Show Notes
If you’re about to run annual objectives with your team, you are holding a leadership moment in your hands. You can make it clear and useful, or you can end up with a set of goals that might look “nice” but not create the outcomes you want this year. In this episode, Mel and Michelle discuss the mindset Michelle used as a manager. “This is a discussion about a new contract. We’re contracting for outcomes.” Michelle says: “That contract is mutual. My job is to bring the strategic, commercial, and financial goals I’m accountable for, translate them into something my team can actually use, and then help each person turn that into objectives that make sense for their role. Before the one-on-one meetings, I strongly recommend a team briefing. I want the whole team to hear the same thing from me, in plain language: where the business is heading, what matters this year, and what our team’s positional purpose is. What do they pay us to do around here? Then I tell them how to prepare for the one-on-one.” Mel and Michelle then explore the fundamentals that team members should follow to prepare for their objective-setting exercise. Think about the accomplishments from last year, yes, but not just the one-offs. What are the repeatable contributions? Wins, metrics, fixes, launches. The stuff they can do again and build on. They want to identify 2 or 3 problems worth solving this year that align with the business priorities discussed earlier. Additionally, we want team members to approach their professional development with measurable outcomes in mind, rather than engaging in training for its own sake. Here’s why this matters. We see too many teams trying to write objectives with a missing link. Michelle discusses a case in which a group of employees lacked visibility into their manager’s goals and KPIs. They were still expected to write their own objectives. They were basically guessing what would “land”. That’s a leadership and transparency problem. Managers, once you’re in the one-on-one, use this question to cut through the noise: If we’re sitting here in a year’s time and we’re saying “we nailed it”, what are we celebrating? You’ll learn a lot from the answer. Some people will go straight to outcomes. Others will tell you they’re anxious, stretched, worried about skills, worried about what’s changing in the business. That’s useful data. It tells you what support they need from you as their manager. Then you get disciplined. Two or three objectives. Not ten. Ten is not a strategy. For each objective, you want a small number of measures. Two or three is usually enough. You’re aiming for evidence you can stand behind later. “I delivered what I said I would deliver” is a very different year-end conversation than “I was busy”. We also talk about what to do when the impact is not a straight line. Consulting is a good example. So is finance. You might not be able to draw a clean line between your work and the organisation’s growth. That doesn’t mean you can’t set a strong objective. Michelle also shares examples like a capability uplift project that strengthens frontline teams that win work, and a senior finance leader running structured lunch-and-learns to lift commercial acumen. Those are enablement objectives. They have a clear delivery commitment, a timeframe, and evidence points. That’s how you set your team up to finish the year able to point to a few outcomes and say, "We did that." If this work resonates with you, we invite you to explore the Lead to Soar Network. It exists to support women who want to lead with intention, depth, and clarity, alongside others doing the same work. You’re also warmly encouraged to comment on this article or join the chat. Leave a comment Want the practical tools that go with the episodes? Upgrade to paid to get the downloadable templates, checklists, and frameworks we reference, plus occasional offers for guest passes to the Lead to Soar network. If you’re serious about lifting your influence and imp
More from Lead to Soar
HR keeps getting scapegoated for executive decisions. Trina Sunday, founder of Reimagine HR, explains why HR isn’t the empathy department and why capability isn't neutral. Mel and Michelle talk with Trina Sunday, creator of the HEART Work™ Model, about why equity and empathy are leadership capabilities that sit alongside decision intelligence and system design. Trina argues that HR leaders, and the CEOs they work with, need a clear answer to one question: what are we using our intelligence, credibility, and influence to serve? Truth Bomb: Fix the system, don’t fix women. What you’ll learn Why HR so often gets scapegoated by executive teams that don’t take accountability for their own decisions Why a seat at the table gives you proximity to power without automatically giving you influence Why leadership carries a different price depending on who is doing it, and what organisations need to examine as a result How Trina defines a boundary, and what holding hers has cost her Why Trina tells HR leaders who won’t use their influence to get out of the game About the guestTrina Sunday is a human-first leadership strategist, founder of Reimagine HR and creator of the HEART Work™ Model. She works with HR and people and culture leaders through her Game Changer HR Leader coaching program, and hosts the People Unconference (PUNC) in Perth, Western Australia. About the hostsMichelle Redfern is a gender equity strategist and author of The Leadership Compass. Mel Butcher is a consultant and facilitator with an engineering background and more than 15 years of experience. Both women are mission-driven to teach women the business, strategic and financial acumen it takes to reach leadership. Go DeeperIf this conversation put language to something you’ve been navigating without it, that’s exactly the work Lead to Soar Network members do together: https://leadtosoar.network/landing
A colleague decides to act on a workplace bully everyone else has been too afraid to challenge, after management’s own attempt to fix things made the problem worse. Michelle and Mel use the story to ask a harder question: how do you work out whether you’re actually safe enough to speak up, and what should you be asking for when you do? In this episode Mel and Michelle discuss a true story from Michelle’s network: a long-tenured bully in a 20- to 25-person team, protected for years by management inaction and then by a badly designed intervention that asked the whole team, bully included, to speak freely. A colleague, weighing their own employability and financial security against what their more vulnerable teammates stand to lose, decides to file a formal complaint and back the newly appointed manager who is trying to fix things. Truth Bomb: leadership shows up at every level of an organisation, in acts like this one, using whatever power, safety and privilege you already have on behalf of people who have less. What you’ll learn * Why sitting an entire team down together, including the person accused of bullying, and asking everyone to “be honest” is a psychological safety failure, not a fix * Why are some employees structurally unable to speak up, even when the misconduct is obvious to everyone else * How to work out whether you have enough positional power, financial security or professional standing to act safely, and why that differs from person to person * Why a woman is so often the one parachuted in to clean up a mess that several managers before her failed to address, and what that costs her * The difference between alerting someone to a problem and asking for a specific outcome, and why “what outcome are you seeking” changes the conversation * What a proper workplace investigation looks like, and why standing someone down while it happens protects everyone, not just the person who complained About the hosts Michelle Redfern is a gender equity strategist and author of The Leadership Compass. Mel Butcher is a consultant and facilitator with an engineering background and more than 15 years of experience. Both women are mission-driven to teach women the business, strategic and financial acumen it takes to reach leadership. Go Deeper If you’re weighing up whether it’s safe to speak up in your own workplace, that’s exactly the kind of decision Lead to Soar Network members work through together:
Years ago, Michelle Redfern told her manager at one of Australia's big banks that the team had a politeness problem. He told her to keep speaking up. A couple of years later she had a reputation, and one of the words attached to it was "abrasive." Mel Butcher and Michelle look at who gets to speak their mind at work and who pays for it. They cover the question every leader needs to ask (am I consulting people for better ideas, or collecting yeses?), how psychological safety works in a team, and why women receive more vague, personality-based feedback than men. Textio's 2022 research found that women are 11 times more likely to be described as "abrasive" in performance feedback. You'll also get three tools you can use this week: the "mad, sad, glad" team check-in, the "play the ball, not the player" approach from Susan Colantuono's The Language of Power, and a "more of, less of, and why" structure for feedback that is specific and actionable. Related: Episode 161, Career Compass: Mastering Actionable Feedback and Overcoming Gender Bias. Michelle's self-paced course on giving, receiving and asking for feedback is coming soon inside the Lead to Soar Network What evidence do you see in your own workplace? Tell us in the comments.
Career pathing is rarely as linear as it looks, and in Michelle's organisational diagnostic work, the single biggest gap women report is that their manager isn't giving them useful career advice. In this episode, Mel and Michelle pull apart why the traditional career ladder is a scarcity game, why leaving your progression in your manager's hands is a risk you can't afford, and what to do instead. They walk through a four-move framework for evaluating what's next: stay, reshape, shift, go, and cover salary benchmarking, strategic networking inside and outside your organisation, why women are so often asked to prove readiness that men get handed on potential alone, and what leaders owe the people they're meant to be developing.
A listener wrote in with a question anyone with a shelf of half-read leadership books will recognise. She reads good books. She underlines the useful parts. Nothing changes. Mel and Michelle did not script an answer. They worked it out in real time, and the diagnosis arrives fast. If your life is already full, work stacked on caregiving stacked on more work, there is nowhere to put the advice. Truth Bomb: The quality of the book is irrelevant.