S2 Ep. 33 - Sharing leadership
We are used to leadership being hierarchical. Always talking about the tone from the top. But what happens when we share leadership and power throughout the organization? And challenge our current ways of working in the most profound ways?
With Mette Aagaard we explore the benefits, guiding principles and biggest challenges of shifting our corporate paradigm from delegated to truly distributed.
Listen to the full episode :
Available now on
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
About Mette:
Mette Aagaard is an expert in what she labels 'Shared Leadership', a progressive organizational format that provides less hierarchy and more active participation. She has worked with organizational and leadership development for more than three decades in executive leadership positions, both in big global corporates, creative scale up and public sector.
She is proud to call herself a 'pragmatic practitioner' because it is what works in real life that has her attention.
In 2023, she published what is now a best selling book in Danish about shared leadership (Medledelse - når teamet er chef'), building on her experiences and providing practical tools on how to get going. Today she is advising work places on how to transform from a traditional operating model into more shared leadership. She is a part of the Danish advanced consultancy, Agora - Rethinking Organizations
Want to connect with Mette:
EP. 057 Transcription
[00:00:00] Shani: Welcome to the Experience designers Mette.
[00:00:02] Mette: Thank you.
[00:00:04] Shani: I'm really, really excited to, to have you here and to dive into this conversation together. I know you've, spent a really big part of your career working with what a lot of people called self led organizations, but I know you did a really beautiful kind of, um, Re a tweak or reformulation on that and call them spaces of shared leadership.
[00:00:28] And that's a pretty unique setting. So before we go into even exploring what that is, I'm, I'm very curious about that mission of yours and what made you choose that?
[00:00:41] Mette: Oh, so it's a long story, but I'll try to keep it short. So I think it's a mix of two things. One is what I would call like consolidated frustration. So both from a long work life, so both as an employee, as a leader, and also in a specialist in the area of organizational life. And, and I guess a lot, a lot of people can recognize some of these frustrations.
[00:01:08] So it's It's as a leader, it was, it felt like at times I was a little bit alone with trying to solve some of the challenges that often occur in workplaces when people of different personality types and, and so forth have to work together. So you had these engagement surveys and it always came out that people were either lacking information or felt they had too much in their inbox.
[00:01:34] They either felt that, you know, Um, we spent too much time together or too little time together. And it was like these kind of like all these preferences running around that it was just impossible to make everybody happy and satisfied and not to complain about being a leader. I've been into more than 20 years.
[00:01:51] I loved it also. So that was one. And as an employee, it was all this kind of like what I would call corporate theater. So all these things that big workplaces do, because Well, apparently they think they need to do it. And as an employee, you sit there, you smile, you nod when you have to, and inside you think this doesn't really make sense and, and well, here we go.
[00:02:14] Here comes another strategy. And if the leadership says we have to be courageous, then we'll be courageous. If they say we have to be innovative, then we'll be innovative. So all of these things, and then as a organizational life kind of specialist. And I think that was the key frustration. I kept on seeing the same dysfunction surface.
[00:02:37] So, you would work on one dysfunction, for example, people being extremely demotivated, or, um, not, I mean, kind of losing sight of the overall meaning of it all, and you would solve it over here, and then two months later it would pop up over here. You would then solve it over here, and then three months later it would pop up over there.
[00:02:58] And, and I, and I kept on working on these dysfunctionalities, until I all of a sudden realized it's not the people in the system that's the problem. It's the system itself. And once I had that realization and it, and it echoed so well with me, it, it resonated so well with me. I just couldn't let go of the desire to go for a hunt for a better organizational model.
[00:03:23] So that's what kicked me off. That was one thing. And the other thing is like, you know, I'm not a future scientist, uh, and I can't see into the future. But if you just look into some of the, the, the tendencies in our society, I think if you look into the future, what's coming at us, and then you look at this organizational model, it just doesn't fit.
[00:03:48] I mean, um, so yeah, I think it was an urge to kind of use my knowledge and experience in the. Attempt to design something better for the future.
[00:03:59] Shani: Hmm. I love that. And I love it. You're highlighting around the system being the problem. Because people have infinite potential, right? We can be anything, um, given the different settings.
[00:04:13] Mette: It was super hard for people to kind of feel that they were responsible for the dysfunctionality. So,
[00:04:18] Shani: Mmm.
[00:04:19] Mette: I mean, I've also been a coach for many years and I've had leaders sitting in my chair, feeling that it was there. Responsibility to, to solve it all. And I've had employees who felt guilt or shame or fear that they couldn't perform well enough in the system. So I think it's also a tall order to ask people to bear the responsibility of an organization, not really working well on their shoulders and on their shoulders only.
[00:04:49] Shani: I like that and it makes a lot of sense. I always see it as the parallel thing because, you know, We are at the same time as we are in the system. We are the system. There's this saying, like, if you're in traffic, you are traffic. So it's a little bit of both, but, uh, and I, I completely have also observed what you're saying around this, the responsibility and how it has such a negative impact on us.
[00:05:15] Especially when we actually get responsibility with no mandate to change anything. So then we're kind of paired with this impossible, kind of friction that just results in a lot of, frustration. Amazing.
[00:05:35] Mette: mandate. like I so often when I work with this, when I, especially in the initial phases, when I speak to, to, to groups of leaders, they would say, Oh, but we already delegate a lot. And to me, the difference between delegation and having a mandate is when you delegate, you delegate the right, uh, to make the right decisions. But when you give people a mandate, you actually delegate the right to make the wrong decisions. Also, because in my experience, I've seen a lot of leaders, including myself, to be quite honest, delegate responsibility to a team, but the second they make a decision, A, you either do not agree upon or B, leads to some kind of a flaw or a mistake.
[00:06:23] All of a sudden the delegation disappears and you centralize, you pull back the responsibility. And people know that. I mean, we are pretty fast in spotting these kinds of, of patterns and dynamics. So when people say, I'm going to delegate the responsibility to you, we all go like, right up until the second I make a decision you don't like, or if I make a mistake, which we all do.
[00:06:48] So to me, the whole, not the whole idea, but an important part of this is to say, if you, if you want to make communities of employees work well together. You have to also give them the responsibility, of course, to make the right decisions, but also to make the wrong decisions, and when they make the wrong decisions, to find out how to mitigate. that's, that's not the same as delegation, at least not how we have seen it played out.
[00:07:16] Shani: I love that distinction and just that nuance of, and as you're saying, how we often also pull back on the right to do something as a consequence, almost like. Treating adults like children. Um, even though I think actually we do give children a chance to make mistakes and try again more often than we might do with adults in a, in a work setting.
[00:07:40] Mette: And it's important to emphasize that this is not the same as saying, okay, but then we don't care. And we'll just let go. And people can make a ton of mistakes. And I don't, you know, that's not the point. The point is that the fundamental belief behind shared leadership is that every person is responsible and would like to make a contribution and prefers not to make mistakes.
[00:07:59] But I think in the world we live in, it's just mission impossible not to make mistakes. So when we do make mistakes or make the wrong decisions, or try out something that doesn't lead to what we thought it should, then I would like to be given the opportunity to correct my wrongdoing. And I think it's the most respectful way of treating each other is to say, you, you asked me to do something and I, and I don't do it the right way.
[00:08:24] I would love to prove to you that I can see that it wasn't perfect and that I can correct it and then deliver it to you.
[00:08:33] Shani: That sounds like shared responsibility, I think, as opposed to what you're saying, or just sharing the right to make a decision, because sharing responsibility is sharing it both for good and bad. Mm hmm.
[00:08:46] Mette: It's
[00:08:47] Shani: I would love, I would love to like dig deeper into this with you because of course, like, I can, I can really empathize and share a lot of your kind of views on the broken system.
[00:08:59] And so what is this better shape of shared leadership? What does it actually look like? I mean, one thing here we talked about. Delegating the, the responsibility and in a different way, but what else?
[00:09:17] Mette: How to make a very long story short, Shani, I think when you asked me it actually that the, when I draw it and I'm not a very good drawer, but, but I, I usually draw the, and a lot of people that work with this do draw the traditional organization as a triangle and the one with shared leadership as a circle.
[00:09:36] And, and I guess it derives from, well, I don't know, maybe it's from sociocracy that talks about circles, but if we were to keep to that image Transcribed I think at the core of shared leadership is the focus on teams. So rather than individuals and rather on leaders as such. So the, the aim of shared leadership is actually to make teams work as, as well as possible.
[00:10:03] So we're basically leaning into everything we know about what is needed in order for collaboration to work, what is harmful for good collaborative communities. How do we make sure that we find a balance between making sure that people thrive while at the same time, we have progress towards our shared aim and, and that's at the core of shared leadership.
[00:10:28] And, and it goes also to speak to a myth that I very often run into that if one person doesn't decide, then no one decides, and that's not the point here. So the point is to set up an organizational design that makes it possible for teams to decide together. And it's not the same as nobody's deciding.
[00:10:47] It's just that we are sharing the responsibility. We're sharing the leadership for the tasks that we are giving a mandate to have full decision power over.
[00:10:57] Shani: Hmm.
[00:10:58] Mette: I guess that's the short version.
[00:11:00] Shani: That's the short version. Well, we're going to go into a little longer version. I've heard you speak about something that really resonated with me and I would love for us to unpack it a little. I've heard you talk about, um, Decisions based on consent instead of consensus. Can you, can you unpack that for us a little?
[00:11:22] Mette: I would love to, and I would say, I would also wish I had come up with that, but I have borrowed it again from, from the sociocratic toolbox. So let me first explain what it is and then why it makes sense in terms of a different organizational design. So the difference between consensus and consent is that consensus based decisions are based on all of us pursuing our own preference. So a consensus based decision is based on you and I coming to a point where we agree, where we both can see that our preferences have been addressed. That leads to a lot of power struggle. So let's say you and I are in a team together. You have opinion A, I don't think that's really a good idea. I mean, I would never have done it that way.
[00:12:10] You know, it's a, my experience tells me that, you know, I've tried this before. It doesn't work. It's just a bad idea. I wouldn't like to do it. So I will start arguing for point of view B, and then you would go, Oh, no, no, no, that's not, you know, give me a chance to try this out. And then you and I will start campaigning for each our point of view, you would try to see if you can find allies.
[00:12:36] among our team members. And I would do the same because we both know that if we can't get to agree, it might come to a vote. And for that, we need our allies. So you can see there's a risk in these kinds of decision making structures that that we will polarize. And we want to find a decision making model that can actually bridge my experience with your point of view. So instead of saying to people, okay, go for your preference, we say, what would happen if we expand? The zone of preference into what we call the zone of tolerance. So I might not fully agree with what you're doing, but instead of, uh, campaigning my own point of views. I would actually go into a completely different process together with you and the rest of the team, because you would not ask for me to agree.
[00:13:23] You would ask for me to consent. And that means that, that means that you and I will start looking for, is there anything about your proposal that would harm our shared aim? Is it, is it dangerous for our team to try out what you are suggesting? And that's a different question. So you're not asking me to say, yes. You're asking me to help you figure out if there's a harm in what you're proposing. And then I might not fully agree, but if there's no harm, or if there is a risk that we can kind of contain, you would get my consent. So we have these three questions again, from the sociocratic toolbox. We would say, is it good enough for now? Is it safe enough to try and can we change it if it doesn't work?
[00:14:08] And good enough for now doesn't mean that we will decrease our ambition level. It just means Shani actually did her homework. She did consult people who would be impacted by this decision. She did research whether it's, you know, is it allowed? I mean, is it in compliance with laws and stuff? So provided you have done that is the risk that we consider is attached to this proposal.
[00:14:31] Can we contain it? So is it safe enough? And then if it turns out not to work exactly as you think? Then we can change it, adapt it.
[00:14:40] Shani: Mm.
[00:14:40] Mette: a kind of decision making that first of all, takes all the ego drivers out of the, out of the, out of the discussion. And it, and it kind of like makes a lot of power struggles evaporate because it's not about you, me trying to convince you, or you trying to convince me.
[00:14:56] It's about us together figuring out, is there any harm in what you're suggesting? And if not, we would salute you for your initiative and we would experiment with trying something new because we are convinced it will. provide some learning.
[00:15:10] Shani: Mm.
[00:15:11] Mette: So that's what consent based decision making is. And if you look into shared leadership, so a key principle in shared leadership is we want to distribute power. So we don't want to produce the feeling of feeling powerless. So, so consent based decision making is about distributing the power so that we together make decisions that would enable initiatives and action. rather than, promote power struggles and, and, and keeping a few knowledgeable or influential or very, outspoken persons, in a position of feeling powerful.
[00:15:50] Shani: Mm.
[00:15:50] Mette: was a long answer. I
[00:15:53] Shani: that was amazing. I think it's really interesting. And I want to pick up on something else that I heard you say, which, I mean, I also know to, to be focused in a lot of shared leadership, which is, you said, you talked about a shared aim and, and kind of pivoting this focus from who has the power to what are we doing and like, you know, exiting the ego from the equation and making it about the task.
[00:16:18] What else can we learn about this kind of principle of focusing on the shared aim rather than our individual interests ,
[00:16:26] Mette: mean, it's super hard because it's not what we've been brought up to do. So, I mean, it's not a new thing to say that the organization should be purpose driven. The thing is that sometimes kind of get lost in translation. So the whole thing about shared leadership is that we look into some of these principles of which I have defined six in the book that I've written.
[00:16:47] And, the whole notion is that these are fine principles and we have, you know, appealing views upon what we believe to true is true about humans. But if we do not install some structures and processes around it, we will just swap back into our habitual thinking. So we need structures, uh, and processes to, to help us get there.
[00:17:10] And so when we say aim first, It's basically not to introduce something completely new because that's why we go to work. We go to work to make a difference together, but we use it as a design principle. When we, for example, establish a team, we don't necessarily look at, you know, would you like to work with me or not?
[00:17:30] Do you and I have the same educational background and where in the organization do we belong? And stuff like that we look into is, is our shared aim clear. So in order for someone to give us the mandate, They need to make the aim and the tasks clear and us receiving the mandate. We need to have a very clear understanding of what the shared aim and the task is.
[00:17:53] Otherwise we can't, we need that as a guiding tool for, for our decision making. So that's another reason why we like to work with consent based decision making. It's focusing much more on is the proposal at hand, beneficial or harmful towards the aim and not so much is the proposal at hand something I like or I don't like.
[00:18:17] The latter discussion is actually not interesting at all. So we practice not asking the question, do we agree? Because we basically don't care.
[00:18:25] I really like that. And I think it also, what you were saying also emphasizes for me this idea of needing to actually replace one structure with another. I feel like. In a lot of conversations, people perceive autonomous or self led or sociocratic or whatever label we want to put on that type of organization as maybe more chaotic, free of structure.
[00:18:52] Shani: And actually, you know, at least from my point of view, the more I've learned and engaged in learning in it to the contrary, they're extremely structured and principle driven on a select few things. And on other things, there is a lot of liberty, but some things are. Very, very clear. And I think that's really interesting.
[00:19:14] Just how, like, how does that, how does that help us drive, you know, changing our behaviors? Because as you're saying, it's hard. We're all grown up in. In this like industrial era of work, which is pretty hierarchical, which is very product driven, which is quite ego and power driven in many ways. And coming into this is, is quite different.
[00:19:36] Mette: It's, it's actually, which has surprised me a little bit, but it's actually, I find it easier to have people resonate with the values, the core principles, the, the kind of fundamental, we have this word in Danish called menneskesyn, and I, and I never really found an English translation for it, but it's basically the fundamental beliefs we have about people, what we think is true about human beings or not.
[00:20:03] And those, I, I find that it's, it's fairly easy for people to, to. identify with that when it comes to the structures and the processes, then it becomes like real, it becomes tangible, and it becomes something you can integrate into your everyday work, which is a huge strength, because that's when you really start changing the way of working.
[00:20:28] It's not by talking about values and stuff. It's when it really comes down to the specifics. And maybe that's why it's more difficult. So people will go like, but isn't this a very structured way of, for example, conducting a meeting? And do you really need to facilitate it this hard? And do you really need to spend time clarifying what is the responsibility in your role and in my role?
[00:20:53] And I'm like, yes, that is actually needed because it may feel cumbersome in the beginning, but once it's in We can see how it just makes decision making processes much faster. People feel it's much easier to bring up, ideas. Those being extremely extroverted feel that it's easier to listen. You know, someone like me who's extroverted, I've always been told my entire life, Mette, you have to learn to listen more.
[00:21:19] And I'm like, but I really want to, but it's difficult. So these structures, they do help me. As an extrovert and the introverts, they have time to think because they don't have to raise their hand and stuff. So there's a lot of structure in this. And I think everybody you talk to that has implemented or installed some kind of shared leadership would say two things.
[00:21:43] You need clear structure and processes and you need to facilitate them.
[00:21:47] Shani: Hmm.
[00:21:48] Mette: So I just had a conversation with a colleague of mine in an organization that's pretty advanced in this. And they said exactly the same to a group of leaders. who interviewed her about, you know, how to get this done. So you're right.
[00:22:01] There's a lot of structure.
[00:22:02] Shani: Yeah. I also like that you're pointing out something about roles. Um, I've, I've met this before also in facilitation sometimes that when you actually give people a role or there is a clear way to kind of engage, then it actually, and it can feel a little bit artificial, but it actually gives people more space.
[00:22:27] And a little bit more clarity on what to expect and how to manage situations. I feel like that is similar to what we just talked about before. It just kind of helps us shave off this like personal ego or fear, or should I take this personally? No, this is the process that we're all engaging in. So there's actually space to make it about the task.
[00:22:49] Mette: And when you talk about space, I would say the informal space is something that a lot of us like. It has this image of being a place where it's easier to relate to each other, to just go with the flow and see where the energy takes you and so forth. So it's hyggelly, as we say in Danish, it's, it's a cozy place to be for a lot of people.
[00:23:10] And, and we feel less restrained by this informal space. The problem with the informal space is that a lot of things become implicit. So for example, as a newcomer into a team, it's really hard to figure out what are the unwritten rules here, and how do you actually make decision making and, and what happens between, you know, where there's a lot of informal decision making going on.
[00:23:33] So people come prepared. And maybe they have already made a decision before they enter the meeting. And who should I talk to? And can I sit in this chair? And, am I allowed to ask questions? And all this is going on inside people who haven't made up the unwritten rules. So the informal space carries with it a huge risk of dividing the team into the powerful and the powerless. And that's exactly what we're trying to avoid with shared leadership. We do not find any meaning or any sense in putting people in a position where they are powerless, because without power, you can't act. And that's what we want us all to do as employees. We want to be able to act upon what we see. So the informal space, yes, it might be nice. And we can have a lot of informal spaces. But when we conduct shared leadership, we don't want the space to be informal. We want it to be formalized to a pretty high degree. And, and that's to avoid informal hierarchy, interpersonal power struggles. Too high a fear level, because of fear of being excluded by saying the wrong thing.
[00:24:42] So there's a lot of things in the formalized way of working together that kind of calms down the nerve, the nerve system, because I know when I go into a meeting, and if you are the facilitator. I know exactly what the process is going to be. The decision making is completely transparent and you will help us as the facilitator to make sure that what we talk about is what we are supposed to talk about and not having someone hijack the whole agenda by having some difference and being very outspoken.
[00:25:12] So yes, a lot of structure and a lot of processes on governance. Not on how you solve your task. That's where your, experience and professionalism and so forth come in. But on governance, we have quite some structure.
[00:25:29] Shani: Yeah.
[00:25:30] Mette: Which is good because then anyone can get started. It's there. The toolbox is there.
[00:25:34] Shani: it's there and you can distribute so you can share the leadership. Yeah. Of, of how it works. I love that. I think it's amazing. And I, I'm curious in kind of two directions. I'll start with one. But one thing that you've spoken about a lot now is, is the relationship with power. I would love to dive into that a little bit more.
[00:25:56] Because I think, Our current paradigm is a quite unhealthy relationship to power. And yeah, I'm curious, what are your observations on that, on these like power struggles and relationships?
[00:26:11] Mette: Careful now. It's my favorite topic. So, you know, I think if to start with the existing paradigm, let me start in another place. So, first of all, power will always be in the room as soon as we become a group or a team. And, And I came, I stumbled across a piece of research, which dates back to 2016, where a group of scientists, they set out to figure out why is it that people reach out for power? Why is it that we crave it? What is the driving dynamics behind trying to get power? And what they came up with made so much sense to me. So they basically asked the simple question, do we want power because we want to have power over others? Or do we want to have power because we want to protect our own autonomy? And the research indicated the latter, which makes a ton of sense to me.
[00:27:07] So we all need power in order to feel that we are, you know, that we have some kind of autonomy and autonomy equals control over our own life at like a deeper level. So therefore we, we know power will always be in the room and we completely acknowledge that. So here's where we, where we kind of, go each our way because in the, in the traditional hierarchy and in the industrial way of thinking, there's like, as if, if you dig deep enough, you can find that there's a fundamental belief that, people given power will manage and hold that power in an ethical way. IE So if you are at the top of the pyramid and you are thereby granted, a lot of power, we believe that you will serve the shared interest. You will focus on the aim, you will use your power to do what's best for the majority of the people and the shared aim. I think I don't need to say anymore, we have enough cases to prove that there's a huge risk in believing that.
[00:28:09] And so in shared leadership, we say believing is one thing, knowing is maybe better. So what if we have a principle that says we want to distribute power so that everybody gets a little bit And then we set structures and processes in place in acknowledgement of the fact that there will always be power in the room, but we don't want to just have one person having it and then believing that they will, you know, um, manage it with power. And I think you can see, I mean, at a societal level, you have the split of power between the policymakers and the, and the, and the law, the justice, the law system. And so forth. So you see attempts to try to navigate around the fact that there's a risk of corruption and people becoming self centered when they get too much power. We basically just taking that acknowledgement one step further and say, let's install some mechanisms in the team so that we make sure that everybody gets a little bit of power. And, and I'm sure that there's a neuroscience, uh, uh, research going on that would indicate what happens to your brain if you feel too powerful over too long. And there's a ton of, psychosocial, experiments, among others. A guy called DHA Ner, from from Berkeley University in California. He, he's conducted a ton of these, and they all show the same thing. It's unhealthy to have too much power. And it's unhealthy not to have anything. So why don't we go for a distribution of it?
[00:29:39] Shani: That is really interesting. I think what, what arises for me as I'm listening to you is, I mean, I think both you and I've seen these power struggles occur in, in our corporate careers and, or in, in, or just organizational life. But also knowing that you work with implementing different types of structures and how are these new structures then met perhaps by people who have power?
[00:30:12] What, what happens?
[00:30:16] Mette: The interesting thing is that it's, it both, I mean, of course there's a challenge in it. If you are already a leader at a certain level where you are. Because of your position, given power, but there's also a lot of informal power already distributed in the organization. So for example, say let's say I just finished my, my studies and I enter a workplace and there's somebody there with 25 years of experience already there, you would have like a power, difference. So we would acknowledge that 25 years of experience has more experience and should be listened to. But it doesn't mean that that person has the right to have power over this other person. And now I forgot your question. How do people meet it? And
[00:31:04] Shani: no, I'm curious, like, is it, do people meet it with relief, with resistance? Like what, what happens to those leaders who move from a traditional setting where the leader is supposed to have a lot of answers to this setting that you were describing, which feels like, I mean. Um, it's a very different role that a leader plays within that paradigm.
[00:31:31] Hmm.
[00:31:36] Mette: I think on top of my mind, I think I mean, first of all, I am mainly invited in because there is a leader who really wants to, you know, do things in a different way, who there's a lot of assignments and polarization that comes as a consequence of the existing model that they don't thrive with.
[00:31:57] And most leaders want the same as the employees. They want to have a strong collaboration. They want to make a difference in this world. They, you know, So, so I'm, I'm always invited in because there's a leader at a certain level in the organization who wants to try something new in order to improve things or enable the organization.
[00:32:18] To meet the demands of the future. Then what I see sometimes is that while they resonate with the values and the fundamental beliefs and the thinking behind it, they also have, they are also in the process of change. So I've often come across the misperception that if you, as a leader, start a change process, people tend to think that, you know, exactly where you're going to end and leaders are just as much in a change process as the employees are in this sense.
[00:32:49] So I find that where it works really well is where the leaders are able to show that vulnerability and that openness to say, I'm convinced that this is the right way to go. I don't know exactly where we're going to end. And I'm sure I'm gonna, you know, there's a lot of pitfalls and I will have like fallback mechanisms into old boss behavior and stuff, but help me, you know, and the leaders that do that, they would find that already at the outset, there's a collaboration around this.
[00:33:20] But, uh, so that's one aspect. Another aspect is I think that a lot of, of leaders, um, feel that they are like in a squeeze because there's a, there's a like general expectation that the leader knows everything that's going on in the team. And so when faced with that demand from higher in the hierarchy, they are afraid not to be good leaders anymore in the eyes of those higher in the hierarchy.
[00:33:48] So, so there's a, there's a potential dilemma between wanting to serve upwards and wanting to serve outwards in the organization. So what you think is right to do in your own organization and with your employees. Tend to sometimes conflict with what you are being confronted with, of expectations higher up in the hierarchy.
[00:34:12] So I salute the leaders who try out small experience with this, because it's not easy because they are in the middle of a transition themselves and they have to manage expectations from above.
[00:34:24] Shani: Hmm.
[00:34:26] Mette: So I usually recommend that if you go into this transition and maybe we can come back to how you start, but you start small, I would say.
[00:34:36] When you go into this transition, there needs to be a room for dialogue with the employees, but there also needs to be a room for dialogue among the leaders in terms of how does this challenge me and my, deep story about what makes a good leader.
[00:34:50] Shani: Yeah.
[00:34:51] Mette: can I, can I live with the fact that if someone asks me about a detail and can I live with the fact that I might have to answer, I don't know.
[00:34:59] Shani: Hmm.
[00:34:59] Mette: Or, you know, I'm not in control of this, you know, can you, can you live with that? Um, so there's a lot of, of dilemmas, but I think what drives the leaders that I'm working with is the fact that they can see that the existing model is, is broken and, and this somehow makes sense. And then they can live with the fact that it's, it's fun.
[00:35:22] It's encouraging and it's difficult at the same,
[00:35:27] Shani: Yeah. I mean, good things don't have to be easy. Um,
[00:35:31] Mette: at once.
[00:35:32] Shani: no, no, definitely not straight away. But I'm curious to go down the door that you opened of like, how do you get started? Because I think it aligns with with another question I have left from a little bit earlier in terms of what are actually the structures that you start with then?
[00:35:52] What can you actually do? Because I know also you work in a, in a big context of a municipality. I think it, is it, what, 8, 000 employees? So, it's not a small organization, by any means, and, and a pretty complex one at that, because the municipality is, It's a pretty wide range of different types of people and different kinds of services.
[00:36:15] So I can imagine that, you know, that's his own set of challenges. I think I'm, I'm very curious to go down that kind of road that you, the path that you opened up and just, uh, reflect a little bit more on a, how you get started, but then also what do you get started with? What are, what are kind of the legs that you, that you, you, you stand on?
[00:36:33] Um, um, um,
[00:36:39] Mette: for two years where I had, one of my main tasks was to develop an integrated version of shared leadership that could work in that public sector, diverse, complex organizational setting. But I'm also working with organizations that consist of only eight people.
[00:36:56] So, you know, there's, it goes with the big ones and the small ones. So how to get started. I think that you have to check out first, at least, at least three things. So one thing is you have to know why you want to do this. So installing shared leadership is never a purpose in itself.
[00:37:14] It's something we want to do because when we look at our organization and the things that we have to do as an organization, and we look into the future trends. Then, then it doesn't, I mean, you have to somehow feel that the existing organizational format doesn't allow you to meet the demands in the future. And you may not be 100 percent convinced, but you should have kind of like a fundamental belief that we need to do something different and that why needs to be clear. So that of course has to do with strategy work and, and, and, but that's super important that you can tell because it's not going to be easy and it's going to take a while, so you need to be fueled.
[00:37:55] And, and, and motivated by the, the overall purpose of getting this done. So that's the first thing on your checklist. The second thing on your checklist is to make sure that, that the values and the fundamental beliefs and shared leadership resonate with you, because it is so motivating in my experience to work with this, when you have this really belief that, yes, I do think it's important to distribute power.
[00:38:22] Yes, I do believe that it's important to put the team. before the individual. Yes, I do think that it's important or a prerequisite to have a focus on our shared aim. And so, and also the, the, the beliefs about human beings. I do believe people want to collaborate. I do believe that people thrive with being shown trust and, and being recognized for their positive intentions. So check out, I mean, can you, you don't need to love all of them, but you need to at least be able to identify with them. So have a clear why make sure the fundamental stories and values resonate with you. And then make sure you're not alone, because it's really hard to do if you are completely alone. So you may start alone, which is how it often happens, but fairly soon in this journey, make sure that you have someone to travel with, because the whole idea of shared leadership is that you shouldn't do it alone.
[00:39:18] So you might as well start out from, uh, by, by making sure. So that's what, you know, kind of three things on your checklist that I would advise people to do. Um, and then I would dive into, so what is shared leadership? Uh, I mean, then that's the fundamentals. And then in order to start preparing, I would dive into, so what is shared leadership?
[00:39:40] I mean, read some books or listen to this podcast, podcast, or, see if there's some training available. Or you could look into the sociocracy toolbox. There's a lot of specific tools down there that's, that could be useful. And then I would start assuming I'm a leader. I would start out by acknowledging that if I'm going to get this to work, I need to not be the one that facilitates the processes it puts too much power in my basket. So I would focus on the facilitation skills, who, how can we build these facilitation skills and the, and the appreciation of the fact that we need someone to, to facilitate our processes. So that goes to like of kind, like three things on your checklist, start preparing by getting to understand what it is and develop the competences to do it, and then you're ready to go.
[00:40:36] And then I would advise you to start specific. So don't start by changing the entire organizational structure. You know, that's what we often do when we make organizational changes. We make a new organogram. There's too many confusion costs, related to that. So don't go there. Start with the processes and start small, start easy, and go slow.
[00:41:00] Shani: Yeah.
[00:41:01] Mette: So like, find a task that enables you to have a clear aim, establish a team around it if you don't have it already, start with maybe one or two teams. And don't, don't choose a task that's too complicated or, has too many stakeholders involved or where there's too many emotions involved. I mean, don't start with the salary negotiations, for example, don't go there and then start easy, start small and go slow, and then you will build a confidence and a deeper understanding of what these processes and structures actually, what are the benefits associated with it.
[00:41:43] Shani: Um,
[00:41:44] Mette: And then you can kind of like, so it's like a jumbo jet taking off, right? A lot, kind of a long runway, have patience, you know, and then once you feel confident and you have a deeper understanding what it is, then you can really, uh, accelerate from there and, and, and include a lot more. Yeah.
[00:42:04] Shani: Um,
[00:42:05] Mette: Yeah. Yes.
[00:42:07] Shani: small and slow. It's a, I feel like it goes against almost everything we learn in, in any big organization where we always want to do it all at once and for everyone. And I resonate with that observation also from points of view of working with, with human centered methods, which are also very much based in a lot of these principles that you talk about, you know, making it about the other, the person that you're empathizing with, or the problem that you're wanting to solve, or, Not so much making it actually about even what the solution looks like.
[00:42:42] It's more about being in the process. Um, and starting out with that is Both exciting and really, really hard. It's quite confronting, I would say, to us as individuals sometimes. Because, I mean, I've personally had the experience of feeling like, Oh, okay, I get to let go of my ideas here. Or I get to let go of something.
[00:43:08] Or I get to step aside. And it's not only breaking habit, it's also having this kind of different, conversation with ourselves, I think. Which usually is easier to practice small first and not go to the most biggest charge project.
[00:43:23] Mette: Yeah, and also in a safe environment where, like, when I worked in the municipality, I had this notion that don't campaign it. I mean, you don't need to tell a lot of people that you start doing this. I mean, don't campaign it because it would just, you know, put the spotlight on you and you actually need a safe space to try this out.
[00:43:42] So make like an internal promise to say, we want to do this because we want to be better at what we are supposed to do with this workplace, while at the same time, we develop a workplace where we all really like to be and where there's room and space for everybody. Who wants to contribute? And then later on, you can start telling the world about what you're doing.
[00:44:02] But if you, if you do that, I mean, and I see that I think a lot is like you go out and you, and you communicate your intentions. We plan to do this, and this is in our strategy. And in three years, we will be like this and this, and then, and people will start asking questions and demanding results. And you don't know in this process when the results are going to evolve. And that's, you know, I can hear my inner KPI enthusiast say, What are you talking about? Right. But, but we do this because we do want to become better at what we do while creating a safe space for everybody to contribute. And if we want to create that safe space, we shouldn't do what we normally do. And that is to put down like a milestone plan and, asking ourselves to do better than we did before after three months and so forth. So let go of that kind of thinking and then have a fundamental belief in the fact that if we can do as well as we do now or even better, then that's our purpose. But we need time to get there.
[00:45:07] Shani: Yeah. I really like that. I remember reading a few years ago, I was reading about, I think it was Deloitte, but I might be mistaken, that had created a training center where you could go and practice certain skills. And you never got any like assessment on how well you did. You only got something for the fact that you went there and practiced.
[00:45:33] And I think that plays into what you're seeing here also around creating that safe space where we actually feel it's allowed to be practicing something. Um, and yeah, I mean, even, I feel like a lot of this conversation has revolved around things that are, that differ quite a lot from, you know, from the norm and even this that you're saying, like, don't show intent, show results.
[00:45:56] Like when you have results, tell the story about those instead, kind of, at least that's what I, what I heard. And I think that is also something that goes against, you know, what we're used to of like, do you have a change management plan? Are you building engagement? And, and I can very much relate because I also sometimes find it's like, well, If you're working really closely with people, so as soon as you communicate, you create expectations and then you can create disappointment as well.
[00:46:22] And then you might create, a lacking desire even to do something.
[00:46:28] Mette: Also about for who are we doing this? You know, is it is it to prove that I was capable of making a fantastic strategy so that I can prove to the world that I made a strategy and I made a plan and we follow through as we as we plan to do? Or is it to basically develop? I mean, strive for an organization that's You know, is, is better at doing what it should.
[00:46:53] And so it's a learning organization and it's a high performing organization, you know, with this caring, inclusive culture, that's the aim. And so we don't wanna deliver results at any cost. So there's like also this kind of like, to use a cliche, but there's this kind of like sustainable or regenerative, intention behind it.
[00:47:13] And that is to say, you know, there's a lot of things we wanna create in the process. collaboration, less, fewer ego drivers, because we believe it's a pathway to delivering better results. Um, and that takes time and we will, you know, we will make flaws and take detours and we need help to get back and there should be room for that as long as we are gently and caringly, but persistently wanting to see slow progress, slow.
[00:47:50] Shani: Yeah. Well, slow, slow that lasts. I really like that you're bringing that up. I think that we, the way the world is and the way our structures are set up, it's a lot of change and progress for the sake of progress and making that visible, but whether or not it lasts is kind of secondary. And I really like that.
[00:48:14] This is, this is a take that is more. grounding almost. And I think you also came back, for me, like I was hearing this reminder of what you were talking about in Danish, it's the word in Swedish, it's the same, mänhusyn, so it's like the, our underlying assumptions about humans. And I find that I question those a lot when looking at current structures.
[00:48:40] The way we kind of treat people like children, we act as if we can't trust them. We act as if we're assuming that they can't do a good job. And to your point in the beginning, sometimes we're pushing all the responsibility out on people, but we're not taking any responsibility also for the system, actually meeting them with the right context.
[00:49:01] And being built on the right assumptions, which is a, it's a completely different story.
[00:49:06] Mette: And what happens is that any. Modern leader. I mean, I don't think you would find anyone who would say otherwise than, we have a trust based, approach to leadership and, and, and people will go like super, you know, that sounds great. So how about all these control mechanisms and how about all these, you know, reporting requirements and how about all this micromanagement going on and how about you taking away my power when I make a decision that you don't like or, you know, so it's, it's, and what happens then is that you basically develop or produce cynicism.
[00:49:45] Shani: Hmm.
[00:49:45] Mette: And that's, I find to be, you know, I've seen it so many times that, and that's what I meant in the beginning about this corporate theater. So you have this, you like the words that people say, and there's nothing wrong with the words, you know, the intentions and the words are all fine. The problem is when there's a discrepancy between what's being said and then what's being, enforced in terms of structure and processes.
[00:50:09] I had a conversation today actually with a leader. Who wants to embark on this? And she's building an organization from scratch. And then she said to me, what am I going to say in a second where I have my employees coming to me and say, I want to raise, and now I'm going to tell you why this is because I did all these fantastic things and I'm like, yeah, but that builds on assumption that you have to fight for recognition and yet you have to fight for getting a salary raise and that your manager doesn't see you.
[00:50:41] So you have to prepare yourself like, you know. Down to the detail. And then you have to go and promote yourself and nobody likes it. The employees, I mean, I never liked it as an employee so what if you replace that structure with a different structure where acknowledgement is something you get a lot and not only from your manager and you make the salary policy, something that is. It's not, not the decisions on whether you should get or not get, maybe, but at least what kind of principles would we like our salary system to, to reflect?
[00:51:15] Shani: Hmm.
[00:51:15] Mette: It's just a different way of going about it. And we have so many systems that are trust based and we want to collaborate, but you build in individual targets that justify or do not justify that you should get individual benefits.
[00:51:31] It was the worst year for me as a manager. It was when people had to get the bonus.
[00:51:37] Shani: Oh my goodness. Yes, I've, I've had the same experience and I, I still remember when I managed the team and I remember going to my own manager and saying, you know, This is, this is all wrong because some of these people, they're not even in the right place. They didn't even get to choose to be on this team. They didn't even have a relevant choice of tasks to do. I mean, the fact that they're here and they're smiling and they're doing their best, I think it's amazing. Like some people would have given up and they're not, they're here. And here we are judging their performance. But we're not taking any responsibility in the system.
[00:52:16] As an organization, we're not looking at ourselves and going, Have we provided the right context for this person to, to grow? Do we know what their skills are? Have we given them the right opportunities to actually exercise those? No, there was no, in that whole dialogue, there was no responsibility taken from the organization side to look at, Like ourselves, including if you're a leader, then you, you have a little bit more influence or you have a part in the conversation.
[00:52:45] What are we doing differently? No, we're all just following this strange process. Which is based on also the idea. I mean, I've struggled with that idea. It's an underlying assumption that you can be a high or a low performer, for example,
[00:52:59] Mette: It's one of those. Pre assumptions, um, that we carry into, uh, this training process. So, for example, I very often get the question, So, Mette, what if you establish, uh, a team where you have shared leadership? And then Joe doesn't contribute as much as Sue does. So think a while about that question. Does Joe need to contribute just as much as Sue does? I mean, what if Sue is in a position in her life where she has the energy and the motivation, and maybe she has the time to work a bit more, uh, maybe Joe is doing a fantastic job at what he's doing, but he's not contributing, maybe the same amount of hours, maybe doesn't take an initiative as often, but he's a valued and important member of the team.
[00:53:54] Why do we need to contribute the same? Isn't it part of being a diverse team that you have some who contribute a lot and some less? And, and I mean, so what is the problem in that actually? And I think that's, I mean, I love it when people come to me with these kinds of questions where like, okay, there's an underlying assumption here that we need to bring to the surface.
[00:54:18] So what is the underlying assumption? The underlying assumption is that it's unfair if I get the same salary as you, if I do more than you do,
[00:54:27] Shani: mm
[00:54:28] Mette: or what is it? I mean, let's, let's explore that together. What is it that, why does that create fear or uncertainty or a sense of unfairness if we do not all contribute with the same?
[00:54:40] Shani: mm
[00:54:41] Mette: if we are, we have scarcity of workforce, we need to welcome everybody who can contribute regardless of how much they contribute. So let's welcome everybody and then figure out if we. What does it take for us to contain or to have a team where we do not all contribute with the same? Isn't that the whole idea of inclusion and building a more human workplace?
[00:55:05] So I always think it's super intriguing when people, you know, when they ask this question, there's always an underlying assumption that's like, maybe we should bring that to the table and investigate it a little bit more and say, does this fit 2024 or where does it come from?
[00:55:20] Shani: Yeah. I love that. I think that's this notion of, is this the right question? Like is this, does it need to be fair? Is it really that, that we're striving for? Is it something else? Is such a good, perspective and lens to bring with us when we explore these things is as same as you. Is it relevant? And also, I think we tend to look at things very linear, but even a project is cyclical.
[00:55:52] Maybe Joe doesn't contribute as much now, but he will further down the line on the project and then another person will contribute less and it will be something different. So yeah, I agree. I think there's, there's a lot of assumptions to
[00:56:07] Mette: a lot of assumptions, and it's so interesting because also, like you said, does it need to be fair? I mean, what is fair? Is it fair to ask of Joe that he should do more than he's capable of? And is it fair that we as a team actually promote him turning in, uh, you know, a sick leave because he's stressed?
[00:56:23] Is that fair? Or is it fair to say if we want to be, if we want to offer people equality, we need to work with equity, i. e. people need to be treated differently in order to feel that they are equally included. So there's a, I mean, yeah, you get the drift. It's like, kind of like there's so many interesting fundamental beliefs behind this that.
[00:56:47] And it's not to say that we should sit down and discuss philosophy and fundamental beliefs on a daily basis. But if, if some of these assumptions surface and they turn out to be like a barrier for us moving forward with this, and they're really valid questions. So I salute people who bring them forward because it's like, it's like, thank you, because you are basically phrasing what's what's maybe inside a lot of us.
[00:57:11] And that stands in the way for us building a much better structure and a much better collaborative environment. than just reproducing the fundamental beliefs from the old system that we're trying to do.
[00:57:22] Shani: I love that. I actually, I taught a class yesterday on culture and there were a lot of questions and to some I actually just answered a little bit similar to what you were saying, I don't know. But I think it's good that you're asking. And probably you should ask it in your team. And maybe you can agree on something.
[00:57:42] And you can surface an assumption that you want to challenge. Or maybe there isn't. Here's the universally right solution to fairness. In terms of contribution, but perhaps you can agree in your team what fair looks like to you or, you know, whatever level that that needs to be. So yeah, I guess, you know, maybe not a fully philosophical conversation, but I think it's good to have them.
[00:58:07] Mette: No, and also, again, it goes to show that you need someone there to facilitate that discussion, because otherwise, one, it can go on forever, two, it doesn't lead to anything. So it would be, but there, so there has to be a purpose of having that discussion. So take the, the leader I talked to early on today, She kind of came to the realization of saying, but all what she mostly wanted was for the employees to say in a couple of years that they felt that their salary system was fair. Okay. So if that is the intention that you want the salary system to be fair, then you can start exploring what does fair mean in terms of a salary system?
[00:58:44] Shani: Mm
[00:58:44] Mette: How do we, you know, and it doesn't take away her response. It's her responsibility to make sure that there's a salary policy in place. It's her responsibility to make sure that if some people feel that it, uh, it's unfair that that's being dealt with.
[00:58:58] So she's not just letting go and saying, you know, anything goes, but she's inviting the team in to have a discussion around the fact, okay, if this shouldn't be everybody fighting for their own right, you know, like this, not, not looking at the team and, and, and knowing that there could be a negative impact on the relations in the team.
[00:59:19] We don't want that. We want something different.
[00:59:22] Shani: mm
[00:59:23] Mette: Try something out, if it's good enough for now, safe enough to try, and it doesn't work, we can change it later. So it's, it's just important to emphasize that if you want to take these discussions, you need someone to facilitate the
[00:59:35] Shani: Yeah.
[00:59:36] Mette: And you can't just delegate a responsibility to no one.
[00:59:40] Shani: No.
[00:59:41] Mette: So again, structure processes, you know,
[00:59:44] Shani: structure, structure processes. Yeah. And I love that what you're describing also feels very unifying because it's about shared aims rather than individual interests. It's just very nice contrast to the reality that a lot of people actually live in, at work
[01:00:06] Mette: sadly, so yeah,
[01:00:08] Shani: Um, as, as just the last like question, I'm very curious cause you, you obviously like been on a, on a journey with this is, this is what you do, what you live and breathe, like what, what have been the biggest learnings for you, uh, in your leadership, in your, uh, co workership that you have kind of practiced?
[01:00:32] Mette: that's a tough question. The biggest learning, I actually don't know. So I'm just going to go with what
[01:00:37] Shani: Yeah, whatever falls into your head.
[01:00:44] Mette: It sounds so banal that you're going to think that my starting point was completely off. But what comes to my mind is the fact that very often I have found that you tend to distinguish very much between leaders and employees. And I found that to be an even stronger storyline or narrative in the public sector.
[01:01:07] Where you have, I mean, extremely formalized meeting formats with the A side and the B side, as they call it, right? So this risk of polarizing employees on one hand, on one side and leaders on the other side. And what I have found after being a leader 20 years myself, but also after having been a leadership coach for many years, is that the difference between leaders and employees is I mean, when it comes down to it, we're all human beings who wants to make a difference, who wants to contribute, who wants to do our best, who wants to collaborate and who hates being in an environment of fear.
[01:01:47] And, um, so deep down, we're just all the same. And I think the, I think there's way too much focus on the individual leader. You know, the leader has to do this and has to do that. And I'm like, but what about the community or the team? I have been in positions as a leader where I have been scared stiff because of things that the employees did, you know, and, you know, feeling extremely lonely and scared in terms of. Am I good enough? And I think that fundamental dynamics are the same in all of us, regardless of whether you are a leader or an employee. So my deep wish is for us to build bridges between, you know, regardless of what position you have, let's, let's focus on what we have in common. And, and I am not naive.
[01:02:37] I have been in corporate life for more than 30 years. I know exactly how it plays out, but this is a value. And a fundamental belief that is guiding me in my,
[01:02:46] Shani: Hmm.
[01:02:47] Mette: in my life. And I found it sometimes to be really difficult because employees would expect something else from me, which I found terrifying. So I guess my key learning is so banal, Sharni, that, you know, we basically all want the same thing, but the structures are preventing us from building bridges.
[01:03:06] Um,
[01:03:07] Shani: I
[01:03:08] Mette: why it's so meaningful for me.
[01:03:10] Shani: I don't think that sounds banal at all. I, I feel like that's been an observation of mine too. And it takes a lot to preserve that view
[01:03:22] Mette: It takes a lot. And what we have seen in Denmark is that young people don't want to take on leadership positions. Because they know it's, you know, it's not a nice job if you're isolated and there's the A side and the B side and why go through all the hassle, you know? Um, so I think we have to calm down on the focus on the individual leader and then zoom in on the team and figure out what does it take for a good team to work.
[01:03:50] It's so much more interesting and much more valuable when in terms of work life, but maybe life in general.
[01:04:00] Shani: I share in the observation. I think a lot of what leadership looks like today is also very much based in these, like in this industrial idea of like surveying work and being the one who has the most competence and all the answers as we've spoken about. And, and that's simply not true.
[01:04:20] It's just, we're all like a little piece of the puzzle. Um, But, but it is, it is a hard notion to challenge, so I, I definitely salute you for, for doing so. And, and my very, very last question to you is, if somebody's listening to this and their fingers are like itching a little, like, ah, I really want to get into this more, what is something, maybe, maybe something that they can practice for themselves and, or something to read about or get curious about? Where do, where did they start opening up doors for themselves? Amazing.
[01:05:05] Mette: the whole foundation of this, but if all of what you and I have talked about in the past hour makes sense, and you really want to get going with the distribution of power and looking into how can I get my team to work better?
[01:05:17] There's one single trick that is also again, so easy, but turns out to, to really add to psychological safety and team collaboration. And it is speaking in rounds. So just having a facilitated meeting where you ask people in turn, what is your point of view? Do you have a question? You know, ask people not to raise their hand and ask people not to interrupt.
[01:05:42] I mean, just that simple notion. Of course it requires that someone facilitates it. But I mean, dividing speaking time is just a huge contribution to psychological safety and, to forcing people to listen to each other and, and inviting people in who might be a little bit more hesitant in sharing their point of view. So start with that, and then I'll see you out there. And if you want to train, train how to become a facilitator, that's what I do also. Right now I only have courses in Danish, but if there's enough people who want to do it in English, I will make it in English. It's a demand driven, it's a demand driven process.
[01:06:22] Shani: It's a demand driven process. Yeah, slow, slow and small and, in the, in the pace of what you're encouraging. That sounds amazing. I love that piece of advice. So taking turns, listening, giving space to others. Sounds really, really amazing. Thank you so much for sharing all your reflections and wisdom.
[01:06:43] Mette: Thank you so much Shani for giving me the opportunity and asking relevant, difficult and engaging questions. So I enjoyed it. Thank you.
[01:06:52] Shani: Thank you.
