Influence in Action

by Craig Weber

  If your goal is to do this, you need to deliberately adopt and strengthen a leadership mindset that stems from two dispositions: the responsibility orientation and the constructive orientation. These orientations differ from the counterbalancing characteristics of the sweet spot. Rather than being mutually balanced, they are two sets of opposing traits. Each one sits on one end of a continuum with a contrasting orientation at the other end.

  To adopt this leadership mindset you’ll need to cultivate both a strong sense of responsibility and a constructive stance. So, let’s take a closer look at both sets of opposing characteristics: first the responsibility versus the victim orientation, and then the even more vital distinction between the constructive and the destruction orientation.

  The Responsibility Orientation Versus the Victim Orientation

  The Responsibility Orientation

  A person with a responsibility orientation has what psychologists refer to as an internal locus of control. They see themselves as intentional agents in their own lives and as active shapers of circumstance. They take responsibility for their decisions because they see their choices as a way to influence and change the situations that they’re in. “A person with an internal locus of control,” says Brian Tracy, “feels that he or she is in charge and is making the decisions that determine the direction of his or her life.”1 So if they get a bad performance review, for example, they immediately begin reflecting on what they may have done to score so poorly, and then try to figure out steps they can take to get a better review next time. They see themselves, not their context, in control of their fate.

  Responsibly-oriented individuals tend toward the growth mindset outlined by Carol Dweck. “Individuals who believe their talents can be developed (through hard work, good strategies, and input from others) have a growth mindset. They tend to achieve more than those with a more fixed mindset (those who believe their talents are innate gifts).”2

  ROBERT SMALLS

  To illustrate the responsibility orientation let me share the extraordinary and inspiring story of Robert Smalls, an underappreciated American hero. He was a man who took impressive action in a system devised to prevent it. Smalls, you see, was a slave in the American South during the Civil War. Legally, he was the property of his master. This is a difficult fact to grasp, much less to overemphasize. It wasn’t just that Smalls lacked freedom; in this society, he wasn’t even considered a full human being. “Slaves had no constitutional rights; they could not testify in court against a white person; they could not leave the plantation without permission. Slaves often found themselves rented out, used as prizes in lotteries, or as wagers in card games and horse races.”3

  It’s hard to imagine a situation that could make it more difficult to adopt a responsibility orientation. The horrific, cold-blooded system of slavery was designed to victimize people—to emotionally and mentally break them so that they would not, or could not, take responsibility for their plight.

  But, despite his circumstances, Smalls responded to his predicament with remarkable boldness. Late one night, after a year of careful planning, he stole the ship on which he’d been working, the Planter, a cotton transport ship that the Confederacy had seized and converted into a gunboat. He then snuck aboard his wife and 16 other slaves before donning the captain’s hat and bluffing his way through multiple Confederate checkpoints, including the heavily armed Fort Sumter, by using the appropriate coded signals he’d memorized.

  But escaping the Confederacy was only the first challenge. The situation grew even riskier when he cleared Confederate waters and approached the powerful Union navy blockading Charleston harbor. This was the most perilous part of the escape because he risked being attacked. A Union ship was just about to fire on the approaching Confederate gunboat, in fact, when at the last minute a Union sailor cried out: “I see something that looks like a white flag.”4

  Smalls surrendered to the Union, declaring to the officer in charge, “Good morning, sir! I’ve brought you some of the old United States guns, sir!” With this courageous act he secured freedom for himself, his wife, and his fellow passengers. Although he was a 23-year-old slave, Smalls’s actions were called “one of the boldest and most daring things of the war.”

  But he didn’t stop there. After escaping from slavery, he maintained his passionate responsibility orientation and kept up the fight, first by helping persuade Abraham Lincoln to admit African-Americans into the military to fight against the South, and, after the Civil War ended, by getting elected to the South Carolina State Legislature and then to the U.S. House of Representatives.5

  Robert Smalls is an awe-inspiring example of the responsibility orientation in action. “Although born a slave,” he later said, “I always felt that I was a man and ought to be free, and I would be free or die.”6

  This remarkable story reinforces several concepts from the last chapter. For example, Smalls’s life is a great example of patience and persistence. He planned the escape for a year. He had both a realistic view of his predicament and an affirmative bias. His story is also an obvious example of courage and conviction. Smalls would have been executed if he’d been caught, and he had to clear no less than four Confederate checkpoints to get out of the harbor. (Imagine how he must have felt at every one of those encounters, with the lives of his fellow passengers, including his wife, hanging in the balance.) Then, even after escaping the Confederates, there was still a good chance he’d be attacked by the Union navy before he had the chance to surrender.

  What’s so remarkable about this story is that Smalls accomplished this astounding feat in a system that was designed to victimize. But even though the risks were high, Smalls found a unique opportunity and took advantage of it. By escaping the Confederacy, working to convince President Lincoln to allow African-Americans to fight for the Union army, and then by getting elected to public office (in the same state in which he’d originally been a slave), Robert Smalls chose to stand up, speak out, and make a difference for himself, for his family, for his friends, and for his country.

  I find this story both inspiring and humbling. Inspiring in that it sets a high standard for the difference a single person can make, even when conditions conspire against them. Humbling because when I’m in a tough situation, and taking less responsibility than I should for my plight, reflecting on the life of Robert Smalls helps me frame my predicament in a more modest way.

  RESPONSIBLE SELF-TALK

  One of the clearest signals that you’ve got this mindset is your self-talk. In a tough situation, responsible self-talk sounds like this:

  • The status quo won’t do.

  • I can do something constructive here.

  • What can I do to make this messy situation a little better?

  • It may not be in my job description, but it’s the right thing to do.

  • I’m willing to take an intelligent risk.

  • If I’m to be effective I need to take responsibility for my tendencies and behave in a more deliberate and disciplined way.

  • I am responsible for my behavior and my effectiveness. I’m not dependent on other people or on circumstances to do my best work and put forward my best efforts.

  It’s not always easy to tell where you should take more, rather than less, responsibility for a challenge, problem, or opportunity. M. Scott Peck put it this way:

  . . . the problem of distinguishing what we are and what we are not responsible for in this life is one of the greatest problems of human existence. It is never completely solved; for the entirety of our lives we must continually assess and reassess where our responsibilities lie in the ever-changing course of events.7

  But with a responsibility orientation, your bias is toward taking more responsibility rather than taking less responsibility. You focus on what you can do rather than on what you can’t. This is the key. There is no way to exercise leadership without taking responsibility.

  There is no way to exercise leadership without taking responsibility
.

  The Victim Orientation

  Contrast the responsibility orientation with a characteristic sitting at the other end of the spectrum, the victim orientation. People with this frame of mind have an external locus of control. They see themselves as passive pawns in the process, as victims of circumstance. And because they take little responsibility for their decisions, they have an irresponsibility orientation. Their choices, as they see them, are dictated to them by their situation.

  “The person with an external locus of control,” explains Brian Tracy, “feels that others are in charge, and that he or she is controlled by external factors and influences about which he can do very little. They feel that their boss, their bills, their childhood experiences, or their current marriage or relationship controls their life.” Rendered rudderless by their lack of responsibility, they allow events to determine their choices and the direction of their lives. When they get a bad performance review, for example, they immediately begin blaming other people and circumstances for their low scores because they see external factors, not their own choices, as responsible for their plight.

  Undisciplined and reactive, people with a victim mindset are fragile and triggerable. This creates a vicious cycle. Their self-image as a victim is magnified by their inability to manage their emotional tendencies and the counterproductive reactions they unleash. Then, when their behavior and intentions part ways, they accept no responsibility for their own lack of discipline, and instead blame other people and circumstances for their own incompetence. In this way, at its worst, the victim orientation spawns a downward spiral. With each passing day, these people feel less as active agents of change and more as passive victims of circumstance. Given all this, the victim syndrome is a more apt description.

  VICTIM SELF-TALK

  Again, a strong clue that you’re re trapped in this sewer of a mindset can be found in your self-talk:

  • It’s not my fault.

  • It’s not my job.

  • There’s nothing I can do about this predicament.

  • This is someone else’s problem.

  • It’s not my fault my behavior was so reactive; other people provoked me.

  • This is above my pay grade.

  • I’m not taking this dumb risk. Let some other idiot do it.

  • If other people behaved differently, and if circumstances were improved, I could be so much more effective.

  The leadership mindset is so important to your ability to take action, wield influence, and make a difference because it profoundly affects the degree to which you take responsibility for two things:

  1. It determines whether you’ll engage the status quo or accept it. Taking action and trying to promote constructive change is an act of responsibility.

  2. It also determines whether you’ll take charge of your own behavior in tough conversations, and whether you’ll put in the work required to gear up for them. Without a responsibility mindset, Steve wouldn’t have put so much careful preparation into managing his own reactions in the conversation with Phil. He probably wouldn’t have raised his concerns at all. Similarly, with a leadership mindset you don’t just recognize your triggers; you own them. And in doing so you take responsibility for your effectiveness by doing the hard work of preparing for important encounters. This stands in stark contrast to people with a victim orientation, who blame other people and imperfect circumstances for their own inaction and incompetence.

  The Constructive Orientation Versus the Destructive Orientation

  The second and more significant distinction is the contrast between the constructive and the destructive orientations.

  The Constructive Orientation

  People with a constructive orientation strive to build things up rather than tear them down. Even in the midst of setbacks, they remain realistically optimistic and focus on what can be done rather than what can’t be done. With this characteristic, which Erich Fromm described as “biophilic”8 (loves life), a person is always trying to make things healthier, smarter, and more effective. With a constructive orientation, you’re not just trying to make things different; you’re trying to make things better.

  With a constructive orientation, you’re not just trying to make things different; you’re trying to make things better.

  Concerned about the people around them, constructive people celebrate when others excel or succeed, and offer support when others fall down or fail. They focus on the strengths and good intentions of others rather than their weaknesses and imperfections. They’re loving rather than hating, encouraging rather than discouraging, kind rather than mean, and positive rather than negative.

  It’s in the nature of these people to nurture—themselves, others, their teams, organizations, communities, and the environment—so they’re driven to create, to build, and to improve. Looking for ways to make positive change, they view problems as opportunities for learning and progress. Focused on promoting constructive progress rather than on inflating their own ego, they have a mutually beneficial relationship with their organization or community. People with a constructive mindset are always trying to make the world around them more vibrant and healthy. That said, when you have a constructive mindset, you’re not a naïve, holier-than-thou Dudley-Do-Right. You have a pragmatic, clear-headed view of the mess you’re in, the challenges you face, and your personal limitations. The difference is in your choices. You choose to play a constructive role and prompt significant change. You embody the realistic yet affirmative mindset we explored in the last chapter. Even when things are really screwed up and people around you are shutting down, giving up, or going negative, you direct your energies toward progress, growth, and learning.

  Here again Steve provides a great example. He took responsibility to inspire constructive progress, but not to look good or to stroke his ego. He did it out of a genuine desire to make Phil, the team, and the organization more effective. And that’s not the only example in that situation. Two of Steve’s colleagues partnered with him to help him prepare. Despite disagreeing with his decision to address the issue, they supported Steve by helping him create a conversational game plan for the encounter. They even called him at home the night before to provide encouragement and support.

  CONSTRUCTIVE SELF-TALK

  A constructive orientation is also reflected in your self-talk:

  • What can I do to make this situation better?

  • What is the most useful thing to do here?

  • What can I do to make this conversation smarter and more effective?

  • What responses will promote progress rather than hinder it?

  • How can I support other people who are trying to do something productive?

  • What behavior will foster more learning and less defensiveness?

  The Destructive Orientation

  People with a destructive orientation delight in tearing things down rather than building things up. When faced with problems or setbacks, they focus on what can’t be done rather than what can. Obsessively selfish and caustic, they refuse to lift a finger to make things better, and they’re often looking for opportunities to make things worse.

  Destructive people are annoyed when others succeed or excel, and they are pleased when others fall down or fail. They focus on the imperfections of others and prey on their vulnerabilities. They feel they can only win if others are losing. (Consider the CEO who walked around his office taking swings with a baseball bat, musing out loud about which of his people might get fired next, and who declared, “It’s not just enough to fly in first class; I have to know my friends are flying in coach.”9) They’re contemptuous rather than compassionate, discouraging rather than encouraging, cynical rather than confident, callous rather than kind, and negative rather than positive. They have more apathy or animosity than commitment or concern.

  Focused on inflating their ego rather than on promoting progress or providing help, their relationship with their team, organization, or community is parasitic. I
nterested only in what’s in it for them, they suck the blood out of the host for their own self-centered ambitions and needs. They see relationships as transactional and opportunistic, and plagued by a zero-sum attitude, they use them to further their own selfish needs with little regard for shared goals or the well-being of other people. When a problem crops up, destructive people respond in unhelpful ways. Rather than work to address the issue, they let it fester or, worse, they inflame it. They often seek opportunities to make mischief or cause trouble, and then they use those problems for their own advantage. People with a destructive orientation make the world around them a darker, lesser place.*

  People with a destructive orientation make the world around them a darker, lesser place.

  To experience what it’s like to be in the presence of someone with a malignant mindset like this, watch the 1999 film The Green Mile and pay attention to the character Percy, the malevolent, dark-souled prison guard, played by the actor Doug Hutchison. (As you watch the film, contrast Percy’s orientation with the more constructive mindset demonstrated by the character Paul, played by Tom Hanks. Pay close attention to how differently Percy and Paul respond to the same people and events.) For a literary example, consider Shakespeare’s character Iago in Othello, widely regarded as one of the most nefarious and destructive characters in literature.†

  DESTRUCTIVE SELF-TALK

  You know you’re on the destructive side of the scale when your self-talk sounds like this: