In a Pickle...

A recent experience at a meeting of the board of directors of a client gave me a fresh  insight into how chairs get into pickles. Also, how they get out of them.

The chair of this group is very committed, well-intentioned and experienced. The challenge for him (as with many chairs) has been giving up the right to advocate for or against an issue, in exchange for achieving what is essential for chairs: impartiality on all issues. Like many chairs, he is highly influential among his constituent base, holding several positions of authority and influence. As is often the case in politics, such status invites jealousy from the less powerful, whom I refer to as "also-rans," in this article.

The result?

The dynamics of board meetings can quickly become non-productive. An issue is on the floor, a member (in this case an also-ran) takes a strong position (also-rans often take this course in order to attract attention to themselves, to achieve political traction, to gain their 30-seconds of fame). The chair, feeling the need to keep the course of discussion in safe territory, then reacts by offering a contrary opinion.

At this point, the other board members become observers of the game being played by the two combatants. A healthy process leading to alignment on a quality decision has been derailed. Time is wasted. Staff is demoralized, and the chair has lost position, as he struggles to defend himself for having attacked the also-ran. The board can see the good intentions of the chair, but knows he should not have gotten into this controversy. Worse yet, board members find themselves leaning toward protecting the perceived victim of the chair's onslaught of rational thought.

How did this come out?

Well, a staff member said that the concerns of the also-ran (which he had been expressing relentlessly, for more than a year)  could be incorporated into a compromise solution. This compromise would ultimately be an improvement overall, because there would be widespread alignment to that solution. Were it not for that insight, the "war" may never have stopped.

Yes, but...

But alas, the chair could not contain himself. Rather than validating the also-ran for his input, he continued on: "That's all well and good but...."  (A word to the wise: "Yes, buts..." are relationship killers.) So, having for a moment escaped from war, we were back at it.

Thankfully, a break was called. I jumped from my seat and cornered the chair.

"So, let me ask you something," I said to him. "If you want to create peace and stop these political attacks on you, which of the following statements would make the most sense?"

"Yes, good idea, but I still think we should not venture into this area because it is fraught with danger."

Or:

"Thank you for your creative contribution. It is important that our solution address all viewpoints of our shareholders, and your proposed addition to our strategy does that.  Thanks for sticking with it and not giving up on your ideas about this."

The chair got my point. After the break, he gave that speech and the also-ran literally glowed with pride.

The moral of the story

The moral of the story? If you want to increase your power and influence, give your team the wins rather than taking them yourself. As a chair, never take credit, even if it is your idea. Rather, use questions posed to the group. Questions are non-advocating by nature, if you ask them properly. Questions will get others to see what you see. And then, when the others have gotten the point, introduce the motion. Almost magically, you have the solution you sought, you empowered your group and you retained your power.

As Lao-Tsu, the great Chinese philosopher wrote: "...When the best leader's work is done, the people will say, 'We did it ourselves.'"

What you can do

If you want to gain power, give up power. Those you empower will empower you.

For more insights on how to be an effective chair, download the article, Effective Chairmanship.