How to be the team leader who gets results

So you've assembled a team of highly skilled CFEs, auditors, paralegals and attorneys to investigate a major fraud scheme. Everyone is excited about the case, and you're turning the levers. However, just a few weeks or months into the case, participants' enthusiasm has waned, and it seems the case is no longer important to some team members. They don't answer your calls or emails promptly, and they've made other cases their priorities. You assume the team members still enjoy working fraud examinations because that's their chosen profession. But before you question their commitment or work ethic, consider that the entropy could be a result of leadership problems.

Most of us can probably think of a case that would've had a more positive outcome if the team leadership had been better. Poor leadership can demoralize the most skilled team and render it utterly useless (to you). Of course, this is great news for fraudsters who'd like nothing more than to go undetected and unpunished regardless of the reason.

Sometimes the seemingly subtle yet damaging impact of poor leadership can make it difficult to identify as a root cause. In other cases, it's clear something is wrong, but the leaders are in denial of their shortcomings and will attribute all other possibilities to explain their ineffectiveness. Those in leadership or supervisory positions might expect their subordinates to follow them and do what they say only because they're lower on the totem poles. But that type of leadership rarely, if ever, yields extraordinary results.

'If you're not for me, you're against me'

I recall a story that illustrates how bad leadership can have an impact on investigations. Many years ago, I found myself working on a major case with a criminal prosecutor. I was temporarily assigned to work that case and only that case for the next 30 to 60 days.

The prosecutor and I drove all over the place interviewing witnesses and following up on leads. He was very professional and had a great desire to do the job right.

One afternoon we were sitting in his office going through the case when he got a phone call. It was brief. I think all he said was "hello" and "yes sir." He left the room and came back about five minutes later. When he returned, he seemed to be in shock.

Over the past few weeks, we'd gotten to know each other pretty well, so without hesitation, I asked what was wrong. He'd been called into the office of the newly elected state's attorney who made one statement and asked the prosecutor one question: "You did not help me with my campaign to get elected. Why should you keep your job?"

The prosecutor was quick on his feet and told his new boss that "during the election, there were three groups in the office. One group supported the new state's attorney, another group supported his opponent and a third just kept their noses to the grindstone." The prosecutor was in the group that kept working. The state's attorney told the prosecutor to go back to work.

We finished the case, and the defendant eventually was convicted of all charges. But the tone in the prosecutor's office had changed. Over the next weeks and months, many experienced career prosecutors left the office only to be replaced by inexperienced attorneys.

To those on the outside, it seemed like an acceptable amount of turnover, so no one seriously questioned it until we began losing major cases left and right that the office would've normally prosecuted successfully. It got so bad that the state's attorney's office had to bring in a special prosecutor to handle high-profile cases because there had been such an experience exodus. Guilty people got away because the state attorney created an "if you are not for me then you must be against me" atmosphere. About a year or so later the prosecutor I worked with found another job.

Four concepts of leadership

Many aspects of leadership can have positive or negative impacts on teams. Although we don't have enough space to address all or even most of those factors, we can begin to frame the subject.

It might seem obvious, but good leadership requires integrity and courage; if you don't have those qualities other positive leadership traits will be meaningless.

You must know your strengths and be honest and courageous enough to face and transform your weaknesses. You must be authentic and transparent.

Good leaders will regularly consider how they're developing their abilities and what they could be doing differently. If you're currently leading fraud examinations (or someday hope to) you must develop ideas or models of good and poor leadership.

We'll briefly consider four concepts of leadership (from "Primal Leadership: Unleashing the Power of Emotional Intelligence," by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee — dissonant and resonant — and "Leadership: Theory and Practice," by Peter Northouse — transactional and transformational; see the references below) that can help make you a thoughtful leader and improve your fraud examinations.

Dissonant leadership

Dissonant leaders create discord among team members. Sometimes they yell, use profanity, slam doors or launch into character attacks when people don't enthusiastically line up to follow their suggestions.

These leaders are often authoritative. A few close allies might like them, but most see them as cold and distant. They don't consider how changes in the investigative plan might affect other members of the team but are only concerned with compliance.

Sometimes dissonant leaders aren't easy to identify. They might not yell or use profanity, but they'll dishonestly manipulate people into cooperating.

The great deception is that in the short term they can appear to be successful as teams complete fraud examinations and meet goals, but trust dissipates when followers realize their leaders are manipulating them to get things done. Even if the dissonant leader is promoted or given an award, his unsustainable type of leadership will leave a trail of disgruntled team members and negatively impact fraud examinations.

Transactional leadership

Transactional leaders rely heavily on the carrot-and-stick approach to induce cooperation among followers via explicit or refined agreements. On one level, all employers and staff are in an explicit agreement: Employees work hard and the organization compensates them. However, the transactional leader seeks to use raises, bonuses, promotions, training opportunities or work assignments to mold a culture of "followership" and cooperation. When the money runs out or budgets are cut, the leader is empty-handed and the good feelings dissipate.

The leaders might then resort to motivational sticks. But team members will find ways to avoid those sticks, and see their bosses as micromanagers or — even worse — tyrants who attack employee reputations in retaliation for lack of enthusiasm for their ideas. Leaders should discipline when necessary, but they shouldn't rely on the stick just because they can't motivate their teams.

Resonant leadership

We all want to work with resonant leaders. They have their hands on the pulses of teams or organizations. This type of leader has a positive and reassuring demeanor and has gained the trust and respect of team members.

She demonstrates a genuine concern for the people on her team and knows them as individuals. She's not weak or overly meek but recognizes that leadership involves genuinely caring about people even when they disagree with you.

The resonant leader doesn't have to announce that he has an open-door policy because he demonstrates it. He stops by a team member's office or places a phone call to ask her opinion about an issue or simply to touch base.

This type of leader doesn't treat people differently because of their titles or positions. She attributes real respect to all members of the team. As a result, the resonant leader is in tune with the group. And because they trust her, they not only give honest feedback but will point out mistakes before they become public. Instead of hiding or avoiding problems, the resonant leader has the courage to face the issues with the team. The resonant leader imbues harmony and inspires teamwork.

Transformational leadership

Transformational leaders are role models and set high moral standards for themselves and team members. These leaders have visions — not mission statements — for their teams or organizations. Therefore, a team knows what it's aiming to accomplish. This might seem obvious, but a vision has description and focus.

The transformational leader promotes a spirit of cooperation. The team member who follows this kind of leader understands her role and how her contributions affect the bigger picture.

These leaders don't get caught up in cliques or "silos" but reach across all team or group dynamics to be truly inclusive. Transformational leaders recognize the accomplishments of team members and don't reward them unequally. They see problems on the horizon and discuss them along with possible solutions with the team. As a result, team members are motivated and get involved with problem-solving because their opinions matter. (The resonant and transformational leadership styles aren't mutually exclusive; the best leaders demonstrate characteristics from both!)

Can't fake it until you make it

Of course, some might try to become good leaders by just checking a list of positive traits instead of internalizing them. But if a lack of genuineness is readily apparent to the layperson, imagine how ridiculous it is to go through the motions with those who have been taught to detect deception in fraudsters. It's similar to the co-worker who greets you in the hallway with, "Hello, how are you doing today?" You know if they're just making niceties or if they really do care.

The resonant and transformational leader won't just say hello, but because he or she knows you they'll ask about a specific person, event or issue that you've previously discussed. In contrast, the hyper-dissonant or transactional leader might just nod or look the other way as they pass you in the hall.

So, the question is: What kind of team leader do you want to become?

The views presented in this article don't necessarily represent those of the U.S. federal government.

Ken Bailey, Ph.D., CFE, MHP, is an investigator with a U.S. federal agency, a member of the ACFE Advisory Council and a leadership consultant. His email address is: kenba1794@gmail.com.

References

"Primal Leadership: Unleashing the Power of Emotional Intelligence," by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, originally published, 2002; abridged paperback, 2013, Harvard Business Review Press.

"Silos, Politics and Turf Wars: A Leadership Fable about Destroying the Barriers That Turn Colleagues Into Competitors," by Patrick Lencioni, 2006, Jossey-Bass.

"Leadership:  Theory and Practice," by Peter G. Northouse, 2010, Sage Publications.