Leading to Empower: Reflections on "Multipliers" by Liz Wiseman

Borrowed & Learned

For our latest quarterly read, the Barrel Team Leads and I read Multipliers by Liz Wiseman. I chose this book to spark a conversation about what it means to engage our teams and help them reach their full potential. The concept felt timely for our leadership team and personally relevant. Over the past few months, I have brought on new leaders across sales, partnerships, and marketing and have been thinking about how to provide structure and support while still giving them space to lead.

The book explores two types of leaders:

• Multipliers, who amplify the intelligence and capability of the people around them, and
• Diminishers, who hold that capability back.

At its core, Multipliers is about getting more from the talent you already have by creating an environment where people can think, contribute, and grow.

Wiseman also introduces the concept of the Accidental Diminisher. These are leaders who mean well but end up limiting the people around them by stepping in too soon, offering too many ideas, or taking ownership instead of giving it away. I can think of moments where I have done all of these things! The first step is simply noticing, then choosing a different response.

As I read, I kept thinking about other leadership books that have shaped how I approach management. One quote from Julie Zhuo’s The Making of a Manager captures the spirit of Multipliers:

“A manager’s job is to be a positive multiplier for her team. When she isn’t, the costs are high: projects take longer because she inserts herself at the wrong times, outcomes are poor because she makes bad calls, or complaints pile up because her people aren’t getting what they need. Even when a manager isn’t actively making things worse, she may still be holding the team back. Maybe she can put out fires but she’s not helping the team become more fireproof. Or she can fill roles but not attract the best talent. Or maybe she requires more coaching to be effective than you have time to give.”

What I appreciated most about Multipliers was how it gave us a shared language for leadership. It put names to behaviors we all recognize, both positive and limiting, and offered a framework for how we can get more out of our teams without unintentionally getting in their way.

Below are the insights and stories that stood out most.

1) It isn’t how much you know that matters

“It isn’t how much you know that matters. What matters is how much access you have to what other people know. It isn’t just how intelligent your team members are; it is how much of that intelligence you can draw out and put to use. Multipliers are genius makers. They make everyone around them smarter and more capable.”

Early in my career, I thought leadership was about having the answers. Over time, I have learned it is more powerful to ask the right questions and create space for others to think. I wrote about a similar idea last year in a post on generative questions (here), how the right question can open up new thinking and unlock potential in others.

The most effective leaders I’ve worked with or observed did not rely on authority or expertise to move things forward. They built environments where everyone’s intelligence was surfaced and could be used. When people feel trusted to think, they step up, solve harder problems, and take ownership in new ways.

2) The logic of multiplication

“Resource leverage is a far richer concept than merely ‘accomplishing more with less.’ Multipliers don’t get more with less; they get more by using more. More of people’s intelligence and capability, enthusiasm and trust. ‘Eighty people can either operate with the productivity of fifty or they can operate as though they were five hundred.’”

Many organizations think in terms of addition. More people. More tools. More resources. Headcount, in particular, can feel like a sign of progress. It’s tangible. It’s exciting to talk about. But more people doesn’t automatically mean better outcomes, and more resources doesn’t guarantee success.

Multipliers challenges this instinct. True growth comes from better leverage, not expansion. This was core to my mindset when moving into the CEO role. The temptation is always there to hire first, especially when things get busy. But constraints can be a good thing. They force us to think harder, prioritize, and get the most out of what we already have.

Bob Fifer writes about this in Double Your Profits:

“My philosophy is always to keep resources very scarce, because that is the only way to force people to soul-search to decide which tasks are truly value-producing and which are not.”

This is about discipline and belief. It’s trusting that the people you already have are capable of more when given clarity and ownership. When we resist the urge to add and focus instead on engaging the team we have, things start to shift. People take more pride in their work. They think differently. And more often than not, they surprise you with what they can do when the solution isn’t to add, but to multiply.

3) In what way is this person smart?

“They think like one manager we interviewed who takes stock of her team members by asking herself, ‘In what way is this person smart?’ She then finds an assignment that both stretches the individual and furthers the interests of the organization.”

When I was leading the design team, I spent a lot of time thinking about how to staff designers on projects. It was never just about availability. I wanted to pair people with work that aligned with their passion and still pushed them to grow.

This question reminded me of that approach. Everyone is smart in a different way. The job of a leader is to see it, name it, and design opportunities that stretch it.

It’s also a helpful question when someone isn’t thriving in their current role. I’ve learned that sometimes it’s not about capability but fit. Are they in the right seat? Are we using their intelligence in the right way? Finding that answer can unlock potential that was there all along.

4) What’s getting in the way of your being successful?

“Mitt would determine what people were naturally good at and find a way to use those talents with the client engagement. In assigning people to roles, Mitt asked questions like, ‘What is the next challenge for you? What would be a stretch assignment?’ In one-on-one meetings, Mitt not only asked about the status of project deliverables, he asked about the blockers. A favorite question was, ‘What is getting in the way of your being successful?’”

This story is about Mitt Romney during his time at Bain & Company. He was described as a Talent Magnet. People wanted to work with him because they knew they would grow.

That is the kind of leader I aspire to be, someone who people know will help them move forward, not just get things done. The question “What’s getting in the way of your being successful?” is a small but powerful shift. It turns leadership from evaluation to collaboration and sends the message, “I’m here to help you move forward.”

I try to bring this approach into my skip-level meetings, where I meet one-on-one with everyone across the agency. Without intention, these meetings can easily drift into updates or small talk. Instead, they’ve become a space to understand what might be holding people back, what they need to do their best work, and how I can help remove those barriers.

My goal is to create an environment where people feel supported and where working at Barrel feels like an opportunity to grow.

5) Is this your best effort?

“When we allow people to think hard and stretch themselves, they produce the highest-quality work. Multipliers create an environment where people bring their best thinking and best effort every time.”

Wiseman shares a fun story about Henry Kissinger and this topic. After a staff member submitted a report, Kissinger asked, “Is this your best work?” The person hesitated and said, “I can do better.” Kissinger told him to redo it. When the report was resubmitted, Kissinger asked again, “Is this your best work?” The man replied, “Yes, it is.” Only then did Kissinger say, “Good, then I’ll read it.”

I loved this exchange. Asking “Is this your best effort?” builds accountability and pride in the work. It encourages people to pause and reflect before handing something off, to check in with themselves and their own standards.

Lately, I’ve been trying to integrate this idea into my leadership in different ways. Instead of asking for confirmation that something is done, I might ask, “Do you feel confident in this decision?” or “Are you proud of how this turned out?” It gives people ownership and opens up room for reflection, which often leads to a stronger outcome.

6) Give the pen back

“You can jump in and teach and coach, but then you have to give the pen back. When you give that pen back, your people know they are still in charge. When something is off the rails, do you take over or do you invest? When you take the pen to add your ideas, do you give it back? Or does it stay in your pocket? Multipliers invest in the success of others. They may jump in to teach and share their ideas, but they always return to accountability. When leaders fail to return ownership, they create dependent organizations. This is the way of the Diminisher.”

This excerpt made me think about Turn the Ship Around! by L. David Marquet, one of the most impactful books I read when I first became a manager. Marquet, a Navy submarine captain, transformed his crew by giving control back to them through clarity and competence. He encouraged officers to say “I intend to” instead of waiting for orders and believed that,

“Leadership is communicating to people their worth and potential so clearly that they are inspired to see it in themselves.”

I think about this concept often, especially in moments of crisis. Finding the balance between getting involved and stepping back is a constant work-in-progress. While I have learned that leadership is not about being all in or all out, there have been times where I have swung too far in both directions. These days, when things go wrong, I try to be intentional about identifying where and how I need to step in.

It’s never perfect but the goal is to help them find clarity, guide them toward a solution, and then step back so they can lead from there. I’ve seen how getting too far in or too far back creates dependency or confusion. “Giving the pen back” keeps the team strong and is a great little phrase I can see the Team Leads and I referencing down the line.

7) The Chips

“I suggested he limit his contribution in the meeting to five comments, represented by each of the chips. He could spend them whenever he wished, but he only had five. After the initial shock, he accepted the challenge. I watched as he carefully restrained himself, filtering his thoughts for only the most essential.”

Moving from an individual contributor to a leadership role within the same company has changed what engagement means for me. As a contributor, the expectation was to share ideas and participate fully. In leadership, it’s more nuanced. Depending on the dynamic, sometimes it’s about drawing people in, and other times, it’s about restraint.

The “chips” idea from Multipliers made me think about this balance. It forces you to listen longer, speak less, and make sure that when you do, it truly adds value. It’s not about holding back but being intentional with when and how you engage.

It also connects with an idea from What Got You Here Won’t Get You There. Marshall Goldsmith writes about the problem with “adding too much value.”

“It is extremely difficult for successful people to listen to other people tell them something that they already know without communicating somehow that (a) we already knew that and (b) we know a better way. … You may have improved the content of the idea by 5 percent, but you’ve reduced the person’s commitment to executing it by 50 percent, because you’ve taken away their ownership of the idea.”

That dynamic is something I think about often. The instinct to contribute can come from a good place, but too much input can unintentionally take away someone’s sense of ownership. The challenge is to strike the right balance: sharing perspective while leaving space for others to think, lead, and own their ideas.

The “chips” are a simple metaphor for that discipline. Leadership isn’t about being the most active voice in the room. It’s about listening closely, speaking with purpose, and helping others build confidence in their own ideas.

8) Let people struggle so they can grow

“Liberators create an intense environment that demands people’s best thinking and work, but not an environment that burns them out. They remove fear and give people permission to think, speak, and act freely. They create space for others to stretch and take risks. And they give people the space to make mistakes and expect them to learn from them.”

In the early 1990s, scientists built a massive glass enclosure in the Arizona desert called the Biodome. It was designed to replicate life on Earth, complete with forests, oceans, and fields. Everything thrived except the trees. They grew quickly but eventually collapsed under their own weight because they never experienced wind. Without resistance, they never developed the strength to stand.

With the new sales, marketing, and partnerships team coming together, it’s tempting to remove every obstacle and make things as smooth as possible. But lasting growth takes time, patience, and a few stumbles.

I’ve been thinking about this in my work with my assistant, too (another new role and hire). It’s easy to step in and correct mistakes, but the better long-term path is to let her learn by doing, even if that means letting her struggle. Taking the slower route now will lead to greater independence later.

One thing that’s helped is asking myself, “What’s the worst that can happen?” If I can be okay with that outcome, I try to step back and let things unfold. It’s rarely as bad as I imagine, and the learning that comes from it is almost always worth it. Like the trees in the Biodome, people need that wind to develop the strength to stand on their own.

9) You don’t need to shrink to be a Multiplier

“People often assume that Multiplier leaders have to step to the side in order to shine a spotlight on others, or that they play small so that others can play big. However, these leaders not only utilize all of the intelligence and talent of the people around them, they use all of their own as well. It’s not that these Multipliers shrink so that others can be big. It’s that they play in a way that invites others to play big, too.”

This can be a tough lesson as you grow as a leader. It can feel like you need to step aside to make room for others. What I’ve learned is that leadership is not about shrinking, it’s about evolving.

When I was a designer, my value came from the work itself. As I moved into management, it came from creating the conditions for others to thrive. Each stage compounds on the last. The more experience you have, the more you can give, and should give.

In Straight-Line Leadership, Dusan Djukich writes,

“As a straight-line leader your mission is to encourage and empower others, and let them get the credit. Straight-line leaders don’t call attention to themselves. They grow leaders all around them.”

It’s about using what you know to elevate others. Leadership isn’t a trade-off between your success and someone else’s. It’s about multiplying the impact of everyone involved.

10) Debate Makers

“Multipliers make decisions by first engaging people in debate, not only to achieve sound decisions but also to develop collective intelligence and to ready their organizations to execute. When the discussion was beginning to reach a settling point, they pushed harder, asking people to switch sides and argue against their previously stated position.”

I’ve been in plenty of meetings that get heated. Good things often come out of them, but afterward, you sometimes leave wondering if they went too far. Then I remember learning about how Jeff Bezos viewed conflict in Amazon Unbound and thinking differently debate in a team setting:

He believed the only way to get to good decisions was to passionately debate hard problems. If I have to choose between agreement and conflict, I’ll take conflict every time, Bezos often said. It always yields a better result.

Maybe tension isn’t something to avoid, but a sign that people care enough to push for a better outcome?

What I liked about Multipliers was how it built on that idea and reframed debate as something you can intentionally create. The idea of asking people to switch sides felt unique and exciting to think about. It pushes you to see issues from a completely different angle and challenges assumptions in a way that simple discussion can’t.

I’ve been thinking about how this could show up at Barrel. What if we made debate a more deliberate part of how we make decisions? It’s not about arguing to win, but sharpening ideas together. Starting with a shared question, debate could help surface better thinking, deepen understanding, and bring the team into closer alignment.

It could even be powerful to apply this with clients, debating from their perspective to see challenges through their eyes. It’s an exercise in empathy that can lead to clearer thinking and better solutions.

Thought

Do people grow in my presence?