Jeremy:

I've only been in this company four years now, and a lot of the folks in our company start at the bottom and work their way up.

Victoria:

This is Jeremy, the vice president of construction at an engineering and construction company. He's working with Chip Hugh, an Arbinger coach, to navigate his current leadership challenges. Before joining his current organization, Jeremy logged 24 years in the U.S. Navy, developing many of the skills he needed to be successful in his new role. However, even four years into his position, he still feels like an outsider, like his experience isn't being recognized.

Jeremy:

And so, I'm kind of the first one that's come in at a senior leadership role. And that may be to my detriment, in their mind as well. Discounting all of the stuff that I've done in my past.

Victoria:

Through the course of their time together, Jeremy and Chip explore the mindset that causes—in Jeremy's case—avoidance, a lack of curiosity, and self-doubt that can keep even seasoned leaders stuck. The idea behind these coaching episodes of Leading Outward is that you can see some of yourself in Jeremy. That his struggles are all of our struggles. And that through direct and honest introspection, dialogue, and action, we're capable of the change needed to transform our workplaces and ourselves.

Welcome to Leading Outward, the Arbinger Institute's podcast where we explore the tools and ideas we've used for over 45 years to help people solve their toughest leadership and organizational challenges by leading with an outward mindset—seeing people as people. I'm Victoria Trammel, an Arbinger facilitator, and I'll be here as a guide throughout this coaching episode. While the actual coaching takes place between Jeremy and Chip, sometimes I'll pop in and chat directly with Chip to help us unpack everything.

Chip:

How do you feel about being the only person to come into the organization from the outside and step into a senior leadership role?

Jeremy:

I was told on day one it's going to be a huge challenge, and four years later, I may be 50% there. It has been a challenge. What's frustrating is, I've got 24 years of military experience that ties directly to our operations, but it just gets discounted. It's not looked upon as value to a lot of people in the organization, because I didn't grow up in this organization. So it's very challenging for me. I've spent a lot of time building relationships, building trust, being there for the team. And I think after four years, I see the fruits of my labor, but it's been a challenge.

Chip:

How do you feel when people discount your experience? I mean, 24 years—that's very impressive.

Jeremy:

Extremely frustrating. And I try to be humble about it and look at it from their perspective. They don't know what I did in the military. I can talk about it, but they don't know. They don't understand. So I just continue to be there for the team, being a leader as I always have been. But personally, it's very challenging when my past is discounted.

Victoria (pop-in):

Man, I resonate so much with what Jeremy's talking about here. So, even coming to Arbinger, none of my previous experience I felt like was at all applicable. And so I took this posture of, like—I'm not only the new kid on the block, I don't have any experience or expertise in this area. And so everything that I had done in my career up until this point, not that it was worthless, but it certainly did not carry a whole lot of value stepping into this role. And so because of that, everything was from this "worse than" perspective. So if somebody had an idea that was different than mine, it was like, well, they must know better, right? I can't be a part of this because they certainly have a better idea than I would.

Whereas in previous roles, when I was in the same kind of industry, it was very similar—where it was like, "How dare you discount what I'm bringing to the table? What makes you think that I don't already know that?" And I would show up that way so often, like before I even would start meetings. I would already have this brewing sense of, "Just wait. Just wait. They're going to try to explain to me something that I already know, and they're going to pretend like I don't know it." And I think back on those experiences and I'm like, man, I can only imagine what it was like to be with me in those meetings.

When you're coming into a new context, you're carrying all that experience with you. And it's really hard to go from being the expert—being the go-to person, the person who has the solution and answers—to being the new guy.

Chip:

I do think this is fairly common. It's exacerbated when we're inward. When we take an outward perspective, and we can think about the mission and what I'm obligated to provide to my employer and my team, I can set that aside. I can even acknowledge it openly and talk openly about it in such a way that it actually takes the power away from that insecurity to undermine and invite self-focus.

So if I'm hearing you correctly, what triggers your frustration is the fact that you feel they don't have what you consider to be due regard for your prior experience, which is extensive. Tell me about a time when you didn't know the things you needed to know, and when you felt judged for it—when you felt minimized for it, diminished in some way.

Jeremy:

Oh, that happened today. Can I use that recent example?

Chip:

Please do.

Jeremy:

I asked a question—why we had divided one crew amongst two crews. And it's a very operational, kind of in-the-weeds question. And the superintendent looked at me and said, "Where in the hell—what rock have you been hiding under? We had four people on this crew fail a drug test, so we had to take them off the crew, and we didn't have enough people to do the job. So we had to take one crew and fill in the other crews and divide it up."

And I said, "Well, that makes sense. But I guess I just wasn't privy to that. I didn't know." And so I was ignorant to the situation, and it was pointed out to me. I said, "You're right. I'm sorry. I didn't know that. I don't know if I've been asleep at the wheel, or maybe I didn't need to know that. But thank you for taking care of it, meeting the mission. I just didn't know." And I was pointed out very clearly, "What rock have you been hiding under?"

Chip:

Yeah, that's a pretty interesting way to deliver feedback. How'd that make you feel?

Jeremy:

Inadequate as a leader. Yeah. I oversee construction and I didn't know that. I didn't feel good when somebody called me out blatantly—"What rock have you been hiding under?"

Chip:

What else do they do that might drive your frustration?

Jeremy:

If it's an issue or a challenge that we're facing, and I just get, "You need to fix it." Help me understand what I need to fix. What's the problem? What's the history? What's the context of it? An example of that was recently we had some material stolen from a job site. And all I was told was, "You need to file a police report." There was a whole bunch of other context around this situation, but all I got was, "You need to file a police report."

And then as we dig into it, there's a lot more information. There could be some nefarious things going on. There could be more people involved, but I wasn't given that information. I was just given, "Some material was stolen, file a police report." And it's taken me a few weeks to dig into that to find out more information. I don't know that I have the rock-bottom truth, but there's a lot more to that. And I know that the information was known at the time, but I was just told to file a police report.

Chip:

I can see how that might help someone feel excluded. So, I'm curious—when you're getting this information kind of on a drip, maybe it feels like it's been edited or attenuated in some way—what do you think's driving that? What's driving their, what appears to be their tendency to not give you the full story? If you had to guess.

Jeremy:

If I had to guess, and how I perceive it is, you know, in our industry, the guy that runs the screw on the back of the paver, right? They started running the screw, and they know how to lay a mat of asphalt, and they've grown up in the industry. Well, I've never ran the screw. And our company is a very hub-and-spoke communication and direction-type organization. So there's a lot of phone calls that are made to individuals back and forth.

And I always joke around that I'm not in the information superhighway, because I'm not on my phone getting phone calls all the time, getting the information. And over the last four years, I've slowly merged into the information superhighway, but it's been a challenge. And I think that is the reason why I just get the drip. I'm not in people's mind the first one they got to call, or call to catch up, or just call to chitchat. The people that have been here 10, 15, 20, 30 years—that's what they know and that's what they do. So I've tried very diligently to ease my way in there and just make phone calls. The conversation and the building trust—it's not my style, but I've tried very hard to do that more and more.

Victoria:

Chip, as I'm listening to Jeremy talk about this and he's talking about how he doesn't know how to do these things, I think back—there was a position that I held where I was deputy program manager on this massive software development contract, and I was about to say I wasn't part of the inner circle. I was not feeling a part of the inner circle. And so what I said to myself was, "Well, that's because I've never been a software developer. I don't have a technical degree. I don't have an advanced degree in a technical field. And so until any of those things have happened, no one is going to take me seriously."

And so what I did then in response was remove myself from those conversations. Maybe not physically, but certainly mentally and emotionally. Because they're not going to take me seriously anyway. I'm not a part of this inner circle, because I haven't done all of these things in a technical field. Therefore, I'm not going to understand what they're talking about because they're not going to explain it to me. They don't think that I'm worthy of their time.

Chip:

That's super powerful, Vic. Up to this point, the problem has been people aren't including him. People are dismissive of him. He's seen that as the problem. But now he's recognizing—and this metaphor of the information superhighway, that's pretty telling. There's some passivity implied there in the way that he's considering being part of this information network. He's been trying to get on the highway. So you see the passive nature of that—it's like, "Well, look, until people start inviting me into this network, I'm not going to have the information that I need. The reason they're not reaching out to me and giving me the information is because I haven't ran the screw. I'm not part of the team."

And what that allows him to do is to evade his responsibility for being intentional about becoming part of the team by reaching out and getting curious. He doesn't have to be curious when he sits back and waits for the people to come to him. He can use the excuse, quite effectively, of them not coming to him as all the reason he needs for not learning the things that he needs to know.

And all that is to say that when I'm carrying around this storyline—and the storyline goes something like, "I'm the kind of person who already is an expert in this field"—then that disinvites me to ask questions that might be considered naive if asked by an expert in that field. So instead, I just sit back and I wait for people to invite me in. And they don't invite me in, which tells me they're the problem. And then I come up with reasons why they're not inviting me in. And of course, the obvious reason is that they just don't value me.

Victoria:

Well, and I think that's the destructive power of an inward mindset, right? Because not only is he creating reasons why people are not including him, I would argue that he's also overinflating the requirements in order to be invited into this organization. It's not that I just have to understand. "I haven't done this one job. I haven't driven the screw. Therefore, I can't be a part of this." Which is what I think is so tricky about inwardness.

Chip:

You said you've never ran the screw. Did I get that right?

Jeremy:

Yep. Never ran the screw.

Chip:

You've been there how many years?

Jeremy:

Four.

Chip:

Four years. What's held you back from learning more about the technical side of the operation?

Jeremy:

Really, no excuse. I go once a week—I do dedicate a day to go out and spend with the crews and ask questions and learn and make sure I understand what the crew's challenges are and how I could help them. But really, time.

Chip:

What other things take up your time? Other priorities? Things that are more important than having a better sense of the technical skills of the people that you lead. What are the priorities getting in the way of that?

Jeremy:

Any one of the other divisions that I oversee. Finances, operations, making sure that we're out bidding work and winning work so that we can create a backlog, logistics, safety for the company, continuous improvement, media relationships—you know, there's quite the gamut of things that consume time. I am the new guy. I got, in my estimation, about eight more years, and then I won't be the new guy.

Chip:

Eight years. So you're going to wait eight years to learn more about—what are you saying?

Jeremy:

No, no. It's our culture. Until you hit the 10- or 12-year mark, you're the new guy in our organization.

Chip:

That's convenient.

Jeremy:

Yeah.

Chip:

I mean, the new guy is not really expected to know a lot.

Jeremy:

Yeah, well, and that's part of it. How can the new guy come in and be in a senior role? It just hasn't happened in our company prior to me. And so it's new for a lot of people.

Chip:

People are aware of your accomplishments in the military. They're aware of your record. Now, you may feel like they give that short shrift, but they know why you were brought in. I just wonder to what degree they might feel that you really haven't transitioned out of the Navy. You're not fully here. You're not fully present. You're not fully in this job because you haven't shown a degree of interest in what they do, and really getting super curious about the technical aspects of the job—the aspects of the job that depend on you doing your job in order for them to be able to do those things. I'm just wondering what they might think about that.

Jeremy, four years is a long time. And I'm not disregarding the cadence of your work or all the responsibilities you have. I'm just curious about the prioritization. I'm curious about what's holding you back from reconsidering those priorities. Are we going to wait another four years to get really curious about these people we find frustrating and disregarding?

Jeremy:

No. When you say "super curious," I have not been super curious. No.

Chip:

Why?

Jeremy:

I don't know that I have a good reason for that.

Victoria (pop-in):

I love this moment from Jeremy. I think this is so honest. And if I was in his shoes, I don't know that I would have been willing to say, "I don't have a good reason." I think I probably would have come up with about 85,000 reasons why I haven't, Chip, and justified to you all the things that I needed to be doing rather than getting curious. I think this is big for relatively early on in your conversation.

Chip:

Yeah. Look, Jeremy kind of becomes my hero here in this moment, because I don't think I would have had the courage to say what he said. It would have been as true for me as it is for Jeremy. I've been in these situations where it's been true. But the fact that he can just be honest about it—because he's smart enough, he's agile enough, he could have come up with an excuse. But he didn't. He just let that all go. And he got to the point where he could actually question himself and be honest about what's happening. And that is the predicate for improving. As a matter of fact, that's the point of our work—is to get people to the point where they can make that admission.

Victoria:

Right. And that allows him to dive a little bit deeper. I mean, just with that one phrase, I feel like he has pierced the veil of his inward mindset. The fact that he is willing to consider that he doesn't have a good reason. What does that mean? He has no justification for not doing the thing he knows he needs to do.

Chip:

That is the pivotal point. That's where we would hope every leader could get to, where they go, "Man, I don't really have a good reason." If I'm not willing to question, "Hey, where am I wrong? Where am I not seeing this correctly? Where have I misstepped? Where have I not acted in the way that I feel I should act in this situation? Where have I not taken my responsibility?"—if I can't ask that question, I'm not after the truth. I'm after justification for staying where I'm at. And I think that's what makes him my hero here.

I want to explore this a little bit. When you feel like people aren't having due regard for your vast experience, your expertise, when you feel like they're excluding you from conversations or editing information and that they're not wanting to collaborate with you—when you're feeling that way, how would you describe those folks? Like, if it was just you and I talking over a root beer, what would you say?

Jeremy:

What would I say about them?

Chip:

Yeah. How do you view them? People that aren't including you on collaboration, people that aren't honoring your expertise, people that don't seem to want to share the unvarnished truth with you.

Jeremy:

I get very frustrated with them. I kind of see them as an outsider for me, in an odd way. I respect them, but then I don't get that respect back, and that's what frustrates me. So I don't look down at them. I don't think of them differently. I just get frustrated, because I don't see why that level of respect is not reciprocated back.

Chip:

What I'm hearing you say is that you experience them as knowledgeable, in the technical sense. You also experience them as frustrating, as outsiders, and as people who are disrespectful.

Jeremy:

Yes.

Chip:

How do you respond to that? How does that show up in your behaviors?

Jeremy:

I would say that I end up getting short and curt with them. And maybe I try to be right instead of get it right. I try to exude more of an authoritarian leadership instead of collaborative.

Chip:

You mentioned that you prefer collaborative.

Jeremy:

Yes. And then I just conflicted myself. That is what I prefer. But when I don't get respected, or my experience doesn't get respected or gets discounted—the red flag is, I become short. I become curt. And then, "Hey, this is what we're going to do," instead of my desire to be collaborative.

Chip:

You're recognizing that as a red flag. That's curious, now that we're talking through it.

Jeremy:

Absolutely. I haven't thought about it in this perspective, but that is absolutely a red flag. Instead of being collaborative, I become more dictatorial.

Chip:

Yeah. There's just a lack of trust. From their perspective, I'm imagining what I say is not going to matter, because Jeremy's going to make up his own mind. He's going to do what he wants to do, and not take our thoughts or ideas or suggestions into account. He's already made his mind up.

Between this session and the next session, I want you to think deeply about what's held you back from being more curious. What holds you back from going out on the front line and simply asking questions, from pulling people in that are doing the technical aspects of the work and getting curious about their challenges, their impediments, their goals.

Victoria:

A few weeks later, Jeremy and Chip got back together for their next session. And the space between coaching sessions is just as valuable as the sessions themselves, because that's where the real work happens. It's where mindset is put to the test, and new ways of thinking start to take hold.

Chip:

What does it mean for you if you don't know it all?

Jeremy:

If I don't know it all, that means I need to ask questions. I need to dig in, and I need to understand. And it's okay for me to not know it all. There's a bunch of this company that I don't know. It's a small miracle, the things that happen every day. But I guess in those situations, I rely on those leaders to execute that piece of the mission that I don't know.

Chip:

But is it really okay for you not to know it all? What I mean by that is, are you okay with being ignorant? Can you sit comfortably in ignorance? What feeling arises in you when you feel like you're ignorant?

Jeremy:

I don't like that feeling. At the root of it, I'm not okay with that. I don't like not knowing, at the very core of that question.

Chip:

I'd be interested in trying to explore where that comes from. Because here's the thing—you're a very intelligent person. So cognitively, you understand that you can't possibly know everything. Not within any domain, even a domain you've dedicated your life to, like leadership. Cognitively. But at the visceral level, it's causing some type of dis-ease. I'm just curious where that comes from.

Jeremy:

It's a great question.

Chip:

I may be way off here, but is there any sense in which, to the degree you feel like you can't do this job, it's impacting your ability to learn? I'm talking about your self-doubt. I'm talking about the self-doubt that you're not talking about. I'm talking about the deep down inside questioning, despite all of the experience to the contrary, of whether or not you can actually do this.

Jeremy:

Yes, those thoughts have crossed my mind for sure.

Chip:

I'm just curious—where does that come from? What experiences have you had that have suggested to you, you're not good enough?

Jeremy:

It probably goes way deep, but probably childhood. I mean, it would go back that far. The childhood piece is just never good enough for my father. Just not good enough. Not fast enough, not strong enough, not smart enough. Just not, not, not. And I think that—well, no, not even probably when—because I've thought about this in the past, and where does that come from? And it all leads back to that "not good enough" as a child, in my father's eyes. That's where I would point it back to.

Victoria (pop-in):

When Jeremy's talking here, my heart hurts, because I think I've had very similar experiences—not necessarily with my dad, but with others. And in a way, as I've reflected on this, it's one of those things that if I want to justify an inward style that I have, I will latch on to the sentiments of others to use those to bolster that justification.

So if I'm in a situation where I feel that I am incapable, it's very easy for me to call up hurtful experiences from my past—my childhood, previous relationships—where I was told I was incapable. And then give those such heavy weight and meaning, that I allow it to shape the way that I view myself moving forward. Because these people who were so significant in my life and my formation had this opinion. Therefore, it must be true, because that's how I'm feeling right now.

It's a cyclical thing, right? I'm feeling this way, so I look for justification that reinforces it. And the further that I can go back, the better—because that means that there's a quote-unquote history of me being this way. So that it then justifies me being this way.

And it's frustrating, and it's disappointing, and it's encouraging all at the same time to know that there are things that are horrible that happen to people. No doubt. Like, factually, there are terrible things that happen. But we have so much power over the way that we take those words and those experiences and how we let it shape our future. But it's so easy to get stuck. And I think that's the thing that interests me here when Jeremy's talking is, what's it going to look like for him to get unstuck?

Chip:

When we're stuck, when we're looking back on our relationships and trying to make meaning of what we perceive as suffering—especially at the hands of others—we're doing this for a reason. Jeremy, me, you, all of us. We have reasons why we tell ourselves these stories. We're protecting ourselves from some perceived threat. But you're right in saying that we have more control than we think we do.

It feels scary, because I'm tempted to think, "Well, look, the things that happen to me define me." But it's really the meaning that I make of what happens to me. That's what defines me. And that's what allows me to take control of the situation and not import it into my current reality. It could be true that people have mistreated me, and they're culpable for that. But I'm responsible for the meaning that I give to what they did.

Sometimes people will mistreat you. That's what people do, to varying degrees. We're hard on one another. But for me then to take that mistreatment, and to accept that as a verdict against my worth—that's a corruption of reality. That's saying, like, "This person has power over me. I've given them power over me to determine who I am and how much value I bring to the world." Why would we do that? One reason we would do that is to avoid responsibility for improving. And if I really am broken and powerless, then I'm not required to be better. I'm not required to get unstuck. I'm just the perpetual victim.

And this isn't discounting people who are actually victimized by things. People are really victimized by things. But I have the power to not let my past dictate my present or my future. I have the power not to continually re-victimize myself by reliving that narrative, and by, again, importing it into my current relationships.

Once Jeremy, or you, or I, or anyone can see that—can see our responsibility, and understand it, and see the way we're disabling ourselves—we can take responsibility for changing the meaning we give those past experiences. And that's the key, in my mind, to unleashing the power of what we're calling the outward mindset. Being able to take on responsibility, to not self-excuse, to not use those past traumas, those past incidents, as a reason for my current avoiding of obligation, or my current dehumanizing of other people, or my current accusations that I make against folks.

McKinlay:

Hey everyone, McKinlay here, one of the hosts of Leading Outward. Since this is one of our first episodes, I wanted to give you a quick lay of the land. You're currently listening to one of our coaching episodes. We also release narrative episodes that explore a single leadership challenge. And we've created these two formats so that you're getting both ideas and a chance to see what incorporating those ideas looks like in practice. We're so glad you're here. And if someone's come to mind while you've been listening, it's probably because what you're hearing could help them solve points of friction in their life. Invite them to learn alongside us by sharing this episode with them.

Chip:

In the Navy, you were really good at your job.

Jeremy:

I was highly competent. Yes.

Chip:

24 years is a long time to be highly competent at something, to be functioning at a high level—and then to step away from that into a new role with a bunch of unknowns. I'm just trying to imagine what that would feel like. It's almost like you're leaving this—to use a nautical term—this anchor. What's anchoring you?

Jeremy:

Yes.

Chip:

Maybe that could even be part of your identity at some point, right? The competent person who gets things done.

Jeremy:

Yes, absolutely.

Chip:

I'm going to run something by you. I am sensing kind of conflicting objectives. Personal objectives, objectives that you have. And I've seen this in myself before, by the way. There's the stated objective that you have. One, which is to increase your level of competence. In the past four years of being here, you've recognized, "Hey, there are different ways of doing things, different processes in place." And you self-disclosed that you hadn't done as much as you felt you could do, objectively, to learn and to grow in those four years. A bit of knowledge that you feel like you have a sense that you need to dedicate yourself to developing. So that's, like, the stated objective. "I want to grow my competence."

What I find ends up driving our decision-making, and driving our behavior, is often the unstated objectives. The stuff that's under the surface that almost feels unconscious. So if someone says, "Look, I'd like to grow my knowledge, but I'm engaging in behavior that actually doesn't further my stated goal." So I say, "Jeremy, I'd like to learn more about this operation, yet I'm doing things, or not doing things, that run counter to achieving that goal."

So it sounds like madness, right? Like, "Okay, Chip, you say this is what you want. Why are you behaving in a way that's not going to get you what you want?" And what I found, at least in my life, is that often I have a secret mission. Something that's not stated, that's actually driving my decision-making. And it's informed by my mindset. Meaning, you told me that one of your concerns was looking incompetent, looking like you didn't know what you were doing. So think about how that might conflict with becoming more competent. If I say I want to be more competent, and simultaneously I want to be seen as the smartest person in the room, how could that get in the way of me being more competent? What are your thoughts?

Jeremy:

My mind went right away, where if I need to look competent, I might not ask a question. I might not expose and ask a silly question, or dive into something deeper. Even though, in my mind, when somebody says something, I don't necessarily say, "Tell me more." And I've learned that I need to do that more. Instead of, you know, an hour later, "I should have asked that, or I should have dug into that more." I might hold back because I don't want to look incompetent. That's where my mind went right away.

Chip:

To what degree have you found yourself doing that?

Jeremy:

It depends on the situation. But I do it in certain meetings, around certain people. Probably to avoid conflict.

Chip:

That's interesting. In what way does that avoid conflict? Staying willfully ignorant.

Jeremy:

It's my insecurity, because I don't want to look silly asking, "Hey, why is that? What is that process?"

Chip:

I feel like you're working at cross purposes. Like, "I want to be dependable. I want to help people." But at the same time, "I get so stuck." So it's like, "Whoa." Okay. As I'm thinking about this, what does it occur to you to do differently?

Jeremy:

It's like a red flag. When I avoid something, that's where I need to focus my energy.

Chip:

Talk about that more. What do you mean by red flag?

Jeremy:

If there is a situation or a person that I avoid or I put off, that's a red flag. It pops up, if I catch it—because I don't catch them all. If that comes up, that's a trigger. That's a red flag that I need to dig into that. I need to focus on that. Because if I'm avoiding, why am I avoiding?

Chip:

Do you see yourself avoiding often? Does that seem like the primary thing that pops up in these situations? Avoidance.

Jeremy:

It's not primary, but it's prevalent. I don't know if that makes sense. I was doing some thinking about that the last couple of weeks, and I think it's really image self-preservation. And I say that because then I'm not putting myself at risk. I'm not potentially saying something wrong. And I think by avoiding that, I don't have to confront that. And it's preserving my image of myself.

Chip:

What do you think the consequences of that are in your position?

Jeremy:

Oh. Huge. Because in my position, I can't be avoiding problems or people, right? I need to have those conversations. I need to tackle that. I need to be there. I need to be present. I don't need to be avoiding anything.

I do have a mechanism that, if there's something I'm avoiding, I need to put energy into that. Probably over the last couple of years, I've been more self-aware of that. Avoidance equals action for me.

Chip:

How's it been going as far as execution? Has that been almost an automatic response for you? You notice the avoidance, you process that, and then you develop a plan of action and you move toward it. Has that been your process, and how's that been working?

Jeremy:

I wouldn't say it's automatic. It's not just automatic. But when I do, you know, at least once a week, self-reflection—I identify it when I'm thinking through business and relationships and processes that I'm aware of. And if I have that little tingling in my neck that I'm avoiding that, or pushing that off, it's getting lower on the task list—that's where I need to put energy. So it's not automatic. It takes intentional thought on my part to identify that.

Victoria:

After this session, Jeremy took action on the things he and Chip had talked about. And when they got back together, Jeremy shared this powerful experience that highlights what can happen when we turn outward toward the people around us.

Jeremy:

Since you and I talked, I used the outward mindset, and I owned a mistake. We did not get foreman pay right. And so in May we did our annual pay raises. And our foreman pointed out some glaring discrepancies in our calculus. And I said, "Hey, let me take a look at it." And where I failed was, I didn't act quick enough, and probably stuck my head in the sand. Some time went by, and the general superintendent said, "Hey, we've got to solve this." And it's not easy. We can't just throw money at problems. There's a lot of thought that goes into this to get it right.

I said, "Next Friday, I'm going to solve this by next Friday." Well, that manifested itself that the foreman thought that I was going to come talk to him on a Friday. And so I didn't do that. I had some meetings in between to try to get this right. Friday—it was probably about 6:30, 7 o'clock at night—superintendent called me and said, "Hey, did you talk to the foreman today?" And I said, "No." And we got into it. And immediately, I knew that I had negatively impacted the guys that really pay my salary. They are the bread and butter of the company. They get it done. And I had negatively impacted them, whether I came back and told them that they got a different merit raise or they didn't. They wanted and deserved an answer, and I didn't give it to them.

And I will tell you that the rest of that night—at least Saturday through half of Sunday—I was beating myself up pretty bad. It had been very easy for me, as I reflect back on this, to say, "I did not say that I was going to tell the foreman on Friday that I was going to go meet with them." But it happened. That's how it was communicated. And I didn't do something. Then I haven't gotten back to the foreman after some time.

And so the first thing I did Monday morning, I went and talked to the foreman. And said, "Hey, I'm sorry. Here's the date that you will have an answer by." And I got it fixed. And they were appreciative that I came out and told them, "I don't have an answer. The answer isn't no. I'm still working on it. I'm sorry. I've impacted you negatively. I will do better." At the time, I felt that's the only thing that I could do. And I fixed the problem. I think they were happy with the outcome.

Even on the weekend, I was traveling. The three people, the superintendent—I came in, gave a handwritten note and said, "Hey, I screwed up. I'm sorry. You deserve better. I will be better. We will get this right." That's basically all I told them.

Chip:

How do you feel on the other side of that?

Jeremy:

I should have done that way earlier. I feel I let people down. And that took away some trust capital that I had built up in the organization. That specific instance, I didn't do what I said I was going to do. That really impacted major players in the company. So on a personal level, I don't feel good about that. But I learned a huge lesson—that I got to understand how I impact people. And I just wasn't equating that time period between when the foreman brought the information to me, and this really went south quickly. During that time, I didn't fully appreciate how it was impacting them. They just wanted an answer. Whether it was, "No, I'm still working on it," or, "Here's a raise"—they just wanted an answer back.

Chip:

You took a situation, and you mentioned that it took away some of the trust capital you built up. But in my estimation, the way that you shifted there, you actually took a situation that could have been very negative and you turned it into an opportunity to build trust. I hope you recognize that.

Jeremy:

Yes. Yeah.

Chip:

Because you came into this—there's adversity, there's conflict, there's concern, there's people that feel marginalized maybe, perhaps, or unappreciated. And then you come in, and simply no excuses made. "I dropped the ball on this." And further than that, you said, "This is what I'm going to do to make it right." So I'm going to guess, Jeremy, that they walked away probably trusting you more—which sounds totally counterintuitive.

Jeremy:

Yeah. Yeah, I think they did.

Victoria (pop-in):

This is huge for Jeremy. I think it's so tremendous, the fact that one, this naturally occurred to him when he was able to figure out what he was supposed to do; and two, that once he got to that point, he did it.

Chip:

When we can move from an inward to an outward mindset, we can acknowledge something that went wrong, we take ownership and accountability for it, reconcile the relationship, and move on. Letter writing never occurred to him when he stepped out of line with his values. But once he realigns with what matters—the things he really believes are important—once he does that, all of a sudden it occurs to him: the right thing to do is write a letter. That wasn't even on his radar before. He's not making a sacrifice. He's not martyring himself. He's just simply doing what outwardness dictates in this situation. He's recovered his sense of these people as people, and he's acting truthfully and honestly and forthrightly. That is the most powerful thing we can ever do when our goal is to connect with and lead other people.

Victoria:

It's been a while since we've talked to Jeremy, and we were curious how it's been going for him. So we reached out to see what his leadership journey has continued to look like for him and his team.

Jeremy:

Not too long ago, we had a crew that had some pretty major infractions—things that would warrant getting terminated. And my initial reaction, I went right to blame. I wanted to go and terminate them all. I said, "Well, I need to step back. If my mind is going right to blame, change your mindset. Let's get curious."

And so I went out to that crew with an open mind, with empathy. And I had a conversation with them, and I just really understood, "Hey, what was going through your mind when you all were doing this? Do you realize these are implications of your actions, you know, up to losing their life, or termination?" And actually walked away with a much better connection. And today, months later—that crew, they are more high-performing now. They changed their attitude. They changed how they operate. And that's attributed to getting curious, knowing that I was going to blame, and then instead going with empathy and leading with curiosity. I just thought that was a huge win.

Yeah, brother. It's been—this has been incredible. I really appreciate you letting me in, and letting me grow with you. There's no words that can express my gratitude of you willing to dig into some of these and challenge me to get better, think deeper. I'm manifesting some of these bad behaviors that are impacting the others. So I really, really appreciate you spending the time with me, and helping me grow as a leader.

Chip:

So cool, Jeremy. So cool. All right, my brother. We will see each other down the road. I am quite certain.

Jeremy:

Absolutely. Thanks for your time, Chip. You take care.

Chip:

Thank you, my friend.

Victoria:

Leading Outward is produced by the Arbinger Institute. To have a conversation about how we can equip you to transform your leaders and organization, schedule a complimentary strategy session at arbinger.com.

And for those of you who have the courage to have your own coaching sessions recorded and shared—like the episode you just listened to, so that others can be helped on their leadership journey—email us at leadingoutward@arbinger.com.