By Tony Samson
CHIEFS are averse to getting advice too willingly proffered by subordinates or peers, especially when these are neither solicited nor welcome. Routine pronouncements that the chief is always open to suggestions from the ranks, and that his door is always open for peasants to walk in unannounced are mere lip service to participative management. (Are you here to water the plants?)
Worse for an underling is giving unsolicited advice in a public forum. An observation on the common background of appointees to important government positions can invite a severe scolding and ad hominem attacks on waistlines and comparisons to jellylike aquatic lowlife not yet fully evolved into insect eaters.
Leaders put arrogant advice-givers (as opposed to advisers) off-balance by publicly castigating them so that everyone knows they’re out of favor, and fresh meat for the trolls.
It is important for any adviser to know his place. The semblance of an opinion being solicited must be established. Here’s the etiquette for giving advice to the chief.
When asked for an opinion on a crisis, take some time to reply. Quick answers are viewed as shallow and not well thought out. (Can’t you think of something more original?) It’s better to repeat the question, nod, and say something cryptic — a crisis should not be wasted. Let another eager beaver jump in and be treated with contempt.
On a one-on-one situation, it is best to dodge with anecdotes and try to see what the chief is really looking for, especially when it comes to the evaluation of another executive. (Don’t you think she’s too passive?) There is no urgency in giving a straightforward answer. (She may just be a bit too careful, Sir.) Watching a basketball game beside the revered one when this question is popped, it’s best to shift the focus on the half-time cheers and nod your head to the rhythm of the drums as if tuning in to his mental pendulum.
Refrain from giving actionable advice, like sacking somebody, even if the person is at the top of your hate list. It is always good to present an analysis of the situation and the implications of certain options — true, he seems to be indispensable to the ongoing project. He’s good at what he does. But is that what the company needs at this time?
If you need to bring up a controversial topic your leader is surely going to be upset about, like the high representation expense of a cousin, it is best to test the waters. Maybe the report is not yet complete, and some other explanation is being verified. Probing reactions to the offensive idea can lead you to the right path, which is to change the topic — yes sir, the weather has been beastly.
Should you volunteer advice without being asked? (Okay, it is a difficult topic that needs to be acted on.) You need to create the situation for bringing it up — I don’t really want to comment on those coffee mugs. This surfacing of a topic which is not on the chief’s radar screen can elicit a question from him — what coffee mugs are you talking about? (It’s the office renovation, Sir.)
Never post advice on e-mail or chat groups. This is sure to leak to the object of scorn with a little twist of the knife — what do you think? Leaving digital tracks will one day come back to haunt you — look, this fiasco was his idea.
Certain phases require one set of advisers which need to be changed when moving to a new one. Campaign advisers may not be selected for top positions in the winner’s administration. Thus, a position requiring the votes of peers may entail committee appointments promised to too many aspirants. The dissatisfaction of the losers is sure to again shift political alignments and groupings.
“Staying in your lane” is a phrase that over-eager advice-givers should heed. Like driving a car, it is best to move only in one’s designated space and not swerve to other drivers’ passages through life. Straying into another person’s lane, even with a signal light, invites the risk of collision… sometimes even with an unexpected third party on a motorcycle.
Tony Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda.
