How Asking The Right 3 Questions Can Inspire Great Leadership
By Yonason Goldson
Times of crisis and terror bring out the worst in some and the best in others. The latter are the stories that need telling. Here are a few:
An anonymous man at JFK reportedly bought and paid for 250 airplane tickets to help Israeli reserve soldiers return more quickly to defend their country.
An Israeli car dealer posted on Instagram his offer to provide new cars on loan to soldiers needing transportation to their bases. “Don’t worry about paying,” he said. “Just come in and pick one up. We’ll figure it out later.”
My daughter in Jerusalem spent her day shopping to buy necessities for IDF soldiers with donated funds. She was chauffeured by a French-Israeli man who rented a car at his own expense and left his family for a week to do what he could to support the troops.
A woman reportedly walked into a sports shop on Long Island and said she wanted to buy its entire inventory of headlamps. Asked why she needed so many, she replied, “To send to the soldiers in Israel.” The non-Jewish owner replied: “Take them for free . . . it’s on us.”
No one could reasonably expect these kinds of largess. Most of us might reasonably wonder whether we could summon the generosity and creativity to emulate such acts of generosity. But a word describing this sort of expansive impulse is this week’s addition to the Ethical Lexicon:
Performed to an extent exceeding what is required or expected; going beyond the requirements of duty
In last week’s column, we examined the psychological phenomenon called licensing, in which we permit our own indulgence now by recalling disciplined behavior in the past. Licensing says: “I’ve done enough; nothing more should be expected from me.”
ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
In contrast, the supererogatory mindset says: “What needs to be done? What can be done? How much can I do?” It goes hand in hand with the ethical mindset that asks not whether it’s legal but whether it’s right, not what I can get away with but what kind of person I ought to be.
As the Great Resignation seems only to intensify, employers need to ask themselves why their employees are so uninspired. Often, the answer is facing them in the mirror.
Early in 2020, the New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof reported the story of Emily James, a senior officer at a call center in Portland, Oregon. On Christmas Eve, James found herself on the line with a customer stranded at a gas station, unable to buy gas with his debit card because the bank had put a hold on his last deposit check. Unable to solve his problem, James drove 20 minutes to the gas station and gave the man $20 dollars of her own money.
When her superiors at the bank learned of their employee’s supererogatory act of kindness and customer service, they fired her, together with the manager who had given her permission to make the trip. The bank’s CEO remained “unavailable” for comment until after the Times ran the story. Only then did he scramble to control the damage, pleading, “This is not who we are.” Despite his protestations, that is likely exactly who they are.
Therein lies the problem. Punishing initiative emulates the overseers in Stalinist Russia, who responded to workers’ high productivity by imposing higher-production quotas. When businesses act this way, they teach their employees to strive for minimalism, which translates directly into diminished productivity and diminished customer experience.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY
Contrast this with a story about the legendary online shoe store, Zappos. When a customer wanted to pay for a pair of shoes with a $100 gift card, sales tax pushed the total over the amount of her card. So what did the customer service rep do? Reduced the price of the shoes. The customer not only became a passionate brand ambassador for Zappos, but related the story to her own team to spark brainstorming for how they could improve their own customer experience. Now that’s paying it forward.
By stubbornly defaulting to rigidity when common sense demands flexibility, employers suppress the kind of initiative and passion they claim they want, the kind that produces happy and productive employees. Perhaps it’s a symptom of insecurity; deviating from the status quo feels risky, and allowing employees autonomy could spiral out of control.
But that’s comparable to withholding water and sunlight from your ficus because you’re afraid it’s going to grow into a banyan tree. It’s a practice related to withholding praise in the hope that employees will work harder to get it. More likely, they will simply stop trying.
IT’S NEVER TOO LATE
To promote a supererogatory work culture, bosses encourage employees to ask for help when they need it and admit mistakes in order to quickly correct them. Employers earn trust and generate engagement when they seek input, schedule check-ins, personalize gifts and notes, and stand up and advocate for their people while praising them in front of colleagues and superiors.
How far does this go? All the way. Literally.
A few months after one boss passed away, a large bouquet of flowers showed up in the office with the following note:
Well, it’s my birthday and I’m dead. But I did want to say thank you. Thank you for being the best damn staff, nurses, and doctors I ever got to work with. I trusted you. I believed in you. And you never let me down. I mean that. Gayle.
With a minimum of creativity and expense, you can make your people feel like a million bucks and, by doing so, possibly boost your bottom line by even more than that.
Just don’t wait until you’re dead to do it.