Great leaders encourage questioning, challenge, and criticism

While a conservative approach is admittedly less risky, an excess of it will erode the competitiveness of the organisation over time because it lacks the variety to spice up its life

The willingness of a leader to be questioned, challenged and criticised is an invaluable trait. Many leaders show annoyance, displeasure, and become defensive when their authority and expertise are challenged in public and, at times, even in private. They take it as an affront to their competence, rank and authority. They also fear that their inadequacies will be revealed. On the other hand, emotionally intelligent leaders welcome challenge, questioning and criticism and proactively use them as platforms of insights, additional information, and personal development. 

They encourage ‘challenge’ and ‘questioning’ as a way of creating a sense of belonging in, and leadership development of, their followers by giving them a voice in strategy formulation, tactical thinking, decision making, debate and discussion. Studies reveal that leaders who invite and welcome ideas which are different to their views, exhibit humility, empathy and positive vulnerability and create psychologically safe environments where followers and constituents feel respected and motivated to express themselves freely. 

Mary Barra, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of General Motors since 2014, is a leader who is renowned for her open-door policy, listening ear and uncanny ability to connect with her employees. Although not widely featured in leadership articles in the same way as Jack Welch, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Satya Nadella, et cetera, she carries the distinction of being the first female CEO of one of the ‘big three’ automakers in the United States of America and has been an effective leader over the past 11 years. She is known to start her day early with an informal visit to the factory where she meets and greets workers before the day gets into full gear. 

The consistency of her visits, the authenticity of her communications and her contrived accessibility to employees have endeared her to them. The thrust of her leadership style is an emphasis on participation and collaboration by encouraging employees to freely share their ideas, be critical of shortcomings, and give no-holds-barred, honest feedback. Mary Barra has been, and is, a staunch advocate for diversity and inclusion in the workplace and believes that a diverse workforce is essential for innovation and growth. She has given life to a melting pot of ideas in General Motors where diverse perspectives and knowledge are continuously gathered as seeds for potential innovation, creativity and problem solving. 

Open-minded leaders

A leader cannot create and nurture an atmosphere of challenge unless he/she has an open mind. Open-minded leaders acknowledge that they do not know everything about an issue and that they are receptive to alternative views and additional information from anyone if such views and information enhance their understanding of the issue. They feel no discomfort in accommodating contrarians in their teams. 

Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States of America, is widely regarded as the greatest president in American history. While he is renowned for preserving the Union during the American Civil War, bringing about the emancipation of enslaved people and his inspiring speeches, he is respected for his open-mindedness, his flexibility of thoughts and opinions and his ability to listen and learn from others, including those who had opposing viewpoints and were openly antagonistic to him. Lincoln’s natural, and willing, embrace of diverse perspectives were evident in the manner he managed his cabinet which included political rivals. 

He was astute, strategic, and foresighted in appointing individuals with different backgrounds and political affiliations to his cabinet in unearthing a wide range of opinions and perspectives. It was this diversity of viewpoints which helped Lincoln make better decisions and handle the difficulties of his presidency in what was a tumultuous era in American history. Politicians in Sri Lanka, and for that matter, globally, can well take a leaf out of Lincoln’s book!

Sri Lanka’s stymied economic, social, and political development in the past five decades can be attributed to a system that suppressed challenge and fawned a “yes sir” culture. While it is natural human behaviour to surround yourself with people who think and act like you, it is not productive and value-adding when the people around you are so blindly beholden that they refrain from telling you the truth and expressing opposition even when reality stares them in the face. Sri Lanka’s leaders have, over the years, surrounded themselves, with ‘yes sir’ lackeys who supported their actions in return for personal favours and enrichment. Our parliament and other legislative bodies have been packed with representatives who followed their master’s bidding by unquestioningly rubber-stamping any document that was thrust before them. 

I cannot think of any Sri Lankan leader who willingly, transparently, and structurally opened himself or herself to criticism and challenge. This must be made to happen, now, by design than by accident. It is opportune for the NPP government to take advantage of its clear mandate, the authenticity of the president and the hope promised by its new political culture by nominating and forwarding representatives who are knowledgeable and capable and, most importantly, have the courage and gumption to challenge their seniors and be challenged. 

Nurturing diversity of opinion

Organisations that nurture diversity of opinion will always elicit a multitude of ideas and perspectives which are vital in fostering a culture of continuous learning, innovation, and creativity. Brainstorming sessions in such organisations are known to produce insights and nuances which may not have surfaced had there been a preponderance of homogeneity in thinking in the organisation. While oneness of resolve is a critical positive in implementation, an excessive oneness in thinking may produce too much of the same and may hinder efforts to bring change and make a difference.

The recruitment strategy of an organisation plays a key role in building a foundation of diverse thinking. I often question the homogeneity, monotony, and insipidity of the wording in many of the recruitment advertisements which appear in the dailies and other media. I also question our hiring approaches and the patterns of discussion and interrogation which are used at recruitment interviews. In 99% of such instances, organisations seek individuals who fit into the existing rhythm even when such rhythm has not been effective, is stale and is not in tune with the goals and objectives which are being pursued. Staid organisations look for individuals who are unlikely to rock the boat or shake the tree. They feel safe in hiring individuals who are likely to’ stick to the knitting.’ They look for more of the same because there is safety in the path that has already been trodden. 

While a conservative approach is admittedly less risky, an excess of it will erode the competitiveness of the organisation over time because it lacks the variety to spice up its life. A leader’s primary role is to make a difference to the status quo. The dynamism of the modern business world causes a constant shift in the needle of competitiveness. Maintaining the status quo is therefore not a sustainable long-term strategy. Organisations must look to recruiting more employees who are wonderfully weird rather than dreadfully dull because they are more likely to inject and radiate the ‘oomph,’ positive restlessness, and excitement of dissent and curious enquiry, which are so essential for growth and development.

A leader cannot create and nurture an atmosphere of challenge unless he/she has an open mind. Open-minded leaders acknowledge that they do not know everything about an issue and that they are receptive to alternative views and additional information from anyone if such views and information enhance their understanding of the issue. They feel no discomfort in accommodating contrarians in their teams

Status quo bias

Many human beings suffer from ‘status quo bias.’ This is a malady where individuals disproportionately value what they already possess than seek better alternatives. Such bias is the primary cause of national and organisational complacency and its preference to stick with the known devil than experiment with the unknown ‘angel.’ Status quo bias results in emotional attachments to long-serving executives and increases the reluctance to effect leadership transitions even when the situation urgently demands it. This was the case in the run-up to the presidential elections in Sri Lanka in 2024 when Colombo’s elite preferred the known Ranil Wickremesinghe to the unknown Anura Kumara Dissanayake!

What worked in the business world yesterday is likely to be out of place today. The business world is becoming unpredictable and weirder by the day. In such an environment, organisations must look for an increasing representation of employees who think differently and act differently. Organisations must aim to have a workforce where at least ten per cent is not the usual Tom, Dick, and Harry. They must seek employees who can be constructively disruptive. These are the employees who are not reluctant to express their feelings and are comfortable in challenging the status quo. These are employees who can set the cat among the pigeons and make something different take root. Effective leadership is naturally enabled when the leader is open to challenge, questioning and criticism and when the leaders themselves are willing and able to challenge the status quo.

My first brush with challenging the status quo in an organisational setting was at Lever Brothers (Ceylon) Limited as it was then known. I was one of five ‘professional qualifications’ pursuing accounts clerks recruited by Levers in December 1972. My batchmates were Elmo De Alwis, Rohan Cabraal, Mano Navaratnarajah and Mazhar Ghouse. Elmo and I were convinced that the calculation of the components of the variance between actual sales and budgeted sales was wrong. After some intensive soul searching, we very reluctantly approached one of the long-serving senior accountants to explain our view. These senior accountants, who were referred to those days as ‘Chief Clerks,’ were well-experienced persons who knew their onions. 

They were ‘walking computers’ who possessed incredible random-access memory. They swore by the tried and tested and were not inclined to change what was working. As was expected we were shown the door by our immediate supervisor who told us, “You podians (small guys), don’t teach your grandmother to suck eggs. Just follow the process we have used for decades.” Elmo and I were gluttons for controversy and punishment and not used to giving up easily. Undeterred, we met with Lakshman Abeynaike who was second in command of the Finance and Accounting function at Levers at that time. 

Lakshman was an inspiring leader, and he gave Elmo and me his full attention, agreed with our findings after a discussion and made immediate changes to the long-established method of calculation. It is no surprise that Lakshman became my role model. There have been many such status quo-challenging experiences in my corporate life. This early career experience gave me the courage to question the status quo without fear. Also, I have been blessed with wonderful bosses who challenged and relished challenge and questioning.

Challenging the status quo 

Placing things in context: The status quo represents the presently accepted norms and practices and the way things are done, currently. Whilst it may be comfortable, familiar, and efficient, it may also be limiting, outdated, and change resistant. Challenging the status quo means questioning the current practices, finding loopholes, and seeking opportunities to improve and innovate. It can help the organisation to gain a competitive edge and the individual to self-develop. It helped me to grow as a leader, a learner, and a thinker. 

I had always been fascinated by individuals who had made a significant difference to society by challenging the status quo. Prominent among them was Bill Gates, American businessman, who radically transformed the computing industry by building on the work of Seymour Cray, one of my early heroes, by shifting the focus from high-performance supercomputers to personal computing and by making computers accessible and user-friendly for the masses. While Cray pioneered the development of powerful supercomputers, Gates leveraged the existing hardware landscape to create Microsoft and develop software that made personal computers valuable tools for everyday use. 

Then, there was Louis Pasteur, the French chemist and biologist who made pivotal contributions that revolutionised the understanding of microbiology and public health. His work on molecular asymmetry, the germ theory of disease and pasteurisation led to advancements in vaccination and disease prevention and significantly impacted the food and wine industries via the control of microbial fermentation. 

Also high on my long list of inspirers was Marie Curie, Polish French chemist, who won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1911 for discovering radium which is now used in cancer treatment and luminous paints, and polonium which is used in nuclear weapons and as a heater in space probes. Her championing of the use of radiation in medicine has left a legacy that is difficult to match. To me, challenging the status quo brimmed with excitement, learning and development. It was macho and, suddenly, work had greater meaning! 

Preparatory work – essential first step 

Challenging the status quo at work was intimidating. It can be more so in a hierarchical company with a deeply entrenched culture and long-standing traditions. Challenging the status quo is particularly hard when it involves the challenge of a process which has been in existence over several years, had been architected by a very senior person in the organisation and has been perceived to be the gold standard in its area. With discretion being the better part of valour, an essential first step in the many times I have challenged the status quo was to make a careful assessment of how my superiors, peers and team members would respond to my feather ruffling. 

Being someone who strongly believes in doing the requisite preparatory work before going into battle, it was my practice to list out my fears, concerns, and apprehensions and estimate the probability of them becoming a reality. Oft were times that I bounced my fears and concerns with my family, close colleagues and friends and sought their advice on how best I should approach the task in hand. These steps helped me in pre-empting and mitigating potential risks, allaying my fears, and making the challenge with confidence. I also developed a set of ‘what if’ scenarios as part of my readiness in case things did not go according to plan. 

Being an eternal optimist, I have always been driven by a belief that nothing is impossible. It was Shiv Khera, Indian thought leader, who said, “You can achieve the impossible by seeing the invisible.” I was his ardent disciple. The last step was a summation of the anticipated impacts of my actions in quantitative and qualitative terms without over-assuming the positives or under-assuming the negatives. The preservation of credibility is a crucial factor if you wish to have the license to venture into the unknown. Further, just as in sports and other individual endeavours, you must shed tears, blood and sweat to excel. You become better with practice. And success breeds success and more confidence.

In concluding, I quote from a recent post in LinkedIn by Summit Consulting Limited: “When your people can’t question your decisions, you’re not running a high-performance team, you’re running a psychological prison. You may not be wearing military fatigues, but the fear in your boardroom is louder than any gunshot. People salute, nod, and take notes. But they are not thinking. They are surviving. Strong leaders don’t just allow challenge; they design for it. Because the moment fear enters the room, truth walks out. And strategy dies silently.”

(The writer is currently a Leadership Coach, Mentor and Consultant and boasts over 50+ years of experience in very senior positions in the corporate world – local and overseas. www.ronniepeiris.com.)