The Dangers of "I have a plan for that"

Note: this article is about leadership far more than politics. I'm choosing a political example to which we can all relate to illustrate a point.

No matter what countries, families or organizations we are part of, we all have problems, challenges and opportunities. In 2019, in response to gun violence, Elizabeth Warren released a sweeping plan with a defined goal of 80% reduction in gun deaths. Warren's campaign sells T-shirts that she "has a plan for that," and that got me thinking about leadership and a delicate balancing act.

Good, effective leadership is context dependent. I've read books about leadership as an art and as a science. As a leader who is learning by doing, I find it more helpful to think of leadership as a craft. A craftsperson practices and develops skills, learns new tools and repeatedly chooses approaches and tools based on the situation and the goal... feedback and adaptation required.

A craftsperson practices and develops skills, learns new tools and repeatedly chooses approaches and tools based on the situation and the goal... feedback and adaptation required.

I love having a well thought-out plan. In fact, I'm allergic to not having a plan. In some contexts, a team might crave a detailed plan for them to execute, especially if it has a good chance of being successful. When timing is critical, people recognize the cost of delay. In the case of gun violence in the United States, we can measure the cost of delay on a daily basis in our news feed. As George Patton said, "A good solution applied with vigor now is better than a perfect solution applied ten minutes later." In the top-down, hierarchical organizations that dominated the past, a leader who defined a goal and cascaded a plan expected to be followed. Even in large organizations today and tomorrow, there will be situations where this is appropriate. Stanley McCrystal said "sometimes you have to shut up and row." One of the roles of leadership is to ensure that a team has a plan, aligned to a vision with the sufficient talent, time and treasure to have a chance to be successful. We risk endless discussion or uncoordinated, counterproductive action.

In almost all contexts, the team sees and knows far more collectively than any one leader. People may work hard for your plan because it is their job, but they will sacrifice for a vision they believe in and a plan they own. Any of us will rapidly adapt a plan we own; in contrast, we may simply report (with some delay) that your plan isn't working. Ownership requires engagement and effective two-way dialogue and this is the danger of "I have a plan."

People may work hard for your plan because it is their job, but they will sacrifice for a vision they believe in and a plan they own. Any of us will rapidly adapt a plan we own; in contrast, we may simply report (with some delay) that your plan isn't working.

How do leaders listen well and ensure their teams feel able and required to bring their best thinking? For almost five decades, I have strived to get other people to acknowledge that I am right. Chris Voss turned my world upside down when he pointed out in Never Split the Difference that we have lost a negotiation when the other person says "you're right," because at that point they have disengaged. We are winning when the other person says "that's right" and they are drawn in; they step up their engagement. I wonder why Elizabeth Warren's campaign doesn't sell t-shirts that say "we have a plan for that."

In the last two years, I have experimented with different ways of identifying goals and high-level plans to produce plans that are viable and have significant engagement. My current favorite it to propose quarterly or high-level goals without a detailed plan to get there and bring them up for team discussion. We have found a one-page document of goals for a project or team for the next 2-4 quarters helps everyone see where we want/need to go. The goals should be tied to meaningful decision/action points or opportunities such that the 'what' is tied to a 'why'. The team can discuss changes to these goals rather easily and we all can think through required sequencing and enablers. We are winning when multiple people start pointing out that in order to do 'B' in the 3rd quarter, we have to have 'A' complete in the 2nd quarter and update the quarterly goals. While I don't intentionally leave gaps in plans before bringing them up for discussion, I have learned to celebrate when others point out mistakes in what might have been my plan to make our plan better. My natural response is to feel embarrassed that I missed something... I have to get my ego out of the way and recognize the engagement that builds when I bring an imperfect plan to a team and they make it better.

My natural response is to feel embarrassed that I missed something... I have to get my ego out of the way and recognize the engagement that builds when I bring an imperfect plan to a team and they make it better.

We need plans to move forward on things that matter. We need people to be engaged with a sense of ownership. The goal is an engaged team that says "we have a plan for that."