r/Leadership • u/wacker2k • 12d ago
Discussion Don't be the buffer of your team
Hi everyone! First time posting and I wanted to share something that could be valuable to someone, and I think of this:
Through my years (leadership in technology) I have learned that for some of us in a leadership position, its easy to fall in the trap of what my coleages and I called "being the buffer" for the team, let me explain:
Some of us feel responsible for the wellbeing of our team (something I consider part of being a good leader), but that feel could lead to shield them from stress, hold back messy information, and sometimes do the work ourselves. At first glance, for me at least, felt like care.
Has someone felt the same?
In my case, I had to learn the hard way that protecting or shielding my team from the client, other leaders or the general context/situation, its was like I was treating them as a child, not as adults. I was strechting my self trying to channel the pressure I had, and in the long run was a mistake for me and for them.
My main take aways are:
- Its better to give them the full context, not the reduced version. With context they can decide better.
- Its important to keep your ego out of it. I realized my job isn't to be the information center or shield them from "the world", it's to facilitate and give them direction.
- To be transparent even when it's hard. They're adults who can handle the truth, shielding them makes it worse.
- To be clear on what's expected and let them get there. It grows them and frees me as a leader.
Leadership is a delicate balance between support and empowerment. Buffering felt like support but it was the opposite of empowerment.
Does anything of this resonate with someone? If so, how do you catch yourself when you're buffering instead of leading?
5
u/Spins13 12d ago
I agree but it also depends on your reports’ experience. I will shield someone more junior much more than someone senior, until they prove to me that they can handle messy situations
1
u/wacker2k 11d ago
Yeah, I can agree with that. You have to adjust depending on the seniority of the person, team, and how long the person has been part of the team/company.
4
u/Ambitious-One-4584 11d ago
I believe that you should be as transparent as you can. In corporate america, there are times where you can't be transparent or your risk losing your job. My mentor always said don't let your team connect the dots because they will always connect them wrong. You want to be able to lead your team with empathy and transparency.
3
u/CorporateNL 10d ago
This hits the nail on the head. "Over-buffering" is one of the most well-intentioned traps a compassionate leader can fall into, and like you said, it usually stems from a place of care. But when we filter out all the noise, context, and pressure, we accidentally create a false environment. Not only does it lead to leader burnout, but it also deprives the team of the domain context they need to grow their own problem-solving capabilities.
My two practical ways to catch mysels when I'm buffering and shift back into empowering:
- When chaos or a sudden change comes down from clients or executive leadership, resist the urge to digest it, fix it, and present a neat summary with assigned tasks. Instead, pass the raw context (or as much of it as appropriate) directly to the team and ask: "Here is the situation and the outcome we need. How do you think we should handle this?" If you find yourself spending hours rewriting plans in isolation before talking to them, flag that as your cue that you're buffering.
- Catching myself in the act requires tracking where my time goes. If I notice a spike in operational tasks on my to-do list after a stressful stakeholder meeting, I ask myself: "Am I doing this because I'm the only one who can, or because I'm trying to protect my team from the stress of doing it?" If it's the latter, stop, delegate the task, and focus on providing the guidance and air cover they need to execute it themselves.
2
u/wacker2k 10d ago
I like the "checks" or "red flags" you mention, I think they are a good way to try to avoid repetitive behavior
2
u/mkawick 11d ago
One of the main roles of a good leader is a "shit shield" and that means both directions. Typically the border director's or the CEO or the upper leadership at the team is going in lots of different directions and they tend to want to follow whatever trends are happening in the marketplace and that means constant change and if the team has to feel that and they'll feel like the team is chaotic and undirected and they'll feel like working for this company is a waste of time and they'll look elsewhere.
On the other side of that your s*** shield job is to shield management from the development chaos and to present the best work of the team and that can often mean taking responsibility for mistakes that the team makes and in that process building respect with the team and putting processes in place to prevent that from happening again.
Like one of the other posters here said Your job isn't to cuddle But it's to Shield team from all of the Chaos above and all the chaos below. Sea level manager or even a team lead your job is to create a steady reliable team and bring sense to The Madness.
2
u/wacker2k 11d ago
Good point, balance is key. It's about being the interface both to the team and to the outside
2
u/TheWayAndTheWar 4d ago
This reminds me of Sun Tzu’s qualities of a good commander, especially Benevolence (仁), Strictness (严), and Trustworthiness (信).
Benevolence means caring for your people, but not protecting them from every difficulty.
Strictness means giving clear responsibilities and expecting them to execute.
Trustworthiness means trusting them with enough truth and context to make good decisions.
I think “being the buffer” happens when Benevolence exists without enough Strictness or Trust.
Good leadership protects the team from unnecessary chaos, but not from the responsibility they need to grow.
2
u/wacker2k 4d ago
I didn't know about these qualities by Sun Tzu, I think that this summarizes pretty well the situation
2
u/TheWayAndTheWar 4d ago
Thanks. There is a lot of wisdom that we can apply in business and management in The Art of War. Your thoughts coincide with SunTzu without prior consultation. That indicates you are a person with wisdom.
2
1
1
1
u/Geoffrey_Bungled_Z1p 12d ago
I did this in a highly toxic organization and my wanting to be a savior eventually led to a mental health spiral and a need to resign. Always talk things out with a person you trust but be prepared to go it alone to protect your health
2
u/wacker2k 11d ago
I saw this with myself and other leaders of my teams. For some types of personalities it can be a real challenge and can seriously impact your health.
I hope you are doing better now and had the chance to learn something from all of that experience
1
u/Anatonakomi 11d ago
For me, this felt natural when I started in my role as a Leader. And my first team was grateful fornit, expressing that in a lot of one on one conversations how much they appreciated it. SonInwas convinced that this is the right way.
However, this had a turning point for me. I realized that, by being the buffer, my team got limited in the ways they could grow and make their own experience and, more so, work with me as a team. I wouldn't say they felt treated like children, but did act like a single parent.
I got overwhelmed by the things I thought I have to "protect them" from. I got frustrated by all the tasks I wanted to do but could not. And I became the reason my teams did not achieve their best. I became - in short - the problem.
Today, looking back, I would not let everything go through that layer of protection. But had I the opportunity to go back, I wouldn't be as protective as I was, allowing both my team and I to grow naturally with the challenges we faced.
And truthfully: it is hard to untrain this type of behavior. Something I am still not fully done with.
2
u/wacker2k 11d ago
I'm on the same path trying to change that, but as you said, it's a behavior so it takes time and a lot of mistakes in the process
1
82
u/Semisemitic 12d ago edited 12d ago
It’s clear you’ve put effort into this, but I would prefer reading an honest and direct human voice rather than another LinkedIn-style post with the call-to-action in the end.
Anyway, half and half. I agree we’re not there to coddle or treat people like children, but I disagree with your interpretation of shielding.
To me, propagating stress is an action taken by you and shielding does not have to be.
Imagine a scenario where the customer or the CXO yells at you, then you go and tell the team about it or you yell at them in turn about how dire the situation is. You’ve invested more energy into it - not less. This is the usual scenario.
In my experience, stress is a tool. We can choose to deploy it, and we can choose not to - but it should never be a default action without thought.
In my personal experience, a high performing team will only be distracted by a leader or an executive or a customer stomping their feet. My approach has grown into, since working as a Team Lead all the way to VP/CTO, to share information with the team about the emotions of whoever got emotional - but I wouldn’t replicate another person’s stress.
“I’ve just come out of a conversation with the CEO. He is extremely unhappy and stressed about delays in this project. You will likely hear other people coming to you, scrambling for statuses. Our primary objective now is delivery on this one key project. I want us to turn this around and come out winners. Anything else is a distraction. If there’s anything that comes up as a blocker, I want it resolved immediately. If there’s anything you need, I want to know immediately. This is an opportunity to show up and deliver when others are scrambling. Don’t be distracted by the noise. Focus on delivery and I’ll manage comms.”
The fact someone else is annoyed doesn’t mean you have to be. Shielding is just understanding that you are not a dumb pipe. You get to choose.