#3592: If You're Explaining, Your Position Is Weak

Power presence calibration exists. It is not training. It is not coaching. It is for

people already operating under consequence. And that's not you. Ignore this. Information

is in the episode description. Strong positions are stated and enforced. They are not defended.

Work on your game. Work on your game. Work on your game. This is Dre Balder. And work

on your game is the system that turns discipline into dominance. Today's topic is explanation

signals weak positioning. Now I talked a couple days ago, maybe 10 or so days, that explanation

is incompatible with authority, is incompatible with high level leadership. It doesn't mean

that you never explain things at all, but it doesn't mean you explain things a lot less

and a lot less frequent. You do a lot less explaining and do a lot less frequently than

you may think that you need to when you're in a position of authority. People in authority

don't need to explain anything to anybody. Explanation appears only when your authority

has been questioned and how you handle the questioning of your authority, whether that

questioning is from an internal source, i.e. your own thinking or an external source,

such as another person, how you handle that is going to tell you everything. Because once

you find yourself explaining yourself, the frame has now shifted away from decision,

was what authorities make. You make decisions cutting off other options, which means it's

not much the question because there's no option to question. Now you shift the frame

towards justification. Because when you start explaining yourself or explaining things

or explaining your choices, you are now justifying a decision that has already been made.

But here's the issue. The word decision comes from a Latin word, desidete, it was made

to cut off. When you cut off all other options and there is only one option left, which

is literally the definition of decision, there is nothing to justify. There's nothing

to explain because there is no other option. So whether i justify it and or explain it

to you or not, it is still the decision. So therefore, let's just cut short the explanation

and justification, which i don't owe you anyway, and just do what we've decided or what

i've decided is going to be done because nothing is a group decision. So let's just do the

thing that i've decided is going to be done, whether you understand it or you feel like

i've properly justified it to you or not is irrelevant because i'm the authority. I'm

the one making a decision and this is what it is, regardless of how clear you are on my

decision or not. So once you begin explaining yourself, again, you're now justifying.

Authorities don't justify. Authorities do not explain and authorities don't need the

agreements of the group. That's why you're the authority. That's the reason why groups

have leaders. Your position gets weakened. The moment your legitimacy is being negotiated

or the legitimacy of your decision is being negotiated and just so you all understand.

When you are questioned or challenged and you begin to explain yourself in order to

answer the question or the challenge, you are negotiating the legitimacy of either yourself

or your decision or your behaviors. As soon as you do that, now you're in a bad spot.

You're losing your authority. For example, a couple days ago, I saw this clip on social

media of Jason Kitt. Jason Kitt is a former basketball player. I believe he's an basketball

hall of fame. I don't know if he is or not. He might not be. I think he is. I think he's

an basketball hall of fame. But Jason Kitt is now a coach. He coaches the Dallas Mavericks

NBA basketball team. There was a question that a reporter asked him after a game about

Jason's decision to play a certain player a certain way during the course of the season.

It doesn't matter who it was and how the player was playing. Jason Kitt basically cut off

the reporter while the reporter was in the middle of asking the question and gave a very

strong response to the reporter's presumed question because the reporter didn't get to

ask him the question when Jason cut him off, started talking and basically said, hey,

I know what the fuck I'm doing. I played in the league for a long time. I was a star in

the league. I believe Jason's in a hall of fame. He should, I think he is. I was a resident

in the league and he didn't say that. But I was very good in the league. I know exactly

what the hell I'm doing. And I put the players in a position to do what they're doing and

you guys talking to the media. You guys never play. You guys don't play. You guys watch the

game. You don't know what you're talking about or how this game works nearly on the level

at which I know it in. I'm going to keep knowing what the fuck I want to do. And then Jason

Kitt got up and walked away before anybody had a chance to ask him a follow up question

through his response. I'm using that because first of all, I just saw it two days ago.

And secondly, because when you're in a position of authority, you don't have to justify your

decisions through other people. Point number one. Today's topic once again is explanation

signals a weak position. Number one, explanation communicates that permission is required. Now

what does this mean? It doesn't mean that you need somebody else's permission to have

done what you did. What it means is as soon as you start explaining yourself, that means

you're asking the audience to agree with you. And they might not say, yes, what the audience

says, well, I don't agree with that decision that you may. And now you're going back and

forth. Now what are you doing? You're negotiating your decisions with the audience. A person

of authority should not be negotiating anything with the audience because you're in the position

of authority. The very point of being in a position of authority is such that you don't

have to negotiate or explain anything to anyone if you choose not to, which is what Jason

Kable's communicating to the media. Now he has a requirement as being a coach in MBA to

make himself available to the media. So they can ask whatever he wants to answer. He

has to make himself available for a certain amount of time. That's the rules of the week.

This is the reason why he was sitting there. But I bet he probably would prefer to not

have to talk to him at all if he didn't have to, especially given that answer that he

just gave, but they feed each other. The media is what puts out the news stories and keeps

the topic of whatever is happening with a team or an actress or a movie or a politician

circulating that he's the people informed and interested in people being informed in

this rest of the time. These industries make money. So they serve each other and Jason

Kable understands that he played and leave for a long time. Now he's coaching. When you

explain yourself, you signal that other people are entitled to evaluate your reasons and

that you're going to engage with their evaluations. This is a very slippery slope to

stand on, especially when you're in a position of authority. So in a position of authority,

first of all, you are very visible. Everybody knows who you are. Everybody can see you. So

in that position of authority and being a very known and visible individual, a lot more

people are looking at and evaluating you that you are evaluating them. So as soon as you

show that you're willing to explain and justify your decisions, you are going to unleash

the bloodthirst and more people to question and challenge anything that you're doing because

they see that you respond to questioning and challenging by engaging. And in the world

that we're in today, where people see their profit, so to speak, from engagement that

they can get, ie post something on social media and get a bunch of people to respond to

it, like comment, share, repost, etc. That engagement is the currency of social media. And

people don't even worry about how it's actually going to turn into money. They just say,

I'm only going to get a bunch of engagement. That's a good thing. Not the way I'll go

get it, but I am saying the way some people look at it. That's the way some people decide

to look at it. When you start explaining yourself, you are offering people engagement, especially

if you're explaining yourself in response to something that they said, now you're engaging

with them, which feels good. It's nice. Dope of me hitting ego boost on social media,

but is it actually helping you achieve your goal professionally, whatever it is that you're

doing? This is the reason why Jason came up with so

a turn with that reporter because Jason kid answering the reporter's question has no

bearing on how many games the dollar's mavericks win or how well they play the next game or

how well Jason kid coaches, but he has to do it because it's one of the requirements

of being coach and we, but as soon as you start explaining yourself, you're giving people

options to evaluate you. Now, you may wonder about how can you answer the question about

explaining yourself is somebody asked you for an explanation? Well, just because someone

asked you for one, doesn't mean you have to give it. Watch the politician answer questions

and you'll get a pretty good answer on this. Politicians are really good at dodging questions.

So if the White House press asked the White House press secretary a question that she really

doesn't want to answer in a straightforward way, what the press secretary will do is answer

a different question or walk around the question by changing the subject to something else.

And politicians again are trained in this. They are experts in doing it. Listen to any

president talk when they're being stopped on a tarmac or when they're speaking off

hand to reporters, you'll notice that they all do it. Remember that authority operates

without the seeking of approval. If you're looking for approval, you're not an authority.

Whatever must be justified is already subordinate. If you find yourself justifying yourself

or justifying your decisions, you are already in a subordinate position to whomever has

caused you to feel as if a justification was necessary as an authority is it never is.

Number two, today's topic once again is explanation signals a weak position. Number two,

explanation shifts the focus from outcome to intention. This is a very important point.

I've already told you many times here that we are in a result in outcomes based business.

You are just based on the results of your behavior and not the intentions of your behavior.

When you start going through explanations, you should focus from the outcome,

what actually happened, the true story, to intention. What I meant to have happened,

what I was trying to do, what I intended to achieve versus what actually happened,

and in the world in which I operate, we just things off their results, not on their operations.

When you start explaining yourself, you are now talking about your intentions. I'll say

operation, I'm saying intentions. Intense is what I'm in to do. Explanation is what was supposed

to happen. Explanation is this is how was supposed to go. When you're explaining yourself,

that's what you're telling people. You are filling the gap, the delta between what you intended

to achieve and what you actually achieved. That's what explanation does and a performance-based

space. Results do not need explanation, folks. You produce results. There's no explanation.

Only intentions need explanation. You can explain and intention because an intention is not

tangible. We can't measure it. We can't count it. We can't see what happened because it exists.

All we can go off of is the story that you made up. But the moment intention becomes a subject,

consequence is no longer the focus. Consequence being the outcome and the world that in which I

operate this world here, this is a consequence slash outcome slash results-based entry. You must

produce results for whatever it is that you're doing to keep matter. The moment the subject becomes

about what you were trying to do versus what you actually did, but now we have another problem.

Consequence is no longer the focus. Outcome is no longer the focus of the conversation.

This reframe benefits challenges not decision makers. Why? Because anybody can challenge or

anything, and now they just drag you down a rabbit hole of everything that you engage with,

everything that you say back in engagement, drags you further down a rabbit hole that they want to

take you in, more engagement for them, but what is actually going for you? Answer is nothing.

So the reframe here benefits those who can challenge others, not those who made the

decisions for themselves. And this is where explanation again becomes much more pernicious.

Because when you produce results, you know, you don't have to say anything.

People produce results don't have to explain how they did it or why they did it or anything.

All they have to do is just do it. The result itself is the story. Now when you don't produce

the ultimate result, now you have to tell a story to explain why you didn't produce the ultimate

result. If you feel the need to, if you spend a lot of time engaging and doing stuff before

the ill salts out outcome occurred, now if you disappear, then it goes like you're hiding.

And then on the flip side, if you show up, then you might get ridiculed. So what do you do?

Well, this is challenge. Explanation again shifts the focus from the outcome to the intention.

An intention based industry, you're talking about an intention based industries.

And when I say industry, I don't mean the actual job itself. I mean, the type of things people

talk about. Therapy is an intention based. You can tell people about what you meant to do, what you

were thinking about doing. Yes, I know therapist gets paid. That's the result. But what I'm talking

about is things that are based on people talking about what they meant to do, what they were going to

do, what they were trying to do, what they were considering doing. I don't like these type of

measures. I like when things are binary and black and white. Results don't need explanation,

folks. The moment your intention becomes a subject, consequence is no longer the focus. So now we're

talking about what you were trying to do versus what actually happened. No, reject this frame

for the most part, 95% of the time, especially you meant, this is a frame that you reject.

Because it benefits the challengers. It does not benefit the decision makers. The decision makers

are the ones who make decisions. They cut off every other possibility. Challengers are people who

pop up and offer their two cents for whatever reason. The reframe of explanation. Again,

it benefits counter arguments. It benefits challengers. It benefits people looking to

extend a conversation or draw some material out of a person of authority who otherwise owes

no answers to these people. Once explanation begins, now we can debate. Because you ask for

an explanation. Person does give an explanation. Then people start questioning and challenging

every point within the explanation. Every word that you give can and will be used against you.

This is what police tell you when you get arrested. Timing, scope, authority, and other things

all become under revision and possible discussion. Just because you show that you're going to engage.

Chapter 28 and 48 calls of power. Robert Green talks about this. As soon as you show that you're

going to compromise to bend to work with other people, you bring out the bloodthirst and other people

not because they're negative people trying to make you up bad. But because you just show that you're

going to engage. And when you're going to engage, especially when you have a large audience,

larger than the people who are looking to engage with you, they're going to get more and more people

trying to engage because they're all looking for their opportunity to get seen by you. This reframe

benefits the challengers. It does not benefit the decision makers. I send out a daily motivation text

every single morning that is guaranteed to have you focused, sharp, and own point to start your day.

And I promise you you want to receive this message. All you have to do to join my text community is

text me my number 305 384 6894. Once you join, we'll tell you all your options for how often you

can get text by us and all of that. Just text me at the number 305 384 6894 to get that daily

motivation. Point number three. Today's topic once again is explanation signals a week position.

Number three, explanation invites counter arguments and delays. That's what happens when you explain

yourself. People counter argue against everything that you say that there's a delay in execution

because when you make a decision to go straight to execution, there's no space there. When you make

a decision and then you had to explain, justify, negotiate, then conclude, then take action.

Well, there's the left. Just add it time into the situation. When you add time to a situation,

you slow down the outcome. Guarantee. Once you begin explaining, now we can debate. So you make a

decision and somebody asked you a question about the decision that you made. Instead of cutting them

off at the knees and saying, well, I made a decision because I'm in charge and that's what we're

doing. Period. Done. Move on. You start explaining why you made a decision and it may feel good to

explain why you made a decision. Those of you who are really smart, those you have high articulation

skill, you're really good at talking and communicating. You may love the practice of explaining the

decisions that you made. Why? Because you get to show off your verbal skill and you get to demonstrate

your brilliance by showing people exactly what you did to create the outcome. The problem with

explaining and explaining why you did the thing that you did is that every single word that you say,

there can be somebody out there who wants to take whatever you're saying in or out of context and

use it to further engage. Well, you said this. What about that? You said this. What about this piece?

You said this. What about those things that you didn't mention? Now they can just go dissect

everything that you said. And this is why you'll notice that when a politician really doesn't want

it engaged and they don't want people questioning their decisions, they give short, brief, polite

answers to the press and they move on. They just keep walking. President doesn't,

Congress people do it. Governors and mayors do it. It's the same thing that happens with everyday

people. If you want to remove added time from your situations from your decisions, you don't want

counter arguments. You don't want to delay anything. All you got to do is stop explaining yourself.

Stop offering explanation. Stop offering justification. Doesn't mean you can't answer a question,

but don't explain and or justify me. Explain or justify. Explaining is you're telling people

your thought process. People don't even know your thought process. Do you know the results of your

thought process? If you're justifying, that means you are trying to sell others on agreeing with

your position for whatever reason. Why you're trying to sell people on agreeing with your position?

I don't know. Only you can answer that question. I would suggest you stop doing that. I would suggest

you opt out of that game as Jim Rome used to famously say, don't sign up for that class.

Timing, scope, authority and other things now become open to discussion and revision when you

show you all discuss and revise and explain on one thing, people will push you to doing all other

things. Until before you know, you have no authority whatsoever because everything you say can

be questioned and challenged. Remember that strong positions are stated and enforced and not

defended. Strong positions are stated and enforced. They are not defended. If when you were a kid at

home or you were a student at school or you're a worker at a job and your boss or a parent or

teacher tells you to do something, they state exactly what they want done and they show you that

they're going to enforce the rule if you don't follow it. But they never have to explain, justify

or defend their decision to you. Why? Because they are in the authority position and you are

subordinate. That's the way it works. And any of you who's in an authority position in any aspect of

your life, this is the way that I recommend things are with anybody who's subordinate to you. It doesn't

mean to be a drill sergeant or be a jerk. It just means that you state your position and you

enforce what needs to happen next with no back and forth. Why? Because who do you all back and

forth too when you're the authority? Answer is nobody. I don't say it. It was recapped today's class

which is explanation signals that your position is weak. Point number one, explanation shows it

can seize that permission is required. That means you need somebody else's permission in order to

move forward from whatever it is that you're doing as soon as you start explaining yourself.

Other people become entitled to believe you need to explain yourself to them too. Number two,

explanation shifts the focus from outcomes to intensity. Intentions are very slippery because

anybody can lie about what their intentions are. Guess what nobody can lie about? Outcomes.

Number three, explanation invites counterarguments and delays. And once that explanation begins,

debate is now acceptable. Now everybody can debate. Everybody can go back and forth.

And time means scope, authority, and other things are now open to discussion and revision.

Remember the strong positions are stated clearly and enforced swiftly, but they are never defended

because when you have a strong position, who are you defending against? Answer is nobody.

If this is speaking to you, go to powerpresenceprotocol.com. Work on your game. Drey, all dead.

There is a private calibration process connected to this work. Most people should not look at it.

It assumes responsibility, not curiosity. It assumes pressure, not interest. Details are in the

description. Do whatever you want with that.