Engaging your team as a leader is a relatively new idea. When I first started work in the early 70s, none of my bosses spent a nanosecond thinking about they could engage their staff as a leader. What they were thinking about was catching mistakes, incompetence, error and willful negligence, before these problems went nuclear. That meant micro managing everyone. “Management by walking around” meant checking up on people. The construct was that the team were problematic and the boss needed to have forensic skills to stop problems escalating. That was the age of the hero boss, who was the best at everything, knew more than everyone else and could do it all. That won’t fly today because technology has made business so much more complex.

Back in 1971 Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon noted, “ a wealth of information would create a poverty of attention”. This is where we bosses are today, with hand held devices which keep us permanently connected through the flood release valves of the internet. We are time poor, handling trouble aplenty, struggling to keep up with market shifts and spending too much time on Clubhouse. What this translates into is bosses are too busy to engage their staff properly. Unlike the 70s when it wasn’t a “thing”, engagement is known today and expected. We are doing a poor job by design today rather than through brutal ignorance.

There are three useful foundation tools we can apply to spark the process of engaging our staff. Engagement levels are closely calibrated with how well the direction, values and culture of the organisation synchronise with those of the individuals in the team. Here is the tricky bit – how well informed is the busy, busy boss about the team members’ agreement with the firm’s direction, their value set and the culture they want for their workplaces?

This is where the “poverty of attention” kicks in and bosses don’t know much about their team, because they never ask. There is scant time for asking questions when you are busy raining orders down like missiles on the team. We can create connections with our team members by asking factual questions about where they were raised, how many in their family, where they went to university, etc. We may find commonalities of experience or gain insights into what has made this team member the person they are today.

We need to have this information as a base, but we need to go deeper to help us understand the way they think. That means using causative questions. These are enquiries such as, “why did you choose to study geography at university” or “why did you choose to join that company” or “why did you get involved with parachute jumping as a hobby?”. You get the idea. These questions reveal motives for decisions and inform about priorities.

The third tool is asking value-based questions. Our values drive our decisions and carve out our behaviour. For companies this is often where the wheels come off. The rhetoric about what the company stands for and the leadership behaviours don’t line up. There is nothing like tough times to reveal the firm and the boss’s true colours.

These are not immediate questions we would ask, because they can feel intrusive. Imagining you will engage someone by getting to know them better and leading off with a question such as “tell me about a turning point in your life” is not going to have the desired effect. We need to be building the trust over time and once we have gotten to know them reasonably well, we can then ask deeper questions. We can enquire, “thinking back to the way things have gone in your life, would you do things differently?” or “what have been the high points of your accomplishments so far?”, etc.

Things are in constant flux and a conversation held eighteen months ago may have been overtaken by a series of events in the meantime. So we have to have to make chances to keep engaging with our team to keep up to date on where they are in their thinking, what are their current primary values and recent experiences.

Less time on Clubhouse and more chatting with the team will do a lot more for the engagement of your people and will help to drive toward achieving the organisations goals.

We are recognised for our capabilities and potential and promoted into our first leadership role. We have been given charge over our colleagues and now have additional responsibilities. In many cases we don’t move into a pure “off the tools” leadership role. We are more likely to be a player/leader hybrid, because we have our own clients and also produce revenue outcomes. One of the biggest difficulties is knowing how to balance the roles of “doer” and “urger”.

Jealousy, bruised egos, sabotage, mild insurrection can be found amongst our former colleagues as we are now their new boss. There will be some who feel the organisation has made a massive error and they should have been the one promoted. Their enthusiasm for striving for the greater good has become diminished and results begin to suffer. The more Machiavellian may be thinking how they can unseat the new boss, by lowering outcomes enough, so that it damages the new boss’s credibility, without getting themselves fired. They are happy to spend long hours conspiring with others to calculate the nexus of those two points.

The danger here is we double down on our own production because we have more control over that and we actually don’t lead. We are busy with dealing with all the accoutrements of power, exciting stuff like approving leave applications, tracking sick leave, filling out reports and general paperwork which is the bane of a leader’s life.

Leaders have four main jobs. Set the strategy, create the culture, maintain the machine so it runs on time and on budget and we build our people. When we were team members we were given guidance and direction by the boss, now we are the boss. Are we sufficiently knowledgeable and talented enough to take the organisation in the right direction? Are we relying on what we knew before we became the boss? Are we studying, reading, listening to podcasts, watching TED talks and doing everything we can to better educate ourselves for the different demands of this leadership role? If we are busy, busy, busy working on our new leader tasks or servicing our own clients, we may not be devoting the time needed to grow.

The leader needs to have a long term perspective, but our subordinates tend to have a short term view and invariably so do our superiors. They expect results from us and in short order or they start wondering if they made the right choice about who should have stepped up and be the boss.

The boss has to challenge orthodoxy. If we keep doing the same things, in the same way, we will get the same results. How can we get better results? That is what the boss needs to be working on. We need to persuade others to follow us and to have influence. Often none of those factors were part of the selection process though. We got the job because we were the best salesperson, accountant, engineer, bookkeeper, architect, etc. Actually, many new leaders don’t even like people and much prefer numbers. Many are poor public speakers have big brains and no friends.

Do the new leaders get any training to build on their skill sets and give them the tools to succeed? Often they get nothing. They keep focused on what they can control which are their own clients, don’t build the people and they wind up carrying the team. That works as long as the outcome demands don’t go up. As the ask increases, the gap starts to form between how much one person can do to hit the targets and the total team contribution. Because we haven’t developed our people, they are not filling in the gap between where we are and where we need to be. After three years of this, the new leader gets fired and the cycle begins again with a new person sitting in the boss’s chair. New leaders relying on their companies for their security to remain in their elevated position are pretty optimistic. The tasks of the leader are different to those of the led, so either through personal study or company sponsored training, there must be the investment to grow their capabilities. The mindset element is important, as that is the trigger for changing the required behaviors in order to grow in the new position. So bosses, are you sufficiently investing in your newly promoted leaders. So newly promoted leaders, are you taking responsibility for your own career and investing in yourself. If the answer to either question is “no”, then whether you realise it or not, you have entered the dander zone. Don’t go there.