S1:E20 The Trust Gap New Executives Must Close

1 00:00:00,268 --> 00:00:00,965 Welcome to the show. 2 00:00:01,125 --> 00:00:05,919 Daniel, I want to start with a scene that I think every newly promoted VP or 3 00:00:05,981 --> 00:00:12,077 Director recognizes: it's 8:07 on a Monday, your title changed maybe two weeks 4 00:00:12,137 --> 00:00:17,030 ago, your calendar is suddenly full of peers from finance, product, 5 00:00:17,110 --> 00:00:22,793 legal, operations -- and everybody already knows your new role before they know 6 00:00:22,823 --> 00:00:24,389 whether your judgment is any good. 7 00:00:24,629 --> 00:00:27,309 That's the uncomfortable part. 8 00:00:27,459 --> 00:00:32,306 You can be fully competent, genuinely capable, and still not be credible YET. 9 00:00:33,196 --> 00:00:37,636 That phrase -- "credible yet" -- is the whole thing. 10 00:00:37,746 --> 00:00:43,561 Because the title upgrade is immediate, but trust is on a delay. 11 00:00:43,641 --> 00:00:46,524 And different people are looking for different proof. 12 00:00:46,636 --> 00:00:51,321 Your boss is asking, "Can I leave this with you without having to circle back three 13 00:00:51,428 --> 00:00:52,203 times?" 14 00:00:52,331 --> 00:00:57,172 Your peers are asking, "Are you going to collaborate, or are you going to throw your 15 00:00:57,212 --> 00:00:58,455 new title around?" 16 00:00:58,635 --> 00:01:03,664 And the cross-functional folks, especially the ones who don't report to you, 17 00:01:03,704 --> 00:01:08,385 are asking, "Will working with you make my life smoother or harder?" 18 00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:09,717 Exactly. 19 00:01:11,733 --> 00:01:15,147 The mistake, I think, is assuming trust is now implied by position. 20 00:01:15,547 --> 00:01:16,827 It isn't. 21 00:01:16,943 --> 00:01:19,349 Position gets you access. 22 00:01:19,409 --> 00:01:20,990 Trust gets you latitude. 23 00:01:21,210 --> 00:01:23,550 And those are very different currencies. 24 00:01:24,230 --> 00:01:28,906 I've watched newly promoted leaders walk into rooms believing they must demonstrate 25 00:01:28,973 --> 00:01:34,342 range -- speak on every topic, opine on every detail, prove they deserved the 26 00:01:34,390 --> 00:01:35,781 promotion in real time. 27 00:01:36,161 --> 00:01:42,490 But what the room is often measuring is much quieter: Do you understand the actual 28 00:01:42,552 --> 00:01:43,128 decision? 29 00:01:43,428 --> 00:01:46,764 Can you separate signal from noise? 30 00:01:46,934 --> 00:01:49,755 Can you hold tension without becoming theatrical? 31 00:01:50,000 --> 00:01:53,759 [responds quickly] And "latitude" is the word I'd underline there. 32 00:01:53,859 --> 00:01:59,435 Because when your boss gives you latitude, that means fewer check-ins, 33 00:01:59,499 --> 00:02:02,313 less second-guessing, more space. 34 00:02:02,457 --> 00:02:07,984 When peers give you latitude, they stop treating every request like it needs a legal 35 00:02:08,053 --> 00:02:08,547 review. 36 00:02:09,434 --> 00:02:14,466 And when cross-functional partners give you latitude, they'll bring you half-formed 37 00:02:14,528 --> 00:02:16,787 problems earlier, which is huge. 38 00:02:16,931 --> 00:02:21,986 That's one of the best signs you're becoming trusted -- people let you see the mess 39 00:02:22,043 --> 00:02:23,262 before it's polished. 40 00:02:24,000 --> 00:02:24,876 That's beautifully put. 41 00:02:24,996 --> 00:02:27,193 And there's a subtle asymmetry here. 42 00:02:27,337 --> 00:02:31,514 Your boss often grants trust based on judgment and reliability. 43 00:02:31,914 --> 00:02:36,076 Peers grant trust based on fairness and consistency. 44 00:02:36,289 --> 00:02:40,881 Cross-functional partners grant trust based on usefulness. 45 00:02:41,281 --> 00:02:46,563 If you miss that, you can perform well in one direction and still stall in the 46 00:02:46,620 --> 00:02:47,522 others. 47 00:02:47,802 --> 00:02:52,727 I've seen leaders who are adored upward because they send immaculate updates, 48 00:02:52,767 --> 00:02:56,959 but sideways they create friction everywhere because nobody can tell what they 49 00:02:57,012 --> 00:02:57,916 actually want. 50 00:02:59,120 --> 00:03:00,998 Let me push on that a bit. 51 00:03:01,198 --> 00:03:07,239 I think some people hear "be useful to cross-functional partners" and translate it 52 00:03:07,303 --> 00:03:09,159 into "be agreeable." 53 00:03:09,359 --> 00:03:11,319 Those are not the same. 54 00:03:11,586 --> 00:03:18,043 If product wants one thing, finance wants another, and operations wants something 55 00:03:18,139 --> 00:03:23,324 else, being trusted does not mean smiling at all three and nodding. 56 00:03:23,436 --> 00:03:29,041 Sometimes credibility is saying, "No, we're not doing all of that in Q2. 57 00:03:29,097 --> 00:03:30,279 Here's the sequencing." 58 00:03:31,000 --> 00:03:33,644 Yes -- not agreeable, but legible. 59 00:03:33,740 --> 00:03:35,000 That's the distinction. 60 00:03:35,137 --> 00:03:37,759 People trust what they can read. 61 00:03:37,879 --> 00:03:42,114 If your reasoning is coherent, if your trade-offs are visible, 62 00:03:42,141 --> 00:03:47,472 if your priorities remain stable under pressure, then even disagreement can deepen 63 00:03:47,552 --> 00:03:48,112 trust. 64 00:03:48,312 --> 00:03:51,712 But opacity erodes it almost instantly. 65 00:03:51,992 --> 00:03:56,903 And newly promoted leaders often don't see the trust gap because they're looking 66 00:03:56,994 --> 00:03:59,777 inward -- "Am I performing at the level?" 67 00:04:00,150 --> 00:04:05,618 -- while everyone around them is looking outward, asking, "What is it like to work 68 00:04:05,650 --> 00:04:06,258 with you now?" 69 00:04:07,137 --> 00:04:12,362 Which is why the first thirty, sixty, ninety days matter so much. 70 00:04:12,408 --> 00:04:16,434 People are creating a mental file on you with very little evidence. 71 00:04:16,614 --> 00:04:19,958 Not in a malicious way -- just human nature. 72 00:04:20,054 --> 00:04:22,003 They're collecting moments. 73 00:04:22,093 --> 00:04:23,725 One meeting where you ramble. 74 00:04:23,825 --> 00:04:25,324 One deadline you miss. 75 00:04:25,484 --> 00:04:28,044 One issue you clarify fast. 76 00:04:28,204 --> 00:04:30,519 One conflict you handle calmly. 77 00:04:30,679 --> 00:04:35,235 The file gets built from those specifics, and then the title starts to mean 78 00:04:35,283 --> 00:04:36,275 something real. 79 00:04:37,072 --> 00:04:42,882 The good news is the fastest credibility signals are rarely glamorous. 80 00:04:42,970 --> 00:04:44,401 They're small. 81 00:04:44,464 --> 00:04:45,282 Repeatable. 82 00:04:45,352 --> 00:04:46,402 And visible. 83 00:04:46,522 --> 00:04:49,004 Clarity, speed, precision. 84 00:04:49,217 --> 00:04:54,119 If I send you a note after a meeting that says, "Here are the three decisions, 85 00:04:54,199 --> 00:04:59,955 the owner for each, and the Friday deadline," that does more for trust than a 86 00:05:00,019 --> 00:05:04,437 brilliant but wandering fifteen-minute speech in the meeting itself. 87 00:05:05,000 --> 00:05:09,085 And that is such a relief, frankly, because it means credibility is not some 88 00:05:09,158 --> 00:05:11,005 mysterious charisma product. 89 00:05:11,138 --> 00:05:14,482 It is often administrative elegance. 90 00:05:14,984 --> 00:05:16,564 I say that with affection. 91 00:05:16,904 --> 00:05:21,879 A leader who can turn a murky discussion into, "Here is what we decided, 92 00:05:21,927 --> 00:05:28,275 here is what remains open, here is the risk if we wait," creates immediate calm. 93 00:05:28,415 --> 00:05:30,197 The room feels held. 94 00:05:30,357 --> 00:05:32,277 That feeling matters. 95 00:05:33,000 --> 00:05:35,953 "Administrative elegance" -- I'm stealing that. 96 00:05:36,803 --> 00:05:37,833 But yes. 97 00:05:37,923 --> 00:05:42,233 And speed matters, though I want to be careful with that word. 98 00:05:42,303 --> 00:05:43,793 Not frantic speed. 99 00:05:43,953 --> 00:05:47,390 Not replying in ninety seconds to prove dedication. 100 00:05:47,630 --> 00:05:53,550 I mean decision speed where appropriate, response speed when commitment was made, 101 00:05:53,710 --> 00:05:57,467 and follow-up speed while the topic is still alive. 102 00:05:57,636 --> 00:06:00,516 Momentum is a credibility signal. 103 00:06:00,729 --> 00:06:06,356 If every action item from your team drifts for ten days, people start to assume the 104 00:06:06,436 --> 00:06:07,796 work will need chasing. 105 00:06:08,000 --> 00:06:09,438 And fewer promises, too. 106 00:06:09,646 --> 00:06:12,232 This is one I feel strongly about. 107 00:06:12,432 --> 00:06:17,594 Newly promoted leaders often overcommit because they wish to appear helpful, 108 00:06:17,650 --> 00:06:19,354 available, expansive. 109 00:06:19,634 --> 00:06:25,422 But a narrower set of commitments, met with consistency, is much more powerful. 110 00:06:25,605 --> 00:06:30,541 Better to say, "I can get you a recommendation by Thursday at 3," 111 00:06:30,781 --> 00:06:36,622 and deliver at 2:15, than to say, "I'll look at several options this week," 112 00:06:36,822 --> 00:06:39,102 and vanish into ambiguity. 113 00:06:40,000 --> 00:06:41,517 Let me make that concrete. 114 00:06:41,677 --> 00:06:46,237 I coached a leader -- won't name the company, but fast-growth, 115 00:06:46,365 --> 00:06:51,833 lots of moving parts -- who had a very simple habit after ambiguous meetings. 116 00:06:52,004 --> 00:06:55,668 Within twenty minutes, she'd send a five-bullet note. 117 00:06:55,794 --> 00:06:58,307 Bullet one: decision. 118 00:06:58,444 --> 00:07:01,108 Bullet two: trade-off. 119 00:07:01,234 --> 00:07:04,550 Bullet three: who was doing what. 120 00:07:04,687 --> 00:07:08,150 Bullet four: what she needed from others. 121 00:07:08,276 --> 00:07:12,067 Bullet five: date of next checkpoint. 122 00:07:12,243 --> 00:07:15,590 That five-bullet format became her signature. 123 00:07:15,704 --> 00:07:20,225 People started saying, "If she's on it, we'll know what's happening." 124 00:07:21,142 --> 00:07:23,241 The "trade-off" bullet is especially elegant. 125 00:07:23,341 --> 00:07:28,123 Because it tells people she is not merely reporting activity; she is interpreting 126 00:07:28,203 --> 00:07:29,083 consequence. 127 00:07:30,000 --> 00:07:30,917 Exactly. 128 00:07:30,987 --> 00:07:33,841 And the reason it worked wasn't style. 129 00:07:34,134 --> 00:07:36,557 It was cognitive relief. 130 00:07:36,777 --> 00:07:42,242 She turned ambiguity into confidence by making decisions easier. 131 00:07:42,352 --> 00:07:46,003 Instead of asking a boss, "What do you want to do?" 132 00:07:46,063 --> 00:07:50,565 she'd say, "Option A preserves timeline but adds cost. 133 00:07:50,691 --> 00:07:55,766 Option B protects margin but slips launch by two weeks. 134 00:07:56,166 --> 00:07:59,929 I recommend A because the revenue window matters more." 135 00:08:00,121 --> 00:08:01,850 That's an easy meeting. 136 00:08:01,978 --> 00:08:04,334 That's an easy leader to trust. 137 00:08:05,064 --> 00:08:10,201 There's a phrase I use with clients: reduce the burden of interpretation. 138 00:08:10,708 --> 00:08:17,081 If every update requires your boss or peer to decode what is important, 139 00:08:17,129 --> 00:08:22,045 what changed, and what you're actually asking for, then you are exporting work 140 00:08:22,148 --> 00:08:24,046 upward and sideways. 141 00:08:24,406 --> 00:08:29,167 But if you can say, plainly, "This is the issue. 142 00:08:29,343 --> 00:08:31,165 This is what it means. 143 00:08:31,325 --> 00:08:38,132 This is my recommendation," you are not merely communicating -- you are creating 144 00:08:38,221 --> 00:08:39,013 momentum. 145 00:08:40,000 --> 00:08:41,839 And visible completion matters. 146 00:08:41,999 --> 00:08:45,713 Not private diligence -- visible completion. 147 00:08:45,753 --> 00:08:48,393 When something closes, close the loop. 148 00:08:48,633 --> 00:08:49,193 "Done." 149 00:08:49,553 --> 00:08:50,393 "Sent." 150 00:08:50,713 --> 00:08:51,673 "Approved." 151 00:08:52,033 --> 00:08:53,113 "Resolved." 152 00:08:53,406 --> 00:08:59,989 It sounds almost too basic, but people remember who leaves threads hanging. 153 00:09:00,136 --> 00:09:04,872 Trust grows when others stop wondering whether you dropped the ball. 154 00:09:05,394 --> 00:09:09,241 Executive presence is one of those phrases that has been dressed up until it nearly 155 00:09:09,294 --> 00:09:10,799 means nothing. 156 00:09:10,896 --> 00:09:16,843 People imagine wardrobe, vocal timbre, immaculate composure -- and yes, 157 00:09:16,874 --> 00:09:21,645 presentation has its place -- but in practice, presence is far more behavioral than 158 00:09:21,709 --> 00:09:22,365 aesthetic. 159 00:09:22,738 --> 00:09:25,716 It is the signal you send under pressure. 160 00:09:25,896 --> 00:09:27,436 Are you calm? 161 00:09:27,526 --> 00:09:28,836 Are you concise? 162 00:09:29,036 --> 00:09:33,003 Are you oriented toward outcomes rather than performance? 163 00:09:34,000 --> 00:09:38,797 [questioning tone] So if someone says, "I need more executive presence," 164 00:09:38,829 --> 00:09:43,432 your translation is not "speak deeper and buy better jackets." 165 00:09:43,645 --> 00:09:49,509 It's more like, "When the room gets tense, can you help people think?" 166 00:09:50,000 --> 00:09:50,800 Precisely. 167 00:09:50,840 --> 00:09:55,441 And one of the clearest markers is whether you lead with the answer or with the 168 00:09:55,521 --> 00:09:56,321 backstory. 169 00:09:56,545 --> 00:10:01,278 Many smart leaders over-explain because they wish to demonstrate rigor. 170 00:10:01,678 --> 00:10:03,638 I understand the instinct. 171 00:10:03,778 --> 00:10:05,437 I had to unlearn it myself. 172 00:10:05,637 --> 00:10:10,872 But senior audiences usually need three things first: the answer, 173 00:10:11,112 --> 00:10:14,479 the trade-off, and the recommendation. 174 00:10:14,767 --> 00:10:18,722 Then, if useful, the supporting detail. 175 00:10:19,026 --> 00:10:22,240 Framing before exposition. 176 00:10:23,000 --> 00:10:25,079 [grins in voice] You're being very diplomatic. 177 00:10:25,399 --> 00:10:31,073 I'll be slightly less diplomatic: if someone asks you for a recommendation and you 178 00:10:31,121 --> 00:10:36,032 take six minutes to narrate your thought process before telling them what you think, 179 00:10:36,052 --> 00:10:38,993 the room starts doing emotional paperwork. 180 00:10:39,121 --> 00:10:42,030 They're wondering, "Is there a point coming? 181 00:10:42,190 --> 00:10:43,869 Is there a decision here?" 182 00:10:43,976 --> 00:10:49,395 Presence drops FAST when people have to wait too long for the shape of the answer. 183 00:10:50,000 --> 00:10:53,080 [laughs softly] "Emotional paperwork" is painfully accurate. 184 00:10:53,170 --> 00:10:57,759 And to be fair, the intent behind over-explaining is often honorable. 185 00:10:57,896 --> 00:10:59,682 People want to be thorough. 186 00:10:59,794 --> 00:11:02,397 They want to avoid being seen as simplistic. 187 00:11:02,697 --> 00:11:07,686 Yet the effect is that others leave the conversation less certain, 188 00:11:07,846 --> 00:11:09,526 not more. 189 00:11:09,606 --> 00:11:15,440 Executive presence, in that sense, is not what you felt while speaking; it is what 190 00:11:15,486 --> 00:11:17,280 others felt after listening. 191 00:11:18,000 --> 00:11:23,438 That right there -- "what others felt after listening" -- I'm never gonna forget 192 00:11:23,470 --> 00:11:24,319 that phrasing. 193 00:11:24,399 --> 00:11:29,829 Because I had a moment years ago, probably twelve, maybe thirteen years ago, 194 00:11:29,882 --> 00:11:33,752 coaching a newly promoted VP in a tech organization. 195 00:11:33,885 --> 00:11:35,914 Smart guy, really sharp. 196 00:11:36,047 --> 00:11:40,394 After every executive meeting, he'd come out feeling proud because he'd covered 197 00:11:40,438 --> 00:11:40,958 everything. 198 00:11:41,098 --> 00:11:46,637 But his CFO finally told him, almost word for word, "When you finish, 199 00:11:46,717 --> 00:11:49,112 I still don't know what you want me to decide." 200 00:11:49,304 --> 00:11:51,276 That was brutal... 201 00:11:51,296 --> 00:11:52,483 and incredibly useful. 202 00:11:53,269 --> 00:11:54,201 Brutal, yes. 203 00:11:54,381 --> 00:11:57,163 But clarifying. 204 00:11:58,000 --> 00:11:58,480 Very. 205 00:11:58,667 --> 00:12:00,401 He changed one habit. 206 00:12:00,561 --> 00:12:05,756 He started opening with, "Here's the decision I need, here are the two trade-offs, 207 00:12:05,876 --> 00:12:08,155 and here's my recommendation." 208 00:12:08,267 --> 00:12:09,432 Same intelligence. 209 00:12:09,528 --> 00:12:10,392 Same data. 210 00:12:10,464 --> 00:12:12,035 Different signal. 211 00:12:12,145 --> 00:12:14,636 And what changed wasn't just perception. 212 00:12:14,739 --> 00:12:17,195 People started relaxing around him. 213 00:12:17,259 --> 00:12:21,989 They trusted that a meeting with him would end in clarity, not exhaustion. 214 00:12:23,000 --> 00:12:25,004 There is a generosity in concision. 215 00:12:25,228 --> 00:12:28,041 That may sound odd, but I believe it. 216 00:12:28,361 --> 00:12:32,280 To be concise is to respect other people's attention. 217 00:12:32,653 --> 00:12:37,640 To frame a decision cleanly is to make collaboration more humane. 218 00:12:37,844 --> 00:12:41,876 Presence, at its best, is not dominance. 219 00:12:42,169 --> 00:12:44,912 It is steadiness plus discernment. 220 00:12:45,232 --> 00:12:50,989 It tells the room, "You need not be anxious; we can think clearly from here." 221 00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:54,635 And under pressure, the giveaway is pace. 222 00:12:54,815 --> 00:13:01,664 Not speaking slowly for effect -- that can become theater too -- but not speeding up 223 00:13:01,696 --> 00:13:02,707 when challenged. 224 00:13:02,920 --> 00:13:09,340 If a board member, or a CEO, or an irritated peer pushes back and your answer gets 225 00:13:09,407 --> 00:13:13,504 twice as long and twice as fast, people feel the wobble. 226 00:13:13,744 --> 00:13:16,225 Calm brevity is a signal. 227 00:13:16,438 --> 00:13:19,182 It says, "I'm still with the problem." 228 00:13:20,337 --> 00:13:25,281 Once you move into bigger roles, a lot of your success comes from people who do not 229 00:13:25,361 --> 00:13:26,320 report to you. 230 00:13:26,533 --> 00:13:32,079 So influence without authority becomes less of a slogan and more of a daily 231 00:13:32,143 --> 00:13:33,683 operating requirement. 232 00:13:33,803 --> 00:13:40,395 And the leaders who do this well are usually reducing three things for others: risk, 233 00:13:40,466 --> 00:13:43,354 workload, and uncertainty. 234 00:13:43,567 --> 00:13:48,315 If partnering with you lowers those three, your influence goes up. 235 00:13:49,000 --> 00:13:54,598 That triad -- risk, workload, uncertainty -- is wonderfully crisp. 236 00:13:54,798 --> 00:13:58,757 And it reminds us that influence is not persuasion alone. 237 00:13:59,024 --> 00:14:01,038 It is design. 238 00:14:01,188 --> 00:14:05,637 You are designing a path that others can say yes to with less friction. 239 00:14:05,909 --> 00:14:08,918 This is why stakeholder mapping matters. 240 00:14:09,101 --> 00:14:13,885 Before you push an initiative forward, ask: who can approve it, 241 00:14:14,045 --> 00:14:19,481 who can block it, who will be affected by it, and who must help implement it? 242 00:14:19,681 --> 00:14:22,044 Those are not the same people. 243 00:14:23,000 --> 00:14:27,487 Right, and pre-wiring is where a lot of newer executives hesitate. 244 00:14:27,567 --> 00:14:31,569 They think, "Shouldn't I bring this to the meeting and let the group discuss it 245 00:14:31,681 --> 00:14:32,289 live?" 246 00:14:32,409 --> 00:14:34,129 Sometimes, sure. 247 00:14:34,289 --> 00:14:38,847 But for anything important, the real work often happens before the meeting. 248 00:14:39,067 --> 00:14:41,481 Ten-minute conversations. 249 00:14:41,534 --> 00:14:43,321 Pressure-testing objections. 250 00:14:43,401 --> 00:14:47,881 Finding out what legal is nervous about, what finance needs to see, 251 00:14:47,993 --> 00:14:50,834 what operations can actually support. 252 00:14:50,994 --> 00:14:55,238 Then the big meeting becomes confirmation, not discovery. 253 00:14:56,065 --> 00:15:00,310 The phrase I often use is: never surprise a stakeholder with a decision that depends 254 00:15:00,363 --> 00:15:01,149 on them. 255 00:15:01,279 --> 00:15:03,673 Surprises create defensiveness. 256 00:15:03,753 --> 00:15:06,159 Pre-wiring creates participation. 257 00:15:06,359 --> 00:15:11,199 And if you can anchor the conversation in shared goals -- revenue timing, 258 00:15:11,243 --> 00:15:16,712 customer experience, risk reduction, team capacity -- you shift the dynamic from "my 259 00:15:16,765 --> 00:15:21,351 function versus yours" to "how shall we achieve the thing we both say matters?" 260 00:15:22,120 --> 00:15:25,917 I agree with that, but I'm gonna push on one piece. 261 00:15:26,117 --> 00:15:29,355 I hear a lot of leaders say, "Just be helpful." 262 00:15:29,795 --> 00:15:31,753 I don't think helpful is enough. 263 00:15:31,873 --> 00:15:34,393 Helpful can become reactive. 264 00:15:34,523 --> 00:15:39,991 Helpful can turn into being everyone's favorite utility player and nobody's 265 00:15:40,071 --> 00:15:41,351 strategic peer. 266 00:15:42,000 --> 00:15:42,800 That is fair. 267 00:15:42,846 --> 00:15:46,480 Though I would defend helpfulness if we define it correctly. 268 00:15:46,680 --> 00:15:52,792 Not servility, not endless accommodation -- but practical usefulness in service of a 269 00:15:52,849 --> 00:15:53,831 shared outcome. 270 00:15:54,000 --> 00:15:54,400 Maybe. 271 00:15:54,600 --> 00:16:00,642 But I've seen too many newly promoted leaders become endlessly available and call it 272 00:16:00,722 --> 00:16:01,522 influence. 273 00:16:01,698 --> 00:16:06,073 They'll sit in every working session, answer every question, 274 00:16:06,137 --> 00:16:08,071 jump on every Slack thread. 275 00:16:08,183 --> 00:16:11,594 Meanwhile, nobody knows what they stand for. 276 00:16:11,698 --> 00:16:15,754 Strategic clarity matters more than generic helpfulness. 277 00:16:16,210 --> 00:16:18,402 Yes, I think that's the sharper framing. 278 00:16:18,514 --> 00:16:23,366 Helpfulness is insufficient unless it is attached to a clear point of view. 279 00:16:23,526 --> 00:16:27,288 Influence requires that others know how you think. 280 00:16:27,581 --> 00:16:32,083 If I reduce your uncertainty but never reveal my recommendation, 281 00:16:32,163 --> 00:16:34,168 I am facilitating, not leading. 282 00:16:34,339 --> 00:16:37,443 Useful, perhaps, but incomplete. 283 00:16:38,000 --> 00:16:39,077 Exactly. 284 00:16:39,224 --> 00:16:44,081 So the practical version is: make it easier, but don't make it vaguer. 285 00:16:44,181 --> 00:16:48,480 Say, "Here's the shared goal, here's what I know you care about, 286 00:16:48,608 --> 00:16:54,076 here's the risk I've tried to remove, and here's the path I think we should take." 287 00:16:54,316 --> 00:16:56,876 That's influence. 288 00:16:56,983 --> 00:17:00,957 It respects their world without surrendering your own judgment. 289 00:17:02,000 --> 00:17:04,480 And this is where cross-functional trust deepens. 290 00:17:04,640 --> 00:17:10,084 When people feel that you have genuinely accounted for their constraints -- budget, 291 00:17:10,153 --> 00:17:15,126 timing, compliance, bandwidth -- they become far more open to your proposal. 292 00:17:15,386 --> 00:17:20,409 Not because you outranked them, but because you did the intellectual courtesy of 293 00:17:20,459 --> 00:17:23,125 meeting reality before making a request. 294 00:17:24,281 --> 00:17:27,525 Trust rarely collapses in a single dramatic moment. 295 00:17:27,717 --> 00:17:30,764 More often, it leaks. 296 00:17:30,877 --> 00:17:31,682 Quietly. 297 00:17:31,812 --> 00:17:37,363 Through habits that seem minor in isolation: too much talking, 298 00:17:37,418 --> 00:17:43,120 inconsistent priorities, slow decisions, silent assumptions. 299 00:17:43,424 --> 00:17:49,440 Each one sends a signal, and together they form a pattern people remember. 300 00:17:50,000 --> 00:17:53,925 [responds quickly] "Leaks" is exactly right because most leaders don't notice it 301 00:17:53,965 --> 00:17:54,886 while it's happening. 302 00:17:55,030 --> 00:17:57,206 Take too much talking. 303 00:17:57,306 --> 00:17:59,768 The issue isn't simply airtime. 304 00:17:59,955 --> 00:18:04,166 It's that excessive explanation blurs priorities. 305 00:18:04,379 --> 00:18:09,760 If everything gets equal verbal weight, nobody can tell what actually matters. 306 00:18:09,940 --> 00:18:13,997 And then people start leaving your meetings with different interpretations, 307 00:18:14,077 --> 00:18:17,275 which means you've created work instead of direction. 308 00:18:18,000 --> 00:18:21,925 Or inconsistent priorities -- which can be especially damaging. 309 00:18:22,325 --> 00:18:25,204 On Monday, speed is everything. 310 00:18:25,577 --> 00:18:28,802 On Wednesday, quality is paramount. 311 00:18:29,229 --> 00:18:33,127 On Friday, the new message is stakeholder alignment. 312 00:18:33,587 --> 00:18:38,169 Now, to be fair, real conditions do change. 313 00:18:38,369 --> 00:18:44,088 But if leaders do not explain why a priority changed, others experience it as 314 00:18:44,168 --> 00:18:44,888 caprice. 315 00:18:45,208 --> 00:18:50,805 The team becomes hesitant because they no longer know which standard will be 316 00:18:50,865 --> 00:18:51,365 applied. 317 00:18:52,000 --> 00:18:53,679 And slow decisions... 318 00:18:53,727 --> 00:18:54,879 that's a big one. 319 00:18:54,986 --> 00:18:58,878 There's a myth that thoughtful leaders always take longer. 320 00:18:59,038 --> 00:18:59,998 Not true. 321 00:19:00,108 --> 00:19:05,115 Thoughtful leaders know what requires depth and what requires closure. 322 00:19:05,355 --> 00:19:10,793 If every medium-stakes decision sits open because you want one more slide, 323 00:19:10,853 --> 00:19:16,067 one more input, one more scenario, people stop trusting your ability to call the 324 00:19:16,163 --> 00:19:16,627 ball. 325 00:19:16,755 --> 00:19:18,226 They work around you. 326 00:19:19,192 --> 00:19:23,232 "They work around you" is devastatingly accurate. 327 00:19:23,432 --> 00:19:27,228 Another leak is changing tone by audience. 328 00:19:27,532 --> 00:19:33,627 Confident with direct reports, deferential with peers, polished with the boss, 329 00:19:33,774 --> 00:19:35,387 vague with partners. 330 00:19:35,787 --> 00:19:41,143 We all modulate language a little -- that is natural -- but when the underlying 331 00:19:41,193 --> 00:19:45,225 message changes to suit the room, people sense it. 332 00:19:45,353 --> 00:19:49,068 Consistency of reasoning is a profound trust marker. 333 00:19:50,000 --> 00:19:54,477 And the disappearing act after the meeting -- that one is so common. 334 00:19:54,566 --> 00:20:00,076 Somebody drives a big discussion, sounds terrific, gets everybody aligned, 335 00:20:00,116 --> 00:20:01,195 and then... 336 00:20:01,285 --> 00:20:01,995 silence. 337 00:20:02,235 --> 00:20:09,193 No summary, no owner list, no next step, no follow-up on the blocker they promised 338 00:20:09,246 --> 00:20:10,152 to resolve. 339 00:20:10,332 --> 00:20:15,828 The meeting felt good, but the trust score actually went down because the energy 340 00:20:15,892 --> 00:20:17,988 didn't convert into execution. 341 00:20:19,000 --> 00:20:20,683 This is where diagnosis matters. 342 00:20:20,793 --> 00:20:26,119 Because most leaders can feel that something is off -- credibility is uneven, 343 00:20:26,183 --> 00:20:31,805 influence is patchy, presence is inconsistent -- but they cannot easily name the 344 00:20:31,855 --> 00:20:32,285 pattern. 345 00:20:32,465 --> 00:20:36,045 And if you cannot name it, you cannot improve it with precision. 346 00:20:37,000 --> 00:20:40,478 That's why tools can help, if they're used well. 347 00:20:40,548 --> 00:20:45,710 One I like in this context is the LEAP assessment because it helps surface where the 348 00:20:45,810 --> 00:20:47,390 gap actually is. 349 00:20:47,603 --> 00:20:48,988 Is it credibility? 350 00:20:49,201 --> 00:20:51,226 Is it executive presence? 351 00:20:51,439 --> 00:20:54,029 Is it influence across stakeholders? 352 00:20:54,242 --> 00:20:55,989 Is it follow-through? 353 00:20:56,044 --> 00:21:00,668 Instead of a leader vaguely saying, "I need to be stronger," 354 00:21:00,708 --> 00:21:06,672 you can get more specific: "No, your issue is that peers trust your intent but not 355 00:21:06,704 --> 00:21:12,357 your decisiveness," or, "Your boss trusts your output but not your framing." 356 00:21:12,517 --> 00:21:15,001 That specificity is gold. 357 00:21:16,204 --> 00:21:18,875 And it prevents the usual overcorrection. 358 00:21:18,945 --> 00:21:21,992 Without a clear read, people tend to fix the wrong thing. 359 00:21:22,072 --> 00:21:25,432 They become more forceful when the problem was clarity. 360 00:21:25,725 --> 00:21:29,117 Or more visible when the problem was inconsistency. 361 00:21:29,597 --> 00:21:33,194 A good assessment can save months of misdirected effort. 362 00:21:34,140 --> 00:21:39,600 If you're in the first ninety days of a bigger role, the value of something like 363 00:21:39,733 --> 00:21:43,837 LEAP is not that it hands you a flattering report. 364 00:21:44,130 --> 00:21:49,923 It's that it shows you the blind spots EARLY, while your reputation is still 365 00:21:49,993 --> 00:21:50,643 forming. 366 00:21:50,803 --> 00:21:55,843 That's the moment when a focused adjustment has the highest return. 367 00:21:56,043 --> 00:21:59,528 You don't need a giant personality overhaul. 368 00:21:59,668 --> 00:22:04,648 Usually you need two or three very disciplined changes. 369 00:22:05,000 --> 00:22:07,555 And that focus is so important. 370 00:22:07,685 --> 00:22:12,512 Because early in a role, the temptation is to improve everything at once. 371 00:22:12,685 --> 00:22:17,553 Speak better, delegate better, build cross-functional trust, 372 00:22:17,622 --> 00:22:23,475 refine your updates, sharpen strategy, be more present, be more decisive. 373 00:22:23,822 --> 00:22:27,308 It becomes an impossible self-management project. 374 00:22:27,868 --> 00:22:30,660 A structured assessment narrows the aperture. 375 00:22:30,900 --> 00:22:35,534 It says, in effect, "Here is the leverage point." 376 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:37,760 Let's make that concrete. 377 00:22:37,840 --> 00:22:44,761 Suppose LEAP shows that your credibility is high with your team but low with peers. 378 00:22:44,865 --> 00:22:50,801 That suggests a very different development plan than if your boss sees you as smart 379 00:22:50,881 --> 00:22:52,481 but too detailed. 380 00:22:52,588 --> 00:22:57,760 In the first case, maybe you work on stakeholder mapping, pre-wiring, 381 00:22:57,800 --> 00:23:00,158 and cleaner trade-off conversations. 382 00:23:00,345 --> 00:23:04,716 In the second, maybe you train yourself to lead with recommendation, 383 00:23:04,780 --> 00:23:05,916 then evidence. 384 00:23:06,076 --> 00:23:07,198 Same title. 385 00:23:07,298 --> 00:23:08,958 Totally different plan. 386 00:23:10,195 --> 00:23:12,641 And for listeners who want to see it, the link is 387 00:23:12,908 --> 00:23:22,757 https://assuredleadership.com/services/assessments-tools. 388 00:23:23,017 --> 00:23:26,796 I'll say that once more naturally because I know some people are walking the dog or 389 00:23:26,876 --> 00:23:28,555 driving -- 390 00:23:28,615 --> 00:23:35,108 assuredleadership.com/services/assessments-tools. 391 00:23:35,508 --> 00:23:40,704 It is worth reviewing not as a label-maker, but as a development aid. 392 00:23:41,000 --> 00:23:47,076 Yes, and not in a salesy way -- just practically -- it can help you get out of the 393 00:23:47,216 --> 00:23:47,796 fog. 394 00:23:47,936 --> 00:23:53,307 The first ninety days generate a lot of feedback, but most of it is fragmented. 395 00:23:53,447 --> 00:23:55,707 One person says be bolder. 396 00:23:55,797 --> 00:23:58,627 Another says slow down. 397 00:23:58,682 --> 00:24:00,987 Another says get more strategic. 398 00:24:01,097 --> 00:24:03,783 Another says communicate more. 399 00:24:04,076 --> 00:24:08,817 LEAP can help organize that noise into a pattern you can actually work with. 400 00:24:09,064 --> 00:24:12,915 What I appreciate most is that it returns us to behavior. 401 00:24:13,035 --> 00:24:14,355 Not image. 402 00:24:14,475 --> 00:24:16,191 Not status performance. 403 00:24:16,351 --> 00:24:17,711 Behavior. 404 00:24:17,983 --> 00:24:20,668 What do you do in meetings? 405 00:24:20,928 --> 00:24:23,069 How do you frame decisions? 406 00:24:23,369 --> 00:24:26,347 How do others experience your follow-through? 407 00:24:26,667 --> 00:24:28,982 Can people predict your judgment? 408 00:24:29,262 --> 00:24:33,215 Those are all improvable, which is encouraging. 409 00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:38,479 And if you're leading someone newly promoted, it gives you a better coaching 410 00:24:38,559 --> 00:24:39,599 conversation. 411 00:24:39,709 --> 00:24:45,116 Instead of saying, "You need more executive presence," which is fuzzy to the point 412 00:24:45,143 --> 00:24:49,512 of useless, you can say, "In the last three staff meetings, 413 00:24:49,552 --> 00:24:54,956 you answered with context before recommendation, and the group lost the thread. 414 00:24:55,056 --> 00:24:55,996 Let's fix that." 415 00:24:56,140 --> 00:24:57,354 That's coachable. 416 00:24:57,530 --> 00:24:59,836 That changes outcomes. 417 00:25:00,330 --> 00:25:05,072 Perhaps that is the real invitation for anyone stepping into a larger role. 418 00:25:05,302 --> 00:25:08,475 Not, "How do I appear more senior?" 419 00:25:08,755 --> 00:25:14,964 But something more demanding, and I think more humane: when people leave a 420 00:25:15,013 --> 00:25:21,919 conversation with me, do they feel clearer, steadier, and more able to act? 421 00:25:22,000 --> 00:25:26,799 [questioning tone] And maybe that's the question to sit with after this one: are you 422 00:25:26,843 --> 00:25:30,957 spending your energy trying to LOOK senior... 423 00:25:31,037 --> 00:25:35,836 or are you becoming the kind of leader who is simply easier to trust?