Jul 09 2013
Send to KindleMy military experience is a big part of my understanding of great leadership. I truly believe that the main reason the U.S. military is consistently ranked as one of the most respected institutions in the country is their approach to leadership development.
Don’t take my word for it though. I enthusiastically recommend Lessons for CEOs in Deploying Military Leadership Principles by David Morken at Chief Executive.net.
Jul 04 2013
Send to KindleThis is my annual July 4th tribute to the founders of the United States of America. It’s become popular in some circles to marginalize what the founders did. While it’s true they were far from perfect, they produced an amazing document and changed the world.
There were plenty of reasons not to be in Philadelphia in July of 1776. It was hot and muggy, and the mosquitoes and horseflies had air superiority. In spite of the discomfort, a small group gathered to discuss nothing less than separating, by force of arms, from the most powerful nation in the world. These leaders produced the Declaration of Independence, a document that would fundamentally change world history, and with it left a legacy of leadership worth examining today. In producing that seminal document, those men demonstrated five basic leadership principles.
1. They understood the mission. It’s essential for a leader to know why they are there. The delegates all came to Philadelphia to strongly and unequivocally address grievances against the mother country. The English parliament had been violating their own laws, the colonies were suffering as a result and they wanted that to stop. Though not everyone who came to Philadelphia arrived in favor of succeeding from Great Britain, they all understood that the actions of the mother country were no longer tolerable and something needed to be done.
2. They were well read and had great knowledge of the issues at hand. Great leaders are always striving to learn and their minds are open to new thoughts and ideas which they endeavor to apply to their responsibilities. Historians tell us that America’s founders, though some did not have the benefit of a formal education as we know it today, were some of the most knowledgeable and well read persons of that, or any other, time. In that room in Philadelphia gathered a group unique in history for pure intellectual might.
3. They knew what they believed. They each had an underlying set of values and lived by them. There was agreement among the members of the delegation of what those basic values were. Not all members were protestant Christians but they did all share a belief in a higher power. Though today, many seek to downplay or ignore this aspect of the declaration, a little honest study reveals a common set of values that was instrumental in guiding their efforts.
4. They did not rush to judgment. Though today we look at July 4th as the date of the Declaration of Independence, the meeting in Philadelphia started in June and in fact, the cauldron of discontent had been boiling for many years. The delegation was actually the last part of what had been a very lengthy and considered discourse.
5. They were willing to take a risk. A huge risk! Benjamin Franklin’s famous and oft-quoted plea that they must “all hang together, otherwise, most assuredly we will hang separately” was not just hyperbole. The members of the delegation knew that what they were doing would be considered treason by England and treated as a capital offense if they were unsuccessful.
Though leaders of today often live in a high stress world, few must face consequences like those faced by the delegates in 1776. The document they produced stands alone in the world’s history and is a testament to what great leadership can accomplish.
Jul 03 2013
Send to KindlePodcast: Play in new window | Download (36.7MB)
There is a lot of talk about non-verbal communication. In this month’s newsletter I wrote about the importance of perception – the audience’s perception of you as well as your perception of them. The ability to understand body language; a person’s non-verbal communication, is one of the tools that will help you understand that perception.
Unfortunately, it isn’t as easy as you may have been led to believe. For instance consider the famous crossed-arms. Many will tell you that it means your listener has put up a barrier. That sounds good except it isn’t always true. If I’m seriously considering what you’re saying, I am very likely to cross my arms. I don’t know why I do it. It’s just a comfortable position for me. You can be assured I’m not erecting a barrier.
So how do you know what a person’s body language means? How a person moves and acts is a part of who they are. So, once again, a key component of leadership success is knowing the people you work with. The better you know them, the more likely you are to not be fooled by their non-verbal behaviors.
There are many books available that will tell you everything you wanted to know about non-verbal communication. Most of them simply reiterate the same truisms but there is one I recommend. The Silent Language of Leaders by Carol Kinsey Goman doesn’t simply regurgitate the same “facts” about body language but gives the reader advice on really understanding it.
So go learn about your people and so you can better understand their body language.
Jun 26 2013
Send to KindlePodcast: Play in new window | Download (32.0MB)
Leaders and Conflict – Encourage Good Debate
If I want your opinion, I’ll give it to you!
Have you ever been in that situation? The boss just doesn’t want to hear any discussion. It’s his way or the highway. That attitude is all too common, but it can be the beginning of the end.
Leaders who are not secure in themselves find it difficult to encourage the kind of conflict that leads to better decisions. They fear that any serious debate or discussion will diminish their standing in the eyes of subordinates. Their fear leads to two serious problems.
Since they discourage healthy conflict, so will the leaders below them. That means few people in the organization are truly thinking, which leads to the second problem
When instead of thinking everyone is just accepting and going along, bad ideas become action and consequently bad things happen.
Flight crew members attend a specific type of training called Crew Resource Management. This training was developed after several mishaps were found to be at least partially caused by an authoritative attitude by pilots in command who were not willing to accept the input of other crew members. The training helped senior pilots learn how to accept and even encourage input without sacrificing their authority.
The best ideas, solutions, and goals are forged in the crucible of healthy conflict. You do want their opinion – ask for it!
Jun 24 2013
Send to KindleThe headline screamed, “The New Rules for Leadership.” This caught my attention since the rules of leadership that I’d seen work so well, and had used myself with some success, were pretty old. Many of the researchers who had codified these principles did so in the early to mid 20th century, but one could trace those principles even farther. They sometimes appear in the Bible and can be found in some of the actions of Cyrus the Great, Persian king in the 6th century BC. Needless to say, I was pretty excited to read that there were new rules.
My excitement was short lived. There was nothing new about the leadership rules the author presented. Instead, he recited time tested ideas such as learning about people, developing their skills, communicating well, and having a vision.
The article wasn’t a total loss though. I’m not sure it was the author’s intent, but he did illustrate two very important points. First, though the fundamentals of leadership are ageless, not everyone understands them. We must continue to develop our future leaders. Second, while fundamentals don’t really change, the way we approach them often does.
In Sonnet 59, Shakespeare, in the somewhat tortured prose of the day wrote,
“If there be nothing new, but that which is
Hath been before, how are our brains beguiled,
Which, labouring for invention, bear amiss
The second burden of a former child.”
He was just expressing the principle espoused by Solomon. There’s nothing new under the sun.
Instead of laboring to invent new concepts, let’s instead endeavor to help more leaders understand and adapt the proven basics.
Jun 21 2013
Send to KindleDo you have high performers in your organization? Are they going to be your next leaders? Often more senior leaders look to the highest performing workers to fill leadership positions. I’ve even heard some state that they just don’t have time to go looking for future leaders that don’t stand out. That makes sense: to a point.
There’s more to leadership development than just picking someone who stands out. Every organization should have at least a rudimentary process for vetting leadership candidates. If you’re concentrating on individuals that stand out; your high performers, here are two questions you should consider.
Is the worker who stands out really a high performer or just loud? Assure yourself that the worker really is doing great work and not just making it appear they are. We’ve probably all experienced the worker who manages to benefit from the work of others. They look like a high performer, but they’re really just a good talker.
If the person is a high performer, does that mean they will be a good leader? More than one very successful technician has failed in a leadership role. No matter how impressed you are with the individual, you still need to have a process to ensure the person will be a good leadership candidate.
Selecting your next leaders is a critical task. Taking shortcuts is a bad idea. It’s important to have a process for selecting leaders. The time to find out that a high performer will not make a good leader is before they are in that position, rather than after they’ve messed things up.
Jun 19 2013
Send to KindlePodcast: Play in new window | Download (32.3MB)
Every organization has one. You know, the person who always says no. Anyone with an idea is grist for his mill and he will grind them to dust. The only reason for discussion is to express how much this person disagrees.
Mr. Negative will suck the life out of your efforts to encourage debate. This guy is not healthy conflict. Quite the opposite. If left unchecked, before long he’ll have created such a toxic environment that no one will want to speak up.
You need to identify this person quickly. Mr. Negative isn’t hard to spot. He usually has a cloud over his head and tends to darken a room just by walking in. People tend to shy away from him, which interestingly enough makes him even worse.
Meet him head on. It may be unpleasant at first, but get to know him. Some people are just negative by nature, but often there’s a reason for the negativity. Perhaps they feel they were slighted or passed-over at some point. Maybe they have more personal issues that are affecting them. I’m not suggesting you become his councilor; just learn enough to help you execute the next step.
Once you have gotten to know him a little, find a time or issue that seems to fit him and seek his opinion. When he gives a negative response, ask him to clarify and defend his position. Try hard to find something in what he says to agree with. It may be difficult, but take what he says seriously. Next time, encourage him to contribute again. Over time, his contributions will most likely be much more valuable and you’ll notice the negativity start to decline.
Jun 17 2013
Send to KindleYou’re never the smartest person in the room.
A bold statement? Perhaps. But one I’ve found to be a guiding light for leaders at any level and a critical concept for leaders to grasp. In any meeting or on any team there will almost always be someone who knows more about the topic, or a part of it than you do. The higher your leadership position, the more this is true. A good leader will leverage that knowledge others possess to make the organization more successful.
I’ve known this for a long time but it was driven home to me in one of my last assignments in the Air Force. I was assigned to lead a large and very complex maintenance organization. Their primary responsibility was one of the service’s largest munitions storage areas. Though I had experience with related policy at the staff level, I had very little actual operational experience in this area. To top it off, the organization had endured some significant problems in the recent past and morale wasn’t the best.
My boss expected me to be the expert. The organization expected me to know what I was talking about. More important they expected me to know what they were talking about. I read and studied extensively in preparation, but a few months of study wasn’t going to put me on a par with people who had 20 or 30 years of experience.
Fortunately, I’ve had some pretty good role models who had trained me to lead in situations like this. When I sat down with my section leaders I was honest that I would need their help and together we would make the organization successful. Had I tried to be the smartest guy in the room, I would have prevented, or at least hindered the great work those people did.
Of course, lessons sometimes need reinforcing. One afternoon, after a year or so at that job, I was sitting in my office reflecting on the past year. We were in the midst of several very significant and stressful changes but things were going fairly well. I was secretly feeling pretty proud of myself and thinking that I sure was a lot smarter than when I had arrived. My private reverie was interrupted by my secretary who, for some reason decided this was the perfect time to tell me that I should join Mensa.
For those of you who don’t know Mensa is an organization for people with very high IQ scores.
I laughed and said that I was flattered at the suggestion but my inside voice was saying, “Right, I’ve never known anyone with a Mensa level IQ.” She said that she was serious, so I asked her how one became a Mensa member. She explained the process, which I could easily see was beyond my feeble capabilities. Then, the clincher. A candidate had to be sponsored by a current member.
And she would be happy to sponsor me.
My secretary had just told me that she possessed a significantly higher level of intelligence than me! I wasn’t even the smartest guy in my own private office. That’s probably why she did such a terrific job of keeping me out of trouble.
Never get too impressed with yourself. There’s always someone who knows more than you do and you’ll be much more successful if you listen to them.
Jun 14 2013
Send to KindleI’ve had an interesting exchange lately on someone else’s blog about whether junior managers should even attempt to practice leadership. 
The authors seem to feel that managers should stick to management functions and not venture into the realm of actual leadership. Apparently they are upset about some managers trying to make improvements and actually act like leaders.
This isn’t just an issue of semantics. To remove the concept of leadership from a manager’s position is unconscionable. It’s also impossible. Anyone who is charged with managing other people is in a leadership position. They certainly may not be any good at it, but the fact remains they provide leadership. More on that concept in a minute.
I’ve discussed levels of leadership before (see http://www.planleadexcel.com/archives/1468 ). It’s the lowest level that seems to be where all the controversy is so I’ll concentrate there. This is the level of supervisors and junior managers who have the primary responsibility of managing a function. They were probably promoted because of some expertise or ability that was recognized by someone above them with the authority to promote.
There is a critical reality to these types of positions. Supervisors and managers have more face-to-face, day-to-day contact with the rest of their workers than any other person in the company. Though their primary responsibility is to manage, they affect the working lives of those they supervise. If they treat those people badly, they will get bad results. If they understand how to recognize motivations, if they have a vision for their own piece of the operation, if they know how to set realistic goals, if they have even the most basic knowledge of leading people, they will be much more effective because leading people, is a vital part of what they do.
When you see leadership in this way, it becomes apparent that anyone in a supervisor or manager position leads, whether they want to or not. To clarify we need to add a modifier; good or bad. Often, leadership is assumed to be good leadership. Bad leadership is considered to not be leadership. That’s wrong. Bad leaders are still leaders. When workers are promoted to supervisory and management positions with no thought to their leadership development, the result is often considered to be an absence of leadership when in fact it is bad leadership.
To illustrate, let’s visit Jack and Jill. Both are experts in their areas and are newly promoted managers. Jack understands the technical part of the job and is diligent about accomplishing each task to the letter. He stays in his office most of the time managing the paperwork. He’s a supervisor now so working on the floor is beneath him. Jack is frustrated because his section’s production is down and he can’t figure out why.
Jill has made an effort to get to know her workers which has allowed her to arrange their schedules for maximum efficiency. She told everyone about her vision to make this section the envy of the rest of the company and she worked with her people to set goals. She even takes time to get out on the floor and work with her people when things get really busy. The result has been a sharp increase in productivity.
Jack and Jill are fictional, but the situations are not. I’ve observed them too many times. It’s often said that Jack is not providing leadership. In fact he is; it’s just bad leadership. For a much more in-depth look at this concept, read Bad Leadership by Barbara Kellerman.
There are multiple aspects to the concept of leadership but at its core, leadership is always about people. So instead of insisting that supervisors and managers shouldn’t think they are leaders, consider how much more successful they, and the whole company could be if they learned to be leaders.
Jun 12 2013
Send to KindlePodcast: Play in new window | Download (31.9MB)
I’m a proponent of conflict in the workplace. I like it when there is lively discussion, disagreement, and debate on important issues. Out of that conflict comes better ideas, more effective solutions to problems, and personal growth of everyone involved.
But, that conflict has to stay professional and concentrate on the issues. Leaders must never allow the discussion, disagreement, and debate to become personal. Not everyone in the office or on the team is going to be best friends and personal dislikes will develop. It’s the leader’s responsibility to keep those types of bad conflict in check.
When I facilitate meetings I have a hard and fast rule. We only discuss the issues. Personal comments are off-limits. I keep an eye on people and when I see the first hint that personal dislikes are creeping into the discussion, I quickly move to someone else or even switch to a different point of discussion.
When facilitating teams I point out that at some point in the discussion, everyone will look across the table at someone else and think, “That is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Are you insane? How do you even dress yourself in the morning?” I assure them that at some point someone else will be looking across the table at them thinking the same thing. Therefore, it’s best to stick to the issues. Such negative personal comments will only come back to bite them.
Remember, good conflict is about the issues, not personalities.
