This retreat is a must-attend for CEOs, C-suite executives, business leaders and entrepreneurs! Our lineup of expert speakers will inspire, challenge and motivate attendees to reignite their leadership spark.

I will share how you can unlock the power of your Brain, Body, and Breath to move from successfully exhausted to Mindfully Successful.

ICF is the leading global organization of professional, personal, and business coaches with more than 40,000 members and over 35,000 ICF credentialed holders world-wide.  ICF offers the only independent and internationally recognized coach credentialing program.

What does this mean?

To my clients:  It means I have even greater depth and breadth of skills to partner with and support you as you explore fresh perspectives, challenges, and opportunities.

For the coaching profession: It demonstrates accountability to the highest professional standards and adherence to a strong code of ethics, including almost 3,000 hours of coaching clients, over 200 hours of coach-specific training, as well as being assessed in coaching competence both orally and in writing by experienced, independent assessors under strict examination conditions.

And to myself:  It demonstrates a never-ending commitment to learning and giving.  When I entered the Leadership Coaching Program at Georgetown University 13 years ago, I looked at MCCs with awe and wonder.  Now after continuous commitment to continued growth and learning, and a focused effort of the past year, I can now call myself a Master Certified Coach.

I couldn’t have done this without all my clients along the way, my mentor coaches, Ellen Fulton and Jennifer Starr; my fellow coach, Sue Nicholas; and my number-one supporter, Mark Boster.

Wow.  That is a depressing view whether you are the employee wanting to advance and do better in your work, or the owner or leader at a company.  The Peter Principle has dominated our thinking for some 50 years; however, now it is falling from favor as we better understand the evolution of leadership and to a greater extent, how to develop leaders.

A Brief History of Leadership Theories

The Peter Principle concept was introduced in 1969 at a time when the leading leadership theory was still influenced by the “Great Man Theory” stating that leaders (nearly all males) were born, not made.  Below provides a brief history of leadership theories over time.

1900’s: The “great man” theory – leadership is an innate ability; one is either born to lead or not.

1940’s-50’s: Trait theory — universal traits are common to all leaders. This theory still relied on the premise that leaders are born, not made, and that a good leader has a set of specific traits.  Employers were told to identify and test for the appropriate traits when hiring leaders.

1950’s- 60’s: Behavior theory — key behavioral patterns result in leadership.  Behavioral Theory was a big leap from Trait Theory in that it assumed that leadership behaviors could be learned, rather than simply being inherent.

1960’s-70’s: Contingency/Situational — establish which leadership behaviors succeeded in specific situations.  Unable to determine which particular behavior patterns consistently resulted in effective leadership, researchers then attempted to match behavior patterns that worked best in specific contexts or situations.

1980’s – present: Transformational leadership – Bernard Bass (Bass), considered as one of the most influential authors in modern leadership, says, “Transformational leaders inspire their followers, meet the emotional needs of each employee, and/or intellectually stimulate employees.” Transformational leaders invoke the adage “the sum is greater than the whole of its parts.”

The introduction and acceptance of any one theory does not inherently dismiss or disprove a previous theory.  However, it is important to understand the values and fallacies of each and integrate appropriate aspects into developing and being a leader.

Developing Leaders

Once Behavior Theory was introduced, it was believed that most people could be trained or developed to be effective leaders.  Along with the leadership development initiatives that expanded as a result of Behavior Theory, supporting developmental theories and assessments were introduced. 

The belief that leaders could be trained was a significant advancement in organizational management and leadership. The pool of potential leaders was now limitless.  However, over time, the shortcoming emerged with the belief that anybody who really wanted to learn could become a leader by receiving leadership training.  Training is an event; development is a journey.  True development takes time, practice, and consistency.  Most important, we learned that the cookie-cutter approach to leadership training was not universally applicable to all participants and variably effective throughout the participants.

Peter wasn’t completely wrong.  One aspect of the Peter Principle is correct – the skills that make one successful in one job do not necessarily translate to the new position.  As an executive and leadership coach I tell my clients, “What made you successful as a [fill in the blank] won’t necessarily make you successful as a [fill in the blank.]”  It doesn’t however mean that the world is filled with incompetent employees.

As you invest to develop yourself or other employees in your organization as leaders, recognize that there is no one right way. It is important to consider type, preferences, experiences and competencies, stage at which one makes meaning, and many other factors when determining when and how a leader can best be developed to their fullest potential.  The most effective leadership development strategies draw upon an individual’s strengths while identifying and cultivating areas in which they can grow.

Interested in engaging an executive/leadership coach to help you on your developmental journey?  Contact me at margo.boster@impaq-solutions.com

I recounted the story of Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, who was asked the question, “What was the best advice you ever got?” His answer? “Get a coach.”

“The one thing that people are never good at is seeing themselves as others see them. A coach really, really helps,” he explained.

As I explained executive/leadership coaching to my seatmate, I realized that others may have the same questions.  Below are some of the answers:

What is executive/ leadership coach? Coaching is a one-on-one personalized leadership development relationship between a coach and an individual executive or manager.

What do coaches do? Coaches help individual leaders build on their strengths, develop flexibility and change-readiness, create awareness of shortcomings and build commitment to self-development and achievement.  Coaches do the following:

• Help their clients set better goals and then reach those goals.
• Ask their clients to do more than they would have done on their own.
• Focus their clients to more quickly produce results.
• Provide the tools, support and structure to accomplish more.

How do coaches do that? Coaches are trained to listen, to observe, and to customize their approach to individual client needs.  The coach’s job is to provide support to enhance the leader’s skills, resources, and creativity. Many coaches are also trained in the use of a variety of assessment tools that help provide further insight for the leader.

What are the benefits of hiring a coach?  The coach can help an executive or leader see things differently, resulting in a better outcome.  There are a number of studies on the ROI of leadership coaching.  However many of the benefits of coaching are difficult to quantify (i.e., what would the leader have done had they not had coaching compared to what the leader did since they received coaching?)  In general, executives/leaders who receive coaching tend to lead better (rather than just tell people what to do), communicate more effectively, have enhanced thinking and decision-making skills, improve interpersonal effectiveness, and increase confidence in carrying out chosen work and life roles.

Can Executive/Leadership Coaching help our poor performers? My answer to this question is a resounding “NO”. Coaching does not save poor performers; it helps good leaders or those with potential to be better.  Executive coaching is an intervention that works with individuals who are at a level of performance that meets or exceeds expectations.  Coaching helps leaders excel in their current role and expand to the next level.

What can I expect to happen during a coaching session? Each meeting is conducted in-person or over the phone. You can expect honest feedback, clarifying questions, support and challenge. You can also expect confidentiality. In order for coaching to work well, we provide individuals the confidential space to speak candidly about their successes, frustrations, mistakes and possibilities.  We may use assessment tools such as competency assessments, MBTI, DISC, or a 360 assessment.  We may also “shadow” you to meetings or presentations to observe your performance and give you confidential feedback.

How do I choose a coach? The most important thing to look for in selecting a coach is someone with whom you feel you can easily relate to and create the most powerful partnership.  To learn more, click here to read about types of coaches and selecting a coach.

If you and/or your company have consider engaging in executive or leadership coaching as part of your development, please contact me for a free, no-obligation (and no pressure!) consultation.  I am happy to discuss leadership development and coaching at any time – even on long airline flights.

“A Coach is someone who tells you what you don’t want to hear, who has you see what you don’t want to see,  so you can be who you have always known you could be.” – Tom Landry

Marketers and advertisers learned long ago that people are motivated to move toward pleasure or away from pain.  We have all seen the advertisements where, with doom and gloom, the worst case scenario is portrayed, heavy music playing in the background, lingering to instill pain in you that “this could happen to me!”  Their product then swoops in to rescue you, sending you on a journey toward pleasure.  Their goal, of course, is to motivate you to buy their product.

We have an emotional association for everything that we attach to pleasure or pain.  So when we look deeper than just saying we move away from pain and toward pleasure, I question what drives that emotional association.

Many of our decisions are based on either desire or fear – desire to move toward something, or fear of what might be.  What is your motivation – Fear or Desire?

• When putting together your annual business plan, are you operating out of DESIRE for incredible growth or because you FEAR the company may fail?

• Are you working hard because you DESIRE to produce outstanding work or because you FEAR what may happen if you don’t?

• When you do something special for your partner, do you do it because you DESIRE to please them or because you FEAR they may be mad or displeased if you don’t?

• If you are a single parent, when you are “nice” towards your child, are you doing it because you DESIRE to help them grow to be the best adults they can, or because you FEAR they will go live with the other parent?

The list of choices we make every day goes on and on.  Have you stopped to think about what is driving your decisions?

Psychologists have spent considerable time and energy describing different theories of motivation – instinct theory, incentive theory, drive theory, arousal theory, humanistic theory and self-determination theory, among many.  Daniel Pink gained worldwide recognition by promoting the Drive Theory (internal focused) over Incentive Theory (externally focused).  Regardless to which theory one subscribes, a consistency that I have found is that motivation – whether internal or external focused – comes down to either Fear or Desire.

I recall a client who was looking to expand his business.  A previous expansion had not gone as expected, so he was more deliberate in making decisions.  Throughout our coaching sessions, I noticed a recurring pattern weaving throughout many aspects of my client’s decisions.  His father had been a wildly successful business man.  Suddenly, due to political unrest in the country in which they lived, the family lost everything – the business, the home, the servants – everything except themselves.  The father later tried to recreate the success he had, and while he attained some level of success, it was never to the standard that he had previously experienced.

This was a significant driver for my client.   In his mind, doom was always just a moment away, therefore he must make decisions based on the fear of loss, rather than the desire to grow.

Of course, we must learn from our experiences.  And we must be aware of realistic risks.  But these are different from continually keeping an eye on the past, on the fear, as we try to move forward.

Years ago, when learning to snow ski, my instructor said, “Wherever you look, there you go.”  That is true whether on snow skis, riding a motorcycle, or in a car.  It is also true in our businesses or in our life.  If we are keeping our eye on the fear, that is the direction you will go.  If you keep your eye on what you desire, that is the direction.

Another client was hired in a very senior position at a large company.  The CEO was known for making unreasonable demands and often being extremely reactive when things didn’t go as he thought they should.  My client was a seasoned executive with an impressive history of success; however, this position was at a higher level in a more impressive company than his previous experience.  He operated continually on fear.  What if he failed?  What if he lost his job?  What if the CEO wasn’t pleased?  Rather than focus on the desire to make the organization that he ran wildly successful, he continually operated in fear.  Rather than stand up and say “Here’s what we need to do,” he continually reacted from the place of fear.   Unfortunately, in the end he did fail, the CEO wasn’t pleased, and he lost his job.  However, he has learned and – as they often say – hindsight is 20/20.  In his next job, he now is able to be aware of the basis for his decisions and respond accordingly.  He brings consciousness to his decisions.  And he is even more successful now than he could have previously imagined.

I encourage you that when confronted with challenges, ask yourself truthfully – am I operating from desire or fear?  Am I moving toward what I desire or away from fear?

Being aware doesn’t always guarantee we will make the right choice.  I recently attended a high-powered conference with some of the top experts in their fields.  Throughout the day, there were a number of “Hot Seat” opportunities where members from the audience would receive one-on-one advice and coaching from the experts.  “How Exciting!”  I thought.  “Just imagine what I can learn and gain from the experience!”

I was filled with the desire to learn and expand my potential.  Wow!

As the day wore on and the time for the Hot Seat opportunities drew closer, fear overcame me.  “oh no!”, I thought.  What if I’m not as good as the other participants in the room?  What if I look like a fool!?”

Fear won out and I did not volunteer for the Hot Seat.  I missed out on receiving incredible coaching from one of the leading experts in the field.

Even with awareness and practice, we can still sometimes succumb to fear.  But that’s OK – just acknowledge it, recognize what you lost from it, and refocus on moving toward your desires.  Fortunately for me, desire prevails much more often than fear.

Would you like to have better awareness of the basis for your decision making?  Contact ImpaQ Solutions for a complimentary discussion on how we can enhance the performance of your leaders, teams and organization.

This article written by Margo Boster was published in Issue 4 http://www.leadershipandchangemagazine.com/.  

You just gotta love Netflix.  I used to love them because for a reasonable price, movies of my choice just showed up at my house.  It was easy to order, easy to return, and if I lost a DVD it was no big deal – just indicate so on the website and they would say ok.

Now, I think I love Netflix for their lessons in management.   Their recent actions can be examined through a number of lenses, including decision making, knowing your customers, or communications (as well as a few others, I’m sure).  Because I’ve been thinking about decision making a lot lately, let’s explore how Netflix’ decision-making has upset the apple cart.

A brief recap – in January 2011, Netflix raised their price $1 month.  No big deal especially because there was no indication of any other pending changes.  Then, on July 12^th, Netflix sends the big announcement –they were going to separate their DVD and streaming plans, with each available for $7.99 a month on its own.  “What!” seemed to be the universal cry from Netflix subscribers?  “Are you halving my service, or doubling my price?”  Either way it just seemed wrong.

On September 18th, Reed Hastings, Netflix Co-Founder and CEO, sent a message that could be described as an understatement – “I messed up.  I owe you an explanation.”  Yes, the Netflix subscribers said almost in unison, you did mess up.

Less than a month later, on October 10th, another email was sent saying “It is clear that for many of our members two websites would make things more difficult, so we are going to keep Netflix as one place to go for streaming and DVDs.”  Steve Swasey, a spokesman for Netflix, provided valuable insight with his estimates that Netflix lost 800,000 DVD customers and 200,000 online users to a price increase and now-jettisoned plans to create separate services for both.

I have to wonder, what were they thinking?  What was the basis for these decisions and reactions?  Below are a few key ideas that can help decision making be less stressful and produce more positive outcomes.

Understand your long-term goal. Strategic management, i.e., being agile enough to respond rapidly to changing market conditions or opportunities, is a thoughtful process; not a cavalier or reactive one.  Reactive companies frequently lose sight of their mission and long-term goals.   As I’m watching the Netflix reactions, I see reaction and inadequate or missing “thoughtfulness.”  There is no appearance of consistency with their mission or long-term goals.  Their website states they are the world’s leading Internet subscription service for enjoying movies and TV shows.  Is that their goal?  Or is that only part of their goal? Or are there other components that make up their goal?  Did Netflix focus exclusively on the technology and profits and take their eye off the customer?

When making decisions, make certain that your long-term goals are clear, concise and complete – and understood throughout the company.  Having the best technology without having satisfied customers only goes half way.

Know the basis for yourself. Socrates’ golden rule was “Know Thyself”.  Do you make decisions based on promoting yourself (ego) or protecting yourself (fear)?  Or are you making decisions with the end goal success of your organization in mind?  Hastings, Netflix’ CEO said, “For the past five years, my greatest fear at Netflix has been that we wouldn’t make the leap from success in DVDs to success in streaming.”  Was he so consumed by fear that his decision making process was myopic?

Have sufficient information.  While no one benefits from “analysis paralysis”, having sufficient data is necessary.  According to a Netflix spokesperson, Netflix relied too much on internal numbers.  Whether you are considering downsizing or restructuring an organization, hiring or firing employees, or changing your market strategy, it is important to have as complete information as possible.  Granted, executives must regularly make decisions without complete information – when is enough, enough?  One should at least do a quick assessment to determine if different segments and perspectives have been at considered.  Did Netflix have external numbers and discount their value?  Or did they only look at internal numbers as the basis for their decision?

Consider the unintended results of your decisions. When you are making a decision to fix one problem, are you creating new problems?   What problem was Netflix trying to solve?  It is unfortunately quite common for companies to fix one problem without thinking about downstream impacts.  If your organization is not performing, do you think you have to restructure?  What happens if you do?  And what happens if you don’t?  What exactly is the problem you are trying to fix?  Think it through and add rigor/analysis to your decisions.

It is unclear to me if the problem Netflix was trying to solve was a technology (streaming) issue, a financial (raising prices) issue, an operational (the people running one group were not the right ones for the other) issue, or some combination of all.  One can almost guarantee that losing a million customers was not the intended results of the decision.

Many companies make decisions that don’t produce with intended results.  Netflix’ decisions, reactions and the results just happened to be high profile.  As you are making decisions for your company, be clear about your goals and the basis for yourself, and think through what new problems you might be making.

Best of luck to Netflix.  I really have enjoyed its services and hope to continue enjoying them for a long time.

Let us hear from you on your decision making experiences – those that worked, and those that didn’t turn out as expected.

Silently, I laughed to myself as I realized that after all this time, there was still a bit of me that questioned if I was doing what they wanted – did I live up (or down) to their standards? And I quickly remembered: “Their standards” – who are They? And why would I give away my opinion and worth to some unknown “they”?”

What are “THEY” thinking?

My unsolicited advice: Stop measuring yourself against what you think other people are thinking you should do or be. It sounds simple, but how often do we go into a job or a meeting or a project and look to measure up? We get built up when our boss praises us and we get down when they don’t. It’s interesting that typically when our boss praises us we tend to accept it (“I have a great boss! She is always so supportive of me”); yet when she corrects us or reprimands us we tend to become negative – either to ourselves or to the boss (“She never appreciates anything I do” or “I’m such an idiot”).

I’m not suggesting that we exclude what is expected or what others think; I’m saying don’t give away your own measure of right and wrong, good and bad, to some unknown beings.

Don’t get too excited when people say great things about you, or too down when they say horrible things about you. I shake my head when I hear the old adage “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me”. This was obviously said by someone who had never been verbally bullied or publicly humiliated. Of course, words can harm us! But only if we allow them to.

It often can take years and years so that we aren’t excited by the nice things people say about us or devastated by the unkind things. One day, you realize that what people say about you says more about them then it does about you.

Conditioned to Please

I spent so much time and energy trying to do and be what they thought I should be.  Of course, who was “they” and why did I allow their opinion to dictate what should be right for me?

As newborns, our very livelihood is dependent on someone else – without “them” we do not have food, water, safety or shelter. We are conditioned from birth that we must please “Them” in order to survive. In the United States, this conditioning continues throughout our growing up. In preschool, we get to play when “they” say it is OK, and sleep when “they” say we should.  Throughout elementary school, conditioning to conform and please others continues. Often, in the teen years, when it is natural to try to rebel against authority and find our own footing, we are punished or ridiculed.

It is no wonder then that once we enter the work force we are looking out to determine who “they” are on which our survival will depend!

Self-Worth and Self-Esteem

To understand your value, you need to look at your sense of Self-Worth vs. Self-Esteem. While these two terms are often interchanged, they have very different meanings. Self-worth is defined as the opinion you have about yourself and the value you place on yourself. It is, in essence, exactly what it says – what you think you are worth. Self-esteem, on the other hand, is a favorable opinion or high regard for something or someone. Self-worth comes from INSIDE – who we are; self-esteem comes from OUTSIDE – how we are doing.

It is entirely possible that we will have a healthy sense of self-worth; however, our self-esteem may fluctuate based on the situation in which we find ourselves.

When entering the workforce or a new job, it is important to understand that others quite likely know the environment better than you; therefore, your self-esteem may – and in my opinion – should be reduced. However, your self-worth – the value you place on yourself – can remain very high as you learn your new environment, subject and situation.

I am not advocating totally ignoring the norms; neither am I suggesting that our self-worth is in the hand of “them”. Responses that I have seen – and experienced – vary from two extremes or somewhere along a continuum. On the one end we minimize our value; on the other end we exaggerate our value.

Know your Value

Carl Rogers, considered by many as one of the most influential psychologists of the 20th century, defined a fully functioning person as “one who is in touch with his or her deepest and innermost feelings and desires… these individuals understand their own emotions and place a deep trust in their own instincts and urges.” (Rogers, 1962) Rogers believed that a fully functional person was “able to live fully in the here and now with personal inner freedom.” A fully functional person, according to Rogers, does not place conditions on his or her own worth – thus knows their value, (i.e., has a healthy sense of self-worth).

Psychologists refer to “under-functioning – over-functioning” patterns that are often familiar in couples. Under-functioning people may be described as those who do not know their value and thus place conditions on his or her own worth. They often rely on others taking the lead and relying on others for advice or making decisions.  Over-functioning people tend to be overly focused on another person’s problems, they offer frequent advice, and may believe “if I don’t do it, it won’t get done.”

Both under-functioning and over-functioning may have low sense of self-worth, they just demonstrate it in different ways – and their self-esteem differs. Not surprisingly, since under-functioning people look to others to take the lead, they often tend to seek out over-functioning people – people who are seen as “having it all together”.

I have found that this dynamic is not limited to couples, but is also very prevalent in the workforce. A person who does not know their value – either because of youth, lack of experience, or continued reinforcement by an “over-functioning” person – will continue to look to others to validate their worth.

Are You working with Idiots?

In coaching senior leaders, the one word that I heard more frequently than expected was “idiots”.

 “If only those idiots would do their job.”

“I work with a bunch of idiots.”

“My boss is such an idiot.”

An idiot is defined as a stupid person or an utterly foolish or senseless person. The people who made these comments about their colleagues / subordinates / bosses / customers were in work environments where a certain level of intelligence was required. So how has our workforce become so full of stupid or utterly senseless people?

What I began to notice was that it wasn’t so much that they were idiots – they just weren’t doing things the way the other person thought they should.

While on the one end of the spectrum there are people who don’t value themselves, on the other end is the person who doesn’t value the other. I can hear the protests now, “NO, you don’t understand.  They REALLY WERE idiots!”. Probably not.

When they were being an “idiot”, were you really listening to what they were saying with the goal of understanding, or the goal of telling them why they were wrong?  In Stephen R. Covey’s bestselling book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, the fifth habit is “Seek first to understand, then to be understood”.

“Yea, yea – I read the book. But Covey didn’t really understand that sometimes I was pretty darn certain I was right. I needed to understand their position so I could explain why they were wrong!”

Think about it for a moment. When you have a conversation with the ascribed “idiot”, what are you hearing? What are you trying to understand?

We filter what we hear through our lenses of past experience and understanding. “Yes, I had the same thing happen to me”. Well – not exactly. You did not have the exact same thing in the same environment with the same baggage that they have. Rather than rushing to “understand”, listen first.

When we over-value ourselves, and under-value the other, we don’t allow ourselves to hear and really understand. You are probably reasonably (or very) smart, have been successful, and are pretty good at what you do. But the other person (your so-called-idiot) also is.

Rather than dismiss this idea, the next time you find yourself “dealing with the idiot”, ask yourself the following questions and listen with curiosity to the answer:

•  What did they hear me say?
• What do they know that I’m not aware of?
• What would happen if they were right – and I was wrong?
• Could it be that we are both right – there are just different ways to approach it?

The answer to a healthy sense of self-worth and self-esteem cannot be answered in a simple saying, single article, or any one single thing. It is a continuous awareness that YOU have great value – and so do THEY.  Recognize your value, appreciate theirs.

Numerous studies confirm the importance of leadership development and the positive impact effective leaders have on the performance of companies. INSEAD global business school (Vries & Korotove, 2010) states “Organizations that take leadership development seriously outperform the competition.” David Day from Pennsylvania State University conclude “Many organizations are viewing leadership as a source of competitive advantage and are investing in its development accordingly” (Day, 2001). And of course, every company that provides or supports leadership development services has an abundance of research to validate the importance of developing our leaders.

Developing leaders is critical as Arizona focuses on advancing its standing in the technology and business community nationwide. The Arizona Technology Council and ImpaQ Solutions recently conducted a survey among leaders from Arizona technology related companies asking for their opinions as we craft a leadership development program. Response to the question: “Leadership development is important to me and my organization in 2015” confirmed research across the world with 100% of respondents stating they strongly agree (76%) or agree (24%).

Unfortunately, the remaining survey results did not support the statement of leadership development being important to organizations. When asked if the respondent had personally participated in leadership development activities over the past two years, less than half (49%) responded that they had.

How, if leadership development was so important to so many, have only half of people participated in any leadership development activities?

Questions and possibilities abounded. Below are three possibilities that quickly come to mind.

• They thought they didn’t have time,
• They thought they didn’t need it, or
• They didn’t know what development opportunities were available.

Let’s explore each of these possibilities.

       Did they think they didn’t have time?

My computer died recently. Not because it wasn’t a “good” computer – I had done extensive research before buying the computer and felt confident I had bought the right one. It has worked (almost) perfectly every day since I had bought it in 2003. And the fact that I couldn’t find updated software to run on my Windows 2000 machine wasn’t important – what I had worked just fine.

Until it didn’t.

Why did it die? Because there were always other higher priorities; I just didn’t have time.

“Our employees are our most valuable asset” is a standard cliché that is repeated over and over by companies and organizations of all description. The HR Scorecard published by Harvard Business Press (E., Huselid, & Ulrich, 2001) demonstrates that higher employee engagement scores tend to be statistically correlated with increased corporate performance.

If the leaders of the companies – who state leadership development is important — do not demonstrate that investing in leadership development is worth the time, what message is permeated throughout the organization?

We make time to keep our computers updated. We make time to keep our marketing updated. We make time to keep our technology updated. Yet too often we do not make time – require the time – to keep our leaders updated.

Saying we don’t have time is just another way of saying that it isn’t important enough.

     Did they think they didn’t need it?

I often hear (and naively have said it myself in the past), “I don’t need the training or development but my team does.” This line of thinking supports the old saying “we often don’t know what we don’t know.” Continuous learning and growth are keys to… well, continued learning and growth. Once we think we know “enough” we become stuck in our current place. This conclusion is true whether you are the CEO of a Fortune 100 company or a budding entrepreneur with only a dream.

Research shows that it is human tendency to think of ourselves as “better than average.” The technically accurate term is illusory superiority; a more pleasant sounding name for it is the Lake Wobegon effect.

The Lake Wobegon effect is named for the fictional town of Lake Wobegon from the radio series A Prairie Home Companion, where, according to Garrison Keillor, “all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average.” According to the Journal of Personal and Social Psychology (Guenther & Alick, 2010), the tendency for people to evaluate themselves more favorably than an average-peer, the better-than-average effect (BTAE), is among the most well-documented effects in the social-psychological literature. Experiments and surveys have repeatedly shown that most people believe that they possess attributes that are better or more desirable than average. One poll found that 90 percent of leaders believe that they are in the top 10 percent of performers.

But just because “everyone is doing it” doesn’t mean that you should do it – nor will it help create a competitive edge.

     Did they not know what was available?

Perhaps the half who did not participate in activities to continue developing themselves just did not know what was available. Perhaps the market is not providing the leadership development opportunities that the leaders need.

Employees often become senior leaders in companies because of their years of experience and knowledge of business and management. In fact, many of those surveyed indicated that they taught management and leadership courses. There is a plethora of management training opportunities and courses that focus on management skills such as sales skills, marketing skills, supervisory skills, and analytical skills. And there are some good academic courses available at our local universities. But for those who have completed their formal education and are experienced in managing, there is limited available.

Many managers and leaders have learned how to be an effective managerial leader, what James MacGregor Burns, Pulitzer Prize-wining historian, describes as “transactional leadership.” Burns describes transactional leadership as focusing on the role of supervision, organization, and group performance; a style of leadership in which the leader promotes compliance of his/her followers through both rewards and punishments.

Once leaders become expert at managing, they may think there is nothing left to learn. Transactional leadership is sufficient to keep you and your company operating effectively. It is very good at maintaining the status quo. Transactional leadership is not sufficient to move you and your company to higher levels.

Burns’ 1978 book, Leadership, introduced the theory of “transformational leadership” and differentiated between transactional leadership. Transformational leadership is a style of leadership where the leader is charged with identifying the needed change, creating a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members of the group. Transformational leadership transforms you and your company to higher levels.

Perhaps respondents did not participate in leadership development because they could not find the opportunities that appealed to help them move to the next level. Every executive needs to ask himself or herself what they are willing to invest personally to move their company to a higher level of success.

What do you think? Please share your thoughts on why so few people participate in something that so many believe is important.

OCAI Enterprise Example Report – Sample report of Enterprise OCAI 

Organizational Culture – Is yours what you think? – A brief overview of why it is important to measure your culture (rather than just operating on “gut”)

The only way is up! -Boosting performance and change with collective, positive, paradoxical leadership

Health Care Examined Health care sector examinedwith OCAI.  A National Survey in the Netherlands

NIH article – Competing Values OCAI – From BioMed Central; Research Article – Research article Open Access; Assessing an organizational culture instrument based on the Competing Values Framework: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses; Christian D Helfrich*, Yu-Fang Li1, David C Mohr, Mark Meterko, and Anne E Sales

The OSUMC Study – From the Academic Health Centers.  Strong Leadership and Teamwork Drive Culture and Performance Change: Ohio State University Medical Center 2000 –2006, Fred Sanfilippo, MD, PhD, Neeli Bendapudi, PhD, Anthony Rucci, PhD, and Leonard Schlesinger, DBA

Delivering bad news is unpleasant but is included in every manager’s job description.  I don’t know anyone who likes to receive – or give – bad news but it will be necessary from time to time.  ‘Bad News’ might be defined as something that is unfavorable, unpleasant, or undesirable.  Delivering bad news cannot be avoided so stop avoiding it and let’s learn how to do it as effectively and painlessly as possible.

It is obvious from watching “Up in the Air” that Bingham is clear, concise, effective, and efficient.  He does not complicate the situation by delivering the news badly.

I recently had to deliver some bad news – not life changing news, but unpleasant nonetheless.  While it would have been easier to have someone else deliver the message or to hide behind an email, I didn’t.  Instead, I sat down with the person and had a conversation.  With genuine respect, I said, “I need to talk with you about this situation.  Unfortunately, we aren’t going to be able to continue as we have in the past.”   While it didn’t change the decision, neither did it complicate the situation by making the recipient feel devalued.

So how should bad news be delivered?  Here are some suggestions:

Be Clear About Your Goal:  Understand the situation, decide what you want to say, and be clear to yourself on the desired outcome.   If you are addressing an employee’s performance, is your goal to give the employee direction for how to improve or is it to develop documentation for subsequent dismissal?   Or, are you really just expressing your frustration to them so they know how disappointed you are?  You will likely clarify your message by being clear about your goal.

Get to the Point:  Too often people think they are softening the blow by leading in with casual conversation.  This is both unfair and dishonest.  If you are having a general conversation with someone and then – bam – hit them with the bad news, they may well receive the message that they must always be on guard with you.  If you meander around the conversation until you get to the point, they may be sitting there with their minds racing wondering what the heck is going on.  Just get to the point.

Be Honest:  We have often heard about the Oreo cookie approach – the bad news (cream filling) surrounded by two bits of good news (chocolate layers).  This approach does not work.  While getting through the first chocolate layer, the recipient is likely be feeling really great – only to be let down, or else they are sitting there in angst waiting for the bad news.  Then if you finish with another bit of chocolate layer (good news) they are now likely confused and probably have missed the real message being delivered.  Just be honest, not cruel, and get to the point.

Don’t Make Excuses:  Making excuses gives false hope.  As soon as you give the excuse, you are simply opening up opportunities for arguments if not false hope.  By making excuses, the recipient tends to enter into a bargaining stage – “What if I did this instead? Would that work?” If someone is being removed from a position, simply state the facts.

Be Clear:  I often tell the leaders I coach that when they are giving bad news to an employee there should be no ambiguity when the employee leaves their office.   If their performance is unacceptable and they are at risk, they need to clearly understand the gravity of the situation.    Sometimes by trying to “be nice” the result is being vague about the message.  Be clear.  Don’t compound the bad news with uncertainty.

Respect Theirs and Your Discomfort:  I have never met anyone who enjoys giving bad news.  Your discomfort at giving bad news reinforces your humanity.  But know that the discomfort will typically be short-lived.  However, when the bad news is handled badly, the potential consequence is much longer.  Accept your discomfort; respect their discomfort.

And a Big No-No – Don’t Give Bad News via Email:  Email is like the tale of two cities – it was the best of invention, it was the worst of invention.  Giving bad news by email makes the giver look like a coward and the recipient feel disrespected.  Suck it up, have the in person meeting or phone call and move on.

What are your experiences to giving and receiving bad news?  Do you have examples of situations that were handled well – in addition to those handled badly?  What lessons can we learn from these experiences?

Click here if you would like to talk with us about how you or team can communicate better and more effectively – even when the news may be bad.