PDF Summary:Begin With WE, by Kyle McDowell

In Begin With WE, leadership coach Kyle McDowell writes that America prizes individual achievement over collective success—a mindset that, in a workplace, erodes trust, pits colleagues against each other, and weakens an organization as a whole. To counter this instinct, McDowell offers a blueprint for leaders to nurture a “we” outlook that encourages collaboration, big-picture thinking, and mutual support.

In our guide, we’ll explore McDowell’s advice on letting your values lead your work, fostering a supportive environment, and using a “we” mindset to build a healthy work ethic. Along the way, we’ll examine the psychology behind some of McDowell’s ideas and look at leadership strategies from other experts, including Stephen Covey, Simon Sinek, and Reed Hastings.

(continued)...

But this can lead us to mistakenly address what might seem to be a problem rather than the actual problem. In business settings, this might result in us focusing on the outcome of a process but missing the fact that it was caused by a much earlier step, or making unspoken assumptions about what’s behind a problem.

For example, a store that’s trying to figure out why their sales are declining might note that customers are unwilling to pay their high prices. They may see this as the core problem, with the unspoken assumption that their customers are budget-conscious. However, customers’ unwillingness to pay their high prices may be a symptom of a different core problem. In this case, it may be that the store’s layout lacks sophistication, thus giving off a “cheap” vibe.

The store can discover this core issue and avoid chasing an incorrect solution by following McDowell’s advice. By asking “why,” they might do research into their customer’s other buying habits, and by examining the process, they might reflect on when their sales started declining, and may thus recognize how a change of decor prompted the decline. This can help them address the true reason customers are holding back, rather than a symptom of the underlying cause.

McDowell writes that once you’ve identified the underlying issue, make a plan of action that you and the other person can follow to prevent the problem from happening again. Finally, follow up later to check whether the actions you decided on have been implemented, and whether they’ve solved the problem.

(Shortform note: Entrepreneur Mark Suster advises giving your employee 48 hours to reflect on the issue before devising a plan to prevent future mistakes. This allows for them to fully process what happened and how they might change. Then, create a detailed map of how you expect them to act in the future—don’t just give them a vague expectation that they should “do better.”)

Admit Your Own Mistakes

To create a culture where people feel safe making mistakes, leaders must acknowledge and take responsibility for their own mistakes. McDowell notes that leaders often fear making mistakes because they believe they must always be right in order to be credible. They also fear looking bad to their superiors because of potential career repercussions. But it’s important that leaders own up to their mistakes—if they don’t, they create an environment that encourages employees to defensively cover up their errors instead of addressing them.

The Importance of Admitting Mistakes

In Switch, Chip and Dan Heath write that people typically figure out how to behave by observing others around them, rather than by being told what to do. This makes behavior contagious—people take on the habits of those they spend time with—and makes it all the more important that you model the behavior you want from your team, rather than just telling them your policies. Since negative behavior is more contagious than positive behavior, you can quickly create a defensive environment where team members hide their errors if you aren’t consistent about modeling this standard.

In No Rules Rules, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings discusses an additional benefit of admitting your mistakes as a leader: Instead of making you look bad, doing so may actually improve your standing in the eyes of your team. This is due to the pratfall effect, a phenomenon whereby admitting a mistake can make a competent person seem more relatable and likable. When you’re comfortable being seen as less-than-perfect, others feel safe feeling that way too, creating a vulnerability loop that fosters a supportive workplace.

Support Each Other In Difficult Times

McDowell writes that everyone goes through hardship and difficulty, and during those times, it’s important that they feel supported by their team members. This will create a positive organizational culture that feels like a family, where employees feel comfortable taking risks and innovating because they know they’ll be supported if they fail. It leads to higher motivation and less turnover.

Support, like all the other principles, starts with leadership—if your team believes you’ll support them when they’re struggling, they’ll emulate your behavior and support each other. McDowell notes there are two types of circumstances that may require support:

• Times of hardship or challenge that lead to mistakes or poor performance
• Times when people are trying to reach higher goals

(Shortform note: In Leaders Eat Last, Simon Sinek writes that it’s crucial for leaders to create what he calls a “circle of safety” around their workers—a psychological wall of protection. Within this circle, everyone feels supported: People don’t fear blame or retribution as a result of mistakes, as they know if they do make mistakes, people will focus on the error and not their personal characteristics. They also feel confident their teammates will have their back if they take on higher-level projects. Because they don’t have to manage challenges from internal sources, they’re able to focus on challenges from external sources, and thus they can devote their energy to innovation, competition, and advancing the organization’s mission.)

Support Employees During Poor Performance

McDowell outlines a five-step process for handling employees who are struggling with a challenge that’s leading to poor performance:

• Recognize: Bring up the issue to your employee. Do this in person, not through email. Be uncritical—say that you’ve noticed, for example, they’ve fallen behind. Allow them to acknowledge it and explain what’s going on.
• Reaffirm: Emphasize that you’re committed to helping them grow and succeed. This ensures they focus on fixing the problem and aren’t distracted by a fear of repercussions.
• Remediate: Discuss how the issue will be resolved so the problem doesn’t continue. Allow them to lead the discussion, inserting your thoughts only if they don’t have a clear idea of what to do.
• Reduce: Figure out how their load can be temporarily reduced so they can get back on track. Be clear when allocating their work to others that this is temporary—it’s not fair to put more work on others’ plates permanently.
• Reassess: Revisit the situation later to see if your employee has caught up and if their workload can be given back to them.

Alternative Coaching Models

McDowell’s alliterative mnemonic of “R” words parallels several other well-regarded coaching structures for addressing poor performance:

• The GROW model has you identify a Goal, evaluate your current Reality, talk about Options, and agree on a Way Forward by putting together an action plan. These correspond roughly to McDowell’s steps of Recognize and Remediate, with his last two steps, Reduce and Reassess, adding more details of how to manage your action plan, or Way Forward.

• The CLEAR model (Contract, Listen, Explore, Action, Review), adds a “review” step aligning with McDowell’s “reassess” step. Its “listen” step corresponds to McDowell’s “reaffirm” step, as the goals of both are to reassure the employee they’re in a safe space, and its “explore” step approximates McDowell’s “reduce” step, as one of the aspects you might explore is why the employee is struggling.

• The OSCAR model involves defining a desired Outcome (similar to the GROW model’s Goal), assessing the current Situation, exploring various Choices and Consequences, deciding on Actions to move forward, and Reviewing later to assess progress.

Overall, no matter which model you go with, the underlying advice is similar: Have a transparent conversation where you focus on the problem (not the employee’s character) and clearly discuss next steps. Some experts caution that any discussions or disciplinary actions you take should be conducted in private—addressing issues in public only embarrasses people, which will make any action plan you devise feel punitive.

Others also note that though you should aim to be uncritical and supportive, it’s OK to convey that you’re disappointed. Many people naturally want to please their authority figures, so this can be a nonpunitive way to motivate them to change their behavior.

Support Employees Striving for Higher Goals

McDowell also offers advice for how to support employees when they’re reaching for higher goals:

• Ask your team members about their goals, passions, and hopes, and whether there’s anything you can do to assist them.
• Ask your team as a whole whether any training or resources would be helpful for them. Employee surveys are a good tool for this.

Leaders as Partners

McDowell’s recommendations for helping employees reach higher goals align with other coaching models that encourage leaders to become partners with their team members, rather than directors. In Coaching for Performance, Sir John Whitmore recommends this approach, noting that in today’s globalized and information-heavy world, the ability to communicate instantly has made the workplace more interconnected than ever. As a result, the traditional command-and-control management model in which leaders hold all information and direct all decisions is now irrelevant because leaders are no longer gatekeepers to that information.

Whitmore writes that to compete in this new dynamic, leaders must embrace a “we’re in it together” mindset that values employees and prioritizes their input, not only into their job responsibilities but also regarding their career trajectories. This fosters a mindset of collective goal-setting, which will motivate employees to perform at their best.

Theme 3: Encourage a Healthy Work Ethic

Several of McDowell’s principles are aimed at helping you incorporate a “we” mindset into your business-related, operational tasks, not just interpersonal interactions. These include:

• Don’t be complacent: Act on ideas and jump on opportunities.
• Focus on results, not process: Avoid busy work.
• Be open to challenges to improve: Challenge others and prepare to be challenged.
• Pay attention to details.

Don’t Be Complacent

McDowell argues that idleness, or inaction, is a big problem in corporate culture. He defines idleness as “doing nothing”: failing to execute ideas, begin projects, question the status quo, or solve problems. He urges you to do something whenever possible so that you identify ways your organization can improve and then work to address those opportunities.

Inaction leads to a lack of progress and a failure to innovate. This, in turn, leads companies to become complacent, miss opportunities, and get overtaken by new competition. They lose their star employees and their customer base, and ultimately, fail to survive. McDowell cites Blockbuster as an example—they were the leader in home entertainment throughout the 1990s but went out of business in 2013. They had grown comfortable in their leadership of the market and thus didn’t foster an environment of creativity and innovation within their ranks. They were then unable to adapt to the rise of Netflix and other streaming services.

What Action Might Have Saved Blockbuster?

The fate of Blockbuster contrasts with another company that missed a window to innovate but ultimately found a path forward: Garmin. From the late 1990s until 2008, Garmin led the market in personal navigation—their devices were a common sight on car dashboards. However, when smartphones came on the market and offered their own personal navigation apps, Garmin’s customer base dropped off.

For several years, it looked like Garmin would follow the same trajectory as Blockbuster—companies built around physical, hardware-focused products losing out to digital, software-based companies. This fate seemed all the more certain when Garmin failed to develop a software-focused product even as other companies, such as Waze, showed that it was possible to compete with smartphone makers by building independent digital apps.

However, Garmin was ultimately able to reimagine itself. Instead of doubling down on their existing business model (as Blockbuster had), they sought out niches that cell phone makers couldn’t cater to, such as smartwatches for athletes and navigation for boats and airplanes. This pivot allowed them to innovate with their existing resources—their high-quality hardware—rather than reinventing themselves entirely.

When compared to Garmin’s pivot, Blockbuster’s failure takes on another aspect: Not only did the company fail to adopt an online presence similar to Netflix’s, but they also failed to find an innovative way to make use of their existing business resources—their retail stores and products. In this way, they fell into McDowell’s trap of “doing nothing”: They didn’t take action, question the status quo, find a way to improve, or pursue new opportunities, either with their physical assets or by reinventing themselves more fundamentally.

McDowell writes that if your organization doesn’t have a “we” mindset, people are not only afraid to act because they’re afraid of making mistakes, but also because they think they need permission. Most corporate cultures emphasize the need to get approval for projects from leadership. This is especially true for creative projects that involve thinking outside the box. This hesitation stifles innovation. A “we” mindset, in contrast, imbues employees with a sense of ownership over the company’s mission and goals, which in turn gives them a sense of ownership over a company’s problems. This mindset empowers them to take initiative, so that they feel comfortable solving problems as they come up.

To build a culture of action, McDowell advises that you encourage your employees to speak up with innovative ideas. He suggests some techniques to prompt them to do so:

• Add innovation elements to regular processes, like an “ideas discussion time” in meetings.
• Ask employees questions to spark their thinking—such as whether there are procedures they’d do differently if they were running the company.
• Establish a suggestion box and make sure to check it regularly.
• Publicize the ideas you receive and be open about which you’re going to pursue (and why). This ensures people know you’ve heard them and value their input.

Additional Ways to Inspire Action

Asking employees to think like leaders and consider what they would do differently is one way to spark the sense of ownership McDowell recommends. Another way to foster this feeling is to rotate “innovation challenges” among teams, giving them leadership over specific problems to solve.

Other methods of sparking ideas include creating informal spaces for idea sharing, like digital forums or chat channels where people can drop thoughts as they arise. This is a version of the suggestion box McDowell suggests, offering team members a way to submit ideas outside of designated sharing times like meetings. Also, in addition to McDowell’s suggestion to publicize the ideas you receive, you may consider publicizing your own “work-in-progress” ideas, thereby modeling the behavior you want to encourage.

McDowell also recommends that once you’ve settled on an idea you’d like to act on, don’t overanalyze it. Instead, go ahead and take a first step in the project, or encourage your employees to. This will prevent you from getting trapped in “analysis paralysis” that leads to inaction.

McDowell does caution, however, that you shouldn’t be reckless: Don’t try out all ideas regardless of their potential. Vet your ideas—especially ones that require management input or company resources.

(Shortform note: How do you know when to take that first step? While you don’t want to delay, you also don’t want to dive headfirst into a project without adequate preparation. If you’re not sure whether you’ve crossed the line into over-planning, you might consider putting together a minimum viable product (MVP)—the simplest version you can produce. In The Lean Startup, Eric Ries writes that an MVP can help you find out if your customers might be interested in your idea, and it can give you valuable insight as to how you can improve it. This is one way to vet an idea—to see it in action in a low-stakes way.)

Focus on Results, Not Process

Another aspect of inaction that McDowell identifies is when you’re technically doing something but not something that’s valuable. This would be when you engage in busy work that takes up time but doesn’t necessarily produce measurable outcomes (the product or service the company provides to make money). This might include writing nonessential reports, attending frequent meetings, responding to unimportant emails, and so on.

McDowell writes that people often confuse busy work with valuable work because constantly doing something makes them feel productive and important. But busy work dilutes attention and prevents people from devoting time to opportunities with more potential. It also drains people’s energy and their enthusiasm for their jobs, which increases the stress level of the entire organization.

(Shortform note: Just as a “me” mindset may be a product of lessons we learned in childhood, so may our tendency toward busy work be a result of childhood training—specifically, from school. Critics of Western educational systems point out that students are often asked to do assignments that require a lot of time and effort but have no learning benefit. These are often repetitive exercises that don’t ask kids to reflect on or analyze new concepts, but instead to play with them superficially, like vocabulary word searches or fill-in-the-blank worksheets. This kind of activity masquerades as valuable work but doesn’t actually produce educational outcomes. Instead, it drains energy and enthusiasm in the same way busy work does in the workplace.)

McDowell contends that leaders foster a workplace that prioritizes activities only when they’re demonstrably connected to outcomes. One way to do this is to make it clear when assigning tasks that any updates workers give you should focus on what results have been produced instead of what activities they did along the way. For example, you don’t need to hear that they’ve attended meetings discussing how to address an issue; all you care about is how that issue is being resolved.

(Shortform note: McDowell’s recommendations to eliminate busy work don’t only make a more efficient workplace, they also create a culture of autonomy and respect: They convey the belief that leaders trust their employees to know how best to solve problems without close oversight or micromanagement. A contrasting management style (where leaders check in on progress and steps) might be touted as a culture of accountability, but it often communicates a lack of trust. Research shows that organizations that promote autonomy tend to have better motivation and creativity among their staff, along with less stress.)

Be Open to Challenges to Improve

McDowell writes that for an organization to live up to its potential, its team members must be open to challenges from their peers, leaders, and subordinates to do things better. Organizations that don’t foster an environment of challenging the status quo risk becoming obsolete. But if your employees feel comfortable pointing out how ideas, processes, or strategies can be improved, you’ll build a workplace of excellence.

(Shortform note: This step might be considered a precursor to McDowell’s earlier advice on how to take action—when you challenge the status quo or question how things might be improved, you examine how you might take action to advance the company’s interests. McDowell’s earlier example of Blockbuster applies to these ideas as well—the failure of that company was a failure to challenge the status quo and encourage employees to point out opportunities for improvement.)

People sometimes avoid challenging others because they don’t want to rock the boat or they don’t believe management would approve of them giving unsolicited advice. McDowell says that as a leader, you should assure your employees that you welcome them to speak up when they see possible places for improvement.

To help them give effective suggestions, give team members guidance on how to frame their ideas by noting that they should:

• Keep their challenges focused on outcomes, not on team members’ personal characteristics.
• Support their ideas with data or experience.
• Aim for reasonable goals—they shouldn’t envision dramatic changes.
• Frame challenges as questions rather than statements of fact. This can make them easier to stomach for the person receiving the challenge.

You can encourage employees to speak up by showing them that if anyone approaches you personally with ideas, you’ll react well. To do this:

• Always assume positive intent when someone brings you an idea for improvement, and focus on the outcome goal so that you don’t take things personally.
• When someone approaches you, don’t react quickly—listen carefully and take time to fully understand the challenge, as the other person is likely noticing something you’ve missed.

How to Give Feedback

When you challenge another person to improve, you’re offering a type of feedback—contructive criticism about performance or behavior that’s intended to help a person grow. In Principles, Ray Dalio writes feedback is an essential element of successful organizations because it fosters a culture of extreme honesty and transparency, where team members surface issues immediately so they can resolve them quickly.

Dalio acknowledges that feedback can be difficult for a recipient to hear, and he offers some guidance on how to deliver it effectively. His recommendations align with McDowell’s in that both sets of suggestions aim to lessen the discomfort associated with feedback, while still getting the message across:

• Start from specific data points, then look for patterns that indicate a larger picture.

• Ask the recipient if they feel the feedback is accurate, which can help them focus on the content of the critique rather than the potential consequences (like demotion).

• Put their mistake into the context of their total evaluation.

• Intersperse compliments if appropriate, but don’t worry about balancing positive and negative feedback just for the sake of it. Be straightforward in addressing where they need to improve.

• Remind them that pain is a signal for reflection and finding the truth, which is the only way a person can achieve their goals.

Dalio’s advice can also be used by leaders to receive feedback as well as give it—when a team member approaches you with suggestions, think of how you’d ask them to process criticism, and adopt that mindset. For example, remind yourself that pain signals reflection.

Pay Attention to Details

McDowell says obsessively paying attention to details can give you a competitive edge over your organization’s rivals by making your customers feel that you care for them. It does this in two ways:

By preventing mistakes: When you make careless errors, you convey that you don’t care enough about your customers to put energy into getting things right. In addition, small mistakes can lead to large errors that harm your brand’s reputation. Both of these factors can drive customers to your competitors.

By allowing you to add unexpected value: If you go above and beyond your customers’ expectations with small details, even ones that seem inconsequential, your customers will be pleasantly surprised and will reward you with loyalty. McDowell cites a hotel he stayed at as an example: Its cleaning staff impressed him with their attentiveness to details, like when they went beyond merely straightening up his room and also organized his clothes and shoes.

Should You Both Meet and Exceed Customer Expectations?

McDowell essentially says paying attention to details lets you both meet and exceed your customers’ expectations: By not making errors, you can deliver on services or products as your customers expect, and by providing perks beyond your basic offerings, you can exceed their expectations. While many customer service experts agree with such recommendations, some caution against exceeding customer expectations too often.

Going above and beyond your typical offerings can be expensive, impractical, and can place unrealistic standards on your employees. Further, companies don’t always know which added perks might delight a customer and which might annoy them—in McDowell’s example, he enjoyed the hotel staff’s attentiveness, but others may have felt it was intrusive. Therefore, many customer service analysts advise that you focus your efforts on meeting expectations. They note that consistently doing so can itself be a way to exceed expectations, since many organizations fail to regularly deliver on their promises.

To produce flawless operations when interacting with customers, McDowell says you must build flawless internal processes. Be sure that the work practices of your team and organization broadcast competence at every level. If your internal interactions are sloppy and riddled with errors, your team will internalize the belief that errors are acceptable, and they’ll make mistakes in their external interactions with customers and business partners, as well. For example, if you regularly send rushed, incoherent emails to your team, they’ll copy that behavior, and errors will multiply.

However, McDowell cautions that you shouldn’t cross the line into perfectionism where you waste time and effort correcting small details that don’t matter. Focus only on things that add value. Small mistakes between coworkers are often minor and have little effect, but mistakes on presentations can broadcast a lack of attention, and customer-facing errors can result in lost business.

Discipline Versus Perfectionism

Business experts consistently echo McDowell’s point that internal discipline shapes external performance. In Out of the Crisis, management thinker W. Edwards Deming argues that quality products are a result of quality systems: If an operating system (such as a manufacturing process) is stable (that is, if it reliably operates smoothly, making few mistakes), it will produce high-quality products. If the system is unpredictable and unstable, its product will suffer. This need for stability applies to everything from small daily interactions to larger processes, paralleling McDowell’s examples of anything from emails to presentations to customer relations.

Experts also agree, though, that conscientiousness shouldn’t cross over into perfectionism—in The Gifts of Imperfection, researcher Brené Brown warns that perfectionism is founded on unrealistic expectations, and the anxiety it produces can stifle creativity, innovation, and learning. Her perspective aligns with McDowell’s advice to be attentive to details only in things that add value—spending time perfecting inconsequential things will hold you back from achieving your goals.