Silencing the Voice That Says You're a Fraud - Is that Even Possible?

In helping executive transform their organizations we ask them to have the perspective that an organization is a network of conversations. We ask them to have the point of view that their access to their organization, to cause change, is the network of conversations of the organization - change that and the organization changes.

Our coaching then is, "to be a powerful leader, manage the network of conversations". Which means:

• Build on all the conversations in the organization that are consistent with your vision, values, intentions, priorities and commitments. Acknowledge them, tell stories to reinforce them, make heroes out of those who speak them, ...
• Notice all the conversations that are inconsistent with your vision, values, intentions, priorities and commitments. Don't engage with them, as in counter them or argue against them. Instead speak for what you want. Gossip, complaining, undermining, negativity and excuse making all fit in this category. Remember the Cherokee grandfather's advice to his grandson - its all about which conversations are you going to feed?
• With your vision, values, intentions, priorities and commitments as a context keep asking, "what conversations are missing, that if they were in place we would be closer to a one-to-one fit with our intentions?" As you see what's missing put that conversation in place with structures and practices to make sure it stays in place.

Now that said, there is another network of conversations at play with each and every one of us that we need to be aware of and take into account - our internal conversations. Our internal conversations are our ongoing conversations with ourselves about everything, and everyone.

We need to take them into account because these conversations run the show, and much more than most of us are aware of. They are always there commenting about everything. If we start paying attention we will see that we have an internal commentator constantly assessing, evaluating and judging everything and everyone - not least ourselves.

These internal conversations are the filter through which we see the world, see other people, see possibility and opportunity. If part of what we are listening to when we are in a conversation with a colleague, is our critical or negative internal conversation, then the possibility in that relationship is limited.

If the internal conversation we have about ourselves is critical - which it mostly is - we are limiting ourselves. We are limiting our possibilities, our opportunities for successful relationships, our happiness and the possibility of personal peace and contentment.

The challenge in managing the internal conversation is to identify what the conversations are - so listen up. Then the next challenge is feeding the empowering conversations and starving the negative ones by changing the conversation on ourselves when we hear a negative one.

At one time or another just about every successful person I have worked with has shared that they think they are a fraud and are scared stiff about being discovered.

Who created that conversation, "I'm a fraud?". Who gives it head room? And who can change it? - only we can. And it is as easy, or difficult, as choosing which conversation to feed. But just know the default operating state is to feed, or engage with the negativity.

Twitter and Social Media as Leadership Tools - Really?

In their most recent edition of the Welch Way, Jack and Suzy Welch wrote an intriguing piece, Why We Tweet.

Now these are two people (who need no introduction) who are highly intelligent, successful, accomplished, engaged in many things - you get the picture. Not folks who fritter away time, who engage in idle nonsense. I say idle nonsense tongue in cheek, as someone who is not addicted to sports, I could accuse those who are ... Maybe I shouldn't go there.

I am frequently asked about the value of Twitter and social media in general. Is this something C-Suite execs should invest time and energy in?

In responding to questions about the welter of social media and networking sites that are around, and the extent to which we are daily bombarded with a constant stream of techno-distractions, to borrow from a savvy friend, I have a few things to say to execs and a few bits of coaching. For example:

• Notice the extent to which you are in a state of continuous partial attention as another tech savvy friend of mine expresses it. We live in a state of partial fragmentation of attention - we flit from a conversation in progress which we interrupt without even thinking to look at our PDAs, or to switch to a cell phone conversation, or an incoming email, or an alarm reminding us of a meeting, or CNBC constantly on in the corner ready to pull us off. Whatever we are doing it is with partial attention. Which means that Twitter et al can be just one more source of distraction.
• Notice the extent to which all the things you engage with are, or are not, part of a narrative theme - a vision, a mission, a clear purpose, a clear set of organizing principles and values.
• In today's world especially, we cannot live in an unmediate fashion. We have to have some way to distill or filter inputs and we have to be clear what we intend to generate as outputs.

So Twitter is both another tool for effective focused people to extend their range and impact - which is how I coach executives to use it, and every other piece of technology, to reach and move people in furthering their mission, vision and values. And, it has the potential to be just another means for the unfocused to be yet more distracted. It's a choice!

Sweat the Small Stuff - Seriously!

Take care of the small stuff and the big stuff takes care of itself - or so it seems.

Because when you think about it big stuff is just huge amounts of small stuff.

I had a meeting scheduled with a senior executive this week - guess what, because of a lot of small stuff was dropped, or mismanaged, the meeting did not happen.

How come so many executives let the small screw ups, or seemingly small moments of carelessness go by without comment? Here are some of the responses I have had over the years:

• I don't want to be overly picky
• If I paid attention to every small thing that is screwed up that's all I be doing
• I feel like I am being petty or pedantic when I focus on small stuff.

Well my coaching is get over your concerns and intervene - sweat the small stuff. Lower your tolerance for putting up with, settling for, making do with, and compromising - that behavior sabotages your intentions and undermines anything you say about what your values are.

The frustrating thing about the small stuff is that everyone knows what it is. So do we think it is inconsequential just because it small? Or is it that we just have a high tolerance for carelessness and forgive it as just being human. Whatever the explanation, failing to pay attention to the small stuff is costly. Here are a few examples of small stuff that everyone knows about yet all to frequently carelessly, or unconsciously, drop:

• Being late is late, period. Whether its late for a meeting, a call, with a promised report, .... the list can go on and on. And remember, a good reason, explanation or excuse for being late does not equal being on time - even though most executives except one as a substitute for the other. How nuts is that? And, BTW, being late, its not so small stuff. If you were to calculate the cost of all the wasted time, opportunity and money caused by giving a pass to being late, it would be huge
• Convening a meeting and/or letting it start without a clear intended outcome, and the right people in the room
• Leaving a meeting without clarifying the who, what, by when, to ensure decision are executed on. Or worse still, leaving a meeting with no decisions or discernable outcome
• Letting people off the hook when they fail to keep a promise or act consistently with some agreed on practice or value.

Why it's important to sweat the small stuff? Because our unconciousness, or carelessness, is the moment-by-moment, day-by-day opportunities we get to learn, improve and correct. To fail to take advantage of these correctable moments is to implicitly commit to undermining our espoused purpose and values.

So, as I said, sweat the small stuff - seriously!

How Women Are Redefining Work and Success

Business Week report in their Work-Life Balance segment that, "Women are using their increased economic power to bring about more creative, manageable work schedules."

The article features broadcasters Claire Shipman, of ABC News' Good Morning America, and Katty Kay, of BBC World News America, and how they each struggled prior to deciding to turn down promotions and plum assignments so they could tend to their families.

As the BW article notes, "It wasn't that they weren't ambitious, they just weren't interested in the grueling climb up the corporate ladder. They yearned for a path to success based on results, not hours clocked." They tell tell their story in their book Womenomics: Write Your Own Rules for Success.

Shipman & Kay show the increasing impact of professional women on companies' bottom lines, and give practical advice on how to create "a more sane" work life.

In the BW piece their is an excerpt from the book that looks at the trade-offs many employees are willing to make to get a better work-life balance, and how companies are reacting.

This is a topic that will, hopefully, generate a lot of thoughtful inquiry and a rethinking of our long standing models or organization, management and work.

Surfacing and Dealing With Conflict: An Essential Competency of Leadership

The way in which leaders express their intentions for the future of their organization, whether in the form of a strategic intent or a BHAG what is explicitly or implicitly expresses is we are not preserving the organization of years ago.

• We are going to be at work building the organization for the future - we will be putting the future first
  
• We are going to be creating milestones – part of a necessary and ambitious support structure to realize that future
  
• We will retain and build on all that works that has been created over the years
  
• We will be dismantling and leaving behind what doesn’t work - what is insufficient or inappropriate for the future we want
  
• We will be building what is not here yet that we will need for the future we want.

In the process of realizing our intentions there will be conflict. There will conflict.

Some conflict will be intentionally built into accountabilities, for example - the CFO will be accountable to tightly control costs and the CMO, R&D and others will have accountabilities that will make more demands on resources than are available.

Some conflicts will be a by-product of missing processes and practices, or unclear accountabilities, or poor communications, unclear policies and procedures, insufficient training, mentoring and coaching.

Other sources of conflict will be a function of interpersonal relationships when individual personalities find some others difficult to deal with. Mostly when we think of conflict this is the one that most people immediately think of.

One of the things to get about conflict is that it is not evidence of something wrong. Conflict managed well will be the source of innovation and creativity - if we learn how to surface and deal with conflict powerfully

So it will be essential to create a set of practices and disciplines to surface and deal with conflict and have those practices be as automatic and and frequently used and say, using email.

Some benefits to be derived from conflicts being surfaced and then handled well:

• We discover conflict is constructive, it forwards values, goals and intentions, especially when the outcome includes a focus on important values, commitments, problems to solve and issues to resolve
  
• Authentic communication is a by product that deepens relationship - to values, commitments, colleagues...
  
• Self-expression that is part of the process releases tensions, expresses emotion, unleashes passions, and defuses anxiety, and stress
  
• Collaboration and cooperation expands
  
• in itself learning to deal with conflict is social skill building
  
• It accelerates innovation and idea generation rather that stop and block it
  
• And it Increases individual self-confidence and the confidence of the organization as a whole
  
• Finally, the give and take of dealing with conflict ends up maximizing outcomes with finite resources.

Most People at Work Under-Perform! How Come? And, What to Do About It.

We at The London Perret Roche Group have the point of view that almost everyone at work underperforms – almost everyone!

Many executives have their own perspectives about how come, and their own ways of dealing with under-performers.

In a recent article, Life at the Bottom: How to Handle Underperformers the author quotes the often cited example of Jack Welch's practice when CEO of GE: "Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric, implemented a strategy of annually eliminating the bottom 10% of his company’s employees. This effective strategy is one of the keys to GE’s long-term success."

When 3M CEO George Buckley was asked in a recent interview, "Jack Welch recommended firing the bottom 10%. Do you agree?" He answered, "I think the concept is right, but it's a little dehumanizing." However he went on to say, "When you have identifiable poor performers, it's in the best interest of the organization for them not to work there." Bottom line: dehumanizing or not they have got to go.

Few executives would argue that poor performers, after all the training and development efforts have failed to produce a transformation in performance need to be let go.

However, don't stop there. That is dealing with the effects of a problem not the source of the problem. I recommend as part of the after action review that hiring, and the initial training induction procedures, be re-assessed to discover whether new employees are going to be performers. Far too many potential under-performers get hired because of missing or inadequate initial screening. Hiring manager take note.

New employees are often dropped into their new jobs with no support, no coaching or mentoring, insufficient feedback from supervisions, insufficient clarity about what it takes to excel, insufficient acknowledgement and appreciation, and most of all insufficient excitement and enthusiasm for the mission, vision and values of the organization - if they even have discovered from leaders what it actually is. So under-performance is an indictment of leadership as much as it is a failing of an individual contributor.

It would be worth taking a leaf out of Zappo's play book and learn Why Zappos Pays New Employees to Quit--And You Should Too as one place to start introspection about your own role in being the cause of your peoples' under-performance.

President Obama's Commencement Speech at Notre Dame

Is there anything to learn about leadership from the events that surrounded President Obama's invitation to Notre Dame, his acceptance of the invitation and how he spoke about the controversy?

Obviously I think so.

Without taking sides on the issue of abortion, the appropriateness of Notre Dame extending an invitation to the President to give the commencement address, and their decision to confer an honorary degree on him and any of the other issues of contention there are some aspects of leadership that should not get lost.

1. The decision of Notre Dame's President the Rev. John Jenkins to invite President Obama in the first place. In his own words he expresses the areas where he is aligned with, supportive of and even an admirer of President Obama while at the same time distinguishing where they have different position in important areas.

Leaders can and do speak for their commitments and values without vilifying or alienating those who hold different, even opposing commitments. They recognize that differences can only be reconciled in respectful relationship and open dialogue.

Leaders are informed by opposition and resistance, but in matters of principle, commitment, and values they are not shaped by it. The Rev Jenkins was at the receiving end of a lot of opposition, often expressed with emotion, and with the conviction of righteousness. Through all of it, he presenced himself with grace, tolerance and compassion for the views of those who wanted him to make different decisions yet remained steadfast in following through with what was, for him, the right course of action given his principles, commitments and values.

2. The decision of President Obama to accept the invitation, in the face of what was clearly going to be a heated debate on a very polarizing topic, with a lot of organized and vocal resistance is another expression of leadership. Leaders do not shy away from controversy. They do not minimize, or attempt to neutralize resistance. They do not demean, or attempt to marginalize the resistors, or the validity of their perspective, or in any way invalidate them. Leaders meet the opposition to their principles, commitments and values head on, and look for aspects of agreement, areas of common cause, and ways in which affinity, respect and dialogue can be pursued and honest disagreement respected as the context for further discussion not as and excuse for alienation and conflict.

3. Leaders do not shy away from facing the facts, especially those that conflict with "our better angels". In his commencement address President Obama said clearly that, "...part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man..." and that, "...bringing together men and women of principle and purpose -- even accomplishing that can be difficult." Leaders are both grounded in the facts of their condition and rooted in their principles, commitments and values.

4. Leaders are in action making decisions and plans and rally their followers and opponents alike, "So let us work together to..."

Regardless of our views about individual leaders there is always something to learn from them.

Generosity as an Aspect of Leadership

Generosity is a "way of being". It is an expression of our humanity at its finest. It is an expression of self - for its own sake.  Generosity does not have an "in order to" element to it .  As in, in order to get a payback, in order to look good, in order to be seen as a "good" person, or in order to get along.

Paradoxically, leaders who are generous - with their time, with their knowledge, with their relationships, with the way they respond to and deal with peoples' concerns do get huge paybacks. 

Their people are more loyal, they are in better shape, they have the experience of being supported and cared for, and so much much more - all of which at some point shows up in behaviors that benefit the leader's intentions for his/her organization.

"We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill

Where Do You Want to be When the Recession is Over?

Most executives recognize that the world they lived in before the recession will not be the one they return to when the recession is over. 

There will be repositioning, rethinking priorities and strategies. We will see executive teams work to reexamine their assumptions, many of which they'll discover turned out to be invalid and is part of what got them (and the whole economy) into trouble this time round.  Things like, debt ratios, risk tolerance, growth expectations and so on.

For some the task will be easy - they will focus on their core purpose and fundamental organizing principles and values, and get back to work with renewed intention and vitality. These folks will see change as an opportunity and will move fast to take advantage of it. Cisco under John Chamber  is a good example of this way of responding to change and Chambers and Cisco have a track record.

For others there will be a period confusion, uncertainty, mistakes, even disintegration. New leadership will be critical. Leadership in which the leaders reinvent themselves, and create a reinvention process for their organization. Paraphrasing Einstein, they will recognize, we can't solve today's problems with the same thinking that created them in the first place.

So the good news is the current meltdown is a call to transformational leaders to settle for nothing less than a transformational change of their organizations. 

We are not going back to business as usual so: rethink, reinvent, rebrand, reenergize and recommit the the core purpose, organizing principles and values of your organization and get to work. 

And if core purpose, organizing principles and values are not clear start there. Pile on all the help you can get until the "what you are up to" is clear. Alignment, collaboration, teamwork, and all the other building blocks of great organizations can't we put in place until this step is complete.

Take Care of Employees You Let Go

You would have to be living in a cave to be unaware of the extent of job losses in the US and around the world over the last year or so. And, as a C-Suite executive or senior manager, it is highly likely that you have had the task of telling people that they are to be let go.

Most organizations have rigorous practices in place to handle all the procedural and administrative steps the take an employee of the payroll and off their premises. Sounds pretty cold when expressed like that.

Keeping morale up after a round of layoffs, and doing all the necessary things to make sure that the company recovers and continues to grow is often challenge enough for most executives. That said, I recommend that attention is paid to the now former employees too. And that practices and disciplines be put in place to support them find their next jobs. I can make a case for doing so simply on the basis of generosity and compassion. If you like, the golden rule in action.

And there are other practical reasons for taking care of people who have been laid off: they may end up with suppliers, with customers, with competitors, they may be people you would want to rehire when the economy recovers, so it also makes good business sense. See Business Week 5/4/09, You're Fired - But Stay in Touch

So I recommend you do everything possible to ease the transition for fired employees from their current job, to no job, to a new job. Give them some practical coaching:

Do what you can to ensure they leave you with, as the TV commercial says, “You’ve got to have a plan!” And, what can you provide to support them execute against the plan? As BW reports many companies have put up support web sites.  A job search requires focus and discipline, especially in a crowded job scarce market. Prepare employees, many of whom may not have been in the job market for years, for how much work will it take? Encourage them to plan for more than they think it will take.  

Make sure they fully appreciate that until they find paid employment “job hunting” is their full-time job. This means they need to approach their job search with the same rigor and discipline their future employer will expect. If you can't find any other context for putting in the time and effort to do this then put it down to corporate brand building, or to existing employee morale building, or to future employee recruitment incentives.

We have worked with clients who have set up alumni support groups to help former colleagues transition to their next career move. The payoff for everyone involved is much much higher than any investment in time effort or other resources.

Here are a few elements of a plan we recommend that you support fired employees leave with. Some daily activities or action items:

1.    Day 1 Create an Action Plan:

a.    What outcomes will you produce and by when – be specific. You need the specific outcome to know what actions are needed. For example: speak to ten people every day and let them know I am looking for a job; have my resume ready by X date

b.    Create a tracking mechanism for the plan, for example who to contact, title, company, when contacted, when you sent a resume, meeting scheduled and so on. DO THE MATH – HOW MUCH ACTIVITY DO YOU NEED TO ENGAGE IN TILL YOU GET THE DESIRED OUTCOME – YOUR NEW JOB? AND PLAN FOR MORE RATHER THAN LESS.

2.    Day 1 Continued: And Every Day Till An Offer Is Accepted:

a.    Tell everyone you know you are looking for a job – have a specific number in your plan.

b.  Post on all your social networks: LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Alumni sites, and so on, that you are looking for a new job. If your former employer has a support web site use it 

c.    Ask all your contacts for one or two referrals and ask them to put the word out to their network, don’t rely on them to think to do that

d.     Stay in touch with your contacts on a regular basis remind the people you have already told about your job search that you are still looking. Ask if they have thought of new referrals, or heard of any suitable openings, or have any advice for you. Ask is the operative word

e.    Speak to X number of contacts or referrals ideally in person, or on the phone, to arrange exploratory meetings or interviews. Remember that most people find jobs from loose ties. See The Strength of Weak Ties

f.    Research: visit job sites, post on job sites, read trade press, go to networking meetings, job fairs and trade conferences

g.     Send your resume to all your search contacts

h.    Do an after action review at the end of each day and prepare the plan for the next day.

Some Questions for Leaders to Mull On

Some questions are design to give a specific answer. For example: what's the cost of distribution as a percentage of sales? The answer needs to be precise and accurate. And, the answer closes the question.

Other questions are open - there is no precise or accurate answer, and the interim answer may well be different at different points in time, or under different circumstances. 

Here are some useful open questions to mull on:

1) If there were the ghost of a dead idea haunting the organization, what would it be?

2) What does the gap look like between what you are currently accomplishing (and settling for) and what you want?

3) In what way do you show your openness to conversations that highlight the gap?

4) To what extent are you willing to deal with the disturbance that addressing the gap will cause? 

5) What results can't you get around here?

6) What mechanism do you have for opposing views to be expressed, and in what way does that allow for better decisions?

7) What are the good things you do today that you would resist changing? 

8) About what topics is your speaking and actions misaligned - where you don't walk the talk?

9) What are you afraid others might find out about you?

Where to Look to Determine the Value You Provide as a Leader

My assumption is that every leader wants to improve his or her effectiveness in causing specific measurable desired results in his or her organization as part of a commitment to profitably grow their business.

So where to look to get evidence that your leadership is effective, and where not to look:

1) Look for the insights that get generated and acted on by the people you lead - not in what you say, no matter how brilliant you think it is

2) In having your people discover the belief systems that are not valid - not in the ideas you generate or the advice you give

3) In seeing your own actions that are inconsistent with espoused commitments and values and correcting, because people pay more attention to what you do than what you say - not in pointing out the inconsistencies and inauthenticities of others

4) In the specific measurable results that are being produced and in the behaviors of your people - not in your opinions, your story, your feelings or thoughts

5) In your capacity to forward a possibility you have committed to - not in your ability to get agreement (or lip service)

6) Your ability to identify and resolve problems, conflicts and breakdowns - not in your ability to diplomatically smooth things out

7) Your ability to enroll others, to gain alignment and cause coordinated action to build high performing teams - not in you power to command and control

8) Your ability to acknowledge, praise, validate and appreciate actions, outcomes and ways of behaving that are consistent with your intentions - not in focusing on complaining, correcting and chastising.

THE most effective leaders see their organization's performance as directly correlated to their own leadership effectiveness. If the organization is underperforming then so are you.

Establishing the ROI of an Executive Coaching Engagement

If engaging an executive coach is considered by an organization's leadership to be an investment in particular executives, or an executive team, rather that an expense, then how is  the return on that investment to be measured and tracked? And how is the payoff of the investment to be assessed and validated? 

Some executives will admit to being skeptical that arriving at a measurable ROI for executive coaching is doable. A legitimate concern expressed is, "how do we distinguish the impact of coaching from the myriad of other factors that can and do impact change in an executive or team's performance, and therefore the ROI of a coaching engagement?"

My speculation is that because this question not asked, and answered, is the principal reason that every executive does not have a coach as a matter of course. Every executive who has a P&L accountability, or who leads a team, or who is accountable for innovation, for..., in fact any specific desired outcome - is without a coach is because the question of the return on investment is not clear. 

Short of not being able to afford an investment in executive coaching - not the case for most large organizations - the only other reasons to not have executives coached are:

1) A belief that a particular executive, or the executive team, is  not coachable - which begs the question, "And you retain people who are not coachable because...?

2) An assertion that our executives will not discover anything they don't know already from being coached. Our executive know it all already

3) The question of return has not been asked and answered, leaving the sense that coaching is an avoidable expense with unquantifiable benefit rather than an investment with a return.

So how do we go about measuring ROI? Here are some key steps:

1) Establish the executive's accountabilities - expressed as what specific measurable desired results (not activities), are to be delivered to whom, and by when?

2) Establish the resources the executive will have at his/her disposal

3) Forecast the likely results the executive is likely to produce: given history, and plans and projects in place, expressed as the most likely case and best case predictable outcomes

4) Create (by declaration) a set of outcomes, beyond the most likely case, as the context for coaching. And outcomes, that if/when achieved would show an ROI of ... - complete that sentence

5) These outcomes that will be expressed as a coaching plan: with milestones, tracking and reporting mechanisms.

In effect the outcome to be achieved, that when achieved, will produce a return on investment that makes the investment worth while, is established at the outset of the coaching relationship. With the ROI criteria established it is a relatively easy monitoring and tracking process to determine that the anticipate returns are being met. 

How to work in this declarative, future first, context is part of the content of the LPR coaching program. 

It's the Culture Stupid!

"It's the economy stupid!" focused everyone's attention on what was THE key issues in the 2000 general election.

Leaders who are committed to causing a transformation in their organization would be smart to get THE key area where they need to focus - "It's the culture stupid!" 

The literature of failed change programs is extensive. The list of failed acquisition and merger integrations is also extensive. Competent and successful executives moving to new organizations find that what worked for them in corporation X where they built their reputations does not work in their new organization. What's going on? "It's the culture stupid!" 

What is culture anyway? There are almost as many interpretations about what culture is, and how important it is in our lives, as there are experts speaking and writing about it. This is what we (LPR) say that culture is.

Even when culture is clearly understood, at least intellectually, the biggest mistake leaders make is that they do not invest themselves in coaching and training people to live the organizing principles and values - pretty posters with value statements that don't reflect what actually happens will kill most organizations.  

Look at Zappos core values and how they inculcate them in the organization. They engage people in creating the culture and training new employees in the culture, for example, here in this culture training class.

They even have a 400+ page Culture Book, in which employees express what each value means for them and how they see it being expressed.  It is the best expression of a culture I have seen in 25 years of working with organizations to build strong cultures. It is a culture in which there is integrity between what is espoused and what is lived.

So to build a vibrant, healthy, growing company with a personality and a following, "It's the culture stupid!"

Listen For Commitments and Values

Every action, I repeat every action, is an expression of our commitments and values! Said another way, our actions are not random, arbitrary or capricious - they are shaped by an underlying set of commitments and values. A bit like the coding in a computer's operating system which we don't see, but nonetheless dictates what a computer can and cannot do, we too have an equivalent set of operating principles, expressed as commitments and values.

Some commitments and values are explicit. If asked what we are committed to, and what we value, many of us would be able to recite them without difficulty.

Having said that, we are not always conscious of all the commitment(s) that shape our actions. And, if asked, we could not say, very easily anyway, what we valued that has us do this, or say that.

In a meeting for example when there is argument and counter-argument, when there is upset or withdrawal on the part of some folks , when there is collaboration and agreement - each of these ways of being are the expression of commitments and values.

Knowing what shapes peoples' actions is just as important a leadership competency as knowing how to decipher the coding of a computer operating system is to an application designer.

Ask us to walk you through the design elements that source action. Producing breakthroughs and creating a culture of collaboration, team work, empowering relations, open communication, innovation, alignment, integrity, respect and fun, will no longer be a mystery

Design Accountabilities to Stretch and Grow People and Organizations

In 25+ years of coaching executives one of the areas where I see huge personal and organizational growth opportunities, opportunities that are being lost, is in the area of establishing and managing the organization as a network of accountabilities.

Firstly, in most organizations we have worked with there is no shared understanding of what it is to be accountable. Mostly we hear people speak about roles and responsibilities and accountabilities using these words interchangeably. The bottom line is the focus is on activity, "just doing my job", "as long as I keep my boss happy, everything is fine".

We have yet to see a network of relationships structured around who is accountable to whom, for what specific desired results, in what time frame. A network of relationships with a set of structures, agreements and disciplines around interacting, dealing with breakdowns, handling conflicts and celebrating accomplishments.

Instead we have who reports to whom, organized by function, with tenure, hierarchy and task as the organizing principles. We have task assignments with goals - much more an activity plan than a set of accountabilities. And we have incrementally extend/improve the level of past performance as another organizing principle.

Individuals and teams thrive and grow on relationships, on challenges, on the opportunity to "go where no one has gone before". Leaders need to challenge their people if they are to stand any chance of unleashing creativity, energy, collaboration - and have any chance of breaking out of business-as-usual.

So first off, create a culture in which accountability is understood by everyone. A culture in which an observable characteristic is that everyone is in a network of relationships based on who is accountable to whom, for what, by when. 

Second design accountabilities in such a way that a significant percentage of each person's set of outcomes to produce requires/calls for personal  growth and development, new learning and new levels of relating to colleagues and customers.

If this is not in place, people have no room to grow and neither does the organization.

Great Teams and Great Companies Have One Thing In Common

Great teams and great companies have many things in common, one in particular is they know how to communicate. 

I was working with one CEO recently who expressed his frustration, with all the histrionics of a prima dona, when a Discovery Audit we had conducted in his organization clearly uncovered that most people in the organization could not say what the organizations strategy was. His frustration became anger and disbelief when we further revealed that even many of his executive team were not clear what the strategy was.

When he calmed himself he asked, almost plaintively, "how is this possible, I have been talking about the strategy for six months?"

There was no doubt he had been broadcasting for six months. He had several town hall meetings in which he talked at people. It was frequently reported that he even talked over people who wanted to stop his presentations with questions. In smaller groups he frequently talked to people about their strat plans - as in "I haven't seen your strat plan yet, where is it?"

What we heard over and over was he never talked with people, engaging them in his thinking, inviting their questions or contributions, encouraging them to build on the strategy, to be co-authors with him, explaining to them how strategy impacts day-to-day actions, investments and decisions of all kinds.

For most people the strategy was the CEO's thing unconnected to their daily concerns. They did not even understand what was required of them in producing the much asked for "strat plans" as the communication was all one-way. Without doubt a failure of communication - but all too common.

So here are a few things things that great communicators have in common:

They talk with people - a two-way exchange of ideas, commitments, excitement, fun, and the nuts and bolts of who, what, when, how and why its all important

They are open, honest and straight - no games, no secrets, no hidden agendas

They know the difference been facts and opinions and opts for the facts when they are available

They actively support each other and look for openings to assist each other - they don't gossip and undermine each other

They acknowledge, appreciate, praise and coach each other all the time, and in real time. They don't postpone feed back for blind 360's or annual reviews

They don't miss any opportunity to celebrate successes

They are not afraid of, or disempowered by, failure. They recognize that when they are pressing to accomplish things that have never been accomplished before - there will be failures. 

They miss no opportunity to learn from failure and then share what they have learned with everyone who can benefit from the insights

The signal to noise ratio is very very high, 90+%.

Look For Teachable (Coaching) Moments

In every interaction with reports and colleagues look for teachable (coaching) moments. 

There will always be opportunities to acknowledge somebody's performance or way of being. This acknowledgment will help people see their implicit, and even automatic, behavior - it makes it explicit. This means that that person will now be able to do what they do - the things that you have acknowledged - more consciously. And that in turn means they can now improve their performance and, they can now teach others - because they explicitly know what they are doing that works.

Also, in addition to acknowledging people, look for ways to help them improve. If you see ways in which people can improve by building on their strengths, or by stopping things that get in their way, and you don't tell them, you are in effect conspiring to have them perform sub-optimally. Not much of a friend or colleague. And worse, implicitly,  not much of a commitment to the team or organization improving.

Be an example by looking for learning moments yourself. For example: ask colleagues at the end of a meeting, "What did I do during the meeting that worked or added value - just one or two things?" and, "What could I have done differently that would have given us a better outcome, or more easily, or more quickly?" This is, in effect, a brief after action review.

For teachable moments to be a rich part of an organization culture there needs to be high levels of trust and a proficiency in open generous communication.

Failure as a Necessary Component of Breakthroughs

In most organizations failure is implicitly, sometimes explicitly, understood to be career limiting.

Regardless of the rhetoric, and I have heard loads of it over the years of working with senior executives. They will say things like: "it OK to fail around here"; "we value failure as evidence of pushing the envelope"; "no success without failure" and so on. The truth is failure is not acceptable in most organizations.

Now if we distinguish between carelessness and failure we may have an opening for a new freedom to invent, create, discover, and take responsible risks - and in the process make major advances, even breakthroughs.

Carelessness I distinguish as not paying sufficient attention in performing in task that has a proven and established process or methodology to ensure the desired outcome. This thoughtlessness in executing a step or missing a step means that the desired outcome is not produced. And, in all likelihood what is produced has unwanted consequences.

Failure on the other hand is the consequence of trying to produce an outcome where there is no clear path or process. Where there is no precedent for a successful outcome. 

In every set of accountabilities there should be a component that requires invention, experimentation, and discover so as to produce a new level of performance. People cannot be free to be fully expressed in this area of their accountabilities if failure is taboo. Innovation and creativity will be stifled.

Also see, Some Perspective on Success and Failure.

 

Helping Employees Cope With Change

What is it about change? Sometimes we love it and thrive on it and other times were are threatened out of our minds by it.

Some years ago I worked with an executive who had been a tenured professor of computer science, with a wife who was a school superintendent, and three children in high school. He was the fourth generation of his family living in his mid-western city and, what's more he lived in the original family home. 

He was lured to silicon valley excited by the opportunity to do the work he loved, with more money, intellectually stimulating colleagues, oh, and a great all-year-round climate. After a relatively brief family council they all decided - Yes! let's go for it, let's move. A major change for the whole family, and it went off smoothly. And, after the fact,  everyone was happy they made the jump.

Fast forward six month: over a weekend the facilities people moved his office, one of a row of identical offices, one closer to the corner office of the CEO. Everything was photographed before the move and put in exactly the same place in the new room  - just one closer to the corner office. After the office was moved, apart from the fact it was closer to the corner of the building no one could tell a thing has been touched - everything was exactly as it had been in the room from which it was moved.

No one thought to tell my client. They did not consider it a big deal; if anything, they thought it would be a pleasant surprise to be one closer to the corner office of the CEO.

On discovering what had happened my client went berserk. He stormed out of the office ranting and raving and door slamming. For two days he was unreachable. He refused to answer the phone, the door, emails - he'd gone to ground. When the CEO did finally manage to speak with him all my client wanted to do was resign.

My question to him when he finally agreed to speak was, what happened? I am curious I said, you made enormous changes to you life and the life of your family coming out to CA with no upset, and yet here you are as mad as hell over an office move that few could even detect had happened - what happened, how come you are so upset?

After a lot of wrestling and introspection on his part, he said the simple difference is I chose to make the change in coming to CA. Changing my office was imposed on me. That's what has made me mad - they imposed change on me and did not even think to consult me.

So the lesson is clear, include people in authoring changes. And I don't mean get their buy in - but a genuine authorship of changes that are wanted and needed. 

If change is imposed, expect unhappy, stressed and mad employees. Now most don't have the luxury of displaying upset and anger as my client above did. That said, they wont cope with it any easier.

Musicians' Brains Keep Time – with one another

In a Scientific America article, "German scientists report in BMC Neuroscience that they measured the brain waves of eight pairs of guitarists using electroencephalography (EEG) while they played a modern jazz piece calledFusion #1 (by Alexander Buck). The researchers found that the guitarists' brain waves were aligned most during three pivotal times: when they were syncing up with a metronome, when they began playing the piece and at points during the composition that demanded the most synchrony."

One has to speculate this same synchrony is in play with high performing teams, teams focused on producing specific measurable desired results in time. 

So is it the very existence of the organizational equivalent of a metronome, and a jazz piece to play together, that allows for aligned, coordinated action, or synchrony?

Most of Your People Are Focused on Activities Not Specific Measurable Desired Results

When I make the assertion to senior executives that 60+% of their peoples' efforts are wasted - that is they do not produce specific measurable desired results in time - most senior executives counter that may be true in generally, but is definitely not true in their organization.

To support their assertion that I am not accurate in their case, I usually get variations of: we have goals and objectives, we measure and monitor, we have regular performance reviews, we have rigorous training programs, coaching, mentoring and we exit non-performers. An impressive list. And I am not persuaded.

I say that most people are focused on activities not outcomes. Try running these experiments and test my assertion for yourself:

1) In your regular walk-arounds stop in to your folks offices, cubes or wherever they are at work and casually, very casually, ask these questions:
Q: What are you working on?

A: I'm doing XYZ (will usually be expressed as an activity)

Q: What result are you trying to produce?

A: (Listen carefully and you will hear a variations activity - finish XYZ) 

If you do get a result the person is working for, then ask them:

Q: Who is waiting for the result? And when is it due?

60+% of the time in these casual questionings, you will discover that people are focused on activities. You will discover they are not clear what desired result their activity is designed to produce, and invariably, they will not be specific about who is waiting for it, and by when its due.

2) Drop in on meetings in progress, again casually ask: what result are you all working on?

Mostly you will get activities, an agenda item they are dealing with or a project they are working on - but seldom a specific result, by a particular time, for a particular person.

So what to do?

Start making promises; create a culture in which making promises to a specific person, to produce a specific, measurable, desired result, in time is a core competency of the organization. Such that everyone gets your capacity to succeed is a function of you capacity to make and keep promises - not just the explicit ones in contracts and agreements, but also the implicit ones. 

It is the broken implicit promises that are the source of dissatisfaction and complaints. So it would be smart for everyone to have a way to surface what they are.

But that's a topic for another post.

Collaborate, Cooperate and Give Up Command and Control- no REALLY!

Advice is often listened to more when the source of the message has undisputed credibility.

So, does John Chambers of Cisco have credibility? In spades!

Listen to him talk about "smart management for tough times". Then be coached by him, make some commitments about who you are going to be as a leader - then choose what you are willing to promise Without some commitments, and some bold promises, John's video will be interesting, and will fade from memory soon, and make no difference.

And that would be a failure of imagination, and a lost opportunity for you, your business and your people.

How to Increase Desired Results and Reduce Wasteful Activities

Now more than ever before the demand on everyone - for survival even - is on reducing wasted effort, all wasted resources, and increase our capacity to produce specific, measurable and desired results. And results that will be a breakthrough for the individual, team, and organization.

The problem is that in many instances we tolerate as much as 80% waste because most of each person's activities (80%) do not produce desired results – which means a lot of wasted effort, time, resources of all sorts. People do not have a reliable set of practices to produce desired results.

If this assertion seems exaggerated, run this simple experiment. Wander the halls of your organization. Stop by anyones office or work-station and, very casually ask these questions:

1. What are you working on?
   
2. The answer will, invariable, be in the form of an activity. After a brief pause, casually ask
   
3. What result are you trying to produce?
   
4. The answer will usually be a restatement of the activity the person is engaged in. Again, after a brief pause, casually ask
   
5. So what result are you trying to produce? Invariably the conversation gets bogged down here because the individual is not clear what result they are trying to produce. However, if you get a result that is specific and measurable, casually ask
   
6. Who's waiting for it and when's it due? Invariably the answers here are fuzzy, less so maybe about the who, invariable about the when.

A “best in class”, high performing organization would be one in which the success rate, or reliability, in producing specific measurable desired results is better than 90%. Which means there is minimal avoidable wasted resources - particularly time and effort.

Here are some action steps to increase desired results and reduce wasted time and effort:

1. Start by being clear what specific measurable desired result do you want, really want: whether the occasion is a brief meeting, a large-scale project or the formulation a multi-year strategy. And what you want, really want, does not mean the best case you can settle for or what is reasonable.
   
2. Say by when the desired result is to be produced, and who is on board to produce it. The by when needs a declaration not a prediction. It needs to be a stretch so as to create the possibility of a breakthrough.
   
3. Create milestones back from the future - the by when the desired results are to be produced.
   
4. Forecast from the present the likely/predictable result continuing with current projects and activities
   
5. Map the the predictable results #4 on to the desired future results #2, in the process identifying the "gap" to be closed
   
6. Regularly, daily if necessary, invent, generate and discover how to close the gap.
   
7. Measure constantly - visibly display milestones and actual results.
   
8. Publicly acknowledge success in meeting milestones and failures.
   
9. Do regular after action reviews so as to build on what works, stop what doesn't work and discover new things to try, learned from the benefit of hindsight.
   
10. Your capacity to succeed as an organization is a direct function of your capacity to make and keep promises.

How do we Reduce Assets - When it Means People?

Unemployment statistics are rising all over the country. In New Jersey, where my firm is located, the December ’08 unemployment rate was 7.1%, the highest level in nearly 15 years.

Which has many people question the assertion that executives make about people being their most important asset.  And, it has me encourage executives to review some of the practices and procedure they have vis-à-vis their people – are they appropriate for our times and consistent with their values and intentions? For example:

• At what level are hiring decision made? And does every person who hires know the values, strategies, priorities and desired outcomes that each employee will need to sign up for to be a value added contributor?
• Does your employee hiring process meet the same level of standards, inclusion and review as financial assets, for example?
• How are employees trained, developed and coached? Do executives who mange people know to what extent are their employees an appreciating asset? Who is accountable for this asset appreciation, and at what level of seniority is this asset management review carried out?
• Is there are well thought out process and set of practices for letting people go, other than the simple expediency of cutting costs?
• And, finally, are their practices and procedures in place to maintain the morale, energy, creativity and commitment of the people who remain after some of their colleagues have been let go?

I encourage executives, when they have thought through my questions, and their own that surface in the inquiry, to communicate as transparently as they know how, about both their commitments and the circumstances they are dealing with that threaten their commitments.

I have seen sufficient examples of employees contributing to solving “people problems”, and with solutions that many executives considered employees would never “go for” to have faith that when employees are included, maybe, just maybe, we could find ways to staunch, even reduce, unemployment.