Article
Is it time to upgrade your team?
August 13, 2020
Building on each other’s experience and expertise, teams can rise higher than a single individual can.

Surround Yourself with Knowledgeable and Experienced People
Effective leaders surround themselves with people who have technical and functional expertise. Like the cabinet of a president or prime minister or the military’s top level “joint chiefs of staff,” the best leaders create a powerhouse team of experts to advise and support their leadership. This doesn’t happen overnight; it requires you to continuously upgrade your team. Unfortunately, some of the early founding team members may not have the necessary skill and expertise to remain in their original role.
“The hardest thing to get right in every company isn’t the products but the people,” said John Chambers, former CEO of Cisco. So, it’s vital that the leader hire and empower a senior team that has expertise in key domains and then learn to value and listen to their views and utilize their insights.
Effective leaders need to augment their leadership style with people who complement their strengths and offset their weaknesses. To do this right, leaders must be honest and objective in assessing their limitations and stylistic tendencies.
“Lisa is a wonderful team-builder. We're lucky to have someone so adept at seeing each team member's skills, putting them to good use, and helping the team understand how best to work with each other.”
So it is critical to hire and empower people you can trust, who have experience and expertise you can learn from. Choose people with expertise in many different domains and let them lead those teams and functions. Select team members based on their technical, functional, problem-solving and interpersonal skills or on their potential for growth. They may come from varied backgrounds and have different styles but share a common set of values that make them fit in and enrich the culture of the team and the evolving organization.
TIP: Avoid hiring people you can control who will not challenge your point of view and may confirm your bias. Rather than thinking short-term and filling key slots with junior people who will be over their heads in a short time, hire people who are smarter and more experienced than you are and who can scale with the company. “The best leaders know that their employees know more than they do.” – Simon Sinek
It’s also best not to overdo hiring people just because they have degrees from prestigious schools and you assume, they have a high level of intelligence and lots of motivation. They may also have little experience and functional or domain knowledge. Without experience they may not have the framework to understand problems and won’t recognize patterns and errors that lead to serious mistakes and poor judgment. Experienced executives have models and pattern recognition to help them quickly spot problems and solutions rather than having to reinvent the wheel. Furthermore, don’t confuse personal ambition with achievement drive. Overly ambitious people are often poor team players.
One of my clients was growing rapidly and having great difficulty recruiting top technical talent. The recruiting organization had grown substantially but was not getting results and was having numerous internal and external problems. The CEO decided that his current VP of People (Human Resources) didn’t have the necessary skills to systematically manage and grow the recruiting team. He decided to move one of his executives from an operational position to head up the human resource organization because she was an outstanding project manager, a tough and disciplined taskmaster, and he hoped she would bring the structure, rigor and discipline that was necessary. The problem was that she had no HR experience and had poor people skills. It did not work out well, and within six months she was replaced by a seasoned HR executive. I’ve seen this story repeated many times.
Value the Contributions of all team members
To have a true “team” rather than just a collection of individuals, members need to value each other’s unique skills and contributions and appreciate the importance of each member’s role. As the leader, it is up to you to model this team spirit in your behavior and promote a team culture that exemplifies it.
How do you do this? When you show interest in a member’s activities and initiatives, openly express appreciation for the person’s efforts and achievements, it is obvious to everyone that the leader values that member’s contribution. Everyone is watching.
Many leaders tend to directly or indirectly show a preference for certain functions, teams, employee groups or areas of expertise. For example, in technical companies, the CEO often clearly values Engineering or Product over other functions. This results in the leader paying more attention to the views and recommendations of certain team members and listening more to their input in meetings. Whatever your background, personal preferences and predilections, try to be even-handed toward all functions and teams. In meetings, particularly those that involve strategic decision-making, it is important for the leader to include a wide variety of people, and actively draw out their ideas and opinions.
Clarify Roles and Responsibilities
Roles define individual responsibilities for successful operation of the team. Lack of role clarity is one of the causes of conflicts, confusion, and inefficiency on teams. Ideally, you want the team to function as an interdependent, coordinated unit whose members interact creatively and harmoniously.
Clearly defined roles promote efficiency. When the leader doesn’t make roles and responsibilities clear or designate who is responsible for and has ownership of specific projects and decisions, then power struggles and border skirmishes result. So if you are the leader, it’s important to define people’s roles or there will be battles over turf and authority, and chances are good that you will ultimately be called on to adjudicate!
Clear boundaries and assigned areas of authority are the key. For the team to function at maximum capacity, members need to understand not only their own, but also each team member’s roles and responsibilities. Consider creating an enhanced org chart that everyone can refer to, that defines the roles, responsibilities, deliverables, and decision authority of each team member. And be sure to update the chart as the organization grows and roles and responsibilities expand and shift.
In every company and team, there are both formal and informal roles. Formal roles involve designating who is responsible for doing what, sometimes accompanied by a title or a job description. On the other hand, informal roles are roles that people spontaneously take on, based on their personality, skills and style, and what problems need to be resolved.
For example, the question may arise, Who is going to be the person we go to when we have execution issues? Often there is someone on the team who is super organized and knows how to get things done, so this person becomes the go-to person for execution questions. Or there may be a person who has deep customer insights or knowledge of current technology trends or has their finger on the pulse of the morale of the engineering team. Often these informal roles can play a valuable part in improving the quality of understanding of problems or critical decisions.
Give High Powered Team Members Independence
Give team members autonomy – when they have earned it. Be sure to give team members the autonomy they want and need, particularly those who have demonstrated that they have good judgment and know what they are doing. “Barry does a great job of granting autonomy and at the same time making people feel like they are really part of a team, not just a worker”.
But be careful: some confident individuals may expect to have freedom and independent decision-making authority before they are actually ready and have demonstrated competence and good judgment. Their exaggerated self-confidence and personal ambition may cause them to overestimate their capabilities. They may not know what they don’t know. As the saying goes, “He was not always right but he was never in doubt.”
Discourage dependence. Other team members, who may be less experienced or less confident, will often overly rely on the leader to tell them what to do. This second type can become dependent, looking to management and leadership for guidance and direction even in small matters, and will have difficulty making the transition to independent decision making as the company grows. Discourage this kind of co-dependent relationship; it will eat up your time and will prevent followers from operating as true partners and leaders in their own right.
Over-controlling, narcissistic leaders don’t develop other powerful leaders, whom the organization needs in order to scale effectively. As much as possible, once people have demonstrated good judgment and their ability to get results, give them more independence and more decision-making authority. They need to know what is expected of them, but once they prove themselves, let talent find their own way to get results. Their mistakes can be learning opportunities and if you coach them properly, these need not be fatal mistakes. Micromanagement leads to decision bottlenecks, frustration, poor morale, and ultimately to executive turnover.
share this
Related Articles
Related Articles

Some of the smartest leaders you will ever meet are also some of the hardest people to work with. They are fast, perceptive, and unusually strong at solving hard problems. They see patterns others miss. They cut through ambiguity. They grasp systems, strategy, and complexity at a very high level. In many cases, those gifts are exactly why they became founders, technical leaders, or senior executives. And yet many of these same people leave a trail of strained relationships behind them. Their direct reports feel unseen or intimidated. Peers experience them as dismissive, impatient, or controlling. Their bosses admire their intellect but hesitate to trust them with broader leadership responsibility. At home, partners often feel emotionally alone. Over time, the leader becomes puzzled. They know they are smart, committed, and often right. So why do people keep pulling away, withholding the truth, or failing to fully follow them? The answer is that many high IQ leaders are working from an incomplete model of effectiveness. They assume that if they think clearly, argue logically, work hard, and produce results, the rest should take care of itself. That model can work for a long time in school, in technical roles, and in the early stages of a company. But eventually leadership becomes less about the quality of your own mind and more about your ability to work through the minds, emotions, motivations, and limitations of other people. That is where many smart leaders start to fail. The Core Problem Intelligence is not the problem. It is an asset. The problem is that intelligence often creates distortions. It can make a leader overestimate the power of logic, underestimate the importance of emotion, and develop habits that quietly damage trust. It can also create a subtle arrogance. Not always the loud kind, but the quieter assumption that if other people are slower, less rigorous, or more emotional, they must be the problem. Once a leader starts living inside that assumption, interpersonal trouble becomes almost inevitable. Five Common Patterns 1. Overreliance on reason Many bright leaders treat relationships as if they are mainly cognitive systems. If there is disagreement, they explain more. If someone is upset, they analyze the issue. If morale is low, they offer strategy. If a direct report feels discouraged, they give solutions. In their minds they are being helpful and efficient. But the other person often feels bypassed. Their emotional reality is treated as noise rather than information. Their need to be heard is mistaken for a need to be corrected. This is a major blind spot in analytical leaders. They often do not realize that understanding is not the same as persuasion, and problem solving is not the same as relationship building. A person can agree with your logic and still not trust you. They can accept your decision and still lose commitment because the relational cost was too high. 2. Impatience High horsepower people often process faster than the people around them. They see the answer early. They get bored by slower thinking, frustrated by repetition, and irritated when others need more context than they do. This can make them decisive and productive. It can also make them hard to work with. They interrupt. They jump ahead. They finish other people’s sentences. They push past concerns before others feel understood. They make those around them feel slow, clumsy, or not worth listening to. This teaches the organization something dangerous. It teaches people that the leader’s mind is the only one that really counts. The safest strategy becomes speaking briefly, deferring quickly, or waiting until the leader has already decided. Then the leader complains that the team is passive or not taking ownership. What they often do not see is that the culture has adapted to them. 3. Emotional underdevelopment hidden by cognitive strength Very bright people can use intellect as a defense against emotional discomfort. They can analyze instead of feel. They can explain instead of reflect. They can argue instead of absorb. They can move to abstraction when the deeper issue is shame, fear, insecurity, hurt, or loneliness. They are often unaware this is happening. They do not experience themselves as defended. They experience themselves as rational. But leadership requires emotional range. Not sentimentality. Not therapeutic language. Real range. The ability to notice your own reactions before they control your behavior. The ability to tolerate feeling wrong, uncertain, criticized, or less competent than you want to appear. The ability to stay present when another person is disappointed, anxious, or angry without immediately shutting it down, fixing it, or counterattacking. Leaders who cannot do this often become brittle. They look composed until challenged in just the wrong way. Then out comes defensiveness, coldness, contempt, withdrawal, or overcontrol. 4. Low interpersonal curiosity Smart leaders are often highly curious about ideas, products, markets, and strategy, but not necessarily about people. They know how to interrogate problems, but not always how to explore another person’s inner world. They ask what happened, but not what it felt like. They want the conclusion, not the hesitation. They want the output, not the psychology. People do not trust leaders simply because they are competent. They trust leaders who show that they are trying to understand them. Interpersonal curiosity communicates respect. A leader does not have to agree with someone to make that person feel seen. But when the leader skips that step, people feel reduced to functions rather than treated as human beings. 5. Weak awareness of impact Many smart leaders are genuinely surprised by how strongly people react to them. They tell themselves, “I was just being direct,” or “I was only asking a question.” In their own minds, intent carries most of the moral weight. If they did not mean harm, then the reaction seems excessive. But leadership does not work that way. Impact matters because power magnifies everything. A passing comment from a founder can ruin a weekend. A skeptical look from a senior executive can silence a room. A blunt critique can stick in someone’s head for months. High IQ leaders often underestimate this because they evaluate themselves from the inside while everyone else experiences them from the outside. That gap sits at the center of many 360 feedback problems. The Identity Trap There is another layer here. Some smart leaders have been rewarded for being exceptional for so long that they quietly build their identity around being the smartest person in the room. They may not say it out loud. They may even dislike arrogance in others. But inside, being quick, insightful, and right has become central to their sense of worth. Once that happens, other people’s competence can feel threatening. Feedback becomes harder to absorb. Collaboration becomes more performative than real. The leader listens selectively, especially when they believe the other person is less capable. They become invested in remaining the mental center of gravity. That is a dangerous place to lead from. It turns intelligence into status defense. It makes humility feel like loss. It makes genuine curiosity harder. And it makes the leader lonelier than they realize, because very few people feel close to someone who always has to occupy the top intellectual position. The Shift That Matters The good news is that these problems are workable. In fact, smart leaders often improve quickly once they see the pattern clearly. Their intelligence then becomes an ally rather than a shield. But improvement requires a shift in model. Leadership is not just about being right. It is about creating enough trust, clarity, and psychological safety that the best thinking of the group can emerge. Your job is not merely to contribute your intelligence. It is to increase the total intelligence of the system. That means treating emotions as information rather than interference. It means becoming curious about your own interpersonal signature. What happens to people in your presence when you are under pressure. Do they get more open or more cautious. More honest or more political. More energized or more tense. Those are not soft questions. They are the real scorecard of leadership impact. It also means slowing down your certainty just enough to make room for other minds. Ask one more question before concluding. Stay with the other person’s frame a little longer. Notice when you are moving to solution because you are uncomfortable with uncertainty or emotion. Let people finish. Reflect before rebutting. And it means understanding that warmth and strength are not opposites. Many analytical leaders fear that becoming more emotionally intelligent will make them softer or less respected. The opposite is usually true. Leaders become more effective when people experience them as both rigorous and fair, both clear and human, both demanding and safe enough to tell the truth to. Practical Experiments A few simple practices can help. In your next one on one, spend more time understanding than advising. In your next disagreement, summarize the other person’s view in a way they agree is accurate before stating your own. In your next leadership meeting, track how often you interrupt, redirect, or signal impatience. After a difficult conversation, ask yourself not only whether your point was valid, but what emotional residue you likely left behind. Ask two trusted people what it feels like to disagree with you, and listen without defending. Final Thought Human beings are not engineering problems. They are not solved by superior reasoning alone. They need respect, steadiness, dignity, trust, and emotional attunement. That is why so many smart leaders struggle. Not because they are too intelligent, but because they have leaned on the wrong part of themselves for too long. At a certain point in leadership, your mind stops being the main differentiator. Plenty of people are smart. What becomes rarer is the ability to combine intelligence with self awareness, candor with sensitivity, high standards with trust, and authority with emotional maturity. That is when a smart leader becomes someone people actually want to follow.




