We all know stories about CEOs who swoop in with a pile of ridiculous ideas, stir up the sediment that had just finished settling since the last tumultuous visit, cause lots of anxiety among the people who do the actual work, and then complain that their unworkable strategy isn’t getting done.
I have a different story to tell.
I used to work for a man named Walter Laessig at Thompson Publishing Group. I’m not sure if his title was CEO or Acting President, but he was doing the job of a CEO. His method was very simple but very effective.
Walt would gather all the department heads for a weekly meeting. He’d go around the room and ask each person what was going on, what obstacles they were facing, and if they had any plans. This often exposed inter-departmental issues, which were addressed in the room.
He didn’t tell us what to do. He created alignment without micromanaging. The department heads created their own to-do lists through the group conversation. Walt took careful notes about what each of us were doing and how we planned to address problems.
The next meeting he’d ask how we were doing with each of those items, and ask us to prioritize them in light of company goals.
There was no yelling. No criticisms. No judgment at all.
Walt knew that none of us wanted to walk into that meeting and admit, “yeah, I promised to do something about that and I haven’t.”
We set the agenda. He provided accountability, and sometimes pointed us to resources that might help, or ask some other department head to help out.
A lot got done because of that very simple strategy.
Decades later, software developers would popularize stand-up meetings built around three questions: What are you working on? What’s blocking you? What will you do next? Walt was doing essentially the same thing long before it became fashionable.
Effective leaders don’t have to have the answers. They create an environment where competent people can identify problems, make commitments in front of their peers, and be held accountable for progress.
The CEO isn’t the genius who solves everything. He’s the manager who creates an environment where the people closest to the problem can solve things.
Walt’s method depends on believing that department heads are competent, smart, hard-working, and desire the company to succeed. I would ask, if you don’t think that about your managers, why are they still working for you?
