It has been an interesting week here in the Weasel Den. DefCon last weekend was amazing, but I brought home an unfortunate souvenir that has had me out of service for most of the week. I’m slowly getting back to normal.
The Set Up
I have been thinking about something that came up in conversation with a friend of a friend a few weeks ago. They were talking about how much their partner was working, and that it was difficult because they’re partner “had to” check in at work while on vacation. My first thought was to blame the company for requiring checking in while on vacation, but that wasn’t the issue. The partner of my friend-once-removed said that “their team needed them too much for them to be completely away for a week.”
Is that a big red flag 🚩 for anyone else?
The Unpack
I wasn’t in a position (or venue) where I could give this feedback directly, so instead, I want - as I often do in these blog posts - explore what I’m thinking about this discussion.
Long time readers (and colleagues) already know that I like to look at both ends of the statement - knowing that the answer lies (as it usually does) somewhere in the middle. The two options to start with are:
The team truly needs this particular leader in order to continue to function
The team doesn’t actually need the leader in place at all to function
I don’t know enough about this particular scenario to get any more details, but I think the thought exercise works either way. Let’s say that the team truly needs this leader in order to deliver. I’m not even going to ask if that’s a good thing - that’s a horrible thing. First, it makes the leader a bottleneck (and you know how I feel about bottlenecks). But worse is that it removes autonomy from the team. If they need the leader around in order to get their work done, they may not be thinking for themselves or making their own decisions. Even worse is I feel like this scenario creates an awkward co-dependency between the leader and their team. The leader feels needed by his team - who in turn rely on the leader to do anything, and validating this feeling from the leader.
That scenario could be exactly the situation, but a completely different scenario could be true as well. The team may not actually need the leader at all, but the leader feels that they need to be around because they’re afraid to let their team run on their own - and more importantly, make mistakes and learn. This is the helicopter parent version of leadership where the team is actually fine, but the leader is unable to give them the freedom (and autonomy) to run and grow.
Both of these options are extremely dysfunctional, and both scare the crap out of me. I’m functioning on half a brain this weekend, so if you have other ideas why a leader may feel like they can’t leave their team alone for even a week, let me know.
The Opinion
Maybe one of the reasons this story pokes at me so much is that my approach to leadership is sort of the opposite. While rarely my top objective in leading a team, something I’ve done continually over at least the last fifteen to twenty years is to try to work myself out of a job. I don’t know when I fell into this stupid habit, but time and time again, I’ve found that the best way for me to grow my team (as well as my own career) is a path where my leadership job ends up being obsolete. I once (purposely) found new roles for all sixty people on my team before figuring out what the hell I was going to to next. Even when I left my last job, I was happy that my team was in a place where I felt confident handing my org to a peer so that I wouldn’t need to be replaced (and from what I hear, that’s still going great). It’s not that I don’t want to be needed, I just don’t think being a necessary part of other people’s success is a great place to be.
Knowledge workers need freedom and space to do their work (autonomy), skills and knowledge to be successful (mastery), and to understand why their job is important (purpose). My role - a leaders role - is to create an environment where employees can be successful. It doesn’t mean that I’m not important - creating that environment requires creating a viable strategy, building relationships, and making numerous decisions that can help the team succeed. As a leader, I do a lot of important, but not urgent work. What this means is that if I need to be gone for a week - whether I’m sleeping all day trying to get rid of a virus, or (if all goes well) taking a week-long walk around a mountain, I can do so comfortably, knowing that my team can be successful without me.
The Wrap up
So, what's the takeaway from all this contemplation? Leadership isn't about tethering your team to your apron strings; it's about equipping them to function independently. The notion that a leader "has to" be present for the team to survive not only speaks volumes about the dysfunctional nature of that work environment but also rings alarm bells about the sustainability of such a setup. It's a house of cards; pull one out, and the whole thing comes tumbling down. That's not leadership; that's a high-stakes game of Jenga.
For those who find themselves in either of these described situations, it's a call to action. If you're the leader, ask yourself why you feel indispensable and then challenge that notion. Is it ego, fear, or some distorted sense of duty? And if you're a team member, you might want to initiate a dialogue about autonomy, growth, and what true leadership should embody. Open conversations can sometimes uncork these bottled-up issues and pave the way for transformative change.
But even for those not directly touched by this dilemma, there's a universal lesson here: the best leaders cultivate ecosystems, not dependencies. They nurture an environment where everyone thrives, not just survives. If your absence would cause a ripple but not a tidal wave, you're likely doing something right. And if you can step away for a week to trudge around a mountain or simply to recharge without causing an organizational meltdown, then you've not only succeeded in leading a team but also in building a legacy. And that's what true leadership is all about.
Until next time, from a now almost fully-recovered weasel in his den, keep challenging the status quo and questioning those red flags when you see them. The path to better leadership is fraught with them, and they're not stop signs; they're checkpoints for introspection and growth. Cheers!
I really like the “Finnish” approach to vacations. 4 weeks in a row is more than normal, its expected. And you are supposed to be offline during that time, cos it’s vacation!
This in practice sets the foundation for the culture to be able do fine (and deliver SW normally) when anyone from the team is away for a longer time.
I.e. totally aligned with Alan here and have been building my org, teams and my own role with the same ideology.
Interesting and completely agree with the philosophy Alan.
I'm wondering if a team member recognizes this behavior in their managers, how should they go about managing up and conveying this feedback without fear of retribution?