Vulnerability has become something of a buzzword in Silicon Valley and is permeating into businesses around the world
.jpg)
It cannot be easy in the nation’s board rooms right now. These captains of industry - who historically are in possession of the experience and wisdom to know how best to steward our organisations - must feel somewhat disoriented in the current climate of change and upheaval. Historically the Board is that collection of smart and wise minds who understand the context, know what to do and can set the strategic direction.
In today’s increasingly uncertain and unpredictable business landscape, we must hold lofty expectations of our boards if we expect them to understand the current wave of unprecedented issues and complex forces.
Quite honestly they haven’t got a clue. They have no precedent. There is no playbook. There is no guru management consultant who knows how to solve every problem. And, they do all their work under the watchful relentless scrutiny of a few billion smartphone journalists in a hyper-connected un-curated global media landscape.
Put simply, it is impossible to fully understand it all. And no one has had to do it before. No one has experience with this context.
What has emerged from this is much writing suggesting that what is called for from Directors is to be vulnerable. Vulnerability has become something of a buzzword in Silicon Valley and is permeating into businesses around the world, as well as being echoed by some of Australia’s high profile business leaders. The belief is, leaders who show they are ‘vulnerable’ can earn trust, loyalty and show people that they are human after all. People can relate with you because, after all, everyone feels vulnerable at times.
But what exactly are we asking our Directors to be vulnerable to? Vulnerable means being exposed to the possibility of being attacked or harmed either physically or emotionally. Many writers suggest that a Director shows vulnerability when they ask a question on a topic they don’t understand or is vulnerable when they ask for something to be explained over again, or when they admit they don’t know.
Saying that we don’t know when we don’t know should not be seen as being vulnerable, it should be seen as being intelligent. No director should be at risk of emotional harm for declaring they do not know or understand something.
No one knows the right answer
If an American tech company bought a chain of grocery stores 15 years ago, it would have generated little more than idle chatter around Australian water coolers. Perhaps we’d have mused about the mind of a bored billionaire tech founder wanting his face on his own brand of granola.
These days it is the source of months of speculation on impending retail doom. No director anywhere in Australia can ring their old ex-Director mates and ask “What did you do when you had your version of Amazon buying Whole Foods?” If the ex-Director is honest they will say, “Never happened in my day.” He will then gaze skyward thanking his good fortune for timing his exit pre-internet of things.
Whether it is arrogance that they do know, naivety that they should know, or wishful thinking that they will know, our C-suites and boardrooms cannot possibly know. And, it should not take vulnerability for that to be acknowledged.
That’s what being in complexity is. We cannot reliably know cause and effect because there are too many possible influences to consider. So, if it calls for being vulnerable then the group that makes up the board or the C-suite is doing something wrong.
There is perhaps a perfectionistic culture, which insists our leaders cannot be wrong, or perhaps there is personal insecurity about not having answers. The smart groups have the muscle for not knowing, for conflicting, and for naïve enquiry. They have social capital between and among the whole group and they pay attention to each other in real time, not letting a furrowed brow, raised eye, or sharp exhalation of breath go unchecked. They stop, enquire, riff and explore.
These conversations are spirited, lively, pensive, and exploratory. Questions rank equally with statements as the dialogue bounces around in a predictably unpredictable way. This invites novelty into discussion and, right now, new ideas are what every boardroom and C-suite is hunting for.
There is no quick shortcut to this capacity, it is a fitness developed with hours of practice. It is earned by the group working as a group and building its collective muscle for being productive in uncertainty. It’s about being strong enough to challenge the status quo and not fear about rocking the boat. What it is certainly not about is being vulnerable.
If we can’t do this in our nation’s boardrooms now, then perhaps the whole country ought to feel vulnerable.
About The Author
Marcus Crow is a co-founder of 10,000 HOURS, a specialist firm that exists to help adults learn and improve their professional fitness for complex and uncertain environments.
