Leadership Qualities Essay

An Essay in Leadership Qualities Comparing and Contrasting Three Contemporary Business Titles By Steven Kelley November 17, 2003 Page 0 The original purpose of this learning contract was to identify the qualities of good leaders by reviewing three relatively recent works in the business press. Although effort has been made to ingest, reflect and individually synthesize leadership aspects studied and described in the books, it seems hardly fair to rigidly adhere to this topic, in light of so many other important concepts illuminated in these research findings. Each book lends its own unique and valuable contribution to leading, managing and building excellence, along with varied and surprising diversions from common understandings of these concepts. In many instances, I could relate to the numerous stories, both positive and negative, from my own career and diverse range of managers I experienced along the way. In setting out to uncover the qualities of great leaders, I certainly had some preconceived notions. My upbringing, the media, and perhaps American culture, has, dare I say, poisoned the minds of many businesspeople today into thinking that great leaders and great organizations overcome any obstacles in heroic and larger-than-life fashion, slaying the dragon and rescuing the princess (or, perhaps, the prince!). But, even after reading these three accounts of leadership and organizational greatness, I struggle to overcome this ingrained super-hero requirement and replace it with the more quiet, subtle wisdom of the authors. The three books I’ve attempted to summarize, compare, contrast and in some way, synthesize, are Primal Leadership by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis, and Annie Page 1 McKee, Good to Great by Jim Collins, and First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman. Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence Primal Leadership was the first of the three books I had undertaken earlier in the semester. From the opening of the book, the authors focus on the primary role of the leader to direct the collective emotions of the organization from top to bottom. Directing emotions positively results in a concept called “resonance” and it is through practicing emotional intelligence that leaders can attune themselves to the others around them and channel that positive influence. The author’s write, “The key, of course, to making primal leadership work to everyone’s advantage lies in the leadership competencies of emotional intelligence: how leaders handle themselves and their relationships. Leaders who maximize the benefits of primal leadership drive the emotions of those they lead in the right direction.” (p.6) The authors continue their introduction with the open-loop feedback concept of mirroring. When people encounter others, they each react to the others cues to set a mood. A wide range of emotions can be transmitted around a room to set a tone, whether positive and cooperative, or negative and combatitive. The authors especially concentrate on the positive emotional hijack abilities of smiling and laughing to diffuse an otherwise tense or uptight situation and interject a sense of relating and relaxing. Negative moods, such as anger, anxiety, and hopeless futility, also strongly impact the efforts of others, decreasing productivity. In this way, emotions play a vital role in the underlying tone of Page 2 the work that needs to be accomplished by contagiously infecting the team, group or organizational whole, for better or for worse. After introducing the concept of resonance, largely accomplished through empathy, a counter concept of dissonance or discordance is discussed. A dissonant leader, then, is one who lacks an understanding of his emotional environment, and fails to correctly respond. The authors relate this contrast in a story about a BBC division that was being shut down: “Consider, for example, a pivotal moment in a news division at the BBC, the British media giant. The division had been set up as an experiment, and while the 200 or so journalists and editors felt they had given their best, management had decided the division would have to close. It didn’t help that the executive sent to deliver the decision to the assembled staff started off with a glowing account of how well rival operations were doing, and that he had just returned from a wonderful trip to Cannes. The news itself was bad enough, but the brusque, even contentious manner of the executive incited something beyond the expected frustration. People became enraged—not just at the management decision, but also at the bearer of the news himself. The atmosphere became so threatening, in fact, that it looked as though the executive might have to call security to usher him safely from the room. The next day, another executive visited the same staff. He took a very different approach. He spoke from his heart about the crucial importance journalism played to the vibrancy of a society, and of the calling that had drawn them all to the field in the first place. He reminded them that no ones goes into journalism to get rich—as a profession its finances have always been marginal, with job security ebbing and flowing with the larger economic tides. And he invoked the passion, even the dedication, the journalists had for the service they offered. Finally, he wished them all well in getting on with their careers. When this leader finished speaking, the staff cheered.” (p. 3-4) Another related concept is one of negative resonance, or demagoguery. Examples offered were that of the charismatic leaders like Hitler, who “rallied angry mobs around a moving—but destructive—message.” (p. 24) Leaders who practice demagoguery employ a profound combination of fear and anger, and often segregate groups by Page 3 focusing them to fear what the other group might be trying to take from them, and inciting anger and outrage to keep that from happening. The authors point out that although fear and anger may provide a means of motivating, the impact is only successful in the short-run and generally destructive to productivity in the long-run, causing a wide range of emotional side-effects. Resonant leaders use their intellect to serve their emotional barometer, and gauge the emotional needs of the situation. Four domains of emotional intelligence are described: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. These areas are considered crucial and overlapping to attain resonant leadership. Self awareness is necessary for self management, social awareness and relationship management. Certainly, one must be attuned to their own emotions in order to synchronize them in a positive and appropriate way to create resonance in their environment. Anger is managed, empathy employed and misplaced outbursts are subdued in managing the larger emotional context. Social awareness, then, results from a keen ability to control ones emotions, assuaging fear and anger, and encouraging and exploiting positive morale, as a shared experience. The authors summarize, “The dynamic relations among the four EI domains are of practical, not just theoretical, importance. They’re the basic ingredients of effective primal leadership—of resonance.” (p. 31) Leadership and its emotional intelligence skill set is perhaps a norm that is cultivated over time, throughout organizations, and between generations of leaders by other great leaders. Interestingly, these authors reference the idea of incubating Page 4 generations of effective leaders from the Jim Collin’s prequel to Good to Great, namely Built to Last. Evidence suggests that emotional intelligence as a basis of great leadership harnesses the positive energy in ways that significantly impact the bottom line, in addition to less quantifiable measures, such as employee satisfaction and overall company morale. It also has implications for selecting the right people to move an organization in a profitable and worthwhile direction. Although great leaders may not have every competency under the emotional intelligence domains outlined by the authors (see appendix A), a highly effective leader possesses an overall strength of perhaps a half dozen competencies, representing each of the four domains. The authors also suggest that these competencies can be acquired over time, with a willingness and commitment to adopt them through careful, mindful practice. They comment, “An important note, which we will develop later in this book: These EI competencies are not innate talents, but learned abilities, each of which has a unique contribution to making leaders more resonant, and therefore more effective.” (p. 38) Research suggests that an effective leader utilizes many different leadership styles, selected carefully, employed at the right time, in an emotionally attuned and socially aware way, for each situation. Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative and Democratic leadership styles generally foster resonance, while Pacesetting and Commanding styles must be cautiously practiced. Appendix B provides the author’s table of these leadership styles, their resonance effects, impact and appropriateness for reference. From the Page 5 analysis, the authors conclude, “Results showed that, all other things being equal, leaders who used styles with a positive emotional impact saw decidedly better financial returns than those who did not.” (p. 54) The first style is the visionary style. Using this style, leaders articulate a direction without dictating the specific method of achieving it, leaving the group to innovate, experiment and develop their own custom solution. By trusting in their employee’s abilities and encouraging innovation, visionary leaders also retain their most valued employees. Finally, transparency, or the leaders credibility in conveying a vision and personal belief in and commitment to the vision are critical to effective visionary leadership. The authors propose that empathy is perhaps most important for the visionary leader, who must be able to sense what truly inspires and engages the group, leaving them with a feeling of pride. Another valuable and effective leadership style is the coaching style. Leaders who coach their employees reserve judgment and criticism, while seeking to understand their career goals and life aspirations. Acting as an objective advisor, they help the employee reflect on and understand in greater depth, the realities of their strengths and weaknesses and help them align these characteristics to define and achieve their goals. Coaches are also good at delegating tasks in challenging ways that develop employees. Coaching style is most effective with people who demonstrate initiative, general self-sufficiency and a desire to learn and grow. This style contrasts sharply with the pacesetting style, which Page 6 dictates direction and scrutinizes perceived employee actions, micro-managing every step. This is truly the polar opposite of the intent behind the coaching style. The Affiliative style is always an underlying effective style, by practicing empathy to understand an employees emotional needs, perspective, and feelings to maintain a positive morale and satisfaction. Leaders who invoke this style identify a need to promote harmony, foster friendly interactions, and nurture personal relationships. (p. 64) The authors warn, though, that this style should not be used alone, which could result in poor performance if used exclusively. Instead, leaders should pair this style with other styles, such as the visionary style. The Democratic style is best used when a leader is uncertain about the direction a group may want to take and the underlying drivers of that direction. Here, it is better to create a forum for open discussion and build consensus under a forum where all are given a chance to offer a viewpoint, understand the relevant issues and uncover the appropriate course of action. Consider the example offered by the authors: “The private Catholic School, located in an impoverished neighborhood of a large metropolitan area, had been losing money for years. No longer able to afford to keep the school going, the archdiocese ordered Sister Mary, who headed the Catholic school system in the area, to shut it down. But rather than immediately locking the doors, Sister Mary called a meeting of the teachers and staff and explained the details of the financial crisis that threatened the school. She asked for their ideas on ways to help keep the school open, and how to handle the closing, should it come to that. And then she simply listened. She did the same thing at later meetings for school parents, for the community, and then during a successive series of meetings for teachers and staff. By the end of a round of meetings that lasted several months, the consensus was clear: The school would have to close. Students who wished to attend a school in the Catholic system would be transferred. Although the final Page 7 outcome was no different than if Sister Mary had immediately closed the school herself, the process she used made all the difference… Compare Sister Mary’s approach with that of a priest who headed another Catholic school, also given the order to close. The priest immediately shut the school down—by fiat. The result: Parents filed lawsuits, teachers and parents picketed, and local newspapers ran editorials attacking his decision. The disputes kept the school open a full year before it could finally close down.” (p. 66-67) One must also be careful when making use of the democratic style. Over reliance on democratic leadership can result in an endless series of meetings, where issues are laboriously discussed, decisions delayed, and consensus elusive. Paralysis then ensues and an organization suffers from a lack of decisiveness and action. A leader certainly fosters an environment for incorporating important and perhaps divergent views, understandings, feelings, and observations, but in the end, the decision must still be made, and executed; the school must be closed. In the Pacesetting style of leadership, the leader demonstrates an almost obsessive drive to achieve high standards and exemplary performance. Poor performers are identified and reprimanded. At times, the leader jumps in, believing their drive, skills and abilities to be superior and timely, in order to save the situation from certain disaster. The authors identify that setting an initial pace or cultural tempo may be beneficial in entrepreneurial settings, but remarks that, “…if applied poorly or excessively, or in the wrong setting, the pacesetting approach can leave employees feeling pushed too hard by the leader’s relentless demands…The result, is that morale plummets as employees see their leader as driving them too hard—or worse, that the leader doesn’t trust them to get the job done in their own way.” (p. 72) Page 8 The other of the ‘use with caution’ styles is Commanding. Often times, commanding leaders undermine the trust and intellect of their employees, by requiring them to follow orders, imposing a militaristic tone. Threats are often used to control subordinates actions and ensure that the orders are carried out. Many of us have experienced this demeaning style, which almost certainly creates dissonance in the workplace. The authors sum up the consequences, “Given that emotional contagion spreads most readily from the top down, an intimidating, cold leader contaminates everyone’s mood, and the quality of the overall climate spirals down.” (p.76) Commanding leadership style should be used sparsely, then, or it will infect the organization at all levels by eroding employee’s morale, pride, and the satisfaction they take in their work, partly because, it wasn’t their decision, innovation, methodology and associated achievement that got the job done. It was, instead, begrudgingly accomplished by dictate, with no personal touch, which is an important factor in employee satisfaction. In the second half of the book, the authors warn of the danger of the ego getting in the way of correctly assessing oneself as an effective leader, understanding that one can grow and change, and offering an effective method for planning and implementing such a change toward more effective leadership. Often, CEOs are sheltered from the realities of the organization, perhaps by their own imposition of a commanding style, or possibly out of past employee experience with this style and a related fear. Nevertheless, the authors warn leaders to be mindful of this “informational vacuum”, by encouraging critical feedback and accepting the conveyance Page 9 of negative information. Perhaps, however, the egocentric, charismatic nature of many CEOs creates this situation. The authors evidence suggests that although many people often overrate their abilities, “it’s the very poorest performers who exaggerate their abilities the most.” (p. 94) They also comment that, “Tellingly, the CEOs from the poorest-performing companies gave themselves the highest ratings on seven of the ten leadership abilities.” (p.95) Once one recognizes deficiencies, understands that leadership skills can be learned and developed, commits to their development and utilizes what the authors call The Five Discoveries, positive change can occur. The self-directed learning methodology centers around developing a knowledge of ones real self, who they are today, and commits to moving down a path toward the goal of their ideal self, who they want to be tomorrow. Sustained change can occur through pragmatic completion of each of the outlined steps, or five discoveries, which are: The first discovery: My ideal self—Who do I want to be? The second discovery: My real self—Who am I? What are my strengths and gaps? The third discovery: My learning agenda—How can I build on my strengths while reducing my gaps? • Goals should build on one’s strengths, not one one’s weaknesses [or, read, not focused completely on correcting one’s weaknesses] • Goals must be a person’s own—not goals that someone else has imposed [specific personal ownership and commitment] Page 10 • Plans should flexibly allow people to prepare for the future in different ways—a single “planning” method imposed by an organization will often prove counterproductive. • Plans must be feasible, with manageable steps: Plans that don’t fit smoothly into a person’s life and work will likely be dropped within a few weeks or months. • Plans the don’t suit a person’s learning style will prove demotivating and quickly lose his attention. (p. 144) The fourth discovery: Experimenting with and practicing new behaviors, thoughts, and feelings to the point of mastery. The fifth discovery: Developing supportive and trusting relationships that make change possible. (p. 112, See also Appendix C) Certainly, this framework necessitates careful reflection on defining the ideal self and open acceptance to critical feedback from managers, peers, subordinates, family and friends in a 360 degree assessment toward understanding their real self. Then, outlining a plan that utilizes ones strengths, with specific identifiable tasks and timelines, incorporating the flexibility needed to accommodate the routine daily distractions and still maintain disciplined commitment, one can practice new behaviors, skills and leadership styles with the support, encouragement, and feedback from objective mentors, coaches, and friends without disrupting the actual work environment. Then, once developed, the skills of the ideal self can be used to the benefit of the larger organization Page 11 by transforming the real organization to the ideal organization, setting an attuned and positive tone by invoking a visionary style, educating and mentoring new leaders through coaching, and spreading emotional intelligent resonance to successfully incubate todays managers into tomorrows great leaders of a company that is built to last. Page 12 Good to Great I was especially impressed by Jim Collin’s Good to Great, which I listened to on Audiobook CD format over the course of about a week. The subject, style, spoken flow and obvious enthusiasm reflected in the author’s voice as he read his compiled research findings. Reflections on stories encountered, debates that occurred among his research team and posited questions supported his thematic quest to uncover what made companies go from good to great. Although leadership aspects were only one element of the research findings directing the leap from good to great, and good leader or manager traits are the primary focus here, I feel the need to stray from the topic to the extent necessary to convey the key points of the book. The methodical approach to identifying the qualities necessary to achieve greatness have such important implications on a leaders positive impact on organizations, that these qualities merit attention in this context. The concepts, research facts, and numerous real-world stories induce me to follow up this read with Built to Last, Mr. Collin’s prequel, which he admits is perhaps a better sequel. Collins sets out to answer the primary questions: “Can a good company become a great company? If so, how?” To do this, he and his research team carefully and meticulously scoured through company data to discover a small group of truly great companies. Using a baseline of GE, they developed a criteria for companies—those that have outperformed the market by at least three times consistently over a fifteen year period, up from an otherwise generally flat prior period, independent of industry. They uncovered companies like Kimberly Clark, Gillette, Circuit City, and Walgreens, along with eight others to compare in obtaining meaningful similarities. These companies Page 13 displayed common traits that rocketed them upward, regardless of cyclical slumps experienced in their industry by competitors. In a novel way, he starts by summarizing his findings up front and then expounds on the concepts behind them, rather than using some sort of suspense building. He comments that the research: • • Does not support an outside CEO savior effect to cause good to great to occur Did not identify links to compensation, bonus or incentive programs to create greatness • • • • Greatness was not found in brilliant company strategy Found more of a stop-doing list than a To-Do list in the great companies Demonstrated that technology didn’t ignite or cause good to great on its own Indicated that Mergers and Acquisitions played almost no role in the initial jump to greatness • • Found that change programs were not a factor Identified that greatness is not a function of circumstance or luck Another important rule to mention is that Mr. Collins’ research team findings were integrated into the book, if and only if, they were present in all of the good to great companies, not just a majority of them. Further, the concepts elucidated in the findings are generally simple, enduring and timeless principles that are seemingly independent of changes in the world, or new global economy. Page 14 Careful not to blindly associate success or failure on the leader, Collins’ team dissected the elements to identify what came to be termed level 5 leadership. Level 5 leaders come from inside organizations, according to the research. Contrary to popular belief, leaders of great companies were described as quiet, even clumsy or eccentric, lacking eloquence, self-effacing, with a compelling modesty, understated, but with fierce resolve, amazing will, and ambition, but not self-interest. Great level 5 leaders attributed their success to good luck or the good people around them more than to themselves. By contrast, other companies who demonstrated unsustainable leaps in performance often had outspoken, media-hungry, egomaniac CEOs, who took all the credit when times were good, and blamed circumstance when times were bad. Level 5 leaders calmly accept blame for bad results and reflect on next steps for extracting and channeling the talent of their people, always giving credit where credit is due, and avoiding the limelight. Level 5 leaders can be developed, although Collins suggests that there are some who “have the seed and some who don’t.” Those who don’t have the seed include those who can not or will not subjugate their ego or those who act as a one-man team. One common theme across the level 5 leaders of the organizations studied implies that a significant life experience such as a battle with cancer, a prisoner of war struggle or a religious awakening correlate with level 5 leadership. To uncover level 5 potential, Collins suggests you look for situations with extraordinary results, where no individual steps up to take the majority of the credit. Also, there seems to be what was called a symbiotic relationship between level 5 leadership and certain qualities, using Collins’ recurrent bus analogy, including: Page 15 • • • • • Knowing how to get the right people on the bus Knowing how to put those right people in the right seats Getting the wrong people off the bus, quickly Then, and only then, deciding where to drive the bus The right people don’t need to be “managed.” They are self-directed and selfmotivated. • If you have the wrong people, the right “vision” is irrelevant In all of the great companies, “who” questions came before the “what” questions; always “who” then “what”…before the strategy, before the visions or values, before the tactics. Collins goes on to postulate that making profits, led by a single great business person is not sustained over the long term and certainly different from an enduring, great company. He cites the egocentric, and self-described brilliant leader at Teledyne, whose vast empire crumbled after the dawn of his reign, perhaps due to his commanding style that paralyzed management into inaction without their supreme ruler at the throne. He goes on to caution that there is a profound difference between rigorous leadership and ruthless leadership, which often focuses on short-term gains through hacking and slashing of the workforce. Instead, he argues successfully that sustained greatness revolves around getting the right people together, who desire to build excellence around them for its own sake, regardless of awards, bonuses, perks or other incentives. In fact, an incentive system designed to motivate the wrong people will be an utter failure and most of the Page 16 good to great companies actually hired more people to spark their catapulted results, rather than ever cutting workers. Layoffs were used five times more often in the good companies than in the great companies. Collins describes some practical disciplines that recognize the value of hiring, growing and retaining the right people. He states that, according to what he dubs Packard’s Law, growth in revenue comes from hiring the right people first. Additionally, if you feel you need to “manage” someone, you’ve made a hiring error—get them either into a new seat or off the bus quickly. You can gauge this decision by asking yourself, “If it were a hiring decision, would you hire this person again?” and “If they announced that they were leaving, would you be upset, or relieved?” He explains that having the wrong person on the bus or in the wrong seat hurts their personal progress, weakens the organization and demoralizes the coworkers that have to deal with the inadequacies of the miscast person, which could result in these good people leaving. Finally, he concludes with the third practical discipline, which is to put your best people on your best opportunities, not your biggest problems. Great companies build their opportunities by constant fortification with good people, while good companies limit headcount and manage problems and budgets. Level 5 executives are not well-trained order-taking soldiers. They are solid debaters, questioning decisions passionately and intellectually. Great companies have cultures that develop this open environment, where CEOs accept open criticism and Page 17 discussion of ideas, projects and corporate direction. Further, level 5 leaders and executives were found to be able to build interpersonal relationships, life-long friendships and respectful but competitive peer, subordinate and manager interactions, again valuing success of the firm over their own monetary gain. Collins continues in describing what was termed the Stockdale paradox. Named after Admiral James Stockdale, who was captured and tortured as a prisoner of war, the term embodied some key traits of the great company. First, pragmatically confront the brutal facts and stark reality of your situation. Acknowledge the problems, deficiencies, and weaknesses. Do away with the rose-colored glasses. If you don’t, you’ll lose good people, because they’re too smart to be duped by unjustified, misplaced or plain idiotic optimism. Face the facts. Collins shares how Churchill, mindful of how his position would naturally influence a reluctance to report all the brutal facts about the war, created the statistical office to produce cold, hard facts about the battles, casualties and self-evident truths. Let the research results speak for themselves and always be mindful of the tendency to filter the negative from the top. Recognizing from the research that programs to motivate people are largely a waste of time (you have the wrong people on the bus), know how not to de-motivate people by denying the facts or failing to confront the truth. Secondly, after facing the brutal realities of your situation, commit to an unwavering faith that you will prevail. Collins suggests that great companies are made up Page 18 of managers, executives and leaders that own up to their current flaws and limitations, but set a course for the long run and commit to it. Moving onward, Collins describes the important Hedgehog Concept, stemming from the simple defenses the hedgehog uses by curling up and exposing his spiny outer shell, outdoing the clever fox at every turn. Great companies showed similarity in a simple, but effective understanding of the facts that formed their Hedgehog concept. Walgreens, experimenting with drive-through pharmacies, found them successful and opened hundreds of them, followed by photo development services. The concept was simply, ”increase the number of services purchased per customer visit.” Additionally, across the companies studied, it was determined that a company does not have to be in a flourishing industry to become a great company—some of the companies in the study achieved greatness during a lousy economic time in their industry as a whole. Page 19 Collins describes the idea illustrated below of three interlocking circles. The HEDGEHOG CONCEPT: Companies should focus What we can be #1 at! their strategy on the center of these overlapping understandings, which support What we are passionate about! Core Fits our economic engine! the idea of enduring growth and sustainable greatness. They include: • UNDERSTANDING what you (as a company) can and cannot be the best at, not second best at… • UNDERSTANDING what drives your economic engine. What makes economic sense… • UNDERSTANDING what you are passionate about… Companies in the study identified their Hedgehog Concept by determining a single, usually simple, economic indicator, or financial common denominator such as “systematically increasing our profit per X”, which in the case of Walgreens, was services purchased per customer visit. Careful dialog, debate and decision is an iterative process, guided by the three circles, to develop a core strategy based on core competencies. Page 20 Once understandings and a Hedgehog Concept are solidified, a culture of discipline and long-term perseverance is adhered to, with little bureaucracy. Instead, a shared vision is understood throughout the organization. Bureaucracy again manages the wrong people, and drives the right people off the bus, frustrating the remaining wrong people, which requires more management policies for the wrong people, which further alienates the right people, in a self-perpetuating destructive cycle. Level 5 leaders develop a culture of discipline, with focused, self-managed and motivated, carefully placed, talented people, rather than a carefully structured system designed to control and enforce a culture. Great companies also largely eliminated executive versus staff-level distinctions, rarely had perks, and more often gave more benefits to the line workers than the executive staff. Collins cites one situation where a worker at Nucor Steel asked, “Let me get this straight…I have nine children. You’re telling me that the company will pay $2000 per year per child toward post high-school education?” The answer was simply, “yes”, to which the worker choked back tears of amazement. His loyalty to the company was unquestioned and representative of the other workers. Union recruiters had to actually be protected from the employees, whose staunch dedication to the company, required no union intermediary. By contrast, struggling Bethlehem Steel had a fleet of corporate jets, carefully designed offices to accommodate the requirement that all vice presidents have windowed offices, and numerous other class-related perks. Page 21 Collins explains that Technology is merely an accelerator of a companies good to greatness, after solidifying its hedgehog concept, and after breakthrough results were achieved. Technology was never found to be the sole source of the transition to greatness in the companies considered. Also, in order for technology to be successful as a catalyst to greatness, it must link directly to all three circles. Finally, and perhaps one of the most important of the concepts is that of the Flywheel versus the Doom Loop. Collins describes the process of achieving greatness as turning a huge flywheel, set in one carefully selected direction at the core of the hedgehog concept, painstakingly pushed turn-by-turn in a patient and disciplined effort, staying steadfast to the identified goal, enduring challenges and accumulating momentum as it builds to breakthrough speed, assimilating all the cumulative actions of the right people. He explains how it is a common misconception that companies just lurch forward, proliferated by media coverage of a successful break-through moment, rather than a year after year account, relating each hastening rotation of the flywheel. He likens the focused and disciplined management, committed to turning the flywheel in a single direction to an egg, which, to the outside observer, sits with no movement, then suddenly cracks open as a chick, the whole time quietly incubating inside its shell. Collins amusingly describes the media frenzy surrounding how the egg miraculously and instantly transformed into a chicken, otherwise unnoticed and ignored until that “defining moment.” Finally, in the incubation period, great companies always under-promise and over-deliver to Wall Street. Page 22 The Flywheel effect impacts outside investors as well as internal staff, naturally getting them excited about the increasing speed of the flywheel, through the dedicated commitment and disciplined action of the management acting on brutal facts with unwavering faith. This consistently breeds organization-wide commitment and alignment, attracts more good people, energizes innovation, and heightens a sense of pride. People always want to be involved in a winning team. In comparison, many companies never get their flywheels going very fast, and therefore fail to achieve breakthrough. They thrash about by changing strategies and leaders, while spending tremendous amounts of time, money and energy on change management programs and motivational incentives to match the ever-shifting direction of the flywheel. Common actions of companies include the misguided use of acquisitions and constant short-term changes in leadership. Although companies can buy growth through acquisitions, they cannot buy greatness this way. Only until great companies achieved breakthrough results did they entertain expansion through acquisition. And, frequent changes in leadership often result in major shifts and undoing of previous management, stopping the flywheel and restarting it in another direction, losing any previous cumulative gains. Like Primal Leadership, Good to Great identifies leadership characteristics that suggest the application of visionary, coaching, affiliative and democratic styles. These level 5 leaders aren’t self-absorbed or commanding. Although Good to Great never specifically mentions Emotional Intelligence, it certainly implies its use, whether Page 23 consciously or not, by level 5 leaders. They seek out people who they enjoy developing friendships with and who share a common goal of achieving excellence for its own sake, often times preferring a sense of accomplishment over maximizing individual wealth. They invite passionate, democratic debate and implement disciplined action, coaching and developing their staff by admitting to their own bad decisions, attributing successes to their good people, and never laying blame on external factors outside of their control. In contrast to Primal Leadership, Good to Great focuses a bit more on the character of the leader. Although ego is mentioned in passing in Primal Leadership as a detractor from ones ability to correctly recognize strengths and weaknesses, Good to Great pinpoints this as a root cause of failure to achieve both level 5 status and to create an enduring great company. Having the right characteristics, then, should perhaps be added to calling the right leadership styles into play, including • • • a rigorous commitment and unwavering determination, putting the company profits before your own accumulation of wealth humility, modesty and personal strength that allow admission of individual mistakes I’m reminded of a story that goes something like this: In training a young prince to lead the people, the king holds up a pane of glass and asks his pupil to look through it and report what he sees. “The people, father,” he comments. The father then holds up a mirror and asks again, “what do you see?” He replies, “I see a reflection of myself.” The father explains, “If you allow silver to come between you and the people, you can only Page 24 see yourself. Let your service be its own reward and the rest will take care of itself.” The story has much application throughout many aspects of life. First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently First, Break All the Rules, by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, presents a different premise than the previous authors. They argue that the greatest managers in the world do not have much in common, both in background and experience, and in managerial style. Based upon a Gallup Survey, data suggested interesting results, some in harmony and some in contrast with the other authors reviewed. In response to the primary research question, “What do the most talented employees need from their workplace?,” a surprising statement concludes, “Our research yielded many discoveries, but the most powerful was this: Talented employees need great managers.” On the surface, this finding contradicts Collins’ idea that good and talented people manage themselves in pursuit of greatness for its own sake. Upon further reflection however, the concept makes practical sense. Clarifying this point, the authors comment, “An employee may join Disney or GE or Time Warner because she is lured by their generous benefits package and their reputation for valuing employees. But it is her relationship with her immediate manager that will determine how long she stays and how productive she is while she is there.” (p. 36) The second posited research question was “How do the world’s greatest managers find, focus, and keep talented employees?” Again, the authors attempt to uncover consistent, enduring truths about the qualities and Page 25 practices of great managers, digging further into the area of how to successfully identify, hire and build intellectual capital. Out of their survey results, the authors identify twelve questions that capture the highest level of both quantity of information and quality of information about success in the workplace. They list them as: 1. Do I know what is expected of me at work? 2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right? 3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day? 4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work? 5. Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person? 6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development? 7. At work, do my opinions seem to count? 8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job in important? 9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work? 10. Do I have a best friend at work? 11. In the last six months, has someone at work talked to me about my progress? 12. This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow? (p. 25-26) These questions reflect an underlying similarity with some of the leadership styles offered in Primal Leadership. Questions 1 through 4, 6, 11 and 12 imply the coaching style. Questions 5 and 10 suggest the Affiliative style. Questions 7 and 9 relate to the Page 26 Democratic style, while Question 8 hints of the Visionary style. In this way, a loose parallel ties some general concepts together between these two sets of authors. Buckingham and Coffman describe constructing the environment of the twelve questions as climbing a mountain. For me, this analogy was difficult to follow. Initially, the manager provides an employee with a framework for operating in her job by answering the questions of expectations and role, materials and resources necessary in the workplace. This is base camp, where the general question, “What do I get?” is answered. As you climb higher, the focus is on the individual contribution, posing “What do I give?” which is reflected in questions 3 through 6. Ascending the mountain, the question is asked, “Do I belong here?” in items 7 through 10, and finally, as the summit of the mountain is approached, the overall question of “How can we grow?” is asked and answered through 11 and 12. The author’s submit, “If you can answer positively to all of these twelve questions, then you have reached the summit. Your focus is clear.” (p. 45) The authors warn of mountain sickness by not crystallizing the answers to one question before moving to the next. Similar to Primal Leadership’s prescription of applying the right style to the right situation, these authors contend that you must apply the right style to the right person, recognizing that each person is motivated differently, thinks differently, and relates differently. Instead of trying to change the employee, great managers capitalize on these strengths and differences. Echoing throughout the remainder of the book, the authors recount the theme of thousands of great managers, “People don’t change that much. Page 27 Don’t waste time trying to put in what was left out. Try to draw out what was left in. That is hard enough.” (p. 57) Continuing, the authors state that in order for a manager to extract positive answers to the first 6 of the 12 questions, they must do four things very well; select a person, set expectations, motivate the person, and develop the person. They admonish that even if a manager has all the vision, charisma, and intelligence in the world, but cannot enact these four things, they will fail as a manager. According to these authors, great managers look inward into the company, the individual, and each individual’s different style, goals, needs and motivations, while great leaders look outward at competition, the future, finding connections, cracks and exploiting competitive weaknesses. The skills of leaders, while important, have little to do with “…the challenge of turning one individual’s talents into performance.” I find this argument ludicrous. Without leaders who, as Collins states, attract good people, heighten a sense of pride and extract talent to accelerate the flywheel, organizations cannot go from good to great. I certainly think there is enough evidence to support that greatness can be achieved, both as a leader and a manager, recognizing an individual’s differences, capitalizing on them, adjusting your leadership style, recognizing the brutal facts of the situation and combining efforts in a disciplined and persistent way, over time, to achieve breakthrough. These concepts can be harmonized, developed and implemented, and individuals can excel as both leaders and managers. These authors also state, “The core activities of a manager and a leader are simply different.” Rather, I would argue, the core Page 28 activities of leader build upon the core activities of a manager. To be a sustained great leader, one must master the skills of a great manager. Expanding on the insight of their survey, and applying it to the managers core activities, the following points are offered: • When selecting someone, they [great managers] select for talent…not simply experience, intelligence, or determination. • • • When setting expectations, they define the right outcomes…not the right steps. When motivating someone, they focus on strengths…not on weaknesses. When developing someone, they help him find the right fit…not simply the next rung on the ladder. The authors label these the “Four Keys” to management success and expound on each. While conventional wisdom says that willpower, experience and intellect are the essential qualities sought, the broken rules suggest you should look for the right talents such as Competencies, Habits, Attitudes and Drive. Great managers think not only about the position and role of the person they seek, but also consider their alignment with company culture, team members attributes and the candidates individual motivations and goals. Once the great manager selects the needed talent, they define only the right outcomes or goals and then allow each employee to determine their own path in achieving this goal. People express their own individuality and creativity through the Page 29 methods they choose to achieve a goal and take pride in the achievement by making the process their own. Great managers, then, permit flexibility in the way a goal is reached, rather than ascribing success to one best way of getting there. Allowing this freedom underscores the employees feeling that their manager trusts and can rely on them, which furthers a mature relationship with the manager as well as heightened employee satisfaction. Great Managers focus on their employee’s strengths, not their weaknesses. They resist outlining improvement plans to hedge against an employee’s shortcomings. Instead of generalizing about “workers,” the great manager recognizes each persons individuality, aspirations, patterns of behavior, sets of talents, passions and yearnings. Like the development process provided in Primal Leadership, great managers coach their employees by extracting the elements of the ideal self and help to align this with ingrained strengths to achieve internal ownership and commitment of the employee. Next, they mentor and support the effort of flexible learning, and resist the temptation to ‘fix’ people. This, then, completes the four keys, in helping the employee to find the right fit, rather than the next rung on the ladder. Page 30 Conclusion and Synthesis Each of the three books has its focus and merits, and each presents valid points. Synthesizing the greater knowledge, then, I conclude by creating a combined list of bullet points, which are presented below. • Great Leaders start with Great Managers and recognize that each employee has different motivators, talents, desires and goals. • Great Managers set clear expectations and trust the employee to creatively define their own path to achieve the goal, without prescribing set rules or micromanaging them. • Great Managers carefully guide their employees through the twelve questions to assist and encourage growth by recognizing strengths and working around weaknesses. • Great Leaders consciously create resonance by emotionally intelligent recognition and adaptation of their ever-changing environment, and employing the right leadership styles in the right mix, being careful in the application of dissonant styles. Resonant styles are Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative and Democratic. Dissonant styles are Pacesetting and Commanding. • Great Leaders can develop by envisioning the ideal self, defining the current state or real self, and then carrying out a flexible, concise, feasible, and personally meaningful learning agenda that capitalizes on strengths, allowing the freedom to experiment with new behaviors, thoughts and Page 31 feelings, and supported by trusted, encouraging relationships to make sustained change possible. • Great Leaders (level 5) are generally modest, and strive to achieve excellence for its own sake, rejoicing in the triumphs of their employees and accepting personal responsibility for failures, rather than laying blame on external factors. • Great Leaders get the right people in the right seats on the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and only then decide where to drive the bus—first WHO, then WHAT. The right people are people who are self-motivated, and self-managing, not self-interested. • Great Leaders promote a culture of open and informed sharing of information to confront the brutal facts and realities, but lead with the faith that, through the minor bumps in the road, the bus will reach its destination and the organization will persevere by defining a strategy at the core of the hedgehog concept, implementing disciplined action yearafter-year to accelerate the flywheel to breakthrough speed. • Great leaders instill their greatness into successive generations of employees and executives, enabling sustained greatness of their organization, rather than demonstrating egocentric and dictatorial rule to achieve short-lived gains during their reign. Page 32 BIBLIOGRAPHY: Goleman, Daniel, Richard Boyatzis, and Annie McKee. Primal Leadership: realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing, 2002. Collins, Jim. Good to Great. HarperCollins Publishers: Harper Audio, 2001. [Compact Disc Audio] Buckingham, Marcus and Curt Coffman. First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1999. Page 33 APPENDIX A: Primal Leadership (p. 39) Page 34 APPENDIX B: Primal Leadership (p. 55) Page 35 APPENDIX C: Primal Leadership (p. 110) Page 36