9 ms·

Small actions make great leaders

156 points by rustoo 4y ago

jjtheblunt 4y ago
the best leaders i have so far worked for reminded me of a transistor: they could, with little but critically positioned decisions, influence the flow of effort much larger than themselves.
- shanusmagnus 4y ago
  I love this metaphor.
- vanadium 4y ago
  This is a brilliant way of framing it; I couldn’t agree more.
gfody 4y ago
this reads like linkedin fiction, it's the worst piece of rubbish ever. the author over analyzes an normal exchange of constructive feedback and makes Julie out to be a cunning manipulator then lauds it as a leadership achievement.
- Spooky23 4y ago
  It’s HBR, what do you expect?
- quesera 4y ago
  Articles in HBR are often best described as corporate fanfiction written by recently-graduated MBAs. See also: 99% of business writing though. HBR might actually be on the better end of a really vapid genre spectrum.
- darkerside 4y ago
  You're right. It was total garbage. Your post actually describes the situation much more concisely and effectively. It really reframes the parable described on a way that makes it accessible to every person, whether they consider themselves a leader or not. Thank you for your contribution to discourse on this forum.
  - DreamFlasher 4y ago
    Made my day, thank you :D
- exodust 4y ago
  Glad someone said it. There are many ways to respond to someone who calls your paper rubbish. In this case, the recipient of the feedback agreed it was rubbish. They could have fired back a witty comment, a joke, or sarcasm, which may have broken the ice and caused the exact same outcome. There is no winning formula in those interactions which reflects "good leadership". It's tiring hearing about all these strategies people use on each other in order to "win" some prize. In my book, anyone who uses pre-cooked tactics when talking to my face, is not leadership material.
  - Hasu 4y ago
    I disagree strongly. Most people, if they're told their work is "rubbish", or trash, or garbage, or just bad, will react defensively and attempt to justify themselves and validate their work. "I was under time pressure", "It's not that bad", or "What do you know?" would be likely responses. A witty comment, sarcasm, or a joke are still deflections, and wouldn't cause the same outcome, because all of these responses persist the narrative of "me vs. you". The response here, acknowledging that the criticism is valid even though it wasn't diplomatic, is the key to achieving a good outcome. It reframes the discussion from antagonistic to cooperative. It's also not a precooked tactic. One of the points of the article is that this kind of reaction isn't really teachable or learnable - some people have it and most people don't. The article strives to find the heart of the interaction and others like it to find ways to make it learnable, but it acknowledges that it doesn't achieve that. It's weird that you're agreeing the article is bad when it's making the same fundamental point you are - good leadership isn't about canned approaches and there are no winning formulas, and someone's background has little bearing on their true leadership abilities.
    - leaflets2 4y ago
      > It reframes the discussion from antagonistic to cooperative Well written, Maybe a similar way of saying that, could be: finding the useful things in what someone said, and ignoring any rude undertones At the same time, if one constantly needs to reframe antagonism, how long will it take until one starts looking for another workplace? Let's hope it was a one time thing
    - 4y ago
purplerabbit 4y ago
A lot of this resonates with the idea of surface acting vs deep acting (see relevant section here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_labor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_labor)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
thenerdhead 4y ago
HBR has constantly produced mediocre content on leadership. The last good bits were when Clayton Christensen was alive. Maybe just me but between these articles, the audiobooks, and the YouTube videos, HBR has really lost me as a regular reader.
- djbusby 4y ago
  Some manager is trying to juke the stats for their next career step. They choose quantity over quality, numbers bigger, line goes up... Promotion! The after effects (decline) are the next fools problem
- lolinder 4y ago
  Would you mind including more details about why this comment applies to this particular piece? I feel like a comment like this shows up every time an HBR article lands, and I rarely see the criticism fleshed out to be meaningful in any way. Sometimes commenters seem to only have read the headline. With HBR, it seems like some people only read the URL.
  - langsoul-com 4y ago
    Yeah, comments underneath this are similar. Doesn't make sense, it's a fairly short article that starts with a story and how to resolve it, adding some explanation as well. Very good formula.
    - exodust 4y ago
      Formula? There are many ways to resolve situations. In this one, both parties apparently agreed the paper was "rubbish". The problem that needed resolving was the paper, not the interaction. And since they were co-authoring said paper, why on Earth would the "rubbish" man not want to help? She could have simply said "can you please help fix the paper, you are a co-author after all?". And he most likely would have helped. There is no connection to leadership from her actions that I can see. Only the one an article wishes to make up.
  - 4y ago
webbruce 4y ago
Definitely agree with the article and thoughts. Little things also make the team feel valued and appreciated, quick thanks, short appreciation/feedback, etc. Feels good. It's interesting having been on the side of being an employee with manager not acknowledging those things overtime it's wearing. But also tough for owner/manager to make sure to keep doing it too. Either way, a good reminder to keep the positivity flowing Out of all these haterade comments, I don't see any having scaled a company or team. Don't read HBR if you don't want to improve as a leader, simple
- kradeelav 4y ago
  Agreed. It feels like there's really a difference between leadership-as-a-buzzword or an self-bestowed empty title (in good faith, maybe what the comments are reacting to), versus true leadership that is so rare it can be experienced less than ten times in a person's career. Real leadership is something special, and feels like it's the kind of actions that were exemplified by the first story in the article.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- robbintt 4y ago
  I'll subscribe to HBR with that endorsement.
- ano88888 4y ago
  Yes, there is a disconnect with HBR articles and the real world. Just look at the leaders today. People like to attribute all the great qualities to leaders and call it leadership skills. But if you look at people at the top of the food chain, you will see a completely different picture. People can become top leaders while being selfish , brutal and emotionally unstable. Just look at people such as Donald Trump (was president, so definitely was a 'leader') , Xi Jin Ping, Putin etc. The list goes on and on. Ok, if you argue these people are not actually 'leading', they are not true 'leaders' , you're redefining words to make yourself feel good. These people are the actual leaders in the real world who have immerse influence in the world (positive or negative).
robbintt 4y ago
I agree with this, especially the part about working to build inner authenticity first. An abrupt remark isn't relevant to the success you may need help to produce. Being a jerk also isn't acceptable, though. There may have been a better followup story where the guy recognized he was being unconstructively critical. Maybe it got cut. If your mind understood this story, the same narrative style is used in the classic book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie.
- darkerside 4y ago
  The whole point of the story is how irrelevant the abrupt remark was in the broader context of the higher purpose they were both trying to achieve. Why did he react that way? Maybe he is a jerk. Maybe he had a bad day. Maybe he was frustrated because the paper was truly terrible. We don't know, and it doesn't matter. What matters is the end product accomplished the higher goal that they both wanted.
ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
I really enjoyed that! I don’t really like getting hung up in “rank and privilege.” If I’m in a leadership position, it really means that I have the burden of Responsibility and Accountability for my decisions. The buck stops at me. It’s always been important to me to cultivate relationships with my staff. It’s not just a command structure. They need to follow my orders, because they trust and respect me; just as I need to trust and respect my employees. It’s much more about being human, than it is about being a “leader,” whatever that means. I dunno. It worked for me. YMMV.
- rgavuliak 4y ago
  I think it's also due to the fact that if you are a leader in the right place, you have to deal with too many things anyway and the only way to survive is to delegate as much as possible. In order to delegate you need to treat people with trust.
- BiteCode_dev 4y ago
  You have the burden of responsibility, because you take it. Many people in charge don't and will gladly blame others as much as they can, yet get away with it because some management don't wish for integrity, but need a watchdog.
shanusmagnus 4y ago
I think there's some wisdom in this, but am annoyed that the article was basically one giant shill for the author's consulting company.
q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 4y ago
TL;DR: Good article. Worth digging through the MBA-speak to get to the value. As someone who has led a decent number of initiatives (and usually done at least a pretty decent job), I can confirm: The article makes good points and strongly suggests the author can walk the walk. The biggest thing that suggests this (at least, to me) is the general focus on mindfulness. The word doesn't appear in the article at all, but the entire framing of first focusing on -- and then gently redirecting -- your internal state is in exactly the same conceptual neighborhood. And being able to get your emotions under control in emotion-spiking situations might be the most fundamental executive skill. (Interestingly, the psychologist Lisa Feldman-Barrett has a related framework that's also very useful for this. [1] She points out that an emotional response can be mindfully observed and decoupled into its components -- and, in doing so, it can be much more easily reframed and redirected.) There were other little things that also suggest he knows his stuff when it comes to leading knowledge workers in modern organizations. The reference to nature analogies -- and the bit about complex systems -- will get a nod of recognition from anyone who's held the job for a while. And the habit-building approach he talks about near the end suggests that he knows how to teach skills in this domain, too. It's a bit Pavlovian, but that Pavlov dude got results. Having said that, I'll admit the points are covered in a thick layer of MBA-speak. Maybe it's just my personal style, but the mock conversation felt stilted and almost painful. And the attempt to turn "love" and "self-realization" into brandable concepts definitely made me laugh. (Good try, though!) [1] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/sep/25/im-extremely-controversial-the-psychologist-rethinking-human-emotion https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/sep/25/im-extremely-c...
ilaksh 4y ago
If that's what great leadership is about then..that's why I often don't respect managers. The situation is that they have worked for years on a paper and now the first draft has serious obvious editing flaws. So the "leader" instead of giving constructive feedback just says it's garbage and dismisses it? It's not only rude but makes no sense for an intelligent person to behave that way in a team. Then the other person recognizing they need to get on the same page and acknowledging the poor writing is just a sort of integral way of preserving all of that work on the research. If you need to go to Harvard to learn to not be a stupid asshole..
- Hasu 4y ago
  > So the "leader" instead of giving constructive feedback just says it's garbage and dismisses it? The person being dismissive is not the leader in this example. The person who does a judo move accepting the criticism and using it to improve the article, the working relationship, and the conversation is the leader.
jnash 4y ago
Great leaders excel at picking the right people for the job at hand, giving them a clear objective to accomplish with matching incentives, and otherwise stay the hell out of the way.
- Hasu 4y ago
  I'd make the distinction that you're describing great managers, not great leaders.
jimkleiber 4y ago
I think this article came to me just when I needed it. I've been struggling whether to frame the services I offer as emotional conflict resolution, communication, or leadership, and after reading this article, I feel a lot more at peace that these skills may swirl together. I agree with the author that I've found it hard to distinguish which skills are being employed, because many are in such short interactions. I also feel a lot more confident in that the person in the story seemed to mostly be saying how she was feeling and how she imagined the other person was feeling—which is the core of the work I do. I feel a lot more hopeful and excited that no matter what I call the services, they may help people, and I wouldn't have found this article at this time were it not for HN. So, thank you, HN friends.
tpoacher 4y ago
The cynic in me couldn't resist paraphrasing the intro in my mind into something truly horrible, so here it is in full exaggerated glory for HN's amusement: > Julie, an organic chemist, was doing drug research at a lab. Her boss, Gordon, was a well-regarded scientist but also a known shauvinist with a huge ego. > One day she walked into Gordon’s office to ask for his feedback on the draft of a research paper they were "co-" authoring but which was basically her own independent work. Gordon told her that it was the “worst piece of rubbish” he’d ever seen, and "that's the problem with letting women in research". > Julie realised that if she wanted to get published she'd have to suck up to Gordon and make him feel in charge again, so she did. “Gordon you magnificent beast, your word is gospel, and I'm just a lowly piece of skirt, vying in a man's world. Lend me your ineffable wisdom, oh exalted one, so that I may get published under your wing, and praise thy name forward unto the ages, amen". > Gordon’s mood seemed to instantly improve. He looked the paper over, pointing out "problems" to be addressed and offering generic ideas on the spot, completely ignoring months of literature review and careful experimentation which warned against them. > Julie went on to publish the paper in a top journal because it had Gordon's name on it, and Gordon is also friends with the editor. She even received a major award for it. > (This is a retelling of a true story from the writings of the preeminent psychotherapist Dr. David Burns, whom Julie had to visit many, many times.) P.S. I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm so sorry.
- Kaibeezy 4y ago
  Chauvinism (Wikipedia) - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism Way more interesting short article than I expected. Started out as a descriptor for a type of extreme nationalism, only much later applied to gender roles.
- cntainer 4y ago
  I don't want to admit it but I'm guessing this scenario happens more often in the real world. And I'm sure most Gordons would approve this behavior much more readily than the one described in the article. Is this some kind of leadership? Or is it just the survival of the fittest? :)
- DeathArrow 4y ago
vgel 4y ago
I have my doubts about whether the conversation in the article ever happened, but I found it interesting that it fits almost perfectly into the model of effectively asking people to do things from Dialectical Behavior Therapy, an evidence-based therapy program. The acronym is DEAR, which stands for Describe (the situation), Express (emotions), Ask, Reinforce (why should they do it). Really simple. Describe: Gordon, I’m not a bit surprised that you thought the paper was rubbish. To be honest, I had the exact same feeling when I was writing it. I felt like I was rambling on and on. Express: I’m always amazed when I read your papers because they’re so incredibly clear and lucid. That’s actually one of the reasons I wanted to work with you and why I was so excited when you offered me a position last fall. The results of our research could be extremely important, and I know that if the paper were well-written, it might make a tremendous impact. Ask: The paper may be beyond repair, but I’m wondering if you might have any suggestions about how I could make it better. Reinforce: I want to learn as much from you as I possibly can. You can structure basically any "ask" this way, even a really brief one. I've found it really useful, especially when planning out in advance how I'm going to ask someone for something. Protip: A good DEAR can be 50-70% reinforce :-) In fact if I had made this hypothetical-paper-editing ask I would have moved the last sentence of the Express to the Reinforce to introduce the question earlier and backload the importance of the paper after asking for help improving it.
- darkerside 4y ago
  I think you also need to layer on that the described reality wasn't her own. It accepted the reality presented by her colleague with no sign of defensiveness.
  - DiffEq 4y ago
    The key aspect that allowed her to respond the way she did was humility. Humility - how is that taught? I can think of how I learned to be more humble and they all were hard trials not reproducible in the classroom; so far as I know anyway.
    - darkerside 4y ago
williamcotton 4y ago
A Gartner survey of more than 6,500 employees and over 100 CHROs around the globe found that “the best organizations rely on their workforce, not executives, to lead change.” —- I know it to be true but it is so exhausting to do what is required of your position while also having to think and behave as the CEO.

156 points by rustoo 4y ago

the best leaders i have so far worked for reminded me of a transistor: they could, with little but critically positioned decisions, influence the flow of effort much larger than themselves.

shanusmagnus 4y ago
I love this metaphor.
vanadium 4y ago
This is a brilliant way of framing it; I couldn’t agree more.

gfody 4y ago

this reads like linkedin fiction, it's the worst piece of rubbish ever. the author over analyzes an normal exchange of constructive feedback and makes Julie out to be a cunning manipulator then lauds it as a leadership achievement.

Spooky23 4y ago
It’s HBR, what do you expect?
quesera 4y ago
Articles in HBR are often best described as corporate fanfiction written by recently-graduated MBAs. See also: 99% of business writing though. HBR might actually be on the better end of a really vapid genre spectrum.
darkerside 4y ago
You're right. It was total garbage. Your post actually describes the situation much more concisely and effectively. It really reframes the parable described on a way that makes it accessible to every person, whether they consider themselves a leader or not. Thank you for your contribution to discourse on this forum.
- DreamFlasher 4y ago
  Made my day, thank you :D
exodust 4y ago
Glad someone said it. There are many ways to respond to someone who calls your paper rubbish. In this case, the recipient of the feedback agreed it was rubbish. They could have fired back a witty comment, a joke, or sarcasm, which may have broken the ice and caused the exact same outcome. There is no winning formula in those interactions which reflects "good leadership". It's tiring hearing about all these strategies people use on each other in order to "win" some prize. In my book, anyone who uses pre-cooked tactics when talking to my face, is not leadership material.
- Hasu 4y ago
  I disagree strongly. Most people, if they're told their work is "rubbish", or trash, or garbage, or just bad, will react defensively and attempt to justify themselves and validate their work. "I was under time pressure", "It's not that bad", or "What do you know?" would be likely responses. A witty comment, sarcasm, or a joke are still deflections, and wouldn't cause the same outcome, because all of these responses persist the narrative of "me vs. you". The response here, acknowledging that the criticism is valid even though it wasn't diplomatic, is the key to achieving a good outcome. It reframes the discussion from antagonistic to cooperative. It's also not a precooked tactic. One of the points of the article is that this kind of reaction isn't really teachable or learnable - some people have it and most people don't. The article strives to find the heart of the interaction and others like it to find ways to make it learnable, but it acknowledges that it doesn't achieve that. It's weird that you're agreeing the article is bad when it's making the same fundamental point you are - good leadership isn't about canned approaches and there are no winning formulas, and someone's background has little bearing on their true leadership abilities.
  - leaflets2 4y ago
    > It reframes the discussion from antagonistic to cooperative Well written, Maybe a similar way of saying that, could be: finding the useful things in what someone said, and ignoring any rude undertones At the same time, if one constantly needs to reframe antagonism, how long will it take until one starts looking for another workplace? Let's hope it was a one time thing
  - 4y ago

purplerabbit 4y ago

A lot of this resonates with the idea of surface acting vs deep acting (see relevant section here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_labor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_labor)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

thenerdhead 4y ago

HBR has constantly produced mediocre content on leadership. The last good bits were when Clayton Christensen was alive. Maybe just me but between these articles, the audiobooks, and the YouTube videos, HBR has really lost me as a regular reader.

djbusby 4y ago
Some manager is trying to juke the stats for their next career step. They choose quantity over quality, numbers bigger, line goes up... Promotion! The after effects (decline) are the next fools problem
lolinder 4y ago
Would you mind including more details about why this comment applies to this particular piece? I feel like a comment like this shows up every time an HBR article lands, and I rarely see the criticism fleshed out to be meaningful in any way. Sometimes commenters seem to only have read the headline. With HBR, it seems like some people only read the URL.
- langsoul-com 4y ago
  Yeah, comments underneath this are similar. Doesn't make sense, it's a fairly short article that starts with a story and how to resolve it, adding some explanation as well. Very good formula.
  - exodust 4y ago
    Formula? There are many ways to resolve situations. In this one, both parties apparently agreed the paper was "rubbish". The problem that needed resolving was the paper, not the interaction. And since they were co-authoring said paper, why on Earth would the "rubbish" man not want to help? She could have simply said "can you please help fix the paper, you are a co-author after all?". And he most likely would have helped. There is no connection to leadership from her actions that I can see. Only the one an article wishes to make up.
- 4y ago

webbruce 4y ago

Definitely agree with the article and thoughts. Little things also make the team feel valued and appreciated, quick thanks, short appreciation/feedback, etc. Feels good. It's interesting having been on the side of being an employee with manager not acknowledging those things overtime it's wearing. But also tough for owner/manager to make sure to keep doing it too. Either way, a good reminder to keep the positivity flowing Out of all these haterade comments, I don't see any having scaled a company or team. Don't read HBR if you don't want to improve as a leader, simple

kradeelav 4y ago
Agreed. It feels like there's really a difference between leadership-as-a-buzzword or an self-bestowed empty title (in good faith, maybe what the comments are reacting to), versus true leadership that is so rare it can be experienced less than ten times in a person's career. Real leadership is something special, and feels like it's the kind of actions that were exemplified by the first story in the article.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
robbintt 4y ago
I'll subscribe to HBR with that endorsement.
ano88888 4y ago
Yes, there is a disconnect with HBR articles and the real world. Just look at the leaders today. People like to attribute all the great qualities to leaders and call it leadership skills. But if you look at people at the top of the food chain, you will see a completely different picture. People can become top leaders while being selfish , brutal and emotionally unstable. Just look at people such as Donald Trump (was president, so definitely was a 'leader') , Xi Jin Ping, Putin etc. The list goes on and on. Ok, if you argue these people are not actually 'leading', they are not true 'leaders' , you're redefining words to make yourself feel good. These people are the actual leaders in the real world who have immerse influence in the world (positive or negative).

robbintt 4y ago

I agree with this, especially the part about working to build inner authenticity first. An abrupt remark isn't relevant to the success you may need help to produce. Being a jerk also isn't acceptable, though. There may have been a better followup story where the guy recognized he was being unconstructively critical. Maybe it got cut. If your mind understood this story, the same narrative style is used in the classic book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie.

darkerside 4y ago
The whole point of the story is how irrelevant the abrupt remark was in the broader context of the higher purpose they were both trying to achieve. Why did he react that way? Maybe he is a jerk. Maybe he had a bad day. Maybe he was frustrated because the paper was truly terrible. We don't know, and it doesn't matter. What matters is the end product accomplished the higher goal that they both wanted.

ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago

I really enjoyed that! I don’t really like getting hung up in “rank and privilege.” If I’m in a leadership position, it really means that I have the burden of Responsibility and Accountability for my decisions. The buck stops at me. It’s always been important to me to cultivate relationships with my staff. It’s not just a command structure. They need to follow my orders, because they trust and respect me; just as I need to trust and respect my employees. It’s much more about being human, than it is about being a “leader,” whatever that means. I dunno. It worked for me. YMMV.

rgavuliak 4y ago
I think it's also due to the fact that if you are a leader in the right place, you have to deal with too many things anyway and the only way to survive is to delegate as much as possible. In order to delegate you need to treat people with trust.
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
You have the burden of responsibility, because you take it. Many people in charge don't and will gladly blame others as much as they can, yet get away with it because some management don't wish for integrity, but need a watchdog.

shanusmagnus 4y ago

I think there's some wisdom in this, but am annoyed that the article was basically one giant shill for the author's consulting company.

q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 4y ago

TL;DR: Good article. Worth digging through the MBA-speak to get to the value. As someone who has led a decent number of initiatives (and usually done at least a pretty decent job), I can confirm: The article makes good points and strongly suggests the author can walk the walk. The biggest thing that suggests this (at least, to me) is the general focus on mindfulness. The word doesn't appear in the article at all, but the entire framing of first focusing on -- and then gently redirecting -- your internal state is in exactly the same conceptual neighborhood. And being able to get your emotions under control in emotion-spiking situations might be the most fundamental executive skill. (Interestingly, the psychologist Lisa Feldman-Barrett has a related framework that's also very useful for this. [1] She points out that an emotional response can be mindfully observed and decoupled into its components -- and, in doing so, it can be much more easily reframed and redirected.) There were other little things that also suggest he knows his stuff when it comes to leading knowledge workers in modern organizations. The reference to nature analogies -- and the bit about complex systems -- will get a nod of recognition from anyone who's held the job for a while. And the habit-building approach he talks about near the end suggests that he knows how to teach skills in this domain, too. It's a bit Pavlovian, but that Pavlov dude got results. Having said that, I'll admit the points are covered in a thick layer of MBA-speak. Maybe it's just my personal style, but the mock conversation felt stilted and almost painful. And the attempt to turn "love" and "self-realization" into brandable concepts definitely made me laugh. (Good try, though!) [1] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/sep/25/im-extremely-controversial-the-psychologist-rethinking-human-emotion https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/sep/25/im-extremely-c...

ilaksh 4y ago

If that's what great leadership is about then..that's why I often don't respect managers. The situation is that they have worked for years on a paper and now the first draft has serious obvious editing flaws. So the "leader" instead of giving constructive feedback just says it's garbage and dismisses it? It's not only rude but makes no sense for an intelligent person to behave that way in a team. Then the other person recognizing they need to get on the same page and acknowledging the poor writing is just a sort of integral way of preserving all of that work on the research. If you need to go to Harvard to learn to not be a stupid asshole..

Hasu 4y ago
> So the "leader" instead of giving constructive feedback just says it's garbage and dismisses it? The person being dismissive is not the leader in this example. The person who does a judo move accepting the criticism and using it to improve the article, the working relationship, and the conversation is the leader.

jnash 4y ago

Great leaders excel at picking the right people for the job at hand, giving them a clear objective to accomplish with matching incentives, and otherwise stay the hell out of the way.

Hasu 4y ago
I'd make the distinction that you're describing great managers, not great leaders.

jimkleiber 4y ago

I think this article came to me just when I needed it. I've been struggling whether to frame the services I offer as emotional conflict resolution, communication, or leadership, and after reading this article, I feel a lot more at peace that these skills may swirl together. I agree with the author that I've found it hard to distinguish which skills are being employed, because many are in such short interactions. I also feel a lot more confident in that the person in the story seemed to mostly be saying how she was feeling and how she imagined the other person was feeling—which is the core of the work I do. I feel a lot more hopeful and excited that no matter what I call the services, they may help people, and I wouldn't have found this article at this time were it not for HN. So, thank you, HN friends.

tpoacher 4y ago

The cynic in me couldn't resist paraphrasing the intro in my mind into something truly horrible, so here it is in full exaggerated glory for HN's amusement: > Julie, an organic chemist, was doing drug research at a lab. Her boss, Gordon, was a well-regarded scientist but also a known shauvinist with a huge ego. > One day she walked into Gordon’s office to ask for his feedback on the draft of a research paper they were "co-" authoring but which was basically her own independent work. Gordon told her that it was the “worst piece of rubbish” he’d ever seen, and "that's the problem with letting women in research". > Julie realised that if she wanted to get published she'd have to suck up to Gordon and make him feel in charge again, so she did. “Gordon you magnificent beast, your word is gospel, and I'm just a lowly piece of skirt, vying in a man's world. Lend me your ineffable wisdom, oh exalted one, so that I may get published under your wing, and praise thy name forward unto the ages, amen". > Gordon’s mood seemed to instantly improve. He looked the paper over, pointing out "problems" to be addressed and offering generic ideas on the spot, completely ignoring months of literature review and careful experimentation which warned against them. > Julie went on to publish the paper in a top journal because it had Gordon's name on it, and Gordon is also friends with the editor. She even received a major award for it. > (This is a retelling of a true story from the writings of the preeminent psychotherapist Dr. David Burns, whom Julie had to visit many, many times.) P.S. I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm so sorry.

Kaibeezy 4y ago
Chauvinism (Wikipedia) - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism Way more interesting short article than I expected. Started out as a descriptor for a type of extreme nationalism, only much later applied to gender roles.
cntainer 4y ago
I don't want to admit it but I'm guessing this scenario happens more often in the real world. And I'm sure most Gordons would approve this behavior much more readily than the one described in the article. Is this some kind of leadership? Or is it just the survival of the fittest? :)
DeathArrow 4y ago

vgel 4y ago

I have my doubts about whether the conversation in the article ever happened, but I found it interesting that it fits almost perfectly into the model of effectively asking people to do things from Dialectical Behavior Therapy, an evidence-based therapy program. The acronym is DEAR, which stands for Describe (the situation), Express (emotions), Ask, Reinforce (why should they do it). Really simple. Describe: Gordon, I’m not a bit surprised that you thought the paper was rubbish. To be honest, I had the exact same feeling when I was writing it. I felt like I was rambling on and on. Express: I’m always amazed when I read your papers because they’re so incredibly clear and lucid. That’s actually one of the reasons I wanted to work with you and why I was so excited when you offered me a position last fall. The results of our research could be extremely important, and I know that if the paper were well-written, it might make a tremendous impact. Ask: The paper may be beyond repair, but I’m wondering if you might have any suggestions about how I could make it better. Reinforce: I want to learn as much from you as I possibly can. You can structure basically any "ask" this way, even a really brief one. I've found it really useful, especially when planning out in advance how I'm going to ask someone for something. Protip: A good DEAR can be 50-70% reinforce :-) In fact if I had made this hypothetical-paper-editing ask I would have moved the last sentence of the Express to the Reinforce to introduce the question earlier and backload the importance of the paper after asking for help improving it.

darkerside 4y ago
I think you also need to layer on that the described reality wasn't her own. It accepted the reality presented by her colleague with no sign of defensiveness.
- DiffEq 4y ago
  The key aspect that allowed her to respond the way she did was humility. Humility - how is that taught? I can think of how I learned to be more humble and they all were hard trials not reproducible in the classroom; so far as I know anyway.
  - darkerside 4y ago

williamcotton 4y ago

A Gartner survey of more than 6,500 employees and over 100 CHROs around the globe found that “the best organizations rely on their workforce, not executives, to lead change.” —- I know it to be true but it is so exhausting to do what is required of your position while also having to think and behave as the CEO.