You are a leader striving to motivate your staff, and it still isn’t working. Why are your efforts yielding so few results? Here’s a contrarian take based on some of Donald Trump’s supporters.
Let’s examine the case of two CEOs. Doug is an urgent problem-solver, eagerly using the managerial techniques which got him promoted in record time.
Nancy takes a different approach. She ran an employee engagement survey which received a lot of detailed responses. She launched projects to address the most pressing issues.
However, both of them are staring at uncomfortable data: sick days and burnout reports are climbing. Staff are quietly asking each other, “Where are we headed?” They both suspect that internal communication is at fault. Or perhaps the resources devoted to problem-fixing.
Beyond these popular blame games, consider that the diagnosis lies elsewhere entirely: ‘Follower-Friendly Failure’.
A new definition of an old tendency
Follower-Friendly Failure is defined as an attempt to engage one’s followers by fixing their problems. In companies, the levers to do so involve internal politics and company culture — both sensitive areas. As such, Doug and Nancy hope to communicate and engage staff while avoiding tactics that alienate. They have adopted an all-inclusive style of management.
At first, their preferred approaches may look like opposites: problem-fixer versus consensus-builder. But they are actually the same mistake in different clothes. The problem does not lie in the way they lead, but in the destination they are both leading towards.
More specifically, Nancy is doing the ‘acceptable’ thing by surveying workers and coming up with a plan that addresses their concerns. This is a common practice and, on the surface, a means to create the right mood for high achievement.
However, aggregating personnel grievances produce a politically safe wish list — not a strategy. It assumes that performing quick emotional uplifts will scale into mass motivation.
Furthermore, addressing immediate complaints merely generates new complaints — a vicious circle. Eventually, constituents burn out from chasing one issue after another.
A different approach — one that draws from the future rather than reacting to the present — is needed.
Using the future as a resource
Dr Riel Miller defines ‘futures literacy’ as the capacity to use the future as a resource for acting in the present. For strategists, it means defining a detailed, measurable vision. A ‘true north’.
Developing that final outcome means temporarily holding the future as open and undecided. Until a single, clear, unambiguous vision is chosen, several outcomes or destinations are seen as probable.
Once the decision is made, inspiration and commitment are unleashed. It stands apart from other leadership capacities such as a charismatic personality, or even intelligent policies.
Consider what polling data reveals: many Jamaicans wonder how Donald Trump maintains the support he has, given his obvious flaws. Most of us know someone who follows him despite privately disagreeing with much of what he does.
Yet, some 25 to 35 per cent of his coalition dislike the specifics — his persona, policies, and plans — but still stay behind him. Why? They agree with the unambiguous destination he advocates.
These destination-first supporters demonstrate exactly what Doug and Nancy are missing: without a clear, unambiguous vision, there is nothing for that cohort of followers to lock onto.
Notwithstanding the obvious differences between electoral and company leaders, there is something they both share: the ultimate need to connect with the actions of an ordinary person, Jody Bloggs.
Ordinary actions, extraordinary outcomes
If you are an executive, you may know that finding proof that a strategic plan is being executed faithfully is harder than it looks. Some trust in ‘vibes’. Others want engagement scores, C-suite alignment, and project management metrics. But none of these lagging indicators prove that a strategy is well under way.
Instead, take the case of ordinary employee Jody Bloggs. Her role has been identified as strategically essential. Why? The new plan has highlighted the work in her department as ‘high leverage’ because it is indispensable to the 15-year destination the company has defined.
Her department’s work belongs in the 20 per cent of efforts that drive 80 per cent of strategic results. Without a clear destination, that leverage is invisible to her — and she spends her Monday doing what she did the week before.
In this context, the best indicator of progress is Jody Bloggs doing things differently. On Monday, unprompted by her boss, she spent three hours taking novel actions in support of the stated destination. When there are enough people like her, the new strategy begins to move the needle in the right direction.
As a leader, name one unambiguous destination, resist the Follower-Friendly pressure to make it inclusive — and then watch what Jody Bloggs does on Monday morning.
Francis Wade is the author of Perfect Time-Based Productivity, a keynote speaker and a management consultant. To search his prior columns on productivity, strategy, engagement and business processes, send email to columns@fwconsulting.com.
