Lieutenant Colonel Kimberly Sievers turned my career around. She was the commander of my unit in Texas when I was at a low point and considering calling it quits in the Air Force. She empowered me and trusted me to do my job, and it made a difference. Within months of a conversation we had where I expressed my thoughts on retiring, she reenlisted me. I’ll always remember those times and her leadership.
And here I am, 17 years later, remembering this because I’m puzzling through how things get done. It’s kind of a fascinating endeavor. I’m always mindful that we can’t sit here and say that how it was in the “good old days” is the right way. There was a lot wrong with the good old days. But one must think that there has always been an overarching principle that governs things regardless of the times – some basic standards that have to be fulfilled for any particular job to be done. So I’m surprised now to see a surge in a leadership style that seems to be avoiding those things that are tried and true.
I’ve always been a big fan of empowerment. But I recognize that there’s a hierarchy to it too. Good leaders empower those under them – it’s what grows good leaders to come up behind them. But there comes a point where “empowering” those at the lowest levels devolves into a mistaken notion that those who are empowered are guaranteed to get it right. Of course it works, but it’s not always the case. There are times – most times – when there needs to be a minimum standard, and if the leader doesn’t communicate that clearly, who knows where their “empowerment” will lead?
I’m encountering that a bit in my job right now. There are certain principles which govern the field – principles that have been established over the course of decades of research and practical experience. And yet, those to whom these principles are being applied are deciding what “works for them” is the way they want to go, regardless of the purpose of the standard. And I can’t seem to get that through to them.
And here’s where some of the puzzling is coming in, because I don’t know where this surrender of standards has come from. Perhaps older generations are so befuddled by technology that they think the younger know what they’re talking about when they propose solutions. Or maybe it’s just the prevalence of a praise culture where younger generations are less able to accept the constrictions they feel when placed under a system that calls them to account. It could even be that we’re buying into the concept that standardized testing is the wrong way to measure results in our schools. I don’t know. All I can say is that I’m seeing an awful lot of it lately.
But maybe it really can’t last (no surprise to me). I think I’m starting to see that some of these people are discovering that a lack of accountability has consequences. Regardless of the intentions, it’s just a fact that once given free-reign to set one’s own standard, the quality of what is being done will degrade to the bare minimum needed to do it. It is in human nature to want to do the least amount of work for the greatest reward (ands so lotteries still go strong), so to expect people to put in an honest days’ work without some kind of supervision, coupled with weak standards and poorly communicated (or understood) expectations, must be a bridge too far.
Empowerment is a wonderful thing. But it has its place, and it should still remain within a set of parameters. Colonel Sievers showed me that. What I didn’t mention earlier about our conversation is that after she let me have my say about the assignment and the possibility of retiring, she leaned into me and told me she still expected me to get the job done. She wasn’t exactly pleased with the work I’d been doing on a project – she thought I was being a bit slow getting it together – and she had no problems with letting me know her expectations.
She laid out the standards, she empowered me to do what I had to do to meet them, and then she held me accountable for the results.
And this works. To simply jettison standards and then tell your people to come up with their own solutions will meet with disaster, regardless of what happy dreams you have about achieving a result. This isn’t empowerment, it’s surrender. It’s laziness in leadership, and it’s a luxury that can’t last.