(Image created by Deposit Photo)
That’s what I call a “two-fer” — two for the price of one. (I bought two pints.)
Later I stopped by the local convenience store for coffee and another sign caught my eye: buy any breakfast sandwich and get the second free.
Another two-fer. (In an unusual show of restraint, I paid for the coffee and fled.)
The whole “two-fer” thing got me thinking about some of the best leaders I’ve known and how they regularly turn the fruits of one good decision into something more – often something even more important.
They know how to get two-fers.
Picture this: You call a meeting of your staff to discuss upcoming coverage of a big event. You’ve told them in advance what the meeting is about, and you urge them to bring their ideas. As you go into the room, your head is filled with ideas, but you take a deep breath and keep them to yourself. “Let’s hear what you’re thinking,” you tell the group. Then you join the conversation as ideas are suggested and developed.
When this approach works, you get a two-fer. First, you leave the room with a plan (maybe based on an idea better than yours.) Second, and more importantly, you demonstrate to the staff that this is a newsroom in which everyone’s ideas matter. They matter so much that they actually can drive the coverage.
You’ve gotten an immediate and a long-term return—a two-fer—just by deciding not to announce your ideas first.
You could have decided, of course, to take the other (more common) approach: Begin the meeting by putting your ideas on the table. That approach also produces a two-fer, doesn’t it? You get a plan, but you also reinforce the staff’s belief that in this newsroom, the boss’s ideas matter most. You’ll know this when, in response to your eventual call for their ideas, the staff responds with silence.
That’s an important point to remember: two-fers work both ways. The impacts of your decisions—both immediate and long-term—can be good or bad. So how do the best leaders increase the chances they’ll achieve both short- and long-term results?
First, by acknowledging that even the smallest decision (like how you run a meeting) can have an important long-term impact.
And second, by stopping before they act and thinking. What message will this action send? How will people interpret its intention? Does it reinforce or conflict with the vision I describe for our newsroom? It’s not unusual, the best leaders will tell you, that after thinking about long-term impact, they adjust or change altogether the action they were about to take.
Here’s another situation: A staffer has come to your office with a problem, seeking your help. She has been describing the issue for less than a minute when a solution pops into your head. You’re about to interrupt her and say, “You know, here’s what I would do… ” when you stop yourself and let her continue to talk. When she eventually finishes, you speak, but not with your idea. Instead you ask her a question, something like: “When did this issue start?” or “When this happens to you, how do you think of responding?”
You’re shooting for a two-fer. First, you’re hoping the staffer leaves your office with an idea for addressing her issue. But more importantly, you’re hoping to demonstrate that she is capable of solving her own problems—or at least contributing to the solution—and that you are not the answer-person.
That’s a two-fer. Well done.
You could have made a different choice. You could have given her your suggestion and sent her on her way. That would have made for a quicker meeting, and you might have resolved her issue. But guess who will be back in your office tomorrow with another problem, waiting for your wisdom to make it go away?
That’s a two-fer, too.
The opportunities for two-fers are everywhere:
- It’s time to edit a story, but instead of calling the reporter to your work space, you go to his. Not only will you send the message that the reporter, even during an edit, retains ownership of the story, you also know that the points you make and questions you ask during the edit will be overheard by all of the reporters in the area. That’s a teaching moment, and a two-fer. (This strategy works less well if the edit is expected to be difficult—no need to embarrass a reporter in front of his peers.)
- A major piece of work is scheduled for publication tomorrow and you are not satisfied that the project’s presentation communicates the gravity of the story’s findings. And so you call the group together, thank them for their hard work, share your misgivings, and tell them you’re holding the project. Go work on it some more, you say. The next day, they present their additional work and you still are not satisfied. To the group’s dismay, you hold it again. Eventually, when the work meets your expectations, you approve it to run. The process is difficult, but it produces an important two-fer: a better project and a clear message to the staff that we will not publish our work until it meets our standards—and they will be high.
- It’s vacation season and you need someone to fill in for one of your desk editors. Your first thought is to do it yourself; after all, you’re a good editor and would enjoy the week immersed in journalism. But then you remember the reporter—a good one—who has chronic trouble with making deadline. So you assign the reporter to work the week on the desk. You’re shooting for a two-fer: first, you’ll find out about the reporter’s editing potential. And second, the reporter will learn first-hand about how missed deadlines affect the newsroom operation and the people who work in it.
Try this exercise for a week: Whenever you face a decision, think about the potential immediate and long-term impacts. Whether you’re about to send an email, conduct a meeting, or announce a plan, think about whether the decision you’re making and the way you’re announcing it will have the effect you want.
Make enough two-fers and you can both address your immediate goal and continue building the newsroom environment you’re seeking. That’s a bargain.
