‘Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions’ – Steve Mostyn

Are you working ‘in’ or ‘on’ the firm?

This is just one of the many provocative and thought stimulating questions Steve Mostyn asks in his book ‘Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions’.

For a long time we looked to leaders to get answers. According to Steve this is because we confuse authority with leadership.

True leadership in business is grounded in knowing ourselves and building a reflective practice to enhance the understanding of ourselves, our organization and our enviroment, with the aim to develop ourselves, our teams, and our business.

In the 40th episode of the Leadership 2.0 podcast, I interview Steve Mostyn, focusing on the question how leaders can develop such a reflective practice.

Steve is a globally recognised leader in senior executive leadership development and an internationally acclaimed thought-leader in leadership training, and the author of the book ‘Why great Leaders ask Great Questions’.

During our conversation we discussed the following topics:

  • Why Great Leaders ask Great Questions
  • How Leaders Reflect
  • Skilled Defensiveness
  • How Leaders can learn to Reflect
  • The impact of reflection on execution
  • Experiences and Empowerment
  • Business Reviews as Joint Problem solving sessions – instead of blame games
  • How Reflective Leaders grow Reflective Leaders
  • Reflection in Executive Programs of the Said Business School

► You can watch or listen to a podcast with our conversation on:

➡️ Apple Podcasts

➡️ Spotify

➡️ YouTube

➡️ No time to watch or listen to the podcast now? Here is a short summary of the key points of our conversation:

Dirk Verburg: Why did you title your book Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions rather than Why Great Leaders Give Great Answers, which is our typical expectation of leaders?

Steve Mostyn: Actually, my working title was The Best Leaders Ask the Best Questions, but my publisher and editor suggested Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions.

Your provocative point about answers is interesting because we often conflate leadership with authority, which are two quite different things. Authority is about meeting the process needs for protection, direction, and order, where answers play an important part. However, leaders are asking a different question: what adaptations are necessary in my organization or team to thrive?

While that can start as an individual quest, it ultimately must become a community activity. Leadership is a process, an action, and a verb—not a noun. In the complexity of the modern world, leaders actually fuel greater productivity by asking questions.

Answers belong to the domain of authority, not leadership. In organizations, C-suite members are authority figures who may or may not exercise leadership. We all know authority figures who do not exercise leadership, as well as individuals without official titles who do. That distinction is why I focused on the power of questions.

Dirk Verburg: You say the best leaders must know two things: how they reflect, and how to build a reflective practice. How can leaders discover if and how they reflect?

Steve Mostyn: I think it is foundational. When working with executive groups, I am often deeply disappointed by the quality of questions from the C-suite. Most of their questions are driven by ego needs to reinforce their authority. Conversely, the most effective leaders know themselves quite well.

My starting point is to ask people in the first person: “How do I reflect?” I ask them to journal their responses without any prior explanation. To ask good questions in the moment, you must become better at reflecting in the midst of action.

You have to slow down to speed up. Understanding how you reflect helps you stand back from the psychological anxiety of needing to reinforce your authority status. A better question always comes from the art of reflection.

Dirk Verburg: What answers do you typically get when you ask leaders how they reflect? Do you sometimes get no answers at all?

Steve Mostyn: I sometimes hear, “I don’t reflect,” which makes me question how they manage, because everyone reflects. However, the most typical response is actually an answer to a different question: where do I reflect? Leaders will say they reflect while cycling, in the shower, or hill walking. Those are great answers, but they address location rather than method.

When we push further into the how, some explain that they use a journal, ask themselves specific questions, or perform a mental postmortem after an event. I also notice a deeply held assumption that reflection is only about improving weaknesses. Very few people seem to reflect on celebrating success.

Additionally, clever people often get exceptionally good at “skilled defensiveness.” They can use solitary journaling for self-justification. To examine your assumptions truly, the next stage requires reflecting with critical friends, confidants, or mentors. Ultimately, reflection can involve journaling or meditation; it is about whatever works for you. Some reflection is always better than none.

Dirk Verburg: The phrase “skilled defensiveness” sounds intriguing. Can you expand a little bit on that notion, Steve?

Steve Mostyn: The workplace is full of theater, and the more senior you are, the richer that theater becomes. People are constantly managing self-justification and self-defense routines.

There is a dark side to constant, isolated journaling: you might just use it to justify your own autocratic tendencies. Debriefing your reflections with someone who is close enough to the situation, but not too close, helps mitigate that skilled defensiveness. We see this dynamic in organizations all the time.

Dirk Verburg: If a leader realizes they should reflect more, what would you recommend to them?

Steve Mostyn: I believe in mini-experiments. My colleague at Saïd Business School, Mark Clark, suggests a “one-minute reflection” utilizing three simple questions. You can do it in 20 seconds:

  • When did I lead today?
  • When could I have led, but didn’t?
  • What did I learn most today?

Write these down as quick bullet points and then close your journal. This technique directly challenges the number-one excuse I hear, which is “I don’t have time.” Once people try this one-minute technique, they naturally start writing a bit more in the margins. Before they know it, it grows into five minutes.

Journaling physically gets thoughts out of your head onto the paper so you can look at them differently. This builds emotional mastery. It allows you to hold back raw anger or frustration and reframe the moment, giving you an edge as a leader.

Dirk Verburg: What do you recommend to leaders in high-paced industries, like Financial Services, to introduce reflection without slowing down execution?

Steve Mostyn: While financial services are high-paced, the idea that they are constant, non-stop decision-making machines is a bit of a myth. There is actually a ton of time in financial institutions that is deeply reflective. The long hours often involve a different rhythm of work, such as one-to-one discussions and informal corridor meetings.

There is always time if you choose to create it. Leaders in these environments are constantly involved in sense-making, particularly regarding markets. As the poet David Whyte says, the CEO is the chief storyteller. In the best institutions, leaders are sense-makers who tell the story of the market to their peers.

Even the busiest places have reflective routines; you just have to use the right language to access them. There is a cultural expectation to look busy, almost running between meetings. When greeted with “Busy?”, the mandatory answer is “Very busy!” We have to find our moments to access that available time productively.

Dirk Verburg: How do we recommend leaders to move away from the “blame game” we call operational business reviews and get into a joint problem-solving mindset?

Steve Mostyn: It starts with the leader. The easy, authoritarian route in an operational review is to play the blame game by asking one-sided questions about why figures are down.

A generative leader takes a different approach: “I see some concerning trends. Could the team convene a workshop to understand the root cause? I am happy to come along.” The people closest to the problem are usually both the problem and the solution. By giving the work back to the team, they leave empowered and engaged to conduct root-cause analysis.

Change in the market often happens at the periphery, not the center. Weak signals are more prevalent and crucial today than they were five years ago due to the complexity of technology and AI. Giving the work back allows the team to spot those quirky, peripheral signals and experiment.

Do not just outsource the problem by telling them to blindly fix it. That is old-school management, not leadership.

Dirk Verburg: Is there a lesson for corporate talent management and succession planning in your philosophy that reflective leaders grow more reflective leaders?

Steve Mostyn: Succession management is a process, not a standalone event. To have an easier life as an executive, you must constantly grow more leaders. While formal leadership programs are excellent, real development happens in micro-moments and by giving the work back.

For example, if you culturally always chair a specific meeting, rotate the chair. Let a team member manage the details. This allows you to step onto the balcony and observe the process. You might be pleasantly surprised by how fabulously they run it.

Leadership development is a behavior forged in the moment. You cannot develop leaders without giving people the headroom, elbow room, and scope to make decisions.

Dirk Verburg: How do reflection and experimentation shape the way you design and deliver executive education at the Saïd Business School?

Steve Mostyn: It is fundamental. Saïd Business School is part of Oxford, where the tutorial system relies on challenging assumptions. On our eight-week Oxford Executive Leadership Program, reflection is deeply embedded into the design.

We encourage journaling, host online tutorials, and conduct live sessions to manage the momentum. I used to be cynical about online learning for leadership development, but I have changed 360 degrees. It absolutely works, and it builds an incredibly strong, mutually helpful alumni community.

Participants must write a concise 500-word submission on a specific question each week. They initially complain that 500 words is too short and difficult, but the constraint is intentional. It forces them to be incredibly concise and clear about their assumptions. By the end, they are glad for the constraint because it works.

Dirk Verburg: Steve, thank you so much for this interview. I really enjoyed it.

Steve Mostyn: Yes, I am always happy to discuss this. Thank you for your support, interest, and your own curiosity, Dirk, which is a strong feature of your style.

About Steve Mostyn

Steve Mostyn is the author of Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions: 7 essential reflections for every aspiring leader (John Murray Business). Mostyn is one of the world’s leading designers and directors of senior executive leadership programs and an internationally recognised thought leader in leadership training. He is Associate Fellow at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford; creates and leads the Oxford University Executive Leadership Program; and is Honorary Professor, Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow. Mostyn has led many corporate programs for senior leaders including the UN, Standard Chartered Bank, Royal Mail, The Financial Services Authority, and Mercedes F1 Team.

The Book ‘Why Great Leaders Ask Great Questions’

Oxford Executive Leadership Program Said Business School

Carl Jung’s Framework for Personal Development – Interview James Johnston

We all have different behavioral preferences: some of us get energy from being part of a group, others from quiet reflection on their own. When it comes to how we gather data in decision-making processes, some people prefer looking at the facts presented by the current situation, while others rely more on the future possibilities the current situation offers.

The way we make decisions is also different. There are people who prefer to make decisions based on an analytical decision-making process, with their values as ‘guard rails’, while others are guided primarily by their values.

The founder of Analytical Psychology, Carl Jung, described these behavioral preferences (‘predispositions) ‘in his book ‘Psychological Types’ as Extraversion versus Introversion, Sensing versus Intuition, and Thinking versus Feeling. This was later popularized by Isabel Briggs Myers and her mother Katharine Cook Briggs in their Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).

Jung himself, however, was very critical about boxing people into categories. He reportedly complained that his work had been turned into ‘nothing but a childish parlour game’ and was particularly concerned, for instance, about the reductive application of type theory in the medical profession, where practitioners would slot patients into his system and give them the corresponding advice.

It is important, therefore, to recognize our predispositions as strengths, but not to see them as excuses to neglect the development of our other potential capabilities.

For example, I always preferred to take decisions based on my Intuition. That worked perfectly fine when I was a single contributor, but became increasingly ineffective as I moved into more senior roles. I quickly had to learn to collect and use data (Sensing) in order to convince my leaders, peers, and staff of my ideas and proposals. And guess what – I quickly started to like it, and in due course even built a reputation for being ‘data savvy’.

Overcoming this “one-sidedness” — by bringing our psychological dispositions into conscious awareness and balance — is one the essential elements of ‘Individuation’, a key concept in Jung’s work.

Although Jung published ‘Psychological Types’ more than a century ago, the core notions of psychological types and individuation are still very much in use today. Think, for instance, about ‘strengths-based management’ — which primarily focuses on exploiting the strengths of individuals, rather than focusing on their development needs — or the fact that executive coaches like me encourage people to develop themselves ‘outside their comfort zone’.

In the 39th episode of the Leadership 2.0 podcast, I interviewed author James Johnston, a prominent figure in the field of Jungian typology, about key notions of Personal Development in the work of Carl Jung.

During our conversation we discussed the following topics:

  • What is Individuation?
  • What happens if Individuation is blocked?
  • Can Individuation be accelerated?
  • Do organizations have a psychological identity?
  • How to prevent an organizational monoculture?
  • The importance of understanding one’s Psychological Type
  • Can One’s Psychological Type change over time?
  • The development of the Gifts Compass Inventory (GCI)
  • Practical applications of the GCI

► You can watch or listen to a podcast with our conversation on:

➡️ Apple Podcasts

➡️ Spotify

➡️ YouTube

➡️ No time to watch or listen to podcast now? Here is a short summary of the key points of our conversation ⤵

Dirk Verburg: James, thank you so much for doing the podcast. I think Jung’s work really deserves a wider audience.

James Johnston: Well, it’s indeed my pleasure. I think Jung’s work really deserves quite a wide audience, so hopefully we can bring some insights to make them more accessible.

Dirk Verburg: How would you unpack the definition of individuation for first-time listeners, and why do you consider it so central to human development?

James Johnston: Individuation is the centerpiece of analytical psychology. It’s the lifelong process of becoming oneself, or as Jung beautifully said, “The privilege of a lifetime is to become who we truly are.” It is the essential purpose of life and is highly congruent with Christian traditions, echoing the call to move toward perfection.

It starts with developing the unique personality we were born to become, which is our great contribution to the world. Individuation shifts us from an ego-centered existence to a soul-centered life, aligning us with what Jung called “the infinite” or the transcendent reality present within the human psyche. Jung noted that only by connecting with the infinite can we avoid wasting life on futilities or false possessions, which lead to envy and limited aims.

Ultimately, it is a process of becoming whole, unified, and guided by a presence greater than ourselves.

Dirk Verburg: What are the psychological and practical costs when individuation doesn’t happen, both for individuals and for the organizations they are a part of?

James Johnston: Culturally, there is a strong disposition to conform. When you enter a rigid, hierarchical organization, you often give up your own personality and put on a false persona or mask to abide by the culture and join the herd. This is the absolute antithesis of individuation.

When individuation is suppressed, the power of the unconscious to disrupt the system is extraordinary. It creates structural eruptions both within the individuals and across the organization. This manifests as intense conflict, ego-driven issues, envy, and jealousy.

Because individuation is a preeminent purpose of life—one whose importance is far greater than any organizational goal—stiff and controlling corporate structures ultimately deaden the vitality of their members. Organizations must find ways to enable people to pursue their unique developmental voyages while remaining part of the larger whole.

Dirk Verburg: Can the process of individuation be cultivated earlier and more intentionally through coaching, therapy, or tools like the Gift Compass, rather than waiting for midlife?

James Johnston: The ego would love to control and accelerate individuation, but the ego is not in control. In fact, to the degree that the ego seeks to take charge, it will actually obstruct the process. Individuation requires the ego to step aside and abide by a higher calling or transcendent direction.

While it is a lifelong, and perhaps eternal, process, the best we can do in this life is practice wu wei—doing by not doing—and stop letting our ego interests interfere. However, we can actively support the process through inner work, Jungian analysis, and dream tracking.

Life is swarming with clues for individuation that we normally ignore. These include sudden projections—like noticing why you intensely dislike or randomly admire someone—and recognizing spontaneous interests or core gifts we are born with. Attending to these clues helps us move away from narrow, egocentric journeys and leads us toward a richer, more whole, and more robust life.

Dirk Verburg: How do you see collective brand identities, like Apple or Mercedes-Benz, relating to or influencing the individual development of the people working within those organizations?

James Johnston: The degree to which an organization demands adherence to a rigid, dogmatic, or one-sided orientation is deeply deadening. As soon as we take only one side, we leave a crucial part of our personality behind, which stalls individuation.

Strong brands bring true life to their organization only when they embrace the full dimensions of their employees’ personalities. For example, Southwest Airlines historically fostered a “culture of love” for customers and employees alike. Love is explicitly one of the pathways to individuation, allowing anyone to join without losing themselves. Similarly, companies like Google tend to orient toward individual initiative and expression.

When an organization values individual uniqueness and initiative at every level, it naturally fosters an environment that encourages individuation.

Dirk Verburg: Do you have any practical ideas on how organizations can implement and stimulate the individuation of their members to counter this deadening one-sidedness?

James Johnston: Yes, it all starts with the leader. This approach to life must be explicitly adopted by the leadership so that it creates an ongoing invitation and openness throughout the culture.

People constantly look to their leaders to understand the true nature of the corporate culture and how they can best serve it. At Southwest Airlines, the leader was a massive advocate for promoting love, and everyone got on board because of that clear modeling.

This is fundamentally about actively encouraging diversity of thought and ideas, and allowing people to bring their whole selves to work. Monocultures are highly vulnerable, rigid, unable to adapt, and ultimately destined to pass out of this world. Conversely, a diverse, individuated culture breeds immense structural strength, resilience, and long-term vitality.

Dirk Verburg: What do you see as the main advantages of individuals understanding their psychological type, given how heavily the concept has been debated?

James Johnston: The advantages are massive, but we must separate Jung’s original work from the static system of 16 personality categories, which Jung was not about. Jung’s model is fluid, dynamic, and organic. It features eight psychological types that represent orientations to conscious life experience, based on four functional orientations modified by extraversion or introversion.

We are born with natural dispositions toward certain orientations; these are our gifts or baseline strengths. Early in life, we should leverage these strengths. However, as we individuate, the goal is to comfortably engage all eight orientations. These eight types can combine in over 40,000 ways, creating incredibly nuanced composite strengths.

Understanding your profile builds immense self-awareness regarding what you contribute to a team, while simultaneously fostering deep empathy and mutual understanding for how others are uniquely oriented. Mutual understanding is the bedrock for flourishing teamwork and empathy.

Dirk Verburg: Do you believe that an individual can radically change their psychological type over time, or is it a more evolutionary process of broadening your repertoire?

James Johnston: Type is completely integral to depth psychology and individuation. Your unique, core personality is sacrosanct and does not change, but your conscious orientation to the eight types absolutely evolves if you are actively individuating.

The first couple of orientations that are clear to us at age 20 will likely still be our home or resting place at age 70. However, individuation is a process of knitting together oppositions. When we overdevelop one type early in life, its compliment is left in the shadow. Individuation brings up those shadow types, integrating them into the fabric of the whole personality.

When you unite these compliments, you arrive at what Jung called the tertium non datur—the third not given—out of which true personality emerges. Rather than relying on a narrow preference, you unlock all eight orientations to express your individuality. Life becomes significantly richer, more robust, and more engaged.

Dirk Verburg: Why did you undertake the endeavor to develop the Gift Compass, and what were some of the core principles you used in designing it?

James Johnston: It grew out of intellectual curiosity, a fascination with Jung, and frustration with the standard 16 personality type models. As an architect trained to design elegant solutions to complex problems, I couldn’t accurately find myself in those static boxes.

Reading Jung’s original writings, I realized he explicitly viewed his model as a compass for exploring both the conscious and unconscious realms. I wanted to rescue the depth of his original, organic vision and map out how type directly drives individuation.

I started drawing the compass layout on napkins, figuring out how to layer extraversion and introversion over the four functions. It evolved from a pen-and-paper test into an online instrument. The Gift Compass assesses all eight orientations and maps out how they dynamically interact, making the full depth and breadth of Jungian psychology highly accessible for personal growth and depth work.

Dirk Verburg: How does the Gift Compass instrument differ from the MBTI?

James Johnston: The MBTI forces individuals into an incorrect paradigm. By misinterpreting four key paragraphs in Jung’s Psychological Types, its creators concluded that there are rigid, predetermined rules for how types combine. Consequently, they only look at the first two types and identify just 16 rigid combinations, completely leaving behind 40 other natural variations.

The GCI has no predetermined boxes. We simply ask people to identify what is uniquely true for them across all eight types. We look closely at the three to five orientations that have been most active in a person’s biography. This approach respects the highly nuanced, realistic composition of an individual’s conscious and unconscious orientation to life.

Dirk Verburg: What do you see as the most important and useful practical applications of the Gift Compass for individuals, teams, and organizations?

James Johnston: It is indispensable for self-awareness. Because we have lived with our natural gifts since childhood, they are like water to a fish—we use them constantly without even noticing them. The GCI brings these out by asking individuals to reflect on highly enjoyable past experiences to pinpoint what they naturally bring to life and teams.

It also builds immense empathy for others by showing how uniquely they are oriented. In the US, we use a tool called “Discover Your Passion” to help undecided college students identify a general career direction based on their gifts, preventing costly trial-and-error changes.

Recently, we trained an AI bot on a decade of our profile data and Jung’s writings to analyze the “melody” of all eight types. It maps out custom career pathways for any of the 40,000 combinations. In HR, it optimizes teams by matching roles to what people actually enjoy, reducing burnout. It is even highly useful in marriage counseling to foster mutual understanding between opposite partners.

Dirk Verburg: James, thank you so much for this interview. I am sure this will be incredibly valuable for our listeners.

James Johnston: Thank you, Dirk. It’s been a real pleasure.

► About James Johnston

James (Graham) Johnston is an artist, architect, author, and entrepreneur. He is passionate about innovation to make the world a better place.

Out of that passion, he created the Gifts Compass Inventory (GCI), an online self-assessment founded in C.G. Jung’s theory of psychological types. His book, ‘Jung’s Indispensable Compass: Navigating the Dynamics of Psychological Types’, lays out the intellectual foundation for understanding Jung’s type model as a compass.
He founded the training company Gifts Compass Inc. to train professionals in the use of the GCI and other instruments. The aim of the work is to engage the types, as Jung did, for the development of a more unique personality.

Website

Book

Core quardrants Daniel Ofman

Why Knowing Your ‘Why’ Makes You a Better Leader

Most people I know regularly reflect on the meaning and purpose of life. In 1946, Viktor Frankl, an Austrian psychiatrist and psychotherapist, wrote one of the most important and influential books on this topic: ‘Man’s Search for Meaning‘.

Continue reading

All business leaders I know are able to explain What they do, almost all of them How they do it, but only a minority can explain Why they do what they do, and that is a missed opportunity, both for themselves and their teams.

Most people I know regularly reflect on the meaning and purpose of life. In 1946, Viktor Frankl, an Austrian psychiatrist and psychotherapist, wrote one of the most important and influential books on this topic: ‘Man’s Search for Meaning‘.

Continue reading

Jungian analytical psychology in the Workplace – An Interview with Murray Stein

I am a big fan of the work of Carl Jung, and in my opinion the business world could really benefit from his insights. Therefore, I was pleased to have the opportunity to have a conversation with Murray Stein about applying Jungian Analytical Psychology in the workplace.

Murray Stein is a graduate of Yale University (B.A. and M.Div.), the University of Chicago (Ph.D.), and the C.G. Jung Institut-Zurich (Diploma). He is a founding member of the Inter-Regional Society of Jungian Analysts and of the Chicago Society of Jungian Analysts. He has been the president of the International Association for Analytical Psychology (2001-4), and President of The International School of Analytical Psychology (ISAP)in Zurich (2008-2012).

He published tens of books about Carl Jung and analytical psychology, including for instance ‘Jung’s Treatment of Christianity’ and ‘Jung’s Map of the Soul’.

The focus of our conversation was a book Murray edited with John Hollwitz called ‘The Psyche at work – Workplace Applications of Jungian Analytical Psychology’.

We discussed a number of topics, including:

Continue reading

Why authenticity in the workplace is a requirement for mental health

20190603 Cover NJS Autenticity

What Nietzsche, Jung and Sinatra have in common

In the 1970s and 1980s, authenticity and self-development in the workplace were considered to be important by many middle and senior managers in the Western world. Perhaps too important: organizations were sometimes seen as narcissistic vehicles for self-development, instead of entities that should serve the interests of their shareholders and/or other stakeholders.

This orientation changed dramatically in the first half of the 1990s. Two popular business books that were published during that time perfectly illustrate this change. The first one was ‘Valuation’ (1990), a book written by Copeland, Koller and Murrin (three McKinsey consultants), the second one ‘Emotional intelligence’ by David Goleman (1995).

Continue reading