I just got back from a month in Greece during which I was confronted first-hand with a different way of seeing and interpreting the world in the form of my Greek brother-in-law who argued quite vociferously as to the benefits of being a European and the disadvantages of being from the states.

For quite a while, our conversations were circular – we didn’t make any progress and kept returning to the same place repeatedly, frustrated by the lack of movement. After numerous attempts to convince the other person, we realized that we were each arguing from perspectives founded on different assumptions and beliefs. Our respective points of view were neither right nor wrong, just different.

The experience of being caught in circular, frustrating conversations is similar to some conversations leaders have, especially leaders new to their position.

Whenever there is a change of leaders, leaders and their subordinates sort out how things will work under the new leadership. Not surprisingly, part of the dilemma is that the difference between their various perspectives takes a while to become clear. Until it does, the circular conversations persist. For example,

While the new leader keeps talking about the importance of change, the staff keeps talking about how well things operated in the past; While the new leader keeps talking about the importance of innovation and responsiveness, the staff keeps talking about how effective their existing programs have done; While the new leader keeps talking about the importance of personal initiative and accountability, the staff keeps talking about the camaraderie and collegiality of the workplace.

Circular conversations all. So, what can leaders do to overcome the dilemma resulting form different perspectives? The solution starts with acknowledging the difference in perspectives and seeking to understand what lies behind them.

Effective leaders learn to see beyond the words of their subordinates to the underlying assumptions and beliefs upon which the subordinates’ perspectives are founded.

How do they learn to do that? Is there some mysterious or intuitive process at work? Quite the contrary. The process is simple and straightforward – though it takes a while to get it right.

The best way for leaders to understand their subordinates’ perspectives and the underlying assumptions and beliefs is to ask. But not, as you might assume, to ask, “What do you believe?” That direct approach is not always effective – most people find it hard to answer so pointed a question from their bosses.

Instead, in conversations with their subordinates, when leaders hear words that have various interpretations or phrases that imply there is something more behind them, they should ask for clarification.

Which words should automatically trigger a question for clarification? Here are a few: accountability, teamwork, customer service, collaboration, professionalism, quality, effectiveness, cooperation, leadership, responsiveness – in essence, those words that embody a value and that only become clear when specifically defined in behavioral terms.

When leaders hear these words, they should ask their subordinates what they mean by them.

And what phrases should trigger a question for clarification? Any phrase that includes a qualifying adjective such as: distinctive culture, unique way of doing things, interesting point of view, or unusual process.

In response, leaders should ask how it’s distinctive or unusual or what makes it unique or interesting?

By asking for clarification of these words and phrases, leaders uncover the underlying assumptions and beliefs of their subordinates. And, once those are known, leaders can better understand their subordinates’ perspectives.

Why is that important? Because it helps leaders avoid the dilemma of circular conversations with subordinates. Once leaders understand what lies behind the thinking of their subordinates, they are less likely to gloss over the differences in perspectives, more ready to accept others’ perspectives, and able to deal openly and directly with the differences in perspectives that underlie every conversation.

Last night, my wife and I went to a black tie gala fund-raiser for a non-profit organization, one of those events whose purpose of raising money rarely provides for a rewarding time for those in attendance. Not so last night.

The chairwoman and her committee did an outstanding job of organizing an evening that was engaging and rewarding in and of itself. How did that happen?

First, the location. The gala was held at an old Washington, DC hotel in a small banquet hall that, because of its architecture, provided interest and intimacy – no cavernous, echo-filled, Spartan room here.

Then, good food and beverage. No bland food, and plenty of time to enjoy it – the pre-dinner social hour provided plenty of time to mix and, at dinner, the food was not rushed.

Great music. The music, two jazz bands, played continuously – not so loud as to make conversation impractical and with enough variety as to be of interest to all the generations in the room – enhanced by the fact that the drummer of one of the bands was also a board member of the non-profit.

A bare minimum of speechifying – the total amount of time spent making speeches was less than 5 minutes. That’s right, less than the time it takes to boil an egg. As a result, conversation continued to flow and everyone was saved from the typically endless drone.

All in all, the gala was organized with the care and attention of a small dinner party where the comfort and enjoyment of the guests are uppermost in the mind of the host and hostess.

What does this have to do with leadership? Leadership is more than setting goals and striving to meet them – it also involves celebrating accomplishments in memorable and meaningful ways.

Thinking about how to make the events resonate by careful attention to the details (setting, music, food, etc.) can help, not by providing another venue for the leaders to be in the spotlight, but by providing an event that is rewarding and memorable in and of itself.

I’m always surprised by the lack of time spent on developing leaders. Granted, I’m a bit biased since leadership development is my work. Nevertheless, it’s always surprising when I hear prospective clients say, “We need a one-hour presentation at our semi- annual planning session on leadership. What can you do?”

The belief that leaders can become better by spending only a few hours a year listening to a speaker is disappointing. Becoming a leader takes time.

As Vince Lombardi said, “Contrary to the opinion of many people, leaders are not born. They are made, and they are made by effort and work.”

A lot of my work is to help organizations find better ways to devote time to the task of leadership development. Let me know if you’d like me to help you, too.