We are admonished by President Truman, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”
Heat in this context is the hot breath of criticism and the red-faced anger of disagreement inflicted upon those whose decisions are vulnerable to public scrutiny. Harry Truman would tell us that if taking heat bothers you, don’t put yourself in positions where you can expect criticism. From a man known for plain speaking, this is good advice.
Extended applications of this Trumanism tell us that some heat will burn you, and some heat will strengthen you. Or, there is bad heat and there is good heat. And, heat is what you make of it.
The “Oh, now you tell me!” of this are these recipes for living and working in a hot kitchen.
• When you make “high ground” decisions, heat will clarify your rationale and clarify your purpose. When you make “low ground” decisions, heat will consume you in defending the indefensible.
The “high ground” is philosophical and ethical and closely tied to organizational mission. If your considered decision cites educational theory and research, if it is aspirational in leading those impacted by its effects to do better than they otherwise would do, or if it is aligned with the stated and accepted objectives of the organization, you can assume a more calm and explanatory role. It is a teachable moment. Listen to the criticism and then ask, “Have you considered this?” Any indication that your critic(s) has not considered your high ground points opens the door for you to add illumination.
On the other hand, if your decision is “low ground” and more transactional than founded, you will slowly roast while making a defense of a situation that could have spawned a variety of lowly-grounded decisions. When there is high ground, take it. Let your critics attempt to assail your decision from the low ground but be silent when they then are swamped in making an indefensible argument.
If your decision is “low ground”, be the first to say “I am reconsidering this matter. Expect to hear from me in two days.”
• When you invite critics into your kitchen to understand their complaints, the kitchen is your friend. Use the kitchen to cook your work, don’t let your work get charred, overcooked or incinerated in your kitchen. When you close the kitchen to your critics, the mystique of what you do in the kitchen becomes a third entity in the scenario and that entity is not your friend.
The kitchen of decision-making is a unique environment. If it is your office or conference room and is adorned with images of your organization, then it is your home field and not a place that is overly familiar to your critics. You occupy the kitchen; it is your home turf so play the home field game. Keep the door to your kitchen open to anyone who wants to enter. Greet them as if they are entering your home, they are. Take the center stage chair in the room, it is your chair. Take care of the small talk, then get to business. It is your home field, set the agenda, set the goal, and set the time. Keep the kitchen open for business and keep it clear that you are the head cook in your kitchen.
Additionally, because this is your kitchen, you can authorize those who get to participate in your cooking session. Often, critics are accompanied by “others”. It is important to identify the critic and the supporters, because it is the critic’s criticism that is the meat of the conversation. Recognize the supporters but do not specifically engage with them. Let them add “support” but ignore the “extraneous”. Visual nodding at them is an appropriate recognition of their talk; verbal replies most often are not necessary for supporters.
When you close the kitchen to critics, the “closed” sign becomes just another negative issue. It adds to the list of things that someone holds against you. Don’t add to the list. Interestingly, inviting a critic into your kitchen often abates their ire and they decline the offer.
• When you can point at “policy and practice” as the basis for your decision, you can move the heat towards a discussion of the organization and its policies and practices and not a person – you. This is not a distractor; it is a focuser. When you can’t attach your decision to policy and practice, you stand naked and will be burned.
Every organization has its policy book or set of operating procedures. These are the adopted understandings that give direction and scope to organizational decisions. Most decisions that a seasoned organizational leader makes can be tied to policy and procedure, even if the leader did not make that connection at the time the decision was rendered. When the thermostat of criticism rises, pull out the policy and procedures book to make the proper connection, even if it is after the fact. Cite chapter and verse. When you can connect your decision and its backstory to adopted organizational policy, the decision is not your decision – you are the enactor of policy.
At the same time, do not hide behind the policy book. Your decision must be explained in everyday human language that recognizes the complaint, places it into an organizational context, and explains the application of policy as logical and appropriate. Policy can be perceived as “cold and impersonal.” Your challenge is to make the policy and its applications real and contemporary to topic of the criticism.
The same argument can be made for past practice, as long as there is clear similarity between the criticism and the massed practices. Give clear and concise examples of how the policy has been enacted in the past. These are real stories with real people. If there is no similarity, don’t invoke past practice. These would be a distracting and viewed as obstructive.
The importance of referring the conversation to policy is that it opens a door for discussion of policy and not people. The disagreement can be with the policy and not with the enactor and that disagreement can then be channeled into an invitation for further conversations about modifying policy. When a criticism can be turned into a mutual engagement in pro-activity, it is a win-win event.
• Finally, experience and insight inform our decisions and help us to live in the kitchen. Kitchen flare-ups for rooky leaders can be frightening. Consider your kitchen a tanning booth for professional skills and emotions. Each time the heat rises, you have the opportunity to refine your skills and enhance your professional image.
And, each time the kitchen gets hot, your emotions are exposed to potentially damaging vibes. So, use your sun screen. Your UPF increases when you find and stay on the high ground, when you maintain an open door to YOUR KITCHEN, and when your decisions are connected to organizational policies and procedures.