Resurrecting your career by following the rules of the stock market

It's resurrection time as mother nature comes back to life after the Autumn and Winter recess.

So let's look at a common coaching challenge I often see - resurrecting one's career in your current organisation.

The fact that one's career needs help can often catch you unawares, like the lobster not noticing the rising temperature of the water around it in the pot.The awareness that there's an issue often comes from some form of comment or feedback from a boss or senior stakeholder  through a process like a 360. 

The analogy I use with clients who find themselves in this situation is that of their personal stock price. Historically they have experienced career advancement,  their stock price consistently rising. But now suddenly we discover that people are selling as opposed to buying the individual's stock.

Here are the steps I advise my clients to follow to get their career growing again

1. Get to the issue.

Be relentless in finding out what the perceived problem is - why is your stock price falling. Even if you have feedback, go back and get even more specific feedback. The more data you have on why people have a specific perception of you and your career, the more focused you can be in addressing the perception.

2. Identity the institutional investors in your career.

Stock prices are not based on individuals like you and me trading - its all about the pension funds and the big institutional shareholders - their decisions move the market. So as opposed to convincing the whole organization how great you are, identify who the big institutional investors are in your career. This may or may not include your manager depending on how senior they are. Very often it is some key folks a couple of levels above you in the company.

3. Get a sponsor to help you demonstrate value to the institutional investors. 

Companies need intermediaries to get them in front of investors and venture capitalists. So do you. Who is going to get you in front of the senior people while also selling your worth to them when you are not in the room. This is were a supportive boss or mentor can really help you.

4. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate.

Wall Street does not support a stock just because they like you or think that you may have value - they buy based on stated intentions, follow through on those intentions, demonstrated results and constant communication of all these. You need to start broadcasting to your sponsor on a regular basis so they can both sell you and challenge negative perceptions about you that come up in senior leadership meetings. And you need to broadcast, on an appropriate basis, to the big investors in your organisations to show them your impact and value. This is not PR over results - it is visibility into your results.

The four steps above have helped my clients get focus and leverage to rebuild their personal stock price.

But! But if the above steps represent plan A, I always encourage my clients to start building a plan B no matter how tentatively. Sometimes the perception is so ingrained with very senior people that at some point one needs to be able to cut ones loses and go elsewhere. In other words, you need to think about refloating your stock in a new market.

PS: the other bit of resurrection going on here is with my blog which has been dormant for over a year. I want to try and make it a more regular process for me

Two lessons I learnt last month from Mai and Dave;

1. Don't write for perfection - just put your thoughts out there i.e. let the writer me, not the editor me, own this process.

2. Write for a few mins every day - something will come out of the simple discipline. 

Not More Delegation - its about More Effective Delegation

“I need to delegate more!” is a statement I hear a lot from my coaching clients. Its often seen as the solution to trying to do too much with too little time.

But the issue is not about more delegation but more effective delegation. Some situations will need you less involved than you are currently. And some situations will need you more involved than you are currently

Marshall Goldsmith has the following suggestions if you want to become a more effective delegator:


1) Have each direct report list her or his key areas of responsibility. Schedule one-on-one sessions with each person. Review each area of responsibility and ask, "Are there cases where you believe that I get too involved and can let go more? Are there cases when I need to get more involved and give you some more help?" When leaders go through this exercise, they almost always find that in some cases, more delegation is wanted, and in others it is not. In fact, more help is needed.

2) Ask each direct report, "Do you ever see me working on tasks that someone at my level doesn't need to do? Are there areas where I can help other people grow and develop, and give myself more time to focus on strategy and long-term planning?" Almost invariably, direct reports will come up with great suggestions. For example, for several of my C-level clients, team management has emerged as an area where letting go can both free up executive time and help develop direct reports. Too many top executives feel a need to schedule team meetings and then act as traffic cop during the meeting to ensure that the time schedules are met and that agendas are completed. This meeting management task can usually be delegated on a rotating basis to direct reports. This helps direct reports understand the agendas of the peer team members and allows them to develop their skills in building collaboration and reaching consensus.


Ask yourself these tough questions. Then ask the people who are working with you. The answers may save your time and increase your team's effectiveness.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Cabinet

Week one into the life of the new Irish Government and they are facing into intensive pressure from France and Germany on our beloved Corporation tax rate, the increased likelihood that the Banking stress tests will highlight the need for many more billions of euro and hence a renegotiated IMF bail-out and continuing fears about the house repossession monster.

So much to deal with and respond to. Yet the new Cabinet is a brand new team and so needs to also stay focused on ensuring it has in place the key ingredients that make any team a success or a failure. After all, they are the most important team in the country!

So what should Enda Kenny and co do about ensuring they work well as a cohesive successful team?

Patrick Lencioni highlighted 5 dysfunctions of a team that I believe are even more crucial based on a coalition of two political parties:

1. Absence of Trust – the key building block for successful teams is trust. Failure is guaranteed if ministers are not genuinely open with each other about their mistakes and weaknesses. Sound familiar – I doubt our previous Cabinet of FF and the Greens scored too high on trust as a team.

2. Fear of Conflict – no trust in a team leads to guarded comments, veiled discussions and whispers outside of meetings. Successful teams have lively meetings, get ideas from all the members and keep it real. Cabinet meetings need to hear what Ministers are really thinking and not just what is the right thing to say.

3. Lack of Commitment – no healthy conflict means no full commitment. Instead team members feign agreement and say one thing and do another. A clear set of common objectives can keep this Cabinet focused. Its about defining what winning is

4. Avoidance of Accountability – no commitment means no accountability and actions promised never happen and mediocrity and passing the buck prevails. This starts with the leader and needs to stay with each team member

5. Inattention to Results – the four previous dysfunctions result in a team where individual needs and glory come before the collective goals of the team and indeed the country.

So while its great to hit the ground running, I hope the First 100 Days plan includes time for this new team to start at the key first step and build trust with each other. Time to connect; learn about each other in terms of experience and strengths; and creating personal relationships with fellow team members.

The huge challenges of any government will always be there – that makes it even crucial that the Cabinet learns how to start being a team as quickly as possible.

Confusion, fear mongering, death-by-delay, or ridicule and character assassination

Confusion, fear mongering, death-by-delay, or ridicule and character assassination.
Another day, another meeting and another idea shoot down. John Kotter has just written a book called “Buy-In” and includes the list below of the 24 most common forms of attack. The responses to each attack which will not silence valid criticism, but will help stop verbal bullets from killing good ideas.

Let me know your thoughts on the list or any additions you have to it.

Colm

#1 "We've been successful, why change?!"
Attack:
We've never done this in the past and things have always worked out OK.
Response:
True. But surely we have all seen that those who fail to adapt eventually become extinct.

#2 "The only problem is not enough money."
Attack:
Money is the issue, not _____ (computers, product safety, choice of choir songs, etc).
Response:
Extra money is rarely what builds truly great ventures or organizations.

#3 "You exaggerate the problem."
Attack:
You are exaggerating. This is a small issue for us if it is an issue at all.
Response:
To the good people who suffer because of this problem, it certainly doesn't look small.

#4 "You're saying we've failed??!!"
Attack:
If this is a problem, then what you are telling us is that we have been doing a lousy job. That's insulting!
Response:
No, we're suggesting that you are doing a remarkably good job without the needed tools (systems, methods, laws, etc) which, in our proposal, you will have.

#5 "What's the hidden agenda?"
Attack:
It's clear you have a hidden agenda and we would prefer that you take it elsewhere.
Response:
Not fair! Just look at the track record of the good folks behind this proposal! (And why would you even suggest such a thing?)

#6 "What about this, and that, and that (etc.)?"
Attack:
Your proposal leaves too many questions unanswered. What about this and that, and this and that, and...
Response:
All good ideas, if they are new, raise dozens of questions that cannot be answered with certainty.

#7 "No good! It doesn't go far enough" (or, "It goes too far")
Attack:
Your proposal doesn't go nearly far enough.
Response:
Maybe, but our idea will get us started moving in the right direction, and do so without further delay.

#8 "You have a chicken and egg problem."
Attack:
You can't do A without doing B, yet you can't do B without doing A. So the plan won't work.
Response:
Well actually, you can do a little bit of A which allows a little bit of B which allows more A which allows more of B, and so on.

#9 "Sounds like 'killing puppies' to me!"
Attack:
Your plan reminds me of a thing disgusting and terrible (insert totalitarianism, organized crime, insanity, or dry rot...)
Response:
Look, you know it isn't like that. A realistic comparison might be...

#10 "You're abandoning our values."
Attack:
You are abandoning our traditional values.
Response:
This plan is essential to uphold our traditional values.

#11 "It's too simplistic to work."
Attack:
Surely you don't think a few simple tricks will solve everything?
Response:
No – it's the combination of your good work and some new things that, together, can make a great advance.

#12 "No one else does this!"
Attack:
If this is such a great idea, why hasn't it been done already?
Response:
There really is a first time for everything and we do have a unique opportunity.

#13 "You can't have it both ways!"
Attack:
Your plan says X and Y, but they are incompatible. You can't have both!
Response:
Actually, we didn't say X or Y—although, I grant you, it may have sounded that way. We said A and B, which are not incompatible.

#14 "Aha! You can't deny this!"
Attack:
I'm sorry – you mean well, but look at this problem you've clearly missed! You can't deny the significance of this issue!
Response:
No one can deny the significance of the issue you have raised, and, yes, we haven't explored it. But every potential problem we have found so far has been readily solved. So in light of what has happened again and again and again, I am today confident that this new issue can also be handled, just like all the rest.

#15 "To generate all these questions and concerns, the idea has to be flawed."
Attack:
Look at how many different concerns there are! This can't be good!
Response:
Actually, many the questions mean we are engaged, and an engaged group both makes better decisions and implements them more successfully.

#16 "Tried it before – didn't work."
Attack:
We tried that before and it didn't work.
Response:
That was then. Conditions inevitably change [and what we propose probably isn't exactly what was tried before]

#17 "It's too difficult to understand."
Attack:
Too many of our people will never understand the idea and, inevitably, will not help us make it happen.
Response:
Not a problem. We will make the required effort to convince them. It's worth the effort to do so.

#18 "This is not the right time."
Attack:
Good idea, but it's the wrong time. We need to wait until this other thing is finished (or this other thing is started, or the situation changes in a certain special way).
Response:
The best time is almost always when you have people excited and committed to make something happen. And that's now.

#19 "It's too much work."
Attack:
This seems too hard! I'm not sure we are up for it.
Response:
Hard can be good. A genuinely good new idea, facing time consuming obstacles, can both raise our energy level and motivate us to eliminate wasted time.

#20 "Won't work here, we're different!"
Attack:
It won't work here because we are so different.
Response:
Yes it's true, we're different, but we are also very much the same.

#21 "It puts us on a slippery slope."
Attack:
You're on a slippery slope leading to a cliff. This small move today will lead to disaster tomorrow.
Response:
Good groups of people—all the time-- use common sense as a guard rail to keep them from sliding into disaster.

#22 "We can't afford this."
Attack:
The plan may be fine but we cannot do it without new sources of money.
Response:
Actually, most important changes are achieved without new sources of money.

#23 "You'll never convince enough people."
Attack:
It will be impossible to get unanimous agreement with this plan.
Response:
You are absolutely right. That's almost never possible, and that's OK.

#24 "We're not equipped to do this."
Attack:
We don't really have the skills or credentials to pull this off!
Response:
We have much of what we need and we can and will get the rest.

SiliconRepublic interview: Why a CIO’s role must be about selling the value of IT to senior management.

Below is a lin to a recent interview I did with SiliconRepublic.com on why a CIO’s role must be about selling the value of IT to senior management.


http://www.siliconrepublic.com/strategy/item/19626-interview-from-cio-to-sale/

Emotional Intelligence in Sport? Part 2

In the last few weeks I have been hearing or reading about a change in top class sports coaching. A change that reflects a much greater degree of emotional intelligence in the world of male macho sports.

I previously shared the example of Pat Gilroy from the parochial world of Gaelic football (see my previous blog).

Example number 2 is from another tough physical sport and this person has the most pressurised job in that particular sport.

Here are some of his quotes from a recent interview with the Irish Times;

“You couldn’t coach the way you did in the 1990s now. They (the players) would not put up with it."

"Really I am the vision man, the strategic person."

"When I coached…..10-15 years ago I was much more authoritarian, but that is how they (the players) grew up, that’s how they were taught at school."

"Today it’s much more consensus management, with people helping each other. So if you are too dictatorial, you just wouldn’t last.”

The speaker is Graham Henry, the coach of the New Zealand (All Black’s) Rugby team.

If you think you have pressure and tough targets, Henry carries not the hopes of a nation but the expectation that New Zealand will win the next Rugby World Cup.

How many of your leaders would you describe as “the vision man”? How many drive consensus and engagement as opposed to dictating everything?

Sport, which can be such a macho, results driven environment involving all ranges of intelligence, is showing the way on leadership – as a business leader are you paying attention?

Emotional Intelligence in Sport? What Business Leaders Can Learn – Part 1

Have always been weary of referencing sport too much in my work with clients as it can be a turn off for those not interested and also because sport is often to simplistic a metaphor for business (if only business had such defined parameters of time, skill, achievement and success).

However I am going to break my own rule because recently I had the experience of listening to a sports coach that have made me realized that sport could be leading the way in Emotionally Intelligent leadership.

Let us just define Emotional Intelligence briefly with one of my favorite quotes which says Emotional Intelligence is “everything you do that isn’t a result of how smart you are” (Martyn Newman).

Pat Gilroy manages the Dublin Gaelic Football team. Gaelic football is indigenous to Ireland (think soccer/rugby/barroom fighting) and is a tough male macho sport – the traditional culture has been of authoritative, telling, “do as I say” , boot and bite leadership.

As the capital, the Dublin team gets 80,000 people cheering them on at games while 3.5 million from the rest of the country are wishing them continued failure. Pat’s job is therefore very high profile, especially since Dublin has underachieved for the last 10 years.

Pat took on the role of turning Dublin around last year and here are some of the things he mentioned when talking to myself and thirty other leaders last month:

- His focus is on ENGAGEMENT (of a panel of 30 top class players) and he has gotten there with his players through VISION, DISCIPLINE and INVOLVEMENT.

- He defines leadership as “creating the CULTURE for THE TEAM to be successful”

- He has focused on doing more “TEAM ASKS” than “TEAM TALKS”

- When results have not gone well he has owned up to his OWN MISTAKES as a way to ensure everyone gets DIRECT FEEDBACK.

No macho stuff, no “I’m the expert”. Pat is leading by connecting to his team and engaging them. He is building a winning culture as opposed to fixating on a winning the cup – he see’s that the success comes after the culture.

So can you take even one of the bullet points above and start doing more of it with your team?

None of them require you to have a big IQ – they all require you though to park your own ego and to ENGAGE with your team as adults who want to be involved, who have good ideas and who can be accountable and responsibility for their own actions.

By the way, Pat’s team got to the semi-final of the championship this summer and missed out on the final by a single score.

Try on some Faulty Thinking today - free trial

Read the following:

1. I see a Tiger
2. I think I’m in danger
3. I feel afraid
4. I run.

Consider this - statement 3 (and 4) is actually derived from statement 2, not from statement 1 as many would initially believe.

They way you feel does not come from your surroundings or even your direct perceptions. It comes from your thinking.

Epictitus said “Man is not disturbed by events, but by the view he takes of them”

As a leader, your thinking can be an enabler or an inhibitor to your success and to the success of your team and organisation.

So how about trying on a few faulty thinking styles to see which ones you tend to, unconsciously, use most? See the list below!

Personally, I seem to like a mix of #4 Mind Reading and #6 Personalisation – and of course they bring out the worst in me (anger, hurt, avoidance, withdrawal). All derailers to me being impactful and effective (not to mention to being fun to be around)

But here is the cool bit – by naming my faulty thinking I make them conscious and therefore I now have the ability to choose to use them or not!

What about you? Do you recognise yourself in any of the 15 styles below? Do you also recognise the often ineffective consequences of these styles in terms of your behaviour and feelings?


Styles of Faulty Thinking

1.Filtering: you take the negative and magnify them while filtering out all of the positives

2. Polarized Thinking: Things are black or white, good or bad. You have to be perfect or you’re a failure. There is no middle ground. Things are either awful or terrific. Useful for judging self or others.

3. Overgeneralization: You come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or piece of evidence. If some bad happens one, you expect it to happen over and over again. If someone lets you down once, you assume they are incompetent or can never be trusted.

4. Mind Reading: Without their saying so, you know what people are feeling and why they act the way they do, especially in terms of how they feel towards you.

5. Catastrophising: You expect disaster. You notice or head something about a problem and you assume the worst possible outcomes.

6. Personalization: You think that everything that people do or say is some kind of reaction to you. You constantly compare yourself to others.

7.Control Fallacy: If you feel externally controlled, you see yourself as a totally helpless victim of fate. You don’t believe that you can influence the important outcomes. Or conversely, you feel excessively responsible. Everything depends on you, and if things don’t go well, it is all your fault. You feel responsible for the pain and happiness of those around you. This is a huge burden.

8. Fallacy of Fairness: Fairness is a big standard. You feel resentful because you think you know what’s fair, but other people won’t agree with you. When things go wrong, you are liable to say “That’s not fair. Its just not fair”

9.Emotional Reasoning: You believe that what you feel must be true…automaticlally. If you feel stupid and boring then you MUST BE stupid and boring.

10. Fallacy of Change: You expect other people will change to suit you if you just pressure or cajole them enough. Some of your relationships are based on the premise that you can change the other person.

11. Global Labelling: You generalise one or two qualities into a negative global judgement. If you have one bad interaction with someone in a department, you will tell others that that whole department is full of idiots.

12. Blaming: You hold other people responsible for your pain or conversely, blame yourself for every problem.

13.Shoulds: You have a list of ironclad rules about how you and other people SHOULD act. People who break these rules make you angry and you feel guilty if you violate those rules. Your SHOULDS are perfectionist.

14. Being Right: You are continually on trial to prove that your opinions and actions are correct. Being wrong is unthinkable and this makes you defensive.

15. Heaven’s Reward Fallacy: You expect all your sacrifice and self denial to pay off, as if there is someone keeping score. You feel bitter when your reward does not come . Often it doesn’t and this upsets you.

(sourced from Bruce Peltier “The Psychology of Executive Coaching”)

“Who’ll be my role model? Now that my role model is gone, gone ……….”

Two random events in a space of four days has got me thinking a lot about role models.

The first, which I am not proud about, involved me arguing with my wife on a Saturday morning in front of our three kids. As I stomped out of the kitchen in my best childish huff, my wife said sarcastically “… and a fine role model you are to these boys!”

Even after peace had broken out thirty minutes later, the significance of me now being a role model to these little boys stayed with me. What kind of imprint do I want to leave with them as they grow and face the challenges of a complex world?

Three days later and as I flick around the TV channels I come across a documentary on Joan Baez. While not a fan of her music I became absorbed in the bigger story of her consistent involvement in the civil rights and the peace movement from the early 60’s to today. It was never the standard celebrity “My accountant and I think peace is a good thing.” Joan Baez marched, got arrested, was spat at and insulted because she stood up for what she believed in and because she got involved.

The impact on her record sales didn’t matter. These were her beliefs and they reflect what she continues to stand for.

That documentary left me wondering again about this idea of a role model and the questions “what do I want to stand for?”

I did think about picking someone like Mandela or Martin Luther King and saying “I want to be like them” . I even went onto a role models website - its big announcement was that it was removing Tiger Woods from his role model status. It seems even role models get rifted.

But to be honest picking someone else, famous or not, did just not sit with me. How can you try to be like someone else when it is hard enough to be fully who are you yourself?

So my new role model is going to be….me.

And that means me stepping up and proving worthy of the role. So what might that look like?

Robert Kegan and Otto Laske have separately worked on defining the main stages of adult development. With stages 1 and 2 being focused on us as kids or teenagers, the next three stages are :

Stage 3 – Socialised Mind – being highly influenced by what I believe others want to hear with constant interpreting of how I fit in and overriding my gut in order to meet others expectations.

Stage 4 – Self Authoring – being able to step back and identify and act from my own authentic value system. Taking stands and challenging the status quo based on my beliefs.

Stage 5 - Transforming – being less attached to own solutions, able to handle complexity, knowing own limit and accepting of others regardless of their view point. A Zen Buddhist state of being.

I definitely know that I start 2010 in Stage 3 – so my role model is going to hit the gym and build some stage 4 muscle this year! It is not going to be easy but then again if it was easier where would be the development?

So what is your role model signing up to in 2010?

Change is tough

Change takes longer than we think and the process is difficult.

Acknowledging these facts can make your attempts more successful.

Marshall Goldsmith, one of my favourite coaches, researched why people give up on their goals.

He discovered that there are five common reasons. Understanding these roadblocks will help you apply some preventive medicine — and increase the odds that you and your reports won't fall into the same old traps.

See his findings below.

Colm
1. Ownership"I wasn't sure that this would work in the first place. I tried it out — it didn't do that much good. As I guessed, this was kind of a waste of time."The classic mistake made in leadership development, coaching, and self-help books is the promise that "This will make you better!" After years of experience in helping real leaders change real behavior in the real world, I have learned a hard lesson. Only you will make you better. To have a real chance of success, you have to take personal ownership and have the internal belief that "This will work if, and only if, I make it work. I am going to make this work."

2. Time"I had no idea that this process would take so long. I'm not sure it's worth it."Goal setters have a chronic tendency to underestimate the time needed to reach targets. In setting our goals for behavioral change, it's important to be realistic about the time we need to produce positive, lasting results. Habits that have taken years to develop won't go away in a week. Set time expectations that are 50% to 100% longer than you think you will need to see results — then add a little more.

3. Difficulty"This is a lot harder than I thought it would be. It sounded so simple when we were starting out."The optimism bias of goal setters applies to difficulty as well as time. Not only does everything take longer than we think it will, but it also requires more hard work than we anticipate. In setting goals, it's important to accept the fact that real change requires real work. Acknowledging the price for success in the beginning of the change process will help prevent the disappointment that can occur when challenges arise later.

4. Distractions"I would really like to work toward my goal, but I'm facing some unique challenges right now. It might be better if I just stopped and did this at a time when things weren't so crazy."Goal setters have a tendency to underestimate the distractions and competing goals that will invariably appear throughout the year. A piece of advice that I give all of my coaching clients is: "I'm not sure what crisis will appear, but I'm almost positive that some crisis will appear." Plan for distractions in advance. Assume that crazy is the new normal. You will probably be close to the reality that awaits.

5. Maintenance"I think that I did actually try to change and get better, but I have let it slide since then. What am I supposed to do — work on this stuff the rest of my life?"Once a goal setter has put in all of the effort needed to achieve a goal, it can be tough for him to face the reality of what's needed to maintain the new status quo. When one of my high-potential leaders asked his boss, the CEO, "Do I have to watch what I say and do for the rest of my career?" the CEO replied, "You do if you plan on ever becoming a CEO!"

Here are the cold, hard truths. Real change requires real effort. The "quick fix" is seldom a meaningful one. Distractions and things that compete for your attention are going to crop up — frequently. Changing any one type of behavior won't solve all of life's problems. And finally, any meaningful change will probably require a lifetime of effort.

“You’ve allowed me keep my job. Now give me back my dignity!”

Type “dignity in work” into Google and you get a number of hits mostly dealing with how organisation can best implement redundancies while treating those been asked to leave with respect and dignity.

But what dignity for those who are being retained by companies? How dignifying are your methods in retaining talented employees?

Lets use George as an example.

George is a coaching client of mine - he was identified as a high potential director by his company 10 months ago.

Yet last month George and his four peers were told that they each had to do a twenty minute presentation as a part of an overall one hour interview to justify why they should be retained for one of them would be let go.

George did a good presentation and interview and in fact got put into a higher profile role but a month latter he is still raising in our coaching sessions the questions “Did my successes and commitment of the last 8 years mean nothing?” He resents the X-factor nature of fighting for his career – one hour of show time to demonstrate his worthiness.

And the extra kick in the arse – none of the management level above George were forced to go through a similar exercise – they all retained their roles automatically.

George continues to feel anger at the hypocrisy and continues to struggle with his 8 plus years of commitment to a company that have made that commitment null and void.

Take Ann as one more example.

Her function also went through redundancies - she has been retained and actually presented with a new role that has been described as putting her into her “sweet spot”

The following 3 months have seen Ann move from feeling appreciative, valued and excited to now feeling devalued, demotivated and micromanaged as her “sweet spot” role has resulted in her bosses focusing, not on her great strengths, but on things she doesn’t like doing and knows she does not do well.

Ann is losing her self belief as she is forced to be what she is not.

George and Ann are talented people. Considered good enough to survive aggressive redundancy programs. And yet both are questioning how the organisation is treating them as a survivor.

For the organisations involved, they are freezing talented individuals – freezing them with fear for the next round of redundancies, freezing their loyalty to organisations that they have given so much to, and freezing their instinct and talents.

Organisations need to plan and demonstrate a lot more empathy and support to those they retain – for these are the people who will get companies out of this current situation.

What next for Leadership?

What a 12 months it has been!

Financial institutions that once swaggered now stagger. Governments are saving banks that still dish out massive bonuses to their executives. Politicians call for us all to tighten our belts while using taxpayers’ money to maintain their expense driven life styles. Once mighty employers shed staff every hour of every day.

And the concept of leadership in the last 12 months? What leadership?!

The 2009 model of leadership is not winning too many awards right now and the brand of being a business leader is tainted in a way that the role of clergy has in the recent past – not to be quite trusted.

So will a new perspective of leadership emerge from the rubble? Will “followers” place different demands based on what has and is happening around the world? What flavour of leadership might we be heading into? Below is a sample of leadership styles that I am hearing more and more about in recent months

The idea of “servant-leadership” is more and more visible in blogs and HR magazines. It sees great leaders as being those motivated by the desire to serve others. Its success is measured by the growth of those being served by the leader, in terms of their development, their autonomy and their wisdom. It seeks to combine two opposite notions of leadership a and service. Simply put, if you lead people, are the growing under you or not?

“Authentic leadership” seems to be referenced in every second email I get from leadership consultant these days. It can mean a lot of different things to different people. The Authentic Leadership in Action council state that when we are authentic and true to “our internal compass” we get the most out of others. So are you truly yourself when you are with your team?

One of my favourite leadership books, “The Extraordinary Leader” by Jack Zenger and Joe Folkman now has a follow up called “The Inspirational Leader”. While initially claming that no one of the sixteen leadership competencies identified in “The Extraordinary Leader” was more powerful that an others, the authors have now identified “Inspiring and Motivating Others” as the one competency that separates good from extraordinary. Do you inspire and motivate your people? Have you asked them this recently?

One of my mentors, Pete Bluckert, has identified the combination of strategy and intimacy as the next focus for leaders with the intimacy element being about the heightened connectedness of a leader to themselves as well as others. Are you capable of real intimacy with your team?

Much more will be heard about these and other visions of leadership but at the core of each of them is the growing importance of connecting with people at an individual and group level through the leader’s use of self.

I am in no doubt that our concept of what it is to be a leader in the 21st century has been changed by the revelations of the last 12 months. Leaders can never again expect their word to be taken blindly without proof of character and deed.

Welcome your comments and thoughts!

Colm Murphy

"No Alarms and No Surprises"

“with no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
Silent silence.”

For many of my clients its coming up to annual appraisal time. And despite the mantra from HR and senior management that a process of regular feedback means that the annual review meeting should not include any surprises for the appraisee, I would feel safe in betting money that for many the annual review is still akin to going to the dentist every five years – there is going to be some unexpected bad news and its likely to be painful.

For me its very clear – it is a manager’s job to provide constant feedback (positive and negative) and support throughout the year, and those who save 364 days worth of feedback for that once a year review are failing their people, failing their organization and failing themselves.

People deserve to get feedback on a timely basis so that they can recognize what they do well and appropriate adjust not so good behaviour if required.

Organisations deserve managers who will earn their salary and actively manage performance.

Managers deserve a team of performers but how can that happen if the manager doesn’t give feedback on what is working or not working?

The authors of Crucial Conversations (a book I highly recommend, that takes the concepts of emotional intelligence and puts them into tools and tips) talk about “Suckers' Choice” being often behind a managers inertia when it comes to feedback.

“Suckers Choice” is about setting the brain a false either/or situation. For example

“I can be liked by my team OR I can be honest”

“I can give tough feedback OR not hurt their feelings”

The point being that this choice makes it simple for the brain to do one or the other.

However can a manage be “liked by my team AND honest” ?– of course but it takes more effort, more preparation, more energy.

We all create “Suckers’ Choices” – but they are short time in value and the easy choice now often results in even tougher conversations down the line.

Never more than now, with the risk of RIFs and redundancies hanging over so many organisations and people, is the need for regular honest feedback required.

Making someone redundant, without ever having given that person the appropriate feedback and the time to address the feedback, is more than a question of fairness or poor management – it’s a human rights violation.

So if you are a manager and you are doing an annual appraisal soon, ask yourself “Have I done enough to ensure there are no surprises for the individual in this review?”

Welcome your comments, and thanks to Radiohead for the title and quote.

Colm

“A worried man with a worried mind"

“A worried man with a worried mind
No one in front of me and nothing behind”

Transitioning into a new role? Excited but feeling a knot of anxiety?

Having a 90 day plan helps you stay focused, gives you purpose, lets your team know what to expect and helps set expectations with the boss

My work with high potentials often (thankfully) leads to them getting promoted and being handed new challenges.

And then the doubt and concern creeps in. The reality of the new position, the task of transforming the existing team, the realization of the resources actually available, and the heightened expectations of the boss who has promoted them – all these weigh on the normally positive and upbeat high-po.

In my experience, it is that last aspect, the expectations of the boss, that most worries the new leader.

With a track record of success behind them, the newly promoted leader has no fear of challenge but they become anxious when considering that they may not match the expected targets and quotas.

The key to removing the anxiety is about actively resetting the expectations with the boss – an open and honest conversation about what the current state is, what is needed, what you plan to focus on and what results to expect.

This is where the 90 day plan provides a vehicle for that crucial conversation with the boss.

Don’t forget – the boss most likely has been involved in your promotion so they want you to succeed. But you need to give them confidence that you are heading in the right direction so that they can breathe in terms of results.

So if you find yourself in a new role, start mapping out your plan and get your boss on board so that you feel them beside you as opposed to being on your back.

Thoughts? Comments? Insults?

Have finally got a Dylan line into my blog title – more to follow.

"Reassurance, Confidence and Belief"

• I am running a coaching session with K, a young dynamic client of mine. K is leading a large sales team which are in the last month of their financial year. Targets are being chased, clients are nervous about committing to deals in this economic environment and K has also been up to his neck in planning for the new financial year.
  
  I ask K “With four weeks to go to year end, what do you need to be focusing on as a leader of this team?”
  
  K pauses for a few seconds and says “The next four weeks are about me providing the team with Reassurance, Confidence and Belief! Reassurance, Confidence and Belief”
  
  “You have obviously thought about this cause that is a heck of a leadership answer”
  
  “ No. Those words have just come to me. Have been thinking about it but only in answering your question has it become so clear!”
  
  In asking K to explain more about “Reassurance, Confidence and Belief” he outlines the following:
  
  - Reassurance – to communicate to the team what next year will look like so that they are reassured that they have a role in next year and to stop them inventing a dooms day scenario. Remove this distraction so the can focus on closing deals now.
  
  - Confidence – in one to one and team interactions, to keep reinforcing their skills and abilities and the quality of the products so that they know we can close the year strongly.
  
  - Belief – to reinforce that we can get through this tough environment now and in the next financial year .Help them belief in the company, the solutions, the plan, in each other and in themselves.
  
  I cannot think of a more powerful mantra for every leader - in politics, in business, in the community – ensure you provide those you lead with Reassurance, Confidence and Belief
  
  Colm