Ep 434: Common Leadership Problems (Part 3 of 4)

responsibility to solve when they're happening on their teams. This particular issue that we're going to talk about today is when your team is playing politics. And I think this is different than the previous to you know, the last week we talked about when your team is consumed by negativity on the on the first episode, we talked about what happens when your team isn't listening to each other, you know, the when your team is playing politics. To me,

that's a little bit different. I had a leader once tell me that they believed that there was no such thing as an office or a team without politics, and and what he meant by that was just in talking about the relationships that exist between people and the the the power structure that is involved, not by where the organization promotes people and assigns people job responsibilities and roles, but that the but the power that we give each

other in terms of the social and emotional relationships that we have within the office. And you know, there will always be people who are you know, known for this or known for that. You know, the guy, the guy that does this, the girl that does this in the office, and that that will always happen. And that person once, you know, said that that was the definition of politics,

and I don't think he's wrong. But in the context of this article, politics is clearly being defined as a as an always negative thing that that you know, kind of comes with a deep seated feeling that things are being done unfairly, or that that that there's different rules for different people, or that people aren't being treated equal by their by their leaders, by their coworkers. So there's a lot more to it than just kind of like ooh,

how do I navigate these relationships? It can be a serious problem on teams when when it's uh, when it rises to the negative level.

in different ways. And because of that, you're going to have these natural kind of spaces that people will play within where they start to think about like how they would do the work, how they would lead the work, what's the right way uh to make things happen, what's the right way or in their own mind to to

be able to accomplish the task that's at hand. And the reality is that, like over time, if you don't address those things when you see them, if you don't talk constantly about the value of seeing the work differently, of seeing the world differently, if you allow those teams to either divide themselves because of maybe competition, or if you have teams that work in a way where this team has to accomplish this before this team can do that, before this can even can do that, then you also

have that feeling of like, well, it's we always do it the right way, it's they do it the wrong way, or if you have teams where somebody's responsible for getting the work done, but somebody's responsible differently for the budget, and then they kind of collide a little bit. Like these things naturally are going to happen within your teams

when you have multiple people working together. I think to your point, though, the kicker is that it becomes that negative politics when it starts to have an impact on either like the productivity of what everybody's working on and or there starts to be a really kind of negative feeling about the relationships amongst the you know, different groups within the team, and or it becomes like in the I guess the way to test it immediately is like somebody new comes in, right like like like what does

that look like? Are are our teams talking positive about the other teams? Our teams you know, uh, kind of saying like hey, if if you're if you do this work, you got to come over here, or we're the ones who see it this way, or they're the ones who

see it that, you know what I mean? Like that's really the best time to understand like where the politics are within your teams is like what happens with the new person and how do they perceive things and how are they welcomed or how are they you know, kind of almost asked immediately to figure out, you know, how they want to do the work and which type of group they should be with, and like that to me

is where when the politics become very negative. These are some of the things that you see when that happens.

into it for a good game. And you get there and half the people there are wearing one jersey and half people that are wearing another jersey. They're all looking at you like, all right, all right, Lorenzo, what what side are you on? You know you're not You're not about to be kicked out of the party, you know,

it's all in good fun. Like there's there's there are examples of what you're talking about where it can be kind of like a almost like a way of welcoming somebody to a team is a way to judge you put them in a situation where you are asking them to take a side and you're trying to see whether or not they want to be one of you. You know, you're it's a test. It's a test to see does this person want to assimilate into our group culture or

whatever that is. And that isn't inherently a problem as long as the group culture is one of welcoming and acceptance and and you know, one where the the the in versus out is not based on anything that is that a person can't control, but based on like, oh, what music do you like? Or what kind of this do you like? Those kind of things can be a

way to form camaraderie and bonds between people. But again, it's a very fine line, and it can and it can go off the deep end into a negative area if it's if it's not done right or if it's left unchecked. You know, when I think about playing politics going into the negative, there are kind of two examples I can think of where where where kind of like the same the same things happening. One would result in not a problem, whereas whereas another situation it would result

in a problem. One is if the person who is supposedly playing politics is in is in a position of power. So it's one thing to have politics between people on a team who are peers. It's another thing when it's when the perception is that the leader is playing politics. Because if I'm not the leader and I think my leader is playing politics, well, now that person is playing a game that I can't compete in because they have they have power over my role, maybe my my annual review.

If I'm if I'm feeling like I have to do things differently because of almost trying to manage the the emotional or political expectations of the leader as opposed to just managing my job description and what's what's expected of me by the organization. That is a problem when when

what's happening by the leader. And then the second is, you know, we all know the difference between the person in high school who had a lot of power because they were the bully and the person who had a lot of power in high school because the people there gave them that power, like they were the They might have been like a jock or like the head cheerleader, but

they were so nice. They just were they They wanted to be nice to everybody, They wanted to be friends with everybody, and they just had to kind of have that gravitational pull that some people have, and that power is given to them by people, which means it can

be taken by people. And those situations are ones that can be difficult because I think in a lot of organizations, if you have somebody like that on a team who just kind of has this natural gravitational pull because of how kind they are and how accepting they are and how well they treat other people, there can be an inherent kind of negative belief from others that that person almost has something that they don't have, Like what like I want to be the person who has that, but

I don't know how to do that. I can't do that, I can't compete. And if I can't compete, now that therefore that person is, you know, it's a negative element on the team that that person is here with that power that we've all granted them because I haven't granted them that power. I haven't decided to do that. It's

the other people on the team we have. And now I feel like I'm having to place subordinate to this person who doesn't have a title, but who now has this this kind of political power granted them by the team.

like from a jersey. For me, that's still something that I would be conscious of because there should also be an option of like you don't even have to wear a jersey.

a choice. Again, Like that's when you're starting to see some of that behavior that again can can be done in a positive way, but more than likely the whole idea is like, but on behalf of everybody here, what you choose to do, how you choose to represent, which jersey you want to wear or not wear, whatever, Like

that's totally fine, we welcome all. So like that that's where I think seeing those things is helpful when you're thinking about the game of the politics and then to your point about the kind of the authority or the power structure element. When I hear like leaders playing politics,

I immediately think of two things. At number one is that they're not being truthful and an authentic about what's going on or what the strategies are or why we have to do things, because I immediately like they're being a politician. Yeah, like like they're they're just telling you what they want to.

when it comes to the teams back and forth. I think that's where as a leader, when you see that there is some elements where you do want teams to have a certain kind of like I don't know, maybe excitement or pride for the work that that team is doing.

You do want some of that to happen. What you have to be really conscious of is celebrating even more so when you see those teams work together, bring each other in, make an adjustment based upon the perspective of somebody else, Like when you see the things that create real great collaboration and a greater sense of team, you really have to celebrate those things to bring down I think the levels of politics that again are always going to exist, but put put them in a space where

they're not leading the larger team into a negative space, or they're not creating a lack of productivity, they're not creating a space where people don't feel welcome or included in the work that your larger team is doing.

C and fourteen. Right, you get to define the choices if the choice is truly yours, which is again, you know, not participating at all if you don't want to, if it's not something you feel that you feel like you need to need to pick a side on it that you feel truly, you know, passionate about when it comes to,

you know, the leadership kind of responsibility in this. I think this is where the rubber meets the road on this top, on this conversation, because on the one hand, you know, we agree that there's a certain element of this that can be positive on a team in terms of the camaraderie that exists, if it's an inclusive environment, if people are if it's kind of wielded the right way, but it can very quickly derail into the negative even

though the intent wasn't to do so. Like the intent could be totally positive, but it goes into the negative if it's kind of left unchecked. And I think you're right. The only way for a leader to effectively do this without stamping out the good things right Like it's it's like when you my five year is, you know, going to change the world someday, but right now she's driving me crazy, right And I could make it so she doesn't drive me crazy, but then she won't change the

world someday. We all know that kind of that kind of conundrum as a parent that we that we deal with. I think it's the same thing I think when a when a leader is looking at the positive elements of this on a team that bring a team together, you can make it so it never turns negative from a political standpoint by just stamping out that behavior altogether, But then you've lost some of the positive that can come from when a team is truly cohesive. And high performing

and working together. And so as a leader, how do you do this? How do you allow this to happen? How do you allow it to kind of people to have the leeway to see what can be done when a team truly cares about each other, when a team is inclusive, when they when they bring each other along without you know, while also having kind of like the spidy sense feelers up for looking for certain elements that

might be go, Okay, that didn't feel right. I'm not going to jump in yet, but I need to keep my eye on this because if I see it happen again, then that means it wasn't the fluke, and I need to address it right away. You know, Like there're these those elements that have to happen, and I think that's important to discuss, like what what do leaders look for and what rises to the level of all right, we can't do this absolutely.

a in a negative way. What you should be looking for are things that that I kind of liken to the field goal kicker losing the game. You know kind of situation. You know, when we all know the situation of the field goal kicker that loses the game because they didn't make that last field goal in the closing

seconds of the game, and everybody blames that kicker. But if we are being perfectly honest here, there were hundreds of other things that happened in that game that caused that team to lose, even though in that moment we think about it as, oh, it's it's all on the hands of this one person. When you see this on your team, what that looks like is, you know, the team is getting together and they start to shirk responsibility of what they can't get done because of somebody else

that's on the outside. So, oh, we would have made our sales targets if the marketing materials were good, you know, we would have made our sales targets. If you know something else, you know, some other element of a person or a team that's the on the outside that can be scapegoaded or blamed for the issues that are that are happening on the team, as opposed to the team members actually taking ownership of it and thinking about the things they can do to solve the problem, even if

it means getting involved. It's like, Okay, maybe the marketing materials aren't good, but there's a difference between we would have made our targets but the marketing materials suck, or we would have made our target. It's next month, We'll do a better job of partnering with the marketing team to make sure they understand our needs so that when so, the materials that come out are are better suited to

what our customers are looking for. As opposed to it, it's it's the ownership, it's I are we is the power that we have. Are we using it to take ownership of our problems? Or are we using it to shirk the problems onto somebody else so that we don't have to so that we can avoid responsibility for the

things that we need to take care of. And it's those kind of elements you have to look for as a leader when you're deciding whether or not what's happening or the discussion is rising to the level that you need to kind of jump in and stamp something down, or if it's a kind of a healthy element on the team.

the larger work. But like you're going to have these moments, and I think to your point, as a leader, it's just being conscious and listening for it and seeing it and like when is it becoming too much? When when if we moved on from saying like, hey, we own this, we can work on this, here's our strategies, here's where we have maybe some hurdles or some bumps in the road,

versus we can't do this because of this person. We can't get this done because of this team, if you know, like like it's when when all of the solutions turn into other people or other teams, that's when you kind of have to get your your you know, you have to move to action as a leader and go have some influence and have some conversations and dig through it.

But this is like a lot of this can also be you know, somewhat minimized by again having the right people's in the rooms, having conversations where you're creating spacefook collaboration, talking through things when they come up, you know, between individuals sometimes or when you see that there's a kind

of an initial rub that's going on. If you just give it to the team and say, you guys, figure it out and get back to me when it's done, Like, that's not helpful, right, right, Like these are things that as a leader you have to catch on to and make adjustments to and address in the moment to let the team know collectively, like we're not going to do this to each other, and we're not going to you know, we all have different layers and different elements of responsibility

to get the work done, but we have to work together to make sure that it's done the right way and the best way possible.

people from the marketing team in the meeting. There would I would venture guests to say that under those circumstances, the people on the sales team it didn't make sales targets are far less likely to say we would have hit these sales targets if it weren't for the marketing team. It's a lot easy to escapecoade it when they are they them not part of our team. You know, they're they're they're the outsider. They're they're kind of nameless and faceless. You know, it's a it's a it's a an entity

more so than a person. Get those people in the room with you, and they become people with names and faces and families and goals and and and shared interests. You're far less likely to find people scapegoating those people later when they're not in the room. I mean there's I guess there's some examples, but very few. It's the when you join people together like that and you create that kind of that welcoming environment where everybody who is who has a stake in the game for the outcome

is kind of in the room. When it's happening. It's far less likely that you will see one of those, you know, parts of it being scapegoaded as the problem or the reason why the problem can't get solved later on down the road. So so yes, get the right people in the room, get the people in the room that that matter for making those decisions, and you can kind of stop this from happening even before it begins.