Leadership Profiles: David Yawman

What are the biggest differences, in your view, between advising top legal teams from the inside as GC and doing so as an external executive coach?

That’s a great question because the roles are entirely different. In fact, I’ve had to move past my naïve idea that being a successful GC would equate to my being a value-added coach. In hindsight, I believe I was effective as an internal leader because I understood myself – I was humble enough to learn, empathetic enough to interact with others, and confident enough to make decisions. That put me in a position to lead inside an organization. In my current work, if I were simply a mentor, I would share my experiences with my clients in hopes they would hear something of value they could apply in their work. But, I’m a coach. As a coach, my goal is to provoke the individual I’m working with to reflect and understand themself – what are they good at, what are they not good at, what triggers them, what brings them energy/excitement, how are they using their time, etc. Guiding someone through their own self-awareness, with the goal of improving their leadership, is a strikingly different skill from leading inside an organization.

In your coaching work, what traits separate high-impact legal leaders from their peers?

Leadership impact is a result of your influence. Legal leaders (and all business executives) distinguish themselves by their level of influence within an organization. To have influence in an organization, your colleagues must trust you. Trust emanates from others’ belief in both your competence and your character. Competence grows over time through hard work, curiosity and discipline. Character stems from knowing your core values and acting consistently with those values. In my coaching work, I provoke executives to reflect on what competence means in the context of their current role – what is their “value proposition” to the organization (e.g., strategy, execution, leadership, etc.). And, of equal importance, I work with executives to clarify and lead through their core values (e.g., results, collaboration, fairness, etc.). You need both competence and character to have influence and impact as a leader.

When advising on succession and leadership development, what are the biggest blind spots executives often overlook?

The most successful executives I work with are those who truly embrace the concept that they are ongoing works in process; there is no end to personal development. So, I consider the biggest blind spot to be an individual’s belief that they are talented enough, informed enough, or self-aware enough. If an individual cannot answer “how are you growing right now?”, they may have stopped pushing themselves into new areas of knowledge or experience, or their ego may bar them from confronting (i.e., admitting to) their own growth opportunities. Growth begins at the edge of your comfort zone. So, those who are committed to growth welcome an almost perpetual sense of discomfort. Some executives reach a certain level and think “they’ve arrived” – that they no longer need to push their self-development edge. That is a blind spot of the highest magnitude.

How do you approach coaching executives who are strong technically but struggle with people leadership or cross-functional collaboration?

I start with the fact that there are thousands of individuals who can do the technical work. Inside an organization, those who add incremental value are those who make the culture and environment more productive. My Dad is 85 and has been a practicing social worker for 60+ years. He facetiously says that, in the mind of any person, “the world would be perfect if everyone thought and acted the way I do.” A successful executive naturally becomes very loyal to the way they do things; their way has worked well. That’s fine until the same executive thinks that their way is the only way or the best way to do everything. For such a person, interacting with others you don’t manage/control is difficult because of an unwillingness or inability to accept others for who they are. I’ve found that, if I can push an executive to reflect honestly on who they are (including the realization that who they are is not better or worse than who others are), that individual is in a better position to accept others for who they are. Thus, through an individual’s self-awareness work, mutual respect flows more easily, as does individual learning, team collaboration, and enterprise-wide results.

What advice do you give to high-potential lawyers aiming to transition into broader business leadership roles?

First, you have to do the work and understand the industry/business/market. The intellectual elements are simply the price of entry – the easier part – and you have to work hard and be curious to broaden and deepen your knowledge base. Second, you have to evolve your “value proposition” to reflect your current and future roles. This is a riff of the concept that “what got you here won’t get you there.” High-potential lawyers are often those who have done great work, but leadership is not about the work you do; it’s about the value you provide. So, can you elevate from a doer who bangs out the work to a leader who adds value to the organization? Easier said than done but recognizing the need for evolution is the start. Finally, I encourage everyone to enhance their self-awareness. Amidst all the leadership traits studied, none is more predictive of leadership effectiveness than self-awareness. To be effective, you must be open to a deep understanding of who you are and what you stand for – your strengths, weaknesses, and values. Everyone can benefit from accepting that feedback, mentors/coaches, and self-reflection are critical elements of continued development and career growth.