.jpg)
The Bosshole® Chronicles
The Bosshole® Chronicles
Stand On Your Square: Why Leadership Clarity Matters
Clarity isn't just a leadership buzzword—it's the difference between victory and defeat. In this continuation of leadership lessons from Gettysburg, host John Broer unpacks how ambiguous communication can derail even the most talented teams. Drawing parallels between Robert E. Lee's fateful directive to General Richard Ewell in 1863 and modern workplace challenges, John reveals the profound consequences of leadership language that leaves room for interpretation.
HERE ARE MORE RESOURCES FROM REAL GOOD VENTURES:
Never miss a good opportunity to learn from a bad boss...
Click HERE to get your very own Reference Profile. We use The Predictive Index as our analytics platform so you know it's validated and reliable. Your Reference Profile informs you of your needs, behaviors, and the nuances of what we call your Behavioral DNA. It also explains your work style, your strengths, and even the common traps in which you may find yourself. It's a great tool to share with friends, family, and co-workers.
Follow us on Instagram HERE and make sure to share with your network!
Follow us on Twitter HERE and make sure to share with your network!
Provide your feedback HERE, please! We love to hear from our listeners and welcome your thoughts and ideas about how to improve the podcast and even suggest topics and ideas for future episodes.
Visit us at www.realgoodventures.com. We are a Talent Optimization consultancy specializing in people and business execution analytics. Real Good Ventures was founded by Sara Best and John Broer who are both Certified Talent Optimization Consultants with over 50 years of combined consulting and organizational performance experience. Sara is also certified in EQi 2.0. RGV is also a Certified Partner of Line-of-Sight, a powerful organizational health and execution platform. RGV is known for its work in leadership development, executive coaching, and what we call organizational rebuild where we bring all our tools together to diagnose an organization's present state and how to grow toward a stronger future state.
Welcome back to all of our friends out there in The Bossh ole Transformation Nation. This is your host, John Broer, and I'm going to be dropping an episode, a continuation of the experience at Gettysburg. If you listened, a couple of weeks ago I was live from the battle at Gettysburg doing some leadership development and this is a continuation of that. Hope you like it.
John Broer:The Bossh ole Chronicles are brought to you by Real Good Ventures the talent optimization firm, helping organizations diagnose their most critical people and execution issues with world-class analytics. Make sure to check out all the resources in the show notes and be sure to follow us and share your feedback. Enjoy today's episode.
John Broer:Good to have you back, everybody, and I just wanted to take a little bit of time to drop this episode in, based on some pretty powerful leadership lessons. I think that would be helpful for all of our managers and supervisors out there. But a few lessons that have sort of resurfaced for me since my most recent activity or my most recent visit to the battlefield at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. If any of you tuned in, a couple of weeks ago I did a live from the battlefield episode. I was fortunate enough to be the guest of one of our clients, Marco's Franchising. Thank you to my friend and colleague Rod Sanders, Chief People Officer at Marco's Franchising, for inviting me to be a part of it. And the event at Gettysburg is really the capstone event for their internal leadership program. It's a wonderful cohort. They put a lot of effort and a lot of resources behind their leadership development program and it pays dividends. I mean, they are the fastest growing pizza franchise in the country, started in Toledo, Ohio, my hometown. There were two really big things that I've been thinking about as a result of that event and just a quick recap. Marco's works with an organization, a consulting practice called Diamond Six. Colonel Jeffrey McCausland is the founder of it took us around the battlefield for the day and used that as a backdrop to understand leadership dynamics between the Confederate Army and also the Union Army in those three days in July in 1863 in Gettysburg. But two things really jumped out at me and they have to do with unclear and inconsistent directives that you get from a manager or a leader. I think all of us can attest to how frustrating it is to get orders or directives or expectations from a manager or supervisor that one are unclear and ambiguous or inconsistent over time, and I've got two examples for you. So the first one has to do with unclear or ambiguous directives, and I'm pulling this directly from what happened in Gettysburg, and if any of you study a little bit about the Battle of Gettysburg, I mean it is a fascinating dynamic.
John Broer:We actually used AI to help hypothesize what would be the reference profiles, the PI reference profiles of the key leaders in Gettysburg, and there were actually two that I want to reference. First of all, Robert E Lee. Robert E Lee, of course, was the overall commander of the Confederate Army, the Army of Northern Virginia Army, and he was beloved, educated at West Point. Interestingly enough, most of these generals were educated at West Point, so they all had a very similar briefcase. Remember, we talk about head, heart and briefcase. How those skills in the briefcase are deployed all depends on what's in the head, the behavioral and the cognitive wiring. But we used AI to hypothesize what do we think the reference profiles were for some of the key leaders. So for Robert E Lee, we know that, based on AI's research, that he was probably on our competing values matrix in the upper right-hand corner, along with Captains, Mavericks, Venturers and Persuaders. There was some hint of scholar characteristics, so he would have been on that right side of the competing values matrix, somewhere between the innovation and agility and the results and discipline group.
John Broer:Now, just to give a little bit of history, Robert E Lee, his literally right-hand man, was Stonewall Jackson. And of course, Stonewall Jackson has a storied history of success on the battlefield, even before the North and the South split. But one of the things that was really apparent is that there was a very strong chemistry, working relationship between Robert E Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Well, Stonewall Jackson, prior to Gettysburg, actually was wounded. He lost his left arm and died shortly thereafter. Robert E Lee was either quoted as saying or he wrote down Jackson has lost his left arm, I have lost my right. And that's how reliant Robert E Lee was on Stonewall Jackson. Now Stonewall Jackson is out of the picture and the Confederate Army starts to descend on Gettysburg.
John Broer:Who actually came in to, who was elevated to replace Stonewall Jackson is a very different type of leader. As a matter of fact, we did the same thing. Stonewall Jackson would have been in that, you know, innovation and agility quadrant much like Robert E Lee. Maybe there were a lot of similarities. They thought the same, they had some similar strategic perspectives, if you will, General Richard Ewell very different. The research came back that he would have been more in the process and precision type of group. So this would have been Guardians, Operators, Specialists and Artisans. Those are folks that are highly precise, focused on accuracy, tend to be a bit more risk averse and I know we're talking about war, but I just bear with me here for a second. But it's interesting how this plays out. I mean risk averse or cautious, with risk meaning probably in battle, making some very informed decision before putting your troops at risk. So what happened was early on the 1st of July 1863, Ewell was in position just on the outskirts of Gettysburg and the Union Army was actually in retreat back through Gettysburg and starting to move toward Little Round Top, toward the latter part or toward the end of Cemetery Ridge. It's just one of the geographic features. There's Seminary Ridge, Cemetery Ridge, point being Robert E Lee went to General Richard Ewell and, by the way, Ewell's troops got there later in the day.
John Broer:And one of the things you have to know is that fighting at night in that period of time was just something you didn't do. I mean, it was highly dangerous, it was a high risk scenario and he didn't have a lot of people. The bulk of the Confederate army had not yet arrived. So anyway, Lee went to Ewell and said I do not want a general attack on the Union army, not until more of our troops get here. That's another story, because it actually did happen.
John Broer:Now number one no general attack, like a large scale attack, okay. But what he did say he wanted him to seize the high ground in front of him. That's where the Union army was going to be. If you find it practicable to do so, okay, that's how they talked in those days. So he essentially said no general assault, but seize the high ground and take it away from the Union army if you find it practicable to do so. Don't attack one way, but possibly press an attack or put pressure on them in this way if and here's the unclear directive if you find it practicable to do so.
John Broer:So what General Ewell did? He decided not to press the attack and he made that decision for a number of reasons. Again, it was late in the day, he did not have all of his artillery and troops to bear an attack or press the attack on the high ground where the Union was ultimately going to be. Now, remember, the Union was making its way back through Gettysburg and behind them was Little Round Top or the high ground at Cemetery Ridge. So Ewell made the decision not to press the attack and, by the way, something you should know, Robert E Lee was known for giving somewhat vague and unclear orders, in other words, leaving it open to the general or the person to whom he was giving these orders make the decision.
John Broer:Now, my assertion is that doing that with Stonewall Jackson, because he knew that Stonewall Jackson was a more aggressive, risk-taking, proactive individual, based on what we understand from history and the bit of research we've done, that directive probably would have had a different result if it was Stonewall Jackson, and there are a lot of people that think that General Ewell. Totally different result Ewell, who is more cautious by nature and did not find it practicable to do so, did not pursue the advance. Well, what happens is the union does move back into the high ground up on Little Round Top and, of course, that high ground, or what they would call good ground, turned out to be a huge advantage for the union and totally changed the nature of that day, actually the next three days. Okay, so what can we take from that? Well, what we can take from that is that managers, supervisors, leaders, if you are not clear about your directives and your expectations and your orders if you will, then you can't be upset when you don't get the results you desire. Because it is widely thought that Lee really wanted him to seize that higher ground and take it away from the union. But it wasn't really clear to General Ewell and he didn't do it. And when you look at the rationale behind Ewell not taking those risks, it makes sense because once again he did not have his full artillery, full complement of troops, and it was late in the day, which compounded the difficulty of pressing an attack.
John Broer:So unclear and vague instructions and directives serve no one and no good purpose. But you can see this dynamic playing itself out in today's workplace. So my encouragement to our managers and supervisors out there if there's something you need to have done, be very clear in your communication. Be very clear in your communication. Clarity is absolutely essential and over-communicating that clarity is also really critical. That was my example from the battlefield experience a couple weeks ago. But it made me think of another thing that happened to me actually, and it has to do with very inconsistent directives and expectations. So this is years ago.
John Broer:I was working for a company I was running the sales program and another vice president, I was a vice president, another vice president and I were given the directive by the CEO to shut down a small division of the company that had been acquired more recently. This was a small division, it was a company that really wasn't a core element of what we did. It was such a departure from our core business. So the CEO was going to be going out of town and we were given the directive to meet with the team of the smaller division and let them know it was going to be shut down. Now that was really clear. All right, we knew exactly what we needed to do. And this other vice president and I, we got together and we were very, very thoughtful. We were thinking about how do we best approach this? How do we do this in the most humane way possible to give these people some runway and opportunity to start to figure out what their next step is going to be and set the date, brought them together and we shared the news. Okay, exactly what we were asked to do. So we did this. Obviously, it was hard for them to hear, but we also let them know that we had a plan in place to help them make a transition.
John Broer:Not long after that, we had a phone call with the CEO, who was on vacation, and just said hey, just want to let you know, we shared the news shutting down the division and we're taking the steps necessary to help them move on. And this is what he said. He said what are you talking about? That's not what I wanted. I said okay, I mean, we were on a phone call, on a conference call, and this other VP and I looked at each other and it was like two wide-eyed deer in the headlights thinking what did he just say? I mean, honestly, did we hear the same thing? And we clarified to say you asked us to do this and we did it. And he said that is not what I asked you to do. Now, if it were just me relaying this story, would I heard the same thing and we were on the same mission? There was no misunderstanding. What he did was change his mind or chose to remember differently what he communicated to us. Now this happens.
John Broer:It created a horrible and very, very awkward situation and we had to backtrack. We had to go back to the team and say, listen, there have been some developments and this is actually what's going to happen, and we just looked stupid and incompetent. Now this is where my encouragement to managers and supervisors and leaders when you make a decision, stand behind that decision, all right, don't cower away from it. Stand on your square and confirm that this is exactly what we're going to do, which we did, by the way. I mean that was very clear. But now, at this point, after the fact, are we going to challenge him on this? I mean we did. I mean I remember saying to him in our conversation week before last you were absolutely clear that you were going to shut this division down and no, no, no, that's not what I said at all. Nothing but breed discontent, contempt, sometimes from the people that are on the receiving end of this confusing information, and just overall disengagement. So I wanted to just drop this episode in there because, again, you are never too old to learn how to refine and improve your leadership and coaching and development skills, people-focused skills, development skills, people-focused skills, and in the work we do with our clients, especially around leadership team development. We have some just remarkable leadership teams with whom we get to work, and on a very consistent basis. We will employ and you've heard us talk about this some of the amazing work of Patrick Lencioni.
John Broer:And if you're going to develop a cohesive leadership team, you have to have clarity. You have to be able to identify with great clarity what are our expectations, who's doing what, what is our mission and how are we moving forward. And you have to over-communicate. You cannot over-communicate that level of clarity, because if you lack that clarity, you lack the results that you hope to get. And then the other part of it, too, is stand on your square. If you make a decision, own the decision, even if it was a bad one, or you decide you know what? I know I wanted it that way a couple of weeks ago, but I've changed my mind, which I guess is which, of course, is anybody's prerogative but it really doesn't make for a strong and cohesive culture if people can't see their leadership of one mind, if you will, or one mission or one message.
John Broer:One of the other things we talk about when it comes to leadership team development is that comes to leadership, team development is that when the leadership team comes together and you're focusing on team number one, I mean that again is taken right out of Lencioni's book the Five Dysfunctions of a Team. If you haven't read that, you have to read it. But team number one isn't the team you manage, it is the team of which you are a member. So if you're a member of a leadership team, an executive team, you need to be talking about these things and have great clarity and commitment. And, by the way, while you may disagree about policy or procedure, when all is said and done you can disagree but you commit. You know that disagree but commit is a very powerful element of team cohesiveness. And as long as you have a voice and you have a level of psychological safety where you can call out mistakes, challenge the status quo, ultimately that team will be strengthened. But what does not strengthen a team are unclear or inconsistent directives and expectations. It just serves to confuse things and things begin to break down.
John Broer:Whether it's in 1863 or more recently in my history, in my work history, these are incredibly valuable lessons and I just wanted to share them with you as well. This is what makes for stronger managers and supervisors in helping them stay out of the boss hole zone. Well, listen everybody. I really appreciate you letting me continue my lessons from Gettysburg. Great experience. I could see this being something that we would take our executive teams to do as a capstone event. Absolutely amazing. Well, I thank you for listening i n. Keep sharing our episodes with your friends and colleagues. We really appreciate the way our audience is growing out there. The Bossh ole Transformation Nation is absolutely growing and we will see you next time on the Bossh ole Chronicles.
John Broer:Thanks very much for checking out this episode of the Bossh ole Chronicles. It was so good to have you here, and if you have your own Bossh ole story that you want to share with the Bossh ole Transformation Nation, just reach out. You can email us at mystory@thebossholechronicles. com. Again, mystory@thebossholechronicles. com. We'll see you next time.