I know, that’s heresy, but it’s still true. We make mistakes all the time, we can only assume that the people working for us do as well.
So, when they do make that mistake, what do we do? Whack ’em immediately? Beat ’em up about it? Public humiliation?
How about, Complete unequivocal support.
Wait… WHAT?? (more…)
There clearly are several significant workplace trends looming in front of us that we would do well to recognize. I’ve mentioned many of them here in this blog. Additionally, other authors, consultants, and practitioners have also done a good job of trying to predict the future.
As with all pseudo-science, however, some of it is pure bunk.
For instance:
Baby-boomer retirement, and its purported “sucking sound” on available talent, is quite possibly much ado about nothing. Let’s look at it logically: The definition of a baby-boomer is someone born between 1947 and 1963 – spanning almost 2 decades. Couple that with the current trend of later retirement, and you have a group of people born over a 20-year timeframe, retiring individually 55-75 years later at various ages. At best, it’s a non-event; at worst, it’s generational in nature, and very specific to population demographics — for instance, it’s clearly more prevalent in the midwest than in either coast, or in the top 10 most populated metroplitan areas.
Organizations are realizing that generational issues are not materializing as expected. No big surprise, really. We’ve been dealing with diverse workforces for a hundred years, including race, gender, and age — “generational” differences aren’t any more significant, and merely require purposeful thought to overcome. Workers do not have to view society, the world, and the workplace equally to be productive. Frankly, I believe we’ll see more of employees just “coming to work to work,” and less senseless attention on those things that don’t directly effect their ability to be productive.
So, when futurists write columns and books, and read the tea leaves to determine where we’re headed, use your noodle and some common sense before blindly drinking the Kool-aid.
A big trend that does needs attention – there is clearly a growing dearth of leadership talent available. This isn’t as much a function of baby-boomers leaving as it is our desire for new, fresh leadership at a time when the leadership “bench strength” is at its weakest. Many hyper-performing employees don’t necessarily view management as a logical progression from their current assignment, and we haven’t done a good job of painting a favorable picture of becoming a leader (think SOX requirements, jail terms, bad publicity for poor performance, etc.). Further, many of those extended-career boomers don’t necessarily want to work that “extension” as a high-stress leader. We better start growing managers and leaders – and fast!
In short, many real trends, contrary to those consistently broadcast like chicken little’s falling sky, are as much a “movement” in the workplace as they are trends.
Changes – they are a’comin’…
Should we use 360-degree evaluations to determine how well our managers are “managing?”
My answer will be brief, followed by some applicable humor (well, it’s funny to me anyway…)
Management efficacy should be evaluated by measurement, not popularity. Don’t ask the question if the answers aren’t actionable. In other words, if the manager is kicking butt on all measurable fronts, what would you have him or her change if a survey came back with suggestions?
The right answer, of course, is nothing.
Having said that…
What would you like to hear them say?
Three friends of Thibodeaux’s from the local Cajun congregation were asked, “When you’re in your casket, and friends and congregation members are mourning over you, what would you like dem to say?
“Jacque said: “I would like dem to say I was a wonderful husband, a fine spiritual leader, and a great family man.
Ovide commented: “I would like dem to say I was a wonderful teacher and servant of God who made a huge difference in people’s lives.
“Then it was Boudreaux’s turn to said somethon: “I’d like dem to say, “Look at dat!!!!, he’s moving!”
Measure managers by results, not popularity or wishful thinking.
Be Brazen.
“Teamwork” has forever been a buzzword in our business world. It seems that the importance of having employees work as a team has been promoted in every available piece of management literature. Nevertheless, we at the top have routinely had a hard time “playing well together,” despite the fact that the need is more pronounced now than ever before.
I used to work for a CEO who believed that the definition of a “team” was a group of people doing things his way. It’d be funnier if it didn’t apply so well to so many…
Who cares?? Why does it matter, as long as I do my job and am good at it?? Some arguments for executive teamwork:
So why, then, if we understand the need, do top executives often fail to form a team?
Consider the source: Managers who have climbed the ladder’s upper rungs are typically strong-willed, ambitious, and experts in their own right. These characteristics, though obviously allowing them to successfully rise within an organization, may also pave the way for an unwillingness to show weakness, overprotective behavior for their functions, and viewing other executives as “competition” in their quest for the Holy Grail: The CEO’s chair.
Personality and behaviors can be difficult to change once they are really entrenched, so forming a true executive team becomes a difficult undertaking.
Ultimately, the CEO must establish a climate that is favorable to developing an executive team. S/He can do this by:
I worked with the CEO of a large services company. A VP member of his senior staff was a brilliant P&L manager — but entirely destructive to the team. We coached, cajoled, taught, pleaded, and begged. This senior manager would not be swayed — he was clearly “on the dark side,” and wanted to stay. He wielded his P&L performance as a Kevlar vest.
The CEO fired him, and you could hear the air being sucked out of all the collective guts of the senior team. The boss was serious, and now the team was, too.
Creating a synergetic team of top leaders in an organization is tough work. Selecting, managing personalities and relationships, establishing and enforcing norms, and developing executive team members is a complex process – but it can be done.
The payback is huge. You know that, of course, if you took the time to read this whole posting. Stop looking for a magic bullet — it takes effort and commitment, and in all likelihood, some tough decisions.
Let me know if I can help.
Triangle Performance, LLC is a solutions-focused management consulting firm specializing in executive improvement, leadership development, and organizational effectiveness. Contact us today to get started on your journey to improving your leadership skills.
This question is a regular in executive circles… are leaders “made” or “born?” Do we have to find that person who by birthright is destined for leadership greatness, or can we cultivate, foster, and nurture someone with currently-unrealized potential to be that leader?
First I would ask, does it really matter? Is this just another stupid consultant-academic exercise, or are we looking for excuses for those performing like crap? Makes you scratch your head, eh?
Combat Leadership
Leadership is necessary in combat, but doesn’t hold its definition there; it may do so for current and/or former members of the military (of which I’m proudly included), but not necessarily the rest of the world. I’ve known many combat leaders who could only purportedly “lead” while in combat. They were ineffective without a crisis. Combat needs leaders; we don’t require combat, though, to have leaders. Long-term organizational leaders don’t have the “luxury” of crisis to be effective. Staving off crises to begin with–that’s leadership.
Critical Leadership
To use simple criticality as the overarching criteria, then trauma surgeons would be more of a leader than a high-performing CEO, merely because of job function. I don’t agree with that thinking, either. Again, crisis management — maintaining a calm, authoritative head under pressure — is an incredibly valuable skill. But it’s not the core foundation for effective leadership.
Leaders are made, not born. It’s easier, of course, to start with someone who has a known propensity (assessments or demonstrated performance) to “learn to lead.” It’s not, however, a necessity. If we take the time and effort, and are willing to marshal the appropriate resources, we can make the leaders of tomorrow from within our existing organization.
Additionally, leadership is entirely situational, which drives people to say things like “She has no potential to become a leader.” They actually mean “Given what I know about leadership from my experiences, this person doesn’t fit that description.” They could easily become an incredible leader elsewhere, as many have proven out in other organziations. the converse is also true: Given again that leadership is largely situational, a successful leader in one organization
may or may not be completely successful in another. Change the dynamics, change the opportunities for success.
I also believe that management and leadership are inextricably linked, so I don’t spend huge amounts of time trying to split hairs on the definitions. That, of course, is a posting in and of itself, so I’ll save the details for later.
Be Brazen.
Join our mailing list to receive our newsletter jam-packed with info, leadership tips, and fun musings.