TL;DR (too long; didn’t read)
Detachment from emotions in decision making is critical for military leaders
Business leaders can use a similar approach
Two perspectives; think like the actor and the director
I was listening to the Tim Ferris podcast. Jocko Willink, author of Extreme Ownership and ex-Navy Seal, was his guest, and they discussed detachment as a critical leadership skill.
Jocko's concept of detachment emphasizes the importance of maintaining an objective perspective in high-pressure situations. Detachment involves stepping back mentally from immediate emotions and chaos to gain a broader view of the situation.
In his experience, this approach allows leaders to make more rational, informed decisions rather than reacting impulsively, which is critical in high-stakes military and combat situations.
The concept of detachment is an effective strategy for modern business leaders as well.
I use the metaphor of simultaneously acting in and directing a sitcom to describe detachment with my coaching clients.
As a leader, there are two perspectives you must maintain at all times.
The first is your role in business operations, the title on your business card; think of this as your character in the TV show.
You have natural tendencies and traits that you lean on to get your job done. Occasionally, you may flex into a "free trait" because the situation demands it, but you act as you for most of your working week.
The leader is also responsible for observing the operations of the whole business to determine its effectiveness level, which is similar to the director's role.
The director's responsibility is to experiment with different variables to optimize the quality and entertainment value of the show. Through the camera lens, they observe how different angles, lighting, or slight changes in dialogue or delivery impact the show.
The director is an objective observer, constantly tweaking the variables to enhance the show's quality.
Leaders should do this as well.
Leaders must consistently experiment with variables to optimize outcomes. The importance of the experiments is to see if they shift the team's performance.
I remember one particular experiment that failed miserably.
At one of our "stracticals," a quarterly offsite that threads the needle between strategy and tactics, I exploded.
My team knows me as a calm and empathic leader. In this meeting, we reviewed deliverables, and a team member glossed over their big rocks and didn't take responsibility for not delivering on their commitment.
Quite out of character, I got upset with the whole team, including this individual who took it personally.
It derailed the rest of the meeting, occupied the team for about a week afterward, and eroded trust between me and this individual.
Interestingly, the acute attention to results increased dramatically through the next quarter.
I was the leader in the meeting; that was my main character. As the director, I observed that the meeting was not going well. I decided to try a different approach to see if I could unlock performance.
I learned that the approach's benefit was not worth the collateral damage it caused.
In retrospect, my mistake was leaning into the emotion of frustration rather than being curious about why the team was not performing.
Regardless, I felt it necessary to try something different to get a better result. I learned that the tactic I chose was not effective.
As leaders, remember your two roles: you as the main character of your show and you as the director responsible for optimizing results through experimentation.
In your role as director, lead with curiosity and a willingness to learn. Be comfortable with only some of your experiments working, and you will have to produce a high-performance team.
You know how to find me if you need help tuning your leadership or team for the fourth quarter sprint. 👇
If you think others can benefit from this concept, please forward this article and encourage them to subscribe.
Comments