Energy Cabinet

Warren Buffet's Residence Cost $31,500 and Other Leadership Lessons

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:41:00 +0000

I have had a great deal of respect for Warren Buffet since he showed his humanity by openly admitting he had been a bad public speaker and had taken lessons to give himself the skills and confidence to talk to groups. It's also intriguing, in a voyeurish sort of way, to think about the Oracle of Omaha living in exactly the same property he bought in 1958...coincidentally the year I was born....which therefore seems a long time ago. Somehow, I suspect we may not be getting the full story about his residential quarters, but non-the-less it makes for a great headline and lesson in leadership!

Indeed, according to Forbes the 6000 square foot home is valued at around $700,000. There may well have been one or two upgrades since I was born!

It's reminiscent of a story I heard when I met with Jim Sinegal, the founder of Costco. In his office, Jim kept the original decrepit desk he used when he started the wholesale giant with co-founder Jeff Brotman. Jim told me he kept it to remind everyone of the virtue of frugality which is easy to forget when every report you receive is denominated in round millions. These days, since his retirement, Jim's not acting so frugally. He made this point in public recently when he hosted a fundraiser for President Obama at his home in Seattle.

Jim Sinegal hosted President Obama at his Seattle mansion
. Source http://www.king5.com/story/news/local/2014/08/03/13137630/

I think its fair to say that both Sinegal and Buffet have made great use of symbolism over the years, which is indeed a technique adopted by many energizing leaders. Here's some more lessons from Buffet that I extracted from a post by Travis Wright, a Venture Catalyst, and Marketing Technology Entrepreneur. (His post first appeared in Inc, and then Linked-in Pulse)

1. On Risk

"Risk comes from not knowing what you're doing," says Buffett, which means one of two things. You can either be a big risk taker and gambler or you can learn what you need to do, play it a little slower and minimize your risks. Obviously the latter approach is best, but it doesn't lead to instant gratification. Put those multi-million dollar fantasies on the back burner long enough to get in control of your risk factor.

2. On Reputations

"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently." This is especially true in the digital era where if something's in writing or on a video, it's forever. You can even take a screencap of a Snapchat, so be diligent when building your reputation--online and off.

Remember Congressmen Anthony Weiner tweeting pictures of his genitalia? Yeah, don't be that guy. His reputation is toast.

3. On Who You Surround Yourself With

"It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours, and you'll drift in that direction." Birds of a feather flock together, and you're probably not in the position to be anyone's mentor yet. If you surround yourself with better people, they'll inspire you to do better yourself.

As I tell my children, "If you want to soar like an eagle in life, you can't be flocking with the turkeys."

4. On Hindsight

"In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield," quips Buffett. Of course, this is true in every other aspect of your life, too. Stop focusing on that rearview mirror, though, after you've gleaned the necessary lessons from it. Move forward, even if that direction isn't quite as streak-free.

5. On Stupid Mistakes

"I bought a company in the mid-90s called Dexter Shoe and paid $400 million for it. And it went to zero. And I gave about $400 million worth of Berkshire stock, which is probably now worth $400 billion. But I've made lots of dumb decisions. It's part of the game."

No successful person is mistake-free, and that's a good thing. Each stumble is a chance to learn and a warning when you're tempted to do something similar in the future.

6. On Knowing When to Quit

"Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks." In other words, ditch the stubbornness and know when to call it quits. Not every project is worth saving.

Leadership Isn't Easy and Other Business Lessons from an Army Officer

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:36:00 +0000

Following on my earlier post about the Full Metal Jacket Leadership style, I was intrigued to run across this article written by former army officer, Matthew Hamiliton. He identifies four of the great lessons he took out of his service for our Nation which he believes are applicable to the business world.

Image provided by ThinkStock (Rafal Olkis)

When I was a kid, I didn’t want to be a businessman when I grew up; I wanted to be a soldier. So that’s what I did.

While serving as an Army officer, I was exposed to some amazing leaders and great leadership lessons. Since leaving the Army, I’ve seen those lessons are just as applicable in the private sector and would like to briefly share a few.

1. Give people a purpose.

Giving employees a task is easy. Giving them a purpose is harder, but much more important. Your employees need to understand the why much more than the what.

In the Army, mission orders consist of both a task and purpose. Emphasis is put on the purpose through the “commander’s intent” statement. Giving soldiers a purpose enables them to be flexible and adjust to changing conditions on the battlefield, while still accomplishing the overall intent of their mission.

Think about how your management team gives out assignments. If the only reason an employee knows why they are doing something is “because I was told to,” you may have a problem. Help put their tasks, large and small, in context of your larger organizational mission and situation. As an added benefit, in addition to giving them flexibility, purpose can help increase engagement and lead to more profits.

2. Be precise when you communicate.

Precisely communicating the intent of a mission in the military is extremely important.

For example, there is a difference between attacking an enemy and assaulting one. The differences are subtle and nuanced, but exist nonetheless. Faint variations of language can lead to a big difference in meaning and interpretation.

Think about how many emails you receive in a day in which the writer’s purpose is muddled and unclear. How often have you attended an unproductive meeting because the participants used ambiguous language that left their message indistinct?

In On Writing Well, editorial writer William Zinsser cautions to “care deeply about words (and) master the small gradations between (them) that seem to be synonyms.” Using precise words to convey your meaning will help people understand you.

3. Structure your problem-solving approach.

Soldiers in the Army are often placed in situations where they have to solve complex problems without much leeway for error. While in combat, my helicopter platoon’s priority was maintenance. Without functioning helicopters, we couldn’t accomplish our mission. With limited resources and a long supply chain, we could not afford to make mistakes.

We planned maintenance using the “P4T2” approach – problem, plan, people, parts, tools and time. This helped us to make sure we covered all the bases. Management consultants refer to a structured approach like this as being “MECE” – mutually exclusive, collective exhaustive – meaning you address all the relevant issues without unnecessary overlap.

The P4T2 approach worked for us. Business leaders, however, can benefit by figuring out what problem-solving method works for their organization. Fully structuring your approach before tackling a problem can help ensure you don’t forget something important that can come back to bite you later.

4. Motivate the right way.

I don’t know a single person who joined the military to become rich. Despite this, military service members are consistently some of the hardest working, most respected people. So why is money often the first incentive that many business people turn to?

Soldiers in the Army join, and remain, for myriad reasons. Similarly, many employees are motivated by more than just a paycheck.

It’s your job as a leader to figure out what they really care about. Try to see the world from their perspective, and ask them what matters to them.

Incentives can change over time, too. In combat, the most common motivation for soldiers is to bring everyone home safe. When your organization is in crisis mode, you need to figure out how to focus everyone.

Warning of layoffs may not do the trick, and may send people to look for something more stable. If you build your organization around strong and clear values, that mission can be the rallying cry to pull everyone together.

Leadership isn’t easy. “You can get knocked down, and it hurts and it leaves scars,” said Gen. Stanley McChrystal in his 2011 TED Talk.

Great leaders continue to learn and grow because they know they don’t have all the right answers. “A leader isn’t good because they’re right; they’re good because they’re willing to learn and to trust.”

Matthew Hamilton is a former Army officer and volunteer co-organizer for TEDxBirmingham, matthew@TEDxBirmingham.org.

This article first appeared in the Business Journal in December 2013

Managing Branson, Einstein, JFK and others with Attention Deficit Disorder

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 06 May 2014 17:27:00 +0000

Dear Chief Energy Officer,

Do you have any advice on how I should motivate one of my most difficult employees? On one hand, she sometimes comes up with the most brilliant ideas. On the other hand, she seems unable to pay attention in staff meetings, and frequently interrupts. She also has trouble completing her assigned tasks, unless she’s really interested. When she’s interested, her work is exceptionally good. When she’s not interested she has me pulling my hair out!

Martha G, Marketing Director, Tacoma, Washington

Dear Martha,

It’s often the case that the “most brilliant” of employees are also the most challenging to manage. I am not a medical doctor, but based solely on the symptoms you describe, there’s a good possibility your employee has Adult ADD, i.e. Attention Deficit Disorder. While termed a “disorder” adults with ADD have many extraordinary gifts and are often:

Creative

Artistic

Intuitive

Empathetic

Visionary

Inventive

Sensitive

Original

Loving

Exuberant.

This could explain her “brilliant” ideas. Famous brilliant people with ADD include Albert Einstein, Richard Branson, and President John F Kennedy.

Her challenges “paying attention in staff meetings” and “completing tasks in which she is not interested” are consistent with distractability which is one of the clinical symptoms of ADD. Ironically, when people with Attention Deficit are interested, they go into a state known as “Hyper-focus”, which is maybe why you are describing her work under such circumstances as “exceptionally good.”

The second clue it might be ADD is her frequent interruptions. This if often coursed by impulsivity, which is another symptom of ADD.

Fortunately there are many treatment options some medical and others behavioral. My advice is to encourage her to do her own research. Remember you can only lead a horse to water, you can’t make it drink.

In the meantime, your best bet is to acknowledge her gifts, and look for ways to help her overcome her challenges, e.g. providing more admin support, more "air time" in staff meetings etc.

Finally, keep in mind that under the Americans with Disabilities Act you are required to make reasonable accommodations for people with ADD. This does not mean giving her carte blanche to perform as she pleases; it does mean you have to make a reasonable effort to help her succeed in her current responsibilities.

Please stop pulling your hair out!

What I learned from a Seattle Sunbreak

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:10:00 +0000

I learned a lot yesterday.

Here in Seattle we had a rare occurrence. A day of glorious sunshine in April. After several months of grey, Seattle residents become euphoric at the first sign of a huge yellow spherical object in the sky, and head for the outdoor bars, beaches, parks etc.

Jeff Nitta, Treasurer of Weyerhaeuser Corp, and Ivan Braiker, CEO of Hipcricket compare notes at a Cheese & Wine evening at the Center for Energizing Leadership, April 29, 2014

Great news for everyone. Unless you planned an indoor marketing event for that evening!

My predicament

Coincidentally, that evening, the Center for Energizing Leadership was holding the first in a series of Cheese and Wine events put on for the purpose of educating the market about our innovative Energy Cabinet program. The big idea is an Energizing Leadership Development program for accomplished entrepreneurs that converts into a New Business Incubator.

Our initial event was “sold out”. As soon as I saw the early morning sun, I knew that the event would experience many no-shows.

Where to turn for advice

I related this concern to my work-out buddies at the local LA Fitness.

Immediately, one of the most seasoned of the group, an elderly retiree (with a general phobia towards new technology) told me that this was a “good” thing. Say what? He pointed out that any prospect who failed to show up due to a "Seattle sunbreak" was unlikely to be a good prospect to join an Energy Cabinet. He told me to think about the time I would save, by not wasting time with “flaky” prospects.

The outcome

So what happened later that evening?

Kara Hamilton, Smartsheet Inc; Jennifer Olsen, Resourceful HR; Amy Allen, Morgan Stanley enjoy meeting each other at the Center for Energizing Leadership's Cheese & Wine Evening, April 29, 2014

As I had feared, several people were no-shows. But overall, we had an excellent turnout of quality CEOs and senior executives. Due to the reduced numbers I was able to spend quality time with the right prospects.

What I learned

So what did I learn? Three points worth sharing:

Although I am an optimist by nature, sometimes it takes a third party to point out that you can view the same set of circumstances through “a glass half-full” lens or “a glass half-empty” lens.
Just because someone is computer illiterate doesn’t mean they are not business savvy. There is a great deal of untapped wisdom among our grey-haired retired friends.
Don’t be afraid to share predicaments with others. Sometimes the wisest advice comes from the most unlikely sources in the most unlikely places.

My other take-away was that when it comes to marketing events, quality of prospects is far more important than the quantity. The Energy Cabinet program is a winner. Those leaders who attended quickly grasped the concept. Due to the unexpected Seattle sunbreak we had the right people in the room!

The Secret Sauce For Energizing Leadership?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:11:00 +0000

Dear Chief Energy Officer,

I’v heard you emphasize the importance of personal mastery recently. Can you please explain why its one of the 'secret sauces' of energizing leadership.

John H, CEO, Seattle, WA

Dear John H,

According to MIT’s Peter Senge, the author of the Fifth Discipline, “Personal mastery is a discipline of continually clarifying and deepening our personal vision, of focusing our energies, of developing patience, and of seeing reality objectively”

Personal mastery means knowing yourself completely and accepting yourself deeply so you think, feel and act from a grounded, integrated center.

Personal mastery builds integrity, authenticity and confidence in a leader. It opens them up to clearer vision and more decisive action. It's experienced as personal power which leads others to trust and be inspired to follow. It motivates those around you to produce their best. What starts on the inside, produces outstanding results when the rubber hits the road in the business world.

At the Center for Energizing Leadership, we've seen that personal mastery provides a solid foundation for great leadership development. This is because energizing leadership comes from who we are, not just what we do. Enduring change happens from the inside out. It is based on knowledge and self-acceptance. We believe that real, lasting, powerful change happens when a leader's inner foundation is strong.

In my experience working with dozens of leaders of businesses, the decision to take the path toward personal mastery brings immediate positive changes in leadership behavior, and business performance.

In other words, personal mastery is one of the key foundations on the way to energizing leadership. This is why we teach it in the first few sessions of our Energy Cabinet program. It’s important because ultimately personal mastery can lift your leadership to its full potential.

Best regards,

Please keep your questions coming to jc@energizing-leadership.com

Will Sir Alex Ferguson teach the Moyes Case-Study at Harvard?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 22 Apr 2014 15:55:00 +0000

I've really had a terrible soccer season, watching Manchester United plummet from its perennial Champions berth, to the ice-cold, murky depths of 7th place in the English Premier League. Therefore, today's announcement of the firing of its head coach , David Moyes, a man who prior to joining the Champions at the start of the season had specialized in 7th place finishes, comes as a great relief.

Having suffered, its some consolation to know that my pain was not in vain, as already the business press are chronicling the disaster, and memorializing it in Case Study format. Here's one I just ran across in Forbes magazine written by Andy Cave. Maybe Sir Alex Ferguson will be teaching it when he assumes his new position at Harvard.

10 Leadership Lessons From Manchester United's Hiring And Firing Of David Moyes

David Moyes

1) Don’t change the two most important people in the organisation at the same time

Sir Alex Ferguson had been manager of Manchester United for 27 years and David Gill had racked up a decade as chief executive when the duo stepped down last summer. For manager and chief executive at a football club, read chief executive and chairman at a publicly listed company. Allowing both to leave at the same time is dangerous, particularly when their combined leadership has been so successful. Where was the succession planning that didn’t let that happen? And what happened to the board’s oversight of the career decisions of its two most important executives? How many companies have lost their chairman and chief executive at exactly the same time and replaced both with great success?

2) Don’t let the last business leader choose the next one?

Sir Alex Ferguson imposed what some observers have described as a “Stalin-like grip” on Manchester United during his 27 years in charge. Very little, it is said, happened without either his direct say-so or tacit approval. But allowing the man who has had a stand named after him and a statue erected at the club’s Old Trafford stadium to effectively nominate his replacement as manager brought personal emotion, ego and self-interest into the succession, when it should have been a rational, well thought-out collective board decision. Who on the board would have dared to shoot down the suggestion of the club’s most successful manager ever? Ferguson was allowed to become much too important during his reign at the top. How many departing chief executives are allowed to select their successors?

3) Groom successors from within when you have a winning team

Ferguson’s biggest failing perhaps was not grooming a potential successor. Maybe that’s a pitfall of having a domineering, win-at-all-costs personality. But some of the most successful leadership at winning companies has taken more of a team-based approach, generating a cadre of capable lieutenants who have gone on to follow them as well as taking the helm at other companies. Groups including Procter & Gamble PG -0.37%, Dixons, Asda and the former menswear chain Burtons have served as prodigious academies of management talent. And in British football three of the 19 other managers in the Premier League served as players and/or backroom staff under Ferguson, demonstrating that the talent to groom at hand was indeed available.

4) Keep the most important support staff intact when the top jobs change

David Moyes entered the lions’ den when he took the manager’s job at Manchester United. The previous manager had won everything there was to win in a glittering career; the top players’ medal cabinets were stuffed full too. Having never won a major trophy himself as a manager, he had an instant credibility gap and needed wise heads around him who had the benefit of having been around in the glory years. Instead, he replaced the entire top coaching staff, bringing in the team that had served him at Everton. While this might have been seen as asserting his authority at the time, it left Moyes unsupported within the club and deprived the club of vital experience, know-how and continuity.

5) Appoint someone big enough for the job

Moyes has never won a major trophy as a football manager and yet he was expected to deliver more or less instantly at a club whose previous manager had won 13 Premier League titles and two European Champions Leagues. As if this was not mission impossible, his body language, demeanour and communications with the media suggested almost from the outset that he did not feel that he was up to the task.

6) Get the cultural fit right

The history of an organisation is an irrevocable part of what it is. It is almost impossible to imagine Apple AAPL -0.17% as a company full of conformists or General Electric GE +0.34% as recklessly-managed. Similarly in football, Manchester United’s history and reputation is as a dynamic and romantic team full of derring-do, adventure and attacking style. From the youthful exuberance of the “Busby Babes” in the 1950s to the swagger and pomp of Best, Charlton and Law in their prime, the club has developed a “United way”. Ferguson, a self-confessed sporting gambler, stuck to those principles. However, while Moyes spoke about a strong youth policy and the club’s fine reputation for attacking football, his actions and strategies did not match his words.

7) Manage the management’s communication

Moyes had no choice but to take the microphone after every defeat – the broadcasting contracts governing British Premier League football stipulate that the team managers are interviewed after every game. Moyes, following a master media manipulator in Ferguson, could not be expected to have his predecessor’s touch in this department. Honest and decent in his public utterances, he nonetheless needed support from his backroom staff and senior players and directors. The club’s media team could have taken a much more active role in protecting Moyes, presenting a collective front and showing support to a manager who was always going to have a tricky first year in following a legend.

8) Be decisive. Know when it’s the right time to stop the rot.

Prior to Moyes’s departure, United had a reputation for giving managers time to build teams, in contrast to some of the rapid firings seen at other top teams in the UK and Europe. Yet, it was clear that Moyes had lost the dressing room, while his comments after the team’s final performance under his management demonstrated that he didn’t have the long-term vision required.

9) Don’t let the news leak

Once the decision is made, make the announcement. Some of the momentum gained from the decisiveness United’s owners showed with their judgment that enough was enough was lost by widespread reports the day before that made Moyes’ sacking the worst-kept secret in British football. Nearly all Britain’s national newspapers led their sports pages with the news that Moyes was to be sacked, before it had been announced. While United’s listing on the New York Stock Exchange governs the timing of price-sensitive news, the leaking of the dismissal led to speculation about compensation, replacements and club strategy, when the focus could have been on a new beginning.

10) Have a credible new plan.

When an instant fix is neither credible nor desirable, at least have a plan, a process and steady temporary leadership. Appointing Ryan Giggs, United’s most decorated player in the club’s history, to take charge on a temporary basis, restores some respect to the fallen champions. Giggs is adored by fans, respected by the players and hugely liked by the sports media. With so much of the past leadership having departed, his is an obvious temporary appointment to try to arrest the team’s slide and provide some stability. Few companies, however, are likely to have somebody with his attributes waiting ready in the wings.

David Moyes is clearly an early candidate for Most De-Energizing leader of 2014.

"If I was two-faced would I be wearing this one?" How Lincoln energized the nation.

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:03:00 +0000

What made Abraham Lincoln such an energizing leader? Here's six lessons that I gleaned from this piece that appeared in The Week. The writing credit goes to Eric Barker.

1. Get out of the office and circulate among the troops

Historians believe he met every single Union soldier who enlisted early in the Civil War. In 1861 Lincoln spent more time out of the White House than he did in it. If a Union soldier had enlisted early in the Civil War, he likely saw the president in person. Lincoln made it a point to personally inspect every state regiment of volunteers that passed through Washington D.C

Lincoln knew people were his best source of information. And accessibility built trust. Lincoln effectively had an open-door policy. John Nicolay and John Hay, his personal secretaries, reported that Lincoln spent 75 percent of his time meeting with people Lincoln was always trying to get the best information so he could make good decisions. He virtually lived at the War Department's telegraph office so he could gain access to key information for quick, timely decisions

2. Persuade rather than compel

Despite having the power of the presidency, Lincoln didn't strong-arm people; he persuaded them.

He made them his friends. He made them like him. Here's Lincoln talking about his methods:

“ It is an old and a true maxim, that a "drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall." So with men, if you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great high road to his reason, and which, when once gained, you will find by little trouble in convincing his judgment of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause really be a just one.”

And it shows in the way he handled subordinates. He didn't give orders — he made requests. Look at his letters:

To McClellan (10-13-63): "…This letter is in no sense an order."
To Halleck (9-19-63): "I hope you will consider it…"
To Burnside (9-27-63): "It was suggested to you, not ordered…"

3. Lead by being led

Lincoln always gave credit where credit was due and took responsibility when things went wrong.

Not only did this satisfy Lincoln's need for honesty, integrity and human dignity; it also gave his subordinates the correct perception that they were, in many ways, doing the leading, not Lincoln. If nothing else, it made them feel good about their jobs. It also encouraged innovation and risk taking because they knew that if they failed, Lincoln would not blame them. Lincoln had no problem saying he screwed up, like in this letter to General Ulysses S. Grant: “I write this now as a grateful acknowledgement for the almost inestimable service you have done the country. I wish to say a word further. When you reached the vicinity of Vicksburg… I never had any faith, except a general hope that you knew better than I that the expedition could succeed… I feared it was a mistake. I now wish to make the personal acknowledgement that you were right, and I was wrong.”

4. Encourage innovation

What did Lincoln know about innovating? Well, he's the only U.S. President to ever patent something.Years before assuming the presidency, Lincoln had shown his interest in innovation when, on March 10, 1849 he received a patent for a new method of making grounded boats more buoyant. And even during his most difficult times, Lincoln continued to call on his subordinates to screen new advances, implement ideas, and win while learning. He realized that, as an executive leader, it was his chief responsibility to create the climate of risk-free entrepreneurship necessary to foster effective innovation

5. Influence people through storytelling

Lincoln was a great storyteller and he actively leveraged this skill to win people over. Lincoln reports “They say I tell a great many stories. I reckon I do; but I have learned from long experience that plain people, take them as they run, are more easily influenced through the medium of a broad and humorous illustration than in any other way”

6 Don’t take yourself too seriously

Honest Abe had a good sense of humor: "If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?"

Like President Reagan, he knew that by self-deprecating he was endearing himself to the population

"If I was two-faced why would wear this one?" asked President Lincoln. 'Only one hat,' thought the General to himself.

Six leadership lessons from a highly energizing President! Of course, if you try to emulate him there's no need to wear that ridiculous top hat...in fact, I would counsel against it unless you are running some form of Funeral Home.

Center for Energizing Leadership's April Newsletter Published

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:37:00 +0000

Center for Energizing Leadership

Newsletter April, 2014 - In This Issue:

Are You A Full Metal Jacket Style Leader?

Does Speaking in Public Make You Tense?

What's The Buzz about Energy Cabinets?

Are You A Full Metal Jacket Style Leader?

Time to retire Gunnery Sergeant Hartman as the poster-child for leadership.

When you think about energizing leaders, you don't instinctively think about officers in the US Military. On the contrary, I usually flash back to images of Gunnery Sergeant Hartmanin Stanley Kubrik's Full Metal Jacket, for a stereotype involving a boot-camp sergeant inspiring his men through the use of hard-edged and somewhat Draconian tactics.

Therefore, it was somewhat of a surprise to find being empathetic listed as a key leadership trait included in the published memoir of retired four-star General Stanley A McChrystal.... a man best known for his disparaging remarks about Vice President Joe Biden. Read more in Energizing Leader .

Does Speaking in Public Make You Tense?

Chances are, speaking in public puts a knot in your stomach. In fact, public speaking beats out death when it comes to being America's number one fear according to the Wall Street Journal. But there is a cure!

Of course, it doesn't take being a key-note speaker in a huge auditorium to get the butterflies going. Did you know that millions of Americans become nervous even when they have to make a work presentation to a small group of people? This is surprisingly common and at one time or another affected many of the people we have come to think of as confident presenters. Even Warren Buffet admits to having been a nervous presenter before he took a class on how to speak in public. So don't worry. There is a cure, and you can find it at the Center's popular workshop on Effective Presentations. It works!

What's All the Buzz about Energy Cabinets?

Find out at a Complimentary Cheese & Wine evening

Learn all about the Center's acclaimed Energy Cabinet program by attending a complimentary Cheese & Wine evening on April 29 and on other dates in early May, Jonathan Copley the Center's Founder will give a mini-presentation titled, Secrets of the Energy Cabinet. Other members of faculty will also be present to meet our guests.

Each session is limited to no more than 8 guests...(tickets for the May 6 and May 8 sessions are Sold Out.)

You can register for your free tickets at EVENTBRITE.

Newsletter of the Center for Energizing Leadership

Editor: Jonathan Copley jc@energizing-leadership.com

Visit the Center online at

http://energizing1.com

STAY CONNECTED

An Intriguing Opportunity for Entrepreneurs and Senior Executives

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 16 Apr 2014 09:22:00 +0000

An Intriguing Opportunity

for Entrepreneurs and Senior Executives

Center for Energizing Leadership

Weekly Event - Every Tuesday & Thursday: 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM (PDT)

Bellevue, WA

Ticket Information

TYPE	END			QUANTITY
Center for Energizing Leadership: Cheese & Wine	1 day before event	Free

Register

Share An Intriguing Opportunity for Entrepreneurs and Senior Executives

Email Share Tweet

Event Details

Jonathan Copley the founder of The Center for Energizing Leadership is hosting a Reception & Mini-Seminar to introduce its ground-breaking Energy Cabinet program.

"Hanging out with negative people does not lead to a positive life."

Many people have achieved success despite being held back by energy-drainers.

Imagine what more they could achieve with a group of energizing peers.

That's why the Center for Energizing Leadership runs Energy Cabinets. Of course, according to participants, there are other reasons:

Take part in a state-of-the-art leadership development program.
Earn "brain equity" by jointly creating new business ventures.
Access to 15 leading professional service firms in the Grow50 consortium.
Obtain a proven business and career mentor for personal coaching.
Network with other CXOs, Directors, Partners, Owners, Entrepreneurs.

To learn more about this innovative and energizing program, join us for an informational cheese & wine evening.

Where

Center for Energizing Leadership

6305 160th Place SE,
Bellevue, WA 98006

Parking is available at the location.

Agenda

6:00 pm to 6:30 pm - Reception and Meet the Faculty
6:30 pm to 7:00 pm - Mini-Seminar: Secrets of the Energy Cabinet
7:00 pm to 8:00 pm - Q & A

When

Choose from one of these dates:

~~Tuesday April 29~~ (Sold out) Thursday May 1

Tuesday May 6 (Sold out) Thursday May 8 (Sold out)

Tuesday May 13 Thursday May 15

How to Register

Each session is limited to no more than 8 guests. Registration is required through Eventbrite.

Grim Reaper Outpaced by People Scared of Public Speaking

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:41:00 +0000

Does Speaking in Public Make You Tense?

Chances are, speaking in public puts a knot in your stomach. In fact, public speaking is the most common fear in the United States, with the fear of death ranked number 2, reported the Wall Street Journal.

Of course it doesn't take being a key-note speaker in a huge auditorium to get the butterflies going. Did you know that millions of Americans become nervous even when they have to make a work presentation to a small group of people? This is surprisingly common and at time or other effected many of the people we have come to think of as confident presenters. Even Warren Buffet admits to having been a nervous presenter before he took a class on how to speak in public. So don't worry. There is a cure, and you can find it at the Center for Energizing Leadership's popular workshop on Effective Presentations. It works! Here's the curriculum for proven two-day workshop

Effective Presentations

This popular two day workshop has made a dramatic difference to the lives of business executives,

start-up entrepreneurs, not-for profit fundraisers, politicians, and students. Their experience levels

range from rookie, to occasional participants in Toastmasters, to regular presenters at work.

Irrespective of past experience, participants leave the class energized and more effective communicators.

Over two full days, this ideally-paced workshop addresses eight key elements of making effective presentations:

Fear of speaking - Uncover triggers; practical tips to address nerves; breathing; success stories.

Practice Routines - Rehearsal; rituals; know your audience; reconnaissance.

Voice - Including pitch, tempo and loudness.

Habits - Eliminating non-words; DOA lines; Fig-leafing; handling nervous energy.

Body - Hand gestures; feet; facial mannerisms and posture.

Audience - Interaction, hecklers, where to stand.

Message - Headlines, takeaways, anecdotes, beginning, ending, calls to action.

Tools - Power-point, microphones, podiums.

We record some of your presentations to allow you to continue to study your form.

You will leave the workshop with a DVD holding the only copy of the recording.

We run this popular workshop at the Center, several times a year.

Check here for the latest details and schedule.

Goodbye to the Full Metal Jacket leadership style

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:51:00 +0000

Move over Sergeant Harman, you're no longer the face of US Military Leadership style

When you think about energizing leaders, you don’t instinctively think about officers in the US Military. On the contrary, I usually flash back to images of Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in Stanley Kubrik’s Full Metal Jacket for a stereotype involving a boot camp sergeant inspiring his men through the use of hard-edged and somewhat Draconian tactics.

Therefore, it was somewhat of a surprise to find the ideas on leadership included in the the recently published memoir of one-time four-star General Stanley A McChrystal

Former 4 Star General Stanley A McChrystal

You may recall, General McChrystal was doing fine until he apparently got suckered into giving an interview with Rolling Stone, which ultimately became his personal Waterloo

Following unflattering remarks about Vice President Joe Biden and other administration officials attributed to McChrystal and his aides in that Rolling Stone article, McChrystal was recalled to Washington, D.C., where President Barack Obama accepted his resignation as commander in Afghanistan.

Here is a good summary of the wisdom about leadership in his book…(prepared by Farnam Street Blog)

He starts off with a statement that is right on point and too little understood. If it was better understood, there is no doubt that many medium sized organizations that aspire further growth would dramatically increase their investment in leadership development. But its point six...about leaders being empathetic that caught me off guard. Empathy was certainly a skill that the bullying Sergeant Hartman could not claim on his Linked-in profile.

1. Leadership is the single biggest reason for success or failure.

So, after a lifetime, what had I learned about leadership? Probably not enough. But I saw enough for me to believe it was the single biggest reason organizations succeeded or failed. It dwarfed numbers, technology, ideology, and historical forces in determining the outcome of events. I used to tell junior leaders that the nine otherwise identical parachute infantry battalions of the 82nd Airborne Division ranged widely in effectiveness, the disparity almost entirely a function of leadership.

“Switch just two people— the battalion commander and command sergeant major—from the best battalion with those of the worst, and within ninety days the relative effectiveness of the battalions will have switched as well,” I’d say. I still believe I was correct.

2. Leadership is difficult to measure.

Yet leadership is difficult to measure and often difficult even to adequately describe. I lack the academic bona fides to provide a scholarly analysis of leadership and human behavior. So I’ll simply relate what, after a lifetime of being led and learning to lead, I’ve concluded.

Leadership is the art of influencing others. It differs from giving a simple order or managing in that it shapes the longer-term attitudes and behavior of individuals and groups. George Washington’s tattered army persisted to ultimate victory. Those troops displayed the kind of effort that can never be ordered— only evoked. Effective leaders stir an intangible but very real desire inside people. That drive can be reflected in extraordinary courage, selfless sacrifice, and commitment.

3. Leadership is neither good nor evil.

We like to equate leaders with values we admire, but the two can be separate and distinct. Self-serving or evil intent motivated some of the most effective leaders I saw, like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. In the end, leadership is a skill that can be used like any other, but with far greater effect.

4. Leaders take us to where we’d otherwise not go.

Although Englishmen rushing into the breach behind Henry V is a familiar image, leaders whose personal example or patient persuasion causes dramatic changes in otherwise inertia-bound organizations or societies are far more significant. The teacher who awakens and encourages in students a sense of possibility and responsibility is, to me, the ultimate leader.

5. Success is rarely the work of a single leader.

… leaders work best in partnership with other leaders. In Iraq in 2004, I received specific direction to track Zarqawi and bring him to justice. But it was the collaboration of leaders below me, inside TF 714, that built the teams, relentlessly hunted, and ultimately destroyed his lethal network.

6. Leaders are empathetic.

The best leaders I’ve seen have an uncanny ability to understand, empathize, and communicate with those they lead. They need not agree or share the same background or status in society as their followers, but they understand their hopes, fears, and passions. Great leaders intuitively sense, or simply ask, how people feel and what resonates with them. At their worst, demigods like Adolf Hitler manipulate the passions of frustrated populations into misguided forces. But empathy can be remarkably positive when a Nelson Mandela reshapes and redirects the energy of a movement away from violence and into constructive nation-building.

7. Leadership is not popularity.

For soldiers, the choice between popularity and effectiveness is ultimately no choice at all. Soldiers want to win; their survival depends upon it. They will accept, and even take pride in, the quirks and shortcomings of a leader if they believe he or she can produce success.

8. The best leaders are genuine.

I found soldiers would tolerate my being less of a leader than I hoped to be, but they would not forgive me being less than I claimed to be. Simple honesty matters.

9. Leaders can be found at any rank and at any age.

I often found myself led by soldiers many levels junior to me, and I was the better for it. Deferring to the expertise and skills of the leader best suited to any given situation requires enough self-confidence to subjugate one’s ego, but it signals a strong respect for the people with whom one serves.

10. Charisma is not leadership.

Personal gifts like intellect or charisma help. But neither are required nor enough to be a leader.

Physical appearance, poise, and outward self-confidence can be confused with leadership—for a time. I saw many new lieutenants arrive to battalions and fail to live up to the expectations their handsome, broad-shouldered look generated. Conversely, I saw others overcome the initial doubts created by small stature or a squeaky voice. It took time and enough interaction with followers, but performance usually became more important than the advantages of innate traits.

Later in my career, I encountered some figures who had learned to leverage superficial gifts so effectively that they appeared to be better leaders than they were. It took me some time and interaction —often under the pressure of difficult situations—before I could determine whether they possessed those bedrock skills and qualities that infantry platoons would seek to find and assess in young sergeants and lieutenants. Modern media exacerbate the challenge of sorting reality from orchestrated perception.

11. Leaders walk a fine line between self-confidence and humility.

Soldiers want leaders who are sure of their ability to lead the team to success but humble enough to recognize their limitations. I learned that it was better to admit ignorance or fear than to display false knowledge or bravado. And candidly admitting doubts or difficulties is key to building confidence in your honesty. But expressing doubts and confidence is a delicate balance. When things look their worst, followers look to the leader for reassurance that they can and will succeed.

12. People are born; leaders are made.

I was born the son of a leader with a clear path to a profession of leadership. But whatever leadership I later possessed, I learned from others. I grew up in a household of overt values, many of which hardened in me only as I matured. Although history fascinated me, and mentors surrounded me, the overall direction and key decisions of my life and career were rarely impacted by specific advice, or even a particularly relevant example I’d read or seen. I rarely wondered What would Nelson, Buford, Grant, or my father have done? But as I grew, I was increasingly aware of the guideposts and guardrails that leaders had set for me, often through their examples. The question became What kind of leader have I decided to be? Over time, decisions came easily against that standard, even when the consequences were grave.

13. Leaders are people, and people constantly change.

Even well into my career I was still figuring out what kind of leader I wanted to be. For many years I found myself bouncing between competing models of a hard-bitten taskmaster and a nurturing father figure— sometimes alternating within a relatively short time span. That could be tough on the people I led, and a bit unfair. They looked for and deserved steady, consistent leadership. When I failed to provide that, I gave conflicting messages that produced uncertainty and reduced the effectiveness of the team we were trying to create. As I got older, the swings between leadership styles were less pronounced and frequent as I learned the value of consistency. But even at the end I still wasn’t the leader I believed I should be.

14. Leaders are human.

They get tired, angry, and jealous

and carry the same range of emotions and frailties common to mankind. Most leaders periodically display them. The leaders I most admired were totally human but constantly strove to be the best humans they could be.

15. Leaders make mistakes, and they are often costly.

The first reflex is normally to deny the failure to themselves; the second is to hide it from others, because most leaders covet a reputation for infallibility. But it’s a fool’s dream and is inherently dishonest.

16. Leadership is a choice.

Rank, authority, and even responsibility can be inherited or assigned, whether or not an individual desires or deserves them. Even the mantle of leadership occasionally falls to people who haven’t sought it. But actually leading is different. A leader decides to accept responsibility for others in a way that assumes stewardship of their hopes, their dreams, and sometimes their very lives. It can be a crushing burden, but I found it an indescribable honor.

In the end, “there are few secrets to leadership.”

It is mostly just hard work. More than anything else it requires self-discipline. Colorful, charismatic characters often fascinate people, even soldiers. But over time, effectiveness is what counts. Those who lead most successfully do so while looking out for their followers’ welfare. Self-discipline manifests itself in countless ways. In a leader I see it as doing those things that should be done, even when they are unpleasant, inconvenient, or dangerous; and refraining from those that shouldn’t, even when they are pleasant, easy, or safe.

Yes, leadership is indeed a choice, which is why so many business executives need to start leading or get out of the way of the many talented professionals they hired for their expertise. Yet too often, it's indecision which causes business failure as the person supposed to be leading impedes progress.

All in all, McCrystal makes some excellent, if not entirely new points. What is new for me is to discover that a Four-Star General in the US military espouse beliefs that would not be out of place in Annual Report of any US Corporation. Especially EMPATHY...the ability to personalize the feelings of others, ...particularly employees. Because if a corporate leader is empathetic to his or her employees, they in turn are more likely to empathize with their customers, and that is a recipe for innovation and greater profitability. Time to say goodbye to the Full Metal Jacket leadership style both in the military and right here on the home front in the corner offices of Corporate America.

Energizing Leaders often Laugh at Themselves...No Kidding!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 02 Apr 2014 03:51:00 +0000

Yep its official...leaders who self-deprecate are viewed more favorably than their non-self-deprecating counterparts. This means these self-detractors are well on the way to being perceived as energizing and even transformational leaders.

For me being self-deprecatory is second nature. I have no choice. As someone who is a genuine klutz, laughing at myself has always served as a solid defense mechanism. But seemingly for the non-klutz executive population its much harder to poke fun at themselves.

Well that's your problem! ...Get over it...Stop taking yourselves so seriously!...You put on your pants on one leg at a time...just like the rest of us.

Face it, if the most powerful man in the world can do it then surely you can. I'm talking about no lesser man than President Ronald Reagan.

One of my favorites stabs at himself came after he took media scorn for nodding off at the White House during the day. A week later he responded by saying,

“I’ve given my aides instructions that if trouble breaks out in any of the world’s hot spots, they should wake me up immediately — even if I’m in a Cabinet meeting.”

Not convinced by the Gipper...well the more scientifically minded among you might appreciate this extract from the Behavioral Science Experiment that confirms my opening assertion that Energizing Leaders often laugh at themselves.

Authors

Colette Hoption, Albers School of Business and Economics, Seattle University, Seattle, Washington, USA

Julian Barling, School of Business, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, USA

Nick Turner, Asper School of Business, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

Humor and leadership

Humor in the workplace has been identified as beneficial for reducing stress (Yovetich et al., 1990), promoting a “fun” culture (Fleming, 2005; Holmes and Marra, 2002), encouraging group cohesion (Francis, 1994), and encouraging communication (Greatbatch and Clark, 2003). Specific to leadership, humor has been described as a way of preserving leader modesty (Kets de Vries, 1990) and improving the leader-follower relationship (Avolio et al., 1999). There is also evidence from cadets in the US Military Academy that “good leaders” (as defined by cadets’ subjective experience) were associated with “a warm humorous style” and consistently rated higher on humor than “bad leaders” (Priest and Swain, 2002, p. 174).

However, humor has also been considered taboo, subversive, incompatible with work, and limited to the “rude and foolish” (Collinson, 2004; Malone, 1980; Morreall, 1991).
Although those perspectives are seemingly contradictory, our conceptualization of the relationship between transformational leadership and humor allows for both of these perspectives to be correct: some forms of humor are destructive, such as those that demean others, whereas other forms of humor are constructive, such as those that preserve and even strengthen the leader-follower relationship. In other words, it is the nature of the humor that is critical. Consistent with Martin et al.'s (2003) humor styles, we suggest that humor which targets the joke-teller (self-deprecating humor) has a different effect than humor which targets its audience (aggressive humor).

Self-deprecating humor deliberately targets the person who is telling the joke and is a form of affiliative humor: a “non-hostile, tolerant use of humor that is affirming of self and others” (Martin et al., 2003, p. 53). However, self-deprecating humor should not be confused with self-defeating or self-disparaging humor, in which “there is an element of emotional neediness, avoidance, and low self-esteem underlying [this] use of humor” with its purpose to “ingratiat[e] oneself or gai[n] approval” (Martin et al., 2003, p. 54; Romero and Cruthirds, 2006). While self-deprecating humor conveys an honest and humble look at oneself, self-defeating humor expresses a depressive and negative view of the self.

It follows that leaders who use self-deprecating humor are willing to make themselves potentially vulnerable by identifying their weaknesses, and exposing kernels of truth (Westwood, 2004). As such, self-deprecating humor de-emphasizes status distinctions within the relationship so that leaders who use self-deprecating humor appear closer to or on the same level as their followers (Kets de Vries, 1990; Martin et al., 2003).
Consistent with the notion that self-deprecating humor will benefit leader-follower relationships, Ziv (1984) reported that individuals who could laugh at themselves were perceived as more likeable than those who could not. In addition, because much of leadership involves getting work done through others, humor is especially important for leaders as the ability to laugh at oneself has been positively correlated with persuasiveness (Lyttle, 2001).

Let us now focus our attention on the four facets of transformational leadership and how they may be associated with self-deprecating humor in different but complementary ways. Honesty is integral to idealized influence (Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999), and as such, idealized influence should be enhanced with a frank look at oneself rather than promoting self-aggrandizing images characteristic of narcissists and pseudo-transformational leaders. We expect that self-deprecating humor is one way in which a leader can express an honest look at him/herself. Inspirational motivation appeals to followers’ emotions (Bass, 1985), and we expect that the genuine mirth following a humorous self-deprecating statement would only enhance followers’ positive affect (Martin et al., 2003). Self-deprecating humor may also reinforce intellectual stimulation through modeling; leaders who use self-deprecating statements oppose the traditional and pervasive depictions of heroic leadership (Meindl et al., 1985).

By confronting such predominant notions of leadership, we expect that followers will be inspired to challenge other assumptions and ultimately foster out-of-the-box thinking, creativity, and innovation. Finally, self-deprecating humor improves interpersonal relationships (Martin et al., 2003), demonstrating that the leader understands the importance of preserving the dignity of others which is central to individualized consideration.

In summary, transformational leaders are interested in the advancement, achievement, and needs of their followers. They are other-centric, and as such, they would be more concerned with promoting an egalitarian leader-follower relationship than exaggerating the status distinctions between themselves and their subordinates. Self-deprecating humor is one viable way for transformational leaders to achieve those means.

And they go on and on as demanded by the Scientific method...here's a link to the full report.

I guess I never realized by laughing at myself I was being a "subversive." Goes to show one man's subversive behavior is another man's energizing behavior!

How Well Do You Know Yourself as a Leader?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:30:00 +0000

At the Center for Energizing Leadership a key element of our curriculum is helping leaders attain Personal Mastery. This thought-piece from strategy consulting firm McKinsey recognizes how important it is for the leader to thoroughly know him or herself.

Change leader, change thyself

Anyone who pulls the organization in new directions must look inward as well as outward.

March 2014 | byNate Boaz and Erica Ariel FoxFirst published in McKinsey Quarterly March 2014

Leo Tolstoy, the Russian novelist, famously wrote, “Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.”

Tolstoy’s dictum is a useful starting point for any executive engaged in organizational change. After years of collaborating in efforts to advance the practice of leadership and cultural transformation, we’ve become convinced that organizational change is inseparable from individual change. Simply put, change efforts often falter because individuals overlook the need to make fundamental changes in themselves.¹

Building self-understanding and then translating it into an organizational context is easier said than done, and getting started is often the hardest part. We hope this article helps leaders who are ready to try and will intrigue those curious to learn more.

Organizations don’t change—people do

Many companies move quickly from setting their performance objectives to implementing a suite of change initiatives. Be it a new growth strategy or business-unit structure, the integration of a recent acquisition or the rollout of a new operational-improvement effort, such organizations focus on altering systems and structures and on creating new policies and processes.

To achieve collective change over time, actions like these are necessary but seldom sufficient. A new strategy will fall short of its potential if it fails to address the underlying mind-sets and capabilities of the people who will execute it.

McKinsey research and client experience suggest that half of all efforts to transform organizational performance fail either because senior managers don’t act as role models for change or because people in the organization defend the status quo.² In other words, despite the stated change goals, people on the ground tend to behave as they did before. Equally, the same McKinsey research indicates that if companies can identify and address pervasive mind-sets at the outset, they are four times more likely to succeed in organizational-change efforts than are companies that overlook this stage.

Look both inward and outward

Companies that only look outward in the process of organizational change—marginalizing individual learning and adaptation—tend to make two common mistakes.

The first is to focus solely on business outcomes. That means these companies direct their attention to what Alexander Grashow, Ronald Heifetz, and Marty Linsky call the “technical” aspects of a new solution, while failing to appreciate what they call “the adaptive work” people must do to implement it.³

The second common mistake, made even by companies that recognize the need for new learning, is to focus too much on developing skills. Training that only emphasizes new behavior rarely translates into profoundly different performance outside the classroom.

In our work together with organizations undertaking leadership and cultural transformations, we’ve found that the best way to achieve an organization’s aspirations is to combine efforts that look outward with those that look inward. Linking strategic and systemic intervention to genuine self-discovery and self-development by leaders is a far better path to embracing the vision of the organization and to realizing its business goals.

What is looking inward?

Looking inward is a way to examine your own modes of operating to learn what makes you tick. Individuals have their own inner lives, populated by their beliefs, priorities, aspirations, values, and fears. These interior elements vary from one person to the next, directing people to take different actions.

Interestingly, many people aren’t aware that the choices they make are extensions of the reality that operates in their hearts and minds. Indeed, you can live your whole life without understanding the inner dynamics that drive what you do and say. Yet it’s crucial that those who seek to lead powerfully and effectively look at their internal experiences, precisely because they direct how you take action, whether you know it or not. Taking accountability as a leader today includes understanding your motivations and other inner drives.

For the purposes of this article, we focus on two dimensions of looking inward that lead to self-understanding: developing profile awareness and developing state awareness.

Profile awareness

An individual’s profile is a combination of his or her habits of thought, emotions, hopes, and behavior in various circumstances. Profile awareness is therefore a recognition of these common tendencies and the impact they have on others.

We often observe a rudimentary level of profile awareness with the executives we advise. They use labels as a shorthand to describe their profile, telling us, “I’m an overachiever” or “I’m a control freak.” Others recognize emotional patterns, like “I always fear the worst,” or limiting beliefs, such as “you can’t trust anyone.” Other executives we’ve counseled divide their identity in half. They end up with a simple liking for their “good” Dr. Jekyll side and a dislike of their “bad” Mr. Hyde.

Finding ways to describe the common internal tendencies that drive behavior is a good start. We now know, however, that successful leaders develop profile awareness at a broader and deeper level.

State awareness

State awareness, meanwhile, is the recognition of what’s driving you at the moment you take action. In common parlance, people use the phrase “state of mind” to describe this, but we’re using “state” to refer to more than the thoughts in your mind. State awareness involves the real-time perception of a wide range of inner experiences and their impact on your behavior. These include your current mind-set and beliefs, fears and hopes, desires and defenses, and impulses to take action.

State awareness is harder to master than profile awareness. While many senior executives recognize their tendency to exhibit negative behavior under pressure, they often don’t realize they’re exhibiting that behavior until well after they’ve started to do so. At that point, the damage is already done.

We believe that in the future, the best leaders will demonstrate both profile awareness and state awareness. These capacities can develop into the ability to shift one’s inner state in real time. That leads to changing behavior when you can still affect the outcome, instead of looking back later with regret. It also means not overreacting to events because they are reminiscent of something in the past or evocative of something that might occur in the future.⁴

Close the performance gap

When learning to look inward in the process of organizational transformation, individuals accelerate the pace and depth of change dramatically. In the words of one executive we know, who has invested heavily in developing these skills, this kind of learning “expands your capacity to lead human change and deliver true impact by awakening the full leader within you.” In practical terms, individuals learn to align what they intend with what they actually say and do to influence others.

Erica Ariel Fox’s recent book, Winning from Within,⁵ calls this phenomenon closing your performance gap. That gap is the disparity between what peopleknow they should say and do to behave successfully and what they actually do in the moment. The performance gap can affect anyone at any time, from the CEO to a summer intern.

This performance gap arises in individuals partly because of the profile that defines them and that they use to define themselves. In the West in particular, various assessments tell you your “type,” essentially the psychological clothing you wear to present yourself to the world.

To help managers and employees understand each other, many corporate-education tools use simplified typing systems to describe each party’s makeup. These tests often classify people relatively quickly, and in easily remembered ways: team members might be red or blue, green or yellow, for example.

There are benefits in this approach, but in our experience it does not go far enough and those using it should understand its limitations. We all possess the full range of qualities these assessments identify. We are not one thing or the other: we are all at once, to varying degrees. As renowned brain researcher Dr. Daniel Siegel explains, “we must accept our multiplicity, the fact that we can show up quite differently in our athletic, intellectual, sexual, spiritual—or many other—states. A heterogeneous collection of states is completely normal in us humans.”⁶ Putting the same point more poetically, Walt Whitman famously wrote, “I am large, I contain multitudes.”

To close performance gaps, and thereby build your individual leadership capacity, you need a more nuanced approach that recognizes your inner complexity. Coming to terms with your full richness is challenging. But the kinds of issues involved—which are highly personal and well beyond the scope of this short management article—include:

What are the primary parts of my profile, and how are they balanced against each other?
What resources and capabilities does each part of my profile possess? What strengths and liabilities do those involve?
When do I tend to call on each member of my inner executive team? What are the benefits and costs of those choices?
Do I draw on all of the inner sources of power available to me, or do I favor one or two most of the time?
How can I develop the sweet spots that are currently outside of my active range?

Answering these questions starts with developing profile awareness.

Leading yourself—and the organization

Individuals can improve themselves in many ways and hence drive more effective organizational change. We focus here on a critical few that we’ve found to increase leadership capacity and to have a lasting organizational impact.

1. Develop profile awareness: Map the Big Four

While we all have myriad aspects to our inner lives, in our experience it’s best to focus your reflections on a manageable few as you seek to understand what’s driving you at different times. Fox’s Winning from Within suggests that you can move beyond labels such as “perfectionist” without drowning in unwieldy complexity, by concentrating on your Big Four, which largely govern the way individuals function every day. You can think of your Big Four as an inner leadership team, occupying an internal executive suite: the chief executive officer (CEO), or inspirational Dreamer; the chief financial officer (CFO), or analytical Thinker; the chief people officer (CPO), or emotional Lover; and the chief operating officer (COO), or practical Warrior (exhibit).

Exhibit

Executives can achieve self-understanding, without drowning in unwieldy complexity, by concentrating on the Big Four of their ‘inner team.’

Enlarge

How do these work in practice? Consider the experience of Geoff McDonough, the transformational CEO of Sobi, an emerging pioneer in the treatment of rare diseases. Many credit McDonough’s versatile leadership with successfully integrating two legacy companies and increasing market capitalization from nearly $600 million in 2011 to $3.5 billion today.

From our perspective, his leadership success owes much to his high level of profile awareness. He also displays high profile agility: his skill at calling on the right inner executive at the right time for the right purpose. In other words, he deploys each of his Big Four intentionally and effectively to harness its specific strengths and skills to meet a situation.

McDonough used his inner Dreamer’s imagination to envision the clinical and business impact of Sobi’s biological-development program in neonatology. He saw the possibility of improving the neurodevelopment of tiny, vulnerable newborns and thus of giving them a real chance at a healthy life.

His inner Thinker’s assessment took an unusual perspective at the time. Others didn’t share his evaluation of the viability of integrating one company’s 35-year legacy of biologics development (Kabi Vitrum— the combined group of Swedish pharmaceutical companies Kabi and Vitrum—which merged with Pharmacia and was later acquired, forming Biovitrum in 2001) with another’s 25-year history of commercializing treatments for rare diseases (Swedish Orphan), to lead in a rare-disease market environment with very few independent midsize companies.

Rising to a separate, if related, challenge, McDonough called on his inner Lover to build bridges between the siloed legacy companies. He focused on the people who mattered most to everyone—the patients—and promoted internal talent from both sides, demonstrating his belief that everyone, whatever his or her previous corporate affiliation, could be part of the new “one Sobi.”

Finally, bringing Sobi to its current levels of success required McDonough to tell hard truths and take some painful steps. He called on his inner Warrior to move swiftly, adding key players from the outside to the management team, restructuring the organization, and resolutely promoting an entirely new business model.

2. Develop state awareness: The work of your inner lookout

Profile awareness, as we’ve said, is only the first part of what it takes to look inward when driving organizational change. The next part is state awareness.

Leading yourself means being in tune with what’s happening on the inside, not later but right now. Think about it. People who don’t notice that they are becoming annoyed, judgmental, or defensive in the moment are not making real choices about how to behave. We all need an inner “lookout”—a part of us that notices our inner state—much as all parents are at the ready to watch for threats of harm to their young children.⁷

For example, a senior executive leading a large-scale transformation remarked that he would like to spend 15 minutes kicking off an important training event for change agents to signal its importance. Objectively speaking, he would probably have the opposite of the intended effect if he said how important the workshop was and then left 15 minutes into it.

What he needed at that moment was the perception of his inner lookout. That perspective would see that he was torn between wanting to endorse the program, on the one hand, and wanting to attend to something else that was also important, on the other. With that clarity, he could make a choice that was sensible and aligned: he might still speak for 15 minutes and then let people know that he wished he could stay longer but had a crucial meeting elsewhere. Equally, he might realize the negative implications of his early departure under any circumstances, decide to postpone the later meeting, and stay another couple of hours. Either way, the inner lookout’s view would lead to more effective leadership behavior.

During a period of organizational change, it’s critical that senior executives collectively adopt the lookout role for the organization as a whole. Yet they often can’t, because they’re wearing rose-tinted glasses that blur the limitations of their leadership style, mask destructive mind-sets at lower levels of the organization, and generally distort what’s going on outside the executive suite. Until we and others confronted one manager we know with the evidence, he had no idea he was interfering with, and undermining, employees through the excessively large number of e-mails he was sending on a daily basis.

Spotting misaligned perceptions requires putting the spotlight on observable behavior and getting enough data to unearth the core issues. Note that traditional satisfaction or employee-engagement surveys—and even 360-degree feedback—often fail to get to the bottom of the problem. A McKinsey diagnostic that reached deep into the workforce—aggregating the responses of 52,240 individuals at 44 companies—demonstrated perception gaps across job levels at 70 percent of the participating organizations. In about two-thirds of them, the top teams were more positive about their own leadership skills than was the rest of the organization. Odds are, in other words, that rigorous organizational introspection will be eye opening for senior leaders.

3. Translate awareness into organizational change

Those open eyes will be better able to spot obstacles to organizational change. Consider the experience of a company that became aware, during a major earnings-improvement effort, that an absence of coaching was stifling progress. On the surface, people said they did not have the time to make coaching a priority. But an investigation of the root causes showed that one reason people weren’t coaching was that they themselves had become successful despite never having been coached. In fact, coaching was associated with serious development needs and seen only as a tool for documenting and firing people. Beneath the surface, managers feared that if they coached someone, others would view that person as a poor performer.

Changing a pervasive element of corporate culture like this depends on a diverse set of interventions that will appeal to different parts of individuals and of the organization. In this case, what followed was a positive internal-communication campaign, achieved with the help of posters positioning star football players alongside their coaches and supported by commentary spelling out the impact of coaching on operating performance at other organizations. At the same time, executives put “the elephant in the room” and acknowledged the negative connotations of coaching, and these confessions helped managers understand and adapt such critical norms. In the end, the actions the executives initiated served to increase the frequency and quality of coaching, with the result that the company was able to move more rapidly toward achieving its performance goals.

4. Start with one change catalyst

While dealing with resistance and fear is often necessary, it’s rarely enough to take an organization to the next level. To go further and initiate collective change, organizations must unleash the full potential of individuals. One person or a small group of trailblazers can provide that catalyst.

For many years, it was widely believed that human beings could not run a mile in less than four minutes. Throughout the 1940s and early 1950s, many runners came close to the four-minute mark, but all fell short. On May 6th, 1954, in Oxford, England, Roger Bannister ran a mile in three minutes and 59 seconds. Only 46 days after Bannister’s historic run, John Landy broke the record again. By 1957, 16 more runners had broken through what once was thought to be an impossible barrier. Today, well over a thousand people have run a mile in less than four minutes, including high-school athletes.

Organizations behave in a similar manner. We often find widely held “four-minute mile” equivalents, like “unattainable growth goals” or “unachievable cost savings” or “unviable strategic changes.” Before the broader organization can start believing that the impossible is possible, one person or a small number of people must embrace a new perspective and set out to disprove the old way of thinking. Bannister, studying to be a doctor, had to overcome physiologists’ claims and popular assumptions that anyone who tried to run faster than 15 miles an hour would die.

Learning to lead yourself requires you to question some core assumptions too, about yourself and the way things work. Like Joseph Campbell’s famous “hero’s journey,” that often means leaving your everyday environment, or going outside your comfort zone, to experience trials and adventures.⁸ One global company sent its senior leaders to places as far afield as the heart of Communist China and the beaches of Normandy with a view to challenging their internal assumptions about the company’s operating model. The fresh perspectives these leaders gained helped shape their internal values and leadership behavior, allowing them to cascade the lessons through the organization upon their return.

This integration of looking both inward and outward is the most powerful formula we know for creating long-term, high-impact organizational change.

About the authors

Nate Boaz is a principal in McKinsey’s Atlanta office. Erica Ariel Fox is a founding partner at Mobius Executive Leadership, a lecturer in negotiation at Harvard Law School, and a senior adviser to McKinsey Leadership Development. She is the author of Winning from Within: A Breakthrough Method for Leading, Living, and Lasting Change (HarperBusiness, 2013).

Nate Boaz would like to thank Mobius Executive Leadership for the ongoing collaboration that contributed to these insights. Erica Ariel Fox would like to thank her colleague John Abbruzzese, a senior leadership consultant at Mobius Executive Leadership, for his contribution to this article.

Big Problems for the British!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:16:00 +0000

We laugh a lot at The Center for Energizing Leadership.

Fortunately, it’s not politically incorrect to laugh at yourself…I’m a British-American.

The general American perception of British people is that we are well-educated, well mannered, easy-going people. But take a look at this list of British “problems” and you may start to wonder? Any Canadians have the same problems?

An Intriguing Opportunity for Entrepreneurs and Top Executives

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:22:00 +0000

We are hosting a Reception & Mini-Seminar to introduce the ground-breaking Energy Cabinet program being offered by the Center for Energizing Leadership.

We invite you to join us for a complimentary evening of Cheese and Wine to learn about the Center's flagship Energy Cabinet program.

During monthly Energy Cabinet sessions, the Center takes an elite group of entrepreneurial executives on an 18 month journey of transformation into energizing leaders. Subsequently, it works with the same energized group to create and incubate new business ventures.
Jonathan Copley, the Center's founder, will present a mini-seminar, 'Secrets of the Energy Cabinet' and share how to obtain an invitation to join a Cabinet. New Energy Cabinets are now forming and their first meetings will be held in early summer

Where

Center for Energizing Leadership 6305 160th Place SE, Bellevue, WA 98006 Parking is available at the location

Agenda

6:00 pm to 6:30 pm - Reception and Meet the Faculty
6:30 pm to 7:00 pm - Mini-Seminar on Secrets of the Energy Cabinet
7:00 pm to 8:00 pm - Introducing the Center, and Q & A

When

Choose from these dates:
Tuesday April 29 Thursday May 1
Tuesday May 6 Thursday May 8
Tuesday May 13 Thursday May 15

How to Register

Each session is limited to no more than 8 guests. Registration is required.
Please click here to register.

Welcome to the Official Blog of the Center for Energizing Leadership

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 08:46:00 +0000

The title of this post says it all.