Episode 52 - Faking Extraversion Boosts Well-Being - What’s All That About?

Summary

This week we’re looking at research that demonstrates faking extraversion as a way to boost well-being. Seriously - what’s all that about? And what might it mean for leaders?

Transcript

Welcome to episode 52 of the Leadership Today podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re looking at research that demonstrates faking extraversion as a way to boost well-being.

There is a well established link between the personality trait of extraversion and positive affect. That is, the more extraverted someone is, the greater their positive feelings and broader well-being. Now, I’ll just pause there to allow time for our introverted half of the audience click on unsubscribe. But as the cigarette company funded Hans Eysenck demonstrated, extraverts are more likely to smoke and over eat, so it’s not all smooth sailing on the other side of the fence. I’ll pause there to allow time for the remainder of my audience to also click on unsubscribe.

Okay - so our personality preferences all come with benefits and draw backs. But exploring the potential benefits of acting more extraverted on well-being is a legitimate area of study. Well, as of August 2019, the initial results are in.

The researchers from the University of California proposed that behaving in an extraverted way should provide a short-term boost in well-being.

How did they get people to act more introverted and extraverted? Well, they actually had each person do both. Participants were split into two groups, with half instructed to behave like an extravert for a week, then as an introvert for a week, with the other half doing the opposite. The participants completed various assessments along the way. In the extraverted week participants were asked to act as talkative, assertive and spontaneous as they could. In the introverted week they were asked to act as deliberate, quiet and reserved as they could.

During the extraverted week, people saw a significant increase in well-being. This included higher ratings of positive affect, connectedness and flow. The researchers also found that asking people to behave in an introverted way decreased well-being.

These findings are similar to other research quoted in the study where people commuting to work on trains and buses were asked to either speak with a stranger or remain silent. Those who spoke with strangers saw a boost to their positive feelings, while those who remained silent didn’t.

But what makes the difference? Was it being talkative, being assertive, or being spontaneous? And do I really need to act outside my personality preference to get the well-being benefits linked to extraversion?

After reading the study, I think these behavioural changes are all possible without working outside of our personality preference. You can be more assertive while still being introverted. It’s a behaviour. You can make a greater effort to connect with other people while still being introverted. Again, it’s a behaviour. And you can choose to be more spontaneous and adventurous while still being introverted. I believe it’s better to think of these as generally beneficial activities and ways of interacting, rather than attempts to change our personalities.

I think one of the key takeaways from this research for leaders is the importance of building connections with others. That, independent of our personality preference for introversion or extraversion, we all need other people and we all want to belong. One of the leadership styles I explore with groups is what I call Connecting. This isn’t just about connecting directly with individuals you lead, it’s also about helping those you lead to make connections with others across the organisation. This helps to provide support while also boosting a sense of belonging, just like those people on the bus or train taking the time to talk with a stranger. As leaders, we can boost well-being and performance by using a Connecting leadership style.

The other key takeaway is helping people to boost their assertiveness - being able to explore other’s perspectives while also presenting my own views and opinions clearly and confidently. If you want to learn more about that, you can check out episode 6 on Assertiveness, and you can also keep an eye out for my online Boost Your Assertiveness course which I’m currently trialing prior to a September launch. But as a leader, I can encourage people to share their views, and also take the time to listen to alternative views. We can boost the assertiveness in our organisations, not just in our people.

If you’re interested in exploring the benefits of introversion, I recommend Susan Cain’s excellent book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking. She also has a great TED talk which I’ve linked to in the show notes. There are benefits from talking less and listening more. I think it’s entirely possible to work on our listening at the same time as we work on building connections and assertiveness. Unlike extraversion and introversion, they’re not opposite ends of a scale.

Now, I came across the research on extraversion and well-being via the excellent British Psychological Society Research Digest. I highly recommend checking that out and I’ve provided a link in the show notes.

References

Susan Cain TED talk - The Power of Introverts. https://www.ted.com/talks/susan_cain_the_power_of_introverts?language=en

Susan Cain - Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking. https://www.amazon.com/Quiet-Power-Introverts-World-Talking/dp/0307352153

British Psychological Society Research Digest - https://digest.bps.org.uk/

Margolis, S., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2019, August 1). Experimental Manipulation of Extraverted and Introverted Behavior and Its Effects on Well-Being. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000668

Episode 51 - Confidence in Action

Summary

Confidence is a key part of leadership effectiveness. It’s much easier to follow a confident leader than one who appears to doubt themselves. But what is confidence, and how can we develop it?

Transcript

Welcome to episode 51 of the Leadership Today podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re exploring confidence in action.

Confidence is a key part of leadership effectiveness. It’s much easier to follow a confident leader than one who appears to doubt themselves. But what is confidence, and how can we develop it?

First a thought - yes, it is possible to be overly confident and to overestimate our abilities. Check out episode 49 on accurate self-assessment for ways to avoid that. 

Self-confidence is underpinned by two concepts:

1. Self-esteem - this is the belief that you have an inherent value. Furthermore, it’s a belief that this value isn’t based on what you do or offer others, rather it’s something that all human beings share. You might also think of self-esteem as self-worth or self-respect. How can you have self-confidence unless you believe you are of value?

2. Self-efficacy - this is the belief that you have capacity to influence events in your own life. It’s a sense of control - that you’re not just a victim of your circumstances, but have the ability to shape the world around you. That no matter what cards are dealt to you, you still have choice and influence. Self-efficacy is necessary for self-confidence. How can you have self-confidence if you don’t think you can impact your circumstances?

You may have noticed that both self-esteem and self-efficacy are grounded in beliefs. They are both about how we think about ourselves and the world. They’re not primarily about feelings, although they will absolutely impact the way we feel. And they’re not primarily about action, although they will absolutely impact the way we act.

Self-confidence is a little different. It is grounded in thoughts, feelings and behaviour. Self-confidence is the belief that you can face day to day challenges. It’s a level of trust in your abilities, capacities and judgements. You can think confidently. You can feel confident. And you can act confidently. Importantly, you can take confident action even when you don’t feel confident. And taking confident action can help you to feel more confident.

So what holds us back from thinking, feeling and acting confidently:

1. Spotlight effect - this is the misguided belief that everyone is watching and judging what we’re doing all the time. It’s easy to feel like we’re always the centre of attention in our world, but that’s probably not the case. More likely is that people are thinking about themselves more than they’re thinking about you. So the fear and anxiety of feeling like we’re in the spotlight can hold us back - it’s a harmful belief that we can reduce once we’re aware of it.

2. Catastrophic thinking - this can lead us to overestimate the potential downside and underestimate the potential benefits of taking action. We can all benefit from taking a more optimistic view.

3. Thinking we need to feel confident before taking action - confidence is, in large part, about taking action even when we don’t feel confident. Try measuring your confidence on the actions you take rather than the feelings you experience.

4. Perfectionism - the need to get things perfect the first time can hold us back because, let’s face it, it’s never going to be perfect the first time, or the second time, or any other time. Instead, set goals around trying new things and improvement rather than perfection.

Confidence is often about what I describe as flight time. Just like when you’re learning to fly a plane, the number of hours of experience matter when it comes to boosting your confidence. Keep putting yourself in situations that expand your capabilities, that stretch you into new territories, and that encourage you to take action. Because, over time, you’ll find out for yourself that your actions can shape your thoughts and beliefs, and ultimately change the way you feel. The pathway to feeling confident is through taking confident action.

If you want to explore more of the themes in this episode further, I suggest checking out two other episodes where we explore growth mindset. That’s episode 9, “Why following your passion isn’t enough”, and episode 42, “The power of ‘I don’t know’”.

Episode 50 - Seven Reasons to Get Back to Nature

Summary

Imagine if there was something you could do to elevate your mood, reduce stress, increase creativity, boost memory, build team cohesion, help physical health and maybe even reduce mental illness. Research demonstrates that getting back to nature can do all of that and more for you and your team.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 50 of the Leadership Today podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we’re exploring seven reasons to get back to nature.

At this point you may be slightly concerned that your podcast feed has been cross contaminated with the “Healthy Living for Hippies” podcast. But, as you know, this podcast is all about research-based tips for improving our leadership. Well, imagine if there was something you could do to elevate your mood, reduce stress, increase creativity, boost memory, build team cohesion, help physical health and maybe even reduce mental illness. As a leader, you would be pretty interested in that for yourself and for your team.

It turns out there are an increasing number of research studies highlighting the importance of people having access to nature. To be clear, this is not just about getting outside or exercising - we already know those things are great for us. These studies are specifically about access to nature such as green areas, park lands and forests. These are peer reviewed studies that are careful to control for things like over-crowding and socio-economic status.

The research highlights seven benefits of getting back to nature:

1. Elevate Mood - Researchers studied hundreds of tweets posted by people from 160 parks in San Francisco. They found that people are happier in parks. And that level of happiness related to the amount of tree cover and foliage. So people in paved open spaces showed a modest uptick in mood, while those in larger regional parks with a lot of trees and foliage saw a boost in mood equivalent to the mood uplift typically only seen on Twitter at Christmas. And the effect lasted up to four hours. People’s language became more positive, and people shifted to using more collective rather than individualistic language.

2. Reduce Stress - Looking at a green landscape, even from indoors, lowers your heart rate and stress levels. It shifts you from the sympathetic nervous system (think fight, flight and freeze) to the parasympathetic nervous system - sometimes called the ‘rest and digest’ mode.

3. Increase Creativity - People who had just completed a four day hike in nature were 50% more creative than before they began the hike.

4. Boost Short Term Memory - Students at the University of Michigan completed a memory test and were then randomly divided into two groups. One group walked in a garden setting, while the other group walked down a city street. The group that walked in nature did 20% than the first time they completed the memory test, while the city street group showed no improvement.

5. Build Social Cohesion - Researchers studied people living in identical apartment blocks, some with green areas and others that had been paved over. They found the people with greater access to green spaces demonstrated a range of community benefits, including higher levels of social support and cohesion. A similar study in the US even demonstrated 9% reduction in gun violence in areas where empty blocks had been converted to green spaces versus areas that had just been cleaned up.

6. Help Physical Health - Natural killer cells have an important role to play in our immune system in rejection of tumours and viral infections. Researchers demonstrated that a three day weekend in a forest boosted natural killer cells by 50%, while the same three day weekend in an urban area did nothing to natural killer cell levels. And the effect lasted for at least 30 days, when natural killer cell levels remained 25% higher than baseline.

7. Reduce Mental Illness - Researchers found poor air quality is correlated with higher rates of bipolar disorder and major depression. Other research in London demonstrated the number of prescriptions for anxiety and depression medications was significantly higher for areas with less greenery, controlling for socio economic status and other factors.

So how does this nature-impact work? The mechanisms for these effects are still largely unclear. It’s not just the about the sight of nature - even natural scents can lead to some benefits. It doesn’t appear to be just about removing the negative effects of crowding or noise either. It’s an emerging area that’s really interesting to follow.

But what does that mean for me and the way I lead. Here are four things to try in the coming week:

1. Don’t just get outside and exercise, seek out nature - after reading this research I’ve varied my morning running route to take me through an area with more trees and greenery. Think about opportunities you might have to do the same.

2. Notice nature in your everyday - recently I was facilitating a program in the middle of a major city, but there was a large tree outside the window I could turn my attention to during the breaks. Is there some green area you can see from your workplace? Make sure you actively look at it across your day.

3. Get the team outside - think about ways you can encourage others in your workplace to get into nature. Maybe it’s a weekend hike or shifting your team retreat to somewhere with more greenery and forest. Or maybe its having a walking team meeting in a local park.

4. Humble office plants - perhaps your workplace isn’t near much greenery, so you might try to bring some of those cues from nature inside with plants. I’ve seen workplaces use vines and climbers as a cheap and low maintenance way to quickly inject some greenery inside. It plays a little bit to my “Day of the Triffids” phobia, but otherwise it sounds like a great idea.

If you want to learn more about some of this research, I have a link to the excellent Hidden Brain podcast episode in the show notes which includes an interview with psychologist Ming Kuo from the University of Illinois. I’ve also included other references to the research quoted in this podcast.

Thanks for joining me for this podcast. I hope you’re finding the content helpful. A special thanks to those who have already reviewed and shared the podcast with others, and to those who have passed on encouraging feedback via the leadership.today website - I really appreciate it. Now get outside and have a great week.

References

Aaron J. Schwartz, Peter Sheridan Dodds, Jarlath P. M. O'Neil‐Dunne, Christopher M. Danforth, Taylor H. Ricketts. Visitors to urban greenspace have higher sentiment and lower negativity on Twitter. People and Nature, 2019

Khan A, Plana-Ripoll O, Antonsen S, Brandt J, Geels C, Landecker H, et al. Environmental pollution is associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorders in the US and Denmark. PLoS Biol, 2019 

Hidden Brain Podcast - You 2.0: Our Better Nature - https://www.npr.org/2019/08/12/750538458/you-2-0-our-better-nature

Robb C Get Outside! How Nature Enhances Work Productivity. Thrive Global

https://medium.com/thrive-global/get-outside-how-nature-enhances-work-productivity-25e26386c348

Episode 49 - Accurate Self-Assessment

Summary

Accurate self-assessment sits at the core of leadership effectiveness. This week we look at five ways you can help ensure you have a clear picture of your strengths and areas for development.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 49 of the Leadership Today podcast. This week we’re exploring a question sent in by a listener named Laura. She asks “How would you go about critically analysing and reflecting on your own leadership skills, individual traits, abilities and effectiveness?”

Central to this question is accurate self-assessment. Daniel Goleman sees accurate self-assessment, the ability to accurately assess our strengths and areas for development, as a central part of Emotional Intelligence. It’s the foundation upon which we can develop further.

As we discussed in last week’s episode, the Johari Window highlights that there are things we know about ourselves that others also see in us. That’s the quadrant where you will find accurate self-assessment.

Two major forces that work against accurate self-assessment. The first is that most people overestimate their performance - they see themselves operating at above average levels compared to those around them. We explored this in our prisoners and performance ratings episode. Put simply, most people believe their performance is better than most people, and this clearly can’t be the case. Pair that with the second aspect, which is that many leaders suffer from imposter syndrome - they feel like a fraud and that they don’t have the necessary skills, qualifications, capabilities etc. to be an effective leader. I’ve coached many leaders who experience both of these at the same time - they feel like they’re an imposter in their role, while also feeling like their performance is still above others in the organisation. These two factors combine to mean most leaders have room for improvement when it comes to accurate self-assessment. So what can we do about it?

Feedback is the first and main way to increase the accuracy of our self-assessment. I was serving on a senior leadership team when I received some feedback which increased the accuracy of my self-assessment by highlighting a blind spot. As I walked out of a leadership team meeting, one of my colleagues asked if I was alright. I felt alright, so I said “yes”. She then said “the reason I ask is that during that meeting you looked really angry”. Now, this was completely out of the blue for me. I didn’t feel angry during the meeting. It was a challenging meeting with lots of complex things to think about. It turns out, that when I was thinking about something complex, my resting face looked angry. The feedback helped to make my self-assessment more accurate - I thought I was doing okay in meetings, but this behaviour was getting in the way. I focused more on smiling during meetings, nodding in agreement, asking more questions when I was uncertain and letting people know when I needed more time to think about something.

A second approach is to identify your strengths. How would you respond if I asked you to write down a list of 20 things that you are good at? When I’ve asked people to do exactly that during leadership development programs, most people initially see it as an impossible task - how could I possibly write down 20 things I’m good at? They then typically start the list with a few ideas, before asking “What’s your definition of good?”. And that’s the critical question. What does it take for something to make it onto your “I’m good at this” list? Does ‘good’ mean you have to be the best in the world? Better than everyone else at your organisation? The best you can possibly be in that area with no room for further improvement? Each of those definitions shortens your list of potential strengths. We often set the bar for what we consider to be our strengths way too high. One practical step you can take from today’s podcast is to list your strengths, making it as long and as comprehensive a list as you can. Ask others who know you well what they see as your strengths - don’t argue back, just add them to your list. We’re far better off developing by focusing on our strengths than by obsessing about our weaknesses.

Laura also asked about individual traits, and this links to the third approach I recommend to build the accuracy of your self-assessment. I encourage you to undertake a broad-based personality profile to identity likely strengths and risks in relation to your role and career ambitions. There may be options to complete one of these through your organisation. The tool I use covers 15 personality traits across the domains of people and relationships, tasks and projects, and drives and emotions. This helps to compare your preferences to others to see what is unique about you and your approach to work. If your organisation doesn’t use these tools, contact me via the leadership.today website - I can set you up for the questionnaire and walk you through the feedback over the phone or via video conference.

The fourth area is effectiveness. I encourage people I coach to look at input measures as well as outcome measures. Our work rate is really important, and this can get lost when we’re just focusing on outcomes. If I take this podcast as an example, the number of podcast downloads and the number of reviews posted are both outcome measures. I actually don’t have much direct influence over either. However, the input measures of writing and recording a podcast each week is something I can control, and these inputs are necessary in achieving the outcome measures.

The fifth suggestion I have is to measure progress. We often underestimate just how far we’ve come in our development because we don’t reflect back to how much we’ve learned. Look back one month, three months or six months and think about the things you have achieved. Also list the skills and capabilities you have developed over the last year. And if the list is short, then build ongoing development into your calendar.

Accurate self-assessment is crucial for high performance and satisfaction. I encourage you to seek feedback, identify your strengths, assess your personality traits, measure your effectiveness by input measures, and measure your progress.

Thanks again for listening and sharing the podcast with others. If you have a question or feedback, go to the leadership.today website and head to the connect page where you can send me a message.

Episode 48 - Four Ways to Explore Your Untapped Potential

Summary

Reaching into our untapped potential is a trip into the unknown. In this episode we use the Johari Window as a framework to identify four ways to explore our untapped potential.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 48 of the Leadership Today podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at untapped potential through the lens of the Johari Window.

One of the best known frameworks in self-development is the Johari Window. I remember a presenter using an overly-posh voice to call it the “Yoharri Window” as if they were a 1960’s mystic whispering to a botanically infused George Harrison. In truth, the name Johari comes from the two researchers that developed the framework - Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham - Jo and Hari. Let me give you a super fast overview so we can then talk about untapped potential.

The method Jo and Hari developed back in the 1950s involves individuals selecting words that they feel best represent them from a list of adjectives. Then others that know the person also select words to represent the individual. In the final step, these words are sorted into four quadrants based on the level of independence or overlap between the lists.

The words that are in common go into the top left quadrant, representing things that the individual knows about themselves that others also see in them. Perhaps the individual sees themselves as outgoing and confident, and others also recognise these traits. This quadrant is the Arena - it’s what we present to the world.

Words that others identify that the individual doesn’t select for themselves go in the top right quadrant. These words reflect aspects that are known to others, but not known to the individual. Perhaps others see the individual as competitive and active, while the individual doesn’t see those qualities in themselves. This quadrant is typically called the Blind Spot. We can extend the Arena quadrant and decrease our Blind Spot through feedback. The Johari Window exercise itself was intended as an opportunity to do exactly that. As we see ourselves the way others see us, we build our self-awareness.

Words that an individual identifies for themselves that others don’t use go in the lower left quadrant, titled the Mask. These are things we see in ourselves that others don’t see. Through disclosure we can extend our Arena and decrease the Mask. Doing this can help us to build relationships with others, as we become more known.

That leaves one remaining quadrant - the Unknown where things are unknown to us and unknown to others. It’s usually at this point that discussions move on - where we explore the benefits of feedback and disclosure further. However I think there are benefits to exploring this quadrant further. Sticking to the other quadrants is really about expanding knowledge about who we are now. We can let others know more about who we are now. Or we can seek feedback to learn more about who we are now. The final quadrant provides a different opportunity. Instead of just expanding knowledge, it’s actually about expanding who we are now.

So how do we explore the untapped potential resting in the unknown?

1. Try new things - expand your interests, even if they don’t appear to be directly applicable to your work. The calligraphy classes Steve Jobs attended out of interest lead to typeface being one of Apple’s early differentiators in desktop publishing.

2. Seek additional responsibilities - take the box you have been given in your job and push it outwards. Work with your manager to take things off their plate.

3. Connect with new people - work with people in your network to make new connections to explore their experiences and backgrounds.

4. Relentlessly seek feedback - as you are expanding into the unknown, you will benefit from targeted feedback. Don’t just ask for general feedback, ask about specific elements relating to your new efforts.

The Unknown quadrant is about exploring new areas and trying new things. The Johari window is a helpful framework to help us to know ourselves and be known by others as we are now. But it also provides a reminder that our boundaries are not fixed, rather they are there to be tested and expanded.

Episode 47 - Five Ways Busy Leaders Prioritise Treating People Well

Summary

The best leaders prioritise treating people well, and reap the benefits through higher performance and greater commitment. But time pressure can make this difficult. Here are five ways busy leaders prioritise treating people well.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 47 of the Leadership Today podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at five ways busy leaders prioritise treating people well.

Treating people well matters, and not just because it’s the right thing to do. Research shows that people who feel they are treated fairly perform better, and have higher team and organisational commitment. People who are treated fairly deliver better results and stay longer.

But what does it mean to be treated fairly? Researchers divide fairness into four factors:

1. Equitable rewards - people want to see a link between performance and reward

2. Transparent procedures for rewarding people - people are clear about the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of reward and recognition - they know what is rewarded, and the way it is rewarded

3. Clear decision making - people are clear about the logic behind decisions, not just the decisions themselves

4. Dignity and respect - people feel they are treated in a considerate way

No doubt you agree these all sound great, and the best leaders you have worked for have probably done all of those things. So why doesn’t it happen more often?

Research published in Harvard Business Review helps to explain why fairness can be such an issue. Through a series of studies the researchers found short-term high workloads were associated with leaders placing less attention on fairness. Even more concerning, they found that chronic and ongoing high workloads were associated with leaders persistently prioritising tasks over people.

The problem is that leaders who are under time pressure tend to put technical tasks ahead of people, and as a result their treatment of people suffers.

The risk is that performance drops off and people think about leaving. Not only that, the best leaders feel compromised - they may want to treat their people better, but feel they don’t have the time or permission to do that effectively. So, what can we do about it?

Here are five ways busy leaders prioritise treating people well:

1. Great leaders still set aside time for their people: treating people fairly is rarely urgent, so the best leaders schedule time for their people. And they keep to those times even when they’re busy. If you’re interested in exploring that further you can check out episode 4 about monthly 1 on 1 meetings that work.

2. Great leaders prioritise the process not just the task: researchers often refer to this as procedural fairness. People want to know that procedures have been established and are followed without exceptions.

3. Great leaders agree and communicate what should be rewarded: they work with other leaders to establish values and performance standards.

4. Great leaders differentiate based on performance: this isn’t necessarily about money, but could include secondments, promotions, conferences, training, additional leave. They also ensure that under-performers know they’re underperforming, then they help them to improve, they move them to a more appropriate role if needed and, if all else fails, they move them on.

5. Great leaders share the ‘why’ behind decisions, not just the decisions themselves: in the absence of this, people make things up to fill in the gaps. The best leaders make sure the gaps aren’t there in the first place.

The world needs more leaders that prioritise treating people well. We also need organisations to value and reward fairness. Once leaders have permission to put people first they’re far more likely to be fair. It’s not just because it’s the right thing to do, but it also produces better results and helps to retain our best people.

References

When Managers Are Overworked, They Treat Employees Less Fairly - Elad N. Sherf, Ravi S. Gajendran, Vijaya Venkataramani - JUNE 04, 2018

https://hbr.org/2018/06/research-when-managers-are-overworked-they-treat-employees-less-fairly

Episode 46 - Saying 'No' Without Being a Jerk

Summary

One of the elements that gets in the way of being assertive as a leader is an inability to say 'no' to requests, or automatically saying ‘yes’ to everything that comes our way. We explore ways to say ‘no’ without being a jerk.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 46 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at saying ‘no’ without feeling like a jerk.

One of the elements that gets in the way of being assertive as a leader is an inability to say 'no' to requests. Or, the flip side, is automatically saying 'yes' to every request that comes our way.

True assertiveness requires us to say 'no'. If we can't say 'no' then our time and efforts become subject to others' needs rather than our own. How can we lead others effectively if we can't choose our own priorities? We also risk becoming overloaded, ending up struggling to fit everything into our work week, and neglecting some of the truly important parts of our role. 

Saying ‘yes’ often early in our career can make a lot of sense. You’re seen as someone who is keen to help out and add value. The catch is when we carry that impulse to say ‘yes’ and take more and more on into the rest of our career. 

Often times this inability to say 'no' comes down to a tension between "I don't want to do it" and "I want to help". Being helpful is a wonderful trait. But being helpful doesn't necessarily mean saying 'yes' automatically.

This is where a "no but..." response can work well. It allows us to still be helpful without automatically agreeing to the request. For example, you could still be helpful by providing advice. "No - I won't be able to do that research for you, but you might find this online resource helpful". Or you could help the person to make a new connection. For example, "No - I can't cover your shift on Saturday, but you could speak with Brett in Human Resources to see if anyone is looking for extra shifts." Or you might vary the timeframe. "No - I won't be able to finish that report today, but I could have it ready by Friday". Or you could vary the task. "No - I won't be able to attend that meeting, but I'm happy to look at your presentation and provide some feedback". Advice, connections, varying the timeframe and varying the task can help us to say ‘no’ while still being helpful.

Another really useful technique is to insert a gap between the request and your response. Just because someone makes a request of you doesn't mean you have to respond straight away. It's perfectly reasonable to let them know that you will think about it and get back to them by a particular time. But what if it's urgent? Well, just because something is urgent for someone else doesn't automatically make it urgent for you. And I'm also not suggesting it needs to be a long gap. If they're on the phone you might say you will call them back in five minutes. It just needs to be enough of a gap so that you can consider whether you have capacity and interest to do what's being asked of you. 

Clearly the context matters. My advice to a teenage son on work experience is to say 'yes' to absolutely everything they ask you to do. But the more senior your position, the more important the ability to say ‘no’ becomes. My advice to a CEO is to never say 'yes' to anything in the moment unless they’re 100% convinced it's the right call. 

So, saying 'no' while being helpful, and inserting a gap are two great approaches to increasing our assertiveness.

I’ve had the privilege to work with thousands of leaders to help them achieve results through people. I have seen many people who struggle with their confidence, with speaking up and presenting their ideas, with being more assertive without becoming aggressive, and with saying ‘no’ to unreasonable requests. In short, the majority of leaders I’ve worked with want and need to boost their assertiveness to become more effective. They recognise that assertiveness is crucial to achieving results both for themselves and their organisation. But they often don’t know where to start. That’s why I’ve developed the Boost Your Assertiveness at Work in Three Weeks program. The course is launching in early September, and those who subscribe to our email list will receive a special offer. If you haven’t already signed up, you can do that via leadership.today website and follow the connect links. If you enjoyed today’s episode, I’m confident you’ll love the online course. Have a great week and I’ll speak to you next week.

Episode 45 - Overcoming a Fear of Delegation

Summary

Delegation - it’s something that every successful leader needs to do in order to perform and progress, yet most leaders under-delegate. This week we explore ways of overcoming a fear of delegation.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 45 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at ways of overcoming a fear of delegation.

Chances are that, like most leaders, you struggle with delegation. And this under-delegation has a significant impact on personal, team and organisational performance. 

People don’t delegate enough for a range of reasons, but here are some typical ones:

1. It will be faster to just do it myself - delegating takes too much time and is inefficient

2. Performance will drop - the person I delegate it to just won’t do it as well as I could, so delegation is bad for quality

3. I don’t trust people to get it done - delegation leads to unreliable results

4. I don’t want to trouble people - delegating work to others is a hassle for them

If any of those reasons or excuses for not delegating ring true for you then congratulations - you’ve found the level of job you will remain in for life.  And I’m saying that as someone who really struggled with delegation - there’s no judgement here! But the extent to which we delegate is the pace at which we progress. 

However there is hope - becoming better at delegating just requires a shift in mindset and a few simple techniques. 

First the shift in mindset. If you think delegation is just about getting things done, then the earlier reasons not to delegate make perfect sense. Yes - it could well be faster to do it yourself. Yes - you will probably do it better. Yes - if you don’t delegate you’re not dependent on anyone else that can let you down. And yes - your people won’t be hassled by additional work. But all of these reasons not to delegate are short term focused. 

If we take a longer term view we see that delegation is actually about developing others which in turn increases the capacity of the organisation to deliver. Delegation is about individual and organisational growth. 

That shift in thinking made all the difference for me. Suddenly the things that I used to hold on to were great opportunities for my team to stretch themselves and grow. Delegating helped them to progress, and it also helped me to progress. Shifting the question from “should I delegate?” to “should I develop others?” will make you much more willing to delegate. 

So let’s say I’ve encouraged you to give delegation another try. A reasonable question is what to delegate. It’s important to delegate meaningful things that will challenge others - things for which they can take full accountability. In fact, a useful exercise is to think about if you had to delegate all of your work, how would you do it? How can you start preparing your team now to be able to take on even the more challenging parts of your role? I’m not suggesting you then delegate all of your role, but it may unlock some additional opportunities to delegate and develop others.

When shouldn’t you delegate? You need to be careful delegating when there’s a combination of time pressure and lack of capability. When you don’t have time to develop and support the person, you’re setting yourself and them up for failure. If it’s genuinely urgent and important, then it’s typically best to do it yourself. But if everything is always urgent and important then that’s a pattern that you need to challenge. 

So how should we delegate? Here are four principles to keep in mind: 

1. Be clear about the purpose - why does this delegated responsibility matter in relation to the organisation, the individual and their development.

2. Focus on the outcomes not the process - resist the temptation to tell them how to achieve results, but rather give them the end outcome that’s required.

3. Be available to coach - let the individual know that you’re available to coach them through anything they are struggling with, and set aside time to do this.

4. Build in update points - set some milestone points up at the start when you will check in with the person. This will help you to manage your anxiety levels around how the work is progressing without hovering around or inserting yourself in the process at unexpected points.

Delegation is something that every successful leader needs to do in order to perform and progress. Give it another try this week and let me know how you go.

Episode 44 - 10 Leadership Lessons From Year One of the Leadership Today Podcast

Summary

Reflection is important in our development as leaders. In that spirit, this week we look at 10 things we’ve learned from year one of the Leadership Today podcast. 

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 44 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week is a little different as we look at 10 things we’ve learned from year one of the Leadership Today podcast. 

It has been one year since we launched the Leadership Today podcast, and it has been a privilege to play a small part in the development of thousands of leaders. Across the year there have been some stand out lessons about leadership, and also things I’ve learned from producing a weekly leadership podcast.

Here are ten leadership lessons from the back catalogue of 43 episodes that have stood out:

1. The power of habits - so much of our effectiveness as leaders rests in non-urgent but important activities. Habits allow us to prioritise these activities. This could include routines around planning, reflection, exercise and connections with others. None of these things are ever urgent, so building habits is a great way to ensure they get done.

2. Mindset matters - taking on a positive growth mindset helps us to make better decisions, to stretch ourselves into new areas, and to develop our capability.

3. Leaders can’t motivate anyone directly, but they can construct motivating environments - our key role as leaders is to set up and maintain the conditions for success.

4. Great leaders regularly share the vision and connect it to the things people care about - this requires us to formulate a clear picture of the future and to be interested enough in our people to see how it links to what motivates and interests them.

5. Influence and assertiveness are the vehicles to making a positive impact - you can have the best ideas in the world, but if no one knows or cares then our ideas are worthless. Fortunately we can all build our influence and assertiveness.

6. Seek and provide feedback - people can’t grow and thrive in a feedback vacuum. Look for opportunities to provide feedback daily, focusing on the positive more than the corrective. And make sure you surround yourself with people who can provide feedback to shape your own development.

7. Resilience is partly about people and partly about environments - as leaders we can create toxic work environments that undo even the most resilient person, or we can craft work environments that foster resilience. So many organisations are rolling out resilience programs in an attempt to toughen up their people, when the real problem rests in job design and organisational culture.

8. Learning is both hard and motivating - anyone can become a great leader, but it takes effort and you never truly ‘arrive’. If we continue to stretch ourselves, there’s always moments of conscious incompetence and feeling clumsy before we become good at something.

9. Take time to reflect - regularly review how you’re spending your time, and how that aligns with your values and what matters to you.

10. Create a legacy - investing in the next wave of leaders makes you a far more effective leader. There is so much we can learn from our people - we don’t need to be the ones with all the answers, but we do need to demonstrate interest in and invest in our people.

Hopefully there’s something amongst those lessons that has resonated with you. I encourage you to step out and try something new - don’t die wondering. Have a great week, and I look forward to sharing the next year with you as we continue to develop our leadership together.

Episode 43 - How Thinking in the Third Person Makes You a Wiser Leader

Summary

As leaders we need to make wise decisions in often complex and emotionally charged situations. This week we look at two techniques for making wiser decisions.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 43 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at two techniques for making wiser decisions.

As leaders we need to make decisions in often complex and emotionally charged situations.

When it comes to making decisions, we are often encouraged to think of our brain like it’s a computer - that our consciousness is the sum total of electrical impulses rushing around circuits producing a stream of thoughts. However, our brains aren’t just thinking machines - they’re also emotion machines. What the computer analogy overlooks is the electro-chemical nature of the brain - that our thoughts and emotions aren’t just about electrical impulses, but also about the chemicals that interact with and moderate these systems. Our brain constantly influences, and is influenced by, our emotional state. 

Our emotional state can help or hinder our decision making. When we’re in a positive emotional state we make better decisions and more readily identify the up side potential of situations. When we’re anxious or stressed we tend to focus on the negatives and become less creative and more risk averse.

To make wiser decisions, it’s helpful to separate out the thoughts and feelings associated with the situation - to recognise the feelings, and act on the facts. One way to do this is to take a third person perspective. Research outlined by David Robson shows that thinking in the third person improves decision making. This approach increases our willingness to consider others’ perspectives, and also allows us to be more open to new ways of thinking about the situation.

Let’s consider an example - that I have a difficult meeting coming up with one of my team members.

Using this approach I switch from saying to myself “I have a challenging conversation coming up with John” to “Andrew has a challenging conversation coming up with John”. I can then work though a series of questions:

1. How do I feel about the situation? What emotions am I experiencing? Perhaps I’m feeling frustrated with how John has approached an issue and am worried about how he will respond to the feedback I need to give him. Even the process of naming the emotions reduces some of their ‘charge’ and control over our thinking.

2. What are the facts of the situation? What’s the data that others would also see and agree with? Before I have my meeting with John, it would be helpful to note down the facts as they relate to the conversation we’re about to have.

3. What advice would I give to a friend in the same situation I’m facing? This helps us to consider the situation at a distance. With John this would allow me to view the situation at arm’s length rather than getting too caught up in the details and history.

One other approach that can help you to act more wisely is to make a decision and then choose to run with it. Once you’ve considered all the factors, commit to your course of action for a set period of time without revisiting it. This approach can help to reduce the rumination and worry that leads us to make poor decisions. For example, research shows that people who check their stock market investments more frequently end up making worse investment decisions and earn lower returns than those who check less frequently. Those who check frequently tend to focus on the negatives and pull out of investments too quickly. It’s similar to people who are always thinking about getting a better job and keep checking for new opportunities - they tend to end up constantly worried and less satisfied with their current job than if they had committed to the job for a period of several months.

This week I encourage you to look for opportunities to apply these two approaches - considering situations in the third person and then sticking to your decisions.

References

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/05/24/a-new-trial-of-an-ancient-rhetorical-trick-finds-it-can-make-you-wiser/

https://www.betterment.com/resources/high-frequency-monitoring/

Episode 42 - The Power of "I Don't Know"

Summary

Recognising that we don’t have all the answers makes us more effective as leaders - there’s power in saying “I don’t know”.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 42 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week’s episode is the power of “I don’t know” - how, as leaders, recognising that we don’t have all the answers can make us more effective.

Some leaders feel that, to be truly effective, they need to have all the answers. These leaders think saying “I don’t know” demonstrates weakness, inadequacy or being unqualified for the job. That was my experience when I first moved from being an individual contributor to leading others. As a management consultant, much of my value was in my knowledge, experience and expertise. So I initially carried that same mindset into leadership. And the research shows that’s exactly what many leaders do - they try to stay in the role of ‘expert’. However, needing to have all the answers places an extraordinary burden on an individual. And our people just don’t buy it - it comes off as an act and a facade that no one can maintain forever.

Recent research shows that people who think they know it all routinely overestimate their cognitive capability - put simply, they aren’t as smart as they think they are. And this mindset has flow on impacts for the way they approach learning and new opportunities. Why would you try to learn more if you think you already know enough? Sure enough, the research shows that “know it alls” end up being less reflective and less curious than others. They stop learning and growing, limiting their future potential.

Other leaders recognise that they can’t know everything - that there’s always more to learn. Researchers call this mindset “intellectual humility”. It’s like having a growth mindset towards knowledge.

Research shows that people with intellectual humility benefit in six ways:

1. They have greater general knowledge - those who can admit they don’t know actually know more than others

2. Their knowledge is more accurate - they are right more often than other people

3. They are more reflective - they take more time to think about their approach

4. They enjoy mentally challenging tasks - stretching their minds further

5. They are intellectually curious - they seek out new knowledge and experiences

6. They are motivated to learn for the sake of new knowledge - they have wide interests, not just those needed for their job

It pays to recognise that you can’t know everything and that there’s always more to learn.

There’s a difference between saying “I don’t know” and not actually taking the time to find out. I once heard about a manager whose nickname was ’Mirrors’ - because whenever people asked him a question he’d always say “I’ll look into it”. But he didn’t follow through. This erodes trust - you need to close the loop.

Three things to try this week:

1. Recognise it’s okay not to know everything - it’s a change in mindset, so think about the mindset you’re currently bringing and challenge it

2. Be curious to learn more - not just in your field of expertise - a while back I completed an online MasterClass by the comedian Steve Martin which taught me a lot about story telling and structuring communication - I didn’t complete the course to help with my work, but the applications to my work have been surprisingly beneficial

3. Coach rather than tell - foster an inquisitive mindset in your team - help them to see that they don’t need to know everything either

Just something quick before you go. The Leadership Today podcast has hit the Apple Podcast charts in a diverse range of countries including USA, Great Britain, Canada, India, Ireland, Brazil, Colombia, Netherlands, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, Slovakia, Australia, and New Zealand. Whenever the podcast or an episode gets into the charts, it helps a whole bunch of new listeners who can benefit from the material to find the podcast. We don’t have advertising and genuinely see this podcast as a gift to help leaders achieve results through people - there isn’t a catch. So I would really appreciate it if you could take a couple of minutes to provide a rating or review - in Apple Podcasts would be great, but whatever platform you use. Plus it’s fantastic to hear your feedback on the show - you can contact me via the Leadership Today website. Thanks.

Reference

Elizabeth J. Krumrei-Mancuso, Megan C. Haggard, Jordan P. LaBouff & Wade C. Rowatt (2019) Links between intellectual humility and acquiring knowledge,The Journal of Positive Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2019.1579359

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17439760.2019.1579359

Episode 41 - Is Putting Employees First Actually Better for Customers?

Summary

This week we explore whether putting employees first ahead of customers and shareholders leads to better customer service and financial results.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 41 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we explore whether putting employees first, that is ahead of customers and shareholders, actually produces better customer service and financial results.

Richard Branson, the founder of Virgin, once famously said “Clients do not come first. Employees come first. If you take care of your employees, they will take care of your customers.” It’s a sentiment that stands in stark contrast to “the customer is always right” and “shareholder value” formulas tracing back to the early 1900’s. 

During an interview with Inc, Branson continues “It should go without saying, if the person who works at your company is 100 percent proud of the brand and you give them the tools to do a good job and they are treated well, they're going to be happy… Effectively, in the end shareholders do well, the customers do better, and your staff remain happy”.

This sounds like a nice management philosophy, particularly from an employee perspective - what employee wouldn’t want to be put first? But does the research back up this link between employee engagement, customer satisfaction and financial performance? 

Large scale research into the link between employee engagement, customer satisfaction and results is actually less common than you might think. A 2008 study by Maxham, Netemeyer and Lichtenstein covered over 1,600 retail employees, servicing over 57,000 customers across 306 stores. Their research found direct links between employee engagement, customer satisfaction and financial performance.

The research highlighted three main findings:

1. Conscientious employees who feel they are treated fairly and who identify with the organisation perform better in their jobs.

2. Increased job performance, not just doing their job well, but going above and beyond for the customer, leads to higher customer evaluations.

3. Customer evaluations around satisfaction, purchase intent, loyalty and word-of-mouth referrals, lead to higher customer spending and store sales growth.

The researchers found that even a one point increase in customer evaluations was associated with customers spending over $12 more per transaction, a 15% increase. And as customer evaluations increased, transaction values and sales growth increased at an even greater rate - it wasn’t just a straight line relationship. Other analysis of multiple studies by Harter and Schmidt also supports these links.

I think this research has four main implications for leaders:

1. Hire well - hire conscientious people who love your organisation and want to go above and beyond.

2. Treat employees well - fairness matters, give them great leaders to work for who also love the organisation and want to go above and beyond.

3. Focus on systems and front line frustrations - as a customer it’s common to hear people apologising for their system or some clunky process. Ask your frontline teams about frustrations and remove them. A CEO of a major bank I worked for would call several bank tellers once a month to hear about their experiences on the front line, cutting through multiple layers.

4. Look to other examples - research broader trends in customer service, including the interesting things others are doing outside your industry.

If we take these steps, we will be well on our way to putting our people first, and delivering better results for customers and shareholders.

References

https://www.inc.com/oscar-raymundo/richard-branson-companies-should-put-employees-first.html

Harter & Schmidt (2002) Business-Unit-Level Relationship Between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, and Business Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology.

Maxham, Netemeyer & Lichtenstein (2008) The Retail Value Chain: Linking Employee Perceptions to Employee Performance, Customer Evaluations, and Store Performance. Marketing Science.

Episode 40 - Are Workaholics Bad for Business?

Summary

We have come to celebrate workaholics in our organisations - those people who always seem to be busy and putting in long hours. But is it possible for a person to be too engaged with their work? And does that lead to burnout and negative performance?

Transcript

Welcome to episode 40 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we explore whether workaholics are bad for business.

We have come to celebrate workaholics in our organisations - those people who always seem to be busy and putting in long hours. But is it possible for a person to be too engaged with their work? And does that lead to burnout and negative performance?

Most models of employee engagement don't examine what actually drives people to work hard and contribute more to an organisation. This muddies the water between what researchers call workaholism and work engagement. As a result, employee engagement scores and measures of performance don't always align. Organisations with high employee engagement can sometimes be perplexed by relatively poor performance and the high incidence of burnout and other negative health outcomes amongst their people.

One study by van Beek and her colleagues separated workaholism and work engagement into two distinct concepts. The researchers then looked at various combinations of the two including the impact on burnout. They defined workaholism as the tendency to work excessively hard and being obsessed with work - working compulsively. In contrast, they saw work engagement as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind characterised by energy, dedication and becoming absorbed in your work.

Their research showed that workaholism and work engagement both lead people to work harder and for longer hours. But it was the incidence of burnout amongst these groups that was most interesting. 

Perhaps not surprisingly, being a workaholic increased the incidence of burnout over non-workaholics. The researchers linked this to work-home interference, poor social relationships, and high levels of job strain. In contrast, being engaged with work decreased the incidence of burnout versus the non-engaged. Interestingly, combining the two, that is being a work-engaged workaholic, decreased the level of burnout below that of your regular workaholic. It also reduced the incidence of burnout to below that of non-engaged non-workaholics. Being positively engaged with work appears to dampen the negative impact of being a workaholic when it comes to burnout. 

This research suggests that improving work engagement will lessen the chance of burnout, even for the workaholics in our organisations. As leaders we can help workaholics in our teams to become aware of what motivates them, allowing them to identify greater meaning and purpose in their work. Understanding the difference between workaholism and employee engagement can do wonders to increasing the sustainability of performance in your organisation. Leaders can set up the conditions that encourage our people to become absorbed in their work versus becoming obsessed and compulsive about the work they complete.

Reference

Ilona van Beek, Toon W. Taris and Wilmar B. Schaufeli (2011) Workaholic and Work Engaged Employees: Dead Ringers or Worlds Apart? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol 16, No 4, 468-482.

Episode 39 - Four Ways Leaders Build Trust

Summary

Trust is the essential currency of any organisation however, it seems to be in short supply these days. This week we look at four ways in which leaders can build trust.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 39 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at four ways in which leaders can build trust.

Trust is the essential currency of any organisation however, it seems to be in short supply these days. And trust has a huge impact on the effectiveness of teams and organisations. Without trust, three things happen:

1. People hesitate - they become reluctant to act, and instead sit back, giving less than their best

2. People make up stories - they try to make sense of what’s happening, and create stories, usually negative, that help to explain actions and events

3. People leave - as the trust bank account dwindles, staff turnover increases

So why is it that we trust some people more than others? Psychological research gives us some important insights. We trust people that we believe have good intentions for us, and who follow through on those intentions.

First, let’s look at the good intentions part - we trust people who have good intentions for us. It’s important to note that it’s good intentions for us that matters - having good intentions for the organisation or even others is not enough. For a leader to build trust, they need to understand what matters to their people. You can’t build trust without uncovering the needs and interests of your people. Without that, people begin to question the leader’s motives and anticipate a negative impact of their actions.

And, second, a leader you can trust is someone who follows through. They’re predictable and act in the way you expect. It’s not enough to just say the right things - trustworthy leaders follow through.

I was a leader in a management consulting firm as we sailed towards the Global Financial Crisis. After several years of record growth, clients were suddenly delaying projects as they tried to cut back on spending. As a result we made a decision to decrease our costs by 10% which, in a consulting firm, equates to people. I laid out the facts to my team - that our revenue was falling and we had to reduce costs or start laying off staff. We wanted to keep people, and were exploring ways to achieve a cost saving while having the smallest impact on people possible. We worked together to propose everyone on the team voluntarily move to a nine day fortnight, meaning they would lose one day of work every two weeks and take a 10% pay cut. People signed up to this because they understood we had their best interests at heart - people wanted to keep their jobs, and this was one way of ensuring they could do that. We also found that people quite liked having a day off every two weeks, and that productivity even lifted despite fewer days being worked. And I moved to a nine day fortnight too, which was an important demonstration of my personal commitment to the change. Without trust, people might have seen the change as a money-grabbing exercise and been less engaged with their work and the organisation. 

Here are four ways you can build trust as a leader:

1. Uncover your team members’ interests and needs - in that way you can align your actions to their needs

2. Share your intent - let people know what you’re trying to achieve, and how that aligns with their interests, being as open as you can

3. Follow through - do what you said you would do

4. Let them know you’ve followed through - don’t just leave them to join the dots, help them to see that you have followed through

I believe any leader can build trust, but it needs to be authentic. People are finely tuned to when someone’s words don’t align with their actions. So keep in mind what it takes to be a trustworthy leader - it’s someone who demonstrates good intentions for others, and follows through on those intentions.

Episode 38 - Do People Really Shoot the Messenger?

Summary

As a leader, it’s likely that you have had to deliver bad news. It can be extremely difficult to do well. This week we look at practical ways to deliver negative news, and hopefully not become the messenger that gets shot in the process.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 38 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we look at practical ways to deliver negative news, and hopefully not become the messenger that gets shot in the process.

No doubt you’ve heard the saying “Don’t shoot the messenger”. You might think it’s just another saying, but recent research suggests that is exactly what we do. Through a series of experiments the researchers at Harvard found that people end up not liking those who bear bad news, even when the person wasn’t the decision maker. And the impact is literally on ratings of the messenger - people don’t end up thinking any less of another representative standing next to the messenger while the bad news is shared. The effect of people disliking the messenger is particularly strong when the bad news isn’t expected or doesn’t make complete sense to the person receiving the news. The researchers saw such news as challenging our assumptions that the world is “just, predictable, and comprehensible”. In such circumstances we tend to question the motives of the messenger - what are they really trying to do, and what are they getting out of it?

Once the bad news is delivered, people may be less likely to then want to interact with the messenger, but the messenger is often the very person who is best placed to offer support for next steps.

As a leader, the most difficult news I had to deliver was making people redundant - people I knew well and liked that we had to let go for reasons entirely out of their control. We had about as good a process as we could around that, but the relationships with the individuals were permanently damaged. Just like the research suggested, they naturally thought less of me as the messenger. After all, who wants to keep in touch with the person who made them redundant?

But there are some steps we can take to help avoid being the messenger that gets shot:

1. Be direct and clear - it can be tempting to try to soften the news, but just end up making it less clear. What are the fewest words you can use to distil the message down to the core.

2. Let them know the reasons behind the decision or information - be honest about what you do and don’t know.

3. Let them know how you feel and your motives - you are a human being delivering a message to another human being.

4. It’s not about you - conveying the message is primarily about them, so don’t make it about you.

5. Acknowledge the emotions - that the news is likely to impact them, and that’s perfectly understandable.

6. Check in for understanding - ask them to share the news in their own words and clarify anything that isn’t clear.

7. Commit to supporting them - let them know that you’re here to help.

8. Look after yourself - sharing bad news can knock you around, so find others who can support you.

If we follow each of these steps, we’re in a much better position to deliver negative news in a way where people can hear it, process it, and then seek additional support.

Reference

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/05/08/shooting-the-messenger-is-a-psychological-reality-share-bad-news-and-people-will-like-you-less/

Episode 37 - Why Everyone is a Born Leader

Summary

This week we explore why everyone is a born leader - that we all have a head start in some facet of leadership.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 37 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are exploring why everyone is a born leader.

I was just about to give a presentation at a conference recently when someone said “I see you’re talking about leadership today - don’t you think leaders are born?”

My answer, having had over 20 years to research and think about it, might surprise you. The answer is yes - I do think leaders are born. But probably not in the way you expect.

When most people think about ‘born leaders’ they’re usually thinking about things like charisma, confidence, and extraversion - those up front skills that draw others in and create enthusiasm. The reality is that some people have a head start in these areas through genetics and the environment in which they grow up, so you might consider them to be born leaders. But these skills and traits are just part of effective leadership. In fact, not every great leader is charismatic, confident and extraverted. There are many different ways to be an effective leader. Research into leadership and Emotional Intelligence highlights a suite of competencies that can help people to be great leaders, each of which can be learned and developed.

I recall an interview with Daniel Goleman, whose books on Emotional Intelligence helped popularise the concept in the 1990s and beyond. Goleman was asked what he thought about Steve Jobs as a leader, and whether Jobs had great emotional intelligence. Now, this was a loaded question, particularly since Jobs had only just passed away earlier that same year. Jobs was clearly a very successful leader who transformed the way we think about technology, music distribution and even animated movies. But he was also renowned for being extremely demanding to the point of being aggressive, often belittling people in front of others. In fact, his close friend and Apple designer Jony Ive described it like this: “I once asked him why he gets so mad about stuff. He said, 'But I don't stay mad.' He has this very childish ability to get really worked up about something, and it doesn't stay with him at all. But, there are other times, I think honestly, when he's very frustrated, and his way to achieve catharsis is to hurt somebody. And I think he feels he has a liberty and licence to do that. The normal rules of social engagement, he feels, don't apply to him. Because of how very sensitive he is, he knows exactly how to efficiently and effectively hurt someone. And he does do that.” That doesn’t sound very emotionally intelligent.

But Goleman drew out Job’s vision and inspirational leadership - his ability to come up with new ways of thinking and bring people around that vision. You only have to watch the launch on the first iPhone to see these strengths in full display. Goleman also pointed out that emotional intelligence is a spectrum of abilities, and that you don’t have to be great at all of them to be great as a leader.

In fact, great leadership can be built on empathy and insight into others. Or resilience and the ability to bounce back quickly from setbacks. Or warmth and the ability to connect with others. Or analytical capacity - being able to pull things apart into their component parts. Or conceptual ability - being able to link disparate ideas into a unified whole. Once we broaden out the list of capabilities associated with success as a leader, you start to recognise that we all have a head start in at least a few areas. That we are all born leaders in our own way.

When I’m facilitating I often ask groups to repeat some statements about leadership. There’s something powerful about a group of 50 or 100 people all saying the same thing. The two statements that have the biggest impact are “Anyone can become a great leader” and “The best leader you can be is yourself.” This week I challenge you to think of yourself as a born leader, with just as much capacity and potential for great leadership as anyone else.

Episode 36 - Four Steps to Building a Legacy of Leaders

Summary

Leadership isn’t just what you do in the moment - it’s the legacy you leave. This week we look at four steps to building a legacy of leaders.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 36 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are looking at four steps to building a legacy of leaders.

Leadership isn’t just what you do in the moment - it’s the legacy you leave. In fact, the most effective leaders create a lasting legacy in people - they create more leaders. The effectiveness of a leader is best measured at least 5 to 10 years further on. Great leadership takes time - there aren’t many quick wins. It’s best to think of leadership as a long-term investment.

I recently spoke at a conference in Malaysia with a group of Doctors, mainly heads of departments in major hospitals from around the world, on this very topic. Hospitals are a tricky environment in which to identify and develop leaders - there’s time pressure, people spreading their hours across multiple hospitals, highly technical work - lots of things to grapple with. Perhaps you have similar pressures in your environment as well. But there are still steps we can take to make progress.

There are four things each of us can do to build a legacy of leaders:

1. Build Understanding - develop a clear and shared view of what ‘great leadership’ looks like in your context. People have often had poor experiences of leadership or have a limited view of what leadership is - that it’s about bossing people around or being taken away from the work that I enjoy. In workshops I ask people to share examples of great leadership. I’m always impressed by the range of answers given. The exercise helps people to understand that leadership isn’t one thing, and that people can be effective leaders in many different ways. That the best way to lead is firstly to be yourself. This helps people to broaden their view of what leadership looks like, and consider whether leadership may, in fact, be for them. That anyone can be a great leader - we all have something to bring and capabilities that we can develop.

2. Explore Aspiration - it’s essential to have development discussions to explore a person’s level of interest in leadership. I worked with a large organisation that had identified hundreds of people in a leadership high potential pool. But the people didn’t know they were in the high potential pool. It was all too common for someone from the pool to be tapped on the shoulder and offered a leadership role, but they had no interest in leadership. No one had even asked them if they aspired to a leadership position. Exploring aspirations makes a real difference.

3. Develop Capability - allow opportunities for practise, feedback and coaching. This can include step up, secondment and project opportunities, but with focused development attached. I’m a big fan of monthly one-on-one meetings that include discussion around an individual’s development. And you don’t need to do all the capability development yourself. You can help them to find mentors both within and outside the organisation that can focus on specific areas they’re interested in developing.

4. Provide Capacity - people need time to develop leadership capability, and this needs to be factored into the job design. A great question for discussion is how much time a person should have each week for leading others versus personally delivering work. Now I know you can’t necessarily carve out specific activities as pure leadership, but it intrigues me when people provide really low numbers - like 3 or 4 hours a week. A study in Harvard Business Review found CEOs spent between 32% to 67% of their time with their direct reports. In fact, they spent more time with their direct reports when they had greater confidence in them. Other research suggested each employee should have around 6 hours a week interacting with their leader to maximise engagement, rising to 10 or even 20 hours for innovation focused work. And increased face to face time with their leader saw a dramatic reduction in the volume of emails they sent and received. This data also suggests each leader should have a cap of around seven direct reports to be most effective - beyond that, the leader can’t dedicate enough time to leading people.

I encourage you to spend some time this week considering your own legacy as a leader, and how you can create even more leaders who can multiply your efforts and impact.

References

https://hbr.org/2018/07/the-leaders-calendar

https://www.fastcompany.com/3032972/why-managers-should-spend-exactly-6-hours-a-week-with-each-employee

Episode 35 - Managing Your Time in an Infinite Job

Summary

Most of us have what I call infinite jobs - where we could just keep working more hours and never quite get everything done. This week we look at practical ways to manage infinite jobs, improving our productivity while also regaining control over our hours.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 35 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are looking at practical ways to manage infinite jobs - improving our productivity while also regaining control over our hours.

There are two types of jobs - what I call finite jobs and infinite jobs. Chances are at some point in your career you’ve had a finite job - one where you had set work hours, and were paid for every hour you worked. For example, retail jobs are typically finite jobs - you start your shift at a particular time, complete as much work as you can during your shift, then walk away at the end of your shift. Whatever work was left over is either there for you the next day, or handed across to someone else. And there’s no expectation to work beyond the hours you’re given - remember those days? In this environment, leaders assess the overall workload and determine the resources needed to deliver. If more work needs to be done, more resources are allocated.

Infinite jobs are quite different. These jobs have objectives to deliver - some being set up front, and some which emerge over time. Here you’re not really paid by the hour. Your contract may specify that you’re employed to work 38 or 40 hours, but you’re really employed to deliver results. Contracts might refer to ‘reasonable overtime’ or something similar. Or you might be running your own business, where you just work the hours you need to deliver results. Infinite jobs are different because there isn’t an end point. You could potentially keep working more and more hours and never ‘finish’ an infinite job. There’s always more you could do - more clients to contact, more processes to improve, more development of people to undertake. The vast majority of leadership roles are infinite jobs, so chances are you’re currently in an infinite job. And more finite jobs are either being automated or converted into infinite jobs. The reality of the modern workplace is that more and more of our work will not have a natural end point.

So how do you manage an infinite job? I remember when I first took on a leadership role. I had worked as a management consultant, so was pretty familiar with having an infinite job, but was able to manage my time reasonably well despite the high demands. But nothing had prepared me for leadership. My work hours began to increase. I started with a bit over 45 hours a week, but found it quickly rose to 50 hours, then 55, then 60 plus. I was getting into work earlier and earlier to try to get something done before my team arrived, then worked later and later to catch up on things at the end of the day. Then I would log in again after dinner, finding myself swapping instant messages with the rest of the leadership team until late at night, before crawling into bed and starting it all over again the next day. I felt exhausted and dissatisfied, and there was still more to do. When the weekend rolled around I’d sleep for much of Saturday morning and try to recover in time for Monday, but would find myself gradually become more and more worn down. 

Eventually it dawned on me that there actually wasn’t an end point to my job. There was never going to be a point where, as a leader, I could say “I’m finished” or “job done”. In fact, the more hours of work I completed, the more work I generated for myself and others. I wasn’t even approaching completion - even though I was hitting all my targets, I was pushing completion even further down the road. There was an ever-present level of stress and dissatisfaction - a constant worry that I was missing something or had more to do. Maybe you can relate to my experience - and maybe you’re in the middle of it right now. The key lesson for me from this experience was we can’t manage an infinite job by just adding more and more hours to our work week. We need to change the way we think about and manage our work.

A framework you’re probably familiar with involves thinking about our work in terms of the Important versus Urgent - basically that every task we complete can be thought of in terms of how important it is, and how urgent it is. While he wasn’t the first to think of this framework, Steven Covey popularised it in his book “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”. Even 30 years on this book is still worth a read. Covey highlighted that we tend to get caught up in urgent work, and don’t prioritise important work enough. Clearly, if something is both urgent and important, then we should tackle that deadline, crisis or emergency straight away. But much of our time is spent with seemingly urgent but not important tasks which we should delegate to others. And we definitely need to get rid of the not urgent and not important distractions that soak up our time. But the other category - the not urgent but important - is what most leaders end up neglecting. This can include planning, reflection, long term development, networking and relationship building, creative thinking - all the things that so often get pushed aside in an infinite job. So how do we make sure we have time to do this important work, while also making our infinite job a little more finite?

Here’s an approach you might want to try:

1. Determine your ideal work hours. For most people you should aim to reduce what you’re doing at the moment, but why not start with around 40 hours as a target. A company called Perpetual Guardian in New Zealand experimented with people working four eight-hour days a week but being paid for five. Aside from the numerous benefits to individuals, they actually saw an overall productivity increase - people completed more in 32 hours than they used to complete in 40 hours. People came up with all sorts of creative ways to be more productive in their infinite jobs. We will fill whatever hours we set, so take this moment to reset.

2. Use your calendar to schedule everything - and I mean everything. This includes putting things in your calendar that unexpectedly come up so you have a record at the end of the week of how you’ve actually spent your time.

3. Identify your priorities and schedule the not urgent but important work for when you’re at your best. Each of us has a time in the day when we’re best at focused work, and that’s where the important but not urgent work should sit.

4. Schedule in breaks - at least three if not four per day. Actual get up, go for a walk, chat with someone else - take at least 10 to 15 minutes to re-engergise and refresh. You will be amazed how much more productive you are with some well-placed breaks every 90 minutes.

5. Leave time for the inevitable urgent and important activities - leave blank periods in your schedule. It’s tempting to schedule every minute then be disappointed when other things come up. I recommend trying to leave an hour or two per day for most people, but it could vary depending on your job. 

6. Be ruthless when it comes to meetings - if there isn’t a clear purpose, agenda and role for you, don’t go. Sure, you might need to negotiate that, but if you’re spending more than a couple of hours per day in meetings, you’re unlikely to be performing at your best.

The beauty of this approach is that you’ve set the overall number of hours, and you can’t be doing two things at once. So if you’ve filled your calendar and something else comes up, you need to get rid of or reschedule something else. You’ve effectively made your job finite by setting your work hours. 

Now, you might ask, what if I can’t get everything done in those hours? Well, now your calendar is evidence of your overall workload which will help when negotiating additional resources or a change in accountabilities. Just like those employees in New Zealand, you’ll be amazed at how creative you can get when you make your job more finite.

Reference:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/work-less-get-more-new-zealand-firms-four-day-week-an-unmitigated-success

Episode 34 - Moving from Stressed to Strong

Summary

Nearly half of all employees often experience negative work-related stress, flowing through to lower levels of engagement and motivation. As leaders, we can dramatically reduce this figure, and transform the performance of individuals and our organisations.

Transcript

Hello and welcome to episode 34 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are looking at how leaders can move their people from ‘stressed’ to ‘strong’.

Negative work-related stress takes a significant toll on individuals and the organisations for which they work. My recent research with over 1,400 not for profit leaders and employees reveals 46% of people report often experiencing negative work-related stress – a group I call “The Stressed”. Furthermore, 80% see their work as demanding – a group I call “The Stretched”. 

The experience of these two groups is quite different. Those who often experience negative work-related stress have 17% lower employee engagement ratings compared to the rest - “The Stressed” are less likely to be engaged with their work and organisation than others. And this negative sentiment is reflected in all aspects of employee engagement, particularly in a 24% lower rating of their likelihood to recommend their organisation to others as a place to work.  

In contrast, those who find their work demanding have 21% higher employee engagement than those who don’t see their work as demanding. “The Stretched” are much more likely to be engaged with their work and their organisation. This group’s level of motivation to do their best work for the organisation is particularly notable, being 29% higher than the rest of the people surveyed. 

However, there is overlap between these two groups. It’s possible to be both “Stressed” and “Stretched”, or any other combination of these two factors. 

In the research I separated out those who find their work demanding, but don’t often experience negative work-related stress – a group I call “The Strong”. This 38% of employees report 34% higher levels of employee engagement than the rest of those surveyed. Their ratings of whether they would recommend their organisation to others as a place to work are 40% higher than others. They’re much more likely to be motivated to do their best work for the organisation, and are also more likely to want to stay with the organisation. The positive impact of being amongst “The Strong” flows through to all elements of employee engagement.

This raises an important question – what is different about the experience of individuals that might account for these dramatically different outcomes in employee engagement? 

It turns out that “The Stressed” provide particularly poor ratings of the level of autonomy they have in how they achieve outcomes, being 21% lower than the rest of those surveyed. Their ratings of the opportunity to develop capability in areas that are important to them are 17% lower than others. This is consistent with broader research into stress at work – a lack of autonomy and capability to do your job well is a recipe for negative stress.

In contrast, “The Stretched” are 32% more likely to see their work as contributing to a cause greater and more enduring than themselves. This sense of purpose appears to buffer people from the adverse impocts of negative stress, helping the individual to interpret challenges and demands in a more positive light. It’s much easier to see a demanding job as a good thing if you believe you are making a positive impact on something that matters. The ability to develop meaningful connections at work also appears to help, with “The Stretched” rating this 24% higher than others.

“The Strong” have particularly positive ratings of purpose, development, connections and autonomy. These four work environment factors are also significantly positively correlated with employee engagement. Each of these factors individually accounts for 28% to 40% of the variance in employee engagement.

For leaders the message is clear. We need to provide a clear and compelling direction first. We then need to provide development opportunities so people are equiped and confident to tackle their work. Thirdly, we need to connect our people with others that can support them and with whom they can collaborate. And, lastly, we need to delegate the authority to our people to act, providing them with the autonomy they need.

As leaders we have a unique opportunity to turn “The Stressed” into “The Strong”, and to create a work environment where everyone can bring their best and flourish. This isn’t just great for our people, it’s also great for our organisations and those we serve.

Episode 33 - The Problem with Solving Problems

Summary

The problem with solving problems is that we often rush towards solutions without spending enough time clearly identifying the challenge we’re facing. In this episode we explore the power of a well crafted problem statement.

Transcript

Welcome to episode 33 of the Leadership Today Podcast where each week we tackle one of today’s biggest leadership challenges. This week we are looking at the problem with solving problems - that we often rush towards solutions without spending enough time clearly identifying the challenge we’re facing.

There’s a quote typically attributed to Albert Einstein that goes along the lines of “If I had only one hour to save the world, I would spend fifty-five minutes defining the problem, and only five minutes finding the solution.” Now, there’s not great evidence that Einstein ever uttered those words, but there is still a great deal of truth in them. We often rush into solution mode when we’ve only partially, or even incorrectly, identified the problem we’re trying to solve.

I’ve spent around half of my career working in management consulting focusing on complex problems and solutions. Over that time I lost count of the number of times I heard the classic attempted put down - “consultants borrow your watch to tell you the time, then charge you for it”. Of course, if you ask a consultant to tell you the time while you’re wearing a watch, then maybe the consultant isn’t the problem. Either way, it highlights that organisations often outsource solution generation, and are then frustrated when the expensive solutions don’t quite hit the mark. I believe this is often because the problem isn’t clearly and accurately identified, so people end up frantically working towards solving the wrong problem. Once the problem is clear, organisations are usually pretty good at developing and implementing solutions.

I shared an example in the last episode of a person who inherited a task to prepare a series of reports. Preparing all of these reports was arduous and took 8 hours to complete - it was a real problem for him as he struggled to get the rest of his work completed in the rest of the week. He initially identified the problem as “these reports take too long to complete”, and so came up with and implemented improvements that meant he could prepare the reports in just four hours. But there was a deeper question that needed answering - “why are these reports needed?” It turned out people weren’t actually using the reports - no one really needed the reports to be generated, and so he took an eight hour task and reduced it to zero. The problem to explore was around the need for the reports, not the efficiency of report production.

It’s hard to identify the real problem when you’re in the middle of it, but using a clear structure and approach can help. It might even save you from using a consultant or, at least, make your investment in an external consultant more valuable.

We need to start by trying to identify the root cause of the problem. I’ve talked about using the “5 whys” approach in episode 20 - repeatedly asking the question “why?” to step back towards the root cause. 

Once we think we’re close to the root cause, a structured problem statement can help. It provides some rigour around identifying the problem and its impact, while also making it easier to communicate the problem to others, and assess the value of various proposed solutions. 

One simple structure for a problem statement includes four elements:

1. Ideal scenario – what it would be like if this problem didn’t exist

2. Current situation – what it is currently like - the current reality

3. Consequences – the implications for this audience if we do nothing - can help build momentum towards change

4. Focus – the areas we will explore to solve the problem

Here’s an example of applying that approach to a business that’s struggling to have sufficient stock in stores.

• Ideal - We want our customers to be able to easily purchase our products with an emphasis on experience and convenience.

• Current - Our most loyal customers are complaining that their local stores are often out of stock of our most popular products, so they’re forced to phone ahead or drive around to other stores looking for stock.

• Consequences - We are losing sales and frustrating our customers, leaving ourselves open to them switching to competitor products.

• Focus - To address this problem, we are going to explore three elements. The first being the reliability of transport of product from our warehouse to stores. The second - building our capacity to track current stock levels at stores. And thirdly, explore our ability to provide stock to customers directly via a new home delivery channel.

Now it’s important to also be responsive. Sometimes as we are seeking to solve the problem, we come across further information which may further clarify the problem. You can always refine the problem statement to reflect this new information.