Grogan Coaching & Consulting » leadership

Truth is in the Eye of the Beholder

Mike — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:55:00 +0000

This post is an excerpt from a LinkedIn discussion. The author, Leland Russell, gave me permission to post this. His blog is at: http://www.geogroup.net/fasttimeblog/

Why do the “beholders” often see the “facts” so differently?

We are not the rational thinkers we sometimes imagine. Our thought processes are often flawed by common thinking errors caused by cognitive biases. A vast body of research has illuminated the fact that these common thinking errors can lead to bad or sub-optimal decisions.

While no one can rid his or her mind of these ingrained flaws, we can make a conscious effort to understand and compensate for them. There is quite a list to consider.

1. Selective Perception – Our brain fits facts into our established mental frameworks. We tend to remember something that is consistent with our worldview, and discount statements or unconsciously screen-out information that is not consistent with our current beliefs. We also tend to gather facts that support certain our worldview but disregard other facts that support different worldviews.

2. Information Distortion – We unconsciously delete, distort and generalize information to make it conform to our pre-existing beliefs. We also distort our memories of chosen and rejected options to make the chosen options seem more attractive.

3. Fundamental Attribution Errors – This is the well-documented human tendency to attribute better judgment, motives and morality to ourselves than we do to those we don’t like or with whom we disagree. We are inclined to judge their arguments to be untrue or irrelevant. We are equally inclined to accept a statement by someone we like and generally agree. We also tend to attribute our success to our abilities and talents, but we attribute our failures to bad luck and external factors. We attribute other’s success to good luck, and their failures to their mistakes.

4. Group Conformity Instinct – Social psychologists have found that individuals tend to lose their personal compass in group settings with either positive or negative consequences. The Group Conformity Instinct is most obvious in an organization’s culture. The prevailing mental norms (beliefs, values and underlying assumptions/mindsets) about how to do things exerts a powerful influence on individuals to conform.

5. Overconfidence – Most successful people tend to be overconfident regarding their:
Personal Performance. For example, a friend of mine who is atop executive development consultant asks senior executives to rate themselves against their peers and the vast majority rate (90%) themselves in the top 20%.

6. Wishful Thinking – We tend to want to see things in a positive light and this can distort our perception and thinking so we sometimes make non-rational decisions based on what is pleasing to imagine instead of making decisions based on objective evidence. Studies have consistently shown that holding all else being equal people will predict positive outcomes to be more likely than negative outcomes.

7. Comfort Zone – This is a range of thinking or behavior that is familiar or routine, a psychological space where we feel “at home” and comfortable. Most people have difficulty making decisions that are outside their comfort zone and, when faced with new circumstances, an unwillingness to change thought patterns that they have used in the past. Decision makers tend to display a strong bias toward alternatives that perpetuate the status quo.

While it is impossible eliminate all of these thinking errors, it is important for leaders to understand that they exist and try to compensate for them. The best defense is the leader’s awareness. Forewarned is forearmed.

Ego or Truth?

Mike — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:05:00 +0000

The beginning of football season reminds me of a story I heard a few years back. I think this one is true. It goes something like this…

Back in the 1950s, a Notre Dame football player was charged with a crime. During the trial, a number of football teammates were called to testify. One of those testifying was a teammate who had been the starting center and captain of the team. He had been voted captain by his teammates not only for his skill, but also for his humility and integrity. He was considered a gentle giant.

After he was sworn in, he was asked a few questions to establish his credentials. The attorney asked him to confirm that he had been the starting center, and team captain.

“Yes, sir,” he replied.

“And did you excel at your position?” the attorney asked.

After a pause, the former lineman spoke clearly and confidently: “Sir, I was the best center to ever play at Notre Dame.”

The attorney proceeded on with his questions.

During a recess, a Notre Dame assistant coach who had been watching the trial walked up to the former center. They exchanged a few pleasantries, and then the coach said: “I have to admit I was a little surprised by your testimony.”

The former center was taken aback. “What do you mean?” he asked.

“Well,” said the coach, “I completely agree with what you said about being the best center to ever play at Notre Dame. It’s just that I’ve always known you as an extremely humble guy, so I was surprised to hear you say it.”

The center blushed and looked away. Finally, he turned back to his former coach. “It was an awkward moment,” he admitted. “But you have to understand, coach. I was under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

Leggo My Ego

Mike — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:06:00 +0000

My introduction to the word “ego” was in 9th grade when my science teacher and text book described the mind as comprised of:

Ego – our thoughts
Super ego – our unconscious drives
Id – the referee between the two

I dutifully memorized these distinctions well enough to pass the test, but never found them particularly insightful or useful.

Fast-forward to the present. In my work with organizational leaders, I’ve come up with a few classifications of “ego” reflecting different combinations of competence, confidence and self-interest:

Low ego – Someone with low ego tends to have low self-confidence, poor self-esteem, or a lack of ambition. Sometimes the esteem issue is rooted in harsh, critical even abusive environments growing up. Sometimes it’s related to lack of competence. In any case, I seldom see low ego types leading organizations. They tend to shun the spotlight and hide their weaknesses. Their career strategies often emphasize politics over substance. They also seem prone to blaming, probably to avoid having their incompetence revealed. The work of someone with low ego is to find and tap their genuine greatness, and to develop true competence in skills pertaining to their work.

Inflated ego – The poster child for this ego level is Donald Trump. Leaders with inflated egos are all about “me, me, me.” (See also, “narcissism.”) They are pretty easy to spot in organizations. They seem ruthlessly ambitious. They tend to “throw people under the bus” to avoid being blamed for mistakes or bad decisions. As they get promoted they forget “the little people.” While they might pretend to be good team players, their real agenda is to gain personal glory. They resent anyone who gets elevated ahead of them. They may be the “smartest guy in the room,” or act as if they are. In the process, they disparage or dismiss the views of others. This does not endear them to their teams, or create strong cadres of followers.

The development work for someone with an inflated ego is difficult – it is to help them embrace a more humble and caring attitude. Usually, it takes a cosmic two-by-four to bring forth an appetite for such dramatic change. The most common humbling events include divorce, alienation from children, unexpected job loss, or health challenges. It’s less painful if the leader with excessive ego recognizes his or her hubris and takes steps to embrace humility and empathy for others.

Healthy ego – Working with a leader possessing a healthy ego is a pleasure. Such leaders are confident in expressing views, listening to others and making decisions. They are humble enough to admit there is much to learn. Rather than trying to hide their own ignorance (low ego), or bluster through a knowledge deficit (inflated ego), they instead come from a place of curiosity. They appreciate those whose knowledge exceeds their own. They might adopt the posture of a student (beginner’s mind) as they seek to learn new subject matter. Or they might simply trust and empower others who have greater knowledge. Leaders with a healthy ego are not shy about negotiating for the better pay and benefits that usually accompany someone at their level of success. At the same time, money and status are not their top priorities.

To be candid, I have experienced only limited success coaching the first two ego levels. Those with low ego can be intimidated by the prospect of a coach, afraid that their incompetence will be revealed, perhaps even ridiculed. For them, the discomfort of change may be too threatening.

Those with excessive egos rarely even consider using a coach, unless they view the coach as a status symbol. In such cases, they may want the coach to do nothing more than observe and acknowledge their greatness. Those with a healthy ego are open and curious with respect to coaching, and are happy to try new ideas that might bring greater success.

Once a person has established a strong, healthy, balanced ego, the next stage of development seems somewhat paradoxical. It is to give up the ego, putting the needs of others ahead of one’s selfish needs. I would call this stage of the process ego-lessness.

Mirror, Mirror…

Mike — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:06:00 +0000

As a business leader, it is essential that you look in the mirror, or more precisely, look in several mirrors. Failure to do so can lead to several unhappy outcomes. For example, some leaders are the last to know that a key employee is fed up and planning to leave the company. Similarly, a dependable customer may be looking for a new supplier without your knowledge, while you continually reassure yourself that all is well.

Another cost of failing to engage employees in honest two-way dialogue might come in the form of missing a key insight, such as an improved process or new product possibility. Finally, unexamined leadership can contribute to a culture of complacency and entitlement.

So, if you’re ready to take a deeper look at the circumstances of your business, the place to start is the mirror of your own perceptions. Ask yourself these questions:

· Overall, how is the business doing? What is the evidence for this? (Hint: Look at revenues, profits, customer satisfaction, retention of key accounts, etc.)
· How am I doing as a leader? What is the evidence for this? (Hint: Look at morale, turnover, the performance of others, the quality of employee input to discussions, etc.)
· What are my 2-3 greatest strengths as a leader?
· What are my 2-3 areas most in need of improvement?

While many people might squirm at the thought of such pointed questions, a self-aware leader committed to a successful business will find it relatively simple and easy to answer those questions. The follow-up questions about evidence are meant to stimulate objective answers to the questions. “I feel like things are going well,” is less compelling and believable than, “Revenues are up, profitability is higher and employees are often arriving early and leaving late without being asked. So it seems we’re doing well.”

While the mirror of self-awareness is of vital importance, it is not the final word. Good leaders need to see how their leadership appears to others, especially employees. Without these external data points, it is possible that the leader is oblivious or self-delusional, either overly optimistic, or overly gloomy about the company and leadership performance.

Before asking questions of employees, it is important to create an appropriate and safe mood and posture. Genuine curiosity and openness work better than a perfunctory check-the-box attitude. Here are a few sample questions to ask employees:

· Overall, how do you think the business is doing? Tell me more about your view. (Don’t prompt them. It will be interesting to find out about their benchmarks for performance.)
· What do you like most about your job? What do you like least?
· Compared to the best leader you have ever worked with, how am I doing?
· What are my 2-3 greatest strengths as a leader?
· What are my 2-3 areas most in need of improvement?
· If you could change one thing about me, what would it be?
· If you could change one thing about the company, what would it be?

Armed with that feedback, what’s next? The answer depends on how closely, or not, your self-perception differs from the consensus view of employees. Even if there is close alignment, a leader seriously committed to improvement needs to circle back with employees and describe the key insights and commitments to change. Otherwise, employees will dismiss the initial conversations as insincere and a waste of time.

Imagine how your staff would feel if you came back after the initial feedback sessions and said something like this:

“Thank you for your candid feedback on how we’re doing as a company, and how I am doing as a leader. This was an enlightening process for me. As a result of comments from you and others, here are the three things I intend to do differently from this day forward (list the three). As a company, we are going to look at a couple of new initiatives, including (fill in the blank). I am counting on you to continue to give me feedback, both positive and negative, with regard to these areas of improvement and anything else you might see.

So, if you tend toward the image of an ostrich with its head buried in the sand, it’s time to pull your head out of the ground and take a look around. There are many things worth seeing.

See One, Do One, Teach One

Mike — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:06:00 +0000

In case you hadn’t noticed, the pace of change today is staggering. Businesses cannot survive using yesterday’s strategies and tactics. Heck, even today’s thinking will become obsolete very quickly. This does not mean you have to adopt every new fad that comes along. But if you are not regularly reinventing how you do business, you are doomed to eventually fall behind.

Looking at the other side of the coin, perhaps the best hedge against a rapidly changing global marketplace is to adopt for yourself and your organization the mantra of continuous learning.

The word “learning” may conjure up visions of classrooms, teachers and homework where the learning formula seems mostly about memorizing information for long enough to pass a test. For a business – and most other professions – learning must have a component of enabling action. Information alone is useless unless it generates new ways of thinking and acting – better products, better service, reduced costs, improved efficiencies, etc.

One simple way to think about action-oriented learning was depicted in a scene in the long-running NBC series ER. This was back in the day when then-unknown George Clooney was a regular. There was a scene where a young, impatient resident was reminded of the medical learning mantra: see one, do one, teach one.

In the medical model, a resident first learns to perform a task, say, heart surgery, by watching an expert. (OK, there’s a lot more to it, like reading text books, studying related fields of knowledge, etc. But at some point, the resident watches LOTS of surgeries.) Eventually the resident is allowed to do one, that is perform the surgery herself under close supervision. After she has done enough of them, she may become part of the faculty and eventually teach other aspiring surgeons. It’s a nice complete circle, and it describes the progression in life toward mastering subject matter.

This learning model does not always play out fully. For example, business professionals will sometimes disparage academics by saying, “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.”

If there is any merit to the criticism of teachers it is that success in academia requires retention of conceptual knowledge and rewards the ability to read, study, debate, and excel on tests. But many teachers do not have to apply their knowledge in “real life.” They seem to graduate from seeing it to teaching it without having the in-between phase of doing.

There is nothing wrong with this model per se, and many teachers thrive within this model and effectively impart and guide learning. But in some subjects, the lack of doing can undermine true learning. Imagine a shop teacher, for example, teaching from a text book without demonstrating expertise with the tools. Similarly, it falls flat for some business leaders when a business school professor with little experience outside the ivory walls presumes to teach leadership.

The business community also has a significant gap in the learning hierarchy. Many (most?) owners and executives spent years observing and learning how to perform the essential moves of running a company. But while they succeeded in the see-one and do-one phases, they often shirk the teach-one element. As a consequence, they may not have a good pool of managers ready and willing to step into leadership roles.

I have a client who is a talented senior executive in a large company. She recently complained to me about the slow progress of one of her department heads. She was especially frustrated at breakdowns and disconnects in their communication. Fortunately, I was able to help her see that for her, leadership and management have become easy and obvious. But her underling is still in the do-one phase. So vast is their difference in experience – and perhaps in natural talent – that it is difficult for the seasoned, accomplished pro to relate to the “rookie,” and vice versa.

Of course, not every business person has the natural aptitude or desire to be great managers and leaders. And some things in business are almost impossible to teach. Imagine Wayne Gretzky trying to teach an up-and-coming hockey star how to anticipate where the puck is going to be before it gets there. This is instinctual knowledge that may not be transferable, even by the greatest teachers.

Still, unless there is a lack of natural ability or motivation, future leaders need good teachers, and a masterful executive should have some skill in teaching and mentoring.

I know there are some business executives who will argue that teaching is not a strength of theirs. Further, some will argue that they learned without a mentor in a kind of trial-by-fire fashion, so they expect that others should also learn that way. While experience is indeed the best teacher, it is also a slow and sometimes expensive teacher. Some of my clients ask me to work with new managers. Although it’s not said explicitly, I know part of the motivation is to help these rookie managers avoid catastrophic mistakes, the kind of mistakes that might lead to lawsuits or mass mutiny. It is also understood that timely coaching can help a new manager recognize and recover more quickly from the inevitable mistakes that come with the territory.

Certainly a Darwinian approach will sometimes produce future leaders. But in these times of accelerated change, companies are often impatient to get leaders so fast that experience can’t keep up. A company can also turn to the free market for proven, accomplished leaders, but this can be expensive. Bringing in an outsider has the added downside of potentially demoralizing the internal candidates who wanted or expected a promotion. Finally, if a company’s leaders are unwilling or unable to teach and coach, they can bring in outsiders to provide this help.

But ultimately, the most holistic and cost-effective approach to develop future leaders is for today’s leaders to make teaching a high priority. Even if teaching does not come easily to a business leader, most leaders can become better teachers if they’re willing to learn.

As someone once said, “A leader’s legacy should not be judged by the results they generated so much as by the number of leaders they produced.” In the next post I’ll offer a few guidelines for becoming a better leader-teacher.