“If you don’t choose to do it in leadership time up front, you do it in crisis management time down the road.”
Stephen Covey
The expectation feels perfectly clear in our heads. We have thought it through, we know what good looks like, and we may have even said it out loud. Still, our team is guessing, because clarity that stays in our heads never actually reaches them.
In Post 30 we looked at saying an expectation twice. This week we look at what goes inside the expectation, and how to share it so those entrusted to our leadership have room to do the work well.
A Moment Worth Paying Attention To
In an attempt to streamline the amount of time I was spending in meetings with my team I stopped asking for questions at the end and encouraged my team to ask questions as we were going through our meeting. I felt this would ensure they understood expectations and we would not spend 10-15 min rehashing the meeting at the end when many questions came up secondary to obvious distraction during our discussion time.
I felt it was working well and our meeting times were decreasing. At the end of the first week there were very few issues, so I counted it as a success and sought to maintain the approach.
At the end of the month, we sat down for our reconciliation of required documentation and the bottom dropped out. So many issues had developed due to differences in priorities and misunderstanding. I could not understand it and asked direction what the issue was. After a few moments of silence one of my team spoke up stating that I spoke so fast that it took her a minute to write down things and process them. This new approach kept her from wanting to ask questions at the end for fear of seeming like she did not pay attention, so she had just been doing the best she could. Several other team members supported the same challenge.
I knew what I wanted done and felt I spoke very clearly. What I did not ensure is that I made certain everyone else understood the plans as I envisioned them. They did not and though we had a quicker meeting, there was much less understood from it. We made a deal that they would close their laptops and engage in the meeting, and we would reinstate the question period at the end to ensure we were all on the same sheet before starting our day.
The Clarity Gap
Chip and Dan Heath (2007) describe a Stanford experiment where one person tapped out the rhythm of a well known song and a listener tried to name it. The tappers expected listeners to get it about half the time. Listeners got 3 songs out of 120, which is about 2.5 percent.
That is what we sound like in the huddle. We hear the whole song in our heads, and our team hears taps on a table. I have tapped on plenty of tables in my time.
Start With the Outcome
Consider starting with the outcome and why it matters, then leave the how open wherever the how can be open. Deci and Ryan (2000) found that people stay more motivated when they have some choice in how they do their work.
Micromanaging usually grows from good intentions. We care about the result, so we reach for the process. Those entrusted to our leadership often hear that as a lack of trust, and we end up carrying work that could have been theirs.
Make the Unspoken Spoken
Three things tend to live only in our heads: our assumptions, our standards, and our definition of done. Say each one out loud. A progress note may mean a quick summary to one person and a full clinical note to another, so consider adding a finish line, such as, “Done means the note is signed, checked against the list, and in the chart before you leave.”
Locke and Latham (2002) found that specific goals produce better results than telling people to do their best, especially with feedback. Jackson and Schuler (1985) tied unclear roles to weaker performance, though the link is modest, so clarity is one piece of the puzzle.
Have the Expectation Conversation
A simple rhythm can carry the conversation. Share the outcome and why it matters, describe what done looks like, name what is flexible and what is fixed, ask what support they need, and set a time to check in. Keep it short and keep it two way, so it feels like a conversation.
Match the Level of Direction
A seasoned team member may need only the outcome and the finish line. Someone brand new to the work may need more steps, and that is care. Blanchard, Zigarmi, and Zigarmi (2013) suggest matching our direction to a person’s skill and confidence on each task.
There are times to specify the process for everyone: high risk work, brand new tasks, and compliance requirements. When a step protects a client or a license, spell it out and explain why. People accept structure much more easily when they understand the reason for it.
Check Understanding With Respect
“Does that make sense?” usually earns a polite yes. Consider asking, “How do you plan to start?” or “What part would you like me to say more about?” Those questions treat the person as capable, and they show us where the picture got fuzzy.
Find the Real Gap
When an expectation is not being met, the gap is in one of three places: clarity, capability, or motivation. Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory is a helpful guide, since people put in effort when they believe they can do the task and believe it will matter. If it is clarity, we explain again. If it is capability, we teach and practice. If it is motivation, we listen for what is getting in the way.
This Week’s Challenge
Choose one expectation on your team that is not being met. Decide whether the gap is in clarity, capability, or motivation, because each one needs a different response. If it is clarity, rewrite the expectation as an outcome with a finish line and share it in a short two way conversation this week. You can do this, and do it well. Now let’s do this.
Reflection
What would our team look like if everyone could describe the finish line without asking us?
How can you share the outcome clearly and still leave room for others to choose the path?
What will you do this week to find out whether the gap is clarity, capability, or motivation?
Lace up your Boots and Go Lead
You’ve Got This.
Suggested Reading and References
Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (2013). Leadership and the one minute manager: Increasing effectiveness through situational leadership II. (Updated ed.). William Morrow. A short, practical story about matching our direction to a person’s skill and confidence on each task.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Research on why having choice in how we do our work supports motivation and well being.
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. Random House. The source of the tappers and listeners experiment and a practical guide to making a message clear enough to remember.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(1), 16-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90020-2 A large review of what unclear roles do to people and performance.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705 Decades of research showing why specific goals with feedback outperform vague ones.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley. The original expectancy theory, which links effort to whether people believe they can succeed and whether it will matter.
