Bracketing: A critical executive leadership skill

On June 6, 1944 General Eisenhower had spent the last two days agonizing over the inclement weather that was putting the largest invasion in history in peril.  By waiting for optimal weather conditions, he would lose the advantage of surprise.  The Germans would be able to develop a line of defense and build up their forces. Worst of all allied troops, who had been anxiously awaiting the call to attack, would be forced to linger; morale would certainly suffer.

However, by attacking now the storm and fog could significantly disrupt all air and sea operations.  Eisenhower could end up failing on a monumental scale.  We all know what happened, Ike gave the go-ahead and the rest is history.  He addressed his officers calmly and confidently saying, “I am quite positive we must give the order. I don’t like it, but there it is….”

Imagine the stress and the real fear that Eisenhower was managing. How could anyone facing these potential consequences maintain composure and appear confident when so much was on the line? 

The answer is found in a key leadership skill called “Bracketing.” Bracketing is the ability to put tough feelings and emotions aside, knowing that you will return to them at the appropriate time.  It allows you to focus on the moment and maintain your composure even when your “insides” are troubled.  It doesn’t deny feelings; rather, it allows you to manage them appropriately.

As a business leader, you must be able to bracket your emotions.  If not, your emotions will get the better of you; your critical thinking abilities will be negatively impacted.  More importantly, those around you will become confused as they witness that your facial expressions, body language, and demeanor seemingly are disconnected from your words.  They will be distracted wondering what is wrong with you and your message will be lost.

Bracketing takes practice. Prior to addressing an individual or group, spend a moment to consider your emotional state.  What is really going on?  If you are feeling angry, stressed, tired, or distracted, accept it.  Then, imagine putting these emotions on a shelf you will return to later.  Ask someone you know and trust to observe you and provide feedback on your performance.  

Eisenhower believed that great leaders aren’t born, they are made.   One of the leadership skills he employed was bracketing.  Eisenhower was able to hone this skill so effectively that, even under the most trying of circumstances, he was able to instill faith and confidence in those under his command; and, in so doing, changed the course of history. 

Getting Past the "But We Already Tried That" Response - my comment to a post by John Kotter on his Blog on HBR.com (Harvard Business Review)

Getting Past the "But We Already Tried That" response is fantastic piece by John Kotter on the Harvard Business Review HR Blog this month and (this is how I commented directly to him on the blog on10.14.10) this is a great example of how execution can get bogged down.  

Another variation of this "block" is to say, "great idea lets study this issue in more depth and get Joe, Bill, and Mary's opinion. Then you can bring it back to us and we can discuss it again."  This delay strategy often has the same effect as an outright block and can be harder to counter because it is disguised as prudent and thoughtful.  

In either case, it can be effective to  immediately establish what YOU AND THIS GENTLEMAN BOTH AGREE ON.  Then, invest some time offline to resolve the issue. This reduces defensiveness, establishes common values, and protects what might be fragile egos.  

It might go something like this:  "Joe, thanks for your thoughts.  They are really helpful.  Do you agree that it made sense to at least explore this idea because of its potential to drive productivity?  Okay, so I would really appreciate the opportunity to meet with you after this meeting to discuss the issue further.  Are you open to investing some time?  Great, I know we both want to improve this business."  

Now if Joe doesn't agree with the basic need to vet this idea, try another more general outcome, like, " I know we both want to see this business improve."  There are times when a little diplomacy can go a long way.

John Kotter  - HBR BLOG
On:Leadership,Managing People,Change Management

Getting Past the "But We Already Tried That" Response

10:23 AM Thursday October 14, 2010  | Comments (9) (I am one of them as above).

You and your team have been wrestling with the problem of increasing efficiencies without a big budget to make it happen. You've been authorized to look at every aspect of the process. One particularly enterprising young woman on your team has found that a complicated safety inspection procedure that was put in place fifteen years ago is no longer necessary because the parts that required inspection no longer exist in the product now being produced. And yet workers are holding up the production for the required amount of time in order to get sign-offs anyway.  Great! Simple! We get rid of this inspection process for parts that don't exist and increase productivity by 15%!

Not so fast. When you bring this insight to the management committee, one grizzled fellow says, "That won't work. We tried that five years ago and the lawyers wouldn't let us take it out of the subcontract." Now, this particular grizzled fellow is used to having his words taken as law. Everyone defers to him because he has been around a long time, is in a position of power, and knows a lot about the ins and outs of the critical and complicated production paths.

What do you do?

Certainly you could try to argue your point, but you don't have all the facts of what actually happened five years ago and past experience has shown that arguing with this fellow can be a dangerous activity.

The basic comeback for "We tried that already and it didn't work" is to say something like: "That's a good point, but that was then and this is today. You know, things change. They always do, for all companies everywhere. We don't make the exact same products. Our customers are changing" [or other basic, clear, facts that illustrate how things have changed]. "I'll make a call to the lawyers today, just to be safe" [if you haven't already done so, which you may have] "and if there's a problem with doing this now, we'll try to solve it and get right back to you. But we need the 15%, right? So unless the lawyers scream, why don't we agree now to go forward with the plan. I mean, it really is a terrific idea."

You must never get sucked into the black hole of "what happened 5 years ago." He may have more facts than you do, and make you look as if you didn't do your homework. (Of course it's always a good idea, as part of your preparation, to learn about earlier similar efforts and why they didn't work out.) The real danger, though, is getting drawn into a distracting conversation that goes on to the point where the idea is put aside because you've run out of time on the agenda. Or that the ensuing discussion either bores or confuses people so that they give up and lose interest.

"We already tried that" is one of the familiar attacks I've seen many times over the years. Be prepared for it, and mold your response to your own particular situation. What are some of the variations on this attack that you have seen?

John Kotter

From a leadership perspective, Exxon can't hang with Apple...

It is noteworthy that Apple's success has been propelled--even during a deep economic downturn-- by a relentless focus on providing highly distinctive products that consumers don't yet know they need. Once they have them, they can't live without them.This speaks to marketing and innovation savvy that is rivaled by few if an other companies, US or foreign. On the other hand, Exxon's market cap has benefited largely due to the surge in oil prices. No doubt, Exxon is capitalizing on the smart bets it made a decade ago. However, from a leadership perspective, Exxon can't hang with Apple. In Exxon's case you have an undifferentiated product that is driven by supply and demand. In Apple's case value is created by truly "changing the game" in its market space. If Exxon were like Apple, it would be innovating aggressively on (and away) from its core product which is under siege on all fronts.

In response to Patricia Sellers' "Postcards" Blog post on 10.13.10 (on Fortune/CNNMoney.com):

Apple stock at $300: Watch out, Exxon Mobil

by Patricia Sellers

This morning, as Apple (AAPL) shares neared $300, a Postcards reader, gslusher, weighed in on a post that Jessica Shambora, my Fortune colleague, wrote in October 2009 about the world's largest stock-market capitalizations. Amazing to see how Apple, in less than a year, has vaulted just behind Exxon Mobil (XOM)...on its way to be THE most valuable company?

1. Exxon Mobil $329.44 billion

2. Apple $272.73 billion

3. Microsoft (MSFT) $214.87 billion

4. Wal-Mart (WMT) $196.08 billion

If one wants to be "global," put PetroChina above Microsoft at $232.42 billion.

To think this all started with two guys building computers in a garage...