Differentiation Matters
It had already been a twelve-hour day when the text came across my Blackberry: the infamous Sev-1 (Severity One) alert. For our fulfillment center, it signified that part of our automation and/or sortation systems were offline, putting customer experience at risk, as orders might not reach their intended destination in time. I headed to the warehouse floor to find my operations leaders and determine the next steps. That evening, Brooke was running the shift. She was a vocal leader, with quick responses that were usually concise and complete. An individual with dual master’s degrees from MIT, she had excellent problem-solving skills and engineering chops. A superb asset in running operations, she was still a young leader within a highly demanding environment where we shipped out over 1.2M parcels weekly. When I approached, you could sense her anxiety levels were already heightened.
“Mike, the sorter is offline, and we need to make adjustments immediately,” she yelled at me as we observed the parcel backlog. “We can’t afford to wait for the maintenance team to fix things. We will blow customer experience.” These customer metrics had been embedded into the site over time, raising the intensity a few levels. The tension was already high. The issue was whether we should move to a backup plan, which would be slower overall, or wait out our maintenance team for a fix with an unknown timeline on a sorter that had been temperamental for months but could provide a quicker recovery. It was the equipment that had a life of its own and was unreliable. Either solution had risks, but she wanted to move and move now. I was not confident that was the best option.
The maintenance team scoured the equipment like ants to identify the root cause. I looked at Brooke and asked where we stood regarding progress on the night. Based on her recent production numbers, she noted that we were ahead of pace for the evening. I asked her how much time we had before she wanted to move to the backup plan (Plan B). “Ten minutes,” she replied. “I don’t want to wait any longer.” You could hear the tension rising in her voice and the stress on her face.
“Do you trust the maintenance team for a fix?” I asked. “Here’s what we will do. I will take the pressure off you tonight, respond to any issues regarding customer experience, and tell our leadership team that it was my decision not to go to Plan B. That is on me. But we will give the maintenance team 20 minutes to solve the problem. You must be patient, which I know contradicts how you operate. You need to trust them.” She stared back at me in disbelief.
“Now, here’s your part of the deal,” I told her. “If the maintenance crew brings this back online within 20 minutes, and we work through the backlog of parcels in the next hour, you owe me a soda.”
Brooke looked at me as if I was crazy and didn’t believe what she had just heard.
“I prefer root beer if it’s in the machine. If not, leave the 50 cents on my desk. I’ll be back in about 10 minutes to check on progress. Thank you!” I turned and walked away, looking for a quiet space to think about our exchange and what actions to take next. At that moment, I also realized I was completely committed to my team and that we wouldn’t let the moment’s chaos rule the day.
In his book, A Failure of Nerve, Freidman states, “The climate of contemporary America has become so chronically anxious that our society has gone into an emotional regression that is toxic to well-defined leadership.”[1] I began to walk through my exchange with Brooke and our team in the fulfillment center and compare it against Friedman’s characteristics of chronically anxious families. Friedman outlines five characteristics that lead to regressive actions and prevent growth: Reactivity, Herding, Blame Displacement, A Quick-Fix Mentality, and a Failure of Nerve in Leadership link them all together.[2]
My evening experience with Brooke captured characteristics that Friedman cites. She expressed intense reactions to the situation and had difficulty self-regulating. While not specific to Brooke, operations team members were quick to blame the vendor for the poor operational efficiency of the equipment. There was a collective unwillingness to avoid leaning into mechanical challenges and claim ownership of the sorter as if it exhibited its unique personality. With a lower threshold for pain, Brooke was looking for more of a quick fix and wanted to solve for the moment when it would be less beneficial as the night progressed.
As I revisited the events of that evening I related to Friedman’s explanation of differentiation, “Differentiation is the lifelong process of striving to keep one’s being in balance through the reciprocal external and internal processes of self-definition and self-regulation.”[3] I exhibited the characteristics to stand in the moment and provide a calm presence and voice during anxiety and chaos. I was not going to succumb to the emotions of the system or call blame on others. We own the moment and control how we navigate through the process. Depending on the level of severity, it can be extremely challenging to stay above the fray.
As a newer operational leader in a dynamic environment, Brooke also exhibited escalating anxiety due to the quantity and speed of change.[4] She was not able to absorb the rapid changes and lower the level of collective anxiety. I was responsible for speaking with her then and helping to mitigate those concerns. After concluding my brief “alone time,” I circled back to the epicenter of the evening’s challenge. At about 17 minutes, our maintenance team gave me a thumbs-up and restarted the sorter. We observed it running for five minutes without issue and then commenced production. Crisis averted.
Friedman’s distinction between the “New World” and “Old World” orientations toward leadership is intriguing and highlights the following:
- A leader’s significant effect on their followers is based on the leader’s presence in emotional processes in the relational system.
- The leader must understand oneself.
- Communication depends on emotional variables – direction, distance, and anxiety.
- Stress is due to the responsibility of relationships with others.
- Hierarchy is a natural system and not one of power.[5]
Those views resonated with me as I reflected on my years in different leadership roles. Over time, my focus has slowly shifted from leading through others, delegating, and setting goals or operational targets to coming alongside and leading with others. The latter method uses a mutually agreed-upon vision and a collaborative approach for experimentation and shared decision-making. I have discovered that this shift in my process has created much more value for my team members and myself.
[1] Edwin Friedman, A Failure of Nerve – Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix. (New York, NY: Church Publishing, Inc. 2007). 53.
[2] Freidman, 54.
[3] Friedman, 183.
[4] Friedman, 57.
[5] Friedman, 194.
About the Author
Michael Hansen
9 responses to “Differentiation Matters”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
But did you get your root beer? The soda story arc must resolve!
Great example of non-anxious, yet present, leadership, Mike. How did you see Brooke respond to the event after the crisis? Did you see it impact her growth as a leader? How did she learn? Did you observe it make a difference in how she continued to work and lead?
Joff,
We made it through the shift unscathed, and the next day, we had a chance to circle up for a more detailed discussion or after-action review to talk through the moment without being in it. We role-played through a few different scenarios, and she provided excellent feedback. She was very respectful and offered me the root beer, but I told her that wasn’t necessary.
She was one of a handful of women leaders at the site. She continued to develop, but as with many of those leaders in that large company, she pursued another direction with a different employer. She contacted me directly, and I was one of her references with her new employer. I couldn’t say enough excellent things about her. There are always great jobs for great people. Almost 15 years later, she is still with that company and I imagine she is doing amazing work for them.
As with Joff, I am also needing resolution over the root beer. I think I have one in the garage and can leave it at your front door if needed.
Did you work with Brooke long enough to see her grow into the operations leadership role? This was a clear illustration of the quick fix mentality. I am curious if time and experience moved her toward Friedman’s ideals. My lack of familiarity–and therefore trust–with the maintenance crew would have made me skeptical that 20 minutes would fix anything. Seeing it happen a few times should either work the anxiety out of the leader or move the anxious leader to another role.
Rich, had I known about your root beer reservoir, I would have taken advantage of that long ago!
From the engineering aspect, the team brought equipment online reasonably quickly. Experience taught us not to rely on 100% uptime, and we had a series of workarounds to help mitigate the issue. In this instance, the workaround was highly intensive and wasteful in a significant parcel flow area. The equipment had a mind of its own.
Brooke rebounded quickly, and the next day, we discussed this in more detail around the “box farm” (think water cooler on the warehouse floor). She offered the root beer, but I declined.
Not soon after, I had her engaged in demanding process improvement projects, and she was on fire. She didn’t stay much longer with the company, but I was one of the individuals contacted by her new employer as a character reference and spent an hour talking about how she would be an asset to her team from the moment she walked in the door. She still works there today. They were extremely fortunate to land her.
Michael –
I’d also love to know what the conversation was like if/when you got your root beer from Brooke.
I’m grateful for your autobiographical parable about well-differentiated leadership, and for your pursuit of collaborative leadership. That shift can be really challenging, especially in organizations that have a more hierarchical culture. I’m curious, how have you successfully invited others to lead *with* rather than *through* along with you when there’s resistance to that approach?
Jeremiah,
We did have a conversation the next day sans root beer. We unpacked the prior day’s events and also spent time discussing her short and long-term desires on a personal and professional basis. It was enriching; she was very open about her past experiences and eager to learn.
A couple of my current managers need that type of help. I have worked with them in each instance to overcome some of their shortcomings and improve the collective team. I have explained that despite their “reluctance,” their teams need to hear a voice, and their voice is critical in that process. It might require energy and focus, but it is essential to success. For our size of operation, the second-level leaders are vital to our overall success. When they feel supported in that process, it has worked well. I have frequent follow-ups and continue to push in a constructive manner with objective conversations and criteria.
I feel like there’s a second part to this post about how you ended up with that root beer in your hand! While some of those roles might test our patience, moments like these provide valuable lessons for all of us. I can truly sense her frustration at not being able to solve the problem right then and there, and that’s completely understandable!
It’s amazing how much time it takes for leaders to grow and thrive in their roles. How long did it take, and was it easy for you to shift your leadership perspective from leading through others to leading with others? Do you ever find yourself tempted to revert to “leading through others?”
Ivan,
I have struggled with your questions on how to lead over time and when you need to intervene. My tendency has been to give latitude and rope to my teams. I have been challenged in their presentation of information back to myself, especially when it comes to written communication and/or work in presentations or Excel workbooks. Due to time constraints, I have found myself doing the work and taking away from their learning experience. I will share my experience with them and provide guidance.
While in the Army, I was more concerned with providing direction and moving quickly, but even that mentality shifted when I was deployed as a young officer. In recent years, I have been more forthright with individuals who are not meeting standards – and in a positive way. My goal is to help make them better.
Congratulations, Mike. You managed to turn a significant portion of the class into Homer Simpson, “Now about that root beer . . . .”