140 | Why Middle-Managers Are Struggling & What Organisations Must Do Differently

Hello there, and welcome to this episode of the Building Better Cultures podcast with me, Scott McInnes. You're very welcome back. We are going to be talking about the second challenge in our Mind the Gap research report today, which for me kind of builds on the first challenge, that idea of senior leader skill and will. And now we're looking at, well, what happens when you roll down the organization from those senior leaders down into that kind of mid-management layer. Before we get into all that, just my usual quick little ask. We do put a huge amount of time and effort into pulling these pods together. I hope you find them helpful. I hope you find something in them that you can take away and plant into your own context or organization. I would love if you could just take, while you're listening, just take 30 seconds or a minute just to give us a 5-star, or even 4-star is fine, review and just a few words on the podcast, because those reviews really, really help to get the podcast out there. Thank you in advance for doing that. I really appreciate it. So, my two guests today, two amazing guests today from really different backgrounds, which is brilliant because I love this. And we're going to deep dive into some of the findings in the report. Yesterday are Katie Lumsden, who is the Chief People Officer in the National Library of Ireland, and Neil O'Brien, who's been the founder of Time to Fly for 25 years, a quarter of a century. You've been doing this as long as I've been living in Ireland.

I know, I feel I need to lie down now.

Already? We haven't even gotten going. In case I forget to say it later, which as I often say, I probably will, if you want to download the report, you can just pop along to inspiringchange.ie/mindthegap. So that's inspiringchange.ie/mindthegap, all one word, and you'll find the full report there. Today we're delving into Challenge 2. But before we get that, let's get a little, just maybe a little bit of background on yourself, Katie, first, and who you are, what you do, your role in the National Library.

Sure, thank you very much, Scott. Thanks for the invitation to come on and just have a chat about the Mind the Gap report. It was a really interesting project to be a part of. So I have been Head of Human Resources in the National Library for 3, 3 and a half years. I've been in the HR business for a decade, a little bit more than a decade, and I had done a complete career pivot from a career as a graphic designer, as a calligrapher, as an artist. I worked in a very niche and esoteric branch of the National Library, which is the Office of the Chief Herald. And the interesting thing to me was when I had the HRB in my wallet and when I finally was able to do that complete career change supported by my fantastic organization. You know, people saw this move from what they saw as a very creative role, a very creative profession into HR. And there were people who were genuinely concerned for my health and well-being and my state of mind. But I would say to anybody, day and daily, the profession that I'm in, the career that I have, the role that I have is no less creative than that creative job that I had, and that is what I love about it.

Amazing. Thanks, Katie. Neil, are you a calligrapher?

Yes, but I'm taking tablets for it, and I should be better soon. But I love writing. I'm still a pen and paper person, pencil actually. So I still love that. The feel of that. So, yeah, thanks for having me, Scott. And it's great to be here with you and Katie. So, yeah, self-employed for 25 years. Before that, I worked in a bank for 24 years. So, in relation to today, I've been that manager, you know. So I think some of the stuff from then still relates. So, yeah, next year I'll be 50 years working. This next year. So I'm not sure, is that gold or silver or diamond? But anyway, whatever, whatever you like, I'll send you whatever you like. Yeah, exactly. So now I speak at events, coaching mostly is my thing, and I should be doing more writing. And then I occasionally get to speak on a podcast. So yeah, that's me. So basically, I'm a recovering banker, basically. And I left in '98, so nobody can blame me for anything.

And you're only 27 years into your recovery. Listen, you've probably a bit of time ahead of you still.

Exactly. Yes.

Brilliant. Listen, both, thanks. It's great to have you both here. And I'm really looking forward to the conversation because it is a conversation around that middle management layer. And as Neil said, he's been one of those. For me, that whole idea of those people at that layer, it's a really tough job. They're getting it often from beneath, they're getting it from above. We expect them to be those kind of chief sense makers that translate and contextualize what the up-aboves want to get done in the organization for their people. And it's a hard job. Before we get into the detail of that, I wonder, was there anything particularly in this chapter or in this challenge or just more broadly in the report that really struck you, Katie, as being odd or different or just stuck out?

Actually, for me, it wasn't so much about what was odd or what stuck stuck out. I think the reassurance in it for me was the commonalities, actually, because as someone who works in a very small semi-state agency, we're part of Ireland's public service, we're a public sector body, and I think it's quite easy for us to think, oh, things are different here, or we have unique challenges, we have a different way of being. And When we saw the reporting and when a small group of us met with yourself, Scott, to start to unpack some of it, it was those commonalities that I really kind of drew strength from, if you like, because I thought, oh, okay, we are as a sector, as a group of people who are people people. There's so much co-elevation and generative stuff comes out of this because people are people wherever you go. I think that was what I took from it.

Brilliant. And it was interesting, actually, when we ran that little debrief a couple of months back, I said, I think I opened it with, there's good news and bad news. The good news is there's nothing new in here. The bad news is there's nothing new in here. So there is a challenge with the fact that we know this stuff is an issue. We know these challenges exist, but they're just not changing. And I don't quite know why. Perhaps Perhaps we'll get into that later on, and perhaps we won't. We'll see where we go. Neil, anything jump out for you?

Oh yeah, everything. I thought it was a great report. Be nearly easier to say what didn't catch my eye. So just real quick, here's a list. Managerial avoidance, fear of upsetting employees, no training, hybrid teams, multi-generation. And yeah, the kind of backtrack for me was, are we expecting too much? You know, these people are the shock absorbers in the system, you know. So do we put too much on them? Do we expect too much? And in that way, are other people avoiding doing things and are happy to point at managers? So, but I like the no training. 3 things in life, apparently, here's one I'll give you for free. 3 things in life we get no training for, and that's parent, politician, and a manager. So If you're a manager, you might get some training later, maybe. So, no, all of that stuff, I think, which we're going to come to shortly, I guess. But I love the people side of things, of not wanting to upset anyone, you know, and avoiding awkward stuff. That's the bit that really catches my eye. Yeah.

And it's interesting. And we will come on to that avoidance piece later. Before we get there, I think that we toss around the idea of leadership and it's always leadership and it's leadership and it's leadership and it's all about people being leaders. But actually, is there a role for management, for just getting stuff done? And I wonder, Katie, in your experience, what's the difference between leadership and management? Do we need one over the other more? Do we need both?

Oh, this is such a— yeah, I could be here for hours. Talking about this.

We've only got about 40 minutes. I'll just call that out now.

Oh no. I think in a way, well, there are lots of things in here. I think evolution is happening. I think the more that organizations start to recognize the reality of ecosystem as opposed to working to the construct of hierarchy, I think, and speaking to Nina's point, like, I would hate to think that that is heaping more on that very pressed managerial level. But I think, as you know, as someone who firmly believes leadership comes from everywhere, can come from anywhere, in a way for me, it's not so much what's the difference between leadership and management, but where are the edges blurring? Where are the commonalities? In that? And how do we as organizations expect that to show up now? So I think, you know, I had reason recently to be looking back at that Warren Bennis book, I think it's called On Becoming a Leader. And that was in 2009, which because I'm very old, that seems like the blink of an eye. Actually starting to read some of the language in it, You go, "Wow, this is like ancient history now." You know, things around the manager administers, the leader innovates, the manager maintains, the leader develops. And even the people piece, the manager focuses on the systems and the processes, the leader focuses on people. Like, that to me now sounds so antiquated and so not where we're at that— I mean, this isn't really answering your question, but I feel that's because I can't answer it anymore. I think there's a lot of work for us to do. As people-people, but also as organizations to really start now to understand the reality of that layer. Like, it is, I think, changed from the days when you said, oh, leadership is strategic. But actually, if strategy is how you get mission done, you know, everything is strategic. Your managers are strategic. So even thinking of some of the old competency frameworks that we used to use in hiring, for example, where it made this sort of clear distinction between strategy and management, if you like. We can't say that anymore. So, that's not any kind of an answer really, but it's just, we are in an evolution. I firmly believe that.

But it's kind of a great answer because it is saying that, well, it's not one or t'other. We need people in those mid-manager roles actually to do both, which you're right, is heaping more stuff onto them than they've had before. Neil, thoughts to add to that?

Yeah, no, I thought that was great. I also get that sense that we're in some sort of lag period now between managing, leading, and something else, perhaps. But I have a different— yeah, I'd throw in a different angle on this. So I want to go back into my experience of this. So when I joined the bank, once we kind of found our feet, everyone, or most people in my cohort, we wanted to become a manager. You know, that was the ultimate, you know. So we were climbing over each other and we were doing our bankers exams and we were doing everything to become a manager because when you became a manager, you got status, you got more money, you got better perks. In some places you even got a parking space. So being a manager was what it was all about. So in the '80s and '90s, nobody ever talked about leadership. So the benefits of being a manager were so measurable and so attractive. So why would you bother even being a leader? You know, because manager was all the good stuff, really. So, and within that organization then, there were managers, senior managers, regional managers, and then there was the SMT, the Senior Management Team. So leadership didn't appear anywhere throughout the '80s and '90s, maybe in American sports, but not, you in work, you know, where I grew up. So, so to me, that's why would I bother being a leader? Or is it something else I'm supposed to do? You know, just manager. And then of course, when I became a manager, then I went, bloody hell, like this, I fought for this. And now this is just a whole pile of stuff that I'm expected to do. So it's, um, so that's to me, that was kind of the, the genesis of our origin of the whole thing is that it was better to be a manager. Who would want to be a leader? You can't get your hands around it. There's no benefits for it.

And I wonder now, I often wonder, people coming into large organizations who are on that same track that you just described there, Neil, that people coming into the workplace now after 2 or 3 or 4 years, they're looking at that role, that people leader role, and they're looking and going, So I'm going to get 5 or 8 grand more than I'm doing for my job currently, and I've got to do all this stuff as well. I don't think I'll bother with that. Thanks very much. I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing, and I just won't go for the promotion. I won't go for the manager job because of exactly that, Neil. Yes, there might be a bit more money. Yes, there might be a car parking space. Yes, there might be whatever other perks you get, but it comes— maybe the perception is it comes with a whole load of hassle and a whole load of extra work. Is that something that you're seeing, Katie?

That is a— it's really interesting for us. I mean, in my organization, you know, the National Library, we're custodians of the national collections. We have a huge array of roles. Many of them are very specialist roles. And it comes back to that piece of, you know, the perception of a promotion is actually taking you away from that thing that you trained all those years for and the thing that you have a passion for or a vocation for. And it's as an organization, as a sector, trying to— I suppose it's around conception and misconception. So bringing it back to the people thing, you know, as a manager, that mentoring role and that leadership piece for me, that has to be in there, but it has to be defined by the organization. Like, you can't ask people to understand themselves as leaders if you're not showing them what that looks like in your organization and what it's expected to do. And that actually it's not, you know, it's adding something on to those things that you train for and, you know, the things that you came into the role to do. It's not, ideally, it's not taking you away from that. Those are the pathways that I'm trying to grow and develop. And a lot of it is just around even organizational understanding. That's a huge piece.

Yeah.

So, if we all believe that managers, those people leaders, managers, advisors down through the organization are the linchpins of really kind of strong and aligned culture. And if you look to things like Gallup, and, you know, Gallup for years have been telling us that 70% of engagement happens at team level. So, organizationally, you can do all the engagement effort in the world that you like. You're only going to maximum get 30% of engagement out of people because the other 70% happens within a team. And I'm sure, Neil, you probably see lots of that in the work that you do with teams, that if a leader and a team can work really well together, that's where the magic tends to happen. How is it that managers, how can they be multipliers of culture rather than maybe cultural bottlenecks? What are some of the things that we'd expect them to be doing? Neil, to kick us off.

Yeah, okay, multipliers of culture. So let's just, just a couple of thoughts on culture, maybe like, for what are we actually talking about? So I think, well, my, so I'm going to trot out now a few, you know, slogans here, but just to get me warmed up. But so, you know, you get the culture, you behave, you know, so therefore, you get the culture you deserve, actually. So, everybody owns it. I think the first thing for a manager in relation to are they multiplier or bottleneck or whatever, I think is, well, like step one is, and excuse my language here, you may have to edit this out, but step one is don't piss anyone off. That's like first thing. So, I think So let's go from there. Also, I think just borrowing a bit from culture, a bit from leadership to like, we're actually, I'd like to reassure managers that actually when we talk about leadership and stuff, we're talking about tiny little things. You know, it's almost like something that might happen in a moment on the people level. You know, it's noticing something and acknowledging it. You know, it's So I wouldn't like managers to think, oh my God, I'm being lumped with leadership stuff as well. So I think it would be useful, I think, to have just conversations around just its tiny moments, its attention. What was that old thing about the opposite of love isn't hate, it's indifference. By just showing indifference, that's how you can really punish someone is act like they're invisible. So I think I'm all over the place now, but I think leadership and culture are tiny, tiny things that are probably more from the heart than from the head, maybe. So my first thing with managers is don't demotivate anyone. And all this the big stuff is tiny things done in a genuine way. So if we want them to be multipliers of a certain culture, it's multipliers of a tiny thing. It's 0.001 multiplied 20 times, you know.

Yeah, I love that idea. Just the little tiny things that make a difference. And Katie, one of the things that popped out Scott, a few times in the conversations I had with CPOs as we went through this research was this idea of a say-do gap. And what does that look like? What do you understand that to mean at this level?

I was really interested in reading that back in the report. There's a say-do gap. Senior leaders in HR say culture is a priority, but managers on the ground don't do the things that build culture.. And I thought, that makes it sound like it's willful. That's what struck me about that piece. And I thought, I hope we're not, but, you know, are we in a place where there's a sort of snobbery around this and going, managers are kind of in the way, we need them to do stuff, but they're sort of getting in the way of this big leadership culture kind of stuff that, you know, in the upper echelons, that's what we spend our days thinking about. And we have this layer of, you know, willfully neglectful managers. Like, that's, you know, I hope that's not the thing. Sorry, Neil, you were coming in there.

Yeah, I just love that willful. I totally agree. But I think it's almost like to protect themselves from awkward stuff. You know, so I think, yeah, I think, I think it is kind of willful in that sense, but it's actually quite clever. You know, it's a clever strategy to be willful and to be a bit snobbish about it because I'm just protecting myself then from having to do stuff I'm not comfortable with.

And that's interesting because I was coming at it from the other way up because I was going, you know, is the snobbery that it's not that the, it's not that the managerial level is at all willful about this, but that the perception is that they're slightly bold and they need telling what to do. And but it comes back to that thing, those incremental changes, which I love thinking about that because I'm a systems nerd. So, you know, there's nothing that happens in a tiny way over here that doesn't impact somewhere or lots of places over here. But in terms of how you make or encourage or motivate people to be that cultural multiplier, there's an intrinsic piece, but there's that extrinsic piece of what are they seeing? How do they know? What tools can we put in place to help them to manage in that context? But they need to know what the context is.

And that piece of what tools can we put in place, is so important. We need to give people, leaders, the confidence, the tools, the skills, the capability, the confidence to be that leader. And it was interesting, Neil, that one of the things that came out of the report was some of the respondents talking about managers not actually wanting to manage people or not thinking it's part of their role, which is kind of surprising to me. But how can organizations, do you think, how can they shift the mindset of people in those roles and help them to see that actually it's kind of a core non-negotiable part of the contract, of the deal?

Yeah, yeah. I was aghast to see that they feel it's not part of the role. But hold on though. I think we go back to a couple of places we've been already. So, for example, managers don't get much training beforehand. So that's the first thing. Second thing is, if I look at my coach, when I coach now managers and senior managers, I would say the biggest, the most common biggest challenge they all have is having to move from being popular to being respected. So they were one of the lads and now bloody hell, they're in charge of the lads. And I find, I don't know if it's a particularly Irish thing, but I just find That's a huge challenge for loads of people. And that taps into that thing of, you know, don't delegate enough, can't say no enough, you know, can't avoid difficult conversations because they're now the boss, you know, and these are used to go socializing with these people. And I actually think that might say more about them as a person, maybe, than a manager. Actually, that's the struggle with moving from popular to respect. So that's kind of, to me, that's a backing track that's in the mix as well, is how do we help someone with that?

Because that's really difficult for people. I think it's actually one of the hardest things to do, from going from being a team member to being the boss, for all those reasons, Neil, that you just you know, beautifully outlined there, that's massively challenging. And it's almost better perhaps that you don't actually end up being a manager in that team, that there's a policy in place that if somebody becomes a manager, they become a manager in another team. So, you're not having to perhaps put people in that really difficult position. I don't know. Katie?

I think there's a huge piece in all of this around role modeling. I think, you know, if you've experienced whatever it is you've experienced, you know, it's role modeling, whether it's been constructive or otherwise. So I do think there's a piece, again, slightly outside of that management level around, like, it is one of the tools you would provide people with. It is not necessarily a formal training piece, but role modeling equips people in either way, good or bad. So that's something that was really coming to me as you were speaking, Neil.

Yeah. So if I go back to before I was a manager and I worked for certain managers, the managers I respected most were people I didn't particularly like. But by God, I respected them. Now, one of the ways they did that actually was. I knew where I stood with them, like every moment of every day, whether that was either good or bad, you know, I knew exactly where I stood. I can think of two. So I probably did about 14 years in the trenches before I, you know, became the other side. So I can remember two people in particular, and that would have been their main characteristic. Now, they also happened, by the way, to get great results and all that sort of thing. But yeah, you knew where you stood with them. And that was, to me, that was really difficult at times. But I learned more about myself in those relationships than I did with the— so that's the role modeling bit. Yeah. Is I can admire them now, actually, with the benefit of hindsight. Yeah.

Yeah.

So do you think that admiring a leader who perhaps you're working for is more important than liking them?

Yes, I think so. Because why would I admire someone? Because they still have an idea of the big picture. They still know what we're about. So I can respect where they're coming from, maybe, if what they're saying to me sometimes isn't what I want to hear. Yeah, maybe that I know where it's coming from, though. So, you know, rather than, is there any other agenda going on here? There's no guesswork, essentially.

Yeah.

Katie, thoughts?

Yeah, no, this is interesting because, again, come back to that cultural piece and values, actually. So if I can see that someone's values are aligning with that big picture and that, you know, they're bringing me with them on that basis. You know, that alignment of values and then the behaviors that underpin that. I don't need to like them in a work context because we're all going in the same direction. And that's fine for me, you know, as a direct report to a manager who is, you know, demonstrating that, you know, it's a service piece. What are we in service of here? And if I can sense that, you know, what they're asking me to do is in that aligned direction, then I am fine with that.

Yeah, you're in.

And I think that idea, it's interesting, that idea of seeing a manager or team members or people more widely in the organization that are aligned to values and that do live the behaviors. For me, that's a really good example of that say-do gap because we might organizationally talk about we've got values of respect and openness and innovation and trying even if we get it wrong. But actually, if my boss kicks me up the backside and gives out to me every time I try something and it goes wrong, then I'm not going to keep doing that because I'm not stupid. I'm going to just go with the easy approach and just not bother trying anything new for fear that it might go wrong. And then we're never going anywhere. So I do think that talks really nicely to that idea of a say-do gap.

Yeah. And I think You said something earlier. I think each of you has referred to perhaps an avoidance of difficult conversations, for example. And part of what we've just been talking about, I think, also starts to get into that idea of psychological safety. And I was really struck before the summer, one of the earlier 2025 editions of HBR had Amy Edmondson revisiting psychological safety herself and Michaela Kerrissey, I think, and actually going, okay, this is doing something that we hadn't intended. Here are 6 ways that we see the concept of psychological safety being misunderstood and misapplied. And I think there's a piece in there that is hampering managers As well, again, it comes back to that willful thing. It's not that we're willfully avoiding those conversations, but if we think in our organization that psychological safety means being nice to everybody, everybody getting what they want, you know, we're afraid as managers then to say anything to anybody. Regardless almost of the values and behaviors piece. I do think that's something that I was delighted to see it being revisited and sort of being her attempt to bring her own concept back on track, actually.

Yeah, and Katie, I'll get that, I'll get the link for that HBR article from you and we'll stick it in the show notes for listeners if they want to have a wee read. One thing that struck me as you were talking there was that idea of— and we spoke about this in the Accountability for Values Challenge episode, which is coming up later— people weaponizing values and people perhaps weaponizing psychological safety. When I talk about weaponizing values, you can't give me feedback like that. We have a value of respect in this organization. I'm going off to talk to HR. Well, I wasn't being disrespectful, and I was just giving you feedback on your performance to try and help make you a better person, performer, team member, member of society, whatever. But I do think definitely that idea of, yeah, some of those things perhaps being turned against the organization is definitely something that's coming up. You mentioned it there, Katie. It was a beautiful segue and saved me a job. Let's talk about tough conversations. Let's talk about people having those tricky feedback conversations. We still call it performance management. I actually think if we started calling it a performance conversation or an improvement conversation or a supporting you to be the best person in your career conversation, maybe it'd be a better and easier conversation to have. But we need to have a performance conversation about your performance.. And I think that suddenly puts everyone on edge and you're going in, in a mindset of, oh, bloody hell, this is going to be tough. So I wonder why it is, Neil, perhaps first, do you think that managers shy away from having those conversations with those individuals that really just need to be perhaps taken aside and given a bit of direction? Why are they shying away from that? You touched on one earlier on, which is, well, probably for years previous, perhaps they could have been their pals and their teammates, and that's why they're not doing it. Is there anything else that springs to mind?

Yeah, and I would just come back to what you've just been talking about. I think, I don't think we should get bogged down either in some describing it in a particular way. I think sometimes you just, someone just needs to be told, you know, or we just need to talk about this now. And that's it. So, so let's, rather than trying to frame it somehow. So, but, well, you see, the starting point then for this, well, like, we all find it difficult to have difficult conversations, don't we, in life, at home, you know. So, so this, this applies to all of us, really. And so that's, that's, that's, I think, the first And then is it a fear? There must be some sort of fear at play, perhaps, I think, as well, then fear of rejection or fear of loss or fear of risk in a relationship or something. There's probably a fear at play too. And I find the bit— because there are models then, you know, for having a difficult conversation with people. And there are different steps, you know, but I think the bit that most managers miss out on is when they're giving feedback and they're giving a difficult conversation, they're trying to move things along, is I think the bit they don't talk enough about is the effect it has on them and how they feel about the issue. You know, we're very good at describing the issue. We listen to their side of the story. Like, I'm trying to remember some model here. We give them— we agree a solution, you know, but what was left in the middle was the bit where, you know, how it makes me feel, you know, what's going on, how that actually makes me feel. Because nobody can challenge that bit. They can challenge all the other stages, but they can't challenge. So I think it's back on us as to be brave enough to say, look, this is bloody hell. This is how it's getting to me. You know, I think that just keeps it maybe on a more human to human, heart to heart level. Rather than some sort of structured corporate event.

Yeah, I love that idea. And I wonder as well, Casey, is it perhaps to build on something that Neil said there, are people worried about the repercussions perhaps of having these conversations? I might not do it well, I might not get it right, I might be misunderstood. The person then brings it to HR, they might then leave the team. We're under pressure already. 'You know what? Probably the easier thing for everyone to do is if I just bury this and we don't talk about it at all.' But of course, the impact of the ripple effect of that decision on accountability and trust within the wider team is massive because they're looking and going, 'Sorry, that behavior was awful. So why is Jim not doing something about it? Or why is Sally not doing something about it? That's dreadful.' And that, of course, then gets talked about in the team and sets the bar, doesn't it?

It does. And it comes back to that systems piece again. And slightly in that context, like, I did want to pick up again, just to follow on from something that Neal was saying, and it was coming to me, thinking about this, around, like, generally speaking, if someone is pulling me up for having done something, or not having done something. They're doing it not because they just want to give me a whatever you want to call it, but it's because they care about the whatever it was. And, you know, again, to that human-to-human thing that you were invoking, Neil, was, yeah, I think that that's really powerful. And again, perhaps as a people leader, it's it's, you know, it's incumbent on me to do more with that, to unpack some of those disputes, to go, yeah, this is, this is because you both care. I think that's important. But then to hold that in the systemic context, exactly what you were talking about, Scott McInnes. Like, I was asked to write an article early this year on teams and resilience. And actually, it went somewhere that I hadn't expected it to go because I had no sort of preconception when I started writing what I might be getting into. And at the end of it all, I came up with this word that isn't often used in the context of organizations, and it was grace. And I think to take that systemic view, like a system obviously is made of people, But it is also a kind of independent actor in an organization in and of itself. And if you have enough alignment, teams and therefore managers are such a critical part of that, as that kind of sense-making, as is in the report, um, role. Um, if you have that alignment and that awareness, the system is endlessly forgiving and endlessly redemptive. So actually, that's again, if people are aware of that, if they know and feel supported by that systemic context that they're in, it allows, I think, empowerment around those conversations because I, if I'm someone who's dreading a conversation, I say, well, it's in the systemic context. But I'm held in that, so nothing terrible is going to happen. You know, it may be deeply uncomfortable, but the bigger picture is the system, if it's aligned well, has got us. We're safe in that space. And again, it's that question of, are we all going in the same direction? How am I showing up in that? That's what was coming to me as you were talking, Neil. Again, it's that human-to-human thing, but recognizing that we're all held in that— actually, it sounds weird in an organizational context, but we're all held in that place of grace, actually.

Yeah, love that thought. And one word that you said there, Katie, that I picked up on was resilience. You talked about resilience there, and I think we've spoken a lot on this podcast about the kind of the dangers of the whole generational label. While Gen Xs are this and Millennials are that, or Boomers are this and the Silent Generation do that. But actually, there is a suggestion in the media and in research that there perhaps isn't the resilience in some of those younger generations coming into the workforce. And therefore, just being able to have a really direct conversation that perhaps a leader would've had 20 years ago, that what happened there wasn't great. It pissed me off. It didn't make me feel great. We've got to work out a way to make it better the next time. Maybe it's not quite as direct as that in the moment, but the idea of having a very, very direct, you know what, let's just cut to the chase and get this sorted because it's in both our interests just to get it sorted, right? But we'll beat around the bush and we'll, you know, we'll not join the dots and we'll just, you know, and we won't really get to the issue of ironically what I'm doing now. Get to the issue of what the actual issue is. So is there a challenge, Neil, with resilience from people coming into organizations? Is that fair?

Yeah, I think that's worth exploring. All right. I just mentioned one thing though before I come back to that, which is I think if someone is facing into a difficult conversation with a colleague, I think that actually shows there's already a problem with that relationship. Actually, I think there's already a fault line there because I could have the difficult conversation with one person, have the exact same with another person, and that's fine. But so what is it about this person that is making me dread this? So I would say, well, that just shows them that the stuff that's gone wrong already, you know, that's why.

That's a great point. Great point.

Yeah. So that's where you start. You don't start difficult conversations with here's a model to have a difficult conversation. You started 3 months back with the relationship, maybe. Then about the different generations in the workforce and I guess younger people who haven't needed to be as resilient, maybe. Going back, the history lesson for me now is I worked through the '70s and '80s. It was just one recession after another. It was just different types of recessions, really. So, you know, you had to kind of tough it out a bit. But then it also depends on how you define resilience, you know. And I would define resilience as being really good at the basics, because I've asked every client over the years to write on a one-to-one to outline a major setback they've had. And then I ask, well, what did you do? Not to recover. The phrase I use is, what do you do to get back to being yourself again? And they all said, you go right back to basics. So core basics are something that we can always practice even ahead of a setback. So I think there's such a thing as strategic resilience, which is we can build up a bank of resilience. Why would we need a crisis to get our act together? You know, so I think there's certain core basic stuff that never goes out of fashion, but we should never neglect. And in that way, we're toughening ourselves for whatever's coming next. So I don't mind. Yeah, I'm nervous of giving people labels and generations and all that. One of the things I would say to leaders and managers when they're struggling with someone is you just don't know the person well enough. You've missed something. You think you know, you don't. So I don't mind what generation people, I just think we need to spend more time getting to know people better.

Brilliant. Brilliant. And just to finish up on this one before we get onto our last little section, because I'm just really conscious of time, because we could talk about this stuff all day. That word grace that you used there, Katie, I love that. And perhaps for the people in those difficult conversations, perhaps the people receiving that feedback need to just give the person giving the feedback a bit of grace. See it as coming from a good place, see it as coming hopefully— look, in the vast majority of instances, I'm sure not in all instances, but in the vast majority, that's coming from a place of good and a place of support and a place of pointing something out that perhaps wasn't the best way to do something or wasn't the best way to speak to somebody. And so I'm actually helping you in your career. So that idea of grace being really important that we give. Yes, we extend grace to each other, but the person receiving perhaps needs to give a little bit of grace to the manager. When I think about that, and I want to close up now because we're on time. So, it's the last question. Otherwise, I've loved this, and I could talk about this all day with you guys. We think about the context. So, we talk about the challenges of this role, and then let's layer in the context that people are working in now, that we are hybrid working. I've got some people in some days. I've got some people in other days. I've got some people at home, some people in Bermuda, some people in wherever. And also, I've got 5 or 6 generations of people in the workforce. So, people have different needs and different requirements. They're coming from different places and different contexts. They've all got loads of experience and loads of needs and wants. And I'm only one person and I can't do it all. And I wonder when— and we spoke about training earlier on, Neil, and you said there that people don't get trained before people lead roles. They might get trained when they're in them. But actually, they don't tend to get trained beforehand. So, if we think about leaders being these cultural stewards, if you like, or these chief sensemakers, just from each of you, a couple of really practical things, because I love getting kind of practical on the podcast. What are some of the skills that you think we need to teach people or give them an uplift in to be able to coach, engage, and really reinforce culture within their teams? What are 2 or 3 things that we should be helping them with? Neil, do you want to go first?

Sure. Yeah, you see, we've got it wrong. So we've spent the last 30 years training managers and leaders to manage and lead football teams. We're all in the room together. We all go to lunch together. We all come back together. We all take on the same enemy together. We know how it's going together. So all of our development has been based on that type of leadership and motivation. Skills. Now people are in charge of an athletics team. So Scott, you're the pole vaulter and I'm a sprinter. We're on the same team, but I don't see you every day. In fact, I don't need to interact with you at all. But if you have a good day and I have a good day, well, we all contribute something into the pot. So now we have to figure out how do you lead, motivate, manage, stay in touch with an athletics team, people you don't see that often. People who go at different speeds of different disciplines. So to me, that's— I'm back to my hobby horse again, which is you can't overdo enough the real basic stuff of checking in with people and seeing. One of the things I'm encouraging leaders that I'm working with at the moment is instead of raising the bar, raising the roof, what about raising the floor? So to me, it's step one these days in this context would be let's make the tough days a bit easier for people, whatever form that takes. To me, that's our first job.

Fabulous. Fabulous. Katie?

Lots of thoughts around that. And I think it comes back to where I started, really, that we are in an evolution. And the things that people used to go on management training to be corralled into a classroom and told about, it's not it's not what we need anymore. I keep coming back to, as the more we discuss things here, that word that is all over the place at the minute, and it's mattering. And how to, I suppose, yeah, encourage those relationships in a direct reporting scenario that are not kind of oppositional or combative from the get-go. But equally to kind of empower managers to feel comfortable kind of getting into the gaps and working in there. Like, that's where the magic happens. And it means that— and it sounds odd coming from somebody in HR where, you know, we have all our policies and our processes, but I think now it's trying to empower that management role to be consistently inconsistent, if you like. It's that difference between equality or that synergy between equality and equity. And you can only really get very skilled at that if you come back to that mattering piece, that human to human. And also, you know, even speaking to the generational issues, recognizing that for a lot of younger people coming into the workplace, you know, at least two generations coming into our workplace who are, you know, younger than me. And, you know, to take the whole context and go, there are a lot of things for those people outside of the work context that are stressors that perhaps I didn't have. And to recognize the whole thing, that's a lot. For managers to hold. And it still comes back to that thing of management not being perhaps perceived as kind of as sexy as leadership. But it is the most dynamic, the most nuanced, the most subtle and dynamic space to work in. And as an organization, I think, I mean, this doesn't speak to the training piece because I don't know what that looks like yet, but it's, I just know that things have to be different.

If nothing else, what it did sound like, Katie, was a siren call for more people to become managers and lead organizations to be amazing with their teams. So I think that was an absolutely brilliant place to finish. So thank you for doing that. Just a quick reminder, if you want to get the report, inspiringchange.ie/mindthegap, all one word. But for now, I'm going to say thank you so much to Neil and Katie for being here. I thought the insights were brilliant. The discussion was amazing. And yeah, just really grateful for you both being here. So thanks so much.

Thank you.

Very welcome. Thanks for having me.