Creating an environment where people can thrive and perform at their best is a key function of leadership.  A characteristic of such an environment is that people know two things:

1. What is expected of them
2. Where they stand

In both cases, the onus is on the leader to give their people this knowledge with absolute clarity.  Often, this is where we trip up and fail.

Communication is more than just speaking, more than just speaking and having someone else listen.  Communication is about the leader taking a picture in their mind and accurately transferring it to their people’s minds. And the full responsibility for ensuring this is done well lies with the leaders. Just saying “If you have any questions, you know where I am” isn’t good enough.  How would people know they might be wrong?

Let me describe this concept using a situation I had during a home-building project.  The agreement was that I would pay for the materials directly, and the building contractor would handle the construction.  In many cases, this meant I had to estimate the amount of material needed.  In essence, the plan worked well until we had to tile the walls in the 3 bathrooms.  We discussed the tasks and agreed that tiling would be done to the window height.  A clear specification that I could work with.  I calculated how many tiles we would need, added a bit for wastage, bought them, and the builder continued.  At one point, the builder let me know that they had run out of tiles and would have to make some contingency plans.  It was a semi-heated exchange. I wasn’t sure how we had messed this up, and in a very frustrated mood, drove out to the building site some 3 hours away.  As soon as I walked in, I saw the problem: the builder had tiled up to the tops of the windows, while I had calculated everything to the windowsills.  “Tile to window height.”  We had heard the same words but had understood different things.  Who was to blame? Clearly, buying more tiles was required to solve this problem, but who would pay?

How often do we communicate, only to find the message we think we gave doesn’t land the way we intended?  And what is the cost of rework, blame-shifting, relationship friction, and bottom line?

So how do we prevent these situations?  Let’s go back to the tiling example.  I was the leader in this case, since I had a requirement that needed to be met.  In the example, there are 4 mistakes I, as the leader, made:

1. Clarity
   I was ambiguous about the requirement.  The tile-to-window height should specify whether the window height was measured from the windowsill or the top of the window.  I could have even given a specific height in cm.
2. Reinforcement
   Regarding the first point, I did not follow up on the decision with written confirmation, such as an email, text, or any other reference.  Had I done so, I might have included a more specific explanation.
3. Check For Understanding
   Interestingly, this was done verbally, but on the assumption that we both understood the same thing. Again, the need for an unambiguous specification is highlighted.
4. Courageous Communication
   This is where we have robust discussions when somebody has not achieved the required standard.  I realised my mistake in taking the builder to task on this, since I had not been clear on the requirement or standard.  The only courageous communication appropriate here was to have that conversation with myself – I was responsible.

The builder did not know what was expected of him (even though he thought he did), and immediately after the incident, he also didn’t know where he stood with me.  If left to fester, he would not have been able to do his best work.

In the Legitimate Leadership Empowerment Framework, we discuss the concepts of Means, Ability and Accountability.  Means refers to the tools to do the job, Ability refers to the knowledge and capability to do the job, and Accountability is giving people positive or negative recognition based on how they have worked against a standard.  Leaders are responsible for the Means and Ability, while the people are Accountable.

The takeaway in my building case was that I could not hold the builder accountable because I hadn’t given him the Means, in this case, a clear standard, to perform the task.  Being able to hold someone appropriately accountable is imperative for that person to know where they stand.

Shaping that special environment starts with communicating with absolute clarity.