Leading Effectively Series
|
So, are leaders born or are leaders made?
As a point for debate, the "born" versus "made" question doesn't generate the same heat that it once did. It might be fun to pose the question to undergraduate students who are getting their first exposure to leadership theory, but the grizzled veterans of the leadership game know that leadership is a learned behavior forged from the combination of experience, support, and training.
At CCL we might as well have a sign on the lawn that says ‘leaders made here.’ And yet, along with all we know about how leaders are made, we can’t deny that some are born with certain advantages. There is one specific advantage some are born with that we were able to clearly comprehend even at the tender age of 5 years old.
The advantage is height.
My colleague, Michael Campbell, and I have found the research on height fascinating.
Several studies indicate that taller men are more likely to be successful and that they earn bigger paychecks. In one study, each inch in height amounted to nearly $800 more a year in pay. The average height of US Presidents is, at 5 ft 11 in, about two inches taller than the average man. Corporate CEOs also tend to be taller and a quick look through CCL’s leader database of 4600 senior executives confirm that senior executives also stand taller than the norm.
So how can those who don’t tower over the masses overcome this apparently innate (born) disadvantage? As with many other facets of leadership, your behavior plays a key role in how you are perceived.
Lara Tiedens, an organizational behavior professor at Stanford Graduate School of Business, has done extensive research on the ways executives acquire status. According to Tiedens, people often use height, or an inflated appearance of height, to look more powerful. Leaders who look directly at others, use an open stance and vigorous gestures, speak loudly in a deep voice, and lean in close are perceived by others as more competent.
Tieden’s research has also shown that women can mitigate the potentially negative consequences of behaving in a more traditionally male mode by pairing assertive speech with a concern for the relationship and a sense of liking people.
So we’d like to hear from you. What physical characteristics do you associate with leadership?
“One of the hardest tasks of leadership is understanding that you are not what you are, but what you're perceived to be by others.” -Edward L. Flom, CEO of the Florida Steel Corporation, in a speech, May 6, 1987.
The dirty little secret about the top leadership in many organizations is that neither they nor anyone else in the organization understands or can clearly define their value proposition.
While the media gives extraordinary attention to their every hiccup and stockholders live and die by the CEO's health and well-being, few can say how they are supposed to work their magic (leaving aside Peter Drucker, of course).
The recent appearance of Steve Jobs onstage to present the updates to Apple's music business was greeted with a collective investor sigh of relief that resulted in a large breeze here in San Diego, 458 miles away.
When I'm in a mischievous mood, I will sometimes ask managers and workers in a company, "What does the CEO actually do?" It's not unusual to get a panicked stare as my answer, followed by some trite response, like "Well, he sets the direction of the company."
So, I ask, "what is the direction of the company?" We are inundated with direction and vision statements that would all serve as good examples of what my high school civics teacher called 'glittering generalities.' They are well-meaning, but often sound just like every other company's vision statement. For these statements to become more than lovely aspirations something is missing.
 So what's missing?
What's missing is clarity about the identity of the organization, its character. If we know who we are and what we are becoming, the people of the organization can make intelligent choices about the investment of their time and energy. So many vision statements read like imperial dreams: to become the best...the biggest...the leading.... They can be overly involved in promises of performance. They're too pie-in-the-sky to have much effect on the majority of workers. They're not personal enough. That's what an expression of our identity can provide.
For individuals, the sense of identity is the mental and emotional skeleton on which hangs all our behavior and personality and values. Our sense of identity is the strong center that tells us when we are doing something that doesn't fit who we are (or believe ourselves to be). No matter what values we proclaim, our behavior is spurred and limited by how we see ourselves. Identity gives substance to what we believe and to what we aspire.
It is the job of the senior leadership of the organization to model and give voice to the organization's identity. As they do, people throughout the organization understand what actions are worthy and what are not (ethics). Workers at all levels can believe in the vision, because they identify with the organization and they adopt that identify as their own (execution). Identity stays the same no matter what's happening in the market.
And, as we know, people live up to (or down to) who they think they are. It's the job of the senior team to walk and talk the identity of the organization. Culture and values are expressions of identity.
Does your organization have a clear sense of who you are as an organization? If it does, the executive leadership is on the ball.
Doug Riddle
My good friend Vidula Bal (at least I hope I'm still on that list) had some useful advice in this space for President-elect Obama. She seems to be a fan of surrounding oneself with smart people and then exercising discernment about what they have to tell you. It would probably be easier to take Vidula along to ride shotgun, as my experience suggests her BS detector is a finely tuned instrument with no lack of calibration opportunities.
That being said, I was interested in what discernment might look like and have started reflecting on some pieces of that puzzle. The question I started with was “who would I call discerning and what do they do that merits that term?” Here are two elements that rose from the mist early on. As predicted by Vidula, they all involve the way one uses one’s social context.
One aspect of discernment is the capacity to forsee the implications or consequences of choices one makes for others. This requires a broad acquaintance with and concern for people who are different from you and each other and a determination to eschew imperial ambitions. I'm reminded of a negative example I saw earlier today when I walked back from the beach to the coffee shop where my writing takes place. I saw a man and woman with two small boys, each about 3 years old. The boys were the typical tow-headed beach tots, each with a boogie-board in tow. My attention was drawn because the woman was unhappy with one of them who ignored his companion’s plea to stop running into him and she was grabbing him away. As they walked by me, I saw that each of the boys had large tattoos on his back and around one arm. While cute in that “my child is really my pet” kind of way, I couldn’t help wondering how happy these boys will be in a dozen years when they are wanting to join their own adolescent culture but they wear the parental “brand.” Cultural imperialism is no less coercive just because it is “counter-cultural” in the local context.
For our President, discernment means that rich or poor, native, early immigrant, or just-immigrated, male, female or whatever new gender we invent this week, all will be affected by your choices and forethought given to the impact on the rich diversity of this land will pay off.
Another element of discernment relates to the obligation and opportunity the President has to make meaning for the collective of the Nation. The care and feeding of the American soul is in his hands and if one does not see that there is such a (metaphorical) thing, how will one preserve it? Now that everyone is re-reading Team of Rivals, we may have a resurgence of awareness that reputation really is something important. Lincoln wanted, above all things, to be esteemed by his fellows. To him that meant that he would do the right thing and thereby preserve his name and the name of the Union. The world has chosen to suspend its judgment about the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave in hopes that we will, once again, stand for more than personal aggrandizement and greed. Discernment in this case means that the President and those who surround him recognize that every choice, every conversation (whether in public or in private) define the identity of this country: its soul. Our kryptonite has always been the fear that separates us into categories of race, wealth, culture, gender, and every other possible division. Since we seem to have elected a president from across the great divide, wouldn’t it be nice to become a whole nation?
Just a thought or two, Mr. President-elect. You’d still be better off putting Vidula in the Cabinet. How about Secretary of State?
Your basic presidential non-advisor,
Doug
Dear Mr. President (Elect),
Congratulations on your election into office! I'll bet the thrill of victory seems like a distant memory already.You’ll be coming into power under difficult circumstances: For the first time in 40 years the country is at war during a presidential transition, retail sales in October slumped 2.8% (the largest decline since 1992), the Senate is considering extending $25 billion in loans to the auto industry (not to mention the billions designated for the financial sector bailout), OPEC slashed production quotas by 1.5 million barrels a day at the end of October – an action that had minimal effect on falling oil prices.The list of crises and resultant emergency measures goes on and on.
Given the calamities occurring on almost every front, I think it my duty as a citizen to help provide you with a realistic job preview. In a leadership role like yours, you can expect to be deluged with data, figures, trends, information, theories, and opinions from a wide variety of experts. You probably already have been. Know, however, that you’re not alone. Leaders from all walks of life experience this barrage. Because they can’t possibly be everywhere at every moment, they have no choice but to rely on information from others. At first, this dependence can be unnerving. After all, you (like other senior leaders) have ascended to your position based on your individual skills . . . your ability to locate and process information, your communicative aplomb, your intellectual horsepower.
When leaders get to the point that they can no longer survey the informational landscape alone, they must develop one of the most under-acknowledged but critical leadership competencies: the ability to discern. Discern what? Good information from bad, reliable sources from unreliable ones, priorities from nuisances, competence from incompetence, realism from hype, and so forth. When leaders are good at discerning, we take the results for granted. Organizations (or nations) work smoothly because sound decisions are made at all levels. When they’re bad at it, the results are the stuff of despair. Mediocrity becomes the pathetic stunt double for excellence, crises overshadow priorities, and people shake their heads in disbelief at the quality of decisions.
Here’s the irony. Discernment belongs to the social sphere. Each of the standards above (i.e., what is good, reliable, or a priority) is determined in and through communication with others. That’s why you’ll need to surround yourself with others who will tune in, tell the truth, and argue. These actions will shape the standards of your presidency.
So, Mr. President, I hope you’re able to find some time to tune up your BS detector (and those of your Cabinet members) prior to your arrival in the White House. You’re going to have a lot of people coming at you with a lot of information. You’ll need those radars in top shape to make the best decisions. Let me know how I can help.
There was a new discussion started this week in our LinkedIn Group about signs of thriving CEO's. A member asked: "What are the top 5 signs of thriving CEO's? Or in other words, in the current challenging environment, what are the keys for CEO's to thrive vs. survive?"
During the past year, we’ve been asking chief executives exactly this question – what does it take to be successful? After surveying nearly 150 leaders, 5 keys to success emerged - factors that executives say are critical to thrive in today’s world.
Here’s the single most important factor: Develop and communicate a strong vision.
The ability to communicate a strong vision emerged as the most critical factor. Three quarters of the 146 chief executives we surveyed selected developing and communicating a strong and compelling vision as an important factor for success in their current position. And they believe it’s more important than the financial performance of the organization, the company’s brand or changes in the industry.
Many of those who commented on the LinkedIn discussion noted the importance of vision. And they’re right. Research shows that the ability to communicate a strong vision and effective leadership are linked http://www.leadershipreview.org/2008fall/article1_fall_2008.asp. Leaders who convey a strong vision are rated higher by their bosses and coworkers on several important factors than those who convey a weaker vision – factors such as the ability to lead change, being dynamic, competence in strategic planning, being farsighted, inspiring commitment, being original, and having a strong executive image.
What does a strong vision look like? Strong visions share three characteristics – they are clear, challenging and ideological. They use clear, unambiguous statements. They use language and ideas that motivate people. And they communicate a general, fundamental, enduring ideal. Here’s a great example: PhRMA President and CEO Billy Tauzin speaks about his vision for the company and how he communicates that vision.
Worried about your organization’s ability to weather the current financial crisis? Do a quick assessment of the company’s chief executives and think about the vision they’ve communicated via their memos, emails and casual conversations. Is it clear? Does it motivate and inspire you? If not, your leaders and the organization may be less well equipped to plan strategically for the future, inspire commitment from employees, and lead needed change. Ambiguity and uncertainty abound today. If you have a leadership role in your organization – as the CEO, the leader of a team or the manager of a project – follow the path set by successful leaders and communicate your vision in clear and compelling ways.
Stay tuned for the next success factor: Implement and execute successful change by gaining organizational commitment.
 Not very cheery news for many of us out in cyberland, but someone had to remind us. How many times in the last few years have you read an article or seen a television clip extolling the virtues of the toned midsection? C’mon now, I have to believe that at least one person out there has “Abs of Steel” grazing among the other animals in their DVD farm. Today we can find scores of DVDs, books, websites, and articles devoted to the message that it’s critical to pay attention to our cores. This notion has so permeated popular thinking that most of us have either 1) run right out to tone those tummies or 2) experienced the crushing guilt of ab flab.
The same holds true in companies where the state of our midsections has more to do with organizational health than we might realize. I was reminded of this fact just last week when I had the opportunity to work with two different organizations – one of which has toned and nurtured its middle, the other of which, well . . . hasn’t. In the case of the first organization, the mid-level of management is thriving. Senior leadership have been attentive to who gets selected, how they are developed, and what kinds of results they achieve (and how). The execs in this organization see mid-level managers as the key to the company’s future – and the company is doing remarkably well despite world economic trends. The other organization has a stellar executive team, but the folks in the middle are ill-placed, too few, and, in over their heads without a paddle. The result? The executives’ ideas are lost in translation and the company is losing steam. I worry about this organization's ability to stay competitive if they don't invest more in the middle.
Clearly I’m not the first person to talk about the importance of the middle. In fact, if you want to read the expert on the systems perspective of mid-level management, check out Barry Oshry’s website & blog. My friend André has also talked about this concept since I’ve known him, but he doesn’t have a website about it . . . yet. Stay tuned for that.
So here’s my spin on the theory of the middle. The most effective middles aren’t necessarily the sculpted, six-pack stomachs that are often on display at your favorite beach. Seriously. Have you ever seen an Indian yoga teacher? They can do things with their bodies most people only dream about (or have nightmares about, depending on how easily you’re grossed out). These gurus are among the strongest, lithest, and dare I say fittest individuals around. And they don’t have six-pack abs. And that’s okay.
Same thing goes for organizations. The best mid-levels aren’t the emaciated ones. They are paid attention to, strategically padded, and given the support to succeed. As a result, they deliver. And well beyond the expectations placed on them.
I want to talk about our new president, but that got me to asking "when do you stop being new?" He's been on the job for a few months more than a year and--like employees everywhere--we've been talking behind his back about what we are observing. (I think he might not be "new" anymore if his predecessor had been with us fewer than 10 years, by the way).
One of the observations I've made about him is that there's a certain oracular quality to his speech. Horoscopes and coaching both have a lot in common with this quality. In fact, it's one of the things that drew me to coaching in the first place. Among particularly powerful leaders I noticed a distinct absence of instruction about what to do. Rather, there was a persistent (and sometimes frustrating) reliance on describing where we needed to go. In other words, the leaders who have inspired the greatest effort and creativity on my part have always insisted they would not do my thinking for me. They paint the picture of the results needed and refuse to tell me how to get them.
Leadership coaching has in common with this a useful refusal to give answers about what the person being coached (pbc) should do. Through the (one hopes) artful use of inquiry, challenge, silence and curiosity, the pbc is gently coerced into thinking deeper, stretching beyond, crossing mental boundaries, and doing the hardest work there is in this world...thinking.
Of course, an oracle is only powerful to the extent that it does something inherently contradictory: connect the chaotic challenges of the present to a beguiling future. Oracular speech that is too indirect doesn't meet us at our current pain. Oracular speech that is too explicit doesn't fuel our hunger to bring the vision into reality. Just like great leadership coaching the oracular moment is fissionable; it flames into existence out of the collision of great challenges and creative minds in the service of great purposes.
your fellow limit-tester,
Doug
 A few years ago a former colleague taught me a phrase that, from the moment I heard it, has had a high stickability factor. The phrase is “hanging out with the phenomenon.” It comes from the world of anthropology where people know that to really understand a thing (a culture, a community, an event), you have to be ready to hang with it. To watch it. To see what happens and what doesn’t happen. To look again and catch the things you missed the first time. Now that’s a phrase worth remembering!
One organizational phenomenon that inspires me to hang is the interpersonal scurrying that inevitably accompanies an executive visit. As you have probably experienced for yourself, the executive pilgrimage to remote organizational locations is a ritual that inspires a range of fascinating behaviors from colleagues. Some are downright predatory. Many are self-serving. Still others show up to the formal events but shy away in a corner making you wonder why they came in the first place. You know what I’m talking about. You’ve been there. And you, too, have seen the veritable potpourri of the “behaviors of the led.”
My most recent brush with this phenomenon was wildly instructive as a number of follower personalities emerged rather clearly:
- The pre-event braggart. A person with this personality lets everyone know that he warranted a special one-one-one meeting with the executive prior to the official event. He takes great care to publicize his pre-meeting and sometimes goes so far as to further monopolize the executive’s time at the planned public events too.
- The routine breaker. A person with this personality meticulously gathers intelligence about the logistics of the executive’s visit and deliberately changes his or her routine for the singular purpose of being seen. People who think nothing of taking extended lunches on normal days can be seen working furiously at their desks over the noon hour. People who “work from home” more than they work from work actually appear in their offices. People whose preferred mode of dress is casual can be seen wearing ties. For these routine breakers and others, it’s all about changing things up for the purpose of visibility.
- The common threader. A person with this personality uses public conversational space (such as a dinner, a town hall meeting, a speech) to establish a one-on-one connection with the executive. You may hear someone with this personality say during a meeting, “My daughter’s best friend’s cousin attended the same school that your kids did in Alaska. She loved it!” It’s a quick fire attempt to establish a relationship (i.e., I’m like you, therefore you should promote me!).
- The fish thrower. A person with this personality uses a public Q&A forum to ask a question that’s easy to answer (and often skirts the real issues in a company). Such a question is often easier for the executive than a layup is for a professional basketball player. But, it creates goodwill.
- The positively positive. People with this personality only talk about good things: Good things about themselves, good things about their clients, good things about their projects. With one fell swoop they cast events in a positive light, and, whoosh, the bad news is erased forever from the annals of history. Don’t get me wrong, a healthy dose of optimism is a very important characteristic for leaders to demonstrate. But as we know, the only productive optimism is the realistic kind that comes from real knowledge of what’s working and what’s not.
- The self immolator. This person is the exact opposite of the fish thrower. He asks the tough questions, and often in such a critical way that he sets himself (and anyone within a 3-foot radius of him) on fire.
So how on earth does any of this babble relate to leadership? As an executive leader (the “phenomenon” as it were), it’s probably worth noticing who's doing what in the social setting and very carefully comparing that to who's doing what in the world of actual work. Sometimes there are big differences. But to accurately assess the work horses from the merely self-serving, we need to break through the celebrity to get to know our people. Easier said than done.
|
