Thread by @berkun

1. The fallacy of "seat at the table" is often decisions are made before the table meets. I know this because much of my career was controlling tables.

The more people at any table, the more the real action goes elsewhere. Why? I'll tell you.

2. The design of a conversation about a big decision works best in the small. 3-6 people. Every leader calls on advisors, individually or together, to sort out what they're *really* going to do.

Look around. If your "table" has 10 or 20 people, you're not in that group.

3. Any meeting of 6+ people has performative elements. People can't speak as frankly. They can't respond as directly.

Yes ideas are raised and heard, but you won't get as much of the truth as 1-on-1 or in a small group.

4. A great leader is able to find the balance - making bigger discussions inclusive and real, but also maintaining a diverse small group of confidants to make tough decisions.

This is hard to achieve. Often it's too much one way (committee) or the other (authoritarian).

5. Many "tables" exist in theory to find balance, but in practice they're dog & pony shows. It's theater.

The leader can say everyone had a chance to be heard. They can perform the act of saying "that's interesting, I'll think about that", but change nothing.

6. The advice:

relationships > tables
relationships > process
relationships > seniority

Who trusts you?
Who shares your goals?
Who can you convince?

You can have the best seat at every big table, but if you have bad answers to those questions it won't matter.

7. To be told it's about relationships drives most experts and skilled people crazy because our belief & education system align on the notion knowledge matters most.

This is in denial of human nature: we are a relationship-centric species! That's the primary essence of work.

8. The blind spot for designers and other experts is the faith their expertise will always be their primary value - but as you rise in an organization your relationships and influence matter far more.

If you don't make the switch you work against yourself. And your team.

9. I often hear "Why should I have to?" The answer is, you don't!

But this is human nature. We all create concentric circles of who we let influence us (including performative ones too).

If u want progress, working /w eyes open is easier than eyes closed. That's my point.

10. I am not advocating for star chambers and evil cabals.

But if you study any successful leader anywhere, they have their advisors, allies and small groups where things are discussed in a way they can't elsewhere. It is a vital part of how good decisions are made.

11. In spite of all this, a seat at the table has real value. You may get information earlier. You have access to more influential people. A chance to make relationships and allies.

But the nature of power is that each level you obtain reveals how much you didn't see before.