By detaching physically, even if only by a few inches, and, more important, detaching mentally from the problem at hand--I was able to see infinitely more than anyone else in my platoon. And since I was able to see everything, I was able to make a good decision, which allowed me, a new guy and the most junior guy in the platoon, to lead.
This was a tangible and physical action that represented pure humility. Delta Charlie was the most senior man in the platoon; he also had the most experience. But there he was, taking out the garbage. And yet I was too good to do it?
I realized I didn't always need to lead. I didn't need to be at the center of decision-making. I realized it was my job to support the team and the mission, which meant supporting the boss.
Keep things simple is an ancient military maxim that holds true for any type of planning.
By trying to do everything, he was accomplishing nothing. He needed to figure out his biggest priority problem and execute a plan to fix that problem before moving on to the next one. He needed to Prioritize and Execute.
The Laws of Combat:
Cover and move.
Simple.
Prioritize and execute.
Decentralized command.
Without coordination between individuals, between elements within a team, and between teams, all is lost.
Ask yourself if you will be moving your relationship with your boss forward or backward by raising this issue. This is important because you should be constantly trying to build that relationship. You are not building the relationship so you can garner favor from the boss; no, you are trying to build a relationship so the boss trusts you and will listen to you so you and the team can more effectively accomplish the mission.
Solid relationships up and down the chain of command are the basis of all good leadership.
Until you are asked to do something that is devastating to you, the team, and the mission, play the game and build the relationships.
There is one type of person who can never become a good leader: a person who lacks humility. People who lack humility cannot improve because they don't acknowledge their own weaknesses. They don't work to improve them, and they won't bring someone onto the team to offset their shortfalls. This person will never improve. Beware.
While there are many similarities between leaders and manipulators, there is one glaring difference: manipulators are trying to get people to do things that will benefit the manipulator, while leaders are trying to get people to do things that will benefit the team and the people themselves.
A leader puts themselves at the bottom of the priority list. The good of the mission and the good of the team outweigh any personal concern a true leader has for themselves.
Lead from the front, especially when things are bad. You take the pay cut. You take the first shift of the overtime work. As a leader, do the hard things. Don't leave it to the troops.
There are many components for learning to lead. One of the most important is to try to see everything through the lens of leadership. In any group of people, leadership is occurring. Pay attention to that. Observe what works and what doesn't. Note the successful and unsuccessful techniques leaders use--how they talk, words they use, interactions they carry out. Think about how you can apply these techniques.
If two people trust each other, they have a relationship; if there is no trust, there is no relationship.
Taking Extreme Ownership means that leaders are responsible for every action the people on their team make. It is as simple as that.
A good rule to follow is that a leader should err on the side of not getting involved in problems; the goal is always to allow problems to get solved at the lowest level. When subordinates are solving low-level problems, it allows the leader to focus on more important, strategic issues.
The easy path leads to misery. The path of discipline leads them to freedom.
Optimal discipline in a team is not imposed by the leader; it is chosen by the team itself. Optimal discipline is self-discipline.
While a bad team is without question the result of a bad leader, a good team is not necessarily the result of a good leader. You must know your people well enough to recognize and capitalize on that fact.
Here are some fundamental rules to keep in mind as you take command: Be humble. It is an honor to be in a leadership position. Your team is counting on you to make the right decisions. Don't act like you know everything. You don't. The team knows that. Ask smart questions. Listen. Ask for advice and heed it. Treat people with respect. Regardless of rank, everyone is a human being and plays an important role in the team. Treat them that way. Take care of your people and they will take care of you. Take ownership of failures and mistakes. Pass credit for success up and down the chain. Work hard. As the leader, you should be working harder than anyone else on the team. No job is beneath you. Have integrity. Do what you say; say what you do. Don't lie up or down the chain of command. Be balanced. Extreme actions and opinions are usually not good. Be decisive. When it is time to make a decision, make one. Build relationships. That is your main goal as a leader. A team is a group of people who have relationships and trust one another. Otherwise, it is just a disconnected, incoherent cluster of people. Lastly, get the job done. That is the purpose of a leader--to lead a team in accomplishing a mission. If you don't accomplish the mission, you fail as a leader. Performance counts.
As human beings, we have a strong tendency to get defensive. Don't. Instead of getting defensive, listen, truly listen, and try to understand the perspective being offered. Then take ownership of those shortfalls and try to make improvements in the areas of critique you have received.
There is an implicit message when you offer to coach or mentor someone--you are implying not only that the other person is lacking in some areas but also that you are better than they are!
The people who taught me the most about leadership, strategy, and tactics never explicitly told me they were coaching or mentoring me; they subtly guided me along the path, filling my head with knowledge, while I barely even noticed it. They managed to teach me without teaching me, putting ideas into my brain so delicately that I thought the ideas were my own. That is the most powerful way to teach, coach, and mentor.
Be decisive when you need to be, but try not to make decisions until you have to. Assess what is happening to the best of your ability with the information you have, and then make smaller decisions with minimum commitment to move in the direction you most highly suspect is the right one.
I much prefer someone I have to reel in over someone I need to push. It wasn't only when I was a leader that I liked that. Even as a junior member of the team, I always loved when the other members were ready to get after it.
No matter what goes wrong, there is always some good to find in the setback. A negative attitude will spread throughout the team, as will a positive one, so it is important for a leader to maintain a positive attitude.
While it is important to maintain a positive attitude about what is going on, don't ignore problems, and don't gloss over the trials you face. Be positive, but be realistic.
One of the best tools a leader has to help shape others is leadership itself; giving people responsibility and putting them in leadership positions teaches them to be better in a multitude of ways.
Take the high ground, or the high ground will take you.
Before taking that intense level of direct oversight, normal leadership procedures should take place. Make sure an individual understands the mission, the goal, and their specific role. Make sure they clearly understand the task required of them and all the expectations around that task.
If your boss wants all the credit, the answer is simple: give it to them.
The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know.
If for some reason your troops don't execute the plan, then, of course, you should first look in the mirror. Do not assume the troops have simply decided not to do what was required of them; instead, assume you did not give them appropriate direction and that is the reason for the transgression.
The environment that rumors grow in is one in which there is a lack of information. If you don't tell people what is going on, they will make up their own versions, and their versions will not be pretty ones.
I'm often asked if there are any scenarios when the leader is not fully responsible for the performance of his or her team. The answer is no. If a team is not performing, then it is the leader's fault; the leader has not trained and mentored the team members to where they can accomplish the mission. If a team doesn't have time to train, then the leader has not made training a priority or run it up the chain of command to get the support needed. If members of the team are simply incapable of performing the duties required of them, then the leader hasn't done his or her job of removing the substandard performers.
Think before you speak, and measure your words carefully.
Foster shared emotions--reflect their emotions but diminish them so they de-escalate, and you can focus on actually solving the problem at hand. Reflect and Diminish.
Since it was the first time he had ever seen me yell, he instantly understood the seriousness of the situation. During my entire career, I never had to yell at someone twice.
Don't waste your words. Let other people do that; instead, speak with poignancy and power.
If I make a mistake, I am going to own it. If someone else makes a mistake and no one will own it, I will own that too. Perhaps that is why I so often found myself in leadership positions; I was willing to own things. I was willing to take the hit, to take the daggers from others. I was willing to apologize, own mistakes, and move forward. I recommend you do the same.
Be judicious and thoughtful about what you say, who you say it to, and how you say it.
If you are in a leadership position, the team is watching you. Your people are watching your attitude. They are watching your behavior, and they don't miss a thing. If you are late for a meeting, they notice it. If you roll your eyes, they notice it. If you yawn, they are watching and are thinking you are tired or bored or both. The team members are watching everything, and on top of that, they will imitate what they see. If you are late, they will be late too. If you dress like a slob, they will dress that same way. If you break the rules, they will also break the rules, so you have to behave correctly at all times. You have to be the ideal.
As a leader, you must remember you are being watched. And in everything you do, you must set the example.
It is all on you, but not about you.
Leadership is not about you. Not at all. Leadership is about the team. The team is more important than you are. The moment you put your own interests above the team and above the mission is the moment you fail as a leader.
To be a great manager, you have to be a great coach.
All too often, internal competition takes center stage, and compensation, bonuses, recognition, and even office size and location become the ways to keep score. This is problematic: in such an environment, selfish individuals can beat altruistic ones.
To balance the tension and mold a team into a community, you need a coach, someone who works not only with individuals but also with the team as a whole to smooth out the constant tension, continuously nurture the community, and make sure it is aligned around a common vision and set of goals.
The path to success in a fast-moving, highly competitive, technology-driven business world is to form high-performing teams and give them the resources and freedom to do great things.
Your title makes you a manager. Your people make you a leader.
Bill felt that leadership was something that evolved as a result of management excellence. "How do you bring people around and help them flourish in your environment? It's not by being a dictator. It's not by telling them what the hell to do. It's making sure that they feel valued by being in the room with you. Listen. Pay attention. This is what great managers do."
The manager's job is to run a decision-making process that ensures all perspectives get heard and considered, and, if necessary, to break ties and make the decision.
Define the "first principles" for the situation, the immutable truths that are the foundation for the company or product, and help guide the decision from those principles.
Compensation isn't just about the economic value of the money; it's about the emotional value. It's a signaling device for recognition, respect, and status, and it ties people strongly to the goals of the company.
If you have the right product for the right market at the right time, go as fast as you can.
The purpose of a company is to bring a product vision to life. All the other components are in service to product.
Only coach the coachable.
The traits of coachability Bill sought were honesty and humility, the willingness to persevere and work hard, and a constant openness to learning.
Listen to people with your full and undivided attention--don't think ahead to what you're going to say next--and ask questions to get to the real issue.
Don't tell people what to do; offer stories and help guide them to the best decision for them.
Bill's guiding principle was that the team is paramount, and the most important thing he looked for and expected in people was a "team-first" attitude. Teams are not successful unless every member is loyal and will, when necessary, subjugate their personal agenda to that of the team.
Bill looked for four characteristics in people. The person has to be smart, not necessarily academically but more from the standpoint of being able to get up to speed quickly in different areas and then make connections. Bill called this the ability to make "far analogies." The person has to work hard, and has to have high integrity. Finally, the person should have that hard-to-define characteristic: grit. The ability to get knocked down and have the passion and perseverance to get up and go at it again.
When change happens, the priority has to be what is best for the team.
Identify the biggest problem, the "elephant in the room," bring it front and center, and tackle it first.
Whether in business or in sports, it's amazing what can be accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit.
Strive to win, but always win right, with commitment, teamwork, and integrity.
Leading teams becomes a lot more joyful, and the teams more effective, when you know and care about the people.
[Bill] had a very special place in his heart for the people who have the guts and skills to start companies. They are sane enough to know that every day is a fight for survival against daunting odds and crazy enough to think they can succeed anyway. And retaining them in a meaningful way is essential to success in any company.
To be successful, companies need to have teams that work together as communities, where individuals integrate their interests and put aside differences to be individually and collectively obsessed with what's good and right for the company. Since this doesn't naturally happen among groups of people, especially high-performing, ambitious people, you need someone playing the role of a coach, a team coach, to make it happen. Any company that wants to succeed in a time where technology has suffused every industry and most aspects of consumer life, where speed and innovation are paramount, must have team coaching as a part of its culture.
Bill grasped that there are things we all care about as people--love, family, money, attention, power, meaning, purpose--that are factors in any business situation. That to create effective teams, you need to understand and pay attention to these human values.
Don't just do a portfolio of things. Whatever you get involved with, have accountability and consequence. Drive it.
The following are my favorite notes from Simon Sinek's The Infinite Game.
When we say things like "people must come before profit," we often face resistance. Many of those who control the current system, many of our current leaders, tell us we are naive and don't understand the "reality" of how business really works. As a result, too many of us back down. We resign ourselves to waking up dreading to go to work, not feeling safe when we are there and struggling to find fulfillment in our lives. So much so that the search for that elusive work-life balance has become an entire industry unto itself.
Great leaders set up their organizations to succeed beyond their own lifetimes, and when they do, the benefits -- for us, for business and even for the shareholder -- are extraordinary.
A finite-minded leader uses the company's performance to demonstrate the value of their own career. An infinite-minded leader uses their career to enhance the long-term value of the company...and only part of that value is counted in money.
Just because a company is big and has enjoyed financial success does not mean it is strong enough to last.
Any leader who wants to adopt an infinite mindset must follow five essential practices:
Advance a just cause.
Build trusting teams.
Study your worthy rivals.
Prepare for existential flexibility.
Demonstrate the courage to lead.
When their is a Just Cause, a reason to come to work that is bigger than any particular win, our days take on more meaning and feel more fulfilling. Feelings that carry on week after week, month after month, year after year.
Leaders can rally people against something quite easily. They can whip them into a frenzy, even. For our emotions can run hot when we are angry or afraid. Being for something, in contrast, is about feeling inspired. Being for ignites the human spirit and fills us with hope and optimism. Being against is about vilifying, demonizing or rejecting. Being for is about inviting all to join in common cause. Being against focuses our attention on the things we can see in order to elicit reactions. Being for focuses our attention on the unbuilt future in order to spark our imaginations.
Money is the fuel to advance a Cause, it not a Cause itself.
The order in which a person presents information more often than not reveals their actual priorities and the focus of their strategies.
The constant abuse since the late 1970s has left us with a form of capitalism that is now, in fact, broken. It is a kind of bastardized capitalism that is organized to advance the interests of a few people who abuse the system for capital gain, which has done little to advance the true benefits of capitalism as a philosophy (as evidenced by anticapitalist and protectionist movements around the globe). Indeed, the entire philosophy of shareholder primacy and Friedman's definition of the purpose of business was promoted by investors themselves as a way to incentivize executives to prioritize and protect their finite interests above all else.
The Economic Policy Institute reported that in 1978, the average CEO made approximately 30 times the average worker's salary. By 2016, the average has increased over 800 percent to 271 times the average worker's pay. Where the average CEO has seen a nearly 950 percent increase in their earnings, the American worker, meanwhile, has seen just over 11 percent in theirs.
If our goal is to build companies that can keep playing for lifetimes to come, then we must stop automatically thinking of shareholders as owners, and executives must stop thinking that they solely work for them. A healthier way for all shareholders to view themselves is as contributors, be they near-term or long-term focused. Whereas employees contribute time and energy, investors contribute capital (money). Both forms of contribution are valuable and necessary to help a company succeed, so both parties should be fairly rewarded for their contributions.
In our modern day and age, it is the employee who bears the most cost for the money companies and their leaders make. They are the ones who must worry every time the company misses its arbitrary projections whether they will be sent home without the means to provide for themselves and their families. It is the employee who comes to work and feels that the company and its leaders do not care about them as human beings (note: offering free food and fancy offices is not the thing that makes people feel cared for). People want to be treated fairly and share in the wealth they helped produce in payment for the cost they bear to grow their companies.
So many leaders, even some of the best-intentioned ones, often ask, "how do I get the most out of my people?" This is a flawed question, however. A better question to ask is, "How do I create an environment in which my people can work to their best?"
It's not the people doing the job, it's the people who lead the people doing the job who can make the greater difference.
How a leader lists their priorities reveals their bias. And their bias will influence the choices they make.
Our goal, as leaders, is to ensure that our people have the skills -- technical skills, human skills or leadership skills -- so that they are equipped to work to their natural best and be a valuable asset to the team.
The Marine Corps focuses on assessing the inputs, the behaviors, rather than the outcomes. And for good reason. They know that good leaders sometimes suffer mission failure and bad leaders sometimes enjoy mission success. The ability to succeed is not what makes someone a leader. Exhibiting the qualities of leadership is what makes someone an effective leader. Qualities like honesty, integrity, courage, resiliency, perseverance, judgment and decisiveness, as the Marines have learned after years of trial and error, are more likely to engender the kind of trust and cooperation that, over the course of time, increase the likelihood that a team will succeed more often than it fails. A bias for will before resources, trust before performance, increases the probability a team will perform at higher levels over time.
One of the primary jobs of any leader is to make new leaders.
I personally find it quite troubling when executives take credit for their "culture of performance," yet take no responsibility for a culture consumed by ethical fading.
Disruption, remember, is often a symptom of a finite mindset. Leaders playing with a finite mindset often miss the opportunity to use a disruptive event in their industry to clarify their Cause. Instead, they double down on the finite game and simply start copying what the other players are doing with the hope that it will work for them too.
Instead of leading the digital revolution, Kodak's executives chose to close their eyes, put their fingers in their ears and try to convince themselves that everything was gonna be just fine. And I guess it was...for a time. But it didn't last. It couldn't last. Finite strategies never do.
Finite thinkers do not appreciate that an investment in people will ultimately benefit the company, the customer and their investments.
