Leadership requirements of the future: What is ahead?

Centauric is launching a exploration of the  future requirements of leaders. We are speaking to thought leaders, scanning the literature and making on the ground observation. In the next few weeks we will be publishing reviews of key articles and posts. Join in the conversation at Centauric Thinking.

What Makes a Great Leader?

What qualities do you think every great leader possesses? Vision? Integrity? Openness? Creativity? Fairness? Assertiveness? Humility? Human resources experts have used those words, among others, to describe the traits leaders should have…but that verbiage falls short of actually defining behaviors that separate so-so leaders from those who are consistently successful.

When one of our clients, about to undergo a search for a new CEO, asked us about desirable leadership traits, I encouraged thinking outside the box, just like Tony Schwartz, author of “Be Excellent at Anything.” He takes a slightly different approach to identifying skills great leaders should have, drawing from his personal experiences working with inspirational people, and finding that great leaders possess four key capacities:

1. The ability to recognize employees’ strengths and believe in their abilities, which leads to expectations that become self-fulfilling. Employees will seek to excel when they have the support and confidence of their leader.

2. The ability to understand employees and meet their specific requirements. When employees’ core needs are met (physical, emotional, mental and spiritual), their performance and sustainability are positively affected.

3. The ability to clarify what success looks like, and then empower and trust employees to determine how to achieve it. Employees need to know what’s expected of them and have the freedom to complete those concrete deliverables as they see fit.

4. The ability to embrace their own “opposites,” i.e., vulnerability balanced by strength and confidence alongside humility. Employees will learn to value themselves, despite their shortcomings, when they see leaders freely acknowledging their imperfections.

Schwartz concludes that great leaders recognize the best way to get the highest value from employees is to give the highest value. That sounds a lot like “lead by example,” a concept that never seems to get old.

Schwartz, Tony. (2010), The Four Capacities Every Great Leader Needs (And Very Few Have), HBR blog

How Rude!

Think about the last time you witnessed someone being rude at work. Did it make you feel uncomfortable? Provoked? Angry? Did it have a negative affect on your job performance, or how you feel about your peers?
A coaching client recently told me that one of his coworkers rudely blasted him in an email about an initiative he was implementing. Adding insult to injury, the email was cc’d to others. My client was shocked…and he felt betrayed and unmotivated to move forward. This is a valuable reminder that how we treat our colleagues has a significant effect on our engagement with work.
Unfortunately, the odds are pretty good that you’ll see someone being rude in the workplace; for up to 25% of employees, it’s a daily occurrence. A 2009 study conducted by researchers from the University of Southern California and University of Florida investigated how witnessing mistreatment influences work performance. They focused on how individuals behave after seeing a co-worker experience mistreatment or rudeness, concentrating on whether it affected their task performance, creativity and/or citizenship behavior.
The study found that witnessing rudeness from a superior or peer affects performance on routine and creative tasks, and also reduces citizenship behavior. It can actually increase anti-social thoughts and behaviors, as a way of enacting revenge. It’s still not clear whether rudeness reduces effort or affects cognition, but it sure does impair the outcome!
These results could be extremely important, as they suggest the possibility that observing rudeness can be a starting point to a spiral of distaste and aggression toward the workplace or colleagues. Maybe our kindergarten teachers were right…a little common courtesy isn’t such a bad idea!
Porath, C.L. &Erez, A. (2009). Overlooked but not untouched: How rudeness reduces onlookers’ performance on routine and creative tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 29-44.

Team effectiveness is not “bullet-izable*”

After a long day of reviewing the proposed annual plans for each of the company’s organizational groups, we all felt we had been drinking from a fire hose. The experience left the members of the executive team on edge as we broke for dinner and some social time.

By the next morning, a typically withdrawn group of managers was ready to vent their frustrations. The newest member of the team observed:

We will contribute better thinking and align ourselves for action if we spend less time reading PowerPoint slides in a meeting and spend more time preparing in advance for dialogue and deliberation.

Seeing proposals for the first time in a PowerPoint format drained the material of its nuances and didn’t provide sufficient opportunity for analysis or reflection. Of course this made sense. In the 2003 Wired article “PowerPoint Is Evil“, Edward Tufte argues that the program encourages “faux-analytical” thinking that favors the slickly produced “sales pitch” over the sober exchange of information.

Ruth Marcus adds that

The deeper problem with the PowerPointing of America — the PowerPointing of the planet, actually — is that the program tends to flatten the most complex, subtle, even beautiful, ideas into tedious, bullet-pointed bureaucratese.”   (PowerPoint: Killer App?)

Some leaders in the U.S. Military go so far as likening PowerPoint to an enemy. In a 2010 New York Times article “We Have Met the Enemy and He Is PowerPoint,” U.S. Brigadier General H.R. McMaster, who has banned the application’s use for military briefings, reflects

It’s dangerous because it can create the illusion of understanding and the illusion of control… Some problems in the world are not bullet-izable.*

Aligned commitment to action requires both nuanced understanding and sufficient opportunity to discuss implications, options, and tradeoffs. Whether the final decision results from group consensus or having a leader who declares the way forward – understanding and dialogue are critical success factors.

The team member who complained about PowerPoint had a good point. The way it was used in this situation served to inhibit deep understanding and prevent give- and-take conversations. By carefully designing a meeting agenda and interactive process, Centauric was able facilitate a conversation that transcended PowerPoint resulting in commitment to a clear well-considered plan of action.

Drinking On The Job Creates A Dilemma For Young Companies

Years ago I was doing some conflict management at a large brewery. It was a shock at 3pm when the participants headed to the refrigerator to collect their afternoon refreshments. They explained that in the past the bar was open all day but there had been too many forklift accidents – so now office staff waited until three and factory workers collected a case to take home at the end of their shift.Fast forward to a recent meeting concerning the organizational culture at a growing Internet business in California. One of the things people told us they really liked was the availability of alcohol at work – especially when they worked late or when there was a celebration. The consensus was that the policy on alcohol demonstrated the firm’s trust in its staff and it created a cool vibe at work. This was not a unanimous opinion. The new head of HR highlighted the litigation risks should someone leave work and get into an accident. The CEO acknowledged his dilemma but wasn’t ready to shut things down.

Up the coast in another office, our culture survey uncovered “the Beer Fairy” who would visit hard-working staff who volunteered to stay late to get the job done. The CEO thought the beer fairy was a competitive advantage in his quest for talent. The HR director was not amused.  Same story.

The CEOs in our example are not the only ones with a dilemma, a recent article in Bloomberg News, highlights the issues and risks as well as the growing trend toward making alcohol part of the workplace. The bottom line is the bigger an organization gets the greater the risks. Risks include increased accidents, sexual harassment and litigation.

Drinking On The Job Creates A Dilemma For Young Companies

Years ago I was doing some conflict management at a large brewery. It was a shock at 3pm when the participants headed to the refrigerator to collect their afternoon refreshments. They explained that in the past the bar was open all day but there had been too many forklift accidents – so now office staff waited until three and factory workers collected a case to take home at the end of their shift.

Fast forward to a recent meeting concerning the organizational culture at a growing Internet business in California. One of the things people told us they really liked was the availability of alcohol at work – especially when they worked late or when there was a celebration. The consensus was that the policy on alcohol demonstrated the firm’s trust in its staff and it created a cool vibe at work. This was not a unanimous opinion. The new head of HR highlighted the litigation risks should someone leave work and get into an accident. The CEO acknowledged his dilemma but wasn’t ready to shut things down.

The CEO is not the only one with a dilemma, a recent article in Bloomberg News, (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-13/booze-makes-comeback-in-workplace-with-silicon-valley-twist.html) highlights the issues and risks as well as the growing trend toward making alcohol part of the workplace. The bottom line is the bigger an organization gets the greater the risks. Risks include increased accidents, sexual harassment and litigation.

Internal Client Service – The dilemma of a great organization.

Organization dynamics can yield counter-intuitive results. Hiring great people who love what they do and giving them cool projects should be the foundation of collaboration and innovation. When colleagues like each other it gets even better. But when their value for harmony interferes with direct frank communication – trouble is on the horizon. In fact negotiation and balancing priorities involve an exploration of differences that can be seen as risky by people who don’t see conflict as constructive. This is only part of the picture that emerged in a recent series of conversations among the members of one of our clients. The good news is that people of good will who slow down to look at their situation and compare notes are in the best possible position to juice up the culture and build a foundation of internal client service that will provide a great experience for colleagues and external clients alike. These kinds of conversations are even more effective when a neutral third party facilitator provides focus and reinforcement for problem resolution.

Change Management: Shifting from Thinking to Doing

We are currently supporting the implementation of a significant new organization design in an operating company that makes, sells and delivers its products across a large area.  A team of consultants and company executives has been working for months to come up with a detailed design that will offer the appropriate balance of corporate control and local flexibility. Models have been tested and seemingly endless role descriptions have been generated. Now it is time for the rubber to meet the road.  So what is the hold up?

Regardless of the detailed plans and many hours of discussions and briefing sessions, the managers who will actually have to make this work in their own areas continue to ask for more information, details and time.  What do they really need? Is it possible to answer their questions? Should leadership delay implementation as the general managers are asking?

Bitter workers dream of post-recession jobs

“Take This Job and Shove It.”
The ‘70s country song, performed by Johnny Paycheck, sounds as outdated as electric typewriters,
carbon copies and pastel leisure suits.
Today, the lyrics might go: “Thanks for this job — I really need it.”
If you’re of working age and employed, lucky you. You’re not a statistic in the Great Recession’s
jobless recovery.
But just because you’re getting a paycheck doesn’t mean you’re happy. Or even grateful.
According to a married pair of “business shrinks” (my phrase), many American workers are keeping
their own angry counsel. These closeted malcontents are waiting, just waiting, to tell their bosses to
shove it.
“Because times are bad, companies assume people won’t leave,” says sociologist Tina Beranbaum.
“That’s true for now. But not when there’s a glimmer of hope.”
Beranbaum, a former McGill University professor, and husband Mitchell Shack, an industrial
psychologist, head up Centauric, a La Jolla-based consulting firm that helps companies “get the best
out of people” (their phrase).