Setting the standard

There was a viral video years ago from the Chief of the Australian Army, in which he made the statement that the standard you walk past is the standard you accept. It’s an interesting one, and on examination, I think he’s right - but only half right.

Humans tend to behave in certain ways. While there’s a lot of art to leadership, there’s also some science. Psychology and social science can teach us some things that are pretty certain when it comes to how we behave in certain circumstances. One thing we tend to lock on to is status. And who has status tends to be who sets standards.

A recent experiment - an uncontrolled one, but instructive - was run with a group of managers in a large organisation. The managers were brought in from every department for a training course, and as part of the course, a messenger chat was set up to pass information about the course between the trainee managers. Another group was set up for the training staff to pass on changes to the training program or details about meeting rooms and the like. These two messenger chats were seperate; the supervising trainers only had access to one group, while the trainee managers had access to both.

The organisation is in a male-dominated industry, but females have been making up a larger percentage of the workforce over the last couple of decades as senior managers look to expand their skill bases and skilled recruiting pool. This particular training course was one of the first where there were a significant number of women among the trainee managers, while the supervising trainers were exclusively male. One of the trainers was a former senior VP within the organisation, who was invited to review the training being conducted. He brought with him decades of experience, and the status to match.

Halfway through the week-long course, it became obvious that there was a spectrum of behaviours from the trainee managers. Some were progressive in their thinking, and looked for opportunities to improve and include everyone. Others identified more strongly with the organisation’s historic male-dominated culture, and were less accepting of the increased number of women in their developing demographic. As the course continued, the trainee manager’s group chat became a means to pass derogatory memes and comments. These were kept to the trainee’s chat only, with the training staff not aware at first.

As the memes proliferated, individuals in the trainee managers group faced a choice. In the words of the Army general, they could walk past the standard, or confront it. But as social scientists and psychologists will point out, confronting a group is not easy. In fact, it’s very not easy - some would say it’s extremely difficult. But it seemed that confrontation was not to be needed; in a classic 2021 mistake, someone posted a meme on both the group chats, which most of the trainee managers thought would stop the memes and see the offending managers called out.

But they weren’t. The meme was ignored, and by default, it was tacitly accepted. While none of the trainers endorsed it, they neither derided it nor called out the behaviour of those who created and posted it. This set the standard. The status of the group was held most by the trainers, and by walking past a standard, they had set it for the entire group.

It’s not enough as a leader to not do the wrong thing. It’s not enough to set the standard for yourself, and trust others to follow suit. As a leader, the standard you set it is the standard others will accept. The standard you walk past is the standard that everyone in the organisation will see as acceptable. Most of all, this standard must be public, and it must be consistent. If you berate and correct others for poor behaviour, but are seen laughing at inappropriate jokes at a later date, you’ve set the standard at the lowest level. There can not be two standards, and the lower one will always be the one others see as acceptable.

For members of a group, it’s hard to set the standard for the group. Status plays a huge part in who sets the group standards, and without formal authority, the group’s standards can be hard fought or easily transgressed with little repercussions. As a leader, the standard of the group is the standard you set. Others will see it as the way things are done around here; the bedrock of culture, of defining what it means to be a member of that group. Beware the standard you walk past, for it is the standard not just for you, but for all.

A remake of the viral video now might be more accurately stated as: the standard you walk past is the standard an individual accepts. The standard a leader walks past, is the standard everyone accepts.

If you like this post, please consider contributing to the Collective Wisdom page. It’s free and will help us - and a future leader - immensely. Thank you, we appreciate what you do.

Brain filtering

There’s a myth that we all seem to accept as kids; that we only use 10% of our brain. This myth gives rise to some fanciful stories about people who use more of their brains, and are therefore smarter, while also providing fuel for many an insult about people who use less than 10%, and are therefore less intellectually formidable. But the truth is that all of us use all of our brains, just in different ways at different times. The human brain has been described as the most complex object in existence. And without an owner’s manual, there’s a good chance we’re not taking advantage of its complexity.

Our brains tend to work in layers. Like onions, parfait, and ogres, layers are an analogy for our brains that we can use to understand a little bit more what’s going on in this super-computer. The first layer is our immediate consciousness. It’s what you’re thinking of right now. Hopefully, for you dear reader, the top layer is the words you see on the screen in front of you. Immediately below this is the peripheral consciousness. This is all the things going on around you that you are aware of, but aren’t paying full attention to. If you’re reading this on the bus, you are aware of movement, but it’s not in the front of your mind. If you are at home, you might have music on in the background - you might even be humming along - but if asked, you might not be able to immediately name the song. Slightly deeper, you’re aware that you are awake, upright (probably) and vaguely aware of the temperature. These are the things that you can quickly shift your attention to in order to bring them to the top layer. It’s this middle layer that we’ll come back to.

The last layer that we’ll briefly look at is the bottom layer. You can give it the label of your subconscious if you like; it’s the thoughts that you don’t know you’re thinking, and that you may or may not even be able to access. And it’s FAST. One example of the thousands that exist is catching a ball. You see the ball coming and you put your hand up. In this bottom layer though, a thousand equations have been solved in a split second to calculate everything about the ball; its velocity, trajectory, the likely effect of gravity, the effect of wind, it’s probable weight, and it’s surface texture. Then a series of commands has been sent to your body to: set your feet, balance your stance, extend your arm and fingers, and close them at just the right moment to capture the ball. On the top layer, you probably thought, ‘I’ll catch that,’ but deeper down, you just earned a Nobel prize in physics.

There are many differences between these layers, and one of the biggest differences is processing power. The top layers are single channel processors; one task at a time. Multi-tasking in the top layer is really just task-switching. But for the bottom layer, it’s all about parallel processing. At the same time it’s figuring out how to calculate every computation for catching a ball, it’s also figuring out how to talk, breathe, balance, squint into the sun, and a thousand other tasks that keep you functioning as a human. You might be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, but that’s because your subconscious is doing them both for you. Simultaneously.

Another way to think about the differences between these layers is bandwidth. You can only consciously think about one thing at a time, and hold another seven or so in working memory. Using our earlier analogy, the top layer has one item in its memory banks, and the middle layer holds a few more. But this isn’t even a fraction of the sensory inputs we are receiving, and it’s a very select group. Are you sitting down? If so, are you aware of the chair beneath you? You are now; you’ve replaced an item in your top layer with this new awareness. Soon, it will drift into the middle layer as you again engross yourself in these words, and then it will silently slip back into the subconscious, replaced by other thoughts until recalled again when you rise and realise you have a numb butt.

With all that goes on around us, we’ve learned to filter the inputs we get into two main areas; regard and disregard. Our subconscious takes care of the disregard part, and we think we’ve ignored it, even when we haven’t. You might not pay attention to the temperature around you (or the chair beneath you) but your subconscious will adjust your internal cooling mechanisms regardless of whether you actively notice that you’re warm. At some point, some inputs are automatically passed from the ‘disregard’ status to the ‘regard’ status. As you get really warm, you might all of a sudden remark how hot is is and look for an active way to cool down. Similarly, when walking on a crowded footpath, you don’t notice the people in the crowd around you, but if you see a familiar face, you react. In effect, there is a filter between the layers in our brain that sorts out what goes into our conscious thinking. And that filter is incredibly important.

Have you ever bought a new car? When you decided on the make and model to buy, did you all of a sudden notice that type of car everywhere around you? Until this point, the information wasn’t very relevant or important, and was therefore filtered out. When the information became relevant, the filter adjusted to allow it to pass into your middle layer for holding as you were near other cars, then the top layer for examination when you saw one. Our filters are adjustable; but rarely adjusted.

The subconscious is incredibly powerful, but with great power comes great hunger. To conserve energy, our brains try to operate on idle as much as possible. For most of our actions, this works fine. But the filter between our layers is a potential power draw, so we use habit to make it efficient too. The effect of this is that we tend to pay attention to the things we normally pay attention to. And unless forced to change, the information passed up through the filter remains very similar. This is totally fine for much of our lives, but there are times it’s better to examine the filter, and see if it needs reshaping.

Our attitudes tend to be a product of our thoughts. And our thoughts, as we’ve seen, are often a byproduct of our habits. This feedback loop is part of the reason for our disposition; we see some people as perennially happy, or morose, or sceptical, or laconic. Part of this - but by no means the whole reason - is the filter we apply to our thinking. If, when confronted with a novel event, we filter for happy thoughts and optimistic outcomes, these will influence our approach. Our brains can’t hold enough information to try and be simultaneously happy and morose in response to a given event. It can’t be wholly mad and wholly laconic. If we train ourselves to filter the world around us in a certain way, that approach becomes habit, and affects our attitude generally.

It’s hard to be reactively selective in our filtering though. We can’t choose happiness as a response to a new event if our general outlook is sombre. Rather, we need to train ourselves to look for happiness in our normal thinking, and set the filter in response. Just like seeing a make and model of car we are interested in, if we are interested in the positive outlook in the world we move through, our subconscious will adjust the filter to suit. If we look for ill intent in others, then we should hardly be surprised to find it.

This is a hugely simplified explanation of course. The most complex object in existence cannot be summarised so easily, and there are scholars who weep for the analogies above. Despite this, the takeaway is clear; if we seek out the positives around us, we will find them, and eventually, the filter that passes information to our conscious brains will adjust to bias towards this outlook. Conversely, if we expect the negatives to happen, we cannot be surprised when they are all we filter for, and in turn, are all we perceive. Ultimately, we choose which habit we form, which filter we set, which attitude we adopt.

As leaders, you can choose to believe that people working with you are doing their level best to perform well and support the organisation. Or you can choose to expect poor performance, and look for fault and blame around you. Either way, you shouldn’t be surprised with the make and model of team mate you see most often.

If you like this post, please consider contributing to the Collective Wisdom page. It’s free and will help us - and a future leader - immensely. Thank you, we appreciate what you do.

The Big Boss

Most of have a shared experience - a meeting with the big boss. Not our day to day supervisor, or their manager, but the Big Kahuna themselves. Sometimes, this is like a brush with celebrity. It’s always refreshing to get a chance to tell people who make the decisions about how it is at the coalface. But what about when you’re the big boss? How do you ensure these opportunities go well?

Leadership takes some ego. We have to have a certain level of self confidence and self belief to be able to out ourselves out as leaders, and to influence others. For some, it’s a necessary evil, a price to pay for the opportunity to help others by assuming a leadership role. For others, it’s a pleasure, and the ego can grow as far as others will let it. This is obviously a dangerous path - hearing only what we want to hear, in the end, does no-one any favours. For those who can keep their ego in check, it’s an immensely rewarding experience. The first tip for being the big boss is to find something that grounds you. For some, it’s a hobby or sport. It’s hard to pretend you’re important when you’re trying as hard as everyone else to win. For others, it’s a trusted insider who will let you know if your head starts to swell. Whatever it might be, find something that reminds you that you work for your team at the same time that they work for you.

It’s only natural to be proud of our work. We’ve put our effort into it, and this often brings with it a desire to have others see our work and take some pleasure in it too. When that person is the big boss, it takes on another aspect; this person can most likely stop the flow of resources that enable us to do our work, or they can find ways to increase our share and do more. If you’re the boss, remember that people want to show you the good that they do. Take pride in their pride; it’s a great sign that the company is on track. The second tip for being the big boss is to show pride in your team. Let them know when they’re doing a good job. And tell them if you need them to lift their game; if you’ve found something that needs fixing, it shows you’re interested and engaged. That doesn’t mean that you try to find things to correct - but don’t hold back if you do.

One of the best feelings we have is that of being seen. It’s easy to dismiss the decisions made in remote buildings, or even in remote cities or countries, by faceless people with important titles. It’s harder to do so when you know that the boss has been to your workplace and seen what you do, and takes an interest. Chances are, if the boss visits, they’ll learn something and adopt a better way to understand your work. So, if you’re the boss, be visible. Part of feeling appreciated is being seen, and there’s no better way to make someone feel seen than to go and see them. Ask questions, and take an interest in the workplace. The impact will be lasting. The third tip for being the big boss is to make time to meet the team in their workplace. Don’t find the time - that won’t happen. People will tell you it’s ok, you’re busy, they understand. Don’t let this stop you; make the time.

It is said that first impressions are the most powerful. When you’re the big boss, you don’t get to make many impressions on the majority of the workforce. When you visit others you get to interact with a wide variety of people and they have little chance to make a big impact. For them though, there are very few opportunities to interact with the big boss, and therefore any interactions will be larger and more meaningful from their perspective. Their entire impression of you might be based on something as simple as whether you greet them with a smile and thank them for their time. It can be hard to be present for every interaction, and to treat every one as though they are the centre of your attention. It’s also hard to claw back a bad impression and engender loyalty in a group you’ve brushed off. The final tip for being the big boss is to be authentic. Treat everyone you interact with as though they’re your boss. If you’re doing your job right; they are.

If you’re the boss, appreciate that people will always want to impress you. So be impressed. Get out and visit the team, and when you do, take the time to listen and understand the differences between what you might think, and what your team thinks. When it’s different, find out why and explain to the team why these differences might exist. Be open and honest. For most of us, especially in Australia, there’s a good chance that no-one thinks you’re special, even if you are the big boss. They know that you put your pants on one leg at a time, so don’t pretend to be better than them. Your job as the big boss isn’t to impress people, it’s to help them. We do this by learning. Enjoy the experience, and take every chance you get - it is a fact of the job that there won’t be enough of them.

If you like this post, please consider contributing to the Collective Wisdom page. It’s free and will help us - and a future leader - immensely. Thank you, we appreciate what you do.

Communicate or perish

If there’s one thing that seems to get people offside in a workplace, it’s communication. You’ve probably heard of the expression ‘being treated like a mushroom.’ If you’re not familiar with the phrase, think about how you grow these fungi; you put them in the dark, and feed them manure. Workers relate - being kept out of the communication loop can make it seem like you’re a mushroom in the organisation, privy only to the leftover crumbs of information. This has two significant impacts on the workforce; it undermines a sense of contribution, and it reinforces status barriers. But it doesn’t have to be this way.

The best thing about living in the twenty-first century has got to be the ubiquitous access to communication. In fact, many organisations now struggle with communicating; there are too many ways to pass information. Email, Slack, IM, direct meetings - the list goes on. Despite this, there’s often no real passage of information. People make decisions and don’t communicate their intentions down the chain, expecting it to instead get passed from one level to the next like a game of pass the message. Sometimes, we overlook the tools that could help us the most.

Correcting this issue can be fairly simple - although with all things leadership, nothing is truly simple; after all, there are humans involved, with all their variety and nuance. But there are certain actions that can lessen the friction.

Initially, decide on the medium. Your organisation likely has a normal means for passing information, and in many cases, it’s probably email. Sometimes, there are better options; engagement can be increased by using YouTube videos, information can be accessed easily through Slack or you might prefer to go old school and gather the team for a meeting. Making this decision though, remember one thing; it’s about the audience. Who are you communicating to, and how will they access the information? And don’t forget that the medium sends a message in itself; if you’re passing on bad news, it’s always best to do this in person.

Next, consider the breadth of the message. How far into the organisation do you want the message to get? Is this something you can send to the entire workforce, or is this relevant only to a small section? For those that might consider themselves mushrooms, how do you open a window and make sure they get the information they crave - the information that they need to do a better job? Most communication mediums now make it easy to share information widely, which empowers people to make decisions and act quickly. If in doubt, share widely.

Don’t forget to add context. Passing on a decision without explaining why a decision was made leaves people with information, but no way to use it. Effectively, this is the manure you feed mushrooms; it sustains operations, but it doesn’t grow oak trees. Without context, people can’t add their own knowledge and experience to the information and in doing so, use it to the organisation’s best advantage. Conversely, if people understand the rationale behind decisions, it’s much easier to anticipate what happens next, and to move in the right direction. By explaining the why, it gives a sense of purpose, and empowers people to do more. Knowledge is not power until you share it.

Information empowers people. It’s entirely natural to want to contribute. By ensuring that information flows smoothly through an organisation, leaders can enable their workforce to see opportunities and act on fleeting circumstances. This translates to speed in reaction, which puts the organisation at an advantage. Knowing what’s happening also provides a sense of belonging, empowering people to contribute and reinforcing their sense of status.

The best solution to communication issues, as it often is to organisational issues, is simply to seek feedback. Engage with the team to find out if they know enough, and if they understand why certain decisions are made. Often, there’s a sense that bad decisions need to be held closely in case people are unhappy with the news, but this undersells the ability for well-informed workers to understand context and appreciate being kept in the loop. Ask the team what’s working and what isn’t - then use the feedback to improve.

The Industrial Age was marked by a sense that managers only passed on the information that workers needed to do their jobs. As a result, improvements - if any - were iterative and slow. In the twenty-first century, any organisation that operates in such a backward way will go the same way as the steam train and the telegram. Don’t be a steam train, and don’t let your organisation create mushrooms.

If you like this post, please consider contributing to the Collective Wisdom page. It’s free and will help us - and a future leader - immensely. Thank you, we appreciate what you do.