The rise of distraction
There was a time in my career when I noticed a distinct shift in leadership styles within the places I worked.
The shift I noticed was fascinating and saddening all at once.
For those that can recall work without smart phones, you would know what I am talking about. Before the common use of mobile phones and without technology in meetings rooms or even offices, generally, work meetings or discussions were often different to that of today. They featured genuine connections, real understanding and most of all people had to be present, attentive and involved in the conversation.
Granted, there is always distraction and disconnection and this increases as the meeting drags on beyond its usefulness barrier. But, the opportunities for presenteeism, distraction and let me coin a phrase “selective attention” have multiplied infinitely now that we have mobile technology attached to us. The potential for this shift to affect leaders and the effectiveness of teams is significant.
As I observed this shift, I recognised how it made less confident leaders more edgy and reactionary, while aware and balanced leaders benefited from the information, but they really remained the same. Still, I was getting worried at one stage that all the leaders I admired would eventually go down the path of being more in tune with their phone or iPad than the people next to them.
Enter the CFO – the hero of this story.
This Chief Financial Officer of an unnamed organisation came to meetings and truly participated. He did not get his phone out every 5 minutes to check it, he did not respond to phone calls during meetings and he did not read emails 30 times a day. He listened intently to all of the contributions provided within the meeting, considered each and chimed in with suggestions or perspectives when it was relevant to do so. He also thought deeply about the presentations he gave, using colourful analogies and providing a set of perspectives that all audience members could relate to.
I asked him after the meeting if he takes calls and responds to emails while on the fly during the day. He told me that he checks email once in the morning and once in the afternoon, he makes and takes calls during two planned windows and ensures his diary is up to date so that his team can find him if something is urgent.
This may not seem like a ground-breaking set of practices and I am sure there are plenty of smart leaders doing similar things. But, there are still plenty of leaders or aspiring leaders who continue to be reactive to their email, their phone calls, online developments and requests for their time. This causes visible stress and reduced ability to make the decisions and provide the guidance their team are actively seeking.
Structure protects scarce attention resources
The defining factor for this CFO was the way he applied a proactive structure to ensure the controlled the engagements throughout the day and in doing this, he controlled his attention, decision making capability and ability to contribute well.
The positive impact of a well-structured approach is incredibly evident in the quality of interactions and decision making of a highly-engaged leader. The biggest factor here is the ability to be proactive instead of constantly reactive and by association, the ability to make clear, well considered decisions.
In his book “How to be a productivity ninja”, Graham Allcott points out that each individual can choose a “boss” or “worker” role through the way in which they deal with information. In boss mode, you are proactively assessing information, making decisions and assigning tasks, while in worker mode, you are reacting to assigned tasks or new information in a less controlled way. As Allcott points out, the tricky part is deciding when to be the boss and when to be the worker and how to switch efficiently between the two.
The key element here is attention management. According to Allcott, your attention is more valuable than your time and while sometimes you feel you have the time to complete all that is required, you have already run out of available attention.
As Colin Powell said, “Only the mediocre are always at their best”, so as a leader you must be alert to how and when your attention and your best performance is being applied.
David Rock captures this challenge nicely in his book “Your Brain at Work”. As Rock points out, you can do a number of things at once but accuracy and performance drop off rapidly. This is due to the myriad of steps your brain is taking to process and apply the information as it is provided. These steps include understanding, deciding, recalling, memorizing and inhibiting. Rock’s main analogy used to describe this process is that of a stage play where the stage represents the prefrontal cortex (where this processing occurs in your brain), the actors represent information that you hold in your attention and the audience represents information from your inner world (thoughts, memories, values, etcetera). The key take away for us from this analogy is that the more actors you have on stage, the less you can understand their unique information, while simultaneously reaching into the audience to recall the knowledge you have to best categorize and decide on how to use the information.
Walk the Talk
In a leadership context, attention management needs to be demonstrated well to ensure your team members can follow suit. Equally, a leader needs to be attentive to provide their team with the direction and feedback that helps them to do their job in a way that connects with the company strategy.
In the book “The Performance Pipeline”, Stephen Drotter points out how much employees are missing out on clear and engaging direction from their leaders today. The strategy and its tactical application need to be actively discussed and applied through guidance, collective problem solving and constant re-connection to the big goals or vision. Drotter says that several studies have found that often employees are left to interpret what their own contributions should be and hence they end up doing what they have always done even if it is at odds with the actual strategy.
In my own experience, the biggest impact of disengaged leaders is the way it encourages team members to behave the same way and with this in mind, leaders must be conscious of how they manage their technology. I once worked with a Project Director who was glued to his blackberry for the majority of a critical community meeting. Once a suitable break was used to inform him of the issues this was causing, his ability to contribute and influence a good outcome increased dramatically. The argument sometimes provided is “I trust you to manage the discussion”, to which you can rightfully reply: “you set the example – if you need to be there, then be there and be present, if you don’t, then don’t”.
As Carolyn Taylor points out in her book “Walk the Talk”, you have to be an example of the behaviour you want. Therefore, this needs to demonstrate the appropriate level of trust. If you trust your people and you know you won’t be adding value to the discussion, show your support by not being there.
So, if you are looking to have more productive discussions in your organisation, set some clear parameters around technology use and make sure nobody follows them better than you.
Be a hero, be yourself. That’s what your team really needs.
