In January I was lucky to convince iconoclastic Henry Mintzberg to speak to the HR think tank I volunteer for (Strategic Capability Network) through a friend, David Creelman, who keeps up with a wide range of management and HR (Human Resources) guru’s. Henry’s presentation showcased a new program he’s been developing as an antidote to his complaints about MBAs (as in his book: Managers not MBAs). It’s called “Coaching Ourselves.” The idea is to get managers together in small groups to walk through a PowerPoint handout that guides them to ask questions about a particular management topic they’re interested in. Mintzberg’s organization develops the PowerPoint  guides for a variety of topics so groups can select the topics relevant to them at the moment – just in time learning, action learning and self-guided learning rolled into one. It’s a great idea, which I think will develop a great following over time, no doubt with lots of imitators.

That was January. Since then speaker after speaker has pointed out that Gen Y (and piggybacking on them, all the other generations now at work) want more autonomy, more discussion, more input into strategy development, to be listened to more by their managers and senior executives, to have a real hand in what’s going on.

True, there’s always an overtone of “they don’t want to pay their dues,” but what is becoming increasingly clear as we all think about that is that no one ever wanted to pay dues. When we started out, that’s just the way it was. Bosses could insist that we trudge along in humdrum jobs “paying our dues” and waiting till we were promoted to have any say in what went on. Now with instant communication keeping every employee a lot more in the loop and allowing everyone to be heard whether senior management expects it or not, there is simply no holding back the ideas that flow from more and more employees.

What’s truly new is that many Gen Y staff don’t have to hang around if they don’t want to. Mom and Dad are willing to put up with them moving back home. Mortgages and babies don’t hang over their heads to the same extent they did with the Boomers, who inevitably had to shut up and go along.

Now not only Gen Y, but many workers have more independence. Being out of work isn’t the disaster it was 40 years ago. We tell executives to get used to interruptions and 4 to 5 month job searches periodically due to re-organizations and lay-offs. Today it’s part of normal career progression. And all this comes at a time when, despite economic setbacks we still believe there will be a shortage of good managers and leaders well into the future, so we have to learn to cater to their desires in order to keep as many as we can and attract the best of the others. Many companies have started to figure this out and so are far more willing to listen… and listening is most of what it takes to develop a new, better kind of leadership.

Over the course of this past year there’s been remarkable progress toward a “tipping point” where more and more companies realize they need new coaching-style leaders. I’m just going through the 10 or so reviews I’ve written over the year on forward-thinking HR practices and strategies plus tons of stuff I’ve read and realizing every single thought leader has urged pretty much the same solutions. Still, we continue hear arguments about details – whether we need this or that Talent Management System, which is the best Performance Appraisal method or Succession Planning program and so forth.

While we’re debating the nuts and bolts, though, we need to recall there is now very broad and clear consensus on what makes HR work best – carefully integrated practices and styles throughout the organization’s people programs, not piecemeal fixes – all directed at involving, listening to and engaging all levels of staff and management to retain the best and attract more like them. In the midst of complexity we’re finally beginning to find simplicity – points on which pretty soon everyone will agree. Remarkable what can evolve in a year once the ball is rolling.

Listening to Kevin Cashman this week on the update of his well-known leadership book offered a chance to reflect on the extent to which the climate in which HR (Human Resources) operates is changing… or isn’t. Interesting that Cashman’s writing retains its Zen flavor, something one might think wouldn’t sell well in the corporate world, but he’s been consistent for more than ten years now.

Cashman updated his book to include more research and case studies that confirm the value of its recommendations – that to create change, a leader must first change him or herself. It’s a message more leaders need to hear. In fact, in my piece for Canadian HR Reporter, I make the point that this is why there are so many bad leaders, a question we constantly hear. A leader who thinks their role is to tell others to change, but has no intention or expectation of changing themselves is a bad leader and there are lots.

Cashman’s point with the update is there are many companies beginning to notice this principle and use it to hire or promote better CEOs who in turn create and lead better executive teams, who in turn lead more effectively for results. The problem is that “many” is a relative term. Where before there might have been a handful of such companies, now there are twice or three times as many – still a handful compared to the vast number of organizations out there.

Listening to Cashman and knowing he’s been stumping the world at conference after conference for years makes one wonder how many of have to push this message out before it becomes everyday stuff for leaders in organizations. Somewhere there is a tipping point, to borrow Malcolm Gladwell’s book title and concept. It can’t come too soon for all the people who continue to struggle in companies that haven’t picked up on this message.

As it happens, it’s my pleasure to MC a Gladwell book launch event shortly after his new book, Outliers, hits the shelves finally next Tuesday. I’m grateful to have this opportunity to finally meet him as well as hear directly what he has to say. Of course, I’ll be posting about it shortly after that.

Times are really changing for leadership and HR when such information is absorbed so readily and more people seek to put it to use. How Outliers is received will be the next measure of how much.

Marcus sure gets mentioned a lot both by those who agree you shouldn’t waste time trying to change your weaknesses, only work on strengths and those who strongly dispute that. If you’ve followed my posts you may guess I believe in doing both! That’s the Zen answer. But which ones when and how much?

A key function of Human Resources is trying to get people hired or existing ones moved into jobs that fit their strengths. Buckingham would be right in thinking I’d be wasting my time aiming for the Olympics, definitely not in my strengths. But every athlete or manager who legitimately wants his or her role and has talent still has “weaknesses” to work on. It would make no difference to me if my biggest problem in the 100 meter dash  was my start, but for those who win or lose by microseconds, knowing their weaknesses and working on them is huge. And to suggest they not bother would be completely wrong.

So, should we only work on strengths – no way! But starting with strengths and working on them as well as what makes them weaker than they could be is essential. Since studies show the lowest rated skills for most leaders are all aspects of working with people (versus things), we clearly need to promote those with inclination and relevant ability, but we also need to work hard to ensure they get exposed to experiences that help them grow people skills.

Tips: How to choose what to work on

Ideally trial and error and solid self-reflection have landed you in a job you like a lot. (If not, figuring out what you really prefer is priority #1.) Then, to get better at what you like doing:

1.    Try to evaluate and especially ask others for their opinions of your strengths and weaknesses for this work. Take time to assess accuracy. Don’t be reactive to emotional issues about these and don’t take anyone’s first word, especially your own.

2.    Work on your three or four biggest strengths… by looking at your weaknesses in those areas, planning a strategy to improve them and consistently doing a bit each day whenever they come up. Set reminders for yourself or you’ll forget.

3.    Then look at your two or three biggest weaknesses. Really look. Some may not be as bad as you think; others are worse. Be aware you have a couple of approaches – first, get someone else to do those things instead (a team member, co-leader, spouse, etc.). Figure out how to be great without ever doing these. Don’t let yourself be tempted. Pamper the people who do this for you so you’ll never have to. …But also… decide on one, just one, weakness you really, really, really want to change. Create a plan and work on it every day, asking people continually how you are doing and asking for their help and suggestions. Make this into a daily habit of practice. In a few months or a year or two, evaluate your results. Chances are you’ve made enough progress (and built some continuing habits) that you can choose a second miserable area to work on. But expect to keep working on these for the rest of your life. They will never come entirely naturally.

4.    Periodically assess your results and the balance between work on strengths and weaknesses, not letting either completely absorb your energy – do both. The proportion of time you spend on each is a balance only you can decide.

The bottom line is you can’t easily change weaknesses, but you better know what they are and have a strategy to prevent them de-railing you. Over time you can certainly improve some of these areas, but only if you work hard on one at a time and choose only those you really want to change… and then persist, persist, persist. For me this has meant a lifelong drive to get over feeling shy. I’ve developed tons of behaviors that work most of the time, but there are still areas where my original habits continue to affect what I do and unless the day ever comes that isn’t the case, I’ll keep this in mind and keep working away at little bits.

Often when you’ve had a chance to sleep on it, some remark you’ve made the day before seems incorrect (that’s the polite word) or maybe just dumb.

Yesterday I suggested that "multitasking" would be OK if you’re working to help people become better while also working toward an objective was an exception to the rule against trying to do two things at once. That’s not what I intended, I see in retrospect.

In fact, it’s better to say you should look for ways to achieve two ends at the same time with the same, single action. By helping others improve, you get work done - through them, with them and even on your own as you model for them how they could approach things. It’s a way of working and thinking about work that ultimately produces better results in every situation.

It really isn’t a "multitask" because you’re not stopping to help them and then stopping that to go back to work, you are doing both together, sometimes working alongside them on a problem, sometimes on your own, but with the objective that your work will help them move forward in some way.

Of course, we can’t avoid distractions. They happen all day long inevitably. But we can avoid distracting ourselves by attempting multiple tasks at the same time. Everyone gets caught up in the sense of urgency and the layering on of one new demand on top of the last.

We have to catch our breath sometimes and say stop the roller coaster, let me sort out what to work on first, second and third and then do those in that order… without trying to do every task simultaneously. If the goals of every task include how this improves things for people as well as achieves results, we’re on the right track. If we can’t see how, we need to rethink our approach to it until we find a better strategy for it.

The volunteer leadership think tank I work a lot for, Strategic Capability Network, had the pleasure and good luck to host Dr. Mintzberg in January on the subject of a new project he’s developing. It’s goal:  simplifying leadership development to a program companies can do themselves in-house that will compete with the International and Advanced Management programs he’s run for years - the new one at a cost of a few hundred dollars versus the $45,000 to $100,000 tuition per person for the International and Advanced programs.

The long-time management guru (not at all too strong a word for a professor, author of 140 articles and13 books like Managers Not MBAs) has always worked toward taking the mystery and myths out of effective leadership… and now out of leadership development.

The new venture, CoachingOurselves, is fascinating if not entirely unheard of previously, but its great to see an acknowledged master show how simply we can develop leadership skills.

In this approach groups of managers, usually four to seven, meet together with the role of chair rotating among them, on topics of their choosing. They follow a guide in the form of an agenda and a few PowerPoint slides, created by Henry or his co-authors and learn on their own from their own discussions about their own experience.

He suggests the primary model is that the group meet once a month for about an hour and a quarter for as long as they feel they’re benefiting. So far there are intended to be a couple of hundred topics to choose from with about 20 or so currently available and more in development that can be tailored, costing in the range of under $200 each - that’s $200 for all five or six people, not per person… and no travel cost or time.

Obviously the major advanced and travel programs can expose managers to experiences, people and diversity that no in-house program could duplicate. Nevertheless Mintzberg insists the core feature of the expensive programs carries over - managers sharing their own experiences and learning from open discussion with each other. So it’s "go big or go home" literally, with the option to learn at home now being a valid one.

It isn’t a program that creates learning, it’s individuals’ willingness to learn and to share their thoughts, knowledge and experience with each other that makes for more effective leadership. And we know from personal experience that doing it consistently beats a one-time shot in the arm every time.

People at every level of work often ask how to cope with frustrations they feel sometimes to the point of despair. Some days it seems there isn’t a sane boss or co-worker anywhere. If it helps to know you aren’t alone, I can certainly reassure you. Not only do I have my own moments of despair (and I’m the only boss I have to blame for that), but being in the leadership coaching business, I hear this constantly from every direction. Unfortunately it’s part of humans working together.

People need to vent. It helps to have someone just listen. Often this can’t be a spouse because it causes them too much worry and they usually just want to convince you things aren’t so bad. Co-workers may cause problems, too, by gossiping about your venting. With splintered families and social relationships there are fewer listeners. A non-work friend or coach is definitely a better choice, but they in turn need to learn coping skills to handle the deluge that usually arrives.

Venting is healthy - to a point. When it goes over the same ground too many times and becomes circular, it’s just more worry. You need to break off the conversation and come back later. Once the person is stuck in the rut, they can’t and won’t let go. They just want your commiseration at that stage.

When you pick things up later, a technique called reframing helps. First, see the challenge differently - it’s a learning opportunity. You’re going to encounter many others like the person now causing grief. If you can learn to handle this one, you’ll be far less likely to reach this awful level of despair next time… so can we move from that to get focused on strategies for coping and improving the situation?

Examples might help.

Recently a friend told me how he’d actually jeopardized his career because he was so frustrated with his boss. He’s in charge of quality improvement and needed the boss’ support to insist other managers follow the process he’d designed. The boss kept advising to cool things off, but my friend is evaluated on results and there weren’t going to be any unless people cooperate. In a risky outburst he basically told the boss she wasn’t doing her job and should get off the pot and do it. This resulted in a counter-speech about "catching more flies with honey than vinegar."

Ouch! Listen when you get that comment. The boss is telling you to cool it and they mean it. Further outbursts are definitely likely to be career limiting. A far better solution is to draw the boss in by asking for coaching. Ask how you should approach people, how important it is to get results, what should you do if there aren’t any by year end? This way the boss can solve problems with and for you and can see what you see… that results, which she, too, is ultimately responsible for won’t be easy to get without a better strategy.

Another recent case: a co-worker of a friend was asked to present to a team meeting on my friend’s project (and take credit for work my friend has laboriously achieved in improving relations and results with a difficult client). This capped some obvious prior efforts by the co-worker to get my friend to give her all the information about the project. Was the boss suddenly favoring the co-worker and ignoring my friend and her effort? Well, it didn’t sound like it to me. My friend had opened our conversation by telling me she’d just been given a terrific performance appraisal rating her in the top 10% of all employees… by the same boss.

Once the venting was over (or at least waning), I suggested the boss might see my friend as so superior she was becoming a "fixer" - opening new client relationships, getting them up to speed and then being able to turn them over to a weaker co-worker and take on yet another challenging situation. If that’s true, that’s not only a great compliment, but a major step toward ensuring promotion to more money and responsibility.

Before venting to the boss or complaining, it’s important to seek feedback that could help determine if the better interpretation is or could be in play. Perhaps the boss hasn’t been fully aware that’s what they were doing and how my friend might react. If asked, "is this what you want me to do, train my co-worker," he might leap at saying yes… or at least begin thinking, "that’s not a bad idea," to my friend’s great benefit. Venting could hurt.

Often these useful twists only come to mind after the initial conversation. Both parties have to get out of the rut they set for themselves when they approach the situation with highly emotion. Emotions don’t let go within that first conversation. You need time out. The next day or so is usually soon enough to step back and ask more strategic questions, look at other possible interpretations and where they could take you. You can even go get several opinions (again, ideally from non-work, non-spouse parties). If you ask, "why else might someone have done [whatever it was]," you may be surprised.

Next - what if there isn’t a really good alternative interpretation? Settle on the most positive one you can even it seems far-fetched… and then check it out… doing so may actually help it come about. No single guess may be the best view. It often takes trial and error to work toward something positive, but just the step of coming up with one new idea to try takes a lot of the sting out of the situation and gets you back to driving toward a solution instead of just sympathy.

A group of financial executives recently asked me to help them develop more creativity.  They feel their profession requires so much attention to detail that being creative is an under-used area for them and they know little about it.

It’s great to have a group identify an area they want to know more about and recognize they might have limitations.  It’s often said you can’t learn anything you think you already know.

The good news is most of this group already have a great deal of creative skill.  They just don’t know what it feels like and how to find it.  That’s a key purpose of understanding the five basic leadership skills.  When you know how they work, you know where to find your creativity.

Creativity arises together with use of the other four skills as a package.  Each of us tends to be more creative in areas where we do the most work.  Since accounting frowns on "creative bookkeeping," it’s a concept accountants don’t think they know much about, but as a group they’re about as creative as anyone else.

The first key to creativity is to develop a goal for something new you’d like to achieve.  That takes practice.  Goals aren’t as easy to come by as people make out.  In fact developing a goal happens while using the other skills, through repetition. 

Great goal setting is a habit like any other.  Take your best shot at setting a new goal for yourself, then working toward it will clarify the process. As you start toward this tentative goal, you need to believe you can achieve it or, more accurately, get beyond it.  Don’t let it be too small.  This also takes practice.  Just do your best. 

Start to research how others achieve this sort of goal.  As you do, you’ll struggle with doubts and flashes of inspiration and positive thinking.  Keep balancing pros and cons as you test out each new idea for achieving your goal.  Keep trying. 

Keep looking for new ideas as you encounter hurdles.  Don’t give up the goal… but you can modify it, expand it and refine it.  Persist.  Think of this process as developing habits that will help you piece by piece to move forward. Here’s where creativity really begins. As you persist you’ll find yourself coming up with more and more creative, new ideas that didn’t occur to you at first.  Eventually they will begin to be substantially different and new, beyond things you’ve been reading or have heard about.  That’s creativity pure and simple.  Remember the famous quote from the most prolific inventor of all time, Thomas Edison, "Genius is one per cent inspiration, ninety-nine per cent perspiration."  This is the way to perspire effectively.

In short, creativity is a habit that takes time to build.  No matter how creative we think someone is they got there trying one idea at a time with a stretch objective in mind.

"Success is not complicated. Clear objectives, workable implementation plans, and the discipline to stay the course…" reads a testimonial on the website of a change consultant from an organization he helped. 

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.

I just gave someone blogging advice that applies to anyone wanting to get attention and more business - offer tips.

Case in point: one of the many email newsletters I keep finding myself on the list for is from Lynda Goldman (http://www.impressforsuccess.com/). The first I’ve seen arrived recently with a tip for being more charismatic.

The tip: Stand and walk tall. There’s a lot of truth in this. You’ll project confidence, speak more strongly, seem a bit larger than life and generally send the message that you know what you want, what you’re doing and that you can’t be dissuaded. Confidence is attractive and, to some degree, catching, so people feel better aournd you.

Is this really charisma? Well, probably if you practice it enough to make it your usual style of presenting yourself, it could be. It won’t be if you do it only occasionally or drop the manner suddenly in the middle of something. Then it will appear false, as a facade, a feeble attempt to be something you’re not. Whether you "are" or "aren’t" really depends more on whether this becomes habit. If it does, you’ve raised your charisma level permanently.

Only you can decide if this is something you want. There are trade-offs. Particularly if you begin to believe your own press (very appropriate word here since Goldman is a communications expert) you may become insufferable. But you don’t have to. You can find a balance. You can develop skills to use in appropriate situations and not in others. It takes time either way. Adding a new capability always gives you more options.

Can it ever become "as good as the best natural" charismatics? That depends on how much you puruse the initial stage you reach. You can always go further, add other behaviors that typify charismatic people. Over time you can pretty much go as far as you want. Can you ever catch up with someone who started in their early teens or get ahead of them. That, too, depends - on how hard, how often and how insightfully you practice.

So the tip makes sense. Whether you choose to pursue it depends on your sense of whether you need it, whether it adds something you want to your skill set and how much time you are willing to devote to it in lieu of devoting time to other things. It rarely takes as long as you might think.

Given that we have such choices, the next challenge becomes sorting out which to pursue. It makes little sense to waste a lot of time on something you’re not going to follow up fully.

Now all I need to figure out is why I can’t accept a perfectly good tip without analyzing it to death. The short anwswer is that it doesn’t make as much sense to me if I don’t.

A news column pointed out a very interesting, relatively new site http://zenhabits.net. Blogger, freelance writer, Leo Babauta, gathers some excellent points and suggestions about personal change and productivity through simplicity and basic changes of habits.

I was disappointed to read criticisms of his site based solely on the fact some feel he isn’t truly representing Zen. The purists, I fear, will just have to get used to the idea that Zen is in the public domain. Not everyone will apply the terms the same way. It’s associated with ideas that are simple and practical as much as it is with challenging concepts of philosophic detail. I’m on Leo’s side. I’ve read, as it appears he has, a good range of ideas, discussion and works of Zen from masters, observers and philosophers. His ideas seem as valid as anyone’s about the practical applications of Zen principles.

The particular piece I saw citing his blog referred to his Haiku Productivity principles - a neat way of saying let’s keep it simple… and by doing so you can accomplish your work in much less time. In his view you can do all you need work-wise in a couple of days a week. You can find the reference by putting Haiku into the search engine on his pages. This idea is growing in popularity as evidenced by books like "The 4 Hour Workweek" by Timothy Ferriss.  Personally I prefer Leo’s Haiku principles.

Ferriss seems to me logical enough, but in ways that few could reliably immitate. Unless you get lucky with a breakthrough idea, I can’t believe you’re going to succeed financially with a new company the way he happened to do. It’s tempting to model yourself on success, but we have to remember that the people who do all the work he doesn’t do in his 4 Hour week company are closer to observing him than readers of his book - but they haven’t yet all run out and copied his example successfully. If it were that easy, no one would actually be accomplishing work.

On the side of Zen Habits, these are things a single individual would seem to have a reasonable chance of emulating that can serve as examples others can use in their particular fields. It’s rare that I run into blog pieces I so thoroughly wish I could have written. Keep up the great work, Leo.