Cowardly Leaders don’t lead teams. They create teams (or what they might label as teams). They refer to their team. But they don’t lead a team.
Michael Schneider, writing in Inc., reported on a study that Google performed with 180 internal teams to determine just what makes a successful team. His article is here if you’re interested in reading the entire piece.
Successful Teams have the following:
Dependability
Structure and Clarity
Impact
Meaning
Psychological Safety
The last trait was the one that surprised the researchers at Google. They supposed that successful teams were comprised of what you would expect. Smart people, well-rounded, had the requisite number of people from different departments, diverse, etc. They also confirmed that teams routinely had their marching orders, had agendas, had a timeline to meet, knew (or reasonably assumed) that their work and findings would be incorporated into the organization in order to make it better.
In other words, they insured that the first four traits above were covered. But only those teams that also had psychological safety were really successful.
What is Psychological Safety?
Quoting the author: “For a second, imagine a different setting. A situation in which everyone is safe to take risks, voice their opinions, and ask judgment-free questions. A culture where managers provide air cover and create safe zones where employees can let down their guard. That’s psychological safety.”
We have all been in meetings, or in a seminar, or some other setting, where we have a question but are hesitant to ask it. Appearing like the only one who wouldn’t know, and slowing down the meeting, is uncomfortable at best. We don’t want to appear less knowledgeable (and therefore less capable) than our peers. Sometimes, we don’t really know how to appropriately word what it is we want to ask. We have all been there. We want, and maybe even need, to know something that is being discussed, but don’t ask. Many times- most times, in a cowardly environment, we know asking a question is pointless and puts us at risk.
Cowardly Environments
It is virtually impossible for a Cowardly Leader to lead a successful team, based on the Google findings. Cowardly Leaders don’t really want your opinion. They certainly want your endorsement to their pre-conceived findings, but not your opinions, or ideas. The last thing on their radar is to provide an environment where debate and even (gasp) disagreement is tolerated, let alone encouraged. Trying to find a better solution is not an option, because the solution has already been determined. By them.
Structure. Clarity. Meaning. These have all been created by the Cowardly Leader when she set the meeting and its premise. Many times it is understandable that a team is formed with a pre-ordained mission as determined by the Cowardly Leader. These happen all the time. What doesn’t happen all the time, in fact, almost never, is that fifth prerequisite- Psychological Safety.
The next time you have an opportunity in a leadership environment to create a team to address an opportunity for improvement, by all means be clear about the structure, dependability, impact, and meaning you expect that team to address. But if you really want it to be successful, and more importantly, add to the success of the organization, insure it also has psychological safety. Give it the latitude to question, probe, discover, and come up with the best set of recommendations.
Not just those that are pre-determined. That’s what Cowardly Leaders do.
Don’t do that.
II-45
