The Metiss Group's Blog

Too often when direct reports come to leaders with a problem, leaders speak using statements when questions are often a much better choice.

When a direct report comes to a leader with an issue, solving it for them makes the leader the choke point for future problems and does little, if anything, to develop the direct report. Asking questions exercises their brain for growth and development, while conveying confidence in their ability to solve the problem or issue at hand.  It gives the leader the opportunity to consider some options they may not have previously considered and in the long run, should save them from future interruptions as the problem-solving of the direct report increases.

When a direct report brings a situation to a leader, the leader should try questions like these:

• What have you done up to this point? What has worked? What has not worked?
• What options have you considered?  Why?
• Have you consulted anyone else about this?  What were their suggestions, or from whom might you be able to seek advice (aside from me)?
• What’s the worst thing that could happen?  What can you do if that does happen?  What preventative measures could be implemented?

When leaders ask questions and solicit solutions, they gain commitment to the execution of that solution since the direct report feels empowered. Secondly, the direct report’s critical thinking ability expands when asked questions.

In Jim Collins’ book, “How the Mighty Fall,” he stresses the importance of question to statement ratio suggesting leaders appoint someone in a team meeting to track how many statements they make and how many questions they ask.  Then, he suggests leaders systematically try to increase the number of questions to double that ratio over the period of a year.

Of course, some problems deserve to be escalated to the leader, but developing the problem-solving skills of others assures that great minds can work together when the problem is significant.

Leaders empower their direct reports by asking questions and communicating confidence in their ability to become successful problem-solvers.

No competent leader consciously micromanages or controls their direct reports’ activities.  Most leaders truly believe they give their direct reports ample autonomy to do their jobs.  Why is it then that most direct reports feel their managers don’t give them the independence they need to do their jobs effectively?  It’s because sub-consciously leaders are reluctant to empower their direct reports and tend to micromanage without recognizing it.

Dr. James Dobson in Dare to Discipline relates the study where social psychologists observed elementary school children in a playground protected by a high fence. The children ran with abandon, playing joyfully within the confines of the fence, unaware and unworried about the busy street just a few feet from the play area. Some theorists decided that the fence was too restrictive, that it inhibited the children, and that they should have more freedom. So, the fence came down.

When the children entered the playground the next day, instead of running with their previous abandon, they tended to huddle together at the center of the play area. Unsure of their limits, they appeared insecure and fearful.

Empowerment works the same way.  Leaders need to consciously define and communicate the boundaries of their direct reports’ tasks, get out of the way, and the direct reports will use their whole playground.  There are four boundaries the leader should establish:

1. Expectations – what does success look like
2. Resources – people, processes, budgeting available
3. Timeframes – hours, deadlines, check-in points
4. Restrictions – budgets, authority level, non-negotiables

Leaders who consciously empower their direct reports by giving them the tools and boundaries to do their jobs then step aside experience more success.

Most leaders have exceptional problem solving skills – that’s generally what got them to their leadership position; however, when providing course correction feedback to direct reports, skip the problem solving and ask the direct report to come up with a solution.

Course correction feedback should focus on the direct report’s behavior AND their responsibility to change it.  The leader’s job is point out the correction, offer encouragement, and solicit a behavior change.  The natural tendency will be for the leader to offer solutions – don’t do it.  Let the direct report provide the solution; there will be a greater chance getting the wanted behavior change.

Some examples:

“Tim, we really appreciate you attending the management meetings, but when you raise your voice and sneer at Joe, the team respects you less.  What can you do next time?”

“Sue, I like all your hard work, but when you show up late for work, we all think you don’t care about the team.  What can you do to be at work on time each day?”

“Joe, great sales call yesterday, but when you order a martini for lunch, our clients might question our professionalism.  How might you handle the next client lunch?”

Leaders who empower their direct reports to offer course correction solutions will experience future successes.

Do people dislike Monday morning because they are disappointed the weekend is over, or because they dread the week ahead?

There’s not much a leader can do about the disappointment direct reports feel when the weekend is over but they can help make the start of the week less dreadful by helping them understand their job’s priorities.

Leaders can use a job accountability matrix to identify the three to five major parts or buckets of the job. Once these accountabilities have been identified, rank them in the order in which the direct report should think about them at the beginning of the week.

Helping directs reports REALLY understand the order of importance of their job accountabilities allows them to focus on what’s important and relieves some of their anxiety over the week ahead.

Leaders who empower their direct reports with rank-ordered job accountabilities experience more success.