In two separate client situations in the last week, leaders (one Board one staff) told me they were experiencing the age-old adage of it being “lonely at the top.” To some extent, I think it can be lonely at the top of an organization—most smaller organizations boil their leadership down to one or two people. But this is ultimately how they want it. It is their organization. If it weren’t lonely, then you’d have four or five other people in there, perhaps making decisions with which you disagree. That is why you created this loneliness (so I am less than patient with the complaint).
But in fact, the complaint often comes from a different place. It comes from a place of burden. It’s lonely being the sole person who is “responsible” for everything. Their neck is on the line, so the success of the organization is up to them. They are the lonely bearers of this unfortunate burden.
This can be a fatal flaw. There is nothing wrong with leaders taking responsibility for results, but the attachment to burden can generate some unfortunate results. Being burdened by responsibility, leaders often react by taking control. It’s my neck on the line, so I want to know how everything is being done (or done my way). This creates the classic micromanager. Burden is about fear, and control, and lack of choice—not the hallmarks of a great workplace.
Barry Oshry has written a beautiful book about power and systems. The title is “Seeing Systems,” and it describes the universal dynamics of “tops,” “middles,” and “bottoms.” He was the one who turned me on to the notion of burden. His book is not traditional business writing, and includes some poetry. Here’s what he said about tops and burden (pp. 66-68):
“Resistance
Some Tops complain about their burden
while clinging to it.
They fear losing control
when they are still responsible
(a not unreasonable fear);
they fear that others won’t be as responsible
or as skilled
or as committed as they are.
They are concerned that creating responsibility in others—
involving them,
training them,
developing them—
takes too much time.
It is easier to simply do it yourself.
And some Tops simply accept burden
as being part of the job.
With awareness comes choice,
And some Tops choose burden.”
Oshry says we get trapped in the “dance of blind reflex” around burden. Anybody out there feel trapped in that dance?
Barry Oshry’s poem strikes a note with me. “Tops,” of course, are people in the upper strata of management or society (as anyone who has done one of his Power & Systems Labs knows). An association executive aquaintance of mine’s board of directors is demanding to be involved in performance reviews of his top staffers. The exec sees staff reviews clearly as his job (burden), not the board’s. In Oshry’s terms, the exec fears losing control (“not an unreasonable fear”). He sees his “burden” as as a mantle of power and does not want to share it with the board who might not do it as well or (heaven forbid) might be empowered to take on new responsibilities. This being a Top is a difficult dance. Our employment contracts and the Top Culture require certain behaviors of execs and that we set firm boundaries. I wonder what other prescriptions are hidden in the Top Culture?
Hi Bob,
Thanks for contributing! Yes, I think the situation you are describing centers on a “Top” really working on whether or not he is actually a “Top” (and not a “Middle”). The firm boundaries to which you refer I think are designed to firmly establish “topness.” If the Board is on top, then the Exec is more of a “middle” whose job is to make sure the top (Board) and bottom (staff) connect effectively. I’d agree that the culture among association execs does not suggest that role. The culture puts the Exec as the top (in terms of the middles and bottoms who are the rest of the staff), and the Board exists as a free-floating top, not actually connected to the middles and bottoms, but focusing more on strategy, direction, etc. Is this an accurate depiction? Is there anything “wrong” with it? I’m not sure.