Why Having the Last Word Can Kill Your Leadership Influence

Photo by Steven Depolo

Leaders often settle for control when they could have influence instead. Mind you, control in leadership is not necessarily a bad thing—in fact, in many situations it's vital. But it's only one approach.

One of the most common ways that the control vs. influence question shows up is in communication. Leaders with a control-first approach tend to talk more, listen less and generally dominate conversations.

You might say they actively seek to "win" the conversation by being the most visible and obvious speaker. There's a natural tendency to believe that if I'm talking, I'm in control—or, more accurately, if I'm not talking I've lost control. Nothing could be further from the truth.

“There’s a natural tendency to believe that ... if I’m not talking I’ve lost control.”

And Your Point Is...?

The only time you need to be in control is when you really need to be—which is actually a minority 100% the time.

So What?

The tendency to "win" conversations likely comes from patterns developed over years of controlling conversations and getting some good results, so you did it more; rinse and repeat. Now it's a habit you don't even know you have—and it's undermining your influence—though none of your subordinates are probably going to tell you about it.

In fact, they are probably working hard to emulate you because you consistently model the (perceived) behavior required to move up in the organization. So you're not only building this behavior pattern into your team, you’re also very likely baking it into the culture of your organization.

“Now it’s a habit you don’t even know you have—and it’s undermining your influence.”

You're also missing opportunities to listen to what your team is really thinking, what they actually know and how they would handle things—apart from your direction. As Andy Stanley put it, "Leaders who don't listen will eventually be surrounded by people who have nothing to say." So, do you really need to have the last word?

The Big Picture

Think: What's the goal of leadership? Is it submission to our dominance as leaders? Or is it to influence other people to develop and achieve their highest possible level of success/effectiveness?

“Leaders who don’t listen will eventually be surrounded by people who have nothing to say.”

— Andy Stanley

I strongly recommend shooting for the latter, which only comes when we give away control and decision-making authority to those we lead.

Your Next Step

Ask: What's really driving my dominating behavior? What is preventing me from being content with letting the other person "win" the conversation (when my control is not essential to the outcome)?

“What is preventing me from being content with letting the other person ‘win’ the conversation?”

Think: Start with the end in mind. For any conversation, fix in your mind the best possible outcome—for the other person. Then let your words (or your silence) drive the content of the conversation.

Looking For a Resource?

Lead AND Manage: Stop Being a 1-Trick Leadership Pony

Tell me if this sounds familiar …

You’ve put your all into leading your team, getting them organized and keeping them focused. You’ve set the tone by coming in early and staying late, driving results and pursuing achievement.

Then at some point you realize you’ve arrived at a crossroads. The things that worked previously with your team don’t work anymore. They don’t respond. You sense they don’t trust you, or believe in you; or … something.

And Your Point Is…?

You probably need to expand the way you influence your team: You must lead AND manage.

“The things that worked previously with your team don’t work anymore. They don’t trust you, or believe in you; or … something.”

So What?

Most of us lean on EITHER 1) management disciplines or 2) Leadership disciplines. Let’s unpack them.

Management is “doing things right.” It prioritizes processes, accuracy, metrics and repeatability. Without management, companies are inefficient and can’t grow or scale. They can’t repeat their successes—and almost always repeat their failures.

Leadership is “doing the right things.” it focuses on things like innovation, being opportunistic, agile and adaptable. Without leadership, organizations become risk-averse and inwardly focused. They don’t drive results, and they become unresponsive to customers and marketplace opportunities.

“Without management, companies can’t repeat their successes—and almost always repeat their failures.”

We all have a natural bias for (and often against) one discipline over the other. Our default behaviors eventually become predictable and stale. Then when the pressure’s on we double-down on our default discipline. We over-rely on its strengths and its weaknesses show up as glaring gaps in our leadership competency.

Our team feels either the chaos that comes from over-leading or the irrelevance that comes from over-managing. They get demotivated and disengage, eventually losing trust in us. Consciously or unconsciously, they choose not to follow us.

Over-relying on your leadership or management makes you a one-trick pony. You can’t be effective, no matter how capable, intelligent, extroverted, correct or successful you are.

“Without leadership, organizations don’t drive results and they become unresponsive to customers and marketplace opportunities.”

The Big Picture

Neither discipline is right or wrong, although leadership is often promoted as being sexier. And neither is preferred, though typically it’s best to lead first and follow with management.

Managing and leading are not mutually exclusive, they are necessarily complementary. Meaning, you must lead AND manage if you want to be effective.

Your Next Step

Identifying your default tendencies is pretty simple and straightforward. Simply observe yourself and take note of what drives you, or have someone you trust assess you. The challenge comes in deliberately practicing them.

“Managing and leading are not mutually exclusive, they are necessarily complementary.”

Here’s a longer article on this topic at Medium.com.

Need some practical help on this?

Check out John Kotter’s classic On What Leaders Really Do. It defined the issue for me, and offers in-depth insight on this issue.

What Commuting Taught Me About Leadership – Stay Humble

Recently I left a job at a great company but with a long daily commute. This is the final entry of a 7-post series on things I learned about leadership on those long and tedious hours on the road.
– – – – –

I believe I’m a reasonably accomplished driver. It’d be easy to relax and not work at improving my driving skills, based on miles I’ve driven and the success I’ve demonstrated at dodging other drivers’ poor decisions.

Yet I must face the facts. There are still times I’ve started to change lanes unaware that someone was in my blind spot, or turned a corner roughly or braked sooner—or later—than I could have.

If I don’t face those facts, I’ll start thinking I don’t need to get better. Which leads to thinking I can’t get any better. Which tells me that I’m better than anyone else. Then I’m convinced that accidents only happen to other people. Which leads me to believe that accidents can’t happen to me. Then I stop using my skills. Then I get careless. Then I’m a bad driver—who still thinks he’s a good driver.

Scary.

“If I don’t face those facts, I’ll start thinking I don’t need to get better.”

And Your Point Is…?

The only way we can get better is to believe that we can get better.

So What?

I have a favorite leadership development mantra: You can’t get better by continuing to do what you’re already good at. It’s easy to over-leverage what has made us successful, whether that’s experience, personality, intelligence, tenacity … whatever.

“You can’t get better by continuing to do what you’re already good at.”

But to borrow Marshall Goldsmith’s perfectly titled book, What Got You Here Won’t Get You There, all those success-generating traits have a ceiling, a limit. Overusing them can make us think we’re a good leader, when we’re really just riding the wave of past success.

This creates blind spots, where we miss opportunities to lead more effectively. And it won’t prepare us for the leadership challenges to come.

“Overusing them can make us think we’re a good leader, when we’re really just riding the wave of past success.”

This requires a level of humility, and a dispassionate, objective view of ourselves. All with a sense of self-acceptance (i.e. my value isn’t based on my performance), coupled with a drive to improve (to fulfill our potential).

The Big Picture

It might seem odd to pair personal development with humility, but there’s a very strong correlation. People who aren’t humble aren’t hungry to learn and grow; there’s no incentive to get better. It takes humility to recognize you have untapped potential.

Your Next Step

Get someone who knows you and has your best interests in mind to reveal how you can improve. Do a 360-leadership assessment. Get a coach. But above all: Believe that you can get better.

Then never stop trying.

Want more leadership insights?

Check out: 

What Commuting Taught Me About Leadership – You Hit What You Aim For

recently left a position with a great company, but with a long daily commute. This is the fourth post of an 8-week series on things about leadership that I learned on those long and tedious hours on the road.
– – – – –

It’s easy to get bored driving the same road every day. To break the monotony I started attempting to avoid the reflectors when I changed lanes (when there were no other cars around, of course!).

After months of trying I had some occasional successes. But truth be told, I sucked at it—which troubled me because I knew I was a better driver than that.

Then one day I had an epiphany: Instead of aiming to miss the reflectors, I needed to aim for the stripe between them. The difference was instant and amazing.

As soon as I adjusted my aim point, I had almost immediate success. I could predict where my wheels were going. I could anticipate when to initiate the lane change and intentionally drive where I wanted to go. Ultimately, getting really clear on my target allowed me to get better.

And Your Point Is…?

You hit what you aim for.

“Getting really clear on my target allowed me to get better.”

So What?

First (and most obvious), not aiming is the same as aiming at nothing—you’re going to hit something, you just don’t know what it will be. When I first started my game I tried to “feel” my way into the next lane and hope for the best. Didn’t work.

Second, if your aim is off target, that’s what you’ll hit: everything except the target. This was my aha experience with the reflectors: In attempting to miss them, I was actually still aiming for them. The reflectors is what I was concentrating on. In focusing on the challenge, I was blind to seeing the solution.

“Not aiming is the same as aiming at nothing—you’re going to hit something, you just don’t know what it will be.”

The Big Picture

Consider how your aim comes into play when you compare A) aiming for success (the stripe), to B) aiming for avoiding failure (missing the reflectors). Aiming to NOT fail is NOT aiming for success.

“In focusing on the challenge, I was blind to seeing the solution.”

Some simple real world examples might be “I’ll be less critical in my feedback” or “I’ll be more aggressive in producing outcomes.” Typically, any goal stated in such squishy terms is likely not to be met. Not only is the outcome not measurable, the path to achievement is obscure. This is a common concept in managing performance (a la setting SMART goals), but for some reason many people have difficulty applying the concept in managing development—especially their own.

Your Next Step

What’s an area you’d like to improve in that you’ve set goals around not failing? How can you reset them so they’re focused on the target?

“Aiming to NOT fail is NOT aiming for success.”

Want more leadership insights?

Check out: 

What Commuting Taught Me About Leadership – Watch Out For People Advancing Their Own Position

I recently left a position with a great company, but with a long daily commute. This is the third of an 8-week blog series on things about leadership that I learned on those long and tedious hours on the road.
– – – – –

At one point in my commuting history I was averaging close to one major evasive maneuver per week. “Major” meaning that had I not taken significant action I would have been calling my insurance company—if not the ambulance.

Usually it was someone changing lanes (see my last post: Stay Visible). Often it was somebody “shooting the gap” to cross two lanes of traffic (rarely a good idea). More than once I’ve had pickups or service trucks pull alongside me then without signaling move into the “space” between me and the car in front of me—even though they hadn’t yet cleared my front bumper.

Almost always it was someone trying to get ahead of everyone else. Even though traffic was heavy, they felt compelled to zig-and-zag, forcing themselves ahead, expending a lot of effort to get in front of others.

And Your Point Is…?

I get competitiveness and wanting to win, but is getting ahead of the people you’re driving with really worth the potential damage?

“They felt compelled to zig-and-zag, forcing themselves ahead, expending a lot of effort to get in front of others.”

So What?

The marketplace is competitive (duh). Aggressiveness is often (usually?) seen as a strength; it gets you noticed. In particular, I think of business development roles where being a competitor is a desirable trait. But for most other roles, you should reconsider using competitiveness as your primary MO, because it comes with lots of potential—and usually hidden—damage.

You can damage relationships. When you push people aside to get ahead of them, you make it incredibly hard for them to trust you again. You’ll have to put in much more effort to overcome the perception that you’re really only interested in yourself.

“When you push people aside to get ahead of them, you make it incredibly hard for them to trust you again.”

You can damage your opportunity to influence. You’re not building into people; it doesn’t build a mutual purpose, accountability, motivation or camaraderie.

Your competitive approach may bring short term results, but it will eventually boomerang. You’re feeding a cutthroat culture where people become expendable and teamwork is transactional, not relational. And when you most need people to respond to your call to action, they simply won’t.

“When you most need people to respond to your call to action, they simply won’t.”

The Big Picture

When it comes to your leadership behaviors, what goes around comes around. If you honor people and their effort they will respond in kind. If you push them aside in pursuit of your own interests you’ll find yourself very alone.

Your Next Step

How can you be hungry for results but in a way that makes others better (instead of pushes them aside)?

Want more leadership insights?

Check out: