the open-door policy

If you've ever spent any time around Wal-Mart, you may have noticed that it's not unusual for somebody in Philadelphia, Mississippi, to get in his pickup on the spur of the moment and drive to Bentonville, where you can find him sitting in the lobby waiting patiently to see the chairman. Now, really, how many chairmen of $50 billion companies do you know who are totally, 100 percent accessible to their hourly associates? I know lots of people in big companies who have never even seen their chairman, much less visited with him. - David Glass

That's not to suggest that they always like what I have to say. I don't always solve their problems, and I can't always side with them just because they bring their situation to my attention. But if the associate happens to be right, it's important to overrule their manager, or whoever they're having the problem with because otherwise the open-door policy isn't any good to anybody. The associates would know pretty soon that it was just something we paid lip service to, but didn't really believe. If I'm going to fly around all over the country telling these folks they're my partners, I sure owe it to them to at least hear them out when they're upset about something. 

Sam Walton

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 141, 142

having your oldest friend come just to see if you're okay

When I started working at Wal-Mart in West Texas, we would anticipate a store visit by the chairman with the same sense you get when you're going to meet a great athlete, or a movie star, or a head of state. But once he comes in the store, that feeling of awe is overcome by a sort of kinship. He is a master at erasing that 'larger-than-life' feeling that people have for him. How many heads of state always start the conversation by wanting to know what you think? What's on your mind?

After a visit, everyone in the store has no doubt that he genuinely appreciates our contributions, no matter how insignificant. Every associate feels like he or she does make a difference. It's almost like having your oldest friend come just to see if you're okay. He never lets us down.

Andy Sims, Manager, Wal-Mart No. 1, Rogers, Arkansas

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 140, 141

less afraid of being wrong

Two things about Sam Walton distinguish him from almost everyone else I know. First, he gets up every day bound and determined to improve something. Second, he is less afraid of being wrong than anyone I've ever known. And once he sees he's wrong, he just shakes it off and heads in another direction.

David Glass

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 39

redefine or change

Improving your leadership effectiveness requires behavior change. A 360-feedback process, when done right, greatly increases the chances that change will occur. When leaders find out that others see them differently than they intend or want to be seen, they have a simple choice. Either they redefine how they see themselves, or they change their behavior. For example, if others tell me that I’m rigid and don’t listen to a different viewpoint, the next time I’m in a discussion about a controversial topic, I’m more inclined to catch myself and listen. And if I continue to argue and hold tight to my views, I’ll be faced with the realization that the others’ perceptions of me were correct.

There’s also an increased likelihood of change if several leaders go through this process together. Social reinforcement makes it easier for everyone involved to be more receptive to new ideas and feedback. This is the same reason that working with a coach can help a leader to change; the coach holds leaders accountable for their commitments to change their behavior, and follows up to see if they did.

Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman

"What Makes a 360-Degree Review Successful?" Harvard Business Review. December 23, 2020

i've heard that before

Leaders who go through a serious 360-degree feedback process will often reflect on a comment or piece of feedback and say something to the effect of, “I’ve heard that before. My (husband/wife/partner/roommate) has told me that, but I didn’t think it was that important.” But now, when a dozen or more people collectively observe that the leader isn’t a good listener, for example, the message is louder and clearer. The 360-degree feedback process underscores the seriousness and credibility of the feedback.

The anonymity of process means that the feedback was given by colleagues with the understanding that they would be confidential. The result is far greater honesty and candor. And, we’re happy to say that after decades of conducting and reviewing thousands of 360-degree feedback reports, we almost never see messages that are intentionally barbed or mean-spirited.

Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman

"What Makes a 360-Degree Review Successful?" Harvard Business Review. December 23, 2020

expanded self-awareness

Expanded self-awareness... is one of the most important outcomes of any feedback process. People with little self-awareness are often puzzled by the behavior of others toward them. They might wonder, “Why do people not include me in their casual conversations?” “Why do I end up in heated arguments?” “Why was I not chosen to lead this project? I know more than the person they selected.” When a 360-assessment is carried out as described above, the leader is able to compare their self-ratings to the ratings from others. Having ratings from multiple people (we recommend at least a dozen) provides greater evidence that this is much more than just one person’s opinion. Combined with accountability, this evidence serves as a strong impetus to change.

Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman

"What Makes a 360-Degree Review Successful?" Harvard Business Review. December 23, 2020

ontological humility

Fred Kofman wrote a great chapter called Ontological Humility in his book Conscious Business. Here’s an excerpt:

Ontological humility is the acknowledgement that you do not have a special claim on reality or truth and, that others have equally valid perspectives deserving respect and consideration. This attitude is opposed to ontological arrogance, which is the claim that your truth is the only truth.

Even though it may make sense intellectually that people have different perspectives, most people do not naturally act from this understanding, especially in the midst of disagreement or conflict.

When you remember your criticism may be wrong, you’ll offer it more humbly. You will challenge others in a way that invites a reciprocal challenge, and you’ll be more likely to see things from the other person’s point of view.

Kim Scott

"How to give humble feedback," by Kim Scott. Radical Candor. Accessed August 17, 2022

situation, behavior, impact

The Center for Creative Leadership developed a technique called Situation, Behavior, Impact that ensures guidance is humble rather than judgmental. The idea is simple. It forces you to describe what you saw a person do and what impact you saw as a result. This prevents you from passing judgments or making assertions that seem arrogant or fall prey to the “fundamental attribution error.”

Instead of yelling, “You a$$&0!e” when somebody grabs your parking space, you say, “I’ve been waiting for that spot here for five minutes, and you just zipped in front of me and took it. Now I’m going to be late.”

If you say this, you give the person a chance to say, “Oh, I’m sorry I didn’t realize, let me move.” (Of course, the person might also just flip you off or say, “Tough s&!t.” Then you can yell with more justification, “You a$$&0!e!”)

Here’s how to do this at work. Describe the situation, the person’s behavior, and the impact the behavior had. All those descriptions don’t have to add up to a novel. They just provide the specifics of what actually happened. In other words, don’t just say, “You’re aggressive.” Better to say, “In the meeting we just had when you and Zan got in an argument (situation), putting your face three inches from Zan’s and yelling ‘F*#& You’ (behavior) was too aggressive.” Here you are describing the situation and the behavior, but you didn’t describe the impact.

Best to say, “In the meeting we just had when you and Zan got in an argument (situation), putting your face three inches from Zan’s and yelling ‘F*#& You’ (behavior) could result in his bringing a lawsuit against the company for allowing a hostile work environment (impact).”

Situation, behavior, impact applies to praise as well as to criticism. Praise can feel just as arrogant as criticism. A great way to offer praise that is helpful is to share the situation, the behavior, and the impact so that it’s clear why the work was important. I often bristle at praise because it sounds insincere or patronizing or somehow belittling.

When somebody says to me, “I’m so proud of you!” I think, “Who are you to be proud of me?” I’d rather hear, “In the presentation you just gave (situation), I think what you said about A, B, C (behavior) was a persuasive because x, y, z (impact).” It’s the fear of sounding arrogant that sometimes makes me hesitate to give praise to people properly. Using situation, behavior, impact helps.

Kim Scott

"How to give humble feedback," by Kim Scott. Radical Candor. Accessed August 17, 2022

he always GETS it right

Andy Grove once told me, over a cup of Jamocha Almond Fudge ice cream at Baskin Robbins in Los Altos, “F*@&ing Steve Jobs always gets it right.”

“Nobody’s always right,” I said.

“I didn’t say Steve IS always right. I said he always GETS it right. Like anyone, he is wrong all the time, but he insists, and not gently either, that people tell him when he’s wrong, so he always gets it right in the end.”

I thought a lot about this conversation over the next couple of years. I think Andy was exactly right: a big part of Steve Jobs’s genius came from his willingness to be proven wrong. Here’s how he described it in his own words:

Jobs: I don’t mind being wrong. And I’ll admit that I’m wrong a lot. It doesn’t really matter to me too much. What matters to me is that we do the right thing. Watch the video >>

In other words, you don’t have to grovel or pretend to be worse than you are. You just need to accept the possibility that whatever you’re saying may be wrong. Don’t be arrogant. Be curious.

Kim Scott

"How to give humble feedback," by Kim Scott. Radical Candor. Accessed August 17, 2022

couldn’t say in the meeting

A final way I tightened up meetings was to discourage people from coming to my office afterward to tell me what they “couldn’t say in the meeting” on account of who was in the room. What kind of leader would I be if I suddenly changed my opinion based on statements from the last person with whom I spoke? When people did come to me after meetings, I explained that because they lacked the guts to speak up, we had just wasted an hour of everyone’s time and would now have to reconvene so that everyone could hear this new input. I only had to do that a couple of times before this baloney stopped. 

David M. Cote

Winning Now, Winning Later: How Companies Can Succeed in the Short Term While Investing for the Long Term. HarperCollins Leadership. 2020. p. 27

sincere words of praise

Nothing else can quite substitute for a few well-chosen, well-timed, sincere words of praise.

They're absolutely free and worth a fortune

Sam Walton

Sam Walton: Made in America. Bantam Books. 1993. p.315. As found in 2022 Great Quotes From Great Leaders Boxed Calendar: 365 Inspirational Quotes From Leaders Who Shaped the World.

change the rule

When [Monty] Williams was fired by the New Orleans Pelicans in 2015, he surveyed former players, who told him they felt like they couldn’t make mistakes in front of him. He vowed that if he got another chance to coach in the NBA, he would listen to his players more. “That made me feel like an idiot,” he said. “To have any one of our players not feeling like they can be themselves. It was something I hope I’ve learned from.”

He eventually worked in San Antonio’s front office. There, he internalized a Gregg Popovich mantra about flexibility: “If the rules stifle talent, change the rule.”

Seerat Sohi

"Will Deandre Ayton Get His Moment in the Sun?" by Seerat Sohi. The Ringer. April 28, 2022

the man, the boy, and the donkey

A Man and his son were once going with their Donkey to market. As they were walking along by its side a countryman passed them and said: “You fools, what is a Donkey for but to ride upon?”

So the Man put the Boy on the Donkey and they went on their way. But soon they passed a group of men, one of whom said: “See that lazy youngster, he lets his father walk while he rides.”

So the Man ordered his Boy to get off, and got on himself. But they hadn’t gone far when they passed two women, one of whom said to the other: “Shame on that lazy lout to let his poor little son trudge along."

Well, the Man didn’t know what to do, but at last he took his Boy up before him on the Donkey. By this time they had come to the town, and the passers-by began to jeer and point at them. The Man stopped and asked what they were scoffing at. The men said: “Aren’t you ashamed of yourself for overloading that poor donkey of yours and your hulking son?”

The Man and Boy got off and tried to think what to do. They thought and they thought, till at last they cut down a pole, tied the donkey’s feet to it, and raised the pole and the donkey to their shoulders. They went along amid the laughter of all who met them till they came to Market Bridge, when the Donkey, getting one of his feet loose, kicked out and caused the Boy to drop his end of the pole. In the struggle the Donkey fell over the bridge, and his fore-feet being tied together he was drowned.

“That will teach you,” said an old man who had followed them:

“Please all, and you will please none.”

Aseop

“THE MAN, THE BOY, AND THE DONKEY”, Lit2Go. Accessed on February 14, 2022

three functional purposes for meetings

 …there are only three functional purposes for having a business meeting:

1. To inform and bring people up to speed.

2. To seek input from people.

3. To ask for approval.

Use this as a filter to determine why you are having a meeting and explain that purpose to your audience. Your meetings may often cut across multiple objectives but forcing yourself to clarify the agenda into these three purposes can result in more effective meetings.

Anthony K. Tjan

“The Key to Shorter, Better Meetings,” Harvard Business Review. June 23, 2009 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

meeting plus/delta

End the meeting with a plus/delta. If your team meets regularly, two questions form a simple continuous improvement process: What did we do well? What do we want to do differently for the next meeting? Investing five or ten minutes will enable the team to improve performance, working relationships, and team member satisfaction. Here are some questions to consider when identifying what the team has done well and what it wants to do differently:

• Was the agenda distributed in time for everyone to prepare?
• How well did team members prepare for the meeting?
• How well did we estimate the time needed for each agenda item?
• How well did we allocate our time for decision making and discussion?
• How well did everyone stay on-topic? How well did team members speak up when they thought someone was off-topic?
• How effective was the process for each agenda item?

To ensure that your team follows through, review the results of the plus/delta at the beginning of the next meeting.

Roger Schwarz

“How to Design an Agenda for an Effective Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 19, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

review and modify agenda as needed

Make the first topic “review and modify agenda as needed.” Even if you and your team have jointly developed the agenda before the meeting, take a minute to see if anything needs to be changed due to late breaking events. I once had a meeting scheduled with a senior leadership team. As we reviewed the agenda, I asked if we needed to modify anything. The CEO stated that he had just told the board of directors that he planned to resign and that we probably needed to significantly change the agenda. Not all agenda modifications are this dramatic, but by checking at the beginning of the meeting, you increase the chance that the team will use its meeting time most effectively.

Roger Schwarz

“How to Design an Agenda for an Effective Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 19, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

a time suck

Dave, a senior VP at a large U.S. bank, was a strong one-on-one manager. However, 360-degree feedback revealed that he struggled in one critical area: leading effective meetings. Multiple employees described his meetings as “a time suck.” They complained that he asked them to meet too often, allowed a few people to dominate conversations, and failed to create an environment where attendees really wrestled with ideas and engaged in critical thinking. These comments took Dave by complete surprise. He’d thought he was doing a good job with meetings—better than most of his peers, anyway.

Dave is not the first manager to overestimate his abilities in this area. Research suggests that of the 23 hours that executives spend in meetings each week, on average, eight are unproductive. Some 90% of people report daydreaming in meetings, and 73% admit that they use meeting time to do other work. And yet research by myself and others shows that leaders consistently rate their own meetings very favorably—and much more positively than attendees do. For instance, a telephone survey of more than 1,300 managers found that while 79% of them said that meetings they initiated were extremely or very productive, only 56% said the same about meetings initiated by others—clear evidence of an “I’m not the problem” attitude. Additional research provides insight into why: In a study with Jiajin Tong of Peking University, I found that the attendees who are the most active are the ones who feel that meetings are the most effective and satisfying. And who typically talks the most? The leader.

Steven G. Rogelberg

“Why Your Meetings Stink—and What to Do About It,” Harvard Business Review. January-February 2019)

seek agenda input

Seek [agenda] input from team members. If you want your team to be engaged in meetings, make sure the agenda includes items that reflect their needs. Ask team members to suggest agenda items along with a reason why each item needs to be addressed in a team setting. If you ultimately decide not to include an item, be accountable — explain your reasoning to the team member who suggested it.

Roger Schwarz

“How to Design an Agenda for an Effective Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 19, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

purpose of the meeting

Note whether the purpose of the topic is to share information, seek input for a decision, or make a decision. It’s difficult for team members to participate effectively if they don’t know whether to simply listen, give their input, or be part of the decision making process. If people think they are involved in making a decision, but you simply want their input, everyone is likely to feel frustrated by the end of the conversation. Updates are better distributed — and read — prior to the meeting, using a brief part of the meeting to answer participants’ questions. If the purpose is to make a decision, state the decision-making rule. If you are the formal leader, at the beginning of the agenda item you might say, “If possible, I want us to make this decision by consensus. That means that everyone can support and implement the decision given their roles on the team. If we’re not able to reach consensus after an hour of discussion, I’ll reserve the right to make the decision based on the conversation we’ve had. I’ll tell you my decision and my reasoning for making it.”

Roger Schwarz

“How to Design an Agenda for an Effective Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 19, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

having everyone contribute

Having everyone contribute isn’t just good for the end result of your meeting but for the participants themselves as well. People like to know that their opinions are being heard and considered, says Gino. And, “just by asking people in the meeting for their opinion, you’re going to raise their commitment to the issues being discussed.”

Amy Gallo

“The Condensed Guide to Running Meetings,” Harvard Business Review. July 6, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.