Leaders are often given the advice to pick their battles carefully. Fighting over issues and decisions that can’t be won or will cause reputational damage is not a good idea. So, experienced and inexperienced leaders are warned to distinguish between battles worth fighting and those that are best avoided. But how does one determine which issues are worth defending and which should be left alone, at least for the time being? To begin with, because good leaders live by values and principles, there will always be battles to fight. Any action, decision, or policy that flies in the face of personal values and principles has the potential for battle. But determining which issues to confront is often complex and requires a pragmatic cost-benefit analysis. The best leaders allow five questions to guide their decision to confront and wage war over a testy issue. Before deciding to engage in battle, they hope to answer all five questions in the affirmative.
- Will the outcome of the issue have a lasting impact on you or others you care about? This means the level of significance is big and has the potential to influence related and unrelated matters for an extended time. If the long-term impact is unclear or will likely fail to register an enduring seismic shift, then the battle is best avoided.
- Will winning the battle lead to positive change? In deciding to fight, the leader needs to believe strongly that the end result will lead to growth, learning, and change that benefits nearly everyone. This means envisioning what winning will look like and believing it will make a positive difference in people’s lives. If a leader can’t articulate how winning will produce promising change, it is best to leave the issue alone.
- Will the battle produce only short-term fallout regarding the people involved? The conflict will undoubtedly bother some people and make others highly uncomfortable. The question is, for how long? In time, will others get over the battle, or is it likely the confrontation could result in long-term ill will? If winning the fight will permanently undermine the leader’s reputation, then the best answer is usually to skirt the issue or to deal with it more indirectly.
- Do I have the time, resources, and support to fight this battle? Battles take time and resources. If a leader’s efforts are directed elsewhere and they can’t give 100 percent to fighting the battle, it will likely result in a costly loss. Allies also make the struggle much palatable and winnable. Those who share your views can strengthen your stance and apply pressure to help win the day.
- Is this the right time to wage this battle? Timing really matters when starting a fight. Smart leaders look for an opening instead of picking a brawl when the adversary is at their strongest. Waiting for a more favorable moment can lead to better outcomes and less fallout.
Only the leader can determine the answer to these questions and decide if an issue is worth escalating into a battle. Good leaders pick and choose their struggles carefully while remembering the military adage, “Not every hill is worth dying on.” When it’s worth fighting for, nothing is more honorable or important to do. But those leaders who commonly fight battles they shouldn’t normally don’t survive to fight the ones they should.
A Daily Dispatch from the Front Lines of Leadership.
