That sensible dissent from managers which entrepreneurs need

An entrepreneur’s day-to-day life is punctuated by a constant stream of decisions. Some are routine, whilst others can shape the future of the company and the people who work there. Faced with this inevitable pressure, a manager can prove to be a valuable ally: a trusted confidant with whom to discuss matters, who helps them weigh up their options with a clear head.

To bring real value, a manager must have the courage to question their own ideas. Not to stifle their thinking, but to broaden it. To act as a ‘mismatcher’ by offering an alternative perspective, whilst respecting their vision. Because however brilliant they may be, entrepreneurs will always have a blind spot in their view, which can be illuminated through constructive dialogue.

The risk for some entrepreneurs is that they surround themselves, more or less consciously, with people who are always ready to go along with their decisions, even when they do not truly agree with them. This tendency is fuelled by numerous factors, including power asymmetry, fear of the consequences, and a work environment geared towards obedience. Surrounding oneself solely with ‘yes men’ keeps the ego in check but stifles deep reflection. This is why managers have a moral duty to express their own opinions, even (and especially) when they differ from those of the leader.

How can you make your contribution without upsetting the person you’re talking to?

A first piece of advice is to engage fully with the discussion – both in understanding the entrepreneur’s point of view and in explaining your own. Listening to the reasons behind certain decisions may not always lead you to agree with them, but it almost always helps you to understand them.

Similarly, a manager who expresses dissent has the responsibility to present all the contextual evidence in support of their argument. Only when presented with the full picture will the entrepreneur be able to provide genuine added value. Disagreement cannot stem from opinions or gut feelings but must be backed up by concrete evidence.

This approach is made easier if it is backed up by adequate preparation and if it is undertaken during specifically allocated time slots. This transforms a simple chat into a decision-making meeting, thereby raising the stakes of the conversation. Conversely, asking for an off-the-cuff opinion will, in most cases, yield an instinctive response devoid of any real value.

Whilst, within the entrepreneur’s office, the manager has a responsibility to challenge a directive they consider counterproductive, in the presence of colleagues they have a duty to respect it as if it were a law. Dissent must remain private, not out of obedience but in the name of mutual respect. The debate may be fuelled by differing opinions, but the final decision must be wholeheartedly supported by both parties.

No manager, however competent, is capable of fully understanding an entrepreneur’s vision. It is possible to engage in a constructive dialogue that leads to a 99 per cent alignment of views. But there will always be that final 1 per cent, which can only be based on trust.

A ‘proven’ trust, that is, one that has developed over time through experience. Shaped by decisions taken in the past which, even if not universally agreed with, have yielded positive results. To paraphrase a quote from Aristotle, “to lead, one must first know how to follow”: to be a good leader, one must in turn recognise authority. And authority also requires a small measure of blind trust.

And it is that very trust which leads the entrepreneur to recognise the manager’s value, to value their judgement and, consequently, to welcome their reasonable dissent with open arms.

*Director of the Academy of Strategic Communication

**CEO of GSL