Beating the Curse of the Democratic Leader

You are a modern leader, one smart enough to engage your team, improving their plan by allowing others to contribute to their decisions. Some of your team's contributions are valuable, with many ideas stemming from their different views and experiences. Because you invite them to own and participate in certain decisions, your team is more committed to the plan.

You are also a consensus-builder, working to bring your team along with you to understand why a certain decision is necessary. In team meetings and individual conversations, you work on gaining their commitment to your strategy, your plan, or your new initiative. But not everyone believes the decision is correct, and some resist—dragging their feet, refusing to contribute, and waiting you out.

This is the curse of the democratic, consensus-seeking leader. Most leaders with this leadership style would be horrified by the suggestion to be an autocrat in certain situations, especially around non-negotiables. If you can feel yourself cringe, consider this: if you discovered that one of your salespeople were deceiving and misleading a client, would you ask for their input about whether they should stop being dishonest? In any organization, there are areas where there is little room for consensus-building, and the execution of your plans and strategies must be one of them.

Building the Plan

Given the choice between building a territory and account plan for each salesperson on your team or having them develop their own plans, the latter choice is more effective. First, it requires the salesperson to spend time deciding what companies they will pursue to win new logos for their portfolio. Second, it requires them to determine how to grow their existing clients, creating new opportunities and promoting new revenue.

As a leader who is more democratic, this approach would appeal to you—especially when people on your team come up with creative ideas that will help improve their colleagues’ plans. This is the great advantage of democratic leadership approach, as seeking consensus improves results. But you must still enforce a consistent and effective sales approach. Leaving that approach up to democratic chance makes revenue growth less likely, as some members of the team may decide not to execute your decision or even to execute a conflicting approach.

The Curse of Non-Execution

Some employees believe that a leader who engages them in a decision also grants them the latitude to avoid executing it. Others may believe the decision is not sound in the first place, or just be uncomfortable executing the decision. Regardless of their beliefs or opinions, once a decision is made, everyone on a team must execute—including the holdouts, the second-guessers, and the foot-draggers.

Once, for example, I imposed a price increase on my sales team. No one thought it a good idea because our competitors had been lowering their prices. When everyone zigs, it's usually a good idea to zag, especially in a commoditized market. My experience was that large clients who were not getting the results they needed would pay more for better performance.

One member of my team was incredibly unhappy with the decision. They didn't want to pursue the new initiative, so they tried to convince me that it should be optional. I didn’t budge. In the first meeting with a large client, that salesperson told the economic buyer that our price would be five percent more than the investment they’d need to make in another area to get the results they needed. The client ended up paying eleven percent more than they had been, something that would not have been possible had I made the price increase just a suggestion.

The Democratic Leader's Curse of Conflicts

Salespeople are an interesting lot. They are generally savvy businesspeople, and many of the best performers are willing to bend the rules, color outside the lines, or otherwise get around certain rules or guidelines. While it would be unfair to call them noncompliant, describing them as "creative" understates what some do when required to execute a decision they don’t agree with. That creativity often creates conflict in sales organizations.

Most companies who create differentiated value for their clients charge a higher price, one that allows them to deliver greater value than their competitors. However, there is a strong tendency for salespeople to believe that their prospective client will decide who to buy from based on price alone, particularly if the salesperson’s last company used a price-focused strategy. They must adjust to a new strategy of charging more and capturing a higher profit margin, which they can then invest in delivering better results. Settling for a lower price and lower margin doesn’t just countermand the leader’s decision but threatens the company’s overall strategy.

Some global decisions must be defended, even if it’s uncomfortable to go from democratic consensus-seeking to autocracy. Remember, it is possible to be a very wise, very kind, and somewhat patient autocrat.