Episode 22 - Goal Setting - New Year, Same You

Summary

As the end of the year fast approaches, we take a look at goal setting - something we all know a lot about, and yet we’re lousy at it. Here are four ideas that might help.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 22 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges.

If I was to ask you “Tell me about the best approaches to goal setting?”, you’re pretty likely to mention SMART goals. We all know goals work best when they’re Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-based. And yet as human beings we are still pretty lousy at setting and following through on goals. Today I want to focus on four quick tips for setting better goals. 

A few years back I set a goal for myself - I said “I want to become a better cook”. So I dutifully picked up Jamie Oliver’s 15 minute meals book - that sounded pretty achievable. I picked out a meal and got to work. Well, 90 minutes, one fennel and three fry pans later, the meal still didn’t look anything like the photo in the book. Plus I discovered that Jamie hadn’t factored in cleaning up time to the 15 minutes. I gave up.

Around the same time I set myself another goal - “I will go for a run every day of the week except Sunday”. Now I had tried running before, even setting a goal to run three times a week. But the inevitable happened - Monday it was a little cold, Tuesday I just wasn’t feeling it, Wednesday there was the sound of rain on the roof - and so on until Saturday. To make up for the lost days I would then run three times as far on Saturday and injure myself, knocking out running for another week. In contrast, my “run every day except Sunday” strategy has held up for over a year. So what made that goal stick, unlike my goal around becoming a better cook?

1. The first difference is word choice - there’s a big difference between “want” and “will”. If you say you want to do something, you’re indicating a preference. If you say you will do something, you’re stating a commitment. Commitments trump preferences any day. Always make sure you express your goal as a “will” statement.

2. Second is the middle part of SMART goal setting - Achievable. This is partly about setting a goal that you think is possible. But it’s also about setting goals that you can actually mark off as complete. The beauty of the “run every day except Sunday” goal is that I either completed it in a particular week, or I didn’t complete it that week. Test the wording of your goal to make sure it is something you can actually mark off as complete.

3. The third key for me was clearly picturing how the process of completing the goal would make me feel. The reality of starting a run on 46 year old knees is not pretty - the first few steps never feel great. But one minute into the run I always feel great, so I focus on that moment as I roll out of bed. 

4. And the fourth key is identifying why the goal matters to you. If you set a goal that doesn’t matter to you, just cross it out - you’re never going to achieve it. For me, running is about keeping fit for my family and my work, both of which I love. Running was part of a broader purpose.

As you set goals for yourself, remember to say “will” not “want”, make it something you can mark off, picture the benefits of the process, and identify why the goal matters to you.

That’s our final Leadership Today Podcast for 2018 before we take a break. We’re on track to sail through 10,000 podcast downloads around about Christmas Day. And I really appreciate the feedback people have provided about the podcast, and for you taking the time to listen. I hope it has been helpful in your leadership development. 

Over the remainder of December and into January we will be featuring four of our most popular episodes, before we kick off again in February. Best wishes for you and your loved ones for 2019.

Episode 21 - Resilience and Optimism

Summary

This week we explore the links between optimism and resilience, using the example of a terrifying real life hang gliding experience.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 21 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are looking at optimism and resilience.

Have you ever had a travel experience that didn’t quite go to plan. Chris Gursky certainly has. Chris recently travelled from his home in Florida to Switzerland. He was particularly keen to have a tandem hang gliding experience over the picturesque Swiss countryside, so he booked that in for the first day of his holiday. The YouTube video of his first flight (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLBJA8SlH2w&t=9s) shows an excited Chris and his pilot running towards their take off from high on a mountainside. As soon as they took off though Chris and the pilot realise something has gone horribly wrong - the harness Chris is wearing is not actually clipped on to the hang glider, leaving Chris to hang on for dear life. Chris has one hand on the steering bar and one hand on the pilot for most of the flight, not sure of how long he could hold on. The pilot tries for an early landing, but is unable to control the steering while also trying to hold on to Chris, leaving the hang glider to travel over an even greater drop - some 4,000 feet from the ground. After an excruciating two minutes, the hang glider finally nears the ground travelling around 45 miles per hour, with Chris letting go just before it lands. Chris walked away with a broken wrist from the landing and a torn bicep muscle from holding on so hard. Amazingly, despite the ordeal, Chris said “I will go hang gliding again as I did not get to enjoy my first flight.”

Chris’ story demonstrates the two main elements of resilience - holding on and bouncing back. On the one hand, resilience is about your ability to withstand difficult circumstances - to hold on despite the odds - which Chris literally demonstrated during his hang gliding experience. And resilience is also about your ability to quickly bounce back from setbacks - much like Chris’ desire to go hang gliding again, despite his near death experience.

So much of our experience of life is shaped by the lens through which we view events, rather than the events themselves. Shawn Achor in his book “The Happiness Advantage” says that if researchers knew everything about your situation, they can only predict 10% of your happiness levels. Around 50% of our happiness is determined by a so-called genetic set point, with the remaining 40% being determined by our thoughts and actions which, of course, we can alter.

Our resilience links closely to our level of optimism. Martin Seligman describes this in his book “Learned Optimism”. As the title suggests, Seligman has long argued that optimism can be learned, just as early behavioural experiments with animals demonstrated that helplessness and pessimism can also be learned. Seligman outlines three ways in which optimists and pessimists differ when seeking to explain the causes and impacts of events - personalisation, permanence and pervasiveness - the three P’s.

Let’s look at these three P’s using an example of a setback. Alan is reversing his car into a tight spot in the city when he hears breaking glass and the hiss of a tyre going flat. It turns out he has backed over a glass bottle, badly puncturing a tyre on his car.

Consider the three P’s if Alan took a pessimistic view of this situation:

• Personalisation - Alan immediately blames himself - he should have noticed the bottle and been more careful while parking the car - it’s all his fault.

• Permanence - these kinds of things always happen to him - this flat tyre is going to take ages to change and then repair - it’s ruined his whole week.

• Pervasiveness - now he’s going to be late for the show tonight, which means his girlfriend is going to be unhappy with him - he’ll be grumpy at work all week, and he just can’t be bothered going to the gym in the morning now.

What about if Alan took an optimistic view of the same situation:

• Personalisation - this could have happened to anyone, and whoever left the bottle there was pretty careless - it’s not really Alan’s fault at all

• Permanence - Alan will be able to change the tyre quickly after the show - it’s a 15 minute job at the most, and doesn’t really impact his evening or week

• Pervasiveness - it’s just a flat tyre - things in his relationship and at work are going well and the rest of his life is pretty positive - it’s no big deal

You can see how an optimistic mindset would make Alan more resilient, both in the moment with the punctured tyre, but also in bouncing back from a potentially negative situation. 

Interestingly, when positive things happen, the thinking styles are reversed. The optimist will be more likely to take credit for the positive outcome, to see it as another sign of things to be grateful for, and will let the positive experience flow into other areas of their life. The pessimist, in contrast, will tend to put the positive outcome down to luck or the efforts of others, limit its impact in time, and see it as a small and contained part of their life. 

You can learn to be more optimistic in the moment. Just understanding these differences in thinking styles will make you more aware of your own thought patterns in both positive and negative situations. You can then treat your initial thoughts as opinions rather than facts. For example, if something goes wrong, you might tell yourself “you’re an idiot - you can never get anything right”. Instead of just accepting this negative thought, treat it as an opinion which can be challenged. Is it really your fault? Do you always get things wrong, or are there examples of things you do well? What are some other explanations or ways of viewing the situation? Train yourself to look at alternative explanations rather than just accepting the first negative thought that comes into your head.

There’s also the ‘boring but important’ aspects of a healthy life that help to build resilience and optimism, namely diet, sleep and exercise. Connections with friends and family also matter. As does taking the time to slow down and be grateful for all the positive things in our lives - noting down three new things each day to be grateful for is a simple and effective practice that helps us to focus on the positives in life.

This week, think of Chris Gursky and his terrifying hang gliding flight. By holding on and then quickly deciding to give hang gliding another try, Chris provides a powerful demonstration of resilience in action.

References

Martin Seligman - Learned Optimism

Shawn Achor - The Happiness Advantage

Episode 20 - Avoiding the Blame Game

Summary

As leaders, there’s always a risk of blaming people rather than processes. This week we look at a technique that helps us to avoid playing the blame game.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode twenty of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. In this episode we’re looking at ways to avoid playing the blame game.

As leaders, there’s always a risk of blaming people rather than processes. Something goes wrong and the first thing we want to identify is who is to blame. After all, we’re responsible for the processes, so there’s a built-in desire to protect ourselves by blaming some incompetent or malicious individual rather than our wonderfully crafted systems. Blaming people is a pretty natural way of defending ourselves and maintaining our self esteem. However, it’s not a great way of building trust, getting to the root cause of problems or improving performance. If a leader is constantly blaming their people, you have to wonder - who hired these people, and who has been managing their performance? It’s the same leader who’s now playing the blame game.

When leaders play the blame game, it leads to fear, and fear leads to cover ups, and cover ups lead to increased risk. Who would raise a concern when they know there’s a risk of being blamed and all the negative consequences that come with that? The team quickly learn the importance of sweeping things under the carpet. And that seems fine in the short term, until the issues mount up and are impossible to ignore.

So, as leaders, it can be helpful to have a technique that allows us to get to the root cause of problems without automatically blaming people.

One simple tool is called 5 whys, originally pioneered by Sakichi Toyoda as part of the Toyota Production System. While it was initially conceived as an engineering method, it works equally well on any sort of problem you’re likely to encounter in the workplace. As a result, it has been incorporated into a broad range of continuous improvement methodologies.

To use the 5 whys approach, you start with the problem, then look for the preceding cause of the problem by asking ‘why’ - why did the problem occur. The idea being that after you’ve worked backwards by asking ‘why’ five times, you should be at or pretty close to the root cause of the problem. One of the principles is that you can’t have human error as the root cause - instead, you need to focus on the process, not the people. 5 whys is fact driven and logical - it’s about evidence rather than opinions. This takes a lot of the heat out of the approach.

Let’s look at an example to bring the 5 whys approach to life. You hang up the phone from a disgruntled customer. They’ve just visited your local store to find their favourite item was out of stock. To make things worse, they had actually called the store the day before to confirm the item would be in stock, and were told new stock was arriving overnight and would be there the next day. Now they’re going to take their business elsewhere. Your natural inclination is to ring the store manager and tell them off for letting the customer down by not keeping enough stock and overpromising to the customer - a classic blame game response. Instead you call the store manager and try to figure out the root cause.

1. Why was the store out of stock? Because the scheduled order hadn’t arrived.

2. Why did the scheduled order not arrive? Because the delivery truck broke down on the way to the store.

3. Why did the delivery truck break down? Because of a broken fan belt.

4. Why did the fan belt break? Because the truck hadn’t been serviced.

5. Why hadn’t the truck been scheduled? Because there wasn’t a schedule in place for truck servicing.

The lack of a schedule for servicing our fleet of trucks was the root cause for the stock outage.

It turned out the root cause didn’t have anything to do with the store manager - the problem was in an entirely different part of the organisation. The risk now is that we try to track down who is responsible for truck servicing schedules and blame them. Instead, a much more constructive approach is to look at this as a shared problem, and something that can be avoided in the future through continuous improvement. In fact, fixing the truck servicing might help to avoid a whole range of other problems in the future - ones that wouldn’t have been avoided if we had just berated the store manager.

Now, 5 whys as a technique is not perfect. For example, it tends to uncover one root cause, when there may be several. And there’s nothing magical about 5 whys - it might only take 3 whys, or perhaps 10 whys to get to the root cause. And sometimes the problem is a person. But the principle of looking at processes and systems first before blaming people is one that any leader can bring to their approach.

Episode 19 - Intent Versus Impact

As leaders, we almost always have great intentions, but our intent isn’t always the same as our impact. In this episode we explore three principles for leaders when thinking about intent versus impact.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 19 of the Leadership Today podcast - it’s great to have you join us today. I really appreciate those who have taken the time to share, rate and review the podcast. Here at Leadership Today our mission is “Enabling thousands of leaders to achieve results through people”, so it’s great to see the global reach of the podcast continue to grow. Today we’re looking at intent versus impact. 

As leaders, we almost always have great intentions - our intent is typically positive. However, if you’ve been leading for a while, you will recognise there are times when people might misunderstand your intent - that your intent is not the same as your impact. And that creates problems for us - it leads to miscommunication and can create distrust. 

Joseph Luft and Harri Ingham were studying group dynamics in the mid 1950s - exploring how we see ourselves versus how others see us. They developed a process that involved individuals choosing words they thought best described themselves from a list of 56 adjectives. Their peers did the same. 

Not surprisingly, they found that some words overlapped between the individual and their peers and some didn’t. They could then sort each word into one of four quadrants, based on whether a characteristic was known or unknown by the individual, and known or unknown by others. 

When the words lined up, this meant the characteristics were known to self and known to others - Luft and Ingham described this quadrant as the arena - others have called it public or open. 

Then you have words people chose for themselves that others didn’t choose - these characteristics were known to self but not others - this quadrant was called hidden, like the person was wearing a mask. 

Finally, there were words others chose to describe someone that the person didn’t choose for themselves - this is known as a blind spot. It’s also where intent versus impact gets interesting. When there's a misalignment between your intent and impact, you could argue that it’s just others’ perceptions, but those perceptions are their reality whether we agree with them or not. And a blind spot can be positive or negative - you are just as likely to be blind to a strength as you are to be blind to a weakness.

When we think about intent versus impact, there are three principles for leaders:

1. If you want people to understand you, make your intent clear

2. If you see people doing strange things, take the time to understand their intent

3. Use feedback to let people know the impact they’re having

Let’s look at the first principle - If you want people to understand you, make your intent clear.

I was working with a leader who had received some feedback that his team saw his leadership style as highly directive, and almost never coaching. As I worked with him, he just couldn’t understand this feedback - he thought he was coaching his staff all the time. I asked him for an example of how he coached his team, and he said “Well, I coached one of my team members earlier today. I was walking past his desk and noticed he was doing something in Excel in a pretty inefficient way. I knew a much simpler way, so I asked him to move across. I pulled up a seat in front of his computer, and then showed him the easier way. I then suggested he do it that way next time. I coached him.” It was pretty easy to see where the impact of being directive was coming from. I asked him to replay the story, but this time from his team member’s perspective. What would it feel like to have your boss move you to one side then start working on your computer in front of your colleagues? How might the team member have interpreted the situation? He soon saw how his positive intentions could have been taken in a negative way. Even if he had done exactly the same thing, but shared his intent - that is, that he actually thought this team member was doing a great job, and wanted to help him become more efficient so he could go home earlier - the impact would have been entirely different. It’s important to make ourselves known to others, to let them into our head, and to share our intent. This will lead to greater alignment between how others see us and how we see ourselves.

Now the second principle - If you see people doing strange things, take the time to understand their intent. Our home used to have vinyl floor tiles in our living room. I walked in one day to find about a square metre of these tiles had been lifted up and placed in a pile by a combination of our three sons. They had managed to get under the edge of one tile, lifting it up, which then gave them access to several other tiles that they could then pull up, and it quickly escalated from there. Several of the tiles had cracked in the process. Now, clearly, I was pretty frustrated by this wanton destruction. It seemed like the kids were trying to vandalise and destroy the house. But I asked them - what were they trying to do? They told me that they were simply trying to build a tower out of the tiles. Understanding their intent helped me to explain their behaviour. It didn’t remove all the frustration, but it did help me to understand why they were doing what they were doing. The same is true in the workplace. People are typically logical and rational in the behaviour - it’s the perceptions of situations that often differ. So when people are doing something strange - failing to get on board with an initiative, focusing on the wrong things, whatever it might be - that the time to explore their intent. Often you will find that it’s actually a miscommunication or misunderstanding that lies at the root of the issue.

The third principle is - Use feedback to let people know the impact they’re having. As a leader you’re in a unique position to help others to decrease their blind spots. And I would encourage you to particularly focus on helping people to uncover their strengths. One of the greatest satisfactions I’ve had as a leader is encouraging people to do things that they initially didn’t think they could. I could see strengths in them that they couldn’t see in themselves.

Intent versus impact is a powerful way of improving your influencing, understanding others, and helping others to develop. Try these three leadership principles this week and let me know what impact you make.

Episode 18 - Don't Ask for a Mentor

Having a mentor provides a wide range of benefits beyond development, including higher pay, more promotions and greater career satisfaction. But asking for a mentor isn’t always easy or the best approach. 

Transcript

Welcome to episode 18 of the Leadership Today podcast. Today we’re looking at finding a mentor, and why asking someone to be your mentor may not be the best approach.

Let’s start by defining mentoring. In a mentoring relationship the focus is on development of the person being mentored in a particular set of skills or capabilities, by engaging with a mentor who has demonstrated experience and expertise in these areas. Sometimes the individuals arrange the mentoring directly with each other, and at other times organisations either support or drive these pairings.

Reseach suggests that the benefits of having a mentor go beyond the individual’s development. When compared to those without mentors, those being mentored had higher remuneration, were offered more promotions, and they demonstrated greater career satisfaction and commitment.

And mentoring also has benefits for the mentor as well. Mentors report feeling more positive about the organisation and their senior leadership. Mentors also experience greater levels of job satisfaction.

Given mentoring is such a win win, why don’t we see more mentoring in the workplace? Here are some reasons:

• People are often afraid to ask for a mentor - plucking up the courage can be hard, particularly when we recognise it’s such a big commitment from the mentor

• Mentors are reluctant to commit time - the traditional model of mentoring often soaks up a lot of time, sometimes outliving its original usefulness

• Mentors may already have someone to mentor - they may therefore be reluctant to commit to a second or third person

So my advice - if you want a mentor, don’t ask for one - at least not straight away. Here’s a process I recommend:

1. Identify the areas you want to develop - be really clear about what mentoring is going to address

2. Identify a range of mentors that could help - it may be more than one person, and you can draw on your networks to suggest people

3. Request brief meetings with the potential mentors of around 20 to 30 minutes each - be clear that you have an area you’re interested in developing, and would like a conversation about their advice and guidance in this area - being willing to use phone or video calls will broaden the potential range of mentors you can access

4. Assuming they’re okay to meet up and the meeting goes well, ask if they would be open to another meeting in two months time

5. Don’t waste their time - turn up prepared with questions, take notes and stop asking for more meetings once you’ve learned what you want to learn

Mentors are great. And, while it sounds counterintuitive, if you really want a mentor, don’t start by asking for one. As always, I’ve included the references used in this podcast in the episode notes.

References

Allen TD1, Eby LT, Poteet ML, Lentz E, Lima L. (2004) Career benefits associated with mentoring for protégeé: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology Feb;89(1):127-36

Rajashi Ghosh & Thomas G. Reio Jr. (2013) Career benefits associated with mentoring for mentors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior 83 (2013) 106–116

Sange, Rabiya; Srivasatava, R. K. (2012) Employee Engagement and Mentoring: An Empirical Study of Sales Professionals. Synergy (0973-8819);Jan2012, Vol. 10 Issue 1, p37

Episode 17 - Prisoners and Performance Ratings

What can prisoners teach us about performance ratings? And how can we better measure performance and support development as leaders? Check out the research and some ideas that will help improve the way you lead.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 17 of the Leadership Today podcast - let’s dive straight in.

There’s a great piece of research out of England that involved people who had been jailed on violence and robbery offences rating themselves on a range of traits. Initially they were asked to rate themselves against the ‘average prisoner’. As we see in many studies of this sort, the prisoners rated themselves more positively than their peers - they saw themselves, for example, as more kind, dependable, honest and law abiding than the average prisoner. They were then asked to rate themselves on the same traits when compared to the average member of the public - and it’s here that the results become even more interesting. The prisoners saw themselves as more moral than the average person. They also saw themselves as more kind, more self-controlled, more compassionate, more generous, more dependable, more trustworthy and even more honest than the average person in the community. The only trait they didn’t rate themselves so high on was how law abiding they were, which makes sense given they were imprisoned for breaking the law. However, even then they rated themselves as on par with the average person on the street.

This over-rating isn’t just limited to prisoners - people in a work setting are also notoriously poor at rating their own performance. Of the hundreds of people I’ve surveyed in my own research, the same pattern comes up again and again - 85% of people think their performance is above average, with 15% of people seeing themselves as just average. Not a single person I’ve surveyed has ever rated their performance as below average.

This creates a range of challenges for leaders. If the vast majority of people over-rate their performance when compared to others, how do we manage their performance? Do you want to be the leader that runs around shattering these self-delusions that are so common? Probably not.

Let’s take another angle. I want you to think back over your own career, and identify some points when would you have rated yourself most positively. For me, I have been most positive about my own performance when I wasn’t being stretched or challenged. I felt confident and on top of things. I felt like I was really delivering for the business. Interestingly, that probably also lines up with the times when I wasn’t as engaged in my work - now it’s not like I didn’t like my work, but it was just easy. I felt like I was contributing and doing my part, but didn’t need to try too hard. In contrast, as I think about the times when I stretched and challenged myself, my views on my performance dropped. It was in those moments that I doubted whether I could deliver what was being asked of me - did I have what it would take to perform? It was in these moments that I needed support and encouragement, because development feels hard. Having a leader that challenges you, but also supports and encourages you, is a great way to take your performance to the next level.

But it’s not just individuals that have trouble accurately rating their own performance. Other research shows that leaders aren’t that great at rating people on performance either. Researchers found two factors led supervisors to rate individuals more positively - one factor was if they thought the person was similar to them, and the second factor was when they liked them. So as a leader I’m likely to rate you more positively if you are like me, and if I like you. And there’s an associated risk of under rating people that we feel aren’t like us, or that we don’t like.  

Here are some ideas to help with these challenges around providing feedback on performance:

1. Get out of the habit of rating your own and others’ performance relative to others - instead focus on the requirements of the job, the objectives and the progress the individual is making. This will help maintain that challenge to keep progressing and improving, rather than getting caught up in comparisons.

2. As a leader, make sure you are combining challenge with support - work with your team to set challenging goals that keep people moving forward in their performance. But also recognise that when people are learning something new or challenging, their confidence is likely to drop. It’s in those moments that they need extra support and encouragement.

3. Invite and provide feedback - having a culture where feedback is encouraged will help people to more accurately evaluate and refine their performance.

Thanks for listening and for supporting the podcast. It has been great to hear how the content has been helpful.If you do want to keep in contact, go to the connect page at our website, leadership.today. There you can join our email list, and connect via LinkedIn and Facebook. I look forward to speaking with you next week.

Research

Sedikides C, Meek R, Alicke MD, and Taylor S (2014). Behind bars but above the bar: Prisoners consider themselves more prosocial than non-prisoners. The British journal of social psychology / the British Psychological Society

Sandy J. Wayne and Robert C. Liden (1995) Effects of Impression Management on Performance Ratings: A Longitudinal Study. The Academy of Management Journal Vol. 38, No. 1 (Feb., 1995), pp. 232-260

Episode 16 - Operating in Uncertainty

In this week’s podcast we explore what leaders can learn from the way surgical teams manage complexity.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode sixteen of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges.

Last week we dipped our toes into the waters of complexity, looking at how the storming stage of team development is better thought of as an ongoing process to be managed.

This week we are extending on that theme of operating in uncertainty, seeing what leaders can learn from the way surgical teams manage complexity.

As leaders we operate in a complex world where we are constantly presented with opportunities and threats. Some describe it as a VUCA world - an acronym that characterises modern conditions as volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. The term VUCA can be traced back to the 1980s where it was used in US Army War College training to describe the conditions faced by soldiers - where the enemy is not always clear and traditional approaches may not work.

In this VUCA world we still need to manage tasks, processes and people within our teams. But we also need strategies that look beyond our team if we are to survive and thrive.

The operating room where surgical teams work is a complex environment. The human body itself is complex and variable, and we’re still learning more every day about how our systems work and interrelate. There’s complex equipment being used, and emergency situations to be managed. There’s input from various specialties - surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses and doctors - people who are highly qualified and full of opinions. Often times there are new teams performing surgery that may not have worked together before. This can lead to a lack of consistency, assumptions and disagreements. From a group dynamics perspective, this sounds a lot like the conditions for storming - and you don’t want storming during an operation. As a consequence of this complexity, surprises occur, things are missed and mistakes are made. This leads to variable outcomes for patients.

A World Health Organisation initiative sought to address these concerns. They tracked the outcomes of thousands of operations across eight hospitals in eight countries, gaining an initial baseline. They then implemented a 19-item surgical safety checklist - just 19 items that the surgical team would work through a check off. It was an initiative inspired by how pilots and ground crews manage the complexity of air travel through checklists.

So how does a checklist help? One example is the risk of people not speaking up during a surgical procedure, even when they see something going wrong. After all, they may not know everyone in the room, and may not see it as their role to intervene. As a result, the checklist includes a step where all team members introduce themselves to each other by name and role. Further down the checklist, the surgeon flags how long the case will take, anticipated blood loss, and any non-routine steps. This all helps to bring everyone together, building clarity and helping to preempt issues that might emerge.

The results of implementing the checklist were dramatic - the rate of death was reduced by over 40%, and complications were reduced by over a third.

So it would be natural to assume that this 19 item check list would be mandated for use everywhere. However, the researchers stressed how Important it was for local hospitals to tailor the checklist to meet local needs. That could include adding or removing items from the list.  They recognised that risks, resources and cultures differ from hospital to hospital. Despite the dramatic results, they were quick to recognise that the true value of their findings was in the principle of having a checklist, rather than the exact checklist procedure itself.

And then there’s the people factor. Given how dramatic the results were, you would think people would be thrilled to use the checklist. However 20% of surgical staff thought even a 19 item check list took too long. Interestingly, of that same group, 93% indicated that they would want the checklist used if they were having surgery. As with any change, there’s always opportunities to streamline by engaging people in the process - helping to address their concerns and involving them in refinements. It’s important to help people to appreciate the principle, rather than being obsessed about the procedure.

There are a number of lessons for leaders from this study in how we navigate through a VUCA world:

1. Always improve - even in the world of modern surgery there was still an opportunity for dramatic change, and even 1% improvements add up over time

2. Look outside your field - in the research surgical teams applied lessons learned from air travel - maybe there are similar lessons that apply in your industry

3. Identify principles - these provide ways to operate in the grey, and should be developed by incorporating input and feedback

4. Principles not procedures - rather than rolling out more and more procedures, we are usually better off communicating a principle that applies more broadly

5. When communicating a principle, start with the reasons why it matters - if people don’t understand the reasons for a new way of working, they will often block the change or just avoid it

I hope you found that helpful. Let me know what you think via our website leadership.today, or feel free to leave a review wherever you get your podcasts.

Reference

A Surgical Safety Checklist to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in a Global Population - January 29, 2009 N Engl J Med 2009; 360:491-499 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa0810119

Episode 15 - Do Teams Still Form, Storm, Norm and Perform?

Over 50 years ago Bruce Tuckman described four stages of team development - forming, storming, norming and performing. This week we explore whether these stages still apply, and the implications for leading in an increasingly complex world.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode fifteen of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

Now if you ask a leader to describe the stages of development a team goes through, they will most likely say the now famous words - forming, storming, norming, performing. It was over 50 years ago that Bruce Tuckman originally described these four stages in small group formation. He later worked with Mary Jensen to add a fifth stage - adjourning (which unfortunately doesn’t rhyme quite so well with the other four stages when forced through an Australian accent - and a big shout out to our many international listeners who have spent the last 14 episodes trying to work out what accent I have - there’s your answer). But does this model still apply today? And what’s the relevance for the way we lead?

First, let’s do a quick overview and reminder of the five stages:

• Forming - a team first comes together, they orient themselves to the task, establish relationships, test boundaries around ground rules and behaviours - at this point people are usually positive, polite if not a little unsure.

• Storming - a lack of clarity around roles and ways of operating means this stage is marked by interpersonal conflict, lack of unity, polarised views - at this point people often actively or passively resist forming into a team - in fact the team may even fall apart at this point.

• Norming - achieve greater cohesion as roles, norms and ways of operating are established - people seek to maintain the group and find effective ways to work together.

• Performing - Tuckman saw the group at this point as having effectively “solved” interpersonal problems and become a “problem-solving instrument” - roles are flexible and functional, structure is clear and fixed, with shared commitment and effort towards the task.

• Adjourning - winding up the team - may be some sadness as people need to let go of the role they’ve had and go their separate ways.

So where did these stages come from? Tuckman’s work was based on a literature review process rather than direct research. He wanted to bring together various ways of thinking about how teams develop and become productive. The studies he looked at were based on therapy groups, training groups, and laboratory experiments. Through this process, he was able to identify common themes - thus the initial four stages.

It is a theoretical model that has proved helpful in practice, and has mostly held up under research scrutiny. The framework has been widely applied and proved to be highly effective in encouraging further exploration of team performance. 

However, there has been some more recent disagreement around the storming stage and where it fits, or even if it is a distinct stage at all. Even Tuckman’s original paper highlighted mixed evidence around the storming stage, with some researchers combining elements of storming with both the forming and norming stages.

Not surprisingly, a common question from leaders is “Can’t we just skip the storming stage altogether?” The answer is maybe in the short term, but not forever. In fact some researchers have conceptualised storming as the management of conflict and difference that occurs across the life of the team, and I think that’s a more helpful way to think about it.

Whether storming is a discrete stage or something that rears its head occasionally, the storm is never far away. And the storm is not necessarily generated within the team. There’s greater awareness now that any team is constantly being barraged with opportunities and threats as part of a larger complex system. No team works in isolation - it’s constantly being tilted, nudged, and pushed off balance.

I served as part of a very effective leadership team in a professional services firm as we sailed directly into the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. Each of us had weathered recessions and downturns before - we had each seen the market move up and down - but the speed and scale of the GFC impact was still difficult. The GFC was a complex environment in which to operate, where we couldn’t fully shield the team and business. The ways of working we established became strained, and we needed to work hard at revising our norms and maintaining our relationships. We were able to do that successfully by changing the way we worked in terms of task, people and process. If we had just focused on our team and ignored the environment around us, we would have failed. It’s a good example of how we had to step back into that storming stage to then create some norms and agreed ways of operating to help us to move forward.

So here are some practical ideas for you as a leader:

1. Don’t just focus on the task - make sure as a team leader you place equal attention on the people and the process. A very powerful question to start with and return to is ‘How can we best work together?’ 

2. Negotiate through difference - conflict, if well managed, is your friend. But conflict management needs willing and skilled individuals, along with effective team processes.

3. Be attuned to your surroundings - keep a weathered eye on the horizon for opportunities and threats. Build a network outside the team that can help feed in information, advice and support.

4. Influence beyond the team - shape the world around you. Be proactive, not just reactive within the broader system in which you operate.

I hope these ideas help you to improve the effectiveness of the teams you lead and are a part of. Next week I’ll be expanding on this idea of operating in uncertainty, drawing on lessons from the operating theatre. See you then.

References

Tuckman, B. Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin 1965, Vol. 63, No. 6, 384-399

Tuckman, B. and Jensen, M. (1977). Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited. Group & Organization Management, 2(4), pp.419-427. 

Denise A. Bonebright 40 years of storming: a historical review of Tuckman’s model of small group development

 Human Resource Development International Vol. 13, No. 1, February 2010, 111–120

Episode 14 - Leadership First Impressions

Research demonstrates that 90% of the initial impression we form about people is based on two factors - warmth and competence. It also turns out these two factors are difficult to combine. So how do we demonstrate both warmth and competence as leaders?

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode fourteen of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

This week we are looking at leadership first impressions.

It turns out that 90% of the initial impression we form about a person is around two things - their warmth and their competence. In other words - do I connect with you, and do you know what you’re doing?

It’s important to note that warmth isn’t primarily about being liked - it’s about making a real connection. That you are a real human being that people can relate to on an emotional level.

Competence is about knowing what you’re doing. That you are a leader who is skilled and capable - someone others can respect.

These factors produce two stereotypes of leaders that perhaps you can identify with:

• The first is the competent but cold leader - they’re all business, great at what they do, but they just seem to struggle to connect with people. People respect them, but they may not put in an extra effort for them.

• Then there’s the warm and friendly but not-so-competent leader - they are great at bringing people around them, but those people gradually drift away when they figure out the leader isn’t up to the task.

These stereotypes assume that competence and warmth sit at opposite ends of a spectrum. That a leader can only be all about results, or all about people, but not both. And many leaders assume that this is indeed the case.

So if they’re forced to choose between the two, it’s perhaps not surprising that many leaders go for the “respected but not connected” version of competence without warmth. That flows into how they communicate and interact with people. Indeed, they have to guard their image of competence, so letting people into who they are as a human being is a risk - and a risk they see as not worth taking.

How does that come across to others? People who take on this competent but cold combination often try to present themselves as an expert. And there’s no shortage of experts - LinkedIn has nearly 6 million people who list themselves as experts in various fields. In fact, LinkedIn lists so many people with “keynote speaker” in their title, that to give each of them just five gigs a year would require there to be over 3,000 keynote speeches every single day. Some people really latch on to the need to lead with their expertise.

The good news is that you can combine the two - it is possible to be seen as both warm and competent. The research suggests that it is tricky, but also possible. And the research also suggests that you should lead with warmth. That making a connection with people matters, and provides a foundation to then demonstrate your competence. 

I worked alongside a leader who embodied exactly this combination. He was a lovely guy to work with, but also filled you with confidence that he knew exactly what he was doing. He was incredibly calm in a crisis - his body language and tone of voice even made him seem relaxed. Even when things were going horribly wrong, he was interested in others’ views, and keen to resolve the issue. He didn’t just remain calm himself, but he helped others to calm down. This allowed people to focus on the problem and work towards a positive outcome. They weren’t worried about the leader and his response - they trusted him, they felt connected to him, and they knew he valued maintaining and building connections with his team, even when they made a mistake.

As Amy Cuddy and her fellow researchers put it - “Before people decide what they think of your message, they decide what they think of you.”

So here are some ideas of how you can combine both warmth and competence in the way that you present.

1. Be yourself. Be a real human being that turns up to work with strengths, weaknesses, interests and concerns. Don’t try to be perfect, but do try to become better.

2. Be interested in others. Take the time to understand where they are coming from - their interests, even their hopes and dreams. 

3. Let people into your head. Share your thoughts and emotions. Sometimes the calm person can appear as if they don’t care enough. Sometimes trying to be friendly can appear flighty. Don’t let people have to guess where you’re coming from and what’s driving your behaviour - let them into your head.

4. Be prepared to present your capabilities with confidence. Try to capture in one or two sentences what you bring and what makes you unique. Then think about how you present that authentic image of you to others.

5. And lastly - get feedback. Ask people about how approachable you are, and what you might do to improve this. Ask for feedback about what makes you appear more and less competent.

I hope you find these ideas helpful as you continue to improve the way you lead. As always, if you’re interested in the research, the references are listed in the transcript at our website - leadership.today

And thanks again for those who have taken the time to rate, review and share the podcast with others. It’s great to hear your feedback and to see the hundreds of people who are downloading the podcast each week. We’ll see you next week.

Research used for this episode:

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition

Fiske, Susan T; Cuddy, Amy J C; Glick, Peter; Xu, Jun.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; Washington Vol. 82, Iss. 6,  (Jun 2002): 878-902.

Connect, Then Lead. To exert influence, you must balance competence with warmth. by Amy J.C. Cuddy, Matthew Kohut, and John Neffing. Harvard Business Review July–August 2013.

Episode 13 - Control your Email (Before it Controls You).

Email is a great tool that can also be a huge distraction. Research shows that if we don't control our inbox, it will end up controlling us. This week we look at some ways to tackle that.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode thirteen of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

This week we are looking at gaining control over our email inbox. It’s easy to forget that email is a relatively new addition to the workplace. When I entered the workforce in the 1990s, I was lucky to receive 5 emails in a day. There was no way anyone would send confidential information by email - it was seen as much less risky and more convenient to fax or mail a document.

As leaders, we’re still figuring out how to make the most out of email, instant messaging, and services like Slack, while avoiding the downside distractions.

You see it at conferences and training sessions - the leader who is constantly checking their phone and then dashing out during every break to feverishly respond to emails and messages. It’s as if their team can’t survive even a few hours without them, let alone a day. In some organisations its endemic - as people walk into a room for a meeting, they all set up their laptops, continuing to smash through their inbox while providing only a minimal amount of attention to what’s happening in the room. It’s like we’re constantly skating across the surface of multiple tasks rather than really applying ourselves to the things that matter.

People approach the challenge of email in different ways. I once interviewed a senior executive and asked about how they manage competing priorities. The example they provided involved how they dealt with the hundreds of emails in their inbox when they returned from holidays. They explained that it was quite simple - they just selected all emails and hit delete. They argued that if an issue was important enough, surely someone would get back to them. I still don’t know if that approach was brilliant or negligent.

Here’s what some recently published research (http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fapl0000343) tells us about email use:

• Researchers found that knowledge workers spend 28% of their workweek reading and responding to email. 

• Staff at Microsoft reported that their work was interrupted by email alerts an average of 4 times per hour, with each interruption causing a further 5 minute delay to their other work. Those delays add up to a third of their time, or 2.5 hours per day. 

• And it may be even worse than that - researchers found the average worker checks email 90 times per day - that’s once every 5 minutes - and that it takes 1 minute to resume work after checking email. So that’s another 90 minutes which isn’t including the time taken on the email itself. Bouncing from email to email across a day makes it practically impossible to complete any work requiring concentration or creative thought.

• Those with high email demands where email is not central to their job experience a lack of progress. They feel like they’re just not getting ahead.

• As a result, researchers found that those with low self-control ended up focusing on routine management activities rather than leadership. Reacting to emails made them a less effective leader.

It’s little surprise then that leaders I work with typically list ‘email’ and ‘meetings’ as the top two impediments to getting their work done. They feel the stress. They know their being reactive. They see the important being smashed by the urgent. They know they have a fixed amount of time every day, and that email is getting in the way of the activities that allow leaders to be effective. But they’re not sure what to do about it.

Here are seven ideas to take charge of your email:

1. Make a mental shift - recognise that your email inbox is effectively a summary of other people’s to-do lists. As a leader, your inbox probably doesn’t contain your most important work.

2. Switch off alerts on everything - your computer, phone, watch - anything that prompts you that a new email or message has arrived.

3. Instead of checking email 90 times, try 4 focused times. Schedule time in your calendar and use the time you have allotted, then get back to your other work.

4. Don’t just hit reply straight away - assess whether a conversation is needed. Try phone calls for a day. Or try grouping issues together so you can have one conversation about multiple topics. The fewer emails you send, the fewer you get back.

5. Set standards - help people to consider when it is okay to reply all to everyone cc’d, that clear subject lines help, and to put requests at the start of emails rather than being hidden in mounds of text. One organisation I’ve seen sends people a report each month outlining where the individual sits in terms of the number of emails they send. There isn’t any judgement - but letting someone know that they send more emails than 90% of others in this organisation usually reduces the number of emails they send. 

6. If your team can’t operate without you, you probably need to vary the way you lead. Delegate more, be clear about accountabilities, and let them know you trust them to deal with issues that arise.

7. Keep experimenting and trying new approaches - I experiment with multiple to-do lists and approaches to organising my day each year, refining my approach as I go. It’s not always big changes - there’s a lot of power in continuous refinement and improvement.

Email is like any tool - it’s not inherently good or bad. We need a plan and approach that works for us - one that leaves us with a sense of control, rather than being a victim of our inbox. This week think about your approach to email - and take control before it controls you.

Episode 12 - The Best Thing About Working Here? It's the People...

When you ask employees about the best thing about the place where they work, they often say "the people". Here are four ideas of how leaders can build connections and collaboration at work.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode 12 of the Leadership Today podcast. My name is Andrew Beveridge, and thanks for joining me.

If you ask employees what they see as the best part about working here you’ll often hear “It’s the people”. Not the pay, not the job, not the location - the people. The need to belong and be connected to others is as powerful a motivator at work as it is in life. It’s what Deci and Ryan in their classic motivational research call ‘relatedness’. 

On top of this, research by Google found the two most important factors for team effectiveness are:

1. Psychological safety - Can we take risks in this team without feeling insecure or embarrassed? 

2. Dependability - Can we count on each other to do high quality work on time?

Connections matter - people are motivated when they have a sense of belonging - that this is this a place where they can be themselves, where they can help others, and where others are reliable and want to help them. 

This need for connections sits in a broader societal context. We are at a point in history where, thanks to technology, people have more connections than ever, while simultaneously feeling more isolated and lonely.  Research shows that on average we have fewer people than ever to depend on when we need help. Sociologists tracked this pattern in America between 1985 and 2004. They saw the number of people that said they had no one at all they could confide in triple over that time, while the average number of confidents people had reduced from three to two. 

And our office environments haven’t helped. The open plan offices that were supposed to help build connections turn out to do the opposite. Recent research into two organisations that moved to open plan saw a 70% reduction in face to face conversations, coupled with an increase in email use of between 22% to 50%. It’s not surprising then that other research demonstrates open plan offices also increase sick leave.

I believe that fostering a culture where people can belong and support each other is at the core of collaboration. And in an environment of ever accelerating change, organisations need collaboration more than ever. 

So what can leaders do to help people to feel like they belong? 

Here are four suggestions:

1. Office layouts matter - you want to involve your people in helping to building a physical environment that combines places for quiet reflection and deep work, with other areas that encourage connection and discussion. Making it a personal and warm place will go a long way to help encourage those connections. 

2. Consider agile work principles - people coming together from across the organisation to tackle a problem or opportunity, and then disbanding once that opportunity is advanced or problem solved.

3. Social connection - just remember that having fun and connecting people with each other is not a waste of time. Have your people generate some ideas around that - what are some ways that we can build those social connections at work.

4. As leaders, we want to demonstrate those connections, we want to facilitate connections, and we want to discuss the importance of connection - always reinforcing that need to connect.

So in summary, connections matter, not just at work but in life in general. I look forward to hearing some of your ideas of how you’ve built connections at work, and how that’s made an impact on the way you operate.

Well that’s the end of this podcast. I’m looking forward to joining you again next week to discuss another challenge at work, and some practical ideas about things we can do to improve that as leaders. 

Links to research in this episode:

http://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/bitstream/handle/123456789/2958/Intrinsic%20and%20Extrinsic%20Motivations%20Classic%20Definitions%20and%20New%20Directions.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/

http://happierhuman.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/P13.-Social-Isolation-in-America-Changes-in-Core-Discussion-Networks-over-Two-Decades.pdf

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/373/1753/20170239#fn-2

http://workplaceohs.com.au/hazards/work-environment/analysis/open-plan-offices-increase-the-risk-of-sick-leave#.W59daf4zbOQ

Episode 11 - Want to Keep Your Best People? Help to Build their Resume.

This week we are looking at how to motivate and retain your best people by helping to build their resume.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode eleven of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

This week we are looking at how to motivate and retain your best people by helping to build their resume.

It’s no secret that leaders are struggling to retain their best people. Recent studies (https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australian-jobs-turnover-churn-robert-half-2018-6) suggest that staff turnover rates are on the increase. It’s easy to see how repeated corporate downsizing has taught the current workforce that loyalty may not be reciprocated by their employer. Add to this increasingly high levels of education and mobility, and you have a recipe for high turnover.

So what should leaders do? Is keeping your best people all about table tennis. bean bags, and fruit boxes? Well, making offices more ‘cool’ only goes so far. Some organisations try to take these surface elements from companies that are known for their ability to attract and retain employees and inject them into their own offices. Like all transplants though, they’re often rejected. Cool offices are an outworking of the culture of organisations – they’re not the driver of the culture. 

And we know that pay isn’t the answer. My own research indicates that 85% of people think their performance is above average, while only 3% believe they’re overpaid. A full 48% of people think they aren’t paid enough. It’s almost impossible to make the majority of your people happy about their pay when the vast majority think they are above average performers.

Here is one practical way to help retain employees. While it sounds counterintuitive, helping workers to grow and build their resume can make them more likely to stay with your organisation. That’s right - making people more employable can make them less likely to leave. 

As we discussed last week, there are four main factors that motivate people at work - purpose, development, connections and autonomy. Helping to build someone’s resume directly addresses the development motivator. People are motivated when they feel competent at what they’re doing, and when they can build the capabilities that matter to them over time.

As a leader, you can consciously help your people to develop skills and experience that matter to them. Here are three ideas you might want to try:

1. During your regular meetings with your people, make sure you set aside some time to identify what further development is of interest, and help to make that happen. It might be a training course. Or it might be using your networks to help pair them up with someone more experienced in their field for a once off mentor meeting. Or it might be an experience - something new that will stretch them.  

2. Spend time together looking back at the previous month or quarter to identify the new skills and experience that they have gained. Sometimes people don’t notice the development they’re experiencing unless they stop and reflect. Making sure you discuss this helps to build awareness of the development that’s already happening. 

3. Help them to summarise this experience in a way that will fit into a resume or LinkedIn profile. I’ve had several team members where we actually worked together on their resume as part of our regular catch up meetings. 

By highlighting and increasing their capability, you will be able to demonstrate that staying with the organisation will have value for their development and employability. And the approach works across all employees - it’s not just for those new to the workforce. Even as people approach retirement, providing them with skills they’re interested in that will help them to pick up part time roles (if that's what they want) will also be attractive.

Achieving this at an organisational level requires leaders who can have skilled discussions with employees. This is likely to involve some investment in development for managers as well. But, as we’ve seen, this development may also help to retain your best leaders.

Episode 10 - Motivation - What's the Point?

TRANSCRIPT

Motivation - what’s the point? And how do we motivate people as leaders? This week I outline the four factors most important for motivating people at work, and focus in on practical ideas to increase a sense of purpose.

I’ll let you in on a little secret - the truth is that, as leaders, we can’t motivate anyone to do anything - well, not directly anyway. But we can create the conditions that are likely to motivate people. In fact, I would argue that, as leaders, the majority of our impact is about setting up an environment where people are motivated about what the organisation is trying to achieve. 

Leadership is about achieving results through people, and we do that through aligned motivation. It’s about aligning the things that motivate our people with the results the organisation needs to achieve. Here’s the good news - if our people are turning up to work, they are motivated. It just might be that their motivation isn’t currently aligned with we are trying to deliver. 

Motivation matters, because it’s through motivation that we produce results. Motivation isn’t just about us as leaders and the organisation - it also matters because it provides meaningful and satisfying work for the people we lead. 

Think about the times when you have been most motivated in your work - what was it about the organisation, your job and your leader that led to that?

Research into motivation has come a long way over the past few decades, and four factors emerge as particularly important when it comes to motivating people at work.

1. Purpose is the first factor - people are motivated when they know the purpose of their job, and how it aligns with the purpose of the organisation.

2. Development is the second factor - people are motivated when they feel competent at what they’re doing, and can build the capabilities that matter to them over time.

3. Connection is the third factor - people are motivated when they have a sense of belonging - that this is this a place where they can help others, and where others help them.

4. Autonomy is the fourth factor - people are motivated when they have freedom over their work - how they do what they do. We talked about this in an earlier podcast about control and health.

Today we’re going to focus on purpose - answering that question “what’s the point of my job and working here?” It’s a great place to start as, without a shared purpose, we don’t have a hope of achieving results through our people.

Researchers describe three levels of purpose that can be achieved through our work, each leading to an even greater level of motivation and engagement (Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 322–337).

1. At the first level, my work feels meaningful and has an identifiable point and purpose in an organisation. At this level I’m clear about my job and what I need to achieve, and also how this fits into the broader purpose of the organisation.

2. At the second level, my work is in harmony with and helps provide meaning in my personal life. At this level my work becomes more than just a job - it’s something that I use to define who I am not just at work, but also in my personal life outside of work - I see the two as far more integrated.

3. At the third and final level, my work provides the opportunity to benefit others or some greater good. At this level I feel my work has a broader contribution beyond the organisation and into society. This is where not for profit organisations are able to engage people so well, even if they can’t match the salaries offered elsewhere. But every organisation has the potential to make a positive contribution to society.

Here are three ways you can build this sense of purpose for your people:

1. The first is the humble job description. Now I know these are boring but, stick with me, they’re also really important. It amazes me the number if times I’ve come across people who, as their first task at a new organisation, have been asked to write their own job description. That’s basically like saying “We’ve hired you, but we have no idea why”. The trap we sometimes fall into is trying to detail all the individual tasks and processes we think are required. But a job description isn’t about how to do the job. And a job description doesn’t need to be fixed - it should be a living document that grows with the individual over time. But, at a minimum, people need to be clear about the purpose of their role and what they are accountable to deliver.

2. The second is about having a clear and robust goal setting and review process. This allows the individual to put some further detail around what they’re going to deliver, with the ability to link this to strategic goals. There are some great systems around that help people to set and track goals - PeopleGoal is one I’ve used which also helps automate the performance review process. You can find it at www.peoplegoal.com

3. The third suggestion is to share the impact your organisation is having on society. Stories are really powerful here. How have people in your organisation made a real impact on the world we live in? What excites you as a leader about the impact your organisation is having?

I believe these three approaches to building purpose can make a huge difference to an individual’s motivation at work. In addition, it provides a greater chance of aligning the individual’s motivation with the needs of the organisation. And it also allows you as the leader to set clear expectations for the person to work towards. 

Again, the four main things that motivate and allow people to succeed at work are purpose, development, connections and autonomy. Over the next few weeks we will continue to explore motivation in each of these four areas, with practical ideas about what we can do as leaders to engage our people in the objectives of the organisation. Next week we will be looking at development, and why helping people to build their resume actually reduces turnover. I look forward to seeing you then.

Episode 9 - Why Following Your Passion Isn't Enough

This week we’re looking at passion and purpose - and why telling someone to ‘follow their passion’ is lousy advice.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode nine of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

This week we’re looking at passion and purpose - and why telling someone to ‘follow their passion’ is lousy advice.

“Follow your passion” is often shared as a mantra for happiness and success in life. That if we can only uncover that unique passion, we will suddenly and effortlessly unlock boundless opportunities in the world. It’s an attractive antidote to the modern dysfunctional workplace - the 9 to 5 (if you’re lucky) grind of a desk job adding to the already overflowing coffers of a soul-less corporation. You can almost picture the person at their desk as the quote comes across their Instagram feed, staring out their window and whispering to themselves - “There has to be more to life than this”. And they’re probably right, but is “following your passion” the best approach.

Perhaps, like me, you can trace many of your passions back to early childhood. My love of science - fuelled (literally) through an often explosive 1970’s chemistry set (that would never be allowed to hit the shelves today), building electronics sets, growing countless crystal gardens, and bashing out computer programs on a trusty Tandy TRS-80. My love of business - labelling everything I owned as “AB Inc” (as if my 8 year old self was some kind of multinational conglomerate), combining life savers and tic tac lollies together to create a value-added product for profit, and running a pretty successful lawn mowing business to fund my early years at university. And my interest in people, reading whatever I could about what made people tic and working on school holiday programs with kids. When you combine those three passions, organisational psychology - applying the science of people in business - looks like a pretty obvious career choice. Lucky I followed my passion.

But that simplified story overlooks the necessary hardships, challenges and setbacks that ultimately helped me to be successful and fulfilled. There were the countless times when I wanted to give up - to pack it in when it all became too hard. Following my passion led me to management consulting - an amazing learning experience and proving ground where I was constantly stretched. It was here that I learnt to manage staff, to grow a business, to put together a plan and bring it to life through people, to collaborate on global teams to make a difference to leaders all over the world. But ultimately, while working for management consulting firms was aligned with my passion, there was something missing. I ended up stressed, overweight and pretty unhappy. Why was that?

A research team*, including the wonderful Carol Dweck, recently looked at “finding your passion” versus “developing your passion”. If you haven’t read Carol’s book “Mindset - Changing the way you think to fulfil your potential”, stop what you’re doing and go and purchase it now. The book outlines the value of having a growth mindset - where we see our abilities, skills and intelligence as things we can develop and improve over time. This is contrasted with a fixed mindset, where people succeed due to talent and giftedness - so if something is hard, you just give up because it clearly wasn’t meant to be. There’s a fair amount of mis-information about growth mindset - it’s not to say our potential is unlimited. Rather, Carol’s work suggests that we often don’t test our potential, preferring to play it safe and stick with what we know.  

The researchers contrasted those with a fixed mindset view around passion, with those who had a growth mindset view of passion. Those with a fixed mindset view saw passions and interests as pre-formed and as something you discover in yourself. In contrast, a growth mindset view suggests that we build our passions and interests over time through experimentation and engaging in new activities. The research found that those with a fixed view tended to have less interest in areas outside their current experience - they didn’t want to explore new things. The fixed mindset group also underestimated difficulties associated with following their passions, and they failed to stick at new interests when they became difficult. In their own words, the researchers concluded that encouraging people to find their passion “may lead them to put all their eggs in one basket but then to drop that basket when it becomes difficult to carry”. 

And I believe that’s where purpose comes in. Again, we shouldn’t see our purpose in life as something that is fixed - it’s more like a strategic plan for our life that we regularly review and update. For me that meant starting my own business seven years ago which is now focused on enabling thousands of leaders to achieve results through people. That wasn’t the purpose seven years ago, or even two years ago - I’ve reviewed, added to and subtracted from that purpose a number of times on the journey. I’ve discovered new things I’m passionate about along the way, learnt lots of new skills, made plenty of mistakes, and achieved far more than I could have hoped for. 

So let’s agree to ditch the “follow your passion” approach. Here’s a potential replacement - Work hard to discover and improve at things you can be passionate about, within the context of a guiding purpose that you regularly review. Admittedly, that’s much harder to frame as an inspirational quote. It also sounds harder to do. “Working hard” doesn’t sound like a lot of fun. But it’s in the hard work that we learn, and it’s in the hard work that we find success, provided that hard work is aligned with our purpose. Maybe “keep discovering new things you’re passionate about” is better.

I encourage you to think about your purpose this week. Why are you doing what you’re doing? When’s the last time you challenged yourself to try something outside your current interests? Are there passions you’ve had in the past that you’ve neglected? Are there new passions emerging that require time and effort to develop?

As always, if you’ve found this podcast helpful, remember to share it with others. Taking a couple of minutes to subscribe and rate on iTunes helps others to find the podcast. And - good news - we’ve finally cracked it onto Spotify - so check us out there as well. 

*Implicit Theories of Interest: Finding Your Passion or Developing It? Paul A. O’Keefe, Carol S. Dweck, Gregory M. Walton

http://gregorywalton-stanford.weebly.com/uploads/4/9/4/4/49448111/okeefedweckwalton_2018.pdf

Episode 8 - Lighten Up! How Humour Fuels Innovation

Do we all need to lighten up? Research shows that the use of humour by leaders can have positive impacts on innovation and other factors. 

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode eight of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. 

This week we’re looking at the use of humour by leaders, and the positive impact it can have on innovation and other factors. As organisations are increasingly needing to become more innovative, research suggests that humour may provide part of the answer.

But first, a story. I walked into the boardroom and took a seat at the table. As I looked around, I could tell the small group gathered were under significant pressure about decisions that needed to be made. They looked exhausted, and stared absently at their devices and notepads. We started with the usual introductions when, suddenly and without warning, I felt something heavy glance off my shoulder and crash to the floor. As I turned in my chair, I could see a large framed picture had worked loose from the wall and fallen to the floor - fortunately just missing me. As the person next to me turned the picture over to move it out of the way, I couldn’t help but notice that it was actually a framed award the organisation had received. And not just any award - it was a second place award for safety. “Well” I said - “I can see why you came second”. Fortunately the group found that to be funny. People visibly relaxed. Frowns were replaced with smiles. The meeting that could have just added to their stress, instead led to some genuinely innovative ways forward.

What does science tells us about what just happened? On one level science helps us to understand that the award fell to the ground due to a combination of gravitational force, insufficient anchoring on the wall and, as the award would suggest, a second-rate focus on safety. But, more importantly, science also tells us that humour and innovation are linked. Researchers recently found that where a leader uses humour more often, the people they lead are more innovative. The paper also has a great summary of other research about the use of humour by leaders - A. Pundt (2015) The Relationship Between Humorous Leadership and Innovative Behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 8., pp. 878-893.

As organisations face greater change, innovation is more important than ever. And organisations are increasingly distributing this need for innovation more broadly. So how can humour help to meet these challenges?

Here are five ways in which humour helps leaders and their teams:

1. Humour often rests on an unusual twist or surprise combination of thoughts, and research suggests that, as a result, humour encourages people to combine ideas in new ways. Humour helps to establish a culture where it’s okay to discuss unusual ideas.

2. Researchers also found that sharing humorous comments during meetings helps to keep idea generation going, even when the humour is seemingly unrelated to the topic being discussed.

3. Stress is the enemy of creativity, which is why we often have our best ideas in low stress settings rather than at our desk. Humour helps to lighten the mood and reduces negative stress.

4. Humour helps build relationships between leaders and their team, and between team members. Often humour will involve sharing a personal story - something that happened to the individual, or something related to the interests of the person. Humour helps people to get to know you better as a whole person.

5. Research also indicates that humour helps to build what is known as ‘psychological safety’ - an environment where it’s okay to put out new ideas, and where mistakes are encouraged as a way to learn and improve.

As leaders, we can use humour as a way to connect with people, to reduce stress, and to encourage creative thinking. And these aren’t just a ‘nice to have’ - they’re increasingly core business, as innovation and collaboration become more central features of the modern workplace.

Here are three tips for leaders that want to incorporate more humour into their workplace and the way they lead:

1. Positive - always use humour to build others and the organisation up - avoid using humour as a way of providing negative feedback, or criticising an individual or the organisation

2. Purposeful - think about what you’re trying to achieve through the use of humour - what is it saying about you as a leader

3. Personal - perhaps you don’t think you have any humour in you, but we all have funny things that happen to us - use humour to give people a greater insight into you and your life

This week I encourage you to explore the use of humour in your approach to leadership. Perhaps it’s asking people to start meetings with a joke, or spending more time with individuals in your team hearing about their week and sharing some of the funny things that have happened to you. Give it a try, make it natural, and let me know how you go.

Episode 7 - Influencing Tactics

This week we look at research into the most (and least) effective influencing tactics used by leaders. We explore how we can combine approaches to enhance the way we influence others.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode seven of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges.

This week we’re looking at influencing. Leadership is all about achieving results through people, and we’re often asked to achieve results through people we don’t directly manage. Therefore influence is central to our effectiveness as leaders.

There are lots of popular ideas about what makes someone influential. It could be someone’s charisma or style for example. But surely it’s more than just personal qualities.

For a psychologist like me, that’s a cue to go to the research, and one of my favourite studies on influencing was undertaken in the early 90’s by Gary Yukl and Bruce Tracey. Together they pioneered our understanding of what they called influencing tactics - the approaches that people choose to take when attempting to influence others. (Consequences of Influence Tactics Used With Subordinates, Peers, and the Boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1992, Vol 77, No 4, 525-535).

They determined how influential someone was in an interesting way - it wasn’t just about whether people committed to an action or approach - it was also about how they rated the effectiveness of the person doing the influencing. In that way, influence was not just about short-term compliance, but also about longer-term appraisals of the individual doing the influencing.

Let’s start with the three tactics that they found were least effective, namely pressure, coalition and legitimating.

Pressure is about using demands, threats or persistent reminders in an attempt to influence someone. Perhaps not surprisingly, this approach was amongst the worst, actually leading to reduced commitment to the task, and negative ratings of the individual. It turns out that people don’t like being forced to do something. Now, we know this intellectually, but it’s amazing how frequently people use pressure as an influencing approach. By way of example, I have three sons at home, and I can assure you, pressure is an influencing tactic I default to with them far more often than I’d like to admit.

The researchers found the coalition tactic, where I gather up others to try to influence you, is also negative as an approach. The old ‘lots of people agree with me’ argument might make someone feel more powerful, but it doesn’t help them to influence others - at best, it’s neutral.

Another approach - legitimating - sounds on the surface like a good influencing tactic. It’s where I point out the rules and policies that support a particular course of action, or why my role means you should listen to me. However this tactic also failed to influence others towards action, and also led to lower ratings of effectiveness.

Why are these three approaches so ineffective? The study indicates it’s because they all focus on behavioural compliance without changing attitudes. Sure - I’ll do what you’re asking of me while you’re standing there, but as soon as you walk away I’ll go back to my original position.

Leaders who rely on pressure, position and rules better be prepared to micromanage every task, because their approach to influencing requires them to micromanage every task.

So what approaches are the most effective?

Yukl and Tracey found that inspirational appeal was a particularly positive influencing tactic. This is where my request is tied to your values, ideals and aspirations, or where it builds your confidence that you can make a contribution. Making an inspirational appeal helps create meaning and purpose for those you lead. Rather than trying to build behavioural compliance, inspirational appeal acts on someone’s attitudes, and that means it works while you’re not there - the person is self-motivated to take action.

But effective influencing isn’t just about a compelling speech. Yukl and Tracey found rational persuasion was also very effective as an influencing tactic. As the name suggests, rational persuasion uses logical arguments and facts to persuade others. It provides the evidence many people need to be comfortable with a particular approach.

They also found that consultation was an effective tactic when influencing others. Consultation involves others in the initial decision making and implementation. By gathering and responding to ideas, people have far more of a vested interest in the change and implementation.

Again, the three most effective influencing tactics all involved the internalisation of favourable attitudes. Whether it’s inspirational appeal, rational persuasion or consultation, something is passed from the leader to the other person which means they want to make a change, rather than the leader having to stand around all day telling people what to do.

So some questions for you now. Of the three most effective influencing tactics, which do you tend to default to? Is it inspirational appeal, rational persuasion or consultation? In my experience, many people default to rational persuasion - a reliance on the facts and data to persuade others - and that’s fine.

But it’s worth practicing the other approaches to increase your influence. Perhaps you might include a story, or some additional data, or involve others more in idea generation - these can all help to increase your influence.

You can also combine these three approaches. Let’s use an example of a company where a number of people have recently had injuries while lifting. It turns out that these injuries all involved the person lifting something that wasn’t directly in front of them - they were twisting their body while lifting.

A legitimating tactic would be to make yet another new rule - no twisting while you lift. But the research on influencing would suggest most people won’t follow this rule because it isn’t internalised. People may not understand the reason for the rule, or why it matters to them.

A better approach would be to use all three effective influencing tactics. As the leader, you could start by sharing the importance of having a workplace where everyone can go home at the end of each day safe, and perhaps even healthier than when they arrived. You could also share the data about the type of injuries that are occurring. Then you could involve people in identifying the kinds of activities where the injuries are most likely to occur, and in brainstorming ways of reducing these risks. Yukl and Tracey’s research indicates this approach will have a much greater chance of success.

This week, think about the way you influence. Watch the way others in the workplace influence. And if there’s someone who is particularly influential, spend some time observing how they influence others.

Next week we are looking at the use of humour as a leader, and some fascinating research about how humour can build innovation. I hope to see you then.

Episode 6 - Assertiveness! (if that's okay with you...)

This week we’re looking at assertiveness - what it is and how we can build it in ourselves and in others.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode six of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re looking at assertiveness - what it is and how we can build it in ourselves and in others.

Assertiveness is one of those areas that people often receive feedback about - “you need to become more assertive” someone helpfully tells you. However people often don't know what to do with that feedback.  What would it mean for me to be more assertive, and how do I build my assertiveness?

We often assume that being more assertive is just about being more confident, or sticking up for ourselves, or being a bit more pushy. But the key to developing assertiveness often lies in more deeply understanding the other person’s perspective. This can seem a little counterintuitive though - isn’t investing more time into understanding the other person’s perspective making us less assertive?

Well another way of thinking about assertiveness is to consider what a truly assertive conversation would look like. It wouldn’t necessarily be aggressive, or pushy, or one sided. In fact, an assertive conversation would be one where both people have their perspectives on the table, and are then actively engaged in taking things forward. 

Assertiveness isn’t about me winning and you losing - it’s about both of us understanding where the other person is coming from, and then working together on a way forward.

To help illustrate, I’d like you to picture a horizontal line. At the left end of the line is a position we could describe as ‘passive’ - where I approach the conversation 100% interested in your perspective, and 0% interested in sharing my own perspective. In the passive position, the balance of interests is completely weighted towards the other person.

At the right end of the line is a position we’ll call ‘aggressive’ - that’s where I approach the conversation with 0% interest in your perspective, and 100% invested in sharing my own perspective. In the aggressive position I’m not even listening to you, and the balance of interests is completely weighted towards my own needs. 

It’s important to recognise that neither of these positions is assertive - passive is not assertive, and aggressive is not assertive. What’s needed is a balance in the interests and needs between the two or more parties involved.

Assertiveness is about ensuring my needs and interests are 100% on the table, and that your needs and interests are also 100% on the table. It’s only in this balance that assertiveness is achieved. Now that doesn’t necessarily mean that we will agree with each other, but that’s not what assertiveness is about. Assertiveness is ensuring we’re clear on everyone’s positions and we can tackle differences as a shared problem.

Here’s an example. 

I’ve setup a regular meeting with my team that happens on the first Tuesday of every month at 2pm. I’ve set this meeting up as a priority, emphasising the importance of keeping it at the same time, and not shifting it. People can dial into the meeting, but the meeting time is going to stay at the same time every time, at least through to the end of this quarter. Things have been going well for the first couple of months, with attendance and engagement at the meetings improved. People are appreciating the meeting being kept as a priority.

Then, in the lead up to the fourth meeting, I notice that a fundraising afternoon tea has been proposed for the first Tuesday of next month at, well you guessed it, 2pm. 

In this example, a passive approach would be to cancel or reschedule my own meeting - to put my own interests at 0%, and the interests of the person organising the afternoon tea at 100%. In contrast, an aggressive approach would be to tell my team members that they’re not even allowed to attend the afternoon tea, and still hold my meeting at the same time. I’m sure you’ll agree that neither of those approaches sounds optimal.

An assertive approach would involve meeting with the person responsible for scheduling the afternoon tea. I could initially point out the clash in times, but then spend the first part of the conversation finding out more about the fundraiser and what they’re hoping to achieve. I could then share my vision for the regular meetings I’m having with my team. 

Now, in a perfect world, the other person might shift their fundraiser to another time, and I might be able to help promote the event with my team - that would be a win win. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Perhaps the person has already ordered catering for that time, or prepared flyers to hand out. Remember, assertiveness isn’t about always getting our way - it’s about getting all the information out from both perspectives. If the clash can’t be resolved, I may still choose to move the meeting time for this month. But at least I have been assertive. 

However the situation plays out, we all walk away understanding each others’ perspectives.

I hope that discussion about assertiveness was helpful. If you’re normally more towards the passive end of the line, this week you might make an additional effort to have your needs and interests tabled. And if you’re normally at the aggressive end of the line, you might want to spend more time trying to understand the other person’s perspective and how your interests may actually be aligned.

In next week's episode of the podcast we're going to be talking influencing. And if you are enjoying the podcast, remember to recommend it to your friends as well - I really appreciate it.

Episode 5 - Feedback is a Gift

Research shows that leaders typically avoid giving feedback, particularly the further away performance is from expectations. This week we look at a feedback structure that focuses on behaviour and the impact we have on others. 

TRANSCRIPT

Hello and welcome to episode five of the Leadership Today podcast.  Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. And this week’s leadership challenge is a doozie - it’s feedback.

I’m sure you’ve heard the expression - feedback is a gift. But, let’s be honest - not every gift we give is fantastic. In my family we have a Christmas tradition which is a variation of the Kris Kringle - the difference being that there’s a $5 limit on each gift and the aim is to be as entertaining as possible - we call it the Krap Kringle (both with Ks obviously). Sure, everyone gets a gift, but most people don’t keep them for very long.

And research indicates that leaders avoid giving these gifts at work - they avoid providing feedback, and that lack of feedback actually gets worse as an individual’s performance drops off. In other words, the further your performance is away from expectations, the less likely you are to receive feedback. 

So what drives this? Well, leaders are often afraid to provide feedback - they are worried about how it will be received. But bad news doesn’t improve with age.

Typically the issue continues to build up, and there’s often a clumsy confrontation which makes everyone feel worse. 

Of course, feedback doesn’t just have to be negative. However, in the busy-ness of life we tend to also miss the opportunities to provide encouraging feedback.

In contrast, if you have ever worked in an organisation with a high-feedback culture, you’ll instantly recognise how beneficial it was to your development. At a consulting firm where I was a leader, we made a habit after every client meeting of providing feedback - taking time to talk about what went well and what could be improved for next time. At first that felt pretty confronting and awkward. People would often just say that the meeting was ‘good’ or ‘fine’. But as trust was built, the appetite for real feedback increased. In fact, aspects of my behaviour that were completely blind to me were shared - both undiscovered strengths, and often simple changes I could make to improve my impact. 

I spend much of my time now facilitating leadership programs, and this is a particularly rich feedback environment - feedback from the co-facilitator, from the clients and participants on the program as well. Sometimes that feedback can seem a little harsh. Sometimes the gift is particularly wrapped all that well. But that doesn’t mean it’s not the right gift. In fact that constant feedback has improved me a great deal and toughened me up.

So here are a few key principles to keep in mind when it comes to feedback:

1. Make it a habit - and do it close to the time - that’s where my earlier example of providing feedback straight after meetings was great - it build the habit and it was immediately after the event

2. Keep it balanced - look for the good as well as improvement - it’s all developmental feedback

3. Start by sharing your intent - if people are afraid or concerned they can’t listen - let them know that you’re on their side - are you really trying to help them, or are you wanting to hurt them? Setting that up as a habit really helps to ensure you’re doing this from the right intent

4. Stick to behaviour - it’s like watching a video tape back - what did you actually see, and what was the impact on you and on others

5. Check in later to confirm understanding - ask them to restate what their takeaway was from the feedback that you provided

William Gentry shares a really helpful feedback format in his book called “Be the Boss Everyone Wants to Work For” - I’ve provided a link to the book in the episode notes. www.amazon.com.au/Be-Boss-Everyone-Wants-Work-ebook/dp/B01E4KC0V8

The approach is called SBI, named after the three components of the feedback approach he outlines.

S stands for Situation - and in that stage you want to describe the exact moment the feedback relates to, being as specific as possible 

B is for Behaviour - what you actually observed - and again that’s like you’re watching a video of the event back and describing it

I is for Impact - this is describing the impact on you, and it can also be the impact on others if you observe that

So let’s apply that - I’d like you to compare these two versions of the same feedback:

The first version is this - “During meetings lately you have being really rude.” - so that feedback is not particularly helpful.

Now let’s compare that with using the SBI format - “(S) Yesterday at the marketing meeting when Jane started presenting, (B) you leaned back on your chair, sighed, and started to use your phone. (I) I felt disappointed that you appeared disengaged from Jane’s presentation”.

And then you want to allow the person to respond. Maybe they weren’t being rude. Or maybe they received a text that lead to their response. There are a whole host of reasons for why they may have behaved the way they did. But none of these reasons change the impact on you and on others, and that’s the important thing. You’re not trying to guess at what drove their behaviour - you’re just providing an insight into the impact they are having on others.

The SBI approach works equally well for positive feedback. For example:

• Situation - During the interaction you just had with that customer who came in with a problem

• Behaviour - I noticed how you smiled and offered a number of helpful suggestions

• Impact - the customer ended up smiling and shaking your hand, and I was really impressed.

This week I encourage you to practise feedback. Use the SBI model or similar. Try to catch people doing good things, and provide the positive feedback straight away. 

Also, ask people for feedback on you, and be specific. If you just say “can you give me feedback”, most people will say “you’re doing fine”. But if you say “can you give me feedback on how confident I’m appearing in presentations”, you’ll receive much richer feedback.

Next week we’ll be talking about assertiveness - what it is, and how we can build it in ourselves and others. I look forward to speaking with you then.

Episode 4 - Monthly 1 on 1 Meetings that Work

In this episode we explore monthly 1 on 1 meetings that work - where both the leader and their direct report turn up prepared to discuss performance, priorities, support, and development.

Performance
What is the person currently doing well?
What do you think the person needs to work on?

Priorities
What are the current priorities for this person?
What goals need to be added, removed or updated?

Manager Support
What’s getting in the way at work? 
How might this be addressed by the manager or direct report?

Training and Development
How is the development plan progressing?
What training and development experiences or programs might be beneficial?

Other
Anything else to discuss?

Action Items
Review action items from previous month
Add any new action items for the manager or direct report

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode four of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re looking at monthly 1 on 1 meetings that actually work.

It’s no secret - People hate performance reviews. They are one of those 'must do' activities that both managers and team members tend to dislike.

To counteract this, we often focus on the performance appraisal process and content. Making sure we look not just at results ('what' people achieve), but also 'how' the person approaches their work and interacts with customers and colleagues. We might try to gather feedback from multiple sources. We might even try to balance discussions about the year past with time to think about the year ahead. But we still tend to run into some pitfalls:

1. The appraisal becomes a high stakes 'event' which tends to add pressure on both the manager and team member

2. The manager and team member haven't had a chance to build a strong relationship, which tends to reduce the quality of feedback and the likelihood of acceptance

3. There's a lack of focus and unclear goals around the job - by the time we discover this during the annual appraisal it's too late to do anything about the year that has gone by

4. It becomes a one-way conversation with too much pressure placed on one person - who is typically the manager - to drive the process

5. Feedback isn't balanced - we either focus way too much on the positives or way too much on constructive/corrective feedback

It’s probably not surprising then that a number of high profile organisations have decided to ditch the performance review altogether. In most cases they’ve actually replaced that with more regular performance conversations, which I think is a great way to go.

You see, I think the answer is actually pretty simple. It's about having 1:1 meeting structures that make performance discussions a more frequent occurrence, and that address the issues and pitfalls that I highlighted earlier. 

I recommend scheduling monthly 1-1 meetings in calendars and ensuring they take priority over the other day-to-day issues that might come up.

The following structure for 1:1 meetings is what I've found to work with people and teams that I've managed. You might want to vary this structure, but hopefully it will provide some ideas for you to think about.

The first topic is around performance. And I have the individual prepare for that, along with myself as well as their manager. Get them to think about what they’re currently doing well, and also what they need to work on. With both people bringing that information together it’s a great opportunity to clarify performance - what’s going well, what needs to change.

The second topic is around priorities. Talking about the current priorities for the person and any goals that might need to be changed or updated. Sometimes the team member might highlight a priority the manager isn't aware of. Sometimes the manager might be able to clarify a priority that the team member isn't placing enough emphasis on. 

Another topic of conversation in those 1:1 meetings is manager support. Looking at those frustrations and the things that are getting in the way at work, and what you might be able to do as the manager to fix those or help. 

The next area is around training and development. This is a great chance to check in with the development plan - see how that’s progressing - and also think about training and development experiences or programs that might be coming up in the coming months that could be beneficial. 

I include a topic called ‘other’. Just covering anything else the person might want to discuss. And that will bring up some interesting things - maybe around work life balance, or perhaps some things that other organisations are doing. It’s good to include that to cover any other areas that might need to be discussed.

And finally action items - an opportunity to review action items from the previous month, and add any new action items for the manager and team member. 

I recommend capturing notes from each meeting to share with team members. As these notes grow through the year, they become a major input into that final performance appraisal discussion. By doing this, the annual performance appraisal becomes little more than a confirmation of what had been discussed through the year. Any areas that weren't clear had already been discussed. You will find it reduces the pressure on you and your team members. It helps you to explore career and development opportunities on a more frequent basis.

I’ve included an outline of those monthly 1-1 meetings at the leadership.today website. If you’ve found this episode helpful, remember to share it with others and to rate and review the podcast on Apple Podcasts. Next week we’re going to be looking at an approach to transform the way you provide feedback to others. I look forward to catching up with you then.

Episode 3 - Control and your Health

Demanding jobs can actually be a good thing for us, provided we have a sense of freedom and control. Without this control, the negative health effects are dramatic. This podcast includes two ideas for improving control.

TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to episode three of the Leadership Today podcast. Each week we provide practical advice to address some of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re looking at control and your health - how having demanding jobs can actually be a good thing, provided we have a sense of freedom and control.

Autonomy is recognised as one of the core motivators people have in the workplace. With greater freedom and control over the way we perform our work comes higher levels of motivation and commitment. Recent research suggests that greater job control also improves our health and reduces our likelihood of dying over a seven year period. Autonomy isn't just motivating - it might just save your life. 

We've traditionally seen stress as a killer - that high job demands have a negative impact on our health. But this research shows that this isn't always the case. In fact, job demands can sometimes help improve our health, provided we retain a sense of control over our work.

Researchers* used a Wisconsin longitudinal study to track people over a seven year period to explore the relationships between job factors and health. They looked at the impact of job demands (including workload and time pressure) and control (the freedom an individual feels they can exert over their job) on health outcomes.

For jobs where people had low control, the research showed that high job demands did indeed negatively impact health outcomes. In fact, the odds of dying over the seven year period increased by 15%. For those who did make it through the seven years, this combination led to an increase in body mass index. In short, a demanding job where you feel little control is bad for your health.

Interestingly, for jobs where people had high control, high job demands were linked to a 34% decrease in the odds of dying over the same period when compared to low demand jobs. Higher job demands actually had positive health outcomes provided people had control over their work.

These findings are similar to my own research. I looked at people who rated their job demands as high. Those who felt their job provided freedom and autonomy of how they achieve results experienced 20% lower negative stress, and 52% higher engagement than those who lacked such freedom. 

What does this all mean for leaders? Here are two ideas. 

1. Seek out and provide autonomy: We know that autonomy motivates - people love having freedom and control over their work. Seek out more freedom in your own work. Negotiate greater flexibility and build your sense of control over the work you perform. If you're a leader, provide your team with more freedom. Give them opportunities to vary the way they perform their work. Manage them around the results they produce rather than how they produce results.

2. Challenge yourself and others: Seek out greater accountability. Once you have control, it's important to ensure you are stretched and challenged. As a leader, provide your team with greater accountability alongside the greater authority you've granted. Discuss the goals people have, and vary the work to capitalise on what motivates your people.

Autonomy and challenge aren't just good for business - they're good for our health too!

*Worked to Death: The Relationships of Job Demands and Job Control with Mortality

Erik Gonzalez-Mulé, Bethany Cockburn 2016 Personnel Psychology
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/peps.12206/full