Leadership Caffeine-Does Your Do Match Your Tell?
Filed under: "To Do" List, Career, Leadership, Leadership Caffeine
Fresh on the heels of my remarkably fun and productive collaboration with Mary Jo Asmus of Intentional Leadership on “The Words of a Leader,” I feel duty bound to remind you that while words are indeed powerful tools for creation or destruction, it’s your actions that will seal your fate as a leader. Or rather, how well your actions and your words match.
Only the Paranoid Survive to Lead Effectively:
With apologies to Andy Grove for truly misappropriating and slightly twisting the title of his great book (Only the Paranoid Survive), in this case, it’s true.
Everyone IS watching you and they are all passing judgment on your credibility as a leader. Constantly. Constantly that is, until they find you guilty of failing the test of credibility and they shift into compliance mode. You’re finished as a leader at this point.
More Practical Lessons in Leadership:
When Rich Petro and I were talking with leaders of all types and levels for Practical Lessons in Leadership, we truly wanted to understand what contributed to a person being perceived as a “credible” leader—someone that people trusted and put faith in to follow.
The answers from our interview subjects came fast and were surprisingly consistent. They had little to do with how articulate the leader was or how well he or she could paint a picture of a glorious new future.
Rather, the answers consistently focused on whether the words of the leader were backed by actions that supported those words. Any dissonance between the words and the actions was clearly identified by our interview subjects as credibility killers.
I loved the way one mid-level manager put it: “The do must match the tell.”
Simply and powerfully stated.
Opportunities to Watch Out for Your Do and Tell:
It might shock you to realize how many times per day you face little moments of truth where your “Do and Tell” are being judged. Here are some all too common examples of self destruction by the leader’s own dissonant behaviors:
- Issues of Accountability: it’s hard to be credible after preaching accountability but failing to deal with performance issues and poor performers. Your “Do” is showing and lacking here.
- The Jordan Rules: Star players contribute to championship teams, but if you’ve got two sets of rules…one for the star(s) and one for everyone else, your credibility is in trouble.
- The Closed Open Door: Enough with that “I’ve got an open door policy,” as you remain huddled behind a slab of oak that only opens to toss out a body after you shoot the messenger who stepped through the door on a rare occasion when it was open.
- The “Work harder so I can relax more” pitch: I love the characters that show up to harangue or implore the troops to push harder and then head out for long lunches or another in a nearly endless string of exotic vacations.
- The “Take Risks, Be Bold and Learn from Mistakes,” preacher: “Just not on my watch,” say their actions…as yet another formerly bold body gets tossed out of the rarely open door.
- The “That’s an important topic and we should talk about it at the right time,” manager: It’s never the right time.
The Bottom Line:
Watch out for the “Do and Tell” traps that snare so many leaders. Even the small situations…the exceptions and the odd circumstances will be viewed through the lens of credibility and judged accordingly. You don’t want to be caught with your “Do clashing with your Tell.”
Leadership Caffeine for the New Week: Bad Coffee and The Tyranny of Consensus
Filed under: "To Do" List, Career, Decision-Making, Leadership, Leadership Caffeine, Leading Change, Performance, Professional Growth
After a chilly Midwest spring weekend filled with tennis tournaments and outdoor chores, I was all set for a great pot of coffee this morning when much to my horror I discovered that I was in the midst of a coffee crisis.
In the rush of the weekend, I blanked out the need to run to the local roaster to restock, and was forced to break out my emergency stock. This coffee of last resort is something best left on the grocery store shelf in its pre-ground, encased in plastic, all the flavor removed glory. Oh well, it’s hot and caffeinated and will have to do for now.
Meanwhile, on to more important things than my momentary coffee crisis.
The Weekend Interview in the Wall Street Journal features retiring Chairman of Intel Corporation, Craig Barrett, and offers some interesting insights into the management practices of this 35-year silicon-valley veteran. The interview is entitled: “From Moore’s Law to Barrett’s Rules,” and the rules read as follows:
- “The business is bigger than the business”
- “Don’t mess with Moore’s Law”
- “Invest during hard times”
- “Consensus is good, except when it isn’t”
- “Follow the business, not Wall Street”
- “When something works, don’t reinvent it, reproduce it”
- “It pays to have good competitors”
While there is much wisdom in all of the rules (see the article for the detail), the one on Consensus strikes me as particularly important and often problematic for many leaders.
Like bad coffee, I’m not particularly fond of leading by consensus or even seeking consensus as a decision-making tool. I’ve long viewed managing by consensus as a “Tyranny of Mediocrity” approach to leading and making decisions. In seeking consensus, compromises are made that eliminate the more radical, revolutionary innovations and settle on solutions that make as many parties as possible happy.
My cold, callous and perhaps bad-coffee induced statement is that I don’t care if you are happy or unhappy about a key decision or direction. Your happiness, while nice, is your own responsibility, not mine as the leader, when it comes to running the business.
The right decisions often leave entire groups of individuals uncomfortable, because those decisions fly in the face of convention, demand change and often require the development of new skills.
General Eisenhower sought consensus on his decision to launch the D-Day offensive that ultimately led to victory for the allies in Europe. The lousy weather meant that logistics would be tough and more men would die. However the window was closing for timing and the element of surprise. Eisenhower’s generals were evenly split and it was up to him as the leader to make the call that would change the fates of so many individuals and nations. “We’ll go,” were his reported words as he stared out the window into the fog that was to complicate the day.
Now before you reach towards the keyboard to point out the errors in my thinking and wonder about how grumpy a person can get on bad coffee, at least consider that I didn’t encourage you to ignore individual or group opinions.
On the contrary, as the leader, it is your job to “seek first to understand” before you “seek to be understood.” Still, at the end of the day, for some issues, you must stare into the fog and decide on your own, in spite of your imperfect knowledge and the potential downsides of your decision. Relying on consensus may just prove too costly.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
I’ve watched and participated as an effective leader worked hard to understand the problem and the many ideas on resolving that problem. I’ve also respected the decision as that leader ultimately concluded on a direction that was based on his view of the issues, strategies and the potential impact on our customer and competitors, rather than solely on the opinions of his team. While my approach might have been different, I understood that once the decision was made, it was time to implement.
First-time leaders often make the mistake of assuming that they need to make everyone on their team happy by adopting a consensus style. I’ve observed this approach carried over into mid career and even in some cases used by senior executives. It has always struck me as an approach that is OK for the small stuff and horribly wrong for the big calls that rest on the shoulders of leaders.
Thanks to Mr. Barrett for pointing this out. Don’t let the Tyranny of Mediocrity be your legacy.
Six Strategy and Leadership Lessons from Studying World War I
Note from Art: this post is not for the faint of heart or for those that fail to enjoy the lessons of human history and warfare.
I often look through the lens of history for lessons in leadership and strategy that can be applied in business. While the lessons are subject to the interpretation of the historian and his or her biases, it is instructional to view pivotal events in human history with the benefits of the passage of time and a significant amount of analysis.
Unfortunately, it seems as most of the pivotal events of human history involve wars. We seem to be preternaturally disposed to fighting each other for power, land ideology and resources, and in spite of the passage of time and the lessons learned in blood, we have not purged this lust, although the form of the fighting evolves constantly.
While war is an odious event, there are many lessons to learn—both good and bad from the leaders that give birth to the events as well as from the leaders and followers that prosecute them.
Perhaps it was my era in the U.S. education system, but our focus in history classes tended towards the American Revolution, the Civil War and World War II. Somewhere in the process, World War I was covered, but never in detail. Perhaps because we came late to that horrific European conflagration, but nonetheless, in my educational upbringing, WWI received short shrift.
I’ve set out to fill in the gaps of my knowledge by reading John Keegan’s work on World War 1, and just to keep things moving along, I added in the historical novel on this same period from my one of my favorite writers, Jeff Shaara.
While absolutely not qualified to comment in a scholarly fashion on this fascinating and difficult point in modern history, a number of powerful and oft-repeated leadership mistakes and lessons jump out at me.
Six Leadership & Strategy Lessons of WWI:
1. The signs of impending disaster and conflict are generally visible for all to see well ahead of time, however, whether due to idealism, naïveté or fear (or some combination), we often choose to ignore the signs.
It was inevitable that the U.S. would enter the War, because our fate and the fate of Europe were inextricably linked, we just choose to ignore this reality for as long as possible.
By the way, weren’t the signs of our current economic debacle there for us to see? Of course they were, we were just too busy enjoying the excesses of our policies and hoping the bill would not come due.
2. The hubris of leaders is always the issue. This distinctly human characteristic gives rise to our wars; helps determine outcomes and sets the stage for future disasters.
Wilson’s idealism and naïveté were every bit as wrong as those of the leaders creating and prosecuting what came to be a nightmare in slow motion.
This same failing is visible in the many decades of mismanagement of our auto industry and more recently in the financial and real estate markets.
3. The failure to innovate leads to stagnation and demise. Like so many insane people, the parties to the conflict defined the rules of the game and refused to change, despite the fact that the results were guaranteed not to change.
The trench warfare that evolved became the way of life and death for years, with little attempt to innovate out of that nightmare. The barbed wire barriers proved to be killing traps with no way through or around. It took an American innovation—the use of chicken wire over the barbed wire that allowed troops to literally march over the acres of wire and change the rules of the game.
Businesses often metaphorically beat themselves to death in a slightly more civilized version of trench warfare, relying on obsolete tactics and ignoring the reality that no one will gain a sustainable edge. It’s only when a more nimble entrant changes the rules that the outcome of the game changes.
4. Mistakes beget future mistakes. The Allied conduct and policies towards Germany at the end of the war….more hubris tinged with vengeance and a hefty dose of head-in-the-sand” guaranteed World War II.
The conflict was never resolved; it just was allowed to fade away, much to the chagrin of General Pershing and others that dared to peer into the future. And while the fighting faded, the handling of the human side of the process sowed the seeds of the next conflict. The Allies broke the economic back of Germany, and in the eyes of the more radical leaders, including Hitler, humiliated her people.
This same thing happens every day in the world of post-acquisition integration. Much of the value of the potential merger is squandered due to the egos of the acquirers and the horrendous handling of people issues.
5. The right leader and the right charter count!
Perhaps the one thing that Wilson did right was put the responsibility of the American involvement in the war on the shoulders of a remarkably capable man, General Pershing, and provide him with an unencumbered charter to lead. Although the U.S. government was often a barrier instead of a help to the effort, Wilson was true to his word and let Pershing conduct the theater of operations without interference.
The lessons here are obvious, and still we often fail to learn from them. Find and cultivate great leadership talent and give them a charter and the requisite latitude to operate.
6. The leaders don’t win the battles, the soldiers do. It’s fascinating to wonder what type of leadership skills are necessary to ensure that humans willingly climb a muddy hill in the face of machine gun fire, bombardment and near-certain death.
For the farm boys from Nebraska and the city boys from New York and Chicago, this was not their fight and their land, but they willingly fought and overcame their natural fears to face down the machine guns and help turn the tide of the war. What remarkably brave, courageous people and what tremendous followers. Will your team members metaphorically do the same for you in business? Will they crawl uphill in the mud and in the face of fire, bent on success and innovating and adapting along the way?
Closing Comments:
There are literally hundreds of other lessons to be gleaned from studying this time in history. It was a period of remarkable innovation with the birth of air war, submarine warfare and of course the rise of the tank. All of these dramatically affected the rest of the twentieth century.
On the people side, there are ample lessons to learn from the logistics magic pulled off by a few of Pershing’s staff. The creation of supply lines across the Atlantic and the massive logistical efforts created the infrastructure necessary for success. The same holds true in business, where an entire organization’s efforts must be coordinated to deliver value to the customer.
There is much to learn from our experiences as humans, and while war is horrible, it is also instructive. Learn and grow, and perhaps we can avoid many of the mistakes that repeat so frequently both in business and in the business of nations.
Leadership Caffeine for the New Week: Lead with Passion!
Filed under: "To Do" List, Career, Leadership, Leadership Caffeine, Performance
I’m taking my morning coffee to go for the first few days this week as I catch a commuter train into downtown Chicago to run a leadership workshop at The Data Warehouse Institute’s World Conference.
The audience at this week’s conference is predominantly technical as you might imagine from the name, and my leadership session is often in competition with heady sounding programs on Master Data Management and Data Governance.
And while a program on leadership and developing as a senior contributor might not have the cache of these deep dives into all things data for many of the attendees, the professionals that have the courage to sign up and attend this course never cease to wow me with their enthusiasm and passion for their own development and the development of their colleagues.
The Power of Passion in the Workplace
The passion that a leader brings to his or her work is the secret sauce in a winning recipe for creating an effective working environment and developing a high performance team.
Good leaders understand their role, work hard on developing credibility, listen and ask questions and provide coaching and mentoring. Great leaders do all of that and they infuse everyone around them with a sense of excitement for the adventure.
Jack Welch in Winning indicated, “Leaders make sure that people not only see the vision, they live it and breathe it.”
The best leaders do this by using their genuine passion and enthusiasm to help turn the working world and all of its inherent headaches and challenges, into something that feels like a great adventure.
Think about those that you’ve worked for that lacked the special-sauce of passion for their work and the work of the team. Thoughts of drudgery, boredom, compliance and escape jump to mind when I think of the manager that was clearly just marking time and cashing a paycheck.
Alternatively, when I’ve been on teams where the leader worked was committed in words and actions to the team’s success, and where challenges were viewed as future victories, it was remarkable to see the results that developed.
Keep in mind that passion is different than disingenuous cheerleading, which will only send people in the opposite direction. The passion that you show must reflect the pride you have in the team and the importance that you place up on the work being performed.
What type of leader are you?
It’s never too late to rediscover a sense of pride and ownership in your craft.
Is this the week that you light the pilot of passion in your work and help your team develop that sense of adventure that is so powerful for all of us?
Improving Your Odds of Success in Driving Change
There is a fascinating article on Change Management in a recent issue (Issue 2/2009) of the McKinsey Quarterly (subscription required) by Carolyn Aiken and Scott Keller, entitled: “The Irrational Side of Change Management.”
And while much has been written over the years on this important and vexing topic, the authors offer some insights and ideas that they describe as counter-intuitive, but potentially helpful in improving your odds of success with these initiatives. This article alone was for me worth the hefty annual subscription price.
On a depressing, but not surprising note, the article cites a 2008 study of over 3,000 executives that found that 1 in 3 change-management initiatives fail. These low success rates have been well documented by Kotter as well as other researchers in the field of change management.
Art’s Observations on the Failure Rate: We all know that most change management initiatives fail miserably. Recall your own reaction to the latest program or makeover handed down from on high. The majority are met with emotions ranging from curiosity to outright cynicism. On the other hand, think of the rare initiative that stuck. Why did this one work? My unscientific guess is that the leaders worked hard to create an environment ripe for change.
The authors cite the 4 basic conditions necessary for change according to the theories around the psychology of change management:
- A compelling story-employees must see the point and agree
- Role modeling-employees must see management and other colleagues behaving in the new way.
- Reinforcing mechanisms-systems, processes and incentives must be in line with the new behavior
- Capability building-employees must have the skills required to make desired changes
Their thoughts on how these 4 conditions are applied: “The prescription is right, but rational managers who attempt to put the four conditions in place by applying common sense typically misdirect time and energy, create messages that miss the mark, and experience frustrating and unintended consequences from their efforts to influence change.”
The authors go on to share nine insights into application of the 4 conditions that explain why change initiatives might fail and how to improve the odds. My focus in this post is on two of the insights related to the “compelling story” condition for change.
First: “What motivates you doesn’t motivate most of your employees.”
While we tend to focus on telling stories about what has changed and why we have to change in kind, or what we want to accomplish, research shows that people respond best to stories that address five forms of impact:
- Impact on society
- Impact on the customer
- Impact on the company
- Impact on the working team (environment)
- Impact on “me”
The money quote here: “This finding has profound implications for leaders. What the leader cares about (and typically bases at least 80 percent of his or her message to others on) does not tap into roughly 80 percent of the workforce’s primary motivators for putting extra energy into the change program. Change leaders need to be able to tell a change story that covers all five things that motivate employees.”
Second: “You’re better off letting them write their own story.”
We as executives and leaders go to great lengths to tell our change stories. We call special meetings, conduct town halls, run webinars, write blog posts and often walk away feeling like we’ve done our job. We’ve spoken, the message is clear and everyone must agree or we’ll single them out as resistors.
The authors suggest that while the stories about the need to change (told in ways that address the five forms of impact) have to get out there, we would be better off listening more and telling less.
“This reveals something about human nature: when we choose for ourselves, we are far more committed to the outcome (almost by a factor of five to one). Conventional approaches to change management underestimate this impact. The rational thinker sees it as a waste of time to let others discover for themselves what he or she already knows—why not just tell them and be done with it? Unfortunately this approach steals from others the energy needed to drive change that comes through a sense of ownership of the answer.”
Art’s Observations: While there is much more to the article than I am highlighting here, just the lessons from the first two points alone are worth the price of admission. My robust translation of these points includes:
- Leaders, you’re going to have to recognize that just because you say that we need to change doesn’t make it so. Frankly, there are a lot of reasons why people will distrust or ignore your calls for change. If you don’t carry leadership credibility (beyond the title), you are likely spewing hot air.
- I love linking the 5 Impact points to the story-telling process on why change is needed. Several of these are very personal and as the authors highlight, those things that we choose and value for ourselves are much more powerful than those given to us.
- Last and not least, the idea of setting the stage and then shutting up and letting people ferret out for themselves why change is needed and what it means is something you can put in place today. Quit talking, start listening and if you do have to talk, mind your Questions to Comments ratio.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
Like so many things in leading and managing, there are no silver bullets for success. A lot of really smart people try and drive change and fail. Those that succeed seem to have intuited that change is intensely personal and that their role is to create an environment where the need for change can be processed and where individuals can take control of defining the terms of change. While it seems that just when the leader thinks that he/she should be hands on, is precisely the time when he/she should step back and let go.
More soon on this compelling topic.
-
Chosen by Guy Kawasaki's Alltop.com as a top site in the Leadership category.
Podcast
Available Now!
Practical Lessons
e-book
e-book-Leadership and the Project Manager - Developing the Skills that Fuel High Performance
