Leadership

When I first started my blog, I intended to focus primarily on movies and music (which I’ve done), but I also had other ideas that I thought might be interesting to write about.  One of those ideas was lessons in leadership that I learned over the years while working in Corporate Finance.  Back in 2012, I was fortunate enough to attend an immersive leadership training session at NASA in Houston.  It was fascinating to be on site and hear the stories of how the leaders of the NASA program in the 1960s overcame enormous challenges.  At some point in a future blog post, I will probably dip back into that experience and share some details.  But for this week, I’m going to focus on my more recent experiences.  The concepts of “Leadership” and “What makes an effective leader?” has been on my mind a lot lately, unfortunately for the wrong reasons.

My Leadership Experience

I managed people for over 20 years and while I was far from perfect, I tried to manage by a set of principles that I learned through experience or co-opted from managers I worked for (including leadership behaviors to avoid – you can learn a lot from a bad manager too).  First and foremost, I believed strongly in the concept of a “team” and building relationships.  When I recruited people for my department, I always looked for someone who was willing to be a part of a team and contribute toward the team’s goals.  We focused on the needs of our customers, and collaboration – within our team, with other teams that we relied on, and with those teams that were dependent on us.  Building relationships across our organization was very important because when times get tough, you have to rely on each other.  You can’t do that if you have alienated someone to the point that they don’t want to work with you.  Personal goals (both career advancement and development) were important, but if the team was successful, I believed personal success would follow, and in most cases, that was how things worked.  One of the phrases I used a lot was “We win and lose as a team.”  If we all worked together and met our deliverables, the department was successful.  The concept of “team” extended in different directions – I had a role as the leader of my team, but I also had a role as a member of my manager’s leadership team.  Those roles were very different, requiring me to consider each situation with a different approach.  While I am usually not a big fan of business advice books (I find a lot of them too academic and theoretical), I read a really good one several years ago that I referred to in my time as a leader.  It’s called “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team” by Patrick Lencioni, and is a quick read that includes some good advice in dealing with different leadership situations. 

In my last role, I oversaw a number of complicated processes at the center of a large matrixed company.  It was critical for us to be prepared and plan ahead (we called it “right to left planning” – former colleagues of mine are once again sadly nodding and having flashbacks as they read that phrase).  We’d think through contingency plans for the unexpected, course correct when needed, and make decisions to move forward.  We lived in a world where we never had complete information.  It was important to analyze what we knew, understand the risks of what we didn’t know, consult with people who were smarter than us on the information we didn’t know, and make decisions.  As you got more data, you’d go through the next set of decision processes.  Throughout each process, you had to be organized.  Another phrase I used a lot (I think they became “Steve-isms” to my team) was “A sense of urgency is different than uncontrolled chaos.”  You can organize a team to work through critical issues, but as a leader, it is critical to give direction, delegate, listen to your team, make a decision, and move forward to the next issue.  Which brings me to the most important aspect of an effective leader – Genuine Communication. 

When you first start leading a team in your career, it can be jarring when you realize that your team expects you to know the answer and solution to every problem.  But what do you do when you don’t know the answer or what to do?  Some leaders that I worked with were quiet, nodding along in meetings as if they understood what was happening, and then after the meeting went to ask their staff to explain to them what they just heard.  They shielded their staff from critical information, imposed mandates without explanation, and didn’t involve members of their team in the decision making process.  Those leaders flamed out pretty fast.  When I had issues to work through with my team, I would get us together to discuss, debate, understand the tradeoffs, and make a decision.  And if I didn’t know something I asked the question.  It’s ok to admit you’re not perfect – nobody is.  Even when I was in meetings with the senior leaders of our company, I could ask them a question to better understand a concept.  They helped me learn – they didn’t call me an idiot for not understanding something.  I found that members of my team appreciated me being transparent and genuine in my communications.  I would try to explain not just “what” a decision was, but “why” I made it – I’d explain my thinking process so they could buy-in and learn.

So, how transparent can you be as a leader with your team and your constituents?  This can be a tough one.  Sometimes you are dealing with confidential issues that are stressful and could impact people’s careers and lives.  My manager had a guiding principle with his leadership team – we would have open and candid debates “in the family” (for example, at a staff meeting), but once a decision is made, it’s our job to execute on that decision.  If you undercut the leadership decision by badmouthing it to your team, you lose credibility for yourself and the leadership team.  That’s a tough job to do some times, but that’s why leadership positions are challenging.  And there were times where I would gather my team together and tell them what I knew and (more importantly) what I didn’t know, and commit to updating them as I knew additional information.  Transparency and clear communication – you can never have too much of it as a leader.

Along the same lines as transparency is being willing to admit when you’ve made a mistake.  I gain appreciation for leaders who can admit they failed at something and what they’ve learned from it.  We had a saying at my company – “It’s ok to fail, but fail fast, fail smart, and don’t make the same mistake again.”  Everyone makes mistakes, but be quick to course correct when you’ve made one, figure out what you can do to learn from the mistake, and don’t dwell on it.  When one of my team members would kick themselves for missing something, I’d tell them “You can beat yourself up today if you want, but tomorrow morning, we start fresh and move forward.”  When you’re willing to be honest and transparent with your team about mistakes you’ve made, you show that you are vulnerable as a leader and you are being genuine with them.  This builds trust and credibility – without those, you have no chance to succeed.

Why Is This relevant Now?

Well, we are at a time in our country where leadership is extremely important – both at the local level and the national level – in government and businesses.  Decisions that have been made (or not made) over the last several weeks and ones that will be made for the next several months will shape this country for years to come. 

It’s probably a good point to pause and point out that I have no allegiance to a political party – I don’t identify with either of the major parties.  I look for leaders who are going to make smart decisions for the right reasons (not pandering to whoever is shouting the loudest or paying the most), who are willing to look at issues from multiple angles and be willing to listen to other points of view without shouting them down immediately.  I look for transparency, honesty, and willingness to admit when things have not gone right, and how they will work to correct things going forward.  I look for leaders who will put “team” before “individual”, leaders who will debate “in the family” and not undercut their colleagues to their constituents in the media (social or traditional).  Most importantly, I look for leaders to solve problems.  Based on all of that, there is no way I could have an allegiance to one political party, because members of both parties are good and bad at those behaviors.  And yes, no one is perfect – but I look for someone is going to score pretty high on the overall report card.  It does make me wonder what it would be like if our elected officials were not aligned to a political party.  We all have unconscious biases – when someone speaks, our natural inclination is to slant our initial reaction based on what party they belong to.  And this goes for the media too – as I mentioned last week, it has become very difficult to try to sift through the rhetoric and get to the facts, in order to decide my own opinion without being told what I should think about an issue. 

As we have been watching the health care crisis get worse each day, it’s been very difficult to watch, even though we knew the numbers would climb as testing expanded.  I can’t imagine the difficulty that the health care workers in New York City are facing now and will be facing in the coming weeks and months to come.  And I fear this will explode in other large city hospitals in the days to come.  In addition to the deteriorating health care situation, the other two big issues that got a lot of attention this week were the economic stimulus bill being fought over debated in Congress and the concept of “reopening the country” – two issues that kind of go hand in hand. 

The Stimulus Bill

As I was trying to learn about the stimulus bill, it was naturally very difficult to find a balanced summary of what was being considered.  No, I have not read the hundreds of pages of the various drafts of legislation – I’ve done my best to find balanced views where I could.  I was less focused on which party was advocating for a specific industry or organization to get funding and more focused on what should be funded.  That last concept is very subjective (obviously), but I try to think about it from a real word standpoint, and not the political bullshit we see unfold in Washington, DC.  But before we do that, let’s think about what we’re trying to do here – this is all about cash flow and liquidity.  Revenues are drying up – for individuals who have lost their job and for businesses that have had to shut down.  But costs are remaining – for both individuals and businesses – rent, payroll, food, taxes, insurance, utilities, etc.  If you have cash reserves or access to credit, you can pay the bills and stay afloat.  If you are highly leveraged or managing week to week or month to month, it is going to be a lot harder the longer this goes.  The issues are largely the same for individuals and businesses – it’s the scale and consequences that are different.

So, the stimulus bill aimed to address some of these issues.  I’ll provide another of my weekly disclaimers that I am not an economist, but I do have a fair amount of financial experience in my professional career.  So, what does the bill provide?  Checks to individuals and families – great concept, but the dollars are not going to be nearly enough the longer this goes; strengthening a support system for those who will lose their job – good, but probably not enough; loans to small businesses – great idea, let’s hope it’s enough; support to state governments and hospitals dealing with the crisis on the front lines – great idea.  Then it comes to financial support for large corporations – what some will refer to as support to businesses that are nationally important and what others will refer to as corporate bailouts.  I am generally not in favor of the government giving large companies money, especially since companies that are effectively managing their cash flow should be able to manage for a few months.  But if a company or industry is critical for the nation to function (like the airlines) and will literally go under, I could see providing financial assistance, but it has to come with very strong restrictions.  Not knowing what will be in the final bill once the fighting debate is over, I would like to see loans (not grants) with very heavy restrictions on how that money is spent, with an independent oversight group that monitors what these companies do with the money.  That’s how it works in the real world – if you are in financial trouble and you bring in an equity partner or take out a loan, there are very tight restrictions on how you run your company under that structure.  I suspect we will end up with some (but not all) of that structure with the final bill.

Then there are the other add-on’s.  This is typical in any Congressional funding bill.  I am having a hard time with some of these, because I am looking at this through the lens of the real world (not the fantasy world in Congress).  If you are running a start-up business, you manage your cash flow very tightly, you make difficult trade-offs, and think carefully about every purchase – even boxes of office supplies.  There will be an extended period of challenging financial choices for people and businesses, who will be using this mindset to manage their finances.  With that context, when we are loading $2 trillion dollars of spending into the economy, is this the right time to fund public television and radio, the Kennedy Center for Performing Arts and the National Endowment for Arts and Humanities a combined $250 million?  I am all in favor of the arts – hell, I write about films and music – but even I will admit that these are pretty silly topics to deal with now.  Needless to say, I am looking for better leadership in this process.

Reopening The Country

This is a tricky one.  On the one hand, I can’t even think beyond the next day or two seeing how quickly things have changed everyday these last few weeks, so it’s hard for me to think about “reopening the country” in a few weeks.  But on the other hand, I am worried about what the country will look like when we are on the other side of the mountain.  And to be clear, I am not talking about the stock market.  I am not a financial advisor (don’t rely on this for investing purposes), but the activity in the stock market makes zero sense right now.  When there is a large amount of uncertainty and fear, there will not be rational trading, so you will see large swings and I’m choosing to largely ignore it.  I’m talking about businesses, jobs and cash flow.  You will see media stories saying that the economy will “come back” – yes, but at what cost and how long from now?

We do need to be patient and go day to day, but it’s also ok to plan and think ahead.  We have a public health crisis and an economic crisis.  Yes, the health crisis is more important, but the economic crisis will also create health consequences for those most impacted.  We need to address both, with considerations for both, and that planning can be done at the same time.  One of the prominent government leaders in this crisis recently said, “Don’t make us choose between the two.  We can do both and we must do both.  You can have an economic start-up strategy that is consistent with a public health strategy.”  He talked about getting people back to work and ramping up the economy with those individuals.  And I largely agree with that – is today the right day to do that?  Of course not – there is too much we don’t know about this disease.  Is it the right time to start the conversation about what we need to do to prepare for that and how it would work?  Maybe.  And if so, work on it private and share the details when it’s ready and when the country is ready to hear it.  That’s being empathetic with your audience.   Let’s take it day to day and see how things evolve.

Wondering which politician said that?  Would it surprise you to know that it was not the person you are seeing at the podium each night and was actually Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York, who has been handling this crisis as well as any government leader could?  Have you watched any of his press conferences?  He is communicating with transparency (giving people the good and the bad), empathy for his constituents, embracing the concept of team, partnering with other states and businesses.  He is using data and information to make decisions, relying on experts to help him.  He is acknowledging what he knows, but also what he doesn’t know.  Is he perfect?  Of course not, but he is willing to admit he has made (and may make) mistakes.  He has earned trust and credibility.  In a word, he is “leading.”  If Cuomo (or someone with these leadership characteristics) were the first politician to talk about managing the public health crisis and economic crisis together, would there have been a different reaction in the court of public opinion?  Would the media be reporting it the same way?

As I was thinking about how to wrap up this topic, a thought popped into my head.  I guess at the end of the day, to me it comes down to the difference between a boss and a leader.  A boss is defined as anyone with authority.  A leader is defined by what you do with that authority.

This Week’s Moments of Happiness

I stole this idea from my sister-in-law, Rachel, who posts her “Daily Slices of Joy” on Facebook and who was the inspiration for this week’s first moment.  She organized a virtual cocktail party with all of our extended family on Zoom last Sunday night.  It was so great to catch up with everyone and see everyone’s faces.  We talked about the seriousness of what we are facing, checked in how we were all doing (my wife did a great job co-hosting – it’s tough to manage about 25 people across a dozen video streams), and most importantly, had a lot of laughs.  I also had a great check-in with my sisters a few days ago, and have one with my cousins this weekend that I am really looking forward to. 

Another moment of happiness was getting out with my good friends to play golf on Sunday.  My friend Mark came down from Massachusetts and we had a great time, despite the cold weather.  It felt nice to get some fresh air, bust each other’s chops and I loved getting up and down from the bunker on 18 to win the match.  Yes, we practiced social distancing and I am (selfishly) happy the State of Connecticut has allowed golf courses to stay open (with restrictions) during this period of social distancing.  I’m also glad I didn’t have to protest outside the state capitol that golf is, in fact, an “essential business.”

My last moment of happiness – My favorite musician (Dave Matthews) performed a short solo performance from his house that was live streamed.  It is part of Verizon’s Pay It Forward series to help support local businesses.  He played some of his classics, but also debuted a beautiful new song (called “Windows”) about the situation we are all in right now, with hope for the future.  You can find it online by searching for Verizon Pay It Forward.

I will likely have a moment of happiness to discuss next week, as one of my favorite bands, Pearl Jam, is releasing their new album (called Gigaton), today.  I will be giving it a listen and share my thoughts next week, along an update on what’s happening with the music and TV industry, and some book recommendations.

Thanks again for reading and if you’d like to subscribe to be notified of future posts, you can do so here.  Stay safe everyone.