Leading from an Underdog Position.

You can listen to me share this journal entry, read it below, or both!

Leadership is widely misunderstood.

Most people believe it’s a position or role. It isn’t.

Leadership is a state of being. It’s something we do. It’s part of who we are.

This is great news for the many who believe they can’t create meaningful impact because of their lack of a title or their place on an organizational chart.

People want to be informed, heard, supported, and inspired. We follow people we trust. We want options when it comes to who we choose to listen to and align with.

And those people aren’t always the ones in “leadership” positions.

As a quick note, I want to point out that the terms “leadership” and “management” are often used interchangeably. This is erroneous.

Management is the process of ensuring that the components of a bigger picture work together to achieve a prescribed result. It’s largely tactical.

Leadership, in my opinion, is a process of discovery — driven by genuine curiosity and care for others — that causes us to uncover what others want and how we can help them get it. We help integrate the visions of our external and internal audiences with that of the organization. Once we’ve facilitated such discovery, we ensure the people we lead have everything they need to succeed — personally and professionally.

Leadership, in my world, if nowhere else, is masterful facilitation, coupled with active support of and care for those around us. It’s embodied in active, outward-facing service.

If my view on leadership has validity and people are actively looking for leaders, this means we don’t need to wait for anyone else to give us permission to lead. We can simply observe and act. No title required.

As leaders, we don’t just serve those we see as below us on an organizational chart, in social standing, or in financial status; we serve everyone. This becomes particularly powerful when we lead from a place most people would consider an “underdog position.”

I’m talking about the employee who does everything he can to make sure his supervisor succeeds and looks good to her boss.

This level of leadership shows up in the politician who, despite disagreeing with a peer, fosters understanding by setting his agenda aside so he can fully understand that would-be adversary for the benefit of the citizens they have both committed to serve.

As an example from my own life, allow me to share the account of a situation in which I felt the people in power held all the cards and were using them to beat me up without warrant, and the mindset shift in me that turned an extremely ugly situation into as positive a scenario as it possibly could have been…

Years ago, I found myself on the undesirable end of a lawsuit filed against me by our federal government. I felt it was completely unwarranted. In fact, I had gone above and beyond (I believed) what was legally required of me to “do the right thing.” Yet the lawsuit moved forward.

This wasn’t a small matter. The sum for which I was being pursued reached into the tens of millions of dollars.

They pursued me relentlessly. I fought back — convinced that my being “right” would allow me to prevail in the end.

One day, after years of this time- and resource-wasting battle for both parties, a thought hit me: what if I helped the attorney from the Department of Justice who was driving this suit against me be the hero? What if he got what he wanted because his boss got what he wanted (and so on)?

At first, the thought seemed foreign and misdirected. Sure, I was always happy to help someone succeed if I agreed with what they were doing, but why would I help someone whose efforts were overtly misdirected (according to me) and making my life miserable?

As I considered this question, I came to two conclusions:

First, did this attorney, the DOJ, and the federal agency that were pursuing me think they were wrongfully pursuing me? I highly doubted it. After all, who would spend their time trying to put the hurt on someone they thought was innocent?

Second, was there a chance I wasn’t as innocent in the situation as I saw myself being? Were there things I didn’t understand that caused me to look different to my legal opponents than I appeared to myself? That thought hadn’t crossed my mind prior to that moment.

So, I did something that felt a little crazy: I contacted the attorney and told him I wanted to discuss a change in approach I was considering. When we met, I told him about the two thoughts that had resulted from my reconsidering the entire situation.

He was surprised. Then I really threw him a curveball.

“David (not his real name),” I began, “in all our interactions, I have failed to gain clarity on your position on this matter. I apologize for that. What do you ultimately want out of these proceedings? What I’m really wondering is how can I help you succeed at whatever is most important to you?”

David looked deeply into my eyes, studying me to determine my intent in taking such a drastically different approach from the one I had taken for the years we had been at odds.

“What’s your angle?” he asked.

“Simply wanting to bring this matter to a conclusion as quickly as possible that meets both our needs as well as possible,” I replied. “It just hadn’t occurred to me before that you have people to keep happy and a career to consider, just like I have my own realities to protect.”

That day, something significant changed between us. David moved with me in this new direction slowly, making sure I was acting in good faith, just as he should have. I, in turn, became curious, asking questions about how the DOJ worked, what they wanted to see happen to meet their objectives, and how I could help them succeed in their real, ultimate purpose — which, from my updated perspective, I realized had to consist of something more than simply beating me up because they could.

We began discussing my intent behind what I had and hadn’t done, rather than simply examining actions or outcomes, which had been the prior focus. We revisited the interpretation of the law and how my situation differed from other cases they had previously seen as similar. In the end, we saw each other as humans. It became clear, I believe, to them that my actions were made in good faith and that I had attempted to be thoughtful and selfless in what I had done — the opposite of what they had previously seen.

In the end, the laws hadn’t changed. My prior actions and their outcomes hadn’t changed. Yet, the conversation changed dramatically, as did the financial obligation I was left to satisfy. I still didn’t wholeheartedly agree with the decision, but I understood their position and, more importantly, was able to get on with my life rather than being distracted by spending more years in the courtroom.

Share

Taking this approach of putting sincere effort into seeing a situation through the eyes of those whom most people might see as adversaries wasn’t a first for me. I had done the same thing many times before while effecting turnarounds on troubled companies. I had similar conversations with creditors, unhappy vendors, the IRS, state tax commissions, and many others who had existing claims against struggling companies I stepped in to help.

I suppose the reason I hadn’t seen this opportunity in the federal case I shared a moment ago was that I was being accused of creating the problem — a claim that simply wasn’t true. I was the guy who showed up to fix the existing problem. That didn’t seem to matter to them. All they seemed to want was someone to pin the problem on, and I was that guy.

Because of this emotional blind spot, I hadn’t taken the opportunity to step back and be objective in my views as I had in other situations. The fact that this matter reached into the tens of millions of dollars likely triggered me as well, putting me in defense mode instead of objective communicator mode — something that happens to most of us when the stakes are high.

The end of this account is that, while I didn’t get what I asked for, we were able to come to a settlement agreement that was infinitely more equitable than what had been dropped on me to begin with — and we did it all within months, not five to seven more years (on top of the eight years we were already into the matter), as my attorney had told me to expect.

For more on stepping into other people’s worlds and interacting within their paradigms, review Session 1 of VEVA: The Art of Human Connection.

When we consider the opportunities we have to step away from our own agendas and see the world through others’ eyes, we open the door to connecting with others in ways people who lack this desire or skill will never experience. Stepping into other people’s worlds, staying there, and interacting within their paradigms is one of the most powerful skills we can develop.

The opportunities to exercise this skill are everywhere. At home. In the workplace. In our communities. Everywhere we go, there are people we can help succeed, who, in turn, see us as leaders — whether or not we hold a leadership title.

And when the people we help are “above” us in an operational or social hierarchy, the effect is that much more powerful.

Living with the mindset of helping those who have some type of authority or power over us succeed — this whole idea of leading from an underdog position — does not, in any way, mean that we are obligated to support actions, beliefs, mandates, or other directives with which we do not align. In many cases, we can disagree with the process or even the position and still be supportive. However, if, at the moral, ethical, or legal level, you are not aligned with what is being done, please do not take my message as indicating in any way that you should support such actions.

When we look beyond agreement and focus on alignment, it’s relatively simple to see what warrants our support and what does not.

This was the key that allowed me to change my mindset from seeing the 800-pound federal government gorilla stomping on me relentlessly as an adversary to viewing the matter from their perspective and realizing that, just like me, they had their own priorities driving their actions. We were more alike than we were different. We were fellow humans putting effort behind what we saw as being “right.” We were working to protect our positions.

All I had to do was be outward-facing enough to see this, act on it by discovering our shared point of alignment, and then lead from my underdog position — despite our lack of agreement — to ensure that our shared point of alignment was protected.

Did it feel natural? Not at first.

Was it easy? No.

Did it make me happy? Not instantly.

Did my change in approach fuel understanding? Absolutely!

Did it yield a more productive result than either party had seen prior to the shift? I know it did for me. I can only assume it did for the federal entities involved as well, based on their willingness to come to a speedy conclusion to the matter.

And here’s a question for careful consideration: Did we have to compromise to arrive at a meaningful conclusion? I don’t believe so. I think we both achieved what we ultimately envisioned as the best possible outcome because we reached our shared point of alignment. (We’ll talk about compromise and why it isn’t a path to peace or clear communication in a future journal entry.)

Are you ready to lead from an underdog position when you’re not in the driver’s seat?

Would you like those calling the shots to see you as a supporter and ally rather than an adversary or a threat to their authority?

Do you want to help your employees, team or family members, or others develop this skill?

The topic of alignment vs. agreement and how to apply what I’ve shared in this journal entry is addressed in another journal entry titled “Agreement Is Optional: How savvy difference makers use disagreement as an asset.” Here’s the link:

Imagine a world in which conflicts between people are minimized because we all understand that we don’t have to be “right,” that we can align without agreement, and when we forget about being understood and, instead, invest our energy into understanding and serving others, we all get more of the positive things we’re all seeking as fellow humans.

We create our realities.
What do you want your reality to be?

I’d love to hear your thoughts or questions about this journal entry. Please share them and let’s have a conversation. Thank you!

Leave a comment

—Bryan

If the message in this journal entry resonated with you, please consider sharing it with others. Together, we are creating a HumanlyConnected society. Thank you for being an important part of this world-changing movement!

Share