CREDIBILITY KILLERS

Life holds limitless possibilities – often influenced by the choices we make (or avoid making) every day. We have many opportunities to make a difference – most influenced by the way we perceive an issue, problem, or situation – yet many choose to obfuscate their influence by neglectfully doing nothing rather than intentionally doing something – or by asking for suggestions before moving forward upon a pre-determined path from which there was no room to consider alternative ideas. Respected leaders decide to act when action is necessary (and INTENTIONALLY choose NOT to act when allowing a situation to run its course). What many do not recognize is that taking no action can often create as much significant and meaningful change as planning and implementing for change if we are willing to accept the results of our inaction. When we preface failure with validators such as “but…” “if only…” or “it was not my fault…” we discount any learning or change that our efforts may have initiated by self-excusing our shortcomings and minimizing the need to succeed by accepting less than our best – a result that NEVER goes unnoticed by those looking to us for insight, direction, and leadership. 

Complacency is the strongest of emotions – more powerful than love or hate because it represents an acceptance of everything and a lack of conviction for anything – and perhaps the greatest killer of credibility that exists. Complacency cannot be argued or discussed – it is simply “existing” without feelings, recognition of others or acknowledgement of the value, feelings, or contributions of other individuals. Complacency obscures any thoughts of change behind the mask of “But…” (when linked to an “I hear you BUT it does not really matter because my mind is made up…) then buries it forever beneath the surface of “What do you think about…” (when you really do not care to think differently than you already do) or “It would have been different if only…” (when the blame is shifted or responsibility to another or side-stepped as being unimportant).  Leaders justifying their inaction or unintended failures by using these deferrals often create animosity and inferior results by shutting out plausible alternatives that “were not their own.”  When one asks for thoughts or ideas and, upon hearing a plausible suggestion immediately respond with “…that is what I was thinking…” (when it is obvious they “did not have a clue” or they would have “led” with their own idea while seeking validation from others) does not reinforce leadership knowledge or credibility. Awareness – and the taking of action based on that awareness – is the key to eliminating complacency and establishing credibility as you chart the path upon which you choose to travel (AND upon which others will confidently follow). Credibility Killers within Leadership might include words and actions (either intentional or inadvertent) such as:

• “I know I asked what you thought about this idea. I am going to do it my way anyway.”  Great leaders present ideas and alternatives then ask for suggestions that might make them more actionable and likely to succeed. They often will accept alternative solutions that may be more widely accepted even if it means altering their own thoughts or accepting a good idea with more support rather than the best idea having less support. When a leader asks for input, thought, and dismisses it – either by words or actions – employees are less likely to offer suggestions in the future as they do not believe you really care what they think anyway. 
  

• Credibility can be destroyed when leaders respond to others with “Thanks for your input BUT…” or continually react to what was done with “Great job BUT did you think about doing it this way?”. Whenever someone invokes the “but” card, the listener learns that nothing is important if said before the “but” AND only what comes after it will be acted upon by the speaker. People follow leaders who listen, analyze, explain and act…leaders that say what they plan to do AND why they plan to do it…rather than announcing their decisions and directions from behind the “but…” card. Choosing a direction by intentionally (OR unintentionally) minimizing the thoughts and contributions of others (without a rational reason or an honest consideration of employee’s suggestions) will create lemmings that follow rather than individuals who challenge and contribute to change. Managers sometimes encourage “mindless” following…leaders rarely find satisfaction in such an approach. 

• “Things would be different IF ONLY… (I had been recognized for the contribution I personally made to my company (or my relationship), someone else had done something differently or I would have just done it myself…”). Far too often people expect an immediate “return” for their efforts and are disappointed if they are not given one. Few people can find reward (or satisfaction) in their individual accomplishments or progress made towards the completion of a goal (rather than the completion itself). Most individuals require verbal recognition or visible rewards from “outside” rather than “inside” to feel appreciated and realize their actions are meaningful. If every situation (or relationship) were blanketed by an attitude of “how much can I give” rather than “how much will I receive,” we might find ourselves too engaged in basking within our accomplishments to seek excuses for our failures. When we focus on “what is” we rarely have time to focus on “what could have been IF ONLY…” Great leaders tend to act based on what they can control and THINK ABOUT how they can control (directly or indirectly) those things outside of their immediate realm of authority or range of accountability. “If only…” may provide an excuse as to why things did not go as planned but it can kill credibility when applied frequently as it minimized accountability and negatively impacts respect. 

Self-defeating (and action deferring) statements might make sense to someone looking to take the easy way through life, but not for someone passionately believing in maximizing the human potential. Exceptional leaders replace “if only…” with “what if?” They openly and honestly take responsibility for their failures (and learn from them). Leaders ask for (then consider and accept or provide sound reasons to reject) the advice of others before acting. Managers may ask for opinions from others but rarely provide reasons that the suggestions were not considered when their pre-conceived ideas are implemented. While great leaders may not ask for other’s opinions all the time (as their ideas are frequently well thought out and logically sound), only poor leaders ask for advice then proceed with their own thinking (without considering the suggestions given or thinking about their applicability). 

Leaders should not hide behind the “but…” escape hatch, sidestep responsibility for shortcomings by saying “if only…” or seek input (unless they plan to consider what is offered and explain why what was given will or will not be implemented). They cannot accept the thoughts offered by others as being “…just what I was thinking…” when it is obvious that HAD they been thinking something they would have led with their thoughts and sought validation rather than fished for solutions that could be claimed as their own. Credibility comes from saying what will be done and doing what is said…from listening, considering, and acting (explaining to all WHY the course taken was chosen) and from replacing “things would have been different IF ONLY…” with “the results are what they are BECAUSE OF what I (or we) did…and we can learn from them and change the outcomes if we alter our thoughts or the way we acted…”.  We establish and enhance credibility whenever we can honestly replace, “I would have done this except for…” with “I am glad I did this because…”