Leadership

What Makes a Team High-Performing?

What makes a team high-performing?

Some would say they should follow the rules for effective team meetings:

· Send out an agenda in advance, showing the amount of time for each topic and the person responsible for that topic,

· Start on time, end on time,

· Someone recording decisions and action items,

· All participants fully present and prepared – no sidebar texting, e-mailing, etc.,

· All persons participating, with the leader insuring that introverts are encouraged to contribute,

· Discussions concluding with action items, with person responsible and due date,

· Parking lot for ideas for future consideration, and

· Interruption-free – no sidebar conversations, phone calls, etc.

The high-performing that I recently observed ignored several of these rules, and yet management said they were the best teams in the organization.

The common thread that makes these teams high-performing is culture: team members were comfortable with each other and trusted each other. (They work together closely, in contrast to an ad-hoc task team.) The teams:

· Joked and laughed – they treated the meeting with respect, yes, but also in a relaxed manner. They knew that they would not be creating world peace in those meetings, so they were able to avoid terminal seriousness.

· Supported each other – they could count on their team-mates.

· Communicated well – they could ask questions and get things resolved.

· Focused on the vision and mission of the organization, instead of their own egos.

· Were learning teams. They were empowered to make changes.

· Made mistakes and owned up to them. They were comfortable that they could make mistakes (that’s how people and teams learn!) without being criticized, and knew the boundaries within which they could experiment.

· Focused on their customers.

· Allowed team members to use their judgment.

We’ll explore some of these topics in more detail in future posts.

What do you think? Does this fit your experience?

Gary Langenwalter

FEAR

Fear can be good. Fear of predators kept our early ancestors alive. Fear of future problems keeps people from signing contracts that could create financial difficulty. However (and you knew this was coming), fear can also stop people from moving forward when it would be to their advantage to do so.

True story: a division of a large company was instructed to implement a new software system to increase production. This was going to add more workload to two departments. Corporate tried to help the division rebalance workloads, and supplied training and new procedures. Unfortunately, despite the fact that two sister divisions had already implemented the new software successfully, irrational fear of the new system took root during the months that preceded the implementation. The closer the go-live date got, the more afraid people became. With less than a month to go, they put it off for two weeks, then for another week. People said, “We’re not ready… We haven’t been trained enough… We need more people…” And some mid-level leaders said, “We’re supporting our people. They’re not ready.” The division’s CEO finally said, “We’re going live. We’ll work things out.” So they went live, with extensive on-site corporate support during the first week. Many of the people were actually relieved, because the uncertainty was finally over and the wheels had not fallen off. But at the end of the week when nothing bad had happened (yet!), one of the senior clerks opined, “This is like being on the beach after an earthquake. Just before the tsunami hits, everything is very calm, then the water draws way out to sea…” And this was duly repeated throughout the division, re-kindling the fear.

Yes, there were hiccups as the division adjusted to the new system. Like all systems, it was not perfect. But the fear was counterproductive; it caused great angst and hurt morale unnecessarily. FEAR can be a mnemonic for False Evidence Appearing Real. And that’s what it was in this case. In this case, the best path forward was implementing the system, because more delays would have only increased the fear.

So how does your organization deal with fear?

Gary Langenwalter

Scariest Part of Leadership

The scariest part of leadership is letting go of control and trusting others to do the right things and make the right decisions. The concept of control underpins hierarchical organizations – the person above controls the actions and decisions of the persons below. This structure has been used for millennia by military, religious, and commercial organizations. These people are managers; they “manage” persons and other resources.

But what if a leader, instead of insisting on detailed control, does something entirely different? What if a leader co-creates the vision and mission, and goals and objectives and strategies, with his or her people? What if a leader then turns them loose to be as great as they can be, and supports them as they try new ideas? What if a leader gives a prize annually for the best new idea that failed? What would that type of organization be like? Unstoppable. Because in that organization, each individual will feel supported and challenged to be all they can be. They will bring everything they’ve got to work every day. And they will collaborate with colleagues to create programs, products, and services that delight customers and increase profits.

So what’s so scary about this? The leader has to give up the illusion of control. It’s an illusion, because we can only truly control those things over which we have one more degree of freedom, which we obviously do not have with fellow humans. However, our society expects and even demands that leaders “be in control” of their company or department. So the leader needs to change from creating controls to insure proper behavior, to instead being effective at inspiring people and nurturing guiding principles.

This transition is a little like learning how to float and swim. When I was younger I was deathly afraid of the water; I would stand in a corner of the swimming pool and shiver. My parents insisted that I take swimming classes. I finally decided to quit fighting the water and trust it to hold me up. It was scary, but it worked! I got hooked on swimming and even earned my lifeguard certificate. Once a leader quits controlling the employees and trusts them to help the organization thrive, they get hooked on the results AND the process – the only question they ask is why they didn’t do this sooner.

I welcome your feedback

Gary Langenwalter

Wisdom – Worth More Than Gold!

Most decisions in organizations are made (or at least are purported to be made) based on logic. And while logic is absolutely necessary, it is not sufficient to assure good decisions and therefore successful results. Logic ignores the deeper truths that wisdom incorporates.

What is wisdom? How does it work? Wisdom comes from your inner being, your gravitas. It can be a still small voice which draws on experience and integrates that experience with knowledge. “It can reflect a deep understanding that incorporates tolerance for the uncertainties of life as well as the ups and downs.” (Psychology Today) It takes the long view and provides a sense of balance.

Wisdom understands a connection with other individuals, organizations, and our earth. It values intangibles, such as beauty, harmony, and joy, which logic cannot measure and therefore excludes.

Wisdom understands that the world is not binary, not either on or off. It embraces nuance and multiple (potentially competing) perspectives. “Wise people specialize in what Roger Martin calls integrative thinking – ‘the capacity to hold two diametrically opposing ideas in their heads’ – and reconcile them for the situation at hand.” (Psychology Today)

Wise people seek to understand, rather than judge. Instead of immediately criticizing, they ask “why” and listen, then work with the other person to understand underlying causes (which they then seek to remedy).

Wise people focus on their purpose in life even if that means putting their personal happiness on the back burner for a little while.

Wise people have a much greater impact on their organizations, their communities and society than smart people or otherwise “successful” people. They make a difference in people’s lives. And isn’t that, ultimately, what life is all about?

I welcome your feedback and comments.

Gary Langenwalter

Walking the Tightrope

Leaders walk a tightrope – balancing the need for change against the willingness and ability of the organization to implement those changes successfully.

Since “change imposed is change opposed”, how can a leader bring change into their organization? Especially if the change will add even more load to key individuals who are already stressed out. If the leader insists on implementing the change, the best people might leave, causing their work to be split among the survivors who already feel overloaded, thereby increasing the probability that they might leave, too.

One approach is:

· Focus on the vision and mission of the organization. If the vision and mission is to use the organization’s products and service to help make a better world for our children, it is one (major) reason why the employees work there. Seeing how the proposed change will help them accomplish their mission will be an incentive to implement the change. However, if the vision and mission is to maximize return to the shareholders, this tactic will probably not be very effective. (Incidentally, contrary to what most people believe, data conclusively show that for-profit companies that honor people and respect the planet deliver substantially higher returns to investors. Thus, for-profit companies can have vision and mission statements that truly engage their workforce.)

· Ask what the individual is currently doing that can be 1) discontinued, or 2) offloaded to another person. Discontinuing is the better alternative, because then the total workload actually diminishes. Value Stream Mapping is a Lean tool that can help an organization see what adds value to the customer (and should be continued), and what does not add value to the customer (and therefore is a candidate for discontinuation). Offloading is less desirable because it merely shifts the work, and because most people (including the “offloadee”) have little or no slack in their workday.

This approach works because it honors the people and works with them. It’s the antithesis of the corporate version of the Golden Rule – “The person with the gold makes the rules!” This approach is better for the long term than forcing change, because forcing change frays the underlying relationship and goodwill, which is the foundation upon which all organizations operate.

What do you think? I’d enjoy your feedback, or, even better, an e-mail exchange (gary) or phone call (971-221-8155)

Gary Langenwalter

Forget Independence!

I broke my foot when I was hiking recently. My foot is in a walking boot, which is better than a cast because I can remove it when I want. However, the doctor said that if I want my foot to heal, I have to stay off it. Thus, I cannot do myriad activities that I used to take for granted – mowing the lawn and other house maintenance chores, walking (which I really enjoy), etc. To keep from putting weight on my foot, I use a knee scooter, which is MUCH better than crutches! But it has zero sideways mobility, which is really frustrating the kitchen, because I can’t just turn around and get something.

Net/net: I now have to ASK people to do things for me, which I never had to do before. And I am grateful for handicapped parking spaces and elevators, which I never used to use.

How does this relate to leadership? Like most other executives, I still have the underlying mantra of self-sufficiency: “I can do it myself”. My ability to do things independently has been a source of pride. I am now learning a lesson in INTERdependence. A truly effective leader is willing to let, or even ask, others to do things for them.

There are 3 stages of social maturity:

· Dependence (when we’re children)

· Independence (as we move through our teen years into adulthood), and

· Interdependence (when we finally realize that we can’t do it alone).

An Ubuntu saying summarizes interdependence quite nicely: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” John Donne echoed that thought 400 years ago: “No man is an island…” The attitude of interdependence fundamentally contradicts our culture – and most of our ideas about leadership. It is diametrically opposed to “management” – in which the boss tells the subordinate what to do and how to do it. Interdependence fosters effective teamwork, and it supported by facilitative leadership.

One other thought, this time about the old maxim: “Tis better to give than receive”. If we only give, or tell, and we don’t allow others to give to us, we’re depriving them of the ability to use their gifts, to make their contributions, to feel really good about who they are. In this way, the practice of being in control is actually selfish. It lets us feel good and powerful and productive at the expense of others.

What do you think? Does this sound reasonable? Or do you disagree? I’d truly enjoy hearing your thoughts and experiences.

Gary Langenwalter

Time Management – an Oxymoron

Time management is an oxymoron. We cannot manage time; we can only manage how we use time. Additionally, when we try to manage by measuring results in a time period, we can unintentionally harm our organizations and ourselves. Let me explain.

Ancient Greeks had 2 words for time: Kronos and Kairos.

Kronos is the root word for chronometer – measuring time by the clock. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Some of those divisions are natural: the length of a day, the length of a year. Others are completely man-made, and therefore artificial: months, hours, minutes, seconds.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with using Kronos time, as long as we remember that it is completely artificial. Natural processes cannot be forced into a Kronos mold – trying to do so creates frustration on the part of the human, and potentially poor results on the part of the natural process. When we planted tomato plants last year, the package said that we would have tomatoes in 72 days. However, our garden only gets partial sun. So it was 80+ days before the first tomato was ripe enough to eat. And that is the basis of the second Greek word for time: Kairos.

Kairos understands natural processes. An ad for wine several years ago said, “We will sell no wine before its time.” How long a person takes to adjust to a new situation – that’s Kairos. That adjustment period differs from person to person, because we are each unique. Kairos takes the long view.

A company headed by a Kronos-driven CEO fired a VP of sales because the sales for the first quarter did not meet expectations. The VP had told the CEO that 3 major bookings were coming in, but the VP could not guarantee that they would be in by March 31. Sure enough, they arrived on April 1 and April 2. Unfortunately for the CEO, the 3 customers decided to follow the VP of sales, rather than continue to buy from a company that was so short-sighted.

Years ago I worked for a company that was committed to having 15% increase in profits compared to the same quarter in the prior year, every quarter! We could have called the company “Kronos Incorporated.” We had gotten to the point in which we would sacrifice dollars in the following month to save a dime at the end of a quarter. Our suppliers and our customers knew this and took advantage of it. We somehow maintained the artificial earnings predictability for 7 years. Then we finally ran out of ways to make the expected numbers, so we incorporated some of the bad news that we had deferred for so long. When the dust finally settled, we could start making decisions that were in the company’s best long-term interest.

An excellent leader understands Kronos and Kairos, and uses them wisely.

What experiences have you had with Kronos and Kairos? I’d enjoy hearing from you.

Gary Langenwalter

Effective Leadership Trait #3 – Skilled Communicator

Highly effective leaders are skilled communicators. Most people assume that communicating is about speaking. Not true. Rule # 1: Excellent communication skills start with listening, THEN devolve to speaking. Only by listening first do we earn the trust of the person we’re talking with. Only by listening first do we earn the right to be heard. Only by listening first do we have the ability to speak to the other person’s interests, to their listening. Listening is the first characteristic of a skilled communicator.

When I was about 6, I was somewhat of a chatterbox. My grandfather, a gentle soul, asked me, “How many ears do you have?” A bit puzzled, I answered “Two.” “How many mouths do you have?” (Even more puzzled) “One.” “Do you think the good Lord had a reason for giving you 2 ears and 1 mouth?” (Oh.)

You’ve heard the expression, “Dance like nobody’s watching.” I suggest, “Listen as if the person is going to tell you the most important thing in the world.” Most of the time the topics will indeed be mundane. But there will be gold nuggets. AND, the speaker will feel truly honored, creating a relationship for future conversations.

Secondly, a skilled communicator continually looks for feedback from the listener – do they understand it? Do they agree? A skilled communicator also pauses while talking, to allow the listener to digest what has been said and to formulate a response. The difference between introverts and extroverts can be striking in this regard. An extrovert does not know what they are thinking until they say it, so they tend to talk quickly and volubly. An introvert needs time to process what they have heard so they can formulate a response. They are equally intelligent – they just need processing time.

Third, a skilled communicator uses persuasion rather than power and position. Didn’t you hate it when your parents or a teacher or coach or drill sergeant said “Do it because I said so”? Aristotle said that to communicate effectively, one can appeal to:

· Ethos – who we are,

· Pathos – emotions, and

· Logos – logic

Ethos is the most powerful. Effective speakers try to identify with their listeners, and have their listeners identify with them. Presidential candidates try to identify with the man in the street, or the soccer mom. Finally, whoever tells the stories defines the culture; they combine ethos and pathos. Look at advertisements – most of them tell stories (with pictures, words, and music), rather than merely citing facts and figures. They use the stories to persuade, and then add facts and figures so the potential customer can logically justify the decision they made.

Coming next: Compassionate Collaborator

Gary Langenwalter

Effective Leadership Trait 2 – Puts People First

What do highly effective leaders do? They put people first. They help others meet their highest priority development needs. It seems counterintuitive, but the data prove that putting other people first makes an organization more profitable. An effective leader puts people first by:

· Displaying a servant’s heart

· Mentoring

· Showing care and concern

Servant’s Heart: A servant leader cares deeply how their decisions and actions will affect others – they want others to benefit. So they don’t make decisions purely on financial grounds. They realize that for a company to thrive, the communities in which it operates must also thrive. They inherently use a win-win rather than a zero-sum win-lose model for making decisions and operating. Example: the executives of Burgerville volunteer an hour a week reading to local elementary schoolchildren, because they know that if a child is not reading by the 3rd grade, that child is destined for a life of struggle and poverty. In fact, the slogan of Burgerville, a privately-held for profit organization, is “serve with love”. They don’t talk about “customers” – they talk about “guests”.

Mentoring: I was grateful to have a mentor as I was starting my career – he was more than just a “boss”. I would like to have had more mentors as I changed fields and professions. I’ve found that mentoring others is truly rewarding. Even (especially?) if you didn’t have a mentor, becoming one provides benefits to both you and the mentee. It’s a great way to pay it forward. Everybody wins!

Showing Care and Concern: This concept is countercultural, even revolutionary. Competition is so engrained in American culture that we don’t even consider its cost. Competition for the promotion; competition for the raise; competition for the customer. Negotiating to get the best possible deal for me, or for my company. But when we were children, our mothers taught us to care for others; they taught us to share. Every well-established religion has care for others as one of its foundations. Our companies, and our society, cannot survive, let alone thrive, if we do not actively care for others. Care for others expresses itself in win-win, instead of win-lose.

Next week: Skilled Communicator

Comments? Feedback? I’d like to hear your thoughts.

Gary Langenwalter

Effective Leadership Trait 1 – Person of Character

What do highly effective leaders do? Wrong question – the right question is “what do highly effective leaders BE?” First and foremost, highly effective leaders (whose companies outperform the S&P 500 2.5 to 1) “be” persons of character.

A person of character makes decisions in a manner very different from a typical “show me the bottom line” leader. In making decisions, a person of character:

· Maintains integrity. Integrity starts with honesty, which is the most frequently-cited characteristic of excellent leaders. But integrity doesn’t stop there – it is deeper. It’s grounded in being authentic. Authenticity is about knowing oneself, and being true to your moral compass. Integrity listens to a “True North” moral compass as it makes decisions, realizing that sometimes the decisions will alienate powerful people, and being willing to pay that price. “Principle before profit” could be its motto. Interesting, isn’t it, that companies that have these highly effective leaders outperform the “Profit first” crowd by 2.5 to 1.

· Demonstrates humility. “A position is a role, not a coronation.” This is true for any position, from CEO to groundskeeper. The root word for humility is “humus” – or ground/earth. A humble person stays grounded in the wisdom that each person has worth, and that each person has gifts and graces. A humble person knows that our society needs each of those gifts and graces, and is willing to learn from people of all walks of life. One man I know, who is now worth several million dollars, often wears shoes with no laces to remind himself that at one time he could not afford laces for his shoes. He KNOWS that he is no better, and no worse, than anybody else.

· Serves a higher purpose. One of the best ways to maintain integrity and remain humble is to realize that we are each here in this life for a purpose. Frederick Buechner states, “A person’s call is where their deepest gladness meets the world’s greatest need.” Some people are called to social services, others to retail, others to technical professions, others to cutting hair or driving taxis, and others as stay-at-home parents. Persons who are serving a higher purpose receive deep peace, which affirms their choices and gives them the ability to keep on keeping on when the going gets difficult. Intentionally serving a higher purpose enables them to help others to seek their own higher purpose, because it removes the element of competition from the conversation.

This, and the 6 additional traits of effective leadership which will be covered in future blogs, are based on Seven Pillars of Servant Leadership, by James W. Sipe and Don M. Frick.

I welcome your reaction, your feedback, your thoughts

Gary Langenwalter