Why it's Hard to be Effective on an Executive Team

Posted by Liane Davey

An executive asked me a really interesting question in a team session recently: “Which should be our first team?” What he was talking about was the divided loyalties of leading one team (your team of direct reports) and participating as a member of another team (the executive team).  It’s a great question, and gets at the crux of why it’s hard to be an executive.

The minute you choose a first team, you have thrown off the precarious balance you must perfect to be a great executive.

It’s a big ask. As an executive, it’s as though you have to be both the attorney and the juror. What do I mean?

Take a common scenario: making budget trade-offs.  Each function/business has submitted its plan; there isn’t enough money to do everything, so somebody is going to get less than they asked for. It happens all the time.

First, be the advocate:

Your first job is to be the best advocate that you can possibly be, fervently arguing on behalf of your part of the business. You need to have a brilliant strategy, with the risks mitigated, and a cogent and compelling presentation. Your job is to make the case for how your function can optimize the resources of the organization.

For example: "With the strategy I have outlined here, one dollar of investment in marketing will yield us $3.00 in revenue."  or "One dollar of investment in higher engagement will save us $2.00 in cost." or "One dollar of investment in this new product line will give us 6 months advantage on the competition."

And that’s where many executives stop.They plead their case and sit back down. "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Marketing department rests its case."  But you can’t stop there! You need to walk over, and sit yourself down in the jury box. 

Second, be the jury:

As soon as you have done the very best you can to make your case for your function or business line, you need to listen to the other cases as carefully and objectively as possible. You need to weigh them against your case and evaluate the relative merits of each. Your job now is to make the best decision for the organization. You are weighing the issue on behalf of the customers, shareholders, and employees.

And that’s not only hard because you might need to support investment in another department at the expense of investment in yours, but also because it’s not an apples to apples comparison. There’s no easy, obvious answer.  You’re trying to decide whether it’s more valuable to have $3.00 of incremental revenue or $2.00 less cost. Or worse, to figure out whether revenue in this year is more valuable than a 6 month lead on the competition for next year’s products.

But that’s why you get paid the big bucks. Because you are supposed to have the maturity and the smarts to be both a passionate advocate for your team and an objective arbiter of the best interest of the organization.  If you aren’t fulfilling both of these obligations, you shouldn’t be on an executive team.

(Of course, every once in a while the judge excuses the jury and makes the decision herself.  And in executive teams, unlike in the courtroom, that’s her prerogative.)

Are you doing your job as both the advocate and the juror?  Where do you find it especially difficult?