Transcription
Question 1.Faced with a strategic decision that's hard to understand, what should a good leader or manager do?
A: Follow the direction.B: Challenge.C: Protect.D: The Joker.
On this question, I'd say start by challenging.I'll go straight for the Joker, because for me it's about communicating with transparency — the fundamental quality.
Hello, Segolene.So happy to be here.Likewise.I chose challenge because in order to explain a decision well to your teams — especially if it's a difficult one,something people don't want to do or hear — you need to have truly understood it yourself and be sufficiently convinced yourself,or at least really have all the details,including what isn't told to you immediately when a leadership team makes fairly drastic changes.
So you need to challenge yourself in order to explain it better afterward.
But to use the word challenge — would you challenge, for example,your leadership on the decision itself, or is it really about challenging for understanding?
Sometimes yes — in the leadership committee you do challenge a decision.
Knowing that sometimes, when you challenge yourself as a leader, you may not be fully convinced and still have to accept a decision that you understand rationally?
I agree with you on the idea of truly...I took the Joker because there was something missing that I consider fundamental: communicating with transparency.
I'm convinced that teams need transparency,especially on decisions that can be a little sensitive.
They'll understand more readily if you communicate this transparently.
Already more people will get on board and will try to anticipate that shift in direction.
I agree with you on the principle of transparency,but in real life, how do you actually do it if you're not completely on board with the decision that was made?
That's a very good question.I think it's legitimate to say to your teams that sometimes there can be doubts.
But ultimately — especially when you're part of a leadership team — you can't start a mutiny by putting yourself at odds with leadership, saying: I have serious doubts,I don't fully agree, but we're going to do it anyway.
Right there, I think you already lose part of your team by doing that.
In the end, it really comes down to shared trust.So that's one thing I do.
And then the other thing I do when there are difficult decisions — particularly decisions I don't necessarily agree with — is that I tend to really focus on the emotional side of it too.
Because in reality, there's a mini grieving process that happens a lot,especially on the product side.
The product roadmap changes, you're abandoning a great investment — a really great product that the team had worked on — but it just doesn't meet a market need, etc.
So there's a real need to take people's emotions into account,not just be in corporate robot mode: That's it, this product, we're cutting the product line, bang, we move on.
And then wonder why people
rarely ask questions.Question two: in a rollercoaster environment, what is the real key
