Managing or Leading?

 

How does it feel for a global CEO to walk into a board meeting with a big decision to make? Only that after ninety minutes there is still no decision.

 

The board discussed it thoroughly. Every perspective was heard. The room took careful note of the intended way forward.  Without endorsing it, the CEO managed the meeting perfectly. Nothing had moved.

 

Why does this happen? The process isn’t the problem. The agenda was clear. Supporting data was adequate. The discussion was structured and civil and thorough. But there is a problem. Below the structure and civility, the CEO didn’t check what message had landed. Those listening didn’t speak out compellingly for or against the proposal. The result?  Fog instead of clarity. Because something was happening beneath the discussion that wasn’t revealed through the discussion.

 

A senior partner protecting a position they had held publicly for three years. A regional leader whose firm would bear a disproportionate cost of the decision going one way. A board chair managing the temperature of the room rather than prioritising the direction of the organisation. This remained hidden. All of it was felt. By not intervening to raise these unspoken points, the conversation remained opaque.

 

The CEO managed to avoid disagreement rather than create a compelling endorsement of the proposal. Leading and managing a room are different. Managing prioritises everyone is comfortable. Leading prioritises moving something forward. Your board doesn’t need better management.

 

It needs someone courageous enough to hear the answers to the difficult questions and get things moving!

 

Reference:

Chris Rawden’s Post on LinkedIn