current event

The Leadership Failure of Mohamed Morsi: Will Your Workers Revolt, Too?

July 9 in Arrogance, Goals, Vision by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

The removal of Mohamed Morsi as Egypt’s President is a poignant reminder of the difficulty in satisfying the myriad demands of disparate segments of a society or organization. While Mr. Morsi was a democratically elected leader of a country, his failure can provide many lessons for those of us who work in business and non-profit organizations.

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi

In a nutshell, Mr. Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood party put personal agendas before the common goal of repairing and building a flourishing Egyptian government and society. He failed to rebuild the Egyptian infrastructure, leaving the economy struggling with high prices for food, gasoline, and other commodities. He and others in his party grabbed power by ramming an unpopular religiously tainted constitution down the throat of the Egyptian people and appointing Islamist officials to as many posts as possible.

Eventually the Egyptian people and military had enough and took to the streets and once again violence has ensued. Let’s take a look at what lessons we can glean from this experience to help us lead our organizations.

In my experience, the best leaders put the organization first and set aside their egos and personal agendas. Jim collins does an excellent job elaborating on this in his well-researched book Good to Great. In his words, a Level 5 leader “Builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will.” You could begin by keeping a journal of your daily activities and noting which activities are moving you closer to your team and organizational goals, and which activities are moving you toward personal goals. You may also find that some activities are taking you nowhere, which would be helpful to know.

The second lesson we can find is how important it is to provide an adequate infrastructure so that a team may flourish and excel—to use their talent to its fullest extent. The Egyptian economy is in shambles, which cripples all businesses from tourism to technology. Are you providing the necessary equipment and financial resources for your team? Have you asked what they need lately?

Finally, pay attention to all of the groups within your organization, whether these be types of workers, individuals at all levels in the organization, all facets of the organization such as marketing, development, production, or ethnic and gender groups. Each group will bring a somewhat unique perspective to your business and may provide a profound insight that propels you forward. One of the mantras I continue to recite is “Respect Everyone.” If we genuinely come from this attitude our team members will see it for what it is—a genuine interest and concern for each individual and group.

Bringing groups together which have widely divergent views and interests is difficult and requires a skilled leader. The key point is to continue focusing on the goals and vision of the team and organization. Use these as the focal point instead of the differences in views. Ask how the different views can help achieve the goal, thus building synergy to create exceptional solutions to problems.

In summary, I believe the lessons from the failure of Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood party are:

  • Set your personal agenda aside and focus on the greater goals of the organization and your team,
  • Provide an adequate infrastructure for your team so that they may flourish and utilize their talents to their fullest extent, and
  • Remain attentive to all groups within your organization.

Keywords: leadership development, leadership lessons, Egypt, Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood

References

  • Al Jazeera. (2013, July 3) Profile: Mohamed Morsi. Al Jazeera. Retrieved July 8, 2013 from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/20137314127329966.html
  • Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap. and others don’t. New York: Collins.
  • Daragahi, B. & Saleh, H. (2013, July 5). Egypt: The second revolution. Financial Times. Retrieved July 8, 2013 from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e341452a-e574-11e2-ad1a-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YSXEDcSR
  • Khalaf, R. (2013, July 4). Morsi’s downfall will entrench Brotherhood’s sense of victimhood. Financial Times. Retrieved July 8, 2013 from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/c14592c0-e4be-11e2-875b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YSXEDcSR
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Evaluating Performance: The Confounding Role of External Factors

October 2 in Performance by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

As a leader in a business organization we are often required to assess the performance of team members. When a someone has not performed up to our expectations one or more factors may be at play. An easy response may be to believe that the individual is not up to the task, but it may also be a case where external, or situational factors are creating headwinds too large to overcome. Perhaps the team member is in a role that is not a good match for his or her knowledge and skills, or that the task is ill-defined.

I find the issue of external factors to be the most difficult to resolve. Let’s look at a few examples. Suppose you were Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, and had to deal with a broken map application in the new iOS release. The data for the application was purchased from several companies and apparently the way it was used or integrated caused some problems. In this case—to us—it seems pretty clear that outside factors were not part of the problem. The individual in charge of the application should have had control of the data, application development, and integration of the multiple data sets. However, suppose this individual was told that the application would be released no matter what shape it was in. Now that’s another story and would point to an external factor as a major contributor to the problem.

Let’s look at another issue, this time a more contentious one—that of the leadership of President Barack Obama during the severe financial downturn beginning in 2008 and continuing until the present day. In this case the opinions vary widely. Some individuals maintain that the President and his fiscal policies have prolonged the suffering and slowed the recovery, while others claim that he has done the best he can with the situation—that it is bigger than he and the Federal Reserve can easily fix. While some people want to replace the President in this election due to poor performance, others feel he couldn’t have done any better than he already has with these profound external factors and needs to remain in office.

A Job Performance Model

Now I’d like to look at what the research says, beginning with the definitions.

  • Behaviors are the actions, positive and negative, that people exhibit.
  • Situational factors are forces not under the individual’s control which may positively or negatively impact the individual’s results.
  • Results are the states or conditions which changed because of the individual’s behaviors and that were helped or hindered by situational factors.
  • Organizational value is the worth associated with results or individual behaviors.
  • Performance is the expected value an organization would receive from an individual’s behavior.

Take the example of a salesman for an auto parts supplier who I’ll call Walter. In 2007 about 16 million automobiles were sold in the US. Walter calls on all the US auto manufacturers and beats his quota month after month. Based on results we would consider him to be a high performer. Fast forward two years to 2009. Less than 11 million cars are sold in the year. Walter doesn’t hit quota one month—his sales are down considerably. Based on his results we could argue that Walter’s performance has taken a nose dive.

In this case, though, it’s quite easy to see the moderating effect of the situational factors. Of course it’s not usually so easy to see and that’s when you get to earn your paycheck.

Using our model of job performance let’s turn back to President Obama. Some would argue that his behaviors have been poor and therefore his job performance is poor. Others will argue that his behaviors have been on the mark but that the situational constraints are so significant that what we have is the best one could expect. I won’t jump into that fray, though.

To truly assess your team member’s performance stay in touch with their activities and ask what tasks they are working on and the processes they are using. Observe their interactions with others to determine how they are helping or hindering team performance. Do they seem to have the knowledge they need to perform their job, and if not do they seek input from others? Are they able to utilize their knowledge and skills to create value? Do they show commitment to the tasks at hand? Ask about external factors and their effect on the output they are generating.

Your ability to assess a team member’s performance and utilize them in the most effective manner can have a huge impact on your overall team performance. If you remain diligent and committed to this effort you will reap significant rewards.

Concepts:

  • Results are a function of individual behaviors and situational, or external factors
  • Job performance is a function of individual behaviors
  • External factors can radically enhance or hinder an individual’s results

Keywords: leadership, job performance, job evaluation, appraisal, situational factors, situational constraints, behaviors

References:

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

An Open Letter: The Choice is Yours

September 25 in Authenticity, Balance, Collaborative Leadership, Communication, Culture, Goals, Openness by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

I’ve gotten a few questions over the week on last week’s blog post and how to bring traumatic issues to closure and move forward. As I was driving one afternoon I began to imagine myself as a plant manager for a Japanese owned factory in China. Some of these factories have been shuttered due to the protests over the Diaoyudao islands in the East China Sea.

Senkaku Islands

The relationship between Japan and China has many dark moments. Most recently, between 1931 and 1945 Japan carried out barbarous attacks in China. While one could argue that several generations have passed since then, the trauma and losses are not easily forgotten.

I drafted a statement and have worked with Nancy Wiser of Wiser Strategies who advises clients on how to handle crises, to craft a message that would help in such a time of crisis. Here is the statement I would make…

“We understand the concern the citizens of China have over the islands between Japan and China and we understand the history between our two countries. We regret what our ancestors have done in China and unfortunately there is nothing that can be done about the past except to acknowledge it and express our regret for it.

“Beyond that, there is nothing you can do about that, there is nothing I can do about it. We can only move forward.

“We respect all of you as citizens of China and citizens of the world. We would like to continue to work with you. We would like to move forward. We would like to put the past behind us.

“You and I cannot control what our governments do. While we can vote and express ourselves peacefully in the streets as you have done, we cannot absolutely control our governments.

“I would like us to focus on moving forward. What can we do in this city today, at this factory to move forward? You can make a choice, we in our company can make a choice. Do you wish to prosper together? We are in business together. We have a factory here and would like for all of us to prosper.

“Every day that we are closed you lose money and we lose money. If you would like to work together to move forward, to create jobs, to help build a lifestyle that you would like and that we would like, then let us figure out how to work together peacefully.

“In this moment the choice is yours. Again, we respect each and every one of you as citizens of the world. We ask that you come together with us to build a prosperous business. The choice is yours and we sincerely hope that you will choose to move forward with us. Thank you.”

Keywords: leadership, trauma, grief, protests, riots, Senkaku islands, Diaoyudao islands

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Lessons From the Culture of Penn State

July 17 in Culture by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

This blog post has been difficult for me to write given the despicable nature of the crimes committed by Gerald “Jerry” Sandusky at Pennsylvania State University. Most of you know that he was convicted on June 22, 2012 on 45 counts of criminal charges for his sexual exploitation of young men at Penn State.

Levels of Culture

I feel there are valuable culture lessons for all leaders in the sordid action by Penn State administrators following each exposure of Sandusky’s activities. As the Freeh special investigation report states, “One of the most challenging of the tasks confronting the Penn State community is transforming the culture that permitted Sandusky’s behavior, as illustrated throughout this report, and which directly contributed to the failure of Penn State’s most powerful leaders to adequately report and respond to the actions of a serial sexual predator.”

The most poignant example of the role the Penn State culture played in the continued cover-up of Sandusky’s activities is that of two janitors who had witnessed Sandusky engaged in an act with a victim. They both felt that they would be fired if they reported this activity given the untouchable status of the Penn State football program. Assumptions such as this are at the core of organizational culture.

I’ve been working with several organizations on their culture recently and find the model developed by Edgar Schein to be very useful. This model looks at organizational cultures from three levels: artifacts, values, and basic underlying assumptions. In the case of the Penn State example I highlighted above, we can easily identify the elements. The janitors assumed they would be fired because the university valued the football program above all else, stating, “football runs this University.” Artifacts supporting this were previous incidents where football players were treated leniently when involved in altercations which would have otherwise suspended them from the football program.

So I think this is an excellent example to learn from so that you can become more aware of the culture you have created for your team. If you wish to assess your team’s culture you can begin by asking the values they perceive and why they have that perception. Sometimes it is difficult to get a true reading from team members and it takes an independent third party for this analysis. An even more difficult task may be to pry out the underlying assumptions related to the values. One of the questions I like in order to determine assumptions is, “What are some actions which may affect your employment here over the short or long term?”

Cultural values are frequently communicated through stories of past actions and experiences. These stories are the artifacts present in all organizations. If you choose to change your culture, behave consistently with the new culture and continually communicate events, experiences, and behaviors by team members exemplifying the new values. These new artifacts will go a long way toward spotlighting the new direction you would like to head.

Concepts:

  • Look at the organizational artifacts you create each and every day
  • Find out from your team members the values they perceive
  • Dig deep to determine the underlying assumptions your team members believe
  • Create and communicate new artifacts to promote the culture changes you desire

Keywords: leadership, culture

References:

  • Denison, D. R. (2000). Organizational culture: Can it be a key lever for driving organizational change? In S. Cartwright & C. Cooper (Eds.), The Handbook of Organizational Culture. London: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP. (2012). Report of the special investigative counsel regarding the actions of the Pennsylvania State University related to the child sexual abuse committed by Gerald A. Sandusky. Retrieved from
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/12_07_12_penn_state_report.pdf
  • Hofstede, G. (1983). The Cultural Relativity of Organizational Practices and Theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2), 75–89.
  • Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Luque, M. S., & House, R. J. (2006). In the Eye of the Beholder: Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership from Project GLOBE. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67–90.
  • Quinn, R. E. (1984). Applying the competing values approach to leadership: Toward an integrative framework. In J. G. Hunt, D. M. Hosking, C. A. Schriesheim, & R. Stewart (Eds.), Leaders and managers: International perspectives on managerial behavior and leadership (pp. 10–27). New York: Pergamon Press.
  • Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109–119.
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

SpaceX Checks its Ego at the Door

May 22 in Arrogance, Change, Collaborative Leadership by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

As I write this the SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies) Falcon 9 rocket has blasted into space, carrying the Dragon spacecraft toward the International Space Station (ISS) with a load of cargo. This milestone marks a new era in private as opposed to government space flight. While a significant portion of the program funding comes from NASA and therefore could be considered government funded, two important points would be missed if we apply such a broad brush.

Falcon 9 Launch May 22, 2012

As a leader our ego sometimes gets the better of us. We begin to believe that we and our team can deliver new products or services without the help of others. Such an attitude frequently ends in failure and a veritable crawl back to those who offered help in the first place.

The collaboration of SpaceX with NASA has been shown to provide tangible benefits in terms of development time and cost. While SpaceX has taken a fresh approach to rocket and spacecraft design they have hired and collaborated with NASA engineers to design and produce highly reliable and much lower cost equipment. This collaboration has created the best of two worlds—the fresh, pristine design team and the legacy team learning from the vast knowledge of successful and failed missions.

In order to make this collaboration work the SpaceX management and design team had to set their ego aside and embrace the NASA voice of wisdom. My work with clients has revealed many a time when individuals feel they can go it alone to achieve their goals. Sometimes this is successful, sometimes not. I find it helpful to strike a balance between receiving and utilizing sage advice versus allowing your team to become bogged down with too many opinions.

I believe the second lesson here is one of minimizing bureaucracy. In general, as organizations mature they continually learn from mistakes and implement a multiplicity of checks and balances. At some point the organization becomes overly cautious and new, more nimble competitors swoop in to take market share with clever innovations.

As you observe this taking place in your organization you have a couple of options: either allow the bureaucracy to slowly build and then destroy it and build anew or continually hack away at the bureaucracy and agree to take on a measured amount of risk.

So when you find yourself turning down offers of help ask yourself if your ego is popping up. Continually assess your processes to ensure you have not become too bureaucratic. After all, this is rocket science and you want to do the best you can.

Concepts:

  • Allow your ego to step aside and ask yourself where the help of others might improve your team’s performance
  • Take a fresh look, from the ground up, what business processes are absolutely necessary for your team to meet its goals

Keywords: leadership, ego, bureaucracy

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Workers Gone Wild!

April 24 in Culture, Dark Side, Goals, Selection by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

In the past two weeks several scandals have surfaced. Individuals with the US General Services Administration (GSA) have been accused of spending lavishly on parties, conferences, travel, and gifts. Under the leadership of Jeff Neely, Public Buildings Commissioner for GSA Region 9, these activities continued for several years.

Members of the US Secret Service were caught in Columbia hiring prostitutes and speaking openly of their mission in the country. Lastly, photos of US soldiers posing with body parts of suicide bombers in Afghanistan have come to light.

All of these incidents have a common thread—individuals have exercised poor judgment. The workers went wild, or as some say, have gone rogue.

Wild Party

While we, as leaders, never have control over our team members’ behavior, we can build and maintain an environment that will go a long way to prevent such rogue behavior.

First and foremost is to foster a culture that centers on doing a good job and feeling satisfied after a job has been well done. Maintain a healthy mix of accountability, fun, and rewards for appropriate action.

Research from several famous studies have highlighted the profound effects of social pressure and role identity. In the prison experiment by Zimbardo and colleagues, college students in the roles of guards began to abuse students in the roles of prisoners and the experiment was terminated earlier than planned. In the Milgram study on obedience, voluntary participants were forcefully ordered to continue to administer electric shocks to actors, illustrating the reluctant willingness for individuals to comply with requests. In a study reported by Solomon Asch in 1951, he relayed the inclination of people to conform to the majority of a group even when it went against their perception of what was correct. All of these studies, along with the concept of crowd psychology, illustrate how normal, well-intentioned individuals can get caught up in undesirable, and even despicable activities when a harmful culture emerges and continues unfettered.

Communicate stories of individual’s actions that promote the behavior you want to see in all workers. Culture is often built on such anecdotal vignettes that become part of the fabric of all organizations.

Secondly, maintain a vigilant focus on your goals. When you see behavior that wavers off the path, have a one-on-one discussion with the team member to understand the reason for the behavior and to re-align the behavior toward your team goals.

Finally, look at how you are selecting team members. Do you have an objective analysis of their personality? Conscientiousness, one of the personality facets in the Big Five personality models has shown good correlation with job performance. Many selection instruments incorporate this element into the mix.

I believe that good selection instruments, a continual focus on goals, and a healthy culture will greatly reduce the possibility of your team members creating embarrassment for you and your organization.

Concepts:

  • Foster a culture with a healthy mix of job satisfaction, accountability, joy, and rewards
  • Keep a vigilant focus on your goals
  • Select employees based on conscientiousness

Keywords: leadership, culture, dark side, goals, conscientiousness

References:

  • Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure on the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 177-190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press.
  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
  • Burton, J. P., Hoobler, J. M., & Scheuer, M. L. Supervisor Workplace Stress and Abusive Supervision: The Buffering Effect of Exercise. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1-9.
  • Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  • Denison, D. R. (1984). Bringing corporate culture to the bottom line. Organizational Dynamics, 13(2), 4–22.
  • Denison, D. R. (2000). Organizational culture: Can it be a key lever for driving organizational change. In The Handbook of Organizational Culture. London: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Etzioni, A. (1975). A comparative analysis of complex organizations: On power, involvement, and their correlates (Revised and enlarged ed.). New York: The Free Press.
  • Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1(1), 69–97.
  • Hogan, R. J., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49(6), 493-504.
  • Hogan, R. J., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership: A view from the dark side. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1&2), 40–51.
  • Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780.
  • Kahneman, D. (1992). Reference points, anchors, norms, and mixed feelings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51(2), 296-312. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(92)90015-Y
  • Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. Free Press.
  • Losey, S. & Medici, A. (2012, April 16) GSA calls on officials to repay party expenses. Federal Times. Retrieved from http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20120416/DEPARTMENTS07/204160306
  • McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215.
  • Meckler, L. (2012, April 14) Secret Service misconduct is alleged. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304356604577342641172505430.html
  • Medici, A. (2012, April 17) Inspector General: GSA official’s waste part of pattern. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-04-17/gsa-spending-hearing/54338102/1
  • Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378.
  • Perez, E. & Decordoba, J. (2012, April 17) New details in Secret Service case. Walls Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304299304577350071554454122.html
  • Perez, E. & Molinski, D. (2012, April 19) More firings seen at Secret Service. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303513404577353991485029140.html
  • Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
  • United States Secret Service. (2012, April 14) Statement by Assistant Director Paul S. Morrissey. Press Release. Retrieved from http://www.secretservice.gov/press/GPA04-12_Statement.pdf
  • Zucchino, D. (2012, April 18) U.S. troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/18/nation/la-na-afghan-photos-20120418
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Are the Mics on? What to Communicate

April 3 in Balance, Communication, Rumor, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

On March 26, 2012, US President Barack Obama was in South Korea and met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. As they were preparing to give remarks to reporters President Obama leaned over to President Medvedev and stated that he would “have more flexibility” in missile defense negotiations after his election.

This blunder is reminiscent of an off-the-cuff declaration by President Ronald Reagan on August 11, 1984 prior to his weekly radio address. Reagan announced, “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”

These comments bring to mind the issue of what to communicate to your team. As a leader you may frequently undertake exercises or explorations with radical negative team impacts. Since these exercises often have a very small chance of being executed and a release of an incomplete plan can install fear into team members, it is important that they stay within a small group of colleagues. While this may smack of clandestine and unsavory business dealings, it is the smart thing to do.

If you are negotiating with an external party this complicates matters further. You do not want to tip your hand to the other party, inadvertently providing them with an advantage. Negotiations can sometimes involve multiple individuals with specific roles, including “good cop/bad cop” duties, the technocrats, the diplomats, and so on. To share such details with your team is both unnecessary and a waste of time and energy.

When considering how much information to share broadly with your team, a litmus test I use is to consider:

  • Likelihood that the scenario will play out
  • Ramifications on the psyche of individual performers
  • Effect of a transmission of partial information or information taken out of context to other groups
  • The value of your team having the information vs. not having the information.

Whatever information you do share with your team, assume that it will be spread widely. I often chuckle at the comment, “Don’t tell anyone, but…” If everyone follows this common policy then everyone ends up knowing the information.

On a related note, I routinely have leaders confide to me that team members are talking behind their backs. Expect that. Accept the fact that everyone is talking about everyone and forget it. Move on to more important issues. People share thoughts and experiences to expand their knowledge and to attempt to bring certainty to uncertain situations. This is why rumors start.

As humans, we abhor uncertainty. Rumors are an effort to find certainty in uncertain circumstances. It is best to deal with rumors using frequent, clear, honest communication. In these communications it is acceptable and reasonable to say that you cannot divulge all information. A good example is potential layoffs. If rumors begin you may need to state that layoffs are being explored but that they are a last resort. You should also state what actions are being taken in order to avoid such an action.

Here’s a parting thought on what to communicate… Think about what you would tell an eight year old child of yours about a possible negative event. On one hand you want to prepare the child, on the other you don’t want to instill him or her with anxiety or fear. So remain thoughtful and diligent about what and how you communicate.

Concepts:

  • Communicate only what is valuable and necessary for your team
  • Assess the ramifications of what you are planning to share
  • It’s acceptable to state that you can’t share everything at the moment but that you will provide updates as more information becomes certain

Keywords: leadership, communication, rumor, negotiation

References:

  • Allport, F. H. (1924). Social Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (2006). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (1993). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Rick Santorum-How Persistence Pays

February 21 in Grit by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

I’ve been fascinated with the 2012 Republican primary process. A field of eight has narrowed to a field of four and of those only Ron Paul has had a steady following. After squeaking a win in the Iowa caucuses Santorum trailed significantly and many were wondering when he would follow his four compatriots in dropping out of the race.

But Rick Santorum persisted and kept showing up. It paid off. On February 7 he won two caucuses and a primary, putting him firmly back in the race.

Perseverance, or what some call grit, is an excellent leadership trait that is infrequently discussed. Research has shown it to have a measurable impact on success in education. Qualitative research reveals perseverance as a common thread among successful individuals.

This doesn’t mean that you should continue down a dead-end path on a project, however. Balance is needed when encountering obstacles. I find it helpful to keep one eye outside looking around to get a sense of whether or not it may be time to adapt and change course or stay on the current course.

And so, as I continue to monitor the Republican primary process I am reminded what the great sage Woody Allen said, “Eighty percent of success is showing up.” Sometimes that’s all you have to do.

Concepts:

  • Perseverance frequently wins the race when others have caved
  • When obstacles arise exercise balance in deciding how much to look around for alternatives

Keywords: leadership, persistence, perseverance, grit

References:

  • Doskoch, P. (2005). The winning edge. Psychology Today, 38(6), 42-52.
  • Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087-1101. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

How About Trust Intelligence?

February 14 in Authenticity, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

A few weeks ago the 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer results were announced. It was a sad day for CEOs and government leaders. Trust that business, government, and NGOs (non-government organizations) will “do what is right” all declined. The credibility of CEOs took a hit, moving from 50% in 2011 to 38% in 2012. Government officials or regulators also declined in credibility from 43% to 29%.

As you well know, trust is a big deal. Leaders frequently bemoan to me the lack of trust from their subordinates. I’ve had the conversation enough times that it has caused me ponder the notion of a “trust intelligence.” We’ve got emotional intelligence, why not trust intelligence? It flows both ways, as well. Subordinates may not trust their superiors and superiors may not trust their subordinates.

Trust is a significant factor in team performance and contains many facets. Let’s look at a list of the elements a leader needs in order to earn trust:

  • Social interaction, approachable
  • Enthusiastic
  • Takes initiative
  • Resolves uncertainty as much as possible
  • Consistent communication
  • Responsive
  • Calming
  • Putting the team before self
  • Fair
  • Respectful
  • Resolves conflict
  • Honest
  • Respects confidences
  • Inclusive
  • Focuses the effort
  • Develops procedures when necessary

With this many facets it is clear that an individual would have difficulty learning to build trust by rote. I believe that the ability and desire to earn trust needs to come from an individual’s soul, from deep within, otherwise it is easily perceived as false and self-serving. Some leaders feel that they can demand or dictate trust. I wish it were so easy.

As you peruse through this list it may be helpful to list times when you have behaved in alignment with these elements and also which elements you might want to work on.

Concepts:

  • Trust goes two ways—how much do you trust your team to get the job done and how much do they trust you to follow through on your commitments and remain authentic to them?
  • A desire to build trust must come from authenticity rather as a means to achieve a performance goal.

Keywords: leadership, emotional intelligence, trust

References:

  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571.
  • Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 606-632.
  • Hempel, P. S., Zhang, Z. X., & Tjosvold, D. (2008). Conflict management between and within teams for trusting relationships and performance in China. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.540
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
  • Lee, P., Gillespie, N., Mann, L., & Wearing, A. (2010). Leadership and trust: Their effect on knowledge sharing and team performance. Management Learning, 41(4), 473-491.
  • Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Simpson, J. A. (2007). Psychological Foundations of Trust. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(5), 264-268.
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

The Collaborative Leadership of Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren

January 31 in Collaborative Leadership, Communication, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

On January 20th U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren and incumbent Scott Brown signed a pledge intending to stop all PAC (Political Action Committee) spending on their campaigns. The pledge states that for every dollar a PAC spends on TV or Internet advertisement for them or against their opponent they will donate half that amount of money to a charity of the opponent’s choice.

I find this agreement a breath of fresh air, setting an example of political bipartisan leadership as well as collaborative leadership. This model should serve as an example for all politicians to follow. Collaboration is about building something together. It is about remaining open to new possibilities.

Collaborative leadership is both unifying and fluid. Think of an evolving organism, one that is highly dynamic as it adapts and wends its way toward its ever-changing goals. While this may seem amorphous, or even wishy-washy, it is the nature of the universe. Physicists speak of the dance when describing particle physics. Leadership and the nature of organizations is exactly the same.

Conversely, hardened positions such as signing a pledge for no new taxes (a la Taxpayer Protection Pledge) takes flexibility and adaptability off the table. Charles Darwin explained all too well for us what happens to species that are no longer able to adapt. Hardened ideological positions are fine for religions but are no way to stay ahead of the curve, whether leading a nation or a private organization.

It is difficult to lead collaboratively. It requires time, patience, and skill. All parties must be committed to the goal of creating something new and building trust. They must be willing to enter a meaningful dialog to come to an understanding of each other’s values and goals so that this new creation may emerge. Begin by building on small achievements together.

So ask yourself how well you’re working with other leaders and other teams…

Questions:

• What behaviors do you exhibit which build trust?
• How do you engage others in meaningful dialog?
• How do you get peers to buy into your vision and goals?
• What process do you use to understand everyone’s values, beliefs, and goals?
• What process do you use to build a common vision?
• How do you build upon early accomplishments?
• Are you willing to invest the time to lead collaboratively?
• Are you willing to invest the time and energy to upgrade your leadership skills if necessary?

Keywords: collaborative leadership, trust, dialog, commitment

References:

Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571.
Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E. (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mullen, C. A., & Kochan, F. K. (2000). Creating a collaborative leadership network: An organic view of change. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 3(3), 183-200.

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged