Today we're gonna talk about leading three types of people.
You know, when leading teams,
you always have that person who makes your job hard.
You know, they suck the joy out of your leadership.
Perhaps you're thinking,
our team would function so much better
if that person would be easier to lead.
You know, in all my studies that I've come across,
people often ask me,
as I did my PhD in management leadership,
studying all the best management leadership practices
from around the world,
if you could summarize it down to one key thing,
what be one of the major things you could share
in terms of leading and managing people?
And I would say it's self-awareness.
You know, many times, self-awareness solves the issue.
Sitting down with someone and saying,
I don't think you represented yourself well
when you did this.
You know, sitting down with people and saying,
are you aware, John, that when you're in meetings,
you talk over people, you take up all their space,
no one can say anything.
You know, self-awareness usually solves
about 80% of team issues or management leadership issues.
But when we make somebody self-aware,
they may respond in one of three ways.
This is a framework given to us by Henry Cloud,
if you wanna research some more about that.
But what it comes down to is,
what do people do when reality comes to them?
Because one of the first jobs as a leader
is to define reality.
We can't call people up until we've called them out.
So we gotta call them out in a kind but clear way.
We have to define reality.
John, you really are difficult to be in a meeting with.
You don't represent yourself well,
and you're changing the rest of the team's view of you,
and you're creating a wrong view of the team with you.
Feedback is not easy to hear for any of us.
So let's categorize, or Henry Cloud categorizes,
people's response, and therefore,
how we need to lead them according to that response.
So he uses three categories.
He calls it the wise, the foolish, and the evil.
Let me say right off the bat,
this is not saying that somebody's always wise,
always foolish, or in some cases, evil,
meaning involves lawyers and the police.
We're not saying that.
We're saying that in this situation, on this issue,
they may be wise, foolish, on very rare occasions, evil.
So here's how we tell them apart.
How do you know someone's in one of those three camps?
And that's got to do with how they own the feedback.
A wise person will own the feedback.
They'll often say, thank you, wow, I had no idea.
They see feedback as a gift, even if it's painful,
but they own it.
They see, I can see that, wow, I was unaware.
Thank you, thank you for telling me.
A foolish person's response to feedback is deflection.
They avoid ownership.
It's always someone else's fault, you know?
And often these people are the smartest people,
person in the room, and they know that.
They're often very high producers,
but when it comes to truth, they adjust the light
because it hurts their eyes.
It's like, oh, it wasn't me.
You don't understand.
You know, I've got 30 years of experience.
Nobody sent me the email.
It's not a big deal.
You know, or they shoot the messenger.
You're always against me.
You just don't like me, that type of thing.
So they deny the seriousness of the issue.
They even get angry, and then you can end up
having meeting after meeting.
But, you know, they leave you as the leader
feeling kind of hopeless.
They just don't hear me.
And the last one is evil.
And you know they are because they are threats.
I'm gonna file a lawsuit, you know, whatever it is.
So there's an immediate threat.
So we know it's wise because they own the feedback.
We know that in this case they're being foolish
because they deflect and don't own it,
and they minimize the issue.
Or they're evil because of threats.
So, you know, you cannot lead each of those three categories
in the same way you would lead yourself.
Each one of those requires a different response.
So let's look at, so we've talked about the indicator.
Now we'll talk about the strategy.
So we said the wise person, indicator, owns the problem.
Growth strategy, well the strategy is growth and development.
Okay, well let's give you some training.
Let's put you on the course.
Or why don't we get together, you know,
for 15 minutes once a week, talk through how,
or after a meeting, John, let's talk for five minutes,
10 minutes, let me give you some feedback
about how you did.
You know, John, you may want to use questions
instead of making statements and then rambling on.
Or John, and I've literally helped people do this,
John, what you may want to do is start with your end point
and instead of working up to it.
This is particularly true of very analytical people.
They want to tell you every single little step to get there
and they'll take 40.
minutes of the meeting, getting to the bottom line,
and teaching John to start with the bottom line
and back full as people have questions.
So these are growth and development strategies.
And the outcome of this is they become wiser and they grow.
So wise person indicator is, own the problem.
Strategy, growth and development outcome,
they grow and become wiser.
Let's talk about the foolish person.
This person is being foolish in this situation.
They deflect, that's the indicator.
Strategy, containment.
I literally had a meeting with a person
and I sat down with him who was just
incredibly brutal in meetings.
And so I said to him, we'll call him John again.
So I said to him, John, you cannot talk to people like this.
This is not the way, you were just rude,
you were demeaning, you talk over people,
you're just, and he said,
well, I've got 30 years experience,
and this person really was an international speaker
in our industry.
And so when I confronted him, he would not hear me.
So what was my strategy?
Containment.
And the containment is, okay, John,
I'm only gonna let you talk
in the last five minutes of the meeting.
Well, that's ridiculous, I'm a senior executive,
I shouldn't be treated this way.
I'm not asking, I'm telling you this what it is,
or you don't come to the meeting.
And you may ask one clarifying question.
He felt, this is demeaning, this is wrong.
But over time, and after a month of that,
why are we doing this containment?
To create self-awareness.
The outcome here is self-awareness.
And they go, oh, I see, I get it now.
Thank you, okay, I get it.
And now we've turned them into a wise person,
and now we can talk about growth and development.
Finally, there's the evil, somebody who's threatening.
And this strategy is protection.
Call the lawyers, call the police, whatever's necessary.
And the outcome here is separation,
usually immediate separation.
So let's just summarize all of what we've learned.
When we bring people, when truth comes to people,
when we give them feedback, we get one of three responses.
So with a wise person, the indicator is
they own the problem.
Strategy is growth and development.
Outcome is they grow and become wiser.
Foolish person, the indicator is they deflect.
Strategies contain them.
Outcome is to create self-awareness.
We wanna win people, we want people to grow.
Evil person, they threaten.
Strategy is protection.
Outcome is separation.
Look, mastering these difficult conversations
does cause us to grow as leaders.
But here's the key.
We're looking for what's best for the person,
not because we're irritated or annoyed.
We're looking to help people grow.
We're managing the impact on the team.
And it's only kind when it's direct and clear.
Don't be so soft, the person doesn't even know
they're being corrected.
You know, I've literally asked a manager once
to have, he had to let somebody go.
And then that somebody came back the next morning
and I went to the manager and I said,
I thought you, I thought we fired that person.
He said, I did.
But he did it so gently,
the person didn't even realize they were fired.
So yes, the kindest thing you can do is be clear.
And if you're gonna sit down in that meeting,
here's a power hack.
Don't get into other conversation.
How's the family doing?
How's your things going?
Don't do the chatty, but just go,
hey, John, we have a problem.
And it's got to do with how you are in meetings.
Go straight to the point.
Have one or two examples.
Don't exaggerate and don't use generalization.
So John, well, you know, you're hard to work with.
That's terrible.
That's unkind.
Be very clear and very specific.
John, in meetings, you talk over people.
Be very, you know, this happened last Tuesday
and the Wednesday before that, here are two examples.
And so we can, what we're doing is we're helping people
to move into the right category.
Now that you have a little framework and a template,
you know how to lead all three types of people.