Customer Reviews

Why Great Leaders Don't Take Yes for an Answer: Managing for Conflict and Consensus

5 star:		(23)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I received an advance copy of an interesting book a week or two ago... Why Great Leaders Don't Take Yes For An Answer: Managing For Conflict And Consensus by Michael A. Roberto (Wharton School Publishing). It's an insightful book on how to effectively promote a culture of open decision-making.

Chapter List:
Part 1 - Leading The Decision Process: The Leadership Challenge; Deciding How To Decide
Part 2 - Managing Conflict: An Absence Of Candor; Stimulating The Clash Of Ideas; Keeping Conflict Constructive
Part 3 - Building Consensus: The Dynamics Of Indecision; Fair And Legitimate Process; Reaching Closure
Part 4 - A New Breed Of Take-Charge Leader: Leading With Restraint
Endnotes; Index

In our results-oriented and media-driven society, nearly all decisions made by an organization (be it corporate or government) are analyzed by whether they worked or not. This leads to the focus on trying to choose the "right outcome". Roberto takes a different tack, and focuses more on how to form the right environment to allow good decisions to be made. Using examples such as the Bay Of Pigs invasion, the Cuban missile crisis, and the Columbia space shuttle accident, he analyzes how the environment surrounding the decisions led to outcomes that varied greatly in their effectiveness. Roberto advocates a consensus style of decision making, where all issues are openly discussed and debated without politics and position flavoring who can advance what ideas. Easier said than done, however. Through either forceful personality or complete abdication of responsibility, too many important decisions are hamstrung by lack of input due to fear or intimidation. Using the techniques in this book, a leader can learn how to effectively structure the group to get the type of free-flowing information exchange that ensures all information is available prior to a choice being made.

The author also realizes and accurately points out that there are different types of leadership techniques that have to be employed at different times with various groups. There are times where s/he might have to remove themselves from the initial discussions to make sure their personality doesn't overpower the flavor of the debate. Other times it might be necessary to be very active to be sure that all the groups who have the important information are heard regardless of their position or rank. It's a fine line to walk, but one in which the resulting decisions will be of a much higher quality and outcome.

Regardless of whether you're a CEO or a supervisor, the techniques and framework discussed here will help you to be a more effective leader in these times of ever-changing environments. Definitely a recommended read.

Last fall, following 86 years of heartache, the Boston Red Sox won the World Series. Two months later, Theo Epstein, the team's general manager, opted not to met a $50 million dollar offer from Omar Minaya, the new general manager of the New York Mets to star pitcher Pedro Martinez, considered by many to be the heart and sole of his team.

Mets fans were ecstatic; Red Sox fans expressed mixed emotions. Martinez's skills clearly had begun to erode; yet it would be next to impossible to replace his battling determination.

It will be years before anyone can clearly assess which general manager made the correct decision.

Michael Roberto, a Harvard Business School faculty member, in this insightful book argues Minaya and Epstein are not alone. In all types of organizations, leaders often have to wait long time periods to see the results of their decisions. The core premise of his book is that a quality process enhances the probability of achieving a positive outcome.

A quality process, according to the author involves more than sound analytics. It involves the astute management of the emotional, political and social aspects of decision making. To wit:

* Have you considered multiple alternatives?
* Have you surfaced and tested your assumptions?
* Did dissenting views emerge during your deliberations?
* Are you building high levels of commitment and shared understanding?

Roberto argues and then demonstrates how leaders cultivate constructive conflict to enhance critical and divergent thinking. This means managing the tension between conflict and consensus. Secondly, he argues leaders need to spend time "deciding how to decide." High-quality processes require forethought. Ensure your desire for a solution to a critical and complex problem employs more than a single-minded solution. Time spent "deciding how to decide" will increase the possibility of walking the fine line between conflict and consensus.

As for the Mets and the Red Sox, my vote goes with Theo Epstein. I am a Yankee fan. I was thrilled to see a great pitcher head for the other league.

The value placed on conformity within companies has been the traditional norm, though it is almost subliminally stated in passive language that emphasizes adhering to a certain set of corporate values. Take a look at a film like Billy Wilder's "The Apartment" if you want historical validation of this perspective or even this year's piercing documentary, "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room", if you want a more current example. In direct contrast and in a most refreshing manner, Michael A. Roberto, a Harvard Business School professor, describes the toll on organizations when leaders fail to create an atmosphere that invites dissent. In compelling examples ranging from the Cuban missile crisis to the Columbia space shuttle tragedy, he clearly outlines concrete steps that managers at all levels can take to spark positive conflict and make sure that all views get a fair hearing. Moreover, Roberto outlines a fair and open process for making more effective decisions.

It is not too surprising how pervasive a "no" organization exists in today's economy given the conservative measures taken by leadership to maintain their power base and wealth. Such companies do not employ dissenting voices as a means of encouraging divergent thinking. Instead, they enable those who disagree with a proposal to shut off dialogue and discourage interesting avenues of inquiry. Such cultures do not provide an incentive for dissenters to defend their views with data and logic or even more importantly, explain how their objections are consistent with organization-wide goals as opposed to the interests of their more immediate divisions. As Enron proved, a culture of "no" enables those with the most power or the loudest voice to impose their will. Roberto points out that the first barrier leaders need to recognize is that expressing dissent can be very difficult and uncomfortable for lower-level managers and employees. Consequently, rather than waiting for dissent to come to them, leaders need to actively seek it out in their organizations. Searching for constructive dissidents remains at odds with the existence of passive leadership since by its nature, it constitutes a substantial barrier to candid dialogue and debate within organizations.

Analysis paralysis can fossilize a company more focused on improving quarterly results. Nearly all decisions made by an organization are analyzed by whether they worked or not, which redirects the focus to one of trying to choose the "right outcome". As an alternative, Roberto focuses on how to form the right environment to allow good decisions to be made. For example, the role of Morton Thiokol in the Columbia space shuttle accident shows how the environment surrounding key decisions led to outcomes that varied greatly in their effectiveness. Roberto advocates a consensus style of decision making where all issues are openly discussed and debated without worry of political ramifications. As most of us know who have struggled in a corporate environment, implementation of such practices can be onerous. Whether through either forceful personality or complete abdication of responsibility, too many important decisions are hamstrung by lack of input due to fear or intimidation.

Roberto's techniques really show how a leader can learn to structure an organization to get the type of free-flowing information exchange that ensures all information is available prior to a choice being made. Leaders can and should take concrete steps to build conflict into their decision-making processes. Roberto has some excellent tips for moving in this direction, for example, asking a set of managers to role-play the firm's competitors in a series of meetings so as to surface and test a set of core strategic assumptions. Another good one is assigning someone to play the devil's advocate so as to ensure that a thorough critique and risk assessment of a proposal has been conducted before moving forward. By inducing vigorous and open debate, leaders avoid the guessing game of trying to discern whether or not people truly agree with a choice that has been made.

The author also realizes and accurately points out that there are different types of leadership techniques that have to be employed at different times with various groups. It's a fine line for leaders to gauge their participation effectively but one in which the resulting decisions will be of a much higher quality and outcome. When leaders are successful in establishing a climate of openness, and they make constructive conflict a habit in the organization, such behaviors will need to be sustained over time. Conflict becomes a fundamental element of a firm's strategic planning process, and the process continues to retain the same atmosphere of vigorous debate. Roberto illuminates how the most effective leaders have to teach the attributes of good process, model those attributes, and coach future leaders in their implementation.

One of the most common problems of business and committees is the tendency of the members of the committee to say "yes" to whatever the owners or upper management proposes. In a company where career paths can be sidetracked quickly by not supporting your superior it is the only answer to give. As a result there is no legitimate feedback for management decision making. This is the problem addressed by author Michael A. Roberto.

Mr. Roberto proposes that great leaders develop a culture of conflict and consensus at the same time. Of course conflict must be created in a constructive nature and kept constructive. The problem is how to effectively deal with a lack of candor and stimulate a clash of ideas while keeping it constructive. Chapter three is one of the best ones in my opinion and the author does an especially good job of discussing the factors that keep dialog from being candid and the barriers to expressing and discussing dissenting opinions. Chapters 4 and 5 looks at the art of how to stimulate an increase in conflict and voice a dissenting opinion without seeming to be difficult. Of course once you have these conflicting ideas out in the open you have to somehow come to a consensus. Why Great Leaders Don't Take Yes for an Answer is a recommended for all business people but especially for those who utilize committees and boards for direction.

Mike Roberto's ability to draw upon facinating and complex stories about leadership and decision making ranging from the Cuban missile crisis to a mountaineering expedition on Everest engages the general reader interested in leadership.

Once he draws you in with these facinating stories he gives clear and powerful analysis backed up by strong research and scholarship helping you see the choices leaders make, their consequences and the implications for successful outcomes.

The result is a book that inspires on many levels. I am using what I learned from the book to create an agenda for leadership development at a cultural non profit organization where I am a board member. I love the powerful quotes that are sprinkled throughout the book, the practical advice on how to create good team dynamics and particularly on how to embrace constructive conflict and help it to work as a positive force-towards reaching a better organizational solution.

It's a very satisfying read--meaty and thought provoking for its ideas but very engaging because of its well told stories.

One of the best characteristics that a great leader possesses is the ability to see past the surface of a yes answer. Affirmative responses to executive queries must always be interpreted within the context of the characters of the sender and recipient. Some executives genuinely want to receive honest responses to their requests for feedback. However, they are a minority, in most cases an executive will downgrade or belittle information contrary to their (mis)perceptions. Furthermore, it is the rare subordinate who possesses the courage to challenge a leader. Therefore, an affirmative response may be nothing more than an attempt to avoid difficulties. The greatest of leaders make it clear that negative responses will be accepted and will go to great lengths to assure that an affirmative response is genuine. The art of honestly dissecting a yes answer is the origin of the title.
Two of the case studies examined in the book were matters of great national crisis in the United States. The first is a combination of two events in the administration of John F. Kennedy. Early in his administration, Kennedy authorized the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion. The operation was inherited from the previous administration and Kennedy did not engage in the proper due diligence of critical evaluation. It was a failure, but to his credit, Kennedy learned from his mistake. He put in place a decision making process that served him very well in the more critical Cuban Missile Crisis. It can be effectively argued that the quality of his decision making helped prevent a nuclear war.
The second case study involves the "debate" in the administration of Lyndon Johnson as to whether the United States should become more militarily involved in Vietnam. James Thomson was a Johnson advisor who argued against further military involvement. However, Johnson constantly referred to him as "his favorite dove", using humor to belittle him. Other dissenters were treated in a similar manner, effectively preventing the contrary view from being strongly argued. By destroying the dissenter position, Johnson helped lock himself into a policy that was a disaster.
The best example of an effective leader presented in the book was that of General and then President Dwight Eisenhower. When Eisenhower was elected President, Harry Truman, the previous President thought that Eisenhower would try to order people to do things, only to find that a President can't do that. However, Eisenhower was not a man with an exclusively military mindset. His experience in managing an alliance between several nations in World War II and dealing with the strongest of personalities was excellent training for the presidency.
Great leaders seem to have an intuitive grasp of what is right and what can reasonably be expected of people. They also must have a somewhat cynical and accurate view of human nature. These skills can be learned and this book can help you acquire and nurture those skills.

Based on extensive research, and a very in-depth study of two cases, the author puts forth two key arguments regarding how leaders can enhance the quality of their decision-making processes: (1) leaders must cultivate constructive conflict so as to enhance the level of critical and divergent thinking, while simultaneously building consensus to facilitate the efficient and timely implementation of choices they make; (2) effective leaders must spend time deciding how to decide. A recurring theme is that leaders must strive for a delicate balance of assertiveness and restraint; the critical question is not whether, but how they ought to exert their influence and control over the decision-making process.The book offers practical guidance for leaders to improve the way they make complex, high-stakes choices. The work is rich with content and insights. Highly recommended.

“In this book, I make two fundamental arguments with regard to how leaders can enhance the quality of their decision-making processes.” Michael A. Roberto writes, “First, leaders must cultivate constructive conflict so as to enhance the level of critical and divergent thinking, while simultaneously building consensus so as to facilitate the timely and efficient implementation of the choices that they make. Managing the tension between conflict and consensus represents one of the most fundamental challenges of leadership. By consensus, I do not mean unanimity, like-mindedness, or even pervasive agreement. Instead, I define consensus to mean a high level of commitment and shared understanding among the people involved in the decision. Leaders can build buy-in and collective comprehension without appeasing everyone on their teams or making decisions by majority vote. This book explains how leaders can do that. The second fundamental argument put forth in this book is that effective leaders can and should spend time ‘deciding how to decide.’ In short, creating high-quality decision-making processes necessitates a good deal of forethought (from the Preface).”

In this context, Michael A. Roberto divides his invaluable book into four broad parts:

• Part I introduces a conceptual framework for thinking about how to diagnose, evaluate, and improve strategic decision-making processes.

• Part II focuses on the task of managing conflict.

• Part III concentrates on how managers create consensus within their organizations without compromising the level of divergent and creative thinking.

• Part IV reflects on how this book’s philosophy of leadership and decision-making differs from conventional views held by many managers.

In the first chapter of the book, Roberto examines a few of misconceptions about decision making in more detail and attempts to distinguish myth from reality as summarized following:

The Five Myths and Realities of Executive Decision Making.

Myth 1: The chief executive decides.

Reality 1: Strategic decision making entails simultaneous activity by people at multiple levels of the organization.

Myth 2: Decisions are made in the room.

Reality 2: Much of the real work occurs “offline,” in one-on-one conversations or small subgroups, not around a conference table.

Myth 3: Decisions are largely intellectual exercises.

Reality 3: Strategic decisions are complex social, emotional, and political processes.

Myth 4: Managers analyze and then decide.

Reality 4: Strategic decisions unfold in a nonlinear fashion, with solutions frequently arising before managers define problems or analyze alternatives.

Myth 5: Managers decide and then act.

Reality 5: Strategic decisions often evolve over time and proceed through an iterative process of choice and action.

I highly recommend this invaluable study for leaders who distinguish myth from reality.

There are those leaders who would argue that they already engage in constructive conflict and play devil's advocate - they don't have time for 200 pages of academic gobbledygook telling them what they already know. I would challenge those leaders to read Professor Roberto's book. He uses punchy and captivating language to reveal how to overcome false consensus and utilize practical decision-making tools. It is filled to the brim with scintillating case studies taken from all industries and walks of life, from outer space to the Oval Office to a Boston-area hospital. Professor Roberto supports his claims with robust scholarly research, but make no mistake - the book is highly readable and even enjoyable. Whether you think there are no `yes-men' in your organization or you're seeking strategies to deal with stale decision-making processes, Professor Roberto's book is the most worthwhile 200 pages on the business shelf today.

Ask any CEO what he or she fears most and they will tell you that it's not knowing what's going on. Insulated by bureaucracy and those who are eager to do the CEO's bidding, CEOs often know less than anyone else what is going on. Leaders deeper in the organization have the same problem, but to a lesser degree.

How do you overcome that? Authors like Tom Peters give you lists of things to do such as "manage by walking around" which can help.

Professor Roberto of Harvard Business School has gone one step past John Kotter's work on leadership in this book to help the leader see the role that she or he needs to play in setting up decision and implementation processes that will succeed. In that sense, this book is in the tradition of Jim Collins in Built to Last and Good to Great.

Professor Roberto focuses primarily on encouraging dissent in looking at choices and then on a process that is perceived as fair to select the best choice and to move forward into implementation. In doing so he emphasizes the need to minimize friction while maximizing organizational gains.

His advice is built both from successful and unsuccessful case histories and academic research. So you get a good overview of all the work in this field in just one book. As a result, I think this book is a "must read" for any business leader.

The book also fits my own experiences. Most leaders never realize that they should work on the process they are using if it doesn't yield the results they want. If you try to talk to them about a better process, they look at you like you are some kind of academic nerd . . . rather than someone who wants to make their efforts more practical and successful.

I found the comparisons between John F. Kennedy's flawed process leading up to the Bay of Pigs invasion and his handling of the Cuban missile crisis to be especially compelling and interesting. I think you will, too.

The book has a number of minor flaws. Professor Roberto seems to have studied the literature on this subject more than he talked to those who developed the literature. Where I know the authors, the points they make about their own research are slightly different from what Professor Roberto has to say about them. For example, those who use scenarios describe how a group eventually finds solutions that are superior choices . . . regardless of the future environment. Professor Roberto doesn't mention that potential benefit at all.

But you'll still be way ahead of the game, even if you miss the nuances. But if any academic's work interests you after reading this book, I encourage you to contact the academic directly and read their work as well.

I thought that the best part of the book came in the discussions and examples on how to change cultures that aren't working.

Thank you, Professor Roberto!