Influence and Impact. George B. Bradt

and impact is when you find yourself doing your direct reports’ jobs instead of your own. You feel pressured and stressed and find it more comfortable to do work yourself than to give it to someone who works for you. There are a number of reasons, all of them valid to some degree:

       “It's faster for me to do it.”

       “I don't want to overburden my people. I'll take it on.”

       “They aren't skilled, and I don't have the time to teach or coach them.”

       “It has to be done just right, and I don't have people who can do it as well as I can.”

      Each one of these feels right and may be true in the short run. But at some point, your people start to feel that they aren't growing, and feel their value is eroding just as yours is.

      Tommy was known for having a blend of technological, operational, and business expertise that helped him rise to become the leader of a 1500-person business unit spanning four continents. He knew the economics of his business and was able convert his skills into practical technology and process solutions. But like many people, his strengths were also his weaknesses. Because Tommy understood the business in such depth, he often knew the answers well before his team did. As a result, he would identify the solution, inform others, and tell them to execute. He spent a lot of time evaluating their work, making adjustments, and providing direction. Unsurprisingly, his team resented what felt to them like micromanaging. Tommy felt overworked and underappreciated. His team felt undervalued, under-challenged, and demoralized.

      His boss asked one of us (Bill) to work with Tommy—to help him focus on what she needed most from Tommy: Enterprise strategy, reorganization, offshoring, and cross-business collaboration.

      As we worked together, Tommy acknowledged that his impatience to get to a solution often made him annoyed at his team members, and he expressed frustration when he found himself sitting in a meeting, knowing the answer, and not hearing anyone tell him the solution.

       I asked, “Why do you need to sit in those meetings? What would happen if you asked them to come up with solutions and present them to you?”

Tommy quickly began to realize that he was avoiding the more complex and long-term aspects of his work where he had less confidence.

      His core job was to build collaborative relationships with senior leaders of lines of business, manage groups whose objectives and rewards were in conflict with his, and deal with complex problems that had no obvious solution.

      Tommy stepped back and let his team sort out the operational problems. He discovered that, without his involvement, they often came up with reasonable solutions. And when they did not initially find a reasonable answer, he started redirecting them and letting them go back to work the problem more.

      Tommy's boss eventually noticed that he had freed up time, and told him, “I've been waiting for you to figure this out.” As Tommy confronted his self-doubts, he was able to focus more on the high-level relationships and the complex challenges that really deserved his attention.

      Sometimes it is faster to do it yourself. Or, you may just fall back on what you find to be rewarding or gratifying. Think of this like “mowing the lawn,” or “doing the dishes,” because the tasks are simple, well-defined, and have a beginning and an end. They rarely require the level of skill the individual brings to the table, but it is much easier (to continue the analogy) to wash the dishes than to figure out how to redesign the kitchen to include a dishwasher.

      Tip for Leaders

      Just because you are better at some things than your people are doesn't mean you should do them. Your technical expertise is important. But that is not what you are paid for, and when you dive into a problem that calls for your technical expertise you lose hours of the most precious commodity of all—time. And your people learn nothing. Because you did the work yourself, your organization is no better equipped to do the work next time. You unintentionally teach your people to do sloppy jobs, since they know you will overrule or fix their work. They stop bringing their A game.

      Doing the Job You Wish You Had

      One of the quickest paths to losing influence and impact comes from trying to do jobs that belong to your colleagues. Many clients have told us, “My colleagues aren't getting their work done! And when they do, it's inadequate. That prevents me and my team from being successful. They should let me take that on.” These individuals rarely see themselves as self-interested. They are trying to help their manager, or the organization, succeed more quickly or operate more efficiently. They are trying to have more impact.

But the results are bad. Colleagues come to believe that you see yourself as smarter, more experienced, or more capable than them. They see you as self-interested or self-promoting. This creates a negative spiral in which your influence and impact drops precipitously. Peers stop cooperating. This causes you to push harder since less work is getting done, which increases their lack of collaboration. One person Bill observed while working with a start-up fell into this trap.

      Rohit was hired to manage consumer marketing for a start-up clothing company, based on several years’ experience in a large company, where he developed a fledgling direct-to-consumer segment for the company. When he arrived, he was given responsibility for print and e-business development, while social media, institutional sales, and private label deals were left to others.

      Almost immediately, Rohit started lobbying to take over other marketing functions. First, he sought responsibility for social media, arguing that the two had sufficient overlap that they needed to be managed together. At the same time, he pushed to take over institutional sales. He argued that the experience from his previous company made him more qualified than anyone else in the organization.

      Unfortunately, Rohit had not yet demonstrated any growth in the direct-to-consumer segment. His peers found his efforts to take control arrogant and irritating. The CEO insisted that he demonstrate success in his own sphere before taking on any other roles. In spite of this, he kept lobbying to take on more responsibility, which frustrated everyone. The CEO rapidly lost confidence in him because of his lack of success in his primary role, and became increasingly intolerant of his attitude.

      Instead of taking on colleagues’ jobs, some individuals try to take on their own manager's job. We observe this less often, probably because the manager usually moves to stop the behavior quickly. For some people, however, they do not seem to understand the difference between their job and their manager's job, and eventually end up in a power struggle to prove they are equals.

      A corollary of this is the person who believes they do not have to discuss their activities or decisions with their manager and should be given total autonomy to make decisions and take action within their remit, without input or oversight. The consistent message we have heard from these individuals is, “I know how to do my job. Why does my manager need to get involved in ‘the details?’”

      Doing What Is Familiar

      Some people we have worked with struggled because they were uncomfortable with the responsibilities of their new job. Often, when someone is promoted, they do not immediately understand what the expectations are. Moreover, the new job frequently requires knowledge and skills that weren't required before, which makes them feel insecure. One recently promoted manager said, anxiously, “They handed me a report and told me to come to a meeting to discuss it. I don't have any idea what the report means!”

      As first-time managers, you may not feel comfortable directing others, or giving feedback. As senior leaders, you may find you are managing people who know much more about the subject matter than you do. Handling these transitions requires three things: Comfort with uncertainty; familiarity with your generalizable skills; and deliberate and effortful thinking.

Because