B2U v1.5

I keep coming back to succession as a starting point because it puts us in the right time frame, the longterm. When we think about defining each leader’s tour of duty as a chapter in an organization’s story - hopefully of making a useful impact in people’s lives - we better our odds. Focusing on what my successor needs from keeps me really, really honest about the long-game, and can provide perspective on whatever dumpster fire I’m putting out today.

If you’re a founder, this idea of working yourself out of job after job as you grow probably resonates; this framework clarifies and builds strong culture regardless of how close to leaving your current role you are.

I think studying power's important. It's easily abused, but properly understood, it can be built, shared and redistributed in ways that make your tech work better and improve the world.

French and Raven's 1959 framework has been edited and improved over the years, but their original framework still resonates. Understanding and building informal power is important.

This is a simple framework for board governance from Dick Chait and his colleagues at Harvard. Their book on governance is my go to for board design: Governance as Leadership. Here's a handy pdf summary from Pew Trusts.

This is a simple framework I use when I'm in the CEO role. I don't know where the academic research is on this one, but it's one of the most powerful real-world tools I've ever used.

A great tool for keeping conversations with investors and board members tight and organized, it's actually more powerful used internally, with employees, vendors and customers; it comes in really handy when I'm working with team members on who's doing what and on modeling a deeper understanding of what mindset I'm in in a given setting.

There are tons of frameworks on decision making out there. Many seem to focus on the leader, how they're wired, how they prefer to work. I like this framework better because it focuses on the situation, specifically where the information lives and who the people are that are involved in the decision. As far as I can tell, this particular framework has evolved from the work of Victor Vroom's work on situational leadership.

Hay McBer’s research on Dan Goleman's Emotional Intelligence theory has produced some of the most useful tooling for leadership I’ve ever used. Choosing the right style here depends on the strategic or tactical factors and how the humans involved are doing. One of many versions of Goleman's framework explores the research behind these six styles.

Korn Ferry, which bought the Hay Group in 2015 continues to study and publish on the topic and certifies coaches on their assessment tools. Here’s an interesting series on how the leadership styles impact climate (page 6: 12 Emotionally Intelligent Leadership Competencies, page 7: 6 measures of strong organizational climate)

There’s lots out there on how to build lean and iterate. Here are some of my go-tos:

Lean Startup

While these tools have come to define the often too-shallow, software-centric definition of innovation in Silicon Valley, the core design elements built by Steve Blank are compelling tools to use when thinking about what you're building and for whom.

Pretotyping

This fun toolkit allows for rapid, low-cost experimentation. I really like this framework because it gives me few excuses for trying something really, really fast. And it forces me to iterate and throw out bad ideas early.

Exponential Thinking

I’m doing more and more reading on this topic. It resonates: See Norway EV’s vs US.

Crossing the Chasm/Adoption Lifecycles

I come back frequently to Geoffrey Moore’s work on Crossing the Chasm and focusing on early adopters before building for the early and late majority.

This is a monster topic, and it’s hard to measure, but most folks do it haphazardly. Goeffrey Smart’s book, Who: The A Method for Hiring is a great read, but the technique can be a little over-engineered in practice. Here’s a simple summary from Acton MBA that simplifies it:

Get to curious before you try and resolve any conflict.

Design thinking centers the human in the process of problem-solving and product or service design. Stanford's D-School, and the bay-area's IDEO popularized this approach to problem-solving and innovation and disciplined creativity.

Often misunderstood as transactional exercises in power, negotiations is really all about humans and communication and as elegant as jazz or improv comedy when done well. Integrative bargaining, where two or more people are trying to work out sharing more than one thing at a time, is my favorite area of study in leadership.

Your tech, your strategy, your org chart, your business model - all of these are expendable and will likely go through massive pivots. And if you don't set a distinctly different frame for how you're thinking about the humans in your mix, they'll (even you'll) get sucked into the cadence and turbulence of the things that should in fact be getting swapped out for something better. This is one reason focusing on your successor is a powerful tool - it makes it easier to think about setting up the organization for the long haul, to be more resilient and more anti-fragile than the stereotypical charismatic founder with the hot software that needs piles of money to grab first mover advantage and race to monopoly domination.

I've learned am a better coach, dad, life partner and teammate when I think more about whether what I'm saying or doing will matter to the person each of us will be in 20 years vs. who we are and what we're doing right now.

I'm trying to define my own success/impact/legacy as how healthy and strong my professional family tree is instead of how big an impact I'm having on any institution I'm working for or with at the moment. Decoupling the metaphor from the verticality of the institution, allows me to think of it as wider, more like a shrub. As it transcends that boundary, the tree shrub becomes more about all the people I've coached, those who've coach me, peers I've worked beside, and whoever I'm working alongside at any one moment. I find I am more present, and I'm a better teammate, when I'm thinking about that framework - the wide shrub, instead of the tall tree.

I'm trying to show myself and others more compassion. A few resources:

As Dolly Parton told Billboard magazine, "Of course Black lives matter. Do we think our little white asses are the only ones that matter? No!" I'm seeking to understand and combat my own complicity, especially when it comes to gender and racial diversity. Some tools I've used:

Our brains are prone to shortcuts that aren't so rational. Step one towards better decision making is understanding what they are.

I’m not sure how this will play out, but I’m increasingly convinced that people in leadership should be moving forward on their own personal infrastructure and investing in their employees pursuit of the same. I’m learning a lot about this process in this project:

I'm a super fan of improv comedy, a rare team-based art form. It makes me a better listener and a happier human. Find a local class and up your leadership game.