The invisible contract really resonates with me — especially the part about it being an accumulation of small things.
I've seen this play out. A leader's words and actions drift apart, little by little. They say they're handing something over, but end up taking it back. As those small moments pile up, the person on the receiving end starts to feel, "Ah, I'm not really trusted here."
And before you know it, that turns into "I guess there's no real reason for me to do this." Once that happens, something like the drive to think and act for yourself quietly drains away.
The "quiet erosion" you describe might unfold exactly like this — from the inside of the person on the receiving end.
You landed on something, from my perspective, is very "real" emotionally and psychologically, when you write about people interpreting, "Ah, I'm not really trusted here."
It's a disappointing, discouraging, upsetting or depressing feeling.
That's not only costly to the recipient but unknowingly to the leader or colleague whose approach helped create that meaning.
This too is so good because it seems to be a natural byproduct: "I guess there's no real reason for me to do this."
Thank you for your thoughtful response to the topic.
I suspect many leaders think they're honoring Article III because they're delegating tasks. But ownership and delegation aren't the same thing. Delegation is "do this." Ownership is "make decisions about this." Most organizations are comfortable with the first and truly terrified of the second.
That's absolutely an important distinction, Neela (how are you??). That assumption that often gets made by leadership is incorrect. Team members can make it clear to them if they are allowed.
The emotional, psychological gap is wide between those two points on a line. And I agree, "terrified of the second."
The invisible contract really resonates with me — especially the part about it being an accumulation of small things.
I've seen this play out. A leader's words and actions drift apart, little by little. They say they're handing something over, but end up taking it back. As those small moments pile up, the person on the receiving end starts to feel, "Ah, I'm not really trusted here."
And before you know it, that turns into "I guess there's no real reason for me to do this." Once that happens, something like the drive to think and act for yourself quietly drains away.
The "quiet erosion" you describe might unfold exactly like this — from the inside of the person on the receiving end.
You landed on something, from my perspective, is very "real" emotionally and psychologically, when you write about people interpreting, "Ah, I'm not really trusted here."
It's a disappointing, discouraging, upsetting or depressing feeling.
That's not only costly to the recipient but unknowingly to the leader or colleague whose approach helped create that meaning.
This too is so good because it seems to be a natural byproduct: "I guess there's no real reason for me to do this."
Thank you for your thoughtful response to the topic.
I suspect many leaders think they're honoring Article III because they're delegating tasks. But ownership and delegation aren't the same thing. Delegation is "do this." Ownership is "make decisions about this." Most organizations are comfortable with the first and truly terrified of the second.
Happy Friday Michael
I hope you had a good week :)
That's absolutely an important distinction, Neela (how are you??). That assumption that often gets made by leadership is incorrect. Team members can make it clear to them if they are allowed.
The emotional, psychological gap is wide between those two points on a line. And I agree, "terrified of the second."
I hope you had a good week too, always, Neela. :)
Happy Monday Michael
Thank you so much