I am embarrassed to be writing this article, as early in my leadership career I often failed to do what I am now strongly advocating. I have continually stated that it is good to learn from your mistakes, but even better if you can learn from the mistakes of others; on this topic, you can learn a great deal from my mistakes! In my first few commands, both civilian and military, I would have been more successful and more effective had I spent more time managing from a higher virtual altitude, as opposed to ground level!

While long contemplating an article on this subject, a recent encounter with a former subordinate served as the strongest emphasis. At a reunion of a military unit that I commanded during Operation Desert Shield–Desert Storm, one of my former Marines approached me to say hello and started the conversation with, “You probably don’t remember me,” to which I had to sadly reply that this was correct. I added that I likely would have remembered him had he been either an extraordinary superstar or a problem person. Reflecting on this and many other similar encounters over the years, it emerged as a painful reminder that perhaps I could and should have endeavored to spend more time “hovering” over my entire commands and perhaps a little less time focusing only on very good and not-so-good situations.

Repudiate the “95% of time spent on 5% of employees” nonsense!

In just about every supervisory and leadership class I attended in my first few years of courses and institutes, it was continually stated as an almost absolute reality that supervisors and managers spend about 95% of their time dealing with about 5% of their problem employees. For years, this perception was often taught and accepted as the “industry standard.” In the evolution of the art of leadership, it is something that should have been taught as a pitfall to guard against, rather than something to expect and accept. In many instances, this nonsense became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Climb up and look down!

In different ways and with different expressions, many leaders have somewhat addressed the issue of limited command visibility. Related, but in my opinion less impactful, terms include “can’t see the forest for the trees,” “look beyond the obvious” and “don’t focus all your energy on one topic.” These expressions are certainly valuable and appropriate, but for me nothing has the same impact as visually looking down at my arena from a high altitude and conceptualizing all that is, or is likely, occurring within my scope of activities and responsibilities.

In my early years as a leader, I would have been much more effective and successful had I spent more time looking down at my arena rather than relying on lateral observations.

Related leadership failures and weaknesses

The leadership weaknesses of micromanagement, failure to delegate and failure to mentor align perfectly in the storm created by failing to lead from a virtually elevated perspective. In painful candor, I can now look back on some early leadership failures where I rationalized the inordinate amount of time I spent on certain command activities as necessary because of their perceived importance, my special expertise or because the individual who should have been involved lacked the requisite skills. With the benefit of hindsight, there were situations and tasks where I should have provided guidance, stepped back, delegated with appropriate mentoring and better distributed my limited command presence throughout the organization.

Case in point

In reflecting on past command distractions, I would place complex and serious disciplinary and disability situations involving particularly challenging employees at the top of the list. In a continuing commitment to noncomplimentary candor, I now acknowledge occasional unhealthy obsessions with problem employees who were “gaming the system” and taking advantage of every legal loophole they could find to escape the consequences of misconduct or gain entitlements (such as disability benefits) to which they were not entitled. I can think of no situations where my concerns were unwarranted, but several situations where I should have reduced my involvement and allowed others to take on the tasks. Beyond the negative leadership implications, this type of intense focus on problem situations can also take an unhealthy toll on the emotional well-being of command employees. From a personal standpoint, many years ago I fell ill with mononucleosis, which I now attribute to excessively spinning my leadership wheels. I needed to work smarter, not harder!

Invaluable approaches that strengthen leadership

The key to operating at the virtual 30,000-level is recognition and planning. I am probably not alone in requiring administrative tools to stay focused and on track. For all of us, it is necessary to take daily inventory of what has been appropriately prioritized and accomplished, as well as what must be carried over to the next day, again with appropriate prioritization. An absolute game changer in my professional development was adopting a paper-based management system (Franklin Daily Planner system), where each day stood alone as a plan, using symbols and designated locations to prioritize tasks, insert reminders and systemically and conspicuously move unfinished tasks to subsequent days. Whatever the approach, each leader must find and implement a system that supports organization, balance, prioritization and follow-up.

Summary

Talk is cheap, and there is no shortage of helpful expressions, but I challenge each reader to consider few images more visually impactful than that of virtually climbing to a high altitude and looking down at the important things in your life and in your command. Doing so will result in even greater effectiveness — I guarantee it!