Interview Transcript

Intro:

Welcome back to CCL’s podcast, Lead With That, where we talk current events and pop culture, to look at where leadership is happening and what’s happening with leadership.

Today, we’re diving deep into the human side of strategy, talent development. It’s more than just training programs and upskilling checklists, it’s about building collective capability in a world that’s anything but predictable. We’re leaning on fresh insights from the Center for Creative Leadership and our new research supporting talent development, creating collective capability in unpredictable contexts.

Spoiler alert, traditional approaches aren’t cutting it. In today’s reality where volatility is the norm and certainty is a luxury, organizations must shift from individual-centric development, to building systems of shared learning and adaptability. Think less, star performer, more resilient team. In this episode, we’ll unpack the research’s key takeaways, explore why context is the new curriculum, and share stories from leaders re-imagining what it means to grow talent, or those who are just stuck in the old ways. And whether you’re in HR, a team lead, or just someone who believes people are the real edge, this one might just be for you.

Ren:

So let’s get into it. Welcome back everyone. I’m Ren Washington, and as usual, I’m joined with Allison Barr. Allison, what’s your best talent development perspective? If you were leading an organization and you were like, “Hey, I got to develop talent,” or you’re on a team, like what’s the number 1 thing that you would do?

Allison:

Well, I have 2 answers depending on, like you said, if I was an organizational level leader or a team / function leader. So if I was an executive or a more senior leader, I would start by identifying leadership competencies that are necessary for success in alignment with the business goals. That’s simplified, of course, I know it’s easier said than done. And I think if I were a team leader or a function leader or somewhere in the middle of management, gosh. I was thinking about this before we started, and it’s important to note that those mid-level managers play a pretty critical role in talent and development. They sit in the middle, right, so they’re a bridge between strategic goals and frontline execution. So I think, from a mid-level manager perspective, the first thing I would do is identify the strengths and development areas of my team. That’s the first thing, there’s a lot more to say of course, but that’s the first thing I would do. What about you?

Ren:

Yeah, I think that makes plenty of sense and I was thinking about this and not unlike in the research that we’re going to be going through today, there’s a conversation I think that’s undergirding all of it and we’ll talk a little bit around the end. But this idea of like really focus on an organization’s unique context. And I think talent development starts with identifying internally, for myself, my team, your organization, like who we are, what we are, and how close we can get talent to that. And so I don’t think there’s a wrong answer here, but I think it’s interesting to start to explore this idea of talent development.

I think you bring up an interesting point, like middle managers, you play an important role, but you don’t really get to create, necessarily, the massive policies that guide this kind of talent development. And so I think that’s what I’m looking forward to looking at today. There’s kind of 6 points in our research, maybe we’ll get through all of them. I can imagine just kind of going through them as we go. But ultimately, I think the challenge in talent development is really twofold. And I think we talk about this with our clients, Allison, a lot of times. It’s like first, figuring out the skills, the behaviors and the mindsets that matter the most for the organization, and then supporting the learning of those things across the organization. So sometimes I think people identify it, but then they don’t support it. And I think that’s an interesting challenge.

Allison:

Yeah. And I’m interested to talk about some of those challenges too, because the culture has to support the kind of behaviors that are needed to have a strong talent development strategy and execution. I’m curious, Ren, have you ever had a manager who was really, really good at talent development, or not good? And what did they do?

Ren:

Yeah, interesting. Yeah, I don’t think anyone’s really popping up for me right now. And I don’t know if that’s just a space that I am in my career, because I think we were like go, go, go. And it’s funny, I’ll talk to people or reflect on going to a workspace and one of the characteristics is find a job where they care about developing you. And I think that’s an interesting frame, because people could care about developing you, but then they just don’t have the time to develop you, which is something I think we need to subvert.

But I think generally, have I had a really good one? I think the managers who, yes, actually, okay, just think of one. One of our leaders in our organization, I found this person to be really always transparent, clear with me, tells me things even if I may not like them. And then I think one of the ways that honed in my development, was less like maybe structures or opportunities, but helping me get a little bit more focused on my skill set. I just wanted to kind of do things and he just said, “Yeah, you’re kind of scattershot though, let’s aim more of your energies in a singular place.” And so I think maybe that was a manager who made a difference on me from a talent development standpoint, kind of helping hone my focus, maybe. I don’t know if that works.

Allison:

Yeah, yeah, that works. And it’s curious too, you mentioned, I’m paraphrasing what you said, the impact that it has on an organization, which I’m sure we’ll get into. But I was looking at, not only our research, but some research from McKinsey and Deloitte and some other folks out there as well, around current workplace desires of employees based on generation. And what’s really interesting is that across 5 generations, what those generations have in common in terms of what they want from their workplace is, career growth and development. So I thought that was interesting. And we found in our research that 41% of employees who move to a different organization, said that they left because they weren’t getting professional development. So I thought that was interesting.

Ren:

Yeah. And what an interesting bridge I think, to maybe the first bit of our research, when we’re helping organizations think about talent development differently. And we’re kind of outlying, if you could do these 6 steps, you’re going to be better positioned for it. And one of the tensions I think you just highlighted is, like the number one step in our research, is pipeline.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And how do we bridge the leadership gap or what we would consider the shortfall between current capabilities and forecasted leadership needs? And I think organizations have, maybe not unlike people in our relationships and stuff, Allison. It’s like we have this, like we take things for granted.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And we don’t look at the pipeline and be thinking of like, people leave organizations, because they’re not being developed. And, oh, by the way, organization, if you develop people, you’ll be able to maintain your success because knowledge stays in the institution. And so I think that idea of like, what is in our pipeline from a talent development standpoint, externally and internally? Can we-

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

Fill in roles or stay as effective if people leave the organization?

Allison:

Right. And yeah, you think about too, if any employee could leave at any given time, for various reasons, it could have nothing to do with not being pleased with their workplace environment. It could be anything, right, any employee could leave tomorrow. And so when an organization isn’t focused on pipeline, it creates, of course, a lot more work for other folks as an organization work to fill those roles. But something you said made me also think about culture too, loosely of course, when it comes to pipeline.

The workplace culture needs to support continuous learning and it needs to support empowering and enabling people to take calculated risks and grow and take opportunities. And I think sometimes at workplaces, leaders press the easy button. And instead of developing talent now, even though they might not need to utilize those skill sets right now, they press the easy button and create a hero culture and rely on the people who can do X, Y, Z versus developing everybody, even though they might not need to be deployed for said skill set right now. So it’s an interesting mindset shift I think that some leaders, not all, will have to make, given some of the external variables that we know are impacting workplaces right now.

Ren:

Well, it reminds me of present bias and I think what I’m kind of tracking with you is saying is like, why should I develop this person when I don’t need them in the role? And an example that’s just recently, that I think is really interesting. I don’t watch tons of basketball and these days sports is so far away from my life just because of everything else in my life. But there was a time where I would care a lot more, but I don’t know if you know much about, do you watch a lot of basketball, Allison?

Allison:

Basketball, no.

Ren:

Basketball, yes.

Allison:

No.

Ren:

Well, the New York Knicks, do you know who the New York Knicks are?

Allison:

Yes, I know who the Knicks are, yes.

Ren:

Okay, just making sure everyone out there knows who the Knicks are, basketball team, right from, you guessed it, the New York. And their coach, this long-standing coach, he led them to their best season in a long time, their best stretch of play this century, which sounds fun, but it’s like in the past 25 years. He won a playoff series in 3 consecutive seasons, advanced to the Eastern Conference Finals this year for the first time in 25 years. And they fired him. And they fired him, because they publicize this idea of like, we are trying to win a championship now. And it’s such an interesting idea, a weird kind of sense making that the organization does, like we’re trying to win a championship now, he didn’t win a championship, so we’re going to let him go. We’re looking for someone to give us more energy to get us over that hump.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And it’s like, if you look at the record, these things build, he’s trying to build this idea. So it’s almost like a short-sighted pipeline, because the success they’re having now isn’t because of a magic pill they took this year, it’s like over the past 4years of development.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And so I think organizations that are able to keep that idea, like, I will need this later, or this is building to something, versus, I’m not going to do it, or worse yet, you’re not winning as much as we need you today, so you’re out of here.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

I don’t know, it’s such an interesting idea

Allison:

Yeah. And there’s a time and a place, right. It can make sense, but it can also hurt you in the long run. And are you ready for me to just stick with sports analogies for a second? I’m sorry to our listeners who don’t like sports.

Allison:

I’m sorry about it.

Ren:

Please. Yeah. It’s okay everybody.

Allison:

Ren, do you know who the Pittsburgh Steelers are?

Ren:

I do know who the Pittsburgh Steelers are.

Allison:

So I grew up in Pittsburgh and by blood I am required to be a Steelers fan, though, with full transparency, I don’t really care, I could care less. But the Pittsburgh Steelers are bringing on Aaron Rodgers, I don’t know if you saw that.

Ren:

I did not.

Allison:

Aaron Rodgers, who’s, in football years, considered to be outside of his prime.

Ren:

Geriatric. 

Allison:

Yes.

Ren:

Yes.

Allison:

Outside of his prime. People in Pittsburgh are up in arms about it, because, if I can make the analogy here, or make a connection, they just did not create a pipeline from Ben Roethlisberger, who won, I don’t even know, however many Super Bowls, and went to the playoffs pretty much I think every year that he was on the roster. They did not develop, they didn’t, again, I’m sorry to my Steelers fans, because I’m sharing what I know, which is very minimal, they didn’t backfill, they didn’t develop. So it’s a bit of a reach, but it’s the same concept. If you’re a star player, if your top performers, your top 3 performers on your team all left tomorrow, what would your team look like? And it’s something to consider.

Ren:

Yeah.

Allison:

It is, like people don’t always love sports analogies, but it is the same thing. If your star people left tomorrow, how much are you relying on them, number 1? Are you overworking them and what’s your pipeline look like? Would you be shooting yourself in the foot if they all left tomorrow?

Ren:

Yeah, I think that that’s exactly the point. And yeah, I know, probably some Steelers fans, I would love to watch you debate someone about Steelers football, Allison, that’d be super fun.

Allison:

Listen.

Ren:

New podcast idea.

Allison:

I won the fantasy football championship this year, I’m just saying.

Ren:

You know what? I hung up my spurs after winning 2 in a row and I’m like, I don’t think I’m ever going to come back, I get to end up on top. And football is an interesting thing about pipeline and I think just like the experience that goes on there. But something that you said that I think is the point, is that anyone on any team, if you’re not prepared for your best people to leave, if you couldn’t pick up the slack, then maybe you’re missing something. And I think there’s a reality, like the organization will do what it did without you when you leave again.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

It was working before you got there, it will work afterwards.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And so maybe I think that’s too, something where we can lose sight of developing talent, is that we just know the truth that,in like your example, I’m not going to develop talent because I don’t need it today. And it might hurt when someone leaves, it might sting, I might say to people, in an all staff, “We should develop talent different.” But I think this whole purpose of our research is, how do you start to create a culture of that? Because if we don’t have the attitude to sort of do that, then we’ll just replay the pain.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And yeah, you sort of see that in some of the things there, but that’s something that I … I think you hit the nail on the head, it’s like, just how can you prepare yourself, insulate yourself if your top 5 performers leave tomorrow? Will that crater you? If it will, then you need to guard yourself.

Allison:

Yeah. And just to highlight your point even more, building a talent pool now with needed skills across however large your team is, across the team and preparing for what obstacles we know are going to come down the pipe, it’s essential. It’s absolutely essential, for the greater good of the organization too, it’s not just about your team functioning. But focusing on pipeline really helps to sustain the organization’s success, it really does. Why do you think people avoid doing it?

Ren:

I think it’s that present bias.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And it kind of goes to the conversation around like, I think the next piece of our research is this idea of, if the pipeline’s important, then focus is the next shift. And we would, I think, boil it down to these 3 primary areas of focus. Like how do you strengthen your pipeline? You help people identify areas of personal growth, you manage people and the work they need to get done. And you manage across the organization that kind of network. And I think the business goes too fast a lot of times, and so we don’t think about what we need to inform. And some of the need for pipeline development or talent development strategy through this focus, is this question of, and you highlighted this a couple of times already, it’s like, what do people need and want now? That’s one question that we have to ask for development, I think. So the answer to your question, like why isn’t the pipeline strong? We’re not asking that question.

But then the other questions we’re not asking is, what do you know that you need to be ready for?

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And you just said that.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And then additionally, maybe most importantly, what do you need to be ready for that you don’t know about?

Allison:

Yes.

Ren:

And what is that next thing that is coming around the corner that you have no idea. Because you should prepare for eventualities that could happen.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And then you should be preparing for eventualities that you don’t think could happen? Like, “Oh, that’ll never happen.”

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

I’d be like, “You need to be careful.”

Allison:

Right. Right, don’t say that.

Ren:

So I think all of that probably is in the cocktail. Yeah, definitely don’t say that, “That’ll never happen.” So I think that’s all in the cocktail of why people don’t do that. But I don’t know, why do you think people don’t fill the pipeline or don’t focus on those things, or what’s getting in the way?

Allison:

Well, sometimes I think people don’t know how, or they will see some companies who say, well, that’s HR’s job. And it’s part of their job, but it’s also a manager’s job to get to know their people. And if I can simplify it as much as I can for somebody who might be a mid-level manager, who’s not going to create strategy for this, who’s not going to create a talent development and capabilities strategy for the organization, getting to know your team’s goals is really important. And that stays the same for people who … Some people are happy in their role and they want to stay there, they want to stay in that role. Some people have goals to be at the next level.

That’s a really simple in concept, place to start, because what I can say is, as a manager, “Hey Suzy, you want to be the VP of Ops or whatever, here’s where you are now and here’s where you need to be.” It’s like 2 plus 2 equals 4, you can look at job descriptions and start there and know people’s goals. I think where some mid-level managers get hung up, is they don’t know how to do it and they don’t know how to give feedback, or are afraid of it. We talked about this a little bit at the start, which was like, creating a culture that can allow for a pipeline. And same with the focus, which is the second step, to develop people, you have to have honest conversations with them, like the manager you mentioned, was always straight with you. So knowing somebody’s goals and then being able to generate feedback conversations around that, is really important.

Ren:

Let’s chase that rabbit right now. Point 5 in the research is conversations.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And it’s so interesting, it’s like why don’t we talk more? And you ask the question, why isn’t the pipeline filled and why don’t we talk more? And again, I think this idea of one of these scariest false paradigms is, I don’t have the time. Which is realistic, because it connects to the third point in the research, was this idea of overload. How do I reach overloaded employees?

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

I think it starts with some conversations, where we have to have a real conversation with each other around what’s happening, what’s going on. But really, I think too, this idea of conversations rooted in candor and psychological safety and trust, those cultures of feedback yield better business outcomes. And I think sadly, we’re not equipped to have those conversations anymore, like from childhood on upwards, from what I observed and even in my weaker states, do not really revel in conflict, don’t engage with conflict with people who have really oppositional views from me. I find myself in cocktail parties fiercely agreeing with one another, you know what I mean? Where we’re outraged around the same stuff.

And so I think there’s a muscle that can be built up in conversation, I think it starts with feedback. I think it starts too, with accountability. Like I let one of my teams down recently and that sucked for them, and it sucked for us too. It wasn’t a good look, it wasn’t a good look for the org, it wasn’t a good look for me and I just had to own that. And it reminds me of leadership disclosure. I had to tell people more about what was going on, my weak points, why they didn’t work and ask for feedback.

And so I really vibe with the idea of like, as a manager or as anyone in the organization, feedback can help you get into that talent development space. And real conversations, honest conversations about growth, about failures, about limiting edges, that stuff makes a difference for talent development.

Allison:

Oh indeed. And it’s interesting you brought up conflict. Can you share more about conflict as it relates to these conversations?

Ren:

Like talent development conversations?

Allison:

Yeah, is that what you were saying? Like conflict in a talent development conversation?

Ren:

No, I was just saying more like generally, I think Americans don’t know how to have tough conversations with each other.

Allison:

Yes, yes.

Ren:

Because we’re like-

Allison:

That’s another podcast.

Ren:

Yeah, yeah, exactly. I think everyone finds themselves fiercely agreeing with people so much that when they meet someone in the opposite end of the spectrum, whatever spectrum it is, they start shouting at each other, because they finally have a chance to tell the other person on that other side, everything that’s wrong.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And I think too then, when you think about, well, that’s a value-based issue, then likely in someone’s talent development, that’s a value-based issue. Someone’s trying to develop their career or themselves and then, it can get heated with a manager or a system that’s not developing it. And so we don’t talk about it or we don’t talk about it effectively.

Allison:

Yeah. Yeah, that’s interesting. And I think talking about it effectively, the more you can just normalize having conversations about performance, the better. Which I know is easier said than done, depending on your organization. But again, I always encourage people to remember that you can love your job and find purpose in your job, you also don’t have to, but you can find great joy and heart in your job, but also be objective about it and remember that your job is to do what’s on your job description. And it can be as objective as that, to look at your job description with your manager and say like, “Where am I doing well, where are my gaps?” Because it’s an agreement, “We’re going to hire you, run to do these things. Here, we’ll let you know if there’s other things we need you to do. How are you doing? We hired you to do it. How’s it going?”

It can be that objective. So you can hold those2 truths together at the same time, sometimes people get really hurt over critical feedback, when really, critical feedback can help you to grow and it absolutely helps you to grow.

You’re also making me think, Ren, about psychological safety, which I know we’ve talked about ad nauseum, probably on these podcasts. But you have to find ways to engage people in a way that you can have those candid conversations that develop trust and growth. And when I think back to the sports analogies, or let me even take it a different way. If you were in a band, you would want to know if you were sharp or flat, right. Because it impacts the rest of the band, and it’s not a personal attack on you as a human. So finding ways that you can create alignment, that feedback is for the greater good.

Ren:

Yeah, that’s real growth mindset stuff. And I think thinking with an abundance mindset too, there are no real failures, just a failure to learn from those things. And too, in a talent development space, I think that makes sense, like you’ve got to create an appetite for failure. As we have the learning curve, where we know that we try a new thing, we’re doing really well, we plateau, we’re great, get a new task, and all of the sudden the performance dips, because we’re not as effective as. And then we get better at it, then our performance lifts. And I think, often, talent development doesn’t happen because in order to develop talent in spaces outside of one’s comfort zone, they’re going to have to get uncomfortable. And sometimes, when you’re uncomfortable, you don’t know what you don’t know and you’re not performing that well.

And so I think there’s something to recognize, like, “Hey, A, take the feedback, ’cause what do you want to know? B, be willing to give the feedback. And then C, also create an environment where we’re more than our outcomes.” And something about the people first kind of perspective that you said, I think connects to what I’d mentioned a little bit over, like this idea of overload. Where organizations struggle to develop an overloaded employee base.

Allison:

Yeah. 

Ren:

Where it’s like, “Hey, we have a development calendar, sign up for these learnings.” And people are like-

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

“I can’t, I have too much job.” Or worse yet, they mandate learning, the organization does, where they’re like, “Here, get developed, but also, don’t you dare underperform. You better work 2 jobs this week.”

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And that’s super hard, the human element, I think, is something that needs to get managed. So the human element showing up in that space for feedback, matters, like how you interact with someone, it’s not personal, but creating an environment of trust and safety. And then recognition too, that once you can see the human in the overloaded space, maybe you can do some different things with talent management.

Allison:

Yeah, that’s interesting, because you’re right, a lot of organizations will have opportunities for “talent development,” “Come to this webinar, come to this speaker.”

And they do invest time on that and then can become frustrated when people don’t attend without digging into the why. And if employees are overloaded in their roles and overwhelmed, it’s going to be hard for them to make those types of decisions. Even for, like thinking about the immediate future and their immediate growth and development, when they’re busy and overwhelmed, it’s just very, very hard to make time for that. As we know, the research finds, with employees and athletes and musicians and top performers across industries need breaks and constant overload does not foster a growth mindset. In fact, it sets you up to make more mistakes and fail, so. It’s just something to look at, is there an easy answer to that? Probably not. But to your point, focusing on, or identifying overload will help you to reach those busy and overloaded employees in a better way, just to be able to understand where they are.

Do you know what’s funny, is I once had, this was years ago, not at CCL, somebody I managed said, “Please don’t develop me. Please don’t focus on developing me.”

Ren:

That’s funny.

Allison:

And we laughed about it. He laughed, so I laughed and I was like, “Okay, what do you mean? Why?” And he said, “I’m so overwhelmed in my role right now that I’m just doing what I can to make sure I’m hitting all the objectives that I have to for this role specifically.” So, important to have those conversations.

Ren:

Yeah, it’s interesting. And you asked the question, like is there an easy answer? And I guess, I think our human centered approach would be our answer at CCL. And I was looking up other perspectives on talent development too, saw this quote from Sean O’Hara, the Director of Accounting, Reporting and Internal Controls at Nissan North America. So a nice simple title for this guy. But he manages a team of over 140 people, pretty high in the organization. And his motto is, “People, quality, then profitability.” He doesn’t say, “Then,” then he says, “And profitability.”

And there’s something, I think the answer to the overload is, starting with the person. I think there’s other ideas to continue to build development into the jobs that people have to get done. Which is sort of what we talk about in the final idea of scaling this kind of talent development conversation. But I think it always grounds into people, and where we just left, it’s like safety too. The guy felt safe enough to tell you, “Hey, I don’t want development,” right. And that could be dangerous.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

But then you were like, “Well, tell me more.” And he says, “I’m just trying to succeed in the job, I don’t have time.” What a candid and real conversation. So we start with that people part, and then we start to ask ourselves, how can we maintain the quality of our product while also trying to achieve your individual development goals? I think that’s the stuff that leads to profitability, versus people contributing and then leaving, so.

Allison:

Indeed.

Ren:

Yeah, yeah.

Allison:

Indeed. And I encourage managers to get away from the hero culture mentality too, which I already mentioned, but it is. Don’t be afraid to develop your “underperformers” that a lot of times cultures will punish instead of develop. And what I’m not saying is to ignore gross misconduct, that’s not what I’m talking about. But your folks who are struggling, it is your responsibility to help them and stop relying, holistically, on your heroes, because that drains everybody.

And one thing that we loosely mentioned but haven’t named yet specifically, is that adaptability. So, Ren, you talked a lot already about being future oriented in mindsets, and it’s interesting to think about the mindset that is needed now. Again, just given some of the obstacles that a lot of organizations are facing. People just need to adapt how they’re working and adapt their frame of reference and their frame of mind to be able to approach challenges in new ways. So again, I’m paraphrasing something you said a few minutes ago, which was, what is it that we don’t know? Like-

Ren:

Yeah.

Allison:

Getting into those conversations right now, like what are the things we don’t know? What should we do? Like how can we generate a conversation about that? So, expanding of mindset is not an easy thing to teach necessarily, if you lead a team. But there are ways you can ask the right questions and generate dialogue with your team just to think about challenges in a new way.

Ren:

Your example of developing your underperformers is such a great example. I think, probably, if any leader has some underperformers, it might even be triggering for you. You’d be like, “I don’t want to do that.”

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And that might be the perfect sign of your need to change. Because I think you’re right, it’s like, the only guarantee I have for you is that change is coming.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And adaptability is required. Maybe shifting our perspectives, I think your example, again, maybe they’re underperformers because they don’t get developed. There might be-

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

Performance there, with time spent sharpening that saw.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

Especially if other people are doing the job well. So yeah, I think that adaptability, the need to shift our looking, our mindset, I think adapt how we’re adapting to execute business strategy. I think things that used to work don’t always need to keep working and they’re worth observing. And I think people too, really matters. We say in our research, “Effective leadership requires not just skills but also greater capacity. While growing leadership competencies is necessary and important, it’s no longer sufficient.” And I think that’s the root when you and I talk vertical mindset or use our assessment, the vertical mindset indicated, it’s not like adding another framework. It’s changing the way we use the information-

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And looking at, or trying to seek new information and use it and apply it in different ways, even future proofing.

Allison:

Yeah. And I like the question too, on that note, is, to consider whether you’re an organizational leader, C-suite executive, senior leader or not, and this question can be considered by all types of leaders. Which is, what type of future are you building toward with your team? And sometimes that’s an easier question to start to generate ideas around, versus, what are the challenges that are coming our way? Because sometimes we don’t know, and other times we get stuck on the challenge then, instead of what are we trying to achieve? What can we do? What are some of the actions we can take? So I like that question as a place to start, but you’re right, it can be complex, for sure. I think we’ve touched on all of them so far.

I’d love to get into a little bit more of talking about scale. So what are some tips we can offer people to start to scale this kind of thing?

Ren:

Yeah, I think it’s hard to do this work across the org, and I think all of these things kind of build up to this point. One of the things that I think, we have these little takeaways in the research, these little blips of, ultimately I think scaling is rooted into the idea of developing the whole organization, not just your high pos, not just your execs. I said in the beginning, it’s like this idea of getting focused on your unique context. What is the organization trying to achieve? How do the people fit inside that? Tie people and development to the people, in the work that they’re doing, and then just starting to be honest about starting where you are, I think are ways to start to set the stage for this scale.

I mean, all of it starts to come into this environment, what is the functional environment that we have? Do we support development? What does support look like for development? How can we add development into the stuff that must be done? I think these are the conversations that we can start to have when an organization or leaders are interested in scaling some of that development.

Allison:

Yeah. And I think too, even adding to what you just said and focusing in on some tacticals, is that you can start by offering development opportunities for people. Again, keeping the story I had in mind, making sure that your people have the space for it and the appetite for it, but offering development opportunities where people can learn new skills. And that will be different, again, depending on the organization and the industry. But also, emphasizing learning as a benefit for everybody and not being afraid to take the long way, knowing that it will sustain your organization.

Again, I think a lot of leaders just say, let’s press the easy button, “Ren, you’re really good at X, Y, Z, so we’re going to keep putting you on that.” Even though Susan over there really wants to be learning in that space, but we haven’t given her the opportunity just for sake of like easy button. So get away from the easy button, understand what’s coming down the pipe and understand your organization’s context too. Again, I know some of our listeners probably are responsible for strategy, some probably aren’t. And I think you can take action, really from wherever you are in the business.

Ren:

Hey, I was just reflecting on what you were just saying there and some of the stuff we’re saying, and it’s going back to your question of the pipeline. Why isn’t the pipeline full, or why do we develop talent? I think we have to change our metrics, not to hit us-

Allison:

Agreed.

Ren:

With the deep philosophical conversation, as we do right when we close the door.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

But I think it’s just this idea of, if a quarterly performance, if year over year numbers weren’t the only thing that indicated an organization’s success, then you could start to develop talent in the confines of the organization. Whereas, pipeline, succession planning talent across the organization, ready to do any job, as a success metric, then that could rise to the top, versus I think the truth of just publicly traded companies. Investors expect that their money is returned and with interest.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

And so I understand the organization’s standpoint and any leader working inside of one who’s like, “Look, this is our prerogative. And it’s not even a personal challenge, it’s just like, if I don’t do this, then I don’t have a job, then you don’t have a job, then we don’t have a job.” And so I think there’s, in some places, there’s probably not much from a cultural organizational, how do we look at talent as part of our win? But maybe as that individual manager, there’s probably a couple of things you can do, helping see people make sense of the development, trying to minimize the overload and burden, I think help them get developed in the confines of their own work so it doesn’t feel like it’s extra. I think really with your people, I think some of the scaling factors probably are in the power of a few hands. But geez, I don’t think it’s easy in an environment where someone says the thing that matters is return on investment, therefore I can’t afford to develop my talent even though it might hurt in the future, the pressure of today is just too much.

Allison:

Yeah. And I’d be really interested to know, gosh, I know we’re doing the doorknob thing. I’d be really interested to know what percent of publicly traded companies who are in the top, financially I mean, what percent of them have a talent development strategy or invest year over year. Like I’d be very curious to know those metrics, I’m sure I could probably… It’s got to be out there somewhere.

But again, you do have to know when your organization is ready for it. And if your organization is not ready to scale it, that does not mean that an individual leader has to prevent or not develop their team. And we talk about scaling, like one of the metrics, or one of the things that we do, actually, here at CCL, is help organizations define what competencies they need at the organization. Which is a huge project, it’s a huge undertaking and can serve the organization pretty holistically once you get those nailed down. But it does take some time. So scaling can look different depending on the organization’s readiness, et cetera. And the culture, as you mentioned, and the culture. I mean, we have to be real too, gosh, do I even want to get into it, because now I feel like I’m going to just take us down a rabbit hole.

Ren:

I mean, we have a few more minutes.

Allison:

Yeah, you know-

Ren:

Say it.

Allison:

I know.

Ren:

It’ll be nice.

Allison:

Okay. Okay, it’ll be nice. So, we also have to be honest too about competition within organizations. We have to be honest about power structures. We have to be honest about leaders who intentionally prevent development, like those things happen too. So there’s a whole other conversation to be had around some of the behaviors that can prevent development even if you do have a good strategy. I don’t want to leave us on that though, because that feels pretty heavy.

Ren:

Well, I think it’s perfectly reasonable when we think about the complexities of all of this. It’s the tension between strategy and culture, and I think the old adage, strategy eats culture for breakfast, or culture eats strategy for breakfast. And I think, I don’t know, did I tell you that story about that strategy guy I was working with, and he said-

Allison:

I don’t know.

Ren:

We were having that conversation and we have that picture of the elephant, which is culture eating the piece of loaf of bread, which is strategy. And we’re like, culture eats strategy. And he goes, “I’ve only ever heard HR people tell me that.” And it was very funny. I think I have told you that, because I think you had the exact same reaction. You’re like, “I don’t know. I may not agree, sir.” But I think it’s a polarity, where it’s like-

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

I mean, you could have the best plan in the world, but if you have people actively subverting it, or an institution that doesn’t incentivize the growth of other individuals, then it’s not necessarily going to vibe.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

And I think that’s probably a good reminder of, whether or not you have the talent strategy, you’ve got to find an ebb and flow between the work that has to be done and how to develop between the tensions that exist around you and your goals or the people around you in their goals. And I think that something too that’s interesting about talent development, maybe one of our last thoughts or my last thoughts, is that it also comes down to the individual.

Allison:

Yes.

Ren:

No one is going to care about your goals more than you do, because they have their own goals, it’s weird like that, isn’t it? And so it’s not like no one doesn’t care about you, it’s that people wake up and they have their own stuff to take care of. And an organization may not look out for you first, because they might be publicly traded, or they might not be. But either way, there’s something about like you as the individual just sussing out your own path, creating some energy around you if you’re able to, try to build some of that connection, so maybe scale starts with the individual.

Allison:

Yeah, I like that. And I have to tell you, so I’m sitting in front of my window, okay, I just need to give you this picture right now, this feels like a metaphor. There has been a hawk that’s been circling right outside the window this whole time.

Ren:

Yeah.

Allison:

I don’t know if you’ve noticed Ren, but it just passed again, it’s enormous and it’s been chasing off this little bird, that I sort of feel bad for. It just seems like there’s a metaphor in there somehow, with what you just said about your culture eats strategy story. But maybe that’s a reach, I don’t know. Regardless, I like what you’re saying, is there’s a responsibility for the employee too to take on their own development and communicate. There is, and your manager is your partner in that. It can be really helpful to think about your manager as a partnership for you to sort of help you to create a plan for your own development. And again, it’s never going to hurt an organization to develop talent, maybe you’ll fight me on that Ren, I don’t know. Maybe that’s conversation for another time, but it can only help. It can only help the success of a business strategy to have a solid plan for developing talent at your organization.

Ren:

Yeah, I think someone could debate it, but I won’t. I agree with you, I think.

Allison:

Okay, thank you for that.

Ren:

I think it’s a boon, so I agree with you.

Allison:

Well, are there any last thoughts you want to leave for our listeners? Well, what I’ll say first is that CCL has a really excellent research paper out on talent development. That really outlines all of the steps that you can take, whether you’re an organizational leader or not, with some links to things like difficult conversations like Ren and I were talking about just now. So I would encourage you if you are listening, to seek out that article and you can find it on the Google, if that’s the easiest way, and on our website. The title of that is, “Supporting Talent Development.” So you can find that. But in the meantime, Ren, any other tips you want to leave for our listeners?

Ren:

Just echo, I think, some of that adaptability. Just ready to future-proof yourself.

Allison:

Yeah.

Ren:

Some of talent development is preparing yourself for a future that you’re unsure about, that you’re always ready to flex, to be dynamic. I was just reading this idea of the 45 to 54 age gap, that space is that, if you have to leave an org at 45, that age group is widely employed, but once they’re not, it’s incredibly hard for them to get a job. They experience more ageism than any other kind of working group. And so it’s just an interesting example, like even when you think that you’ve got your perfectly built career, everything’s all stable, you never know. And so just be ready, just be ready. And I think organizations, the same, and so develop, continue to develop.

Allison:

Yes, future-proof yourself. I like that as a tagline for you as an individual and for your organization. So thanks for the conversation, Ren. For our listeners, you can find all of our podcast episodes and show notes on ccl.org. And check out our next episode, which will be likely this early fall, as we move to more of a quarterly cadence with our episodes. In the meantime, find us on LinkedIn, let us know what you want us to talk about. Let us know how your talent development is going. And to all of our CCL peers behind the scenes who make our podcast happen, a big thank you to all of you. And Ren, I’ll look forward to chatting with you next time.

Ren:

That’s right. Thanks Allison. Thanks everybody. See you in the fall. And find Allison on TikTok while you wait.

Interview Transcript

Intro:

Welcome back to CCL’s podcast Lead With That, where we talk current events in pop culture to look at where leadership is happening and what’s happening with leadership.

Ren:

So, what does leadership look like when you’re 250 miles above Earth, facing an unexpected 9-month extension to your work trip? NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams didn’t plan to spend nearly a year aboard the International Space Station, but when technical failures grounded their return vehicle, they adapted, preserved, and led with resilience. This episode, we’re diving into their experience — not the spacecraft, not the mission logistics, but the astronauts themselves. How do they cope?

How do they lead, and what can we learn from their ability to stay focused, motivated, and mission-driven in the face of uncertainty? Both Wilmore and Williams demonstrated what leadership under pressure truly looks like. Rather than frustration, they chose optimism. Rather than isolation, they leaned on teamwork.

Williams put it best when she said, “We don’t feel abandoned or stuck up here” during her interview last year. They tackled scientific research, station maintenance, and the psychological demands of an extended mission with unwavering commitment. It’s truly a masterclass in adaptability, trust, and the kind of leadership that transcends gravity. So, what can we leaders learn on Earth from their experience?

Today, we’re breaking down some lessons around the high-stakes problem-solving, mental endurance, and teamwork under extreme circumstances. So, whether you’re leading in an office or orbiting the planet, Wilmore and Williams’s story proves that the best leaders are steady, and stay steady, no matter how long the mission lasts.

Welcome back, everyone. I’m Ren Washington, and as usual, I’m joined with Allison Barr. Allison, what’s the longest you’ve had to work with someone on a job, like a single person stuck on one gig?

Allison:

Single person stuck on one gig? Well, we run 5-day programs all the time, but I suppose we leave at the end of the day, so maybe that doesn’t count.

Ren:

You get to go home.

Allison:

So prior to CCL, in my past life, I was in charge of getting retail stores open from both a training perspective and an ops perspective. There was one occasion in which I had to open a very small store in a very, very small space that me and another teammate spent all hours of the night working. So, that was probably 7 am or earlier, to about 3 or 4 am, give or take. What about you?

Ren:

I don’t know. Yeah, maybe like a 12-hour stint, 7 to 7 in some of our programming, maybe on a work trip internationally, spending more time with someone. I was always able to clock out and go home. Considering that long stretch, how did you manage your space with each other? What were ways that you were able to work better together? What were some of the things that you took away from a “leading yourself and leading the situation” experience?

Allison:

Well, I think, gosh, there’s so much to say there. The root of our success was that she and I had, and still have, a very good relationship and were able to communicate transparently and effectively with one another. So, just to be clear, there were no windows. It had to be private, for some reason that I’m still unsure of. So, they didn’t want anybody looking in the window, so they barricaded everything. So, there were no windows, which you would think wouldn’t be that big of a deal, but it does have an impact on you.

I think we were just able to communicate and had lots of caffeine, and we knew what we were getting into. We knew what we were getting into, which is actually something that these 2 astronauts said, too. We knew it was going to be a trek. We knew that in advance. So, I’d say that, and the communication, and us having a very solid relationship was helpful.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, I think you highlight some of those things that maybe Suni and Butch have to lean onto, or Wilmore and Williams. I’m going to call them all sorts of names, hopefully the polite names, but let’s run it back because I think it’s such a wild story.

I didn’t really pay attention until the astronauts were coming home, and then I saw a meme. Imagine you were told that you’re stuck up there, and then they were like, “Hey, actually, let’s wait a day” because the return ship was delayed for a day once it was planned. So let’s first look at who they are.

Butch and Suni, both Navy test pilots, they’d served as Navy pilots and they both were astronauts. They’ve been up multiple times. You’ve probably seen Butch on all those NASA clips. He’s one of those faces that they put on TV when they talked to the astronauts. So, they’ve both done a lot of work in planes and in space.

And, as they’re test pilots, this was Boeing’s Starliner. That was the space shuttle that they took up to the space station. That was Boeing’s first pass at taking astronauts. NASA, for the past decade, has been using this commercial flight program where they rely on private industry, or private companies, to take their astronauts up there. That’s why SpaceX has been involved, and we’ll talk a little bit around the return capsule. So, we got these Navy test pilots who are astronauts who were asked to fly the Boeing Starliner up to space for the first time ever. It’s the first manned flight for this pod.

So, they go up, and as they’re going, there’s some hydrogen leakage issues in some of the thruster engines, especially as they’re getting close to the ISS, and they were able to stop the leakage. But as they began to dock with the ISS, some of the thrusters failed. So much so, that both Butch and Suni had to re-engineer, get this stuff back online, get the computer activated, and for them to safely dock. But it’s just such a wild thing to think of. They finally can see it, and then they have these issues. It reminds me … Was it Apollo 11 or Apollo 13? Which one is a Tom Hanks movie?

Allison:

Oh, I think it’s 11, right? Oh no, I don’t know now. I’m questioning myself.

Ren:

Oh, did I ruin it?

Allison:

I think it’s 11.

Ren:

People are yelling into their microphones. They’re like, “Idiots, it’s Tom Hanks.” But anyway, so they get up there and so they’re the only 2. I think the plan was supposed to be 8 days, and they were going to fly up to the space station just to see how it went and then come home. But after the thruster issues … it was June 2024 when they flew up there. After the thruster issues, NASA and them said, “Okay, we’re going to try to figure it out.” And for 3 months, they waited for a plan. So, it was June, and then in August, NASA was like, “We’re not sending you home” and that “We’re going to bring it home unmanned. Also, we’re just going to keep you on board until the next crew arrives,” which was going to be in September.

But after more and more conversation happened, they say, “Well, you know what, what we’re going to do is …” And the crew that usually come up, they come up in groups of 4. So, the crew, instead, they dropped 2 people off of the September crew, and then they brought up those 2 other people, a cosmonaut and the other US astronaut. His name was Nick Hague. So, those 2 arrive at the space station in September, and then they all stay and work together until March, when they were finally able to go home. So, it’s a wild day. Wilmore and Williams ended up spending 286 days in space, 278 days longer than anticipated. They circled the Earth 4,576 times. They traveled 121 million miles by the time they splashed down.

And Williams and Wilmore quickly transitioned from being guests to full-fledged station crew members. In fact, Suni Williams became the station commander once they decided that she was going to be up there, and, wildly, they did 62 hours over 9 spacewalks. Williams specifically set a record for the most time spent spacewalking over a career among female astronauts. So, it’s like this super-duper wild story. They get up there and there’s a lot of things to unpack too around, “Were they stranded, were they left?” NASA and the astronauts both made a conscious decision, and probably a financial decision, that they’re just going to roll them into the squad.

But the thing that got me really thinking about this is you got an 8-day trip and it turns into a 286-day trip. And I asked you, like, “Should we talk about this?” Maybe just how they didn’t freaking kill each other. So, I think I want to dig into some of the tension that could have happened, some of the characteristics that they leaned into in themselves, some things that came out as they talked about it when they arrived home, But it’s just this wild trip with so many factors at play. So, I wonder, as you observe the story, listen to the astronauts, hear about the details, what sticks out to you about any of this?

Allison:

A lot. I think 2 things. One was just interesting to read about some of the health ramifications about being up there for such a long duration, that I thought about, but didn’t really consider deeply until I really started reading about it. Even on just a typical engagement — we can probably agree this is atypical, but — astronauts in general usually experience, or can experience, bone and muscle loss, vision impairment, shifts in brain structure — I just want that to land, a shift in your brain structure — immune dysfunction, and others. So, again, you and I are not in the medical business, but I would be really curious to just know how they’re doing. They both said they had experienced a lot of dizziness, a lot of balance obstacles as you might imagine.

But I think from more of an organizational perspective, there was a quote that stood out to me that I want to read as a direct quote from Wilmore. That quote is, “The plan went way off from what we had planned. We prepare for any number of contingencies, and you cannot do this business without trust. You just can’t. You have to have ultimate trust and for someone to step forward in these different organizations and say, ‘Hey, I’m culpable for part of that issue.'” He’s referencing the obstacles that they faced and the major delay in their return. So, for someone to say, “I’m culpable for part of that issue,” that goes a long way to maintaining trust.

“And if I was given another opportunity to fly,” Wilmore said, “We’re going to fix it. We’ll make it work. Boeing is completely committed, and NASA is completely committed. With that, I would get on in a heartbeat.” That was really telling to me. What do you make of that, given everything that you just said, plus the health issues, and they’re saying, “Yeah, we would do it again”?

Ren:

Yeah. Well, it made me think, too, about, so the only way this works is because they have 2 of the hardest-nosed, hard-skinned Navy test pilots who just get into planes to test them. They’re just the biggest risk-takers. And I’m thinking, “Could it work with a normal human?” So part of me goes, okay, but yeah, that makes sense because that’s what you do. Your identity, I wonder how wrapped up it is in being a pilot and doing really tough stuff.

But I think there’s a couple of things. One, it reminds me of the nature and nurture conversation around human development, but also around leadership. At CCL, we firmly believe and have for decades that leadership can be developed. And I think there’s some truth that some people are naturally born into it.

So, it’s interesting. Butch said something, too. He’s like, “We plan and we prepare.” What an interesting sentence. And Suni says, “This is in our hearts, it’s in our heart.” I’m not surprised to hear … yeah, sign me up. I don’t know if Suni’s going back. I mean she’s done almost anything you could possibly imagine for an astronaut. I think this is her 5th or 4th time, maybe. And for prolonged amounts of time; she’s had long stays at the ISS before. So, it’s like I don’t know if they would go back. Some of it makes me wonder, are you just being a good soldier, you’re not trying to blast Boeing?

But it is interesting to say, from an organizational standpoint, someone in Boeing’s got to say, “I know what the problem is, and we were attached to it.” Because if they’re not honest about it, then they have a much bigger headline about the thrusters not working and the thing crashing into the ISS. So, I did think it was interesting. Like, “We trust Boeing, they’re going to get it right.”

It reminds me, too, mistakes happen. Even with SpaceX, I mean, the SpaceX Dragon brought everyone back. SpaceX has been, I think, flying up there for 10 years or something, but even they recently had a pretty large explosion across the sky.

So, these things happen, but there’s something around the trust, trust that you planned, trust that you prepared, trust in yourself, that you were made for it, or trust in yourself that you could hack it. So, that’s probably I think the thing that you’re talking about right there is one of those things too that they had to rely on, which was that notion of trust.

Allison:

And the knowing: “We plan for this.” Now I’m not quoting either one of them, but loosely paraphrasing what they both have said, which is, “We know there are risks to doing this, major risks. We know that. We’re aware of that. Yes, we’ll do it again.” So, you’re right. I think it takes, well, a specially trained person to do what they do, of course, but also a special type of human to be in literal outer space for that long and then to come back and say what they said.

And I’m just going to take them in good faith, although you’re probably right, there’s probably a little bit of being a good corporate citizen, so to speak, and not blasting their partners. But I just wonder what kind of adrenaline junkies either one of them might be, to want to do something like that again. But it did get me thinking about contingency planning and risk taking, calculated risk, and how all of that also partners with trust and plays out at the workplace too.

Ren:

It’s interesting when we look at our organizational culture, sometimes at CCL, we use a lens where we look at … There’s 4 dynamics about risk taking, decision making, conflict, and feedback. We often get leaders into a room and talk about, “Hey, where is your organization today, and where does it need to be? Where are you in this room, as a team or executives, and where do you need to be?” So it’s an interesting lens to look at for these folks around how do these things play out? I think some of what I’m thinking too is, “Well, would a normal person have been okay? How quickly would’ve a normal person reacted or rebounded?”

We know too, there’s so many personality assessments that … some of us take a longer time to rebound. Some of us are really, really stressed out when something doesn’t go to plan. So, I think there’s something about that cultivated skill, or something that really stuck out with me is a growth mindset. There’s more than a few times that there was no time to do “Woe is me.” There was no time to be like, “Well, crap.”

I mean, even like Suni said, “Did I think I was going to not be there for my daughter’s high school year?” Oh no, sorry, that was Wilmore. That was Butch. Butch missed his high school year. But even through that lens, when he was in the Navy, he was saying, “When I was in the Navy, they never got to experience me being away or me being at missions that were risky.” So he was actually kind of glad because, he said, “My daughters, my family, they got a chance to build resilience too.”

Yeah, it sucked, but also think about the resilience they’ve cultivated. Think about the story that they have now. Think about when something shocks them in their world again, they’ll be able to say, “Well, my dad was up in space for 200 days when he was supposed to be there for 8.” So there’s something, too, around the idea of that growth mindset, that preparation, and then too, can a normal person inhabit that space and succeed? I think there’s a couple lessons here for normal people, too.

Allison:

Yes. And I think, too, that the story highlights the complexities they faced and, really, the collaborative efforts that you alluded to earlier that were taken to ensure their safety. We probably could call this a crisis situation, and success in crisis can often depend on collaboration and trust, as you already mentioned or we both mentioned. Really among those who are in the field, so to speak, and those who provide the support, like you mentioned earlier, I think it’s a good reminder too that, when hardship or crisis falls on a team or an organization, that cross-functional efforts and cross-functional teams really need to work together to solve the problem rather than become siloed.

I think it’s human nature sometimes that when crisis occurs, some of us can go into silo mode, and it’s almost just a protective reaction. Hopefully, most of our listeners won’t go through anything like this at the workplace. But crisis can be defined in a lot of different ways, which we call it hardship. Anytime there’s hardship, which a lot of organizations are facing right now, it’s really important to have that cross-functional collaboration to work to solve problems together.

Ren:

That always makes me think too, because I think sometimes silos, and for those of you who maybe don’t use that language a lot, I feel like sometimes I take for granted that corporate speech, but it’s like if you are working in an organization or a funnel or a team and all the communication or all the conversation just stays in your little vertical, like a tube, like a grain silo is what the image looks [like]. There’s all these grain silos around the organization. And the goal is to not just have that work happening behind walls, undercover, where we don’t see or know what’s happening there.

I remember I was doing this work with this team, and they worked in the energy space, and they were saying, “I don’t know if silos are bad. For us, we are all on top of each other because of the emergent nature of the work. Sometimes we have to know whose sandbox is whose.” They’re like, “Sometimes we have to draw borders.”

It made me think, I was like, I don’t know if there’s an implicit issue with silos, so much as when we put a lid on the silo, that’s the problem, when information can’t get out or is not openly communicated. It’s like, how do I then build bridges between my silos? Because NASA is an interesting point of view. I love the movies or the shows, where they’re about to take off, and they go through the final check, and the whole room — subject matter experts, flight engineering, temperature — go for launch, go for launch, go for launch.

These people have to have boundaries in their work. The jet propulsion team doesn’t really need to engage, frankly doesn’t have time to engage, with the weight dispersal team. They have to do some collaboration around thrust and velocity.

I love that you brought in accountability on the front end, and that’s one of the words that’s shouted out of the silo. It’s like, “My bad, this is what happened.” So we can fix it. So, it’s really interesting, even if you’re in an environment where you’re saying, “Ren and Allison, you don’t understand, we have to have boundaries.” I would say, “Great, just make sure that you’re communicating outside of your boundaries.” Because it was Apollo 13, I think, the film, and I was thinking —

Allison:

Yes, I was going to say that it is 13. So, for my movie buffs, I’m sorry. It’s Apollo 13.

Ren:

Well, I mean I failed us too. But I think there’s such an interesting sign, because they have an air filtration issue wrong, and then there’s a scene down on Earth where they got the engineers in a room and it’s like, “We’ve got to make this circle thing fit into this square filter with only these parts,” because they can’t mail them parts. That’s that collaborative conversation, where a group of subject matter experts get together into a room, bring their subject matter expertise to bear. Sometimes I think that’s your job as a leader, if you’re listening, formally or informally, it’s how do I get all the right people in the room so we can have a conversation about solutions?

Allison:

Yeah, exactly. You’re making me think about boundary spanning too. Me and a colleague, we’re working with a senior team of a tech company a few weeks ago, and they’re integrating new top leadership to the organization. It’s one of those scenarios where half of the group has a very long tenure with the company and half is “brand new.” So, there’s the old and the new. How are we going to work together? What does culture look like? There’s all of that.

And when we talk about boundary spanning leadership at the Center, one of the most important things to do is something that you alluded to, Ren, which is clarify who’s responsible for what. You can call it creating boundaries if you want, but it’s really about clarity, so that when there is a crisis, you can go from one end of the spectrum to the other pretty quickly and how people respond to it, from chaotic to being underreactive. And one of the ways you can navigate that spectrum is to be very clear on who’s responsible for what.

It doesn’t mean that they don’t have a say or input in other parts of the project or the “crisis,” but it’s a really good idea to know, okay, Ren’s been doing X, Y, Z for 10 years, so I know I can come to Ren about whatever that is. I think a really interesting way to look at spanning boundaries, too, is to put the container off of it so that you’re not completely isolating people, but to also keep it contained so that you know who, in essence, is responsible for what.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, that’s why I like the sandbox metaphor, because what I love about boundary spanning is the first step of boundary spanning is qualify your own boundaries. Tell someone about your boundaries or your team’s boundaries or whatever, so that they know.

And then it makes me think about systems thinking, right, Allison? It’s like the more I know about your experience, the better I can ease the condition of your experience. So, I like the sandbox because you can see a border, but there’s no walls. I can talk to you, you can talk to me. You’re like, “Look at my sandcastle.” You’ll be like, “Cool, look at my truck over here.”

I think that’s a fun metaphor because, again, borders aren’t the problem. It’s opaque borders that are a problem; things that we can’t see through or get through are an issue. But if borders are just existent in a flexible, fluid space where the border is like my sandbox, but you could walk through it, you could speak to me through it, you could see what I’m doing in it …

I think that’s a really interesting idea around when we span boundaries, again, we’re talking about opening options as opposed to restricting them. Part of that, too, starts with a recognition that these are areas that I operate and play in, and these are areas that you operate and play in.

Allison:

Yeah, definitely. I think it might be helpful for our listeners to know, who might be new to this type of language around boundary spanning, is that traditionally within any organization, there are 5 different kinds of boundaries that exist. So, there’s horizontal, which is between functions of the organization; vertical, which can be hierarchical; stakeholder, external groups; demographic, so gender, generation, etc., and geographic. So, depending on the company, different regions, different markets, and different distances.

I would say when it comes to being effective at the organization, it’s important to be able to navigate all of those boundaries, but especially when there’s a crisis or a major hardship, you are going to need to get a lot of those players involved. The ability to span those boundaries, by the way, was cited by senior executives as, 71% said that it was absolutely crucial to their success for the organization, not just for them as individuals.

Ren:

I think boundary spanning, too, helps us navigate those crisis spaces, because when I think about the best people who deal with the crisis in the moment, they’ve prepared for crisis. Organizational resilience, there’s all this narrative where they were stuck or they were abandoned.

Pretty quickly, NASA and the astronauts and all of the space community, they made decisions, functional decisions about what they were going to do and why they were going to do it. Every time, there’s always a lifeboat on the ISS. So, had something traumatic or dangerous happened, they could have left. But they decided, “Hey, for a variety of reasons, we’re going to ask you and rely on your service to stay up there and rotate into the next crew and then finish that part of it.”

So it was all really intentional, but I have to imagine, when Butch and Suni talk about planning, there is probably some page in their pamphlet that’s like, “If you’re marooned on there, you’re going to work on the station for us. That’s just the way it’s going to be and we’re going to appreciate your help and then we’re going to bring you home.”

Allison:

Sure.

Ren:

So there’s this being ready for everything. That’s what makes a resilient organization and might cultivate some personal resilience when you anticipate things that could go wrong. And then you start to say, “Well, I’m here now. What can I focus on?”

Allison:

How do you get from point A to point B, right? A lot of organizations have risk mitigation, but not all of them do. This is rhetorical, Ren, unless you have an answer, but how does a leader know when to focus on one or the other, and how to plan for contingency based on situation A, B, or C?

It’s tricky, right? But I do think what we were talking about a few moments ago is that first step in boundary spanning is to create and actually strengthen an understanding of skillsets, expectations, values, etc., so that you do know how to do collaborative work, period.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, I think I do have an answer for you. How does one or an organization manage that crisis preparation and preparedness? It reminds me of that phrase that we talk a lot bit here, polarity management. How do I do both things?

I think at any one plan, or if any of you are working on major projects or there’s real risk out there, you’ve got to do the work. You can’t just prepare for the risk. But if you never prepare for the risk and something goes wrong, you’re stuck holding the bag. I think this is a great polarity that they manage. It’s like a both/and. We have our mission preparedness, which is an 8-day test flight, but we’re also deeply prepared pilots and astronauts. So, we know, too, that we got a valuable skillset that we need to keep cultivating and then ready to deploy.

So, I’m thinking, if you’re listening out there, how do you plan and do the work that you need to do, and how can you carve out time in your project plan to talk about worst case scenarios? Now, maybe not for every job or for everything, it makes sense, but I think there’s certain spaces, especially when the stakes are really high, having someone say, “Okay, so what do we do when things go wrong?”

So making sure that there’s time for both, I think, is how someone would functionally balance crisis preparedness versus analysis paralysis, where if you think about crisis too long, everything looks really horrifying and then you don’t do anything. So, yeah, we don’t want that, but we also don’t want complete ignoring of it, but instead being ready for it.

Allison:

I would imagine, for some people, when you get to that point of over-planning, could almost generate a freeze response. But I want to come back to something that we both mentioned earlier, which was this trust, this concept of trust. And I want to tie it to boundary spanning here in a moment.

But when I think just as a human being, just as a human, regardless of title, job, etc., being stuck in a small space with somebody for that long, I would imagine they had to have had some trying moments. I would imagine. I think about my sister, who’s probably the closest person to me in my life. If you put my sister and I in a small space for that long, we would probably be at each other at least a few times, if not more than that. Don’t you think, Ren, for you, for most people?

Ren:

Yeah, 100%. I think that’s why I asked you, how do they come back alive, not fly back, but how do they end up not beating each other up? So yeah, I think that’s completely reasonable.

Allison:

But to bring it back to the workplace, hopefully none of us are going to be sent out into space unexpectedly for that long. But another part of the ability to span boundaries, especially in a crisis, and something that people can think about now before crisis happens or hardship, is really about cultivating and nurturing relationships.

And I don’t know the history of those 2. I’m not sure how long or how often they had worked together in the past. Regardless, something that leaders who are listening can take away from this is, when you’re able to connect on a personal level with folks, I’m not saying you need to share diaries or anything like that, but just simple, “How are you, Ren? What’s going on in your world?” Those types of things, basic human decency, right? Connecting at a personal level does help to build trust and enable more candid communication.

So, you’d ask me earlier how me and my prior coworker were able to navigate that. Part of it was because we had connected on, not on a deeply personal level, but enough to have trust established so that we could talk about obstacles, we could identify priorities, we could identify challenges, and collectively build and almost mobilize towards a new strategy or a different direction based on some of the unexpected turns that happened.

Ren:

I’m going to say one word, so we come back to it, so I don’t forget, but then I want to talk about some of what you said. So, one words can be compartmentalized or compartmentalization, but maybe another side of that polarity is what I’m thinking and you’re talking about is this idea of leadership disclosure.

As we are famed at the use of Johari window — classic American psychologists Joe and Harry getting together writing a 4 by 4 or 2 by 2. Folks, when we talk about leadership disclosure, it’s like you’ve got an opportunity, when working with people, to expand how you work together. One of those ways is asking feedback, how am I impacting you, so I can identify some blind spots for me, so I can treat you differently, that works?

The other one is sharing some more of that hidden information about you, things that I would keep private. Again, like Allison saying, it’s not like your diary, but hey, why am I making that decision, or what of my experiences have made me act the way that I do, or why do I look at challenges the way that I do? So often we make decisions, especially if you’re in a close, personal dynamic with someone, you’re stuck in a piece of metal above space.

It’s easy to see someone’s behavior and then make up a story about it. “Oh, why didn’t Suni say hi to me today? We’re stuck in this tin. We ran into each other.” When it could be like, “Oh, I know that, in the beginning of Suni’s day, she stay super focused. She doesn’t engage with anyone. She’s head down, works on her tasks.” The moment I know about someone’s experience or their personal mechanisms for operation, the easier it is for me not to take their behaviors personally.

So you, as a leader, if you’re listening, you’ve got to model that behavior. It’s like, what’s some information that you don’t tell your team that maybe they could learn? And then definitely be asking for feedback about how you’re impacting people to determine how you can operate better.

Allison:

I love that. I love that so much. It does start with the individual level. It almost always will. I was just talking to some clients yesterday about this. We went orienteering and we’re out in the Colorado Rockies. It’s a no-risk environment; at the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter. We’re not playing with real money, but they’re achievers and they want to achieve their target. One of the things that we talked about was this notion of disclosure, too, around, “Where do you go when you’re under stress?” So we did a power pause, if you will, right in the middle of the session to talk about, “What’s going well? What do we need to do differently?”

And one of the leaders said, “I am really much aware when I get into high achiever mode, I get very granular and honed in on a singular task, and I stop listening. I just want the 2 of you and my group to call me out on that. Feel free to be like, ‘Hey, you’re doing that thing. You’re doing that thing. With love, come back to us. Stop doing that thing. You’re not listening. Come back to us.'”

So then, one by one, the 3 of them just shared where they go under stress, and they were all different. So, we might make assumptions, like you were just saying, in the way that you shared and also in a different way, of okay, I can stop listening, so I might assume that everybody does the same thing.

But another group member said, “I just check out. I just assume my opinion’s not valued. So, I don’t share at all, and I just check out. And people might read me as being calm and cool, but I’m boiling inside because nobody’s listening to me.”

So, again, I’m just underlining that, in partnership with what you just said, in that disclosure can be so helpful, especially when it’s high stress. And you really do want to be collaborative together. It’s knowing yourself and knowing where you go under stress, and having the courage to share that and ask people to hold you accountable.

Ren:

I think it’s like you said, it starts with the individual, but then it’s about us very quickly. Because I always tell people, involve people in your development. If you’re working on something, tell someone you’re working on it. If you’re trying to shift the behavior for the benefit of the team, tell them that you’re doing that. Not so you have more people busting your chops about it not working, but so you have a community of people that are helping you try to be your best. Because I know a leader who’s willing to say, “Hey, I know when I go to stress, I do X, Y, or Z. Please, you have permission to say, ‘Hey, Ren, snap out of it.'”

That’s, I think, a generative, positive experience. When someone’s like, “Hey, you’re doing that thing you said you didn’t want to do,” I’m not going to be mad at them. I’m not going to hold it against them. I’m going to be like, “Hey, thanks for calling it out,” because I know I want to work on it.

And so, there’s something about that recognition of what I need, and then involving people in it. It’s like, “Hey, I’m trying to accomplish this,” or “I know that we spoke about this is how we’re going to interact, but this is how I’m feeling now.” I think, too, leaving space for that flexibility, but always leaving those lines of communication open … really, really critical.

Allison:

Yeah, indeed, indeed. Well, there’s probably so much we could talk about in this story, but I’m wondering, too, Ren, we just gave a bunch of tools, but if there was one standout from this story that you wanted leaders to take away, just one, what would it be?

Ren:

Yeah, I’m going to cheat. I can’t, because I’m going back to the word compartmentalize, and then it attaches to something else.

Allison:

Oh, yeah, please elaborate on that.

Ren:

No, I think it’s a good segue into some of what we’re talking about, because what I thought was interesting, and Butch said this in an interview too, is like, “Hey, sometimes we have to compartmentalize. It’s like, I can’t let my life at home or our experiences interfere with what I’m called to do at that moment.” He said, “It’s not about me. It’s not about my feelings. It’s about what the human space flight program is about. It’s our national goals.”

Now it sounds totally great, like a person who served the US, our national goals, but also it’s not about me, it’s not about my feelings. There’s something there, too, like you were saying when you get into a room with someone, even your sister, the closest person in the world, you’re going to get into fisticuffs maybe sometimes.

I think the perspective-taking of being like, “Oh, wait, this isn’t about me. It’s not about you. It’s not about our feelings.” And 2, I love the psychology and philosophy around like, “Are you your feelings, or are feelings just a symptom of whatever?” So there’s something about the ability to recognize that part of yourself and then put it in a tiny little box and say, “Cool, that goes over there. We’re in space. I need to do station maintenance.”

So I think the biggest thing, then, that connects for me for leaders, and something that was really clear, and maybe I don’t think it’s just reserved for Navy test pilots, is this idea there was no abandonment narrative. We often talk about, like we were just talking about here, it’s easy to fill in the gaps for storytelling. When you don’t have information, it’s easy to feel like you’re the victim or make yourself the hero.

One of the biggest derailers I [see in] people in their relationships is victimization, where they feel victimized or they take on a victim narrative, especially when they don’t know what’s happening behind someone else’s wall. Some project gets thrown on them, or they’re stuck here, and it’s like, “It’s X, Y, Z’s fault,” or “I wouldn’t be here if not for those people,” or “I can’t believe this is happening to me.” And I imagine there were moments of that for these folks. And hear me, Allison and everyone else — there are moments where people are legitimately victimized.

I’m talking about when we create a story of victimization in our own head, where I don’t know what’s happening, someone’s just like, “Hey, Ren, you got to do this new project.” I’m like, “Oh, no, these people, they’re torturing me on purpose.” I might just ask like, “Hey, Allison, is there a reason that you gave me this project?” And like, “Oh, you said you wanted to go to Cabo and it’s in Cabo.” I’m like, “Oh, yeah, I’m not a victim here. Actually, this is a benefit.”

So there’s something around they just didn’t say, “Oh, I’m stuck here. I’m abandoned.” They were like, “This is the mission. This is the job. We’ve been trained for this,” and they got to work. So something about your circle of control, stemming the narrative, and too, because they’re not the only heroes, they needed to rely on a whole bunch of people on Earth. So, it’s like, we all have to work together, we’re not abandoned here, stuff happens. I mean, even the SpaceX Dragon, like I said, they were delayed almost a month from coming home because it messed up a little bit. So, there’s these things where we just have to go, “Okay, nothing’s functionally happening to me. No one woke up today and said, ‘Butch, Suni, you’re stuck in space. Ha-ha.'”

So I think that’s probably like, all of those things are likely their takeaway, but the interesting thing is how do we cultivate that strength to leave the abandonment or victim narrative alone and find out the real information? Really find out if you are being victimized before you embrace that, because it might be disempowering.

Allison:

We always do this. There’s so much to talk about in what you just said, and we’re nearing the end. So, 2 things that immediately came up for me. One is the sphere of control, which is something that we talk to our leaders a lot about, which is … if you can imagine 3 circles, one is what can you control as a leader? What can you influence, would be the next circle. And what do you need to accept?

In a situation like that, I would imagine, it sounds like, too, those 2 leaders got to, “I need to accept that this is happening. This is the reality right now, and work on or focus on what I can control, which is probably not a lot.” But the ability to get to that quickly, I think, underscores the importance of that awareness, and what you’re referring to, in a crisis or hardship situation. I was going to say at the workplace, but probably in life too. But I suppose we’re not here to be therapists, but same, same.

I think the situation that we’re talking about really underlines that leadership is not just about command. Sometimes it is, but it’s not holistically about command. It’s about adaptability. It’s about trust. It’s about teamwork in the face of uncertainty, which can be really hard for people. Again, these folks are probably used to some level of uncertainty, and most of us are not going to be sent into space like I mentioned, but uncertainty is a reality for some people right now. Again, that adaptability, the trust and the working with your team and your people, can be so important in handling hardship thoughtfully.

And I would also state that it can help protect company morale, too. And how an organization handles hardship can also really indicate what their long-term reputation might be — as you and I have talked about in prior podcasts, different stories — but just as NASA didn’t abandon or try to avoid or evade responsibility, leaders also have to guide their people through turbulence with, I would say, clarity, compassion, and sometimes a little bit of creativity.

So, perhaps we can leave it at that for today. Again, I feel like based off of where we just went, there’s lots of other things to talk about, but perhaps in the next episode.

Ren:

We could stay in orbit, but I don’t think we have to. Let’s go home.

Allison:

Well played. It’s your dad joke for the day.

Ren:

It sounds like it really worked for you. Yeah, I killed it. I crushed it. You’re welcome. You’re welcome, everybody.

Allison:

Well, Ren, thanks for the conversation, and to our CCL team who works behind the scenes to make our podcasts happen, we thank you. To our listeners, you can find all of our podcast episodes and show notes on ccl.org and find us on LinkedIn. Let us know what you think about this story, and let us know what you’d like us to talk about next. We look forward to chiming in with you next time. Thanks, everyone. Thanks, Ren.

Ren:

Thanks, Allison. Thanks, everybody. See you next time. Find Allison on Amazon’s TikTok.