“I really miss Outlook,” Nancy said. “I loved how, with one click, I could sort by name and see all the exchanges I’d had with any client. It really helped me stay in touch with them and understand the history of our past conversations.”
As background, when Nancy joined in the company in early 2013, we were on Outlook and all was going well, but then random emails started disappearing. She would send me messages I’d never receive, leaving us unsure what we weren’t getting, and that’s the worst situation of all. I was on the phone constantly with Microsoft trying to figure out if the problem was Outlook and with GoDaddy (our email provider at that time), trying to discern if the issue was on their end. Of course, each blamed the other and I got nowhere.
Something had to be done. First, I moved us off GoDaddy and over to Gmail to ensure the underlying service was solid and, once having done that, I proposed we do away with the extra layer of complexity that Outlook constituted. With things simplified, everything worked perfectly — no more disappearing messages.
But though she was a good trooper and went along with the program, it turns out Nancy was silently pining for Outlook. To her, when I removed that extra layer of complexity, I also stripping away a valued layer of functionality. To her, I threw out the baby with the bathwater.
Fast forward a few years, and I hear Nancy’s comment above. As a believer in the principles of servant leadership, I know it’s my job to give the team everything they need to get their jobs done. If facing an obstacle way they cannot move, it’s my job to bulldoze it. If they say they need Outlook to get the results I want, it’s my job to give it to them.
Of course, there are caveats. As with anything, leaders must take a cost/risk versus reward approach to determining what can be done and what can’t. To you, this should come as no shock — with a good example being the debate that has gone on for years about bells and whistles-laden departmental applications versus enterprise packages, which may lack some flair but get the interoperability job done. In some cases, you simply cannot give an individual what they say they need if the cost to the organization would be too high.
In the case above, however, the downsides of giving Outlook another try are minimal. And so, after some trial and error, Nancy’s back up and running on her favorite email tool. For my part, I’m sticking with Gmail — a stripped down but very solid email platform I’ve gotten used to.
As a team, our email functionality is strong and secure, with each employee using the setup they like best. For now, we’re solid. That is, unless and until emails start disappearing again. And if that happens, Nancy may have to — for the team’s sake — say goodbye to the bells and whistles again. Since she’s the quintessential team player, I know it won’t be a problem.
Share Your Thoughts
You must be logged in to post a comment.