SEEING THE HOLES IN THE BOAT
Jim had enjoyed the brainstorming meeting. That afternoon, he went by Angus’s office. A new technology director, Angus had only been at the firm for a few weeks, but his reputation preceded him. He was known for being one of the best in the industry—creating new technical models that supported their work, enabling them to offer potential clients solutions that were both faster and more reliable. Jim had been working on an exciting new project. He had taken the initiative to redesign a client service offering, known internally as “Ex-cap,” and had received positive feedback from many across the firm—he couldn’t wait to take it to clients. “Angus!” Jim beamed as he walked through the open door. “How’s it all going? Your office is looking great!” “Hi, Jim,” Angus replied, moving some papers around on his desk. Jim jumped straight to the reason he was there: “You’ve probably heard about my Ex-cap development project? I’d love for you to get involved, Angus. I think it could make a big difference for clients—everyone’s pretty excited. Having your input would be amazing. We’d be unstoppable!”
Angus: Take One
Having seen some of the draft materials, Angus asked, “How are you planning to deal with the fluctuations in the independent variables? I don’t think the model will hold up with the continuing changes. And if you look at the second phase . . .” Angus went on and shared all his concerns, highlighting the numerous issues that needed to be fixed in order to make the project successful. He was pleased that Jim had come to him with this. The partners had mentioned it with a great deal of excitement, and it would be good to have his name associated with such an important project so early on. He wanted to make sure they had worked through all the technical challenges so all would run smoothly when they took it to market.
Jim couldn’t believe it. Angus went on and on, listing one challenge after another, all of them seemingly small in Jim’s mind—surely these things could be fixed? That was why he’d come to Angus. But Angus didn’t seem to understand how exciting this project was, or see its potential. After all, it was a groundbreaking approach and the partners had almost said as much. Jim felt deflated and defeated. He’d given this project his all, and here was the new guy beating up on him with an endless stream of, “This is wrong.” Angus’s tone was flat—it was almost as if he were bored by the whole idea. Jim wished he hadn’t come to Angus—he could have worked out the glitches with the team he usually worked with. He certainly wouldn’t bring his best ideas to Angus again.
Let’s give Angus a do-over.
Angus: Take Two
Angus was pleased that Jim had come to him with this. The partners had mentioned it with a great deal of excitement, and it would be good to have his name associated with such an important project so early on. He had seen some of the draft materials and wanted to make sure they had worked through all the technical challenges so all would run smoothly when they took it to market.
“Thanks for thinking of me for this, Jim,” Angus said with a smile. “I’ve heard the partners talking about this, and they seem pretty excited. Why don’t you talk me through your main goals and challenges and how I can help?” Jim took him up on this offer to share all his plans and some of his concerns. Angus realized that Jim hadn’t seen all the potential problems, such as changes to the independent variables and phase two. “Would it help if I went through the technical details and came up with a list of things for us to look at? I want to make sure it’s all smooth when you take it to market.” “Yes, great!” declared Jim. He was thankful to have someone on board who could spot the gaps. Any technical glitches would really frustrate the clients. This was exactly the reason why Jim had come to Angus. He felt more confident than ever that Ex-cap II would be a hit.
Not Just What, but How
The way we offer our critiques, not just what critiques we offer, shapes how much value we add to a situation. It changes the way others hear us, what they do with the information and comments we share, and whether they come back to us again. In order to lead the room, we have to be welcomed into it first.
People differ in how they offer, and prefer to receive, critique. Critique is a necessary part of business success. When heavily invested in a new venture or plan, we want feedback that is encouraging, not challenging. But we know that’s not necessarily all that’s needed. Greater value lies in challenges to improve our initiatives. And people with authentic gravitas add value. Adapting here doesn’t mean we don’t find the holes in the boat. It is about being mindful of how people prefer to receive a critique and adapting how we give it, not what we’re saying.
When working with people who tend to be optimistic and big-picture oriented, it’s important to respond with energy if they are sharing an idea. Explain why you like the ideas (be authentic, and only communicate what you genuinely feel positively about), or comment on how much work they’ve clearly put into it, or the interesting nature of the project or topic. And share that with energy—not silly, over-the-top excitement, but at least some energy. People with this interactive preference can feel particularly deflated when new ideas are received with immediate criticism or simply a lack of vitality. People with authentic gravitas not only develop their own confidence but also instill confidence in others. Immediately critiquing a new idea delivered by someone with high energy can decrease his or her confidence. Alternatively, it can decrease your gravitas in their eyes. You may feel you’re adding significant value to the content, but if it is at the expense of the one who owns the content, you are not making a positive impact on that person. Furthermore, professionals with this preference, particularly if paired with high self-confidence, can self-protect by responding with a critical approach themselves—not of the content but of the messenger. They may regard the messenger as lacking sophisticated social skills or the ability to see the big picture.
The goal is certainly not to flatter without substance, instill false confidence, or overlook problems. It is to instill confidence in others, to match their energy levels and communicate a commitment to making a project work—by highlighting strengths and asking if pointing out challenges would be useful. If your initial response is phrased well, constructive challenge will almost always be well-received. It will enable you to make a significant and positively received contribution.
Having recognized Jim’s energy and enthusiasm, Angus was able to adapt his style well in the following ways in take two:
He was clear (and genuine) about what he appreciated about the project/conversation and why.
He delivered his messages with matching energy.
He asked if Jim would like to hear challenges and constructive input, highlighting why this would make a significant, positive difference in the bigger picture, thus letting Jim take the lead in inviting challenge and constructive criticism rather than having it forced upon him.
If Angus were giving feedback to Marco rather than to Jim, he would need to adapt differently—still focusing on the big picture, but perhaps requiring less positive energy and being more direct. Offering a critique is one of the key areas where we need to adapt to others’ preferences to build authentic gravitas.
It’s not only how we highlight the holes in the boat that matters but also how we respond to them. Let’s look at how Marco could increase or decrease authentic gravitas when responding to a critique offered by Angus.
Curry with a Side of Recognition
“The vegetable curry, please.” Marco heard Angus order from the spot in front of him in line. They had arrived at the corner shop at the same time and decided to have lunch together. Marco was pleased to have this opportunity to speak with Angus. A founding partner had poached Angus from their biggest competitor, and Marco knew Angus was regarded as an important addition to the firm. He was certainly the strongest technical adviser they now had, and he’d only had one chance to work with him so far. Knowing that Angus would be in great demand across the firm, Marc
o wanted to build a solid relationship with him and have him work on his larger client cases.
Marco: Take One
“Did you get a chance to look at my report on Stellar-Beatty?” Angus asked Marco. He had put in long hours on this report, finding a lot of problems with the current plans and highlighting many changes he felt needed to be made. He had enjoyed throwing himself into the case and was proud of the work he had done, knowing that if his suggested changes were made, they would have a significant impact on the way the firm handled the Stellar-Beatty merger. “Yes, I had a quick look and think we have it all covered. If we make just a couple of changes, it will be fine,” said Marco. “What I really want is to talk with you about the new Scotcher case. It will be a big one for us. You’ve probably seen the . . .” He went on to give an overview of the case.
Angus couldn’t believe how little Marco appreciated his work. He also doubted Marco’s ability to manage the large Scotcher case well, given that he clearly couldn’t manage the smaller Stellar-Beatty one. “If we make just a couple of changes, it will be fine.” Angus marveled at Marco’s words, mentally rolling his eyes at Marco’s clear lack of understanding of just what was required to make it work. With many partners asking for his involvement on projects, Angus was reluctant to get involved on the Scotcher case, or any others with Marco, for that matter.
Let’s give Marco a do-over.
Marco: Take Two
“Did you get a chance to look at my report on Stellar-Beatty?” Angus asked Marco. He had put in long hours on this report, finding a lot of problems with the current plans and highlighting many changes he felt needed to be made. He had enjoyed throwing himself into the case and was proud of the work he had done, knowing that if his suggested changes were made, they would have a significant impact on the way the firm handled the Stellar-Beatty merger. “Yes, I’ve gone through it. Thanks for all your work, Angus. You obviously put a lot of time into it,” offered Marco. “I noticed you suggested a lot of changes. I particularly appreciated your observations regarding the technical challenges in section three.” He paused, sensing Angus was keen to discuss something. Angus went on to describe what he saw as the main challenges in section 3, also drawing Marco’s attention to two other findings he wanted to make sure weren’t overlooked. Marco nodded in agreement. “Okay, thanks, Angus. Would you be open to working with Anita to make some of the changes and then come back to me with any remaining issues?” “Sure,” replied Angus, pleased that his work had been appreciated. “Great,” said Marco. “I’d like your input on another case, a bigger one—the Scotcher client—if you’re happy to talk through it now?” Angus smiled. “Yes, great, what’s it about?”
Noting the Value of a Critique
Seeing the detailed work Angus had provided, Marco should have picked up on how important it was to Angus to offer a thorough critique. When working with someone whose tendency is to offer in-depth critical analysis, authentic gravitas means we show that we notice and appreciate the value they add. Again, the goal is not to offer false confidence in the work, but rather to recognize the effort made by the contributor and to highlight where real value is added. If the person offering the critique has little confidence, that person can turn their natural strength for critical thinking into criticism of themselves, particularly if they routinely experience a lack of appreciation for their work. Their self-identity and sense of their own gravitas can be reduced because they feel that they can never offer contributions that are valued and taken seriously by others. Alternatively, their focus can turn to the recipient who has not demonstrated—in their mind—that they possess the critical capacity required for the project. That person’s gravitas is reduced in their mind.
Having observed Angus’s detailed critique, Marco adapted his own style effectively in take two in the following ways:
Marco offered genuine appreciation for the amount of work Angus had undertaken and highlighted specific parts of particular value.
He gave Angus space to talk through what he saw as being important parts of his work.
He identified a way to tangibly address Angus’s concerns without transgressing on his own need to strategically focus on a different project.
Let’s flip it around, though. What if Angus were giving feedback on work Marco had done? Marco would likely be looking for Angus to recognize and value his work as well, and then follow it up with a simple instruction on next steps and further clarity if needed, before moving on to discuss the next case. Gravitas is not only about adding value, but recognizing that people experience value in different ways.
Camille
Let’s wrap up by coming back to Camille, who was struggling in her new position at a European hedge fund, and look at how she built authentic gravitas at the new firm. Camille looked for cues to the interpersonal and thinking preferences of her colleagues. She sought to adapt her style to each one, particularly along the lines of how they preferred to work when it came to pace, generating ideas, and identifying holes in the boat. Sometimes she didn’t get it quite right, but she stayed open to further cues, and with some colleagues, she went ahead and asked them how they preferred to work, particularly when it came to generating ideas and identifying holes in the boat, which she found more difficult to gauge from observation. She continued to adapt, and within a few months, both she and her boss were happier with her position at the firm. Camille was committed to, and increasingly skilled at, tailoring her approach to her colleagues while staying true to herself.
PRACTICES FOR ADAPTING YOUR STYLE
We all naturally adapt to some extent when interacting with different people. We wouldn’t survive long professionally if we didn’t. But people regarded by others as having a great deal of authentic gravitas have mastered adapting their style while staying true to themselves. They are not rigid in their behavior but act in line with their values and their intention for impact. For the moments when you’re finding interactions with someone tricky, the following points may help:
First, it’s useful to identify your own preferences for interacting, including pace, how you like to come up with new ideas, and how you prefer to give and receive critical feedback at work.
Think of people who you believe are different from you on each of the above points. List two or three people for each (they’ll be different people for each of the three areas) and describe how you think they prefer to work and interact.
Consider how you have adapted your style successfully to work with those people in the past (or conversely, times when things didn’t go as well and how you think you could have done something differently).
If there is a particular person you’re finding it difficult to work with, consider what their preferences might be for how they work and interact. What examples of their behavior made you come to these conclusions?
Could you ask them how they prefer to work? Perhaps share that you’re keen to build a good working relationship and would genuinely like to know if there is anything they would like you to do differently, particularly in terms of how you work together.
Make some decisions about how you could flex your style when working with them. Have the courage to try out some new behaviors and reflect afterward on whether you feel it made a positive difference. If it did, is there anything else you could do? If it didn’t, seek feedback (from that person or others) and try something different. Even if you don’t get it right the first time, hopefully the other person will notice your willingness to be flexible and your attempts to build a stronger relationship. Evidence that you are prepared to adapt can be as important as the behavior of adapting itself.
EIGHT
INFLUENCE WITH INTEGRITY
Creating Professional Chemistry
“They can lead the room, regardless of their position in it.” This was the sentiment relayed (in various forms) by many senior executives, profes
sionals, and practitioners who participated in my research when asked to describe someone with gravitas. An ability to influence the way others think, feel, and act, regardless of one’s place in the organizational hierarchy, was considered a clear marker of gravitas. But people with high levels of gravitas didn’t always act in the same way—rather, they were reported to have different approaches in how they influenced different people across various situations. Authentic gravitas involves successfully influencing others in line with your values and intention for impact, in order to make a noteworthy contribution to a situation or the people in it. People with gravitas lead positive change, taking ownership and helping others navigate challenging contexts, regardless of whether they are tasked with it or not.
Authentic Gravitas Page 20