Category: leadership

Stop the Arsonists: Better Leadership for Burning Workplaces
“I’m always firefighting. There’s no time to think.”

I can’t remember the first time I heard this phrase, but I hear it A LOT – particularly when I’m coaching senior leaders in transformative and project leadership roles.

And whilst evocative of modern time-management (or lack thereof) has to be a better way, right? Well this got me thinking, and a confluence of three things sparked this blog:
1. Someone using this phrase in a coaching session…again!
2. Reading about systems thinking.
3. Watching the Apple TV+ show, Smoke.
A bit of context about each, and then the thought…

The phrase

It paints a clear picture…or we can all think of the meme with the cartoon dog in the house that’s on fire saying ‘this is fine’…everything’s going a million miles per hour and we have to move from one crisis to the next, urgent to urgent to urgent – never doing the important things we promised ourselves we’d do, like strategic thinking, self-development, 1:1s with others, improving processes, etc.

Systems Thinking

This is something that I’ve dabbled with on and off for years. In the first instance, I didn’t really get it. Someone sent me a video of blobs moving around rectangles and said ‘I think you’re going to love it’…

More recently, I’ve come to understand more about systems and how interconnected everything is – that is, whatever happens may be as of a result of something else far away in the system, or whatever we do may have far reaching and unintended consequences on the wider system. And that, traditionally, when things go wrong people tend to analyse; that is, break the problem down into smaller and smaller constituent parts – e.g. an app fails and analysis tells us a line of code needs rewriting, whereas Systems thinking asks us to synthesise, or to look up at the wider systemic nudges that may cause the problem – e.g. an app fails because of management pressure to ship fast on smaller budgets.

Smoke

This is a show on Apple tv+ about a fire scene investigator partnering up with a cop to identify and catch two serial arsonists. No spoilers, but it’s far more compelling than I thought it might be to start with. The fire scene investigator character, played by Taron Egerton, often delivers talks to trainees about the chaos of fire and being prepared.

The confluence

This got me thinking, if a fire kept happening in the same place, you wouldn’t want to keep relying on the fire brigade/department to come and put it out…you’d solve the reason why the same thing kept happening…so why don’t we do this at work when people describe their entire jobs as ‘fire fighting’?

I can’t imagine a fire fighter loving having to revisit a scene time and time again if a fire keeps getting ignited there – they’d want to put some other measures in place – systemic changes – sprinklers, better equipment, arrest the arsonists, create escape plans.

This approach could apply to the highly flammable systems in the workplace because it’s not ok to perpetually expect colleagues to be fire-fighters – presumably we want them spending their time adding value and putting their hard-won skills and experiences to work rather than rushing around, meeting to meeting, putting out things that have gone wrong.

Setup Sprinklers

In the immediate term, a knowledge-work equivalent of the sprinkler system might need setting up. If a fire keeps breaking out, having something to immediately dampen it down might be a reasonable temporary solution. In our imagined knowledge-work based equivalent, maybe that’s a standing meeting, decision forum, Andon Cord, or emergency WhatsApp channel that can be triggered straight away to solve the biggest crises and challenges.

Improve Equipment and Systems

The system is broken if fires keep breaking out. The system needs fixing. In the same way that if a restaurant kept catching fire they might need some better quality ovens, in our knowledge-work environment, we need higher quality systems that avoid these fires breaking out. Maybe it’s visualising all the work that’s going on so that people can see a potential fire brewing. Maybe it’s limiting work in progress so that more work can’t be shoved into an already overloaded system. Maybe it’s building in slack, recovery, creativity time into work.

To continue the fire metaphor, sometimes a fire-break is required in order to break the spread of the chaos and put new systems in place and so it may be with our work systems. It’s not ok that colleagues describe their working days as perpetually being on fire, we have to find better systems.

Arrest the Arsonists

If you’re the fire fighter in this scenario, then I’m going to assume it’s not you lighting the fires…you keep putting them out. So who IS lighting them? Stop them. Take their jerry cans of fuel away.

If it’s people adding stuff to your plate, check out the No Repertoire from Greg McKeown; if it’s people bringing you down, stop spending time with them; if people change their mind every five minutes, perhaps introduce something like the RAPID decision-making framework and force people to take some responsibility.

Develop Escape Plans

And, if it can’t be prevented, fire breaks out – then you need an escape plan. Getting away from your desk for a minute to assess the situation, having a friend to call, taking a holiday, going for a walk all may be release valves for dealing with these situations.

There’s a reason firefighters have to have breaks and spend a lot of time training – it’s not tenable to be doing it all the time. And it isn’t for us either. We need breaks, we need training, we need recovery if we’re going to have to fight fires at work.

These are some ideas I’ve been kicking around on firefighting. What other techniques could people try to change the system and stop the arsonists?
01/08/2025
Does your canopy of work make sense?

Another trip to Westonbirt Arboretum, another incredibly valuable lesson in the development of the Outcomes Tree. I was so enthused, I took a picture. Check out this beautiful Acer tree:

Look at the gorgeous canopy, the perfection of the Japanese Maple leaves – extraordinarily satisfying, yes? Such perfection in nature! Look down the branches – layers of growth and life. Then to the trunk…hang on…there’s two trunks! Two trees! Living in perfect harmony with each other. Check those leaves again – oh yes, the ones on the right are slightly more mature, a reddening in the pigment compared to the ones on the left. Two lives, combined as one.

Multiple Trees at Work

In a recent Outcomes Tree workshop, someone asked me how it works if there are multiple trees in an organisation. This picture is, I think, a healthy metaphor for answering that question.

Very often in organisations, there’s a lot of land-grabbing, empire-building, whatever you want to call it – it’s the equivalent of fighting for the sun at the expense of everything else around. It’s a desperate and limiting pursuit of power at the expense of others. It actually reduces the overall impact of the organisation, demoralises some and promotes others. What the Acers teach us is that, when we are working together, there’s space for both of us. See how each tree makes space for the other; how they flourish in their respective space and limit their overlap; and ultimately, how they appear united as one single canopy.

When using multiple Outcomes Trees in an organisation, we need to look to see if the overall canopy makes sense.

Do some outcomes cede way for others so there’s an overall, natural coherence beyond the individual pursuit?

Where there’s space for our specialism, can we thrive and grow? Where there’s overlap, can we combine or cede growth for the benefit of the overall?

I understand ceding looks like giving up something or giving it away but, you can see here, it’s natural for the benefit of the overall. There is room for all of us. There is abundance if we embrace it. Internal politics and aggression will be to any organisations detriment, not growth, and land-grabbing doesn’t help. Coherent, generous growth with an abundance mindset will endure.

Mature leaves=mature leaders

And what about the more mature leaves? What can they teach us? I believe they show us that in a healthy organisation, there are some experiments more advanced in their learning than others, and we can follow their lead; I also believe it shows us that the more mature people are in an organisation, the more willing they are to ‘go first’ and forge a bold, new set of outcomes for the future. The reddened leaves are going first to provide their energy back to the tree – and our leaders can do the same for our organisations.

Dare you cede something for the benefit of the canopy?

The impression from the outside of any organisation should be one, coherent experience (or canopy), even if, internally, it means we cede growth to others for the overall benefit of the customer or user experience.

Does your canopy of work make sense? Is there too much overlap? Can you cede control over some things to promote growth overall?

Watch the FREE Green Shoots introduction to the Outcomes Tree to get started growing your own!

21/08/2023
Was Marcus Aurelius an Agilist?

Lessons in Change from an Ancient Philosopher.

In the run up to my 40th birthday, I thought I should read some classic philosophy. I’ve just finished reading Meditations, a collection of personal reflections by Roman Emperor Philosopher, Marcus Aurelius, written in the second century of the Common Era.

I picked three such reflections (or ‘Chapters’ as they’re called) which I thought were humbling and important to bear in mind when thinking about the work we sometimes do as Agile Coaches and change agents.

The numbers quoted below refer to the Book & Chapter.

First, was a compelling reminder from 4.42:

Change: nothing inherently bad in the process, nothing inherently good in the result.

Here, Marcus Aurelius reminds us, even the evangelical change agents, that just because we say it’ll be better by doing things differently, it doesn’t necessarily make it so.

We must always be careful to check ourselves against a deep-seated belief that changing things will improve them. There is, as Aurelius says, nothing inherently bad in the process of changing things and nothing inherently good in the result – we must work at both aspects.

I’ve worked with people who assume that just because of a business model, framework, brand, etc. is what it is, that it’s inherently better at creating products and services that engage, inspire and wow customers than the competition. This is short-sighted thinking that risks hubris and complacency.

We must work to understand the difficulties and challenges of change as we move through the process, which may be a good or bad process (however one might define ‘good’ or ‘bad’); a breeze or a quagmire. And we must not be precious about the result – it is wholly possible that change isn’t better – and in fact we need to shift direction and move elsewhere based on what we learn through the process.

An important lesson for evangelists!

Second, for those struggling with change, 7.18:

Is someone afraid of change? Well, what can ever come to be without change? Or what is dearer or closer to the nature of the Whole than change? Can you yourself take your bath, unless the wood that heats it is not changed? Can you be fed, unless what you eat changes? Can any other of the benefits of life be achieved without change? Do you not see then that for you to be changed is equal, and equally necessary to the nature of the Whole?

We often work with people who are afeared of change because of what it says about themselves, their roles, careers, industries; but this meditation gives us hope that everything changes – and that it is perfectly normal and natural. I work with people who don’t want to change, and I understand it: they’ve build successful, long careers doing things a certain way and change threatens it. In their hearts, they must truly understand that nothing remains still – through the career they have built, they will have changed – their practices, their skills, their identity, because we are human beings as part of nature – and change is natural.

This Chapter gave me hope for those we partner with and walk alongside on the journey of change.

And finally, 5.23:

Keep in mind how fast things pass by and are gone—those that are now, and those to come. Existence flows past us like a river: the “what” is in constant flux, the “why” has a thousand variations. Nothing is stable, not even what’s right here. The infinity of past and future gapes before us—a chasm whose depths we cannot see. So it would take an idiot to feel self-importance or distress. Or any indignation, either. As if the things that irritate us lasted.

This verse speaks to me on the nature of Agile product development. Things move fast and change happens every day (today we’re all excited about ChatGPT – whatever happened to Stable Diffusion? Has it come and gone already?) As is noted, the what and why have many variations; it’s only our hope that the ‘how’ (working with greater agility) is better (but that’s no guarantee from the first lesson). This meditation shows the folly of having long-term plans or being stressed at things slipping on a Gantt chart, for the future, as noted, gapes as a chasm before us and we cannot predict everything that will befall us in time.

It’s also worth bearing in mind that if we Agilists ‘irritate’ others – that we probably won’t last either! A wise lesson in meeting people where they are.

Some insightful lessons from 1850-year-old philosophy about navigating modern change.

There were many other Chapters I’ve underlined for personal reflections on the themes of time, presence, death, the cyclical nature of things, nature itself, fate, and our place in the Whole. A most edifying read.

Have you read Meditations? What stands out for you?

18/04/2023
Why we must reclaim the human face of meetings

Do you know how big your ‘self-view’ video is on Zoom when someone else is sharing content? It’s pretty small, right? In fact, on my 27” monitor, when Zoom is fullscreen and someone is sharing content, every person’s video is about 1.5” x 1” (4cm x 2.5cm).

Do you know how big the content is? On my monitor, it’s 16” x 10”. That means that you could fit about 100 people’s videos into the size of the content. Are we really saying that when someone is presenting, everyone else’s input is only worth about 1/100th of the value? No wonder people don’t bother contributing or turning their video on; the app is telling them they are not as valuable or worthy as whatever is being shared.

This was thrown into sharp focus for me recently when I prepared for, and then delivered, an in-person workshop. The team and I spent lots of time crafting and refining slides in preparation for the event to drive the agenda and content. But when we started working together in person at the event, the slides faded into insignificance compared to the actual conversations that took place, and the space I was sharing with other human beings. Suddenly, the slide content was a mere backdrop, not a foreground, and the interactions and individuals took centre-stage. The engagement from participants was absolute, the interactions were insightful and fun, and the outcomes were undoubtedly better.

When we are in person, the people are the most important thing.

My personal and professional purpose is to liberate the greatness in others. I believe that humans are inherently brilliant, and if we can only find ways to help each other to switch off their censors and unleash their genius, we’ll all fly. And here was an event where, what I’d prepped, may have been in the way of liberating greatness. This event was a humbling reminder of what I instinctively knew anyway; that when we are in person, the people are the most important thing.

There’s a building consensus that online, or e-learning, wasn’t successful for children during the pandemic. Whilst schools are all back in classrooms now, we haven’t yet applied some of this understanding to the corporate world. I’m certainly not advocating for getting everyone back into offices – in fact, I think most of the time, most of the work we do can be done from anywhere. When we are expecting to learn, collaborate, and workshop ideas through however, then prioritising the human attendees’ experience must be the best way.

I make a distinction between just being ‘in-person’ and prioritising attendees, because I think we can do so much more through our current media of choice (Zoom or MS Teams or a.n.other) to recognise that we’re sharing the time and space together as ingenuous, brave, collaborative, thought-provoking human beings.

I’ve been on two, online, two-day short courses recently. One course used only three slides, temporarily, over the entire duration of the course and it changed my life for the better. One had nearly 400 slides onscreen the whole time over two days and made me wish I’d made better life choices.

I don’t believe this is all our fault. My hypothesis is that attendees on calls are acting in alignment with what the apps are telling them – that they not as valuable as the ‘content’ being shared. And, with this self-fulfilling prophecy, engagement declines, thinking stops, cameras go off, mics go on mute, and we’re reduced to a quiet box in the corner, overshadowed by what, visually, we’re being told is important – i.e., not us.

We must reclaim the human face of meetings, especially when we’re online. We must endeavour to think about the experiences of the attendees, show them their contribution matters, and value their input and creativity as human beings. I, for one, will hack-and-slash the number of slides I ever choose to use again on screen and stop sharing them as soon as I can, if it’s required at all. I encourage you to do the same. If we don’t, we risk losing the insights and inputs from the attendees that can sustain and save our organisations from irrelevance.

16/01/2023
The most stunning leadership statement I heard this year

Leadership is hard. In any organisation, at any level, being a leader requires clarity, calm and consideration. It requires people to paint such a compelling picture of a possible future that it seems like it could be a reality today. So much of the role of leaders is based on how they speak – and whether those words match their actions.

I was wowed when I heard this statement from a leader’s opening remarks earlier this year. Rodrigo leads part of a large multi-national financial services provider. His words and actions impact work that serves millions of customers. He leads quarterly planning events that have thousands of attendees, and during his opening address, he said something that will stay with me forever:

Your children know my name and I’ll have never met them. Your team members’ children know your name. What do you want them to say about you?”

This was such an ingeniously human way of describing the impact leaders have, not just in the workplace, but in our lives more broadly. He knew that, whilst he won’t ever meet many of his team members’ children, they have probably heard his name at home. And he wants his people to talk about him positively to their children. By extension, he was making an extraordinary invitation to consider the impact his leaders have on their respective team members.

We can all think of leaders and managers we have talked about with disdain at home – to loved ones, friends, family (and children pick up on everything!). Those people close to us will have formed views and opinions of that leader and, potentially, by extension, that organisation. And because these people love us and want what’s best for us, their views will be strong-held based on what they hear. So, this wonderful statement was to ask us to consider how we’d like to be talked about when we’re not there. Do we want to be the leader that people are stressed and upset about and worry about interacting with, keeping people awake on a Sunday night; or do we want to be the leader that enthuses people to speak well about our organisation at home, to look forward to working with them, to bringing their best selves to work with us?

As my coaching supervisor says to me, ‘how we do anything is how we do everything’and here’s a perfect example of how this can play out: our lives are complex webs of social interactions where each part of the system has an impact on the other.

What kind of impact do you want to have on others?

13/12/2022