Agree to Disagree

March 21, 2014

The dissatisfaction expressed about a particular individual in a leadership position was the focal point of a discussion I recently had. There were many issues noted but the primary one revolved around the process with which this leader chose to execute his role. 

His job was two-fold;  foster the development of skills amongst each of the members as well as lead them in their effort of reaching the highest level of achievement to which they were capable. The leader unofficially divided the group into two sub-groups. All direct reports received the basic requirements of mentoring and the opportunity to excel however one sub-group received more attention, hands-on-learning and additional time to participate in this short-term project. Members of the other sub-group reported feeling devalued, unimportant and underutilized. When this concern was addressed with the leader, he reportedly became defensive and unwilling to consider how his actions contributed to the member’s learning, productivity and emotional well-being. The formation of two sub-groups was denied yet he identified distinct differences in the members as he categorized some as more skilled, productive and focused while claiming that the others were less skilled, less focused and less productive.

This scenario was challenging in that many of these concerns were subjective in nature and not directly related to the group’s objectives. The choices the leader made about establishing the sub-groups as well as not accepting responsibility for (some of) the emotional impact his decisions had on the members was being disputed, not the fact that he met the requirements of the stated goals.

Ultimately the leader had the authority to make the choices he saw fit and agreeing to disagree was the means of resolution. The group eventually disbanded and what remains is the memory of this experience and the opportunity to pause, reflect and learn from it.