The Big Question
Over the past couple of months, I have been visiting with various leaders, and a unique question keeps coming up in our conversations: How do we balance our understanding of the current and emerging market trends and the strategy of our company versus having the bandwidth to deal with continual operational problems, technical or adaptive, and, at the same time, discern the strengths of each of our direct reports? When we dive deep into this multi-layered question, the discussion always get quite interesting.
First, the question assumes that an individual is aware and understands the current and emerging market trends within their industry. It also assumes that an individual is aware and understands the strategy of their company. In the former, the focus needs to be on the speed of change in the trends, and a understanding of how quickly the overall risk profile is changing due to these trends. Once this is understood, a decision will need to be made about whether or not these conditions will require a change in the existing strategy of the company. However, the later assumes that an individual understands the strategy of the company, and knows why it is the right strategy given current events.
From my perspective and experience, the first half of this important question starts with some big assumptions related to understanding trends and strategy. For my part, I no longer assume people understand these two things. Often, at best, they are aware of them, but have not done their in-depth homework to move from awareness to understanding. Therefore, their capacity to make major strategic decisions is more likely limited at best, or narrow in scope.
Second, when it comes to the second half of this important question, it assumes that an individual is aware and understands the difference between technical and adaptive problems. It also assumes they know how to discern, and then build on the strengths of their direct reports. This level of problem-solving, and this level of people management takes a great deal of education, coaching, and experience over time in order to be done well. Again, from my perspective and experience, many of these kinds of assumptions rarely result in effective outcomes.
But, given the original question is a good one, and given many leaders have, to some degree, a level of proficiency in these areas, the question still stands, namely “how do we do this?” When I enter into dialogue about this question with others, I realize that the problem is not due to a lack of effort or focus. Instead, what I discover is a lack of bandwidth around all of these issues. And I believe managing one’s bandwidth is a significant challenge for people in leadership positions.
Understanding Bandwidth
Now, bandwidth is defined as “the maximum amount of data that can be transmitted over a network or internet connection in a given amount of time.” It also is defined as “the energy or mental capacity required to deal with a situation or problem.” The reality is that most people in leadership and management positions at this time period are trying to process a large number of problems with barely enough energy or mental capacity to handle the tsunami of information that is being directed toward them on an hour by hour basis. The result is that they feel overwhelmed, and burdened by it all.
But, underlying this bandwidth issue is a dangerous assumption, namely I should be able to discern changes in market trends, understand strategy, solve all technical and adaptive operational problems along with building on the strengths of all my direct reports. And I should be able to do this all at the same time period.
Now, any reasonable person, who is not feeling overwhelmed and burdened by this assumption, would look at these assumptions at face value, and recognize that they are unrealistic and unattainable. I seriously doubt at this time period that the majority of people in leadership positions can meet or excel given these expectations.
When I pause and reflect about this situation, I am reminded of something that Arthur Brooks in his book, The Meaning of Your Life: Finding Purpose In An Age of Emptiness (Portfolio/Penguin, 2026), wrote about called “the Striver’s Curse: the more you achieve, the emptier you feel.” Right now, I believe that many people in leadership positions are suffering from the Striver’s Curse, and, as a result, are experiencing a deep feeling of emptiness at work, and in life over all. With a full bandwidth based on unrealistic expectations of self and others, plus an overall feeling of emptiness and a general lack of meaning or purpose in their life, many leaders don’t know what to do, and thus ask the aforementioned question, seeking a realistic and honest answer.
The Four Realizations
Through my many dialogues about this subject, my answer to this important question has three parts. First, we need to reset our expectations of our self and others. This begins with the following, four realizations:
- the realization that relationships are more important than tasks.
- the realization that processes are more important than outcomes.
- the realization that intention is more important than attention.
- the realization that faith and trust are as important as competence and experience.
Now, on the surface, these seem pretty elementary. However, to fully embrace them, one needs to focus on building and maintaining relationships, plus making sure the right processes, or systems are being followed correctly. For what I often discovered as a consultant was that a bandwidth problem often reflected a lack of healthy relationships and the belief that if I want to get something done, and done right, then I have to do it myself. However, when teams are functional rather than dysfunctional, and when healthy social networks are present, many leaders can activate a collective response to a problem or situation rather than default to their own individual effort.
Furthermore, when processes are followed correctly, rather than by-passed because people don’t know of them, or don’t know how to utilize them, then people can solve their own problems rather than always defaulting to pushing up the problem to a person in a management or leadership position.
To be continued on Tuesday.
© Geery Howe 2026
No comments:
Post a Comment