I begin with this essential journey into the domain of information. I invite Jacinda to reflect on information about herself as well as the world in which she will be operating. We begin with an appreciative review of times when Jacinda “was doing it right” concerning her use of thoughtful and assertive modes of leadership. When were there times that she was very strategic and “slow thinking” (Kahneman, 2011) in addressing difficult issues? What was the nature of a setting that encouraged (or even allowed) her to work carefully on an issue? Were these settings that allowed for (even encouraged) collaboration? How did various constituencies (including the press) react to her engaging a slow, “cerebral” approach?
Similarly, we can explore the times when Jacinda was being assertive as Prime Minister. What was the setting like, and how did various constituencies respond to this more “demanding” approach to leadership? It is important to note that while various constituencies might want Jacinda to be more forceful (or more thoughtful), they will often react negatively when she actually engages in this unexpected leadership behavior. Many folks that Jacinda was serving were more comfortable with the “usual” Jacinda than with the Jacinda that they called for in their public rhetoric.
We know that this matter of displaying unanticipated assertiveness is often particularly disturbing when the suddenly assertive leader is a woman. Calling an irksome male an “arrogant prick” is usually more acceptable if this pronouncement comes from another male in the heat of battle. “Proper ladies” are not supposed to be “nasty” like this. They are “required” to sit back and take the abuse. Only a sharp glance of her eyes is allowed—and perhaps a few negative comments offered to other “ladies” in the “powder room.” Thus, a careful appreciative examination of Jacinda’s successful use of assertive leadership behavior is particularly important: “When were you being directive or at least clearly advocating in a manner that led to a successful outcome?” An in-depth exploration of Jacinda “getting it right” is critical as she moves forward to post-prime-minister life.
Clarity regarding the environment in which she was working as Prime Minister is also important, as is clarity regarding the environment she is about to enter (or the various environments to which she might journey). Once again, an appreciative perspective can be used effectively, especially given Jacinda’s apparent exhaustion. I would ask: “When did you best ‘figure things out’?” Was she clearest and most confident about what was happening in her world when she was collaborating with other people or when she found time to be alone and carefully process the information she was receiving? What sources of information did she most rely on? And which sources were not only most valid but also most useful?
We would then turn to environments in which she might find herself in the near future. How might these environments differ from or be similar to the environment in which Jacinda operated as Prime Minister? How might the way(s) in which Jacinda took in and successfully navigated the challenging and stressful world of her prime ministership transfer to new environments? We can then turn to the less pleasant side of her performance as a governmental leader. “What can you learn from your less successful work as Prime Minister?” What do you want to avoid in the new environment you will be entering?” I might challenge Jacinda at this point: “Can you really avoid these challenges in any new environment you might enter?”
Download Article
