Lead With That: Leading While Stuck in Space

Interview Transcript

Intro:

Welcome back to CCL’s podcast Lead With That, where we talk current events in pop culture to look at where leadership is happening and what’s happening with leadership.

Ren:

So, what does leadership look like when you’re 250 miles above Earth, facing an unexpected 9-month extension to your work trip? NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams didn’t plan to spend nearly a year aboard the International Space Station, but when technical failures grounded their return vehicle, they adapted, preserved, and led with resilience. This episode, we’re diving into their experience — not the spacecraft, not the mission logistics, but the astronauts themselves. How do they cope?

How do they lead, and what can we learn from their ability to stay focused, motivated, and mission-driven in the face of uncertainty? Both Wilmore and Williams demonstrated what leadership under pressure truly looks like. Rather than frustration, they chose optimism. Rather than isolation, they leaned on teamwork.

Williams put it best when she said, “We don’t feel abandoned or stuck up here” during her interview last year. They tackled scientific research, station maintenance, and the psychological demands of an extended mission with unwavering commitment. It’s truly a masterclass in adaptability, trust, and the kind of leadership that transcends gravity. So, what can we leaders learn on Earth from their experience?

Today, we’re breaking down some lessons around the high-stakes problem-solving, mental endurance, and teamwork under extreme circumstances. So, whether you’re leading in an office or orbiting the planet, Wilmore and Williams’s story proves that the best leaders are steady, and stay steady, no matter how long the mission lasts.

Welcome back, everyone. I’m Ren Washington, and as usual, I’m joined with Allison Barr. Allison, what’s the longest you’ve had to work with someone on a job, like a single person stuck on one gig?

Allison:

Single person stuck on one gig? Well, we run 5-day programs all the time, but I suppose we leave at the end of the day, so maybe that doesn’t count.

Ren:

You get to go home.

Allison:

So prior to CCL, in my past life, I was in charge of getting retail stores open from both a training perspective and an ops perspective. There was one occasion in which I had to open a very small store in a very, very small space that me and another teammate spent all hours of the night working. So, that was probably 7 am or earlier, to about 3 or 4 am, give or take. What about you?

Ren:

I don’t know. Yeah, maybe like a 12-hour stint, 7 to 7 in some of our programming, maybe on a work trip internationally, spending more time with someone. I was always able to clock out and go home. Considering that long stretch, how did you manage your space with each other? What were ways that you were able to work better together? What were some of the things that you took away from a “leading yourself and leading the situation” experience?

Allison:

Well, I think, gosh, there’s so much to say there. The root of our success was that she and I had, and still have, a very good relationship and were able to communicate transparently and effectively with one another. So, just to be clear, there were no windows. It had to be private, for some reason that I’m still unsure of. So, they didn’t want anybody looking in the window, so they barricaded everything. So, there were no windows, which you would think wouldn’t be that big of a deal, but it does have an impact on you.

I think we were just able to communicate and had lots of caffeine, and we knew what we were getting into. We knew what we were getting into, which is actually something that these 2 astronauts said, too. We knew it was going to be a trek. We knew that in advance. So, I’d say that, and the communication, and us having a very solid relationship was helpful.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, I think you highlight some of those things that maybe Suni and Butch have to lean onto, or Wilmore and Williams. I’m going to call them all sorts of names, hopefully the polite names, but let’s run it back because I think it’s such a wild story.

I didn’t really pay attention until the astronauts were coming home, and then I saw a meme. Imagine you were told that you’re stuck up there, and then they were like, “Hey, actually, let’s wait a day” because the return ship was delayed for a day once it was planned. So let’s first look at who they are.

Butch and Suni, both Navy test pilots, they’d served as Navy pilots and they both were astronauts. They’ve been up multiple times. You’ve probably seen Butch on all those NASA clips. He’s one of those faces that they put on TV when they talked to the astronauts. So, they’ve both done a lot of work in planes and in space.

And, as they’re test pilots, this was Boeing’s Starliner. That was the space shuttle that they took up to the space station. That was Boeing’s first pass at taking astronauts. NASA, for the past decade, has been using this commercial flight program where they rely on private industry, or private companies, to take their astronauts up there. That’s why SpaceX has been involved, and we’ll talk a little bit around the return capsule. So, we got these Navy test pilots who are astronauts who were asked to fly the Boeing Starliner up to space for the first time ever. It’s the first manned flight for this pod.

So, they go up, and as they’re going, there’s some hydrogen leakage issues in some of the thruster engines, especially as they’re getting close to the ISS, and they were able to stop the leakage. But as they began to dock with the ISS, some of the thrusters failed. So much so, that both Butch and Suni had to re-engineer, get this stuff back online, get the computer activated, and for them to safely dock. But it’s just such a wild thing to think of. They finally can see it, and then they have these issues. It reminds me … Was it Apollo 11 or Apollo 13? Which one is a Tom Hanks movie?

Allison:

Oh, I think it’s 11, right? Oh no, I don’t know now. I’m questioning myself.

Ren:

Oh, did I ruin it?

Allison:

I think it’s 11.

Ren:

People are yelling into their microphones. They’re like, “Idiots, it’s Tom Hanks.” But anyway, so they get up there and so they’re the only 2. I think the plan was supposed to be 8 days, and they were going to fly up to the space station just to see how it went and then come home. But after the thruster issues … it was June 2024 when they flew up there. After the thruster issues, NASA and them said, “Okay, we’re going to try to figure it out.” And for 3 months, they waited for a plan. So, it was June, and then in August, NASA was like, “We’re not sending you home” and that “We’re going to bring it home unmanned. Also, we’re just going to keep you on board until the next crew arrives,” which was going to be in September.

But after more and more conversation happened, they say, “Well, you know what, what we’re going to do is …” And the crew that usually come up, they come up in groups of 4. So, the crew, instead, they dropped 2 people off of the September crew, and then they brought up those 2 other people, a cosmonaut and the other US astronaut. His name was Nick Hague. So, those 2 arrive at the space station in September, and then they all stay and work together until March, when they were finally able to go home. So, it’s a wild day. Wilmore and Williams ended up spending 286 days in space, 278 days longer than anticipated. They circled the Earth 4,576 times. They traveled 121 million miles by the time they splashed down.

And Williams and Wilmore quickly transitioned from being guests to full-fledged station crew members. In fact, Suni Williams became the station commander once they decided that she was going to be up there, and, wildly, they did 62 hours over 9 spacewalks. Williams specifically set a record for the most time spent spacewalking over a career among female astronauts. So, it’s like this super-duper wild story. They get up there and there’s a lot of things to unpack too around, “Were they stranded, were they left?” NASA and the astronauts both made a conscious decision, and probably a financial decision, that they’re just going to roll them into the squad.

But the thing that got me really thinking about this is you got an 8-day trip and it turns into a 286-day trip. And I asked you, like, “Should we talk about this?” Maybe just how they didn’t freaking kill each other. So, I think I want to dig into some of the tension that could have happened, some of the characteristics that they leaned into in themselves, some things that came out as they talked about it when they arrived home, But it’s just this wild trip with so many factors at play. So, I wonder, as you observe the story, listen to the astronauts, hear about the details, what sticks out to you about any of this?

Allison:

A lot. I think 2 things. One was just interesting to read about some of the health ramifications about being up there for such a long duration, that I thought about, but didn’t really consider deeply until I really started reading about it. Even on just a typical engagement — we can probably agree this is atypical, but — astronauts in general usually experience, or can experience, bone and muscle loss, vision impairment, shifts in brain structure — I just want that to land, a shift in your brain structure — immune dysfunction, and others. So, again, you and I are not in the medical business, but I would be really curious to just know how they’re doing. They both said they had experienced a lot of dizziness, a lot of balance obstacles as you might imagine.

But I think from more of an organizational perspective, there was a quote that stood out to me that I want to read as a direct quote from Wilmore. That quote is, “The plan went way off from what we had planned. We prepare for any number of contingencies, and you cannot do this business without trust. You just can’t. You have to have ultimate trust and for someone to step forward in these different organizations and say, ‘Hey, I’m culpable for part of that issue.'” He’s referencing the obstacles that they faced and the major delay in their return. So, for someone to say, “I’m culpable for part of that issue,” that goes a long way to maintaining trust.

“And if I was given another opportunity to fly,” Wilmore said, “We’re going to fix it. We’ll make it work. Boeing is completely committed, and NASA is completely committed. With that, I would get on in a heartbeat.” That was really telling to me. What do you make of that, given everything that you just said, plus the health issues, and they’re saying, “Yeah, we would do it again”?

Ren:

Yeah. Well, it made me think, too, about, so the only way this works is because they have 2 of the hardest-nosed, hard-skinned Navy test pilots who just get into planes to test them. They’re just the biggest risk-takers. And I’m thinking, “Could it work with a normal human?” So part of me goes, okay, but yeah, that makes sense because that’s what you do. Your identity, I wonder how wrapped up it is in being a pilot and doing really tough stuff.

But I think there’s a couple of things. One, it reminds me of the nature and nurture conversation around human development, but also around leadership. At CCL, we firmly believe and have for decades that leadership can be developed. And I think there’s some truth that some people are naturally born into it.

So, it’s interesting. Butch said something, too. He’s like, “We plan and we prepare.” What an interesting sentence. And Suni says, “This is in our hearts, it’s in our heart.” I’m not surprised to hear … yeah, sign me up. I don’t know if Suni’s going back. I mean she’s done almost anything you could possibly imagine for an astronaut. I think this is her 5th or 4th time, maybe. And for prolonged amounts of time; she’s had long stays at the ISS before. So, it’s like I don’t know if they would go back. Some of it makes me wonder, are you just being a good soldier, you’re not trying to blast Boeing?

But it is interesting to say, from an organizational standpoint, someone in Boeing’s got to say, “I know what the problem is, and we were attached to it.” Because if they’re not honest about it, then they have a much bigger headline about the thrusters not working and the thing crashing into the ISS. So, I did think it was interesting. Like, “We trust Boeing, they’re going to get it right.”

It reminds me, too, mistakes happen. Even with SpaceX, I mean, the SpaceX Dragon brought everyone back. SpaceX has been, I think, flying up there for 10 years or something, but even they recently had a pretty large explosion across the sky.

So, these things happen, but there’s something around the trust, trust that you planned, trust that you prepared, trust in yourself, that you were made for it, or trust in yourself that you could hack it. So, that’s probably I think the thing that you’re talking about right there is one of those things too that they had to rely on, which was that notion of trust.

Allison:

And the knowing: “We plan for this.” Now I’m not quoting either one of them, but loosely paraphrasing what they both have said, which is, “We know there are risks to doing this, major risks. We know that. We’re aware of that. Yes, we’ll do it again.” So, you’re right. I think it takes, well, a specially trained person to do what they do, of course, but also a special type of human to be in literal outer space for that long and then to come back and say what they said.

And I’m just going to take them in good faith, although you’re probably right, there’s probably a little bit of being a good corporate citizen, so to speak, and not blasting their partners. But I just wonder what kind of adrenaline junkies either one of them might be, to want to do something like that again. But it did get me thinking about contingency planning and risk taking, calculated risk, and how all of that also partners with trust and plays out at the workplace too.

Ren:

It’s interesting when we look at our organizational culture, sometimes at CCL, we use a lens where we look at … There’s 4 dynamics about risk taking, decision making, conflict, and feedback. We often get leaders into a room and talk about, “Hey, where is your organization today, and where does it need to be? Where are you in this room, as a team or executives, and where do you need to be?” So it’s an interesting lens to look at for these folks around how do these things play out? I think some of what I’m thinking too is, “Well, would a normal person have been okay? How quickly would’ve a normal person reacted or rebounded?”

We know too, there’s so many personality assessments that … some of us take a longer time to rebound. Some of us are really, really stressed out when something doesn’t go to plan. So, I think there’s something about that cultivated skill, or something that really stuck out with me is a growth mindset. There’s more than a few times that there was no time to do “Woe is me.” There was no time to be like, “Well, crap.”

I mean, even like Suni said, “Did I think I was going to not be there for my daughter’s high school year?” Oh no, sorry, that was Wilmore. That was Butch. Butch missed his high school year. But even through that lens, when he was in the Navy, he was saying, “When I was in the Navy, they never got to experience me being away or me being at missions that were risky.” So he was actually kind of glad because, he said, “My daughters, my family, they got a chance to build resilience too.”

Yeah, it sucked, but also think about the resilience they’ve cultivated. Think about the story that they have now. Think about when something shocks them in their world again, they’ll be able to say, “Well, my dad was up in space for 200 days when he was supposed to be there for 8.” So there’s something, too, around the idea of that growth mindset, that preparation, and then too, can a normal person inhabit that space and succeed? I think there’s a couple lessons here for normal people, too.

Allison:

Yes. And I think, too, that the story highlights the complexities they faced and, really, the collaborative efforts that you alluded to earlier that were taken to ensure their safety. We probably could call this a crisis situation, and success in crisis can often depend on collaboration and trust, as you already mentioned or we both mentioned. Really among those who are in the field, so to speak, and those who provide the support, like you mentioned earlier, I think it’s a good reminder too that, when hardship or crisis falls on a team or an organization, that cross-functional efforts and cross-functional teams really need to work together to solve the problem rather than become siloed.

I think it’s human nature sometimes that when crisis occurs, some of us can go into silo mode, and it’s almost just a protective reaction. Hopefully, most of our listeners won’t go through anything like this at the workplace. But crisis can be defined in a lot of different ways, which we call it hardship. Anytime there’s hardship, which a lot of organizations are facing right now, it’s really important to have that cross-functional collaboration to work to solve problems together.

Ren:

That always makes me think too, because I think sometimes silos, and for those of you who maybe don’t use that language a lot, I feel like sometimes I take for granted that corporate speech, but it’s like if you are working in an organization or a funnel or a team and all the communication or all the conversation just stays in your little vertical, like a tube, like a grain silo is what the image looks [like]. There’s all these grain silos around the organization. And the goal is to not just have that work happening behind walls, undercover, where we don’t see or know what’s happening there.

I remember I was doing this work with this team, and they worked in the energy space, and they were saying, “I don’t know if silos are bad. For us, we are all on top of each other because of the emergent nature of the work. Sometimes we have to know whose sandbox is whose.” They’re like, “Sometimes we have to draw borders.”

It made me think, I was like, I don’t know if there’s an implicit issue with silos, so much as when we put a lid on the silo, that’s the problem, when information can’t get out or is not openly communicated. It’s like, how do I then build bridges between my silos? Because NASA is an interesting point of view. I love the movies or the shows, where they’re about to take off, and they go through the final check, and the whole room — subject matter experts, flight engineering, temperature — go for launch, go for launch, go for launch.

These people have to have boundaries in their work. The jet propulsion team doesn’t really need to engage, frankly doesn’t have time to engage, with the weight dispersal team. They have to do some collaboration around thrust and velocity.

I love that you brought in accountability on the front end, and that’s one of the words that’s shouted out of the silo. It’s like, “My bad, this is what happened.” So we can fix it. So, it’s really interesting, even if you’re in an environment where you’re saying, “Ren and Allison, you don’t understand, we have to have boundaries.” I would say, “Great, just make sure that you’re communicating outside of your boundaries.” Because it was Apollo 13, I think, the film, and I was thinking —

Allison:

Yes, I was going to say that it is 13. So, for my movie buffs, I’m sorry. It’s Apollo 13.

Ren:

Well, I mean I failed us too. But I think there’s such an interesting sign, because they have an air filtration issue wrong, and then there’s a scene down on Earth where they got the engineers in a room and it’s like, “We’ve got to make this circle thing fit into this square filter with only these parts,” because they can’t mail them parts. That’s that collaborative conversation, where a group of subject matter experts get together into a room, bring their subject matter expertise to bear. Sometimes I think that’s your job as a leader, if you’re listening, formally or informally, it’s how do I get all the right people in the room so we can have a conversation about solutions?

Allison:

Yeah, exactly. You’re making me think about boundary spanning too. Me and a colleague, we’re working with a senior team of a tech company a few weeks ago, and they’re integrating new top leadership to the organization. It’s one of those scenarios where half of the group has a very long tenure with the company and half is “brand new.” So, there’s the old and the new. How are we going to work together? What does culture look like? There’s all of that.

And when we talk about boundary spanning leadership at the Center, one of the most important things to do is something that you alluded to, Ren, which is clarify who’s responsible for what. You can call it creating boundaries if you want, but it’s really about clarity, so that when there is a crisis, you can go from one end of the spectrum to the other pretty quickly and how people respond to it, from chaotic to being underreactive. And one of the ways you can navigate that spectrum is to be very clear on who’s responsible for what.

It doesn’t mean that they don’t have a say or input in other parts of the project or the “crisis,” but it’s a really good idea to know, okay, Ren’s been doing X, Y, Z for 10 years, so I know I can come to Ren about whatever that is. I think a really interesting way to look at spanning boundaries, too, is to put the container off of it so that you’re not completely isolating people, but to also keep it contained so that you know who, in essence, is responsible for what.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, that’s why I like the sandbox metaphor, because what I love about boundary spanning is the first step of boundary spanning is qualify your own boundaries. Tell someone about your boundaries or your team’s boundaries or whatever, so that they know.

And then it makes me think about systems thinking, right, Allison? It’s like the more I know about your experience, the better I can ease the condition of your experience. So, I like the sandbox because you can see a border, but there’s no walls. I can talk to you, you can talk to me. You’re like, “Look at my sandcastle.” You’ll be like, “Cool, look at my truck over here.”

I think that’s a fun metaphor because, again, borders aren’t the problem. It’s opaque borders that are a problem; things that we can’t see through or get through are an issue. But if borders are just existent in a flexible, fluid space where the border is like my sandbox, but you could walk through it, you could speak to me through it, you could see what I’m doing in it …

I think that’s a really interesting idea around when we span boundaries, again, we’re talking about opening options as opposed to restricting them. Part of that, too, starts with a recognition that these are areas that I operate and play in, and these are areas that you operate and play in.

Allison:

Yeah, definitely. I think it might be helpful for our listeners to know, who might be new to this type of language around boundary spanning, is that traditionally within any organization, there are 5 different kinds of boundaries that exist. So, there’s horizontal, which is between functions of the organization; vertical, which can be hierarchical; stakeholder, external groups; demographic, so gender, generation, etc., and geographic. So, depending on the company, different regions, different markets, and different distances.

I would say when it comes to being effective at the organization, it’s important to be able to navigate all of those boundaries, but especially when there’s a crisis or a major hardship, you are going to need to get a lot of those players involved. The ability to span those boundaries, by the way, was cited by senior executives as, 71% said that it was absolutely crucial to their success for the organization, not just for them as individuals.

Ren:

I think boundary spanning, too, helps us navigate those crisis spaces, because when I think about the best people who deal with the crisis in the moment, they’ve prepared for crisis. Organizational resilience, there’s all this narrative where they were stuck or they were abandoned.

Pretty quickly, NASA and the astronauts and all of the space community, they made decisions, functional decisions about what they were going to do and why they were going to do it. Every time, there’s always a lifeboat on the ISS. So, had something traumatic or dangerous happened, they could have left. But they decided, “Hey, for a variety of reasons, we’re going to ask you and rely on your service to stay up there and rotate into the next crew and then finish that part of it.”

So it was all really intentional, but I have to imagine, when Butch and Suni talk about planning, there is probably some page in their pamphlet that’s like, “If you’re marooned on there, you’re going to work on the station for us. That’s just the way it’s going to be and we’re going to appreciate your help and then we’re going to bring you home.”

Allison:

Sure.

Ren:

So there’s this being ready for everything. That’s what makes a resilient organization and might cultivate some personal resilience when you anticipate things that could go wrong. And then you start to say, “Well, I’m here now. What can I focus on?”

Allison:

How do you get from point A to point B, right? A lot of organizations have risk mitigation, but not all of them do. This is rhetorical, Ren, unless you have an answer, but how does a leader know when to focus on one or the other, and how to plan for contingency based on situation A, B, or C?

It’s tricky, right? But I do think what we were talking about a few moments ago is that first step in boundary spanning is to create and actually strengthen an understanding of skillsets, expectations, values, etc., so that you do know how to do collaborative work, period.

Ren:

Yeah. Well, I think I do have an answer for you. How does one or an organization manage that crisis preparation and preparedness? It reminds me of that phrase that we talk a lot bit here, polarity management. How do I do both things?

I think at any one plan, or if any of you are working on major projects or there’s real risk out there, you’ve got to do the work. You can’t just prepare for the risk. But if you never prepare for the risk and something goes wrong, you’re stuck holding the bag. I think this is a great polarity that they manage. It’s like a both/and. We have our mission preparedness, which is an 8-day test flight, but we’re also deeply prepared pilots and astronauts. So, we know, too, that we got a valuable skillset that we need to keep cultivating and then ready to deploy.

So, I’m thinking, if you’re listening out there, how do you plan and do the work that you need to do, and how can you carve out time in your project plan to talk about worst case scenarios? Now, maybe not for every job or for everything, it makes sense, but I think there’s certain spaces, especially when the stakes are really high, having someone say, “Okay, so what do we do when things go wrong?”

So making sure that there’s time for both, I think, is how someone would functionally balance crisis preparedness versus analysis paralysis, where if you think about crisis too long, everything looks really horrifying and then you don’t do anything. So, yeah, we don’t want that, but we also don’t want complete ignoring of it, but instead being ready for it.

Allison:

I would imagine, for some people, when you get to that point of over-planning, could almost generate a freeze response. But I want to come back to something that we both mentioned earlier, which was this trust, this concept of trust. And I want to tie it to boundary spanning here in a moment.

But when I think just as a human being, just as a human, regardless of title, job, etc., being stuck in a small space with somebody for that long, I would imagine they had to have had some trying moments. I would imagine. I think about my sister, who’s probably the closest person to me in my life. If you put my sister and I in a small space for that long, we would probably be at each other at least a few times, if not more than that. Don’t you think, Ren, for you, for most people?

Ren:

Yeah, 100%. I think that’s why I asked you, how do they come back alive, not fly back, but how do they end up not beating each other up? So yeah, I think that’s completely reasonable.

Allison:

But to bring it back to the workplace, hopefully none of us are going to be sent out into space unexpectedly for that long. But another part of the ability to span boundaries, especially in a crisis, and something that people can think about now before crisis happens or hardship, is really about cultivating and nurturing relationships.

And I don’t know the history of those 2. I’m not sure how long or how often they had worked together in the past. Regardless, something that leaders who are listening can take away from this is, when you’re able to connect on a personal level with folks, I’m not saying you need to share diaries or anything like that, but just simple, “How are you, Ren? What’s going on in your world?” Those types of things, basic human decency, right? Connecting at a personal level does help to build trust and enable more candid communication.

So, you’d ask me earlier how me and my prior coworker were able to navigate that. Part of it was because we had connected on, not on a deeply personal level, but enough to have trust established so that we could talk about obstacles, we could identify priorities, we could identify challenges, and collectively build and almost mobilize towards a new strategy or a different direction based on some of the unexpected turns that happened.

Ren:

I’m going to say one word, so we come back to it, so I don’t forget, but then I want to talk about some of what you said. So, one words can be compartmentalized or compartmentalization, but maybe another side of that polarity is what I’m thinking and you’re talking about is this idea of leadership disclosure.

As we are famed at the use of Johari window — classic American psychologists Joe and Harry getting together writing a 4 by 4 or 2 by 2. Folks, when we talk about leadership disclosure, it’s like you’ve got an opportunity, when working with people, to expand how you work together. One of those ways is asking feedback, how am I impacting you, so I can identify some blind spots for me, so I can treat you differently, that works?

The other one is sharing some more of that hidden information about you, things that I would keep private. Again, like Allison saying, it’s not like your diary, but hey, why am I making that decision, or what of my experiences have made me act the way that I do, or why do I look at challenges the way that I do? So often we make decisions, especially if you’re in a close, personal dynamic with someone, you’re stuck in a piece of metal above space.

It’s easy to see someone’s behavior and then make up a story about it. “Oh, why didn’t Suni say hi to me today? We’re stuck in this tin. We ran into each other.” When it could be like, “Oh, I know that, in the beginning of Suni’s day, she stay super focused. She doesn’t engage with anyone. She’s head down, works on her tasks.” The moment I know about someone’s experience or their personal mechanisms for operation, the easier it is for me not to take their behaviors personally.

So you, as a leader, if you’re listening, you’ve got to model that behavior. It’s like, what’s some information that you don’t tell your team that maybe they could learn? And then definitely be asking for feedback about how you’re impacting people to determine how you can operate better.

Allison:

I love that. I love that so much. It does start with the individual level. It almost always will. I was just talking to some clients yesterday about this. We went orienteering and we’re out in the Colorado Rockies. It’s a no-risk environment; at the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter. We’re not playing with real money, but they’re achievers and they want to achieve their target. One of the things that we talked about was this notion of disclosure, too, around, “Where do you go when you’re under stress?” So we did a power pause, if you will, right in the middle of the session to talk about, “What’s going well? What do we need to do differently?”

And one of the leaders said, “I am really much aware when I get into high achiever mode, I get very granular and honed in on a singular task, and I stop listening. I just want the 2 of you and my group to call me out on that. Feel free to be like, ‘Hey, you’re doing that thing. You’re doing that thing. With love, come back to us. Stop doing that thing. You’re not listening. Come back to us.'”

So then, one by one, the 3 of them just shared where they go under stress, and they were all different. So, we might make assumptions, like you were just saying, in the way that you shared and also in a different way, of okay, I can stop listening, so I might assume that everybody does the same thing.

But another group member said, “I just check out. I just assume my opinion’s not valued. So, I don’t share at all, and I just check out. And people might read me as being calm and cool, but I’m boiling inside because nobody’s listening to me.”

So, again, I’m just underlining that, in partnership with what you just said, in that disclosure can be so helpful, especially when it’s high stress. And you really do want to be collaborative together. It’s knowing yourself and knowing where you go under stress, and having the courage to share that and ask people to hold you accountable.

Ren:

I think it’s like you said, it starts with the individual, but then it’s about us very quickly. Because I always tell people, involve people in your development. If you’re working on something, tell someone you’re working on it. If you’re trying to shift the behavior for the benefit of the team, tell them that you’re doing that. Not so you have more people busting your chops about it not working, but so you have a community of people that are helping you try to be your best. Because I know a leader who’s willing to say, “Hey, I know when I go to stress, I do X, Y, or Z. Please, you have permission to say, ‘Hey, Ren, snap out of it.'”

That’s, I think, a generative, positive experience. When someone’s like, “Hey, you’re doing that thing you said you didn’t want to do,” I’m not going to be mad at them. I’m not going to hold it against them. I’m going to be like, “Hey, thanks for calling it out,” because I know I want to work on it.

And so, there’s something about that recognition of what I need, and then involving people in it. It’s like, “Hey, I’m trying to accomplish this,” or “I know that we spoke about this is how we’re going to interact, but this is how I’m feeling now.” I think, too, leaving space for that flexibility, but always leaving those lines of communication open … really, really critical.

Allison:

Yeah, indeed, indeed. Well, there’s probably so much we could talk about in this story, but I’m wondering, too, Ren, we just gave a bunch of tools, but if there was one standout from this story that you wanted leaders to take away, just one, what would it be?

Ren:

Yeah, I’m going to cheat. I can’t, because I’m going back to the word compartmentalize, and then it attaches to something else.

Allison:

Oh, yeah, please elaborate on that.

Ren:

No, I think it’s a good segue into some of what we’re talking about, because what I thought was interesting, and Butch said this in an interview too, is like, “Hey, sometimes we have to compartmentalize. It’s like, I can’t let my life at home or our experiences interfere with what I’m called to do at that moment.” He said, “It’s not about me. It’s not about my feelings. It’s about what the human space flight program is about. It’s our national goals.”

Now it sounds totally great, like a person who served the US, our national goals, but also it’s not about me, it’s not about my feelings. There’s something there, too, like you were saying when you get into a room with someone, even your sister, the closest person in the world, you’re going to get into fisticuffs maybe sometimes.

I think the perspective-taking of being like, “Oh, wait, this isn’t about me. It’s not about you. It’s not about our feelings.” And 2, I love the psychology and philosophy around like, “Are you your feelings, or are feelings just a symptom of whatever?” So there’s something about the ability to recognize that part of yourself and then put it in a tiny little box and say, “Cool, that goes over there. We’re in space. I need to do station maintenance.”

So I think the biggest thing, then, that connects for me for leaders, and something that was really clear, and maybe I don’t think it’s just reserved for Navy test pilots, is this idea there was no abandonment narrative. We often talk about, like we were just talking about here, it’s easy to fill in the gaps for storytelling. When you don’t have information, it’s easy to feel like you’re the victim or make yourself the hero.

One of the biggest derailers I [see in] people in their relationships is victimization, where they feel victimized or they take on a victim narrative, especially when they don’t know what’s happening behind someone else’s wall. Some project gets thrown on them, or they’re stuck here, and it’s like, “It’s X, Y, Z’s fault,” or “I wouldn’t be here if not for those people,” or “I can’t believe this is happening to me.” And I imagine there were moments of that for these folks. And hear me, Allison and everyone else — there are moments where people are legitimately victimized.

I’m talking about when we create a story of victimization in our own head, where I don’t know what’s happening, someone’s just like, “Hey, Ren, you got to do this new project.” I’m like, “Oh, no, these people, they’re torturing me on purpose.” I might just ask like, “Hey, Allison, is there a reason that you gave me this project?” And like, “Oh, you said you wanted to go to Cabo and it’s in Cabo.” I’m like, “Oh, yeah, I’m not a victim here. Actually, this is a benefit.”

So there’s something around they just didn’t say, “Oh, I’m stuck here. I’m abandoned.” They were like, “This is the mission. This is the job. We’ve been trained for this,” and they got to work. So something about your circle of control, stemming the narrative, and too, because they’re not the only heroes, they needed to rely on a whole bunch of people on Earth. So, it’s like, we all have to work together, we’re not abandoned here, stuff happens. I mean, even the SpaceX Dragon, like I said, they were delayed almost a month from coming home because it messed up a little bit. So, there’s these things where we just have to go, “Okay, nothing’s functionally happening to me. No one woke up today and said, ‘Butch, Suni, you’re stuck in space. Ha-ha.'”

So I think that’s probably like, all of those things are likely their takeaway, but the interesting thing is how do we cultivate that strength to leave the abandonment or victim narrative alone and find out the real information? Really find out if you are being victimized before you embrace that, because it might be disempowering.

Allison:

We always do this. There’s so much to talk about in what you just said, and we’re nearing the end. So, 2 things that immediately came up for me. One is the sphere of control, which is something that we talk to our leaders a lot about, which is … if you can imagine 3 circles, one is what can you control as a leader? What can you influence, would be the next circle. And what do you need to accept?

In a situation like that, I would imagine, it sounds like, too, those 2 leaders got to, “I need to accept that this is happening. This is the reality right now, and work on or focus on what I can control, which is probably not a lot.” But the ability to get to that quickly, I think, underscores the importance of that awareness, and what you’re referring to, in a crisis or hardship situation. I was going to say at the workplace, but probably in life too. But I suppose we’re not here to be therapists, but same, same.

I think the situation that we’re talking about really underlines that leadership is not just about command. Sometimes it is, but it’s not holistically about command. It’s about adaptability. It’s about trust. It’s about teamwork in the face of uncertainty, which can be really hard for people. Again, these folks are probably used to some level of uncertainty, and most of us are not going to be sent into space like I mentioned, but uncertainty is a reality for some people right now. Again, that adaptability, the trust and the working with your team and your people, can be so important in handling hardship thoughtfully.

And I would also state that it can help protect company morale, too. And how an organization handles hardship can also really indicate what their long-term reputation might be — as you and I have talked about in prior podcasts, different stories — but just as NASA didn’t abandon or try to avoid or evade responsibility, leaders also have to guide their people through turbulence with, I would say, clarity, compassion, and sometimes a little bit of creativity.

So, perhaps we can leave it at that for today. Again, I feel like based off of where we just went, there’s lots of other things to talk about, but perhaps in the next episode.

Ren:

We could stay in orbit, but I don’t think we have to. Let’s go home.

Allison:

Well played. It’s your dad joke for the day.

Ren:

It sounds like it really worked for you. Yeah, I killed it. I crushed it. You’re welcome. You’re welcome, everybody.

Allison:

Well, Ren, thanks for the conversation, and to our CCL team who works behind the scenes to make our podcasts happen, we thank you. To our listeners, you can find all of our podcast episodes and show notes on ccl.org and find us on LinkedIn. Let us know what you think about this story, and let us know what you’d like us to talk about next. We look forward to chiming in with you next time. Thanks, everyone. Thanks, Ren.

Ren:

Thanks, Allison. Thanks, everybody. See you next time. Find Allison on Amazon’s TikTok.