Matt Abrahams: When there's a gap between our intention and our impact, we
diminish others and our communication.
My name's Matt Abrahams, and I teach Strategic Communication at
Stanford Graduate School of Business.
Welcome to Think Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast.
Today I am super excited to chat with my friend Liz Wiseman.
Liz is a researcher, executive advisor, and CEO of the Wiseman Group.
Liz has written a number of best-selling books, including Multipliers: How the
Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter, Impact Players, and Rookie Smarts.
Liz's work has had a profound impact on leaders around the globe.
Welcome, Liz.
I am so excited to have our conversation, to take what we talk about when
we walk around that lake and bring it here so everybody can hear.
Thanks for joining.
Liz Wiseman: Well, it's always a pleasure, and I love our talks.
Matt Abrahams: Thank you.
Shall we get started?
Liz Wiseman: Let's go.
Matt Abrahams: All right.
For listeners who don't know your work, what's the core idea behind
being a multiplier or a diminisher, and how did you stumble onto
these patterns in the first place?
Liz Wiseman: Well, let's start with how I stumbled onto it.
You know, right out of college, my first job, I joined Oracle, and I found
myself in this sea of brilliant people.
Everyone was so smart, so amazing, and I noticed as those people got
put into management roles, a lot of them were really smart, but no one
else got to be smart around them.
It was almost this, like, exclusive intelligence that they were, were
quick, they were sharp, they had great ideas, but other people held back
around them, or other people had to sort of recede to make room for them
and their intelligence and capability.
I ended up calling these leaders diminishers.
Matt Abrahams: Okay.
Liz Wiseman: I also noticed other people who were equally brilliant.
People around them were smart, capable, sharp, took ownership,
stepped up, had ideas.
Like, somehow their intelligence was more of a tool than a weapon.
And I watched this dynamic for years, fascinated.
Like, why is it that some leaders seem to amplify intelligence while others
are sucking the intelligence and life and creativity and energy out of a room?
And it wasn't until I left Oracle and saw this pattern with other
leaders that I decided this deserved, like, some academic study.
Matt Abrahams: Right, and you dove right into it.
Help us understand what are some of the behaviors and cues and clues
that lead to being a diminisher?
Many people do it accidentally.
They don't say, "Today I'm gonna go, you know, make sure that everybody
pays attention to me," and they don't get to say that what they wanna say.
What are some of the cues and clues that we can pay attention to?
Liz Wiseman: One of the clues that I pay attention to is the talk to listen ratio.
You know, we find that diminishers tend to be know-it-alls.
They operate in directives.
They're telling people what to do, whereas the multiplier leaders are
asking people, "What should we do?
What can we do?" Like, "What do you think is possible?" Diminishers
tend to be, um, a bit of tyrants.
They're creating an environment that is tense, full of stress, and we know what
happens to people's ability to think and reason and solve hard problems when
they're experiencing that kind of stress.
Um, whereas multipliers create an environment that's
not tense, it's intense.
And it's not necessarily a lackadaisical environment, but it's
not like, "Hey, knock yourself out.
Do whatever you want." It's like, "I'm gonna give you space to think,
to take risks, to make mistakes.
I'm gonna give you time to experiment, but in exchange for
that, I expect your best thinking.
I expect your best work.
And, like, I'm gonna give you space, but don't you dare give me anything
other than your best thinking.
Matt Abrahams: It sounds to me like, uh, some of this, and, and I know you and I
both know Amy Edmondson, but psychological safety, setting up an environment where
people can feel safe but challenged to do their work, is what a multiplier does.
Liz Wiseman: Absolutely.
And at the core of this is trust.
What's at the core of trust is psychological safety.
And I think what I found with these multiplier leaders really
gets at the heart of Amy's work.
And one of the things I think if Amy were here, she would say sometimes her work
is misunderstood, and that people think, "Oh, psychological safety is like, well,
I can be ragged. I could say anything, like, 'Ooh, don't infringe on things that
make me stressed.'" And what Amy would say is that the best leaders create that
kind of safety, but that alone isn't enough for people to do great work.
They also create stretch.
And I think it's in this combination of comfort, like, I feel comfortable here.
I belong here, I can be myself here.
But then challenge of like, okay, now we expect you to do really great work.
Like, it's in this magic of creating both safety and stretch that people
do great work, and that's really the environment that great leaders create.
Matt Abrahams: I love this tension, uh, and focus on stress versus stretch, and
you wanna create the opportunities for stretch, not necessarily for stress.
It strikes me that tone plays a role here.
Because I was thinking, okay, what's something I could look in
my own behavior to make sure I'm multiplying, not diminishing?
And asking questions seems to be a reasonable thing to look at,
but I can ask a question with a tone that can be very diminishing.
I can do the right action, ask a question, but the way in which I do it
can actually be seen as diminishing, and I find that really interesting.
Have you looked at not just the verbal actions, the messages, but
how people deliver those messages as, as helping multiply versus diminish?
Liz Wiseman: We see that, like, the currency of a
multiplier leader is inquiry.
Maybe what's at the heart of that is curiosity.
And it's asking people questions, um, not to placate them, not to humor them.
It's asking because you want to know what they know.
It's being curious that what you don't know that somebody else
may know may be more interesting than what you already know.
And which is what draws you into the head of other people.
But we all know a question can be used as a weapon or it can be used as a tool.
You know, we haven't really studied what that tone is, but I think
it's one that everyone knows.
Like you can tell if someone is weaponizing a question versus
is it an honest question.
And I think maybe the litmus test for yourself as a leader
is, why am I asking this?
Am I asking this to show off what I know?
Or to catch someone not knowing, or am I asking this because I really
want to know what that person knows, the insight that they bring?
Matt Abrahams: Right.
So a question is a tool to get inside somebody else's head versus to put
them in a particular position, and I think that's really helpful for people.
Uh, I love that advice.
Ask yourself why are you asking the question?
Speaking of questions, if you were to give advice to a leader, what's
one question that a leader could ask, say, at the end of a one-on-one or an
all-hands meeting, that could serve as a multiplier and not a diminisher?
What, what might a question sound like?
Liz Wiseman: If I had one that you might wanna ask regularly, uh, as a leader is,
"What do you need from me to be able to do great work?" I think it's easy for
people to get into, like, "Here's what I want from my leader." But, like, a
leader's job is to create the environment where people can do great work.
And then have the tone and the posture of, "We expect you to do great work here."
I think asking, like, "What is it that I can do that would create the possibility
for you to do your best thinking and your best work?" is something that I think
a leader should be asking regularly.
I studied multiplier leaders.
I can tell you, "Here's what on average, they do.
Here's what they tend to do, but everyone's different.
Everyone brings a different leadership style.
Everyone on your team is a little different.
And so I think taking this posture of, what does this person need from me?
I think when we focus on not what people want from us as their leaders, but what
they need from us, it puts us in the right posture to enable people to do great work.
Matt Abrahams: This notion of being in service of the people you lead and
trying to enable them through providing them support, really important.
And, and a question that helps get that across could be very valuable.
Liz Wiseman: I wanna, um, add to that.
There was something that, uh, my boss at Oracle said, Phil Wilson.
He said something once that has stuck with me forever.
He said, "Your employees are the customers of your leadership." I think
it's what allowed me to do this work was to see that, like, leadership is
truly in the eyes of the beholder.
If you wanna know what good leadership looks like, you don't ask great
leaders 'cause they may or may not know what they're doing that's effective.
You ask the people who work for them.
And people need different things from us at different times.
Matt Abrahams: Envisioning leadership as serving customers, those that report
to you, is a really interesting frame, and I, I'm huge on checking the frames
that we use in our communication, and I really like that one.
I'm gonna add that to my stockpile of, of frames.
Thank you.
I think taking a customer service perspective on all of our relationships
can make a big difference.
You know, if I see myself as a teacher, my students are my customers.
I, I teach them very differently.
I'd approach it very differently than if, hey, they just show up and I'm
here to bestow knowledge on them.
Uh, it really changes that perspective.
I appreciate that.
You've also studied and written about impact players at work.
Uh, what is an impact player, and what do they do differently from others?
Liz Wiseman: Well, impact players are, like, in short, they're
the difference makers at work.
They're the people who are doing standout work.
And not only are they the people who are making plays and making plays
consistently, they're people who make the entire teams around them better.
They raise the level of play.
They raise the aspiration on the team.
And in short, what we found that the impact players do differently
than ordinary contributors, like rock solid performers, what they
do differently is they handle everyday ambiguity differently.
Matt Abrahams: Oh, interesting.
Tell me more about that.
Liz Wiseman: Yeah, they handle, um, what have become, I think, the perennial
challenges of the modern workplace, like messy problems, problems without
clear owners, unclear roles where you can't quite figure out who's leading
this effort, unforeseen obstacles, something very inconvenient beyond
your control, changing targets where the market's changing, preferences are
changing, the environment, policy is changing, and then unrelenting demands
where the workload is increasing faster than the resources to do the work.
If you leave one organization because of all of this inconvenience,
you're gonna find it somewhere else.
And we find that the impact players approach that everyday ambiguity
really differently than other people.
When the problems are messy, while other people are doing
their job, they're figuring out the job that needs to get done.
Matt Abrahams: Oh, I like that distinction.
Liz Wiseman: When roles are unclear, while other people are waiting for direction,
they're stepping up and taking charge.
You know, they realize you don't have to be in charge to
take charge of a situation.
Um, when unforeseen obstacle drops in your path, while other people are
escalating up to management, they're moving things across the finish line.
When, um, targets are changing and other people are avoiding change,
they're adapting, adjusting, pivoting.
And when the workload is heavy and hard, while other people are
adding to the burden, they're, they're making work light.
Like, they're the kind of people who just make hard work easier.
And while other people are seeing threat in all of that ambiguity and
uncertainty, they're the ones that are finding the opportunity in it.
This is a mess.
This is an opportunity for us to do something different.
Matt Abrahams: I hear several things there.
So one is mindset, drive, uh, as well, and this notion of tolerance for ambiguity.
You know, when Rob Siegel was here talking about the needs of, uh, system
leaders, it, it really is the ability to, you don't have to thrive in ambiguity,
but at least be able to, to manage it.
You work with lots of leaders, lots of organizations.
If you were to give one bit of advice that you would like people, leaders, or just
average employees to stop doing in their behavior or their communication that gets
in the way of all of these things you're talking about, is there one thing that
you would advise people to stop doing?
Liz Wiseman: Okay, this is a little conceptual but your intent
is translating to other people.
And, uh, I wanna go back to this idea about leaders who have a diminishing
effect versus a multiplying effect, and one of the, there were two things
that were startling in this research.
One was that the diminishing leaders were getting less than half of people's
available intelligence, their knowledge, their insights, their creativity.
I witnessed this in the workplace, and I assumed that these multiplier leaders
were getting more, like, I don't know, I think 20% was my hypothesis on this.
It's a 2X difference between what these multiplier leaders are getting and
these diminishing leaders are getting.
But the thing that was even more surprising is that most
diminishing was accidental.
It wasn't coming from tyrannical, narcissistic, bully, the
decision-makers, the micromanagers.
A lot of it comes from that, but the majority is coming from really, really
well-intended leaders who are trying to be good leaders, trying to do the
right thing, are just brimming with positive intent, but their impact
is different than their intention.
Coming to, to talk with you today made me realize that there's a really
important communication angle behind this.
Intent doesn't translate to impact, particularly when it comes to leaders.
Like, there are so many ways we accidentally diminish by being like
idea fountains, by being always on, by being rescuers, protectors, rapid
responders, pacesetters, and they're all done with really good intent.
But the intention alone doesn't get the right result.
Like, let me take one of those.
The rescuer.
This is when a leader sees someone struggling, perhaps in a meeting, and,
like, you see someone struggling with a hard problem, or they got asked a
difficult question, and your, like, great big heart kicks in, and you wanna
help that person, and you think you are sending the message of, "I got you.
I care about you.
I want you to be successful.
I'm here for you.
I've got your back." But what's messaged in our behavior when you
step in and rescue someone who's struggling with a difficult problem
or got asked a difficult question?
What's transmitted in our behavior is a message that says…?
Matt Abrahams: You're not capable.
Liz Wiseman: Yeah.
I don't think you can do it.
I don't trust you.
And trust is really at the core of what good leadership is, like, to trust other
people and then to be trusted by them.
So I think part of the art of being a good leader is understanding that intent
alone is not enough, that you really have to work in the realm of how your
actions are impacting other people.
Align that intent with, with impact.
So what should people stop doing?
Assuming that good intent is enough.
Because it's as diminishing as the tyrannical bully.
Matt Abrahams: One of the things I like so much about the work you do is not only
do you give specific advice, you help categorize and help people understand,
but you have data behind it, and there are a lot of people who do some of the
stuff you do that don't have the data.
And it's amazing to me how diminishing can actually impact or
not impact the work that happens.
As you were going through some of these accidental diminishing
behaviors, I, I saw many in myself.
I often have lots of brainstorming and think I'm helping people.
Well, maybe I'm not.
Maybe I'm overwhelming.
Maybe I'm overshadowing.
How do we uncover the well-intended acts that could be diminishing?
Is it through having a coach?
Is it through reflection?
How do we learn that about ourselves?
I mean, I had a couple epiphanies just listening to that answer.
So not everybody has access to you in the moment like this.
What can we do so we can figure that out so we're not doing it?
Because as you said, it's, it's not intent.
That's not the intent.
The intent is actually the opposite.
Liz Wiseman: You've listed a bunch of them.
One is sometimes just hearing the names, and there were a few others,
like perfectionist, strategist, um, optimist, which is one of my
accidental diminisher tendencies.
Sometimes just hearing that and hearing how, like, oh, yeah, with the optimism,
I'm intending to send the message that I think we can do this, but what I'm
really overlooking is how hard this is and the struggle it takes to get there.
Um, so sometimes just hearing the names is enough.
Uh, sometimes it requires a conversation.
Here's what I don't recommend anyone do.
Like, sit people down and say, "Hey, am I a diminisher?" Or even asking, "Am I
an accidental diminisher?" Like, here's a question that you could ask, and
Matt, this might be one of the questions that you could ask over and over again.
What am I doing with really good intentions that might be shutting
down good ideas, good thinking?
Like, what am I doing with the best of intentions that is making it
difficult for you to do your best work?
Matt Abrahams: I love that question.
Liz Wiseman: People can answer that.
Because it's easy for me to talk with you about like, "Matt, you're doing this thing
that I know you're trying to help me, but actually, like, let me suffer and figure
this out. I will figure it out on my own, but I appreciate the offer." It's really
hard to give feedback to your boss on things that seem, um, a little malintent.
Matt Abrahams: I love it because the question is framed from a place
of you're trying to help, and I'm actually reflecting some of the
best, uh, best critical feedback I've ever received was in that vein.
It was like, "You're sharing too many ideas. It's overwhelming." You know,
and that was really helpful for me.
Thank you.
Many things you've said have been really helpful.
I, I'm gonna take that question and, and leverage it.
We'll be right back to finish our conversation, but first, a quick
word from one of our sponsors.
Their support allows us to bring you this show free of charge.
One of my favorite things about this show is hearing from
listeners all over the world.
Communication connects us, and the more people you can communicate
with, the bigger your world becomes.
So many of you are collaborating internationally, working across cultures,
or simply trying to connect more deeply with people around the world.
That's one reason I've been thinking more and more about language learning.
Babbel focuses on helping you have real conversations with real people,
not just memorized vocabulary.
Their lessons are designed by more than 200 language experts and built
around practical communication skills you can actually use in everyday life.
And because the lessons are short and approachable, it's easy to
fit them in a busy schedule.
Just 10 minutes a day can help you make meaningful progress.
If you've ever thought about learning a new language, this is
the perfect opportunity to start.
Right now, Babbel is offering up to 60% off your subscription at babbel.com/tfts.
And now, back to our conversation.
You know, Liz, I knew this was gonna be great.
Before we end, I like to ask everybody three questions.
One I make up just for you, and two I've been asking
everybody for a long, long time.
Are you up for that?
Liz Wiseman: Let's do it.
Matt Abrahams: I know you're currently doing some really interesting research as
you prepare to bring it into the world.
Is there anything you can share about your, your current focus that, that we
can, one, maybe get intrigued by, but is there a nugget or two you can share?
Liz Wiseman: Yeah.
I am looking at the making of a great leader, which means I'm also
looking at the making of a bad leader.
And what I'm trying to understand is how do our formative experiences
in the workplace and in life, how does it shape the way that we lead?
How does it shape the way we show up, and what are the patterns that
the best leaders have experienced?
And what I can share is that there are some very distinct windows of
influence, periods in our work life where a little bit of good leadership
goes a long way and a little bit of bad leadership goes a really long way as well.
Like, where we create these imprints that stay with us for a long time
and lurk in our heads and tell us how to operate, how to lead.
Um, a few of those are, um, our first job and our first boss
has huge imprinting quality.
New assignments, new terrain, anywhere where we're, like, doubting ourselves
and we don't know what we're doing.
Mistakes, like victories and defeat.
The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat creates these really,
um, formative kinds of experiences.
And then, of course, our upbringing.
And one of the things that I'm finding in this research is that the best leaders,
when we look at this pool of, like, people who are really great leaders today,
there's a few things they have in common.
They have a history of adversity.
Early in life or early in career, like, resolved adversity, and they don't
all have a history of great bosses.
Like, just having great bosses doesn't make you a great leader.
Matt Abrahams: I love that you're studying the development
of leaders, both good and bad.
I can think about my trajectory and some of those key points along the way.
Now, as somebody who used to run learning and development organizations before
I came back to academia, how valuable would this be to, to understand this
so as you're bringing on new employees, increasing your bench strength, to really
understand where those key inflection points are and how you can help people
have a more positive experience?
I think that's wonderful.
I look forward to that work.
Let me ask question number two.
Who's a communicator that you admire, and why?
Liz Wiseman: I wanted to mention Kim Scott.
Matt Abrahams: Yeah.
Kim's been on the show and is a friend.
Liz Wiseman: Radical Candor.
There's something I've noticed that she does regularly, um, and it was
a real, I, I think, a real factor in the success she had at Google, and
she, she mentions it in her book, is that Kim presents opposing opinions.
Like, when she would, and I've, uh, she's a friend of mine.
I see her do this, is, like, when she would go and be presenting a case for we
need to increase headcount here or funding here, go this direction, and she would
present it to, like, Larry and Sergey.
She would always say, "But let me tell you why we might not want to do that."
And I think it's an amazing practice.
If you wanna increase the impact of your communication, don't just
advocate for a single position.
Like, be willing to talk about the downsides, the
underbelly, the risks of that.
I think it massively increases your impact.
So that's just one example and someone I admire.
Matt Abrahams: I've noticed that, too, that she, she definitely brings
up the opposing view, and, and that, that really is very helpful.
Final question, what are the first three ingredients that go into a
successful communication recipe?
Liz Wiseman: Well, I think good communication starts with respect,
and not necessarily interpersonal respect, respect for people's time.
I took a writing course early on in my career, and I remember
what it said is, "The cost of writing is the cost of reading."
Matt Abrahams: Oh, interesting.
Yeah.
Liz Wiseman: So we often think of communication as, like,
what does it take to create it?
But the real cost of communication is what it takes to consume it, and I
think when we start communicating with respect for people's time and energy
they're gonna put into the receiving of it, I think we do a better job.
Maybe next from there would be empathy.
To understand that the person or people with whom you're communicating have had
a different experience with that issue or topic than you have, that they've
got a different perspective on it, that maybe your point of view is not the
only point of view in this situation, I think allows us to communicate better.
And then clarity, like knowing your point.
Matt Abrahams: Being clear and concise, having empathy,
appreciating others come to your content differently, very important.
I really like this idea of thinking about the time and energy that those
receiving our messages have to take.
How can we maximize it for them instead of for us?
So much, uh, that you have shared with us that has really helped us.
Uh, you truly were a multiplier today for all of us to learn and grow, and,
uh, it's lovely to learn from you in this format versus the walking
around the lake that we typically do.
Thank you so much for being here, Liz, and I look forward to your new work.
Liz Wiseman: It's a pleasure, Matt.
Matt Abrahams: Thank you for joining us for another episode of Think
Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast.
To learn more about leadership and being your best at work, please listen to
episode 147 and 212 with Whitney Johnson.
This episode was produced by Katherine Reed, Ryan Campos, and me, Matt Abrahams.
Our music is from Floyd Wonder.
With thanks to the Podium Podcast Company.
Please find us on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
Be sure to subscribe and rate us.
Also, follow us on LinkedIn, TikTok, and Instagram.
And check out fastersmarter.io for deep dive videos, English language
learning content, and our newsletter.
Please consider joining our Think Fast, Talk Smart Learning Community
at fastersmarter.io/learning.
You'll find video lessons, learning quests, discussion boards, my AI
coach, and book club opportunities.
Again, that's fastersmarter.io/learning to become part of our Think Fast,
Talk Smart Learning Community