Lemanskills.com

Search
Close this search box.

Do I Even Want to Be a Leader?

Why people accept being leaders? Is this something we dream about as kids? When we get the question: “Who you would like to be when you grow up?”, do we answer: “A middle manager in the huge, global organization”?

Is it a matter of a “natural talent” we have and show as children to lead or maybe a set of skills that every person can learn and then use quite successfully?

Why is that some people are great leaders for their teams and the others (statistically bigger representation) are making people miserable and in consequence: quitting?

Let’s unpack this subject today.

 

The Story of One Tech Leader…

 

I work a lot with First Time Managers. Those are people who are fresh in leadership positions, statistically up to 3 years in the role. Most of the time there were great SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) and a natural move for them to grow was to be offered with a Team Leader role of the team there work in.

I remember very well one story that relate to a Tech Leader I worked with in the mentoring process a couple years back.

He was a very skilled expert in one of the leading technologies that was used in the core product of the company. He started as a junior, but learned very quickly, constantly participating in trainings, conferences and projects, working on different implementations and most of the time building functionalities from scratch. When he grew to the expert position, he also got the task of teaching others, onboarding new team members and acting as a technical mentor to them. He was doing great.

Then, as an obvious offer for the organization he got a proposition to become a Team Lead of the team: the same one that he was an expert within. He took the job: the money wasn’t extremely bigger, but potentially more organizational and strategic impact was an argument that he was sold to. He thought: “I know everything about the scope of the team’s work, what else can there possibly be?”

A few weeks later in the role showed him otherwise. He started to be a completely different person: like he had some hidden personality that was there, waiting to be awaken for so long. He started to be mean to team members, getting angry and mad very quickly when he saw any mistakes or imperfections in what the team delivered. He even got constructive feedback, by name on team daily meetings: what was unacceptable and never happened before. The team engagement started to drop; first people made decisions about leaving the area that they loved working within.

That was the moment when he was redirected to me, so I support him in this situation.

 

Why People Accepting Leadership Roles?

 

This story shows us a few aspects of why we accept those roles connected to People Management when they are on the table. What I see from working with different cases and circumstances, there are 5 reasons that are the most common: I would say they cover 80% of all decision about choosing this career path:

1. The only way to grow. Sometimes people don’t see other options. They think that accepting leadership position is the only way they can be promoted or have possibilities to learn. Either is their strong belief that can have a root even in childhood (if it was a home conviction, being expressed loudly so we picked it up as children and we took it for life) or an experience from different organizations from the past. Sometimes it is true that organizations offer more, i.e. trainings, workshops, mentorship opportunities for leaders. It shouldn’t take place, so if you see if, I would advise to reach out your supervisor or HR person to take a closer look on that.

2. Fancy position name. Team Lead, Manager, Director, Head: the higher in the structure, the fancier it sounds. And the better it looks on LinkedIn or the resume. Potentially of course. The question is: do you want to grow in the leadership space in your current and different organizations on the market in the future? If yes, ok: the name of the positions matters, since recruitment process is marketing process (for both sides). If not: it doesn’t really matter. So, first: go and answer this question.

3. More potential influence / power. Sometimes we take leadership positions because we believe that’s the only way to make a real change. To get a seat at the table, to have opportunities to say things out loud, to be an advocate of what we say as a team. To have more positive influence or power to reshape a work environment, even if it’s just a small piece of it. The question is: is it a really a truth that by changing the role to be a leader, you will have this influence, more than you have as an expert?

4. Better visibility. I hear this one a lot. And it’s connected with the more influence and power element described above, sometimes treated as one thing. “If I’m a leader, I’ll be more visible = I’ll have more credibility to make a real change.” It also comes with the visibility on the market or in the specific part of the industry: when I’m a leader, I will be more reliable, my LinkedIn will blow out and I will have countless invites as an expert / speaker / podcast guest etc. Is it really a truth? Can’t you be all of these as a real expert in your area?

5. More money. Here comes a catch. The money part most of the time comes at the very beginning of the list of reasons on why to accept the leader role. And you know what? It’s not always the case. I saw multiple examples of extremely skilled, well-known experts that earned way more money than their supervisors. Because their skillset was super niched out, and there were literally few people in the area that could’ve done what they were skilled at.

So, the real question is: what are you passionate about? What you can do all day, in the flow state, sometimes even forgetting about going to the bathroom or eat properly because you’re so into the process? If it is being a leader, taking care of the team’s work environment, give feedback and recognition, organizing the work, solve conflicts and misunderstandings every single week? If yes, that’s great: you have a lifetime of learning ahead of you to be a leader that people don’t quit.

If you are passionate about something else: being a developer, analyst, accountant, employer branding or an expert in a chosen marketing area, the leadership job is not for you. You can’t have the cake and eat the cake.

Why?

 

What Are the Consequences of Hating Being a Leader?

 

When we take leadership position and we really don’t want to deal with people, there is a high probability that we are going to make ourselves and our people miserable.

1. You won’t want to learn. Leadership skillset is quite different that the SME skillset. Yes, you can use some of the skills that you’ve acquired over the years of being a specialist, but the truth is that there are a lot of things you’ll do as a leader that you’ve never done as a non-leader. And if you don’t have a heart to it, you will reject the opportunities to learn, you won’t be willing to get new knowledge and tools to put it into practice.

2. Your frustration will influence your people. The influence of a leader on a team is bigger than we think. If we are frustrated, angry, disappointed as leaders, our people will get there too. Even when the circumstances of those emotions or reactions are different than ours, they will behave in a parallel way. Our fixed mindset will become their fixed mindset. You won’t be an advocate of the organization if you are not in the right place: and you won’t’ help your team to thrive.

3. If you hate your job, your team will their too. It is quite visible when someone loves what they do professionally. We see the passion and energy when a person talks about it, we see how much time they spend on working on some tasks, learning about the field, participating in conferences, meetups, workshops etc. It’s inspiring: even if our area of expertise is different, those behaviors itself are making a positive impact. If it’s not there, the person whines all the time on how hard it is, how exhausted they are, how pointless is everything we do here… You see the difference.


So… What is the Conclusion Here?  

 

The conclusion is simple: you need to decide if you want to be a leader. It’s one way or the other, there is no other option here. When you decide: yes, I want to be a leader, you go all in. You delegate SME tasks, and you learn how to be a real leader for your people.

When you decide: you know what Alex? I really don’t want to be a leader: I want to do my SME tasks and grow in this space. That’s great! You can expand in the current scope or learn new things to become a broader expert. Or pivot a little bit and learn something new, reskill yourself. That’s fine as well!

What if you’ve already made a decision about being a leader and you know now that it was a bad decision?

Quit.

It’s nothing wrong with it, it doesn’t mean that you are a weak person. It means that you are a brave person, who took time to really get to know yourself and is mindful about yourself and others. It means that you don’t want to be miserable for the 60% of your life (that’s approximately how much time we spend at work: doing and thinking about it). Don’t listen to other people who say that you should suck it up and just hang on there to get another promotion in 2 years. It’s not worth it.

But working on what you are passionate about every single day? I bet it’s quite the opposite.

PS 1. You want to know what happens with the manager from the story? After few mentoring sessions with me, he had decided to quit being a leader to come back to the SME role. And you know what? He’s never been happier in his life.

PS 2. If you want to expand more on the topic from this article, go check out my newest course “3 Ways to Be a Leader that People Don’t Quit”!

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
0 komentarzy
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Czytaj także

Transactional Analysis

What Does It Mean to Be OK-OK?

When I think about all workshops and mentoring processes that I deliver each week, very rarely I don’t talk about it with people. Sooner or later, this is a part of a conversation: whether we work together around communication, feedback, leadership, change or transformation. Today the story about OK-OK Matrix, which another name is Life Positions Matrix. One of the most important elements of Transactional Analysis framework, a base of building outstanding relationship: professional and private.   What is the Matrix?   The Matrix is a tool that show us four options that consists of set of beliefs, thoughts and feelings we have about ourselves and others. Based on where we are, we have a certain orientation, that becomes a base for our behaviors, ways of reacting on what happens for us: professionally and privately. It doesn’t really matter about which part of our life or work we think, this tool is applicable equally well. You can take a look on how the Matrix looks like on the simple picture below:   The first axis describes what we think and believe is a truth when it comes to ourselves: who we are (as people in general, but also in each role we have in our life: professionally and personally), what we do, what we are worth because of that etc. The second axis describes the same elements, but in the context of the external world: it can be another person, a group of people (the entire family, team etc.) or the whole institution (organization, state, the whole political party etc.). Where we are in the Matrix influences on our mood, mindset, behaviors in different situations, the way we react, how we communicate and make decisions. The first thing is to be aware what kind of dominant tendency we have in going into certain quadrants. Quadrant 1: OK-OK   OK – OK quadrant is the one that we should aim to be as frequently as possible. This is the space where we are fine, and everybody are fine too. I have good intentions and people have good intentions as well. Of course, not everything and everybody is perfect, but we aim to be the best version of ourselves, we support each other, we share knowledge and work as a team. This is a place where we have and develop a growth mindset. Thanks to that set of thoughts, believes, convictions and decisions we make base on all that we are successful, happy and build a good life. We see opportunities, abundance, instead of gaps and things we don’t have or know. We reach for more, instead of giving up.   Quadrant 2: OK-Not-OK   OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you are fine, but others – not so much. Example: ‘I always do everything I can to finish my list of tasks before the day ends, and he never does it. He always works 9-5 and then – regardless of how many things are undone, he just closes his computer and goes home. Ugh, I hate it!’. Or: ‘I’m doing everything I can and this organization? Only requires more and give less and less!’ This place is not healthy for us, since we are going to resent everyone and everything at the end of the day. Even if this is only one person at first, it becomes more and more severe with time. When we are OK and the world not, what we end up with? Hate, resentment, miserable life. I would say that’s not the best place to be, especially in a long run.   Quadrant 3: Not-OK-OK   Not-OK – OK quadrat is a low self-esteem place. We are there when we think that everybody is fine, successful, happy, except for us. A good example can be: ‘Ugh, everybody has somebody, and I’ll die alone with my cats’ or: ‘Everybody can handle their tasklist, and I never have time for anything!’ When we think about ourselves from this position, we are never good enough. Sometimes we choose one work or life role (consciously or not) that we are so bad at that it’s pathetic, sometimes it’s all over the place. It depends on what level of low self-esteem we took with ourselves from our childhood into the adult life. People who are raising us most of the time has good intentions, but the wording and behavior they use is not so good or adequate to those intentions.   Quadrant 4: Not-OK-Not-OK   Not-OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you suck, but other people too, or you have this belief that the environment / organization / economy / world is bad. Example: ‘My goodness, I am so bad at this, but I cannot learn since I don’t have time for anything in this company. My manager always gives me more to do, the colleagues are not helpful at all, and I need to do everything on my own, even if I have no idea what I’m doing’. This is the ultimate, negative place, that we operate from the fixed mindset. We don’t see any opportunities, we use fatalistic view of the world, ourselves, our relationships, competences, organization we work with etc. Everything and everyone are bad, there’s no hope for the better.   The Bottom Line   The bottom line here is that we fall out of the first quadrant multiple times every single day. It’s impossible to stay there all the time, since we are triggered by different stressors, we have frustrated motivational needs and that’s why we go into distress. Being in another quadrant than the most optimal one is being conditionally OK: I’m (or the world) is OK only if… I fulfill a certain condition. The key thing is to recognize when (in which circumstances) we lose our optimal position and what can we do to faster come back to it. Also, what matters is how we behave in relation to others: our employees, team members, supervisors, stakeholders, colleagues, but also in private

Czytaj dalej
Transactional Analysis

PCM: Communication Channels

When I was describing all 6 Process Communication Model (PCM) types, it dawned on me that if I want to find one aspect of it that interests me, I need to go into each article and look for one part. And there are some of those, that are more important to dig deeper into, a good example is the aspect of communication channel. So I’ve decided that I’ll go into this directing to simplify and edit this experience for you: to go into some aspects of PCM, with practical examples. Hope that’ll be useful and will give you all the impulse to start using it in real life.   What Are Communication Channels?   Before we go into the details, let’s start with answering this questions: what a channel actually is? Communication channel is the way we build a sentence we want to push forward the other person (doesn’t matter if it’s a written or verbal communication). Surprisingly it really does matter if we put a question mark or a period at the end of the sentence. It matters so much that most of the time it has a huge influence on if the communication will go through or not (will be efficient or will lead to a misunderstanding). What do I mean by that? Take a look on those examples (purposefully not business-related): What do you think about this painting? Please tell me what you think about this painting. Oh man, what a painting, I’m sure it kills us both just from looking at it!!!!! Thank you for being here with me to marvel this painting, I’m more than happy to hear your impressions on it. Do you see the difference? We all have one dominant preference of getting and using the channel, depends on our personality base. When you look on those sentences: which one is the most comfortable for you? Depending on which one you choose, it’s a strong indicator of your base.   Requestive Channel   The first sentence is a great example of a requestive channel. As you can see, the idea is simple: ask a question (so a sentence with a question mark at the end of it). Using the knowledge that you already have, you can see the difference between the questions that we can ask towards 2 bases that will prefer this channel: Thinker and Persister. Channel is only one part of the puzzle: if we want communication to go through with success we need to combine a preferred channel with a favorite perception. That’s why we’ll ask different question within a conversation with a Thinker and Persister. We’ll ask: Thinker: “What do you think…?” Persister “What is your opinion on…? / What do you believe…?” It is important to ask the right questions. And as much important is to know which channels are not so good to use in communication with certain types. Thinker and Persister will react really badly on others, but the worst thing you can do is to use directive channel. It will trigger them to go straight into distress, reactive aggressively form their attacker mask.   Directive Channel   Directive channel is about creating the sentence with the dot at the end of it. I would love for all of us to demystify being direct and separate it from being aggressive, rude or too pushy. Being directive is just saying what there’s to be done: I’m not asking you or hesitate. I just say it in a straightforward way, taking care of OK-OK perspective. Two PCM types prefer to get it: Promoter and Imaginer. And again, it will differ on how we build a communication to each of them. That’s because their need of getting directive channel is different: Promoter doesn’t want to waste time, so they just want to get a task and move to action. Imaginer wants to be invited to share what’s in their heads, so they need direct communication to do that. So, the way we is this channel matters. We’ll say: Promoter: “Please create this report for tomorrow, not later than 5PM.” Imaginer: “I need this report to be done by tomorrow, not later than 5PM. Please tell me what you see in your head when I ask you to do it.”  Both are tasks we want to delegate for a person but said differently. They are not very good at receiving requestive channel, also Imaginer will react with a drooper mask on Emotive one (too much emotion for them).    Emotive Channel   Emotive channel is about the positive energy and contact. As we can easily guess, the Rebel is our person here: it’s their favorite channel. In this one they can exchange energy, creative ideas, brainstorm and get into positive contact with others. It works even if it’s just for a little bit at the beginning of the conversation. How can it look like? “OH MAAAAN, this weekend was so dope, I need to tell you about it!” “C’mon, let’s do it and then we’ll go into the agenda: it won’t kill us to talk a little bit!” It is about 2-3 exchanges and then you can go to the point of the meeting or a conversation. Sometimes it’s just about the exchange and that’s enough: especially when you are a Rebel in a base yourself, you’ll enjoy the conversation itself if it’s led that way.   Nurturative Channel   Last but not least: Harmonizer and their preferred nurturative channel. Nurturative channel is all about seeing a person, feeding their recognition of person need. Harmonizers needs to be seen, as an important part of a team, community or other relationship. Sometimes it’s enough to say: “Thank you for being here. I know that recently it’s been crazy busy and hard, so I really appreciate you finding time to talk.”  The key thing here is to give a positive, nurturing recognition of a person, making them visible and important. In the world of endless task lists, constant rush and not

Czytaj dalej
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Imaginer

Do you know a person or two who most of the time are staying in silence, observing the world that is around them? During the meetings, a family dinner or other friends gathering they are not the kings or queens of the party, but you can tell that they are processing in their heads what they hear? That’s the Imaginer. The last (but not least) of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE, then we’ve described the other 5: Persister, Thinker, Promoter, Rebel and Harmonizer. Today we’re adding the missing piece to our PCM puzzle, so we understand different people once we meet them, have them as team members or stakeholders in different circumstances (professional and private). For those of us who has little Imaginer energy (like myself), they might be the hardest to communicate with since they don’t say a lot of things out loud and their processes (i.e. decision making) are longer than in the rest of the types. Why is that? Let’s take a look! How do we recognize Imaginer? Imaginer is a person who experience the world through the lens of reflections (or inactions). Most of the time, they use their reflective mode: they have a lot of processes inside of their heads, so they see many different things in their brains. Sometimes it’s called inactions, since they don’t take action on what they reflect on until somebody says them so. How to recognize an Imaginer in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Imaginer it will be: “I imagine…”, “As I reflect on that…”, “In my head I can see…”, “I see it that way…”, “I picture…”. They say all that because they operate the best in their internal world. It doesn’t mean that they are antisocial (in a clinical way). I’m sure that you’ve experienced not once, not twice a person who doesn’t say anything, but you see their eyes moving or looking out through the window in intense internal process. That’s because there is a tough reflective sequence that’s happening in the head of that person. They have a lot of things inside them, a lot of options or scenarios they create in a certain situation. The recognition of Imaginer is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: like in the Thinker’s case, it’s a flat, computer face, with almost no mimics on it. Their voice is linear, monotonous, static. Their body is still, they don’t use movement to not waste the energy that they can invest in more internal reflective process. They don’t say much, but when they do, that’s what we can observe externally. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Imaginer in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person? What does Imaginer need in communication? The Imaginer needs communication process where they have a chance to reflect on things. Once they do it, here’s a time to directly tell them to share what they have in their heads with us. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can be alone to reflect, and then they are ready to talk to us. To be efficient in communication with Imaginer, we need to use directive channel of communication. It’s the same story we had in the Promoter’s description: Imaginer needs to know exactly what to do and say to us. It means that asking them questions is not going to work, since they are not responsive to the requestive channel. How to do it right? Using the same example as before: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be opening the conversation with a direct statement. “Hi Mike, I want you to take a task X. (Now we describe briefly what the task is about). Please tell me what showed in your head when I was describing it to you.” And we give them a moment to reflect. Pushing or rushing them is not going to work well, what can be hard, especially for Promoters and Rebels. They value Autocratic interaction style. It means that they are the most efficient when the other person just tells them what is there to be done and leave them alone, so they can go and focus on the delivery. Straight to the point, sometimes (especially for the people that are not so big fans of a directive communication channel) might look a little harsh or cold. It’s the same situation that we had in Promoter’s case, but the root cause is different. Promoter just needs to get the job done, and Imaginer needs to have direct communication, so they have a one communication and then they are left alone. Also, it helps them so they are not lost in the fog or the infinity of their imagination. Imaginer seeks to answer the existential question: will they come for me? Yes, they prefer to be alone, so they have a space and time to be in their reflective world. But they don’t want to be lonely: they need to have space to say out loud what they imagined. For them this sentence is the truth:   Somebody will come for me = I’m valuable as a person   A motivational need attached to this PCM type is It’s important to know it that sometimes for Imaginer the best way to help them is to leave them alone. It can be extremely difficult for Harmonizers, Rebels and Promoters, since their energy and need of contact is on higher level. They don’t understand how it is possible that a person can be so long on their own, sometimes even not leaving the house. Again: it’s not antisocial, it’s their way to

Czytaj dalej
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x