Is your boss lying to you?

Is your boss lying to you?

To get weekly insights of high performance leadership from Martin G. Moore, a successful CEO who's already walked the path hit the "subscribe" button here.

WE WANT TO BELIEVE IT… BUT SHOULD WE?

Bad news can be really tough to handle, especially when it's unexpected and you didn't see it coming. At times like these, it's human nature to try to explain what happened in order to process it and to find meaning in it. This is what allows us to eventually move on…

As we search for answers though, the first place we look to, understandably, is what we were told. When the boss delivered the bad news, how did she explain it? Because there always has to be an explanation, right?

We find it pretty easy to latch onto the cover story, because more often than not, it's designed for no other purpose than to provide us with a soft landing – but it may be a really long way away from the reality of that situation.

How would you know if your boss was giving you genuine feedback, or just lying to you to avoid an escalation of conflict?

I start today's newsletter with a real-life story from one of our listeners, whose boss probably lied to him; I then go through a range of common scenarios that demonstrate how your boss is probably lying to you right now; and I finish with my foolproof method for working out whether your boss's feedback is honest… or not.

IT’S TEMPTING (BUT UNHELPFUL) TO SOFTEN THE BLOW!

When I started putting this newsletter together, I was answering a very specific question from one of our listeners, Trevor. He offered his question as the basis for a podcast episode, in an effort to ensure that other leaders aren't blindsided, as he was – so thanks for that, mate!

Trevor was surprised by his boss when he was let go from his role after only nine months. He was told, "You have great skills, both technical and leadershi… but the gap between your current skill set and the requirements of the role is about 10%, so we're going to let you go. But don't worry – you’re really good, and we expect you'll be really successful in your next role."

I don't know about you, but my bullsh!t detector is going berserk – red flashing lights, sirens – the whole shooting match!

In my world, if I could see only a 10% gap in the individuals I had on my team, I would be high-fiving everyone in sight! It's most likely a line his boss chose to make himself feel better, to reduce the likelihood of escalating conflict, and to soften the blow for Trevor. It's also likely that there was some element of risk reduction to ensure Trevor didn't take any further action.

If you ever receive feedback in a situation like this and you suspect that the reason given isn't the real reason, how should you interpret what you're being told? It could be a range of things, and not necessarily all of them are negative:

  • You might've p!ssed off someone influential, and they did a political hatchet job on you;
  • You may have been operating in a way that didn't fit the culture, which is to say, not in line with the way your bosses might want you to do things;
  • You may have just made a couple of poor decisions; or
  • It's entirely possible that you may have a skill gap – but in my world, it would have to be much greater than 10% to have your employment terminated.

Unfortunately for Trevor, he’ll never know the real reason. Why? Because his boss probably lied to him.

The simple fact is, you’re much more likely to be on the receiving end of a carefully fabricated story when you're being given bad news… like having your role made redundant as part of a restructure… like having your employment terminated for convenience… or like missing out on a promotion.

To be fair, there's often a legal aspect to these situations. In whatever country or state you're operating in, you have to observe the relevant employment legislation and regulations. And, depending on the governing jurisdiction, these can be quite restrictive. Whatever you choose to say in any given situation can have a degree of risk to it. So, of course, there's that.

But every good leader knows how important feedback is. They give it frequently, both formally and informally. They make sure that the individuals are under no illusion as to where they stand in terms of their performance, their behavior, and their future prospects.

Beyond that, if their employment needs to come to an end for any reason, they've had all the feedback they could reasonably expect. And if they haven't taken that on board, then the problem isn't with their boss.

I'm going to walk through three common scenarios where your boss is probably lying to you. For leaders like us, it's really useful to use these scenarios as a self-reflection point. Have you ever done this with one of your people? I know I have.

Or perhaps you've come in to lead a team and realize that your predecessor lied to his people as a matter of course. The higher up you go, the more common this is.

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW LIES

Let's first take a look at the annual performance review. The feedback given in these reviews is often misleading, inaccurate, or just plain untruthful. Bear in mind, this is a formal record of an individual's performance over a period of time, and it's one of the few official documents supporting other HR processes, like talent management.

Why wouldn't leaders be diligent in a formal performance assessment scenario, where their comments are recorded for posterity and they form part of an individual's employment history?

Even as a first-time, wet-behind-the-ears leader, I never thought that it might be a good idea to be anything other than 100% honest. But as far as I can tell, many leaders lie to their people at performance review time, for a range of reasons:

  • Perhaps they believe in the philosophy of treating everyone the same, and they interpret this to mean that everyone has to achieve the same outcome (I saw this a lot in unionized workforces);
  • More commonly though, the leader gets to the annual performance review, and because they haven't given the necessary informal feedback during the year, it feels as though it would be inconsistent to give critical feedback in the formal review cycle, where it matters the most.
  • Maybe there are financial bonuses at stake, and the leader lets sympathy dominate their actions – they don't want to be responsible for an individual's livelihood being affected by their assessment; or
  • Sometimes it's just a simple case of conflict aversion: to avoid any pushback or argument, they dodge the subject altogether.

I cannot begin to tell you how frustrating it was when I'd go into a new role and find someone in my team who was clearly, measurably, and unmistakably performing way below any reasonable standard. Then, when I'd look at their historical performance record, I'd find years, sometimes decades of performance reviews describing the individual's performance as “outstanding”.

These situations are really hard to break through, because there are only two ways this happens:

  1. Through years of completely untruthful feedback being given to the individual; or
  2. Because the standard being set for the team and the organization is so low that everyone has become insular and complacent, and you’re just being drawn towards the worst examples.

Where do you even go from there, as a leader?

In these cases, I'd often have tough conversations where I'd say, "Houston, we have a problem! Here's what I expect from you, and here's the gap in your performance right now."

Understandably, they would respond to me by saying, "Mate, I've got performance reviews going back more than a decade that say, I'm doing a bang-up job, and now you come in and tell me I'm not performing?. It's not me. It's you!"

Unfortunately, they will never be in a position to hear your feedback. If only they had one leader in their past with the courage to tell them the truth, it may have completely changed the whole trajectory of their career.

I found this absolutely heartbreaking, to see someone's life impacted so significantly through nothing more than the benign neglect of an organization and its leadership. The moral of this story is that there's no shortage of lies around the performance review cycle.

RESTRUCTURE AND REDUNDANCY LIES

The next scenario that I'd like to cover is the restructure / redundancy process. Many of you will have led through a restructure process where jobs are made redundant. I've seen loads of restructures, and there are a few reasons why companies do them.

In one of my earliest experiences, over 20 years ago, I found myself on the wrong end of a hostile takeover. There was little rationale for the restructure and redundancy process that followed, other than cutting costs.

A bunch of consultants came in with a template for where they thought cuts could be made, and they started crossing boxes off the structure chart with a red sharpie. I sh!t you not!

I fought passionately for months to try to get a more sensible outcome. Don't get me wrong here, I wasn't trying to prevent the inevitable job losses. What I was trying to do was to stop the consultants from recommending something dumb to their client (the acquiring company) – at that stage, I was being paid by the new company and I felt duty bound to do everything in my power to reach the highest value outcome for the acquiring business.

Consequently, I was at pains to explain why certain individuals should be kept over others with similar skills, but perhaps inferior performance. I was also at pains to clearly describe the risks, the opportunity cost, and the potential value leakage from removing certain boxes. I didn't manage to get everything I recommended, but by the end of the process, I reckon I'd call it a draw.

This case is rare though. Much more commonly, a leader decides to restructure, and a team develops plans to make sure the people they want to go don't have a chair when the music stops.

Importantly, in a process where a role is being made redundant, the performance of the person who's allocated to that role should be irrelevant. You know how it goes, “It's not about your performance. You are just an unfortunate casualty of a restructure that we have to perform to meet the ongoing requirements of the business…” yada yada.

This is partly true but, as I said, the planning normally takes into account which individuals have been marked as underperformers.

If you're on the receiving end of a redundancy, your leader is obligated to feed you the party line. So whatever feedback you get from a process like this, you should take it with a grain of salt.

Finally, there's the mini-restructure that's carried out to remove someone you don't want to keep, but you can't remove for performance reasons (often, because their performance is beyond reproach).

I've seen loads of restructures fabricated purely to target one or two individuals, because a weak leader doesn't have the courage or the decency to give clear, truthful, targeted feedback.

For me, this is a clear case of a leader shirking their responsibility. Instead of giving feedback and working with the individual to cover any gaps in their performance or culture fit, they move them on, and then spin a line about why a mini-restructure was necessary.

I can only describe this as a breathtaking lack of courage.

CONTRACTUAL TERMINATION LIES

The third and final scenario that I want to look at is termination for convenience.

In most employment contracts, there will be a section on termination. It deals with some important questions, which you need to be absolutely full bottle on before you sign any contract. You never really think it's going to apply to you, because you’re in the honeymoon period – but it's something you'll find really hard to change later when you may need to, so get across this before you enter into any employment agreement.

Termination clauses typically cover things like:

  • Who can terminate the contract and under what conditions?
  • Are the grounds for termination clearly defined?
  • What entitlements would apply to each type of termination?

There are two main types of termination clauses: termination for convenience, and termination for cause.

If you are subject to termination for cause, it's most likely that you'll be acutely aware of the reasons you're being let go. The company will have to detail exactly what you've done to warrant the termination, and you'll have an opportunity to answer the allegations about your breach of the employment conditions.

This is how strong leaders handle underperformance.

But there's also the termination for convenience clause. I like to call this “the love is gone” clause. Just like a no-fault divorce, it's designed to allow either party to terminate the employment relationship without the need to provide a reason.

There's usually a notice period and some financial entitlements prescribed for these situations. If your company invokes this clause and says, "Thanks for everything, but now the love is gone," your boss has absolutely no obligation to provide you with feedback… and really, you shouldn't ask for it.

In most cases, if you hadn't already picked up on the dynamics of how you're perceived by your boss, then you should probably work on building your EQ. These things rarely come out of the blue.

HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR BOSS IS TELLING THE TRUTH?

Okay, we've been through a few of the most common scenarios. Hopefully you can see why sometimes the problem isn't just that you find yourself in your boss's crosshairs. It's also that you haven't read the play on the way to that event.

As leaders, it's important to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that you never put people in a position where they have to be given bad news, without being given prior feedback. Very occasionally, it may be unavoidable, especially in the case where you’re taking up a leadership position after a weak or incompetent leader before you.

A really good boss is going to give you feedback well before any of these significant events take place. Regardless of the actual situation, you should never be blindsided by something that wasn't obvious to you for some time. This is why you need to seek feedback from your boss – not all the time, but every so often, at appropriate points. If you're not getting informal feedback, just ask when the opportunity seems to present itself.

I once had a boss who I came to learn would never give me honest feedback. One day, in an executive meeting, he was giving me a bit of a hard time – nothing serious, just a few uncharacteristically pointed comments, as I was presenting the quarterly results for my group.

It just so happened that two days later, I had a one-on-one meeting booked with him. It was an early morning start and we were both pretty fresh. I sat down in his office, and after a little chitchat, I said, "Mate, you were right up my ribs in the quarterly business review on Tuesday. Do you have some feedback I need to take on board?"

And, just for a fleeting instant, I swear I saw a look of mild panic pass across his face before he broke into a genuine belly laugh and said, "Oh, no, Marty. It was just your turn."

I knew that wasn't the truth, but my boss had decided, in that instant, that that's how he was going to handle it – with avoidance.

It didn't tweak with me right away until I started putting other pieces of the relationship puzzle together. Whenever I asked him what he needed from me, he would say, "Just keep doing what you are doing." Reading between the lines, I eventually learned that when it came to his feedback, I couldn't trust a word that came out of his mouth.

THE ONE QUESTION TO ASK YOURSELF

When you’ve been given some bad news by your boss, what do you do with the feedback they gave you at that point? It depends entirely on your answer to this one critical question:

Have you been getting useful, direct, informal feedback during the course of your working relationship so far?

 If the answer is “yes”, then you know you’re dealing with a boss who's prepared to invest in you by putting aside her own feelings. She cares more about your performance, growth, and career development than she does about her own apprehension and fear.

If this is the case, you are indeed fortunate, so pay attention to what she tells you; ask pointed questions to seek greater clarity; and try to understand why you haven't been successful in that particular situation.

However, if the answer to that question is “no” (in other words, you haven't been getting useful, direct, informal feedback during the course of your working relationship so far), then you’re dealing with a boss who isn't prepared to tell you the truth… so, don't believe a word of it.

You know not to take anything that comes out of his mouth on face value. Of course, it's important to reflect and to think about what you might've been able to do differently:  but don't expect that your boss is going to give you an honest assessment of why he’s doing what he’s doing. His whole conversation will have been constructed to preserve his position, his comfort, and his self-image.

REGULAR FEEDBACK IS A GOOD INDICATOR

Bringing all of this together, there are heaps of reasons why your boss may have to give you bad news. It happens, in business and in life – and the higher up you go, the more subject you are to the whims and vagaries of your boss, because he can use money to solve his problems much more easily.

Trend is your friend! A boss who gives you frequent feedback, as a matter of course – who you feel a sense of professional alignment with – is unlikely to tell you something that isn't true.

But if that's not the case, then you'll have to accept the cold, hard fact that your boss is probably lying to you!


This is from Episode 327 of the No Bullsh!t Leadership podcast. Each week, I share the secrets of high performance leadership; the career accelerators that you can’t learn in business school, and your boss is unlikely to share with you. Listen now on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or on your favorite podcast player.

To view or add a comment, sign in

Insights from the community

Others also viewed

Explore topics