It correctly notes about 40% of leaders in business (and elsewhere) are actually introverts. That shouldn’t be such a surprise, but it usually is. Being quiet, thoughtful and liking ‘alone time’ has never stopped actors, singers, speakers and leaders in other supposedly ‘extraverted’ endeavors from excelling. It’s not as clearly understood as other ‘obvious’ leadership traits that we are normally trained to think of, but introversion can contribute a lot. We need balance, and who better to understand how to balance the demands for being out in public with thoughtfulness than people who can see both.

In a presentation I have coming up for a senior university class on leadership, I thought I should show some photos of myself as a kid so these younger students could related to the gray-haired, bespectacled guy in front of them – someone who was a super shy, introverted kid who ultimately was able to learn to succeed as an executive and speaker. To me the transformation has always seemed almost unbelievable. I dragged out some old shots and was surprised to find I didn’t look as scrawny and geeky as I thought and I could actually see the progress, in increments, from that kid to the full fledged executive I ultimately became.

                                        
The kid………..             the union leader………          the graying executive.

So I thought I’d go find a photo of someone somewhat ‘geeky’ looking like what I had in my mind when I thought of myself in those teenage years. What turned up was a photo I will show the class with the comment, “As a kid I was convinced no one who looked the following guy, like how I thought I was, could ever be a leader, let alone someone who could make real contributions.” Nobody ever told me leaders could be like this unless they more or less walked on water. I think the message here is, when you see yourself as weak and introverted, it almost doesn’t matter what  you look like – you’ve put limits on yourself that no one else is seeing. Thankfully I had experiences that slowly, but surely helped me develop a different style of behavior, yet I continued to see myself as the shy kid I was once. Here’s that photo: I wish.!

Bookmark and share this post

More »

I wrote the rest of this post to a friend, another keen observer, David Creelman of Creelman Research, who brought it to my attention. I realize this is actually a review:

Just finished Managing and have some thoughts it seems good to put down here. It’s an impressive assembly of far-reaching thinking. I think it will probably frustrate and confuse a lot of readers, which is too bad, but possibly an inevitable step in recognizing what really works. The management/leadership complex is just that – very, very complex without any clear single answers, very situational and requiring unique fit or adaptability to succeed at. I agree with the general premise, but would word it a bit differently. I would say not have said we are wrong to hold up leaders as worthy of examination and sometimes praise, but we are wrong to deify the idea of leader and leadership (and wrong to talk about it as a set of things that can be learned by the usual rote learning we get in schools). However, I believe that leaders do make a difference if they operate as Mintzberg outlines – constantly learning and reflecting and by trial and error efforts to improve things. I’m sure he would agree and wonder a bit why he didn’t make that more clear.

As I see it, organizations solidify the ossified structures they form in hopes of sustaining themselves as the original driving leader(s) move on. Theoretically the structure that worked should be able to adapt with new people coming into the slots and changing them to fit changing circumstances, but we haven’t paid nearly enough attention to that concept. We treat the structure almost as sacred once it’s in place (despite the tendency to constantly ‘re-organize’ to solve every problem, which really amounts to re-arranging the deck chairs – it doesn’t really change much – the power hierarchy is too attractive to those rising in it). To some extent the organization structure does ensure some continuity, but for how long if it doesn’t evolve?

It’s easy for those appointed to assume that they somehow inherit the stature of those who built the organization in the first place, not realizing it wasn’t a one-person show, but a cooperative effort that may be seen from outside to be one person. The fact that some initial leaders are strong-man types who create by force and maintain power by force leads to confusion as well. When we know that 90% plus of leaders believe they’re in the smartest 10%, it’s easy to see why they are so willing to try to impose their vision as Mintzberg points out is so common among those newly promoted. At that moment you’re at the peak of confidence in your infallibility; it’s just been proven, so why not impose it? Then it’s hard to back down and reveal your uncertainty as things begin not to work. You may not even realize it isn’t working and just apply more force to drive things the way you ’see they will work if only everyone cooperates (with your vision).’

We need to help people see that maintaining and developing existing organizations is no less challenging, but very different from the initiating, entrepreneurial phase, that a different type of leader, adept with equally difficult, but different challenges, is needed – one who needs to manage and lead in a very different way, with more visible involvement of others typically, building a truly learning organization, which has to start with a learning leader.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

These are powerful, important questions that we’re finally beginning to see asked and answered more often. I like this practical answer at Chief Learning Officer magazine online. But it’s important to understand the role employees play and what anyone can do about it.

This came to mind again with a phone call from a colleague wanting to know what makes a good leader and venting about two hours they’d just spent listening to a manager gripe about their CEO in a small company. “The boss is selfish, lazy, uninterested in anyone’s ideas for improvements,” went the complaint, “My great talents aren’t being used; I’m only staying for the money.” Sound familiar? We’re told about half of all employees or more feel this way much of the time.

In varying degrees we hear this everywhere. I’ve quoted Bob Eichinger of Lominger/Korn Ferry before – that only about 18% of managers have the key people skills for leading and developing others, that these skills fall in the lowest 20% of skills among most managers. Yet, to answer my friend’s question about what leadership is, people skills ARE leadership, so the scarcity of them indicates exactly how scarce effective leadership is in organizations. If we could raise that just 10% or 15% across the board, results would skyrocket.

Once a company grows beyond about 25 to 50 employees in size, employees can no longer be simply extensions of the leaders abilities. Until then a really hardworking boss can probably get around and tell each employee exactly what to do and how every day. Above that size the futility of that should be obvious. Employees have to be empowered and entrusted to take initiative and do things the boss hasn’t specifically ordered or blessed, so the leader’s role becomes encouraging, stimulating creativity, coordinating and supporting initiative where it makes sense – a very different job than controlling every activity day by day.

We shouldn’t be vilifying weak leaders as much as asking ourselves how best to improve their skills and help them transition from command and control styles to coaching and developing. Companies, even many of the biggest and best funded, some of whom spend millions on leadership training, are doing a lousy job of this in the main. How else to account for the finding that 82% of leaders lack the most critical skills for their roles. Hopefully the blizzard of articles and books on what it takes to get results with people will start to make a dent in that gap.

More on this in future posts.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

First my interest in studying happiness led me to attend the First World Congress of the International Positive Psychology Association based around the first MA course set up Marty Seligman of Penn State, whose book, Learned Optimism, I always highly recommend). The inexpensive, well-attended (1500) conference was great and all the ‘who’s who’ of Positive Psych presented – Diener, Haidt, Fredrickson (many of whom I’ve mentioned in posts previously) and many others, some known, others not so much. An amazing amount of research has been done in 10 years of the concept’s short life and a number of countries have actually absorbed the general principles as a way of measuring the success of government policy. After all, what is the purpose of government if not to create the environment for happier lives. Perhaps this is even a concept business might look at. We know for a fact that happier employees are more productive. More on this as we go forward.

Second, I spent considerable time thinking about why I don’t post more. And concluded, not totally surprisingly, that I only feel like doing so when I think I have something of value to say. What a novel concept. Of course, it’s very personal since, like most sites now, there is some unknown, potentially large number of people who MAY be reading some of this, but typically a lot fewer than 1% comment, so you have no real measure. Perhaps there are thousands of people out there just dying to hear everything that pops into my head. Somehow I pretty much doubt that. If so, I apologize, but you’re always welcome to let me know.

In the mean time, I will stick to my new timetable – whenever something is significant in my opinion. I’m not in this to pump out posts every day or attract business or a huge following, but to see if ideas can evolve into useful forward movement. With so many blogs and discussion groups desperate for readers, attention and significance, I’m happy not to compete every day. It will either add up to value in the long run or it won’t. Over time the Internet needs better ways to help people locate material of true interest to them. Maybe then the right people will find what they need here. In the mean time I’ll keep at it. occasionally.

Third, this coincided with some thinking about ‘full retirement’ whatever that might look like. I concluded that for me it probably looks like what I’m doing – bits of this and that – work, volunteering, travel, etc., all melded together. My idea of great travel was going to the conference, for instance. And I’m blessed with a spouse who is happy to tour those towns on her own and then guide me to the best parts we can share together.

My main conclusion was I should stop soul-searching about all of it – the ‘worry’ was a drag and I enjoy the stuff I do. While I don’t market, the work coming in is just fine. I like to be engaged and hopefully always will be, but not at the expense of a strenuous sales effort. Again, either people are interested or they’re not. Wouldn’t it be great if the world could work this way for everyone. It’s great that people write about what they and others are doing and keep us aware of new products and services. We all want to hear about things we think might improve our lot, but. do we really want the hard-driving sales ‘attack’ that so many businesses feel they must keep up?

Bookmark and share this post

More »

The second trait he pulled out is Emotional Stability. Is it any wonder a big company CEO might need the skills or temperament to tolerate rocky surroundings and keep on trucking? You can’t get to the top without being severely buffeted by conflicting demands, crazy work expectations and dramatically challenging personalities around you. To forge ahead Conscientiously in that environment takes Emotional Stability, for sure. We  hope in personal life to have it a bit smoother, but for many it isn’t too different.

The fact these traits are possessed by pretty much every big company exec – and needed in most of what we ourselves do – stick-to-it-iveness and the emotional balance to persist long enough to get results – should be no surprise. So they’re ‘common’ to everyone. But that’s not to say these are their only traits nor that having them makes them ‘dull’ as Brooks argues. The top notch people I mentioned are or were highly unique personalities that we’d describe as anything, but dull.

The problem is exactly that these two are not ‘enough’ to get the very best results. Beyond sticking to it and staying the course, we need to be creative, able to work well in teams and energetic enough to care to, whatever the origin of that energy – belief, faith, commitment to a great goal, faith in people, whatever. These other three can all come from very different sources, hence the uniqueness of personality and style we see. When we look deeper we see that the first two traits can come from very different sources, too, not just gritting our teeth discipline.

Viva variety. Yet we see the five core needs for success are pretty much the same five in every endeavor, for every person. HOW they achieve them can be unique, but not whether they work. These are the five skill areas I work to help people discover and develop – ones that turn up in every book on success and which anyone can build for themselves if they simply keep focused and keep adding to steadily, conscientiously. throughout our entire lives: it isn’t over till it’s over. unless you flat out give up.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

While it remains to be seen whether the current economic crisis will reverse this again, it’s reassuring to know things can improve. In the UK concerns about work stress seemed to be reaching an all time high when I spoke to their national HR group a couple of years ago. Recently the same group noted cautiously that work hours are falling and that this seems to indicate that individuals are exerting more control.

At the same time, Queen’s University’s Industrial Relations Centre highlights an international study of nearly 10,000 executives from the Journal of Applied Psychology (2008, Vol 93, #4, pp.789-805) showing some male and female managers achieve better work-life balance and, moreover, those who do actually have higher career advancement potential.

Interestingly, an HBR book published last May, Total Leadership, by Stewart Friedman, founding Director of Wharton’s Leadership Program, reinforces this,  arguing convincingly that leaders can only improve their work performance by simultaneously improving in four areas of life – work, community, family and self. The subtitle: “Be a better leader; have a better life!”  Balance!! Need I say it again?

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Two in particular come to mind this season. Vertex One, an unusual Canadian investment company, always sends an unusual book to its clients. This year: A History of the World in 6 Glasses by Tom Standage. His “first glass” describes plausibly how beer likely was one of the great forces pushing humans to create cities, leaving behind 150,000 years of wandering in hunter-gatherer bands virtually overnight a mere 10,000 years ago. From there we’ve evolved the amazing science, technology and organizations that offer us totally different lives today. Yet beer continues to exert an influence. Such time scales change the way we look at our present, miraculous information evolution in less than a generation via the Internet. I would never have thought such a book would be worth reading, let alone the source of numerous amazing insights.

That led to recalling the phrase “remember how unlikely is your birth” – each one of us being entirely unique. Shaped by millions of interwoven circumstances, we’re both significant and amazingly insignificant in the grand flow of time and the universe. This is a line from a Monty Python song from one of my favorite movies, highly irreverent “The Meaning of Life,” mostly forgotten in the daily flow of minute by minute.

It’s one of those ‘you have to see it’ things. Fortunately you can, though whether it should be legally free is another puzzling question from our instant communication revolution. It’s here on YouTube via Stumbleupon, another Canadian success story.

The best part of holidays for me is the time to ponder the imponderable. I’m always glad to get back to practical challenges, but with a new perspective. Have a great new year!

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Many have argued unions have served their purpose and are no longer needed in our modern era because employees have all the rights they should expect. Yet bullying, arbitrary terminations and capricious management decisions continue to occur in most organizations.

I’m relatively a conservative who would sometimes take a dim view of this. However there is no doubt, not a shadow, that there is still room for employees to be increasingly involved in decisions and management of organizations. How this happens will be very important. This ruling allows it to evolve over a long period of time, through lengthy and expensive court challenges that will define a further new era in employee involvement. Although costly for the few “bad actors” who will be involved directly, this way of staging change “slowly, but surely” should actually prove beneficial, far better than some sudden leap to new legislation.

Whatever your view on this, you might want to take a look at this article by Queen’s law professor, Kevin Banks, which concisely explains how the Canadian Supreme Court has determined to open up labor laws to further, perhaps endless, challenges that unions can now undertake to extend worker rights.

The upshot is to give added impetus to what HR managers have been saying for decades – you get the unions you deserve if you act poorly, and you prevent third party involvement if you proactively ensure your employees are involved, engaged and consulted. This will slowly drive less HR-conscious companies to get with the program and start involving people more broadly. Stats show this actually pays off in far superior results, but if that carrot hasn’t provided enough incentive, this will certainly continue the “stick” threat toward much deeper and more complete implementation of effective practices.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Of course, these are really the same four issues. Buy-in by managers would mean they would follow up their staff’s training with coaching and mentoring thus producing learner buy-in. So how do we get this? The most successful answer is to start at the coaching-leadership end of the chain. If managers work in a culture where they’re expected to coach and they have some experience (and training) in how to do it, it becomes natural for them to be following up regularly with how people are doing.

When you lead by coaching, you work in a pattern of coaching all the time as the primary way of managing every issue. On daily coaching rounds with staff, you naturally ask, “how’s it going” and hear about their experience at training. You enquire what they plan to do with it – “what they really want” from it and that would lead to mutual objectives that you would be asking about in future conversations. This is far from rocket science as they say.

Experiences employees have, whether in training, attending meetings, conferences internally or externally, working on teams and projects and so forth all are things a great leader keeps up with, asks about and takes an interest in. When follow up is just “the way we always do things here” we have a culture of effective leadership. Questions about “buy-in” just don’t arise. If managers and staff aren’t bought in it’s because they have no mutual interests in what’s going on daily.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Several very different factors are evolving rapidly in society, having begun 30 or 40 years ago, now becoming visible in many places. Best known, most obvious is the impact of the PC dating from the first Apple computers built in Steve Jobs’ garage in 1975. Not only have these changed world history, but we don’t yet know how much or what the most powerful impacts will be. From pure record-keeping to social networking the story is far from finished.

Less well known, but now quite clear in direction, we can date recognition of the amazing power of effective HR from the takeover of GM’s Fremont, California car plant by Toyota, who were able to double production with the same people, machines, suppliers, etc., in just two years and have continued to boost productivity steadily since – for 25 more years – a management/human resources process that in incredibly powerful.

Then Complexity theory, with roots in biology and mathematical systems, least well understood, tells us that complex situations behave in similar ways in all endeavors, all challenges from physics to human behavior. HR – or human behavior – is the most complex area of all.

Complexity theory tells us that thousands or millions of “independent agents” working on problems will evolve rapidly to produce amazingly powerful, unexpected answers that turn out to be based on simple principles. Of course this is exactly what we’re seeing on the Internet… and at Toyota’s Fremont adventure called NUMMI – notice their simple principles: teamwork, equity, involvement, mutual trust and respect, and safety.

With blogging and social networking conversations, often truncated, halting and confusing, by millions of people someone will stumble on answers and ideas that will change the world in dramatic ways – and some of those will be further clarity in HR and leadership.

We now know HR process can revolutionize results. What we don’t fully understand yet are the simple principles that work together to create the right framework for this to occur in the widely varied organizational situations we face. We know what work on auto assembly lines.

Hospitals are struggling to apply complexity theory directly, a confusing path based on the concept of “positive deviance” or “copying the successful people from thousands of attempts” at solving a problem like rampant, drug resistant infections. More of these efforts are being tested world wide. The potential to solve political and organizational problems never before resolved logically is enormous. Those whose conversations lead them to the best solutions stand to reap equally enormous benefits.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

I’ve always loved technology, so it’s easy for me to say. But none of it is completely transparent and easy. The new blog hasn’t been as easy to finish setting up as I’d hoped, but it’s been a chance to try engaging help via elance (a popular site for hiring virtual help, mostly in this case for techie challenges like web design. It’s only one of many, though that provide a mind-boggling array of services.

The technology is amazing, but the first time you try anything there’s a learning curve. Fortunately you can usually get advice from Google at any point along the way.

The real quesiton is going to be how many of these new initiatives you can juggle along with everything else. What’s the ROI for individuals trying this stuff? Are we going to drive ourselves crazy or can we anticipate there will be a limited number of sites and programs to learn and then we’ll feel “fully equipped?” Somehow that seems a bit unlikely just at this point. What’s your take?

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Lack of balance for people means they cannot persist long enough to succeed in a big way, that they will burn out before that happens. Lack of balance for organization strategies means some stakeholders will be left out and will ultimately derail the objectives. Lack of balance in arguments ensures that many will not buy in…. You get the idea. Balance is a word I’m accused of using far too often, but the fact is you can’t succeed highly effectively without it in every situation.

None of this takes away from the fact that at times we need to throw balance to the winds and simply “go for it.” But we need to step back and look at the bigger picture, too. We can’t rush headlong every day on every issue without damaging both people and results in the long run. As often as we laud supreme, Herculean efforts, we need to praise the ability to sustain effort over time and refuse to give up no matter what humdrum setbacks we encounter. Different kinds of commitment and persistence must balance together for total success.

I’m thrilled to be able to start a new site and blog that I can entirely operate myself. Wordpress looks like the answer and it seems to improve steadily as most free, open-source software does. It’s been remarkably easy to get going, though surrounding questions like what to do about past sites and links abound. They can all be worked through – with persistence – and I fully intend to enjoy the journey as much as the results.

So, welcome, I hope you will find it as interesting as I do. I will shortly say goodbye to my old blog at http://www.crispstrategies.typepad.com/and eventually my old web site, too (www.CrispStrategies.com), combining both here.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

His own blog, Simplicity, I’d describe as a rather quirky, opinionated version of the concept, but that’s a plus. It takes your thinking in new directions and collects links to some other very interesting, somewhat quirky stuff as well.

I started with his video and then some background, but was very interested to skim some of the blogs he links to, like these: Promanager , Hillbilly PhD, Phil Gerbyshak’s Make It Great which in turn refers to this list: Top Productivity and Lifehack Blogs (a Lifehack, by the way is blog-speak for cute tips and shortcuts you can use to improve your life – or "hack" your life, in other words).

The only trouble I have with blogs, including my own is too many and too much to read. They work if you keep focused, but it’s easy to get sidetracked in a thousand directions.

What bloggers link to is often misleading because they mix personal and business interests and some bloggers waver back and forth between the two far too much to make either aspect useful. If you believe in Serendipity (lucky coincidence) great, but finding what you’re actually looking for can be a long haul.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

Exactly.  The "clear objectives" noted in the quotation are the Strategies (as I call them in my model) that you choose to arrive at your goals.  "Workable implementation" means building Habits.  And "the discipline to stay the course" is all about finding Balance in the midst of constant up and down emotions ranging from highly Positive to Honest recognition of the hurdles.

Why emphasize the same five key words in every single situation instead of finding a specialist and learning specialized words for each new challenge?  The reason is simple.  Doing so connects what we do successfully in one situation to all others. When we generalize our skill we give ourselves a far greater chance of succeeding immediately in every new situation without much additional training.

Every time we read a success story, we are likely to find the author using different words from earlier ones.  The result is people imagine the principles may be different in each situation when they are not.  By seeing the pattern in the skills you develop for one situation, you can apply the same principles immediately to the next.

The ultimate objective is to give people themselves the tools they need in the simplest possible form to achieve whatever results they want.

Showing how to apply these five basic concepts consistently in every situation means people become expert at all of them and at balancing them together.

One way to reinforce this for yourself is to translate what you read about success in any situation into these five ideas.  You’ll begin to see the pattern instantly wherever you look.  That will add to the ease with which you use the skills in an unfamiliar situations.

Bookmark and share this post

More »

I’ve long pointed out my objective isn’t to do research myself. Several people, noting my interest, have suggested I start a PhD. Not for me, thanks. I love working with actual clients way too much. Their needs are usually short and easy compared to the time needed academic work. Besides there are others who enjoy it more and are probably better at it. I see my role as simplifying a lot of hot new findings and relating them to what produces results for individuals and organizations.

This relatively new (last year) McKinsey work deserves a much wider audience. It reinforces much of what we already know, but puts some solid proof behind it. And it simplifies quite usefully.

The take-away is this: you or your organization can get far better results from people by focusing on just two things. First, stop doing dumb things or using patently bad practices. Second, focus on three to five key practices that work together. Pursing practices that don’t work together or choosing single "quick fixes" is one of the bad things you should stop doing.

That raises two questions. How do you figure out what’s bad? Easy. Most people already know because others have told them many times, but they don’t want to admit it. A sure-fire way is to ask others what you do that bugs them. Then stop it. At a company level, my old employer persisted with a bonus plan everyone laughed at. The biggest gainer each year was a guy who purposely set stretch goals and failed to meet them. The problem was his goals happened to be to reduce his sales to ease the company out of his line of business. Each year he didn’t make the effort to reduce so his sales far exceeded the low target he set. Paradoxically that meant he beat people who set targets to raise sales and failed to make as much over target as he did. A simple fix could have made this logical, but senior management refused to change anything several years in a row. So the entire bonus plan became a joke… and a serious irritant. Similarly bosses have often been told not to yell at employees. These things aren’t rocket science. Just stop. But many executives can’t seem to grasp this.

Interestingly, the key HR practices that the McKinsey guys found reliably improve results turned out to be very close to the five I recommend at every level, for all size of situations from individual to total organization. In their findings, these boiled down to setting a clear, inspiring vision of the goals needed, then developing a culture of positive trust and openness (honesty) and finally helping each person see clearly what their own role is in achieving these goals. I would only add – keeping these factors in balance as you move forward. That’s captured in their insistence that these only work if they work together. When one or two are allowed to dominate and aren’t balanced with the others, things break down.

They go on to point out, as I do, that neither individuals nor organizations need to be perfect. Far from it they say. What’s needed is consistent effort. And their stats show companies who do this versus those that don’t end up with double the results financially (and every other way) over the courses of a year or two. You can see why I get a kick out of following such research. It consistently validates what I show people how to do. Pretty simple, but highly effective.

Bookmark and share this post

More »