About four years ago, I realized that I had a major weakness. I didn’t communicate clearly. I focused on that problem and improved. Today I have a different problem – I need to fill my pipeline. I’m not ashamed to admit these problems. In fact, by recognizing these problems and getting them out in the open, I’ve been able to do something about them.
I’ve always found it odd that in so many big organizations, the word “problem” or “barrier” is taboo. The conventional wisdom in performance evaluations is that you should talk about people’s “strengths” and their “opportunities for development”. The same is true in how we talk about our organizations. I once had an executive tell me to change the title of a slide from “Barriers to sales” to “Opportunities to improve sales”.
The most common reason that I’ve heard for using the word “opportunity” for individuals is that we don’t want to de-motivate people. We don’t want anyone to feel like they aren’t special or good. Similarly, at the organizational level we worry that if we admit to having problems it will undermine our confidence as an organization. Worse yet, it might create the appearance that we aren’t perfect? How can a big, powerful organization have problems? Problems are a sign of weakness and incompetence, right? Wrong. Problems, weakness, and barriers are a sign that something isn’t working and needs to be fixed. It’s that simple. Calling them anything else, simply masks the problem and removes accountability. By changing the language, we might make people feel better about themselves. But feeling good about yourself doesn’t usually fuel action.
The 70,000 people whose jobs were cut on Monday have a problem. They need to act and they need to act now. The people whose jobs are still intact have an opportunity to get a raise, a bonus, and a promotion. If they are satisfied with where they are at, the don’t need to capitalize on the “opportunity”.
Problems and barriers are not the same as opportunities. When you soften the language, you soften the message and ultimately, soften the response. There are plenty of ways to help people maintain their self-esteem. Not being clear about the impact and urgency of issues is not one of them.
Say Chief, could I use this post to teach my students Freudian analysis? The pipeline part. Filling it. You’d better get some help with that, fella 🙂 .
Seriously. Woe. I’m blown away by your tone: ” It’s a Hobbesian jungle, baby! Get used to it. ”
Life is full of problems and struggle. But do you mean to say what I think you’re saying– that people are only motivated to change when they don’t feel good about themselves; ergo, managers and need to crack the whip? By extension, then, feeling bad about yourself is a good thing? Jeez, talk about a problem.
Should I then infer that those 70,000 people may not have lost their jobs if they weren’t led to feel good about themselves by well-meaning supervisors? Or, now that they’re goners, if they are made to feel properly bad about themselves they will be “fueled” to find new jobs? Sometimes, the something that needs to be fixed is not an individual but a system, right? So why is there no room for this acknowledgment in your post?
Like you, I agree that we shouldn’t be ashamed of our problems. They’re part and parcel of being imperfect humans inhabiting an imperfect world. And like you, I think that when we talk about a problem and take ownership of it, the process itself can be transformative. What’s wrong with thinking about problems, then, as challenges that can help you become more resilient, more creative, softer. . . more human? Am I communicating clearly? 🙂
Great points! I guess I didn’t solve my clear communication problem after all.
I don’t know that people are only motivated when they don’t feel good about themselves. There are a lot of people who are motivated to capitalize on opportunities and are very successful as a result.
I didn’t mean to make it sound like the issue was about people’s self perception. It was more about using language clearly to emphaisze the urgency of the issues.
Using the language of “opportunities” or “areas for development” implies that things are ok but they can be better. In many cases, things aren’t ok but the person or organization isn’t hearing that. As I mentioned, when you ask people why they are using those terms they’ll openly admit it’s because they are trying to soften the message.
I wasn’t implying that the people who lost their jobs were a victim of their their attitude. Rather I was trying to illustrate the difference between a problem and an opportunity.
The words “problem”, “weakness”, or “barrier” imply something that is preventing you from succeeding. The focus is on your current state.
Opportunity implies something that can put you in a better position but ignore the current state. I have opportunities when I am doing well and when I am doing poorly.
So the issue I as pointing out, when I’m offered an opportunity, I assess whether I’m comfortable with my current state and decide whether to act. “Problems” imply that the current state is not acceptable and must be changed.
The distinction between problem and opportunity is now blissfully clear. Thanks, Chief! And, based on the evidence– you don’t have a problem with communicating. Some of your fans have a problem with their brains functioning.