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 CCLs 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:

I’m not sure if you know this, but family is a bit of a dirty word these days. Well, in the corporate context at least, and maybe for some of us as the holidays approach, in the family context too. But anyway, as Netflix tells us, we model ourselves on being a professional sports team, not a family. A family is about unconditional love. A dream team is about pushing yourself to be the best possible teammate, caring intensely about your team, and knowing that you may not be on the team forever. Thanks for the copy, Netflix. So in today’s episode, we’re going to talk family versus team and which one might be best. When we think about the traditional family structure, we often associate it with love and loyalty and long-term commitment.

But how does this compare to the team dynamic? Teams are known for their agility, diversity, and adaptability. Which approach is more effective in today’s America when it comes to leadership and building a strong, cohesive, and high performing workforce? Are either of them appropriate, even? Nothing like the threat of being off the team forever as a motivating factor.

Either way, we’ll talk about leadership’s role in creating these structures, look at some of the payoffs, some of the payouts maybe, and see how you can create the culture you need most. Welcome back everyone. I’m Ren Washington and, as usual, joined with Allison Barr. Allison, best team you’ve ever been a part of?

Allison:

The best work team that I’ve ever been a part of was when I was getting my first graduate degree and working retail. And my boss was named Ellen, last initial G, because I had a couple Ellens as bosses. So Ellen, if you are listening, best team I was on.

Ren:

And did that team, even better than any other team you’ve ever been on in your life? ‘Cause you said best work team.

Allison:

Well, I mean we could talk about when I was in 6th grade playing soccer and my soccer coach gave us Kit Kats after the game. That was certainly —

Ren:

So just chocolate bribery really boosts the best —

Allison:

Oh yeah. You do well, you get a Kit Kat. That was enough for me.

Ren:

Well, I mean I think it might already be a worthy conversation of which one would you pick? 6th grade Kit Kat chocolate bar soccer team, or Ellen “G for gangster’s” retail team.

Allison:

It depends. I mean, context, right? I have to make a living, right? So I don’t think I’m good enough to make a living as a soccer player, unfortunately. Though, if I had … Is that what you’re asking, for a job?

Ren:

No, I’m trying to … Yeah. Well, I wonder. Maybe you are talking about it, because some of it’s like, do I need to make a living in order for the team’s greatness to be relevant? I don’t know. I guess I’m probing the idea of, what are the structures that were the most effective for you inside of a team? Whether that team was personal, professional, sports, debate, work …

Allison:

Okay. I see where you’re going with this.

Ren:

So, if you had to choose, if you had to choose, which one are you choosing? Which Allison was happier? Now that’s too loaded.

Allison:

That’s too loaded.

Ren:

Which team was better?

Allison:

Probably the retail team.

Ren:

Yeah. What made it better?

Allison:

Well, a lot. I mean there’s a lot to say there. We had a really strong foundation of trust amongst us, and there were really clear expectations from the moment that I was hired, from the moment that I had my onboarding, my very first meeting, expectations were laid out. Not just around my job, but how the culture was there and what I could expect. So I think because the groundwork was laid so early and there was trust amongst us as a team, that allowed us to handle obstacles in a, not only just an empowering way, but a way that allowed us to progress through them a lot faster than if we had not. And we had fun. We had a lot of fun. And I will say when I was talking to you about the Kit Kat situation, Ellen also had a budget for staff rewards. And it was not anything major, but here and there we might get, I don’t know …

Ren:

Larger Kit Kats.

Allison:

Larger Kit Kats. I don’t know. I think once I got rewarded with a Starbucks gift card, which we’ve talked about Starbucks before, so I was happy about that, but there was motivation that was not simply targeted to making a financial goal.

Ren:

I appreciate that, especially when we start to think about reward and incentive, because I think that’s a critical part of leading and leadership, and work and work effectiveness. But before we maybe continue to diverge, I’m getting a sense of maybe the best teams you’ve been a part of, best family you’ve been a part of. I’m just kidding. But that brings me to the point. I was like, oh, what an interesting premise. I see this post around Netflix’s culture and “we don’t model ourselves after family.”

I mean they put that … You go on their culture page and … you want a job at Netflix? It’s not the first thing they say, but it’s about halfway through after their values and things like that. And it made me think, yeah, is that better? Should we be calling our work groups families? And I was like, should we model ourselves after a group of dysfunctional people like our families or like my family? I can only own my own experiences. But I mean, what do you think? Family, team, had you ever even considered? Did you consent to being part of a family? Where do you fall on this?

Allison:

Well, I think companies and employees who say, “We’re like a family here,” are well-intended. I think they’re well-intended and they’re trying to send the message that they have a supportive, accepting environment much like a family should behave. But some translate that to be a metaphor for the most dysfunctional parts that can come in family units. Not all the time, but often what that metaphor means is a lack of boundaries, expecting unconditional acceptance despite maybe even abusive behavior, and forced prioritization with punishment for not doing so. Punishment for not putting the, quote unquote, the family, the work family, first.

And so I saw an interview with the former CEO of Netflix who said, and you’ve alluded to this already, family is about unconditional love despite, say, your sibling’s bad behavior for example. A dream team is about pushing yourself to be the best teammate you can be, caring intensely about your teammates, and knowing, you already said this, that you might not be on the team forever. And I interpret that last part, by the way, as for a variety of reasons. Sometimes people choose not to be part of the team or they get promoted. It doesn’t have to be a negative.

By the way, we’ll probably get into this as well, but Hastings, he had an 87% approval rating from his employees according to Glassdoor, which is astronomically high. I think the norm is somewhere around 35, 36, something like that. So he was doing something right, but you asked about where do I fall, team, family? I don’t know that I really care, but I understand why people get turned off by companies saying, “We’re like a family here.” What about you?

Ren:

Yeah, I mean wasn’t laughing at you. I think that’s funny. And the nihilist in me is like, yeah, who gives a shit? ‘Cause I’m here to do work, though. But I think you and I probably have a unique individual drive that moves us through environments. That would be my read of you. But I do pause and I wonder, because when you start talking about the dysfunctions of a family, I’d say yeah, those are the dysfunctions of all families. I think you can love a family member unconditionally and hold them accountable.

And I think sports teams, I think about Ted Lasso or John Wooden even. I think real coaches who understand that our sports, especially college coaches or high school coaches, when an athlete comes through his system for 4 years, the best coaches in the world realize that the winning and losing is a finite experience. But the kids there, you’re foraging life. So you can love a student unconditionally, love them as a person, and expect more from them as an athlete and not necessarily start them.

So if I wanted to push back on what I would consider some of the arbitrary borders that this family versus team dynamic puts forward, I probably could. I wish you would’ve picked a side because then we could debate. I don’t know. I like the familial nature of an organization, but you know what I love most about a team? The family nature of it too. And so when I think about some of the best teams, whether they be family or teams I’ve been a part of, there was this unity, this “we are bound by a seal” or “I identify with my team or my team members” or “we are here to do something together.” And those are the things where maybe I fall down. Yeah, I don’t know if I really care, but I wonder how I could tap into the benefits of both of them.

Allison:

Yeah, and that was something I was going to ask you, too, is how can we have both? And I think what we’ve seen in the research, and what CCL’s research posits too, is that some of the most necessary leadership skills right now are empathy, compassion, emotional intelligence, and also agility, drive for results. So it’s not overt in what Netflix says, but what I hear when people have these conversations is that family feels too emotional and that team perhaps feels more drive, drive, drive for results when we’re at work and our goal is to drive for results. I would argue that’s not necessarily true, but that’s, I think, what people hear when they’re debating those 2 sides.

And you need both. Let us not forget that we work with human beings. When you just mentioned being unified, when I was working retail, I was selling clothing. At the bottom line, I was selling clothing. However, we had so much fun as that team. And like I said, we were able to come in every day and know that we did have a financial target to meet, but there was a certain level of support that we gave one another to achieve that target, celebrations when we did make it. And if we didn’t make it, there was conversation pretty immediately about what we could have done differently. So yeah, at the end of the day, I was selling clothes to people, but we were unified in our approach, in what we were trying to do together. And some people might gasp at this, but some of my lifelong friends I met working that job. So there’s another argument that’s, “I don’t go to work to make friends, I go to work to do my job.” That’s fine. But some of us also make friends.

Ren:

Well, it’s interesting when we talk about commitment in our leadership framework: direction, alignment, commitment. Commitment is not just committed to me or committed to finishing the job, it’s committed to each other, our shared success. It’d be interesting … Did the work contribute to your long-term friendships? You talk about lifelong friends. Was that because you all just happened to vibe or were you forged in the fire of retail, which is something that we could chuckle at, but for real? I mean anyone who’s ever done that knows. I don’t know. What would you say to that?

Allison:

So, is the question why we became friends? Did it have more to —

Ren:

Yeah, did work contribute to it? Because as we explore this environment and you think about, and I mentioned this idea of team environment or family, either way, I felt best when I was unified and you said, “Yeah, you know what? Me too, especially here in this team, and I met some friends.” So did the familial environment contribute to the long-term friendships, or was it this hard-driving team environment, or was it this third, unnamed, part of the equation?

Allison:

I think it was the third, unnamed, but probably includes both of those things. [clears throat] Excuse me.

Ren:

Sure, yeah.

Allison:

The culture there. I think it was the culture. We were taught how to have difficult conversations from the get-go. And there was an expectation that we would have difficult conversations. That was expected of us. It didn’t mean that we couldn’t ask for support, but asking for support meant that you were looking for some sort of remedy, not to complain. And so the culture also, I think, this is my opinion, led them to hire people who had similar interests. And so after work, for example, some of us might go to a yoga class or we might go hiking. There were things that we all had in common in terms of interests that, I think, enabled us to nourish those friendships.

And so what I’m getting at though, with the difficult conversations and the feedback and all of that type of thing, is that our workplace relationships were so strong. And when you think about friendships and family, ultimately you think about having really strong relationships. That doesn’t always happen. It often does not happen at the workplace. So I think it was the culture that really, naturally allowed for friendships to unfold.

Ren:

Really strong relationships. I wonder. As we’re exploring the different characteristics of family or team or any of these things, just as we talk, I keep on mapping on, is that exclusive for a family, or is that exclusive for a team, or is that accessible if you’re on one or the other? And the really strong relationships thing is interesting, because I think in a dysfunctional family, there’s no guarantee you’re going to have really strong relationships. And then I wonder … But then maybe, is a strong relationship necessary for the success of a family? I don’t know. It depends on what the goal of the family is. Then transfer the same into the work environment. Are strong relationships necessary for the success of a work environment? I guess it depends on what the work is trying to accomplish.

And that makes me think of the first thing that you said, maybe a question or 2 ago. People feel like the “family” word is maybe too personal and so we’re shifting to a little more of a team-driven language. But I would say culturally, now, people engaging in work are more mushy than ever before. Why is empathy in these things the driving force behind work? When before, 10 years ago, it was … Not 10 years ago, even maybe 40 years ago. Time is so weird. 40, 50 years ago, we work you until we kill you. Even some, right now, organizations believe in this extraction capitalism. But so we shift into … Managers should care about each other, and we should care about people, but don’t use the word “family” because families are really screwed up. So we don’t want to do that.

It’s just really interesting to think that there’d be such a pushback. And maybe there’s not such a pushback, but I’ve heard this … dedication in family. Don’t let someone use the guise of family to suck the loyalty out of you.

Allison:

Yeah, a couple of things came up when you were talking. I think people hear it as a manipulation, and for whatever reason, that’s what they hear. No one’s saying that you can’t say it. Go ahead and say it. Right? Go ahead and say it.

Ren:

Well sure, sure.

Allison:

I wonder too, when you were talking about people are, you said, mushy, mushier than ever, sometimes I wonder if, in our line of work, we get into a bit of an echo chamber because we initiate those types of conversations, and we create the type of environment and the type of space where people can talk about what’s really going on with them. But I don’t know that that is culturally common at the workplace. I think we create an environment for people thankfully to be able to do that.

Ren:

Well, maybe mushy was too reductive, a slight marginalization or minimization of the experience. But I would say maybe from a lens of a Boomer or even a Gen X-er, the pushback of this “everyone gets a trophy” vibe.

Allison:

Oh, I’m so glad to bring this up. Keep going.

Ren:

As the pendulum swings, and you could look into this environment saying, well, people come to work now, and they want more than a paycheck. And if that’s the case, maybe some of them even come into work saying, “Hey, I want to build relationships that matter.” I don’t know if people are saying that, but maybe they do. I could imagine someone looking at that from the outside and saying, well, that seems like family then is your jam. So what’s the problem? And so I don’t know. But why are you so glad that I’m bringing up this idea of “get off my lawn?”

Allison:

Get off my lawn.

Ren:

Tell me more.

Allison:

Well, because a McKinsey study came out very recently, this is this year, and across 4 generations … So for the first time in contemporary history, there’s 4 generations at the workplace. And across all 4 of those generations, the top 5 reasons for an employee to leave an employer were the same. So this notion that generations want different things from their employee is not true. And anytime that I hear somebody say … I know you said it in jest, but people do say it very seriously. Anytime I hear someone say, “Oh, Millennials want a participation trophy,” or, “Boomers are out of touch,” my question is, how do you know that? What’s the data that led you to that belief? Because if you’re just parroting what you heard from a headline, you’re doing more harm than good.

So the top reasons for people leaving an employee, and again this is across generations, are inadequate compensation, uncaring leaders, so that goes into what we’re talking about, unsustainable work expectations, lack of career development, and lack of meaning in their work. And that’s across generations, which is not what we’re talking about today. But I thought I would bring that into the conversation just for anyone who’s curious.

Ren:

It’d be interesting to see … Now I’m just going to play the role of a Boomer here. While someone I know may have quit, no one quit. And so maybe one person quit and when they did quit, it’s because the job didn’t pay enough, or they hated their boss. But most of us just expected to work in misery, especially with my hard puritanical upbringing. Sorry to get political and religious, but I wonder then if there’s not something …

Because that’s a really interesting facet. I go, okay, cool. I hadn’t heard the stat around everyone leaving for the same reasons. And when I hear those reasons, I go, “Okay, cool, that makes sense.” Money, I don’t like my boss, I don’t make sense of meaning. And I don’t know, we don’t have the numbers, but I wondered if it was like, well fine, some people quit, but usually there were a lot more people living in misery. And maybe I’m thinking the conversation is shifting to, well, don’t live in misery anymore. And maybe that’s why people don’t want to use the word family, because families are miserable.

Allison:

Well, back to what you said, role playing. “I went to work every day.” I’m paraphrasing what you said. “I sucked it up. I pulled myself up by my bootstraps.” 2 things can be true at the same time. Okay, that’s great. And … a lot of people don’t want to, and so they’re pushing back, and that’s it. I’m sorry that you experienced that, and the masses don’t want to do that.

Ren:

Well, I mean this is a useful transition. Speaking of the masses and then listener as a leader or all of you listening, engage in the active process of leadership, which is getting stuff done together. Maybe we say, well, how do I shift the narrative? I’m a leader, I’m a middle manager. How do I lead from an organizational standpoint or for my teams if I’m in a family structure or a team structure? Or what do the people want and how can I give them what’s required?

Allison:

Well, I’ll be curious to hear what you have to say too. I just shared with you some research about what people do want. So there’s that, right? A middle manager can’t necessarily control compensation. Some of them can, but a lot of them can’t. However, they can, for the most part, manage inspiring people. They can manage career development to an extent. That was one thing also that Ellen did really well was give us opportunities for growth constantly. It was constant. And they can control having a type of environment where people aren’t working 7 days a week, assuming they were hired to work a traditional 40-hour work week. So they can control some of those things. And for a leader to be inspirational is a bit tricky because that’s going to be different for everybody. But there’s research out there and it’s pretty tangible. What do you think?

Ren:

For being inspirational, or just what it means, what people want out of work?

Allison:

For what people want out of work. I think honestly, Ren, I think sometimes we overthink things and make these huge statements or huge stories that then become contagious all over organizational development, and then in LinkedIn, and then in the workspaces, and it just starts to domino, where maybe not that many people are actually that unhappy.

Ren:

That’s interesting.

Allison:

You have to look at your company’s turnover.

Ren:

I don’t know, I —

Allison:

Sorry, go ahead.

Ren:

Oh, interesting. Well, yeah, I just got real meta with you. You said maybe people aren’t unhappy. I was like, we should look at pharmaceutical sales on anxiety meds.

Allison:

At work, I mean.

Ren:

If you want to talk about how happy people really are. Hopefully they’re not purchasing their anxiety meds at work. I would agree with you. I think there’s something you said that really resonates. I think we overcomplicate things. And something you said, too, around the greatest teams you’ve ever been a part of, whether it was Ellen or soccer, was expectation, clear expectation. And here’s something that I know is true for humanity. Suffering comes from expectations.

Allison:

Say more about that.

Ren:

You want to be … Well, if any of you want to be happier in your relationships, your personal relationships, have less expectation of the “shoulds” and the “oughts.” Pain comes from what we think should be or ought to be. And I often ask leaders or ask anyone, “Who said that’s supposed to be that way?” So often I think we are over-index on the things we are told is supposed to be the case, and then that continues to echo through each other.

So you and I could talk much longer about maybe humanity and expectation and suffering, but for the teams, it is an interesting paradigm because I say teams revel and succeed with expectations. And I would say the best teams have boundaries for their expectations. One team would say, “I would expect you to try your hardest and learn from every opportunity.” That’s different than, “I expect you to never lose.”

And so I think there, when I use the word expectation, what I mean is that it helps for people to understand what’s expected of them, and if what’s expected of them isn’t bound by over-rigid criteria, like “Meet these sales targets, then you are accepted,” even though I understand that there’s an environment for the necessity of those things, instead, maybe the expectation is, “You are expected to be your best self here.” And then we take the ups and the downs as we go, recognizing that you are not your wins, you are not your losses. You are the work.

Allison:

Yeah, I think there’s inter-relational expectation and that’s where pain can come. And then there’s job expectation. And that sounded like you need to be on time. If you’re scheduled to start at 10:00 am, whatever that means for you, you need to be on the sales floor at 10:00 am. If that means you need to get here 10 minutes early to settle and whatnot … So I mean very specific. It’s almost norms is more what I mean.

But I remember being hired for a job after that, and not having that same expectation conversation, and I eventually just asked in my onboarding meeting, but it was unbelievable to me that I was not told what time we start in the day, how many vacation days I had. It was unbelievable to me that that was not provided to me from the get go.

Ren:

Why didn’t they do that? Did they say?

Allison:

I just asked. I didn’t ask why they didn’t tell me that. I just asked them because I realized we weren’t going to talk about that and we had our first onboarding meeting and I didn’t even know what time I was supposed to show up for work.

Ren:

Was it a culture where you could just come in, whenever?

Allison:

No, no. No.

Ren:

Okay. That’s super weird then, right? That sounds like a failure of work right there. That’s like a negligence of duty.

Allison:

Right.

Ren:

Yeah. That’s interesting.

Allison:

But my point is, though, those inter-relational, I think, expectations, that can cause some misery. You’re right. If I expect you to treat me in a certain way or I expect … Like in families, sometimes. Families can expect unconditional acceptance, and that’s not usually how it goes.

Ren:

That’s a bummer because it should, and I agree with you. If only that was the environment. And not to get too heady about it, but it’s interesting … I was listening to some music the other day, and this artist was talking about “find someone who loves you for you.” “She loves me for me.” And I thought, what an interesting idea. How many of our relationships where we look at each other and we are like, “I love you for the person you are?” Or do I love you for the person who you could be? Or do I love you for the person that you told me you were going to be?

And so thinking in the context of work environment, really in the personal environment, I was like, it doesn’t really matter if you love me for me. Do I love me for me? And what the relevant conversation for work then is, as you create your own value or your sense of value, when you are either a leader or, maybe like you said, a mid-level manager who can’t pay for compensation but helps people qualify and define their own value, helps people qualify and define the pride in themselves and love for themselves and appreciation for their own efforts …

I think in a family or on a team, these are the conversations that, when we lose, we can look at each other and say, “Dust it off, man. We’re going to lose again.” And when we win, we go, “Congratulations. Also, need I remind you of the loss?” So we’ll win again too, but let’s just keep on doing the environment where we are proud of ourselves, or we are proud of what we’re doing, or how we’re doing it, or why we’re doing it. Which comes back, I think, to that connection that I said earlier.

Allison:

And it connects as well to what people want out of work, one of which was meaning. And I think there’s something really admirable about trying to create a workplace culture that’s nurturing and compassionate. And like you said earlier, there has to be a way to blend. I don’t know that it’s necessarily a polarity to have a nurturing and compassionate environment with a drive for results type of environment. I think you do need both.

Ren:

Agreed.

Allison:

However, what Netflix brought to the table culturally is and was really interesting, because Hastings believed in a culture of transparency, which you and I both know is really crucial in leadership. They also prioritize their people by giving them freedom and autonomy, but also responsibility, clarity on responsibility. And they also believed that paying the highest salary possible was a better retention plan and better motivation than paying an average salary with bonuses. Which I know some people, people who are responsible for deciding on salaries, that might blow some minds a bit, but that’s their strategy.

So I do think it’s both. And when it comes down to it, it is culture, and culture can be complicated. We probably don’t have time for that today, but it is. It is, what is the culture you’re creating on your team? By the way, you can create a culture within your team that is different from the organization’s culture. And I’m sure, Ren, that you know the cliche. Actually, I’ve heard you say it before in programs, that culture eats strategy for breakfast. And there’s something to think about there, too.

Ren:

I resemble the implication of cliche usage. I love the notion of the polarity. It’s not an either/or. You can be absolutely high performing and compassionate. And again, I grew up in the sports world.

Allison:

Me too.

Ren:

And leadership looked like William Wallace, like Braveheart. I mean, coach standing up in front of the group, charging up their warriors to go out there and kick a ball or tackle somebody. And that’s such an interesting translation. And then I have a military father, so another real command and control, standing in front of your troops, rallying them to a particular target.

And this idea of how we focus our energies, when we think about the culture that we can create around us or the team members that we want to be a part of, I think that structure that I came up with, where there’s no crying in baseball, is such an interesting, limiting paradigm. When I think, whether we’re using a family or a team framework, don’t be reduced by your language, because everything that we’re talking about, it’s like the highest performing whatever, just create a family that has those things, create a team that has those things. None of these things are restricted to the environment.

I wonder if we could, or even if we would’ve had time to explore it, what is something that’s solely for a family and not for a team? I think you alluded to something earlier. I can’t remember it. But I wonder, what would be something that’s just restricted for either one of the 2 places?

Allison:

Well, families aren’t trying to maximize — Well, let me start over.

Ren:

Okay.

Allison:

Because what I was going … I’m going to say it. What I was going to say is that families aren’t necessarily trying to maximize capital, though somebody out there would argue me —

Ren:

That was a thing that I thought you said.

Allison:

Somebody might argue me on that. And I’m not talking about families that have businesses, I just mean families that … Just your family. You go home for Thanksgiving, or you go home to celebrate a birthday, or you have a family reunion or something. When you’re all together, you’re not trying to make a product and you’re not trying to gain a new customer.

Ren:

Well, so let’s just stick with Netflix just because. And I’m sticking with the paragraph that I talk about family and teams, and dream teams are about performance, not seniority. So okay, I guess there’s that performance metric that one could argue is reserved for a team. Now, if I could frame that we often say in our classrooms, too, that performance is actually not just the results. Winning as a team is results. It’s learning. Do you know how to do it better? And it’s satisfaction. Do I want to work with you again? So I could be that person that you’re talking about, Allison, that in fact, while a family may not push for capital gains, they do work for results, which is learning and satisfaction and —

Allison:

Families do?

Ren:

Then if you wanted to get … I would say so. I mean, think about the best familial environments that you’re ever in. Well, see, this is interesting. What do we want from families?

Allison:

Elaborate, yes.

Ren:

I want from family an environment full of support and love. And in that environment, I support people on their growth and opportunity to learn and try and learn new things. And I create an environment where we don’t have to like each other all the time, but we do respect, love each other, and so we want to continue the good work. Now I could see that same language for a really effective team and feel good about it.

Allison:

Sure, sure. And I think it’s complex. I think it’s complex. Yeah. Yeah. When we’re talking about family, it’s too nuanced, depending on who you’re talking to and their family dynamics. And some people don’t have families. Some people have been excommunicated from their family. I just think I could go down a real rabbit hole here, but I get what you’re saying. I do get what you’re saying. Yes, you need all of those things to thrive. And maybe that’s what we’re talking about is thriving organizations. What do you need to thrive? Ultimately, organizations have to make a profit for them to succeed, to exist even, to exist. They need customers and they need capital to be able to exist. So different than a family, but what you’re saying is potentially how people thrive, and you need to thrive at a workplace.

Ren:

Yeah, I appreciate your perspective, especially the idea of the familial and it’s super nuanced and loaded, and family can be traumatic. And then I’m thinking, okay, well have you been on teams that could cause as much pain and suffering? I was like, I don’t know. As a family? Probably not. Maybe some of us have. Write in, let us know. But then I’m thinking, okay, well what is the next frontier now, Allison? Because I don’t want to use either word, dang it. I want to do a new word. Here at Ren Organization, we’re not family, nor are we a team. We are at this other word. Is there a more appropriate word that I should start using at CCL when I’m emailing someone like, “Hey team.” That’s what I say on my emails regularly. “Hey team.” Is there a better encapsulation?

Allison:

Well, and that’s why I say sometimes we overthink, and I don’t mean me and you. I mean all of us, inclusive of me and you. I think we overthink things sometimes. And it’s my understanding that one of the reasons organizations began using that language of family was to drive recruitment, and to create engagement, and to create a reputation for their organization.

So I don’t know, to me it does not matter. To me it does not matter. I understand why it does for people. I think the bottom line is that companies were using that language and then it stuck, so that they could create a reputation for their company, that it was a culture of belonging. It was or it is a culture that’s compassionate and welcoming and understanding and all of the things that you would assume come with a proper family. And that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s the case, though. So when you call a workplace a team, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re going to have all of the things that you mentioned.

So that’s why I say I don’t know that it matters that much. I think what matters is if you are a leader, what kind of culture are you creating within your team? And Ren, you mentioned earlier about direction, alignment, commitment, and how leadership is a social process. Your organization and your team’s culture is the way that things get done, the way that people interact, the way that people make decisions. Leaders’ own conscious and unconscious beliefs can drive the repeated behaviors that become the practices on a team. We talk about this a lot, but I think because those practices become, then, the patterns of the culture, leaders have to understand what their responsibility is in creating a culture. Again, this is probably another podcast, but …

Ren:

Yeah, especially when we start talking about the lived patterns and behaviors of people. Because great, good luck for working through the unconscious patterns of behaviors that echo through my existence as I lead humans, ’cause I am a human. I mean, that’s the Rosetta Stone.

Yeah, I’m with you. It’s like does it really matter? Especially family or team. Does it matter when the world is burning? Who cares? But I think whatever drives the motivation. I think at its worst, people use a word for family to draw people into this idea of the perfect nuclear family with two and a half kids and a white picket fence, which was never really a real family anyway. And maybe that’s where people are like … The pendulum’s swinging back away from family. Don’t even give me this … Whose family? And what ideologies are we following here about what a family needs to look like?

And at the same time, you know what, I’m not here to demonize anything. I like a familial vibe. There’s certain things that I like about CCL that, I would say, we’re not like the Olympic dream team on basketball. There’s the way leadership works, the way players interact with each other. It just looks different. And that’s okay, and I’m okay with it. But I think it comes down to, as you’ve said and always, our favorite consultant language, it depends. But maybe asking what do your people need? Family, team? Why do they need that thing? And then when you create a new word, Allison, or anybody, you just email me first.

Allison:

Yes. Well, I can’t help but ask you a probing question. I’m sorry. I know we’re almost out of time, but I’m going to anyway. I’m going to anyway.

Ren:

Let’s do it.

Allison:

You said you like that CCL has a familial vibe. What does that mean behaviorally?

Ren:

What does that mean behaviorally, and what do I mean about it? CCL was an organization that I think welcomed my humanity and the humanity of those around it in a way that I hadn’t ever really seen or experienced. And I saw the space for people to be. And I guess maybe in the healthiest family, that space for the humanity was, I think, representative. And we have this … I’m not trying to air our dirty laundry, but who doesn’t have dysfunction? We have dysfunction, but there’s something charming about our dysfunction, like an uncle you really don’t want to interact with, but sometimes you do. And sometimes he says something funny and then you’re like, “Okay, yeah, I get it.” And so I think there’s probably the glitz and the dark stuff that I think is really representative of the familial vibe.

Allison:

Okay, you know I’m not going to let you off the hook that easy. So you said, I’m paraphrasing, they welcomed your humanity. That’s very conceptual. What is that? How? How did they do that?

Ren:

I guess there was some of what I said earlier around an expectation that I come and do my best. That my personal success was aligned with the organization’s success. And for me, that was a resonant of my family experience and different from the high-performance team experience where … Again, because my high-performance team wasn’t at Netflix, it was on a football team. So I had a very unique role in a larger cast of players, and we were driven toward a particular goal, and there was no crying in baseball. And so I felt like there was this crying at CCL and it’s like almost part of the job. So maybe that’s what I mean. And I think maybe the humanity of it, it’s amorphous. It’s hard to nail. And that’s maybe what I meant why familial. It’s intangible.

Allison:

Yeah. I dig, because somebody asked me recently, why is culture change so hard? And it comes back to what you just said, and what you said a few moments ago, which is, leaders are responsible for culture, and culture is driven by our unconscious and conscious, but our beliefs. And it is very hard to find a leader who’s willing to look at that kind of thing and really start to dissect what they are bringing to the table and creating.

And I want to validate too, it’s really hard, because it takes a certain level of self-awareness, but also a willingness to ask for that type of feedback. How am I showing up for others? What am I creating here that’s working? What am I not creating? Oftentimes, there’s a disconnect between senior leadership, their belief in what culture is, and what the employees are experiencing because of that lack of awareness. So it can be very, very hard. So for the companies out there that are … It sounds like what you’re saying too, Ren, is that you were welcomed as your, dare I be cliche again, but as your whole self, versus just somebody who’s coming in to make a dollar for CCL.

Ren:

It certainly felt that way.

Allison:

Yeah. So if you were —

Ren:

It certainly felt that way.

Allison:

And I hope it still does.

Ren:

It does.

Allison:

Good. So if you were going to leave leaders today with a tip, what would that be?

Ren:

I am reminded of … You were talking about your whole self or that exploration of the unconscious and the conscious and reading a book by this author, and she’s got this premise around child raising and she has a sense that makes me chuckle. Ultimately, you just got to get over your own stuff. Don’t project your own stuff on your kids. I say it jokingly because I’m like, well, winning, solutions, we got it. So maybe it’s … identify your own stuff. If family’s a dirty word for you, you need to suss that out for your long-term satisfaction.

Allison:

Yes.

Ren:

If “team” is too cold for you, why? And I think then, using that as maybe an open exploration for those other people around you to do the sense-making, you asking me what makes it familial? What are the behaviors? I don’t know if I’d ever been asked to define the behaviors. They’re pretty quick at hand. But I think it’s useful to name our experiences, as Brené [Brown] would tell us in Atlas of the Heart. And the more we can name our experiences and label them, the more effectively we can navigate them. Just that, I guess, leaders. All of those things.

Allison:

Just that. It’s that easy.

And I think from more of an organizational lens, I would offer that the most mature and successful organizations, Netflix being one of them, operate with the belief that leadership is a collective activity. Those organizations that do so have a higher capacity to take creative action in the face of complexity, which Netflix certainly reflects. And right now and for the past couple of years, we’ve been in what we would call a VUCA environment, volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. So now would be the time to really think about whether or not leadership is a collective activity at your organization.

Again, that’s probably another podcast at hand. However, one way that you can do that if you are a leader is to look at one piece of direction, alignment, and commitment. Just one. You can look at how you’re creating direction. How are you creating direction? Is it a shared exploration or is it dictated? What you’re looking to do is create a shared exploration around what direction we’re trying to take and an acceptance of multiple perspectives, not necessarily dictating. “This is what we’re doing and I need you to be compliant.”

So yeah, I think there’s a lot of different things that we could talk about here. Ren, and I appreciate the conversation. And as always, to our listeners, you can find all of our podcast episodes and our show notes on ccl.org. And a special thank you to Emily and Ryan, who work behind the scenes to get our podcast off the ground. And we’ll look forward to tuning in with you next time. I almost said team. I almost just said, we’ll look forward to tuning in with you next time. Find us on LinkedIn, let us know what you want us to talk about next. Thanks, Ren.

Ren:

Thanks, Allison. Thanks everybody. See you next time.