Tag:

Corporate Culture

Blog

Top 10 Posts of 2017 – Part I

by Ron Potter

For the rest of the year, we’ll be looking at the top posts of 2017. Today we dig into posts 10 through 6.

10. Balancing Innovation and Execution

At some point, every leader seems to grapple with the balance between innovation and execution. Many leaders struggle with the notion that one great idea will save the day for the organization. Others spend an inordinate amount of time focusing on “getting out the laundry” and not on new ideas.

Continue Reading…

9. Opposite of Victim

Someone asked me the other day what was the opposite of the victim mentality. That ignited a lively dialogue which came to the conclusion that Creativity is the opposite of victim mentality. Isn’t that a great picture? If we eliminate policies, procedures, governance, or leadership styles that create or assume a victim mentality, we unleash creativity. Although my work is focused on leadership within corporations, the first thing that came to mind was our law makers.

Continue Reading…

8. You can’t fix culture

I named my company Team Leadership Culture because those were the three elements that made a company great. You can think of those three elements as a triangle: Team and leadership at the base of the triangle, culture at the top. If you have not taken the time to build great teams and great leaders, a great culture is not going to develop.

Team is the most important. With a great team, lots of wonderful things can happen, sometimes even with mediocre leadership. However, great leadership without a good team almost always fails.

Continue Reading…

7. Myers-Briggs In-Depth: Deciding: Thinking vs Feeling – Part I

Most (business) people react negatively to this “Feeling” function and will associate with the Thinking side rather than the “touchy feely” side. While this is a complete misconception, it drives a very strong bias to the Thinking side. In my data base of corporate leaders that I’ve gathered over the last 25 years, roughly 85% identify themselves with a Thinking Preference and about 15% with a Feeling Preference. This is far outside the parameters of the other functions.

 

6. Qualities of a Caring Leader: Confrontation

Part of leading is confronting people and urging them toward better performance.
Confrontation does not involve giving a report on another person’s behavior. It means offering feedback on the other’s role or response. Its goal, in the business environment, is to bring the employee, boss, or peer face to face with issues (behavior, emotions, achievement) that are being avoided.

Continue Reading…

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Golf Lessons

by Ron Potter

This summer each of my grandsons wanted to spend time on the driving range with me learning the golf swing. That was great fun. Even though I’m not a professional golf coach and only an average golfer, my coaching at the range made a huge difference in their performance. Each seemed to grow from the experience.
That started me thinking about the coaching aspect of leading a team of people. Let me paint two possible scenarios:

1-on-1 Meeting after the event

I could have let each grandson hit golf balls for an hour, made notes and observations, then returned to the house for a good 1-on-1 evaluation. It might have gone something like this:
Me: I noticed right from the start that you had too many moving parts.
GS: What does that mean?
Me: Your feet were shifting. Your knees were moving too wide. Your arms were flopping all over the place.
GS: So, what should I do about it?
Me: Well, let’s start with your feet. We’ll get those stable first then work on the rest.
GS: Great, can we go back out now and test it?
Me: No, we’ll be having supper soon. Maybe we can try it again over the weekend.

Coaching During the Event

Me: (After about the third swing). Try keeping your feet still.
GS: (New swing with still feet but same result). That didn’t help!
Me: But it was a much better swing. Try it again.
GS: Wow, that helped a lot. (He hit several more balls with much better results)
Me: Now that you’ve got your feet still, try twisting your waist instead of swaying.
GS: Show me. (I demonstrated a few swings myself then had him swing a few times until he got the feel for it)
GS: (He hits a few balls that now go straighter and longer). Man, this is great!

Expected Results

Which approach worked better? It’s obvious. The second approach is much more effective than the first. And, it didn’t make any difference of the skill level between grandsons. The individual instruction may have been different but the process was the same.

Development Process

How are you developing your people? Are you saving your notes and observations for your formal 1-on-1 review time?

1-on-1 Meeting after the event

You: Back in March, you made a statement that shut down Carla. That prevented you from accomplishing your goal.
Them: What was my statement and how did you know Carla reacted?
You: Your statement was something about lack of planning and I could just tell that Carla took it personally.
Them: So, what should I do about it?
You: Well, let’s start with your ability to read reactions then we’ll move on to the next steps.
Them: Great, can we work on it now?
Me: Maybe we can try it again at our next meeting in a couple of weeks.

Coaching Immediately after the Event

You: When you made that statement about lack of planning, Carla took it personally and shut down.
Them: Wow, I didn’t notice that. What did you see?
You: First she crossed her arms. Then she pulled some papers from her briefcase and began working on them. She never re-engaged in your discussion.
Them: What should I have done differently?
You: Keep eye contact with people in the room. If you’re losing the focus of Carla or others, you’ve probably made a statement they don’t agree with. Express the fact that you may have misinterpreted some results and ask that everyone share their beliefs and assumptions about what happened.
Them: We have another meeting tomorrow. Would you help me notice if I’ve lost people so I can try this process?

Expected Results

Which approach do you think would work better?
Coaching requires immediate feedback. Don’t wait for your 1-on-1 meetings. Take the time (it takes both time and courage) to develop your people in the moment. You’ll get better results and they’ll appreciate the time and courage it took to care for them.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTrust Me

Becoming a Mentor

by Ron Potter

Last week we discussed being a dynamic mentor that inspires change in others. But how does one get there?

Here are some thoughts on becoming a mentor to others:

Character Over Skills

First, the best mentoring plans focus primarily on character development and then on skills. As Jim Collins reports, “The good-to-great companies placed greater weight on character attributes than on specific educational background, practical skills, specialized knowledge, or work experience.”

Set Clear Expectations

Second, I see many mentoring attempts fail because the participants do not sit down together to discuss and set boundaries and expectations. The process flows much better if the participants take time to understand each other’s goals, needs, and approaches than if they take a laid-back, let’s-get-together approach.

Any mentoring relationship should start with a firm foundation of mutual understanding about goals and expectations. A mentoring plan should be constructed by both individuals, even if it calls for spontaneity in the approach. Nothing is more powerful than motive and heart. Both of the people involved need to fully understand what is driving each of them to want this deeper experience of growth and commitment.

I once worked with an organization where a senior executive was trying to help a new manager. Incredible as it may seem, the manager was frequently not showing up on time—or at all—for scheduled mentoring appointments. We doubt that he fully understood the senior executive’s passion for his personal growth. When they later met to discuss the problem, the senior executive explained why he was willing to get up very early in the morning to help mentor the manager. Once the manager had grasped these basic facts, he started taking the sessions more seriously. Good idea!

Although I strongly endorse the notion of mentoring spontaneously during “teachable moments”, ideally I suggest using a combination of scheduled and unscheduled opportunities to learn and grow together.

Catch the Vision

What image comes to mind when you think of the term mentor? You might picture two people sitting at a table in a restaurant, the older person, his or her head topped with waves of shimmering, gray hair, waxing eloquent while the younger listener is furiously scribbling notes on a legal pad. Although this scene may warm our hearts, it seems just a bit out of sync with the real world.

I would like to offer an alternative image of mentoring: Picture two people sitting across from each other in an office. Obviously, an important project is under discussion. The interaction is animated, intense, and often humorous. These people obviously know each other well. Speech is direct and honest. Mutual respect is readily apparent. Some coaching is occurring, but the protégé is not restrained in sharing some insights on the performance of the mentor as well. This relationship is built on trust.

With this picture in mind, I like to define mentoring as a long-term, mutually supportive and enhancing relationship rather than as a relationship in which a highly advanced human being tutors another who stands a step or two below him or her on the developmental ladder.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Are your Values Valuable?

by Ron Potter

Almost every company I walk into has their values displayed somewhere. Often on the wall of the lobby in large font with beautiful art work. Very impressive.

But, it’s immediately evident that the values are either embedded in the culture and achieved every day or they are considered aspirational. The difference is stark!

Aspiration is good. But which type of aspiration are we talking about? There are two very different definitions of the word aspiration.

  1. A hope or ambition of achieving something.
  2. The action or process of drawing breath.

In some organizations, the values are aspirational. I was taken back by one CEO who very proudly proclaimed, “Oh yes, we aspire to these values each and every day.”

“Have you actually achieved any of them?” I asked.

“No, these are aspirational. We attempt to live up to them each day.”

In other companies, the values are aspirational. They are as natural and critical as breathing. When I asked another CEO about their values, his response:

“This is who we are. If we violate these, we die. If anyone violates the values, they’ll be called out immediately, no matter their rank in the company.”

Which aspiration defines your values? It’s obvious to me that the people who work and live in organizations believe values are the breath of the organization. When they’re violated, breath is taken away. Suffocation begins.

When they are treated as the breath of the organization, people know they are to live the values. They know there are consequences for violating the values. They’re quick to tell stories of people who have been asked to leave the company for not living up to the values.

However, when they’re treated as “Hoped for” values, they simply become a list of things that would be nice to have. They seem to come with an understanding that failure will happen but credit should be given for trying.

Sorry. As my grandfather used to say, “Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.” When those values are displayed on the wall but not achieved every day, the conclusion of the people is lack of integrity. If you lose your integrity you lose your ability to influence. Leadership is only influence.

If you’ve published those values in your company and are not breathing them, you’ve forfeited your leadership. The only resource you have left is power and control and your organization knows it.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Title Unknown

by Ron Potter

I never could decide what to title this blog post:

  • The Chicken or the egg: Which came first?
  • Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. – Albert Einstein
  • Culture eats Strategy for Breakfast – Peter Drucker (attributed)

With one of my clients (but certainly not just one) we had just concluded our third Culture Survey over a span of about four years. And the results continued to decline. Every year, the culture results were worse than the previous year and every year the reaction by the leadership was the same “Let’s take the survey again next year. We’re sure the results will improve.” Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. – Albert Einstein

I thought I had my title. But wait, there’s more.

When I suggested that we need to spend some time on the leadership issues that are causing the culture results to drop year-over-year, the answer I received was “We’ll get to that soon but right now we need to dedicate our (precious) leadership time to developing our long-term strategy.” “Culture eats Strategy for Breakfast” – Peter Drucker

Once again, I thought I had my title. But wait, there’s still more.

When I pressed the issue that culture work needs to come first, the answer I received “Look, good cultures are the results of good performance. If we get our long-term strategy right and executed we’ll have great financial results and everyone will think the culture is great.” The Chicken or the egg: which came first?

And there’s the third title for this post.

Which does come first? When I first met Dan Denison, he had recently published “Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness.” Since then the Denison Consulting Group has continued to grow and refine their Denison Organizational Culture Survey (DOCS). Recently Forbes Magazine wrote an article about research done a few years ago and published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior. Results from cross-lagged panel analyses (survey speak 😉 indicate that culture “comes first,” consistently predicting subsequent ratings of customer satisfaction and sales.

Culture comes first. Culture eats Strategy for Breakfast. Stop pushing for better results and ignoring the culture.

The purpose of leading a company is to build great teams that allow the best in everyone to rise to the top, grow as leaders and grow other great leaders and to create a culture that inspires innovation, contribution, and drive. Team, Leadership, and Culture. Focusing on results first doesn’t work. Results happen because of great people thriving in great cultures.

0 comments
1 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Are you being Sub-Optimal today?

by Ron Potter

Maybe you should be to acquire success

Bio science is one of the most complex areas of science. The systems are so complex and inter-related that few scientist attempt to go there. To many, it just seems too daunting.

But, as scientist begin to probe this tiny, complex world one of the key features become evident. In order for an entire system to function properly and efficiently, many of the subsystems need to function at a sub-optimal rate.

  • Could that sub-system operate faster? Yes, but that would screw up the timing crucial to the overall system.
  • Could that sub-system generate more heat? It could easily double its heat output but that would overheat the entire system.
  • Could that sub-system be reduced in size? Yes, but without a certain momentum, it couldn’t support the benefit it provides to the overall system.

Years ago, the book Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge introduced us to the idea that we must think systemically. The system as a whole needs to operate well and that should be our goal.

I’ve often run simulations during team building sessions. The title is self-explanatory. The exercise will “simulate” a system in a smaller size and shorter timeframe so that we can grasp what’s going on as a whole. Real systems are often too large and complex or take too much cycle time for us to fully understand what’s going on. Simulations attempt to simulate what’s going on in the time of a meeting (a couple of hours) and the space of a conference room so that the dozen or fewer participants can observe the system as it operates.

One of the simulations I’ve used is “Paper Planes” created by Discovery Learning Intl. Just as the title suggests the team will build Paper Planes to meet certain specifications and performance standards. Each person is assigned to a station, equipped with the proper tools and trained well before the simulation starts.

GO! The team has 30 minutes to produce as many planes as possible. The average number of planes produced in the first 30-minute run? 0.5! That’s right, half the teams never get a single plane across the finish line. After three runs with debriefing and re-engineering time between runs, teams will often produce 20, 30, 40 planes and more. Why the difference?

During the debrief and re-engineering times, teams begin to look as the system as a whole. It often makes sense to spend less effort and manpower at certain stations (sub-optimize them) so that the whole can be productive.

So, bioscience says that some systems should be sub-optimized to keep the entire system healthy and functioning optimally. A simple manufacturing simulation says that some systems should be sub-optimized in order to produce the maximum output.

And yet when we look at corporations as a whole, we still see leaders incentivizing functions, departments and divisions to operate at optimal levels with little regard to what that does to the whole system. One thing it clearly does is establish points of friction and incentives that are odds with each other. Teams at the top never seem to gel as teams because they’re never encouraged to remove their functional “hat” and put on the team hat to make those tough decisions. The decisions that require one group to take a back seat to another group in order to optimize the whole.

Do you have a team of leaders or a group of functional heads all trying to optimize their piece? Answering this question could go a long way in discovering your maximum potential.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

The Motivation of Money

by Ron Potter

Clotaire Rapaille. If the name alone doesn’t fascinate you, his life story and his life work should.

I don’t have time to tell his story here but read his book The Culture Code: An Ingenious Way to Understand Why People Around the World Live and Buy as they Do

I had the opportunity to work with Dr. Rapaille for a short period years ago. But what I learned during that time sticks with me. Dr. Rapaille was performing a series of “syndicated studies” for major corporations around the world on various topics. One topic was about Rewards and Recognition, what motivated people. It was very clear from the global study that people were not motivated by money. In fact, it turns out that every time money is involved, in the form of a bonus, pay raise, profit sharing or whatever the mechanism, the deep-down belief in people was that the company had simply leveled the playing field using the money. Put simply, money was granted when they had already given the company an extraordinary effort. The company was simply “leveling the playing field” by rewarding them with money. Money was not a motivator, it simply made things even.

I know a young entrepreneur who is creating and growing a successful company. In my conversation with her the other day, she spoke of how she sits down with each employee at the beginning of the quarter to talk about how the employee wants to grow personally and what they would like to learn. They always find an opportunity for growth and development for the employee that would also benefit the company. By funding the personal growth and development of the employee she keeps them motivated and benefits the company through increased skills and capabilities.

Dr. Rapaille’s study answered the question, if not money, what was motivating. The answer to this began to take on the idea of a GPS system. All employees are on a journey to somewhere. There may be long-term goals and there are always short-term goals. Short-term goals might be related to having a young family and needing more time to be with them. Or trying to finish an advanced degree and needing the resources, time and tutoring to accomplish the goal. Long-term goals might include living in a particular geographical region, reaching a certain level of corporate leadership or even retiring at a young age.

The conclusion of the study? To really reward and motivate your people, you must know them and their journey. You must understand their GPS system and where they’re located on that trajectory. Once you’ve made enough personal connection with them to understand their current location, reward them by helping them get to the next mile-marker on the journey.

  • After a period of heavy dedication, send them home for a few days with their family.
  • Give them some time off to study for that next exam. Offer the help of someone who knows the topic well.
  • Give them some great feedback and then training to help them with the next stage of professional growth, not a one-size-fits-all training and development.
  • Whatever reward personally benefits them, that’s rewarding!

Two decades ago it took a high priced, global study to help managers understand what’s motivating to their employees. My young entrepreneur understood it instinctively.

Every leader/manager I know is asking me about the millennials and what motivates them. It seems to be a mystery. I have one piece of solid advice. Don’t ask me. Ask them!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Never do this when seeking a promotion!

by Ron Potter

You should never seek a promotion!

The word seek means to

  • Solicit
  • Beg
  • petition for

Don’t you just get a warm feeling when you think about solicitors or beggars or being asked to sign a petition?

Of course not. It feels like we’re being manipulated. When people seek promotions if feels the same way.

Why do people seek promotions?

What’s the mindset of those who are seeking a promotion?

The words I hear include statements like:

  • I deserve it.
  • I’ve been here the longest.
  • I have all the qualifications for the job.
  • I’m more qualified than the person being considered.
  • If I was in control of the larger group I could make things happen.

These sound like Level 2 of the 4 Levels of Happiness.  Simply put, the four levels are:

  1. Money
  2. Ego
  3. Serving
  4. Teaming

When we’re seeking a promotion, we’re attempting to satisfy our ego.

What Happens when we get the promotion we seek?

If the promotion is received under these terms, what are your chances of success? Unfortunately, not great. There is very little support granted those who seek and then receive promotions.

  • They think they deserved it, let’s see them prove it.
  • Because they’ve been here the longest they think they can lead. They can’t.
  • They had the skills to do the work in their previous position. They don’t have the leadership skills to be successful in this position.
  • We should have hired the other person. It’s just a matter of time before this leads to failure.

How should we approach promotion opportunities?

If there’s a job posting and you’re interested in the position, please submit your application. Then let your work speak for itself.

After consulting with many leaders, it amazes me how many times I’ve heard “I wasn’t looking for this position. But, they promoted me into the job and I’m trying to do the best I can.”

Do your best where you are. That’s the key to promotion. Get better. Learn. Grow. Try things. Collaborate. See that others grow and get the credit for success. Strive to be better at what you do. That’s what gets promoted.

What happens when you get that promotion you were not seeking?

Then the things I hear are:

  • Give them a chance. They should have the opportunity to succeed.
  • I’ll give them a helping hand. They earned it.
  • If they make a mistake, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Can you see the difference in the responses? If you seek the promotion you’re on your own. Not even your boss, who may have promoted you will give you much support. But if you were working hard at being the best you could be at your position before you were promoted, people want to help. They want you to succeed. And most importantly, they’ll give you the time to be successful.

Will you sometimes be overlooked for a position? Quite likely. Would it have been better if you had sought the position? Absolutely not!

We’ve had the framework backward for a long time. Success doesn’t lead to happiness. Being happy leads to success. You will find that you’re the happiest when you’re doing your best, learning, growing and enjoying the moment.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Would you make a good spy?

by Ron Potter

I love spy novels!

One of the abilities that the good spy’s (at least the ones in novels) have is the ability to read micro expressions. Is the other person telling the truth or not?

This is not a novelist fantasy. There seems to be an actual science behind the idea of micro expressions. Following is the official definition:

Micro expressions are the rapid movements of facial muscles which show underlying emotions.

There are seven universal micro expressions:

  • Disgust
  • Anger
  • Fear
  • Sadness
  • Happiness
  • Surprise, and
  • Contempt

We all believe we can pick up on some of these clues in others. People who are good actors have learned to express these facial emotions as well. I’m impressed by that actor who, without words, can express that message of fear or contempt or disgust. But, the idea of micro expressions is that they happen quickly and we don’t have the ability to conceal them.

But here’s the bigger question. Do we have the ability to conceal our own micro expressions from ourselves? Or do we ever take the time to learn from our own micro expressions?

Dr. Hank Weisinger co-authored the book Performing Under Pressure. On his blog he discusses making better decisions.

WATCH YOUR FACIAL EXPRESSIONS

Use your facial expressions when making an important decision. Emotions are directly linked to facial expressions. Before an important decision, stand in front of a mirror and think of the decision you are to make. Does your face show fear, anger, happiness, anxiety? If your face does not look happy or satisfied when you think about the decision you are to make, you better think twice, because you will be ignoring your instincts.

Dr. Weisinger is not talking about being a good spy to understand other people. He’s saying look in the mirror. What do you see? Are your own micro expressions revealing what your emotions?

Corporations have promoted the idea that decisions must be rational and fact-based. That’s true, but brain science is telling us that we make decisions based on our values and emotions. We then justify decisions based on rational facts (at least the ones we chose to support our beliefs).

Would you make a good spy? Do you even understand yourself? Get to know your micro expressions. Pay attention to your emotions. Your decisions are not separated from your emotions. They’re all tied up together. You make better decisions when you include them in the process.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts