Philosophically, couldn't agree more - I would just add, it's a matter of balance. I started out as a consensus leader - I always wanted my team to figure out everything and set a course that we all agreed on - until I realized that it was also the role of a leader to say "OK, I've heard you all, you don't agree on this one but here's what we're going to do...." And I felt so much tension go out of the room once we all knew where we were going together. Even the folks who lost the argument were (usually) happy to go with the flow once they knew where we were going. The Amazon principle "Disagree but commit" is right on. So like you said, speaking last doesn't mean not speaking at all. Good observations Rae.
Thanks for commenting, Michael! Glad you liked the post. Totally agree that leaders still have to lead. We can do it in a dictatorial way (tell), or in a way that helps our team learn and grow in the process (teach). I think the latter produces happier teams and better results over the long-term.
Philosophically, couldn't agree more - I would just add, it's a matter of balance. I started out as a consensus leader - I always wanted my team to figure out everything and set a course that we all agreed on - until I realized that it was also the role of a leader to say "OK, I've heard you all, you don't agree on this one but here's what we're going to do...." And I felt so much tension go out of the room once we all knew where we were going together. Even the folks who lost the argument were (usually) happy to go with the flow once they knew where we were going. The Amazon principle "Disagree but commit" is right on. So like you said, speaking last doesn't mean not speaking at all. Good observations Rae.
Thanks for commenting, Michael! Glad you liked the post. Totally agree that leaders still have to lead. We can do it in a dictatorial way (tell), or in a way that helps our team learn and grow in the process (teach). I think the latter produces happier teams and better results over the long-term.