Level 2 Leadership - Where engineers often live

Level 1 leadership is focused on visible behaviors. Level 2 leadership focuses on rational thought; which is where most engineers live. These are my thoughts from reading chapter 17 of the textbook "Level Three Leadership".

Overview

Have you experienced engineers being fractured by debates? Tabs vs spaces; pros and cons of different languages? Engineers proudly focus on how people think, on data, on analysis, on being rational.

A core belief of Level 2 leadership is changing how someone thinks; will change what they do. It's assumed, that the best way to change how someone thinks is to win a debate with data, logic, and arguments. Often, an unspoken assumption is that we are right, and to convince others, we only need good data/logic. Another assumption is that people are rational and they are optimizing for the same thing as us.

The Problem of Habit

Weight loss is a multi-billion dollar industry based on people "knowing" what they should do; but not being able to do it. Habits are often stronger than we realize. Change requires more than knowing. It requires new habits.

Think about your favorite programming language? I'd bet it's the one you know best. As you debate things, or push for changes, recognize inertia. Often, good data/analysis is ignored due to biases based on people's habits. Just as often, our own data/analysis is biased by our own habits.

How the brain works

The brain carves pathways each time we do something. Those same pathways are etched each time we think something. We interpret data, and formulate our opinions using the pathways we've carved over our lifetime. When data/logic tells us our thought pathways our wrong; we can't change those pathways instantly. Neither can others.

Team building

One of the tools I enjoy is strength finder; because it allows teams to recognize and appreciate the different strengths of teammates. Our strengths are based on the pathways in our brain. The understanding and empathy developed within a team; acts as a lubrication during debate. The team starts to see; not only the direction someone wants to go; but why and where it's coming from.

We also start to appreciate the diversity of values. Someone that values simplicity; may have a different solution to someone that values handling every edge case.

Debates are often more productive when clarifying the problem, and the values the team is solving for.

Presentation Style

Some people are visual learners, others auditory, and still others need to experience things. Knowing the best channel to present; will help the effectiveness of communication.

Deduction

Most people are deductive thinkers. Deduction is when you take a principal; and apply it to the world around you. "Test coverage allows you to refactor" is an example of a principal that can be applied to many problematic code bases. "Simplicity is hard; Complexity is easy" is another principal that can be applied to lots of situations. "Why write code that already exists?" is another principal to encourage open source and software reuse.

The problem with deduction is there are too many principles; and unacknowledged assumptions live deep within. Teams can argue for hours, without ever acknowledging the principals they each believe in. We can even miss-understand the problem; because problems frequently depend on values.

Induction

Induction is where we look at the world around us and come up with principles that match what we see. The authors of the Agile manifesto used induction to come up with a better way to build software. The people that signed the Agile manifesto, use deduction to apply those principals. There is a difference.

The problem with induction is it takes a long time and not everyone can induce things. Deduction lets us solve problems fairly quickly using concepts that worked in the past. Most education is based around teaching people formulae and principles. "5 hacks to networking like a pro" for example.

But, in todays rapidly changing landscape; we need to inductively recognize the right principal for the situation. This requires judgement, practice, and learning from applying principals to lots of past situations. It also requires looking at reality; and trying to remove the previous bias you bring to the current situation.

Tips For More Persuasive and Effective Decision Making

Do others rely on data, their network, or their gut? How about yourself?

Strong arguments are clear, impeccable, and powerful.

1. Be clear and state your point in few words. People have short attention spans. Simplicity signals the problem and solution are understood.
2. Build each step on top of the previous. Keep things linked together so it is easy to follow.
3. Be transparent with supporting data and techniques. If people question the data and methodology; they will doubt the conclusions.
4. Stick to a theme and stay consistent. Don't argue for multiple things at once; people will get lost. Don't call out "interesting findings" that aren't central; people will get distracted.
5. Avoid circular logic. There should be a clear beginning and an end.
6. Stick with the analysis and data. Your preferences, wishes, hopes, and beliefs only muddy the waters.
7. Acknowledge your biases. People probably already know them.
8. Have allies. Many people make decisions based on the beliefs of their network; or key experts they know. They will ask others for their thoughts to pressure test an argument. Win these people over before the presentation.
9. Pressure test yourself. Don't focus only on getting others to support you; rather focus on learning from their expertise. What did you miss? What forces are at play that you didn't consider? Could someone draw different conclusions? Is logic tight and message concise?
10. Be aware of motives. If conclusions threaten a person's org, status, or goals; they will push back.

Closing Thoughts

Arguments often come down to values and preferences. Everyday, we decide without thinking; what information to believe, which to discount; and which to ignore. This is done based on what data we are comfortable with, and which meets our world view. Most people hold onto beliefs, even when logic and data say the world doesn't match. Which of your beliefs need to be questioned? What are the underlying beliefs behind long-standing debates you are involved in?

See www.level3leadership.com for more.