Stop Tailgating & Brake Checking at Work

Imagine you’re driving down the road in the passing lane, already exceeding the speed limit, when you see somebody following very close.  The tailgater’s message is clear: “I need to get somewhere and I need to get there quicker than you are going”.  Some people in this situation might “brake check” the tailgater – they slam on their breaks to send their own message.  The  brake checker’s message is equally strong: “Watch out!  If you follow too close, you may cause an accident and it will be clearly your fault.”

Does this sound familiar to disagreements at the office?  Two people are working on a project and it appears both are trying to get to the same destination.  Yet one person demands greater risks for quicker results.  This happens a lot, especially in organizations where near-term results and quarterly goals are prioritized over sustainability.  As a result, employees are often competing for who can get the job done quicker and not necessarily who gets there with the best balance of risk and reward.  Both the Brake Checker and the Tailgater have better options to serve their company.

The Brake Checker

The brake checker usually is the one that starts off in front.  They have everyone aligned, driving in the same direction. Yet it becomes apparent the objective is not pursued quickly enough for someone in the organization.  As a result, at least one individual, looking for quicker results, pushes for greater risks and speed.  There are a couple of options the current leader has:

Brake Check: The leader could do the risky tactic and slam on the brakes.  In other words, they could threaten everyone, insisting that anything they try to move quicker could  cause horrible results.  Yet, in doing so the leader puts their own credibility at risk for not considering alternatives.  The key is not to allow confrontation to exceed collaboration.

Slow Down: Instead of slamming on the brakes, the current leader could caution the contesting follower by carefully explaining the situation and risks to the organization. Instead of utilizing alarmism, a temporary slow down to carefully examine risks in all options ensures everyone understands the risks in speeding up the team.

Pull Over: Finally, if the leader has explained the risks they face, explained why she is not comfortable speeding up and still the tailgaters come with support from behind (and above), there is the option of pulling over to let the tailgater lead.  As a servant to the organization, you must make sure you’ve made your concerns clear and detailed the risks the organization faces.  Yet if the organization understands the risks and you are not comfortable accepting that level of risk, then the best way to serve, may be turn over the keys to the car.

The Tailgater

The tailgater is interested in going the same direction but is willing to take greater risks to get there faster.  They may  feel there is a better way , believe the current leader is not taking enough risks or may be for pursuing their personal ego strokes.  The tailgater may seek fame and want to be recognized for speeding up success at any cost.  Regardless of their reason, the tailgater creates risk for both individuals and the organization as a whole, in order to achieve their results.  There are also better options for the tailgater.

Flash Headlights: The tailgater could flash their headlights from a safe distance.   By sending the message to the current leader and those around them, without threatening, the follower and team can collaborate on alternative options for quicker results.  This would also call attention to the concerns from leadership, alert everyone that the current follower feels greater risks are acceptable and yet not endanger everyone around them.

Pass on Right: There may be other options to help the team get to their destination more quickly.  When the opportunity presents itself, the follower could pass on the right.  In business, the follower may be able to lead a critical piece of the project that does not threaten the organization’s overall success.  In so doing, the follower could be charged with carrying a specific load where greater risk is acceptable.

So the next time you’re driving on the road or leading a project and you feel the current leader is not taking enough risks or moving too slowly, remember you have many options to support faster progress.  Similarly, if you’re dealing with critics and followers that demand greater risks in the name of speed, understand their reasoning and respond appropriately.  Whichever role you play in the traffic friction, remember there are many options you have to best serve the organization with the optimal balance of risk and reward.

1. Accountability
   Servant Leaders accept the blame for failures within the team. However, in serving their organization and their stakeholders, they must ensure accountability. As a result, leaders must follow up on failures, identify the root cause, fix whatever process and circumstances are required, but also hold people accountable. This is never an easy conversation and the person accountable for the failure undoubtedly does not like receiving the message. Yet, this dialogue is necessary if the leader is to meet the needs of all stakeholders. What separates the servant leader from others is their assurance to reprimand in private and set clear expectations with guidelines to avoid a recurrence of that failure. In contrast, power-based leaders may use public humiliation tactics to “make an example” of the individual accountable for the failure.
2. Military
   One of the top Servant Leader consultants and thought leaders, James D. Hunter, has many clients in the military (mostly the U.S. Army and Air Force). When you think about a drill sergeant barking orders at new cadets in a military film, you don’t think of “nice guys”. However, in preparing these troops for the high demands and significant risks of their future, the sergeant is serving these men and women in some of the most extreme ways. In order to prepare troops to respond in a crisis (see below), they must learn quickly to obey orders, follow a chain of command and countless other concerns in a very short time. What sets the servant leader apart from others is their focus on serving those troops and their community (or country), while other leaders may leverage abusive tactics for their own career advancement.
3. Crisis
   In times of crisis, the servant leader makes decisive actions that may not always reflect full consensus.Regardless , when quick action is required, especially when that action means risk to the leader, the servant leader steps up to the challenge. Often, in cases of crisis, leaders are slow to step forward – be it for fear of retribution, losing political clout, fear of making the wrong snap judgments or simply the insecurity most feel in such uncertainty. In these times, leaders need to serve by accepting the risks of quick decision making to protect and serve the community. In responding quickly and effectively under crisis, the servant leader may make rushed decisions that are perceived as cruel, unreasonable or simply against the norm. However, to do less in a time of crisis may be detrimental to those they serve. While serving leaders make bold decisions to serve immediate needs of their stakeholders, others may manipulate the circumstances to achieve personal fame and glory for their own benefit.
4. Managing Out
   In serving their stakeholders, servant leaders often find individuals whose interests and / or skills would be better utilized elsewhere. This may mean on another team or with another company altogether. A servant leader understands the needs of the organization, serves its stakeholders by finding the best people for the job and helps the organization’s people find the best job. This may mean people need to be led out of their role, to new opportunities. What sets the servant leader apart from others is their commitment to helping anyone displaced by the shifting needs of an organization. A servant leader goes above and beyond to help their team find the best fit for their skills, experience and passion, regardless of where that fit may be.

When circumstances call for it, servant leaders can seem mean too. However, therein lies the difference between servant leaders and others – there needs to be the right circumstances. Servant leaders don’t condemn someone for immaterial savings, they will not belittle vendors to achieve higher service levels and they will not reprimand publicly, just to set an example. A servant leader will not be soft because they want everyone to like them, for if they were, they would not be serving their organization. In serving others, great leaders may seem mean, but they never have to be cruel or respond in a manner that reflects anything other than our commitment to serving stakeholders and our community.

Questions:

1. Have you known a leader you thought was “mean” but later realized they were serving the organization?
2. What other ways have you seen great leaders act in a “mean” way?