The
Influential Two
"I think it's important to live out my values, to always
focus on what we need to be doing to serve the mentally ill," said Emily Dracker,
a leader in community mental health services. Emily sought a business coach because of her
wish to better influence her peers in the mental health system. "They used to see
me as a troublemaker," she said. "Now that I'm running this agency, they
see me as a real threat because I'm always asking 'Why are we continuing to do this?'"
Her peers concurred somewhat that Emily ruffled feathers, but they also
saw the benefit of her challenging the system. "I think she would manipulate the
establishment to reach her goals," said one colleague, "but she's honest
and argues from her beliefs – she has such a high value for clients' needs." "She's
very interpersonally oriented," said another, "and very
genuine with her feelings; but it's sometimes difficult to know where she's coming from
because she can react emotionally."
My work with Emily centered initially on clarifying her boundaries. This
was important because she found herself overly focused on satisfying others' needs. At
times she even portrayed a kind of martyrdom with her own staff. Emily is so caring,"
one of them commented; "she has a natural talent for feedback." "You
could idolize her," said another; "she's more of a friend than a boss and
she's done so much for me."
But sometimes when her team members would try to
treat her
as an equal, giving her feedback about how her own behavior could be at cross-purposes
with teamwork, she would be more boss than friend. This murkiness about her role showed up
in two ways: (1) seeing them as being the whole problem, and (2)
responding to their feedback with tears. "I've worked so hard to support them in
spite of their failings. Maybe I've just put too much faith in them," she said.
"I think they see me as 'Mom' and want to take out all their anxieties on
me – sometimes they seem so childish!"
In coaching executives with
Style
Two I've emphasized awareness of how driven they can be by their
image
of being "a good boss," "a good mentor," etc. Emily had
earlier written a letter to all members of her extended family announcing "I'm no
longer taking care of people in this family," yet she continued in the role of
caretaker with a brother who was addicted to gambling – he'd once gotten in trouble with
the Mafia and appealed to her literally as a "life-saver," since she was
"the only one in the family with enough money to pay his debt."
At one of our meetings she
said her brother was in jail and
needed bail. "I know this is an opportunity to act counter to my impulse,"
she acknowledged, "but it's really hard for me. I need to talk it through." I
pointed out as long as she was taking care of him, she was subtly reinforcing his
self-image that he was too weak to take care of himself.
In other words, she could only help him by
not helping him.
This
paradoxical intervention shook
her
underpinnings sufficiently to allow a different response. She told her brother she loved
him but he'd have to figure out how to get himself bailed out of jail.
In my experience, Twos create their own resentment because they find it
so difficult to turn people down: "How can I make a breakthrough with my boss so
he realizes I'm absolutely doing all I can?" plaintively asked Bill King, head of
Operations for his company. "In my view I'm getting more work and less staff. On
my bad days I'm panic-stricken because I don't want to take it on and fail. But he gets me
to do things by saying, 'There's no one else here who can do it as well as you.' How do I
keep myself from short-circuiting?"
Bill's boss, the CEO, observed, "He says he's overworked, but
when I try to take some projects away to give him relief, he won't give them up!"
A subordinate said, "It's a double-edged sword because things fall between the
cracks while he's trying to be everything to everybody."
On the positive side, Bill was described as charming, charismatic,
bright, energetic, and "incredibly committed to customers, really aggressive about
going out there and finding out what we can do." "He really cares about
their lives," said one subordinate. "His mission comes out of the deepest
sense of service." "This is true
even to a fault," agreed a general manager; "he's loyal, but I'm not sure
he would protect the organization if he perceived it to be in conflict with client needs."
As a manager, Bill's interpersonal orientation brought other strengths:
"He has a wonderful capacity to empower people," praised one of
his peers. "He took a group of misfits and malcontents and they've
accomplished remarkable feats out of commitment to him. He values participation, shows
them respect, keeps people informed, and pushes decisions down. If he fails to delegate
it's because he doesn't want to burden his people."
"He could be more hard nosed," said another, "but
he's good at giving people the opportunity to do something a little outside the normal
course, and he fiercely defends his people outside the group." "There's
always a high level of pressure here," reported a subordinate, "but he
can 'read' me when I'm stressed out; he does a lot of reality checking: 'Are you O.K.? Do
you need help?'"
Bill created "a strong sense of family" resulting in
huge energy and commitment from his team members. He also cultivated pride among them
about the quantity and quality of their efforts, but this was accomplished somewhat at the
expense of others in the organization. He kept running up against the perception that he
created tension with other functions because of the "us against the world"
feelings that predominated in his group: "He's the Lone Ranger when it comes to
the rest of the organization, but he fosters dependence from his staff.
This last point was corroborated by his staff. "He's never
happier than when someone says they can't get along without him," noted one
subordinate. "We're part of his gang," sighed another, "we'd be
almost in tears if he left."
As seen by his peers, Bill was not universally loved. According to one,
"When things are not going his way he gets indirect,
manipulative – his agenda with resistance is always to get around it or to blow it up!"
Again, there was evidence for this in interviews with Bill's staff, though they viewed
this phenomenon as necessary "politicking." "When the other managers
start picking his vision apart," one of his staunchest supporters said, "he
shows us ways to get his ideas employed anyway--without outright sabotage."
Prior to our work together, Bill felt he had had to be indirect in order
to get things done the way he wanted, because he always felt taken in others'
persuasiveness ("I tend to believe at the time that there must be something wrong
with my judgment!"). As he became more
self-aware over time he learned not to commit to new projects without
a reality check from people he knew were candid; and he disciplined
himself against "those little white lies – saying what you think they want to
hear."
