Real leaders really listen

“The team are mutinying” said our director. “It’s not working.” The room swayed, and I checked the hanging light. It was still. No earthquake, though in Taiwan we often had small quakes. “Mutiny” was a shock though. I was leading the User Education team’s move to new tools and processes. That change program was big for the team, and huge for my career. But now …?

I led the program because I’d sown its seeds, driving small proofs, then pitching bigger, then picking the software and services. Now, I held the ship together, steering through waves of choice and change, moving twice as fast as western companies would do it. I’d earned the director’s trust and support. At least till now.

Now? Why hadn’t the team told me that something was wrong? Wasn’t I a good listener? Brought up as a Quaker, I knew about calm and openness. I’d been part of Quakers’ unique business meetings, vote-free and based on consensus¹. Didn’t that make me a sensitive colleague? For sure, things were different now, halfway across the globe, in an intense work culture. But I asked for comments on all my decisions. And there weren’t many comments, so things couldn’t be bad?

The director wouldn’t be drawn further; she told me to talk to the team lead, then left the room. That night I slept uneasy, adrift on a sea of nerves.

The group shared their concerns with me in a meeting two days later. People worried that decisions were moving too fast. Some didn’t feel consulted or involved. I was mortified. I’d pushed the team to a bad place. And my future as project captain seemed in doubt.

It wasn’t that my decisions were wrong. (A later analysis by the group re-validated most.) But a good decision isn’t reached by one person’s logic. It’s not even a decision, really, until the affected people buy into it. And the best way to gain buy-in for a decision is to come to conclusions together. I’d forgotten that lesson from the Quaker business meetings.

As we worked out new decision processes, things improved. One colleague would test and plan alongside me, which was very welcome help. Another would lead some social media monitoring, a different project but complementary. And we’d come together more regularly to review.

Listening is the only way to get change done

That point of near-mutiny was the start of the real change project. Without greater commitment from the team, the project never could have succeeded. I realized that I wasn’t entirely at fault for the place it got to before recovering. The project took more than the team had expected. But I could have spotted the signs of trouble earlier.

Looking back, the signs had been clear. The team’s muted responses showed that they weren’t convinced the ship was heading the right way. Concerns were raised, but indirectly, with signals that I wouldn’t recognize until a few more years in Taiwan’s business culture.

Actually, every culture has context behind its communication. Even the so-called low-context American business culture has more emotional subtext than many people think. Leading teams from any or many cultures, the more you pay attention, the quicker you spot when something’s wrong,

Since then, when I sense conflict in or between teams, I’ve worked to surface it. Sometimes it’s a phrase in an email that alerts me. Here’s an example: “[Name] said you had to approve the decision, but I’m sure they misunderstood.” In context, that “misunderstood” signified the writer’s and the team’s discomfort with being asked to explain their priorities. Working past the discomfort took a while but was worth it. If I hadn’t picked up that early sign, the team could have become unhappy and unproductive.