Investing in Leadership Futures

  Doctor Leaders, know thyself to heal thyself

“But who should begin? Who should break this vicious circle? The only possible place to begin is with myself. … Whether all is really lost or not depends entirely on whether or not I am lost.” Vaclav Havel

Vaclav Havel, the former president of the Czech Republic, and one of the greatest icons of the Cold War recently passed away. His story is a hero’s journey and shows his courage and leadership on the level of Nelson Mandela. Vaclav was a young dissident playwright who was imprisoned for his beliefs. Through his self-reflection while in prison, he found the fortitude to continue to write and eventually lead the 10-day Velvet Revolution.

Don’t Change Everything, Start with 1%

Learning today that we will be presenting at a leadership development conference in Argentina in June, 2012, made me immediately think, of course, of a great grilled steak (for which Argentina is famous for).  Our topic? Inviting disruptive change into one’s professional life in the spirit of leadership innovation.  Steak and innovation.  What better chance to share a few coaching lessons learned from my own journey as a novice grillmaster: 

 

Bananas vs. Pintos - Has the pendulum swung too far in mitigating against risk? by Dr. Dirk Baxter

   vs. 

Since 1906 in the United States there has been an interesting transition in perspective worth noting as we move forward into unknown and uncertain times. Business leaders have gone from being coldly calculating; effectively ignoring a business’s responsibility to workers and the public (e.g., made famous in Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”), through a more balanced approach to doing business, to a current mode that is wrought with figuring out what could possibly go wrong before taking too many steps. This newer mode has leaders deeply evaluating financial risks, far reaching public risks and brand risk in order to mitigate against negative outcomes. Though I am a fan of hedging against the downside, I wonder if the pendulum has swung too far from being blind to black swan events (defined as low probability but high impact events) to being scared of everything?

4 Legal Leadership Strategies to Build In-house Legal Capability

4 Legal Leadership Strategies to Build In-house Legal Capability by Dirk Baxter, PhD SPHR and Karen Steadman, PhD

Having the right in-house legal counsel team is an increasingly important facet of a successful talent strategy, however it is often neglected.  If your organization’s current state consists of what would be considered the bare minimum [individual PDPs (personal development plans), career planning meetings individually every 6-12 months, and recruiting for technical expertise], you might be in for some bad news.  The complexity of the modern market and political landscape requires a more agile and interpersonally savvy legal team than previous scenarios.  Here are four strategies that legal leadership should incorporate to help increase the team’s capability.

What Charlie Sheen’s recent performance should teach us about Talent Risk Mitigation

“The most important decisions that businesspeople make are not what decisions, but who decisions.”  - Jim Collins, “Good to Great”

In the entire Charlie Sheen saga that has been playing out over the past several weeks we really are seeing what can go wrong with mismanagement of top talent who make the company a lot of money.

“All for One, and One for all” - A Musketeer’s Challenge for Team Alignment by Dr. Dirk Baxter and Dr. Karen Steadman

Alexandre Dumas wrote a classic tale on the adventures of d'Artagnan after he leaves home to become a guard of the musketeers. Throughout their adventures, the Musketeers lived by the motto  "all for one, one for all", and this creed was their foundation. Through this value, regardless of trial, they knew they were not alone and were able to focus as a team aligned to their purpose.

Part II – Always Play your Best Hand – More Leadership Lessons for Raising your Game - Dr. Karen Steadman and Dr. Dirk Baxter

 
Our last article with leadership lessons from the world of poker resonated with so many people (leaders and poker players alike), here are a few more lessons to raise your game at work.  

Assessing Leaders Who Might Make Bad Decisions by Dr. Karen Steadman

I have a friend in the mortgage industry who shared the following sentiment with me about refinancing:

“Do not try to use common sense to understand this process, there is none of that in our industry at the moment.  The mantra in our industry is “rules over risk” which means that they are not concerned whether your loan represents a risk or not, it is all about whether we are able to meet the guidelines.”

Rules over risk?  This approach concerns me. 

Assessing Talent in a Tough Economy - article featuring Dr. Karen Steadman

Exciting press for Leadership Futures on the Atlanta Journal website and featured in the print edition today

Assessing Talent in a Tough Economy 

posted July 1 and July 11th, 2010 by Laura Raines for the AJC

 

Many companies have been treading water, struggling to stay afloat in the choppy waters of a tough economy. And their employees are tired, said Karen Steadman, president of Leadership Futures, an Atlanta consulting firm that helps corporations assess, coach and transform their top leaders and teams.

Steadman helps companies identify and develop their high-potential employees.

Reminiscing on Current Times of Unprecedented Challenge - Drs. Karen Steadman and Dirk Baxter

As organizations grapple with economic turmoil, specialty market upheaval, environmental crises and ever-increasing requirements from both consumers and creditors, some leaders may find their focus waning.  If something falls outside of immediate issues, it may fall off altogether.  Other leaders, however, are learning more than they realized possible.  We believe these unprecedented times will provide significant lessons that, if captured and acted upon by leaders, will provide accelerated learning points that are difficult to simulate any other way. 

The Willow and the Oak – Leadership Flexibility Rooted by Strong Systems- Drs. Karen Steadman and Dirk Baxter

 

Since the Chinese outlined talent selection thousands of years ago, the selection and retention of top talent has been extraordinary. Organizations spend billions each year on tests, assessments, and recruitment strategies. Some organizations emphasize technical skill for selection and promotion which, unfortunately, may be a set of infrequently changing variables once beyond entry professional levels....... 

 

The Power of MicroFeedback - Karen Steadman

My first professional experience with what I now term “MicroFeedback” was approximately 12 years ago when I was asked to take notes in a very important meeting for my boss.  Little did she know she would receive a 10 page record of the conversation as well as my observations of the audience members, their responses to her, her conscious and unconscious changes in behaviors based on reactions and input from the audience.   As an assessor, I tend to take people-watching to the extreme. In this case, the data that came back to my boss that day encouraged her to take her project in a very different direction.  She also promoted me and shifted my time to allow for many more meetings. 

My love of MicroFeedback has only grown.  I often observe my clients in groups as large as an earnings call or as small as a 1:1 simulated event I create to inform areas for growth.   We debrief the wealth of data to help optimize their performance but, interestingly, such hyper-observation is helpful long after we meet about it.  Knowing that I will be asking them for their own report *next time* they are in the same situation has been described many times as if I am “riding around on their shoulder”.   They are more aware, they make their own microadjustments based on inputs, they apply positive changes in behavior and I’m not even in the room.    Wonderful!    Interviews with stakeholders validate the results and people always notice something is different.

This week, I found a great way to challenge myself on the power of MicroFeedback, the BodyBugg.   This gadget is a “personal calorie management system” that uses very sophisticated technology to measure calorie burn.  It feeds into a web-based program that tracks calories burned down to the minute and reports trends over time.   I have the visual display on my wrist so I can tell you in the moment exactly how many calories I burned while kickboxing and compare it to the moment I was watching TV (BIG DIFFERENCE!) With my new Bugg on my left arm, I’ve achieved 2x to 3x the result this week than the 3 weeks prior.  Coincidence?   I doubt it.  I have been able to re-validate for myself the following obvious yet powerful behavioral laws:

• MicroFeedback promotes Instant Adjustments as well as Sustained Changes for “next time” – watching the calorie burned per minute fluctuate during 1 hour of exercise instantly promoted me to adjust my level of effort.  This week, I saw my effort drop off at the end of a class which incented me to pump up my efforts immediately to meet or exceed where I was earlier.    I remembered the point in time for my next class and made sure to NOT let myself drop off at that time.  My results were much higher the 2^nd time because of my sustained effort.
• Observation is Powerful Even When No one is Watching – The Bugg tracks calorie burn but it relies on the person to track how many calories they eat.    However, I dare you to try and eat a piece of chocolate cake with this little gem on your arm!   It doesn’t stop you, see you, or smell the cake but there is that extra incentive to skip it knowing the Bugg is like your coach sitting on your shoulder.
• Without Data, there is often a big difference between Estimated vs. Actual output – The most enlightening information from this week has been the difference between my estimated effort and the actual output.   I took the same yoga class today with the same teacher as I did last week and there was a 175 calorie difference.   I knew I felt more “game on” last week, but I would not have estimated nearly half as much.  There will be no slacking on 2^nd set for me next time. 
• MicroFeedback feeds a Natural Desire to Improve – My executive clients are competitive and so am I. Rather than running around with no end goal, the Bugg program and gadget has helped me set relevant, achievable, positive targets and then provided me the data to reach or exceed them.  The trend lines from day to day show a view of slippage but also clues for how to improve. This experience has been very positive for learning from the past in order to improve the results in the future.
• Informed Stakeholders are Critical to Success – Though the Bugg has been helpful, I do believe my results so far have been enhanced by letting others know what I am trying to accomplish.  I have several comrades in my exercise class who are now tracking my progress.   There is no way I can show up without it now!

Armed with this new validation for instant feedback, does anyone have any creative technology ideas for me to simulate “Coach Karen” who can ride around on someone’s shoulder?

 

Assessing Coachability – Is that Change Agent Ready to Change? by Karen Steadman

“What isn’t working?” I ask the CEO. 

“Max is bright, driven, results-oriented and has excellent ideas so I naturally thought he was ready for the next step.   Unfortunately, I’m finding out he is also intense, very critical of others and, frankly, a pain to work with if he isn’t onboard with an idea.  The feedback from his new peers is horrible and I am worried he won’t be able to affect the change I need going forward.  Can you coach him?  What is the likelihood he will change?”

My answer – “hmmm…….that depends”.    Before moving forward my task is to conduct an assessment of whether Max is a lost cause in his current situation or merely a diamond with a few rough spots.  Then, and only then, will I be able to answer these coaching questions.   Max is expensive if he fails, yet has succeeded in the past and may have the raw materials to succeed here with some coaching.  A potentially worthy coaching cause but also someone who has a reputation for being difficult to work with if he isn’t onboard.   

My follow-up answer - “I can assess him, and then I will recommend next steps”.

Assessing Coachability

My motto is to always assess well rather than coach poorly. The following are the experiences that someone must pass through before I will deem them as fully “coachable”.   Note that I am merely discussing issues of willingness to be coached in this article….issues such as integrity issues are not addressed.    If someone is deemed worthy of intervention by the company than these tests can help make sure I recommend the right intervention.   The tests are in order and each one requires time.  A person as driven as Max is likely to begin changing from the very beginning.   

Test  1 – Level of Engagement

In stage 1, everything that factors into assessing engagement level applies.  Does the person return calls, are they eager to meet you, do they have a lot of questions (a good thing), or are you obviously being treated as a “have-to”.   If someone is skeptical about coaching but actively participating they can score high on engagement level.  However, if the only reason someone meets with me is because their boss said so, they score very low on level of engagement.  

Test  2 – Level of Awareness

In stage 2 I take a deeper look at the feedback someone has received.  How can someone like Max have received such mixed feedback?   My answer is that strengths in one setting easily become strengths overplayed in a different context.  If left unchecked, the leader who is bold suddenly appears “too blunt”, others who are nice are perceived as “not edgy enough”.   For Max, he has perception gaps to address including:

· Too critical - though excellent at sifting through data and making difficult decisions, he is apparently unable to leave his critical thinking behind even when he should. 

· Too intense – Max is driven but lacks savvy to stop fighting the wrong battles. 

· Too competitive – his results-orientation has crossed over into being competitive to the point of excluding others. 

I often review a lot of assessment data in this stage in addition to conducting formal assessments as the majority of people want to make sure I see that they have had good feedback in the past.  To pass the Awareness test, Max needs to acknowledge that there might be opportunities in which he is not currently using his strengths in the right way even though he has been successful with these same strengths in the past.   

Test 3 – Willingness to try New Things

In stage 3 (which may still be in the first meeting) I ask someone to identify one thing that they believe they should change.  This item does not have to be directly from the feedback but should instead be something they really want to change.    I ask them to identify the item, why it is important, and where they will try new behaviors starting immediately.    The goal is twofold:  first, most people like to gain traction immediately, but it also provides me a wealth of information on their willingness to try new things.  Did they choose something important?  Did they choose something from the feedback?  Did they choose something and then not do anything about it?   This is a real-time test of someone’s willingness and ability to change.

To pass the New Things test, Max would need to identify and act on something within a 2 week to 30 day timeframe.   

Test 4  – Willingness to ask for help from Stakeholders ( THE TURNING POINT)

In stage 4, time has passed to gather assessment data and also gather field data on trying the 1 new behavior.    By this time, it is typically a turning point in which people like Max will decide whether to act on their own items or to ask for help with stakeholders.  IMPORTANT:  if a leader does not want to ask for help from stakeholders, they may appear “coachable”, but likely the boss can be that coach.  I will support them for a maximum of 90 days as coaching with an external coach becomes a poor investment in this scenario.  However, if they pass the Stakeholders test, they are typically considered “coachable” for a retained process.  

To truly pass the Stakeholders test, Max would have to be willing to set up feedback mechanisms with stakeholders and ask for ongoing feedback.  For some people, it is too much and we part ways.

Test 5 - Willingness to commit to an Action Plan

For those leaders that have passed through the first 4 stages, the one last test helps me determine if they will be able to sustain their changes for the long term.   I help them gather feedback AND they commit to willingly seek opportunities to solicit ongoing feedback from those that can observe them.  We create an action plan that they sign because it seems so obvious now how to achieve results the right way.   If they pass the Action Plan test that includes feedback mechanisms, I know that there is a very strong chance they will be able to achieve results through coaching.  If they don’t, follow-up meetings are merely accountability meetings and not worthy of a coaching investment.  It would only be going through the motions.

Recommendations to the CEO

My prediction is that Max is a diamond.   He will be a perfect candidate for coaching if he is able to go through the assessment phase and start using his strengths in a different way.  Assess well rather than coach poorly.  We can help if you or someone on your team is a diamond who is:

Too opinionated

Too critical of others

A poor listener

Too blunt and too bold

Too intense

Too “me” focused

Too difficult

Too nice

Not “edgy” enough

Too attached to the details

Too slow to make decisions

Too easy on performance issues

Networker ≠ Social Butterfly by Dr. Dirk Baxter

Social Butterfly: a gregarious person who likes to attend parties and other social gatherings.

 

Networker:   someone who creates positive opportunities by building networks of like-minded people. Networking allows one to create mutually beneficial relationships and generate business opportunities at the same time.

 

Everyday there are more and more networking events as people are trying to connect to others in professional settings, find their next position, and drive new business.  Unfortunately, many of my clients have a distasteful picture of the process because they incorrectly equate “networking” with the visual of the Butterfly – flitting from conversation to conversation – collecting cards and names but never resting long enough to solidify the opportunity to truly connect with people.  With this visual in mind, many are turned off completely.  I encourage people to look at the networking process differently as it appears they may have the wrong visual and end game in mind.

 

Here are a few of my “Do’s” and “Don’ts” for optimizing your own networking experience:

 

DO: Ask and REMEMBER who people are and what they do.

The butterfly measures success by the number of meetings. On the contrary, the networker truly seeks to know, understand and remember what that other person does.  Take notes.  You may not have a way to help each other now but the opportunity may present itself later.  Seek to remember.

 

DON’T: Be afraid to take the conversation to a deeper level

A critical error of butterflies is to have brief, superficial conversations.  For example, they may spend precious time to speak to the “important” person in the room (often the guest speaker at an event).  Instead I suggest that you note who goes up and talks to the speaker – and then go introduce yourself to that person. You likely have similar interests – leverage the fact that you just had a shared experience and take the conversation to a deeper level.

 

DO: Talk to people that you do not know

Some butterflies take the same path and repeat the same patterns over and over again. If your goal is merely to socialize at these events, you will lose out as you safely gravitate to people you already know.  The key is to not only meet people, but to meet new people.  I challenge you to push yourself out of your pattern – ask your colleagues to introduce you to people they know or challenge each other to meet new people together.

 

DON’T: Attempt to talk to the entire room

The butterfly wears themselves out searching everywhere for the perfect landing spot. Your goal should be different …be strategic to meet a few people and anchor yourself in a good conversation. This isn’t to say that the effort that you put in pays immediate dividends, but you should be focused in your efforts and set goals before the event.

 

DON’T: Forget to ask for a card & FOLLOW-UP

Butterflies are famous for quickly moving on to the next thing.  Differently for you, plan for the important follow-up. Having a conversation is powerful, but you may be quickly forgotten. Within the next few days invite someone to coffee or at the very least invite them to stay connected with you on LinkedIn.

 

DO: Help others and Pay it forward

Butterflies are social in many ways as they fly in groups, but they are not partners for each other.  The true standard of a good networker is the selfless interest in “paying it forward”.   Think through how you can help other people build their networks and always pay it forward.  

 

Read the Experts - here are my favorite writers who provide great insight into creating your own positive networking experience:

1)    Tim Sanders “Love is the Killer App” – Tim inspires me because he strongly emphasizes helping others as critical to networking. If you help others you actually help yourself.

2)    Simon Vetter “Stand Out” – you have a brand whether you like it or not, Simon outlines how to build your professional brand and most importantly, how to market it.

3)    Harvey Mackay “Dig Your Well before You Are Thirsty” – we all need a hand from time to time. Networking aids us in collecting that critical information BEFORE we need it.

4)   Bob Littell "The Heart and Art of Netweaving" found at www.netweaving.com - I like Bob's points that good things happen to those that make it happen:

a.   Strengthen your relationships with your existing clients, customers and referral sources, especially those who are doing well because of the nature of their business and/or industry

b.   Develop new relationships with potential clients and customers realizing you may not be “selling” them any products or services now

c.    Expand your network of existing and potential referral sources

 

Influencing the rest of the pack

Have you ever received widely varying feedback from a group of stakeholders?  You might be making some assumptions that are ultimately taking you further from achieving your objectives.  Before getting stuck on "they just don't know me well" or "I've never gotten this feedback before", check my scenarios to see if you are working in the wrong direction. For some immediate takeaway application: I've included a few lessons on influencing from what may seem like an unlikely source - Cesar Millan, The Dog Whisperer. 

Succession planning, M&A scenarios, turnover, promotion or a crisis are catalysts for a rebalancing of who are your key stakeholders and how should you best influence and interact with them.  Best case scenario = consistent and conscious calibration of your influencing plan and seeking ongoing feedback on whether or not you are being effective.  Too often it is not until a stakeholder analysis reveals widely varied responses on how someone is perceived - How can they be "too assertive" sometimes and "not nearly assertive enough" with others?  Effectively influencing depends on the person and the situation at hand.  I observe people making several incorrect assumptions when trying to influence outcomes:

Incorrect Assumption #1 - The Match - incorrectly assuming one should always match their level of assertiveness to the other person's level -   Typical poor result: the conversation gets stuck.  Examples:

• Your peer always speaks their mind so you *match* by being outspoken in order to influence them. You get stuck in an argument and get nowhere.
• Your direct report is not assertive so you *match* by tempering down your level of direction.  You get stuck because they take no action. 

Incorrect Assumption #2 - The Push - incorrectly assuming that an increase in your energy level or efforts will always equate to being more influential - Typical poor result: others attack or withdraw leaving you with lost credibility.  Examples:

• You push for something you deem important without realizing that the group has already decided. People stop listening to you.
• You work longer and longer hours on an issue and learn that the stakeholder gets angry that you have overstepped your boundaries.  You've lost time and colleagues stop asking for your help.

Incorrect Assumption #3 - You are in control - incorrectly assuming that your title, tenure, authority to sign a paycheck or high IQ gives you automatic influence in a situation. Typical poor result: you are no longer chosen as the strongest candidate to accomplish a future objective.  Examples:

• You make decisions because "it is your assigned territory" without seeking input outside your territory. Senior leadership expresses concern that you are not a team player
• You share an FTE who technically reports to you yet the matrixed manager complains you are a bottleneck to decisions. You are deemed a micromanager.

Tips for How to Influence the Rest of the Pack 

I have no fewer than 3 sisters who are veterinarians so comparisons of human behavior to animal behavior are nothing new to me.  There are many behavioral comparisons that do not apply (though you might be surprised!) - however I see direct application from our canine comrades and The Dog Whisperer's work around assertiveness, influence and applying the concept of Who is Alpha to choose behaviors for different situations. In my understanding, the Alpha is the one in control and, if influenced well, promotes a highly collaborative relationship for working towards an objective.  This so-called Alpha can be female or male, and WILL CHANGE depending on the situation and the evolution of the relationship.  Perhaps you are Alpha which means you are influencing correctly in some situations.  However, that can change if you are not conscious about it.  I believe the following lessons from the canine world might be applicable:

Realize that anyone can be Alpha at any time -  sometimes you are Alpha, sometimes you aren't.  Alpha has more to do with level of influence and ability to gain buy-in for results than title. This is essentially relationship power vs. title power.  One of my clients sadly found out 6 months into a new role that she had been trying to influence a situation through her boss and had neglected the person who was actually gaining buy-in from senior leadership - her peer.   

Remain calm, yet assertive - being overly aggressive or unassertive doesn't work.  When approaching the person of influence- remain calm, stay conscious of emotion or frustration, and assert yourself.   One of my clients encountered an Alpha who made him crazy by being very indecisive "hmmm, let me think about that".  Weeks would go by and the more he fought, the longer the pauses and indecision.  When he calmed down and visibly didn't let it get the better of him - he was accepted and the behavior disappeared. 

Learn the boundaries and respect them - working across boundaries without giving or taking too much is ultimately important to working relationships.  There are volumes of work on boundary setting but one key that seems universal is to establish a feedback mechanism to consistently calibrate roles and responsibilities. Boundaries are dynamic and require communication and willingness to recalibrate to work. 

So, a few takeaways for you humans out there:

• Canines can tell you right away who is Alpha. Can you?
• Canines get kicked out of the pack if they don't pass the calm but assertive test.  Relax and go further.
• Canines spend a good portion of their life communicating about boundaries and making sure they know the limits.  When was the last time you rebalanced your influence plan?

The Art of Perception

I spent Memorial Day in Washington DC with two extremely smart friends and colleagues of mine (former NASA engineer and a high speed fiber optics specialist nonetheless!).  One highlight was touring the International Spy Museum.  Though I was wow'd by the miniature cameras, creative hiding places for radio signals, and the physical prowess and supercars of a few of the famous spies we all know and love, it was none of these things that alone won over the long term.  True, there were many grim stories that do not apply to what I am speaking of here so I ask that comparisons to bugging the CIA building and some of the KGB's tactics be left out (and those extreme tactics aren't close to what day-to-day corporate leaders are actually doing).   However, the experience was yet another reinforcement for the application of the "what" and the "how" contributing to historical successes.  The difference between winning and losing, living and dying, success and failure across cultures, wars, and centuries was often anchored in the savvy Art of Perception.

The Art of Perception = knowing the audience, adapting, sending the right message, making certain the message is received as intended, consistently gathering feedback to ensure clear communication.

But what about the art of deception?  Is that what I'm advocating?   No.   Not at all.  Out of fear I see perception and misperception too automatically linked in most people's thinking.  One must work and communicate consciously in order to avoid two of the biggest mistakes:  

• Mistake #1 - Being disingenious - I am absolutely not advocating for manipulative misperception, deception, or tactics that are not genuine.  Many leaders in their evolution mistake political savvy with having to lie, cheat and steal to get ahead.  I have seen this approach work only with luck (at best) and never consistently. In fact, it is one of the quickest paths to failure.  This approach will without a doubt consistently damage reputations in both the short and long term.   

  

• Mistake #2 - Ignoring critical information - From the other perspective, I advise leaders to make sure they are not naive.   More often than not I see leaders make the mistake of not learning how they are being misperceived.  In fear of being disingenious they avoid the issue completely writing it off as as "soft skills".   

Though the Aston Martin is quite lovely, what is the realistic takeaway and application for you?   What is the biggest misperception about yourself that you haven't yet decoded?