There will be plenty of post-mortem analysis of the US intelligence community’s failure to anticipate the precipitous collapse of the Afghan military over the past few weeks. It will take a lot of explaining (or rationalization) to show why, after spending more than $80 billion over 20 years to train the Afghan government forces, such a massive effort yielded such pitiful results.
Whatever transpires from the analysis, it will almost certainly contain multiple factors and reasons, and it would be irresponsible to speculate this early on all of these. When disasters happen, the dots line up and connect perfectly in hindsight, but of course the view is never that clear before it happens.
But one of the factors is worth discussing here, because it applies so well to the business world as well. An article in today’s New York Times states: “Part of the problem, according to former officials, is that the can-do attitude of the military frequently got in the way of candid, accurate assessments of how the Afghan security forces were doing.”
It sounds obvious, but it’s hard to prevent. Imagine being a junior officer being asked to report on how your training efforts are going. What would be the effect on your career prospects if you candidly reported that despite your best efforts, you were pessimistic about their impact?
Now imagine yourself being an account executive or a product manager in a forecasting meeting. Would you do it any differently?
Probably not. America has long been a country where the power of positive thinking is enshrined in our culture. And overall, I believe that has been a good thing. It has enabled us to accomplish incredible feats and helped build the most powerful economy in the world.
But it can go too far. Can-do is almost a religion, where pessimism is a sin and realism is suspected to be. So, when someone reports or forecasts to their managers, they’ll naturally tend to shade toward the bright side, even when they think they’re being absolutely candid. Those managers will in turn take those reports and shade them slightly when they report up to the next level, so you can imagine the possibilities for overconfidence when the “ground truth” gets to the top.
If you’re a leader, here are three things you can do to reconcile can-do and candor:
- Take this saying out of your vocabulary: “Don’t bring me a problem unless you bring me a solution.” If your subordinate finds out about a problem that they’re unequipped to handle, do you really want them to keep quiet about it?
- Go to the gemba. That’s lean-speak for going to the scene of the action to see for yourself.
- Break the path into detail. In his book, Perfectly Confident, business professor Don Moore cites the well-known example that 93% of people rate themselves in the top half of all drivers. But when they ask them to rate themselves on individual skills such as signaling, using mirrors, or backing up, their “overplacement” reduced substantially. Detail helps the dots line up into a truer picture.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Chip Bell is one of the world’s top experts on customer loyalty and service innovation, as well as a very wise man. In this podcast, he shares his vision on several topics, including the nobility of service, the importance of appealing to higher motivations, and the characteristics of one of the most impressive leaders he has ever worked with.
One of the highest accolades I can give a speaker is that he or she made me want to be a better person after hearing them, and I trust you will agree with me that Chip does just that, in this podcast.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
After 61 episodes, I have finally brought a guest speaker into the Practical Eloquence podcast. I’m honored to speak to day with John Spence, named one of the Top 100 Leadership Speakers in America. John and I talk about his journey toward becoming a professional speaker and some of the lessons that he learned that can make you both a better communicator and a better leader.
John’s wisdom includes:
1. How a proper structure inspired one of his listeners to write a check for $800k.
2. The number one thing that John reminds himself to conquer his pre-speech nerves.
3. The close relationship between leadership and communication ability.
It’s funny how things sometimes come full circle. When I first met Chip Bell many years ago, he was teaching a class on leadership, but he has since become one of the world’s top experts on customer service. He recently wrote a fascinating article for Forbes about using questions to improve the customer’s experience, but I believe the lessons also translate perfectly to leadership communication.
The article is titled QAQ: The Path to Insight. Chip tells us that if you want to gain insight about a customer’s experience with your product or service, you can’t just ask them, “How is everything?” Most times, the answer will be “Fine.”
That’s because the first question is seen as a greeting and not as a direct request for information. I’m reminded of the old beer commercial where the Midwesterner visits New York and every time someone says “Howyadoin?”, he replies with an enthusiastic recitation of what’s going on in his life. It’s funny because it doesn’t happen that way in real life.
There’s nothing wrong with starting off the discussion with that type of question. People actually expect it; it’s part of the standard conversational ritual, and leaving it out can be a bit awkward and abrupt, like starting a phone call without at least saying hello. But, as Chip tells us, “The real test of the intent of the enquirer is the second question—the QAQ, or question after the question.” Are you asking just to be friendly, or do you sincerely want to learn from the other person?
It’s a good lesson for customer service, but I believe it applies even more so for leaders. That’s because subordinates may be even more reluctant to speak what’s truly on their minds than consumers of someone’s product. When you ask them how things are going, you can almost guarantee that their response will be, “Fine.” If you let it go at that, you’ve squandered a chance to do two things: learn something useful, and demonstrate that you truly care. In lean terms, that’s pure waste.
What you should do, after hearing their first ritualistic answer, is follow up with a more specific question; get them to open up about a specific issue or complaint. That would be progress. But don’t stop there, because the first thing that comes out of their mouths is a test: they want to see if you truly want to hear about a problem or a different point of view.
To pass that test, you have to show you care by asking at least one more question, to probe deeper into that issue or to uncover others. It takes at least three questions to demonstrate that you care and to give you a shot at learning something useful. The first question is a greeting, the second is a door opener, and the ones after that at least give you a shot at producing a real insight.
Chip calls them insight-seeking questions, and he says the goal is not to produce “more words in the answer, but more depth in the thinking need to produce that answer.”
It’s hard to find a better description of lean communication than that phrase: not more words, but greater depth of thinking. It’s a reminder that the first goal of lean communication is not to be efficient—it’s to produce value. If you want efficiency, stop at the first question. If you want value, ask at least three questions.
