The Strategic Leader

Influence People!

2012-02-13T23:58:00.001-05:00

I had the pleasure of listening to Brian Ahearn this evening at the Central Ohio Coaches meeting at THE Ohio State University. Brian is one of only 27 people--in the world--who is certified by to present the principles of Dr. Robert Cialdini.

He shared some great insights into simple--really simple--things that people can do to influence people! And "people" has significant meaning to Brian's message...but you have to go to his blog to find out what it means! I couldn't help but frantically scribble notes as ideas popped into my head inspired by Brian's talk tonight!

Do yourself a favor and check out Brian's blog: Influence People.

Penn State: A Failure of Leadership

2011-11-16T12:34:00.001-05:00

There is a reason that both Joe Paterno, former head coach of the Penn State Nittany Lion football team, and Graham Spanier, former President of Penn State University, were fired in the wake of the current scandal: they failed in their roles as leaders.

Whatever the details end up being, the events took place on their watch and ultimately, they are responsible. I think the Board took the necessary decisive action with regard to Spanier and Paterno--but it remains to be seen who else should be held accountable.

This is a poignant lesson for leaders at all levels of organizations. Organizational culture is most often a reflection of leadership. If leaders overlook minor things, soon there will be more "minor" things happening within the organization. In time, minor things will develop into less-than-minor things. Before long, there is a grown man showering naked "horsing around" with young boys at the University YOU are responsible for.

Jerry Sandusky didn't develop overnight. I am of the opinion that the only way this could happen at PSU is because there was a culture that allowed for leaders to "overlook" things that should have been major warning signs within a healthy organization.

PSU had a cancer and only now has the tumor become visible to the world. Perhaps with new leadership, PSU can start the long road to recovery.

FREE Seminar on Coaching Available to Organizations in Ohio

2011-11-10T23:50:00.000-05:00

Take advantage of a FREE 2 hour seminar on Coaching for Performance Improvement for your organization!

This seminar is ideal for Chambers of Commerce, school districts, small business associations, leadership development programs, churches, and any other kind of organization where there is a desire to find ways to help people reach their full potential!

In this interactive seminar, participants will explore the reasons that both managers and employees fall short of their potential, learn and practice a coaching model designed to help people reach their full potential, and develop ways to implement that model with new employees, problem employees, and even high-performing employees.

This seminar is free and is available to organizations in Ohio (for now). One month advance notice is required so contact me now to schedule your date! You can reach me at chris@harbencoaching.com.

Eisenhower on Leadership

2011-11-09T21:48:00.000-05:00

Leadership is the art of getting someone to do what you want done--because they want to do it!

Dwight D. Eisenhower

One of the risks of reading this quote is that one could get the impression that leadership is about manipulating people. If we don't go deep enough into the last part of the quote--"because they want to do it"--we will not really understand the power of leadership. To be blunt--as Eisenhower oft was--this is not about people wanting to do things because they want to keep their job, get a promotion, stay out of the doghouse, or just get through the day. This quote is about connecting with those you are leading in such a deep way that the motivation to perform comes from within them--inspired by you. This is what leadership coaching is all about.

Coaching is a technique used by more and more leaders who desire to see their people fulfill their highest potential. It is a not a process by which leaders tell their people "here's what you need to do." Rather, it is a process that inspires people to say to the leader "here's what I can do!" Because the action steps come from within the person being lead, the rate of success is much higher. Because the ideas come from within the lead, the action steps are things that they want to do.

I like to think this is what Eisenhower was referring to...

Time to demand ethics from our leaders!

2011-11-08T18:46:00.001-05:00

If we don't demand ethical behavior,
we deserve what we get!

Tonight is election night. It should be one of the most exciting nights of the year. It is the night that each of us has a say in the future of our town, our state, and our country. Unfortunately, many many people choose to stay home. They feel that their vote doesn't count and they are completely uninspired by the crop of candidates that exist. I feel their pain.

I voted tonight. I wasn't happy about my choices but I voted. Here in my small town, I found an example of why people just don't care about the political process anymore--and why politicians continue to have some of the lowest ratings in terms of respect and ethical standards of any profession out there. I blame political "advisors" as much as I blame the politicians. Actually, the politicians bear more blame because they don't HAVE to listen to political advisors.

One of the young men running for office tried to bolster his credentials. I am certain this was on the advise of a political advisor...but I cannot prove it. I just like to think that the young man was naive and trusted an experienced advisor. It's understandable to try to make yourself look as appealing as possible, but this young man held himself out to be a "corporate executive." In letters he wrote in the local paper, in mailings from "the party," and in a debate, this young man continued to boast that he was an "executive with the (blank) corporation." What image does that convey? What would you think his stature in that company would be? What does that imply about his level of experience? That's exactly what it was meant to convey...and it would be inaccurate. Unfortunately, few in the electorate choose to dig any deeper.

The thing is, this young man will likely win tonight. However, I think he would have won even if he hadn't lied (ahem...gave a false impression) about the nature of the position in his company. I would have liked to like him but...

In the end, I didn't vote for him. I voted for someone who probably is less qualified for the job--but who was completely honest about himself throughout the campaign. I am comfortable with that choice. I wish more would make choices like that...

A great quote on Winning--and it didn't come from Charlie Sheen!

2011-11-07T13:25:00.000-05:00

Those who have to win, win a lot. Those who fear losing, lose a lot!

--John Whitmore

LeaderLab: A wonderful resource for Leadership Theory

2011-11-05T14:04:00.000-04:00

David Burkus is a friend of mine as well as a member of my cohort at Regent University. Last year, he created a resource that he envisioned would develop into a clearinghouse of ideas and discourse in the area of leadership theory. That site, LeaderLab, has become just that.

At LeaderLab, you can download papers written by students and practitioners of leadership theory as well as share commentary about those works. In addition, David provides reviews of some of the latest books on the subject matter.

For those interested in academic works, David and other Regent University students and alumni have teamed up to create a new peer-reviewed journal called the Strategic Leadership Review. This innovative new scholarly journal will feature works in the following areas:

§ Leadership
§ Followership
§ Motivation
§ Management
§ Strategy
§ Innovation
§ Organizational behavior

If you are interested in leadership theory and its current applications, please visit LeaderLab and the Strategic Leadership Review!

Squirrel!

2011-11-03T20:03:00.004-04:00

A client of mine just recently reminded me of one of the greatest challenges facing many of the most high potential people out there today: Squirrels!

Of course, I don't mean literal squirrels! I mean those opportunities that seem so interesting and so important that they immediately distract you.

Squirrel!

This particular client is super-creative and completely enthusiastic about the potential that exists...and he see's that potential everywhere!

Squirrel!

The problem is that things he wants to accomplish get delayed as he becomes distracted by all the great squirrels that pass near him.

You don't necessarily have to ignore the squirrels in your life because they can represent valuable ideas. But you do have to learn to manage them. Here's a couple things you can do.

First and most important, have a specific goal that you want to accomplish. The emphasis is on specific. If the goal is not specific, it is simply a hope. When you have that specific goal in mind, you are better able to determine which squirrels help move that goal forward. It will take discipline, though.

With that goal established, you don't have to ignore all the squirrels. One idea is to keep a pad of paper handy--or, if you are a geek like me, use your voice recording app on your smartphone--to record the squirrels throughout the day. Set aside 15 minutes each night to review the days squirrels and decide what to do with them right then and there. Some will be ideas that you can incorporate right now. Others will be valuable to you some time in the future--create a file for them. And others will just be distractions--toss them.

If you can discipline yourself to incorporate these into your day, you will find that you will get more done and be more creative than ever. If the squirrels still drive you nuts (ha!- pun!), then you may wish to hire a coach to help keep you on track.

Dale Carnegie understood Coaching

2011-10-31T23:55:00.002-04:00

As I prepare to officially launch my coaching practice, I have become re-acquainted with a quote from Dale Carnegie that highlights the foundation of successful coaching:

We all have possibilities we don't know about. We can do things we don't even dream we can do.

Make goals S.M.A.R.T.

2011-10-31T19:41:00.000-04:00

Recently, I was reminded of the power of goal-setting--particularly when you follow the S.M.A.R.T. formula. Funny how trying to lose weight can provide a powerful lesson!

Let's break down the S.M.A.R.T. goal formula...

S="Specific" Too often, I hear people say things like "I need to be more organized" or "I want to have more time for my family" or, as in my case "I need to lose weight." All are great goals to have, but as they are, they are completely useless statements because they are not specific enough. Be specific. For me, I made my weight loss goal be 20 pounds. That's pretty specific.

M="Measurable" The reason you want to be specific is because you need to have something to measure against to see if you are making progress. Measuring should be easy, as well. With my weight loss goal, I decided to weigh myself once a week at the same time and day each week. That way I can track progress.

If you have a goal of going home 30 minutes earlier everyday, you can track how many days in a week you were able to do that. Over time, you can see what kind of progress you have made.

A="Attainable" Don't create a goal that is impossible. That will only create discouragement and setup sure failure. My actual weight-loss goal is 35 pounds. However, I knew that was a lot to shoot for. So, I created the smaller, 20 pound goal as a "first step."

For the person who wants to gain more time, perhaps an initial goal of 15 minutes a day is better than trying to go home 30 minutes earlier. Once you attain a small goal, you can always create a NEW goal. That creates a momentum of success rather than failure.

R="Realistic" This may seem very similar to the "Attainable" category. However, it is slightly different. This has more to do with knowing yourself. Will you do the things necessary to achieve the goal? For me, my weight loss goal amounted to losing 2 pounds a week. I had to know that I was willing and able to do the things that would lead to that.

Be honest with yourself. Lying to yourself here sets up failure. It is much better to succeed at a smaller, realistic goal than to fail at a larger one.

T="Timely" Without a deadline, a goal is only "hope." My deadline for my 20 pound weight loss goal is my birthday in about a week from now. I set that when I started and I am only 1 pound away from achieving that. Then, I have set my secondary goal (for the other 15 pounds) to be reached by the second week of January--when all my family gets together for the Holidays.

Without a target date set, you have nothing to hold yourself accountable to. It becomes too easy to keep pushing the date further and further away. Next thing you know, you are at New Years 2012 wondering what happened to all your goals.

Revisiting some leadership advice from boot camp

2010-10-15T00:03:00.000-04:00

This was written almost 8 years ago while completing Army Basic Combat Training at Ft. Sill, OK. I wrote this for About.com's military area specifically to address the issues faced by older recruits at BCT. As I re-read this the other day, I thought some of the lessons could apply to people facing challenges as leaders (or aspiring leaders) in organizations of all kinds today.

I am currently home on Exodus from Army BCT at Ft. Sill, OK. I thought some of you would be interested in some insights from the perspective of an older person (I turned 34 the week before I shipped) going through BCT.

First of all, I recall several discussions on this forum about the advantages/disadvantages of being older and going through BCT. Let me tell you that success at BCT really has nothing to do with age but rather, with your level of maturity. If you are able to follow orders, focus on the task at hand, work in a team, understand the mental game, and keep a positive attitude, you will have a good time at BCT. The people who bring an attitude with them or have a problem accepting authority will quickly draw negative attention from Drill Sergeants and will likely hate the BCT experience.

Having said all that, my experience has been that DS's tend assume the younger guys AREN'T mature and tend to give the older guys the benefit of the doubt. Specifically, they will assume you are mature and not focus too much attention on you...until you prove that you are NOT mature. THEN you become a glorious target. Case in point: There is a 33 yr old in my platoon who just doesn't do real well in dealing with others. He is the type of guy who takes things very personally and lets it get under his skin. He bunks right next to an 18 yr old who likes to pick on those type of people...especially when he can see it really bothers them. One day on the drill pad while practicing Manual at Arms, the younger Pvt was picking on the older Pvt. They were in the back of the formation. In the middle of the DS explaining Inspection Arms, the older Pvt raised his hand and said "Drill Sergeant, the Pvt to my left is harassing me!" It sounded like something you would hear on the school yard. The older Pvt didn't get the response he wanted from the DS. It was more like "so, you have a problem with your left private, Pvt? Sounds like a feminine problem! 'Course I always wondered about you anyway but I am not allowed to ask and you damn well better not tell me! Now the both of you...PUSH!" By the way, the older Pvt is one of my Squad Leaders.

One thing I found in my situation is that the Platoon looked at me early on as a mentor. I have a lot more life experience (I am married, have two kids, and a good civilian job -- I am NG) than alot of these guys so some of it was natural. However, I have not been an ass about things and have kind of enjoyed and respected the mentor role. Before a PG (Platoon Guide) was assigned, whenever there was a conflict, people came to me to try to resolve it. They thought "Gramps" (my nickname) could work it out and I often did. I tried to deal with my "Battle Buddies" in a respectful way even if they were complete idiots. One guy thought I was too soft and tried to insult me by describing my style as a "Dr. Phil" management style. I took that as a compliment. I figured that we have 3 DS's assigned to our Platoon who scream at us all the time. The Platoon didn't need a "Drill Private" doing the same thing. I am not writing this to pat myself on the back but rather, to give a heads up to anyone else who may be going to BCT in a similar situation. You really need to "act your age".

As far as those who give the advice to "lay low" and don't draw any attention to yourself...that's not realistic. Sooner or later you will be drawn out. The DS's look for ways to get people out of their comfort zones. For example, in week 3, the DS's started assigning psuedo PG's. In every instance, the person who was chosen was someone who either was "laying low" or was someone who was very timid or shy and needed to be brought out of their shell. Typically they were fired after a day. We went through 6 in one week and not one of them would have been considered (at that time) a strong soldier. So, it's best that you prepare yourself to get attention. In my opinion, that's the way to get the most out of the training.

In week 4 I was assigned as the "permanent" PG (permanent being the phrase the DS used but he did remind me I could be fired at any time!). It is a challenging position that requires a lot of extra time and stress. It is excellent leadership training but you do sacrifice some (ALL if you are not careful!) of your free time to accomplish what you need to. It is a job with a lot of responsibility but with no perks (except I get to call cadence!) and no "real" authority. To be effective, you really have to lead by example and always have a positive attitude. If you are given this opportunity, look at it as such...an opportunity. Give it your all. This is another way of getting the most out of the training. Just be prepared for the extra work and responsibility.

In terms of the physical aspect of the training, I have been a little disappointed. Although I have lost 15 pounds so far and am in the best shape I've been in for a long time, we are limited as to how much PT we can do. We have one organized PT session in the morning. This usually alternates from run days to MSE (muscular strength and endurance) days. However, we have only had 4 runs so far. The DS's are clearly frustrated about the fact we are not allowed to have any evening runs or PT sessions. When I get back (the day after tomorrow), there are only three scheduled runs before our final PFT for record. Also, on days where we are scheduled to do an obstacle course or a road march, there is no organized PT scheduled. Of course, this does not apply to "smokings"! These rules have come down all the way from TRADOC according to our DS's.

Overall, the experience has been a good one. The worst part is being away from my family and I have new found respect for those soldiers who are deployed for long periods of time. Especially during the holidays. To reiterate my advice to anyone going to BCT as an "older" person: Act your age, treat your Platoon with respect.

Above contributed by SPC Chris Harben

Wasted Ethics Policies

2010-09-23T01:33:00.000-04:00

Since SOX (Sarbanes-Oxley), companies have scrambled to develop policies and training to keep them from becoming the next Enron. Some companies have even created a "Chief Ethics Officer" position. These efforts are welcomed although largely fruitless if not supported by actual leadership action.

Let's be honest. How likely is it that an unethical employee will suddenly become ethical after reading a new ethics policy or sitting through an ethics training? Not likely. After all, having an ethics policy in your company is like having a Bible in a hotel room. Just because it is there doesn't mean that everything that goes on is ethical. The best we can hope for is that the ethical employees will now be more aware of certain behaviors to look for and hopefully will be more willing to report unethical, or at least questionable acts. The worst that can happen is that we provide the unethical employee with the intelligence to know what we are looking for so that they can either avoid that altogether or become more clever in concealing that activity.

After all, having an ethics policy in your company is like having a Bible in a hotel room. Just because it is there doesn't mean that everything that goes on is ethical.

This is not to say that we should avoid writing strong ethics policies or provide training to our employees. Rather, it is to put those efforts into the proper perspective. Neither a written policy or any training will have the desired impact if it isn't supported by leaders willing to "walk the talk." Any indiscretion by leadership--no matter how minute it may be--can lead to the development of a "culture of corruption." It can actually happen very quickly. A sales manager fudging an expense report gives tacit approval to the sales force to do the same. A CEO using a company vehicle for personal reasons--against company policy--loses credibility and the ability to discipline a subordinate who does the same thing. As an old Russian saying goes, "A fish rots from the head down." So, any ethics problem in a company is actually a leadership problem.

What can leaders do? Besides the aforementioned training and policy efforts, leaders need to be willing to act quickly and decisively against ethics violations. Discipline must be fair, consistent, and quick. The moment an employee at one level is treated differently than an employee from a different level, for similar violations, the leadership has been neutered. Even if the employee in question is a "star," leadership must be willing to support the principles of the ethics policy lest they become worthless.

Leaders must lead with integrity.

More suggestions on actions leaders can take to impact the ethics of their organization will be upcoming.

The "Extreme Makeover" Fallacy: "Fixing" Leadership with Organizational Design

2010-09-13T16:42:00.000-04:00

Business organizations love buzz words and acronyms. Drive through any industrial center and you are likely to see a large banner proclaiming “ISO 9001 Certified” hanging proudly from the side of a manufacturing facility. Walk inside that facility, and you are equally likely to find memos referencing the latest efforts to implement “Lean manufacturing,” “JIT,” “5s,” an “ERP” system, or some level of Six Sigma training. Businesses spend countless amounts of resources—both financial and human capital—on these kinds of implementations to squeeze the most productivity possible out of their organizations. Why shouldn’t they? After all, organizations are being asked to do more, better, faster, with less.

This same mentality has crept into the world of organizational development (OD). There is a growing notion that organizational ailments are the fault of improper design or structure of the organization itself. In other words, the wrong lines are connecting the wrong boxes on the organizational chart. Changing the organizational design with a tweak here or there may be the recipe. On the other hand, perhaps the symptoms are serious enough to warrant a complete overhaul of the design. The underlying premise and (I contend) flaw to organizational design theory is that the shape, structure, or design of the organization is a dominant factor in the behavior of the people in that organization. I call this the “Extreme Makeover Fallacy.”

The premise of ABC’s hit reality series “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” is that a new home will give a deserving family a new start. “The renovated home always belongs to a deserving family” and “the lucky homeowners always have a heartening back story: Heroes, community leaders, and a plethora of inspirational families are truly the heart and soul of the show” (ABC: Shows). However, changing the structure that these “lucky homeowners” live in does not necessarily change their behavior or ensure success. A family from West Chester, Ohio with 3 children—2 with special needs that made life difficult in their original home—were recipients of a new home from the show in 2008 (WLWT Homepage: Family, 2008). Two years later, the parents filed for divorce. In 2009, a Penn Hills, Pennsylvania family was given a new home based on the community work done by the corrections officer father (WTAE Homepage: Entertainment, 2009). Within that same year, the couple ended up in divorce court with a protection order taken out against that father (WTAE Homepage: News, 2009). A Lake City, Georgia family, after getting their home from the show in 2005, used it as collateral for a $450,000 loan to start a construction business. Three years later, after the failure of that business venture, the home was in foreclosure (Associated Press, 2008). In these cases and more, the newly renovated home did not stave off failure. In some circumstances, the new home exacerbated the underlying—yet ignored—problems of the family. Applying the premise of Extreme Makeover: Home Edition to an organization, can lead to the same disappointing results.

Organizational design is often written about as if the results are completely independent from the contributions of the members of the organization. “Organizational designs that facilitate variety, change, speed, and integration are sources of competitive advantage” (Galbraith, 2002, p. 6). Does this mean that such designs can overcome members of the organization that do not “facilitate variety, change, speed, and integration?” According to some, organizational architecture can ensure that employee’s choices (which are typically based on self-interest) are more aligned with the corporate vision (Brickley, Smith, Zimmerman, & Willet, 2009). Again, the implication is that the structure can produce this result regardless of the involvement of leadership. Essentially, if organizations can renovate or build a better “home,” the “family” (employees) will be more successful. This is the fallacy.

This is not to say that organizational design is not worthy of consideration within an organization. Design issues should be considered—but as a way to support and to enhance already effective leaders. Shifting design while maintaining poor managers, only shifts the burden and poor performance to another area of the organization. If an organization, following a typical growth pattern, moves from a functional organizational design to a product design (Galbraith, 2002), and has had effective managers from the start, that design change will likely improve the overall performance of the company. But, if there were ineffective managers in the beginning producing mediocre performance, and those same managers continued with the organization into the product organization stage, the performance of the company would likely continue to be mediocre.

So why all the talk about design? Brickley et al hinted at this answer when they wrote that “Some argue that leaders motivate people through personal charisma, style, and inspiration. But while business managers can learn a lot from studying the styles of inspirational leaders, charisma is a quality that for most people is difficult to acquire” (2009). In other words, leadership is tough. General Omar Bradley is quoted as saying that “leadership is intangible.” Businesses prefer tangibles. Programs such as lean manufacturing and others mentioned at the beginning of this article offer businesses a tangible way to attack a problem. Similarly, organizational design theory gives businesses a tangible way to address leadership…all the while avoiding the real issue: leadership skills.

The entire quote from Bradley actually is “leadership is intangible, and therefore, no weapon ever designed can replace it.” In the context of this discussion, this quote could be re-phrased to read “leadership is intangible, and therefore, no organization ever designed can replace it”—no matter how “extreme” it is.

ABC: Shows. (n.d.). Retrieved September 09, 2010, from ABC.Go.com: http://abc.go.com/shows/extreme-makeover-home-edition/about-the-show

Associated Press. (2008, November 20). News: KOMO. Retrieved September 9, 2010, from KOMONews.com: http://www.komonews.com/news/entertainment/25999079.html

Brickley, J., Smith, C., Zimmerman, J., & Willet, J. (2009). Using Organizational Architecture to Lead Change. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance , 58-66.

Galbraith, J. R. (2002). Designing Organizations: An executive guide to strategy, stucture, and process. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Solitude and Leadership

2010-07-21T10:33:00.001-04:00

This is a great article that deserves some consideration...
Solitude and Leadership

Leadership You Can Hold a Candle To...

2010-07-18T19:52:00.000-04:00

Edith Wharton once said:

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it.

That quote is about much more than being a candle or a mirror. A candle has the ability to create light where there is none currently. It need only be exposed momentarily to a source of heat in order to create a flame that lasts for a prolonged period of time. When faced with challenges such as wind or water, a candle may blow out…but it is not defeated forever. It simply needs to be touched again with the heat from a match or another candle so that it can resume its duty as light-creator for the room in which it resides.

A mirror, on the other hand, depends upon another source of light. It can take the light produced from a candle and direct it to a larger area than the candle could on its own. Perhaps, based on the position of the mirror, light may reach a part of the room that rarely gets light when the candle is alone. So the mirror is a “force multiplier” for the candle—helping the candle extend its influence beyond the standard capabilities of that candle. But the mirror cannot create light on its own. If the candle were to go dark, so would the mirror. The mirror would be left to wait until such time that the candle would be re-ignited before the mirror would reflect light again.

A metaphor for organizational leadership

The candle and the mirror can be a metaphor for leadership styles. Or, more accurately, they are a metaphor for how leadership style flows through an organization. The light produced by the candle (the leader) is passed through the organization via the other levels of leaders in that organization (the mirrors). The more “in line” or engaged the mirrors are, the more likely that light will pass as far as possible and remain bright throughout the organization. But not every candle burns the same.

A variety of candles

In 1922, the Ajello Candle Company created a candle to honor a friend. The candle stood 18 feet tall, was 5 feet in circumference at the base, and was expected to last 1800 years if burned only one day a year on the anniversary of their friend’s birth. The candle was extremely ornate and awe-inspiring. Such a candle might represent a person with charismatic leadership style. In describing a charismatic leader, German Sociologist Max Weber described charisma as “a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.” Like the Ajello candle, these leaders often inspire awe in their followers and enjoy a high level of unquestioned cooperation from those followers. Earlier this year, Barbara Kellerman of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, observed after the inauguration of Barack Obama that “none (of the Presidents) in our lifetimes have been authentically charismatic. None in our lifetimes have forged with their followers a bond so tight it transcends the ordinary.” Other leaders who are generally recognized as charismatic in their style would include Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, and even Adolf Hitler.

It is not always necessary to have such a flamboyant and stimulating candle because sometimes it becomes more about the candle than the light it actually produces (or doesn’t produce). When all you really need is the light, a simple utilitarian candle may be the right choice. This candle serves a role much as a servant leader would for his followers. For a servant leader, the focus is always on providing for the needs of their followers. Robert Greenleaf, the author who coined the term “servant leader” in his 1970 essay “The Servant as Leader”, says that “The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first.” In other words, it’s not about the candle for the servant leader.

A conscious choice of candles

Not every candle is appropriate for every occasion or setting. Certainly, if the power went off in your home, an 18 foot tall ornate candle from Ajello would not likely serve you as well as the 6 inch long utility candle found in your kitchen drawer. Conversely, that utility candle would not likely inspire the appropriate celebratory atmosphere if it were stuck in a cake instead of a birthday candle!

Leaders make a conscious choice of style to implement. Even if a leader is predisposed to a particular style, it is still a choice to follow that style. The choice is ultimately based on what matters to the leader or what that leader’s motivation is. Martin Luther King was interested in changing the status quo and this status quo was not localized to his parish in Alabama. Rather, it was an issue that penetrated through the heart of the entire nation. He spoke with passion from his pulpit and inspired people. His message drew more and more followers to him and he motivated them by eloquently sharing his simple vision. Soon, his very presence had an impact. His charismatic style changed a nation. Yes, he was blessed with the talent, but it was still his conscious choice to use it in the way he did.

It’s a good thing King didn’t choose the utility candle.

Gen. McChrystal "Stoned"

2010-06-22T19:43:00.005-04:00

Just in case you've been under a rock (and there are a few out there...my waitress the other day asked me what my iPad was!), the top military commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine that has caused a bit of a stir. In it, McChrystal and his staff are critical of the Obama administration...pretty bluntly.

I am not so concerned about what Gen. McChrystal said and about whom he said it. That is for others to debate. What I am concerned about is the effect on the organization around and below Gen. McChrystal as they consider the behavior he modeled.

Certainly, in a military organization (and others), these kinds of comments are made. But they aren't generally made for public consumption in a forum such as Rolling Stone. I am sure Jack Welch had some opinions about different people in the public eye yet I doubt I'd ever see him making those comments to a reporter.

It is not out of the realm of imagination that those led by Gen. McChrystal might say, "If he says that about Obama, Biden, or Holbooke, what does he say about me?" That's probably the least of the issues. More likely, these public comments will have a negative affect on the leadership culture in the units deployed in Afghanistan. A "Runaway General" does not set the stage for great leadership of soldiers. I wonder how a "Runaway Captain" in Kanadahar province, who might disagree with the General's policies, would be looked upon by that same General?

This is not just a failure of one leader. It is a failure of the leadership team that surrounded this leader. A plant manager doesn't run a plant by themself...at least not successful ones. Likewise, a successful General has a successful team around them...to have his back or to advise him of a bad decision. Make no mistake (to borrow a phrase often used by Pres. Obama), if his team was bad, it was the General who is responsible. He picked them. He cultivated the culture surrounding them. He reaps the fruits.

Ultimately, this decision to do the interview falls squarely in the lap of the General. When he is fired (or as early reports are indicating--resigns), he can blame no one but himself.

Ego and consulting...

2010-04-03T21:19:00.002-04:00

I am not speaking of the consultants ego here...although that could be a great subject for a post in the future. This addresses the reality of personality types with regard to success for a consultant.

As people develop, so do their personalities. There is general agreement that this personality development (or “ego development”) occurs in stages through a person’s life (Loevinger, 1980). There is minor disagreement in terms of how many stages there are. The critical issue is recognizing what the stages are and, in the context of Loevigner’s essay, developing the appropriate counseling modality to suit the particular stage the client is in (Loevinger, 1980).

This is extremely relevant to a consultant seeking to enhance strategic thinking in a client organization. In fact, a study by Merron, Fisher, and Torbert used the stages of ego development as a basis of studying management action. Stages of the subjects were determined using Loevinger’s Sentence Completion Test. The study revealed that managers make meaning of the different challenges they face based on their stage of development (Merron, Fisher, & Torbert, 1987). Those at earlier stages of development may be more authoritarian or coercive whereas those at later stages of development are likely to be more consultative in their approach (Merron, Fisher, & Torbert, 1987).

This kind of information is critical to the consultant in determining the appropriate course of action with that client. The relationship between consultant and client is really a partnership (Block, 2000) and if the client partner is in the earlier stages of development, that can likely create resistance to consultant recommendations.

Block, P. (2000). Flawless consulting: A guide to getting your expertise used (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Loevinger, J. (1980). Some Thoughts on Ego Development and Counseling. The Personnel and Guidance Journal , 389-390.

Merron, K., Fisher, D., & Torbert, W. R. (1987). Meaning Making and Management Action. Group & Organizational Studies , 274-286.

Findlay Dale Carnegie Class Graduates TONIGHT!

2010-03-31T11:45:00.002-04:00

Come celebrate the graduation of the latest group of people to complete the world-famous Dale Carnegie Course in Findlay, OH!

This group was made up of wonderfully diverse and dynamic people from all over the Findlay Area. They included people from the construction, manufacturing, technology, financial services, and golf industries as well as college students.

Over the past 13 weeks, they worked hard to develop and improve their skills in the following areas:

Leadership Skills--getting cooperation!

People Skills--building/maintaining key relationships!

Communication Skills--being clear, concise, and LISTENING!

Handling Stress--put things into proper perspective to maintain productivity!

Self-Confidence--step outside comfort zones to successfully take on greater challenges!

If you are interested in these things for yourself or your people, feel free to join us tonight. The graduation session is open to the public and begins at 6pm. The location is Red Hawk Run Golf Club in Findlay, Ohio.

For more details, contact me at chris@harbenleadership.com or by phone at 419-618-7488!

More on consulting...

2010-03-30T13:06:00.001-04:00

Often times, consultants can “over-consult” and recommend processes or major overhauls that aren’t necessarily needed.

At one point this past week, I was awake for 40 ½ hours straight largely because of a commitment I made to a consulting client. The result of my effort was a meeting on Friday where I was able to provide some simple adjustments that could increase the effectiveness of the communication of strategy and vision within the plant. What I offered was not earth-shattering or ground-breaking processes. Rather, I offered insight and clarity to a company that needed it. My investment of time could have motivated me to “over-consult” but I pride myself of doing only what is needed. Further, the more complicated the recommendation of the consultant, the less likely the client will actually implement it.

On consulting...

2010-03-29T23:22:00.001-04:00

Certainly, a consultant must “practice what we preach” if we are to maintain credibility with the client. The significant financial investment a client makes in our services should cause the client to scrutinize our behaviors as they seek to verify our credibility. That credibility is critical because in order for us, as consultants, to benefit the client, the client has to have the confidence to take and act on our recommendations.

That is why the most critical part of the process comes before we make any presentations or recommendations. In reviewing research on instructional design methodologies in which the goal was to ascertain what models provided the most efficient results, one of the models revealed was an efficiency methodology that followed the acronym ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate). That methodology is not unlike the process a consultant would use to develop needed skills (i.e. increased strategic thinking) within a client. An important theme found in that research was that the bulk of the work was in the analysis prior to the implementation of any design.

As consultants, ADDIE can be an efficient way for us to work, as well.

The New Harben Leadership & Management Consulting website!

2010-03-15T16:58:00.003-04:00

Hello everyone!

For the last month or so, I've been putting the finishing touches on my website devoted to my consulting practice. I invite you to visit www.HarbenLeadership.com and look around! There are listings of upcoming events and you can access my Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter pages from there! This blog also feeds to the front page of that site.

Be sure to sign the guestbook and refer a friend!

Have a great day!

2010-03-14T12:16:00.002-04:00

To See or Not to See...(continued)

2010-02-03T00:22:00.005-05:00

To review, I met with a company that thought they had a training problem...

If you guessed that the performance issues began almost simultaneously with the announcement, you'd be pretty close. From my conversations with some of the managers who were the focus of the issue, I learned that they actually took the news pretty well. They assumed that the acquisition was going to be good for the company even though they had had no conversations with the company President about it. They just had a general good feeling toward the company and the prospects.

However, the people these managers supervised wanted specifics almost immediately. They wanted reassurance that their jobs were safe. They had made concessions over the past couple of years in order to help the company survive some lean times and they felt that they were "owed." When the managers could not provide reassurance (other than from themselves), the "natives got restless" as one of the managers put it to me.

The HR manager who did the original presentation was approached several times about when there would be another meeting with more details. The answer was always "soon." Meanwhile, the President was out of the office more than usual. This, coupled with the lack of more information, fueled the rumor mill.

I think you can see where I am heading with this.

The problem was not one of training. It was a problem with communication. The leaders of the company--the ones responsible for creating the vision for the company--failed in that task. There were good and legitimate reasons for the acquisition and it meant good things for the future of the company. However, that was never conveyed to managers and by extension, the rest of the company. When there is a void in information, people tend to fill that void...and not always with the "best case scenario."

There is damage control to be done now because this situation lasted too long. Meetings are being held with small teams of employees with the President himself. I've coached him to allow a little more "venting" than usual and that was tough for him to accept at first. But, he is willing to engage a little humility in order to engage the employees. It's still a work in progress but there is progress where there once wasn't.

The lesson here is how critical it is for the followers to see what the leader sees. Without that alignment of vision, instead of pulling together, a team will pull apart.

To See or Not to See...

2010-01-30T18:50:00.002-05:00

I met with an organization the other day that was concerned about the performance of its supervisors and second level managers. According to the company, these supervisors and managers where missing deadlines, not participating in meetings, avoiding "people problems" in their direct reports, and generally showing no innovation. The morale throughout the company was poor. The opinion at the top of the organization was that the performance was the result of poor training. That's why they came to me.

The company wanted to hear my ideas for training. But before I started, I asked for a tour of the facility. During the tour, I asked them questions about their product, their processes, and anything else that struck me as we walked around...with the exception of training. What I learned was that the company had just recently announced the acquisition of another company in a different state. They told me, rather proudly, that they only had one meeting for the employees and that was about 5 months ago. I asked about what they covered at the meeting and they said that they tried to keep it simple and only gave out "what the employees needed to know." Specifically, the company told the employees that the acquisition should be complete within the year and that it "shouldn't" affect the jobs at this location. I learned that the meeting was not attended by the President of the company. Rather, the VP of Human Resources lead the meeting. I would later learn that there was not generally a good relationship between this HR person and the rank and file.

Do you wish to guess when the performance issues started to show up?

More tomorrow...

Change!

2010-01-25T11:40:00.002-05:00

You may have noticed a subtle change to the header of The Strategic Leader blog. Over the last couple years, I have been helping businesses and individuals develop their people into effective leaders and coaches through Dale Carnegie. While I am not abandoning Carnegie, I am starting a new phase of my career today.

Harben Leadership and Management Consulting (HLMC) is a full-service consulting firm dedicated to developing strategic leadership in organizations. Services include analysis, customized training development and delivery, and executive coaching. Keynote talks are available on a variety of subjects including leadership development, creating alignment, mentoring/coaching, team building, strategic planning and customer service. Seminars are available for a 1 hour session at a meeting all the way up to full day sessions.

To inquire about my services, please send me an email and I will respond right away!

I look forward to becoming a part of your success!

"Rattle and Hum"

2009-11-11T14:27:00.002-05:00

One of my Dale Carnegie participants in Defiance last night talked about how he handled a customer who was concerned about a "rattle" in their car. It was an excellent example of how to handle a person when they are potentially stressed and "disgruntled." He understood that the customer was concerned about her car performing well and she new that if there was a "rattle", there likely was a problem that could affect performance. His empathy helped him keep that customer a customer.

It caused us all in the class to reflect on how we treat people in business. Businesses tend to be accustomed to investing in the maintenance of their equipment. If a machine starts to "rattle", it gets maintenance quickly because the business cannot afford for that machine to be down. It makes good business sense to invest in this activity. Ideally, the business wants to maintain the equipment BEFORE a "rattle" shows up.

But what about the business' people? If they don't get "maintenance", don't they also start to "rattle"? Wouldn't it make just as good business sense to invest in the continuous maintenance of its people? After all, they are the business' biggest asset.

An Analogy of Leader/Follower Alignment

2009-11-06T22:31:00.002-05:00

This is inspired by John P. Kotter, who said in the Harvard Business Review that leaders create vision and set direction while managers deal with complexities. With that in mind, here is an analogy of the importance of alignment between leaders in your organization and their followers.

Think of your favorite automobile. The wheels each have independent suspension so that they can better deal with rough surfaces that they may be driving over. Specifically, and those of you who are more mechanically inclined can help me out, when a wheel with independent suspension is driven over a bump, the independent suspension helps reduce the impact of that bump to the other wheels on the car. However, all four wheels are still tied together. These wheels represent your team. They each have a specific identity and personality but for best performance, they are somehow tied together.

The driver of the car represents the leader (foreman, project manager, President, CEO). The driver is determining where the car is going and communicates that to the wheels by turning the steering wheel. If the wheels are out of alignment, what happens when the driver wants to go straight? The car pulls to a different direction. This can happen when even one wheel is out of alignment. The driver then has to exert more energy to counteract the mis-alignment and must continue to exert that force for the duration of the trip. Sound familiar?

How efficient will a mis-aligned vehicle be when compared to a properly aligned vehicle? What will the fuel and maintenance cost be of a vehicle that is allowed to continue to be mis-aligned versus a car that is constantly adjusted for proper alignment? Think about tires, shocks, bearings, tie-rods, etc. Which provides the smoother drive? What about the physical impact on the driver?

Now, put this in terms of your organization. Are you aligned?

The accountability of a Coach

2009-10-30T20:55:00.003-04:00

If you have team members who are under performing, before you become convinced of their ultimate failure, ask yourself this:

"What have I done to be a COACH rather than a BOSS?"

"Have I put them in a position to be successful?"

"Have I been proactive in their development?"

OR...

"Have I simply hoping that they would develop on their own?"

Want organizational change? Don't paint without primer.

2009-10-29T22:48:00.001-04:00

Three years ago, a local manufacturing plant was faced with the news that they had been selected for closing by their corporate headquarters. The plant manager, who is a disciple of Jim Collins’ “Good to Great” and who exemplifies what Collins refers to as “level 5 leadership”, addressed the employees at the plant. He said that he believed there was a chance to save the plant if they all did some specific things. This moment was the catalyst for what Richard Daft refers to as a paradigm shifting radical change. In the context of Kurt Lewin’s 3-step theory ("unfreeze-change-refreeze"), the status quo was instantly “unfrozen.”

Over the next year, the plant focused on creating greater leadership alignment, encouraging a culture of discipline, and seeking opportunity for growing a continuous improvement mindset. The level of engagement was significant and change occurred rapidly as a result. Their efforts saved the plant. However, saving the plant removed the motivation to make those cultural changes permanent. In other words, the “field” in Kurt Lewin’s field theory was now dramatically changed .

It occurred to me that the change process was doomed from the start. There was not enough time devoted to the first phase of Lewin’s 3-step theory. The idea of the “unfreeze” stage is to make people “change ready”. The announcement of the closing of the plant provided the stimulus for unfreezing by providing a instant crisis to rally around. The problem was that the motivation was based around a singular goal—saving the plant—rather than the more broad goal of changing the organization. In other words, the scope was too small and that contributed to the failure to permanently change.

Today, the plant is refocusing...and taking a step backwards in order to move forward. The goal is to change the culture of the plant and to make that change permanent. The key staff members have to be on board--they have to be engaged--they have to be ready to change. Think of it as painting the walls in your home. If you want the paint to stick--for a long time--you need to prep the walls correctly.

The change was flaking away at this company. Now they are spending time scraping and priming...so that the change sticks this time.

Who am I?

2009-09-21T22:58:00.003-04:00

I am going back to my Dale Carnegie roots for this brief post about names.

In this age of avatars and screen names, knowing the names of the people you surround yourself with, or depend on in business, is absolutely critical. We often just don't give it enough thought or make it important to us. Here is what Dale said:

Remember that a persons name, to that person, is the sweetest more important sound in any language.

You know how when, in a crowded room, you can hear someone mention your name? It's because you are tuned to it. It is who you are. It is your identity.

During the course of a day or week, we get so busy that when we meet someone new, we make very little effort in learning their name. We are a visual people so we will often recognize their face a week later at the mall...but their name will escape us.

Here's how you can improve:

First, you need to realize and accept the importance of a persons name and commit to putting some effort into it. Without effort, you will not improve. You might as well issue name tags to all you speak with!

Once you have committed, here is what you do when faced with an introduction to a new person.

Stop. Whatever you are doing, it can wait. Put down the pencil, the Blackberry, the remote, the burger, and give your full attention.

Look and Listen. Make eye contact. Notice things about the person while repeating their name in your head--but not so much that you miss what they are saying!

Impression. We all have the ability to get a "first impression" or a "feel" for a person almost immediately.

Associate. Connect this person with something significant about them. Perhaps they are from a vendor--so connect them with their product. Perhaps they are a teacher--connect them with a subject, or a school.

Doing these things automatically increases your effort in remembering names...and will increase your success. Being able to address people that are still new to you by name will win you points as a leader!

Myers Briggs--So what?

2009-08-31T20:26:00.003-04:00

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a popular test used by many companies to help develop leaders. Often, I will run into people who just underwent the assessment at a company-sponsored seminar and they are excited to tell me that they are a "ENTJ" or an "INFP" (I happen to be an ENTP based on my last assessment). People like to "be" something as long as that "something" tends to be positive. This kind of personality trait indicator gives people that ability.

But so what?

I mean, what do you do with that information after you have it? Do you now have to somehow memorize the types of every member of your team? Or do you just note it in your files? Do you reflect on what your own type means to you and your team? Do you change the way you approach things?

Unfortunately, for many of the companies I know that have done Myers-Briggs (or a similar program), the assessment is not the first step in a leadership development process...it is the ONLY step.

Any time you can gain insight into why you or others do things in certain ways, your potential to be a great leader has increased. But to move from potential leader to actual effective leader, you must actually do something with that information. It takes more than just knowing that you are a "ENTP".

It's not about YOU!

2009-08-18T12:06:00.003-04:00

Ego is one of the most dangerous enemies of the true leader. Yes, it is important to be confident in your abilities. Someone who is lacking such confidence cannot effectively inspire those around them to reach their full potential. But thinking that the success or your organization is dependent upon you alone is foolish and arrogant.

This is where many public figures fall down. In the near future, I will be writing articles for the Toledo Examiner. In those articles, I will focus on those in the public eye who hold positions of leadership. I will analyze them as leaders and make recommendations that will help all of us to learn from those examples.

A Case for Mentoring

2009-08-05T23:15:00.004-04:00

From the August issue of The Business Journal of West Central Ohio.

Several years ago, I was a Regional Vice President for a financial services firm and was travelling with my new boss. Our first appointment of the day was with a firm that I had been trying to get into for several months. The business potential with this firm was significant and I had been persistent in seeking an opportunity to speak to the decision makers there, so I was excited.

Jim, the Divisional Vice President—my boss, had been my boss for only a couple of months. I had met him at some training in Minneapolis a few months earlier and had a favorable impression of him. While in Minneapolis, I made a presentation that was critiqued by a panel that included Jim and he spoke in support of my style and my approach. He was held in high regard so I felt good about receiving those comments.

But on this given morning, Jim destroyed my confidence.

We arrived at the firm ten minutes before our presentation and were shown to the conference room by Kathy, the spouse of the firm’s president and a co-owner of the firm. The presentation lasted for just under an hour (as I had promised) and went very well. The staff of the firm was very interactive with me and the mood was light and cordial. Many questions were asked and there were many “buying signals” given by the staff. After the presentation, Don, the president of the firm, invited us back to his private office where he spent an hour telling us all about the philosophy of his firm. His pride was clear and I felt that he was welcoming us to his business. After he was done, he walked us up to the front desk and instructed his assistant to schedule a private follow-up meeting for me. This appointment was now, officially, a success!

As Jim and I walked out of the office toward my car to continue with the rest of the day’s appointments, I commented that “this was a great way to start the day!” “You think?” said Jim. “Sure. What did you think?” I asked. Jim replied with a stern look on his face “It was awful.” All my enthusiasm drained out of me as if I was a tire that just ran over a spike. Jim offered no further explanation and, frankly, I was no longer interested.

Each appointment that day produced the same negative feedback from Jim. That is, until the completion of the very last meeting. After that meeting, Jim said nothing. I reluctantly asked why he hadn’t said anything about it. He replied that I “did nothing wrong” and that it wasn’t his job to tell me what I did right.
Within six months, neither Jim nor I worked for that company any longer and sales in my former territory dropped to 20% of what they had been while I was there.

Clearly, opportunity was lost here. There was, of course, the opportunity for increased business for my company. Beyond that, because there was no mentoring relationship between me and Jim, I missed a chance for me to grow in my skills in my position. Whatever it was that made that meeting “awful” could have been made into a coaching opportunity. If it had been handled correctly, I could have become an even more valuable member of the organization. There was opportunity lost for Jim as well. At the end of the day that he invested in me, he ended up with someone less connected, less motivated, and less likely to excel. In other words, instead of a stronger team, Jim ended up with a weaker one.

To be a mentor is not a simple proposition. Chip Bell, author of Managers as Mentors: Building Partnerships for Learning, says that mentoring is “more about a mutual search than imparting wisdom.” He goes on to say that mentoring is more “art than science”. In its truest sense, says Dr. Bruce Winston of Regent University, mentoring is about helping the protégé “be all they can be.”

Can your organization afford to NOT be mentoring?

What is "Servant Leadership?"

2009-07-24T01:05:00.004-04:00

The term “Servant Leader” is largely based on the work of Robert Greenleaf. He describes a servant leader as someone whose first focus is on serving rather than leading. One of the tests that Greenleaf talks about is whether those served grow as persons. There are 11 generally accepted characteristics of servant leadership:

1. The leader Chooses to lead
That is to say, even if this person is not in a leadership position, they have made the choice to act as a leader. Or, if this person IS in a leadership position, they have chosen to actually behave in the manner of a leader rather than just occupying the position and exerting authority.

2. There is a focus on Listening
Communication is two-way rather than just an "edict from on high." This develops a relationship based on mutual respect. There is often much more experience and knowledge on your team than you are aware. Without listening, you would be giving up a significant asset.

3. The leader has Empathy for those he leads
The leader truly identifies with those that are led. There is a genuine concern for the well being of the entire team. This is especially important when there is change occurring in the organization. Whether it is implementing a new warehouse management system or a major reorganization, change creates anxiety.

4. The leader is interested in Healing
The lines between work life and home life are more blurred than ever. Servant leaders recognize that their team does not function in isolation from whatever challenges they may have personally.

5. The leader is highly Aware
Team members believe that the servant leader has a high level of awareness of what is going on. This includes organizational matters locally and corporately. It also includes, by virtue of the leaders listening ability and empathy, issues facing individual team members. This fits with what Dale Carnegie describes as having a "genuine interest" in other people.

6. The leader uses Persuasion rather than authority
This produces a higher level of cooperation amongst the team. One plant manager I recently interviewed referred to his style as being very "collaborative." During his collaborations with his team, the team often came up with solutions. Because it was their idea, they took more ownership of it. This is another example of building a relationship based on respect.

7. The leader encourages Conceptualization
It's not only the leader's vision that is important...it is also the team's. In fact, the leader encourages their team to think of what "can be." Defiance Metal Products in Defiance, Ohio recently completed a restructuring of their manufacturing facility. The project was led by their Lean Champion, Mary Short. But what really made the project successful was that Mary's relationship with her maintenance team enabled some very creative and highly efficient solutions.

8. The leader has good Foresight
The leader has the ability to pick up on trends and to understand their implications for the future. They also can "see" what the future consequences will be from a decision made today.

9. There is a strong sense of Stewardship
Followers of a servant leader feel that the leader has a strong sense of "making the world a better place." The leader seeks to prepare the organization to contribute to the greater good.

10. There is a commitment to the Growth of others
Servant leaders tend to be mentors and have a strong desire to have their team become "all that they can be." They have the "ability to see ability" in their team and they position their team to be successful.

11. There is a strong sense of building Community
Followers of servant leaders typically will feel part of something more than just an organization. Often, followers will describe the organization as a "family" because of the connection that exists. The leader enjoys a position more than simply as "boss" or "supervisor."

In the end, servant leadership is a style that focuses significantly on the relationship with the followers. It requires setting aside ego in the interest of accomplishing tasks through the followers.

In other words, a servant leader seeks the success of their followers rather than accolades for themselves.

A Definition of "Mentor"

2009-07-22T23:01:00.000-04:00

Mentor: Someone whose hindsight can become your foresight. (anonymous)

The Most Pressing Leadership Issue of Today

2009-07-19T16:05:00.003-04:00

In his book “Lincoln on Leadership…Executive Strategies for Tough Times”, Donald Phillips shares examples of Lincoln’s leadership style during the Civil War. In explaining why he relieved Gen. John C. Fremont of his command in Missouri, Abraham Lincoln said "His cardinal mistake is that he isolates himself, and allows nobody to see him; and by which he does not know what is going on in the very matter he is dealing with".

It seems that we have not learned that lesson well enough because, almost 150 years later, leaders continue to struggle with how to deal with their people on a personal level. Specifically, leaders fear getting too close to their teams and so, they often distance themselves too much.

There are plenty of reasons for keeping your distance if you are a leader. The military has always had a policy against fraternization. Simply put, leaders were forbidden from socializing with their subordinates. It applies to all leader-subordinate relationships. Many companies in Corporate America have instituted similar rules feeling that maintaining a strictly business relationship amongst team members and leaders promotes the most efficient and trouble-free environment.

Another reason that leaders may create a rigid boundary between themselves and their team members is to prevent a perceived vulnerability. As people open themselves up to each other more, flaws may become evident. Some leaders may feel that they cannot afford to have their flaws exposed. They may feel that it undermines their authority or credibility. This idea, itself, is flawed because the reality is that leadership is not derived from authority. A person in authority MAY be a leader…but it is not always so. On the other hand, someone with no authority at all may still be a leader.

The risk to creating this distance is that no relationships are built. According to Roger Looyenga, then Chairman and CEO of Auto Owners Insurance, you cannot coach or mentor someone without entering into some sort of relationship with them. One of the current “buzz words” in the industry today is “engagement”. You simply cannot inspire true engagement of your team if you do not have a foundation of a positive relationship with them. It is actually essential to have some element of a personal nature in the relationship. The more levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs that you can connect with, the more likely you will be successful. How will you know what it will take to touch someone in that way if you never really get to know them? Auto Owners has apparently done this well because earlier this year, they were recognized with the Dale Carnegie Leadership Award.

And speaking of Dale Carnegie, it’s not enough to just start asking personal questions. The attitude of sincerity and genuineness must go hand in hand with such efforts. In his ground-breaking book “How to Win Friends and Influence People”, Carnegie advises to “become genuinely interested in other people”. Obviously, the key word is genuine. Insincere gestures made in an attempt to build rapport will more often than not create a greater void in the relationship than existed previously.

These relationships that a leader must build are truly the most pressing issue in leadership today. Leaders are constantly being asked to do more, better, faster, and with fewer resources—today more than ever. Today’s business environment requires creativity, sacrifice, foresight, and determination. Those traits will likely be thriving in an organization whose leadership has built relationships based on genuine interest in its people.

Leadership Principles by an Apprentice Winner

2009-07-14T12:49:00.005-04:00

Kelly Perdew is a West Point grad who, while serving in the Army, was a Ranger and an Intelligence Officer. Today, he is an entrepreneur and CEO of Rotohog.com. Probably, you would recognize him mostly for the fact that he was the Season 2 winner of Donald Trump's "Apprentice."

Here are some leadership principles that Kelly adapted from his military background and writes about in his book TAKE COMMAND: 10 Leadership Principles I Learned in the Military and Put to Work for Donald Trump.

Integrity:
Take the harder right over the easier wrong.

Duty:
Do what you’re supposed to do, when you’re supposed to do it.

Passion:
Be passionate about what you do, or do what you’re passionate about.

Impeccability:
If it is worth doing, it is worth doing right.

Teamwork:
There is no “I” in TEAM.

Selfless Service:
Give back.

Planning:
Fail to plan, plan to fail.

Loyalty:
Up, down, and across your organization.

Perseverance:
It’s not the size of the dog in the fight; it’s the size of the fight in the dog.

Flexibility:
The person with the most varied responses wins.

One thing you might wish to reflect upon as you look at Kelly's principles is that these are not merely "Leadership" principles. In every organization, success also requires people with a good sense of "Followership." Each of these principles can also be applied in that context.

In other words, the practice of leadership is not reserved to those in leadership positions.

A Great Quote About Leadership

2009-07-08T17:58:00.000-04:00

A leader is best when people barely know he exists, not so good when people obey and acclaim him, worse when they despise him. But of a good leader who talks little when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves. (Lao-Tzu)

Follow up to "Yet another definition of Leadership"

2009-07-05T13:58:00.002-04:00

It certainly is critical for a leader to be able to recognize the skills, talents, and abilities of their team members. But that is not enough. What good is it if you, as a leader, can see ability in your people, but you DO nothing about it? You MUST tell those people that you see that talent in them. And, you must find a way to put those people in positions to highlight their talents. This is what Jim Collins, in his book Good to Great, refers to as "having the right people in the right seats on the bus".

Recently, I worked with a client who runs a manufacturing plant. He and his leadership team hired a talented young woman with a particular set of skills that the plant was lacking. The young woman would report directly to the department head who did not have the same skills as the new hire, but who had a different set of complimentary skills. My client thought that the match would be ideal. There was even thought that the new hire would develop into becoming the successor to the department head.

A few months later, my client was disappointed in the performance of the new hire. She was "rubbing people the wrong way" and seemed to have an overall abrupt nature to her. My client had come to the conclusion that she was just not going to be the person to succeed the department head. She just didn't have the people skills, my client said.

Upon some investigation, including a conversation with the department head, it became clear that the new hire was never put into a position to succeed. She was not given an opportunity to use the skills that the company had hired her for...and she had become frustrated. For one reason or another, the department head required to be involved in all aspects of the new hire's job. If another department had a question that was in the area of expertise of the new hire, she was not allowed to answer it directly. She had to first go to the department head. The new hire was being micromanaged.

This type of management might be appropriate to use with someone who has demonstrated a lack of competency or trustworthiness. But that was not the case with this new hire. She had never been given the chance to prove herself. She was hired, with great excitement, being told that she was going to be a great asset to the company. But after starting, the actions did not match the words.

Consequently, when the department head took a leave of absence, the performance and attitude of the new hire improved dramatically! She finally felt like she was doing what she was hired to do. The positive change was felt throughout the department.

Remember, the talent on your team wants to be "in the game." People are happiest and most productive when they feel that they are contributing. You, as a leader, NEED that contribution...at the highest possible level. If your talented team members don't feel that way in your organization, they will likely find another organization where they will. And they make take others with them.

Yet another definition of "Leadership"

2009-07-03T20:48:00.004-04:00

Here is a new definition of leadership that I have been rattling around in my head for a while. As far as I know, it is completely original and it fits perfectly with my core beliefs.

A leader...
has the ability
to SEE ability
in someone
who doesn't have the ability
to see that ability
in themselves.

Think of mentors, coaches, or other leaders you have known in your life. Didn't the good ones fit this definition?

The question is, do YOU?

One Simple Thing to Improve Your Organization

2009-07-02T16:18:00.003-04:00

Yep. One simple thing. Just one thing. My mind is going back to that scene in City Slickers where Jack Palance is telling Billy Crystal the same thing!

Here it is: In every interaction you have with people in your organization, make the focus THEM. Make it a goal for yourself to have each person who talks with you feel better than they did before they talked to you.

What? What about the "problem children" in my organization?

Were they always problems? Remind them of what you saw in them when you hired them. Tell them why they are important to the organization and how much they impact it.

Try it. People need to feel important and they will perform better when they do. You may even find that your own stress is reduced! What have you got to lose?

Economy Leaves Little Room for Leadership Mistakes

2009-07-01T16:27:00.012-04:00

This column appears in the July 2009 issue of The Business Journal of West Central Ohio.

I don’t need to tell you that belts are being tightened all over the State of Ohio. Businesses of all sizes are working with reduced staff in an attempt to keep overhead low and the chance of survival high. Employees are being asked to do more, do it better, do it faster, and with less resources than ever before. It is a time like this that reminds me of a quote that is often attributed to John Wooden of UCLA basketball fame (even though the originator of the quote was actually a sportswriter named Heywood Broun): “Sports do not build character, they reveal it.” In a leadership context, an appropriate version of this quote might be “Crisis does not create leaders, it reveals them.” Now is the time for the leaders of your organization to reveal themselves.

The department typically under the most pressure right now is human resources. The key word here is human. Your staff is your greatest asset…and they are coming to work stressed right now. Even if your particular business is doing well, your employees may still be bringing the stress of their spouse’s job with them to work. If your business is not doing well, just imagine the concerns that your employees may have. Many companies have laid off staff and the remaining staff may be wondering “am I next?” Stress may manifest itself in the form of increased sick time being taken by staff, lower morale, increased workplace violence, and a general decrease of productivity. None of those are a desirable outcome.

It may be obvious to you that this is not simply an HR issue. Rather, it is a critical issue that leaders at all levels of the business need to be concerned about. It is something to be proactive about. Consider these steps:

Keep communications open and honest. Avoid spinning the situation to convey a contrived positive. Your employees are smart and can smell when they are being “fed a line." Such actions tend to reduce the credibility of the leader. When a leader needs to make tough decisions (such as reducing hours or benefits), credibility is essential in gaining the understanding of the staff.
Increase the personal touch. Get out of your office and implement MBWA (Management by Walking Around). Spend time listening to your people. Try honestly to see things from their point of view and resist the urge to debate decisions. Let them do a great deal of the talking!
Set goals (or adjust ones you already have). Give the staff something to work toward. This gives them something positive to focus on. Perhaps create productivity competitions between shifts.
Include more people in strategy. If you have a strategic planning team, ensure that it has representation from every level of the company. This increases employee engagement and could improve implementation. People tend to take ownership of programs that they feel they had significant input in.
Invest in your team. Too often, companies shut down all programs that can improve productivity in order to keep overhead down. This is actually the exact wrong thing to do at the exact wrong time. It’s akin to stopping maintenance on machines in the assembly line. Appropriate training can yield significant benefits in productivity and morale for your organization. You may want to focus on your “front line” managers. These are the people that are “getting it from all sides”. Investing in these managers can often yield the greatest dividends in the shortest amount of time.
Handle mistakes carefully. Your team is made up of humans…and they make mistakes. Assuming that the offending employee is not a chronic problem, look at the mistake as a coaching opportunity. Your goal should be that the employee, after having the mistake addressed, should come away MORE engaged in what the company is doing. In other words, a mistake can be an opportunity to improve an employee. Handled incorrectly, however, the mistake might just turn into a chronic issue. In good times, disgruntled employees will leave. In times like this, disgruntled employees are more likely to stay because there are fewer options. But if they stay, they will not be a model employee. Chances are, their performance will continue to degrade and they will take up more of your time. Remember, employees don’t leave companies. They leave managers.
Keep a long-term view. One of the greatest mistakes I am seeing companies make right now is making choices that are too heavily based on the short-term. These companies have cut everything to the bare minimum and are focused simply on reducing overhead. There is very little thought given to strategy. These companies have essentially succumbed to a self-induced business coma. When the economy starts to turn around, these companies will still be slumbering and will lose valuable time and consequently, market share.

With the right attitude, focus, and leaders in place, your company can avoid the business coma and leap ahead of your competition.