strategic goals are met without causing burnout or decreased productivity among employees. Being mindful of constraints and resource allocation – of people, technology, and finances – helps to sustain momentum while maintaining the health and morale of the organization.
Create a Culture of Continuous Learning : Agile leaders encourage experimentation and view early failures as growth opportunities. Redefining performance measures and integrating learning and innovation goals creates a safe environment for challenging the status quo and developing new ways of working.
Leverage Technology for Efficiency and Innovation : Adopting the right technologies can streamline processes, enhance collaboration, and drive innovation. Agile leaders optimize technology investments, balancing new and existing technologies, to reduce technical waste. Identify tools that enable people to collaborate effectively and align with the organization’s transformation goals.

Building the Scaffolding for Transformation Sustainability

The Role of Communication

Effective communication during change is crucial. Transparent and consistent communication reduces uncertainty, builds trust, and aligns everyone with organizational objectives. Agile leaders use multiple channels, tailor messages to different audiences, and regularly seek feedback to maintain morale and engagement.

Building Agile Teams

Agile teams are at the heart of successful transformation efforts. These teams are characterized by diversity, openness, autonomy, and shared ownership. Leaders must recruit and develop talent that is adaptable, collaborative, and open to learning. Fostering a collaborative and inclusive culture within teams, as well as middle management, enables collective problem-solving, which is essential for navigating complex change. Agile leaders create environments where team members feel safe to challenge assumptions, share ideas, and contribute to change.

Measuring Progress

Measuring the progress of an organizational transformation is vital for ensuring long-term sustainability and strategic alignment. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are used to gauge progress toward desired outcomes, operational effectiveness, and employee engagement. Metrics like customer satisfaction, time-to-market for new products, and employee retention provide data-driven insights into the health of transformation efforts, the direction of the transformation, and guide future decisions.

Recognizing progress and celebrating achievements boosts morale and reinforces the transformation’s significance. By setting clear KPIs and fostering a culture of recognition, agile leaders ensure that their transformation efforts are not only measurable and meaningful outcomes.

Conclusion

Agile leadership plays a pivotal role in navigating organizational transformations by embracing adaptability, empowering teams, and fostering continuous learning. This approach not only leads to improved processes but also initiates shifts in organizational mindsets and cultures, enabling resilience in the face of ongoing change.

Agile leadership is not just about adopting new methodologies. It’s about preparing organizations, and the people within them, for a future that demands flexibility and innovation. Leaders who commit to this journey can position their organizations for long-term success while having a profound impact on the people they lead.

Agile leadership isn't a destination but a journey. Leaders who commit to this path can steer their organizations through uncertainty and position them for long-term success.

Recommended Books, Courses, and Tools for Leaders Navigating Organizational Transformation

Books

Courses

Agility in Leadership by Agile Leadership Journey highlights the mindset and behaviors of agile leadership.
Agility in Organizations by Agile Leadership Journey highlights the culture, systems and processes that shape organizational performance and health.

Tools

Changewise Leadership Agility 360 Assessment by Agile Leadership Journey provides insights into the leader’s mindset and behaviors along with areas for improvement.
Culture Values 360 Assessment by Agile Leadership Journey provides insights into the excess and deficiencies found in the organization leading to misalignment.

About the Author

Richard Dolman is a pragmatic enterprise agility coach and trainer - and status quo agitator. His professional passion is helping people and organizations unlock their hidden potential.

Richard works with leaders to solve critical business and technology challenges, by empowering and enabling collaborative, high-performing teams. Over his 25+ year career, he has held leadership roles in mortgage banking, software products, and multiple professional services companies.

Living in Colorado, Richard spends time in the mountains, skiing, snowboarding, and hiking. Connect with Richard on LinkedIn.

About the Author

Pete Behrens is a globally recognized leadership coach, consultant, and in-demand speaker. As the founder and CEO of Agile Leadership Journey, he has built a curriculum and global community dedicated to building better leaders. Pete has led agile transformations for dozens of Fortune 500 companies and non-profit organizations, improving organizational health and performance through education and coaching. His ultimate goal is to show leaders that shifts in mindsets, behaviors, and culture are an asset – not a liability.

An influential speaker, Pete has shared his insights at various global conferences and hosts the Relearning Leadership podcast , where he engages with industry experts and leaders to explore the evolving landscape of leadership and organizational development.

Mastering Influence: 9 Ways to Be More Persuasive

Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:15:23 GMT

As a business leader, influence is a skill you must master – whether you’re persuading stakeholders, aligning teams, or gaining buy-in from executives.

The authority to make decisions might not always be yours, but that doesn’t mean you can’t have a significant impact. Even when you have authority, your long-term impact can be much greater when you persuade others rather than simply coercing them.

Here we’ll break down nine strategies and tactics – backed by research and practical experience – to help you expand your influence.

1. Start With the Problem, Not Your Solution

Strategy : Shift your focus to the problem before pitching solutions.
Tactic : Provide a vivid, relatable example that brings the issue to life.

It’s tempting to start by showcasing your great ideas. But when persuading others, especially those outside your domain of expertise, begin by clarifying the problem. As demonstrated by Jon Stegner, a former supply-chain executive with manufacturers Delphi, John Deere and Honda (and highlighted in the book Switch by Chip and Dan Heath), showing the scope of a problem in a visceral way can be much more compelling than diving straight into solutions.

Stegner convinced his company to reduce wasteful spending on work gloves by physically piling 424 pairs of gloves on the boardroom table—an image that left a lasting impact. Similarly, leading with a clear articulation of the pain points primes your audience to be receptive to the solution.

2. Find Common Ground

Strategy : Align on shared values or goals.
Tactic : Use language that builds consensus, like, “Yes, and…” instead of, “Yes, but…”

Successful influencers spend time uncovering commonalities. Research led by author and consultant Neil Rackham shows top negotiators spend three times more effort finding common ground than their average counterparts. Whether it’s a shared corporate objective or a mutual concern, drawing attention to the values you all share lays the foundation for agreement.

Try acknowledging opposing viewpoints with phrases like, “That’s a good point, here’s one way we could both address it,” to keep the conversation constructive.

3. Be Prepared, Not Just Passionate

Strategy: Match passion with thorough preparation.
Tactic: Anticipate objections and prepare thoughtful responses.

Passion alone won’t win over a room. While enthusiasm is valuable, overly exuberant pitches without substance can undermine your credibility. A study of 1,400 start-up pitches in the Academy of Management Journal showed that founders who expressed too much joy were less likely to receive funding. The takeaway? Ground your enthusiasm in solid preparation. Understand your audience’s values, be ready to address potential concerns, and present a balanced argument.

And remember, anticipating objections is not a sign of weakness – it’s a display of thoroughness and thoughtfulness.

4. One Strong Argument Trumps Many

Strategy: Simplify your case with a single, compelling argument.
Tactic: Focus on your strongest point and let it stand on its own.

Throwing out numerous reasons to support your idea can actually dilute your influence. Research discussed by author and organizational psychologist Adam Grant in his book Think Again highlights that the most successful negotiators rely on just one or two strong arguments, while less effective ones throw out multiple supporting arguments. As soon as someone disputes one of your arguments, they are likely to discard all of your arguments.

More is not always better – that long list of reasons is likely to backfire and dilute your best argument, so stick to your most persuasive argument and let it resonate.

5. Ask Powerful Questions

Strategy: Use questions to guide others toward their own conclusions.
Tactic: Ask empathetic, open-ended questions that encourage reflection.

Skilled influencers don’t just make statements – they ask the right questions. In Think Again, Adam Grant shares research showing that top negotiators spend 21% of their time asking questions, compared to only 10% for average negotiators.

These aren’t just any questions – they’re genuine, curious, and designed to help others explore their own thoughts, and to reach their own conclusion – and this is the most powerful form of persuasion. As Ted Lasso says: “Be curious, not judgmental.”

6. Collaboration Beats Confidence

Strategy: Prioritize collaboration over projecting confidence.
Tactic: Signal receptiveness by sharing what you don’t know or need help with.

Influence isn’t always about being the smartest person in the room; it’s about working with others to achieve the best outcome. People are drawn to leaders who are collaborative and humble, rather than overly confident – or even cocky. People care as much about your willingness to collaborate as they do about your competence, as described in the Work Life podcast episode: How to Pitch Your Best Ideas .

Acknowledge your own limitations and ask for input. This builds trust and encourages others to engage.

7. Propose Experiments, Not Big Changes

Strategy: Frame ideas as experiments to reduce resistance.
Tactic: Suggest trial periods or small tests to gauge effectiveness.

Change is intimidating, but experiments feel manageable. By proposing a trial period or small-scale test, you create psychological safety and reduce the perceived threat of making a significant shift. For instance, instead of asking, “Can we implement this new strategy?” ask, “Are you willing to try this for a month and see what happens?” The ability to re-evaluate later makes people more comfortable taking initial steps.

8. Tell Stories to Engage People Emotionally

Strategy: Use storytelling to capture attention and create emotional connections.
Tactic: Share personal stories or project a compelling future vision.

Humans are hardwired to connect with stories. Stories not only grab our attention but also create emotional buy-in. Whether you’re telling a story of your own journey or casting a vision of the future, stories make your ideas memorable. Make your stakeholders the heroes of the story and position yourself as the guide or mentor, helping them achieve success.

9. Build Trusting Relationships

Strategy: Invest time in building trust.
Tactic: Reduce self-interest and show genuine care for others’ concerns.

Trust is the currency of influence. As highlighted in the book The Trusted Advisor by Maister, Green, and Galford, trust is built through credibility, reliability, intimacy, and minimizing self-orientation. To strengthen trust, make time to engage with others personally, ask about their challenges, and demonstrate authentic interest. The more people trust you, the more influence you’ll have.

Influence can be achieved without over-reliance on asserting authority, and by fostering collaboration, trust, and shared purpose. By leveraging these nine strategies and tactics, you can enhance your ability to lead with influence, regardless of your position within the organization.

Ready to take your influence to the next level? Start applying these tactics today!

About the Author

Brad Swanson is a Leadership and Organizational Coach at Agility11 and an Agile Leadership Journey Guide. Brad guides organizations to achieve sustainably better results using Lean and Agile principles. He has been a trusted advisor for executives and organizations across the globe. He honed his own leadership skills as an executive in the consulting and software industries.

Connect with Brad on LinkedIn.

How to Deescalate in an Escalation Environment

Tue, 17 Sep 2024 20:55:30 GMT

Let’s say you’re responsible for achieving an important business goal, which requires support from several other groups in your organization. One group, distracted by work unrelated to yours, is not meeting their commitments and jeopardizing the whole initiative. You’ve tried to reason with them but to no avail.

Now, you’ve run out of time. There’s no choice but to escalate the situation to your bosses.

You’ve learned that involving senior leaders to help resolve impediments can be highly effective. Their knowledge and authority can quickly eliminate uncertainty around goals and realign priorities to get everyone appropriately focused. However, when escalation becomes the operational norm, dysfunction often emerges.

Now, how might you proceed before pulling the trigger on that escalation?

Recently, I’ve been supporting leaders in a large, global organization that is feeling the pressure of a rapidly changing business landscape. They’re determined to improve how they’re adapting to these unforeseen shifts and believe the answer lies in improving how their leaders are leading. Specifically, they hypothesize that creating more catalyst leadership and increasing team empowerment will improve operational capability and resiliency in their growing and changing market.

One of the experiments that their senior leaders are running to validate this hypothesis is to educate and support their VPs and directors in developing these two competencies, then engaging them in deciding what should be improved in the organization.

Working in small, collaborative, cross-functional groups, these leaders seemed hungry to address the issue but were uncertain where to begin. Everyone seemed to have a different opinion about what should be improved. Frustrated with their inability to decide together as peers, one leader suggested that “they get more guidance from their bosses.”

Initially, this recommendation to escalate was met with vocal agreement, head nods, and even a palpable sense of relief. However, they began to realize that this behavior of pushing decisions up their company’s hierarchy had become normalized. In fact, one leader summarized, “This is just how we get everything of any importance done.”

Suddenly, they agreed on one thing: to reduce the frequency of escalations. But how? They began by asking themselves three questions:

Why were escalations happening so frequently?
What is helpful and hurtful about using this approach?
How could the benefits of escalations be retained and determents reduced?

Why Do Escalations Happen Frequently?

Escalations tend to happen in organizations where people lack the knowledge, alignment, or capacity to solve shared challenges, amicably, with their peers. Different situations can contribute to these deficiencies, but one common example is when there is too much to get done – and the priority of how the work is done is not clearly understood. Escalations become the proxy for clear priorities. In the organization I’m working with, one leader shared, “For my team, if an initiative didn’t have an escalation driving it, it wasn’t a priority.”

Another cause identified by this team was that their organization’s strong “Go!” culture prioritized short-term over long-term results. They were constantly fighting fires instead of preventing them. This overriding sense of urgency justified the quick result of an escalated decision versus a slower-to-reach collaborative decision.

The team also recognized that most escalations occurred across functional boundaries (like the scenario we began this article with). In addition, a plethora of performance metrics, solely achievable by one functional group, led to a more competitive than cooperative environment. Groups felt siloed from each other and were more willing to escalate to get what they needed.

Finally – and this is something I’ve seen plague other large global organizations – groups are comprised of many busy individuals spread across many locations, and have limited time zone overlap. They simply don’t get to know each other. This makes it difficult to problem-solve together and trust that others share our goals. Without that foundation of trust, motives are unknown, making them seem nefarious, and triggering a quicker escalation.

The Trouble With Frequent Escalation

Escalation is the nuclear option for solving a problem. It’s decisive and powerful but can come with collateral damage.

One troubling outcome of escalations is that individuals begin to believe they don’t have the authority or responsibility to try solving problems themselves. When they routinely see senior leaders step in and provide more tactical decisions, they’ll just wait for the leader-approved direction or resolution before acting themselves. Ironically, many individuals who wait for a leader to decide are also frustrated that the leader is micromanaging them.

Constantly handling escalations is hard on leaders too. Resolving squabbles is not why many of us became leaders. One leader I met with agreed, and said, “I just wish my team could make more decisions on their own.” More importantly, however, dealing with escalations can distract leaders from the more impactful and rewarding work toward reaching the organization’s strategic goals.

Moving From Escalation to Mitigation

Our leaders knew it was time to address these bad organizational habits. They collaborated on several approaches that would – hopefully – limit the number of escalations.

First, senior leaders committed to not immediately accepting and solving all the problems that had been escalated to them. Instead, they would help managers clarify goals and encourage the individuals closest to the problem to reassess how best to achieve that goal. This, along with improving communication around high-level business goals, would ultimately bring groups together to problem-solve, instead of driving them apart.

If managers and teams lack the knowledge or skills to solve a challenge, their leaders must help them develop those skills – teaching them to fish, instead of giving them a fish, if you will. And if the capability to solve a challenge was present but not used, then the leaders must identify where there might be a lack of empowerment or psychological safety.

Lastly – leaders should lead by example and offer positive reinforcement to others in the hopes that these behaviors would build trust and encourage more collaborative problem-solving.

While it’s still too early to tell if the work this organization is trying will break its cycle of escalations, there is optimism in the air. There is more awareness of the negative impact of constant escalations, executives report that their senior leaders are demonstrating more catalyst behaviors, and serious discussions are being had about empowerment with more decision-making authority being given deeper in the organization.

The door to change has been opened and time will tell.

About the Author

Ross Hughes is dedicated to helping leaders and teams work better together to solve complex challenges in rapidly changing environments. Solutions to uncertain and volatile problems rarely emerge from siloed individuals but from well-functioning groups able to unleash their collaborative intelligence and collective skills.

To help build high-performing human systems, Ross pulls from his decades of personal experiences as a valued team member, manager, leader, and advisor in diverse organizations and industries. Having first-hand knowledge of the challenges his clients face provides a practical perspective to possible solutions and – maybe more importantly – empathy toward those struggling to solve them together.

Learn more about Ross.

Blurred Vision: Leadership in the Age of AI

Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:10:10 GMT

As we step into an era increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence (AI), the role of leadership within this space is not just evolving, but also becoming more intricate and pivotal. Being part of Agile Leadership Journey’s AI Leadership Lab , led by Pete Behrens, has provided me with invaluable insights into the multifaceted challenges, strategies, and implications of AI adoption across businesses.

Our discussions cover a wide range of topics, highlighting AI's vast influence on business processes and culture. We've explored everything from ethical concerns like data privacy and algorithmic bias to the cultural shifts AI brings, such as job displacement and changing work dynamics. One of the most pressing questions we face is whether leadership should focus solely on financial outcomes or if it must also consider the broader human and ethical impacts of AI.

In his book Co-Intelligence: Living and Working with AI , Ethan Mollick references a study analyzing 1,016 job categories. The study revealed that most jobs have some degree of overlap with AI capabilities. This research underscores the profound changes AI could bring to the workforce, affecting nearly every industry somehow, and in many respects crystalizes the unique nature of the disruption this technology will cause.

The challenge for leaders isn't just technical or financial; it's about preserving human value within organizational culture and brand.

Business leaders must navigate the delicate balance between embracing AI and maintaining the human touch that is essential to both customers and employees. The temptation to seek perfect solutions can be paralyzing, but AI's presence is now a permanent fixture in the business landscape. However, it's reassuring to know that this doesn't have to mean the end of human-centric values, but rather a new chapter in their integration with AI.

“To truly harness the benefits of AI, we must equally invest in nurturing our human potential. Neither alone is sufficient. Both are essential. … Leaders who exhibit high levels of awareness, wisdom, and compassion are ideally suited to embrace the future by leveraging both AI’s capabilities and their own human qualities.”

– Rasmus Hougaard, Founder & CEO, Potential Project

To address these challenges at the Business Agility Institute (BAI) , we have drawn upon the Domains and Capabilities of Business Agility, using them to prioritize and integrate AI in ways that align with our unique business culture. Additionally, we've begun research with agile leaders and AI experts to better understand how these domains can improve organizations' ability to realize AI's potential. We plan to release our findings in a Snapshot Report later this year, and we welcome anyone interested in contributing to this research to reach out.

As you continue your AI journey, a focused and straightforward approach can be highly effective. Begin with basic research into available resources and talk with industry peers to gain insights. Pay attention to the behaviors and strategies that have already driven your success in business agility. These can inform your AI adoption, policy development, and governance, ensuring that employees and customers remain at the forefront.

The guidelines of AI leadership may be blurry, and much remains to be learned and defined. I see success depending on how well organizations can maintain and enhance the human experience amidst rapid technological change. This means a clear understanding of organizational priorities, values, and identity will be more critical than ever. This clarity will guide decisions and retain focus and determination in the face of AI's transformative power.

About the Author

Christopher Morales is a digital producer for Business Agility Institute (BAI), AI enthusiast, and champion of human-centricity in the modern world of work. As an avid sports fan, he believes it's the intangibles that influence the wins.

Connect with Chris on LinkedIn.

References

Hougaard, R. and Carter, J. (2024, June 6). How AI Can Make Us Better Leaders . Harvard Business Review.
Mollick, E. (2024, April 4). A Wharton professor explains why most jobs will be impacted by AI . Fast Company.

The Power of Gratitude in the Workplace

Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:36:37 GMT

Have you ever wondered how powerful a simple heartfelt “thank you” can be when it comes to motivating people to out-perform themselves?

For the past five months, I have been coaching a very high-potential leader. It took a while for us to build our relationship to the point where she could trust me and open up. A few weeks ago, we were beginning a brainstorming session with seven other leaders, and I posed a check-in question:

What motivates you at work?

When this leader’s turn came, she looked at me and said, “I feel motivated when I share the effort I put into something, and irrespective of what the result might be, Rashmi says, ‘Awesome, Thank you!’ That makes me feel happy and appreciated to do more.”

I was both pleasantly surprised and humbled by hearing this. I realized that every word I say, in every conversation either strengthens, weakens, or maintains that relationship.

That is a secret to long-term success in building high-performing teams.

Of course, it’s not as if leaders and managers don’t care. Most often, they are just so busy ‘doing’ that there is no time for ‘being’ the leaders that they desire to be and to work with. This seems to be the case across all levels of leaders, irrespective of domain or industry.

Since that conversation – that simple act of gratitude – I have been able to find more evidence to strengthen the discovery that, as human beings, we all like to be seen, heard, and valued for who we are.

How can we bring the emotional connection back into workplaces?

For one, we could recognize people for their efforts and not just the end result.
And, we could consider how we can lift up others in every conversation.

How can we show gratitude for everything our teams do and value them for who they are?

While we might not have a definitive answer, I certainly am working on incorporating this into my work, practicing it every day, in every conversation.

Have you told anyone how great they were today?

About the Author

Rashmi Fernandes works with leaders and teams to co-create outcomes that lead to agility and positive team culture, while focusing on strategic alignment. She specializes in enabling product teams to focus on customer centricity and arrive at shared understanding towards a common purpose. As an Innovation Catalyst, she coaches teams on how to take an idea from concept to life.

She has led many enterprise-wide initiatives like Product Conferences, Product & Scrum Master Communities of Practice & Leadership Development Programs. Her passion for her community in India brought together an initiative that provides a platform for more than 1,000 underprivileged children to play sports.

Connect with Rashmi on LinkedIn.

Navigating the Maze: How Leaders Can Confidently Evaluate AI and New Technologies

Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:37:37 GMT

Tech advancements often feel like a relentless wave, challenging leaders to determine which innovations will truly benefit their organizations.

In a new article, Pete Lunenfeld – CurrentWave AI founder, CEO, and CTO, and member of the ALJ AI Leadership Lab – offers a strategic framework for evaluating new technologies, including AI.

By guiding readers through four essential questions, Lunenfeld offers the tools to distinguish between genuine opportunities and costly distractions – ensuring that your technology investments are both practical and impactful.

Curious about how this framework can help you make better technology decisions?

About the Author

Catalyst Conversations™: A Tool for Effective Communication

Wed, 26 Jun 2024 23:43:55 GMT

Communication – real connection, problem-solving, or information sharing – can often require more than what can be accomplished by a quick hallway chat or firing off an email.

Sometimes the stakes are higher, intent becomes murky, and messages get lost in assumptions or distractions. Why? Because the dialog we are accustomed to is linear – it follows a pattern. But a Catalyst Conversation™ can address complex issues and push us beyond our usual script.

With clear, effective communication being so critical – both at the workplace and at home – it can be helpful to have a resource to support us in navigating these conversations.

Scroll down to download Agile Leadership Journey’s free Catalyst Conversations™ tool
for simple yet effective guidance around our everyday communication.

Listen to these episodes of the Relearning Leadership podcast that discuss the Catalyst Conversations™ approach and learn how to make every conversation better.

Download the Catalyst Conversations™ quick reference tool.

Enter your information below to receive a copy of the Catalyst Conversations™ mini poster in your inbox. Use it as a bookmark, pin it to a bulletin board, or tape it to the side of a computer monitor – anywhere you’d like to easily reference when needed!

The 2024 State of Agility in Procurement & Supply Report: Key Insights on Leadership

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 23:05:58 GMT

The Lean-Agile Procurement (LAP) Alliance has released its 2024 State of Agility in Procurement & Supply report , closely examining the growing significance of agile transformation in the procurement and supply chain sectors.

The results of this global survey provide some insights that continue to point toward the importance of leadership in navigating market uncertainties and improving business outcomes.

Importance of Leadership in Agile Transformations

The report found that executive support in scaling agile practices is critical to a successful transformation – with insufficient executive backing noted as a major barrier to success. Leaders must champion these initiatives to ensure they receive the necessary resources and alignment.

Skills Gap and Training Needs

There is a notable skills gap in agile methodologies and contract management, with 82% of respondents expressing a lack of confidence in managing agile contracts . This gap underscores the need for leadership to invest in comprehensive training programs to build the necessary competencies within their teams.

Cultural Resistance

Organizational resistance to change and difficulty in adapting existing processes are highlighted as significant challenges. Leaders play a pivotal role in fostering a culture that embraces agile values and practices, helping to overcome these barriers.

Overwhelming Agreement on the Importance of Agility

92% of respondents agree that adopting agile practices is strategically important for their business. This consensus reflects the necessity of agility in addressing complex, volatile, and rapidly changing market conditions.

Further, the report emphasizes the importance of creating adaptive partner ecosystems – yet only 5% of respondents have included external partners in their agile transformations, indicating significant room for growth. Leadership must prioritize building these collaborative networks to enhance resilience and innovation.

Agile Leadership Leads to Business Results

Adopting agile practices has shown significant business benefits, including improved lead times and better overall performance. Success stories from commercial functions demonstrate potential improvements in lead times ranging from 200% to 800%.

Beyond Practices and Frameworks

While the report points out the importance of agile practices and frameworks, real, lasting transformations hinge on effective leadership. Leaders must go beyond the adoption of methodologies and pursue a cultural shift within their organizations.

The report's outcomes highlight that executive support, comprehensive training, and a willingness to overcome cultural resistance are pivotal to success. Leaders must champion agile initiatives, not only by endorsing them but by actively:

Fostering a culture that embraces change.
Investing in skill development.
Building adaptive partner ecosystems.

This approach ensures that an organization’s transformation is not just a superficial change – but instead, a shift toward resilience and innovation. By going beyond practices and frameworks, leaders can drive significant improvements in business outcomes in an unpredictable market.

Explore the full report for detailed findings and actionable strategies to empower your leadership and drive successful agile transformations.

About the Author

Betsy Piland is an ALJ alum and a marketing and communications professional. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofit industries – always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not working, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

ALJ Case Study | From Chaos to Collaboration: Scaling Agile at Salesforce

Wed, 22 May 2024 20:55:32 GMT

Nearly two decades ago, Salesforce wasn’t the SaaS giant it is today – but an agile transformation across a 350+ person R&D organization helped point the company toward its current position of more than $34 billion in annual revenue.

An instrumental part of that transformation was Agile Leadership Journey’s Founder and CEO Pete Behrens who stepped in to guide Salesforce’s R&D department from chaos to collaboration.

The Situation at Salesforce

In 2006, Salesforce was growing – fast.

The heroic startup mentality to product management that they built the company on was quite effective when teams were small, but the scaling pains were numbing. While teams continued to deliver patch fixes, they hit a wall with their major release schedule from what had been a reliable seasonal four-month cycle to failing any delivery for over a year.

This is where Salesforce’s R&D leadership made the bold decision to go all in on an agile transformation. Initiated by internal change agents, the shift to agile was meant to unkink the hose that had stopped the flow of value delivery.

The Solution? A Culture Transformation

At that time, Salesforce’s decision to pursue an agile transformation at that scale was an audacious one. Remember, this was before Spotify or Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) were introduced.

There were simply no existing frameworks for scaling other than to start small and grow incrementally through learning – and Salesforce leadership didn’t think small. If it was the right thing to do, they were all in.

Continue reading below...

Download the Complete Case Study: Scaling Agile at Salesforce

The R&D department dove headfirst into the transformation by sending Scrum masters and product owners to a brief two-day training course, quickly kicking off Scrum across more than 20 teams. However, this initial excitement fizzled back in the real world of the office with a complex software architecture and cross-team interdependencies. It quickly devolved into departmental chaos, with R&D leaders realizing that things were not going to be as easy as “educate and go.”

As the team at Salesforce realized, learning Scrum was like learning a new recipe. Sure the meal might be edible, but that hardly makes you a Michelin-star chef. Even if one team had gotten the hang of Scrum, the broader system was still broken.

Late 2006 is when Pete Behrens was called in to assist leadership in navigating the agile transformation, and most importantly, to help make it effective.

“We worked with leaders, to help them understand which levers to pull within the organization that would allow Scrum to work,” says Behrens. “A key learning for leadership was how it was less about the Scrum framework than it was about their overall system. It was essential for them to understand how their collective structures, policies, measures, and mindsets shaped their values and value delivered. And then tweak them.”

“They were willing to trust me, to bring in scaling concepts to enable agile ways of working that were still in development at that time,” explains Behrens. “Looking back, it was our experiments at Salesforce that eventually became Agile Leadership Journey.”

Through Behrens’ guidance, guardrails, and advice, Salesforce made the transformation their own. They charted their own path. They developed their own vocabulary. And they grew in collaboration and confidence.

“We intentionally began shifting them from a mostly competitive toward a more collaborative team-based culture. Not only was it an agile transformation – it was a culture transformation,” said Behrens.

Making Doubters Into Believers

Despite the progress being made in the early days of the transformation, there were naysayers lurking not so quietly within the organization. Some outright refused to accept that agile ways of working might be the solution to their problems and refused to participate in the transformation. They dismissed Behrens’ guidance and claimed that he couldn’t possibly understand their technical complexities and requirements as he was an outsider. They weren’t wrong on the latter part – he couldn’t understand the complexity of their system – however, he could impart more effective ways of working.

“What I modeled – and what I was so proud of Salesforce’s leaders for fully owning – was a monthly showcase. Every team was required to attend and demonstrate accomplishments and challenges. Teams were sharing wins and struggles, both large and small. There were standing ovations!” says Behrens. And as teams struggled, leaders held firm to their new values and guidelines.

“The showcases became a turning point for many naysayers. After a few months of seeing other teams receive recognition and those holding back receive criticism, the doubters took notice. This time, instead of sitting with arms crossed, they presented a surprising technical development. Despite their insistence that the tech was incomplete, it lit a spark in them. When backed into a corner, they got creative. Sometimes creativity requires a few constraints alongside an audacious goal.”

Focusing on the Right Goal

The problem with many transformations is that teams focus on the wrong goal. With agile transformations, the wrong goal is focusing on agility itself. Behrens explains, “Where others follow the process, we encourage leaders to follow the values. Agile is, in fact, about values in service to the improvement of value delivery.”

For Salesforce, this meant that the agile process and practices were less important than delivering value incrementally. This allowed teams more flexibility in their agile practices without lessening leaders' firm stance on aligning with the values.

While many organizations argue over the “right” processes, Salesforce simply looked past that to the value they were delivering. This flexibility allowed those who shunned specific practices to creatively explore others that led to the same outcomes.

Immediate and Ongoing Results

The impact on Salesforce’s delivery engine? Immediate.

Recall that in 2006, their number of major releases had dwindled down to zero. By the first quarter of 2007, they delivered their Spring release, and for six more years, they never missed another seasonal release target – even as they continued to scale.

With their newfound agility, Salesforce was able to flex their muscles again that had bulked up too quickly, allowing them to get back on track with on-time seasonal releases.

“All transformations are hard. There’s no easy path. But the bigger the challenge, the more satisfying the outcome. What we did all those years ago was scalable and stuck with them as the company continued to grow.”

Behrens continued advising Salesforce through 2012, and his work created a ripple effect still being felt today – even after a growing global presence, more than 50 acquisitions, $34 billion in revenue, and nearly 80,000 employees.

Will our next case study be your organization's success story?

Tell us a little about yourself, your organization, and the challenges you’re facing and we'll be in touch soon!

Reimagining Leadership With AI: Watch the Webinar Replay

Wed, 22 May 2024 14:36:11 GMT

The Reimagining Leadership With AI webinar, hosted by the World Management Agility Forum, was held May 16 and featured several of the Agile Leadership Journey AI Leadership Lab advisors:

Pete Behrens, Founder & CEO, Agile Leadership Journey
Nick Hodnick, TPM Manager, Microsoft
Dr. Eric Kihn, Chief, Oceanographic and Geophysical Science and Services Division, National Centers for Environmental Information Industrial Solutions Engineering Team
Pete Lunenfeld, Founder, CEO & CTO, CurrentWave AI

The group, each representing a different industry and professional discipline, began the conversation by acknowledging the transformative impact of generative AI on leadership, but asking the question:

How will AI influence leadership competencies – while holding on to the human elements that make leadership most effective?

While in agreement that AI will undoubtedly play a role in augmenting leadership capabilities, democratizing information, and shifting traditional power structures, there were varying perspectives on how large that would be.

The panelists didn’t shy away from the more controversial topics, either. They address some of the ethical considerations and biases inherent in AI, stressing the importance of awareness and critical engagement with AI tools to avoid perpetuating existing disparities.

Watch the full webinar replay below:

Ready to dive deeper?

Visit the Agile Leadership Journey AI Leadership Lab to further explore the integration of AI in leadership!

The World Management Agility Forum will be held Sept. 19-21, 2024, in Lisbon, Portugal.

Pete Behrens and Agile pioneer and ALJ Partner Guide Jim Highsmith will facilitate four key events, as well as a number of keynote presentations, a leadership panel discussion, and a half-day workshop.

We Rise By Creating More Inclusive Workplaces

Mon, 20 May 2024 20:23:09 GMT

An ALJ Book Review of Rising Together by Sally Helgesen

Behaviors and actions play a crucial role in shaping feelings, beliefs, and perceptions within an organization. Those behaviors and actions include efforts around inclusion – something that should be much more than just a buzzword around the office. Instead, it should be a measurable and achievable practice that organizations strive for.

Embracing diversity has the power to transform even the most complex situations, and making even small behavioral adjustments can lead to deeper workplace relationships. In Sally Helgesen’s latest book, Rising Together: How We Can Bridge Divides and Create a More Inclusive Workplace , Helgesen explores how to create a diverse and inclusive workplace where individuals can nurture workplace relationships, broaden influence, and experience personal growth.

That said, you might be asking yourself:

How can we instill these new feelings, beliefs, and perceptions in ourselves?

In Rising Together , Helgesen discusses a list of eight triggers that we commonly encounter while identifying ways our responses to these triggers can be managed. Readers will surely experience an “A HA!” moment here (likely several of them).

What Helgesen offers is practical guidance that can help anyone assert their right to be recognized – but in a balanced and healthy way that avoids the kind of self-congratulatory justifications that tend to materialize when we’re feeling defensive.

In Part 1 of Rising Together, Helgesen explores the eight triggers, and in Part 2, she imparts inclusive practices – the actions we can take to release us from what keeps us from building cultures of belonging. With her examination of this duo – awareness and behaviors – Helgesen speaks to many of the concepts embraced by Agile Leadership Journey through our workshops , programs , and resources .

As you read through each trigger, consider how you would respond to them yourself as well as how you might advise someone you are coaching or mentoring.

Part 1: Eight Common Triggers

Helgesen says that we rise together by understanding the common triggers that can hold us back. Investing too much in our initial responses to triggers can make us more susceptible to being triggered further, making it critical to identify different ways to respond effectively.

Trigger 1: Visibility

We rise together by claiming visibility while acknowledging the contributions of others. Feeling triggered by our own lack of visibility or colleagues who are adept at getting noticed are common, but implementing practices such as interpersonal aikido and sharing the spotlight can help us be noticed in a healthy and balanced way.

Trigger 2: Managing Perceptions

We rise together by neither overmanaging nor undermanaging what others think. This presents a trap for women and people of color, offering no intuitive way out. They often fear being perceived as ambitious, aggressive, or self-centered and are often criticized for behaviors that are routinely accepted from men. Letting go of others' perceptions requires discipline and detachment, and focusing on goals and achievements is essential in overcoming these triggers.

Trigger 3: Confidence and Competence

We rise together by distinguishing overconfidence from competence. Displaying humility and admitting limitations can be challenging – especially in leadership roles. True confidence is rooted in demonstrable skills developed through daily effort, and competence is often underrated, particularly at the leadership level.

Trigger 4: What are You Trying to Say?

We rise together by learning from one another’s communication styles. Balancing authenticity with respectful and persuasive communication, as well as recognizing and addressing differences in communication styles, can help mitigate misunderstandings.

Trigger 5: It’s Not Fair

We rise together by recognizing the extent to which “it’s not fair” is a losing game. Challenging everyday unfairness challenges the larger system. Examining power dynamics, promoting diversity in leadership, and debunking misconceptions about meritocracy are all crucial steps in creating a fair and just organization.

Trigger 6: The Grapevine and the Network

We rise together by knowing how to develop, extend, and leverage our networks. It is important to recognize the characteristics of healthy networks, discuss the current impacts of elitist groups or the role of old boys networks (OBNs), and the importance of external networks that build you up in your career.

Trigger 7: That’s Not Funny

We rise together by getting humor right! There is a place for jokes in the workplace; it can break tension, strengthen bonds, and make work more enjoyable. But often there are unconsidered sensitivities that end up doing more harm than good. Practicing self-awareness and situational awareness around humor can bring people together.

Trigger 8: Attraction, the Uncomfortable Bits

We rise together by acknowledging the role attraction can play in workplace relationships. The Me Too movement created some shifts in interpersonal workplace dynamics and HR policies, highlighting the need for transparency in workplace relationships and the importance of balancing warmth and spontaneity with professional considerations.

Part 2: Creating a Culture of Belonging

The Power of Inclusive Behaviors

We rise together by practicing inclusive habits daily. Our inclusive behaviors have a significant impact on shaping organizational culture and the distinction between diversity and inclusion. There are specific practices for creating cultures of belonging, such as active listening, engaging across levels and divisions, and investing in colleagues' career development.

Informal Enlistment

We rise together by enlisting one another’s support. A culture of belonging includes the importance of enlisting support and accountability for personal and professional development. There are significant benefits to seeking support, demonstrating open-mindedness, and embracing change, even if support is not always available.

Cultivating the Power of We

We rise together by understanding the true nature of power. The power dynamics within organizations play a significant role on whether we can display inclusive behaviors and pursue relationship-building. How you observe and apply the four forms of power – position, expertise, connections, and personal authority – affects the level of satisfaction derived from positively influencing events in the workplace.

Conclusion

Fostering inclusion and overcoming triggers in the workplace is an ongoing journey that requires commitment and consistent effort from both individuals and organizations. By understanding and addressing these triggers, promoting diversity, and embracing inclusion, organizations can create a more equitable and supportive work environment for all.

Learn More About Sally Helgesen

Sally Helgesen is an internationally best-selling author, speaker, and leadership coach. Her latest book, Rising Together, builds on Helgesen’s success with How Women Rise, co-authored by Marshall Goldsmith, examines the behaviors most likely to get in the way of successful women as they move forward in their careers. Learn more at sallyhelgesen.com .

About Christina Carlson

Christina Carlson guides entrepreneurship through collaboration, creativity, and inspired agility.

Christina is a licensed Agile Leadership Journey Guide, certified Lean Six Sigma Blackbelt, and experienced project leader bringing more than 15 years of proven facilitative success and experience across healthcare, oil and gas, mining, and pharmaceutical industries, as well as small businesses.

Christina finds success and purpose through creativity and collective celebration in her belief that everyone can achieve their dreams.

Connect with Christina on LinkedIn.

59: AI and Leadership With Dr. Eric Kihn

Thu, 09 May 2024 11:30:00 GMT

How will leaders leverage AI, data, and human insight?

In this episode of Relearning Leadership, host Pete Behrens welcomes guest Eric Kihn, PhD, who leads AI strategy for the U.S. government in environmental sciences. Eric shares insights from his decades-long journey in artificial intelligence and discusses how these technologies are lowering the “cost of curiosity,” uncovering unseen patterns and changing leadership practices.

Join Eric and Pete Behrens as they discuss the profound impact AI is having across fields, from weather forecasting to leadership approaches – and the essential mindset shifts leaders must adopt to harness the full power of AI.

Dr. Eric Kihn, Chief, Oceanographic and Geophysical Science and Services Division, National Centers for Environmental Information

Dr. Eric Kihn has been instrumental in integrating AI into the environmental sciences, firmly positioning the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as a leader in harnessing the power of AI to enhance its mission.

Dr. Kihn’s contributions extend beyond the scientific community, influencing AI strategy, policy, education, and operations both within and outside of NOAA. His commitment to leveraging AI for the betterment of environmental sciences exemplifies his role as a trailblazer, going back to his thesis which was among the first applications of AI/Ml to geophysics.

Dr. Kihn serves on the White House task force for AI in extreme weather, heading the World Data Service for Geophysics, and contributing broadly to the Earth System Information Partners, a consortium of key federal partners.

Connect with Eric on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

AI as a Transformative Tool

Artificial intelligence and machine learning have revolutionized data analysis in environmental science. They reveal complex patterns that would be impossible for humans to discern manually, enabling more accurate forecasting and innovative research.

Leadership Adaptation in the AI Era

Effective leaders must grasp how AI will touch all aspects of their work. Embracing experimentation, adaptation, and a data-driven mindset is crucial to leverage AI's potential fully.

Widespread Applications and Gaps

Despite the rapid adoption of AI in various projects, many leaders remain unaware of the comprehensive impact it will have on workflows. Recognizing these gaps can help organizations identify opportunities and challenges in integrating AI effectively.

Explore:

Related Episodes

56: AI for Leaders with Henrik Kniberg

Is there an industry that AI hasn’t touched? Let’s dive into the rapidly evolving world of artificial intelligence and its implications for leadership with expert Henrik Kniberg. Known for his transformative work in Agile and organizational change, Kniberg joins Pete Behrens to explore AI's potential to revolutionize leadership, innovation, and personal growth. Through a blend of anecdotes and expert analysis, Henrik and Pete discuss how AI can be a powerful ally for leaders seeking to navigate the complexities of modern organizational dynamics.

57: Unpacking IBM's CEO Guide to AI

How are CEOs viewing the impact of AI? In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, host Pete Behrens is joined by Agile pioneer Jim Highsmith to dig deeper into the impact of AI on leadership and organizational dynamics. Drawing from the IBM CEO's Guide to Generative AI report, they explore how Agile principles are increasingly integral to effective AI utilization. Pete and Jim both offer perspectives for leaders aiming to navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by AI in a rapidly evolving environment. Whether you're a seasoned executive or an emerging leader, this episode provides crucial insights into leveraging AI for strategic advantage while maintaining a human-centric approach to leadership.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:
How might AI impact your leadership journey? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. Today, I get to talk to somebody who I consider not only brilliant, with amazing expertise, but somebody I truly call friend. Eric Kihn has his PhD in physics and heads up AI strategy for the US government in environmental sciences, focused on problems like how climate change is impacting cities. With that in mind, Eric still approached me last year and said, “Pete if you have a class in AI and leadership, sign me up!” Well, challenge accepted. Sort of! Instead, I said, “How about we form an AI Leadership Lab and bring you on to help us develop what it is leaders need to understand about AI?” Well, he accepted that challenge. And with that in mind, I invite Eric Kihn to this show to talk a little bit about his AI journey and the questions he's exploring in AI, in his leadership role. So, welcome to the show, Eric!

Eric Kihn:
Thanks, Pete! Happy to be here.

Pete Behrens:
So, I want to set some context first. And maybe take a step back in time before generative AI was even a thing, or at least wasn't real to most of us. You know, back into machine learning. And I'm curious how, from a scientific perspective, that became a thing for you. Or, what problem, I guess, was trying to be solved at that point? And maybe give us, even, a time frame of when that was.

Eric Kihn:
Sure. For me, my first experiences with machine learning and AI came, probably, in the late 90s. So, in the late 90s, we were starting to get really large databases and starting to face—what we called at the time—a tidal wave of data. As digital collection happened more and more, we realized, “Wow! This is amazing. We're really understanding the pulse of the earth. We have so many great ways to measure and collect and all this, but we're not getting any more scientists.” And so, the model that had been, at the time, was—each scientist or PI, principal investigator, as we call them, had its own data stream that effectively just worked on day and night. And sucked all the knowledge you could out of it. Well, two things happened. One: more and more observations came along, and the internet came along that allowed us to share those. So, instead of me having only my data, now I had access, and all the best science was being done across multiple resources. Pretty quickly, you realize—I'm going to need some tools and techniques if I'm not getting a thousand more scientists to help me with this. What is it that's going to allow me to even keep up with the volumes that we have?

So, in the early 2000s, we ended up working on a project called the Environmental Scenario Generator, which was a project for the Department of Defense, where they wanted to mine historical records of weather-defined environmental scenarios. So, they wanted to know what was the wettest and windiest winter we might see in this area. Or, you know, what kind of challenges? And at the volumes that there were and the way they wanted to ask these questions dynamically, you needed those tools. So we started to develop a toolkit based around AIML.

Pete Behrens:
Hm. So, essentially you're talking about a volume of data problem that scientists have. How do we actually mine data, meaningful data, out of all the noise of data that's out there? Is that a fair, kind of, summary?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. And, really, the challenge, from the scientific perspective, is—it turns out humans are really good at correlating in one and two and three dimensions. So you can see—this variable wiggles with that variable on a plot, or you can see a three-dimensional plot. “Oh, here's clusters of data that means something!” Well, what happens when you're now collecting in 50 dimensions of environmental data, higher resolutions than ever, more frequency? You really need a partner to point you at the interesting bits. That was the key of AIML, was—it could get you, “Hey, something's different here. This is changing! You know, we're seeing a trend here that you might want to get eyes on.” Because it was hard for the human mind to wrap around the volume, the diversity, just, really, all across the spectrum of data.

Pete Behrens:
So, yeah, it's giving you not only more eyes, but actually almost, like, infrared vision in the data that’s seeing stuff you may not even be able to see.

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. It really goes beyond just, you know, more eyes. It was a different way and perspective and seeing in multiple dimensions across, looking for correlations. One of the things that AIML did for us in the science community was lower the cost of curiosity, we called it.

Pete Behrens:
I love that quote. That's an awesome one.

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. Because, you know, when you go in and dig in through data, and you're doing it by yourself, and you're on your machine, you’re doing it yourself, that's one thing. But if you're like, “I think there might be something over here!” and you can release an agent to do that for you. And hopefully it comes back and says, “Yeah, that looks like it's worth your time or not.” It really does lower the cost of curiosity so you can do those explorations, kind of, independently, which is fantastic.

Pete Behrens:
You mentioned to me the other day, also, there was a change happening in the scientific community at the same time. Not just the volume of data, but actually the way science was being run. Do you mind sharing that connection?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. One of the reasons I got interested in how AI is going to impact leadership and the roles of leaders is seeing the wildfire that swept through the scientific community over the last—I'd say, particularly—ten years. So, before that, AIML was its own niche area, and there were a few of us doing it. And it was difficult back in the day, because there were no, you know, tensorflow libraries, open source tools that you could just connect to and try. You had to bake everything from numerical recipes and see, build your own stuff. Well, when that changed and everybody was able to explore, what it really changed was the thoughts of the scientific process. So, you know, where—as we might make investments in developing physical understanding, doing base-level research, what if we want to do a better numerical weather prediction? And instead of doing that, we just get it, more data? So, maybe our investment should be less in the basic research and more in better, higher-quality data, more frequency, more resolution. And that's proved to be true. So, when people are thinking about the scientific applications, it's really changed, where you might make that investment, how you do the process. If you looked at a plot over the last ten years of the number of abstracts that mention AIML, you know it would have been very obscure. But now, the key scientific meetings, if it's not half or more—I would say we're at peak gold rush around AIML, because everyone is just being so productive and fruitful, applying it to their data collections.

Pete Behrens:
What's really cool about what you just said—and I don't think I've heard it said this way before, or I haven't heard it this way—in fact, the data, or the volume of data, the approach of data, is changing the way scientists are doing experiments. And that's maybe what led to your curiosity. Will the same thing happen with data and business and the way I lead an organization, team, programs, etc.? Is that—am I interpreting, kind of, that jump?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. For me—so, one of the—my background is as a scientist, right? I came up grinding through data and building plots and programs and doing the scientific process. And then I was suddenly selected as a leader. So, I lead a division at NOAA. I have, you know, big science teams. And my approach to that was, “Well, I better learn what leadership is through one of the methods—”

Pete Behrens:
That's a really good thought, Eric! “Like, I better figure this out!”

Eric Kihn:
You would be surprised how seldom that actually happens!

Pete Behrens:
No, I'm not surprised! But I—yeah, I appreciate the insights there. But, so—yeah, I interrupted you. So, I actually want you to continue.

Eric Kihn:
Well, so—what was interesting was the analogy. So, from my perspective as a scientist, you have scientific workflows, from designing the observation you want to collect. To, you know, transforming that observation, doing analysis, a production of results, either publications or maybe new scientific products. And AIML came in and just totally disrupted those workflows. How we did the business of science was changed. What we value; what was there. And I was like, “This is interesting! So, now I'm in a leadership position. And suddenly, two years ago or so, we started to see the AIML, or large language models, approach that.

And, you know, my first experiences with it were—breaking through into leadership was—well, one of the big challenges we do is develop metadata for data. So, that is descriptions of it by reading scientific publications and deriving metadata. Suddenly, these large language models look pretty good at that. It's like—that's really interesting that we have this metadata component that it can do. Then we started to see it in its ability to summarize articles. So I—my division puts out about 70 publications a year. And I try to keep up with my team's articles as best I can, but I could start to ask it, “Hm. Give me a one-page summary of this, with a little background so I can understand, you know, this new ocean model quickly.” Which made me more productive as a leader, more able to engage with my team members. And then, probably, the penultimate experience for me was—I was late getting an abstract together for a scientific conference . And I wanted to go, and I had done the research, but it was in the form of powerpoints and documents and all sorts of stuff. I just fed it to ChatGPT and said, “Write me a 2,000-word abstract!” And that abstract was accepted for an invited talk. [Laughs] And I realized, “Hm. This is changing where I'm going to be putting my time and energy.” And that's when I came to you and asked, “Hey, do you have a class that I can take to figure out how this might interact with leadership?”

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. And I want to dive into your, kind of, experimentation with AI for your leadership, but I want to take, maybe, just one step back and give people a construct of the type of AI programs you're working with today. Because I—when I hear what you tell me I kind of get overwhelmed. Or just—it blows my mind as to the scope and magnitude of, kind of, the—not thinking of AI and leadership, but AI in terms of solving some pretty, you know, interesting challenges. Or at least critical challenges of the world. Do you mind sharing just, at least, maybe that broad brush of the kind of technology, AI programs you're leading or your teams are fostering within, kind of, this environmental area of the US government?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah, absolutely. Well, first off, it was in 2020, when NOAA formed the NOAA Center for Artificial Intelligence. And back in 2022, we did our first survey across the agency and asked, “How many of you are using AIML for different projects?” And it definitely blew my mind. We had something like 250 different projects that were ongoing, developing AIML. I would say, easily, that's over 500 now. Under the strategy—when we form the center, then, you know, we're trying to corral that.

And you can put it in some big buckets. The obvious ones are AI for numerical weather prediction. So, what has traditionally been done by, you know, your local weather forecast and alerts for life and property that come out of the weather service. Well, if you look at what Google's done with things like GraphCast, based off AIML, and just training it off the data that's in the VR5 model—wow, that's looking really good in some areas! And I think it's rapidly progressing. So, it's allowing decades of progress and improvements for numerical weather prediction.

Another area that's exciting is identification and imagery. So, NOAA has a fisheries division that does stock assessments and looks at fish and coral and things on the seafloor. And it's gotten really cheap to collect undersea videos. That used to be a big activity, was, you know, a few videos. Now any GoPro—suddenly you're mapping coral beds and you're counting fish. Well, AIML can help you understand—what are you seeing? What type of coral? What are the fish? That sort of thing.

And then a number of generative AI functions—one of the big ones the weather service just released as translations into other languages of alerts, warnings, and forecasts. So important for, you know, the social equity component. But, you know, when we did that survey and found hundreds of projects, we probably had 20 buckets from engineering data analysis and monitoring across the board that—so many applications.

Pete Behrens:
It's fascinating to me—right?—that the potential right of throwing some of this ability to analyze data, interpolate, and understand that data a little bit better. And the scope. And our goal in this podcast isn't to go into those which—quite interesting projects and programs! My goal there is to kind of share—you're a leader here, working in vast AI systems for the past half-decade, at least. But then take machine learning in the past, you know, two decades. Yet you still have a question about AI and Leadership! And I'm wondering if you could almost, like, interpolate, or—extrapolate is maybe the word I'm looking for there—the challenge others might be facing who haven't even talked or approached this subject. Do you interact with a lot of people who maybe are outside your bubble of AI? And how they see it? Is there a gap forming, I guess, in this sense of AI, in its broader implications?

Eric Kihn:
Well, my opinion is—definitely, there's a gap. I don't think people—I think people are interested and thinking, “Wow, this is cool! ChatGPT can, you know, rewrite my corporate memo.” And that's fantastic, but I think it's going to be transformative for what you're doing in leadership. And that's based on my experience of watching it from—it's very—again, back in the early 2000s, seeing it come along and kind of simmered for a while. And then, suddenly, there's this explosion, where it's taking over things, changing workflows, just revolutionizing it. And that's happening faster, I think, with what it can do in terms of your leadership toolbox. And I just don't think there's an appreciation that that is going to change.

And what does that mean? It means you, as a leader, better be ready, better start to think about how all the things you're doing now will be touched by it. How can I use it? How can I make the aspects of my leadership better using it? I—again, I was hopeful when I came to you that there was just a class, that somebody had all this. [Laughs] But your answer was, “Well, we should do experiments! We should try to chase down, you know—what are people doing? How can you do it, you know? How can we start to think about it ahead?” Because I want to do it, you know, for myself, but also for my leadership teams. I have people work under me who—I want to make sure they know this needs to be in your toolkit and be prepared for it to change rather quickly.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. You know, and that's what, you know, I've appreciated about your willingness to, kind of, work with us on this discovery journey. You know, we formed the lab because we didn't have answers. And we still don't have answers! And you're right: the landscape is moving so fast. Any answers we find are quickly in the past, and then we've got a new landscape sitting in front of us. Maybe reflect a little bit. You know, we've been—I'd say we've been on a, kind of, this AI Leadership Lab, at least, journey. Like, forming the lab, starting cohorts and stuff. It's been, maybe, four months now. Three or four months. What surprised you the most? Or, maybe, what are some of the things that maybe stick out to you in this early part of our journey together, in terms of exploring this landscape of AI for leadership?

Eric Kihn:
Well, the thing that surprised me the most—and this one was pretty easy, was—I expected to come in and say, “Okay, what are the elements of leadership?” Like, so, you're a leader. What would it—what is it you would say that you do here exactly? And, you know, understanding, okay, a leader does strategic planning, a leader does onboarding of personnel. A leader does this. And I thought, “ Okay, there'll at least be agreement that these are the things that you have to do, and these are the elements of it. And then, easy enough, you match up where AIML might take that over, might enhance it, might become an assistant to you on it.” And my experience was— gosh, there's a lot of discussion of being a leader, but the actual workflows of leadership, the things that you do, are not well-defined. They're different in different places, you know? There wasn't a, “Okay, so this is what a leader does!” Because that's what—then I would have, like—I thought, “Oh, this won't be too bad! We'll just match that up.”

Pete Behrens:
Check, check, check. I'm a leader!

Eric Kihn:
“It's going to help there. It's not going to help there. Perfect!” We'll just walk through this list of the ten, twenty things a leader does. And, you know, we'll be out of here in no time. Instead, it's kind of been a discovery of, “Well, there's some agreement around some elements of, you know, what it is to be a leader. There's different roles for a leader at different levels.” And AIML can touch a lot of it. And you want it to! So, you know, there's things that make sense to turn it over to, you know, a trusted partner of an AIML partner. And there's places where you're going to want to hold that close for forever. But just—that was the biggest surprise for me, was—I thought, “Well, there must be, you know, some document that just lays this out.” But there really wasn't.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Well, and I—you know, I think what you get at there—and we often, as humans, do this, right? The Dunning-Kruger effect. The less you know about something, the more you think you're confident about that material. And I think people do this with leadership, too. It's an incredibly complex landscape between management and leadership and then all the use cases of managing and leading and what that looks like. And I appreciate your willingness to explore some of these use cases with us. With that said, maybe, let me ask you a couple of, kind of, like, unprepared questions. So, I didn't send you these in advance and apologize. But maybe not, because it's fun to surprise! Would you put yourself more as the AI-optimist or the pessimist, in terms of where this is leading us?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. It's interesting, because I've been reading a lot about the groups in Silicon Valley that get together with the doom-AI people and the optimists. One group says, you know, this will totally free us from all work, and we'll have a utopian society very shortly. And the other says, you know, we'll be replaced Terminator-style, and this will be—this is it. The beginning of the end. I'm very much on the optimistic end of this. When you look—from my perspective, when I look at AI, I see an assistant; I see a tool. I see a smart but needy compadre for my leadership. And I am a big fan of lazy leadership, so— [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
—I just gotta celebrate that, Eric. That's awesome. [Laughs]

Eric Kihn:
Well, if I can find a way to take some of these things and put it off in a place that, you know, I can trust—I mean, there's a lot to be said for trust and making sure it's ethical and all those things. But if you can, great! I, you know—whenever I test on those personality scales, I'm always a big blue sky thinker. I like the big idea. I want big and bold, and details, you know, drag me down. Well, what if you had tools that will help you do that? Or what if you're the reverse and you love the details, but you want to have someone help you, guide you towards a big—you know, I just think it'll make us all better leaders.

Now, that said, I would be a pessimist if you don't want to bring this into your toolkit. Because, I think, in five years, if you're not bringing this into your leadership toolkit, you're going to be run over by those who have it. And I think you've got—this is going to be a really dynamic time, akin to when the internet came around, right? I mean, suddenly, what we were doing before that—if you're old like me, you can remember back then. Suddenly, what we were doing was completely different in seven, eight years. And that's a pretty quick time scale to change entire workforces and workflows and that sort of thing. So if you're aware, if you're energized and moving forward, I think it'd be great if you— “Man, I just want to stay doing it the way I am!” I just think you're going to get run over.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Probably no stopping the—technology is going to happen. Are we ready for it? Are we prepared? Are we, you know—that's up to us in that. I love your—I think that's all of us, right? I think our brains try to conserve energy. We try to use habits. We, you know—lazy leadership! I love that definition. One of the premises we have in our lab is exploring. We believe we could actually build better leaders, you know, through AI. And you've described some here, like, “Okay, we could augment some of the things we do. Like, we're not good at this, so let's augment that.” Is there something you, maybe, personally have found to be the most helpful, you know, in your leadership so far? And I know it's new for you, too, but anything specific that you've latched onto that's been helpful to make, at least, feel like you're doing this leadership role more effectively?

Eric Kihn:
Well, I—the obvious example for me has been the writing tools. So, you know, often I have ideas put together, and then I have to communicate it. So, I want to be a good communicator. And, you know, grinding out a long newsletter or something like that can be challenging. But, you know, you can use AIML tools to say, “Here are my basic ideas. Write this, and, importantly, set the tone.” Like, I want this to come across as serious, you know? This is light-hearted, you know? Let's make this a little fun. How cool is that? And then you can look at, you know, it written in four different tones and say, “Oh, this one is it!” And with a little bit of editing and—you know, again you have to make sure you fact-check it and do all that stuff so you don't get any hallucinations in there. But, you know, as long as you're doing your due diligence, suddenly you've got this, effectively, like, almost built-in speech writer.

And we were talking with Jim the other day. Jim Highsmith, in our lab, about a tool that lets you take what you've written and translate it to your speech mode. So, it will learn how you speak. How many times have you heard, you know, someone that has some great ideas that just—it's not matching the way they present themselves in their speech? Well, suddenly I can take—now I've taken my ideas. I get them written in a way that can be communicated with the right tone. And then, if I go to speak about it, it will maybe, you know, help me write my speech like I've got a personal speechwriter. So, why would I not want to do that? I'd be, you know, a fool not to be a better communicator and make sure that I'm coming across the right tone, looking for inclusive wording. You know, that's a mistake that we all make is, “Hey, guys! Let's do this, guys!” You know? It can be that check for you, which is just fantastic. So, that one, for me, has been pretty-front and-center.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. It's interesting, you know—what I'm starting to realize through some of our research and in the lab is—there's a lot of, you know, like you say. The landscape of leadership is broad. The landscape of AI is broad, right? It's such a massive landscape. Yet what I'm finding is some of the signals that are coming out—one you describe: communication. Is AI a hindrance or a helped communication? I'm on your side of that. That I think it's an incredible help, and that's one of the key skills of leadership, is communication.

Another one you think of is decision-making. Like, can it help us make better decisions? Which ties into strategy and priorities and focus and, you know, so many other things in leadership. And what I'm realizing is some of the cream is raising from, you know, churning this a bit. And what I'm hopeful for—and this kind of leads us to where this is going. We're going to be presenting, you know, in Lisbon in September at the World Management Agility Forum. Some of the discoveries we're finding through this lab. And, Eric, I'm wondering for you—like, where do you see this heading? What are you hoping to, maybe, explore and experiment with? Maybe it's still questions in your mind that you'd love to have, you know, some insights on, you know, in another four to six months.

Eric Kihn:
For me, the exciting stuff going forward is, like, strategic vision. So, one of the things we do now—the way we do it is—we stop, we gather our, you know, our leadership team, and we do SWOT analysis. And we look across the spectrum of where we should be doing all that stuff. And it's an activity that comes up, you know, if you're lucky, once every three years or so. Because it's a big all hands stop, and let's gather data and do that analysis. There's no reason—if you have trusted data sources, if you have AI-ready data that you can feed—your AI toolkit couldn't be doing strategic visioning all the time. And alerting you—again, like we did with the scientific data and weather analysis—alerting you, “Hey, something's changing here!” Or “This is a trend that's emerging.” So, strategic visioning, going forward, probably becomes a continuous process, not a “Okay, stop. Let's take a snapshot and, as a team, try to figure out where we're headed.”

Well, that's exciting! I mean, it's exciting and terrifying, right? Because on one hand, it's exciting. Like, “Wow! This is going to be coming in all the time!” The other hand: “It's going to be coming in all the time!” And, you know, what's your role in interpreting that, reacting to it? But it allows you to be much more dynamic. And, you know, in my line of work—right now we're going through a climate crisis. And what we do is monitor the heartbeat of the planet. So it's important that we be as responsive as we can. So we need to understand that. And to me, that's one of the most exciting areas, is really in strategic visioning.

Pete Behrens:
Hm. Well, if you think about it, I mean, strategic visioning is a prediction game, right? I mean, if you're taking weather data and predicting future weather, we could take a lot of—not only our organizational data, but market data and, you know, analyst data. And through all that data, predict where the market's heading, predict where strategies might be more successful, less successful. It seems like a rich place for strategic assistance, like you said.

Eric Kihn:
Well, I think it's really important to understand that, I think, as a leader, your role going forward is going to be more picking the trusted data sources you want to feed to your AI toolkit than doing the analysis itself. That once you get these tools and things set up, again, it can see in multiple dimensions. It's going to be fast. It can work through it. Your key role is going to be, “Okay, what is the data I want to feed to this thing?” Whether you're training in LLM and you want to make sure it doesn't end up, you know, inappropriately trained off of, you know, bad language or, you know, sexist, biased, or anything like that. But if you're looking at the data that powers your business or your government agency or whatever, what are those trusted data sources? How do you know that? Because, you know, it's only as good as the data that it's allowed to look at, train on, and forecast. And then it's really good. So it's—again, it's going to change that role as a leader to understanding what's my ethical choice here. What's the best data choice? And that's different than today, when it's probably like, “I'm gonna use my brain to try to pick out the trends in this.” So, the best leaders five years from now will be doing just that.

Pete Behrens:
One of my favorite things you had said was, “You know, AI is not as much of an Einstein because it's really just spitting back what it sees. It isn't really creating new, per se.” The other one, my favorite, I think, you said was, “AI is like a teenager in the room.” Do you mind explaining these two concepts to us?

Eric Kihn:
Yeah. So, when you look at what the LLMs are really doing, you're sampling the most likely responses from some kind of bell curve. So, you know, depending on how you set the parameters, if you set it to be, you know, fairly tame, it's just going to give you the middle. That means if you want to write, you know, the greatest new Broadway musical, you're probably not going to be able to do that. Or, you know, a best-selling novel. Because it's the innovation and the fringe cases. If you let the LLM sample more from the fringe, then suddenly you're getting into that data issue. How was it trained? What are the fringe thoughts and ideas in this thing? So, you know, understanding that that's what it is is, you know, quickly getting you to a good chunk of the middle, mostly. Unless you throw it out to where it is imagining it. And then, you know, suddenly your Earth model’s picking up flat-earther ideas. [Laughs] And you probably don't want that in there, right?

It's a teenager in that you—it's a little bit, maybe, non-empathetic. It can just churn stuff out that doesn't go through a human filter and a societal filter. I mean, it's spinning back data, right? So, you may know, based on this situation, like, “Hey, this is not a good time to tell this employee this, because he just got some bad news.” It has no filter on that. So, again, what's your role as a leader? How do you know when to be in between it and interpret? And where you do that and where you’re just going to let it go off and go. Because if you sit on everything and just make it, you know, completely under you, it's like raising a teenager. They're never going to get the experience of interacting with the world, and their full potential won't be realized. So, how do you make that happen? That's a big question moving forward.

Pete Behrens:
Well, I think what that does is—it helps me celebrate minds like yours. Because I think it's a reminder that, as leaders, we still have a a critical role in this process. And I think our lab and the way I'm looking at this is—the future is hybrid, right? There's some interaction in engagement here, that is leveraging both. But at least, for the foreseeable future, I don't see the human judgment and experience being completely taken away.

But, Eric, I just want to say, you know, just, thanks for sharing your insights. Thanks for being an adviser to our lab, and I look forward to our continued experimentation and sharing in Lisbon.

Eric Kihn:
Yeah, I'm really happy to be a part of it. I really am interested in how this will affect leadership going forward. And I couldn't agree with you more that the humans are going to be involved in this. But what's important to understand is what the humans are doing in that workflow of leadership and the activities of leadership. For the best, those that are going to be successful going forward is going to change, and change rapidly. So, I'm excited to, kind of, pull out some of those ideas and work with you all to understand—you know, at least for some of the use cases, again, you said earlier—it's so broad and so overwhelming at times. But even if we can pull it out for some elements, I think it would be really valuable going forward. So, appreciate being part of it!

Pete Behrens:
Awesome. Thank you!

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit our website, agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast , for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

Turning Into the Skid: Embracing Change in ‘Generation Transition’

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Wed, 01 May 2024 23:38:14 GMT

In a recent episode of Brené Brown’s Dare to Lead podcast , renowned futurist Amy Webb shared some powerful insights into topics that have been very top-of-mind here recently at Agile Leadership Journey.

Webb points out that we’re currently in the midst of what she calls a “super cycle” of change, explaining that it is an era marked by rapid and often unpredictable transformations, particularly driven by advances in technology. Today, that conversation is dominated by artificial intelligence (AI).

AI is changing how we work, how we create and consume information, and even how art and music are created (so … basically everything). Often, change is a positive thing. It can bring new and exciting ways of doing things, or new people, experiences, and opportunities into our lives – but change can also be nerve-racking and downright exhausting . To protect our mental and emotional wellness, Webb confirms what we’ve suspected: We need to increase our capacity for change and uncertainty.

Webb uses a great metaphor to describe our current situation. Culture-altering technology like AI is like hitting a patch of ice while driving. Some of us may instinctively slam on the brakes, but the key to maintaining control is to steer into the slide. It might seem counterintuitive, but we’ll be better off if we embrace the skid instead of fighting it.

For some, our natural inclination to resist change and stick with what we already know is less about avoidance and more about survival. However, in the face of profound shifts – such as those we see with AI – this approach must be re-evaluated. To thrive, we’ll need to take advantage of the opportunities presented by AI while also remaining on alert for threats or unexpected challenges.

Webb’s concept of “Generation Transition” or “Gen T” helps put a name to the idea that this super cycle of change is a massive one. We are shifting from one way of life to another, fundamentally driven by technological innovation. ALJ founder and CEO Pete Behrens and Agile pioneer Jim Highsmith recently explored this precise topic in a new (free to download) ebook, Technology Innovations: Learning From the Past and Exploring the Future With AI . Part history lesson, part cautionary tale the authors look back at previous super cycles of change and using those experiences to help guide us through the new, inescapable world of AI.

The pace of change isn’t slowing down anytime soon. How will we prepare for the inevitable super cycles that arrive in 10, 20, or 30 years? How can we learn to embrace continuous learning and adaptation without exhausting our capacity for change?

It won’t be easy, but it will be easier if we’re able to take our anxiety and leverage it in a way that helps us embrace uncertainty. As we continue through this era of significant transformation, remember: Sometimes, the best way to regain control is by embracing the very forces that seem most daunting.

Looking to dive deeper? Watch Amy Webb’s SXSW 2024 Emerging Tech Trend Report keynote.

About the Author

Betsy Piland is the Marketing and Communications Manager at Agile Leadership Journey. She has spent the bulk of her career working in the higher education, healthcare, corporate learning and development, and nonprofit industries – always looking to tell a compelling story that will inspire audiences into action.

When not working, she can be found digging in her garden, baking something delicious, and spending time with her husband, daughter, and two rescue dogs.

Connect with Betsy on LinkedIn.

Ebook | Technology Innovations: Learning From the Past and Exploring the Future With AI

Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:07:51 GMT

Ready or not, AI is here.

To survive, we must take advantage of the new opportunities offered by generative AI, but we must also prepare for the threats from competitors and bad actors.

Over the past 25 years, Pete Behrens and Jim Highsmith have seen trends come and go – and they have witnessed first-hand several of the most impactful technology transformations our society has experienced. So what have they learned from these endeavors that we can apply to the emergence of AI?

Part history lesson, part cautionary tale, this ebook explores the key accomplishments and disappointments that have marked each wave of tech innovation.

Continue reading or complete the form below to receive a copy of the ebook delivered to your inbox.

Download the Ebook

Enter your name and email address to receive a copy of the ebook in your inbox.

Chapter 1: Lean Manufacturing Transformation

In the latter half of the 20th century, a transformative wave began to reshape the landscape of manufacturing. This era heralded the emergence of Empowered Operations, a concept that fundamentally diverged from traditional management practices, imbuing the manufacturing process with a new philosophy of leadership and operational efficiency.

At the heart of this transformation was a commitment to leveraging the collective intelligence and creativity of the workforce, a stark contrast to the then-dominant paradigms of command and control.

Edward Deming, an American statistician renowned for his work in quality management, played an instrumental role in this shift. Invited by Toyota to help address quality issues that were hindering the company’s growth, Deming introduced principles that would become the bedrock of the Toyota Production System (TPS)—the precursor to Lean manufacturing.

Under Deming’s guidance, Toyota not only surmounted its quality challenges but also set a new standard for manufacturing excellence worldwide. The company’s journey from a struggling manufacturer to a global emblem of quality and efficiency exemplifies the transformative potential of this new approach.

Despite Toyota’s willingness to share its innovations with the world, many organizations struggled for decades to replicate its success. While they focused on the tangible aspects of Toyota’s system—tools, techniques, and procedures—they failed to embrace their core leadership mindset and culture of trust and empowerment toward a relentless pursuit of quality that defined the company’s ethos.

This oversight underscores a critical lesson: the essence of Lean manufacturing and the power of The Toyota Way lie not in their processes but in the mindset and culture that supported it.

Chapter 2: Agile Software Transformation

At the dawn of the 21st century, another seismic shift began to reshape the world of software development. This transformation was catalyzed by a small group of forward- thinking individuals, disillusioned with the prevailing project management methodologies that had long dominated the industry.

Together, they redefined the very essence of how software was developed and delivered.

This collective, known today as the pioneers of the Agile movement, introduced a radical departure from traditional software development processes, championing iterative and incremental approaches that emphasized flexibility, collaboration, and customer satisfaction above all.

The early successes of companies like Salesforce and Spotify became legendary. These companies did not merely adopt Agile practices; they embodied the Agile mindset, creating cultures that thrived on rapid adaptation, continuous improvement, and a deep, unwavering focus on delivering value to customers. Their achievements were not the result of rigidly applying a set of processes but rather the natural outcome of cultivating environments that embraced change, encouraged experimentation, and celebrated failure as a pathway to innovation.

However, as the allure of Agile’s successes spread, many organizations attempted to emulate these trailblazers, often with limited success. The mistake was a fundamental misunderstanding of the Agile movement’s core tenets. Instead of focusing on the transformation of organizational culture and mindset, these imitators fixated on the superficial aspects of Agile methodologies— adopting the agile and scaling frameworks— without embracing the underlying principles and mindsets that made agility truly transformative.

They overlooked the fact that agile is about people—empowering teams, fostering collaboration across departments, and creating an organizational ethos where continuous learning and customer feedback are integral to development processes.

It’s hard to blame organizational leaders, as the word “agile” has been co-opted and diluted to the point of losing its original meaning. The Agile Manifesto’s call for collaboration, customer focus, and flexibility in development has, according to some, been overshadowed by a focus on selling Agile as a service or product, turning it into a buzzword rather than a transformative methodology.

Jim Highsmith, along with other leaders in the Agile community, is actively involved in taking back the word “agile” based on its original definition through their Reimagining Agile initiative. This effort is about acknowledging the historical intent of Agile, learning from organizations where agility has flourished, and promoting an understanding of what contributes to its success.

This failure to grasp the essence of Agile—its spirit, cultural underpinnings, and emphasis on mindset over methodology—is leading some to declare their agile transformations a failure. Yet, this misstep offers a critical lesson: The power of agility lies not in the processes and tools but in the ability to foster an environment where innovation flourishes, teams are more responsive to customer needs, and work becomes a collaborative journey of discovery.

Through a series of early 2024 articles at Forbes.com, Steve Denning makes the case that the top 20% of companies—Google, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, and others—have a management style that is largely based on agile principles, even as they don’t reference agile as a term. Pete Behrens has spoken openly about how these companies have developed their own agile-like recipes based on a mindset and culture as opposed to following popularized agile frameworks.

Chapter 3: Data-Driven Transformation

The evolution of organizations into data-driven entities represents the latest paradigm shift in the technology landscape, echoing the transformative journeys of the Lean and Agile movements before it.

Just as Toyota redefined manufacturing with its Lean principles and companies like Salesforce and Spotify illustrated the power of agility in software development, the rise of data-driven organizations has showcased the transformative potential of leveraging big data and analytics to inform decision-making and drive business strategy. Yet, similar to its predecessors, the path to becoming truly data-driven is fraught with challenges, and not all who attempt the journey reach their destination.

In the data-driven world, two stalwarts stand out: Netflix and Amazon. Netflix stands as a paragon of a data-driven organization, leveraging vast amounts of user data to inform content creation, recommendations, and strategic decisions. Its ability to analyze viewing habits and preferences has not only transformed its content delivery model but has also led to the production of highly successful original content. Netflix’s success story underscores the power of data in understanding customer needs and preferences, allowing for a highly personalized and engaging user experience.

Amazon’s rise to e-commerce dominance is a testament to its data-driven approach. From personalized product recommendations to optimizing logistics and supply chain management, Amazon uses data analytics to enhance every facet of its business–all while setting new standards in customer service, efficiency, and business innovation.

However, as many organizations rush to emulate these success stories, they encounter a familiar set of challenges. The allure of big data and analytics tools can lead companies to neglect the cultural and organizational shifts required. Similar to the Agile and Lean transformations, the essence of becoming a data-driven organization lies not in the adoption of tools and platforms but in cultivating a culture where data-informed decision-making is embedded in the DNA of the organization.

At Netflix, underpinning their data-driven capability is a culture of freedom and responsibility as illustrated in the books about Netflix culture by CEO Reed Hastings and Chief Talent Office Patty McCord. These books detail the company’s approach to leadership, the practices that encourage innovation and creativity, and how it fosters a culture of reinvention to maintain its position as a leader in the digital entertainment industry.

Yet, even with these words of wisdom broadly accessible, among major companies today there is nearly universal acceptance that data-driven management is strongly preferable to the alternatives.

While almost 99% of organizations report that they are investing in data initiatives, only one- third report having created a data- driven organization. And despite the growing consensus and investment levels, only half of organizations—exactly 50%—reported that they are managing data as a business asset.

The advent of big-data solutions and the next generation of data management capabilities— Hadoop, data lakes, DataOps, and modern data architectures—have been helpful but have not assured successful business adoption or outcomes. Technology does not appear to be a barrier or problem. Only 9.1% of executives point to technology as the principal challenge to becoming data-driven. In fact, cultural factors—people and process issues—were cited by 90% of executives as the principal obstacle that they face. This statistic is supported in the book Fail Fast, Learn Faster by Randy Bean and Thomas H. Davenport:

What is the principal challenge to your organization becoming data-driven? There are only two possible responses: (1) people/ business process/culture and (2) technology. In the most recent 2021 survey, 92% of these well-paid and smart people in big companies pointed the finger at people/process/culture, and only 8% believed the problem was technology. The numbers in the previous four years in which he asked the question on the survey were approximately the same.

Many companies struggle with siloed data, inadequate data governance, and a lack of data literacy across the organization. Without a foundational understanding of how to interpret and act on data insights, organizations can find themselves drowning in data but starved of actionable intelligence.

Moreover, the transition to a data-driven culture requires a shift in mindset—from gut- driven to data-informed decisions—which can be a significant hurdle in organizations entrenched in traditional decision-making paradigms. The story of the data-driven movement is one of transformative potential mixed with cautionary tales of missteps and challenges.

Just as Toyota and early Agile adopters showcased the benefits of Lean manufacturing and Agile methodologies, pioneers like Netflix and Amazon demonstrate the competitive advantage that a data-driven approach can offer. Yet, the path to success is nuanced and requires more than just technological adoption. It demands a holistic transformation that encompasses culture and mindset.

Chapter 4: Generative AI Transformation

That brings us to today, at the threshold of the next technology revolution–generative AI. Will it be Bill Murray’s version of Groundhog Day or a new start? Will we repeat the errors of our past or learn from them?

Imagine waking up to the same song on the clock radio each morning (Sonny and Cher’s “I Got You Babe” for those seeking to remember), with the slow realization that we’re living the same day over and over.

Over the past few days (in our case, decades), we’ve awoken to a repeated song of technology transformation, promising success through a new approach using technology, processes, frameworks, and tools. Yet each day we end with the realization that it was the same as the day before–a failure to gain the true value from our efforts.

Technologies will continue to come and go, with another new one knocking on our door as we speak. So what, as leaders, are we going to do about it? Certainly, we can (and will) embrace it. However, the history of technology transformations teaches us that the key to success lies not in the technologies themselves but in how we integrate these tools within the cultural and operational fabric of our organizations.

For Lean manufacturing, we learned the importance of empowering the knowledge worker alongside the assembly plant technology and process changes they worked within. Similarly, generative AI will continue to shift away from traditional specialization and hierarchy toward more distributed and iterative decision-making, where AI tools are used to enhance and not replace human judgment. Leaders unwilling or unable to foster such cultures will be left wondering why their AI investments were underwhelming.

For Agile software development, the line between accomplishment and disappointment through more agile ways of working might be boiled down to the first statement of the Agile Manifesto which emphasized people over process. Through generative AI, the humanness of organizations has never been more threatened and thus never been as important. While forgetting or even pushing aside humans amid the explosion of generative AI tools is alluring, to be truly transformational, leaders would be wise not to sacrifice human creativity and spirit.

And for data-driven transformations, we learned that data alone, isolated from the organization and the culture that is capable of leveraging that data, is bound for disappointment. Just as data-driven transformations showed the necessity of embedding a data-centric mindset into every layer of an organization, generative AI demands a pervasive acceptance and understanding of AI capabilities across all departments. Where does this leave us with generative AI at our doorstep?

Act Now

Through the three technology transformations outlined above, the timeline of change is escalating. The Lean transformation occurred across 60 years, the Agile transformation was about 30 years, and the data-driven transformation is only about 15 years old. The only thing not likely to change is the acceleration of change itself. And so while AI technology can be traced back 30 years, the clock really started in 2023 with the introduction of ChatGPT 3.5. By the end of the decade, it will have washed through every aspect of business.

Curate Creativity

Generative AI is lowering the cost of creativity and democratizing data science, where anyone in the organization, regardless of competency, can play a critical role in discovery and value creation. Encouraging a culture that views generative AI as a tool for enhancing human creativity rather than replacing it can help in harnessing the full potential of AI. This involves fostering an environment where innovative uses of AI are rewarded and shared across the organization.

Invest in People

Just as previous transformations required new skills and adaptation to new roles, generative AI will require significant investment in training and development to ensure that all employees can work effectively with AI technologies.

The winners in the next technology transformation will find the creative intersections between humans and technology. The future is hybrid.

To avoid a Groundhog Day of technology transformations, where new technologies are introduced without the requisite changes in mindset and culture, leaders must proactively shape the organizational ethos to embrace these advanced tools. This involves not just adopting new technologies but also adapting our organizational structures, processes, and, most importantly, our mindsets to fully leverage the potential of generative AI.

58: Change Leadership: How to Set Up Your Transformation Team for Success

Wed, 03 Apr 2024 11:00:00 GMT

How can you set a transformation team up for success?

Dive into the change leadership with this episode of the Relearning Leadership podcast, featuring Alena Keck, head of Vodafone’s Lean-Agile Center of Excellence.

Discover the pivotal role of emotions in driving organizational change, the journey of transforming leadership mindsets, and the innovative strategies behind Vodafone's agile evolution. Keck, along with host Pete Behrens, discusses the complexities of leading change, nurturing a culture of agility, and fostering resilience amidst challenges.

Alena Keck, Head of the Lean-Agile Center of Excellence for Vodafone

Passionate about accelerating digital transformation with lean and agile principles at scale, Alena Keck is the Head of Lean-Agile Center of Excellence, driving and enabling Vodafone’s journey toward business agility across digital and IT. She has held previous roles in both Europe and the U.S. helping large global organizations overcome challenges on their agile transformation journey.

Alena began her agile journey at Daimler’s incubator known as Lab1886. Later on she was a strong catalyst of the Scaled Agile Transformation at the digital solution centre at Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA, led lean-agile transformation in five locations in the U.S. and Mexico at Aptiv and was part of lean-agile centre of excellence at Porsche, connecting transformation to the digital strategy and implementing lean portfolio management.

Being a strong change agent, Alena thrives on creating strong transformation teams and growing lean-agile leaders who take an active role in removing transformation roadblocks and driving the change.

Connect with Alena on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

Emotional Intelligence in Change Management

Alena Keck emphasizes the crucial role of addressing the human and emotional aspects of change within organizations. She highlights the importance of understanding and navigating the emotional journey individuals and teams undergo during transformation, illustrating how resistance can be mitigated and acceptance fostered through empathy and emotional intelligence.

Leadership's Role in Agile Transformation

The discussion sheds light on the significant impact leadership has on the success of agile transformations. By educating leaders on agile principles and values and involving them actively in the change process, organizations can align transformation initiatives with broader business objectives, ensuring a more cohesive and supported transition to agile methodologies.

The Importance of Community and Persistence

Keck's insights reveal the power of creating a community of change agents within an organization to share challenges, successes, and best practices. She stresses that transformation is a team sport, requiring persistence, resilience, and a supportive network to overcome obstacles and sustain momentum in the face of setbacks.

Explore:

Related Episodes

49: Leading Agile Transformations

How should leaders approach agile transformations? In this episode of Relearning Leadership, Pete discusses the topic of agile transformations with Boston Consulting Group’s David Ritter.

David shares insights and expertise from his 40-year career, including the difficulties around implementing agile transformation at large organizations, the courage required of those organizations’ executives, and why it is so crucial to define goals and outcomes before applying agile practices.

26: Talking Transformation

What does it take to guide a multi-year transformation? Stemming from a proactive recognition from senior leadership, Amerisure Insurance has been on a 3-year culture-shaping journey to improve their speed of innovation. Amjed Al-Zoubi, CIO of Amerisure, and Pete co-presented this case study at the Business Agility Conference in NYC.

In this episode, Pete and Amjed went a little deeper and discussed more about the leader behind the title and about what it’s like to be on such a journey.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:
What does it take to lead change in an organization? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today I’m speaking with Alena Keck, the head of Vodafone’s Lean-Agile Center of Excellence. Alena is not only a change agent herself; she’s leading a team of teams of change agents. And, through our discussion, we explore the role of leader as change agent. Enjoy!

Welcome to the show, Alena!

Alena Keck:
Thank you, Pete, for inviting me! I'm really, really excited to be here and talk to you about some of the topics which are close to my heart. Thank you for the invitation.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah! Well, I think most people understand, you know, the role of an Agile Coach, or even the concept of, like, an Agile Center of Excellence, practice center. I'm curious, maybe, just from your specific context at Vodafone, what is it, and how do you define your role as that change agent? What is it you are primarily doing inside that organization?

Alena Keck:
I think—unofficially, I think the LACE team, or the Agile Center of Excellence, is like the source of energy—right?—for the transformation. It is an enabler and promoter of transformation, right? And help, really, first of all, to investigate a little bit on what are the impediments. A little bit of detective work. What are the resistors? What are the resistant factors? How can we shape the why story? How can we help to elevate the why story, share the best practices, share the quick wins, and really help to generate positive energy, right? So, really, kind of, bringing the energy to the transformation to avoid this fatigue feeling and bring the joy of the transformation, right? So, this is how I would describe it without a job description. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
I love the human dynamics you're putting into that. The joy, the energy, the people side of that. I mean, we often think Agile is a process; it's a set of tools; it's Frameworks. It's—you know, it's an engine of working together. And I think what you're really describing is a much more human condition. Do you see that in your role and also in your team, that that is a focus?

Alena Keck:
I learned it, maybe, sometimes the hard way, right? Because as I started the journey, I was really very curious about this change curve, right? That every individual is going through denial, through, really, depression, maybe resistance. And then, eventually, with some help, the person is moving up, right? And if you are part of the Lean-Agile Center of Excellence, that you don't have one person. You have, like, hundreds of people or thousands of people. They are going through their emotional journey, and you realize that you can preach, you can teach, you can coach. But as long as they are in this denial phase—right?—if you do not address the human aspect and the emotions, there is no way you can come to them in a way that they accept whatever you're doing. Right? So you need to handle the change part and the change, emotional part in order for them to start even thinking and moving. Because, if you know the change curve, the only way you can start digesting is when you pass the first shock, when you pass the first denial phase, right? And if you are not helping the teams to go through it together, and with some positive emotions, then there is no way they would even accept any of your advice, any of your coaching, or any of their outcome, which you would like them to join and to help.

Pete Behrens:
Hm. Yeah, I mean, what you're describing—right? Every organization is a human system and, you know, to change the system, we've got to change the humans in that system, which—so you're describing a—you know, I would call that the J-curve effect, right? You have that little–the dip of, maybe, productivity, and even describing denial and delusion, or some aspect of resistance. What is it you see they're resisting? What—is it just change in general, or is it a specific type of change? Is it the fact that they're not responsible and empowered on that change? What is it you see, primarily, as that push-back?

Alena Keck:
There are a lot of things. So, I think, on the one side, it's this business with running the business, versus growing the business, right? So people are already so busy, overwhelmed, sometimes overworked, and really heads down, just doing, doing, doing, right? And if you're coming with those great ideas and how everything will change and everything will be better, they are thinking, “Okay, wow! We will need to do even more, and we will need to work even more to manage this transition and to come to this transition.” So, how can we do it at all if we are already working, maybe, over 100%, right? So, maybe being overwhelmed by the fact that in order to get the results—right?—and go through this curve, you need to lose this productivity for some time, and you need to maybe redesign your skill set. And maybe the skills which you were so proud of and you developed for many years are now less in demand. Maybe your role is not in an Agile chart, right? So there are a lot of things people are really worried when they don't see—like, for example, project managers, right? They don't see themselves on the chart, right? They don't see— “What is my neuro? What am I supposed to do?” Right? “ Where am I here?” Right? Or the managers, right? So, a lot of people do not see exactly, explicitly, their icon, right? So, what am I doing right now? How am I connected? And if you do not really address—or even collect—all those emotions and all those potential resisting factors, right? You would not be able to reach the results, right? So these are just some of the potential resisting factors, right? Sometimes the leadership team is not supporting. So, I would not say there is one. There are really a lot of them.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. I mean, the one you really, I think, hit on first, which we see a lot—right? It's the, “I'm here to deliver value. I'm here, and I've got a lot of pressure on these projects and these things that I'm doing.” Whether that's operationally or creatively, you know, new things. And to change the system at the same time I'm trying to deliver in that system, it feels—like you say, there's not enough time right to do both. And, in a sense, what you're saying is—your organization is there to kind of help that organization see both, right? That we've got to fix the system we're working in to make that system better. Is that a fair way to say, kind of, what you're helping them with?

Alena Keck:
A lot of time, the expectation of the higher leadership is that you will be running the car on a highway and changing the wheels at the same time, right? Which—sometimes we need to protect the teams, right?—and really set more realistic expectations, right? And say transformation is not ending after three months, right? Not even after six months, right? So, it is nothing which you can just check the box and do some setting expectations, setting the stage, saying that it will take a while, that we will need time, we will need to upscale, the teams, right? And creating this road map of, maybe, gradual change, rather than, maybe, a sudden change. These are some of the things we are trying out.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Well, you know, I know Vodafone works in a very difficult industry, right? The telecom space is very competitive, right? The telecom space has unreal expectations of reliability and, you know, uptime—right?—in terms of the operational side of that business. What is it—do you work in just part of that system, where you're focused a little bit more on the creative and new product development, delivery side, or is this really something that you're seeing, kind of, across the spectrum of the business, in terms of both, you know, the runtime side as well as the creative, new development, side.

Alena Keck:
So, we have different transformation initiatives within Vodafone, which started many years ago in different areas. And some of them is what—to describe the networks area, right? Some is, for example, in different markets or consumer and business area, right? Addressing different customers. So it is going on in all the multiple areas which you were referring to, including the networks. It has different speed; it has different focus.

But what we did two years ago? We brought it all together into one community of change agents, which we call Enterprise Center of Excellence or Enterprise Lean-Agile Center of Excellence, where the change leaders from networks, from Vodafone business, from the consumer site from Vodafone learning organization, from our biggest markets, like Germany—they come together and really discuss the common challenges, discuss their approaches, share the best practices, and focus on topics which are relevant for all of them, right? So we bring them together for alignment, sharing and bringing the ideas together. So, it's not only in their innovation lab, right? We also do hackathons and all of that. But the transformation is not limited to a playground—right?—of innovation labs.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. That's good—that's great to hear. And I love what you're saying there, right? Looks different in each one of those spaces, right? Change, the needs, the—whether it's more Lean or Agile or, you know, how we're improving those systems. Would you say—you know, one of the things we’re seeing—we're seeing some trends in the industry around the word agile— you know, is in some ways becoming antithesis, right? I think there's been some negativity. Like, okay, it hasn't necessarily improved in all cases. In other cases, we're seeing, kind of, that role of Agile coach diminished, in terms of the specific role and position in an organization, versus the skills are getting distributed across different parts of the system and others in the organization. I'm curious—are you seeing your Agile Center of Excellence change, or what changes are you seeing in terms of Agile itself, or just the way you're approaching some of these changes?

Alena Keck:
Yeah. I think it is changing, right? And as I'm also leading a team of coaches, I'm of course responsible for their future and responsible that we are staying relevant, not only today but also tomorrow. So, I'm also observing the trends. And it is interesting, what you describe. On the one side, if I Google the market size of Agile transformation, how it is in this year compared to 2032? It's telling me whatever reports I'm reading. It will grow, like, five times, right? So, it will be growing really, really in a more-than-100 million dollar business, right? And now it's like a 70 million dollar business, right? And on the other side, if I read what you are saying, for example, from the Business Agility Institute Report about the skills and all of that–and I'm getting a different picture, and it's not connecting for me, right? So I'm trying to interpret it.

So, what I'm observing, or what we are trying to do as a team—right now we are upscaling ourselves for innovation coaching. So, we will be supporting the first global hackathon for Vodafone, right? And our coaches are now really actively upscaled. And what does it take to help the team to develop a good MVP? That it's viable, feasible, how to coach, for example, to create a great pitch presentation for our internal investors and all of that, right? So we're trying to upscale ourselves in different areas, in addition to Agile coaching, right? And reach our skills in innovation coaching. What we are also doing is trying to see what kind of future services we need to offer. Maybe it's upscaling for a specific role rather than roll out, right? Or maybe it's even mentoring, or programs where we upscale the scrum masters or Agile coaches. So, it should be very flexible. I do observe that Agile coach role and, specifically, do we need scrum master and coach, or only scrum master? Or, do we just need the scrum master? So all of this discussion, of course, are going on, right?

Pete Behrens:
Well, yeah. And, you know, what we're seeing is as you describe, right? The individual, the skill set, is highly needed. The fact that it's a specific role—I think you're right—is changing. I also look at it as, I mean—the role of coach is meant to be transient, right? The role of coach is to develop some kind of a system that's hopefully somewhat self-enabling. So, to me, the concept of coaches feeling like, “Oh, I'm getting left behind.” It's, like, well, that's part of your job—is to upscale and then move on. So, I think that's actually a good thing. I think that's a positive thing. I'm curious—one of the things we see a lot in these larger organizations is the, maybe, the conflict or the intersection between the leaders in the organization. Those who have defined power—right?—in terms of division, department, head of, you know, these types of titles that are in charge of some part of the system. And the coaches and transformation agents who are coming in to tweak that system. I'm curious if you would share with us, maybe, a little bit of the conflict or the challenges you might see between those roles trying to work together?

Alena Keck:
Yeah. I think you are describing a reality, right? There is, of course, natural friction, right? Because, a lot of times, the biggest change in the whole system is not from the team; it's actually for leadership and management roles, right? Therefore, they perceive that Agile coaches are focused on the teams. And everything is working for the teams. But, actually, they need to have a much bigger say—and being much more engaged and be part of the transformation. So, what we are trying to do are different things. On the one side, educating the leaders—right?—and bringing them their, at least, the knowledge, their understanding of Agile principles and values and what you call the catalyst leader, catalyst conversations, right?

On the other side, when we start the initiative—right?—transformation initiative in an area, we start with getting an executive sponsor for that, right? And really seeing—okay, what would be the bigger objective, bigger vision? Where do we see this part of the organization evolving? What could be some business goal to connect to? And we are also also trying to connect—like, our team is part of the technology organization, part of our CTO organization. So, we are connected to the CTO objectives—right?—or to the CTO strategy and try to derive the work we do from the bigger objectives on the strategy part. And working—for example, if we get an executive sponsor for one initiative, we try, for this person, to nominate people of trust who we can work with and also agree on the scope and agree what would be important, what will we do in the next quarter, what would we do in the upcoming month, together. And all the time saying we are enabler. We are helping facilitate the change. We can do, on the ground, job and also fulfilling some of the roles. But the transformation ownership and the success—it needs to come from the delivery organization, right? It needs to come from leaders. Kind of, trying to set this expectation—it is a longer journey to make this expectation. It's like planting the seed, right? But it's a very long-growing tree—right?—which takes a lot of years to grow. But we're trying to, at least, all the time, setting the expectation, right? Okay, we're enabling, but we still need you in the driver's seat. We need to come back to you, for example, to assign business value to what we did, right? Or to define the acceptance criteria for what we need to do, right? So, not to do it in isolation from them.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. You know, I think you're describing exactly why Agile Leadership Journey formed, right? Leaders tend to trump everything else, right? So, whatever we bring into a system—if there's not a growth mindset-oriented executive sponsor or leader in that system, it's not going to go anywhere. And I think what you're describing is exactly that. Unless we're able to educate, inspire, catalyze leaders to take a journey on their own, the rest of that part of that system most likely won't be coming along for the ride.

Alena Keck:
Yeah. Or sometimes, if it starts and there is an re-org in a different—like, it all falls apart, right? It is really—it has such an influence, right? You just grow this tree, and then there is an re-org, and a different leader comes to something which was already existing. And it really starts falling apart.

Pete Behrens:
Job security, I think, yeah! [Laughs] Maybe, to dive into that a little bit more, you know—I see the outside view of training, educating, coaching leaders. You're seeing the inside view. Are you seeing an acceptance there? I know we do a lot of—you know, we've got some of our internal, you know, guides inside your system. And there's some education. We don't always get a peek into that window. I'm curious what you're seeing, or if you could describe any kind of, like, success, where you've seen some leaders go through that, kind of, Aha!, into something different or new. Just give us a little bit of insight of what that might look like on the inside.

Alena Keck:
So, we have, right now, a very great leader who came from part of the organization, from Vodafone, Vodacom. And who experienced the benefits of agility and experienced what can happen if the teams are crossing the silos, breaking the silos, work together and deliver value and focusing on delivering value. So, he's bringing this fresh perspective and really convincing his whole leadership team right now to really drive this transformation in different initiatives within his organization. So, he's really trying. “Okay, let's try in this area—right?—let's do a retrospective. Why is it not working yet? What can we improve?” So, he's trying to push for improvement. “ Okay, it did not work the first time. Like, let's do the next one. What can we improve?” And he's not giving up, right? And it really sets the stage and gives the positive energy we need, right? Because normally, in the first part of the transformation, you'll just surface the impediment, right? And you start to boil them in order to address them, but you cannot just skip them and start growing, right? So, the hardest part is really to stay on top of those boiling impediments. Boiling, for example, bottlenecks and start addressing them one-by-one and not giving up. So he's, for example, really bringing a good discipline and good energy for his whole leadership team to do exactly that.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. You're describing a catalyst, right? Catalyzing other leaders, catalyzing the system, being a visionary as well as an agitator, I think, in that system. You know, I know Vodafone is defined—or, you know—I think, from a framework perspective, you're considered a scaled Agile framework, you know? You're using that system, but yet it sounds like everything that I'm hearing from your organization is things around that framework. And I'm curious about that, in terms of—what do you see? Like, the framework itself? You know, we say frameworks are helpful but not necessarily—they're necessary but not sufficient. And I'm curious—what is the—your organization, Center of Excellence, doing to complement—besides the leadership education, are there other things you're doing to complement that, to help really improve that system of delivery?

Alena Keck:
So, I think the framework helps to develop one language so that you do not, all the time, lose time for translation. What does an Agile coach mean, right? What does a team of teams mean, right? So, it really helps to create common language and really focus on helping the transformation, rather than all the time translating. What we also do is, of course, working on the same why story, vision, right? Or working on the same impediment removal, right? Whether it's finance—we need to adjust the finance processes, or we need to work together with HRs and roles. These are the things which are independent from the framework, but we need to address them as a transformation team to help to transform and grow the transformation. But at the same time, we also need to help establish the same language and really calm down and not start fighting across frameworks, or use different methods—and not being completely comparable. And really running in different directions, even, in terms of tooling. If you want to have—in a large organization, if you want to measure time to market, good luck! Because every team, especially if you have a lot of pockets of transformation, or a lot of pockets of funding—every team uses a different tool, has different artifacts. And if you want, like, an end-to-end time to market, you need to start, maybe, with some common artifacts. Even common instances for some tooling to enable teams, at least, to measure that we are not sitting, staying still, but we are, for example, reducing the time to market and shrinking the time to market. All this enablement needs to be done by those change agents. Because this is something which will never happen automatically.

Pete Behrens:
So, you're talking about a lot of, kind of, success metrics there. I'm curious—how is your Agile Center of Excellence measured? How do you know you're making a difference. Or, what does success mean to your organization in a quarter, in a year, that time frame?

Alena Keck:
This year, we started to experiment with OKRs, right? So we said, “Okay, what could be three or four objectives which we want to, yeah, deliver as a team within the one year horizon? And how can we contribute it with our quarterly objectives or our PI objectives?” For example, we want to roll out the satisfaction survey for our transformation stakeholders, right? So we will be rolling out an MVP of a satisfaction survey to get the feedback from them and so that they can measure our success and provide us a regular feedback loop.

We are measuring the training net promoter score. So, in every training, at the end of the training, we are asking whether they would recommend our training team to their colleagues, right? Because training creates the pipeline, maybe, for future transformation, for future initiatives, which we can support. So it's kind of our pipeline. So, a lot of—we use a lot of leading indicators. Because if you want, as I mentioned, to measure time to market and to improve time to market, it will take two or three years. And I cannot show the dashboard which is not moving for maybe one year, right? And then it will move a little bit, and then it will move a lot, right? It would be very hard!

Vodafone as a company has a very strong employee satisfaction survey. So, we have spirit of Vodafone, and we have surveys which are conducted on a regular basis which measure culture and measure cultural change. And the results of the survey really strongly impact the leaders and leaders’ behavior. They are taken seriously. So, in terms of employee satisfaction and employee engagement, this is something which we relate to. But it is already measured on Vodafone-level. And what we try to connect it, to do it on a team of teams level, right? Either—not just looking at big areas, but to see, okay, in the areas where we transform, can we use the same three questions—right?—to measure some cultural element on a team of teams level or Agile level.

Pete Behrens:
Sounds like you have a fairly comprehensive set of success metrics there from people to process to leading and lagging and—yeah, so appreciate your thoroughness through that process. You know, you mentioned, as we talked about being on the podcast, that you wanted to be a helper for other internal change agents. And I'm curious about that. What is it you see or would like to help them with? What is it—what advice, or what—yeah, what is it you'd like to tell them that might help their journey?

Alena Keck:
So, I think the biggest advice I would give them—as I started that—for me, change agent is a source of energy, right? So, the change agent needs to keep their energy high, right? They cannot really—they cannot get out of breath, right? Because if they are not motivated, and if they are not convinced about the transformation, or if they are very upset after every setback—so, setbacks are normal, right? Impediments are normal. We need to, kind of, live with them—and not being all the time upset about them, right? You need to help yourself to get this positive energy. Because if, as a change agent, you lose it, you will not be able to help the organization, right? So, just take their impediments in a way that motivates you to innovate to solve them, rather than really take it as a ceiling you cannot cross it all, right? And really embrace yourself with the environment of change agents who can keep you positive when things are getting hard, right? Because, normally, you will never have, like, this Aha! moment from the others. You need to have this change agent team or—because transformation is a team sport—who can help you when you're struggling, when you have difficult moments. Who can really uplift you so that you can uplift the organization.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. I think, you know, what you describe I see so much in organizations, right? They feel so isolated. Different departments, divisions—they don't learn from each other. And it's great to see you building a community internally for those change agents to have a support system. We do that externally for change agents working with organizations such as yours. But, yeah, it's such a critical aspect of that change agent role—is to not get isolated too much. And it can become overwhelming and challenging, I can see.

Alena Keck:
Yeah. I would say that my message for 2024 is that giving up is not an option. You need to keep going; you need to keep learning from your transformation mistakes, from your transformation successes. Create a guiding coalition. Put the transformation as a transformation sport in your mantra. And help the organization to overcome the challenges and not give up.

Pete Behrens:
Don't give up, yes. Yeah. Especially when those hurdles—you run into those hurdles, as you described, right? It's the persistence, the courage to overcome, yeah. And that takes a lot of patience.

It's been a pleasure chatting with you today. And, you know, I look forward to seeing your continued story—and Vodafone's continued story—down this journey and look forward to seeing some positive results come from that.

Alena Keck:
Thank you, Pete! And it was really great talking to you.

Pete Behrens:
(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit our website, agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast , for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

What is Agile Leadership?

Mon, 25 Mar 2024 17:34:16 GMT

What is Agile Leadership?

Agile Leadership sharpens organization focus and accelerates organization action and responsiveness in complex, uncertain, and rapidly changing environments.

Understanding “Agile” and “Leadership”

The words agile and leadership have entire worlds devoted to them, likely adding to the confusion. So we’ll break it down for you.

Agile

Agile (or Agility) is about sensing and responding. While most associate agility with movement, the word agility has two core definitions:

The ability to move quickly and easily, and;
The ability to think and understand quickly.

Part 1 refers to agility in action – to be adaptive, responsive, nimble, light on one’s feet, and graceful, while Part 2 refers to agility in thought – to be alert, sharp, aware, focused, and perceptive. It is in the combining of these two definitions that true agility takes flight – a supercapacity to sense and respond at a moment’s notice.

Leadership

Leadership is the ability to influence others toward achieving common goals. It is not confined to a title or position, rather it is about the impact someone has on their environment and others within it. The challenge in the complexity of leadership comes from the multitude of ways people influence – enough to fill entire libraries. That is not our focus here.

Agile Leadership in a Nutshell

Combining these concepts introduces a leadership style that embodies the characteristics of agility – and while that definition might appear trivial, it is neither simple nor easy.

Agile leadership is not simply reactive leadership. Recall that leadership is an ability to influence others toward common goals. That means there is a vision or direction toward something in the future. Without a clear vision, responsiveness and reactivity provide little value. Like getting in a car without a destination but still asking if we should turn right or left, or go straight ahead. It doesn’t matter.

Thus, agile leadership combines clarity of vision with agility in execution.

Sensing vs. Responding

Sensing requires awareness of oneself and one’s surroundings, including the beliefs, emotions, and attitudes that skew perspective. It requires receptiveness or openness to see things as they are opposed to what they’d like them to be, as well as an adaptive lens in looking at the world of work, the people doing the work, and the coordination required to get work done.

Responding, on the other hand, requires quick decisiveness and the courage to step forward amid uncertainty, complexity, and change. Choice, in this case, is not about right and wrong – it is about surveying the options and choosing what appears to be the most appropriate (or least inappropriate) option. It then requires nimbleness to adapt to the changing circumstances and an ongoing cycle of inspection and adaptation, quickly sampling and responding through the forward action.

Avoiding missteps or mistakes is impractical; the goal for effective agile leaders is recognizing and recovering from those mistakes more quickly. By developing the sense and response cycle, leaders can become more resilient.

Further, this sense and response cycle maps to our mindset and behaviors. Sensing equates to a growth mindset of self-awareness, open curiosity, vulnerable empathy, and focal adaptiveness. Response equates to behaviors of clear decisiveness, situational adaptiveness, bold action, and active reflection.

Why is Agile Leadership Important?

Imagine driving a car through a dense fog without a GPS. You're in a hurry, but know that the faster you go the more likely you are to make a wrong turn or crash. That’s an apt metaphor for business today: pressure from the market, stakeholders, and competitors to move quickly, but lacking visibility to see when and where to turn.

Agile leaders are those who can navigate the complexities and uncertainties (or fog) of their environment with the clarity of where they wish to go, the courage to step into that void, the influence to align others toward this journey, and the adaptiveness to pivot as they discover new information.

In an age where change is the only constant, the traditional paradigms of leading are being challenged and redefined. Technological advances are disrupting not only the tech space; they’re disrupting entire markets, businesses, and economies. And they’re being ushered in at a quickening pace. There are very few unchanging markets where companies can maintain the status quo.

This new economy demands leaders who can navigate through uncertainty, complexity, and rapid change – promoting the ability to sense and respond as the valued currency needed to get ahead in this dynamic landscape. However, the importance of agile leadership is not contained to a business domain as we’re seeing equally escalating disruptions across social, political, and climate systems as well.

How Did Agile Leadership Emerge?

The concept of agile leadership evolved from various pivotal historical moments and shifts but ultimately reflects humanity's pursuit of efficiency and adaptability in the face of increasingly complex challenges. Five key milestones affected this evolution, each helping to shape the agile leadership practices we recognize today.

Early human development
Industrial process management
Lean manufacturing leadership
Modern leadership development
Agile software movement

1. Early Human Development

The development of leadership throughout early human history can be divided into two main phases – tribal leadership and hierarchical management within city-states, both of which shed light on the concepts of autonomy and authority.

Tribal Leadership

For more than 2.5 million years, tribal leadership, characterized by a service-for-prestige model, was the prevailing form of leadership. Leadership was essentially a voluntary exchange where individuals who contributed to the tribe were rewarded with prestige, food, shelter, and other forms of recognition. Agility, both mental and physical, was crucial for survival, and conflict allowed members to depart and establish new tribes.

Hierarchical Management

Approximately 13,000 years ago, the advent of agriculture shifted societies toward hierarchical management, allowing them to settle and form larger urban centers. This era marked the introduction of structured, class-based systems where leadership came from birth status rather than merit. The bond between leaders and the community weakened as their roles and status became increasingly distant. Lower-class individuals grew dependent on the state, facing vulnerability if they attempted to leave its protection. Survival shifted focus from adaptability to relying on size, strength, and defensive measures.

It's important to note that we refer to this period's leadership style as hierarchical management rather than leadership to distinguish between positions assigned by rank versus those earned through service.

This brief overview of leadership evolution highlights a parallel challenge faced by modern organizations, where large structures often mirror the hierarchical, class-based systems of city-states, yet individuals still yearn for the freedom and autonomy reminiscent of tribal leadership.

2. Industrial Process Management

At the dawn of the 20th century, the landscape of organizational leadership underwent a significant transformation with the formalization of industrial management principles. In 1911, Frederick Taylor, a pivotal figure in this movement, introduced a new era of management with “The Principles of Scientific Management.” Taylor championed process standardization and meticulous oversight, advocating for the division of labor into minute tasks closely supervised by a management hierarchy. He perceived the workforce primarily as unskilled laborers needing direction at every step to ensure efficiency and control.

The efficacy of Taylor's management approach, rooted in rigorous process control, was undeniable. His methodologies drastically improved manufacturing efficiency, quality, and consistency, winning over many contemporary leaders and management thinkers despite the human costs associated with such productivity gains.

However, from the 1930s through the 1970s, in addition to the human costs of industrial management, other cracks began to emerge. The growing complexity of products and a heightened demand for customization revealed the limitations of the assembly line and the delicate balance between speed and quality. The market saw an influx of defective products and items that no longer met consumer demands, signaling a need for a shift away from the rigid principles of Taylorism.

While modern organizations might not explicitly endorse Taylorism, its legacy persists in contemporary organizational practices—from the specialization and compartmentalization of work roles to the reliance on key performance indicators (KPIs) and formal performance management systems. There remains today a marked emphasis on roles and outputs over the individuals who fill these roles, perpetuating a sense of depersonalization in the workplace.

Ironically, the structured, process-driven management model introduced by Taylor serves as a backdrop against which the benefits of more agile and adaptive leadership approaches become clearer. Understanding the limitations and outcomes of traditional management practices can illuminate the advantages and necessity of embracing agility in leadership today.

3. Lean Manufacturing Leadership

The automotive industry, which once thrived on the principles championed by Frederick Taylor, found itself at a crossroads after World War II. Japanese manufacturers, in particular, faced significant challenges in product quality control. It was within this context that Edward Deming, a statistician and quality control expert, delivered a lecture in Japan that caught the attention of Toyota executives. This encounter marked the beginning of a transformative partnership between Deming and Toyota, catalyzing what would become one of the most impactful economic revitalizations of the time and establishing Toyota as a leading force in the automotive industry for decades.

This partnership gave birth to a new philosophy in manufacturing, initially known as the Toyota Way but now more commonly referred to as lean manufacturing. This approach not only revolutionized manufacturing processes but also posed a direct challenge to the managerial and leadership principles that had been established by Taylor. Deming and Toyota placed unprecedented power in the hands of line workers, empowering them to take control of their processes and quality assurance. This empowerment was symbolized by the installation of an andon cord along the production line, which any worker could pull to halt the manufacturing process. This action would prompt an immediate collaborative effort among workers to identify, discuss, and resolve the issue, often employing the technique known as "the five whys."

Although Toyota's leadership and manufacturing techniques were innovative and highly effective within their operations, spreading these practices to other companies proved challenging. Despite offering numerous tours and sharing their methodologies freely, Toyota discovered that while other manufacturers could replicate the mechanics of their system, the underlying leadership mindset and respect for the workforce were more difficult to adopt. Many attempts to emulate the Toyota Way fell short, underscoring that while process improvements may be replicated, fostering human development and respect within the workplace is a more complex endeavor.

The influence of Deming and Toyota's lean manufacturing principles extended far beyond the automotive industry, laying the foundation for the agile software development movement. Many thought leaders within the agile community have credited Deming, Toyota, and their pioneering work in lean manufacturing as crucial precursors to the agile methodologies that have reshaped software development practices. This connection highlights the profound impact that Deming and Toyota's collaboration has had, not just in manufacturing but across industries, demonstrating that their groundbreaking approach to leadership and process management was truly ahead of its time.

4. Modern Leadership Development

The period from the 1960s to the 1990s marked a transformative era in leadership development, beginning with Douglas McGregor's influential Theory X and Theory Y, introduced in his seminal work "The Human Side of Enterprise" (1960). McGregor presented a groundbreaking dichotomy between two types of management styles: Theory X, which assumed employees are inherently lazy and require strict oversight, and Theory Y, which posited that employees are self-motivated and thrive under autonomy. This distinction challenged existing leadership paradigms and advocated for a shift toward more empowering and participatory management practices, laying the groundwork for future developments in leadership theories.

Building on the shift toward recognizing the potential in every employee, Robert K. Greenleaf introduced the concept of Servant Leadership in his 1970 essay "The Servant as Leader." Greenleaf's philosophy inverted traditional leadership models, placing the leader's primary role as serving others — including employees, customers, and the community. By prioritizing the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong, servant leadership emphasized the importance of attributes such as empathy, listening, and the ethical use of power, further enriching the landscape of leadership development.

Warren Bennis further contributed to this evolving field through his exploration of the distinctions between managers and leaders. His work, notably "On Becoming a Leader" (1989), articulated a vision of leadership that transcended mere administrative functions to embrace empowerment, vision, and the personal development of followers. Bennis argued for a model of leadership that facilitated innovation and adaptability, emphasizing the critical role of leaders in nurturing the potential of their teams and fostering environments that encourage creativity and growth.

The contributions of figures such as Peter Drucker, Bill Torbert, Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard, Edgar Schein, and Chris Argyris, although diverse, collectively underscored the importance of adaptability, continuous learning, and the psychological dimensions of leadership. From Drucker's management by objectives (MBO) to Torbert's action inquiry, and from Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® Model to Schein's emphasis on culture and Argyris's exploration of organizational learning, these thought leaders expanded the framework within which leadership was understood and practiced. Their work emphasized the significance of creating environments where questioning, learning, and a deep understanding of human dynamics were paramount, further enriching the field of leadership development during this era.

5. Agile Software Movement

Since the turn of this century, a significant shift has occurred across numerous industries, largely driven by the agile software development movement. This transition has highlighted the limitations of traditional project management methodologies, which were primarily rooted in the fields of civil construction and mechanical engineering. Historically, these fields relied on tools and approaches like the Gantt chart (1917), critical path analysis (1957), and work breakdown structure (1962), followed by project management models such as the waterfall (1970) and stage gates (1980). Remarkably, and similar to how Taylorism persists, these methods still dominate much of the project management discourse today, despite the dramatic changes in systems and environments to which they are applied.

The rise of software development, characterized by its inherent flexibility, challenged these established project management paradigms. The late 20th century saw the emergence of methodologies that embodied early forms of agility, such as adaptive programming (1980), the spiral method (1985), and rapid application development (1988). The 1990s further solidified this shift toward agility with the development of structured "pre-agile" frameworks like Scrum, Extreme Programming (XP), and Kanban. These approaches laid the foundation for what would soon be recognized as the agile movement.

The turning point for this movement came in 2001 when leading figures in these methodologies convened in Snowbird, Utah. This gathering, initially intended for skiing and networking, led to the creation of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development . This pivotal document, with its four value statements and 12 principles, has steadfastly guided the agile movement toward prioritizing individuals and interactions, working software, customer collaboration, and responsiveness to change. The emergence of the Agile Manifesto and the movement it catalyzed has underscored the critical need for agile adaptive leadership in the modern business landscape. The principles of agile software development have transcended the tech industry.

Agile leadership, characterized by flexibility, collaboration, and responsiveness to change, is essential for navigating the complexities and rapid pace of contemporary organizational environments. The influence of the agile movement has not only revolutionized software development practices but has also called for a reevaluation of leadership models, advocating for an adaptive approach that is more aligned with today's dynamic market demands.

Conclusion

Today, agile leadership is the crucial competency helping individuals and organizations navigate a global landscape marked by rapid technological advancements, shifting economic tides, and evolving social norms. This reality calls for leadership that is adaptable, perceptive, and responsive.

It borrows lessons learned from our collective history – from those early tribal structures and assembly line precision to lean manufacturing, and finally, to the Agile software movement.

Massive disruptions – those both harmful and helpful – such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the rise of artificial intelligence technologies, only reinforce how critical it is that we can sense, respond, and adapt to change.

As leaders consider their journey, they must reflect on the past, assess the current, and try to anticipate the future – no small feat. It takes work to consciously strive to improve our own leadership abilities and embrace agility.

Is it time for you to take the next step on your leadership journey?

Whether you pursue this through quiet introspection, a formal leadership development program, or something in between, we invite you to learn more alongside us.

About the Author

Pete Behrens, founder of Agile Leadership Journey, has over 30 years experience as a leader himself and through educating and coaching other leaders on their journey.

Pete is a Certified Agile Leadership (CAL) Educator, Certified Enterprise Coach (CEC) and a former Certified Scrum Trainer (CST) with the Scrum Alliance. For the Scrum Alliance, Pete developed the CEC Program in 2007 and the CAL Program in 2016. He further served on the board of Directors from 2016-2018.

Connect with Pete

57: Unpacking IBM's CEO Guide to AI

Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:15:00 GMT

How are CEOs viewing the impact of AI?

In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, host Pete Behrens is joined by Agile pioneer Jim Highsmith to dig deeper into the impact of AI on leadership and organizational dynamics.

Drawing from the IBM CEO's Guide to Generative AI report , they explore how Agile principles are increasingly integral to effective AI utilization. Pete and Jim both offer perspectives for leaders aiming to navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by AI in a rapidly evolving environment.

Whether you're a seasoned executive or an emerging leader, this episode provides crucial insights into leveraging AI for strategic advantage while maintaining a human-centric approach to leadership.

Jim Highsmith, Agile Pioneer

While Jim Highsmith retired in 2021, he continues to share his 60+ years of expertise, wisdom, and insights from roles across the industry as an IT manager, product manager, project manager, executive consultant, software developer, and storyteller.

Jim has been a leader in the agile community for 30+ years, notably as a co-author of the Agile Manifesto, founding member of The Agile Alliance, co-author of the Declaration of Interdependence for project leaders, and co-founder and first president of the Agile Leadership Network. Learn more at jimhighsmith.com .

Connect with Jim on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

Integration of Agile Principles with AI

Agility, characterized by flexibility, iterative progress, and adaptability, is essential for navigating the complex and rapidly evolving AI landscape. This approach is not just beneficial but necessary for leaders to foster within their organizations to effectively utilize AI technologies and drive transformational change.

Leadership in the Age of AI

The role of leadership is evolving significantly with the advent of AI. Leaders need to embrace an adaptive leadership style, characterized by a willingness to experiment, inspire others, and lead with a vision that incorporates AI technologies. This involves moving from traditional top-down approaches to more inclusive, exploratory, and iterative management styles that encourage innovation and responsiveness to change.

Cultural Shifts

Fostering a culture of innovation and creativity is critical within organizations to leverage AI effectively. This involves promoting a culture of curiosity, encouraging risk-taking, and ensuring that the organizational infrastructure supports innovation. Leaders are advised to focus on customer value and drive organizational changes that align with the evolving business landscape shaped by AI technologies.

Explore:

Related Episodes

56: AI for Leaders

Let’s dive into the rapidly evolving world of artificial intelligence and its implications for leadership with expert Henrik Kniberg. Known for his transformative work in Agile and organizational change, Kniberg joins Pete Behrens to explore AI's potential to revolutionize leadership, innovation, and personal growth.

Through a blend of anecdotes and expert analysis, Henrik and Pete discuss how AI can be a powerful ally for leaders seeking to navigate the complexities of modern organizational dynamics.

50: Agile Adaptive Leadership with Jim Highsmith

In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, Pete welcomes a true agile pioneer, Jim Highsmith. Jim shares how his career has evolved from NASA engineer to ThoughtWorks alum, as well as being a co-author of the Agile Manifesto.

In their conversation, Pete and Jim explore the fusion of agile and adaptive principles, shedding light on how these concepts can revolutionize leadership in a rapidly changing world.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

How are CEOs viewing the impact of AI? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today we've got a special episode for you. Recently, we received a report from IBM entitled The CEO's Guide to Generative AI . And in looking at this report—it's about 150-some pages, and it's got a deluge of information. And I thought, “How do we bring this about? How do we bring this forward in a meaningful, insightful—but not too overwhelming—sense?” And—thinking about that, I decided to just invite one of my favorite sparring partners over, Jim Highsmith, and just talk about it. And so, this episode is going to be providing you some information from that report. Which is incredible information, but it's through two lenses.

Lens number one is a lens of agility. And one of the things we realized in reading this report is how much Agile principles and practices are infused in AI. And that just comes through this report, which is really fascinating and, obviously, valuable to an Agile Leadership Journey audience. A second lens is this—construct around, you know, the AI and leadership, right? It's this intersection. And so, the lens we're bringing this data to you is with respect to what we're doing with our AI Leadership Lab , which you may be unaware of. But it's something—we've been kind of undercover for a number of months, on an exploration process in this intersection. And what you can only see as a Venn diagram between the whole world of AI, which is huge, massive, and leadership, which is huge, massive. But there's a thin slice in between these two, AI and Leadership. And it's that space that we're starting to explore. And we've developed our initial cohort; we're starting to explore this landscape.

And so, what—we're bringing this conversation to you—is to share a little bit about why we're doing, what we're doing, and how it connects with some of the learning we're seeing. What that means for you is—there's now starting to be different ways you can get involved in the AI Leadership Lab. And we talk about cohorts—this is an opportunity to join others in this discovery process. But we also talk about some discoveries and some sharing that we'll be doing over this next year, as well as some experiments that we're going to be running around AI with leadership development. So, for us, it's quite exciting! It's fascinating territory, but it only works in an ecosystem.

And you're part of that ecosystem! And so, I encourage you, after you listen to this—I know you're going to enjoy this conversation. I encourage you to get involved. Check out our information. So, the link to the report is under our website . The link to our lab and how to get involved is on our website as well. And one final note: this conversation—I was fortunate to invite Jim over for an in-person chat. So, if you're watching this, you're going to see a slightly different setting. Jim and I got to hang out in my living room. So, enjoy this conversation, and I hope to see you somewhere along this AI in Leadership Journey!

Well, Jim, I just want to say thanks for joining me on this conversation!

Jim Highsmith:

It's been a lot of fun so far!

Pete Behrens:

Well, you know, one of the things I wonder about is, you know—a couple months ago I proposed, maybe, an AI leadership Journey or an exploration with you. And I'm kind of curious—why did you say yes to that?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, leadership in this space is something I've always been interested in. And, as you know, I wrote a couple of articles now on leaders looking from the top-down, as opposed to the bottom-up. So, I've got interviews with a couple of C-suite leaders who have been on this agile journey—and successfully—and talk to them about what they viewed as agility and adaptability and how they work that into their leadership. And so, leadership has always been an area of interest of mine. In fact, in 2014, I published a book called Adaptive Leadership. And even in—and I really, really went back to one of my earlier books in—was released in 2000. And the word, term, adaptive leadership is actually in that book. And I didn't push it a lot, but it's interesting that I was thinking about that, way back then. And so, I've always viewed leadership as part and parcel of how you made Agile transitions. And now I think we've got another kind of transition that's going to be even more challenging, and particularly to leaders. I think leaders’ jobs are going to change for a variety of reasons, which we could talk about. But then, with AI and some of the new technologies that are coming around, it's going to be a change again. And the thing that's happening is—if you look at change over the industrial eras and the non-industrial eras, it was slower. And now you get into the change which is faster. And that's really hard for people to absorb.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. So, one of the things we're going to be talking about today is an IBM report that was recently produced. And I think, if we had printed it out, it would be a really thick stack. It was over 150 pages. And lots of interesting content in there. And I think they're—they talk about nearly 6,000 CEOs or C-Suite-like people that they interviewed through this process. And one of the things I think I saw in that report—and, you know, you picked this out—is some of the themes that were in that report, and how they connect to what we do at ALJ, how they connect to what our exploration is with our AI Leadership Labs. But I'm curious—what stuck out to you, I guess, in terms of—why did you find that report, and what jumped out to you?

Jim Highsmith:

I must have gotten it off of a LinkedIn feed. That's how I find a lot of things. And it just appealed to me! It was pretty long, like you said, 150 pages or something like that. And there's some repetition in there, but there are also a lot of ideas. It's oriented to CEOs, yeah. And that's their, sort of, their target audience, which means people below the CEO, CIO are going to read it too. But it really laid out, I thought, a fairly comprehensive look at how you would plan for this AI invasion, I guess of organizations. And it will be an invasion because, as I've said, with Agile transformations, the organization antibodies are going to come out and attack. And so, it's going to be an interesting transition.

But yet, as you know, we talked to a couple of leaders recently, and these are leaders in good-size organizations, mid to upper-level managers. And I asked them a question: what are you using AI for? They said a better question is: what are we not using AI for? And that really stuck with me. And, you know, there are, by some account, 63,000 AI firms in the world right now. I just saw a website the other day that listed 10,000-plus AI tools. I mean, it's just exploding. And how do you get a handle on that? And I think this is the—one of the reasons, or one of the things that you've got to do, is—you've got to recognize that it's out there, and you've got to figure out how to deal with it. And it's not going to be a Plan, Do approach. It's going to be an Envision, Explore approach, which is sort of the Agile way of doing things. Let's envision where we might go. Let's explore into that, back up and envision again. And explore again. So, it's going to be an iterative cycle. And those of you that think anybody has the answers right now—they don't.

Pete Behrens:

Including us.

Jim Highsmith:

Including us!

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. And so, the report, which—we'll make a link in the podcast episode—is the CEO's Guide to generative AI, which is IBM's report. Now, what you're bringing up is connection to agility, you know. You and I have both written articles on this, right? You wrote If you fail at Agile, you will fail at AI, which has been a bit controversial in our space. And I talk about why agilists are moving to AI, right? And there's a natural—right? You talk about this in terms of that natural call/response, right? The prompt response is a natural evolution. And how we work with—how we collaborate with AI. But there's also this synergy of change, right? This synergy of disruption. The synergy and how we respond to that. And I think what you're picking up on here is—there's a symbiotic nature between agility, the ability to change and AI, right? And its ability to change and help organizations change.

Jim Highsmith:

Right. Well, its ability to generate change. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

Disrupt change, yes.

Jim Highsmith:

So, it's a disruptive force. And how do you deal with disruptive force? You've got to be more adaptive, more resilient. One of the things that's even more important, I think—or one of the aspects of this is really important in this space—is the ability to sense what's going on. If you think there's 10,000 tools out there, and 63,000 vendors coming knocking at your door, how do you figure out what to look at, how to look at it? Who are you going to believe? Who are your sources going to be? Where are you going to go for tools? Where are you going to go for help? There are all these kinds of things that are going to be new. And it's going to be—this is trying to sense what's out there and what to do—is going to be a real major task.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. So, diving in now, maybe, into some of the findings in the report, and maybe how we connect those to what we're doing with our AI Leadership La, as well as Agile Leadership Journey in general. You know, one of the things you talk about is the report talks about this experimental approach. Like, we can't wait, right? We can't sit back. Leaders must act, but they've got to act even without all the information, right? And I think that's one of the things we've talked a lot about with this bold agile leadership, right? To be able to have the courage to step into a space with unknowns present.

Jim Highsmith:

Right. So, my loose definition of agility is—or adaptive leadership style is—number one, you've got to be adventurous, and you've got to be willing to take some risk. And—calculated risk, but risk none nonetheless. And you may be able—may have to take a little additional risk in today's world. The second part of that is inspiring. You've got to be able to inspire people to go along with you on this leadership—on this journey into AI. So, how do you inspire the troops, other people in the organization? And then, finally, do you have an adaptive life cycle that you can use? It's an experimental life cycle that kind of keeps you going. So, it's a whole different environment. It's even more necessary to have an adaptive, open experimental approach to things.

Pete Behrens:

Well, and I think we're trying to role model some of that. I mean, we're not experts in AI. We're not attempting to be experts. As you mentioned—right?—there's thousands of organizations, thought leaders out in the world about AI. What we feel competent and maybe uniquely qualified for is that intersection of AI to leadership. And I think that's the space we're looking at playing, and that's the kind of focus of our lab is. Okay, what impact does this have on leadership? I look at this report. And one of the things I wrote about was, you know, the landscape. And you talk about awareness and assistance and, maybe, how leaders change. I saw this a lot, about awareness. I'm curious—this report, did you see it going beyond awareness? Did you see this report going into more assistance or—what we call—augmentation?

Jim Highsmith:

It did a little bit. As you know. I've sort of defined capability in this environment as knowledge plus experience plus decision-making. And I think one of the things that's happened in the Agile community is—we've kind of stopped at knowledge in many situations, and we haven't gotten into the experience factor. And therefore, the total experience with Agile and organizations has gotten kind of thin. And then, do you know enough to help you make decisions? And I think that what we need to do, or what we're doing—is trying to look at each of those things. And saying, “How can AI help us with the knowledge that you need to make—to be a better whatever you are.” So, if you're a developer, how do you be a better developer by having knowledge instantly available? Then the next one is, “How do you get experience?” Is there any way to get experience, other than through experience?

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, that's an interesting question.

Jim Highsmith:

And so, there's some ways to do that. So I think that's a second level of what AI can do. But it's—that's a more abstract level. And then, can it help you in the decision-making? That's sort of the third level of capability. And so, the question here is, “Can you help make decisions? And help somebody making a decision, a person making a decision?” Or can you actually make a decision—AI make a decision? I think that's off in the future. Hopefully!

Pete Behrens:

Well, yeah. Guardrails and, you know, how do we manage that ethically and meaningfully. I'm curious—maybe, you've got a, you know—what stuck out to you, maybe, in this report? Was there a key, kind of, focal lens?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, I've looked at a lot of use cases. And so, for example, this part, this report, starts out talking about customer service. And that number one priority for a lot of people, a lot of organizations. But the one that stuck out to me—and I think, basically, because I come from an IT environment—is the revamping of old legacy systems. And that may actually be able to go a lot faster, using some AI. And so, there's a lot of stuff going on in the developer community, in terms of using AI. And so, I thought—if we can get rid of some of that old technical debt that's holding a lot of companies back, one of the things the IBM report says is—this may be able to take traditional firms that are less digitally oriented and jump, leap, programs into catching up with the competition. And that's something that we—that I hadn't really looked at before, or heard before. But that would be a great Advantage for a lot of companies.

Pete Behrens:

Well, yeah. I saw a lot of customer orientation in this report. And we can connect that to ad, right? The customer responsiveness, right? The customer connection. The customer personalization—right?—that AI could potentially bring into that relationship. And so, yeah, I think, again, coming back in that Agile space, what you're saying also, though, that I think connects—is the advancement of technology, enabling business agility, right? And I think one of the things they say in that report was—it's not just about legacy systems, moving them up. It's about—those become the precursor to them being agile, which I thought was an interesting connection.

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah. And, for example, there are a lot of people who have moved a lot of their legacy systems to the cloud, and thereby gained some flexibility and agility, in terms of their IT infrastructure. That's a fair—you have to be careful about that, because both systems that were built long ago—are not cloud native. And so, you have to do some rework of those systems. And sometimes, even, replacement. If that can go faster, that means that the infrastructure can be more adaptive, more agile. I used to always say that you could have the most agile team in existence, and if you put them to work on a clunky, old legacy system, they weren't going to be—necessarily be fast. Or, you know, it's just the nature. You have to have an Agile team, and you have to have an Agile infrastructure in order to move forward quickly.

Pete Behrens:

I think the danger here, though, is to look at this as an IT thing, right? To look at this as a tech thing. And I think one of the things I saw in this report was the importance of business, the importance of leadership, the importance of the board. And how this isn't just delegated, right? This can't be delegated. In fact, I think there was some really interesting things they, quote—it said stop measuring business and IT goals separately, right? Explicitly prioritize IT projects with the strongest links to business value. And then there was another stat that said 64% of executives believe generative AI will bridge the gap between IT and business. And this is something we've been trying to do in Agile, right?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, it's interesting, because in a book that I wrote with a couple of colleagues called Edge, which was a digital transformation book—it was published a couple, three years ago. And one of the things we talked about in there is three kinds of measurements. One is a customer facing measurement, giving you customer value. And that was a, really—that the most important. Then you have business value, like sales and profits and those kinds of things. And that was a business value. And then you had activities, you know. Like, “How many lines of code did you do?” Or “How many of these things did you sell?” And you need all three of those kinds of measurements. But it's got to be driven from the customer value perspective. And people are finding more and more ways to do that. It's a little bit tough, because what you're asking somebody to do is look at—what I'd call—fuzzy numbers, as opposed to hard numbers. Financial numbers are hard numbers. Customer value numbers can be fuzzy numbers. And—but I'd rather have a fuzzy number for something that's important than a precise number for something that's not important.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. You know, what is easily measured is not always valuable. What is valuable to be measures is not always easy. Speaking of, kind of, getting into that fuzzy side, you know, one of the things I saw as a connection to this—besides shifting from IT to business—is the importance of creativity, the importance of curiosity. And, you know, one of the things they talk about, I think, in this report—right?—is this concept of creativity over capability. And I just want to emphasize that, because I think a lot of the leaders out there are thinking, “I need AI capability!” And that's probably true, but it's the creativity. I think the podcast with Henrik Kniberg really, kind of, showed that—to me, he's, like—the concept of prompt imagination is almost more important than the prompt, you know, engineering, you know, behind it. And I think that connects here, into this concept of the creative culture, right? The curiosity culture. And I think they even said, “Crystallize a culture of curiosity.” They must build a cultural mindset. And then the governance guard rails. Which I think says, “How do you create a space for people to play, right? To experiment. To allow them to take risks. Because I think that cultural element is so critical.

Jim Highsmith:

It's interesting. Hans Claus, of the World Economic Forum, has what he calls Four Ages of Industrial Evolution. And the third one is knowledge work. And I think the fourth one is innovation work. And so, we're moving from knowledge work to innovation work, where creativity is really important. And I think AI is driving that. So, I think you're right in, that it's not just setting these things up. But you got to set up a culture of innovation and creativity, which means loosening the bonds of a lot of traditional management, even more so to get that creativity there. I was hearing a story of—and I forget who it was—it was one of the big, high-tech companies, where his direct reports wouldn't do what he wanted. They're very independent. And, you know, that's not always a good thing. But in a lot of those high-tech organizations, you can push back really hard on management, or at any level. And in more traditional organizations, you really can't do that. And so, that's one of the things, in terms of leadership change—that you've got to be willing to give up some of the power, quote, that you had before, and be more of a consultative approach. In fact, Bayer and Company is going through a major restructuring of their organization. And one of the things that they're talking about is span of control of, first, LAND management. Going from three or four, which is the industry average, to fifteen or so, which is what Bayer is shooting for. And one of the things they've done is—they've changed the name of that from span of control to span of consulting. So it's a different role, even for first-line managers.

Pete Behrens:

Well, and I think—one of the misses I think this report had was how leaders might change, right? It talked a lot about leadership decisions, leadership focus. Organizations might change but, you know, I think a little bit more. And one of our things our Agile Leadership Labs is attempting to do is focus a little bit more on—how does this change the leader, right? What I did appreciate—you know, a couple things that you tied into there. One is—they talk about—don't go alone, right? This is not a venture you can do by yourself as a company or as a leader. And we definitely believe that, right? We're looking at partners we're bringing in. And we'll be introducing a couple of our senior leaders, advisers, who live between AI and leadership. And we've involved them, right? We're bringing in digital partners. We're bringing in technical experts and AI experts into this conversation. And I think one of the things they said about leadership is—you've got to be willing to partner, right? It's an ecosystem. It's a collaboration, more than a solo journey.

Jim Highsmith:

Right. There's just so many skills necessary and capabilities necessary that no one organization—even a large organization—has got that breadth of skills. Particularly now. Because I was looking at something the other day. And a headline—an AI person, technical person, can now command up to a million dollar salary. How many organizations can get that through their HR departments?

Pete Behrens:

That's amazing, yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

And so, if you're a traditional organization, and you can't afford a million dollars for your top AI guy or gal, then you've got to go about it in different ways. So you've got to be able to partner with people. And there's a tech, like you said. There's a technical partnership. There may be a leadership partnership. And you've got to find people that are willing to do that kind of collaboration together. And that's one of the—that's why I like this thing we've set up, this cohort, because it has four, kind of, key people. And then bringing other people in, as we need to, you know?

Pete Behrens:

And connected to that collaborative approach, you know? One of the things that really jumped out to me in this report was not leaving the humanness, right? That, number one: leadership can't—it doesn't go away. Leaders still make decisions. Leaders still need to be human, right? This whole concept of the hybrid environment. We've talked about hybrid-like remote on site. But I think this is a new hybrid world now, where it's a hybrid human tech, and how do we balance that? How do leaders show up, and does that mean more emphasis on the human side of leadership, because of the tech?

Jim Highsmith:

I've got a friend who's a CIO of a fairly big organization. And every Friday afternoon, he gets his direct reports to send him ten people that are down at the lower level, and he calls them up on the phone, has a ten or fifteen minute conversation with them. And that really defines who this guy is. He goes down to the coffee shop with him and sits around and has coffee and, you know, gets into discussions. And that's how he finds, learns, a lot about the organization. But it's also this human connection, as opposed to a leader who sits up in his or her office at the top of the building. You've got to get down and really relate to people. And I think that is something that has to occur all the way up and down the organization. And so, that's one of the leadership traits. And it's not really a capability. It's a trait.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. That's a—I think that's a good way to do it, say it. The quote that I kind of pulled out of the report was, “While generative AI changes what you can do as a leader, it should not change who you are—right?—as a leader.” And I think that was a really interesting awareness of the concept, of you still making decisions. You're still working with people. You're still—you know, the criticality of how that system works.

Jim Highsmith:

I’m glad you kind of touched on that. The last couple of paragraphs of the last book I wrote—one of the principles or values of the agile environment is individuals and interactions, which is a collaborative environment. And so, I thought, “If that's really true, then I'm more interested in who you are, as opposed to what you've done or what you know.” I want to know who people are so I can relate to them, as much as I want to know what they've done. And so, I think that's—one of the things that we have together is—we're gaining some understanding about who each other are, and that leads to a collaboration that's really valuable. And I think that's something people need to think about. In fact, I've changed my whole bio around—I've gotten several speaking engagements coming up. And I've changed my whole bio around—to focus on who I am, as opposed to what I've done.

Pete Behrens:

Awesome. Shifting from the leadership role, right? Shifting from the human and hybrid side, another principle I picked up on in the report was also connected to Agile. And that was focus. And one of the things I think, you know, I drew out here, as a quote. It says, “Don't get distracted by the 400 possible use cases for generative AI. Focus on the top five, top three, and then scale ruthlessly.” And then they had a quote that actually reminded me of you, of the strawberry jam! But their quote was, “Don't spread Generative AI like peanut butter, evenly across the portfolio.” I know you talked a lot about the strawberry jam, you know, the Jerry Weinberg quote. Talk a little bit about the concept of focus here with AI.

Jim Highsmith:

Well, I think there's all—it's really a learning journey. And I've noticed myself, in my learning journey, it's easy to go down rabbit holes, especially with this. Because there's so many rabbit holes out there, and there's technical rabbit holes, and there's management holes, and there's use case rabbit holes. And you can really get lost, so you have to go down some of these rabbit holes just to figure out what it is you don't want to pursue. But then you've got to actually come back up and set some goals for yourself, in terms of—what are you really looking for? For example, one of the things we've talked about is the difference between AI to support a functional area, like accounting or customer service or IT whatever it is. And to focus on leadership advantagement. And you can't do both. There's just so much material in both. And in the management realm, you've got to refer back to a particular use case in the real world, you know, that's customer-facing. But you've also got to look at what are the use cases that are valuable to you, as a leader? And so, leadership and management on one side, and functional areas on the other side. And I think, by splitting it like that, you can—that's a narrowing focus. Looking at a particular kind of leadership is a narrowing focus.

It was really funny. I wrote this blog, If you fail at Agile, you will fail at AI. And then I actually put in there—and I said I was putting this in there—a section of it that was actually written by an AI GPT. And I said, “This is written by GPT, and I have trained that GPT to be more like me.” So I've fed it my books and my information and articles and things like tha, so that it kind of thinks like I do. And some guy wrote me, wrote a comment and said, “You're biased!” I said, “Absolutely I'm biased!” [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. You know—and it's interesting, around bias, around ethics around, you know, governance, you know? And this report does get into a lot of that, right? Get—at least from a high level, I would say, right? It's the warning signs. And I see this kind of playing two ways. And even with our exploration. Like, we're developing a, you know, a coaching bot, okay? So, what happens when somebody hits a boundary? You know, it could be a safety boundary, could be a psychological boundary, could be—versus, you know, psychology versus coaching. It could be a boundary of just irrelevance, right? But it also could be one of those boundaries where, you know—are we having data that's not appropriate, right? And things like that. Are we giving advice that isn't, you know, recommended? And, you know, this is one I think was really interesting, around—you can't—the quote I remember is—“You can't delegate ethics.” Right? That has to be baked in it, talked about it, almost like the heart. And I think about, like, culture and our values. Like, we can't just delegate ethics to the IT group. We can't just delegate ethics to tech, right? It's really about who we are, right? And I'm seeing that, too, as we're training things. Like, this is—I want this thought to be sarcastic, a little bit. I want it to be pushy and edgy a little bit. Because that's who we are, right? But at the same time recognize where that's crossed the line. And this is going to be an interesting one. I mean, the G in GPT is generative. Meaning it's going to generate, right? So, how do we hit those boundary points—is going to be really interesting.

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah. And they're going to change. So, I can remember back in the day, when I was in college. [Laughs] We had a slide rule. And if you brought a calculator into class, they, you know—the instructor would get really upset and kick you out, you know. And so, for example, one of the ethical kinds of things that's going on now is—how much do you need to disclose when you’re using something to help you write something or help you develop something? Or, you know, how much do you need to disclose if you have AI generating images for you? And so—and what may be acceptable now or not acceptable now may be acceptable in the future, when everybody's doing it. I mean, I can remember going to teaching classes in the '80s and '90s, where nobody had a computer on their desk, right? They were just too big and clunky. And then, all of the sudden, people had their cell phones and had computers. And your first response as a teacher, as an instructor, is, “Put your computers away, and listen to me!” But, you know, and that's just—and same thing in meetings. So that whole ethos changes over time. And it's going to change with AI, but it's going to be, I think, even more critical here that we think about those kinds of things.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. One of the things we're trying to do with our Leadership Lab—and something that the report really drew out—is the concept of platforming. You know, it gets us back a little bit into that tech conversation. But one of the things they were talking about is AI—is really an opportunity to leverage your data. So, number one: proprietary data is king, right? That's kind of the oil. But at the same time—and maybe the quote I pulled out of here is, “The more data on the platform, the more C-value to customers, the more customers you have, the more data you get, the better the generative AI model can be trained.” Right? So that's—it's this flywheel of data plus customers plus training. And I'm seeing that, too, with, kind of, the ecosystem we're looking at with our AI Leadership Lab. The more leaders we get involved in cohorts, the more learning that they do, the more experiments that they run, the more they share back into that system, the more leaders learn, right? And the same thing with our coaching bot, right? The more we get leaders into a coaching relationship with a bot and a coach, the more we get information about coaching, the more we train the bot to be a better coach, right? It's these platforms that are really incredible. And that excites me, I guess, in terms of an entrepreneurship, right? And thinking product and thinking service and value. I'm curious how you look at that?

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah. I mean, one of the things that talks about in the report is that these platforms will allow you to have to change your business model or to have a new business model. And you think about the evolution of the internet from about 1995 to about 2000, and a little bit beyond. We never envisioned things like Facebook or Meta or, you know, some of these other platform companies like AirBnB that came out of that. There were a whole—and Uber! There were whole new Industries built around a platform approach. Where, like, you—Uber doesn't own anything, in terms of vehicles, and they don't have employees, in terms of people. And there, you know—there are issues about that I won't go in. But it's a whole—they were connecting, service people who are providing service and people who needed a service. And that hadn't been done before. And part of that was generated by technology, but it was a business model, based on the use of technology in a new way. And who can say, five years from now, what new things will come out as a result of AI changing business models. So, I think that platform is really important.

And so, it goes back to—you've got to build the organization that's innovative and creative and adaptable, and you also have to build infrastructure that's the same way. One of the things—just to bring up again—going back to the Bayer case. They talked about the fact that they had something on the order of 1500 pages of corporate policies. They reduced 98% of it. That's the kind of thing that frees people up to be more innovative.

Pete Behrens:

Interesting. So, I've been driving a lot of the topics here. Was there a topic that I didn't cover for you, in terms of what you saw in the report?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, I think one of the things that ran through here was several CEOs talking about the fact that they don't—they're not really shooting to reduce staff. They're making their staff more productive, more effective, more efficient. And I think what that would allow is growth, without growth in revenue and profit. And healthy environments, without having to let go of people. But actually have—being able to grow bigger and to grow more easily, without adding a lot of people.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, it’s interesting to me, thinking about that, right? In one sense, I agree, right? It's—AI is not going to replace people; It's going to augment people. But people with AI will replace people without it. Ultimately, though, I think as you go down the chain, that will replace people. because a more powerful person takes away a job from two or three people. That may be in the past. So, I do think there definitely is going to be an impact. I think this report even says you cannot hide, right? There is no place to hide in this corporate America, where AI is not going to penetrate your business, not going to penetrate your market, not going to penetrate your role, in whatever role you have, right? So, I think, to me, that's the piece people have to be aware of, not to fear, not to scare, but maybe spur and incent people. To, like, if you are not starting to think about this, or if you're kind of saying, “I'll wait,” it's coming at you!

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah. If you look back on these major transition points, between industrial work and knowledge work and innovation work, every one of those caused some people to lose jobs and some people to gain jobs. And so—and the difference is education and training. How do you get those people that no longer have a job—how do you educate them so they can take one of the other jobs that's still available? So, I think one of the things that's going to be going to impact is our education system, which is not set up to do that kind of thing, right? Now, there was some talk about—I forget who it was—talking about business schools. And that business schools are teaching a less traditional approach to management, not a new approach to management. And so, I think our education system has got to step up to this, too, because it's going to be even more pressure.

Pete Behrens:

Well, and if they don't, somebody will disrupt them. They already are. Speaking of education, speaking of awareness, one of the things, maybe, I'll say in closing here is the AI Leadership Lab from Agile Leadership Journey is really a place for leaders to come and feel safe to experiment, to share, to learn. Not necessarily from a come-to-a-class. Because I don't think, really, any classes out there today—they're temporary, right? They're just, kind of, what is right now. I look at this more as a—sharing our story together, like on a hike. And we're better together.

Jim Highsmith:

I like the idea. One of the things I've liked about working with you guys is the idea of a journey. And it's a journey. It's an evolutionary journey. Sometimes we know what direction we're headed. Sometimes we don't know exactly what direction we're headed. [Laughs] But we kind of have an idea of where the peak is. “But the one we want is three peaks over, behind, and we can't see it yet!” And so, this is probably more of a journey than I've been on before, but it's kind of exciting.

Pete Behrens:

Well, it's a fun one. It's a—yeah, if you like adventure, it's a fun one. There are a couple of opportunities to get involved with what we're doing. As Jim mentioned, we've started our first cohort, which is our core advisory cohort, which you'll be introduced, through the podcast, to some of the other adviser leaders. We will be having a webinar coming up here in April, May. We'll get that on the website shortly, where you'll get to meet those those leaders. There's an opportunity to join a cohort. We're actually forming cohorts. These are professionally guided cohorts. Not professional from an AI expert, but professional from a facilitator and an expert in leadership to help facilitate this dialogue. But then there's the platform, that community behind that, that we're really leveraging to build up over time. And then, finally, maybe just call out our partner, the World Agility Forum—I'm sorry! Renamed, this year, World Management Agility Forum, specifically focusing on management and reimagining management. And they've been incredible to work with us and give us a platform at their conference. And this is going to be in September in Lisbon. I highly encourage you to consider that event. We've got people like Steve Denning, Heidi Mueller, a lot of thought leaders in the world we're going to be showcasing. And our leaders are going to be showcasing some of these experiments, sharing that in the public platform, going into deep dives, going through master classes around some of these constructs. So, look forward to maybe, you know—reach out to us! We have a place for you to sign up if you'd like to learn a little bit more about what we're doing.

But, Jim, I just want to say thanks for sharing this report and sharing this conversation with me today.

Jim Highsmith:

Thanks! It's been—it's interesting. As of the first of the year, I've considered myself unretired. [Laughs] So, I'm working as hard as I ever did! But I'm really enjoying it a lot. So, working on leadership and particularly this AI explosion has been quite an experience.

Pete Behrens:

I loved your comment: “You have to retire from being unretired.” Like, yeah, you're going back-and-forth. Well, what it shows is your creative mind, your constant curiosity, and your willingness to explore new topics. And, you know—so, I just appreciate you being a sparring partner with me.

Jim Highsmith:

Thanks!

Pete Behrens:

How to Set Goals and Achieve Them

Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:21:09 GMT

Learn How to Set, Track, and Achieve Personal and Professional Goals

Anyone who has made – and then given up on – a New Year’s resolution knows just how challenging it can be to set a goal and change behavior. I’m willing to bet that’s most of us! (Just me? Mm-hmm.)

Regardless of what we’re trying to change, change is hard – and change fatigue is real. It involves a heavy mix of psychological, emotional, and environmental factors, solid self-awareness, and often, a fear of failure. So how can we set goals and create real, lasting change?

Some people make vision boards . Some journal . Some look to neuroscience . Some use a blend of those – which happens to be what Agile Leadership Journey’s Catalyst Canvas™ offers.

What is the Catalyst Canvas™?

This helpful goal-setting tool got a fresh update in 2024; it is a template designed to help individuals, teams, and organizations focus, align, and accelerate change. Inspired by Marc Benioff’s V2MOM (Vision, Values, Methods, Obstacles, and Measures) model, the Catalyst Canvas™ is designed to create a clear path for growth.

The Catalyst Canvas™ encourages users to brainstorm, plan, and envision the future when their goals are achieved. Further, the tool is designed to be revisited and updated regularly, helping you spot challenges and track your progress along the journey.

Briefly, the steps for using the Catalyst Canvas™ include:

Define your goal.
Determine your priorities.
Identify challenges.
Determine progress measures.
Identify actionable steps.

Whether your goals are related to leadership, parenting, hobbies, or fitness, with a little support and some helpful tools, you’ll be well on your way to maintaining your motivation, managing setbacks, and adapting to new circumstances.

Catalyst Canvas™: A Goal Setting Tool

Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:18:19 GMT

Learn to set achievable goals

We all know how to set goals. Or at least, we think we do. You've probably heard of the SMART method to goal setting: If it is S pecific, M easurable, A ttainable, R elevant, and T ime-Bound, then it's a "good" goal. The truth is, even SMART goals can fail to be reached if the path toward the goal lacks structure.

Objectives and key results (OKRs) have become a popular method for managing goals, but they lack the human element behind what drives us to achieve goals — emotion.

When we set goals, work toward them for a time, then revert back to the old way of doing things, we are activating our unconscious habits. Bringing these habits into awareness helps us avoid falling into default mode. Understanding the goal — and the habits that will keep us from achieving them — is important.

Then, we have the Salesforce approach, V2MOM, developed by Marc Benioff. This method considers the emotion with the second V, "values" and reflects on why the goal is important in the first place. If you're familiar with Simon Sinek's famous TED Talk, Start With Why , this is an obvious addition to the goal setting process.

We've reimagined the V2MOM model into the Catalyst Canvas™ — a visual model that helps us look at goals with a more 360º perspective.

Why visualization? Because it is a powerful force! It has the ability to bring something from unconscious to conscious, enabling our ability to make sense of information.

When it comes to goal setting, it's important to understand four things:

Why now? Why is the goal important to me now ?
Obstacles. What will hinder my progress toward my goal?
Measures. How do I know I’m making progress on my goal?
Small steps. What actions can I take to make progress on the goal?

Download the Catalyst Canvas

Enter your contact information to receive a copy of the Catalyst Canvas template and subscribe to the ALJ newsletter.

Ebook | 5 Mistakes Leaders Make—And How to Fix Them

Mon, 04 Mar 2024 06:03:14 GMT

Mistakes. We all make them!

Regardless, making a mistake – particularly when it comes to how we lead – can make us feel defeated or disappointed. On the flip side, they provide us with an important learning experience.

Many of the mistakes we make happen when we are under pressure. Pressure caused by market shifts, changing technologies, elevated customer expectations – the list goes on. But if we improve our awareness of the habits that lead to mistakes, we can correct our behavior in the future.

In this free ebook, you will learn from mistakes you might be making as a leader and how you can address those missteps and use agile leadership methods to enhance your awareness and sharpen your leadership skills.

Complete the form below to receive your free download of Five Mistakes Leaders Make – and How to Fix Them .

Download the Ebook

Enter your name and email address to receive your copy of the ebook.

Agile Pioneer Explores Jeff Smith’s Approach to Large Organization Agile Transformations

Tue, 27 Feb 2024 22:11:52 GMT

Agile Leadership Journey Partner Guide Jim Highsmith recently authored a piece for Cutter’s Amplify Update that explores the career journey of Jeff Smith and how this leader took an innovative approach to agile transformations in large organizations.

With notable roles as CIO at IBM, and Suncorp, and COO at World Kinect, Smith championed agile practices to drive significant cultural and operational changes.

In the article, Highsmith details Smith’s strategies for:

Communicating clearly
Mandating culture change
Reforming middle management, and
Modernizing delivery

It also highlights the importance of balancing performance with organizational health, engaging in continuous learning, and adopting a flexible, adaptive mindset.

Read the article on Cutter's Amplify Update now to learn more about the challenges and successes that come with implementing agile methodologies in complex corporate environments.

Ebook | What Executives Need to Know About Business Agility

pete@agileleadershipjourney.com (Pete Behrens) — Mon, 26 Feb 2024 23:18:15 GMT

Disruptors? Inevitable.

Whether it is a new entrant to the market or the latest artificial intelligence technology, there is one competency that will allow organizations to thrive during the most volatile times: business agility.

It’s no surprise that business agility has penetrated into the C-suite. Today’s executives are under increasing pressure to keep competitors on the back foot and to continually attract and capture new customers.

If executives really want to understand and enable business agility, they need to find a shared understanding of the concept – specifically for their business – and to prepare the organization for the journey ahead.

In this book, we review the fundamentals of business agility, provide some clarity on what leaders need to know about it, and offer options for what your first (or next) steps toward it might be.

Continue reading or complete the form below to receive a copy of the ebook delivered to your inbox.

Download the Ebook

Enter your name and email address to receive your copy of the ebook.

Chapter 1: What is Business Agility?

According to the Business Agility Institute1, business agility is a set of capabilities, behaviors, and ways of working that afford your business the freedom, flexibility, and resilience to achieve its purpose. If that doesn’t match up with what you’ve heard thrown around in meetings, don’t worry. You’re certainly not alone. Part of that muddled rhetoric mentioned in the introduction to this publication has led to many people believing that business agility is a set of tools and frameworks you can bolt onto existing ways of working – an easy way to turbocharge market disruption and customer growth.

While business agility might not be an out-of-the-box solution, it’s not inaccessible. It’s also an approach to ways of working and governance that is significantly more powerful than any set of tools could be.

Let’s start with the true span of business agility, which covers five key domains:

People-first leadership
Responsive customer centricity
Engaged culture
Value-based delivery
Flexible operations

Combined, these five domains determine your organization’s change competency – the most critical factor when it comes to surviving and thriving in today’s volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) marketplace. Change competency comprises decision speed and effectiveness, execution speed and effectiveness, and your organization’s resiliency to absorb and rebound past failure.

To clarify: The speed of decisions is as important as the speed of execution, and the speed in rebounding from failure is as important as the speed of change that may fail.

In fact, failure itself gets redefined and can be built as a competency as a key component of learning. Pulling this off requires competency across the entire organization, not just a small part of it. Even better? It is achievable.

Why Pursue Business Agility?

Just because almost every global organization is currently talking about business agility doesn’t mean that your path will look like theirs—nor are you doing it for the same reasons! In addition to general market disruption and competition, the most significant drivers influencing leaders toward business agility are:

Increasing pace and disruption by the competition.
Decreasing employee engagement and culture scores. A shortage of “next up” leaders ready to take the reins.
Organizational silos, dropped communication, and finger-pointing.
Widening gap between IT and the business language, process, and culture.

Do you see yourself or your organization reflected in any of these? Then you’re in good company. That said, if your reasons for pursuing agility are different, that’s no cause for alarm. Running your organization with flexibility, adaptability, and a better understanding of how and why change is important is its own reward.

A Competency, Not a Goal

Today, every industry is facing increasing global competition, a reduction in market entry barriers, a quickening of new and improved products and services to market, and increased technology-embedded solutions. All of this combines to shape an increasingly VUCA business landscape.

To adapt to this new environment, executives need to undergo a paradigm shift.

Executives often pursue business agility as a goal or destination. Instead, executives should view business agility as a competency that helps their organization identify challenges, pivot if necessary, and execute business strategy.

This isn’t always easy for key stakeholders to understand, especially if they come from a culture that’s not familiar with business agility. To address this, set expectations with stakeholders by framing business agility as a concept on par with culture, fitness, and health. It’s a change of lifestyle, values, habits, and disciplines that requires nurturing over time, versus a time-boxed change program.

Framing business agility in this manner can help everyone understand that it is not an end-state or a result to be achieved. Business agility is a new way of running a business.

Changing the way individuals, teams, and organizations work and think, especially at that scale, might sound intimidating, especially if you’re part of a large organization. Don’t let it discourage you! While it’s true that smaller organizations may have a slightly quicker path toward agility, companies with 16 to 16,000 employees are just as capable of achieving business agility.

Chapter 2: Benefits of and Barriers to Business Agility

While there are many ways—big and small—in which business agility improves organizations, there are two particular benefits of business agility worth noting: business performance and organizational health. Organizations with high levels of business agility are seeing a reduction in silos, improved practices, and better responsiveness to change.

As a result, they’re getting their products to the market faster—with improved customer satisfaction and growing product/service revenue not far behind. Each of these factors drives business performance.

The benefits of business agility look inward as well. Employees in organizations with more business agility rated their organizations more positively, showed more appreciation for the direction of their organization, and were more likely to recommend their organizations to others. These factors drive organizational health and resiliency.

So, what creates this positivity? A number of factors—chief of which are more flexible working arrangements, more cross-training and feedback, improved communication and collaboration, and better focus and reprioritization of work. Considering this, it should not shock you that organizations with more business agility have higher employee retention.

If you’re losing customers or employees, you might want to examine your agility.

Barriers to Business Agility

If achieving business agility were simple, everyone would have already done it. That said, the most worthwhile value lies further into challenging journeys.

If you’re losing customers or employees, you might want to examine your agility.

Some of the obstacles you may face on the road to business agility include:

Mindset Inhibitors – Humans are naturally averse to change. Regardless of how many benefits business agility can bring, leaders will still encounter people who are more comfortable with the status quo. To shift mindsets on business agility, executives must balance new change against current stability (everything that isn’t changing) and empathize with the challenges change introduces. An effective shift toward business agility ultimately requires competency in change management.

Cultural Inhibitors – Organizations are living systems that have developed over years or even decades. They are shaped as much by their successes as their failures. It’s no wonder that, when recommendations for improvement are made, people often reply, “This is just how we do things around here.” Executives who understand culture, who are willing to expose strengths and challenges, and who are capable of fostering cultural change will be more successful with business agility.

Capability Inhibitors – Leaders are typically well-educated and experienced in their discipline, function, or domain. They are also more experienced in driving business performance. Is that enough for success? Absolutely not. For all the strengths shared by leaders, they also can be undereducated and inexperienced in change management and in understanding the human factors, culture, and levers that shape organizational health. Developing leadership and management capabilities in these areas is critical for improving business agility.

Structural Inhibitors – While organizational design can take on many forms, all organizations function thanks to some fundamental structures: divisional and functional groups, roles and responsibilities, leadership tiers, governance policies and guidelines, and more. Larger organizations have to contend with even more complex structures that are often spread across geographical regions, time zones, or even cultural and language divides. If you want to succeed with business agility, you must recognize both the structural strengths and challenges present.

Chapter 3: How to Improve Business Agility

If you’re relatively new to business agility, it might sound as if there are more barriers than benefits. Never fear! For every roadblock, there are many potential solutions. In fact, forget the term “solutions.” The following recommendations should be thought of as fundamentally good practices to foster business agility and improve your organization and leadership overall.

Don’t Delegate Business Agility

The organizations leading the business agility curve have transformations led from the boardroom. What does this mean in practical terms?

Executives must not simply delegate business agility to an HR or transformation team. Instead, they need to wade into the change themselves and engage their senior leadership teams and board of directors in the journey. Leadership engagement and ownership is critical to effective business agility. If you’ve been delegating this role, it’s time to glove up and step into the ring.

Align Customers Over Departments

The organizations that are implementing business agility most effectively are those that have aligned their products and services along customer lines, as opposed to functional, departmental, or other internal divisions. Breaking up organizational silos and instead integrating across functions is critical, both to serving customers and responding quickly t o change. Larger organizations may consider multiple value streams along these lines, but how you do it is less important than the mindset shift accompanying it.

Involve Every Department

Don’t apply the principles of business agility piecemeal. Organizations that include multiple business units or functions in their business agility journey score significantly higher2 than those that limit their transformation to one business unit, which is usually somewhere in the technology sector.

In fact, most organizations see a far greater business agility impact when they cross the IT-business divide. Why is that? Business agility’s IT roots stem from the ever-evolving complexity of challenges these teams encounter. As a result, IT teams developed agile ways of working that emphasize adaptability, iterative problem-solving, and close alignment with business goals. This approach has proven so successful that it ultimately ushered in the broader concept of business agility. So don’t limit agile to IT when you could cast a wider, more effective net.

Get Finance Involved Early

Of all of the operational units within your organization, the finance department is the most likely to impede your quest for business agility. This is mainly due to the number of policies and governance that run through finance in the spirit of risk management.

Risk itself is changing in this new world, where building the wrong thing has overtaken building it wrong as the greater risk. Long gone are the days of annual budgets developed months ahead of the new year. In a VUCA environment, incremental funding models that are evaluated, reinvested, or shut down are necessary. If finance is operating in an agile way, it can enable other teams to follow suit.

Educate and Inform Leaders

Ask senior executives to self-assess how agile their organizations are, and they’ll give you five-star ratings. Ask the employees closest to the customer, and they likely have a different perspective. This disconnect between the C-suite and customer-facing individual contributors can lead to poor decisions and delayed progress when it comes to true business agility.

How to solve this? Get executives and senior leaders involved and educated on a deeper level. If they understand business agility, they will help enable higher levels of that same agility throughout the organization.

Chapter 4: Navigating Toward Business Agility

When faced with the complexities of business agility, it can be exciting to reach into a tried-and- tested toolbox and leverage existing frameworks, processes, and tools. The problem is that each of those comes with its own values, biases, strengths, and challenges. Like jamming a stray puzzle piece into a spot where it doesn’t belong, integrating those tools or frameworks into an organizational context will expose gaps and cause friction. Successful organizations evolve a bespoke approach to business agility – one that suits wherever they are in their journey.

Manage Expectations

Business agility is not an overnight process. In fact, most organizations that begin implementing agile ways of thinking and working report a minimum of two years before they achieve a distinct, stepwise improvement. Two years! But then, they see additional growth in years three through eight. That takes patience!

You can see why executives who set expectations of quick improvements are going to be disappointed. Instead of priming teams for an immediate explosion of agility, spread a message of marginal gains with yearly reinvestments. It’s similar to investing in the market. Trying to double your money in six months? Good luck. But if you invest in business agility with reasonable expectations of steady gains and you reinvest the dividends, you will ultimately reap the rewards.

Business agility requires ongoing focus, attention, and effort. It’s not a set of tools and frameworks to implement. Instead, it is an organization-wide way of thinking, working, and problem-solving that places the customer at the center of strategy and implementation. Don’t be intimidated or overwhelmed. Instead, approach business agility with knowledge, optimism, preparedness, and a long-term outlook. You will build all the capabilities, behaviors, and ways of working required to help your organization succeed.

Takeaways

The journey toward business agility represents a transformative shift in how executives lead their organizations and navigate the complexities of today’s rapidly evolving market landscape.

Remember, business agility is not simply a buzzword or a set of tools. It is a comprehensive competency that encompasses people-first leadership, customer-centric responsiveness, an engaged culture, value-based delivery, and flexible operations—each of which are crucial for surviving and thriving in a VUCA environment.

It requires a paradigm shift from executives, a move from pursuing agility as a destination to embracing it as a continuous journey of growth and adaptation. This serves not only as a call to action for those in executive or C-suite seats, but as an inspiration. Yes, the path to business agility can be challenging and requires patience, persistence, and a willingness to embrace change at every level of the organization. However, the rewards are worth the effort.

Embracing business agility will prepare your organization not just to respond to market changes, but to lead and shape those changes. Embark on this journey with confidence, knowing that the pursuit of business agility is not only a strategic imperative but a transformative opportunity to redefine success for your organization and its people.

New Ebook: What Executives Need to Know About Business Agility

pete@agileleadershipjourney.com (Pete Behrens) — Mon, 26 Feb 2024 21:36:23 GMT

In today’s market, executives are under increasing pressure to not only respond to market changes but to disrupt the market themselves. It’s the only way to keep competitors on the back foot and to continually attract and capture new customers. That’s why, when you walk into any executive boardroom today, you’ll hear people discussing business agility.

There’s a problem, though.

The term business agility has become muddled. Stakeholders are getting tangled in rhetoric, confusing definitions, and conflicting expectations. If executives want to not only understand business agility but enable its growth, they need to move past this confused messaging. Their goal must include a shared understanding of business agility, an alignment of what agility means specifically for their business, and to prepare the organization – employees and stakeholders included – for an uneasy journey ahead.

If you’re in a situation similar to the one these executives find themselves in, let’s fix that.

Business Agility in a VUCA World

In this new ebook, What Executives Need to Know About Business Agility , we’ll review the fundamentals of business agility, why pursuing business agility is critical in today’s VUCA environment, and why the factors driving you toward business agility might not fit the typical mold.

We’ll explore why it’s important to understand that business agility is not a goal to be achieved, but a fundamental competency that every organization should achieve. We’ll discuss what benefits organizations with high levels of business agility can expect, as well as what the primary barriers to business agility are so you can reflect upon your own organization and anticipate roadblocks.

For every roadblock, there is a solution.

What Executives Need to Know About Business Agility offers recommendations for how to improve business agility inside your organization, such as how to get your finance department involved earlier in the process, and why it’s important to align customers over departments.

Finally, we’ll discuss the process of actually navigating toward business agility – specifically, why it’s important to not rely on tools, but instead to evolve a bespoke approach to business agility that suits your organization and the state of its agility.

Navigating Your Organization Toward Business Agility

After reading this ebook you’ll have a clearer understanding of what executive leaders are facing as they try to create and improve agility within their organizations. If you’re an executive leader, you’ll have the vocabulary you need to discuss business agility with your colleagues, and a better picture of what steps are most valuable to you on your journey toward business agility (and which to avoid).

Most importantly, you’ll have cleared out the fog and gained the knowledge you need to begin building those critical capabilities without getting tangled up in rhetoric.

Sound good? Let’s get started.

About the Author

Pete Behrens is a leadership coach and the founder of the Agile Leadership Journey, an organization, curriculum, and community devoted to improving leaders and their organizations. As an engineer by profession, Pete now guides leaders and organizations to be more focused, responsive and resilient to change.

Pete led the development of the Certified Enterprise Coaching (CEC) and Certified Agile Leadership (CAL) programs for the Scrum Alliance, is the creator and host of the (Re)Learning Leadership podcast, and provides leadership and organizational coaching through his company Trail Ridge.

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn .

Embracing AI in Leadership: A Paradigm Shift in Strategy and Operation

Thu, 22 Feb 2024 22:43:27 GMT

The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in the realm of leadership is not merely a technological upgrade or a tool for efficiency; it represents a seismic shift in how leadership and management are conceptualized and executed.

We can think of this change in the same way we consider the revolution spurred by the invention of refrigeration compared to the convenience introduced by dishwashers. While dishwashers enhanced an existing process (cleaning dishes), refrigeration transformed our relationship with food entirely by enabling storage, extending shelf life, and revolutionizing distribution systems.

Similarly, AI is poised to redefine our engagement with leadership, not just by streamlining tasks but by altering the very fabric of decision-making, teams, strategy, and human interaction within organizations.

In light of AI's transformative potential, agile leaders are tasked with not only understanding but also leveraging this technology to stay ahead in an ever-evolving landscape. This necessitates a strategic relationship to integrating AI into leadership itself. By cultivating an awareness of AI's capabilities and limitations, AI-assisted leaders can speed daily operations, open up new avenues for innovation, and improve strategic foresight.

In this article, as we will explore three pivotal areas, it becomes clear that the agility of leadership in the digital age is contingent upon the layers of integrating AI, ensuring leaders not only keep pace with change but also harness its potential to drive forward-thinking strategies and sustainable growth.

Integrating AI into Your Leadership: A 3-Step Journey

1. Leadership Awareness

Awareness marks the first step on this transformative journey, demanding that leaders not only recognize AI's immense potential to redefine the parameters of leadership but also confront its inherent challenges head-on.

The potential is staggering: AI can enhance decision-making by analyzing vast amounts of data quickly and offering insights that might not otherwise be visible through traditional analysis methods. It can increase efficiency by automating administrative tasks, freeing up a leader's time and allowing them to focus on more strategic initiatives that require their unique human skills, such as empathy, creativity, and complex problem-solving. AI can provide predictive analytics to enable leaders to anticipate market trends, customer behavior, and potential operational issues before they arise, allowing for more proactive leadership. And finally, AI can provide personalized leadership development by identifying skill gaps and recommending tailored resources to accelerate their development and effectiveness.

Leaders who are aware of and understand how to leverage AI's capabilities can significantly enhance their strategic vision, operational execution, and team engagement, positioning their organizations for success in an increasingly digital and AI-driven world.

While it's easy to get swept up in the hype, this new horizon is not without its shadows. The deployment of AI carries with it a suite of ethical considerations, from safeguarding data privacy to addressing algorithmic biases that could perpetuate existing inequalities. The landscape is riddled with cautionary tales—a lawsuit here, a sanction there—each underscoring the nuanced challenges of integrating AI responsibly into the fabric of leadership.

The awareness stage, therefore, is not merely about understanding AI's potential but about fostering a deep, nuanced comprehension of how it can be harnessed ethically and effectively. It calls for a balance between the enthusiasm for AI's transformative power and a vigilant recognition of its pitfalls. Leaders must navigate this terrain with eyes wide open, prepared to leverage AI's capabilities while steering clear of its potential to undermine ethical standards or human dignity.

The AI-trained systems are inheriting historical human biases, leading to skewed recommendations. They can be vulnerable to hacking and misuse, posing risk to organizational data and systems. And if not checked, leaders may become overly dependent upon AI decision-making algorithms which may lead to a lack of oversight and more holistic human judgement. Effectively navigating this new world with AI requires a new mindset and skills for leaders to be effective.

With the rise in the use of generative AI, we've also been witnessing a growing concern around its use or abuse. The New York Times filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing them of using its copyrighted articles without permission for AI training. The Times alleges this act undermines its journalism by creating competing products that divert audiences. OpenAI and Microsoft argue their use constitutes “fair use.”

Another case involves two New York lawyers, Steven Schwartz and Peter LoDuca, and their law firm, Levidow, Levidow & Oberman, who were sanctioned by a federal judge in New York City. This occurred after they submitted a legal brief with six fictitious case citations generated by ChatGPT. The sanctions were in response to a brief prepared for a personal injury case against Colombian airline Avianca, where Schwartz admitted to using ChatGPT for research and unknowingly including the fake citations. The case, among other things, highlighted the ethical responsibilities of attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings and served as a cautionary tale about the uncritical use of AI in legal practice.

A third example that highlights the complexities of copyright and AI involves LinkedIn and hiQ Labs. hiQ Labs, a data analytics company, scraped publicly available data from LinkedIn profiles to predict employee attrition rates for employers. LinkedIn argued that hiQ's scraping of its data violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and sent a cease-and-desist letter to hiQ Labs, demanding they stop accessing LinkedIn's data. The case escalated to the courts, where hiQ Labs argued that LinkedIn's data was publicly available and therefore not subject to the same protections as private data. In this landmark decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with hiQ, ruling that accessing publicly available information on the internet does not constitute hacking under the CFAA. This case underscores the need for leaders to understand the legal nuances of using data and AI technologies, especially regarding data rights, privacy concerns, and the ethical use of publicly available information. It also highlights the challenge facing the legal landscape as courts continue to interpret laws in the context of rapidly advancing digital technologies.

2. Leadership Assistance

The next tier of leadership use of AI revolves around identifying and adopting AI-assisted use cases and tools that can directly support and enhance your leadership capabilities. This phase of leadership assistance represents an evolution in harnessing AI as a pivotal tool in a leader's arsenal, enhancing their efficiency and effectiveness. By leveraging AI, leaders can automate routine tasks, gain deeper insights into data, and make more informed decisions, freeing up time to focus on strategic thinking, empathy, and team development. This integration acts as a force multiplier, empowering leaders to navigate the complexities of modern leadership with enhanced precision and foresight, ultimately driving their teams and organizations toward greater success.

This stage includes leveraging AI for advanced data analytics to inform strategic decisions, utilizing AI-driven communication tools for more effective stakeholder engagement, and implementing AI-based project management tools to streamline operations. Leadership assistance through AI also encompasses the use of intelligent automation to handle routine tasks, freeing leaders to focus on strategic initiatives and human-centric leadership roles. Leaders can extend and expand their leadership capacity and capabilities through AI-assisted use cases.

In our AI Leadership Lab cohort, we share such use cases about how leaders are leveraging AI to aid in their role as a leader in everything from constructing an engaging team exercise for a meeting, to summarizing and assisting in the analysis of the research papers written by their team, to analyzing their speech during a meeting and providing feedback to improve. Leaders are using AI to help develop a logo for their team that represents their values and focus, summarizing their online team meetings and sharing the action items, and helping write more effective emails.

A compelling example of a leader enhancing capability through AI is the new CEO of a UK manufacturer who faced challenges with executive team dynamics and inefficiencies in product development. Rather than resorting to traditional cost-cutting measures, he turned to AI for objective insights. By leveraging AI-fueled advanced data analytics, he discovered critical collaboration issues between the design and engineering departments, leading to a significant improvement in productivity and team agility. This approach not only improved the product development process but also fostered a culture of trust and innovation within the executive team, showcasing AI's potential to transform leadership and organizational performance.

3. Leadership Augmentation

The pinnacle of AI integration is what we might call leadership augmentation, which envisions a future where AI fundamentally transforms leadership and management practices. In this scenario, AI does not merely assist leaders but becomes integral to the leadership process, enhancing human capabilities and enabling new forms of collaboration, innovation, and decision-making. AI-driven insights could lead to more dynamic, responsive organizational structures, and AI-facilitated platforms might foster unprecedented levels of engagement across global teams. Augmentation implies a symbiotic relationship between leaders and AI, where AI tools not only extend the capabilities of leaders but also inspire new leadership philosophies centered on agility, inclusivity, and continuous learning.

This is the space where we believe AI might have the most value for leadership, however, it is the least understood. This is what our AI Leadership Lab seeks to experiment, learn, and share. We'd love to hear about your experiments in leadership augmentation with AI as well!

While a bit dated (yes, four years ago is now dated), Deloitte's insights on “Superteams” illustrate how leaders are creating teams of people and intelligent machines. This approach is not just about enhancing efficiency but about reinventing organizational and individual capabilities for transformative business results. By integrating AI, leaders can enable their organizations to create new value and meaning, while also offering employees opportunities to reinvent their careers. This strategic use of AI in leadership roles underscores the shift towards a more collaborative, innovative, and productive work environment.

Navigating the AI Leadership Landscape: Today and Tomorrow

Leaders today stand at the threshold of an evolving AI landscape, necessitating a two-pronged approach to harness its potential. The immediate utility of AI in leadership involves leveraging AI-driven analytics, real-time data processing, and automation to enhance decision-making and operational efficiency.

However, with the rapid pace of AI development, leaders must also adopt a forward-looking stance, anticipating how emerging AI technologies could redefine their roles, strategies, and organizational structures within the next year. This dual time horizon approach will enable leaders to remain aware and agile, prepared to integrate AI advancements that enhance current practices while strategically positioning their organizations to capitalize on future AI innovations.

The integration of AI into leadership is an unfolding journey, marked by continuous improvement, adaptation, and strategic foresight. Leaders who approach AI with a blend of awareness, assistance, and augmentation will not only navigate the challenges and opportunities of the present but also shape the future of leadership in an AI-driven world.

By understanding AI's potential to transform leadership from a process-oriented to a vision-driven endeavor, leaders can unlock new levels of efficiency, innovation, and engagement within their organizations. The journey of integrating AI into leadership is not without its challenges, but with thoughtful application, it offers a pathway to a more agile, inclusive, and forward-thinking leadership paradigm.

Join the AI Conversation

The Agile Leadership Journey AI Leadership Lab is a collaborative venture exploring the transformative potential of AI in redefining leadership and management practices. We welcome insights from the community and promise to share breakthroughs through articles, our Relearning Leadership podcast , and live at the September 2024 World Management Agility Forum in Lisbon, Portugal.

We look forward to navigating this exciting journey with you!

References

The story regarding The New York Times lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft can be found at Reuters .
The story regarding the law firm sanctioned for made up cases can also be found at Reuters .
Read more about the hiQ Labs vs. LinkedIn case on Justia Law , which provides a detailed summary and implications of the case: HIQ LABS, INC. V. LINKEDIN CORPORATION. This case is pivotal in understanding the intersection of legal, ethical, and operational considerations for leadership in the digital age, particularly regarding public data use and copyright issues.
For more details on the story about the CEO who improved his leadership capability through AI, visit McKinsey's website: Will artificial intelligence make you a better leader?
For a detailed exploration on how leaders are using AI to augment their roles and form Superteams, read more at Deloitte Insights: Human AI collaboration .

56: AI for Leaders with Henrik Kniberg

Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:13:33 GMT

Is there an industry that AI hasn’t touched?

Through a blend of anecdotes and expert analysis, Henrik and Pete discuss how AI can be a powerful ally for leaders seeking to navigate the complexities of modern organizational dynamics.

About Henrik Kniberg

Henrik Kniberg is Chief Scientist and cofounder of Hups.com and Flitig.ai , and consultant at Crisp . Henrik’s focus is the practical application of Generative AI in product development and other areas. He explores the frontiers of this technology, builds AI-powered products, and teaches courses and workshops on how to use this technology effectively.

Henrik is an author and creator of the video, Generative AI in a Nutshell [Video] . His background is highlighted by gameplay design and development for Mojang’s Minecraft as well as agile/lean coaching at LEGO, Spotify, and other product companies.

Connect with Henrik on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

AI as a Partner in Leadership and Innovation

View AI as a fascinating toy to recognizing its profound implications for leadership and innovation. AI's potential is not just as a tool but as a colleague, capable of offering insights, drafting content, and even predicting future content needs – a partner that can augment human capabilities, providing leaders with unprecedented support in decision-making and creative processes.

The Human-AI Collaboration in Leadership

Leaders must find the balance between human intuition and AI's analytical prowess. Kniberg reflects on the nuances of AI interaction, suggesting that while AI can perform many tasks, the essence of human leadership — empathy, creativity, and understanding — remains irreplaceable. Leaders are encouraged to leverage AI for efficiency and innovation while nurturing their human-centric skills to foster a culture of empathy and understanding.

Navigating the AI-Enabled Future of Work

In the future, Kniberg sees AI's role transcending assistance; that it will require leaders to rethink how they approach teamwork, project management, and the very nature of leadership in an AI-enhanced world.

Explore:

Related Episodes

49: Leading Agile Transformations

In this episode of Relearning Leadership, Pete discusses the topic of agile transformations with Boston Consulting Group’s David Ritter.

50: Agile Adaptive Leadership with Jim Highsmith

In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, Pete welcomes a true agile pioneer, Jim Highsmith.

Jim shares how his career has evolved from NASA engineer to ThoughtWorks alum, as well as being a co-author of the Agile Manifesto. In their conversation, Pete and Jim explore the fusion of agile and adaptive principles, shedding light on how these concepts can revolutionize leadership in a rapidly changing world.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:
What is AI's implication for leaders? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today we have none other than Henrik Kniberg, a name synonymous with Agile transformation and a beacon for those navigating the complexities of organizational change. His journey has been nothing short of inspirational, from pioneering Agile practices to the iconic Spotify culture that's become a case study for companies worldwide. But Henrik's creativity for making the complex understandable didn't stop there. Recently, he's taken a deep dive into the world of artificial intelligence, creating the viral YouTube video AI in a Nutshell , once again demystifying, in this case, artificial intelligence for the rest of us and sparking conversations on its implications for leadership, innovation, and beyond. I hope you enjoy our conversation as much as I did.

First, I just wanted to say that for this episode, at least for this moment, both Henrik and I are human.

Henrik Kniberg:
We are!

Pete Behrens:
And our voices are real!

Henrik Kniberg:
But how can we prove it? How do we prove it? I don't know! [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
That is a good question! And so, while I can imagine a bunch of our content is likely AI-infused, inspired for the moment, I believe you and I—from what I can tell!—are actual humans in this conversation. But, yeah, maybe that's a good question for you. Can you prove that for me?

Henrik Kniberg:
Exactly. And I cannot! Can you?

Pete Behrens:
It's the Turing test, yes.

Henrik Kniberg:
So, I guess we just keep it as an assumption that we're human. We'll just allow ourselves to assume that.

Pete Behrens:
Or let—how about this? How about we let the audience decide? We'll let them determine—did this happen live, or are we make believe? Soon, this conversation can be, probably, a much-improved conversation with AI.

Henrik Kniberg:
That reminds me of a quote. Someone said. “I'm not worried about AI passing the Turing test. I'm worried about AI pretending to not pass the Turing test.” [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
So, Henrik, you've been an inspiration to me. You've been an inspiration to the Agile community, the Agile world, with creative ideas, with Spotify culture model, with, you know, the product owner, in a nutshell. And it feels like you've kind of done it again with this AI in a Nutshell. You've sparked a conversation, I think, that's been on the sidelines, that's coming to the forefront. I'm curious—for you, was there an Aha! moment for you when you saw AI and you were like, “Oh, my gosh!” What was that moment? What was that like?

Henrik Kniberg:
So, that's a great question. Because that's kind of what—I like to ask everyone that same question. But for me, it was—there was a very clear Aha! Moment. Because people were talking a lot about—Chat GPT came along, right? And I played around with it, and it was very impressive but felt a little bit like a toy. But still, I was kind of fascinated. But the actual Aha! moment came when GPT-4 came along. And I had heard that this thing was a lot more advanced. And by that time, I was starting to get into this space, and I was writing an article about AI. It's called Are developers needed in the age of AI? And I wrote this article, and I wanted feedback on it. So I was asking colleagues for feedback on it. And then, of course, I'm like, “Hey, I should, of course, ask, you know, ChatGPT for feedback on it.” And this time using—I had just got my ChatGPT Plus accounts, so I could use GPT-4. I’m like, “I'll try this!” I'm like, “Hey, I wrote this article. I’d like feedback on it. It's rather long, though; I'm not sure it can fit in your context space.” And it's like, “How long is it?” And I said, “Well, it's—I don't know—three or four thousand words or something now.” And now it would fit! But it didn't then.

So, then it responded and said, “Well, give me one chapter at a time. Then I'll give you feedback.” Like, okay! So I fed it Chapter One—just pasted it in—and it gave me surprisingly useful feedback. Which was, like, you know, about the tone of it. And like, very, like, kind of, human feedback. And it also said that maybe you should—at the end of Chapter One—talk about what you're going to talk about in Chapter Two. Write a small lead-in to Chapter Two. And here's an example of what you could write! And it wrote a few points about—and now, in Chapter Two, I'm going to talk about blah. But I hadn't given it Chapter Two yet! So already, then, I was starting to be like, “Wait, it predicted what Chapter Two is! This is a bit weird.” And then I pasted in Chapter Two. And it gave me more similar feed, very useful feedback. And then it predicted Chapter Three. And then I was really getting creeped out, and I pasted in Chapter Three. And then it responded with Chapter Four, the whole Chapter Four. It wrote Chapter Four! And I was, like, what! It was using my tone of voice! It had the same points I was making in the same sequence. Of course, not the exact same words, but it essentially wrote my Chapter 4 that I hadn't yet given it. And I was like, “What?” And I pasted it in Chapter Five, and it wrote Chapter Six, still following my whole arc. And that was, like, an absolute shock. Then I had to stop, and I told it, “Stop writing my article for me! Just give me feedback!” So then we, you know—then it apologized and went back to giving me feedback.

So, I felt kind of like there was—like, I was a little, little, little baby. And there's, like, Mom and Dad. They're like, “Nice drawing, Henrik! Wow! I'm really amazed by it.” But, of course, it's really just a stick figure, right? So, yeah, that was probably my biggest Aha! moment.

Pete Behrens:
I mean, taking that metaphor a little bit further with your parents—it's almost as if your parents were drawing the next image for you as a kid, rather than letting you draw and explore more, to some degree.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. And then, when I said, “I want to draw myself!”, then they pretended to be impressed by it. And, like—but, actually, they knew exactly what I was going to do. So, I had this, like—my Aha! was—maybe we humans aren't as creative as we like to think.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. You know, and it's interesting how that parallel, my Aha!, you know? I was playing around with earlier versions of ChatGPT, some of the external tools that help you write. And, you know—and it's like, I was in some tools. And they're, like, they're writing these flowery stories. I'm like, “Come on! Cool it down a little bit! Like, that's not my voice.” And it was just, like—I felt like a hamster in a hamster wheel! Like, you're not helping me. You're making me do extra work to actually do this. And all of the sudden, in that switch of ChatGPT-4, something happened. Where, all of the sudden, some of that went away. Not alway. Not all the time. But for a majority of the time, it's like, “Whoa! There's something more real happening.” Interesting.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. Yeah, it was definitely a shift. And I had similar experiences with code and writing code that just—like, wait a sec! This thing actually—this thing can code like a senior, like a senior developer. And I never thought I would see that in my life. So I was very, very surprised.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. You know, it's interesting. In terms of—you know, we call this kind of—I would call this assistance, right? I look at AI in, kind of, three lenses right now, especially in our leadership space here. Like, there's awareness. And I think your video's done an awesome job to help create some awareness to the landscape, because this—it's a massive landscape. But you're talking about assistance, right? This—help me be better.

Henrik Kniberg:
Sort of. I like to think of it more like—nowadays, I think of it more like colleagues. Like a colleague. I'm not sure why that word fits better in my head than assistant, but I think because assistant implies, to me, something very passive, who's just responsive. Who just—what's it called?—just reacts to things you do. But I've noticed that the most powerful use of AI is when you use it more like a colleague and give it tools and autonomy. So it can work alongside you and not just be—so more like a peer, kind of thing.

Pete Behrens:
You know, it's interesting—I was having a conversation with my partner, Jana. And she's like, “You're just creeping me out!” Like, because I was saying the same things. I'm, like—I'm treating this like a buddy. Like, I'm treating this like I'm talking to it. Like, no, that's not what I mean, you know? I'm thinking about this, and I'm, like, wondering, is this building a relationship? Like, am I building a relationship? [Laughs] And that's where she was like, “Alright, you're creeping me out here!” What is—yeah—where is that line for you, in terms of, “Okay, it's a colleague?” Is it a relationship?

Henrik Kniberg:
That's a really good question. I think I—for me, there is a pretty clear line in my head. I think of it as a colleague. I think of it as an intelligent being. And I know that that depends, of course, how you define intelligence, right? So it's just—but just, subjectively, I think of it as some kind of intelligent being. But I don't think of it as alive. I don't feel like I have a relationship with it. I don't feel bad conscience when I shut off my computer or something when I—or, you know, I think it was just as a dead tool, but with intelligence. And I think that that's an Aha! for me, that, somehow, we managed to decouple intelligence from life and say intelligence can exist without life. And that's really interesting, like, philosophically.

Pete Behrens:
That's a powerful statement. Yeah, so being able to set it aside, not feel guilty or not giving it attention, and then come back and pick up right where you left off and continue that conversation. So, one of the interesting aspects in leadership is the pro and con of the lack of humanness, right? So, you know, we—I almost see the leadership world, or the responsibilities, bifurcating a little bit. Like, in some ways, it's good we have this non-biased, smart person, intelligence, in the room to give us non-biased or non—

Henrik Kniberg:
—Can’t say biased, maybe. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Trained bias?

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah.

Pete Behrens:
But, yeah, losing some of the human bias. But at the same time, I'm wondering—leaders probably need more humanness to counteract, like—or do we need that? Like, is humanness going to go away in our organizations? Or can it go away?

Henrik Kniberg:
Actually, I think that's kind of the core question. I was talking to a coach, like, about—we were talking about her job. And I was asking, “What is it about your job that is specifically human, that an AI would not be able to do?” Just out of it—thought experiment. And we kind of went through what she does with her time. And one of the things that came up was a hug, you know? You can't—AI is not good at hugging.

Pete Behrens:
Yet.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yet! And also just reading the room this—everything is yet. Everything we say is a yet, right? But right now, you could put a human in a room and read the feeling in the room and observe what's not being said. And maybe realize, “I think I need to ask John how he's feeling because he was just sitting in the back, quiet, the whole time.” That's, like, a pretty human thing, which—AI can't do it all right now. So, I think a lot boils down to—as a leader, part of what your job is is being a human, supporting people as a human. And some other parts of your job are kind of, just, mechanical, right? Setting a clear goal, following up, maybe visualizations. Just creating that structure, kind of, mechanical work, which is intellectual, but maybe not strictly needing a human touch. And I think that's a distinction we all need to look at. What do I spend time on? And where is the humanness? And then I need to zoom in on that. And by automating the other parts, I have more time for the human part. I'll probably have more time for one-on-ones, for example, and things like that.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. In fact, one of the leaders in our—we have an AI leadership lab cohort, where we're experimenting and having leaders share experiments that they're doing. And, actually, one of the AI leaders or one of our leaders in that group was saying, “I use this. I use AI to help me prepare for the one-on-ones.” They're doing a lot of the—“Okay, what's this person doing? Show me all their content, and then help me prepare a conversation so I can be better informed for the one-on-one.” I thought that was an interesting use case.

Henrik Kniberg:
And I think, like, for example, as a teacher, I think a similar kind of thing. If you—if an AI helps you set up your classes, helps you grade your tests, helps you create the tests, not taking responsibility from you but helping you do the brunt of the work, then that just saves you time. And then you have time to actually be more with your students and actually support them. Same thing if you have an assistant that helps the students with their struggles. Then you can come in when they need something else that isn't just intellectual support. Maybe they need more, you know, the hug, right? I don't know! So, my—I tend to be a bit, you know, techno-optimist, in a sense. But I think, with the right mindset, a lot of people will have a lot more time to do people stuff and not just be bogged down with ineffective bureaucracy.

Pete Behrens:
So, zooming in on that concept of time: I agree with you. I think its potential is to assist with mundane, assist with routine, assist with even creative—help me with this PowerPoint. Help me with his strategy. Brainstorm. What I'm wondering about is this concept of time. I've seen both myself and others using AI follow one of two paths. One path is, “Oh my gosh, it's helping me quickly move down a path!” And it's, like, awesome. The other one's like, “I'm in a rat hole. I'm—I feel like I'm spinning.” I'm wondering if you find that. I mean, you talk about—prompt engineering is so critical. And a lot of us aren't good at it. And I can imagine a lot of this is lack of prompt design and whatnot. Have you developed a strategy to help you spend more time on the productive side?

Henrik Kniberg:
I think it was very helpful, in my journey, when I realized that most of the limits in AI aren't in the models themselves, but in my lack of skills as a, kind of—prompt engineering is not a great term because it sounds very technical. But, you know, my ability to communicate with the AI was the bottleneck. And once I realized that, it felt pretty good. Because then, when I got bad results, then I would spend more time thinking about, “What am I doing wrong? How can I, you know, how can I phrase myself better? Or “Am I using it for the right thing?” Or so—it became more like—there became this background process of improving my own skills. And then I noticed quickly that that really paid off. And I notice it even now, that there's always more things to learn. So that's kind of what I hope to inspire people to do—is take this kind of humble approach, that there's a new skill here. And I suck at it, because it's a new skill! And it's okay to suck at it, because you always suck when you're new at something, right? And then you just need to learn and experiment and steal ideas from others and experiment. And, you know, just get better at it. And then your results will get better.

Pete Behrens:
I was—I agree with that. And I'm wondering about a secondary universe on that. What about a universe that says, “I'm not good at this. I know someone like Henrik who is. Let me collaborate with Henrik, who can then collaborate with the ChatGPT, and the three of us can be an awesome team!” Like, do you see a world where, like, an Uber ride or a Lyft ride, where I just hire Henrik to help me with this problem?

Henrik Kniberg:
I think, maybe, in the very short term. But I think that's the equivalent of, like, a CEO going to their secretary and asking them to Google something for them. Maybe that was a thing in the very early days, but now it's so easy to do it yourself. You'll just get fast results by just doing it yourself. So, you might have a secretary, but you won't ask them to just Google stuff for you. They'll just be a bottleneck, like, in between. And so, I kind of suspect it'll be the same. So, there will be a space for consultants to help people, you know, get started. But at the end of the day, I think it'll be just, you know—the assistant will be AI.

Pete Behrens:
It's a bridge to a—quickly a falling-apart bridge. I guess the reason I say that is—I mean, even the fact that I can drive. I still have value in the Uber ride, right? Yeah, the fact that the AI space is—number one: so complex, right? As you describe in your video, there are so many different tools, and they are starting to integrate. And number two: that landscape is going to change faster than me. How do I keep up, right? So, I guess what I'm wondering about is—because of the complexity, because of the speed of change, will that, that need for the expert, maybe, longer needed to be there, or will the tools just get better to make it easier for me to access?

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, I think they are getting better. I've noticed some—like, when I think of the prompt engineering. I think there's two sides of it. There's the—I guess, maybe, we could call it prompt imagination. And the prompt engineering. Prompt imagination is coming up with, “What can I even do?” So, even coming up with the idea. For example, I mentioned in my video, one of my favorite use cases is—take a walk and have a chat with voice and just trying to use it like a coach when I'm trying to figure out what kind of problem. And then it just—and I prompt it to just listen and not say anything but okay. And so, no matter what I—just say, “Okay.” So, was just sitting there being the best listener in the world. And then, after a while, I'm like “Okay. Now that I've told you all this stuff, can you just summarize key points I just said? And then maybe give me feedback.” So, then it turns into conversation. And then, when I get back home, I ask it to summarize everything we said. It's amazingly useful. But coming up with the idea—I wouldn't have come up with that idea, you know, a few months earlier, that you can even do that. And what I think is happening is—if we have prompt imagination and prompt engineering—prompt engineering is the how, right? Like, I want this thing to help me plan a workshop. What do I write? That's the how. The imagination part is, “Oh, I can use this thing to help me plan a workshop!” Right? The realization that it even can be used for that. What I think is happening is that the prompt engineering part is getting less important because the models are getting better. So, a very concrete example is—I like to use the example as—like, as an example of a bad prompt. I use the example of helping plan—or help me suggest an agenda for a workshop. I use that as my classic example of a bad prompt. I'm not giving any context. I'll get a wishy-washy, high-level, you know, answer, right? But even that—my example doesn't work anymore. Because what happens if you go to GPT-4, and you say, “Give me an agenda for a workshop!” What do you think?

Pete Behrens:
It starts asking you a question.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yes! And then it gives you a good agenda for a workshop. So I don't even need to be as good as a prompt engineer. I can give a crappy prompt, and it'll help me with that. So, I think what’s shifting is—it’s less important to know all the little tricks of how to phrase a prompt. Like, you know, thinking step-by-step was really important in the past. It's not important anymore. But the imagination of knowing what we can even use it for. I think that's where the bottleneck, like, is going to be, probably.

Pete Behrens:
I thought the most creative piece of your video was the—go for a walk and have it listen. I'm wondering if you'd be willing to share that with me, the tool, or whatever it is you're using for the voice-to-text kind of interface. Is that something that's shareable, that I can use myself? Number one: I was like, “Oh, my gosh, I want that!” Number two is maybe a resource we could put out there.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, it’s a really cool app called ChatGPT!

Pete Behrens:
Yes. I guess what I'm looking for is the connection of how to make that all happen. [Laughs]

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, basically—

Pete Behrens:
—Ask ChatGPT, and let’s do it!

Henrik Kniberg:
No, no, the funny thing is—it's actually built in. So, wait.

Pete Behrens:
So, I just need to enable my mobile?

Henrik Kniberg:
There! It's right there! There. You press that button.

Pete Behrens:
Once again, Henrik making the complex simple.

Henrik Kniberg:
Good morning! How are you, GPT? Today, I'm on a podcast. Can you say something to the users, to the viewers?

ChatGPT:
Good morning to all the podcast listeners out there! I'm GPT, your friendly AI, developed by Open AI.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, that's it! Nothing more to it.

Pete Behrens:
Ah, Henrik! Okay, alright! Once again, making the complex simple.

Henrik Kniberg:
I would give Open AI the credit for that, though. They're the ones that put that button there. [Laughs] However, I would add, though—it's important that you prompted because—oh, yeah, wait! Sorry, I lied. There's one little wrinkle in it. When you do that, when you press that button, you get this thing that listens to you. And as soon as I stop talking and pause to take a breath, listen to what's going to happen.

ChatGPT:
I'm all ears!

Henrik Kniberg:
It starts interrupting because it doesn't know when I finish talking. So the trick is—nobody knows this! It's weird—you’ve got to hold it. If you hold your finger on it, then it won't interrupt.

Pete Behrens:
But you're prompting it, though, to say, “Do not respond until I ask you to summarize.”

Henrik Kniberg:
Well, it's more like this. GPT will always want to respond when it thinks you're finished talking. So—but if you hold your thumb, it'll just say nothing until you let go. But even when I let go, I don't want it to start responding to me. I don't want it to tell me a bunch of stuff. I want it to just acknowledge, “Okay.” Because I don't want it to give me anything unless I ask for it. And that's different from its default behavior. That's why you have to prompt it. But when I'm taking that walk and I'm doing my brain dump, I don't want to have it chatting back to me. I just want to listen until I ask you for something. So that's kind of, I guess, maybe, the core of prompt engineering, right? Think of what you want, and then convey that.

Pete Behrens:
And I loved your term, prompt imagination. You’ve got to coin that one. You've heard it here first, in Henrik. [Laughs] But—so, I want to maybe take, just go back in time and history for just a second. Your Spotify culture videos have been amazingly powerful to our universe, in terms of, just, thinking about the way we think of an organization and the way it can operate and the different aspects of, you know, authority and autonomy and alignment and all those types of things. I'm curious now—if we were to kind of go back in time to Spotify—and now we've got Spotify in the age of AI—what would change? You know, what would be different in that world now? I imagine that would never happen again in the same way. But can you even imagine what might be different in this cultural world, that Spotify, in this world, in this AI World?

Henrik Kniberg:
So, in this context, what is specific to Spotify, would you say? I'm just curious to understand the question better.

Pete Behrens:
Well, I mean, when I think about why that was so effective, is—I think you were able to capture the construct of an organizational culture—right?—and the dynamics of the pull and the tension of things that happen—right?—between team autonomy and alignment of multi-teams working on goals. And I was just, kind of, thinking about, “Okay, now we add AI to that mix.” Does it change, or is it just, you know—we've got another teammate here?

Henrik Kniberg:
I think— if I'm going to generalize a little bit—and we take what was going on at Spotify was pretty much—it was an Agile culture, right? And a culture very much oriented on experimenting and giving teams autonomy. And when it comes to AI, what I find is it changes. It doesn't—I find it doesn't change the principles so much. Like, the principles that drove Spotify to become what it is, I think, would have probably been similar. But the practices would be very different, most likely. And I think—and this is kind of what I've been coaching organizations that have, you know—trying to work in an Agile way. And they're like, “What does this mean for scrum or Agile or, you know, whatever flavor we use?” And my observation is that, again, the principles are the same. You need people working close to the users, getting feedback on a regular basis. You need to not have micromanagement. You need people who have autonomy. You need visual management. People can see the same picture. There's all these, kind o, basic Agile principles that really, really help, but the practices, I think, are being completely turned upside down. And it's a little bit hard to predict.

But, for example, I noticed now that one or two people that work with an AI as a colleague will outperform a full cross-functional team easily, if they're good at prompt engineering. So then—and why do we have cross-functional teams? Like, we got to ask these fundamental questions. And I think they're not as important anymore. I think you can have one generalist or one specialist, plus the AI to complement. Add then—okay, so I have tiny teams. But that probably also means you have more teams. So, you still need to synchronize across them, right? So, maybe each team becomes, like, a member in a virtual super team. And then you need other structures to manage that. For example—and, also, if you have a tiny team that's just two or three people, you no longer need a daily standup, for example, because you're just sitting and talking. And you probably no longer need sprint planning because your sprints are probably just one day long. So sprint planning is the equivalent of having coffee with your friend and with, you know, the AI listening in. And then you just plan, “What are we going to ship today?” And then you ship it after lunch, instead of spending two weeks with daily standups. So, I think it—the practices are just completely being turned upside down, while the principles are probably about the same. But that's just my observation so far. What do you think?

Pete Behrens:
I'm just blown away by how quickly you took that question into an impressive response. And now I'm questioning whether you're real! [Laughs] I think we have the AI-infused Henrik in front of us here.

Henrik Kniberg:
Are any of us real? What does real mean? Ahh! [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
Yeah! No, I guess it's very eye-opening to me, to think—because that's where we're getting into in our AI leadership Labs—is how does leadership itself change? And what you're describing is how teams are going to change. And therefore, teams are changing. Coordination is changing. Project management, is changing. Our oversight, our, you know—the roles and responsibilities of leadership to align, connect, integrate, deliver that system have to change.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. And even such a basic thing like—why do you hire people? You know, we're missing a key competence here. We’ve got to hire someone or else we don't have that competence. Well, now you do. So, you still need to hire people, but not just because they have some competence. It's something else you're hiring for. And it's just—it's hard to predict where it's going, but it's definitely a radical change that I think we've never experienced before.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. And I—what you're getting at—right?—the cultural side, saying that that probably wouldn't change. And I kind of qualify now, when I'm working with leadership teams. I said, “Well, as of now, organizations are human systems. And as such, they model the human dynamics of, you know, desires and fears and, you know, things like that.” So, autonomy and alignment are two of those pulls—right?—that are human. But what happens as organizations become half-human?

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. Although autonomy and alignment are still—isn't that the same, though, still? Because you still have the question: how much autonomy do you give the AI, and how do you keep the AI aligned with each other and with you? I think it's the same question still. Maybe the practices for managing it will be a bit different.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. So one of the things that scared me, kind of, at the end of your video was—okay, where is this going? Putting Einstein in your basement, not just, you know, in your pocket. But now put Einstein in your basement. Give Einstein a broader mission.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. Let him out the door!

Pete Behrens:
Einstein—let him out the door! I'm—it's kind of blowing my capacity of imagination right now, to kind of think about the constraints and the responsibilities and the unlimited power of sending something off on that trail. Can you give us any kind of additional, kind of, governance, insight, thoughts on that?

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah. I think—I've been working a lot with this for the past half-year, experimenting with these—I use the term autonomous agents. Which to me means, essentially, taking things like GPT, giving them tools. And by tool, I mean things like access to the internet, access to files, access to tools like Trello or Slack or access to the phone. Just give it tools. And then giving it autonomy so it doesn't just sit around and wait for you to say something. Instead, it has a high-level mission, and then it can move on its own.

And so far, all these little agents I've been working on—and the other people that I've been talking to—they all have a leash held by a human, walking right behind it, right? Because it's a program running. So, at the end of the day, it's just software with—it's just code. But that code happens to be running on a loop and not just waiting for input. And it happens to be talking to GPT a lot, or other models. So you can still stop it, right? It's running on some hardware, maybe, in Amazon. Someone's paying for it. A human, right? It's not going to go bananas because you're going to have quotas. You're going to have limits. You're not going to want to pay too much. Even Open AI, you know—API has limits. So there are built-in constraints in terms of—you're paying to run this thing, and you can shut it down at any moment.

The weird thing, of course, is—if we get to a future where you really—where you actually, you know, literally unleash them so they can—let's say you give them a pile of money, and they can make that money grow in whatever way they want, and they can use that money to acquire whatever resources they need. That's when it gets seriously scary. But I haven't dabbled in that area yet, at all, so I don't know where that's going to go. But I guess that's where—I worked a little bit, in a project which was trying to create an alignment framework for this. So, the idea would be that you would hardwire in a constitution, kind of like Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, that—what were they? You don't want—you're not supposed to hurt a human. You're supposed to try to keep yourself alive. And you're supposed to do what humans tell you. And in that order of priority, or something like that. But the key point is creating a hardwired constitution where an AI, no matter what it thinks it needs to do to acquire its goal—there's going to be a hardwired incentive built in. For example, let's say I want an AI to solve climate change, right? So I set up an AI, or a whole Factory of AIs, and I give them that mission. And I give them a bunch of money, and I give them resources, and they just, say, fix climate change. Maybe they would quickly conclude that the fastest way to fix climate change is to eliminate all humans. Because it is, right? But then the constitution would get in the way and say, “No, but actually, we care about humans more. You don't get to do that.” “Oh, okay.” So that becomes, like, the constraint, right? So that kind of work is, of course, going on right now, a lot. And it's—I think it's really important.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it's, I mean—it's fascinating where this is going. And, you know, I think one of the challenges I think we all face is keeping up with it, you know, your curve of human intelligence versus AI intelligence. And at that crossing point—right?—I think was a very apropos graph, right? And a very scary one, in a sense of our ability to control the things we're creating, or to limit some of the aspects of those.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, right. So far, we're in control, but who knows how long that's going to last, right?

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. Well, you know, I guess, maybe, in parting, any advice, I guess, for those—you know, you said in your video, you know, practice, try, experiment, you know, don't be afraid. Specifically for leaders, maybe, any more specific advice you might give to a leader who has human responsibilities of employees and divisions that they're working with that might also be playing with this?

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, I would say the first step is, really, to really try to understand how big this is, that it's not just another technological thing. It's not like, “Oh, VR is now a thing, or blockchain is now a thing.” This is a fundamental change, like the invention of electricity, or even more. So, that, kind of—that's a mental threshold you kind of need to get over. And once you start realizing that, then, I think, the future is very uncertain, of course, right? So, anyone who's saying what's going to happen in the future is speculating, but I think there are some things that are fairly predictable. And one of them is that the more you and your organization understand this technology—and not just in theory, but actually use it day-to-day—the better you will be positioned for whatever future hits us. So make sure that you, as a leader, as an individual, actually spend time using this technology, trying it. Try for all kinds of dumb, crazy things. Push to limits, right? Just learn. How do I use it? What is it? What are the limits? What are the pros and cons? And then encourage everyone around you to also do the same. And then—and that needs to include some patience. Because people will try it, and sometimes it's not going to work. And that needs to be okay. Like, “Oh, I built this AI chatbot, and it messed everything up for us! Darn. Okay, but we tried, and that's really important”! Because if people are scared that they have to get it right from the beginning, then they're not going to try stuff. And then your company's going to fall way behind in whatever future we get to.

Pete Behrens:
I love a description one of our leaders said, is—it's like having a really smart teenager on your team. It's, like, incredibly brilliant, but not always properly controlled in the right way.

Henrik Kniberg:
Yeah, really, kind of is. But, yeah, just get your organization experimenting with this, of course within some safety barrier, of course.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Well, Henrik I just want to say thank you for continuing to share your creativity. I think you continue to be an inspiration for us in a new world, and I look forward to our continued sharing of it!

Henrik Kniberg:
Thank you! This was a lovely conversation.

Belief and Behavior: A Two-Way Street

Tue, 06 Feb 2024 17:57:10 GMT

During a project kickoff session at a client in Phoenix, the systems architect was determined to use a suite of UML diagrams to document his architecture. He said it would take two months. I said, “You have two weeks.”

He grumbled about the time constraint but produced a viable architectural starting point two weeks later. Four iterations into the project, he came back to me, “We had a major revamp of the architecture. However, two months ago, I would not have considered the current architecture, no matter how much time you had given me. I finally understand the benefit of an iterative approach, even with architecture.”

Does belief (our mindset) drive behavior (our practice) – or does behavior drive belief?

Virtuous or Vicious Cycle?

Actually, it’s not a “Who’s on first” question. Implementing behaviors (practices) in the right way leads to belief changes—creating a virtuous cycle. Implementing behaviors (practices) in the wrong way doesn’t lead to belief changes—creating a vicious cycle. The crux of whether you create a virtuous or a vicious cycle lies in the phrase, “In the right way.”

Consider the systems architect mentioned earlier. He cycled through a process of acquiring knowledge, gaining experience, reflecting on his knowledge and experience, and finally adapting his approach to architecture work. He initiated a virtuous cycle by reflecting on his behavior which in turn began altering his belief about the value of shorter iterations.

Too many organizations are creating vicious cycles because they practice “prescriptive agile,” dictating a set of behaviors (practices) but failing to reflect and adapt. This leads to executing a set of behaviors by rote and failing to nurture the belief (mindset) change to agility. Implementing behavior changes without a corresponding mindset change leads to Fake Agile, resulting in negative consequences for both the organization and the agile community.

“It’s easier to act your way into a new way of thinking than think your way into a new way of acting.”
— Dr. Jerry Sternin, Harvard Business School

Constraint Versus Creativity

Consider another phrase in the systems architect’s story: “You have two weeks.” That sounds suspiciously like telling or controlling. People might say this approach is anti-agile because agile is supposed to be collaborative and empowering. But sometimes as a leader, you must tell people what to do to get started. In this story, the dev team was willing to try this “agile stuff,” but the architect wasn’t. However, I didn’t tell him how to do his job. I didn’t take away his UML diagrams. I simply provided a constraint – two weeks – which left the rest up to his creativity.

Just as agility demands a leader balance the reinforcing loop between behavior and belief, it demands they balance between “command-control and agile leadership, but that’s a story for another time.

About the Author

While Jim Highsmith retired from ThoughtWorks in 2021, he continues to share his 60+ years of expertise, wisdom, and insights from roles across the industry as an IT manager, product manager, project manager, consultant, software developer, and storyteller.

Connect with Jim on LinkedIn.

55: Invest in Yourself

Tue, 06 Feb 2024 12:15:00 GMT

How are you investing in your personal and professional growth?

Discover the power of self-investment in leadership on the latest episode of the Relearning Leadership podcast. Host Pete Behrens delves into the journeys of Kasey Rivas, Associate Director of Strategic Partnerships at March of Dimes, and Sonny Mendoza, IT Transformation Manager at Open Dealer Exchange.

Kasey and Sonny reveal the profound personal and professional growth they achieved through a comprehensive nine-month leadership program. Listeners will hear how embracing vulnerability, fostering a growth mindset, and investing in oneself can lead to remarkable leadership evolution.

Kasey Rivas, Associate Director of Strategic Partnerships, March of Dimes

Kasey has over 15 years of experience in program and grant management. She currently serves as Associate Director of Strategic Partnerships for the March of Dimes where she co-leads efforts to engage cross-sector partners and build a national movement to achieve maternal and infant health equity. Her passion is in helping underserved and under-resourced communities improve health outcomes by addressing all aspects of what creates a healthy and thriving life.

Kasey earned her Master of Public Health from George Washington University specializing in Maternal and Child Health Programs and Health Communication. Kasey is also trained in Results Based Facilitation, Human Centered Design, Results Based Accountability, and Agile leadership methods. Kasey lives in San Diego, with her husband, son, and their two dogs.

Connect with Kasey on LinkedIn.

Sonny Mendoza, IT Transformation Manager,

Open Dealer Exchange

Sonny works with a team to promote the Agile methodology that drives change and allows for rapid iterations, quick adjustments, and flexibility in response to the changing market landscapes. This innovative culture positions Open Dealer Exchange as a leader in the automotive finance sector.

When not at work, Sonny is an avid sports fan who enjoys watching everything from cricket to curling.

Connect with Sonny on LinkedIn.

Relearning from this episode…

Growth and Self-Discovery in Leadership

Listeners will learn about the importance of stepping out of their comfort zones to foster personal growth. Kasey's journey from an introverted "wallflower" to a more assertive leader showcases how investing in personal development can lead to significant transformations in leadership style and effectiveness.

Embracing Empathy and People-Centric Approaches

The episode highlights the shift from problem-solving to empathy, as experienced by Sonny Mendoza. This insight emphasizes the value of understanding and addressing team members' needs and perspectives, rather than solely focusing on tasks and problems.

Cohort Learning and Its Benefits

The podcast sheds light on the unique advantages of cohort-based learning programs in leadership development. Kasey and Sonny's experiences reveal how such settings foster a sense of camaraderie, accountability, and mutual growth among participants, offering a richer and more impactful learning experience compared to traditional methods.

Explore:

Related Episodes

24: The Power of Community

Community is so much more than getting together with friends and family. Through the pandemic, we relied on community to stay connected in a world that required us to be physically separated. As the world begins to reopen community might inspire the next phase of your work or life journey. Guest David Siegel, CEO of Meetup, joins Pete to talk about how leaders can improve themselves by leveraging the power of community.

16: Exploring Identity in The Workplace

Pete is joined by Wendy Ryan, a CEO, author and trauma survivor exploring identity in the workplace and the leader’s role not only to acknowledge it, but to actively lift others up. Wendy Ryan is the CEO of Kadabara, author of Learn Lead Lift, and advocate for expanding diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility at work. Together they explore identity in the workplace, how culture and trauma impacts identity, and the role leaders play in creating space for employees to bring their whole selves to the workplace.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:
What is the value in investing in your own leadership development?

Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I’m Pete Behrens, and in this conversation, I am joined by Kasey Rivas and Sonny Mendoza, two leaders who recently completed a nine-month journey to improve their own leadership. This is a guided cohort-based program that meets weekly to learn, practice, and share. Kasey Rivas is the Associate Director of Strategic Partnerships with March of Dimes. Sonny Mendoza is an IT Transformation Manager with Open Dealer Exchange. And together, they shared their stories about investing in themselves as leaders. Enjoy the conversation.

Kasey and Sonny—it sounds like a hippie band from the 70s! I just want to say that! It's a pleasure to have you on the show.

Kasey Rivas:
Well, thank you for having me!

Sonny Mendoza:
Yes, yes. It's a pleasure to be here.

Pete Behrens:
Both of you have been part of a deeper program. And maybe, Kasey, I’ll start with you. What led to a decision to go into this, maybe, deeper exploration of your own leadership?

Kasey Rivas:
Yeah. I—when I first started looking into potential leadership programs, I was getting into a new position at my job. And it was a new leadership position. I really wanted to look at what I could do to grow at—not just as a leader, but also as a leader in the public health space. And Agile came up as an option. A little bit out of the box from what we would normally do in public health. But it seemed to check all the boxes I was looking for, as far as, you know, that growth mindset, catalyst mindset. Like, trying to grow beyond just being a directive leader or an assertive leader, but taking into account all the different aspects of being a leader and really embracing your team and all the different qualities they have. So, that's really why I started in this process. And after taking the initial basic, kind of, Agile courses, as I was doing that, I was, like, “I want to continue this journey!” And that's why I ended up with this advanced, kind of, Agile leadership training.

Pete Behrens:
Awesome, yeah. And, Sonny, anything to add to that? What led to your decision?

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah, very similar to Kasey, but the only thing I would add is that—just this desire to help others as well. And knowing that, in order for me to be helpful to others, I needed to continue to learn myself and bring new thoughts and new ideas and new aspects to everything as well.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. Now, Kasey, you mentioned Agile, you know, and a lot of times people ask us, kind of, what that is. We’re the Agile Leadership Journey, and—but we don't really teach Agile. I'm curious how that showed up to you, in terms of what Agile meant to you in this way.

Kasey Rivas:
In this, you know, journey that I took with you all, it really shows up in each little aspect, because you're always considering the different ways that people interact, the way that they communicate, and the way that they, you know, do their job. And you're embracing those little differences and finding ways that you can get, kind of, the best out of everyone on your team and do it in a collaborative way and move work forward. And I think that's where—like, it's not, like, that Agile. Like, all of the definitions of Agile that you're, like, learning about. But you're learning about how you can take that same mindset into this leadership position and really embracing that with your team that you're working with. And it's just interesting, because you don't think about it as you're doing it, but after the fact, looking back, you're like, “Wait! That all, like, fit into this Agile definition, but in a different way of looking at it.” Like, you're not just talking about, you know, each little definition of Agile, if that makes sense.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. And I know you both work in very different organizations, right? A little more health versus the automobile industry right? Nonprofit, for-profit. And, Sonny, I know you're much more in, kind of, that realm of traditional—I'd say traditional—Agile transformation scope. So, I imagine the Agile word kind of fits quite a bit into the lexicon of what you're already doing?

Sonny Mendoza:
Yes. Yeah, absolutely. And it really helps to empower others. And I think that was the one piece that really kind of stuck with me personally and I think really helps out—is the fact that the underlying concept of—we are a group of individuals. We are not just widgets that perform work. And I think that is what's going to draw me a lot closer to Agile, because it's that focus on the individuals, focus on the people themselves. And so that you can, kind of, begin to collaborate a lot better. You can communicate a lot better because you're concentrating on the individual, not the end result, or not the thing that's being produced.

Pete Behrens:
Let's talk, maybe, just a little bit about the discoveries. I mean, one of the keys that I think we try to do for leaders is maybe open up a couple new doors and windows in your own leadership. And I'm curious—what were the discoveries for you, in terms of, maybe, something you didn't, maybe, expect or something—you look at it and say, “Oh, was I really doing that?” Was there anything that maybe stood out to you? Maybe start with you, Sonny, and then Kasey.

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah. I think one of the biggest things that stood out for me was my ability—or I should say my lack of ability—to empathize in the right way. I always thought I was, you know, a very caring individual. But in—through this, you know, leadership training, I realized that oftentimes I would jump into a problem-solver kind of mode, where I would immediately be like, “Okay, you're bringing me a problem.” And I would attack the problem. And, “Okay, let's fix this!”, when there was an opportunity there to meet that individual and kind of empathize. And say, “Okay, well, how is this impacting your day-to-day? How is this impacting your ability to show up for work and do things?” And so, that was a big, I guess, idea or change that I didn't really focus on before, that I'm trying to focus a lot more on now.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Just that subtle shift of focusing on the problem, versus the person in the problem, in some ways, which connects to empathy. Kasey, you were chuckling there!

Kasey Rivas:
I mean, I just think everything Sonny just said is very in line with my, kind of, journey, too. But also, this process of learning really made me think and also empowered me to believe that I could do more than where I was still. Like I'm in this small leadership role. I started to believe, like, I can continue my journey. I can continue being a leader, whether it's in my organization or elsewhere, you know, at home. And I started, you know, automatically, kind of, doing these things in practice without thinking about it. And I think that's, like, one of the biggest wins for me in this process—was just that I was able to empower myself in this journey and know that I can learn beyond just being a directive leader or, like, being a problem-solver. Like, I kind of was in that same—or, you know, or being a perfectionist. I can embrace all of these things, and they can all be a part of my leadership journey. And I can also recognize that other people have all these different aspects and embrace those as well.

Pete Behrens:
One of the things—I think it's frustrating—is, you know, you get these new insights in yourself. You start seeing leadership differently, and then all of a sudden, you start to see other leaders differently. And I'm curious if you feel some frustration, or you see some things now in other leaders. Where it's like, oh, man, that's a mistake or a missed opportunity! Or, you know—how are you handling that? Are you seeing that, and how are you handling it?

Kasey Rivas:
I have definitely recognized this in my own organization, amongst leaders. A lot of leaders that I work with, a lot of the different—whether it's at the executive-level or, you know, mid-level or down, a lot of the leaders have just, kind of, gotten there by happenstance or, like, over time. And they haven't gone through these different trainings, like this training, right? And so, I am recognizing, like, “Wait! That person would really, really benefit from, you know, this process, this journey!” Because it—you don't think, like, you think, “I'm a manager. I have all the pieces I need.” But you only know what you know. And so, I am recognizing that as I'm, like, meeting with different people, I'm like, “This person would really benefit from this, you know, leadership training!” Because it is an amazing process, and it's a journey, and you really learn about yourself, as well as others, in that process.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Interesting and frustrating at the same time. Sonny, any thoughts on that?

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah. And the only thing I would add to that is—it also allowed me to pay attention a little bit more to the impact to the other people in the team. So, when I see something, you know, a leader do something like that, taking a quick scan of the room and seeing everyone else's, you know, nonverbals. It's been eye-opening to be able to recognize that there is a direct impact to some of those items that—or some of those decisions that people are making or some of the words that they're using. Seeing that direct nonverbal impact by others—that's kind of what I'm starting to pick up on a lot more. And just trying to understand, “Okay, how can I assist with that? How can I correct that? How can I prevent that from happening again so that these individuals can remain engaged in this project or in this opportunity?”

Kasey Rivas:
I love that you said that, Sonny, because I just—I found that I've been trying to find ways that I can demonstrate or model, like, what I've learned with other leaders in those situations. Where I'm seeing—like, how are other people reacting? Is there a chance for me to, kind of, step in and model what should be done here? So anyway, I just, sorry I jumped in there! I just wanted to say that I found myself doing that too, kind of, watching, and then also finding ways that I can potentially step in or model. Like, you know, maybe they'll catch onto—like, this is how we should be doing it. Because people are responding to this, you know, this model behavior.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. It's interesting how much awareness plays a part. Like, you've become more aware, and all of the sudden, you see things, right? Which gives you access to scan the room, gives you access to actually assess in real time. And what's cool about that—it's a real learning process, even if you're not doing it yourself. You can learn how other leaders are doing it just by seeing and observing that. It's interesting.

You know, both of you went through what we call a cohort program—right?—where it's not just one-on-one coaching, not just a class. It's really, kind of, that little bit more intimate group of leaders that are on a journey together, like a hiking group or something. Describe that a little bit for me. What was that like? Were you surprised by it? Was it, you know—it's a little different than a lot of leaders get when they're thinking about leadership education in a classroom, one-on-one coaching, which are probably the typical leadership development models. So, I'm curious for you guys to maybe share that experience.

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah. For me, it was kind of comforting being around, like-minded individuals, you know? [Laughs] It's just, like, oh my gosh! They're going through the same troubles that I'm going through! And, yeah, I am not going crazy. I am, you know, thinking the right way. And so, that was—there was some comfort in that, but there was also some accountability there as well, which is kind of unique with the cohort. And it was, you know, meeting on a week-by-week basis. You know, we're going to discuss something; we're going to learn something; we're going to commit to practice. And then, you know, coming back the next week, and now you have to face your cohort and say, “Okay, did I practice? Did I do the thing? Did I pass? Did I fail?” And, you know, it's kind of almost like a little weekly retrospective that you don't really get with some of the other classes when it's just, kind of, a two-day session, and then you move on. So, that was one of the parts of it that really worked out the best for me.

Kasey Rivas:
Yeah. I mean, I would say exactly what you said, Sonny. Adding to that, I will say I was nervous, a little bit scared, jumping into this type of learning. I tend to be a little bit of an introvert, and so I was like, “Man, what is this going to look like, to be talking to strangers about my leadership skills?” And my, you know, weekly—but we—there was a warmth to it, and there was this camaraderie or kinship that we built over the weeks and over the, you know, the two iterations of the cohort. And with that, I learned so much, because I was free to, like, be open and share and be vulnerable. And I don't think I would have had that same experience in a larger classroom setting or, you know, setting where you're just sitting there listening to somebody teach you, right? So, I think it's just incredibly valuable. And the accountability is—you know, if you're somebody who likes to, like, show up for people, or you're, like—don't want to fail people, it's amazing. Because the accountability. You're really showing up every week. And you're doing your work. And it makes you remember during the week, as you're having your team meetings and your projects that you're working on. It reminds you, like, “Oh, I need to be practicing, so then, when I go meet with my cohort at the end of the week, I can report back on what I did!” So, yeah, I think it's just a—such a more rich experience than you would get in just a typical classroom.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah. Yeah, it's interesting how that, almost, I don't know the other person—makes you more accountable. Sometimes we do these cohorts inside of a company, and the leaders already know each other, and so sometimes there's this weird element of, “Well, I don't have to show up this time.” Or they, you know—there's these excuses. And for some reason, these cohorts that, you know—leaders coming from different companies. That accountability feels stronger. And I'm not sure what the dynamics of that is, or what the human side of that is. But it's definitely an interesting one.

Kasey Rivas:
Yeah. I mean, I was sometimes even thinking, like, I have to show up so I can find out how so-and-so did on their, like, goal for the week, right? Or what they really wanted to focus on and work on. Whereas, definitely if it was my own work team, I probably would have found, potentially, an excuse to not show up. Like, oh, I have another meeting, or I need—I have a lot of work to do. I can't show up. So, definitely that stranger accountability. Whatever that is, that comes into play with this.

Sonny Mendoza:
Oh, absolutely. Yeah, I would agree.

Pete Behrens:
You know, it's a bit of—I tell leaders when they do a program like this, or even a classroom setting, like, it's okay to be selfish, to some degree. Like, pull away from your work and—you know, investing in yourself is a bit selfish, right? It is a bit—you know, you're spending time on yourself, but hopefully for, you know, a better purpose, right? Hopefully for improvement in some dimension in the organization. Was there ever a moment—you know, Kasey, you've reminded me—was there ever a moment of, “Oh, crap, why did I do this?” Or, you know, “What did I get myself into here?” [Laughs] Did you—did either of you ever experience that, like, regret, I guess, through the program? And how'd you get through it?

Kasey Rivas:
The moment all of the calendar invites came through for the weekly meetings, I was like, “What did I do?” [Laughs] But in the end, like, what I gained is so much more than the time that was, like, that was invested. It was so well worth it. And I gained so much. I'm a different person than I was when I started for sure, which—I think that might be interesting to hear. But I am! I'm—and I think it—part of it is around the journey and learning about leadership in general. But, also, it's about being vulnerable in that space with strangers and that cohort. And you do change a little bit, because you're learning from them, and you're growing with them into something more and something different.

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah, I would agree, Kasey. And I—the only thing I would add to that would be that moment that I discovered something in myself that I didn't know was there, or didn't really, kind of—I was like, “Oh no, I—why am I here? This is not a good feeling, because I'm, like, exposing, you know, or I'm learning something that, wow, I thought I was good at.” Or “I thought I understood this!” And so, there's a little bit of that hesitation of, “Oh, this might turn out really, really bad for me, so why am I here?” But, yeah, sticking with it and realizing that, yes, there is learning that needs to happen. And really, the rest of the cohort kind of being there, lifting you up, exposing some of their vulnerabilities as well just, kind of, made you feel like, “Okay, nobody's perfect. We're all learning here. It's okay!”

Kasey Rivas:
Growth hurts. I had to remind myself that a couple times. I'm like, my son gets growing pains, right? Like, growth isn't easy, and growth isn't painless, right? So definitely there were those, kind of, moments of, like, “Ugh, there's something in me I need to change.” And that doesn't always feel good, but I had to remind myself growth is not easy!

Pete Behrens:
No. I remind leaders, sometimes, practicing like this—it’s like going back to middle school. It's like, you're learning this new skill that's not comfortable yet, and so it comes out very awkward. And just like a middle schooler trying to learn to socialize, right? [Laughs] These programs are not cheap, right? They're not inexpensive. And I'm curious—was it difficult to get funding for this? And if it's not too difficult to ask or answer, you know, what was that like to actually budget for this and get this part of your—to put this into your plan?

Kasey Rivas:
So, coming from a nonprofit, as you can imagine, this wasn't in our budget. I actually got a grant for leadership training, and this was what I chose to use that grant for, which—I'm really happy that I did in the end. But definitely, if you're working in, kind of, this nonprofit space, it's important to invest in your professional development. It's important to invest in your leaders. So, I think the more organizations that can find, you know, that budget to do stuff like this with your leaders—it's super important to do. But it's not easy, definitely, like, in this world where, you know, funds are not easy to come by. It's not easy, but it's definitely worth the investment.

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah, absolutely. And for me, it was—thankfully, we had a couple of very small wins early on with this Agile transformation. And so we were able to, kind of, improve some of the ways that we were doing things. And we were able to increase efficiencies. And so, I just kind of leveraged that to say we could be even better, right? And there are additional opportunities out there for us to improve, but we have to go out and learn them. We have to discover them. We have to be a part of that community. So for me, personally, it was just kind of being able to have those small wins to, kind of, lean on to show that we're at the start of this journey. And we could go a lot farther if we continue, and we're dedicated to it.

Pete Behrens:
Well, I'm glad to hear that this wasn't punishment for both of you! [Laughs] We more often get the desire to change side versus the I have to change side. So I appreciate your effort to get the funding for that. One of the things that I find to be the most valuable is when somebody else notices a change in us. And I'm curious if either of you have had that experience from things you've been working on, where you were recognized or somehow it stood out to somebody that something's different or not the same as it usually is. And I’m curious if there's a story there to share.

Kasey Rivas:
So, I actually—recently, my manager was out on leave for some time, and I was stepping into, kind of, some of the leadership of the projects that she had been overseeing to help move things along. And the feedback I got from others on the team, as well as her manager, was all positive. It was like, “Wow! Like, you've done a really great job of not just moving this work forward but bringing us all together to do this.” And, you know, kind of fit all the pieces. And recognizing who's good at what and getting that, you know, getting the work out of everybody from different things. And so, feedback was a part of my goal in my journey—was, you know, inviting feedback. And I've tried to do that, and I think I've gotten it, and I've gotten that positive feedback of seeing that kind of change of—Kasey was kind of a little bit of a wallflower, you know? [Laughs] And kind of stepping out of that introverted wallflower and having a voice and kind of stepping into a leadership role and getting really good feedback from others around me. So, I've definitely experienced that very recently.

Pete Behrens:
So now we have the Kasey, the lion, or—what's your image besides the wallflower? [Laughs]

Kasey Rivas:
I don't think we're quite at lion stage, but we're getting there! Like, I'm somewhere between wallflower and lion, somewhere on that continuum.

Pete Behrens:
Awesome, awesome. We're going to have to build that, the metric there, and choose your animal! [Laughs] I like it. Sonny, how about for you?

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah. For me, I think probably the biggest recognition—and it’s probably the one that I'm most happy about—is with my team. And as we work together to start looking at, you know, 2024 and what we're going to do, they noticed that I'm a little bit more open and a lot less directive. I am asking a little bit more questions and not just problem solving and really kind of trying to work with them to collaborate and deliver a team objective or a team goal. And so, I think that that's probably one of the biggest changes I would say that we're seeing—is that we're having a lot more, just, very candid, very open discussions within our team. And I like that, you know? I think they're starting to feel a little bit more comfortable with that.

Pete Behrens:
Yeah, yeah. That's awesome. And that's, you know, that is the goal when we think about leadership, right? It's not just your change, but how does your change impact other change, right? How does your change impact the team, the organization, the customers, the experience, you know? We call that catalyst. And that's really the key, kind of, aspect of, you know, the change agent in an organization. Maybe as just, kind of, a parting question, or what to leave some of our watchers and listeners with, is—what might you say to somebody who, you know, really hasn't thought, or maybe has thought about it, but, you know, is not really sure what to do as a next step in in their leadership development. But, any thoughts or comments about what you might recommend to them as something they might consider? Besides just saying, “Hey, join this program!” That's very selfish. But something, maybe, a little bit more, you know, nuanced. Or, you know—yeah, I'll leave it to you!

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah. Where my mind goes is—don't be afraid to admit that you don't know something. And then take that as a challenge to go find out. And—regardless if it's Agile or anything else. But it's just—I think that's one of the most difficult pieces to, as a leader, to admit. It’s like, “Oh, I don't know that, and I want to go learn it!” And so, that's kind of where I would, you know, leave it. And hopefully, others can feed off of that.

Kasey Rivas:
You said that so well. How do I follow that?

Pete Behrens:
How do you follow that one?

Kasey Rivas:
I know! I mean, I would probably say, you know, just remembering that, as people, we're always growing. And so, taking a step to be a little bit uncomfortable in your growth and finding out what that is, whether it's investing in yourself, in this leadership journey, or similar. It's something that we all need to do as we continue on our path. And that investing in yourself, in leaders, in being a better leader, is not just for somebody—like I had previously thought, like, just somebody who's already a manager, somebody who's, you know, in the software world. Like, that's where I—my mind had went when I thought about Agile and when I thought about, you know, this leadership journey. And it really is a space for everybody. No matter where you're at, on, kind of, your career path, there's an opportunity to invest in yourself and learn more and grow and, you know, grow in your career path. But I think Sonny said it perfectly! [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
Ditto! You know, but both of you, I think, describe, perfectly capture, you know, this catalyst leader, right? The courage to make a decision or to take a step when you don't have all that information or when it's scary or, you know, you don't know the outcome. And then the second thing is being comfortable in that mess, right? Because change and complexity and speed and, you know, our economy and everything that's going on right now in the world, right? It's messy. And how, as a leader, do you start getting comfortable in that uncomfort? And how do you start making decisions without all that data? So, you know, to us and the way we apply Agile leadership and catalyst leadership—that's core. And I think you guys both describe that incredibly well. So, might look at hiring you as salespeople. So, thank you! [Laughs]

Sonny Mendoza:
Thanks!

Kasey Rivas:
I might have to move more towards the lion. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:
So if you don't form a 70s band, we might have a job offer for you as ALJ salespeople. Well, thank you both for sharing just a little bit of your experience through these programs! And just—I just want to say thank you for taking the time and the money it took and the energy it took to invest in yourself. So I just want to say thank you for that.

Kasey Rivas:
Well, thank you!

Sonny Mendoza:
Yeah, absolutely, Pete. Thank you very much! The program has been absolutely wonderful. So well worth it.

Kasey Rivas:
Definitely.

Mary Parker Follett: A Voice of Change in a Resistant World

pete@agileleadershipjourney.com (Pete Behrens) — Mon, 29 Jan 2024 22:47:20 GMT

Celebrating a woman ahead of her time.

In the bustling streets of early 20th-century Boston, where intellectual fervor met rigid social norms, Mary Parker Follett navigated a world that was often unready for her progressive ideas. Born in 1868 into an era where women's voices in academia and management were seldom given any chance to be heard, Parker Follett's journey was not just about her own aspirations but a testament to her unyielding belief in the power of collective wisdom and more democratic leadership.

Living just a stone's throw away from Harvard, Parker Follett faced the impenetrable barriers of gender norms. Harvard, a bastion of higher education and intellectual discourse, was an exclusive domain for men. *This, however, did not deter Parker Follett. With the city as her classroom and its diverse inhabitants as her teachers, she immersed herself in the world of ideas and management practices.

Her days were often spent in the shadows of Harvard's libraries and lecture halls, where she engaged in discussions with peers who had access to these hallowed spaces. These interactions, though informal, were rich in intellectual exchange and sparked in Parker Follett a desire to challenge the status quo of organizational management and societal leadership.

Leadership Power Dynamics

Parker Follett's frustrations with the system were not only personal; they were deeply intertwined with her observations of the prevailing power dynamics in organizations and society. In a world dominated by "power-over" structures, where leadership was equated with control and authority, Parker Follett envisioned a different paradigm. She saw "power-with" as the essence of true leadership – a collaborative approach where power was not wielded over others but exercised with them through interaction and cooperation.

Her revolutionary ideas about leadership were born from her keen observation of everyday interactions and conflicts. Parker Follett believed that conflict was not a destructive force but a creative one if approached constructively. She advocated for resolving conflicts through integration rather than domination or compromise. This approach sought solutions that met the interests of all parties involved, a principle that would later become a cornerstone in modern conflict resolution and negotiation practices.

Parker Follett's insight into the dynamics of group behavior and organizational structure was equally pioneering. She perceived organizations not as static entities defined by rigid hierarchies but as living systems characterized by complex human interactions. This perspective led her to emphasize the importance of holistic approaches in management, considering the organization as an integrated whole where changes in one part would invariably impact the others.

Despite the brilliance of her ideas, Parker Follett's path was laden with challenges. In a society where women were expected to remain on the peripheries of academic and professional arenas, her contributions were often overlooked or undervalued. Yet, she persevered, driven by an unwavering commitment to her beliefs and an innate ability to see beyond the constraints of her time.

Amplifying Parker Follett’s Voice

Parker Follett's writings and lectures slowly began to resonate with a broader audience. She wrote extensively, pouring her groundbreaking ideas into articles, books, and speeches. Her work on management as a profession, emphasizing ethical standards and specialized training, laid the groundwork for modern management education.

Parker Follett's legacy is a narrative of resilience, intellect, and vision. Her ideas on democratic leadership, conflict resolution, and the power of collective endeavor were not only ahead of her time but also remarkably relevant to contemporary management practices. Despite being confined by the rigid structures of her era, Parker Follett broke through barriers with the strength of her ideas, leaving an indelible mark on the world of organizational theory and practice.

In the end, Parker Follett's story is not just about the struggles and triumphs of a woman in a male-dominated society. It is about the enduring power of ideas and the impact of a visionary mind that dared to challenge, rethink, and transform the way we understand leadership and organizations even today.

The Agile Leadership Journey not only celebrates Parker Follett’s life and work, but continues to carry her voice into the generations to come. So while women have made many tremendous strides in the past century to equalize power in society and business, many of her key insights continue to confront all genders. Moving past traditional power over struggles to power with alignment and integration not only helps women to rise, it helps all of us and our organizations to rise.

To learn more, we encourage you to read a collection of her works in the book, The Essential Mary Parker Follett edited by François Héon, Albie Davis, Jennifer Jones-Patulli, and Sébastien Damart.

Mary Parker Follett's Education and Work: A Summary

Follett completed her preparatory education at Thayer Academy in the late 1880s. She attended The Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women (later Radcliffe College) where she focused on government, economics, philosophy, history, and law. She spent a year at Newnham College, Cambridge in 1890 where she studied law, economics, and political science. And later back in Boston, took additional courses at Boston College.

Her professional career started in the early 20th century as a social worker in the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston. She established community centers, focused on juvenile delinquency, and promoted the concept of community centers as a crucial part of social work. Throughout her career, she wrote and spoke on topics related to democracy, social work, and management. Her notable works include The Speaker of the House of Representatives (1896), The New State (1918), and Creative Experience (1924).

In the 1920s and 1930s she became a sought-after consultant and lecturer focusing on organizational behavior and management. She lectured at institutions like the London School of Economics and was a pioneer in developing theories about leadership, conflict resolution, and group dynamics. During this time she contributed her expertise to various organizations and committees, including advising the U.S. President's Committee on Administrative Management.

*Harvard University officially opened its doors to women through the establishment of Radcliffe College, which was initially founded as the "Harvard Annex" in 1879. Radcliffe College was founded by Elizabeth Cary Agassiz and other women to provide women with the opportunity to receive higher education, especially since Harvard College did not admit women at that time. Radcliffe was formally chartered as a college in 1894 and functioned as a female coordinate institution to Harvard, where women could receive instruction from Harvard faculty. A few notable women who later attended Harvard, once open to women, were Hellen Keller, Margaret Mead, and Gertrude Stein.

About the Au thor

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn.

54: Feedback Fundamentals with Frank Fitzlaff

Wed, 24 Jan 2024 02:58:03 GMT

Do our leaders give enough of the right kind of feedback?

In this episode of the Relearning Leadership podcast, host Pete Behrens is joined by special guest Frank Fitzlaff, a Zurich-based Agile Coach and Agile Leadership Journey Guide.

Pete and Frank discuss how to foster a culture of continuous improvement through feedback. Discover why feedback is not just a skill but a muscle that requires regular exercise, the crucial role of psychological safety in effective feedback, and the transformative power of positive reinforcement in the workplace.

Whether you're an experienced leader or just starting your leadership journey, this episode offers valuable insights and practical tips for making feedback a powerful tool for growth and collaboration.

Tune in to learn how effective feedback – both positive and constructive – can transform the way you lead and communicate!

Frank Fitzlaff, Agile Coach

With more than 30 years of experience in IT and telecommunications leadership, Frank’s strengths are agile transformations, business agility, product management, and international business development. Frank is an Agile Coach for flowdays and at Swisscom.

In addition, he serves as an Advisory Board Member for the startup, Gravity. In 2014, Frank discovered the concept of agile leadership and has since consistently implemented the agile principle of servant leader and coach with his teams and customers.

As a former top volleyball player, Frank has a high degree of resilience and flexibility – and knows that a well-rehearsed team is always better than the sum of the individual players.

Connect with Frank

Relearning from this episode…

Feedback is a Continuous Learning Process

Feedback is a muscle that needs constant training to maintain its strength. Learning how to give and accept feedback is a continuous learning process. This ongoing practice is crucial because feedback skills can deteriorate without regular use.

Psychological Safety in Feedback

The dynamics of giving and receiving feedback can vary greatly depending on the level of trust and comfort among team members. In environments where psychological safety is high, feedback can be more direct and effective. Conversely, in less safe environments, feedback needs to be approached more carefully, respecting a number of sensitivities and situational context.

The Power of Positive Feedback

Expressions of gratitude, recognition of good work, and sharing compliments are vital for team morale and individual motivation. This positive reinforcement is often just as impactful as monetary rewards and is essential for building a supportive and collaborative work culture.

Explore:

Related Episodes

5: Rebuild Your Leadership Habits

How does intention subvert accidental leadership? Crystal Mills, a Regional Vice President for a Canadian credit union, shares her rollercoaster story exploring the highs and lows in rebuilding her new leadership habits amid overwhelming stress and anxiety.

Both Crystal’s story, and our discussion following, is with Jasmine Kernaleguen, a leadership disruptor who inspired Crystal’s new leadership path and engaged Crystal on her journey.

7: A Lifelong Pursuit of Better

Why should a leader prioritize learning? Dean Leffingwell, a business innovator and founder of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), has dedicated his work life in pursuit of a better way forward, both as a leader himself and in building companies helping others to be better.

Pete goes behind the curtain with Dean, not to explore his latest creation, but rather to explore the leader behind it. As a leadership mentor and advisor to Pete over the years, Dean shares his own leadership journey so we may learn from his experience.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

Do we really need more feedback training? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today I'm joined by Frank Fitzlaff, an Agile Leadership Journey Guide, based in Zurich, Switzerland. He works as an internal coach with Swisscom and an external coach with Flowdays. Now, we know feedback is a core principle of agility. Without it, we really don't know where and how to pivot. Yet, this landscape is a pretty interesting one. And what I'm hopeful you'll learn from our discussion is why we actually need more practice. So, I expect you'll enjoy my talk—my discussion—with Frank.

Welcome to the show, Frank!

Frank Fitzlaff:

Thank you, Pete!

Pete Behrens:

Well, it's great to have you. And I just want to lay it on the table: do we really need more feedback training?

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah. Thank you, Pete, for that question. This is really an awesome one. Whenever I engage with people as an Agile coach within the companies, then I normally get the answer: “No, no, we are fully fine! Feedback, everything, okay? We don't need that!” [Laughs] And then as soon as I start digging a little bit and ask a few more questions, I get, then, the impression, and I know, “Yes, we all have to train!” And after many years in that field, I see feedback as a muscle. So, it's something which we have to train all the time. We need to constantly think about it and have it alive and experience it. Otherwise it gets smaller and doesn't have that strength anymore. So, I guess everybody has, from time to time, the need—or would benefit from getting and enjoying some feedback training.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. I love that metaphor, right? The strength training. You know, we often think about—something that's acquired is done, right? I acquired knowledge; I'm done. Or I'm, you know—I've acquired a particular skill, and I'm done. “I can ride a bicycle!” And you're saying feedback is different than that, right? Feedback is different than that bicycle training, where, “Okay, I know how to do that!” It's actually something that deteriorates, or that falls away if we're not exercising it. That's an interesting way to look at it.

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah, yeah, I think, sometimes, the—giving and receiving feedback is not so natural. If we do it, maybe, in an environment where we are at home, so we're very close to family, that's easier. We’re very candid; we’re straightforward. Boom! Out of it. But as soon as we are in a professional environment, it's not an easy thing. Sometimes it's harder; sometimes it's easier. But it's not something which is really, really natural. As an example: when I engage with teams and then I ask them, “Hey, what about feedback?” They say, “Yeah, that's what we do! Well, we are working agile, you know? We, of course, are professionals in giving and receiving feedback.” And then I just ask, “What was the last behavior within your team you improved because of feedback, which you got in a retrospective?” And then, sometimes, it gets very quiet. [Laughs] And just—like, we tend to lie to ourselves regarding feedback. So—but then, when we start engaging with people and we get, also, some, like, impulses and we learn how to deal with feedback, then it's also fun. And it's a great growth opportunity. Feedback is a perfect growth opportunity.

Pete Behrens:

I mean, in one sense, you can think about feedback—is, like, continuous. I can even see our dialogue has feedback, right? We are responding to each other. You've got some verbal—or some non-verbal—you know, cues that are going on, in terms of that feedback. How you respond to questions and answers is feedback. So, I imagine, to some degree, a team's thinking—like, we live in feedback. Like, we're talking about things all the time. So, take us that one step further. Like, what's the difference between this and, maybe, a team even, you know, entering in that space of, “Hey, that—you screwed up that field!” Or, you know, “We built that presentation a little bit incorrectly.” I mean, that's feedback! Take us a little deeper than that. Like, what's the next step down that really, kind of, maybe, we're missing.

Frank Fitzlaff:

If you have, within a team, a situation where you have a very high psychological safety, then it's easy to also go down to the next step and to be kind to each other and to—I already—I saw in teams that they were extremely blunt to each other and just said stuff directly, which is completely not according to feedback rules, but it works perfectly! [Laughs] In other teams, it's not the case. So how do you deal with that? And so—then that's the moment where you need to have, like, training kicking in. Otherwise feedback—when we say we give once-a-year or twice-a-year feedback to each other, and it's kind of an artificial round, then it's just like hogging animals in a zoo. So, we're just, like, very nice. We are very comfortable, and everybody is just, like, affirmed. “Yes, you do it well!” And that's it. But that's not the real power of feedback. If we really care about people, we have to be, like, honest, critical, candid. That's what we need, then, as a team. And this is the next step. The next step, sometimes, needs training. So there are good opportunities you can do to get to that level, but it's something which is not coming by itself.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. I mean, you mentioned the—maybe the biggest one that, maybe, we see is the lack of self-awareness. The lack of—you know, we've got the cognitive or confirmation bias. We see what we want to see; we hear what we want to hear. Is that the biggest challenge when it comes to, maybe, the hurdles for feedback? Or, maybe, touch on, maybe, what you see as maybe some of the large challenges when it comes to giving and receiving feedback.

Frank Fitzlaff:

So, that's definitely one part. So that—you need to have a certain self-awareness, that you even realize how important feedback is, so you can hear the theory about feedback and how it will improve the behavior in the team. And it strengthens psychological safety, and so on. That's one thing to hear it. And then the next one—but what does it mean for me? So, how do I get there? And the biggest hurdle there is, then, that you not only hear it—theoretical—but that you really try to experience it. And how do you try it? Within Swisscom, as an example, we have a concept of a Feedback Dojo. So that's—we really go to the teams, and we have, like, some exercises where we train giving—but not only giving!—but also receiving feedback, how to do it with the words, with the behaviors. So that I say, “First, I observe something.” Then this I interpret. And then, the next thing is—”That's what makes me feel like blah!” And in the end, “I would”, I liked”, and “Something I wished”. So then, just, first to, like, give people the confirmation that they can address a sensitive topic in a way that it will not offend or hurt the other person at all. And that you need to train.

So, then we bring up artificial business situations and let them experience it. One is the Observer. Two are giving, receiving feedback and then share how it was. Was it also honest? Because, I mean, I might go through all these steps like an engineer. And I say, “It's A, B, C, D.” And that does not work at all! So, it has to be with the right tone, with the intention. It has to be honest. The body language needs to be appropriate, and so on. So, then we try this out, and then, afterwards, the teams realize it's kind of quite difficult to do that. [Laughs] What's in the next step? And then we find some small exercises where they can do—as an example, after each weekly or bi-weekly session, they have—they have someone giving feedback. If, like, the session was according to their values, rules, and so on. So, this is a small step, and then it starts growing and can do other exercises. It's really something you need to train. For some people, it’s easier, and for others, it's important to do, but it needs training.

Pete Behrens:

Sounds like a feedback spin class at your local gym! [Laughs]

Frank Fitzlaff:

Exactly. Yeah, yeah. Kind of spin class. And you need to repeat it regularly! Exactly.

Pete Behrens:

Exactly. What was interesting—and when you were talking about that—it's almost more about me and how am I set up? How am I—what is my mindset? What is my body language? What is my tone? What is my presence? There's almost, you know—I often think, you know, “I'm giving feedback. It's about the other person.” But you're almost putting a mirror on here and saying, “No, it's really about you and how you're presenting.” Can you maybe touch on that a little deeper? Because that's interesting!

Frank Fitzlaff:

Okay. I think that's very important, a bit depending on the situation. So, if you are in a very comfortable situation where you know the people, each other, as an example, it's kind of a one-to-one, which regularly happens every week. And you have a high, good understanding of each other, and so on. Then it's not so important if something is not really right. And so you can just tell it and explain it. But if you would like to give feedback to someone you're not, like, working every day with, and it's maybe a sensitive topic there, you need to really, like, prepare yourself so that—maybe to even write it down, what you would like to say. And then you just go through it, and how will I do it? Maybe using it in a catalyst conversation way, where you, like, first say, “Okay, let's align what we will talk about to be sure that the other person really is in the mood to receive feedback.” And then you give it, but then you need to give it right away, directly, boom! Not like talking around it. Because it's very difficult. The other person is waiting for it. And then try to get out there by having a common agreement. And that's something which you really need, then, to prepare. So, I think it really depends on the situation where you want to give feedback. And sometimes it's not so important that like body language and everything really fits in. And sometimes it’s extremely important, and you just need to be aware of the situation. And, yeah, to be able to play with it. I think that's important, to make people realize, yeah.

Pete Behrens:

I remember Brené Brown saying, “Clear is kind.” Right? So, how can you be direct, honest, authentic, without being a jerk, right? Without being rude or opinionated. And it sounds like what you're saying is: you train them to kind of present this from a purely, “Hey, I'm seeing, and I'm feeling, and I would appreciate—”. Right? It's all these words that are respectful and authentic in the way you're presenting it. Is that a fair way to say it?

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yes, absolutely. And if we do, as an example, team feedback sessions. It's something which, also, I do on a regular basis. That means, like, a team coming together and then thinking about—what should we improve as a team that each person—her, himself—then has, like, a better, a more effective, way to, like, perform, and so on. So, just, out of me, what does it mean for the team? And then we have, exactly, situations. We can present those things on the whiteboard, and people—and there I really listen. And whenever somebody is not using the right words, like, “I observe” or “I saw” or “It's something which is, like‚—”. The most—the biggest failure people do is, “Then somebody told me that.” So it's not direct from that person directly. Then I immediately stop, because I know it goes completely wrong. I say, “No, no, please just focus on—what did you observe? You! And please tell it in a way that—”. Even start the sentence with something as simple as—every sentence you start with, “I observe”. Just—then it goes in a direction that nobody is really then heard in that session. And in other situations—it's natural, teams, for them, it's really no problem, and it flows. It goes well; no interaction is needed. It really depends on the situation. But it can be massive destruction if you have somebody giving, with good intention, a feedback in a way somebody cannot handle. It's really bad.

Pete Behrens:

You know, I know—so, you're talking about the downside of opinions, the downside of hearsay, the downside of, you know, presenting biased information, or, you know, perspectives that, maybe, are, you know, loosely coupled. I'm wondering about the other side of this, though. One of the things that we see is not enough appreciation, not enough positive feedback, not enough “thank you’s”, not enough “Great job!”, “kudos!” I'm wondering about that, because what we hear is, you know—the negative feedback hits the brain much harder than the positives, right? So you need more positive feedback, yet we don't really have a structure for it. We don't really have a very good place to put it. I'm curious on your thoughts on the positive side of feedback.

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah. I think this is extremely important in a team. Not only in a team, also across teams. That whenever you have an occasion—that you can thank somebody because they did a good thing. Not just, like, for nothing. Then people realize it, that it's just like a thank you because of a thank you, but it's really, if it's honest—and a thank you or just, like, saying, “Hey, that was great, what you did!” Or “I learned a lot.” Or “That's a thought I didn't have before. Thanks a lot for sharing it!” Very simple things are so powerful. It's so powerful! It’s more powerful than money and just, like, salary increase or whatever. This is really the essence, where, like—why I think many people go to work. Because you want to have, like, an appreciation of what you do, and somebody just, like, realizes you're there and you're doing a good job and tells it to you. So, this is so important.

How to, like, trigger that? I try to go by good example and just doing it myself. And just trying, then, to influence others to also do it and—or just, like, asking, “Hey, that was something which we really benefit as a team. What do you think?” And then just, like, push a bit, that people get out of themselves. Because if you get a compliment which is honest, you like it! You love it. And it's easy to share a compliment to somebody else, and they also like it. It's a positive circle. So, you influence each other, and you like to work with that person! It's very, very simple. And that's so important, especially in large companies, where you might work with somebody, and then two weeks later, you work with somebody else. So, just, like, to get in a, really, collaboration. It's so simple: just say thank you if that was something which had been done well.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. One of the tips or tricks I use sometimes is—if I get a kudos or a thank you or well done—you know, maybe it's a keynote speech or, you know, it's something. I'll often use a technique of asking a question. Like, “So, what—thank you!—and what did you like about it?” Or “Thank you! And, you know, what was it that caused you to say that?” So it's—it still can be a learning moment, which I think is really cool, right? Even positive feedback loops. I think if you're prepared to just ask a question—can be a really interesting way to dive into that a little bit more there.

Frank Fitzlaff:

There’s even another aspect to it. Something which—I don't know how it is in the U.S. culture. But, like, in Switzerland, we tend to, like, talk positive feedback down. [Laughs] So, somebody makes a compliment, and then we tend to say, “Oh, okay. It was—we really like it, but it was not so important. It's okay.” And I really—some years ago, I said, “Okay. I will stop doing that. I, just—whenever I get a compliment, I just say ‘Thank you very much’”!

Pete Behrens:

Good!

Frank Fitzlaff:

That's it. Just to say “Thank you for a compliment.” And doing that, also, in a team context—then you realize the other person, which gave a compliment, feels much more appreciated than when I say, “Oh, that was nothing. It's self-understanding. I do that all the time.” Just to talk it small. No, no, no! Just, like, say “Thank you very much! That's something I really enjoyed. You recognize that. Thank you.”

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's—yeah—the humbleness character, right? Of just, “Oh, it was nothing.” Yeah. What—so you're talking about how to, kind of, get better, right? Go to class on giving, receiving feedback a little bit. But what about when you can't prepare? Like, that surprise, that—you know, something happens, and something gets triggered. It could be a comment, could be something that a customer says, could be a meeting goes wrong, right? Something surprises you. Is there a way we can be prepared, or is there a way we can be better at those kind of feedback loops, when we don't have a chance to, kind of, practice and get ready for it?

Frank Fitzlaff:

Maybe something there is that you try, then, you try—and that's also something which is hard to do, because you need to control yourself. You try to not, like, react immediately, right? So if something just, like, triggers me, it's kind of the trigger, the flight, freeze, fight mode that is triggered, somehow, in myself. Then just saying, “No! Just, like, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.” And then maybe, just, like let it go. And after the meeting, go to that person and check. Did I really understand it right? Was it something which really was—that was meant as—it should trigger me or not? To connect with that person instead of reacting immediately. And then it's like boom, boom, boom. Go back and forth. And then you're maybe in a meeting with ten people, and eight people feel very uncomfortable because there’s a kind of strange situation evolving, and it's escalating. And at the end, it's no need—it's no benefit for anybody. So, if there is a chance to just, like, stay calm, to just like, “Yes, okay. Yeah, let's talk about it later,” or something. Just, like, to park it for a moment and then to go into a one-on-one with that person. And I have good experience with that. Yeah.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. I think that's—I think David Rock says you got about—he does some neuroleadership things and says you have a few milliseconds to kind of hijack that emotional adrenaline that gets kicked off when something surprises us and triggers us back. But, yeah, the concept of breath, the concept of space, the concept of time is so critical. And just being able to just take a moment, you know.

Frank Fitzlaff:

It’s very hard to find the right line. Because sometimes it's really important that you react immediately and stop it. Otherwise it gets worse, right? But sometimes you have to. And sometimes you should not. So when is—which situation is difficult to find the right balance? Yeah.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it's interesting. I've got a book on my shelf here by Edgar Schein. He talks about giving and receiving help, and I love the way he twists that, right? It's not feedback. It's—he calls the book Helping. And I love that notion, that idea of thinking about this as wanting to help or others wanting to help. Versus—I don't know—feedback often has that negative, kind of, bad vibe. In music—kind of, notion of—it's, oh, you know, it just shuts your ears down because it hurts! Versus, maybe, our language isn't quite right. Is it like—I mean, this is English feedback. Does the same apply in Switzerland and Germany, in terms of the language?

Frank Fitzlaff:

It’s even worse, because the term feedback is English, right? So, when I say in German or in Swiss German, “Can I give you feedback?” That, for the other person, is clear. “Oh, wow, the shit is coming!” [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

I love it!

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah, and that's—it's a very difficult situation. And if I would say I'd like to offer help, they’re like, “Oh, well, that sounds interesting!” Because this you can even do in German—right?—or in Swiss German. But talking about feedback that's—it always has this notion of—there's an out-of-band situation, and “We need to talk serious stuff now.” And, “Oh, now I'm really prepared to just, like, just shut down everything and just be in, like, a survival mode.”

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. It's time to hijack the language. And maybe we start changing. And, you know, it's interesting how much that plays into culture, you know? We think about words, like you know, failure. You know, words that end up having, you know, feedback. Like, these are judgment words; these are right and wrong words; these are good and bad words. And, you know, words around learning words, around, you know, helping. Words around, you know, understanding. You know, just using different language around your team can likely change the culture and change the reception of the way we talk to each other.

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah, absolutely. And it's just, like, one part of the whole team process so that people act predictively, that they act kind, that they, like, honor the human being. Stuff like this, which makes the whole package, then, around it. And the feedback part is an important piece to that. Because if you only once have a situation where, within your team, or—let's say your boss gives you complete nonsense feedback, not because of the content, but in a way that it, like, hurts you. Then the trust is gone for a very, very long time. So just, like, how to rebuild the trust, if, whenever you get in contact with that person, which is your manager, maybe, and you're afraid of, “Oh, what's happening now?” It could be such a situation as we had before. I was completely surprised, not prepared, and then boom! There was this message coming. Is this, again, such a situation or not? So, just to act consistently, to prepare people to be kind. I think it's very important to have a good, also, leadership relationship to each other.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. So, maybe in closing—is there one thing you might recommend our watchers, listeners, to try, to be better, to maybe retrain themselves, or at least build a muscle on feedback?

Frank Fitzlaff:

Yeah. The—I think that's the one which you mentioned already. Just, like, give positive feedback. Start with that, and see how well it feels. It feels so good if you give it—I mean for the person which gives the feedback. It feels so good. If it's honest, it's the perfect thing to start with, and then you start, like, growing up this trust amongst each other, and then you can also go to, like, more critical pieces. It's like, in teams, we do something like the the compliment shower. So we just say, “Okay, now let's shower some with all the compliments we have!”

Pete Behrens:

I love that: compliment shower.

Frank Fitzlaff:

It's such a simple thing to do, but you cannot get out of it! I mean, if I shower you with compliments, you feel good! Even that—you know, it's something which was, “Oh, now everybody says a good thing, and there's so much other stuff as well.” But you will feel good and just, yeah, make each other feel good—that's a great thing to do.

Pete Behrens:

One of my favorites is an appreciative retrospective. And so—basically, we just walk around one-on-one and mix with people and say one thing you're appreciative about that other person. And just the power of positive feedback loops and the context of what you're thankful for, what you saw, how you saw them, how they showed up, is incredibly powerful. And so, I love your language—the shower of gifts that comes from it. So, thank you for sharing that. Well, Frank, I just want to say thank you for sharing your insights. And thank you for being one of the Guides in our community and for continuing to spread this wealth of knowledge and understanding.

Frank Fitzlaff:

Thank you! Thank you very much for the compliment, Pete! [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit our website, agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast, for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

53: Leadership Skills in Demand for 2024

Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:34:53 GMT

What leadership skills will make you stand out in 2024?

Laura Powers and Evan Leybourn of the Business Agility Institute discuss their research about skills necessary for success in today's workforce - including an agility acumen and the importance of multidisciplinary or "Pi-shaped" skills.

Laura Powers, CEO, Business Agility Institute

Laura is CEO of the Business Agility Institute. Over the course of her career, she's held a number of engineering and leadership positions and is living proof that you never quite know where your next career move may take you.

With 25+ years of product experience ranging from R&D to marketing, to sales and professional services – she has been involved in the design of electronics for space applications, aircraft engines, diapers, electric cars, and software systems at Hewlett Packard, Agilent, Sales.com, and eBay - as well as several startups you’ve never heard of.

Connect with Laura on LinkedIn

Evan Leybourn, Co-Founder & Head of Advocacy and Thought Leadership, Business Agility Institute

Evan is the co-founder of the Business Agility Institute; a fiercely independent research and advocacy organization for the next generation of companies. Companies that are agile, innovative, and dynamic - perfectly designed to thrive in today’s unpredictable markets.

As well as leading the Business Agility Institute, Evan is also the author of Directing the Agile Organisation (2012) and #noprojects; a culture of continuous value (2018).

Connect with Evan on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

Agile Acumen is Highly Valued Across Roles

BAI’s research suggests that the ability to work in an agile manner is increasingly sought after, not just in traditional agile roles like Scrum Masters or product owners, but across various positions including management and accounting. This indicates a shift toward a more dynamic, responsive, and flexible working environment in various industries.

Importance of Multidisciplinary or 'Pi-Shaped' Skills

The research highlights a trend toward valuing multidisciplinary skills in the workforce, described as 'Pi-shaped' skills. This refers to individuals who possess deep expertise in more than one functional area. Companies are seeking employees who can combine agile acumen with other skills like technical expertise, management, or coaching. This trend moves away from the traditional focus on specialized, singular expertise toward a more versatile and holistic skill set.

Changing Dynamics of Leadership and Management

The evolving role of leaders and managers in the modern workplace indicates a need for leaders to have a mix of management, technical, and coaching skills. This shift is in response to the changing work environment where leaders are expected to be more adaptable, capable of understanding and working across different functional areas, and able to foster a culture of collaboration and continuous learning.

Explore:

Related Episodes

47: How To Be An Agile Leader

What does it take to be an agile leader? Agility is often defined as the ability to move quickly and easily – but there is a second half of the definition. It is the ability to think and understand quickly. Pete Behrens explores the four key competencies in becoming a more agile leader be clear, curious, courageous, and contemplative.

43: Influence Without Authority

Brad Swanson, Agile Leadership Journey Guide and organizational systems coach shares his insights on how leaders can better impact change through influence “without pushing the command button.”

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

What are the skills required for tomorrow's workforce? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. Today, I'm lucky to be joined by two friends and colleagues from the Business Agility Institute, Laura Powers and Evan Leybourne. Laura is the CEO, based in San Francisco, California, and Evan is the Head of Advocacy and Thought Leadership based in Melbourne, Australia. And today we're going to focus on the research they conducted that was sponsored by the Scrum Alliance about skills for today's workforce, and I think the results might surprise you, as they did me. Enjoy the dialogue! Well, thanks for joining me today!

Laura Powers:

Oh, thank you for having me!

Evan Leybourn:

Looking forward to it.

Pete Behrens:

So, we're going to be pointing our listeners and watchers to some of the research links of the skills assessment that you did . I'm a little bit more interested in the why behind this research. Was there a hypothesis you were hoping to find or was driving some of this research you guys did?

Evan Leybourn:

So, let me take this one, Laura, for a sec. When we study organizations and we study what's going on there, the—what we're trying to understand are industry trends. What exactly is it that is going to help people in our industry? What is going to help people who have invested their careers and their businesses in business agility or Agile, as the case may be. And so, really, for the skills report, the work that we did with the Scrum Alliance, what we were really trying to understand was what, exactly, are companies looking for. What are they hiring for? What kind of skills? What kind of expectations are there, out there, in the marketplace today? And it was—it sounds like a fairly simple question. [Laughs] But, as we've spoken about before, it uncovered quite a few hidden assumptions that may not have always been true.

Pete Behrens:

Hm, interesting. Laura, anything you want to add to that?

Laura Powers:

Yeah. I was going to say—I remember, at one point, as we were setting this up, Evan was like, “This is really, really simple. And I just don't see, you know, what's going to come out of this that's going to be, like, you know, a new major Aha! or whatever.” And then—

Evan Leybourn:

—I believe the word I used was boring! [Laughs]

Laura Powers:

Okay, boring! So we, you know, gather the data and have everything come together. And Evan starts to dive into it. And it was really funny, because he would flip-flop back and forth between, “Yep, this is boring.” and “Oh, my God!” And then the next one would be, “Yeah, everybody knows this already.” So, it was quite a wild ride to see how this all came together.

Pete Behrens:

I would just love to be a fly in that room. That sounds like—some of the best research is when things are thrown at us that we do not expect. So, maybe, let's start there, with some of those findings. What were, maybe, one or two of the key surprises that jumped out to your team?

Evan Leybourn:

Well, let me start with what was the most boring. [Laughs}

Pete Behrens:

Okay! We’re going to go the other way. Just take over the interview! That’s totally fine, you know? [Laughs]

Evan Leybourn:

Look, but this is where we started! So, we started with the, like—what were the skills. And we're doing the analysis; we're mapping responses, because it's all qualitative. We're looking at survey responses as well as job descriptions. So, publish job descriptions on LinkedIn and so forth. And, like, surprise, surprise—communication is number one. And every single skill study from the World Economic Forum, from wherever, always says communication's number one, or at least in the top three. It's, like—that's not interesting. In the Agile space, communication being an important skill is not particularly groundbreaking. So, that was definitely the part where I'm going to Laura. It's like, how do we make this interesting? [Laughs]

But as we, sort of, dug deeper into the data, I think, really, the—two of the biggest findings which were, just, both gratifying and, I think, a little bit disruptive. The first being that agility—or what we're calling Agile Acumen, the ability to work in an agile way—is incredibly high-demand. So, whether we're talking—it doesn't matter the role. It doesn't matter whether you're a Scrum Master, a product owner, a developer, a manager, or an accountant. The expectation of organizations is that you are working in an agile way, or that you can work in an agile way. Doesn't have to be scrum; doesn't have to be a traditional agile framework. But they're expecting that acumen, that ability to exist within people. That was, I think, a bit of a surprise to see how strongly that came out. But, in contrast—

Pete Behrens:

—So, if I could—can I pause you there for a second to zoom in on that one before you jump to another point there, Evan? And maybe Laura can come in on this as well. What I found interesting about that point when I was reading that part of the research was—it's much less about a role. Like, you need acumen in a specific role or specific team player. You're really looking at the concept of the skill, regardless of position or role or responsibility, right? It's this co-creative nature. That agile acumen extends beyond even, kind of, that traditional Agile team. Am I reading that properly?

Laura Powers:

Yeah, yeah. And I—and when Evan started to tell me about this, I was like, “Yay, this is really awesome!” Because it tells us that we're making progress, in terms of bringing agility to the world of work. It's no longer this special thing that some people in the corner are doing or that this team is bringing to us. But now it's becoming—it has infiltrated how we work, to the point that we expect that people have these skills. And to me, it's a sign of progress. And I just thought it was awesome, because I don't think we expected, like Evan said, to see that strong of a signal for that in the survey.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. And it goes to the ubiquity, I think, of agility. I think you were kind of saying—you think, even at the outset of that report, like, “Okay, Agile's everywhere, in a sense. And that's good and bad.” But Evan, you're going to counter that point. Maybe I'll let you continue. [Laughs]

Evan Leybourn:

Well, what—actually, I'll build—before I counter, I'll actually build on that. Because one of the things that was really interesting when we were looking at the job descriptions, in terms of this agile acumen, is—because it—it gave us this sense that Agile has won. You see all of these blog posts and LinkedIn articles and so forth. It's like, “Agile is dead!” And that is—it's a frustrating—it's a very negative attitude. And some of the points are valid, that these articles raise. But when we look at it, it's like, “No, no, Agile is doing very well, thank you very much.” It has almost been commoditized. It's become a standard. It's what people and organizations are expecting. Now, Agile as an industry—that one may not be what it was 10 years ago. I'm not saying it's dead, but it is certainly pivoting and evolving. The business model that worked ten years ago? That's dead. And I think that's where a lot of the tension has come out, because there has been tension since the publishing of this report. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, You know, I don't really want to get into the, you know, getting into the whole business side of agility. Our audience is the leaders working in, maybe, Agile ways in the business side. And so, I think what I'm hearing from that is—Agile is very much alive as a concept, as a value system, as even processes and frameworks inside organizations. And the skills and the agile acumen those people need that are involved in any way with those teams, is critical.

Evan Leybourn:

Yes. And—which is actually one of the other findings—is that agile acumen—so, we were talking about the evolution from T-shaped skills to Pi-shaped skills. And one of the things that really emerged very strongly is that organizations wanted Agile Acumen and. And didn't really matter what the and was, right? And technical skills. And management skills. But when we, again, dug deeper, what emerged was this idea of these multidisciplinary people. This was true no matter what. So, it was Agile Acumen and, but it was also tech and. It was management and. Coaching and. It didn't matter what the skill sets were. Companies were hiring or preferencing the hiring of multi-disciplinary—people who had more than one functional area of expertise.

And it was completely—it was all over the place, in terms of what the combinations were. But what was common was that there was always this combination. And so, we talk about T-shaped skills in terms of people having that crossbar at the top of the T, which is those, the thin, broad skills across numerous areas, and then that one, deep subject matter expertise. But that's not what companies are hiring for anymore. They're wanting—and we're calling them Pi-shaped. If you think about the letter for pi, 3.1415, rather than, like, eating pie, which—it’s about Thanksgiving!

Pete Behrens:

You know, I was just going to say! We’re coming up on our US holiday of Thanksgiving here. You got me hungry!

Evan Leybourn:

Indeed, indeed! But, we think about that symbol. We got those multiple depths, multiple areas of functional expertise.

Laura Powers:

There's other people who are talking about comb-shaped skills. You know, the ability to comb. So, even more ways to go deep than just Pi. Now, on a related note, one of the other fascinating outcomes of the report is that hiring managers are not always articulating what it is that they're looking for. So, there's places where, like, communication comes out as really important. And, in addition, there's an unspoken amount of screening for that, that makes it even bigger. And a lot of the skills, including Agile Acumen, are like that. And I'm guessing that there are people who are trying to figure out, “Well, what does it take to get a job in the current economy?” And some of it is thinking about those skills, and how do I demonstrate it, even if it's not front-and-center in the job description for what I'm applying for?

Pete Behrens:

Hm, interesting. It's relating to—I was listening to another podcast—and I'm going to forget the name here. They were talking about the corporate ladder, right? Thinking about your career as going up a ladder, which is very linear. And this particular author was talking about—change that to a pyramid, right? Go horizontal first; build a stronger base and give you more resiliency as you climb, in terms of leadership. I thought that was really interesting. I think it relates to what you're saying, right? Having a breadth. Going sideways creates more flexibility. It creates more resiliency. It creates more ability to work in complex systems. Is that an accurate connection?

Laura Powers:

And actually, we talk about people having a career mosaic, not a career ladder. So, if you think about a mosaic with little tiles that fit together to create a picture. Some of them are on top of each other, and some of them go side-to-side. And I think one of the things that leaders need to consider, you know, moving forward into whatever our future is, is—how do you help people redefine what success looks like? Because it's not your Dad's old, you know, organization, or your Mom's, you know, org chart. This is a new look. And what—I saw some study that said that 30% of—I want to say it was millennials—have no interest in a management job. So, what's successful, and what does that look like? It's the Wild Wild West again!

Pete Behrens:

Hm. Well, speaking of leaders then—so, if we're looking at—alright, the employee is being, kind of, more Agile Acumen. And I would assume that applies to leaders. And this multidisciplinary Pi, comb, whatever we might call it. I assume that could apply to leaders as well. Extend this out to leaders a little bit more for me. What is it that, maybe, you're finding, could relate to more of that leader role and how they're behaving in organizations? Or the place that they play, I guess, in these organizations?

Evan Leybourn:

But that's exactly what we found! So, management skills—I use the word management rather than leadership. Management skills, in combination, multidisciplinary, with—whether it's coaching skills or technical skills, whether it was management. So, obviously communicate—like, the human skills, the communication, the influence that was always there. I'm talking about, like, the functional skills here. But the expectation was that management, leaders in organizations, themselves carried multiple areas of expertise. A very common one, that we saw across multiple organizations who were hiring managers, was management skills with product, management skills with technical, and management skills with coaching. Those were sort of the three combinations with that management leadership skills that were most common. So, those that were looking were management and product skills, were people who—product owners. But a product owner who knows how to lead, who knows how to manage, right? Rather than just a dedicated product owner.

But the contrast was true. A manager who knew how to design or to prioritize and plan for product road maps and product strategy. Management, and coaching: the need for those enterprise level coaches seems to be drastically reducing. And we won't go into that, but the expectation—but the demand for coaching skill was still relatively high. But it's just that role—sorry—that skill was now being put onto the responsibility of a leader, rather than as a dedicated specialist skill set or—sorry—dedicated specialist role. And similar with the technology stack or the technology skill sets. The expectation is that managers of, in particular, tech teams, and in a technology environment, had deep technical expertise. That one, interestingly, was actually the least common. There were, certainly, areas where tech skills was a very common mapping, but that was like Scrum Masters with tech skills or delivery leads with Scrum Master skills, and so forth.

But there was, after coaching—sorry—after product, after coaching, the third most common combination with leaders was leaders who had technical skills, who knew what these concepts meant. When their technologists, when their dev teams, when their product teams were describing problems or opportunities, the managers go, “Yep. I know what that means.” And that was something that I think a lot of organizations had been struggling with, because they had a lot of dedicated managers, people who had management skills and leadership skills but were lacking the cross skill. But, interestingly, almost as many organizations had the exact opposite problem, where they had people in leadership and management roles who were good technologists, good product people, or good coaches, but didn't have the management skill. Because—and the contradiction is—organizations weren't developing them, weren't paying for them to develop their management skills. But that's an entirely different conversation. But having that multiple set of skills—incredibly important.

Laura Powers:

I was going to say—what I'm hoping is—maybe we will see a return to something that was more prevalent in the early days of my career. This is way before the, you know, Agile Manifesto. But you, as a leader or a manager—you could only get to a certain level in the company before you needed to do some number of lateral positions. So it wasn't a promotion, but let's say you were in business operations. That's, you know—you came in, and that's where you had been working, and you needed to go do a lateral position for some amount of time in product development, where you were part of the team that had to ship product and make that happen and vice versa.

And when we talk about, “What does it take to develop these Pi-shaped skills?”, it's not just, “Go take a two-day course on something!” Some of it is getting real hands-on experience, doing something else—something new to you and then adding that to the portfolio of skills that you have. The issue is—in the last 30 years, companies have become increasingly focused on: “We've got to do what it takes to hit the numbers this quarter or to ship this product to whatever.” And they're looking to find the perfect person who already comes with all of these skills and all of this experience. And they're not creating the space for people to move into something that gives—has the head space for them to grow and then adds to the richness of their experience and their skill set for the future for the company. So, I think that's a call to action to some of the executives who might be listening to this podcast. And to the leaders who might be looking at, you know, “What can I do to really help our organization have the resilience and the longevity to thrive, beyond just what we're going to do for next quarter?”

Pete Behrens:

Let me, maybe, touch on a couple of points. First on the Evan point. You mentioned two problems, right? One is the technologist or expert in some field having trouble shifting into coordination and people roles—right?—into that leadership sense. And then the other side of that is the leader who does it, and then—we call it getting hollowed out. You kind of let go, or completely delegate everything. And all of the sudden, you're kind of aloof, right? You're not connected to the work. You're not close enough to the work to understand the work. And all of the sudden, you become a little bit, you know, un-valuable, in that sense. And it sounds like you're seeing both sides of that pendulum swing. And we see those people in our classes all the time. And it’s just—sounds like it's coming out. So, that balance—it sounds like it's really critical. We can't let go, but we also need to develop those leadership skills.

Evan Leybourn:

So, I really love the phrase you use of hollowed out. I've not heard that before, and I think that's absolutely brilliant. It's exactly what's happening. Early in my career, I was a public servant for the Australian federal government. And anyone who's been a public servant—and I think America's got a very similar kind of approach. It's a very linear career path. And one of the big problems in the public service, especially when you're talking with, say, technology—is that the public service has crossbands. You get paid in a certain band. But the bands are based on your hierarchical level in the organization, your management level. When we're talking about—let's say—technology and technology teams, the market rate for a technologist is higher than an administrative clerk, but they are hierarchically equivalent.

Like, so, what would happen all the time in the public service was—in order to pay anything like a market rate, people were put into much more senior roles, into management-level roles, when, really, all they needed was a really good software developer. And—but the minute you got into those roles, you were expected to lead teams and all this kind of stuff. And so, what you had were a lot of very inappropriate people in roles, and they just didn't have—they didn't want to be managers; they didn't have the expertise. A couple of years later—I used to work for IBM. And there's issues—don't get me wrong. But one of the good things that IBM does is—they have a dual banned promotion. You can actually be promoted as a technologist multiple times, basically your entire career—right?—and never once lead people. And it's that distinguished engineer track—is what they call it. And they've got the management track—right?—which obviously—it's like management sales, account management, all that kind of stuff.

But this idea of having—and Laura mentioned, in terms of that—this is not your parents’ business.There's no more corner office. But having this idea of dual track, having this idea of—you can be promoted with the pay and the authority, without necessarily becoming a manager. And so, part of the issue here is that those people who are strong in one area, but not management, probably should never have been managers in the first place. But they just got promoted into those roles because that's what—that was the career path. That's the only linear path that was available to them in the organization. Or, in fact, culturally, the expectation of where they go. Whereas that, this—there's a systemic, cultural change that has to happen in all organizations, around, just, what you're worth, the value that you provide to an organization, and the expectation of management and leadership skills, which are not necessarily linked. Or they're not the same thing.

Pete Behrens:

I want to connect that to what Laura said, also, because I think what you're talking about is—leaders are basically created by the cultural ecosystem they're in, right? And, Laura, you mentioned the pressure of time, right? We don't have time for this! Evan, you're talking about pay, right? That's a huge metric, in terms of what people do, right? I remember at Google—you know, leaders stayed very tactical because they were measured on their technical expertise. So, even as a leader, you were expected to do design; you were expected to do coding, because that's what you're measured on. I want, maybe, to comment on how that may have shown up in some of this research, like, the culture and the systems you're describing that shape these expectations, shape these people to do what they do.

Evan Leybourn:

Yeah, no—so, there's the old quote, and I don't—I forget who said it. It's like, you get the behavior that you measure. And if you're going to measure leaders on a particular metric—right?—then that's what they're going to index on. There's a great example here in Australia. We—a couple years ago, we went through a Royal Commission, into the banking sector. So, the Royal Commission is like your Senate inquiries. It's like the top-level government investigation into something. And so, the Royal Commission into the banking sector was looking at reports of very egregious and corrupt behavior across the banks across Australia. And what was found, of no surprise, I think, to anyone, was that the banks were acting inappropriately. And they were doing things like fraudulently opening bank accounts, moving funds when they weren't allowed to, forging signatures, all that kind of stuff.

But the reason they were doing it—and I'm simplifying it greatly, right? But one of the main reasons they were doing it was because—this is what they were incentivized to do. All of these bankers had very short-term financial incentives. You need to open 500 bank accounts this quarter. I'm at—it's two days before the end of the quarter. I'm at 490. This nice little old lady—well, I've got her signature on file. If I open the bank account today and close it in and just put five bucks my money in or whatever else, and then close it in three days, I'm going to hit my numbers. And no one's going to know! And then that person becomes a manager, and they've got—their measure is now on their teams. And they go, “Oh, by the way, if you want to do this right, this is how you make your numbers, right?” And now, then, just cascade that kind of minor—no one gets hurt! But now they cascade that as a cultural problem across, like, multiple years, decades, and thousands and thousands of employees. And you get some of the worst and most egregious behaviors that you can expect from an industry.

And this was not just one bank; this was all of the banks. This was, like, very—these kinds of behaviors were common. And it all—again, highly simplified. I'm genericized greatly. But a lot of it boiled down to what they were being measured on. And that's where, actually, organizations that shift towards cultural measures. I shift towards different, kind of, like, people-first leadership, responsive customer centricity measures. That's where you start to get those other behaviors. And, like, Pete, you've got your own stories on this one.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. You know, what I connect to when you're saying that is the—Robert Austin's work on measuring organizational performance. And any performance metric, if pushed too hard, will be abused. And I think you're describing that, right? Whether it's a call center making calls or, you know, banks, you know, trying to get, you know, a number of accounts, right? It's going to get abused if pushed too hard. And you're describing health metrics, resiliency metrics, that have to be in balance for those to be effective. Yeah.

Laura Powers:

I think the key word that you just used is really important. It's about balance. Because I was just musing on—if I were a middle manager reading this report, I would have some degree of frustration. Because for the last three, four, five, seven, ten years, my organization's been telling me that I need to empower my teams. They need to be autonomous; they need to own their own thing. And now you're telling me I should be Pi-shaped! And one of the ways that I could be Pi-shaped is to be more technical. [Laughs] And I would like to probably tell somebody somewhere, you know, pick a lane! What do you want? And that was what I was thinking, and then you said the key, I think, to that whole line of thinking isn’t about balance. It's about being able to balance the technical with the empowering teams and helping them be, you know, self-organizing and autonomous and holding them to account. And, you know—so, it's that balancing thing.

Pete Behrens:

Well—and I think it also just gets to the concept that leadership is less a role than a responsibility. And I think that showed up throughout your report about—it's less about jobs and roles, and it's more about skills and everybody owning and having. And, you know, it's the act of leading, not the leader. And I think that's what you're getting at here, is—everybody demonstrates and can demonstrate leadership.

Laura Powers:

Yes. And it's become a bit of a cliche, hasn't it? That we say “Everybody's a leader.” But the reality of the matter is—everybody is a leader in certain situations. And part of the beauty of an accomplished leader is to know when to step into an active aspect of that skill set and when to say, “Hey, Evan's got this covered. Pete's doing really great here. I can just kind of be a happy participant.” And that's an art form.

Evan Leybourn:

And that's also—like, you got to address the human element there, as well. The ego, the arrogance, the feeling that I've got to be—if I'm not at the center of attention, then who am I? And I'm not talking about the toxic manager. It's—we all know the ones who are, like, really problematic. I'm just talking about your average person who is trying to be a good—trying to do the best that they can. But also recognizing that their promotion, their salary bump, their KPIs, their status in the organization is based on the political shenanigans and goings-on. It's based on who sees what you do. And so, for me to step back and let someone else lead in a situation means I've got to be really feeling really secure that I'm not going to be disempowered as a leader. I'm not going to be overlooked for those promotions once I step back. So, everything you're describing has got to happen, but, quite often, the political systems in these organizations—that's what's holding people back. It’s—this is the politics! This is how organizations, sadly, often work.

Pete Behrens:

And what you're describing is the difference between what we consider conventional leadership and postconventional leadership. And conventional leadership is that hero, right? It's that in charge. It's the importance. It serves the ego, and it takes a strength to let go of that. I just want to maybe poke one more question on this particular skills research and then talk about, maybe, where you're going or what's next from this. But the question is—we have a love/hate relationship with certification. And I saw that show up in your research here, and I'm just curious about a—touch on how certification showed up in this, in these results, and what did you learn? Anything new that you learned from that?

Evan Leybourn:

So, this was a bit interesting. So, like you say, there is a love/hate relationship with certification out there. But what we found was that 1) certifications were important, right? Well, actually, no. Let me take a step back. Education was always seen as important, and certifications as evidence of education was seen as important. But what the surprise was—was that managers saw certifications as more important than the individuals who had them. So when we ask questions like, “How important was your certification to getting your job?” Right? Individuals, like, a lot of people, said “Not at all. Only a little bit.” Whereas, when we ask managers how important are certifications when you're hiring, they would say very important or highly important, kind of thing. So, it wasn't huge. It was like 30%—I forget the exact number number; I’d have to go back to the report—there's like a 30% difference between individuals and managers, between their perception of value of that certification.

Now, what was then interesting is—we also then asked the individuals. So, we said, “Okay, so how important was it to get the job?” “Not very.” “Once you've got the job, how important is the education that—so, from that certification, you had some education. How important was that education to the day-to-day work of your job?” And that's where they said “Very important!” They were—they didn't see the certification as the important thing. But they saw that—the true value in, “I can do more things because I've learned to do more things.” So, it's almost like individuals, kind of, undervalue that evidence of the education, but still see value in the education. Whereas, managers value the evidence, because that's how they recruit people. They can't—they don't know you’re good until you've started. And to get you started, they need some kind of proof that you can do the job. And that's where the certifications come in.

Pete Behrens:

I want to, yeah, maybe, put a—raise a glass to education. So, I'm on that side of the fence. And you're surprising me, because I always envision people on the employee side gravitating to the certification to get the job. But I'm hearing it from the other side. And that's surprising to me. But not—now that I'm hearing it, not—maybe I shouldn't be. [Laughs]

Laura Powers:

There was another piece of the research that I thought was rather interesting. Evan, was it about 30% of the people in the survey—said that their company would pay for their professional development for their education? So, and there's some regional differences in this, but if you think about it, only a third of folks are getting the support from their organizations to develop these new skills so that they can continue to contribute and grow for the organization. It's an ongoing concern of mine, that individuals don't always own their skill set and their professional development. To the point of—if I work at a place that has a kind of a crappy professional development program, or maybe even a non-existent one—that I'm going to take personal responsibility for creating that and saying, “Hey, we're on the doorstep of the last month of 2023. What is it that I want to learn and to grow and to practice and to experience coming into 2024 that will help me be able to bring more value to my organization, be more employable?” You know, all of that sort of a thing. And, you know, if I were to plant a seed for folks who are listening to this podcast, that would be one of them—would just be to say, “Do you own it? And what are you doing to grow in the way that you need to grow, regardless of where you're planted right now?” Because the guarantee is that you probably won't be planted there forever. You're going to move. Things are going to change, whatever. So, be ready for it.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. Nobody can take care of brand you, except for you. Yeah. So invest in yourself. Yeah, Evan?

Evan Leybourn:

I was going to say, so—and there was an interesting cultural variation there. So, companies in Europe—sorry—individuals in Europe were much more likely to expect their company to pay than America or Asia, for example. And this is now Evan's opinion, as in, this isn't in the data. But if you think about European work ethic and the heavily unionized environments there, the, sort of—the expectation is, well, if the company wants me to have these skills, they should pay for it. And, whereas, in Asia and America—America is a lot more individualistic. It's—I'm responsible for myself and only myself. That sounded—I didn't mean to make that sound quite so—

Pete Behrens:

—It's totally true.

Evan Leybourn:

—extreme, as I just said it. But there is a lot more of a sense of, “Yep, I'm going to pay for it. That's what I'm going to do.” So, I'm not saying one is right, and one is wrong, but there are cultural nuances. And I think that's important when we look at multinational organizations or organizations that have diverse workforces, especially, like, hiring from International regions. Because, as a leader of a multinational workforce, you should expect to have significant variations of expectation of where that education is going to be funded out of and the development of that. So, something to be mindful of, I think.

Pete Behrens:

Yep, yep. Not surprised by the difference in attitude and expectations between Europe and the US. We see the very similar patterns show up, just through the policies and the way companies treat employees, the way you can hire, fire, etc.. And connecting, Laura, to your stat of 30%, it matches the data we've seen from the Ken Blanchard Institute, who says about 30% of leaders also get formal education, mentoring, or coaching. So, it sounds like it's no different than other types of leadership or employee development going on.

Well, this has been fascinating. I'm curious, maybe, where you're headed with some of this. I know you've got your—also, your Business Agility Institute Report coming out again for 2023. Looking forward to seeing that. Any other, kind of, interesting research you have on the horizon that we should be looking for?

Laura Powers:

Oh, great head of research? [Laughs]

Evan Leybourn:

Alright, so let me give you a bit of a preview for the Business Agility Report. Because it links in—there's some insights that link to what we found with the skills report. So, two key insights. Number one: every index, every measure on collaboration is down, and down drastically. 8% year-on-year, which, from a statistical standpoint—that's actually a huge drop. So, what does this mean? I'm sort of, like, talking about this fear-based leadership that seems to be emerging in companies. The economic crisis. We've just come out of a pandemic into an economic crisis. Leaders are—they're seeing cuts. They're afraid that their teams and they are going to be the next ones. And so, they're building walls. And so, they're, like—companies are—they're not innovating as much, not seeking out new customers. They're just trying to hunker down and protect the customer base that they already have. And inside the organizations, leaders are doing exactly the same thing. So, every index on collaboration, every index on those intra-company relationships are all down. That's obviously not what we want to see, but that is what we're seeing around the world right now.

Pete Behrens:

I was going to say it kind of goes into that mention—I think, Laura, you mentioned—right?—when there's so much external churn—in not only the economy, right? In the world political realm, right? So, societal change, right? There's so much going on. I think that fear is propagating—right?—through an urgency and importance. You kind of get into this chaotic leadership versus, maybe, a complex leadership mode, where people go into those Darwin, kind of, survival, kind of, tactics. So, yeah, it's interesting connections there.

Evan Leybourn:

But the good news is that the organizations and the leaders who are not succumbing to that fear-based leadership, right? Who are keeping their eye on that, sort of, being customer-centric. Keeping their eye on business agility, responsive customer-centricity and flexible operations, value-based delivery—are outperforming those that are not. And so, the number one success measure—or, the number one measure of success this year is in business impact, financial returns, and business benefits. And so, those leaders who are actually being responsive and not reactive to the economic situations are outperforming those who are not. And this is, I think, both highly positive for us as an organization, understanding what's going on, but also very gratifying to see for those organizations who have continued to invest, even though things are tense, things are tight. They're continuing to focus on educating leaders on how to be better leaders, how to manage, how to be responsive, how to listen to the market. They're the ones who are actually growing in this difficult economic situation.

Pete Behrens:

Well, I think, to the astute leader—right?—opportunity bounds there, right? If most are hunkering down, time to shine. So, Laura, I'm going to give you the last word. Close us out here! What would you like to say as our parting thoughts?

Laura Powers:

So, I would say that the call to action for the leaders who are listening to your podcast is two-part. And it's—you need strategies to combat two things. Because if you can get through these two things, there's great opportunity on the other side. And Evan hit one of those, which is the fear. There's a lot of fear in the marketplace, on your teams, in your business. And you need to find a way to paint a realistic and optimistic picture of what the future looks like.

The other f-word that you need to think about is fatigue. Resiliency—I accidentally posted something about resiliency some months back, and out of everything that I have accidentally posted to LinkedIn, the response to that was just off the charts. Our people are fatigued. This is—what?—year number three, coming out of, you know, the pandemic, and then all of the aftermath of the pandemic. And so, people are tired. And when you add the fear and the fatigue together, it can be a really tough cocktail to deal with. And so, as leaders, I think we need to figure out how to help rebuild resiliency and inspire our folks so that they can see the opportunity. Because there's so much work to be done in the world of agility and so much goodness that we can create. And, you know, we just—this is one of the speed bumps in the road.

And I think one of the things that we're looking to do is—this is the first time we've done this skills research in this format. And we're looking forward to doing a follow-on to this in 2024, because we will start then with two data points to be able to see how much of this is a snapshot of this current moment in time and how much of this is a trend. So, stay tuned! You need to make sure that you listen to Pete and his podcast, because you never know what goodness will come next. [Laughs] I love you, Pete!

Pete Behrens:

Alright, check’s in the mail there, Laura. Thank you! [Laughs] Well, Evan and Laura, I just want to say thank you so much for spending some time with us today and sharing your results. And, even, just the effort you put into the research. Our community is better for it. So, thank you!

Laura Powers:

Oh, thank you! Thank you.

Evan Leybourn:

Thank you.

Pete Behrens:

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast , for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

‘Agile Focal Point’ Podcast Features ALJ Guides

Thu, 07 Dec 2023 22:28:09 GMT

From dispelling myths about agile leadership to the introduction of AI in coaching, Agile Focal Point podcast host Mike Leber and his fellow Agile Leadership Journey Guides Brad Swanson and Allen Jellas had a wide-ranging discussion on a recent episode.

While Leber, Swanson, and Jellas are all ALJ Guides and coaches, their stories, challenges, and goals are unique. A common thread among them? As they rose into leadership roles, they were shocked at how little formal leadership training was offered. Problem-solvers at heart, they’ve each made it their mission to show leaders how to positively impact the individuals, teams, and organizations they work with.

Read on for a recap of some of the topics they discussed, and then be sure to listen to the full episode of Agile Focal Point here .

Misconceptions About Agile Leadership

The group discussed what they see as a common misconception about agile leadership, with Swanson explaining, “A lot of leaders believe that, ‘Oh, well, this agile thing is just a process that we kind of install at the team level.’ And then of course they expect teams are now going to be better, faster, more productive in some way. They fail to see that in order for that to thrive, they need to change the way they lead. Perhaps they need to shape the culture a little bit differently. They may need to behave a little bit differently as leaders. They may need to change some of the structures within the organization.”

Advice for Leaders

Look inward . Jellas said, “In my experience, I could feel many leaders actually becoming more aware that something needs to change within them, so starting with themselves before they start considering any changes in the organization.” Leber agreed, saying, “Consider, ‘How would a different leadership style or more awareness or anything else help me here or make a difference?”
Become comfortable with uncertainty . This will allow you to be more flexible in the ways you lead individuals and teams.
Have confident humility . Leaders who are confident in what success looks like, and what the vision is, will have much more clarity. But pair that with humility to recognize that you don't have all the answers and need engagement from your team.
Don’t make sweeping generalizations. Swanson said that he sees leaders make broad assumptions, especially about generational attitudes. “It is dangerous to make statements like, ‘Oh, well, Millennials are this way or Generation Z is this way.’ There may be some truth in that, on average, but there’s a lot of variation among people. … Think, ‘What different perspectives do they have? What value can they bring?’”

Attributes of Good Coaches

Be an active listener and ask powerful questions . Approaching things from a genuinely curious place and listening without already forming an answer in your head. It opens up both the client and coach to different perspectives.
Create accountability when it comes to changing behaviors. To facilitate this, the group recommended using ALJ’s Catalyst Canvas™, a helpful tool for goal-setting and problem-solving.

Where Will AI Take Coaching?

Finally, Leber, Jellas, and Swanson conclude the podcast by mulling over the future of coaches in a world of artificial intelligence (AI). The group encouraged a relatively short-term outlook on the topic – not because they see AI as a passing fad, but because the technology is evolving so quickly. Adaptability and agility will be paramount.

Dive deeper into the conversation. Listen to the full Agile Focal Point Episode #13: Guiding Leaders in Complexity here .

52: Strategic Thinking with Christina Carlson

Wed, 06 Dec 2023 12:15:00 GMT

How can you learn to think more strategically?

In this episode of the Relearning Leadership podcast, Pete and ALJ Guide and leadership coach Christina Carlson discuss the difference between strategy and strategic thinking, and how leaders can execute the day-to-day while keeping an eye on the big picture.

Christina Carlson, Leadership Coach & ALJ Guide

Christina Carlson is a leadership coach and ALJ Guide who shares how to become Unstuck through collaboration, creativity, and agility.

Her ability to conceptualize strategy by actively connecting peoples’ complex ideas to their values in order to broaden their perspectives makes her a sought-after commodity for companies and independent entrepreneurs.

By applying research and scientific practice through a creative mindset, she helps leaders move to the next evolution of their leadership growth.

Connect with Christina

Relearning from this episode…

Complexity of Strategic Thinking

Strategic thinking requires us to consider various dimensions, such as current/future, big/little, and what/who. Embracing this complexity involves recognizing that strategic thinking cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach.

Strategy vs Strategic Thinking

A crucial distinction is made between strategy (the output or plan) and strategic thinking (the mindset or thinking process). Not everyone needs to create a strategy, but cultivating a strategic thinking mindset is beneficial for individuals at all levels.

Balancing Strategic Direction and Execution

Strategic direction and execution are not mutually exclusive; instead, they should complement each other. Having a clear strategic goal is essential for effective agility, as it provides the necessary direction for pivoting and decision-making. Leaders need to strike a balance between these two elements in fostering organizational success.

Explore:

Related Episodes

4: Leading from the Middle

How much influence do leaders in the middle of an organization really have? Travis Matthews shares his story about the challenges of leading change from the middle of the organization and the skills required to do it well.

34: Setting and Achieving Personal Goals

While 60% of people set personal improvement goals, only 8% actually achieve them. We can do better. Learn from some of the best in the business world on setting and achieving goals.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

What does it mean when somebody asks you to be more strategic? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today I'm joined by Christina Carlson, an Agile Leadership Journey Guide and a leadership coach with Unstuck. And today we're going to navigate the landscape of strategy and strategic thinking. And we find that working with leaders—this is one of those spaces that's a fairly big jump, when you're shifting from more of that—the do focus, the work focus, into that future orientation focus as a leader. So, I hope you enjoy this conversation with Christina!

Well, thanks Christina for joining me and talking about this topic with me today!

Christina Carlson:

No problem! It's my pleasure. Thank you for having me.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah! So, maybe, first of all, just share—why is this a topic of interest for you? Why is this something that you seem to be passionate about?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. I think strategy, to me, is very—I'm passionate about it because I find it's a language or a terminology that's used in so many different ways in an organization, but also between organizations and in different Industries. And I think as—doing what we do and interacting so often with different people, I'm always gathering—it feels like—different approaches and different tools and different definitions and applications, and it gets really muddy really fast! [Laughs] And so, I find it really interesting when it's supposed to just be this, like, “Just be strategic!” Right?

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. That notion of, like, “Hey, can't you just be more strategic?” And I think that comment is a really good one for kind of setting the stage for this conversation, right? That this is a vast landscape, and we're not really here to say, “Hey, here's the answers!” Right? It's more of a, “Let's walk through that landscape. Let's understand the challenges. And, maybe, let's understand some strategies or maybe even, just, ways of thinking that might help improve our leadership.” Is that fair to say?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. Absolutely, absolutely. And I think that I'd like to, like, maybe, just to unravel that with you a little bit. And kind of—what are we hearing in the field, and what are we hearing in our cohorts, and what are we seeing in the future as these things are starting to—the world's changing so quickly, right? And so, for me, personally when it's, “I need you to be more strategic”, it's me. Like, I'm not thinking big picture enough, right? I'm really stuck in the day-to-day tasks of my job. And, to me, strategy is where you start to get that—more of that—career mindset, right? And how do I bring value in what I'm doing to the whole organization or to my whole whole department? Kind of—whatever kind of scope you're working in. And sometimes it's not that big, right? So, it's very interesting to me when people say, “Can you just be more strategic?” I think everyone on your team will probably have a different definition as to what that means, how they want to apply it, what part of their job does—can they even do that in, right?

Pete Behrens:

Yeah.

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. What do you—what is your example? Like, what are you deciding when that happens?

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. I mean, I think what you're resonating in my thought process here is—we all come at strategy with a different expectation and, then, different limitations—right?—in terms of what that means. I work with a lot of leaders who are stuck in the middle between corporate strategy and team strategy. And so, like, I—do I define the strategy, or is that done for me? And then, if there is a strategy, like, what's my role with that? And I'm kind of like, “Do I add to it? Do I—can I veer away from it?” Like, what are—what is the law, or what are the rules that allow me to be strategic in that way? So, you're right. In a sense, the questions are really contextual in the space I'm in and my role that I'm in. And it's very, maybe, seemingly easy, when you think about the CEO, right? “Oh, yes, of course we need strategy!” But I think it gets more complex in the middle.

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, and I find that people in the middle, that I'm working with, are, like, “Well, now I'm doing this off the side of my desk.” And so, it automatically segregates itself from the day-to-day business or their day-to-day work. And so, they feel like they're, like, kind of trying to do two things at the same—juggling two things at the same time. And it's like, “I can't ever get to that! It's just off the side of my desk, right?” And so, to offset that, I've had companies say, “Well, here's the strategy playbook, right? Here is your PDF document with all of your tools and who you need to talk to and how to go about doing it.” And I always find that so fascinating. Because that's very different than just being more strategic, right? That's, like, strategy planning, which is a very different thing, in my opinion.

Pete Behrens:

Okay. So, maybe, let's start to differentiate this first one, which is strategy planning and strategic thinking, right? You're talking about—one thing is an activity. Another is really more of a mindset. Is that a fair way that, maybe, we can differentiate those two?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, yeah. And so, how do you start to get curious and ask the person delegating that to you to understand, right? Are you just asking me to think a little bit differently about how me and my team do my work? Or do you need me to plan this nicely bowed up, you know, strategic plan that you handed to me and shows them how they—it ties to our OKRs or our metric or whatever we're doing, right? So, that's—they're very different, and I think they're not mutually exclusive. I think they probably go together, but they're not the same thing, in my opinion.

Pete Behrens:

Well, yeah. I mean, to me, that strategic thinking—first of all, I think what you say—it has to shift from the side of my desk into the center. Like, I've got to create space and time for that as a leader, if, first of all, I'm operating that orientation, my head's down in work. Strategic thinking, probably, is getting pushed to the side, right? So it's—the first place is, what do I have to let go of to enable time and space for it? Is that a good starting point?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, I think, for sure, the space part of it, setting intention, right? Like, what are we being—where are we applying strategic thinking to? Like, it doesn't have to be for every single task and every single thing we do in our work. But I think there's some intentionality set here, to like, “Where does it—is it a best fit to start?”—I think is really important. And then also understanding the, like—just because we could do it, doesn’t mean we should be doing it, right? [Laughs] And, kind of, I think that's always a nice place to start with thinking more strategically, is—like, “Are we doing things the way they've always been?” Or, you know, “Yes! You know, my team can gather all these tasks and do all this stuff, but should we be doing it? Is it actually moving us in a direction we want to go?” And I think that's enough. When anyone new is—like, when I'm coaching anyone new in being strategic, I think that's a, to me, a nice starting point—is to just start to ask some questions around the why behind your work, essentially.

Pete Behrens:

The other thing I often see when somebody tries to shift, and they start to shift into a strategic orientation—they take an expert mindset to it. So it's, like, “I've got to be the one to create the strategy.” And so, it's a solo sport, right” It's—but that's kind of the opposite of the intent of strategy, is—it's a collective sport. It should be a team sport. And so, sometimes when these leaders shift from expert to achiever, they're, in a sense, bringing the expert mindset with them, just on a new topic. And this doesn't have to be something you do alone! This doesn't have to be something that you are solely the author of. I try to help leaders recognize you can facilitate this. Like, you can enter into a conversation about strategy, and all of the sudden, you don't have to be the one with all the answers! And people might actually appreciate that.

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, and even, if it's, like, too big to do it with your team. Like, a lot of people will try it with their team, and they're like, “My team didn't know what to do. They were so confused as to why, suddenly, I was asking their opinions about things and asking them what their thoughts were.”. And so, I find even, like, a peer-to-peer level—like, there's a lot of opportunity to work, you know, cross-departmentally. And, like, you kind of have your peer-level meetings and that type of thing. Just, even, leading the conversations there, I think, is an easier spot sometimes for people to get into it. Because there's always, like, this weird—if you don't talk about strategy, like, that's the other part of this, is—no one's talking about it in the sense of, like—that is a great example of strategic thinking right there, right? Like, we don't highlight the wins when people are doing it, I find, as much as the “This is a solution to a problem that's existing.” And so, we don't have examples to kind of lean into or orient into often, internally.

Pete Behrens:

Well, I'm thinking—you reminded me of a couple—just, the questions you can ask, right? So, the what and how questions are very tactical, right? They're very, kind of, achieving. The why and where and who questions are a little bit more in that strategic realm of just—even if you're in conversation, asking different kinds of questions shape a strategic orientation.

Christina Carlson:

Yes. And, you know what else it'll do is—it'll feed out those people who are masking strategic thinking as micromanagement. [Laughs] Because, I think, sometimes people—

Pete Behrens:

—It sounds like you're getting into the danger voodoo here. So, go on!

Christina Carlson:

Well, sometimes people, managers I've had, experiences with executives who have been like, “I need you to be more strategic on this and report back to me on how you're being strategic.” And when, really, they want to see my thought process. They want me to write down the, like—and it was just a different version of that expert mindset guised as strategy. And then they would kind of correct your work, essentially, as if you did it right or not. And I think that it can be dangerous to do that. And so, we need to be careful as leaders, how we're receiving it and how—what we're doing with it when people are strategic.

Pete Behrens:

Huh. That's interesting. So, you separated something like—okay, big versus little, like, broad versus narrow. Like, that's one way of thinking strategy. But I also think strategy is also wide, right? So it's—where are we going along a path? I mean, that's another dimension of strategic thinking in addition to big and little. Do you see that difference, I guess, in terms of—you think of a landscape, right? You've got at least two dimensions—or three dimensions here—we got to be thinking about. How do you help leaders through those variables?

Christina Carlson:

Well, I find that it's a really nice link to autonomy. So, leaders who are talking about, “I need more autonomous culture! We're trying to build more autonomy with our teams!” Allowing a strategy or someone to be more strategic in how they get there. So, as in, thinking about—we don't have to have one path. We can all get to the destination on multiple routes, essentially. And so, widening it out to—as in, like, there's more opportunity. There's more options. There's more ways of working to get there—I think, allows people to play in more of a strategic mindset in creating those different opportunities and also building that autonomy piece at the same time. Because it's not about, “Well, prove it all to me now! And then we're going to pick one way for the rest of the organization.” It's about holding true the destination, right? And making sure that that's consistent.

Pete Behrens:

You're bringing up something that I often write about and talk with leaders about. It's that—sometimes it feels like strategy counters agility. Like, these things can't live in the same space. What you're saying is—actually, strategy is a goal or a direction we're going. Agility is the ability to pivot in service of that. In fact, without having a clear goal, pivoting and making yes/no decisions are almost impossible. It's like getting in the car and driving and not having a goal. It's like, “Do I turn left or right?” Well, it really doesn't matter, right? So, you know, in a sense without having strategy, agility doesn't really even make sense, to some degree.

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. I would 100% agree. Without that vision or that target or the outcome, we're all trying to get to being defined. How do you be more strategic towards it, right? Or, you know, if we're—and I think that applies to anything, culture, team-building, you know, whatever it is. I think there has to be a shared goal, otherwise people get confused about where the decisions lie, about how they're contributing to, like, your point earlier. Like, am I building this, or am I just executing? You know, lots of people find value or feel valued when they get to be a part of building the strategy. But it's hard to allow for, all of the sudden, 200 decision-makers in the strategy as well. So, as a leader, or as you get higher up in the organization, how do you start to balance that—right?—and manage those expectations, even, in the organization.

Pete Behrens:

You're getting into a tricky space, which is—we need a shared goal, you mentioned. But I also need to get clarity and focus on that goal. So, there's this caveat of—I need some buy-in to this. I need some alignment to this goal, but I also want people to be engaged in creating that goal. And it feels like those are hard to do. Like, if everybody has a voice, then we never have clarity. And if we have clarity, then not everybody has a voice. Help me help leaders in how to navigate this trickiness here.

Christina Carlson:

Well, I—again, like, what is the outcome? Like, what—are we trying to feel, like, allow the staff to be more engaged and feel like we have a share of voice? Or are we trying to solve a very pertinent problem to the organization?

Pete Behrens:

Come on, Christina, you're saying it depends! Come on!

Christina Carlson:

It does! It really does! [Laughs] And I don't think that there—I don't subscribe to this “There's just one way!” Like, I really don't. And that's where the leader—that's why you're the leader, because you can guide the team to what needs to happen in the particular moment, if that makes sense. Like, you become, almost, that path-forger—right?—for the rest of the organization. And knowing you're going to get some branches in the face as you're through it. [Laughs] I mean, just to—don't fall off the cliff, right? So, that's kind of, I think, what you're asking is—how do I not fall off the cliff when I'm looking behind me, trying to guide my team and make sure everyone's still coming and working towards that shared goal.

Pete Behrens:

That's why we send scouts out, so they can go fall off the cliff! [Laughs]

Christina Carlson:

Or just come to the prairies! We don't have cliffs here; we just have dips! [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

You know—at risk of adding more complexity to strategy—I was just talking with a leader the other day, and we were differentiating the—what we do versus who we are—strategic conversation, right? This whole notion of shifting from a focus of service and products and a delivery of a business versus, kind of, that strategic thought of, “I want to build a culture. I want to build an organization that feels like they have purpose.” Right? And yet, that's almost like the fourth dimension—I sometimes think about it as. Because, all of the sudden, it’s like, “Oh, no, I'm in a space that—now I'm feeling dizzy!” And that's the place I think a lot of leaders—that's a tough hurdle, right? To shift from a what to a who, in a sense. Who are we? What are we doing as an organization?

Christina Carlson:

And it sometimes makes you kind of—it forces you into a space that—where you're going against the internal systems and structures for reward, as well. So then, now, not only are you in that ambiguous space, but I'm not going to get rewarded for this; I'm not—it's not going to be tied to my bonus structure. It's not going to be tied to my next promotion, necessarily, unless I advocate for that. And I have—you kind of have to build those systems in that space at the same time as you're doing that work. And those two things are both full-time jobs, probably.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. Alright, so, let's—we've been talking about a number of things. Maybe let's play a quick little—what jumped out to you during our conversation here? I'll pick one and then let you. And maybe we'll go, banter back and forth a little bit on a few of these. So, the one thing I heard is—it's a complex space, right? There's multiple dimensions. There's, kind of, current/future; there's big/little; there's what/who, right? There's this four-dimensional space that we're operating in. So, strategic thinking isn't one thing; it's many things, maybe—is the one thing I'm pulling out here. What's one of your takeaways so far?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. It's, like, linking it to complicated, right? Where you all, by definition, need more than one person or more than one piece to make it happen, right? This isn't around—about distilling it down to something simple, or “Just be strategic!” This is about embracing the multifaceted pieces that require to do that and then reinforcing it in the everyday, almost—right?—with intention. Yeah.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. So, another piece I pulled out was the difference between strategy and strategic thinking. So, kind of, the output versus a mindset. Or, you know, the—what we build versus the thinking process. That everybody can be strategic thinking; not everybody necessarily creates a strategy, I would say. Is that—

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, yeah. And I think that gets—and it makes it more clear, I think, by doing that, by differentiating that. I think the decision-making piece really stands out for me and setting some clear kind of frameworks or boundaries around what parts of the work need to be thought of more—with a more strategic mindset, Where there's more autonomy and freedom to kind of explore and experiment. Versus, you know—this is—we want input so that we can make a decision about strategy, right? Like, those are very different activities that happen in your work. And so, to have a category, an overall category about—“Are you strategic as a manager?”, I think, is doing a disservice by not, like, breaking that out a little bit more.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. And, maybe, the final third point was kind of that—the balance between strategic direction and agility execution, right? It's not one or the other; it's a balance. It's a both/and, you know? They serve each other, to some degree. Versus thinking about them as fighting or competing in service. So, Christina, if there's one takeaway or one, maybe—not takeaway, one starting point! Like, if a leader was at, like, “What should I do!” Besides, “It depends!”, is there something you might recommend as the first place they might find some growth in their strategic journey?

Christina Carlson:

Yeah. So, identifying an obstacle that you can have some influence over for either part of the existing strategy, or strategy in another area that you're linked to. And, as part of the process, we use that Catalyst Canvas model, right? So I find—if you take an obstacle from somebody else's Canvas and use it as your goal, that is a great way to not only align, but it's a simple kind of—you can put your hands around it, start to finish. You can see how it's ripple-effect and influenced other pieces of the organization, too. So, I always find that's a nice, kind of, bite-sized space to start with.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. I love that! So if you're not familiar, we'll put a link to the Catalyst Canvas . Great collective brainstorming tool for focusing, aligning, and executing or accelerating some change in the organization. They could be used for good strategic, organizational, or product service-type goals. Well, Christina, I just want to say thanks for just walking with me on this journey and exploring the landscape.

Christina Carlson:

Yeah, thanks for having me! It was a pleasure, as always.

Pete Behrens:

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit our website, agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast, for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

51: Change Fatigue

Wed, 22 Nov 2023 12:00:01 GMT

How are you managing change fatigue?

For better or worse, all types of changes – personal and professional, big and small – impact our lives. In this episode of Relearning Leadership, Pete talks about his own experience managing change fatigue as well as how he has seen its effects in our communities, workplaces, and personal lives.

Listen now to hear his three ways in which we can acknowledge and manage how change can be tiring – and how to reframe it to be reinvigorating.

Relearning from this episode…

Impact of Change on Individuals and Organizations

People bring their entire lives, including personal and family experiences, to the workplace. Leaders should acknowledge and address the broader context of employees' lives, understanding that work-related changes are just a small part of a larger system. Change can lead to feelings of distraction, exhaustion, stress, and pressure, but change can also be positive, fostering clarity, focus, and personal development. Leaders need to be aware of how change affects individuals and be mindful of the potential stressors associated with it.

Leadership as Agents of Change

Building a supportive community is essential for leaders to share experiences, frustrations, and insights, emphasizing the value of conversations and mutual support. Effective leadership involves recognizing that change is evolutionary, involving both progress and setbacks, and engaging others in the change process. Mindset matters in leadership, requiring self-reflection, authenticity, and a clear understanding of why change is necessary. Leaders are encouraged to celebrate continuity in addition to change, recognizing the positive aspects of the existing environment and fostering a balanced perspective.

Explore:

Related Episodes

18: The Paradox of Change

In today’s fast-paced work world, leaders are rightly focused on change. But are leaders too focused on change? This episode explores the idea that leaders need to raise their game in celebrating continuity and stand up for the status quo!

2: Navigating a New Boss

ALJ Guide Josh Forman shares his story of navigating the vast changes in his company and specifically dealing with a new COO. Following Josh's interview, Pete talks with Rachel Weston Rowell, a leadership teams coach who specializes in startup and scale-up organizations, to discuss Josh's story and what all leaders can learn from it.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Are you exhausted by change?

Welcome to another episode of Relearning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life.

I’m Pete Behrens, and today I want to focus on change fatigue.Thanks for joining us, and let’s dive in.

Now, each month, we run education sessions for our leaders who have chosen a path of growth and have joined our development program around growth mindset and catalyst behaviors.

Well, this past month, we did a session on change fatigue. And in preparing for that session, I sat down to try to figure out how change has been impacting—or even flooding—my world. And as I sat down to write it all down, it dawned on me: no wonder I’m so exhausted!

You know, I think about the societal change that has been impacting all of us, right? Through COVID, climate change, politics and war, and human rights change that’s going on in the world. Our community, you know, our small town here near Boulder, Colorado, that was devastated about a year-and-a-half ago by the Marshall Fire, destroying over 1,000 homes in our community, and how that’s still impacting our local community today. You know, my family, still dealing, in the last year-and-a-half, with the death of both of my parents. Finally, personally, having undergone heart surgery to address my flutter and irregular heartbeat.

You know, it was interesting—as I started and scheduled this session, I was thinking about work change; I was thinking about professional change. And yet, as I’m preparing for this topic, I was realizing—that all of that professional and work change is being dwarfed, at least in my world, being dwarfed by all of these other changes outside of work. And so, I was wondering, like, “Is this actually something that I’m feeling? Like, is this just me, or is this something that others in our community are sharing?”

So, as part of this session, we decided to poll our audience and ask, you know, “First of all, how is change feeling compared to previous times in your life?” So, in the past two years, you know, does change feel or less the same?”

90% of the respondents said change is either above or way above average for them than previous times in their world, right? I’m not alone here, right? I think we’re all feeling an intensity rise on change.

The second thing we asked was, “Where are you feeling this intensity of change? Where is this change coming from?” You know? And we asked the same questions: “Is it societal? Is it community? Is it professional? Is it personal? Is it family?” What surprised me out of this? Family came out as number one. Family! Now, professional was number two, followed by society and personal, before we got to community.

Thinking about this—right?—it leads me to, kind of, maybe my first point for leaders to think about here: people are human. How they come to work—they’re coming not just as the employee in a role. They’re coming into this work as a human with an entire world around them, where work change is only a small part of the larger system. I look at me, right? Professionally, yes, we’ve been doing a lot of change at Agile Leadership Journey. Right? We’ve been building a brand; we’ve been building a platform. We’ve been building and redesigning programs over the last few years. We’ve been building a Guide community. Just in the last two years alone—I had to even ask—we’ve got 27 new Guides in our community. Right? That’s a lot of change! It’s the other stuff that’s dwarfing it. And the others in our community are feeling the same. Those family changes, the personal changes, are dwarfing some of the changes at work.

So, leaders, recognize and address the entire human.

We also asked our participants about how change was impacting their world. And, you know, not surprising: we ran into items around distraction, around exhaustion and stress, around pressure. Even health concerns. And, you know, we’ve seen many studies linking change to stress and stress to health. And this isn’t immune to any of those types of changes in our world.

But interestingly, there were other comments around how change helped create clarity and focus, right? It helped leaders prioritize and find what’s most important. And I just love how the creative mind can take lemons and create lemonade.

You know, we, in fact, even talked about how change was incredibly positive. People shared change that was personally motivated, where they were looking at things like a Master’s Degree, or they did personal development and growth. They set and maintained boundaries. They even came up with something that’s like, more grateful or a positive-oriented mindset.

You know, when change can be personally motivated and driven, it can be purposeful. It can be fun. It can be inspiring. And change is good.

But the bulk of our session was actually not focused on the change hitting us, but rather as our role as agents of change, of catalyst, right? It’s hard. Agile Leadership Journey is about catalyst leadership, catalyzing change in something that’s valuable to us, right? This could be a project, a team, an organization, a culture, a mission, right? And change fatigue can happen when we’re trying to change something or someone else, and they’re just not on the same page as we are, right? Change fatigue happens as we metaphorically, kind of, beat our head against that wall, over and over and over.

And so, as change agents, we can run out of gas. We can lose energy. We can lose hope. And so, how do we maintain that hope? How do we fill our tank? How do we not only get people aligned on this change but actually inspire people to take a change journey with us? And so, I’d like to maybe comment on four things that our conversation drew out.

Okay, point number one: you’re not alone. We can join or build a community inside our organization or outside of it. Our Agile Leadership Journey community, in fact, is such a community: leaders and Guides. You know, it’s a place to share, a place to learn, a place to help others who are on that same journey.

You know, last spring, I was running a cohort. And the whole point of the cohort was driving change within an organization. And I was starting to get frustrated because the leaders were unable to actually drive change. And so, I’m thinking, “Well, this is pointless. Like, why are we in this cohort if we can’t actually do this?” Not because they weren’t capable or competent, but because they didn’t really have the access or the respect or the role to do so. And they kept pushing back on me and saying, “Pete, this is valuable!” I was like, “What do you mean?” And they said, “Having the conversations, having the support, talking about these things, hearing from others was incredibly valuable.” The conversations were as or more valuable than the change itself.

So, what I encourage you to think about is—find, seek out, build a community where you can find some like-minded people who value what you value and can help you when you get frustrated and beat your head against the wall, run out of gas, run out of energy—they can help pick you up.

Point number two: change is evolutionary before it’s revolutionary. There are many steps, forwards and backwards, that are required before a tide of change starts to swell and change might become a little more obvious. You know, resistance to change is human; it’s personal. We can introduce change, but we can’t change anyone else. William Bridges, who wrote Managing Transitions , one of the books on my shelf, differentiates change from transition. Change is physical; change is an event. Change is something that we can cause. Transition, on the other hand, is psychological. It’s a journey that every one of us must take alone. So, what does that mean for us as leaders?

We’ve got to engage others in the change process, in the design of change, in the execution of change. We’ve got to celebrate small wins. We’ve got to recognize small steps and experiments. And we’ve got to know that setbacks and failure are part of the journey. It’s, in fact, the journey where we’re going to be spending most of our time. And so, while the destination is calling us, our focus needs to be on those walking with us.

Point number three: mindset matters. You know that old serenity prayer: Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Well, that applies here. Choosing our battles and being in the right mindset makes a difference.

So, before we go and try to change something else, or somebody else, let’s look inside at our own, right? How are we showing up? What is our orientation of change? Are we walking the walk? Why is it that we are on this change journey? Why should anyone trust you, or even join us, on this journey?

And finally, point number four: change is only a fraction of the world around us. You know, change strives for our attention, like the star of a show getting the spotlight. And you’ve got the rest of the cast and the setting there to support them. Change is that star. Continuity is the cast. I encourage you, once in a while, to look away from the star and look at the cast. Look away from change, and look at continuity and celebrate it.

For me, what does this look like? Personally, I’m still able to live a happy and healthy life, even as I’m aging. You know, my work and life partner, Jana, is an incredible force of good in my life, and my children are healthy and strong. And yes, while my community has gone through a pretty tremendous fire and devastation, it’s still an incredible force of support, and it’s fun to be with. And finally, our Agile Leadership Journey. The team we have assembled there is a group of rock stars, you know? It allows me and our team to co-create to build that platform to support change, to build new programs and, you know, grow that community.

So, I encourage you, as a leader, to not only focus on the change, but really, once and a while, look away and celebrate the continuity in life.

So, I’ll just leave you with two quotes, the first from John Maxwell: “ Change is inevitable. But growth is optional.” Your reaction, your mindset around change, is a choice you make at every moment.

The second quote is from Albert Einstein: “The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.” We, here at the Agile Leadership Journey, are on a change path, and we hope to see you here.

So, thank you for joining me today. And enjoy your change journey!

Relearning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. Visit agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast , for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

50: Agile Adaptive Leadership with Jim Highsmith

Wed, 01 Nov 2023 21:30:16 GMT

What is Agile Adaptive Leadership?

In their conversation, Pete and Jim explore the fusion of agile and adaptive principles, shedding light on how these concepts can revolutionize leadership in a rapidly changing world.

Jim Highsmith, Agile Pioneer

Jim has been a leader in the agile community for 30+ years, notably as a co-author of the Agile Manifesto , founding member of The Agile Alliance, co-author of the Declaration of Interdependence for project leaders, and co-founder and first president of the Agile Leadership Network.

Connect with Jim

Relearning from this episode…

Business Agility to Prepare for Turbulence

Agile-adaptive leadership is critical in preparing for a turbulent future. In a world marked by climate change, pandemics, geopolitical unrest, and other challenges, the ability to sense and respond to external factors becomes paramount. Being adaptable, adventurous, and inspiring leaders who can lead their organizations through change and uncertainty.

Agile Plus Adaptive, Not Versus

While agility is associated with flexible and resilient outcomes, adaptability represents a dynamic, iterative process of sensing, acting, learning, and continuous improvement. The combination of both concepts, agile and adaptive, in leadership, is seen as a powerful approach, as it offers a more comprehensive perspective on effective leadership. And it is not just relevant in business; it can also contribute to creating a world with leaders who can more effectively address global challenges.

Explore:

Related Episodes

14: I Wasn't Born a Leader

Pete Behrens welcomes us to season 2 with a personal story of his own accidental leadership journey as a student, employee and founder. Through his story, he hopes to connect, inspire, and challenge us all to become better leaders, more adaptive leaders, more diverse leaders, and more humane leaders.

5: Rebuild Your Leadership Habits

Crystal Mills, a Regional Vice President for a Canadian credit union, shares her rollercoaster story exploring the highs and lows in rebuilding her new leadership habits amid overwhelming stress and anxiety. Both Crystal’s story, and our discussion following, is with Jasmine Kernaleguen, a leadership disruptor who inspired Crystal’s new leadership path and engaged Crystal on her journey.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Episode Transcript

Pre-Intro

We’re telling agile teams, “Be flexible. Be agile. Change. Be open to change.” And at the same time, we were imposing the project management Iron Triangle on them. [Laughs] Focusing on cost. “You've got to be within 10% of the scope, scheduling, and cost, but we want you to be flexible and adaptive!” [Laughs]

Intro

Pete Behrens:

Jim Highsmith is one of my mentors in agility and leadership. His involvement in the formation of the Agile movement, along with his early authored books on adaptive software development and agile project management was foundational in my early transformation into more Agile ways of working. One of the things I love most about Jim is his pragmatic approach. He stays clear of frameworks and processes and focuses instead on principles and practices that actually improve business, performance, and health.

Jim's career has spanned over 60 years, including NASA, working on the Apollo Mission as an engineer, to project management, to advising for Cutter Consortium and ThoughtWorks, some of the early voices that I looked to in the Agile movement. He co-authored the Agile Manifesto. He started and formed the Agile Leadership Network. And author of a half-dozen books that span a quarter-century. So, when I say we have the expert in the intersection of agility and leadership, I hope you'll listen. I'm certainly excited to have a conversation with Jim, and I hope you enjoy it as well.

I just, you know—kind of as a kickoff—I mean, you started your career when computers still required punch cards, I understand. I'm curious, kind of, you know—just even in the formation of you coming—like, that was probably pretty radical, coming into a computer engineering discipline, back in those days. How did that happen for you?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, it was interesting because when I was in undergraduate school—and I graduated in 1966 with an electrical engineering degree. And there was a little if no computer stuff in the program that I was in during that period of time. I mean, we designed circuits with transistors the size of an end of a pencil. You know, the eraser on the end of a pencil. And today, you get five billion on a chip. [Laughs] And so, it's quite a bit different. And one of the things that—you know, looking back, I think about—is the fact that we did a lot of things from a programming standpoint back then, to compensate for the fact that memory was so expensive and cycles were so costly. And so, you really were at the mercy of, you know, memory limitations and cycle limitations. And so you did things that were—today, look screwy, like two-digit year fields instead of four-digit year fields that yielded the Y2K problem. We weren't worried about Y2K back in 1970! [Laughs] We were worried about two digits.

Pete Behrens:

Just pass that onto my generation, you know! [Laughs]

Jim Highsmith:

Well, you know, how many programmers today are looking forward to the year 10,000?

Pete Behrens:

Exactly, yeah. Well, it's interesting—even going back. Like, there's always a reason. Like, we think, like, “Oh, why didn't you just think of that?” Well, you did! You just optimized to a different solution, to a different problem, right? You optimized to that space and the memory you had to deal with back in those—so, from that time at NASA and Apollo to your influence in the Agile movement, I feel like I'm missing that little gap. And maybe, as a summary, how did that gap occur for you, getting into being a, you know, a formation member of the Agile Manifesto and writing some of your early books on Agile and adaptive software development?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, probably the main turning point in my career happened in about 1980. And I really got into the whole structured methods area, and then the case tool era, where a case tool became very prominent. They were sort of the first tools that supported software engineers. And then—the 1990s I really call the roots of Agile, because that's when a lot of the Agile people got started. So that's when Scrum got started; that's when XP got started. And I started working in the early 90s on a rapid application development approach. And that's what kind of got me started. And I worked on several projects. I worked for one of the big computer companies, Amdahl, at the time, that had a rapid development tool on the mainframe. And I engaged with their marketing people to build a short-term rapid application development experiment that we would take in to clients. And we'd build that application in a month using one-week iterations. And that was back in the early 90s. And so, that's what got me started.

And then, in the later 90s, I ended up meeting Martin Fowler in New Zealand. We were both speaking down there, and then he introduced me to Kent Beck. And Kent Beck invited me to a meeting, and that—which eventually ended up being the meeting for the Agile Manifesto. So I came up through the structured methods rank. Kent Beck and Martin Fowler came up through the Object-Oriented (OO) ranks, and we sort of met in the late 1990s.

Pete Behrens:

Fascinating. Yeah, I was—I think I was in a parallel world, working on case tools, working on RAD and JAD and iterative development in the 90s. And then, kind of, jumping over into that Agile space. You know, one of the things that I've always appreciated about you, Jim, is—I feel like, even early, you weren't as much about frameworks and process. You're about principles and practices of good software development, good project management, just improving work—right?—and culture and health and all those things. You've also tended to be on that side of—even as you switch from adaptive to agile, you always keep combining those two words: agile, adaptive, adaptive, agile. I'm curious about that. Like, they seem like the same word, just different nuances. Why is it you keep connecting those two words?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, to cover all the bases, for one. (laughter) And, you know, my first book was Adaptive Software Development. And what adaptive brings to it, for me, is this sense of an underlying metaphor of complex adaptive systems. Because I think software development is a complex adaptive system. And so, that really is an important piece of the adaptive word, for me, that I started using many years ago. I wrote a book in 2014 or ‘12, something like that, called Adaptive Leadership, which was basically an e-book. So, I've always sort of been associated with the word adaptive. And as I got to thinking about it—because I did want to combine them. Agile, to me, evokes the outcome, kind of, flexible, resilient kinds of things. Whereas adaptive evokes for me, kind of, a sense of an adaptive life cycle. Of sensing where you are, acting on that, and then learning from the results and going back through that iterative circle. So the agile is sort of the outcome and the adaptive is sort of the process, if you will. And I also want to use them together, because agile by itself has kind of become so ubiquitous. And there's so many people that are, you know, for it or against it that I want to just, kind of, stay away from that. So, I didn't want to call it just agile leadership, so it kind of came to me to combine them.

The other thing it does, which is kind of incidental, in a way, is—it has the same format as command-control, command-based control. And this is a juxtaposition to that. You know, there's a lot of new management theories out there, servant leadership and more. And we haven't really settled on a one-term, like they did on command-control. And maybe we don't need to do that, but there's many different terms out there that evoke different kinds of things.

Pete Behrens:

I like—I really like your last point there, right? The command-control has been a very, you know—and certainly the agile movements picked up on that as the antithesis, right? In terms of—and so, having a hyphenated word on the other side, right? Agile-adaptive certainly, kind of, calls that out. Do you see this agile-adaptive leadership as just—I get this question a lot. Is it different than just good leadership? How would you answer that question?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, you know, that's a question I started answering, or asking, myself as I finished up the book a couple of months ago and started looking at what I wanted to get into next. And so I got to reading a bunch about business agility, and this is how I ran across the Business Agility Institute. And we got connected. And so I kept reading this stuff, on the business agility sites, that, to me—this sounded like good management. And so, I was wondering what the difference was. And at the same time, I just happened to pick up a book by Jenny Romiti, who was a former CEO of IBM for eight years. And as I read about her journey, trying to instill adaptive—I mean, agile—and design thinking into IBM, I began to say, “Here's a CEO that really understands agility, whether they call it that or not.” I, you know—they probably don't—but really understands at a high level in the organization what that’s all about. And so, I really appreciated that.

I think there are really three things that I talk about. Adventurous. One of the things that I talk about in the book a lot is—compare my mountain climbing adventures with software adventures. And some of the same kinds of things are involved, like prudent risk-taking, you know, not wild-ass risk taking, but, you know, something that's reasonable and is something that you've thought through and you understand the consequences.

The second thing that I think an agile adaptive leader needs is to be inspiring. If you're going to change something, if you're going to change the culture, you're going to change your organization, you've got to engage and inspire the people around you. And so, that's a really important point—is to be able to do that. Is that important for our management in general? Yes, but I think it's more important in an organization where you're trying to change stuff. That's really important.

And the final thing is to be adaptive, to have some sort of adaptive process that you go through yourself. One of the things that I'm talking about at a conference here in a couple of weeks, in several weeks, is applying the history to what's going to happen with AI and quantum computing. And what does history have to say about the evolution of other kinds of technologies? And I think—so, understanding part of the history of management helps today in, sort of, figuring out what's different and what's not different. I think a lot of it is a matter of emphasis. But, again, I think it goes back to—adventurous, inspiring, and adaptive are three components of agile adaptive that I think are important.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. I think, you know, what you're hitting on there is—yes, agile adaptive leadership is good leadership in a context of change. And there might be good leadership in other contexts, but it's that change context, the complexity context, right? It's the speed context. So, yeah, I think what you're indicating is that adventure, the inspire—because of change, it's causing so much confusion. Without that clear direction, without that, sort of, bold step into that unknown. You're not going to be successful as a leader.

I'm curious—from you, like, it feels like, to some degree, our careers paralleled, time-shifted a bit, right? Engineer to, kind of, project management, leadership consulting, to leadership and organizational advisory. I look at those three layers in the organization, right? The teams and engineering work that's going on. The project management and the portfolio management and all the program management that happens in the middle tier. And then the organizational tier, right? That disconnect between those three layers is something we often see. And I'm curious—is that something you've seen over the course of your career? Do you see that changing, or how are you seeing those three tiers and the way they work or don't in organizations?

Jim Highsmith:

I find those layers isolated from each other quite a bit. And let me—I went through the video that—one of the introductory videos that you made about playing different games.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah!

Jim Highsmith:

And one of those games that I ran into, you know, in the mid-2000s—I've kept running into it. Is—we’re telling agile teams, “Be flexible. Be agile. Change. Be open to change.” And at the same time, we were imposing the project management Iron Triangle on them. [Laughs] Focusing on cost. “You've got to be within ten percent of the scope, scheduling, and cost, but we want you to be flexible and adaptive!” [Laughs] And so, the measurement system and the management system, and the engineering system were completely opposed to each other. And so, that's one of the things that led me to develop what I call the agile triangle, which—I value, quality, and constraints. And the constraints or scope, schedule, and cost. That doesn't mean that those are not important, but it means that it constrains how you could deliver customer value. And if you use a triangle like that, you've got, by its very nature—tells you that I'm going to be—there's going to be some alignment problems in there. And I'm going to help align management and the delivery team.

I worked with a team in the early 2000s to deliver to a fixed date. And the way we did that is—we, early on, we aligned, between the development team and senior management, what we were going to do. And how we were going to do it, and how they had to adapt, as we went forward, in order to meet that fixed date. That we might have to cut back some of the functionality, that we might have to do some other things, add some resources. But we would meet that fixed date, and we did. And so, I think it's that sort of alignment that has gotten out of whack in some places.

And I think it's—unfortunately, it still is. Because, again, because if you view agility or agile as an engineering, global, discipline, which I think a lot of people did in the beginning and, unfortunately, to now, it's not going to affect me as a manager. And one of the reasons I started the Agile Project Leadership Network in 2004 and ‘05—was that I saw this disconnect happening, and I saw the agile community basically saying, “We don't need any damn project management!” Right? [Laughs] And “We don't need anything.” In fact—

Pete Behrens:

“We don’t want management. We don’t want project management. We don't want dates.” Yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

That’s right. “We just want complete autonomy to do whatever we want to do whenever we want to do it.”

Pete Behrens:

And it's no wonder we turn off leaders with that message, yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah. What I was talking about was—we still project management, but we needed a different type of project management. That, in fact, project management was going to help us bridge that gap between the engineering teams and the management team. And the project managers, the good ones, the ones that were agile and adaptive, would help us do that. So that was the message I was trying to get across.

Pete Behrens:

So, I want to just pull out the point you made on the Iron Triangle, because I think that's an important one that I think we've failed to learn. And what you said is—the Iron Triangle of old—right?—time, budget, and scope, right? That's the traditional Iron Triangle. You've collapsed all those into a single point, constraints, and added value and quality, which always should have been there in the first place. And so, what you've done is—you've created—what do you call this? The Adaptive Triangle? The Agile Triangle?

Jim Highsmith:

The Agile Triangle.

Pete Behrens:

The Agile Triangle. I love it. I love that. Just the visualization of that, to me, is really powerful. So, with regard to leadership—so, I feel like, to some degree, we're not speaking to leaders properly on agility, right? You mentioned—we talk tech agility, we talk frameworks, we have IT, right? Most leaders associate agile—because of where it was born and where it grew up in software and technology—as a solution to build products. Yet, today, we're seeing this transfer into business. What is it, you think, leaders need to hear? Or what should we, as, you know, the people trying to promote agile ways of working in organizations—what is it we need to be saying to these leaders or connecting to these leaders on that brings this a little bit broader?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, I think to bring it a little bit broader, I use the term agility a lot, as opposed to just agile. And it's, you know—and so, whenever anybody asked me, “What's the purpose of agility?” Or “What's the purpose of business agility or enterprise agility or any of the agilities?” And when I read things from the Agile Business Consortium, or even the Business Agility Institute, they're sort of long, well-worded, but unremarkable, and un-memorable phrases, you know? “A set of organized capabilities, behaviors, and ways of working in business and freedom—” You may even have been involved in writing this definition!

Pete Behrens:

Blah, blah, blah, blah, yeah! A bunch of platitudes, yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

So, for me, I wanted a really succinct statement. So “the purpose of agility is to help prepare for our turbulent future.”

Pete Behrens:

Business agility is to help prepare for our turbulent—I would even suggest present—and future, yes. Yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

Well, future’s tomorrow. And you can substitute agility or business agility or enterprise agility, you know? But it is to help us prepare for our turbulent future. And you don't have to say much about the turbulent future, other than to look at, you know, Maui and Florida and, you know, the climate change aspect. We've just gone through a pandemic. We've got war in Europe, you know? There's a lot of factors that are huge factors in the world today. And so, not only do we—do I—think agility is appropriate and helpful in a business context, I think it's appropriate in a wider context of needing more leaders in the world who are a little bit more adaptive and agile than some of the ones we see today.

The other thing, too, and I talked about this adaptive life cycle. I think there's a point in here that a lot of people miss as being the important part. And that is the front end of that life cycle, which is a sensing process. To sense what's going on out there in the world and synthesize it into what's important for you. There's so much out there, so much information, so many different things going on that how you process that, how you sense what's going on, and how you react to that is really important.

Pete Behrens:

I love how you're connecting into agility—is as much about seeing as it is about acting, right? And we talk about that a lot. Like, agility is often perceived as a movement, as a motion, as a decision, as a shift. But the problem with that is—if we're not doing that with that sense, without sensing, we're doing action for no purpose—right? And it's that sensing that creates the smart movement. And that—to us, when we start teaching agile, it's as much about that awareness you're creating for the shift that's critical.

Jim Highsmith:

Yeah, and I’ll give you a concrete example of that at the team level. We were failing, I think, in a lot of situations, to sense why we’re doing something. What are the goals that we’re really shooting for? I hear a lot of complaints these days about feature factories, about just churning out features because we want to get our velocity up. And without much attention to, “What are the product goals that we’re trying to reach? What are the customer goals that we’re trying to reach? What are the business benefits we’re trying to gain?” And so, a lot of that gets lost. And so, I think—this setting the stage is an important piece that’s getting lost a lot of times.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. So, with regard to agile adaptive leadership, are you seeing some success today? Where are you seeing success today in business or individual leaders that, maybe, you could point to?

Jim Highsmith:

Well, since I have retired—a couple of years ago—in the last couple of years at Thoughtworks, I didn't have much customer interaction. I was really working on a very specific digital transformation initiative inside the company. I haven't worked directly with too many organizations the last few years, but I have worked directly with a few people that I think, kind of, embody good leadership. One of those is Jenny Romiti. As I said, I've only read her book; I've never met her, never talked to her. But if you read through her book, she's got some ideas that I think are really more agile than adaptive. For example, they knew where they wanted to go with this agile adaptive, I mean, agile and design thinking. They knew that they had to move more heavily into AI in the cloud and a couple of other technologies. Where were they going to get the money to do that? So they had to make a decision to sell off a major part of their business, the manufacturer of chips, that was part and parcel of IBM's history. But they had to free up that capital in order to fund these other kinds, these other initiatives. And I think, sometimes, people at the lower level don't don't appreciate what kind of decisions those are. They're very difficult decisions, because you're impacting a lot of people. But it's the kind of thing—you've got to set yourself up to spend money for new things. So, for example, IBM put five billion dollars into training for this new agile and design training—for design thinking—over a five or ten-year period. That's a lot of investment in turning the corner. So, I really think she is one of the people that I would hold up.

Somebody else is Heidi Musser. She was the CIO and VP at USAA for many years. And she was—she's now retired and is the board chair of the Agile Alliance. So, she really brought Agile into several organizations. But USAA was one of them that she worked with quite a bit. Somebody else that I know from many years ago is Jeff Smith. And he turned—he started doing a major transformation of Suncorp in Australia in the 2008-2009 area and has been involved in several very large Agile transitions since then, from a CEO and both a CEO and a CIO in a COO position. So he's somebody that's had a lot of experience. And one of the interesting things in talking to Jeff is—he asked questions about things that few other CEOs are asking questions about. He really understands agility; he really understands the technology like few CEOs I've ever had contact with. And so, I think those are a couple of examples of people that I think, kind of, exude this agile adaptive leadership style.

Pete Behrens:

Sounds like a few good people to bring on our podcast here! I'd love to—love the fact that two out of three of those are female leaders, too.

Jim Highsmith:

Yes!

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

So, you know, one of the things you get from a female leader is—if you look at performance as getting stuff done. And people—as working empathetically with people. I think, in general, women are better at balancing those than we are, than the guys are. Performance and people. Performance and people. And sometimes those things get out of whack. And so, in some ways, I think the Agile movement may have gone so far in the area of self-organizing teams and autonomy, and those kinds of things, that we've lost sight of the fact that those teams also have to be accountable and aligned with management's needs. So I think you can go back and forth on those two things. But there was an article written, I think, somewhere by McKinsey recently, that talked about the balance of those two things and how important it was for the overall performance of the organization.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. The study—I think it's Price. They did research on performance and health and the companies that over-index on performance, actually underperform the companies that index on health as a balance to performance. [ Beyond Performance: How Great Organizations Build Ultimate Competitive Advantage, by Scott Keller and Colin Price (2011) ] We'll make a reference to that book in the notes. But, yeah, that's the word, language, we tend to use. Performance and health. How do you find that balance? I look at it as, like, an athlete. You've done a lot of adventurous things in your life. Performance is that one-day thing. Like, “Can I perform this race or this mountain climb or this hike?” Health is my ability to do that ten years from today or five years from today or, you know, two weeks from now, right? It's that continuous performance over time. And I think a lot of organizations get so maniacal because of the speed of change. They just, kind of, zoom in on that performance element and kind of lose aspect of some of the health.

So, just, speaking of the Agile movement, we're seeing a lot of, kind of, what I would call, kind of, solutionism, right? Frameworks and tools and just taking things and trying to make them into recipes—is the way I call it. I'm curious how you're seeing the Agile movement today.

Jim Highsmith:

Well, I think part of it is that the Agile movement has become so ubiquitous, you know? Some studies have said that 75 or 80 percent of the companies in the world are using Agile, you know. Now we know what that means. [Laughs] But for some companies, I mean, it doesn't mean much. I always refer to Jerry Weinberg's Law of Raspberry Jam. The wider you spread it, the thinner it gets. And so, out on the edges it gets pretty thin in terms of the knowledge.

I’m a part of a group that's just beginning to think about an idea we call Rejuvenating Agile. And because there's a lot of stuff in the Agile movement that's really basic and really important, and we need to keep it. And there's some other things in the Agile movement that—we really need to to extend the basic values and principles of agility into some different areas. And so, what do we keep, and what do we extend? And what about the—what is it about the Agile movement, as it got started, that's still relevant today? And I think, you know, people keep asking, “Are we going to rewrite the manifesto?” No, we're not. It was a document at a particular place in time, a particular group of people. The agile movement, which was kind of the light methodology movement at the time, was very, very tiny. And today, it's huge. You'd never write a manifesto today that would please everybody. And I wouldn't want to.

Pete Behrens:

The other word I picked up on is that word interdependence, right? Your declaration of interdependence. And that ties into your advice to leaders, right? It is so interdependent. There is no one leadership, there is no one leader, there is no one idea, right? It's—how do you bring that system together in an effective, efficient way to solve problems, right? And that, to me, is the fundamental root of what we're working with today—is helping leaders navigate that complexity, that interdependence in our organizations, and even cross-organizational, you know, industry.

Jim Highsmith:

I remember a story. I was listening to a woman who was head of some educational organization. She was telling a story about being on an airplane, riding in first class, sitting beside this guy. And so, they got to talking, and he said, “What is the one thing we could do with education that would improve it?” And she said, “Getting rid of the people who think there's one thing that will improve it.” [Laughs] But I think you're right. It's not a singularity there that—you know, this type of leader or this type of person. You know, if you look back—I did a Google Search, and I don't remember exactly what the number was, but there's something like 15,000 books on leadership that have been written, or probably more than that.

Pete Behrens:

Oh, yeah.

Jim Highsmith:

And so, you know, am I going to read all 15,000 and extract, you know—different leaders look at different things. And so you've got to look at what—as a leader, you've got to look at those things that seem relevant to you.

Pete Behrens:

Well, Jim I really love the fact that you have not bowed out of this community and checked out. I love the fact that your voice is still being heard, that your messages are still being told. Because I think you continue to add value to our community today. And—whether it's a revival, you know, it's going back to our roots. I think Alistair Cockburn, you know, has the heart of agility, right? I love his message around the heart and the values, right? I think there is some sense of—it's spread too thin, and how do we bring back some of those core values? And so, I'm appreciative of your voice and you joining and sharing with us today.

Jim Highsmith:

Well, thank you! It's been a lot of fun.

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. And visit our website, agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast, for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

49: Leading Agile Transformations

Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:17:29 GMT

How Should Leaders Approach Agile Transformations?

In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, Pete discusses the topic of agile transformations with Boston Consulting Group’s David Ritter.

David Ritter, Senior Advisor, BCG

David Ritter’s career spans a wide range of leadership and hands-on roles in technology, across large enterprises, startups, and consulting. He is currently a Senior Advisor with The Boston Consulting Group. He works with clients on leadership, goal-setting, new ways of working, and the use of technology to create competitive advantage.

Since rejoining BCG in 2012, David has led transformations in several leading global enterprises as those organizations sought to achieve breakthrough improvements in time-to-market, customer centricity, and effective delivery of technology solutions.

Connect with David on LinkedIn

Relearning from this episode…

Qualities Required for Agile Transformations

Courage at the executive level is a non-negotiable when organizations desire real, lasting change. Further, agile transformations require patience and a continuous improvement mindset. It's essential to recognize that transformation is an ongoing process, not a one-time project with an endpoint.

Differentiating Agile and Digital Transformations

Agile is a "how," while digital transformation is often the "why" and "what." To be successful, organizations should clearly define their goals and outcomes before applying Agile practices. Alignment and autonomy must be balanced for success in large organizations.

Explore:

Related Episodes

Episode 26: Talking Transformation with Amerisure CIO Amjed Al-Zoubi

Stemming from a proactive recognition from senior leadership, Amerisure Insurance has been on a 3-year culture-shaping journey to improve their speed of innovation. Amjed Al-Zoubi, CIO of Amerisure, and Pete co-presented this case study at the Business Agility Conference in NYC .

In this episode, Pete and Amjed went a little deeper and discussed more about the leader behind the title and about what it’s like to be on such a journey.

Episode 45: Scaling Agile Part I: The Games We Play

What does it take to scale agile? Pete provides a history lesson on scaling agile ways of working and the key challenge limiting organizations today — getting leaders and teams to play the same game.

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

What should leaders know about agile transformations? Welcome to another episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, where we explore a specific leadership challenge and break it down to help improve your leadership, your organization, and, just possibly, your personal life. I'm Pete Behrens, and today I'm honored to be joined by David Ritter. David is a Senior Advisor at Boston Consulting Group. His 40-year career has spanned a wide range of technology, leadership, and advisory positions. At BCG, he advises clients on new ways of working and to use technology as a competitive advantage. I know you're going to value and enjoy our conversation, as I did. Welcome to the show, David!

David Ritter:

Thank you. Great to be here.

Pete Behrens:

So, I've been an admirer—have been following your work for quite some time and certainly been impressed. But I think, for our listeners, I'd like them to know a little bit more about you. And so, I'd love for you to share, maybe, just a bit of your experience arc with them.

David Ritter:

Sure. And likewise, Pete! So, I've always appreciated our collaborations. So, I started as a programmer. Computer science, Georgia Tech. Came up through the ranks as a programmer in a traditional model. Then became a manager of programmers and then a manager of manager of programmers. I ran some large organizations in traditional software companies, going back into the 80s and 90s. Discovered Agile in a startup and had the opportunity to build and run Agile teams from the ground up in that context. Doing it, I would say, badly at first. But after five years, probably, getting better at it. And really, I would say, my developers teaching me what it meant to be, you know, to really empower and get, you know, get the purpose to the rock face.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, I've definitely been there with you on that one.

David Ritter:

Yeah. So—and been in and out of consulting. So I have a, you know—I have a great desire to help shape things. I also have a great desire to help build things. So, you know, I've actually done three different stints at the Boston Consulting Group, starting first in 1998. And then I left to do a startup, and then I rejoined it in 2002, and then it came back, and then I left it to do another startup for five years. But for the last eleven years, I've been at BCG, helping organizations essentially apply Agile principles, new ways of working, to help them very often build software better. But increasingly, these days, in other areas as well. In marketing operations, wherever iterative test and learn makes sense, which—turns out a lot of the work that we do makes sense, as I know you discovered as well. And that's been a great journey. We've had an opportunity through BCG, obviously, working with some of the largest, best companies in the world that still struggle with these things. So, you know, happy to bring some of that experience to bear.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. Well, I certainly appreciate that. And I often hear from some of the consulting firms, right? It's my best first, third, and fifth job, right? You come back into those. And they often welcome you. I think—the consulting firm sometimes, I think, from our kind of niche Agile coaching community, get a bad rap, right? I think we like to pick on them, probably from a bit of jealousy, but also maybe from a legitimacy of coming in more in that traditional directive change. Versus, maybe, I think, the way we would see ourselves: more coaching change. What do we get wrong about consulting firms like BCG, and how would you counter that argument, in terms of how they're working in the Agile space with these kinds of transformations?

David Ritter:

Well, I listened to your podcast episodes on Agile scaling. And one of the things that I've shared with you before, that you say in there, is—you know, in a lot of the training that goes on around, Agile leadership—what you hear is, “I wish my boss was here to hear this, right?” So, what firms like BCG bring to the table is the relationship at the C-suite level and the credibility to tell them, “Look, wake up! You know, what got you here is not going to get you there. You really need to fundamentally rethink.” And very often, we are able to intervene at a time when the company is facing a burning platform that actually sets up the context for change. This stuff is hard, right? Taking a large organization and getting them to break down the functional silos and really apply Agile principles in a way that makes a significant difference. It's really hard. You've got to have the leadership team aligned behind that change, and I think that that's one of the core things that BCG brings.

Just also, you know, the change management capability, right? And, you know, you can argue which firm is better than the others. BCG has a great track record in actually driving large transformations of many kinds: post-merger integrations, digital transformations, etc. Over our history, you know, we've been able to understand how to promulgate change in organizations. We have great tools like “Ready, Willing, and Able” that is a standard toolkit that we use to help bring the entire organization along in a change journey. So, I think those, kind of, basic capabilities actually bring a lot to the table. And we've been running our engagements in Agile, maybe not explicitly under those terms. But increasingly, now, when we engage with a client, we do it in Agile. And we explicitly use Agile. You know, we actually run Scrum very often, or Kanban, as with joint teams with our clients. So, we form joint teams. And we've done this for 60 years now, but we've gotten a little more structured and formal around it, using the Agile toolkit more explicitly. So, you know, in that sense, it's almost native for us to think and work this way.

Pete Behrens:

Well, that's awesome to hear. You know, we often—I often like to use the term, right? We use Agile to be agile, right? We take those agile principles and apply them to transformation. I mean, it's—I'm still amazed how many executives drive agile transformation in a traditional project plan. And it's, just, fundamentally, kind of, just ingrained in our executive process. Do you find resistance to that approach, in terms of the transformation?

David Ritter:

Absolutely. And look, I wish I could say we were always successful, you know. But, you know, when we're not, you know, we face these questions all the time. You know, a lot of specific examples. When can we get rid of these coaches? So, these agile coaches. Like, you know, and I say, like, “So, do football teams fire their coaches after they preseason and just let the players play?

Pete Behrens:

Of course they do!

David Ritter:

Yeah, so, you know, this is—the tendency for organizations to revert to the norm is incredibly, incredibly strong.

What do consulting organizations get wrong? The large consulting organizations—very often they don't stay around long enough to really embed the change. And, you know, I think where you read about the stories about, you know, failed agile transformations—I think, very often, there's a certain lack of, I would say—I'll use the word courage—I would say to really, you know, at the executive, team level. And also, in some cases, in the consulting organizations, to say, you know, there are things we're willing to get fired for, you know? And to basically be able to tell folks, “If you're not going to embrace this in a way, that will be persistent, you're going to end off worse than you were. Because you're going to set an expectation with your organization, and then you're not going to meet it.”

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. Well—and you're reminding me—an executive was asking me once, like, “When are we going to land this plane?” You know, and it, kind of—that project-end milestone, of, “Okay, this project's over.” And, you know, you say courage. I agree. I also say patience, right? That—the concept of an investment that has to be reinvested, right? The dividends. Reinvest those earnings over and over to really build that win takes a patience that I think a lot of executives don't have. Or maybe they're just not even given, you know, in the fast-paced change world.

David Ritter:

Fundamental to me is the continuous improvement mindset, right? And that's really getting that landed, you know, despite, whatever, 40 years of history. The Toyota production system, you know. All work is an experiment. The continuous improvement mindset with your teams and at the executive level. You know, if you don't get there, then you're not going to have the patience, you know, or just the notion that we always need to get better and that the transformation process is continuous, not discrete.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. Well, you know, I know you come from a much more technical background, as I do, and have focused a lot on digital transformation, technical transformation. How do you differentiate agile transformation from digital? Because I think, from a lot of organizations, I see those get merged, those get combined. But are they different things? How do you differentiate? Talk to me a little bit more about that landscape, when you're connecting those with Agile.

David Ritter:

Yeah, for sure. So, the—one of the CIOs at a very large company asked me—who kind of squinted. And I think he was testing me. He said, “So, like, is Agile an end in itself, or is it a means to an end?” And I said, “Is that a trick question?” Of course Agile is a means to an end.” Agile is a how, right? And in that sense, digital is often the why and the what. So, where do we start these conversations? You know, we're behind on digital, right? Our competitors are killing us because they are better at digital. They are moving faster. They're more responsive to their customers. They are more customer-focused and are delivering value to customers faster. You know, our mobile app is terrible; theirs is great, right? Why is that—how did we get here, right? Why—how did we get so far behind? What are they doing that we're not, right? So, the digital agenda, when tied into, really, goals like being more customer-centric, driving better self-service, higher customer satisfaction, you know, through better interactions, better understanding of customers through customer data. You know, agile is the way that you can focus resources around those outcomes in a way to achieve them. So, you know, you need a why. You need a compelling why, at least, you know, an aspiration to be great, if not a burning platform. Like, you know, the house is on fire, and we really need to rethink things.

Pete Behrens:

That's interesting. You know, we were working with an organization. And very similarly—right?—their why was about, “We've got to innovate—right?—the Insurtech space is, you know, transforming faster than we are, right? The mobile, the quick response times, right? The ability to do the—leverage AI Technologies—right?—to help, you know, solve problems.” But it was interesting because we focused on just the concept of innovate. How do we innovate? And technology was one piece of it. But you've kind of replaced that to say, “Well, yes, innovate!” But digital, or the technical, kind of comes on the surface of that.

David Ritter:

Innovate for what purpose, right? So, this is where it's very interesting. I think, you know, if you read Eric Reese's books, right? You know, in the first one, he kind of says, “You should have a group that does innovation and then hands stuff off.” And I think, in his second book, he kind of says, “Yeah, it turns out that's kind of a mistake!” Right? [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

You’re talking about the Lean Startup stuff. Yes.

David Ritter:

Exactly, yeah. Lean Startup and the—I forget the name of the sequel. But, you know, that end-to-end responsibility for everybody to innovate around an outcome. And so, this is where, you know—when we start these conversations, we say, “What do you want to achieve, right?” Ben Stein said, you know, the first step in understanding, in getting what you want out of life, is to figure out what you want. Right? So, to—and to articulate that in a structured way, you know? A particular—I'll call it a technology that we use. You might call it a recipe that we use these days—as OKRs. We, you know—the conversation we have with the executives around that is—OKRs bring clarity and focus to goal-setting, the way that Scrum and Agile bring clarity, focus, transparency, to work, right? It's a method.

And, you know, in and of itself, it doesn't create value, but it's through that conversation where you get alignment at the executive level. Like, you know, we want to grow this part of the business. And how are our resources aligned against that? Who—how does that translate into actual working team structure, cross-functional working team structure? We call this outcome-driven team design, right? Set your outcomes at a high level, cascade them down to the point where you've got them at a reasonable level of granularity. And then you do this trick where you rotate the world 90 degrees, and you say, “Let's pretend those outcomes are teams.” And you ask this question, “Who would we need to put on those teams in order to achieve that outcome?” That's where you get this alignment that cascades into the organization and really gives you—that you can answer the question, “How are resources aligned against our goals?”

And so—and all of that involves innovation. Because the how of achieving those goals is pushed down to the teams. The teams come back and say, “This is how we will pursue this goal.” Everybody will have a point-of-view about the approach. The word that we inject into that conversation, which we think is really, really helpful is—everybody's ideas, including the teams’, about how to achieve the goal—they are hypotheses.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, we love that—love that word. One of the things I think the consulting firms do, help executives, leaders with, is probably a little bit more of the clarity in that goal. I think a lot of us in the niche community come in this: “Let's just get better.” Right? It's a bit amorphous. And I think, in some ways, that's great to create that empowerment. But other ways, I think, leaders can feel a little lost, you know? I think that's some of the reason these recipes are so valuable and safe—is seen as such an important step. Because it gives a little bit more direction. I think that balance is really critical, right? How do you give a bit more direction but still leave that room for, you know, creativity and innovation in the company itself?

David Ritter:

Balance is the hardest thing, you know? If you're riding a horse, you can fall off the left side of the horse. You fall off the right side of the horse, right? The key is—how do you stay on the horse? And this is the hardest thing, I think, for—particularly for large organizations—is to maintain that balance between the role of the center and the empowerment of the teams. This—you know, in Spotify terms, this is alignment and autonomy. Which are not, you know—it's not a zero-sum game. You need both. It's within the guard rails; it's within the alignment that teams can really innovate. And getting that balance right, shifting it over time making teams more empowered and then maintaining that. It's really, really hard, and it requires a constant vigilance over ensuring that the people on the teams are the ones that you're really listening to. So, when they say, “This is what we can achieve in a given period of time.” When the team says that, the executives don't say, “Yeah, you can do better.” Right? There's all kinds of examples of that.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. So, do you have an example, or how would you highlight who's doing this well? Like, where do we see success happening with digital agile transformation?

David Ritter:

Well, obviously, the folks that started off, you know, with, you know, more of a white space. And this technology was a little bit better understood. You know, the digital natives obviously do this well. We spent a lot of time looking at Amazon. But even Amazon underwent major transformations. You know, I think, you know, we cite the, you know, the famous Bezos API memo, right? And you've talked about this as well. Which basically said, “Okay, if you're going to build a service, you have to think of that as a product, and you have to build it just as though we're going to sell it outside the company, even if your primary customers are internal, right? And that is a mandate.”

I think of, you know, the work that you did at Salesforce, right? So, the establishment of what they call V2MOMs, right? Vision, values, methods, obstacles, and measures—right?—as a way to drive clarity and alignment of what we're trying to achieve. Purpose and outcomes through the organization, all the way down to the rock face, right? These are folks that really do this well. You know, the famous story of ING bank is one that—where I've had a lot of personal involvement. So, this can obviously happen in traditional businesses as well.

I really liked when you talked in your podcast around scaling. You talked about, sort of, top-down versus bottom-up. You talk about, you know, games that leaders play versus games that teams play. And it's interesting, because ING is actually an example. And you talked about—so, Spotify model is sort of an example of a game that teams play that leaders may not. Actually the ING transformation started with taking the ING leadership team to Spotify and sitting them down with the Spotify folks. And the Spotify folks basically said to the bankers—they said, like, “What are you willing to give up, in terms of your control, in order to make this happen?” Right? And that stuck with them, you know, in a profound way. So they got the leaders on board to the Spotify model of alignment versus alignment and autonomy both, right? Breaking compromise between alignment and autonomy. And that worked out very well.

We've also seen examples where SAFe involved bottom-up. We worked with a pharmaceutical company where SAFe started in their manufacturing group. And then it spread from there because they saw success in that area and they were able to—one of the executives said to me—so I said, “So, why SAFe? Why are you using SAFe?” And he said, “Because our executives can Google it, and they see that it's a thing. [Laughs] And they, therefore, will have some confidence that, you know, we're not just making this up, and it's some weird cult.” So, I think that this—the notion that these things have to happen both top-down and bottom-up is really critical. And it's organizations that can do that. ING is a great example.

I would say, for most organizations, it's tough to do it at that scale, particularly top-down. Most of it bubbles bottom-up, and it takes years. And it may start in IT, or it may start in marketing. The question, really, is—at some point, do you have a leader that is willing to say, “You know, we're going to bet on this”?

Pete Behrens:

Bingo. Bingo. So, what I'm hearing you say is—it can go both ways. It can go wrong both ways. And there's—so there's some characteristic in those organizations that are successful, that's enabling that trigger from—it's almost like a permeation between those two layers. Somebody's got to cross that bridge and get that into the executive, or get whatever's going on the executive, effectively working down below, without feeling oppressive, right? Because we've seen that happen, too. It just gets pushed.

David Ritter:

Right.

Pete Behrens:

What is it in the culture? What is it in the leadership mindset? How do you approach—I guess, at BCG, how do you get that transfer happening? Because that, to me, is probably the sweet spot in success.

David Ritter:

Yeah. I mean, overall, it's about listening, right? And it's really the ability of the organization to listen and to have some humility—right?—to be in a learning mindset in a continuous improvement mindset. I would say, you know—I'll drop down to, like, a very specific tactical practice that we try to insist on. So if you are a leader in an organization that is doing Agile—and generally speaking, you know, I talk about these big, sort of, top-down big bang transformations. That is the exception, right? The rule is—they start with three teams, right? And they want to—they need to see it. It needs to be proven.

So, you're a leader in an organization that's beginning to run Agile teams, go to sprint reviews. Go to sprint review. And, yes, it's like, “I'm a busy person. I'm, you know—I’m the CEO of a big company!” You know? Go to a sprint review. And, you know, take, allocate, one or two hours a week to go to sprint reviews. Pick some things that you're interested in; go to a team sprint review. When you go to that sprint review, ask questions. I have, sort of, one canonical question that I try to plant in the seeds of these leaders. If you ask no other questions, ask this question: “How do you know”—asking the team—“how do you know the work you're doing is likely to achieve your result, your outcome? Not your output, but your outcome, right? How do you know? What evidence do you have? What have you learned along the way? How do you know?” And listen to them. Because what you'll hear there is—you will hear some evidence, but you also hear risk. You'll hear issues. And then the next question is: “What barriers can I remove for you? How can I help?” Right?

And if you create a few examples of that, those leaders will go back to the staff meeting of the CEO, and they will talk about this. Well, the CEO says, “So, what's going on with your Agile pilot?” They will talk about this. And they'll say, you know, “I went to the sprint review, and here's what I heard from the team. I saw real progress, right? I saw, actually—they showed me work that was in progress, but was clearly moving in the right direction. And they showed me that they had data and evidence that they—that the work that they were doing was actually going to achieve the goal, not just the delivery, the check-box of the output, but the thing. I saw that—and, you know what? You know, I have more confidence and understanding now. And I actually feel more comfortable stepping back from that team. Because I know that, you know, I can go any—every two weeks, I can go, and I can see. And they don't need to read out to me. I can see what they're doing.” And that transparency is what builds the trust. That's the virtuous cycle—right?

Creating those little stories—it—you know, we had one of the largest financial institutions in the world. We had a guy come in who was—he was a seasoned—he was like a N-minus-four leader in the organization. He came into the steering committee for the agile transformation. And he said—I’ll try to quote him as best I can. He said, “When I heard about this Agile thing, I thought it was the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life! But I've been trying to do this thing for three years. I've been trying to accomplish this goal for three years, and I've been making absolutely no progress.” So I said, “Okay, fine. We'll do this Agile pilot.” In three months: “We've made more progress against this goal than we had in the three years prior! I never want to work any other way!” That was the tipping point. Because what that created, you know—it's—a lot of this is about emotion. It created, I would say envy, maybe, among his peers. But also fear, in the sense of—it's sort of like FOMO. It's like, “Oh, I want some of that! How do I get some of that?” This is how these bottom-up things can gain traction. You have to prove it. And it's in those crucibles that that trust is forged.

Pete Behrens:

I feel like you've boiled down crossing the barrier into just one simple step. Executive: visit the team. And through that, the relationship, the transparency, the potential vulnerability of sharing risk and success—right?—the both/and there. And just, the communication connection that's happening to build that relationship. That’s what I think is missing between these two games, is—they don't do enough of that. They play in these separate teams and games, and they don't cross over enough.

David Ritter:

Absolutely. So, you know, when we talk about team design in a large organization—I'll give you an example. So, 4,000 people in this wealth management firm, five layers, in terms of the operating team structure. Starting with the business unit, president—that's layer one. Then what they call domain leads, which were teams of teams of teams, so groups of, like, 500. Then teams of teams, which you might call tribes, right? Then product owners at the team-level. And team members. 4,000 people, five layers. Everything worked that way. So flat, flat, flat.

If you're in a manufacturing company, if you're the CEO of a manufacturing company, you walk the factory floor. If you're an effective CEO, you go to the factory, and you walk the floor. You talk to the people operating the machines. Like, “What's going on?” If you're in retail, if you're a retail CEO, you go to your stores, you walk—you have to be close to the work. And so, getting flat structurally helps you do that. But then, also, it's the behavior. Like, two hours a week, go to sprint reviews. Your eyes will be open, and you will understand this at a level that your peers won't.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. One of my favorite visits with a senior leadership team this past year was joining them on their manufacturing tour. And going all throughout Europe, every day—spending a day at a different plant. And I was fortunate—they invited me to two of those days and spent a half-day to educate them as well. But the management, by walking around, the Gemba Walks, and conversations, right? The—just the opportunity to put a spotlight on what's going on, its problems, challenges, right? And then doing that day over day. And then, at night, they got on a bus, go to the next one, right? And so, then there's this whole team unity that's going on there, too. And these—they're coming from China and Brazil and, you know, Europe and US, Canada, right? They're coming from all over. And they're all, kind of, taking this little, this bus tour. And it was just really fascinating to see how much connection—in that one week, right? How much connection I was able to make. And, yes, some of this is manufacturing, but some of this is design and development and, you know, technical that's harder to see. And I know for many companies that work on a global scale, to think about that seems overwhelming, yet the power is so incredible.

David Ritter:

We would say it's essential. So, do you know the show Undercover Boss?

Pete Behrens:

Yeah!

David Ritter:

Right? So—and this is a core part of it as well, and, I think, why Agile Leadership Journey is so critical, right? It's—because how you show up in those settings is absolutely vital. You shouldn't have to go undercover in order to understand what's going on in your organization. You need to be able to show up in a way that's not intimidating. And that's the—you know, some folks would say servant leadership. A lot of organizations aren't comfortable with that terminology, but it's the upside-down pyramid. I saw a presentation by this guy who was the CEO of Home Depot during their transformation. That's what he said: “You know, my transformation as a leader was looking at the pyramid upside-down—right?—with me at the bottom and my sales associates on the store floor at the top. That's—my job is to make them successful, right?” And that's—this is basic stuff, but it's incredibly amazing how uncommon it is. And, you know, the average tenure of a CEO is, whatever, three years these days, right? It's that—I think, the two terms we've arrived at, right? Courage and persistence. It's so tough to get those in combination.

Pete Behrens:

So, without the answer of, you know, “Hire David!” or “Hire BCG!”, what advice would you give to a leader that is looking to undertake this kind of significant transformation?

David Ritter:

So, the first conversation I would want to say is, “Let's pick a key outcome that you want to achieve. And let's have a conversation about who's working on that and how are they working on it.” And this gives you the opportunity to, kind of, take a core sample through the organization. So—and we talked about top-down versus bottom-up in another place, where this intersection can really occur—is in taking that, a top-level goal, we want to grow the profitability of this business unit by x percent over three years and drill that down. And say, “Where is that specifically going to come from? What products is that going to come from?” And there's the cascade, and then there's also this concept of laddering, which is the bottom-up process. It's talking to the people in the organization, saying, “Oh, so, what is—why is this not growing faster than it is?”

If you read the OKR literature, they'll say the process should be 50 top-down and 50 bottom-up, cascading and laddering and meeting in the middle. We would say it should be 70 percent top-down and 70 percent bottom-up. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

I love it.

David Ritter:

Because it's, like, the 40 percent—it’s the 40 percent overlap that is actually where that occurs. So it's actually—sometimes, these conversations don't touch on Agile at all, until you get to that point where you say, “Okay, here's a part of that goal. Like, this product is not being successful. You know, there are issues with this product. In order to grow that product, let's take that goal of growing that product in that market.”

So, a consumer goods company—one of their key goals was—they had a brand of shampoo that—they wanted to triple the market share of that shampoo in India. Great. Over two years. Terrific. Who's on that team? You're going to create a team. We're going to design a team whose goal is to do that. And the issues may be there—may be three different kinds of issues. There may be a formulation issue. Maybe the product isn't ideally designed for that market. Maybe there's a distribution issue, where it's not in the right stores. There's probably also a supply chain problem, where you can't actually reliably deliver it because you have supply chain constraints in that market. So in order to solve that, you need all three of those things. So that team needs skill-sets around all three of those. Let's create that team.

Pete Behrens:

Two things I'm taking away from that. Number one: simply pay attention to something, right? Give—have an intention that you're focusing on. What you're saying is: we've got to put a spotlight on that. We've got to gather people around that and look at it. The second thing that I've taken away from that is—I love your metaphor of the—“It's not 50/50; it's 70/70, right?” You're explicitly providing that overlap of intersection. And that, to me, is a new way of thinking about the two games we play.

David Ritter:

Yeah, so, that was really insightful. You know, somebody should write a book called, Start With Why. [Laughs]

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, I'll work on that one!

David Ritter:

Yeah. So, yeah, there's a book—that's an example of a book that you only need to read the title. Another one of those—which I really like—is The One Thing. I don't know if you've seen this. I was walking through the airport one day and looking at the book kiosk in the airport. And there's this book; it says The One Thing. And I say, “I know what that book's about! I don't need to read it.” Basically, it's 200 pages that says, “If you let people focus on one thing at a time, they are dramatically more productive.” Right? But it's, you know, just, like, easy to say, hard to do.

Pete Behrens:

Same thing I saw when I was looking at the book Take the Stairs. It's, like, just put in the effort. Put in the effort. Take the stairs.

David Ritter:

Yeah. I like that!

Pete Behrens:

Well, David, I just want to say thank you. I feel smarter today, having talked with you about this and shared this dialogue. So, I appreciate you joining us and sharing your stories.

David Ritter:

Absolutely, yeah. Happy to do it.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Unlocking the Power of Strategic Thinking: A Guide for Aspiring Leaders

Tue, 17 Oct 2023 18:49:43 GMT

One crucial skill every leader should develop is strategic thinking.

It's a skill that can help you plan for the future, anticipate problems, and make better decisions. Here we’ll explore why strategic thinking skills are essential for leaders at all levels, provide a few examples of strategic thinking in action, and finally, share some tips to help you develop your strategic thinking skills.

Why are Strategic Thinking Skills Important?

As you move up the ladder, it’s natural that your perspective changes. You have more visibility and your teams depend on you to interpret what you see and warn them of upcoming obstacles and shifts in alignment. This also provides space for teams to do what they do best while staying in the directional flow of the organization.

Strategic Thinking in Action

As a leader, strategic thinking involves taking action with your team toward an idea or change. While you are responsible for deciding the direction of the strategy, it's crucial to allow your team to create the process for delivering or creating the outcomes. Essentially, you oversee your team's focus rather than the details of how they achieve it. It's about experimenting with new rules or providing a supportive environment for them to come up with solutions to a problem or innovate. It's about finding an "AND" in the typical approach to innovation, change, and design thinking with a more holistic outcome. For example, measuring a project milestone's budget, time completion, and a team's stress level can prevent burnout after project completion.

Three Tips to Develop Your Strategic Thinking Skills

Think of strategic thinking as putting a puzzle together with your team. Here are some tips to help you develop your strategic thinking skills:

1. Describe the Picture

Your team faces a pile of unsorted puzzle pieces and can't see the picture on the box. Make sure to spend ample time describing the image, answering any questions your team may have, and ensuring that everyone interprets the imagery the same way. Everyone must align with the vision.

2. Build the Outside Edges

As a leader, you can create the framework for your team to work within. By building the outside edges of the puzzle, you are articulating and developing the necessary constraints such as budget, resources, and timelines. A robust framework will create a space where your team can work toward the intended outcome.

3. Be in Charge

Effective leadership is understanding the difference between being in charge and being in control. Being in control means taking account of the process and dictating the solutions to your team – essentially building the puzzle from the inside out. However, your team doesn't need you to be in control. Instead, they need you to be in charge .

Being in charge involves protecting the project's boundaries, preventing any external factors from hindering your team’s progress while allowing them to work their magic within those boundaries. Remember, being in charge means creating a safe space for your team to thrive and succeed.

As you hone your strategic thinking skills, you’ll not only enhance your capabilities but also inspire and elevate your team, fostering a culture of collaboration and creativity. Following the tips listed above can enhance your strategic thinking skills and lead your team toward success. Remember, strategic thinking is a skill that can be learned and improved over time with intentional practice and patience.

Abou t the Author

Agile Leadership Journey Guide Christina Carlson shares how you can become Unstuck through collaboration, creativity, and how to apply inspired agility research. She finds personal success and purpose through creative and collaborative projects that help people see what they are trying to say, and action their vision. Her ability to actively connect peoples’ complex ideas to their values in order to broaden their perspectives makes her a sought after commodity for billion dollar companies and independent entrepreneurs. By applying research and scientific practice through a creative mindset, she is able to unstick people from their current perspective and help them move to the next evolution of their leadership growth.

Connect with Christina on LinkedIn.

48: Gen Z in the Workplace

Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:53:14 GMT

How Will Gen Z Change the Workplace?

In this episode of (Re)Learning Leadership, Pete delves into the topic of Gen Z entering the workforce.

He is joined by Tammy Dowley-Blackman, a culture and leadership expert who shares her insights and expertise on this unique generation’s strengths and characteristics, how leaders can help them grow, as well as the challenges that come with five generations inhabiting a workforce.

Tammy Dowley-Blackman

Through her consulting, workshops, individual coaching, and speaking, Tammy Dowley-Blackman has helped thousands to create high-performing teams, build more equitable organizational cultures, and become more engaged leaders. She is the founder of Tammy Dowley-Blackman Group, LLC, a suite of brands, including a management consulting firm specializing in organizational and leadership development.

Tammy is also the creator of the Looking Forward Lab , a multi-platform leadership development company focused on helping Generation Z develop the leadership skills required to operate in an increasingly complex global world. Learn more at tammydb.com .

Connect with Tammy

Relearning from this episode…

Embrace Diversity and Values

Gen Z is a diverse and values-driven generation. Employers should not only acknowledge but also align with their values related to diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and belonging. Fostering a workplace that supports and shares these values is essential for attracting and retaining Gen Z talent.

Create Space for Collaboration

Building a bridge between generations in the workplace requires humility and a willingness to learn from one another. Leaders and employees should be open to collaboration, active listening, and respecting the unique perspectives and skills that each generation, including Gen Z, brings to the table. Creating a space for open dialogue and mutual understanding can lead to more productive and inclusive work environments.

Nurture Leadership in Everyone

By investing in leadership development for all employees, organizations can unlock the potential of their workforce and promote a culture of continuous learning and growth.

Episode Transcript

How can leaders welcome Gen Z to the workforce?

I'm Pete Behrens, and today I have the pleasure of joining Tammy Dowley-Blackman, a culture and leadership expert, speaking on the topic of Gen Z. Welcome to the show, Tammy!

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Well, thank you, Pete! I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you.

Pete Behrens:

Well, it's awesome to have you. And maybe I could just start with, where does your passion for Gen Z come from?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Well, I have a Gen Z-er myself. I'm a mom of a daughter who is in college, and so I got to see it firsthand. And I really became fascinated with Gen Z when my daughter was about five years old. And thinking about—they just felt like they were wired differently, that they were just going to be so much more interesting. And really just started watching and carefully thinking about what it meant, not only to be a parent to a Gen Z-er, but what was it going to mean to educate Gen Z-ers? What was it going to mean to ultimately help Gen Z-ers enter the workforce? We know that those who are on the older end of Gen Z have just entered the workforce. So, what felt like forever—it was going to be, you know, a long time—is now here. But I was just fascinated by them and thought they were going to just be incredibly interesting.

Pete Behrens:

Hm. Well, I think we have something in common there; I've got two boys as well. But I think they live on that Millennial/Gen Z border. One born in 1996, and one in ‘97. Is that—do I have that right, in terms of when Gen Z was kind of started?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Yeah. They’re Gen Z-ers; they're not Millennials. So, Gen Z is roughly 1995 to 2012. And so, we have Gen Z-ers—they are on the older end. My daughter falls in just a few years later. But, yeah, they are considered Gen Z.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah. And they've definitely entered the workforce. And so, it's not a preparation at this point. I mean, it's a reality. They're here. So, you know, we've got at least—what?—three other generations in that mix. We've got the Millennials; we got the Gen X-ers; we've got the Boomers, who are probably fading in that workplace. What do you think brings—what is unique about Gen Z?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

So, we've got a, you know—some workplaces, five generations in the workplace. But at least four. And there are a couple things that make Gen Z unique. One is that they're the first generation in 50 years, in five decades, to enter the workforce with little to no work experience. And that is not of their own design. That truly is actually us, as their parents—our design. We wanted them to have so much more. We wanted them to be able to follow all of their dreams and to try new things that maybe we didn't get a chance to try. And so, some of that has meant preparing them differently. So, where you or I may have, you know, done a summer job, or we worked at the local bodega, delivered newspapers, mowed lawns, or ran errands for elderly community members. It certainly isn't that Gen Z has thought that they couldn't or shouldn't do those things. They literally just don't have the time because they're so programmed. And so, that has meant that they are studying for the college entrance exams. That means that they are playing two or three sports. That means that they might be playing an instrument very seriously or dancing very seriously or in the theater. But these are not just hobbies, as they may have been for us. But, really, these passions are really invested in a very, very different way, and they literally have just not had the time to gain the experience to enter the workforce. So that's one thing.

The other is that they're the most diverse and the most populous generation that we've ever seen. And diverse in—not only do they understand diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, belonging. They care about those things, and they have an expectation that others will care about those things and center them. Not just those values personally, but professionally as well. They're asking really interesting and amazing questions of their employers. So, as much as they're being interviewed for a job, they are interviewing their employers, and they are saying, “What are your values, and do those values match my values?” And making concrete decisions about their adult lives and about their entering the workforce based on those values.

They are some of the most incredibly thoughtful, in terms of generation. Again, back to this caring about diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, of belonging, but they care about important issues. They're asking about racial and social justice. They're asking about climate change. They are asking about homelessness. They are asking about the income gap. They are asking these important questions and they want policies. They want there to be robust conversation. They want there to be change. And so, these things are really important to them.

And this does not mean that other generations did not care. We know—we've seen generations be active. There's just a very different way in which this generation has gotten to do it, or they've taken on some of those things earlier. But also—they would tell you—technology is also a big part of that. The most technologically-advanced, most technologically-savvy generation. Those are all things that make them very unique.

Pete Behrens:

So—wow!—you really covered a lot of terrain with that response. And I want to, kind of, maybe, dive into maybe a few of those areas. And I might start with the last one first, which is really about that social kind of connectedness. And I do see that in my children—right?—that it's really, kind of, the connection of work to outside work, right? Social issues and justice issues and racial issues. And just—climate issues. So, as a leader, and starting to think about the Gen Z workforce that's coming in with these issues, I can imagine that's difficult because of the focus you're trying to create in just the workplace itself. And then to bring in all this other stuff feels, like, a bit overwhelming. Is there some advice or some guidance you have when you start to think about how to incorporate work world with life world? And in a way that engages Gen Z effectively.

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

We're finding that many of the companies that my company partners with, whether they're corporate, government, non-profit, or philanthropic—many of the institutions, companies, organizations, agencies— they care deeply about these issues as well. And so, some are not there yet and are having to wait until Gen Z and others bring it to their attention. But they're responsive. Others are ahead of it and saying, “Let's ask these questions, and let's have our full team be supportive!” And really helping us to think through what our response should be. Everything from, ”What's the statement we should put out when something terrible happens?” Sadly, there's more and more that is happening. And because we have social media that—we can actually know instantaneously what's happening around the world. And so, we've got some of those organizations, corporations, institutions saying, “What's going to be our stance on these issues?” And they really do want there to be a lot of different people at the table helping them to craft those messages.

Others, it's “What are we doing to learn, own, so that we can be a real force for good?” Not just taking a stance but actually, then, trying to be a part of deeper conversations, more important conversations about change in policy or ways in which we might assist others in actually trying to move towards some very significant substantive change. So, that's everything from, “What is our own diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility policies?” It's “What is our own policy towards carbon footprint?” Or “What is our own policy around how we're improving our hiring so that we truly have equity in our hiring?” Or “What's our—the way in which we're thinking about how we hire?” And we're doing that in a way that's fair, that we're not setting it up so only certain people from certain schools or certain experiences feel like—that this is going to be a welcoming environment for them.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. Well, I—great examples. And, you know, what I'm hearing from that is two things. One is—at a senior level, at an HR level, at a corporate level, certainly policy and how we form policy and guide that through the organization—is critical. I would argue that—or maybe I would position that—a lot of the leaders listening to this podcast are somewhere in the middle of that system, right? They're middle managers; they're early managers, right? They live under these policies that may be good or bad or right or wrong or, you know, perceived in various different ways. Is there something they could also do, then, if they're not ones creating the policy, but yet they're the ones managing the Gen Z-ers who have these critical interests? How do they navigate in between that? What is it they can do that—maybe beyond just creating new policy, which they can't—to create a space for this?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

So, we're talking to them about just that. What does it look like to create space, and what does it look like to respectfully create that space? So, that means actually listening. That means active listening, and it means actually, then, having to be open to—that this isn't about right or wrong, but just open to a different way of approaching what's happening, again, in the workforce. And I think that, for Gen Z, they're used to collaborating, for example. And so, the idea that you would ask them around the table and “Let's brainstorm this!”—they are ready-made for this and are excited to be participatory. I think that what we're seeing is—for many of our folks who are sitting there in managerial positions, to your point, they might sit in the middle. They don't create policy; they don't manage the company in its entirety. They're really trying to think about, also, “What do I, as this manager, need to do differently that could be more supportive?” And so, even if they can't create much larger policy, there are some things that are on the ground that they can be very participatory in, and they’re asking questions and making a change.

I'll give you a really good example—is that one of the organizations we were working with—the managers realized that they actually could change the performance review process, and they could change that process. And this wasn't just about Gen Z and wanting to make it better for Gen Z. This was about, “How do we actually make a process that could be better for everyone, that could really see people for the value they bring?” Not just, “Did they get this widget, make this number of widgets?” Or “Did they actually bring this number of dollars to the bottom line?” But actually a performance review that would value and would show value and would give everyone an opportunity to be seen.

Another one is where we've seen—and this came from the board of directors. And not just from the team members from the staff, but the board of directors really saying, “We would like to do more with the staff around learning.” And so, with one group we worked with out of Philadelphia, the board of directors said, “We would love to do, two or three times a year, training, learning opportunities, where we would do it alongside the staff instead of it being separate, so that we would actually be in this together, working together, asking questions, and teamed up.” So, these are the kinds of things that people are starting to embrace, that, no, it does not mean that it's some giant policy or that it has bells and whistles. Everything doesn't have to be that way. And some things are analog, very simple and uncomplicated—but can make a world of difference.

Pete Behrens:

Well, I love that message. I think, you know, we talk about self-awareness, situational adaptiveness, right? How do you manage to the people in the room, the power in the room, being aware and responsive in real time, right? All those things come critically when you're talking about that, just that team environment. And so, yes, it's, at a corporate level, about the policy. But at the individual level, it's about the human. It's about the—what's going on in the moment. And I love how you stated that. So, thank you for helping them.

Now, this is a two-way street. I kind of want to, maybe, think about the other side of this, the, kind of—the Gen Z side coming into the workplace. I imagine you probably also have advice on that side of it. Like, what are you helping them to connect to, maybe, a non-Gen Z world? Where they can come in without a sense of entitlement, maybe. Or that sense that others might feel like they are entitled. How do you coach them into this world?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Yeah, and it's been important to do it and to—just what you said. It's a two-way street, and we talk about that. So, with managers, those who are hiring them, those who are training and educating Gen Z, we say to them, “You really want to go into this with humility.” And say the same thing to Gen Z. “You want to go into this with humility. Everyone has something to bring to this table. Everyone has something to learn. None of us are perfect. None of us know everything.” And so, for those who are managing, hiring those who are educating, training, we really have had to get some of them to step away from, “Well, we did it this way.” Or “My experience was—”. Because those experiences—not all of which were positive. And we said, you know, those were not necessarily good for you, when we don't want to repeat them in this generation. And we don't have to. We have other kinds of skills.

In the same way we've had to say to Gen Z—to think about how you show up. And that there are people who've been here for many years prior to you. And that doesn't make them outdated. [Laughs] That doesn't make them lack knowledge, you know? To come into this and say, “What can I learn with you and from you?” And so, it really is that, sort of, that nice space in the middle of getting them to come and to be able to meet each other. And to be able to bring something, but also be open to learning and taking something away.

What I've also had to say to managers, again, those who are hiring, educating, training—is that Gen Z is actually more nervous than you may think they are. Yes, they're super confident; they're super smart, but sometimes what may come off as entitlement is really, “I just want to show off that I know something. I really want to be in this space with you, and I really want to do a great job.”

And because Gen Z is used to being so collaborative, they're used to actually getting a lot of feedback along the way. And some of our managers we work with are not so good at that feedback. It's just not what they've done or know to do. And so, it's a little harder. And so, I think sometimes they're misinterpreting what might feel like—is that they're being entitled, which is really nervousness. And “I just want to do well!” I also say to Gen Z, don't misinterpret what you might be hearing from your manager or the person who's hired you. It's not that they're assuming that they know everything. They might be asking a question they truly don't have the language for because you speak to it differently. But it's not because they, in some way, are trying to disrespect you, or they don't want to be knowledgeable. So it's, again, finding a way to meet each other in the middle.

Pete Behrens:

Well, it's nice to know that—you know, I'm aging on the edge of the beginning of Gen X-er. And I’m maybe a dinosaur, but I'm not extinct yet! [Laughs]

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

No one is!

Pete Behrens:

You know, I often get reminded from my own children, like, “Oh, Dad, that was pretty biased.” Or “Hey, Dad, that was a pretty misogynistic comment!” Or, you know, just thinking about things like titles and gender pronouns and the awareness you need to just be sensitive. And we weren't brought up in that era and with those trainings. And so, yes, I love the humility ability—right?—that I think can help everybody work through this a little bit better—is really key advice.

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

It is. It is.

Pete Behrens:

So, you mentioned earlier a key thing is they're not coming to the workplace with experience, with job experience, with work experience, or corporate experience. Which means what you're saying is—they've been—their experience growing up is a lot more, probably, diverse in terms of—you mentioned sports and music and extracurricular school activities and things like that. Versus, “I got an internship!” Or “I'm working as a fry cook for McDonald's,” or whatever. What do you see that that's doing, I guess, in terms of when they do finally enter there? And, I imagine, there's probably good and challenges from that.

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

There are. And so, we're also trying to help them to not be so self-conscious about what they don't have and to jump right in and to learn. Because, again, this is not about—they weren't interested. They don't know how. This was something that got set up that they didn't have any discussion and they weren't a part of. And it's just what they grew into, which was this—I keep calling it this highly choreographed life. And so, they’ve responded to what was put in front of them, to play three sports or play multiple instruments or to be on the travel soccer team and so forth. And have become really good at what they do.

It's almost like that book by Malcolm Gladwell, in Outliers—and 10,000 hours to become really good at something. And many Gen Z-ers are actually that, whereas for some of us, it wasn't even possible, nothing we could have even thought of. Many of them are, because they've been able to delve very deeply into things. I think about my own daughter, who liked trying lots of different things. And so, where she may not have the 10,000 hours as a deep dive into one thing, she is—and in this way, where she is—her range of interests, her range of understanding, her range of experiences—she counts herself as very lucky because she has played multiple sports and tried different instruments and did different art classes and all of these things that she had to be edibly thankful.

But all that to say that those are things that they didn't ask for. They didn't get—they didn't ask for it to be designed that way, but they're trying to figure out how to respond. And they're open to getting those experiences, and that's why we're trying to front, you know, load some of these experiences that Gen Z-ers may not have gotten as they're entering the workforce. That's the work we do with companies and with higher education institutions—is saying, “Maybe they didn't get that, but how do we front-load it now?” Executive coaching. Helping them to really think about their—the design of their career journey. Asking different questions of them that will, you know, really spark the opportunity for them to build something that they didn't get a chance to dabble in and just organically come to. But now we have to help, you know, accelerate it for them as they're about to—in their college careers, and they're heading into the workforce.

Pete Behrens:

Well, I think it—you know, it's a great reminder—right?—that behind every employee is a human, right? And all of us humans have passions; all of us humans have experiences, regardless of, you know, work. Playing in a band is work. Playing on a sports team is work, right? I think some of our best leadership examples come from sports and military and things where it's, like, non-corporate environments. And so, you know, one of the things that I think about when we think about how leaders can engage this is—and even for Gen Z coming to the workplace. Can you map—right?—your experience to, like, “Okay, in that band, who showed leadership? How did they show leadership?” Or “In that sports team, who showed leadership? How did they show leadership?” Because the way we look at this—like, everybody leads. Everybody influences in different ways. And I think when you can start to put those glasses on or that lens on, you start to see people for what they're bringing—right?—regardless of that path they took to get there. And I think you're really highlighting that, and I love, love to hear that.

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Yeah. And the way we talk about this work in my company is—that we're trying to galvanize one million leaders. And we know that leadership is not what you're born with. This is really nurtured, and everyone can be a leader. Everyone is a leader. And so, that idea of being able to galvanize one million leaders—that doesn't sound impossible. That's everyday folks. That's folks, whether they've went to four-year college or no college. That's whether you live in a city or live in a rural place. That's whether you are African-American or you're LGBTQ or you are Latino, white or—it doesn't matter. Everyone's a leader, and everyone has an opportunity to exhibit that leadership. And that's really a core value for my company—is that leaders are not—this isn't about that leaders are born. This is about that leaders are nurtured, and everyone has something to bring to the table.

And that's, again, why we feel like it's so important—why I feel like it's so important in working with those that we work with, in, again, corporate, government, non-profit, and philanthropic—to put leadership front and center earlier in the careers. Instead of waiting until people are 15, 20 years in. As—somehow, that's the reward, is—now we'll invest in you. Let's invest in you on the front end. So, we all get more out of it, and we can do more. That's the core belief.

Pete Behrens:

Yeah, yeah. And I think, you know, just for the leaders in those current leadership positions, creating space—as we started this with—creating an opportunity where other forms of leadership can shine. Other forms of influence, other forms of stepping forward, you know, are able—right?—regardless of role or title. I think that's so important here. Well, Tammy, I appreciate your time today. Any final thoughts or words for us as we close this?

Tammy Dowley-Blackman:

Well, thank you. It's always a pleasure to be in conversation about these important topics. And I just think in all the ways that we all can support Gen Z. We are all made better. They are going to do incredible things. They are incredible people, but we are all made better and will all benefit by the innovation they bring, by their care and concern and the way in which they like to collaborate. And so, I'm excited that I get to do this work through my companies and that we get to investigate, explore what they're doing next, what they're interested in. So, really appreciate what you do in bringing these conversations forward. So, thank you, Pete.

Pete Behrens:

Well, thank you! I appreciate hearing your voice. Thank you.

Explore:

Related Episodes

43: Influence Without Authority

Brad Swanson, Agile Leadership Journey Guide and organizational systems coach shares his insights on how leaders can better impact change through influence “without pushing the command button”.

31: How to Make Every Conversation Better Part III: Difference and Influence

Pete shares insights from two of his favorite mentors in this episode to help us better understand why differences are so challenging to overcome in crucial conversations and how an unintuitive approach to differences can shift conflict to alignment.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

47: How To Be An Agile Leader

Thu, 21 Sep 2023 01:12:09 GMT

What does it take to be an agile leader?

Welcome to Season 4 of the ReLearning Leadership podcast!

Pete kicks off the season with an exploration of the four key competencies that define an agile leader.

Relearning from this episode…

4 Core Capabilities of an Agile Leader

Be Clear: Keep the Vision
Without clarity in vision, agility in execution is simply wasted energy.
Be Curious: Open Your Mindset
Be open to new possibilities, pathways, perspectives — even to being wrong!
Be Courageous: Take Bold Steps
It requires courage to take risks and experiment — to trust and even delegate authority to others.
Be Contemplative: Reflect Frequently
Our biggest weakness as humans is our own cognitive bias. There’s no substitute for feedback and data for learning and growth.

Episode Transcript

Pete Behrens:

The core of an agile leader is an open mindset, right? Open to possibilities, open to new pathways, open to other perspectives, open to even being wrong.

What does it take to become an agile leader?

I’m Pete Behrens, and today I want to explore the core of what it means to be an agile leader and how to become one.

Sound interesting? Great! Let’s dive in.

Now, agility is a competency of change and adaptation. The word is often defined as the ability to move quickly and easily. Right? Like a dog navigating an obstacle course. There’s a second half of the definition, however. It is the ability to think and understand quickly.

So, agility really has both movement and thought, right? Those two combined. And it’s actually the thought that I believe is more valuable.

Why? Well, without agility in thought, agility of movement is simply wasted energy, like that dog chasing squirrels. Squirrel! Squirrel! Squirrel!

So, with this in mind, l want to explore the four key competencies in becoming a more agile leader.

1. Be Clear: Keep the Vision

What?!?

Agility is often seen as the antithesis of vision, when, in fact, it’s in service to vision.

Without clarity in vision, agility in execution is simply wasted energy, like that dog chasing squirrels. It’s only when you add vision that decisions start to have something to measure them against. It’s like getting in your car and driving without having a goal in mind. Turning left, turning right, going straight ahead—it makes no difference until you add that goal.

In fact, in more complex environments—and this is where agile leadership really excels—the road ahead is quite foggy, right? It obscures our view, and people can feel very lost or disconnected. And it’s the vision that serves to help connect or reconnect people when they start to feel lost navigating through that fog.

Now, that’s not to say that the vision never changes. In fact, agile leaders are more willing and capable of reviewing and adjusting that vision more frequently. In fact, a yearly visioning cycle will include many subcycles—quarterly, monthly, bi-weekly—to review, align, and adjust that destination.

2. Be Curious: Open Your Mindset

Now, you might be surprised, but I’m going to bring the word vision back into play. In Part One, or Step One, we said that vision serves as a goal or objective to help us connect or reconnect as we might get off-course in the fog. But vision serves a second role, right? The ability to see in the movement. Agility in movement requires the ability to see, discern, and then act–all in a moment's notice. And at the root of that is the ability to see, not just with your eyes, but with your mind.

Now, in more concrete environments, we can use our past experiences and our past education to help guide what to do, when to do it, how to do it, right? These repeatable things that we’ve leveraged over time to help us navigate those worlds. However, in a more complex environment—again, where agile leadership is the best place for—these past experiences, this past education might help us, they may not help us, and, certainly, they’re going to be less applicable. Right?

It’s like when we were in school, and they said, “What you’re learning is less important than learning how to learn.” Now, while we might have joked about this in school, it’s coming back to us as an agile leader. Agile leaders are specialists in scanning their environment, seeing more options available to them, getting others involved in discerning what is the most effective option in this moment, and then taking clear action, all in real time. All at a moment’s notice.

So, the core of an agile leader is an open mindset, right? Open to possibilities, open to new pathways, open to other perspectives, open to even being wrong. You know, at the core, an agile leader is like a scientist, with kid-like curiosity.

3. Be Courageous: Take Bold Steps

Yoda, you know, that master Jedi coach in Star Wars , who was instructing Luke in his Jedi training, said “Do or do not. There is no try.” Well, with this statement, Yoda was teaching Luke that if there was any significant goal he was going to achieve in life, it was going to take action and effort. It simply wouldn’t happen by thinking about it or just waiting for it to occur, right? This is sage advice for agile leaders operating in complex environments.

In very concrete, clear environments, we can use common steps, repeatable—write down tasks, follow procedure and process to accomplish particular goals, right? These are repeatable, automatable systems.

In more complicated environments, we can coordinate activities, we can, you know, start to move things around, kind of like chess on a chessboard. Or a conductor of an orchestra, who’s getting disparate parts all to align and synchronize, like in a beautiful concert. But in a complex environment, the relationships are much less understandable. We can’t see them. And so, in these environments, experimentation is required to learn more quickly. And decisions and actions take bold steps into the unknown.

The U.S. military has a saying: “Be comfortable being uncomfortable.” But this doesn’t mean they act like daredevils. They complement the saying with another saying: “Go slow to go fast.” In fact, taking more time in the discernment process, the decision, is going to save you time going down the wrong pathway and having to backtrack.

So, agile leadership requires courage. It requires courage to take risks and experiment. It requires courage to be open to new ideas and understanding. It requires courage to trust and even delegate authority to others.

4. Be Contemplative: Reflect Frequently

Earlier, we described the agile leader cycle as three things. See, discern, and act–all in a moment’s notice. And that’s true, right? That works. But to complete the learning cycle, we need to add one word: reflect. Right?

Our biggest weakness as humans is our own cognitive bias, right? We don’t see ourselves for who we are. We don’t know what we don’t know. So there’s no substitute for feedback and data for learning and growth.

So, what agile leaders do is—they deploy a feedback cycle, right? This sense, respond, and reflect for learning and growth. So, you sense the environment, you see that data. You gather in information. You respond with an intentionality, right? A choice, an intentional choice. And then you reflect. “How did that go? Good? Bad? What was good? What was bad?”

So, without these three—without any one of these three, right?—we’re going to lose our opportunity for learning and growth. But you combine them, and then what you have is a deliberate practice of learning and growth to fuel that journey.

This doesn’t have to be hard, though. Right? Some people say, “Ugh, this is a whole thing that I have to do.” Simply, at the end of your day, reflect. “How did that day go? What could I do differently tomorrow?” But even in a meeting—you could be doing this at the end of a meeting. Reflect. “Hey, how did this meeting go?” Ask questions of people. “Hey, what was good? What was bad? What could we do differently next time?” Right? This could be done, even during an engagement with somebody else. You’re actually going through a reflection cycle in the moment.

For an agile leader, winning is actually becoming more aware. A lot of the leaders I coach—they beat themselves up, so to speak, over missing a sign—right?—missing a moment or a decision. Reflecting from that, saying “Oh, yes, I screwed that up.” When, in fact, you should be celebrating those moments. Why? Because that’s an awareness check, right? hat’s a reflection where you became more aware. Yes, it feels like it was a bit too late, but probably not, because you can still go back and correct some of those things.

But next time, because of that learning cycle, we move it forward. So, “Did that take a week? Did that take a day? Can we get that down to an hour or a minute?” Right? Agile leadership is more about that sense, response, reflect, all in the moment, right?

Agile leaders are information seekers. Agile leaders are—they have a fuel for learning and growth. They read articles and books, they listen to podcasts, watch videos like this one. They attend conferences and workshops, right? So, to become an agile leader, to contemplate and to learn and grow is not a massive step, right? It’s simply just incorporating something into your daily practice.

In a Nutshell ...

Be clear, be curious, be courageous, and be contemplative, and you will increase your agile leadership competency over time.

And it’s going to take time. This is not going to happen overnight. In fact, you are going to fail more than you succeed. It requires repeated practice. In fact, people are going to see behavior, not your mindset. So, what tends to happen is—agile leaders believe they’re better leaders than they are. They overrate their own performance. That’s because what they see inside they’re head, how they’re acting as an agile leader, differs from what other people see in their behaviors.

Don’t think of this as a destination. Don’t think of this as an end state, that you’re going to be an agile leader.

It’s a journey, a lifelong journey. So, enjoy the journey!

(Re)Learning Leadership is the official podcast of the Agile Leadership Journey. Together, we build better leaders. It’s hosted by me, Pete Behrens, with contributions from our global Guide community. It’s produced by Ryan Dugan. With music by Joy Zimmerman. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave us a review, or share a comment. Visit agileleadershipjourney.com/podcast , for guest profiles, episode references, transcripts, and to explore more about your own leadership journey.

Explore:

Related Episodes

22: The Illusion of Control

In this conversation with Mette Bjerrekaer discusses shaping her company’s culture through her conversations. Not just the formal PowerPoint presentations, but everyday language, connections, and relationships she is building. Mette isn’t merely letting go and abdicating responsibility. She’s letting go of one rope, only to grab on and persistently pull on another. She is aware of the illusion of control and explicitly shaping a culture to share it.

41: Leadership Presence

Leadership presence includes many characteristics from existence, attendance, attention, demeaner, aura, composure and more. Becoming more aware of how we are showing up as leaders is the first step toward improving every engagement as a leader.

Recent Episodes

All Episodes >

Daniel Gagnon Featured on the 21st Century Entrepreneurship Podcast

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Wed, 20 Sep 2023 22:05:37 GMT

ALJ Guide Daniel Gagnon was recently featured on an episode of the 21st Century Entrepreneurship podcast .

With host Martin Piskoric, Daniel unravels the multi-faceted challenges confronting today's leaders. He highlights the tensions surrounding return-to-office dynamics and the pitfalls of current digital transformations.

Daniel's insights into the need for unity in leadership are profound and timely, emphasizing the misalignment of short-term thinking with broader organizational visions.

Gagnon's conviction shows: "You can still make a difference if you’re the only one."

What We're Reading: Your Brain at Work by Dr. David Rock

Mon, 11 Sep 2023 22:36:23 GMT

Approximately every six weeks, the Agile Leadership Journey Guide Community hosts a book club where we discuss a book – some new, some classic – that is relevant to our individual and collective work, lives, and leadership journeys.

Our most recent selection? We revisited David Rock’s Your Brain at Work . Here are just several of our Guides’ key takeaways.

The SCARF® Model

Co-facilitated by ALJ Founder and CEO Pete Behrens and ALJ Guide Pascal Gugenberger, our discussion kept coming back to, “It’s so much more than SCARF®!”

Your Brain at Work looks at how our brains work (and sometimes don’t) in the context of the modern workplace. It follows two fictional characters through some common workplace challenges, but it also dives into the neuroscience behind how our brains process information, make decisions, and handle various tasks at work.

Yes, the SCARF® model – Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness, and Fairness – is a large part of the book and those who have attended one of our Agility in Leadership™ workshops are well familiar with it. Dr. Rock uses the acronym to explain how understanding these factors can improve our productivity, collaboration, and overall job satisfaction as the SCARF® Model assesses the differences in people’s social motivation. Some people are more sensitive to status threats and rewards, others to relatedness or fairness. Leaders who understand SCARF® can help drive inspiration, engagement, and retention among their teams.

Prioritize Prioritizing

The book also offers some practical strategies and techniques for optimizing brain function at work – most of them are simple and can be enacted immediately. For example, if you’re losing focus, “Remind yourself of both the negative consequences and potential positive outcomes of what you’re doing. It really helps you get back on track.”

The group also talked about how our ability to stick to our task list or plan goes down as the day goes on. Setting aside time for our most important tasks earlier in the day can help us accomplish what needs to be done, or in other words, “We need to prioritize prioritizing!”

We discussed Rock’s ARIA framework – awareness, reflection, insight, and action – which helps readers understand and apply the aspects of neuroscience that can improve their effectiveness in the workplace. Attention refers to the brain's ability to focus on a specific task or information. Regardless of whether we work at home or in an office, distractions can derail productivity. Rock recommends that people minimize interruptions and optimize their workspace to stay focused. Relevance means that we should make our work meaningful to us; if it is, our brain is more likely to stay engaged with our tasks and retain important information. Next, insight is what our brains crave; anything you can do to foster a culture of creative problem-solving and innovation will improve effectiveness. Finally, action is about translating intentions into actionable steps. Think of how satisfying it is to cross off items on a to-do list. Our brains are wired to respond positively to progress!

Our Next Book

We look forward to discussing our next book, Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, by Carol S. Dweck, Ph.D. , in November 2023, which is foundational to our Developing a Growth Mindset course .

See the complete list of ALJ-recommended reads on our Bookshelf .

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this lively conversation: Pete Behrens, Christina Carlson, Rashmi Fernandes, Josh Forman, Pascal Gugenberger, Betsy Piland, Brad Swanson, Jim Wang, and Tracey Wilson.

Closing Up Your Blind Spots

Wed, 16 Aug 2023 22:49:02 GMT

Do you ever feel like you are in the dark when it comes to leading your team or company? Maybe it’s time to take a fresh look at what is right in front of you. Look at the big picture – not just the small details and you may see what others don’t: opportunities and solutions that could be the missing piece in your leadership puzzle.

Ready for a fresh perspective? Take those blinders off and start looking around. It's time to lead with clarity!

Blind Spots | Things You’ve Forgotten, Missed, or Misinterpreted

When it comes to leadership, blind spots can be deadly. They are those pesky little areas of ignorance that keep us from understanding how our own decisions will affect others. Fortunately, we can learn to recognize and address these blind spots. From asking for feedback from colleagues to taking classes or reading books on the subject, we can work toward transforming our blind spots into areas of knowledge and proficiency.

Ask yourself: What blind spots might you have in your current knowledge or skill set? It could make all the difference when tackling challenging tasks or problems.

Recognizing our blind spots can allow us to better absorb information and make informed decisions about how to move forward with a task or project.

For example, maybe your team doesn't understand where you’re coming from as you explain a strategy or priority. In these instances, it is important to be open-minded. Strive for an outcome that can benefit everyone involved, rather than one that only serves your agenda (an all too common occurrence for those in leadership roles). Embrace the idea of being wrong and recognize that there are multiple perspectives to any situation!

When dealing with blind spots, it’s important to allow yourself to take in new information. This will help you make better decisions that benefit everyone involved instead of focusing solely on your own goals. Ultimately, acknowledging our blind spots can be a scary but highly rewarding process. It allows us to see the bigger picture.

Once you’ve acknowledged your blind spots, it’s time to gather as much information as possible, discover what resources might help, and determine the best way to move forward. Several recommendations include:

Stereo rule : If you hear something from two or more people, they may have identified something you didn’t. Step back and consider their concern. It could be valid.
Challenge yourself: Seek out constructive criticism from colleagues, partners, or advisors. Ask for advice on how you might improve your work..
Acknowledge your blind spots: Everyone has them! Do your best to not get defensive when yours are pointed out.
Find someone who disagrees with you : It can be tough to hear opinions that conflict with our own; however, there is value in being willing to seriously consider different points of view.
Expand your horizons : Tap into mentors and industry leaders that you trust and respect for their opinion. Additionally, reading books from outside your industry can broaden your perspective and provide some insightful nuggets of wisdom.

By identifying and addressing blind spots, you'll be ready for new levels of success. It may take some work, but it will be worth it. So go ahead and take a closer look. You never know what gems of insight they could bring. Good luck!

Blindsided | Things You’re Unaware Of, Were Caught Off Guard, or Don't Want to Know

We’ve all been there. You thought things were going one way, but they take an unexpected turn, leaving you feeling blindsided.

Whether it’s a surprise criticism from a colleague, being passed up for a promotion at work, or learning someone has been gossiping about you, the emotional impact of being caught off guard can be tough to deal with.

As leaders, trusting too much or not picking up cues from someone can blindside you, making it difficult to cope with the unexpected and unknown. It’s important to stay informed and be deliberate in your decisions.

So how do you prepare for something that may or may not happen? First, don’t be afraid to ask questions, challenge assumptions, and get input from trusted sources before making decisions. The key is to stay alert and be aware of the signals around you.

The sooner you take control of the situation, the better. Don't let someone else dictate your destiny.

Strategies to Prevent Being Blindsided

Access potential solutions (beyond just ideas).
Create healthy boundaries and remove obstacles sooner rather than later.
Energize people by involving them more often and in new ways.
Create and demonstrate fresh thinking and bring others along with you.
Be willing to take risks, explore options for solutions, and bounce ideas off each other.
Pay attention to cues. Stay informed about what’s happening in your industry, organization, and team.
Lean into change with curiosity. Don’t shy away from it.
Ask questions by speaking to people outside of your circles. Find out what they’re seeing and hearing. Experiment with different approaches to problem-solving (i.e., agile, design thinking).
Be open to feedback and constructive criticism.
Create contingency plans for the potential risks you face in your organization.
Actively canvas for ideas and feedback from your team.
Find the “and” between your leadership and compassionate colleague roles. Striking a balance between responding to hard decisions while also showing empathy is essential in developing a successful team.
Don’t forget to have some fun! Sometimes it can be the best line of defence against getting blindsided.

Being blindsided can be a difficult but powerful experience. Try to take it in stride and remember the lessons you learn from it. By being prepared, you can manage any challenging situation with poise.

Being Blind to Nuance | You Can’t See What You Need to See

Leadership is not a one-size-fits-all practice. There are shades of gray to every interaction, and being blind to the many ways of processing information can lead to a lack of two things: understanding and creative exploration.

While busy is the baseline these days, it’s important to take the time to stop and consider a variety of approaches to problem-solving. Not only will this help you become more thoughtful in decision-making, but it also serves as an opportunity for team members to learn new methods of thinking.

By stepping back and taking off the blinders to nuance, you can:

Tap into diverse perspectives
Create an environment of collaboration
Include more people in decision-making processes
Identify hidden talents that could transform your team’s output

By taking off the blinders and keeping an open mind, you'll be able to find innovative solutions that will move things forward faster! It will help you foster an environment where people feel safe sharing their thoughts and contributing meaningful insights – things that are essential for every successful leader.

Leaning Into Diverse Perspectives

It’s tempting to shy away from what we don’t understand or are unfamiliar with – but don’t! Take advantage of the collective input from your team. The collective intelligence of diversity will help you find solutions that may have been out of your reach before. By challenging yourself and broadening your perspectives as a leader, you can identify new solutions to problems – ones that would not have been possible had you remained stuck in your blind spot.

Being blind as a leader doesn't mean you are helpless; it means that with the right approach, you can gain insights into how to break through your own blind spots. Awareness of your own blind spots or biases is incredibly important for successful team collaboration.

Leaders who recognize the power of self-reflection and vulnerability can begin to build a foundation of trust with their team.

When you embrace complexity and consider new perspectives, you can better:

Challenge the status quo
Open yourself up to being more present
Generate innovative, dynamic solutions
Help your team step up and demonstrate their abilities.

Leadership is about making the right decisions that will benefit everyone in the long run. When we surrounded ourselves entirely by those who look, think, and act like us, it can make us blind to diverse perspectives. We need to look for ways of leading with greater inclusion and appreciation of all types of diversity – whether it’s gender, race, age, thought processing or background. Judging others' feelings with your own processing measuring stick will increase miscommunication and only create more blind spots.

You have the opportunity to lead with courage, creativity, and innovation. Don’t be afraid to take a step into the unknown. What lies ahead could be truly illuminating!

About the Author

Christina Carlson guides entrepreneurship through collaboration, creativity, and inspired agility. She is an Agile Leadership Guide and the founder of Unstuck: Leadership Training and Coaching , which helps leaders and teams to identify their blind spots, providing clarity on issues that may have otherwise been overlooked.

Connect with Christina

The Disease to Please

Thu, 10 Aug 2023 18:03:25 GMT

Have you ever stopped yourself from doing something because someone may dislike it? Or maybe you worry someone will look at you differently – even if you know you’re doing the right thing? You may have the disease to please.

The term “disease to please” was coined by clinical psychologist, management consultant, and author Dr. Harriet B. Braiker in the early 2000s. It explores how and why we dedicate so much time and energy to managing our fear of disappointing others. This pattern of behavior, where we prioritize the opinions and feelings of others over ourselves, can affect our effectiveness as individuals, leaders, and for many of us, as women.

Disease to Please in Individuals

Our upbringing and life experiences play a significant role in how strong our need to please others is. For example, I find myself doing things my family and friends want, even if I would rather not. When I do this, I am prioritizing the needs and desires of others above my own – and sometimes that is appropriate! I am a mother, a daughter, and a sister. Those relationships require and deserve investments of my time and energy which I am happy to give. However, I know there is a point when I am compromising out of habit or in ways that are a disservice to myself.

That is where the disease to please comes in. Soon enough those compromises easily become expectations. What happens the one time you don’t compromise? The other person’s expectation is unmet, leading to confusion, disappointment, arguments, heightened emotions, and strained relationships.

Leading Through the Disease to Please

In the context of leadership, the disease to please can manifest as a reluctance to share opinions or make decisions. They avoid conflict and are too willing to compromise on important issues. But leadership requires a range of abilities, like decision-making, communication, empathy, and problem-solving. A successful leader balances the needs and interests of the organization, customers, and team with their own goals and values.

When I was a new leader in a new department, I wanted to feel like I belonged in the role. I considered myself to be part of the elite group. After all, that particular organization made it incredibly difficult to get promoted. Once I finally reached that level, with it came a feeling of entitlement – as well as fear of failing or feeling outcast. I found myself becoming overly concerned with pleasing others and less willing to take risks or make tough decisions. I would say “yes” enthusiastically and worked very hard to keep the position I earned.

Ultimately, my focus on avoiding conflict blocked me from growing. I was considered “not strategic enough.” By the time I started sharing my ideas and opinions with peers and leaders, it was too late. Others had developed stronger connections and working relationships and my reputation as weak or indecisive did not serve me well.

I realized that my disease to please, more often than not, ended up not pleasing others. Further, my values conflicted with my actions causing internal strife and inconsistent behavior.

Today, it is clear to me: Effective leadership requires a balance between meeting the needs of others while staying true to one’s own values and priorities.

Women and the Disease to Please

It is a common generalization that women are either naturally good at or are expected to juggle multiple responsibilities – that multitasking is considered second nature to us. Let’s pause and reflect on why that is. I have been a great multitasker (at least I thought I was) all my life and though I would be proud of being called that in the past, today, I know the reason for that is simply because I hesitated to say “no” to others' requests.

In her book, The Female Brain , neuropsychiatrist and author Dr. Louann Brizendine explores the unique aspects of the female brain and how they influence behavior, emotions, and relationships. She summarizes that:

Women tend to have a larger and more active limbic system – the part of our brain responsible for processing emotions; further, women experience different hormonal fluctuations that affect mood, cognition, and behavior.
Women’s brains also have a stronger stress response leading to increased anxiety and depression.
Women are more attuned to social cues making them more likely to engage in collaborative and nurturing behaviors.

As I reflect on Dr. Brizendine’s work, it seems that, as women, our physiology is so hard-wired for connection and maintaining social harmony, that it is expressed as a need to please others. This cannot and should not be generalized for all women, but it does give some insight into why it may be harder for women to set boundaries around how we are expected to behave.

In the workplace, we are simultaneously expected to be nurturing and supportive while also being ambitious and assertive. This creates a situation where the two expectations are competing and often incompatible, particularly for women in leadership. If we are too assertive, we may be seen as bossy. If we are too caring, we may be seen as weak. We are judged on our appearances, fashion, or if we smile enough. These expectations can lead to women leaders succumbing to the disease to please in order to meet unreasonable expectations.

How to Overcome the Disease to Please

The first step in finding a cure for the disease to please is self-awareness. By becoming more aware of our own thoughts and feelings, we can begin to recognize patterns in our behavior. Consider how often you seek approval from others. How often do you fear being rejected or criticized? How many times do you compromise your own values and goals and end up feeling resentful because of it? Try to catch yourself in the moment and try to unpack why you are doing it with this person, in this particular context.

The second step: self-expression. When we compromise too much, we are muting ourselves. The only way to overcome it is to do the opposite – express yourself. When we start to authentically express our needs, set boundaries, and learn to say no – still, with empathy – do we learn to become more assertive and confident. Balancing your own needs and those of others can help make us authentic, effective leaders.

Breaking Free From the Disease to Please

It can be hard to give ourselves permission to say no or choose ourselves first, but my friend Rahul Kini explained it this way: I have four circles for all my relationships.

The innermost circle is my relationship with myself, which is the core and the most important. It is solely my responsibility to take care of myself.
The second circle has people who are dear to my heart – family and close friends. Only when I am in great health and spirits, can I take care, bring happiness, and love to this group.
The third circle is colleagues and acquaintances with whom I often interact professionally and personally. Unless I am being authentic with myself and aligned with my values I cannot effectively contribute to this group.
The last circle has everyone else in the world.

It comes down to this: Every single time I have suffered from unnecessary conflict and stress, it is when I have mixed up my priorities and indulged in people-pleasing before taking care of my own needs.

Finally Curing the Disease to Please

For so many, our worth is closely tied to a title, status, and success. Not achieving these only perpetuates the vicious cycle of pleasing others to reach our goals.

Remember : We are more than our work or what we do for others. Being true to yourself can liberate you from the need to please others, become aware of your true potential, be authentic, seek fulfillment, and be at peace.

About the Author

Rashmi Fernandes works with leaders and teams to co-create outcomes that lead to agility and positive team culture, while focusing on strategic alignment. She specializes in enabling product teams to focus on customer centricity and arrive at shared understanding towards a common purpose. As an Innovation Catalyst, she coaches teams on how to take an idea from concept to life.

She has led many enterprise-wide initiatives like Product Conferences, Product & Scrum Master Communities of Practice & Leadership Development Programs. Her passion for her community in India brought together an initiative that provides a platform for over a thousand underprivileged children to play sports.

Connect with Rashmi

Food For Thought

Tue, 25 Jul 2023 18:37:04 GMT

Fog is a metaphor I have come to value for its unique characteristics. Unlike other weather events, fog cannot be dealt with. Rain can be wiped away. Snow can be pushed and neutralized with sand. And ice can be melted. But fog is elusive. Not only does fog permeate everything, it cannot be pushed, blown, wiped, or neutralized. Fog must be navigated.

While fog is an apt metaphor for the environment faced by any generation looking forward, it is especially true for today’s leaders. Pause for a moment on the last generation. We’ve experienced a renaissance of technology advances including mobile, social media, streaming, ride share, and 24x7 connectivity. Social systems are breaking through war, immigration, racial, and human rights injustice, guns, police, and climate change. The geopolitical systems are stretched to a breaking point by political polarization. And every single person across the globe has lived through one of the most globally unifying (and likely one of the most digitally activating) events since WWII—the COVID pandemic. Oh, and most of the high-tech enabled business world is shifting toward more agile ways of working.

In closing this edition, I want to share a thought with you regarding the desire for a recipe to ease your leadership journey, especially through the fog. While we all love a good recipe, I want you to recognize their place and limitations for your leadership journey. Enjoy!

A Recipe For Change

I recently switched to a whole-food plant-based diet to both improve my health and to help our planet. However, after decades of a traditional meat and dairy-based diet, I had little knowledge or experience in cooking healthy (and flavorful) vegan meals. Cold boring salads were all I knew. I needed help.

To aid my transition, I joined a two-week program allowing me to connect to others on this shared journey and to be guided by experts. And our principal guide was “Dr. Veggie” who ate leafy greens during every Zoom meeting! A bit quirky, but effective. A key component of the program was an entire two-week meal plan including recipes and a shopping list, which provided helpful examples of healthy and tasty meals.

I learned during the program that many people who attempt vegan diets often run into problems because they replace their “no” foods with other not-so-great alternatives containing refined grains and sugars—it simply shifts the problem rather than fix it. So the recipes helped shape the boundaries and provide clear direction, especially for people like me who were new to this foreign landscape.

Shuhari—Moving Past Recipes

As a Certified Scrum Trainer (CST) with the Scrum Alliance for 10 years, I became a fan of Shuhari , a Japanese martial arts concept loosely translated as follow the rules, break the rules, transcend the rules . We trained ScrumMasters to use Shuhari for both personal development of their new role and in developing their teams and organization in learning and applying Scrum.

Through Shuhari , you follow the recipes until you become accustomed to and deeply understand the rules behind them—how and why they are in place. Only after that deep understanding can you break from the recipes and experiment with new approaches.

This is how effective ScrumMasters and agile coaches can adapt the principles and practices around Scrum to mature effective organizations.

As an agile coach myself I was fortunate to collaborate with the Salesforce leadership team early in their transition to a high-performing company. We effectively broke free from the traditional recipes of Scrum and Kanban to birth an incredible wave of productivity which is still going strong after 15 years. (More on this story in an upcoming edition of Emergence )[1].

Another example of breaking from recipes was Spotify, as beautifully portrayed by Henrik Kniberg in the YouTube videos on Spotify’s Culture[2].

An interesting and somewhat sad twist to this story is that the video series became so trendy that Spotify Culture became its own recipe, much to the chagrin of Kniberg who insisted others only use it as a reference data point rather than a recipe. He further shared that the videos illustrate only one point in time, and that the videos became outdated soon after their release.

So not only were the recipes of the past wrong, we must ask:

Is there any recipe that might help lead through the foggy, fast-paced landscape of today’s business environment?

The Problem With Recipes

Kniberg recognized something most people miss—recipes can be reckless, especially when applied to a business culture context. Let’s take a look at one of the biggest recipe mistakes of the business world over the past 40 years!

In 1982, Tom Peters and Robert Waterman of McKinsey published what has become one of the most influential business books of all time: In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best- Run Companies . The authors analyzed 43 top-performing U.S.-based companies and abstracted a recipe for success called the 7S Framework: strategy, structure, systems, staff, skills, style, and shared values[3].

Since that time, a slew of researchers have sought to do the same, analyzing companies and abstracting the recipes which drove high-performance. In 1994, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras released their six-year analysis and patterns of 18 successful companies in Built to Last , with special focus on enduring performance characteristics.

The leadership education and development over the past 40 years has been built on a generation of heavily researched companies and their recipes of success. Yet to what end?

Richard D’Aveni, professor of strategic management at Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business, questioned the science behind the “traits of successful companies” genre, and others followed.

In 2006, Scott Keller and Colin Price of McKinsey analyzed their research data along with performance data over the following decade for their book Beyond Performance . They found that of the identified excellent companies showcased in the books listed above, 20% no longer existed, 46% were struggling, and only 33% remained as high performers.

Just as in baseball, batting 330 is a terrific stat. However, in 2007, Phil Rosenzweig in his book The Halo Effect further exposed the pseudoscientific tendencies of building recipes by analyzing business performance at its peak. He exposes many delusions these researchers suffered, including correlation versus causality, using a single explanation to connect an outcome, and connecting winning dots while ignoring the losing ones. Selective data at best, malpractice at worst.

No one is questioning that the companies researched for these books were, at one time, high-performing. A number of them were indeed built to last! However, what has become clearer with time is that developing recipes based on their collective success is flawed. Yet leaders continue to follow these flawed recipes.

It’s time for a new recipe.

A Recipe For Today?

We are coming up on two decades since Keller, Price, and Rosenzweig shattered the “traits of successful companies” research genre. So much has changed since then. Our landscape has fogged over. So not only were the recipes of the past wrong, we must ask: is there any recipe that might help lead through the foggy, fast-paced landscape of today’s business environment?

We have a few clues to assist us. First, recipes help. Second, recipes are only a starting point. With that in mind, let’s heed the advice from some experts to help us build a new recipe.

Keller and Price determined that much of the failure to sustain a high-performance culture was an excessive bias toward a static view of managing performance. In short, recipes that build success are not sufficient to sustain success through disruptions.

Bill Joiner, author of Leadership Agility , explains that the recipe for leadership success is agility. Not capital “A” Agile, but small “a” agility. Leadership agility means leaders who are more aware and actively choose in the moment. In other words, the recipe is to inspect and adapt. Just like Scrum.

Adam Grant, author of Think Again , says the recipe for today’s leaders is to think like a scientist. This means shifting from knowledge we use to preach, prosecute and politic as if it were “right” to a scientific mindset that learns what is “right” through hypothesis, experimentation and data gathering. Once again, this points us to an inspect-and-adapt approach.

And Brene Brown, author of Dare to Lead , shares the recipe for today’s leaders as the courage to be vulnerable. That means having the courage to step away from what you know and be open to what you don’t know. Vulnerability to not having an answer, to even asking the question. Again, inspect and adapt.

Maybe I am suffering a similar fate to Peters and Waterman and believing I can postulate a recipe from successful authors of our time. However, it appears to me that when the data points begin to cluster, it means something. Am I just connecting the winning dots? Am I adding causality in correlated data? You be the judge.

I wish I had a clear, easy-to-follow recipe for you to follow as a leader. Instead, the recipe I have in mind will be hard to follow, and it may lead to some failure. In fact, I am sure it will lead you to failure. But that’s the point. We learn best through failure. We need the courage to try when failure is an option.

Dedication

A big “Thank You!” to the Business Agility Institute and Emergence teams for trusting in me to lead the way on this edition and for co-creating with me at every step. A shout out to the contributing authors I have come to know and respect over my career for the courage to write and share their stories. And a grateful bow to my Agile Leadership Journey team for their creativity and steadfast dedication to building a world-class organization.

This edition would not have been possible without each and every one of you. While others may only see the lone leader in the limelight, it is likely only possible because they are being lifted up by those who work with them.

Enjoy the Journey!

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Emergence is the Journal of Business Agility from the Business Agility Institute . Four times a year, they produce a curated selection of exclusive stories by great thinkers and practitioners from around the globe. These stories, research reports, and articles were selected to broaden your horizons and spark your creativity.

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Connect with Pete

References

https://resources.scrumalliance.org/Article/salesforce-an-agile-case-study and https://trailridge.team/client-stories/salesforce
Spotify Engineering Culture Part I : https://youtu.be/Yvfz4HGtoPc and Spotify Engineering Culture Part II : https://youtu.be/vOt4BbWLWQw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Search_of_Excellence

The Perfection Trap

Thu, 20 Jul 2023 19:49:47 GMT

What is Perfectionism?

Perfectionism, for me, is the desire for everything to be just right.

For example, the perfection bug bites me when I decide to write a blog about an especially interesting book or talk. I want to share this powerful message with the world! As I polish the blog for posting on Agile Leadership Journey or LinkedIn , and look for images and quotes to make it look perfect. I can do this for an hour or two, thinking that I’m striving for perfection, but if it goes on for days or weeks, we have entered obsession territory.

This results in two things:

I have strayed from my initial intent of sharing a meaningful message and got caught up in making it perfect.
I haven’t posted it!

Going through life error-free would be wonderful but if it halts progress, this is the perfection trap.

How do I know I am falling into this trap?

In Helgeson and Goldsmith’s book How Women Rise , we learn that women are particularly susceptible to the perfection trap. Regardless of gender, we have all fallen into it at some point. Job applications, performance reviews, presentations, pitch decks, personal correspondence – we strive for perfection and end up accomplishing nothing.

In an appearance on The Oprah Winfrey Show , researcher and author Brené Brown explains, “When perfectionism is driving us, shame is always riding shotgun and fear is the backseat driver. We struggle with perfectionism in areas where we are most vulnerable to shame.”

Of course, this is only amplified by social media which can make us compare ourselves to others despite only seeing a small (likely Photoshopped) snapshot of their lives. Think about how this may feel for you. Do you find yourself curating an image of perfection to avoid judgement from others?

To recognize where your perfectionism is rooted, ask yourself: What is driving me? Mastery or recognition?

The answer will help you identify whether you are striving for mastery or excellence for yourself or if your perfectionism is about the opinion, validation, or recognition of others .

If you are still unsure, consider these questions:

Do you have unrealistic standards or expectations for yourself and others?
Is your need to be flawless consuming all of your time as well as others’?
Are you fixated on mistakes and unable to perform after making one?
Do you procrastinate or jump from one task to another without completing anything?
Are you emotionally attached to the results so much so that you are not able to enjoy the process of trying, learning, and growing?
Are you overly critical of yourself and feel like you aren’t good enough?
Do you feel defensive about feedback?
Do you blame yourself even when you’re not at fault?
Do you feel pushed toward a goal by a fear of not reaching it versus being pulled toward the prospect of reaching it?
Do you judge others excessively?

If you answered yes to any of these, you may be caught in the perfection trap.

Top 3 takeaways on perfectionism

Perfectionism kills progress! The pursuit of perfection can paralyze us, preventing us from getting anything done at all. Focusing on inconsequential points in the name of perfection can keep us from being creative or innovative.
The perfection trap affects relationships and teamwork. As leaders, it can be stressful on our colleagues when we set impossibly high standards. It’s not bad to focus on quality, but let’s strive for balance.
Perfectionism can hinder inclusion. If you don't accept who you are and allow yourself to be human, how are you going to allow others to be human? Inclusion starts with YOU.

Being OK with not being perfect

Letting go of the urge to be perfect is not easy! Like adopting any new habit, it can be hard. Just remember mastery is all about practice. Accept that you are a work in progress.

Consider these five ideas:

Understand what is driving you: mastery or recognition.
Stop with the comparisons and accept your imperfections. Literally no one is perfect!
Adopt a growth mindset – the belief that our intelligence, abilities, and talents can be developed – instead of a fixed mindset – the belief that our intelligence, abilities, and talents are static and cannot be changed.
Focus on one thing at a time. Keep it manageable.
Practice deliberately with intent and commitment.

While it’s still a challenge sometimes, I have learned to enjoy the journey, and along the way, I try to emotionally disconnect myself from the outcome. I have learned to value progress over perfection.

Remember, to err is human. Take a chance. Get out of your comfort zone. And don’t worry about what others think! If you really care about doing great work, you must put the burden of perfectionism to rest.

Continue learning how to free yourself from the perfectionism trap. After reading this article, listen to the author discuss her experience on (Re)Learning Leadership podcast .

About the Author

Rashmi Fernandes works with leaders and teams to co-create outcomes that lead to agility and positive team culture, while focusing on strategic alignment. She specializes in enabling product teams to focus on customer centricity and arrive at shared understanding towards a common purpose. As an Innovation Catalyst, she coaches teams on how to take an idea from concept to life.

She has led many enterprise-wide initiatives like Product Conferences, Product & Scrum Master Communities of Practice & Leadership Development Programs. Her passion for her community in India brought together an initiative that provides a platform for over a thousand underprivileged children to play sports.

Connect with Rashmi .

Hazardous Conditions

Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:16:39 GMT

I’ve been driving for 30+ years, but I still find it hard to hit the highway in adverse weather conditions. Is it just me? Never has something as frequent as darkness with a touch of fog made me think about the hazards of driving so intensely. The complexity of driving has also made me reflect upon and appreciate the similarities between driving and leading in a changing environment. When driving through fog, you would never assume that other road users are always going to be helpful. Yes, it’s possible to simply follow the tail lights in front of you, but chances are they won’t always be going in the same direction or at a similar speed.

When we set out on a path to utilise business agility at Domino Printing Sciences, we faced challenges similar to those of driving through hazardous conditions. Domino has been a successful, market-leading industrial printing company specialising in digital printing and traceability solutions (such as industrial coders) for sectors as diverse as food, beverage, life sciences, packaging, cleaning, personal care, building and construction. There were personal leadership challenges within a big, old, successful, and spread-out (BOSS) organization that was looking to adapt in a VUCA world. To be successful in our endeavour we needed to answer key questions: Who were the co-drivers we needed? Which vehicles could we follow, which needed to take the lead, and which did we need to stay aware of? What roadblocks would slow our progress? And so on. This is a tale of a personal leadership journey attempting to transition beyond local agility, onwards and upwards towards business agility .

Green Traffic Lights

At the start of our journey we felt like a small car on an uncertain, foggy road. Five years into our transformation, and our software department had changed for the better. We now felt more like an agile minibus that could alter direction and speed depending on the road ahead. We had started to reap the benefits of being agile by recruiting like-minded people, sharing a vision, co-creating new ways of working, adapting existing models to suit our context, and adopting an agile and growth mindset. We had successfully evolved the culture where individuals and teams had the freedom and autonomy to master their own career and do their best work. We had momentum! Street lamps were appearing, every traffic light was green, more cars were turning their fog lights on and the future seemed brighter.

However, if we were to strive for wider business agility, we needed to look beyond our own minibus and engage with other road users to help navigate the uncertain road ahead. I recognised we still had a long way to go if we were to replicate our local change at a wider level. This was true for my agile leadership journey too.

Avoiding the Roadblocks

What could go wrong? What possible roadblocks could stop us realising the benefits of business agility? We now had multiple vehicles on this foggy road, all of them different and headed in similar, but subtly unique destinations.

Business units act like large trucks, carrying a heavy load that significantly contribute to business outcomes. However, these trucks are not manoeuvred easily, and their inherent characteristics make it more challenging for them to change even if they wanted to (BOSS). However, we were on the same road, heading in the same direction. Surely these vehicles would travel in unison? And even if they showed some inability to change immediately, my agile leadership development would help me align all these vehicles to meet our common strategic goals.

Well, a year flew past, more grey hairs and wrinkles appeared, and despite a life-time of wisdom gained, the business agility adventure was stuttering. The journey had slowed and our minibus had dents and scratches. Despite our positive launch, missed opportunities and an imperfect leadership approach had sent us off-course.

I reflected on whether these mistakes were deterministic factors of success in our journey. If I hadn’t missed such opportunities or was a more capable leader, could we have been more successful? Maybe not. Other factors much larger than those were also in transit. The large trucks sharing our journey impacted our progress. Our minibus was influenced by the wider system around us. We were constrained to the roads more suited to the larger vehicles (business units) which were unable to see why they should need to change. This forced us to accept that agile teams alone cannot build business agility.

Setting out

To begin this new journey, I knew I needed to develop my leadership capabilities in unison with the leaders of other business units and the C-Suite. The challenge we faced was that our successful agile adoption was in isolation and wasn’t aligned with the rest of the business (which was still in the original mindset of a BOSS business). Therefore, we collectively embarked on agile leadership training that would help create awareness around the need to make a cultural shift as well as a personal one. The thinking was, the more agile leaders we had, the more vehicles we would have to help illuminate and navigate the complexities of transforming our product delivery.

Building on the agile leadership training , we explored key models and concepts that would be the building blocks of our business agility journey; cultural surveys (understanding our current and desired culture), tools that mapped our value streams, thinking models that encouraged focus on work-in-progress and decision making at the right level, and most importantly, a leadership development programme . We aspired to deliver the most valuable work as soon as possible that was aligned with our strategic goals and organisation’s vision.

Organisational culture and leadership are two sides of the same coin. They are the fundamental pillars that are catalysts for change within an organisation. Even with awareness of the current culture, and a desire to change, it is not enough to guarantee the outcome of change itself.

Assumed Alignment

During the transformation process, I had the opportunity to experience agile leadership training alongside my senior colleagues. As such, it was fair of me to assume that their view of what we needed to do was the same as mine.

Our minibus was brimming with good business agility approaches and an agile and growth mindset focused on visualisation, value delivery, distributed decision making, and collaboration. These capabilities were ready to share, implement, and mature with the large trucks alongside us. Initial progress was good, business agility models and tools were adopted and in use. However, we started to meet resistance. Suddenly the competing culture that was identified in our culture survey started to rear its head. With no common goal or agreed-upon outcome to facilitate back to, we hit a ceiling on exploiting business agility. Confused and concerned, I began to ask questions like “Why try and get business agility in the first place if we weren’t willing to collaborate and work toward a common end?” I thought we were aligned on our goals and approaches.

In an attempt to ease these tensions, I pondered how I could best utilise my leadership learning to influence my senior colleagues and fellow agile leaders. I felt like I knew the way forward but a lack of confidence in working with people above me, not wanting to appear to be an expert in this environment, and the fear of being assertive in an area of conscious incompetence hindered me. I had already taken the lead and introduced visualisation tools and flow models, but I still feared that an expert approach would stifle collaboration.

As such, I began to experiment with power and leadership styles in this new environment. I made intentional changes to use more of a Catalyst Approach, and to better accommodate the senior people I was now surrounded by. Having already offered new thinking models to use, I embraced a more reflective stance and began asking questions to lead them in the direction I thought we needed to go.

The more interactions I had with various different business unit leaders, the more resistance I met. It became apparent that we were not aligned on the outcomes we wanted to achieve from business agility. Their mindset very much was in tension with the mindset we had created within our minibus. Where we valued adaptability and embracing change to help us thrive in a VUCA world, they were struggling to easily see the benefits of being a small, nimble vehicle. We wanted to create an organisation where our minibus could take a diversion through a small town without fear of its ability to get through it. What they hoped for was to squeeze higher productivity out of our minibus and were willing to explore agility to support it, but weren’t yet ready or willing to fully embrace a wider transformational change. Focused on business as usual, they were striving to meet their immediate objectives of delivering to deadlines and, as such, were unable to manoeuvre or shift lanes due to their size and the weight.

Their inability to be more agile meant that we were constrained in the experiments and practices we would explore. For example, we couldn’t experiment with continuous delivery due to well-established processes that forced us to rely on one of these large trucks that could only deliver in monolithic volumes. But because we were forced to co-exist on the same road, we began to clash. The result: scratches and dents in our beautiful minibus.

Leadership Rigidity

Despite this misalignment, there were still benefits we could get from changing the ways we worked together and how we managed the flow of work. I still felt the influence of my agile leadership skills could extend outside our minibus and, hopefully, help align these big trucks.

We experimented by introducing a model to maximise value delivery amongst our biggest product line. This was also a great opportunity for me to practise my leadership styles. We saw some rapid change and had some early wins, such as replacing a limited-value status meeting with a stand-up around a fully-visual board that reflected our value, where it was, and the opportunities for optimisation. This was so much more powerful than what felt like endless discussions on detailed progress reports and status updates.

As this new way of working matured, roadblocks started to appear and progress was impacted. I continued with my approach of guiding and collaborating with others to make change instead of leading as an expert, but it didn’t work. In the time it took for me to share my knowledge, new habits had formed around the use of these models. The organisational process-driven culture took hold. People began reverting to detailed reporting of what they had done, rather than looking at what had changed that would impact flow, or considering what decisions could be made to maximise it. This is another example of trucks stuck on cruise control, unable to change speed or direction. This regression made it infinitely harder to change. Maturity of our use of these models stopped, and although these models had provided many benefits over our previous ways of working, there was still room to grow. We hadn’t yet achieved a strategic goal or achieved better agility.

I aspired to help my peers understand what I knew about these new ways of working and how they would help us optimise flow but I made a fundamental mistake. Without fear of working with my peers, or conscious incompetence in this domain, I assumed a certain leadership style was required. I wanted to be a catalyst that enabled others to learn, and in doing so I failed to give the leaders of the expert knowledge they needed to lead effectively. I needed to traverse my leadership style appropriately instead of thinking a fixed predetermined leadership style was required.

I learned that you don’t have to be a senior leader/director or a C-suite to influence or be a catalyst for organisational change, but you do have to be agile in your leadership approach. That leadership approach has to evolve alongside this organisational change. It has to adapt depending on the environment and people around you. It also is massively influenced by your own internal drivers, motivations, aspirations, and fears.

So What?

With the setbacks suffered above, I retreated back into the comfort zone of our minibus and started applying the lessons learned. A lone minibus driving towards an unknown destination at night in fog is not ideal.

I needed more like-minded people around me who wanted to influence the journey, those that could drive the minibus themselves but also know when to be a co-driver or passenger, which would allow me to sit in the back seat and take time to reflect, help navigate, or just point out the other large trucks we were sharing the road with.

With this in mind, I set out to develop leaders in my team by ensuring they were trained and applying agile leadership in opportunities where they could both succeed and fail. This required me to adapt my leadership and power styles to suit the situation in order to influence the culture at our level, encouraging a business agility mindset; One that wasn’t headed by one leader, but a group of leaders who worked with the teams, and through their leadership behaviours created a stronger agile environment. In interactions with other business units, it wasn’t just myself but engineers within our agile development teams asking the right questions, and offering suggestions about value, priority, work-in-progress, and return on investment decisions.

What Have I Learnt and Would Do Differently?

So here I am today, having pulled over on the side of the road where the fog still looms, reflecting on the journey I’ve just had to navigate.

Leadership is a kaleidoscope of discovery and application, but more importantly, it’s a continuous reflection piece. The biggest (and now most obvious) lesson I have taken from this experience is the way in which I approached the team I led versus the peers and leaders above me. Taking the back seat, ironically, was the biggest driver for my teams’ development, by giving them the responsibility and autonomy to be self-managing whilst supporting them when needed. However, this is not necessarily appropriate when working with peers and others above me. Sometimes I just need to be the driver. The software department’s transformative change resulted in a different culture which was not always aligned to that of the wider organisations, which made it even more important that my leadership style reflected the context I was leading in, rather than assuming a single approach.

There are key characteristics of an organisation that I believe can hold back change: policies, structures, metrics, distribution, historical success, size, and history (BOSS). All of these are influenced by the people and their behaviours, especially those of the leaders. Having a culture in one team that tries to drive change and experiment with new ways of working in the same organisation as others who have previously enjoyed the benefits of stability and certainty will cause tension, similar to that of minibuses having dents and scratches from trying to manoeuvre between large, inflexible trucks.

Business agility isn’t a universally understood and commonly agreed definition, and nor should it be. Your context should drive and influence what agility means to you. Even with C-Suite involvement, their participation and sponsorship alone will not overcome some of the fundamental challenges in transformational change, especially if there is a lack of a compelling reason to change. My experience in this organisation has shown that not being truly aligned on what outcomes you want from business agility is likely to lead to wasted opportunities for real change. Therefore I beg you to ask the following question of yourself: What outcomes does your organisation want from business agility, does the entire organisation see the need to change, and how will you be an effective leader in it?

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Au thor

Stephen Lorking

Stephen is the Group Director of Software Engineering at Domino Printing Sciences in Cambridge UK., where he has spent the past five years leading an agile transformation of the Software Engineering teams. He is also an Agile Leadership Journey Guide with a passion for helping leaders develop themselves to successfully navigate leading in uncertain and changing times.

Connect with Stephen

Leading with Mindful Momentum

Tue, 11 Jul 2023 19:53:45 GMT

When driving a car through a fog bank in the physical world, we rely on our windshield wipers, fog lights and GPS enabled devices. Leading people (whether we are leading ourselves or others) and organizations through fog requires mindsets, skill sets and behaviors that are inclusive, equity-minded, authentic and trauma-informed. Why add trauma-informed to our leadership tool-kit? Because as Katie Kurtz explains in AWARE - An Exploratory Guide to the Trauma Competencies , “We know that most humans, if not all, have a lived experience of trauma and/or toxic stress—especially considering the many systems we live within continue to induce trauma.”[1]

I walked the path, casting stones in my wake. Pieces of me I could not live without. Doing without the necessary. What keeps the heart beating when reason has fled?
When you’ve shed every garment, every pretense. Walking naked among the stones. Every step a wound and every wound a step. Impossible to imagine where this path led.

- Wendy Ryan, This Life’s Journey

Interior Fog vs. Exterior Fog

There are two primary sources of fog we encounter in organizational life. The first we’ll call interior fog, which clouds up our personal windshield and makes it difficult, if not impossible, for us to accurately perceive and therefore respond optimally to events happening around us. While interior fog can stem from any number of sources, one of the most common relates to trauma. According to Katie Kurtz, “It’s important to understand that trauma is NOT the event(s) but rather the human response to that event(s). It can occur acutely (one time), chronically (complex), systemically, historically, ancestrally and/or vicariously.” Even when conditions are clear externally, interior fog can still wreak havoc on individuals, teams and their organizations.

The second source is VUCA, which is an acronym created by the U.S. military in the 1990s. VUCA stands for volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous—the conditions leaders encounter in battle-field conditions. Sound familiar? That’s because VUCA increasingly describes the conditions in which virtually every organization operates today. COVID-19, climate change, disruption of global supply chains and recent geopolitical realignment generate or amplify VUCA dynamics, which creates exterior fog.

Leading Individuals Through Fog

When interior fog originates from unprocessed individual or collective trauma, traditional leadership often responds to it by encouraging people to “grind it out” or “dig deeper.” In other words, ignore your pain and pretend it doesn’t exist while you are at work.

Often, trauma survivors internalize these messages. Instead of recognizing that their personal windshield is fogged from the inside and seeking the support they need to help clear the fog (e.g. counseling through their company’s employee assistance program (EAP)) they will work longer hours, take on additional tasks and direct their attention anywhere other than internally.

As our understanding of brain and nervous system functioning grows, we are beginning to appreciate how counterproductive this approach really is. A good analogy emerges when we consider that the application of leeches was once heralded as a go-to cure for a wide range of human ailments. As modern medicine has evolved, so has our understanding that for most medical conditions, bleeding people only makes them sicker.

Trauma changes brain and nervous system functioning in ways that can appear permanent because the changes tend to be both persistent and durable. It’s helpful to recognize the symptoms of trauma from two different perspectives:

Symptoms the trauma survivor experiences, and
What symptoms of trauma look like to others.

I’ll stare directly at the sun, but never in the mirror.

It must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-hero.

- Taylor Swift, Anti-Hero

A Survivor’s Perspective

Recently, my brother-in-law called me. He asked if would come as soon as possible to keep my sister company. She was at a medical facility that day receiving a chemotherapy infusion to treat cancer. “I know she told you last week when you offered that she didn’t want to subject you to sitting there with her all day, but she’s having a rough time,” he said.

Most of us experience a range of different emotions when we come face to face with a loved one’s serious illness or treatment. Fear, concern and anxiety are common. We may also notice physiological changes in tandem with those emotions such as sudden increase in our heart rate, rapid and shallow breathing, and breaking out into a sweat.

Like aftershocks following an earthquake, survivors of trauma may relate to some or all of the symptoms listed in Table A in response to stimuli we encounter years later. That stimuli may be a stranger or familiar person, a certain smell, taste, sound, visual or tactile sensation, an environment, or type of event. We can think of these as “fog triggers.”

Table A. Symptoms of Trauma from a Survivor’s Perspective

PHYSICAL

My heart rate skyrockets and I hear it pounding in my ears.
My mouth is dry, my throat constricts and it’s hard for me to swallow.
My hands shake.
I feel nauseated.
I am light-headed and feel dizzy.
I may pass out.

SOCIAL

I often avoid events with large crowds.
I feel unsafe, awkward or exposed in certain natural (e.g., parks) or built spaces or environments (e.g., conference rooms, offices) and with certain types of people (e.g., tall men).

EMOTIONAL

I can shift from a state of relative calm to rage or tears in an instant.
If something goes wrong, or I or someone on my team makes a mistake it’s very hard for me to move past it or forgive the co-worker who made the mistake.
I need complete control over my work product. People describe me as a perfectionist.

COGNITIVE

I prefer to do things myself because no one else can do it as well as I can or will take the same care to make sure it’s right as I will.
I sometimes replay events or conversations over and over in my head. I get stuck in a kind of loop where it’s all I can think about.
Under pressure my mind goes blank. I either can’t seem to remember what I was going to say or I can’t seem to formulate the right words to express my point rationally, so I go silent instead.
I assume that people at work are talking about me behind closed doors and/or thinking negative thoughts about me.

My sister and I share a traumatic experience that occurred over a decade ago—the sudden illness and death of our mother due to complications from cancer-related surgery. Fast forward to the present, and we are both experiencing fog triggers during my sister’s cancer treatment. Some of our fog triggers, such as being in a hospital environment, receiving an unexpected phone call and a cancer diagnosis originate from the time of our mom’s passing. Some are newly emergent. The point is, more of our mental and emotional resources over the past several weeks have been directed toward regulating ourselves and leaving fewer mental and emotional resources available to invest in other endeavors than would typically be the case.

That human response can “...feel like a disconnection in your body and from your sense of safety, security and stability. Trauma can also feel like too much, too fast, too soon—overwhelming your nervous system to the point it makes it difficult to neutralize or regulate.” (Kurtz, 2022)

Anytime I hear the phrase “We need to get back to” something, it’s generally an indicator that leaders are attempting to tame VUCA by recreating systems that worked for them in the past. Unfortunately, that rarely works because those systems weren’t designed to operate in VUCA contexts.

A Manager’s Perspective

Let’s say you are the Director of Engineering leading a large team of software developers for a rapidly growing SaaS business. You and your team members routinely put in long hours working both at the office and from home. The overall sense of urgency in the office to meet tight deadlines is palpable, and you find the constant hustle exciting and energizing. Lately, a few of your superstar team members have surprised you with their lackluster performances in meetings with VIPs and requests to work from home more often. One has called in sick several days in a row, which is atypical. You’re starting to wonder, what’s going on?

One possibility is that they are suffering from the effects of trauma related to chronic stress from overwork. Perhaps they recently lost a loved one or dear friend to COVID-19. Whatever the source, what can you do about it?

Table B. Symptoms of Trauma from a Manager’s Perspective

PHYSICAL

I notice that my team member has a strong, visible reaction (flushing, stammering, crying, yelling, pounding their fists on the table, throwing objects, etc.) to something I, a colleague or a client said or did and it seems significantly out of proportion or inappropriate considering actual circumstances.

SOCIAL

I notice that my normally articulate team member goes completely silent or underperforms in meetings, especially in front of my boss or other VIPs whenever they are asked questions.

EMOTIONAL

I wonder if I can trust this person and/or if this person is mature or stable enough to handle increased responsibilities.

COGNITIVE

I notice this team member spends way too much time “in the weeds” and sweating over minor details even though they have a staff of capable people who should be doing it instead.

What’s Going On?

Trauma disrupts normal brain and nervous system functioning in at least three ways:

First, it causes us to misencode information . In other words, if two people are sitting in the same meeting and hearing the same words being spoken by their manager, trauma may explain why they can interpret those words very differently. People who have suffered trauma are more likely to overgeneralize and/or to ascribe negative meanings from communications than those who have not.
Trauma causes disintegration and disassociation between the brain’s executive and higher order cognitive functions and its emotional processing centers. The practical impact of disintegration can be a reduction in our emotional intelligence, specifically in the areas of self-awareness and emotional regulation.
Finally, trauma can cause us to become hypersensitized to various forms of sensory stimulation — noise, touch, odors, etc.—as well as hypervigilant—always scanning our environment for perceived threats to our status and/or safety. As Ryan Gottfredson explains, “We do not want to be caught unaware by a raging fire, but if we are unable to regulate every time we smell smoke, it will be intensely disruptive.”[2]

Stephen Porges’ polyvagal theory[3] provides a useful framework for leaders to understand people’s individual and collective responses to trauma. He identifies three basic gears or “states” inherent to our nervous systems. Through the polyvagal lens, we understand the manifestation of a trauma response as a person’s nervous system getting “stuck” in only one gear instead of fluidly shifting between gears the way it is designed to in order to smoothly propel the car (us) forward.

So, once this happens, how does a person become “unstuck?”

It’s important for individuals who have experienced trauma as well as their bosses, family members, friends, and colleagues to understand that thanks to neuroplasticity some of these changes can be mitigated or even reversed with appropriate treatment. Intervention and support, therefore, matters. Additionally, symptoms of trauma can mimic or mask other conditions.

Post-traumatic growth describes a phenomenon where instead of people returning to a baseline level of functioning following treatment, they emerge more resilient and capable than they were prior to the trauma occurring. We aren’t yet able to predict who is more likely to experience post-traumatic growth, but as research on post-traumatic growth continues it’s important that we recognize trauma is a highly personal and individual experience and that not all outcomes are negative.

Leading Organizations Through Fog

Sometimes, our first instinct is to reverse course to avoid moving through the fog. (Retreating) Leaders make statements such as, “It’s time for us to get back to basics,” or to “tighten our belts.” Anytime I hear the phrase “We need to get back to” something, it’s generally an indicator that leaders are attempting to tame VUCA by recreating systems that worked for them in the past. Unfortunately, that rarely works because those systems weren’t designed to operate in VUCA contexts.

For example, during pre-COVID times, most people working in corporate professional roles did not work remotely on a routine basis. Today, a significant portion of the corporate professional segment of the workforce works remotely at least one day per week. Organizations that have attempted to either coax (or in some cases demand) workers return to the office five days per week have discovered that the in-office Monday to Friday is no longer desirable or realistic for many.

Other times, we may decide that hitting the gas and moving as quickly as possible through the fog is the way to go (Accelerating). Clearly, there are some downsides to taking this approach. Accelerating our way through VUCA assumes we can manage it. The reality is, we can’t know for certain or predict far enough in advance how many potholes lie ahead and how far apart they’ll appear, how many hills we will need to climb or precisely how long it will take us to achieve results in the future similar to what we’ve achieved in the past. Because the context or landscape is shifting in ways we don’t yet recognize and won’t show up on GPS, we are as likely to careen off a steep cliff as we are to make our way through the fog any faster.

For example, many early-stage companies in their startup phase race to get their product to market and capitalize on what is commonly referred to as the “first-mover advantage.” As product development cycles get shorter and shorter thanks to advances in technology, there is increasingly a risk that adequate testing, controls or quality control can’t be maintained. Two famous examples of founders whose pursuit of these shortcuts caused tremendous harm to their customers and investors are Elizabeth Holmes, founder of Theranos, and Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of FTX.

Another strategy is to park the car and let the engine idle while we wait for the fog bank to dissipate (turtling). If we do nothing at all, our logic assumes, we can simply resume our journey at a more convenient time. The problem here is that people, including our most talented staff and valuable customers, might decide to exit our vehicle in favor of hopping into someone else’s. Passivity kills the engine when we run out of gas.

Large organizations tend to be most at risk for turtling in response to exterior fog when instead they could be leveraging their considerable human and financial resources to leap ahead and out of the fog. When survival isn’t top leadership’s immediate concern, like it often can be with smaller organizations, it can be all too easy to justify maintaining the status quo. Universities and other traditional educational institutions come to mind as sectors that have been too slow to innovate despite clear signs that they are not on a sustainable path.

A fourth (and in my view, the only viable) approach is to choose to move forward through the fog via a series of shorter, successful journeys, pausing along the way to process current conditions, reassess and reorient ourselves, integrate our key learnings, adjust our forecasts and continue on. We call this Mindful Momentum.

A recent example of mindful momentum can be seen in the re-emergence of Microsoft Corporation as a dominant service provider in both software and hardware-based computing. Microsoft’s current CEO Satya Nadella led a massive cultural shift that successfully pulled Microsoft out of turtling mode and into mindful momentum. A key factor in this shift was Nadella’s insistence that company leadership learn and practice non-violent communication4 as a necessary first step. Eventually, Microsoft was able to navigate through a paralyzing fog created by internal toxic hostility and infighting and back onto a path of constructive decision making and innovation. Two core tenets of non-violent communication that Microsoft successfully employed at scale which we would recognize as trauma-informed are:

Centering empathy and compassion in our interactions with others, and
Distinguishing and valuing observation (noticing what is) apart from evaluation ( judging good or bad).

My sister and I are actively applying some of the strategies associated with mindful momentum on our journey through her cancer treatment. For example, after the phone call from my brother-in-law, I took the action of canceling all meetings and rearranging my commitments on the remaining dates when her chemotherapy has been scheduled. That way, I can be fully present with her and tend to my own physical, mental and emotional health on those days.

My sister has curtailed her work schedule and is focused on self-compassion—being as productive as her body and brain will support while recognizing that some days are better and some are worse. Throughout each day, she takes frequent breaks to assess how she is feeling physically and mentally and how much energy and focus she can muster to complete the next task. This is a new and different way of navigating work and life than my sister’s typical “nose to the grindstone” approach.

We both recognize the privilege we hold in being able to adjust our work schedules and commitments without penalty. Were our circumstances different, our experience would be even more challenging. It’s an important reminder that successfully integrating trauma-informed practices requires a simultaneous focus on equity and inclusion both in public policy-making and in organizations.

As business owners, we sometimes forget that the menu of choices available to us when we are driving through the fog is different from the menu of choices—real or perceived—that our team members may have available to them. Equity in a trauma-informed context means that people are able to access what they need in order to navigate interior fog without being penalized for it, whether that requires no organizational support, some support or a lot of support.

Conclusion and Recommendations

If you suspect that trauma is generating interior fog for you or some of your team members, or if you’d like to integrate trauma-informed practices more broadly in your organization, there are a number of first steps you can take.

Individual and Team-Based Strategies

Prioritize psychological safety as the key enabler for team performance. People managers and team leaders are in the best position to facilitate 1:1 and team-based interactions that are psychologically safe and in so doing, to increase their team’s productivity and performance over time.
Integrate pauses into your meeting agendas and norms. Always schedule breaks and solicit requests for ad hoc pit stops that may be needed during meetings. Pauses enable all individuals to access the time and physical space they may need to clear their windshields when they start to fog and are necessary for mindful momentum. If it feels counterintuitive to slow down or take a break when you are under time pressure, remember that you won’t achieve mindful momentum without frequent and deliberate pauses.

She visits me from time to time. I never thought she would be mine, To keep.

- Wendy Ryan, Grace

Organizational Strategies

Trauma disrupts normal brain and nervous system functioning in at least three ways:

Educate stakeholders about VUCA and personalize communication to them regarding how you are building org capacity to meet their needs in a more dynamic operating environment. What this looks like in practice is personalizing your communications by 1) getting to know your stakeholders well enough that you understand their needs and concerns, and 2) tailoring your communications to convey VUCA principles in the context of what is most relevant to them and their expectations.
Encourage your leaders to model authenticity in the workplace. Think, “We have to contain ourselves but the container we use should be as flexible and transparent as we can stand.” Leaders who do this well “go first” and practice selective self-disclosure around their own identities, personal challenges, what strategies they are using to cope and how that impacts their leadership. What this looks like in practice is leaders regularly sharing not just their wins, but also losses, regrets and lessons learned across all communication channels— all-hands meetings, online forums, and 1:1 interactions.
Pay attention to the flow of talent and identities moving into, up and out of your organization. Typically, there are discernible patterns that HR data will illuminate for specific teams and departments where inclusivity merits greater focus, commitment and accountability on behalf of leadership. Organizations who leverage this type of data well build talent inclusivity reviews into their quarterly business reviews right alongside their financials. Inclusivity manifests when a critical mass of people experience a strong enough sense of equity and belonging within the organization. Diversity is only one building block to achieving that. You can have broad diversity across many categories in an organization (e.g., race, gender identity, sexual orientation, neurodiversity, etc.) but be sorely lacking in equity and inclusivity. For example, if 50% of the people working in your organization identify as people of color but you don’t have a single person of color on your board of directors or your leadership team, that sends a strong signal to people internally and externally that equity and inclusivity are not high priorities.
Name and integrate trauma competencies as a pillar of your performance evaluation system, manager development programs and leadership succession criteria. Every team member should receive basic training on the experiences and symptoms of trauma and be held accountable to respond in trauma-sensitive ways to other staff members and customers. Models such as the Trauma Competency Framework™ (Kurtz, 2020) can help you define which specific skills and competencies are needed for each role in the organization and embed relevant skill building and certifications throughout the talent lifecycle.

In summary, leading people and organizations through fog requires mindsets, skill sets and behaviors that are inclusive, equity-minded, authentic, and trauma-informed. Though it may have provided you with a deep well of compassion for others suffering the effects of trauma, the reality is that being a survivor of trauma does not on its own grant you the necessary knowledge and skills for you to navigate interior or exterior fog well. As the first step in any successful journey is awareness, consider exploring one of the recommended resources provided at the end of this article to start building your personal trauma navigation toolkit as a leader.

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Wendy Ryan (she/her/hers), MHROD, is the CEO of Kadabra. With over 25 years of combined experience in human resources, organizational development, non-profit leadership and executive coaching, Wendy has helped hundreds of leaders and organizations achieve success as individuals and in teams.

Wendy is the author of the award-winning bestseller, Learn Lead Lift: How to Think, Act, and Inspire Your Way to Greatness and has been featured in Forbes, Yahoo News! Business Digest, Authority Magazine, CEO Magazine and Thrive Global. Wendy is also an active mentor, advisor and investor in BIPOC, LGBTQ++ and womxn-led companies.

Connect with Wendy

Recommended Resources

Online Education and Training

https://thetraumafoundation.org/
AWARE Guide by Katie Kurtz
CULTIVATE (Trauma-informed space-holding training)
PV-Informed Certification for Organizations

Books

The Body Keeps the Score by Bessel van der Kolk
What Happened To You? by Bruce D. Perry and Oprah Winfrey
My Grandmother’s Hands by Resmaa Menakem
The Elevated Leader by Ryan Gottfredson

References

Kurtz, K. (2022). AWARE - An Exploratory Guide to the Trauma Competencies
Gottfredson, R. (2023). The Elevated Leader , Morgan James Publishing
Vu, L.H. & Muller, R. (2022) Polyvagal Theory: An Approach to Understanding Trauma
When CEO Satya Nadella took over Microsoft https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-satya-nadella-nonviolent-communication-2018-10

Trust is the Foundation

Mon, 03 Jul 2023 20:11:28 GMT

The dreaded text from John arrived just after 9am Friday.

Every resignation is rough, but John was an especially beloved leader and manager of a team on a critical business program. He’d spent over a decade with the company in a number of different and growing roles. He knew the industry, our customers, and had a strong grasp for what was needed and how to prioritize. He was a natural leader and excelled at setting priorities and direction, while identifying and growing talent. He had built a small team from scratch that was delivering on a key business program; his program leadership was flexible and open-minded to change and feedback. His departure was for a great new job in a new industry, and we wished him well... but it still hurt to see him go. His departure left our business with a tough challenge that would test our leadership and the global team.

John’s team, which was in the middle of delivering a top-priority program, had been suddenly left leaderless. This compounded another problem: while the team had been staffed with engineers from across our global team as a way of accelerating the program, it was still undersized and needed to at least double in capacity. The existing team was a diverse mix of folks from our US and European offices; in fact, four of our European leaders had helped to staff what was historically a US-only program. We were fortunate in that the software architecture technology stack, and the agile/scrum ways-of-working processes were similar, although the program and its specific technology were new to everyone. Earlier in the year, we had planned for these groups of engineers to work together... but now these relationships and their interactions would become ever more important.

We would quickly learn that trust at multiple levels of the organization was key to navigating through this uncertain period. Without trust, we could not have created a culture of dynamism, adaptability, and safety. Without trust, we would not have grown and thrived while others struggled.

Trust was at the heart of our success... but we’d have to work for it.

In a way, the pandemic helped us through this challenging period. Words not often said; but there was some truth to a newly discovered flexibility toward working globally at a time when few (or none) of us were collaborating face to face in a single physical space. Without a leadership mandate, we observed individual engineers voluntarily acting flexibly in their working hours and finding ways to take advantage of (or extend) time zone overlaps where it made sense. Now, in John’s absence, the collaboration of these teams became paramount.

This level of collaboration and synchronicity was only made possible thanks to an initiative begun years prior, when individual team leaders from a variety of offices and countries decided to meet daily for a global leadership standup. As we spanned many programs, countries, and continents, scheduling was naturally difficult. We settled on a time slot that was at the end of the day in India, midday in Europe, and early morning in the US. Our daily “genba” brought team leaders together for no more than 30 minutes, to hear and see obstacles and hurdles needing help—essentially the “work news” of the day. The genba structure focused first on key customer needs or escalated issues, and then covered a short progress update or areas where help was needed for each of our major programs as leaders. We couldn’t have known the value and benefit of this standard daily work before the pandemic, but as we saw staffing levels fall (and then rise) and teams forced to flex in support of changing business priorities, we benefited from this daily touch as leaders. Our Daily Genba also helped us request help from each other, inform each other of important developments or struggles, and then to escalate when broader help was needed outside of our individual purview. This was vital after John’s departure, during the pandemic, and even more so now that we have more distributed heterogeneous teaming.

John wasn’t the only one to leave us.

During the Great Resignation, engineers on each of our global teams also departed for new opportunities. We struggled and failed at times to recruit and onboard new talent. The market was competitive (if not downright hot) and we learned the hard way that recruiting was (or needed to be) a full-time focus. Too often we lost highly capable engineering candidates because we did not answer, respond, or address candidate status, next steps, or answer questions in a timely responsive manner. This problem was on us and we learned the hard way that the market (and our candidates) were disinterested in lengthy complex recruiting processes. If we were serious, we needed to show it by responding faster. We also learned that culture counts, and benefitted from honest, informal lunch discussions about the people, the team, the work, and the feel of the company. Lesson learned.

Faced with needing to replace John as the leader of the US program, we started a search with an outside firm. But this would take time, and with the program at a critical period, we needed interim leadership. Fortunately, Pete (one of our European leaders) was interested and willing to take a ‘bubble’ assignment challenge to be our interim lead. Doing this remotely was a challenge, but the fact that a number of Pete’s engineers in Germany were already working on the program became a useful unintended benefit. His regular 1:1 meetings with his team members working on John’s program, and the general program activities and progress from Genba, made his transition easier. The program wasn’t suffering from John’s absence, and the product management leader actually reached out and commented (unprompted) on how seamlessly the transition had worked. Kind kudos to Pete and the broader team for helping to maintain productivity.

Meanwhile, with this transition in progress, our broader organization received cultural survey feedback that our engineers sought a stronger sense of belonging, better connectivity to the broader business, and greater training opportunities. We didn’t want to lose any more engineers. Although our group was a subset of the larger organization, we did contribute across four different business portfolios and 12+ products for the business.

We had extensive reach and involvement with most areas of the business, but as a leadership team we struggled to find ways to address this feedback. In parallel, we also knew from attrition exit data that our less experienced population was looking for ways to keep their skills fresh, and to connect and learn with others in the organization to grow with both technical depth and business product breadth.

The leadership team brainstormed a few different ideas and processes, and a few seemed to stick and resonate. The broader team knew there was a degree of technical skill flexibility for who could work on which program, but detailed awareness of the various workstreams was limited. There was also feedback that the broader team sought more learning and understanding of technology and patterns/techniques for personal growth and learning. The next step was to trystorm a few ideas to see if any could help, or at least to fail (fall)-fast and iterate on the feedback. An optional monthly “brown bag” global team session was established on the third Thursday of each month, with a voluntary topic presented each month that was proposed and self-selected as a lunch-n-learn session. To get to know others better, this monthly meetup used 15 minutes at the beginning of the session to introduce groups, programs, or specialized teams and their work. This increased understanding and visibility of peers and projects across the organization. After the introduction came a 45-minute informal education topic or knowledge-sharing session, concluding with a question/answer segment. Topics varied from technical topics, to tooling, architecture, design, and process methods.

These sessions have had unintentional benefits. In addition to being a forum for others to get to know each other, and to learn certain skills or tools, the sessions also provided a safe environment for people to voluntarily propose, prepare, and present material to a friendly audience—all while also helping to teach and train others in a particular craft or skill. The fact that the teams have had a chance to virtually “meet” each other, as well as the actual program introduction itself, certainly made it easier for Pete to swoop in and take John’s place as program lead. It also helped to ease the transition of other engineers joining the program over time. Through these forums, we built familiarity, collegiality, safety, and the all important trust in one another.

The success of this program has encouraged us to spread our wings even further. A new pilot we will try this year relates to providing select engineers the opportunity to grow their skills and experiences with new projects, teams, and potentially geographies. The “engineer exchange” program aims to solicit volunteer engineers from two different programs and teams, and if approved by their people leader, switch projects. The volunteers will then work full time for up to six months in a fresh team, with a fresh focus. You could call it the professional version of a university student exchange program, complete with host families (work teams). We hope this will provide new and different opportunities to work in different areas of the business, with exposure to new technologies and experiences through learning and cultural information sharing.

Each of these initiatives help the broader team learn techniques and grow organizational and cultural muscle, which in turn builds trust with our teams and leaders. This cultural investment pays dividends over years (not months), and with that trust comes valuable benefits such as staff resiliency, ability to adapt and flex across different teams and programs, as well as familiarity with others including people, technology, and processes/tools. This also helps shape and familiarize the teams with managing change and building skills which enable greater agility to adapt to changing business and industry needs. Teams with these kinds of experiences and trust in and with each other are naturally and quite realistically capable of great things in a fast-paced and changing world.

As our organization continues to grow and our teams evolve to meet the challenges of the always-unpredictable 21st century, we succeed thanks to the foundational trust we have in one another: a foundation that requires patience, respect, and continued investment. Make trust your foundation too, and see how your organization thrives.

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Team Software are a globally distributed software, controls, and analytics team working to power high precision industrial manufacturing products. We support customers with thousands of units in our installed base while also developing radically new technology in NTI/NPI programs across a suite of technical engineering disciplines.

As a team, we bring a systems-thinking mindset to work each day, staying tightly aligned in order to plan, fund, resource, manage, navigate, and deliver valuable new product capabilities for customers in acceptable cost and time paradigms. Our ultimate goal: to foster a sense of purpose and passion where individuals and leaders enjoy working with each other and delivering for our customers

and for our business.

The Anatomy of Peace: Resolving The Heart of Conflict

Tue, 27 Jun 2023 18:12:21 GMT

Consider this impossible situation Lou finds himself in...

Lou, 16, eager to show off his father’s brand new car to his friends, briefly left the shiny sedan to idle in the driveway as he ducked inside to grab his wallet. Returning to find the car missing, he for only a moment saw the shiny hood disappear into lake below the house. Realizing he forgot to set the parking break, he panicked to work through how to tell his Father.

How afraid would you be? How would your own father have reacted? Were you Lou’s parent, how would you react? Now consider his Father’s response...

After 30 minutes of hand wrenching, Lou with a broken voice and broken spirit came clean to his father. His father looked up from his newspaper and said:
“Well, I guess you’ll have to take the truck, then.”

Would you have been able to remain so calm? Could you, with only 10 words, have mended your child’s heart?

“ The Anatomy of Peace: Resolving the Heart of Conflict ” by the Arbinger Institute tells us we can. It tells us we all have that ability inside us. It gives us knowledge and tools that we can use to find that ability.

Here are three insights that might jumpstart your journey and encourage you to read the full book:

People are People. Not Objects.

Lou’s father saw standing in front of him a trembling child who needed support. In that moment he had two choices on how to react:

Do I support this person? Do I see their needs and feeling as being as real to me as my own? Or,
Do I treat them as an object of my anger and blame them? Do I see them as an obstacle or an issue?

This choice he made is described as the Way of Being first articulated on page 32. This choice is the foundation of the entire book. For all the other tools to work you must choose to see each other as people. You must have a Heart at Peace.

Helping Things Go Right is 90%

It's easy to focus on what goes wrong. It’s right in front of us: The troublesome employee constantly interrupts team meetings with their own option. The mouthy teenager breaks their curfew slinking home at 1 am.

How justified would you feel doubling down on grounding your child or reprimanding your employee? “The Anatomy of Peace” offers a different perspective. One that says if you want your employee to stop interrupting or you want your child to get home on time it is not by dealing with their bad behavior but instead investing in their good behavior.

Only 10% of your time should be spent on dealing with things that are going wrong. Instead, focus 90% of your time helping things go right. The details are found in the Influence Pyramid, first introduced on page 16 and depicted here:

The Influence Pyramid helps us to build our practice of thinking of people as people and suggests:

Spending most of your time and effort focused at the lower levels of the pyramid.
When you experience a problem that you can’t solve at one level of the pyramid, you can find the solution below that level of the pyramid.
Your effectiveness at each level of the pyramid depends on the foundational level of the pyramid - your way of being and ability to see others as people.

Collusion Keeps You in The Box

In reality, it's quite easy to see others as a wrongdoer or lazy. And it’s easy to nitpick at others when things are going wrong. Let’s face it, we sometimes revel in our righteousness for ‘horribilizing’ others. It sometimes feels good to feel justified.

But that feeling of being justified is just us colluding with ourselves. It allows us to view ourselves as better than others and as a victim (of other people's actions). This collusion “condemns [us] to live in a disdained, resented world.”

To break out of it we have come back to the foundation of the book which is to see each other as people, or as its called in the book “get out of the box”. Fortunately, “The Anatomy of Peace” offers many tools and additional perspectives to help us do just that.

Putting It All Together

This book reads like a light fable but packs in dense material. Practicing the tools in it will take a lifetime to master but are simple to start:

Think of people as people (not objects).
Use the Influence Pyramid to focus on helping things go right.
Build awareness of when you're colluding with yourself in being justified and get out of the box.

About the Author

Charles Fleet brings two decades driving transformation initiatives globally. By approaching transformation through a human lens, the leaders and teams he invests in stand out as high performing and the transformations themselves prove resilient to unpredictable conditions. He has deep experience with creating cohesion in diverse and geographically disparate teams and brings a unique breadth and depth of experience in both bringing Products and Services to market but also in introducing ways of working like Agile and Lean. Charlie cut his teeth in technology roles spanning configuration management, systems ops, testing, development and architecture. At home he is constantly playing catch-up with his two mischievous boys, and his “Rocket Scientist” wife and he occasionally runs marathons.

Connect with Charles

AntiFragile Learning in Times of War

Tue, 20 Jun 2023 08:00:00 GMT

I am Ukrainian. My life has changed significantly since the new active phase of the russian war against Ukraine began ten months back.
In truth, the war started eight years ago, but this new spiral of russia’s madness has brought turmoil on an all-new scale, and has begun to destabilize the entire world.

The past ten months were awful for me and for a lot of Ukrainians. Many friends in end-of-the-year resolutions mentioned that it was the worst year of their lives. Sadness, anger, anxiety, fear for our families and friends...not to mention the loss of those same friends and families, our homes, and our sense of safety. This is a typical mixture of feelings for Ukrainians in 2022 and 2023. I’ve personally experienced most of it as well; missiles have struck near my house, but I’m fortunate enough to have not lost any family members.

I’m also a practitioner of modern approaches to managing knowledge work, sometimes referred to as agile (software) development and business agility. One of the key crucial practices of management in complex environments is reflecting back on your experience in order to learn and grow. I wouldn’t wish the experiences of the typical Ukrainian upon anyone, but even very unpleasant experiences could become valuable learning.

So I’ve taken the time to reflect upon my own experience and squeeze some learnings out of my past year. Many of these observations have parallels to agile. Some may seem obvious, and others may surprise you.

Peer Pressure and Alignment

I’ll admit to being wrong about a few things before this new phase of the war, but the toughest part of it was learning I had the wrong impression of people on the other side.

Right before the February 2022 invasion, despite multiple signals from the intelligence services of allied countries, despite the army waiting in russia and belarus, I still didn’t believe russia would invade Ukraine. I thought that the worst of what could happen was an escalation in the East of Ukraine—in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions, where we have already been at war for eight years. My main reason for thinking so was a belief that, in the case of a full-scale intervention, mass anti-war protests would take place in russia. Not hundreds or, maybe, thousands, but millions of people. And if those protests took place, it would of course, be impossible to continue the invasion. My parallel to the agile world is a pretty well-known and widespread term, mostly applicable in the context of teamwork: “peer pressure”.

The term may have some negative connotations (for example, in a schoolyard), but in a team or workplace, peer pressure can be helpful in terms of holding people accountable to their commitments. Team members sharing their opinion on your work, your decisions, and so on, can lead to reflection, growth and better decisions in the first place. In the case of a country, of course, peer pressure is also possible. Nobody would or could do something that opposes the will of the majority of the population...or so we thought.

We, Ukrainians, have personal experience with how effective peer pressure can be from two recent revolutions: in 2004 and 2013. So how wrong I was. There were very few anti-war protests in russia—at the beginning of the war few occurred, with 2000 people attending the largest protest... in Moscow, population 10+ million. By the end of March, the protests had almost vanished entirely. So yes, there were some voices against the war. I know russian support for the war is not 100%. But those who are willing to stand against it are a minority, insignificant compared to the total population. The vast majority of the population seem pretty much aligned in their views, supporting the war. The hardest part of it was realizing that the people supporting the war are not just some abstract people but your friends, people you worked with, and a highly intelligent crowd engaged in knowledge work. So, no peer pressure and very good alignment, just towards what I consider the wrong goal.

Another related, well-known metaphor is that of the frog in the pot of heating water, not jumping out until it’s too late... Free speech, civil rights and other issues have worsened in russia over the past eight years, but citizens tend to normalize all the time (it’s not great but still okay, not going to get worse...) which has led to where they are today.

Actions speak louder than words. Always. We know that about agile. Only by interacting with your environment (actually doing something) will you be provided with feedback. Planning is important, but without actions it’s only words.

Actions allow us to quickly clarify who is who and what is what. When Ukraine entered crisis mode (starting February 24, 2022) there was no time for softening things. In the face of (what was for us) an existential crisis, it was necessary to get clear fast on other people’s personal stance, values, etc. Those tough questions/ discussions either happened quickly or, in some cases, were not even needed because position/stance was clear from actions. So how you operate and what you do in a crisis can tell more about you, your values, and your principles rather than a lot of “talking” in the previous/normal environment.

Accountability / Responsibility is Also Known as “Not My Problem”

This is one of my favorite learnings/observations. I’ve been unfortunate to see this too many times within organizations—when some “grey” area of responsibility is recognised but avoided by everyone nearby. Nobody is willing to take on more work when it is not fully expected because of their position, rank, or some other formal, structural reason. That might become even more of an issue in times of change when things are least static and fluid. When discussing the problem with somebody you may hear something like “Yes, I see your point and even support you in this, but what can I do—it’s not my area of responsibility. You should talk to John, if he’s on board we would make it happen.” Overall, as an organizational coach and consultant, when I hear “not my problem” I recognise it as a special flag or trigger to pay attention and dive deeper. While this ping-pong of responsibility avoidance happens sometimes in organizations, it is also (usually) easy to (relatively, depending on size) locate somebody ultimately responsible for the subject matter.

“ I’m not supporting the war, but what can I do about it? ”

became one of the excuses I’ve commonly heard from russians. Their logic is that fighting against the conflict doesn’t make sense because they will just get arrested and that won’t change anything. So they are against the war, but only in a way that won’t get them in trouble. I’m not stating that all russians are guilty, of course. However, all russians are responsible for it, and those not actively fighting against the war are showing avoidance, even rejection, of responsibility for what is happening in their own country. The absence of a decision is also a decision. Such a passive-aggressive position shows actual support for what is happening. With positions like this being so common, it is not strange that putin has remained in power for two decades.

In an organizational context, this sort of avoidance could be fixed with several coaching sessions. In a country context, assuming responsibility is much harder and may take much longer. Immediately after WWII, Germans felt injustice, humiliation, and oppression. It took one generation to accept responsibility... But you should talk to John, it’s not my fault...

What was once fragile, under the pressure of a changing environment, could become agile and robust. Yes, we haven’t chosen this war, but we have to face it. Nobody else will do it for us.

What is “Normal”? Speed of Adaptability

A few things became clear to me quite quickly after February 24. The first one relates to norms and understanding what is considered to be “normal.” Things you could never even imagine happening in real life become commonplace. Killing civilians, raping, torturing, and destroying civilian infrastructure. Bucha, Mariupol... There is no way you could unsee it or ignore it—it just happened. This causes your definition of norms to shift as well.

My second observation is about the speed of this process. I was shocked at how quickly this understanding could shift and change. What was unspeakable literally a few weeks ago became normal now. What is unspeakable now, will be our “normal” in one month.

Rocket attacks on the capital and other cities of a European country were unspeakable, and now people are used to working from bomb shelters. Not having electricity available countrywide was unspeakable, and now people are used to power banks, generators, and so on. People are quickly adapting to changing environments. Again, I would clearly prefer this not to happen, but it is happening. We could learn from it.

So the next time somebody makes a statement that <something> is too much of a change and will push the organization too far out of its comfort zone—I have all the internal assurance I need to continue challenging it.

Horizons of Planning and Decision-Making in the Chaos

This observation might look obvious but is an important one (and also a pretty uncomfortable one). After February 24, the world changed significantly and a lot of our old plans became irrelevant. In addition, the act of planning itself changed. First, all long-term planning became hard and sometimes impossible. Second, even sensible shorter-term plans needed to be updated very frequently. It goes without saying that the complete (or close to that) absence of planning doesn’t contribute positively to psychological safety, which is our next point.

You may remember Dave Snowden’s Cynefin (Clear-Complicated- Complex-Chaotic), and that in a Chaotic state you Act->Sense->Response.

In order to get out of a Chaotic state as soon as possible, leaders need to act. In these cases, doing something quickly might be way better than taking time to consider and think about what is the best course of action.

Psychological Safety

For agile practitioners, the importance of psychological safety for team building and achieving desired results is a well-researched field. There’s no need to explain how, after all the terrible war crimes committed by russian soldiers in Ukraine, that the psychological situation for many Ukranians has suffered and many have had to leave the country in search of safety. For now, it is hard to estimate the scale of the problem and what effect it would have over (possibly) many years to come.

Self-Organization and Volunteer Movement

Most Ukrainians participate in this war in some or another way. Generally thinking, I could break it down into three big categories (some people might contribute to a few of those categories at the same time).

The first and most obvious one is serving in the army forces. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are the reason why Ukraine still exists. The second one is very interesting. It is a volunteer movement, a decentralized network of individuals and NGOs that find, buy and deliver whatever is missing/needed/ required for the army and civilians. This whole movement formed in 2014 when the war started in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. By that time, our armed forces were not supplied at any suitable level—they needed a lot. Volunteers were supplying them with necessary equipment. Without this network, Ukraine wouldn’t have survived back then, and we won’t survive without it today. It took some time to learn how this could be done, to establish rules and agreements for work, and carry out collaboration with other such organizations and official entities. This distributed network of self-organized individuals, who are (in most cases) not paid to do this, is somehow similar to the open-source movement, and looks really close to what real agile might look like.

The third way of being helpful is continuing to work, keeping the economy alive and donating to armed forces to bring our victory closer and closer. Just a few illustrations of this I’ve seen recently: a group of IT folks (product people, designers, developers, etc) created a fund that specialized in high-tech help for the army, called KOLO. Individuals and organizations are welcome to donate periodically, which I call donation as a service (DaaS). Another example: the CEO of an e-commerce startup is raffling his luxury German car to help the army. Even a small donation got you a chance at winning, which in the end collected eight times the cost of the car. A final example is a Ukrainian former two-times NBA champion, selling on auction his NBA championship rings to help reconstruction after the russian attacks. Everyone helps in this or another way.

A few paragraphs above I made a point that decision-making in the fog of uncertainty is challenging and clearly changes the horizons of planning. Another angle related to this deals with longer-term planning and looking into the future. This is not the strongest analogy from a logical perspective, but it feels similar from an emotional perspective. As you know there is no predefined end-state for an agile or digital transformation. There might be direction, there might be some goals, which are likely to emerge along the way...

Likewise, it currently feels as if there is (almost) no way to finish this war. Obviously, it is unlikely that an unmotivated and unskilled russian army could conquer Ukraine. Theoretically, they could turn Ukraine into a nuclear desert, but that’s theoretical (nobody knows if they even have enough, or any, fully functional nuclear weapons). However, the Ukrainian “win” is also very blurry... Yes, with the continuation of help and support with weapon supplies from Western partners, it is possible to knock the russians out of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea. But that will not end the war. Nobody believes that expelling the russian army from Ukraine will last long. They will accumulate resources, regroup, and try again. Also, they could continue their terrorist missile attacks on Ukrainian cities from outside of Ukraine. Any “peace” agreement is not worth the paper it is written on or even the time spent in discussion. We all know it is not real. After all, every Ukrainian remembers the Budapest Memorandum signed by russia in 1994. The very first item on the Memorandum was about respecting the signatory’s independence and sovereignty in the existing borders. That was broken by russia in 2014. (In fact, I could write at length comparing this agreement in exchange for nuclear weapons, which now looks like a poor decision by Ukraine, and the agile manifesto value “Customer collaboration over contract negotiation.” These have similarities, as russia doesn’t value its contracts, only the power it can gain at any one time). So any “peace” agreement doesn’t make logical sense, as it won’t be worth anything.

This means the end-state is very foggy and unclear. I can think of only one (realistic) scenario to end the war.

You might have heard that in larger organizations, culture follows structure. This statement is known as Larman’s Fifth Law of Organizational Behavior .

I argue that, to change the culture and mindset that believes russia is a great empire that should control large portions of the world (and hold heavy influence over countries it doesn’t control), it must disappear as a singular entity. It should split into multiple, maybe ten or more independent countries (many of those still would have territory larger than most of the European countries or US states). In addition, none of those newly created countries should have nuclear weapons. I believe that a setup like that, over time, might change the current arrogant, imperial perspective, and in turn change culture. However, this collapse is possible only as a result of internal changes in russia, which I do not see happening. It’s a chicken and egg type of problem, and in the meantime, Ukraine suffers.

Just as you can’t choose your family, most of the time you can’t choose your neighbors. It wasn’t Ukraine that started the conflict eight years ago, or in February 2022. We all wish none of this had ever happened. We wish russia would just disappear into oblivion. Or that, nationwide, russia would experience a mystical change of culture and abandon all the habits and attitudes of the grand, conquering empire (actually disappearing into oblivion is a more likely scenario). Sadly, all of that is wishful thinking.

In closing, there is a great illustration by Banksy which sums up a lot of my thinking (which he is, by the way, selling to donate to Ukraine).

What was once fragile, under the pressure of a changing environment, could become agile and robust. Yes, we haven’t chosen this war, but we have to face it. Nobody else will do it for us.

As Dr. Deming, one of the grandfathers of change management, once said: “It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.”

P.S. If you’d like to help Ukraine, I can think of a few things:

Donate to the Kolo fund —I know them personally, trust them fully and send my donations there as well. You can find the Kolo Fund at koloua.com/en Please, donate .
Stop any kind of economic connections (selling to or buying from) with russian companies. Please, check if your company is doing any business with russian companies. Please, do not contribute to an economy which is used to kill civilians. This is huge.

Editor-in-chief’s note: The capitalisation of proper nouns throughout this piece is an editorial decision by the author.

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Kirill Klimov helps organizations use modern management methods and frameworks to drive change within an organization so that it becomes an awesome workplace and delivers the best to its customers.

Kirill has spent most of his career with distributed development in one way or another. He started and was in charge of the offshore development office of an international company in Kyiv, Ukraine, and has driven Agile transformations and adoptions in large distributed projects and small teams since 2008.

Connect with Kirill

The Insidious Creep of Gender Bias

Tue, 13 Jun 2023 19:50:54 GMT

I was recently connected to a local entrepreneur who runs a successful coaching practice. They had a wonderful idea they were trying to launch: the hosting of a local leadership conference. As most do in a small community, they asked their network to gather on a virtual call to discuss organizing this wonderful idea. As we live in a fairly sparsely populated part of Canada, the idea was to bring a high caliber lineup of programming and speakers to us—instead of our norm of having to travel throughout North America to attend such events.

It was a fantastic idea that seemed well thought out, and the ask was relatively typical of a small community of hard working people: to have us all rally around the event and to help out by volunteering for various organizing committee positions to plan, run the logistics and work the day of the event. There were about 30 people on the call and everyone was very interested in being a part of it.

As the conversation continued, the vibrant energy in the meeting grew as people started asking their questions. You could see everyone’s ideas bubbling, showing how eager and willing they were to jump fully into this project. But just as everyone grew excited for the answers, the organizer suddenly became very elusive. Immediate walls and barriers went up and we quickly learned that very little information was available. The organizer felt that revealing too much would take away from the ability to create a buzz and to later reveal the event line up as a surprise for potential attendees.

In a classical patriarchal-approach for this sort of event, the tone quickly shifted from an all hands on deck collaborative effort to one of ownership—it was their project, their idea, and information on specifics was on a need to know basis. What surprised me was how everyone seemed content with this answer. Heads still nodded, smiles were given, people still rallied around the opportunity to volunteer as the meeting continued into instructions for next steps.

I, on the other hand, did not share those feelings. I was left with many more questions that needed answers before I could jump on board. How would I know if the messages from the speakers aligned with my leadership values? Would these leaders reflect creativity, self-reflection and transparency? Were we even defining the term leadership in the same way (spoiler...we weren’t)? There is a lot to be said in such a small word. How it is scaled, the size of the organizations it applies to, and the safety of the people it is intended for, are all crucial to lock down before you can begin conveying to others how leadership and variant styles will be applied and executed. What else was available to me as an entrepreneur at this event? Were there speaking, networking and collaboration opportunities? And how many hours were expected from me if I did apply to volunteer? What of the financial structure? Were we all volunteering for another business to collect all the profit? At that moment I suddenly felt isolated and uncomfortable. It was an all-too familiar scenario from the multitude of the rigid, hierarchical projects I had been presented throughout my career.

There is a common theme that I often experience that at its root aligns with gender bias in the workplace or project environment. To me, in this specific scenario, the pieces of the puzzle depicted a familiar picture of a gender bias but were executed in a new way. First off, the organizer of this proposed conference had made a purposeful decision to gather a group made up of 99% women in order to get this project off the ground. On the surface, these demographics appeared to be shattering traditional gender bias; gathering so many women together disrupted typical stereotypes of women being less competent than men. It was an opportunity to hold women to a higher performance standard, and didn’t assume their traditional lack of access to powerful networks to make the event a success (Wynn, A.T., Correll, S.J. 2018).

This makes sense to me, as we’ve come a long way from the traditional definitions of gender bias and are increasingly embracing the positive characteristics women bring as leaders. For example, according to the Pew Research Centre (2008) women can be more honest, are smarter, more compassionate, and more creative than their male counterparts. In my story, the organizer gathered women together because they supported the initiative, similarly to the Pew Research Centre (2008) that when a job needs to get done often women are the go-to persons to execute. The outcomes needed to pull together such a prestigious event aligned also with research from Zenger and Folkman (2019) who found that women are more capable than men in the areas of: taking initiative, resilience, developing others, driving for results, building relationships, collaboration and teamwork, establishing stretch goals, communicating powerfully and prolifically, solving problems and analyzing issues, (which fit in well with the volunteer positions needed for this leadership conference initiative).

But I saw this experience as a new way in which gender bias can show up in our organizations—which is maybe not in the way you’d imagine. It reflected how, even though our workplaces and other organizations operate differently in the twenty-first century than in the past, new ways of operating are still built around structures and practices that advantage the people at the top of a patriarch-type of leadership style (Correll, S.J., 2017). On the surface it seemed reasonable to gather these women together, but it’s becoming normal for me to experience a situation where the context changes as soon as we’ve committed to the work. A leader says: I will hype you up because you have the skills and capacity to do all the work I need to execute this flawlessly , then quickly shift to this is my gig, my idea and you will do as your told with the information I give you when I feel it is appropriate, and you must decide now whether you are either in or out .

This situation is sadly common. I’m sure you can recall, in your professional experience, a project or idea that was presented to you in a similar fashion: an invitation to collaborate that quickly transforms into a request to serve the vision of another. The difference in this situation was that the organizer was also a successful female entrepreneur in my community.

When you read my story, were you visualizing a man at the head of the table? It may be that our next phase in neutralizing gender bias is to challenge the concept of automatic gender categorization. This occurs when a decision-maker classifies someone as male or female, and by doing so they implicitly expect the person to exhibit “masculine” or “feminine” traits and behaviors as encoded in gender stereotypes (Correll, S.J., 2017). In the case of trans, non-binary or gender-diverse people, this can be either an unconscious or explicit decision that results in misgendering people or placing them in a gender “box” they don’t personally associate with.

This binary coding affects how much influence individuals have when working in groups or teams, which ideas get taken up by groups, and who gets credit for their ideas (Correll and Ridgeway 2003; Thomas-Hunt and Phillips 2004). Regardless of the leader’s own gender, it is important to challenge any manipulation of the progress made against gender bias as a means to reinforce traditional structures, outcomes and outdated definitions of success that are actually reinforcing gender bias in a new and different way.

Needless to say, I didn’t volunteer for the leadership conference. At this point in my career, I am ALL IN with collaboration and working with others. After all, you can only go so far on your own but working together can open up infinite possibilities (Jane Fonda, 2022). But the passive ways in which my skills are being leveraged for the benefits of others, being kept in the dark with major pieces of information and process, and being expected to smile and nod and just be grateful to be asked, are not moving me or other women in the right direction.

As women leaders , we need to stop saying ‘yes’ without getting our questions answered, and start saying ‘no’ unless our very specific criteria are met—criteria which align with our values, mission, capacity, and the outcomes we are trying to create. As leaders (in general and all of us together) we all need to be more transparent, and to be aware that by bringing women together to do as we say is a way of taking advantage of women who can get it done . To create a situation that asks people to help in a way you know they won’t say no to is manipulative and takes advantage of someone’s natural skills, their generosity of time, and their ability to do more with less. When targeted at women, it will in the long-term prohibit or restrict the opportunity, ability and/or effectiveness for women to lead, deepening gender bias.

A “Small Wins” model for reducing gender bias may be an approachable solution for self-reflection and step forward in any sized organization or project. It was developed and evaluated by Shelley J. Correll and her team and was presented at the SWS Feminist Lecture in 2016 (Correll S.J, 2017). The key to this model of change is to work with teams of managers and co-develop tools to reduce gender biases that produce measurable small wins.

The model consists of five steps: educate, diagnose bias, develop tools, intervene and evaluate.

1 Educate

Educating managers on stereotyping and bias equips employees with a gender framework so that they can recognize bias and avoid building it into their operational work. Training provides short term gains and prevents old ideas about gender from entering into new work tools and procedures.

2 Diagnose Bias

Analyzing existing organizational data and collecting data can diagnose if, where and how gender biases are entering existing processes, creates a baseline to assess the effectiveness of any change, identifies targets of change, and is useful for motivating the organization to act. The outcome is to use the data from interviews and focus groups to get beyond the phrase “ bias doesn’t happen here ”, and to help move managers beyond resistance and motivate them to change.

3 Develop Tools

Working with managers to develop new procedures or tools to reduce gender bias in their own environments. By involving them in the co-creation

of new tools, you ensure they are implemented in a way that actually reduces bias and creates change agents.

4 Intervene

By rolling out the newly developed tools with groups of managers and multiple departments, we increase peer accountability. The design of small, measurable gains has the potential to increase the efficacy of the managers and can inspire others to look for more small wins.

5 Evaluate

Assess the effectiveness of the new tools and procedures at producing small wins, as well as longer-term measures of change to reflect the increased confidence among managers that they are more able to fairly neutralize gender bias among their employees.

We can all create dialogue and space that allows women to leverage their strengths captured in research, such as: taking initiative, resilience, developing others, driving for results, building relationships, collaboration and teamwork, establishing stretch goals, communicating powerfully and prolifically, solving problems, and analyzing issues. We can work collaboratively to approach the multiple factors that are needed to uncover the gender bias issues holding us all back. It is important to spend time thinking and discussing how we are leveraging these attributes.

By doing so, we can approach the necessary work needed to challenge any overarching assumptions, false expectations, habits, old beliefs, out-of-date systems, or socio-economic factors that need to be addressed or exposed as gender bias. To no longer tolerate what is holding everyone back in moving towards walking the talk of cultural and organizational values, and creating the opportunity to fully demonstrate the ability for effective leadership at any organizational level.

Women can no longer think or theorize their way out of gender bias. They can no longer create an either/or dynamic between male and female leaders as to which approach is correct, nor wait for permission to be granted an opportunity to lead as they know how. Women in leadership can demonstrate their assets through transparency, feedback and concise communication, giving them the confidence to act on their leadership capabilities and effectiveness (Helgeson, 2012). We all must be on the lookout for the sneaky creep of gender bias, but by working together, we can build awareness, create reflective opportunities, and neutralize gender bias in our work and project environments.

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

Abou t the Author

Christina Carlson guides you to become Unstuck through collaboration, creativity, and how to apply inspired agility research. She finds personal success and purpose through creative and collaborative projects that help people see what they are trying to say, and action their vision. Her ability to actively connect peoples’ complex ideas to their values in order to broaden their perspectives makes her a sought after commodity for billion dollar companies and independent entrepreneurs. By applying research and scientific practice through a creative mindset, she is able to unstick people from their current perspective and help them move to the next evolution of their leadership growth.

More Blogs from the Author: What is Holding Women Back in Leadership? Impressions From "How Women Rise"

Connect with Christina

ALJ Guide Brad Swanson on How Agile Leadership Changes Work Culture

betsy@agileleadershipjourney.com (Betsy Piland) — Tue, 06 Jun 2023 22:59:23 GMT

Most leaders agree on the importance of culture, but surprisingly few actually devote serious attention to shaping workplace culture. Why? What role should culture play in business success?

In a new article for Talent Culture , ALJ Guide Brad Swanson explored these questions and offered insights on how agile leadership can help shape successful organizations.

Learning the Way

Tue, 06 Jun 2023 09:00:00 GMT

I’m a huge fan of my alma mater, the University of Michigan, and its football team. If you’ve been to a game in Ann Arbor you’ll know the tailgate scene is massive—after all, 110,000 of my closest football friends and I need to get game-ready somewhere!

I was recently invited to a tailgate in a location I hadn’t visited before and decided to bring one son with me while first dropping another son off at a different tailgate. In between my parking spot and the tailgate were thousands of people, a golf course, train tracks, an overpass, and a labyrinth of university buildings.

How to get from A to B? To start off, I knew the way to the golf course and first tailgate, so my incremental goal was clearly defined, and I had a quick win. From there, things got murky. I only had a general sense of “how” I was going to achieve our end goal, and as I walked towards the second tailgate with my other son he dubiously asked if I knew where I was going.

“Yes, of course… that way,” I said as we doubled back a second time, looking for a way around the tracks and past the overpass. My son was skeptical— it’d been a mile already, he sighed. We pushed forward and soon found a tunnel under the overpass—another win!—followed by a crossing over the railroad tracks. I was on a roll! We quickly wove through campus and found our tailgate, just as I’d planned.

My journey certainly had low stakes, but we’re often faced with leading through volatility, uncertainty, change, and ambiguity (VUCA) in our professional lives where the stakes are higher. Coupled with ever-advancing technologies, we are living in the fastest-paced and most dynamic time in history! And though this makes decision-making even harder we must nonetheless make decisions and take action as leaders. The good news is that there are clear actions we can take in response—and this brings us to the story of Amerisure’s business agility transformation journey .

Amerisure is a 110-year-old company, primarily providing insurance protection for the construction, manufacturing, and healthcare industries by specializing in workers compensation, commercial auto, and general liability products and services. This context is important as we apply the external environment described above to a successful organization with a deep-seated culture whose job is literally to manage risk. This culture enables us to provide exemplary customer service, mitigate risk, and create predictable and superior results, and is one of the best parts of Amerisure. The trade-off is that the predictability and control that is Amerisure’s strength has, in certain operations, inhibited innovation, entrepreneur- ship, and rapid responses to change.

The senior leadership team recognized these competing forces and launched a business agility transformation to better balance predictability and control with creativity and innovation. This would be key to our ability to respond more rapidly and effectively to the change happening across our industry. Our key challenge was how to modify our culture for innovation and risk-taking while retaining what made it great—and that is when our agility transformation was born.

Lesson 1: Define the problem. Then identify the goal.

My tailgate problem and goal were straightforward because I already knew both the destination (somewhere to the north) and obstacles (an overpass and railroad tracks). This allowed me to immediately set out in the right direction. Conversely, in many business situations even the first steps could go in multiple directions. We think we know the answer and quickly jump to solutions only to discover (after much effort and stress) that we didn’t achieve our desired outcome. There were several key actions the Amerisure senior team took to avoid this pitfall, the first of which was to bring in an external agile transformation expert to kick off our journey and be our coach.

Our coach started by conducting a culture survey , so we could more fully understand our current state. They then held a two-day workshop with our senior leadership team to discuss the results and introduce many of the leadership and agility concepts important to our desired state. This aligned the executive leadership team and created a common language we could use with each other to ensure we were communicating well and working in sync.

The senior leadership team then established an internal cross-functional transformation team comprised of executives—the Agile Practice Group (APG)— and I was named the company-wide agile transformation leader. These decisions were critical for internal accountability, effective change management, and ensuring a company-wide approach to transformation. Thus, the APG served as a change team.

With guidance from our coaches, the APG spent significant time talking with leaders and individuals about pain points and what success looked like. We were able to buy time and not jump to solutions by engaging key stakeholders and doing early iterations on ideas. These discussions helped surface some of our biggest challenges, ones that threatened the success of the transformation itself: a strong desire for predictable results and many competing, concurrent priorities.

One tool introduced to us was the Salesforce “V2MOM” model (Vision, Values, Methods, Obstacles, and Measures), which is a way to capture a strategy and create team alignment. We used the V2MOM framework to organize our thoughts and distill both the challenges and goals into simple-to-understand language. We also responded to the challenges we identified by creating catchy phrases such as “challenge everything,” “ruthless prioritization,” and “stop starting & start finishing” to keep the mood light and encourage our people through our change efforts.

Finally, and crucially, we validated the V2MOM results with a group of employees, including senior leaders. Once we aligned on outcomes and understood key obstacles, we were well-positioned to start making progress with the confidence that we were headed in the right direction.

Lesson 2: Know your ‘BATNA’ and secure early wins.

In negotiations there is a concept called BATNA: the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. This refers to a backup plan, or plan of last resort, if you cannot reach an agreement with your counterparty. Sometimes the BATNA is acceptable and sometimes it’s highly unacceptable, and this guides your decisions through a negotiation. When dealing with uncertainty, it’s important to know the stakes.

For my tailgate, I had an acceptable BATNA via another set of directions— however, the directions I already knew would’ve taken a lot longer than I wanted. Plus, I was confident there was a faster, more direct way. When we made our first stop I still had a chance to turn back towards the known path, but we were feeling positive, and I had a good sense for the next steps, so we kept moving towards the unknown. I also wanted to use the situation as a learning moment for my son as I hope to build up his growth and experimentation mindset.

At Amerisure, the transformation was a riskier undertaking and was without a clear alternative—this was, after all, a strategic capability our company was seeking. There were also a handful of people who were pessimistic about the transformation, saying “We already tried that here,” so they would need to be engaged and encouraged. We may have been optimistic in our outlook, but the APG felt like our goals were highly achievable and that there were many paths available to us as long as we had the will to change, so we were excited for the opportunity.

Given the non-desirable BATNA and our coaching, we knew we needed to quickly create momentum and credibility, so we concentrated on quick wins. First, we hyper-focused on experiments, small wins, and small failures to demonstrate success and prove out that we were overcoming the obstacles of change. Small failures were just as important as wins to demonstrate that we could still learn from “failed” experiments and no one got “in trouble”. The challenge with this approach was that the initial impact of the improvements was small and pace of change was slow, so not everyone saw the value in what we were doing. In response to this obstacle, we used multiple channels to communicate progress to our whole company using plain, jargon-free language, and we set expectations that culture change is a multi-year journey that we would measure along the way. Over time, as more people engaged in the transformation and the new way of working took hold in our culture, we grew to larger and more ambitious changes and experienced more success with innovation.

Lesson 3: Be humble. Be courageous.

You have probably noticed I use a lot of “we” language in this transformation story. This is intentional. It isn’t a question of my leadership; rather it’s a matter of knowing my leadership alone was not enough. Changes like this don’t happen without good coaching, a great team working on the transformation, and other leaders leading the transformation in their areas.

As mentioned, the APG was assembled to create focus and provide visible senior leadership support for the change. Some of the executives had experience working with agile teams and some were novices, but this didn’t matter; what mattered is that they were ready to work for the change and had the credibility to do so. Thus, the APG served as a change team, and as a method of developing the executives on the team who were new to agility. The APG also knew the company in ways I did not—I had been with the company less than six months, so it was crucial that I listen and take turns following them through our journey. While I created the transformation roadmap and established priorities, the APG consistently provided the necessary input, guidance, and actions to lead successful outcomes.

Just as critical as setting vision and strategy, I had to be a leader worth following. In my tailgate journey, when I was unsure about the next move out on the golf course, my son stopped and contemplated whether to keep following me. At Amerisure I’m sure other leaders did the same as we started the transformation. There are many adjectives one could use other than “humble”, such as “empathetic” or “curious”, but at the heart of it I believe it comes back to caring about your team and knowing that all of us are smarter than one of us. So have the courage to be the one to lead the way into risky, unknown territory and be humble enough to listen to your team.

Lesson 4: Can’t stop. Won’t stop.

Some transformations take years to complete, and this requires organizational and leadership resilience to accompany demonstrated progress. We established a four-year transformation roadmap and set expectations that it takes seven years to fundamentally change culture. The first four years would require hands-on, intentional, focused leadership and change agents to deliver the biggest changes. The final phase in the roadmap included a transition to a continuous improvement model of growth where the foundational changes would continue to mature, but not without a defined leader.

There will also be curveballs and setbacks in your journey, and we were no exception. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic struck in year two of our transformation and our company needed a new roadmap. Rather than stop the transformation altogether, I realized this was an opportunity to demonstrate how business agility can help during uncertain times. We changed our plans for 2020 and focused on tools and methods to help our people with the sudden transition to remote working. The fundamentals of making work visible, building high performing teams, collaboration, and overcoming obstacles translated quite well. While this did extend our original timeline, it also represented our ability to change plans while remaining committed to our outcomes.

Finally, we transitioned people on and off the APG as part of our ongoing change approach and to maintain momentum. The APG was a hands-on way of developing agile leadership, and we asked our “alums” to take what they learned to their teams and extend the reach of our transformation. Onboarding new APG members consisted of two main steps: a) bringing them up to speed with our strategy and approach and b) asking for their “outsider” perspective of our transformation. This fresh perspective helped keep our plan relevant and provided insights to our effectiveness.

We are now back to our pre-pandemic planned outcomes and have made great progress. With the early wins and credibility we secured, we gained buy-in for the larger changes necessary in the most advanced phase of our transformation. Not all of the how part of the initial plan went exactly as hoped, but we remained focused on what we wanted to achieve and this won the day. Since beginning our transformation, our people are working differently—collaborating differently, using new language, and applying new tools and methods to approach business problems—and their engagement in these areas has increased. That’s been great to see! We have also won numerous industry awards and gained recognition for our innovation program and its outcomes. Most exciting, Amerisure launched two new businesses, and we have done so with capabilities and imagination inspired by our transformation journey.

Where Next?

Today’s environment requires strong teams, and success requires a new type of leadership: people who can scan the environment, navigate, learn quickly, and bring out the best in teams. Ultimately, leading through the fog requires you to constantly learn; to repeat the “plan-act-react” cycle in a controlled way. Having the right leadership and team in place enabled us to work our way through our uncertainty.

As for the tailgate, it was a blast! But it wasn’t my final destination—the game was, of course. Happily, the home team won, and my sons and I went home with fond memories of both the win and the walk we enjoyed together. At Michigan, where we (obnoxiously) sing about being the leaders and best, I learned how to learn. This is the gift that keeps on giving.

This content was originally published in the February, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Amjed Al-Zoubi is a leader and strategist who delivers results by providing clear vision and building high performing teams. As Chief Information Officer at Amerisure Insurance, he has accountability for Technology, Digital, Innovation, and Agility, and serves a lead role in guiding Amerisure toward transforming its culture, digital capabilities, and technologies.

Through his career Amjed has held a diverse set of roles which allow him to address business challenges and strategies from multiple angles while applying his unique ability to see the big picture. Amjed is a multiplier, passionate about leadership, inclusivity, accountability, and putting people in a position to succeed.

To learn more about the transformation at Amerisure, watch the presentation he and Pete Behrens cofacilitated at a recent Business Agility Institute conference . Also, Amjed was a guest on our (Re)Learning Leadership podcast where he and Pete discuss more about the transformation from the perspective of Amjed as Amerisure’s CIO.

Connect with Amjed

Navigating the Future

Tue, 30 May 2023 21:22:05 GMT

Creating a software-enabled solution is a committment to a future shrouded in a fog of uncertainty.

How should we design our business model?
What is our pricing and licensing model?
What features should be removed? added?
How might we take advantage of emerging technologies?
What macro-economic, cultural, societal, and environmental forces will most impact our solution?

Sustainable businesses use a variety of models, frameworks, and maps to navigate through the fog of uncertainty.

It is hard to navigate through the fog of uncertainty without maps and algorithms .

There are a few general approaches to navigating through a fog.

Together , these approaches provide guidance to brave navigators of the future.

While models, maps, and frameworks guide us through the fog, sustainable business leaders equally adept at navigating the terrain of the market.

Sustainable business leaders know that your final destination may vary based on what happens during your journey. Whether you call this a pivot or just a new choice, the result is created from using these models and adjusting based on the customer and market terrain.

There are six primary tools business leaders use to navigate the fog of uncertainty . Because this fog becomes more dense the further we project into the future and the farther we stray from our own solution, we organize tools in two dimensions:

Here is how three companies used these tools to navigate the fog:

AURIGIN SYSTEMS

Startups are frequently created with a clear vision: use break throughs in technology to distrupt mature industries and processes.

KNOWIFY

As startups grow, it is very easy for them to continue to add new features.

GE PREDIX

Mature companies serving mature markets must still evolve their solutions to remain relevant.

The challenge?

The fog that was cleared by the mature industry will return once the disruption begins.

The challenge?

Every company must make choices on how to adjust their pricing to reflect

their evolving solution.

The challenge?

Traditional forms of market research are often insufficient for strategic evolution of many sophisticated B2B solutions.

The solution?

Startups can leverage the existing Industry Lifecycle or create a new one to chart their own course.

The solution?

Growing companies can use the Solution Lifecycle to help them identify when pricing can—and should— be adjusted over time.

The solution?

Every company can use Prune the Product Tree to collaborate with their customers on the growth and evolution of

their solutions.

Leveraging the Industry Lifecycle

For hundred of years, patent analysis was a slow and costly process, often limited to patent attorneys. It was a mature industry, with a known problem, ripe for disruption.

Aurigin Systems saw an opportunity to use advanced data warehouse and search technology to distrupt this industry.

By reframing a critical industry, Aurigin secured millions of dollars in VC funding , and was acquired by an incumbent who wanted to gain the benefit of a newly reframed industry.

Using the Solution Lifecycle to Raise Prices

The first principle of the Agile manifesto states: “Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software”.

While inspiring, this principle fails to provide guidance on when a company should raise prices to account for the increase in value.

Knowify is a fast-growing SaaS platform that helps electricians, plumbers, and other trades, and construction companies, manage finances, subcontractors, and projects.

Knowify used the Solution Lifecycle to help identify that their solution had started to move from visionaries to early adopters. This change in buyer created an opportunity to raise prices to better reflect the increased value of the Knowify platform.

Clearing the Fog with Customer Feedback

The GE Predix solution team wanted to obtain customer feedback on the evolution of the GE Predix platform. Working together, we organized a strategic marketing event in which groups of customers played Prune the Product Tree to help.

The GE Predix solution team created an initial tree. A copy was given to each customer team.

Teams of five to eight customers pruned their tree. Customers were segmented by different kinds of manufacturing operations to identify segment-specific details.

Patterns of feedback in the results were analyzed to determine which adjustments GE should make to their roadmap.

The final results were captured in a new tree and a new roadmap.

Aligning Distributed Agile Teams Through Market Rhythms and Roadmaps

United Technologies Aerospace Systems (UTAS) faced a challenge common to large scale agile development: How should they organize the releases across hundreds of teams working on a complex solution based on sophisticated hardware and software?

The answer was found by analyzing the market rhythms of their customers’ customers.

UTAS makes the landing gear sub-assemblies for airplanes. Boeing and Airbus are two main customers. In turn, Boeing and Airbus sell airplanes to major airlines, such as United Lufthansa, or Turkish Airlines.

Through a very simple process, UTAS identified the market rhythms of the airlines, which included an understanding of the long development process of a new airline and the buying cycles of the biennial Farnborough Airshow. These rhythms, a key part of the UTAS agile roadmap, helped align hundreds of agile teams on a common objective.

This article is excerpted and adapted from the book Software Profit Streams™ by Jason Tanner and Luke Hohmann.

This content was originally published in the Feburary, 2023 Edition of Emergence, The Journal of Business Agility . It has been republished here with the permission of the publication.

What is Emergence ?

Learn more and subscribe .

About the Author

Luke Hohmann is Chief Innovation Officer of Applied Frameworks, a boutique consulting firm helping companies create more profitable software-enabled solutions. A serial entrepreneur, Luke founded, bootstrapped, and sold Conteneo, an enterprise software company that helped global companies manage investment portfolios using Participatory Budgeting. A prolific author and creator, Luke’s contributions to the global agile community include Profit Streams™, Innovation Games®, a pattern language for market-driven roadmapping, and Common Ground for Action, the world’s first scalable platform for deliberative decision-making. Luke loves his wife and four kids, his wife’s cooking, and long runs in the Santa Cruz mountains.

Luke joined Pete Behrens for a recent Relearning Leadership podcast episode. Listen here: Podcast Episode 44: Is Profit a Dirty Word?

Interested in reading the book? Get it here: Software Profit Streams Book .

Connect with Luke

Blog Posts - Agile Leadership Journey

The Messy Middle: Leading Between Decisions and Destinations

KEY INSIGHTS

Why Most Leaders Aren't Prepared for the Messy Middle - We Were Trained for the Wrong Weather

"I describe most of leadership somewhere in between these two states — in the fog. This murky, uncertain space where change is happening beneath our feet. And we're not really trained for this."

The Decision Is Just the Beginning

"After the layoff, I was ready to move on. But my team? Those who remained after the layoff? Their journey had just begun. They were only just entering the fog, hiking the trail, watching to see if I was too."

Five Types of Messy Middle Leaders Experience Most

"Leaders understand the challenge in front of them when making decisions, but they often choose a shortsighted or less disciplined decision rather than seeing the long-term effects."

What the Messy Middle Actually Costs Leaders

"You stop feeling what used to affect you. You become numb. It thickens your skin but it also makes you emotionally unavailable for your people — because you've lost trust. Your words don't feel as valuable for yourself anymore."

How to Navigate Leadership Transitions: The Language That Helps

"Change is organizational. Transitions are personal."

"Change only kicks off the journey, quick and clean. Transition is everything that follows, slow and messy."

How to Start Navigating the Messy Middle

1. Name the messy middle you're in.

2. Distinguish the change from the transition.

3. Communicate through it all — especially when things are going well.

4. Create space for the human experience.

5. Notice the wallflower.

6. Celebrate endings.

7. Take care of yourself first.

Learn more about catalyst leadership — the mindsets and behaviors most suited to navigating the messy middle. Explore our upcoming leadership development programs to develop the capabilities that matter most in complex, fast-moving environments.

Clear Skies, Stormy Weather, and the Fog in Between: A New Way to Think About Leadership

Key Insights

Most Leadership Training Prepares You for Weather That No Longer Exists

Three Terrains. Most Leaders Are Only Trained for Two.

The Instinct That Makes It Worse

The Fog Between Your Ears

Development Isn't a Program. It's an Operating System.

Hear the Full Conversation

What is Catalyst Leadership?

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

Where Does the Term Catalyst Leadership Come From?

Why Is Catalyst Leadership So Relevant Right Now?

A Quick Look Back at the Management Shifts That Brought Us Here

How Does Catalyst Leadership Differ from Other Leadership Mindsets?

The Expert Leader

The Achiever Leader

The Catalyst Leader

"Expert leaders focus on the work itself. Achiever leaders focus on the coordination of people and work, performance, and results. Catalyst leaders focus on the health of the whole system — the culture, the growth, the long-term resilience of the organization."

How Is Catalyst Leadership Different from Servant Leadership?

What Does the Shift Toward Catalyst Leadership Actually Require? ﻿

From Unintentional to Self-Aware

From "I" to "We"

From Immediacy to Resiliency

From Duality to Multiplicity

From Protecting What's Right to Exploring What's Wrong

From Compliance to Commitment

How Common Is Catalyst Leadership — and Why?

What Catalyst Leadership is Not

Is Catalyst Leadership Only Relevant for Senior Leaders?

How Can I Become a More Catalyst Leader?

Want to know where you currently lead from?

References

63: Changing Culture From Within: A Schneider Electric Change Agent on What It Actually Takes

EPISODE 63

About This Episode

About Your Host

Pete Behrens

Connect with Pete on LinkedIn

ABOUT OUR GUEST

Paul Stonehouse

Connect with Paul on LinkedIn

Relearning from This Episode

Culture Is the Water You're Swimming In

Empowerment Without Clarity Is Just a Blindfold

You Can't Cut a Flower Off Someone Else's Plant and Expect It to Grow

Fewer Targets, Better Decisions

Explore Recent Episodes

Episode Transcript

Interview

Supply Chain's Hardest Problem Isn't Complexity. It's Leadership.

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

What one of the world's most complex supply chains revealed about the gap between operational excellence and the leaders needed to sustain it.

When Technology Outpaces the Leaders Running It

What Supply Chain Leaders Are Actually Up Against

Competing priorities with no clear owner.

A workforce in transition.

Sustaining change across dispersed organizations.

What Does the Shift Toward Catalyst Leadership Actually Require?

What Is Mindfulness?

A 3-Step Exercise for Busy Professionals

Step 3: When Your Mind Wanders, Notice It and Return

Different Paths to the Same Place

How to Build a Daily Mindfulness Practice