How To Take Advantage Of Your Greatest Leadership Fear
Most leaders privately acknowledge their greatest insecurity is feeling like an impostor. Leaders enter jobs with deep-seated feelings of inadequacy, feeling certain they are over their head , and hoping they don’t “get caught.” Our research studying thousands of leaders rising into bigger jobs revealed 69% of them feel minimally or unprepared for roles they assume. 45% of them had minimal understanding of the challenges they would face, and 76% percent said their organizations were not helpful in getting them ready. Fearing exposure as a fraud, and terrified of letting others down, many leaders overcompensate with extreme attempts at flawlessness to win the loyalty of followers from whom they expect their credibility to be questioned. Here are four common narratives bellowed by the inner voice driving these leaders.
I have to be perfect
Many driven executives struggle to accept that flaws and mistakes are part of being human. And when you act is if you are, or should be perfect, you eventually expect it of others as well. Followers, on whom those standards are imposed, typically revolt and withdraw their support. Abused followers — starved for acknowledgement — wait to pounce on any hint of (hypocritical) deficiency, leaving no room for missteps. Leaders, fearing criticism and exposure, work to perpetuate the illusion of infallibility. Many experts suggest leaders live in cycles of self-recrimination, fearing they’ll be discovered as a fraud. 67% of our respondents struggled with micromanagement, a common symptom of managerial perfectionism.
Followers need assurance that leaders know they are flawed. Leaders must be upfront about what followers can expect– about strengths and foibles. They must welcome feedback, and encourage candor when their weakness becomes problematic for others. Apologize early and often when mistakes are made, and show followers grace when they slip-up. A leader’s greatest source of credibility is, ironically, their vulnerability. Owning imperfections wins trust ; hiding them doesn’t. Leaders must shed tapes that imprison them with idealistic standards, and bring their humanity to leadership. Followers will line up in support of leaders who aren’t afraid to be imperfect.
I have to be 100% fair
When it comes to resource allocation – from compensation and promotions to strategic priorities – leaders are scrutinized for “fairness” in unfair ways. Many employees expect to get overlooked when it comes to performance evaluations, promotions, pay, and access to resources and opportunities. A fragile economy and colossal gap between executive and worker wages continue to fuel distrust. Organizational injustice is in the eye of the beholder, and sometimes those that play the “that’s not fair” card lack facts.
Leaders must distinguish the difference between equity and equality. When people naively say they want equality, what they are looking for is equity. While people want to be treated equally, not all jobs are equal – not every contribution holds equal value. Instead of trying to treat everyone the same, be clear that disproportionate performance and results get disproportionate rewards, resources, and opportunities. When executives try to neutralize these differences by creating the false appearance of egalitarian polices that “treat everyone the same,” they provoke the very anxieties they sought to allay because people instinctively know that everyone is not the same.
Followers want to know the rules, and know leaders care when the rules are broken. If employees understand the standards, and how rewards will be distributed, they will believe there is no capriciousness beneath those choices. They want to know leaders have their backs, despite the realities of organizational injustice. One executive we worked with, thinking he was showing empathy, said to an employee, “I know our bonus structure is messed up, but there’s nothing I can do.” Making himself a co-victim reduced his credibility as he advertised feeling powerless to advocate for change. When someone is behaving in ways that disadvantage others, leaders must swiftly step in. Advocacy on behalf of those feeling wronged sends a powerful message about standards of organizational justice and fairness.
I have to motivate people
Inspired performance comes from a part of followers where they choose to exceed expectations. While passion, engagement, and vision are common vernacular, less common is the energizing impact they are intended to have in environments that feel draining. Followers, bereft of purpose, expect personal validation from leaders. Some have insatiable needs for affirmation that alienate executives who perceive them as “needy.” We tell people to take pride in their work and when they do, it should be reinforced. But those who bring unresolved childhood issues to work for boss’ to resolve are experienced as bottomless emotional pits to leaders whose emotional intelligence runs out when trying to assuage them. Too many leaders get sucked into obligatory co-dependence trying to fill unappeasable emotional needs. The inspiration a leader sought to infuse gets hijacked by a loud unquenchable minority.
As a leader, you can’t “motivate” others – it’s not a verb. People must choose it for themselves. Followers need a reason to hope. They need to hear the realism of what is, and the optimism of what could be. Peterson and Byron point out that high-hope individuals are more goal-oriented and more motivated to achieve goals than those with low hope. They also found higher hope executives produced more and better quality solutions, suggesting that hopefulness may help employees when they encounter obstacles. Hope, then, is a choice. Its true power lies in choosing it when presenting data suggests otherwise. Hope invites the leap of faith to place one’s confidence behind something without having tangible evidence to back it up. Once followers feel reality-based hope, they are inspired to offer their greatest contributions.
I have to be accessible 24/7
Leaders never feel they have enough time to give, and followers don’t feel they get enough. Two-thirds of respondents claimed they had insufficient time to offer those they lead. The challenge is how to negotiate with each follower what they need and how to provide it. Don’t let militant gatekeepers prevent access, and don’t offer unlimited access. Set clear boundaries and enforce the need to work within them. Leaders can maximize the impact of their time with creative use of governance that gets teams of people access to them vs. a series of one-on-one conversations.
Followers really want reliability. If they have problems, leaders will help find solutions. If there’s something they can’t make sense of, leaders will offer perspective. If they can’t get an adjacent department to cooperate, their leader will run interference. While the amount of time spent doing these things will vary, when followers conclude leaders aren’t reliable, the amount of time they don’t spend with them becomes the issue. While leaders can’t become everyone’s answer ATM, knowing they are there to guide and support bolsters trust, helping followers decide when and how to engage.
The leadership stage is a high-wire act without a net. As a human being with gifts and flaws, accept you aren’t perfect. Anchoring yourself with transparent principles that aren’t vulnerable to fickle expectations of followers will help weather the harsh blows dealt by the discontented. Leaders must satisfy follower’s real needs rather than contorting themselves into what they can never be, and you’ll find followers more satisfied than ever.
