[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.He tried to teach good process topeople at all levels by establishing new norms, modeling desiredbehaviors, and giving people an opportunity to practice approaches todecision making that were both fairer and more disciplined.Not everyone got the message.In Levy s second month on thejob, he discussed an important issue with his staff, and by the end ofthe meeting, he thought that the group had reached consensus onhow to proceed.He reminded everyone of his efforts to combat the culture of yes and asked whether everyone truly supported the deci-sion.No one expressed objections or concerns.Just a few days later,one chief complained publicly about the decision, despite having CHAPTER 7 " FAIR AND LEGITIMATE PROCESS 191remained silent in the staff meeting.Levy chose to reprimand theindividual publicly, pointing out that he had been given numerousopportunities to voice his ideas and concerns in a constructive man-ner.Of course, public criticism can be dangerous, but in this case,Levy employed it judiciously to reinforce the new behavioral norms.It became a teaching moment, not just for that individual but for theentire management team.Levy also delegated many tactical decisions and responsibilities,providing managers at all levels the opportunity to practice newapproaches to problem solving and decision making.He took on thejob of monitoring the way that people went about making those deci-sions to ensure that people embraced the new norms and employedthem effectively to achieve consensus and reach closure in a timelymanner.However, he did not micromanage.As groups went abouttheir work, Levy chose to think of himself as the organization s ver-sion of an appeals court judge.He did not want to review all cases denovo (starting all over) and simply overrule decisions made by thelower court; instead, he strove to review the decision process used bythe lower court to determine if it followed the rules. 30 If so, its deci-sion often stood.If not, he intervened to teach his managers how tolead more effective decision-making processes.He did not simplycorrect their choice.31What About Conflict?This chapter focused on building consensus.Some might wonderwhat happened to all the talk about conflict, dissent, and divergentthinking.How does one reconcile this discussion of fairness and legit-imacy with earlier descriptions of how leaders can stimulate the clashof ideas? The answer is actually rather simple.Let s go back to ourdefinition of consensus.It does not equal unanimity or even majorityrule.It does not mean that teams, rather than leaders, make deci-sions.It does not mean that one must find a compromise solution that 192 WHY GREAT LEADERS DON T TAKE YES FOR AN ANSWERmarries elements of multiple options.Consensus means that peoplecomprehend the final decision, have committed themselves to exe-cuting the chosen course of action, feel a sense of collective owner-ship about the plan, and are willing to cooperate with others duringthe implementation effort.Leaders can and should build consensus even when team mem-bers cannot reach unanimous agreement on a complicated issue.Infact, too much unanimity ought to be a warning sign that peoplemight feel unsafe expressing their views.Striving for consensus cer-tainly does not mean minimizing conflict among the members of yourmanagement team.In fact, to build a strong and enduring consensus,leaders need to stimulate conflict, not avoid it.Although that last statement may sound counterintuitive, thinkabout the concepts of procedural fairness and legitimacy again.Theopportunity to engage in vigorous debate plays a critical role in shap-ing perceptions of fairness and legitimacy.Individuals will not per-ceive a decision process to be fair if they have not had an opportunityto air their diverse points of view, and to disagree with one anotherand the leader openly and candidly.People do not consider aprocess to be legitimate if they are steered toward a preferred solu-tion or presented with token alternatives; they want the opportunityto debate a genuine set of options on an equal playing field with theircolleagues.Scholars W.Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne try to dis-pel the notion that one must avoid conflict to build commitment andfoster active cooperation:Fair process does not set out to achieve harmony orto win people s support through compromises thataccommodate every individual s opinions, needs, orinterests& Nor is fair process the same as democracyin the workplace.Achieving fair process does notmean that managers forfeit their prerogative to makedecisions.32 CHAPTER 7 " FAIR AND LEGITIMATE PROCESS 193Those final words remind us that, when all is said and done, peo-ple need to be led if an organization is to move forward.Not everyonewill agree with the decisions that a leader makes.Yet, we have learnedthat people care about process, not simply the outcome or verdict.Bycreating fair and legitimate processes, leaders can create the cushionof support that enables them to make tough decisions, about whichreasonable people will disagree.As leaders make difficult calls, theywill have to step in to bring lively and argumentative decisionprocesses to a close.In those instances, they need only remember thewords an observant manager once shared with me: People just wanttheir positions heard.Then, they really want a choice to be made. This page intentionally left blank 8REACHING CLOSURE Nothing is particularly hard if you divideit into small jobs. Henry FordDuring World War II, General Dwight Eisenhower commanded oneof the most powerful military forces ever assembled in human history.Under his skilled leadership, the Allied Forces stormed the beachesof France, defeated Hitler s army, and liberated Europe.Severalyears later, the American people elected the popular war hero as theirpresident.Naturally, not everyone believed that the retired generalwould make a smooth transition to the Oval Office.During HarryTruman s final months in the White House, he reflected on the chal-lenges awaiting his successor: He ll sit here, and he ll say, Do this!Do that! And nothing will happen.Poor Ike it won t be a bit like thearmy.He ll find it very frustrating. 1195 196 WHY GREAT LEADERS DON T TAKE YES FOR AN ANSWERTruman spoke from experience.Getting his ideas and decisionsimplemented had been a formidable challenge at times
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]