Show Notes

  Guest

Cleveland Garvin — Dr. Kim’s father. Retired after 36 years at IBM (retired 2004), 30 of those years in management, rising through four levels of leadership from first-line manager to fourth-level.

  Episode Summary

In our first guest interview of the season, Dr. Kim sits down with her own father, Cleveland Garvin, for a conversation that’s part leadership case study, part family story. Cleve spent 36 years at IBM — 30 of them in management — rising from first-line supervisor to fourth-level leadership. The thread running through all of it: there is no one-size-fits-all leadership style. Cleve breaks down why he doesn’t believe in “born leaders,” how individualizing his approach — person by person — was what actually moved disengaged team members, and the leadership mistake that taught him to plan before he ever assigns a role. And yes — he tells the story of raising Dr. Kim, including the leadership lesson he wishes he’d taught her sooner about how she studied.

  Quotable Moments

“I don’t believe there is any such thing as a born leader. There might be someone born with the capabilities of being a leader — but you grow into that.”

“Not all influencers are good leaders. In fact, sometimes influencers are bad leaders.”

“You have to understand what makes each individual tick, and work with them on that basis.”

“I think people genuinely enjoyed working for me. I know they trusted me — and that’s what tells me I had some impact.”

  Dr. Kim’s Takeaway

One of the biggest threads in this one: leadership isn’t one style applied to everyone — it’s knowing your people well enough to lead each one differently. “Fifteen people, fifteen plans,” as Cleve puts it. That individualization is also where emotional intelligence shows up in practice: you can’t tailor your approach to someone you haven’t taken the time to actually understand.

Episode Transcript

Kim Richardson: Okay, everyone, welcome back to Rise Up and Lead: Real Lessons, Real Stories, Real Talk. I’m Dr. Kim, and I am so glad you’re here. This is our first guest interview, you guys — I’ve brought in my own father, Cleveland Garvin, to be my guest today.

But before he dives in and shares a little bit about himself and his leadership journey, I want to remind you about our season opener, where we talked about what engagement actually means for leaders — the difference between attendance, participation, and engagement. Because engagement is deeper than all of that. It’s about people really showing up: feeling connected to the purpose of the work, experiencing emotional safety, and understanding what’s being asked of them.

So, I’m going to turn the mic over to my incredible dad, Cleve Garvin. Hi, Daddy!

Cleve Garvin: Sweetie. And I like that description — “incredible dad.” It’s so nice to be with you. I’m excited to see where we go today.

Kim Richardson: Dad, tell everybody about your work. You’re retired now, enjoying it — but tell everyone a little bit about the job you retired from.

Cleve Garvin: Oh, well — I was a 36-year employee at IBM. I retired in 2004. I had various jobs at IBM. Usually, if you’re on the move, if you’re rising, you want to take advantage of opportunities, so I ran the gamut — from manufacturing support, to planning and scheduling for the manufacturing facility, and then into management. Out of my 36 years, I spent 30 of those years in management.

Kim Richardson: No way.

Cleve Garvin: Yeah — it was a journey. A learning process.

Kim Richardson: Well, you said the people “on the move” got opportunities — you must have been on the move, then.

Cleve Garvin: That was at a time when there was a big push for hiring and diversifying the workplace — mid-’80s. I was a benefactor of that. But it still took work to get the interview — I had to sell myself. I had about five or six interviews. And, by the way, I have a degree in math, so I was looking for something technical.

The guy who interviewed me for one role was in the statistics area, and I loved that — he offered me the job. And I didn’t take it.

Kim Richardson: Oh! What happened?

Cleve Garvin: The technical area was the right fit for me, but he was such a lousy interviewer that I thought, “I don’t think I want to jump into this big corporation with someone who doesn’t give me much confidence.” So I didn’t take that job. I had a couple of other offers, so it turned out fine.

Kim Richardson: Before we dive all the way into your journey — my listeners know we’ve defined “enlistment to lead” as having someone who tapped you to lead, who saw something in you that maybe you didn’t see for yourself, whether in the workplace or elsewhere. Most of us never asked for the job of leadership. So who was that person for you?

Cleve Garvin: It turned out to be my manager at the time. Often people get tapped based on how well they’re doing technically — you might show some potential to lead, but for me it was really my technical capability that got noticed. So that part was natural. What was unnatural was that I ended up managing the same department I’d been working in.

That puts you in a situation where — if the relationships were good, fine. If they weren’t, there was a lot of work to do.

Kim Richardson: So, Dad, did you rise up from inside the same team? You were on the team with the same people you ended up managing?

Cleve Garvin: Yep.

Kim Richardson: That happens to a lot of people. How did you handle that? Was there a tip or a trick?

Cleve Garvin: I think the hardest part is that you already know everybody’s habits — you know their capabilities, you have a sense of how they deal with each other. That background helped, honestly, because I had a good relationship with the people in the department already. It wasn’t “oh wow, look what we got” — it was more like, “oh, he knows us, and we trust him.” So it was easier from that point of view.

Kim Richardson: Was there ever a time when the team wasn’t committed, or wasn’t complying? What tipped you off, and what did you do as a manager when you saw that kind of behavior?

Cleve Garvin: Like any team, you’re going to have a couple of people who don’t pull their weight. That was actually one advantage of working in that department — I already knew who could do what and understood the personalities. So I chose to work with people individually. I’d say, “Hey, Mary, you’re a great scheduler.” I gave feedback, and out of that feedback would come, “Let’s work on these things.” You want people to understand that you understand them, and that you’re there to help — not to be the bossy boss. My approach was to be a team member, not to be bossy.

Kim Richardson: But what about someone who was performing, but their heart just wasn’t in it — they didn’t seem committed?

Cleve Garvin: I’d work with them on an improvement plan — same approach. “Here’s what I’m responsible for, here’s what you’re doing well, here’s what you’re not doing well, and let’s put together a plan to improve.”

Kim Richardson: Did you find the people who weren’t committed were also not performing? I’m wondering if there was a parallel.

Cleve Garvin: In some cases, yes, they weren’t performing — and it wasn’t necessarily about capability. It could be things going on at home with kids or family life, or just not being fully invested — “I like what I do, but I’m not in love with it, so I’m not going to put my all in.” You see that often. And then there’s competition — “John seems to get better assignments than me,” and they’re not happy about it but never talk about it.

Kim Richardson: That definitely sounds like disengagement.

Cleve Garvin: Oh yeah, without a doubt. But that’s the job of a leader — to be observant, to look for the trigger points, and to try. You won’t always be right, but you have to try.

I had a problem when I first took my management job — I was just not a morning person. Back then, secretaries would give you a folder of mail — we weren’t quite up to email yet — and I’d go through that first thing in the morning, trying to get in earlier than my employees. And invariably, this one guy would come in every morning with a suggestion for our suggestion program — if it got adopted, you could earn a little money — and I think he wanted to prove he could come up with a suggestion every single day. His suggestion might be worth two pennies, who knows, but you still have to spend time with that. And I wasn’t happy about it.

So I said, how do I solve this? I can’t be short with him — I’d have been out of that job pretty quickly. My solution was to come in thirty minutes earlier than usual, get through my mail, clear my mind of all of that, and then be able to focus on greeting people and being fully present for the department. It actually helped a lot — I think I would have been out of that job quickly otherwise.

Kim Richardson: So you decided to come in and handle your own work first, so that when people arrived, you could focus on them — at your own inconvenience.

Cleve Garvin: Well — yeah, but at that time, you’d go all out to help your employees. That’s just what we did.

Kim Richardson: Now, this was a very corporate setting, so a lot of people are hearing the terms “manager” versus “leader” maybe for the first time. Do you identify as a leader? And if so, how do you know?

Cleve Garvin: Well, first — I don’t think they’re the same thing. I consider a manager someone focused on guiding people toward a certain responsibility. A leader can be an influencer — someone trying to get you on board with an opinion, a process, a method — but without any direct responsibility attached to it, other than imparting knowledge. So I think you’re an influencer first, and that might push you toward leadership. But not all influencers are good leaders — in fact, sometimes influencers are bad leaders.

There was a level of management above me responsible for making sure I understood that difference, based on the expectations placed on me. So I’d say — I was an influencer, and as you take on more projects, you learn to be a leader.

And I know I wasn’t born to be a leader. I think I had some characteristics of a leader early on — I can think back to elementary school — but I don’t believe there’s such a thing as a “born leader.” You might be born with the capability, but you grow into it. I’m still learning how to be a leader.

Kim Richardson: Well, did your leadership expand beyond IBM?

Cleve Garvin: Actually, it should have started in the home. But it started even before that — elementary school, junior high. When you think about it, I was thrust into a lot of leadership positions early.

Kim Richardson: What were you doing as a kid — in elementary school?

Cleve Garvin: We had security patrols — that was a big deal, wearing that patrol badge. And we had spelling bees within the classroom, which is actually how I earned free ice cream or lunch — we didn’t have much, so I had to hustle to get lunch.

Kim Richardson: Well, okay then! So — we’re talking about engagement and presence. Thinking back on working with people and engaging them so they feel committed and safe — what was a leadership mistake you made that taught you something you never forgot?

Cleve Garvin: It’s not necessarily the smartest person who should lead. I had someone who was technically the top student in the class, and I put them in charge of a project — a science project, a chemistry experiment. I was the team leader in that lab, and I made the mistake of appointing the person who was very smart with the formulas to lead that part of the project. It was a disaster. The results turned out fine, but that team lead couldn’t explain what we were doing.

So I learned that when you’re doing your evaluation, you really have to set up categories that are meaningful and related to the project — build your project plan so you can put the right people in the right spots to make it happen.

Kim Richardson: So that was your reaction — and your next step was?

Cleve Garvin: The next step was really to do proper planning. You know me — I don’t do anything without a plan.

Kim Richardson: Sounds familiar. Dad — you raised a leader. What did you try to plant in me on purpose about leadership? And what do you see in how I lead now that surprises you?

Cleve Garvin: Oh, my. Well — I tried not to show you leadership by lecturing. I tried to show you by doing it.

One bad habit you had was… studying. Not that you didn’t study, but how you studied. There were many nights I had to shake you awake, because you’d be lying on the bed with the book open, asleep. So I had to find a way to help you understand the reason you needed to plan well — so that earlier in the evening, instead of pacing the hall, you’d stay steady and not get sleepy.

So one thing I learned is that you have to understand what makes each individual tick, and work with them on that basis. With you, I should have figured that out earlier — I needed to do something different, and I didn’t. But you turned out to be a good leader anyway, so you must have gotten something out of it.

Kim Richardson: I must have. So, Dad — let’s imagine IBM calls you today, remembers who you were and how impactful you were, and asks you to mentor a brand-new manager on their first week on the job. What would you tell them about who they’re becoming?

Cleve Garvin: Whoa. I don’t think I’d tell them anything, actually — I think that conversation would be about asking: What are your aspirations? What do you think you need to get there? How do you think I can help you with that? I want to get to know them — where they’re thinking, what they’re thinking — and hopefully get some insight into how I might approach them. If I have fifteen people in a department, I’m going to have fifteen different plans — like it or not.

Kim Richardson: That sounds like a coaching stance — getting them to think future-focused.

Cleve Garvin: My style would depend on the moment. There are so many management styles you could use — there’ll be a time to be more directive, a time to be participative, and a time to just be part of the team. I’d have to figure out which approach fits the person. With you, for instance, I knew I couldn’t be a dictator, because you simply wouldn’t listen. I’d have learned that over time. But if I took a participative approach — just threw out an idea and asked, “what do you think, would this work for you?” — that would land.

It’s about getting to know your team, and then figuring out how you function within that. Now, at a higher level of management, you can’t manage that way one-on-one anymore — but the same principle holds: get to know them.

Kim Richardson: Were you ever in a role where you were the boss of the bosses?

Cleve Garvin: Three times over. I started at first level. The second level was boss of a boss. I was at third level, which was boss of the second-level managers. And I was at fourth level, boss of the third-level manager.

Kim Richardson: Wow. So how did your leadership change across those levels, knowing the impact kept getting greater?

Cleve Garvin: You have to go from micro to macro. The first level is the lowest — that’s down in the details, where the work actually happens. Say you’re manufacturing cell phones: there’s an area that puts together the cell phone parts — that’s a first-level department. There might be several of those steps in making the phone, and a second-level manager might oversee four different departments that all come together to build that phone. So it’s hierarchy upon hierarchy — but you have the same responsibility in terms of the end product.

As the fourth level, my job was to make sure the end product got done, leveraging all the areas that supported it. So the higher you go, the less hands-on technical you are at the lower level — but at the same time, I didn’t need to become an engineer myself. I had nothing to do with the engineering work directly, but I learned the right questions to ask and what to look for, so I could work effectively with my engineering counterparts. That’s still leading — you’re learning to lead.

Kim Richardson: And you don’t have to know everything the people you’re working with know — you just need a basic understanding and the right questions. That’s huge.

Cleve Garvin: It is. It’s learning where to pick things up, learning what you need to know, knowing how to connect the dots — and really surrounding yourself with people who will have your back.

Kim Richardson: Well, I’ll get you to close with this one. When the people you managed think about Cleveland Garvin, what is it you’re hoping they remember about how you led them?

Cleve Garvin: Oh, that’s an easy one — easy, because I’ve been retired for twenty-two years, and every year, at least once a year, a group of us get together for lunch. People who were direct reports to me, and people who were two or three levels removed from me. We get together as friends — it’s never that “boss stuff.” We just don’t play that.

In fact, I got a call just yesterday from a guy who used to report to me, wanting to know how I was doing and asking if he could come by to see me next week. And I still have people call and ask me personnel-management questions — “I had this happen, what do you think?” — that type of thing.

I think people genuinely enjoyed working for me. I know they trusted me. And the fact that they’re still asking me personal questions means a lot — it tells me I had some impact. It’s amazing. It really is.

Kim Richardson: Well, what a legacy — and the fact that that return is still evident and there for you. I’m so excited I got the chance to interview you, Daddy! There are so many connections here for our listeners. One of the biggest things I heard was the importance of emotional intelligence over technical skill as you rise through levels of management — and how having the capacity for self- and social awareness doesn’t automatically mean you’re executing and demonstrating it. So thank you, Daddy, for coming on the podcast.

Cleve Garvin: Thank you for having me. Love you guys, and I know you’re going to do well. And don’t forget those leadership lessons — study early!

Kim Richardson: I won’t, Dad. I will not. I appreciate all of you listening. Please don’t forget — leadership does not begin with a title, it begins with influence, which you heard today. So, with that, thank you for tuning in to Rise Up and Lead: Real Lessons, Real Stories, Real Talk. I’m Dr. Kim, and until next time — keep rising, keep leading, and above all, stay true to who you are becoming. Adios!

 

Cleve Garvin: Adios!