Team Leadership Culture
  • Team
  • Leadership
  • Culture
  • Myers-Briggs
  • Trust Me
  • Short Book Reviews
Top Posts
Obituary
REPOST: Four Functions, Three Rules
ROUNDUP: The Rise of AI
REPOST: Facing Adversity Series
ROUNDUP: Curiousity
ROUNDUP: Deep Work
REPOST: Character vs. Competence
REPOST: Opposite of Victim
REPOST: Listening With the Intent to Understand
REPOST: Performance vs Trust
  • About
  • Services
  • Resources
    • Trust Me
    • Short Book Reviews
  • Contact

Team Leadership Culture

  • Team
  • Leadership
  • Culture
  • Myers-Briggs
  • Trust Me
  • Short Book Reviews
Tag:

Decision Making

BlogCulture

The Power of Stepping Back

by Ron Potter May 21, 2015

In Warren Berger’s book, A More Beautiful Question, he writes

“The term stepping back is often used when we talk about questioning—step back and ask why, step back and reconsider, and so forth. But what are we stepping back from?”

Image Source: Tim Green, Creative Commons

Image Source: Tim Green, Creative Commons

Later he says:

“It’s necessary to stop doing and stop knowing in order to start asking.”

I have noticed—as has Warren—that the stop doing part is actually the hardest in the business environment. In another blog, I write about a destructive attitude that I see in the business world today. That’s the attitude of quick deciding. When we enter meetings with the attitude that we must decide quickly we tend to shut down the diversity of thinking and questioning that may “slow down” the deciding process and yet it’s those diverse thoughts and “why” questions that most often lead to better, more innovative decisions.

Stepping back from the fast paced, globally connected, task oriented work world is difficult.

Years ago one of my CEO clients asked me what key elements I had observed in building great teams. I was pretty quick to answer because I had seen the pattern so quickly and consistently.

Teams need to be BUILT.

Teams that get offsite twice a year to focus on team building and leadership continue to improve year over year. But, it’s critical that during these meetings you have to put down the bats and balls. You can’t be reviewing the business and the numbers. You’ve got to kick off your shoes, get real with each other and deal with each other as human beings, not human doings.

I can elaborate later on the importance of these meetings and the things that tend to sabotage them, but for now, notice that this is a way of stepping back from the business in order to gain clarity about the business. I’ve experienced time and time again that stepping back from the numbers, pressures, and routines of the business and focusing just for a couple days on team, leadership, and culture brings a tremendous amount of clarity about the business.

Management is about providing answers; leadership is about figuring out the right questions. Are you and your team stepping back enough to see that questions that will propel you in the future or are you simply frazzled trying to come up with answers day after day? Step back! You, your team, and your company need it.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogMyers-BriggsMyers-Briggs In-Depth

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

by Ron Potter April 13, 2015

MeyersBriggsIn-DepthDeep Misconceptions

We learned in the Energizing Function that preconceived ideas of what constitutes an Extravert and an Introvert often lead to misunderstandings.  It gets even worse in this function because of the title “Feeling.”

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.

Why the bias?

The main reason is that the people leading corporations pride themselves with making purely logical decisions.  Or more accurately, leaders fool themselves into believing they make purely logical decisions.  We know through observation and are increasingly aware through brain science that we actually make more of our decisions on the feeling side and then justify them by logic.  I think that’s the point here.

It Felt Like the Right Thing to Do at the Time

Justified.  Besides being the title of one of my favorite TV programs over the last several years, we are often faced with this issue in the corporate world.  As we review results we are often asked how and why a certain decision was made.  If we can recall the “logical” steps that we went through to make the long ago decision, we have a chance of justifying the decision.  If our only response is “It felt like the right decision at the time” it becomes difficult to defend our choices.  More corporate leaders identify themselves with a Thinking Preference (85%) because of the assumed superiority of Thinking, logical based decisions.

How Do You Feel about that?

I’ve used one technique through the years that dispels this imbalance very quickly.  While grappling with a topic during a team discussion I’ll ask “What do you think about this solution?”  This question will generate many logical based answers.  A little while later I’ll ask “How do you feel about this solution?”  For the truly Thinking preferenced people, it seldom generates any new response beyond their initial logic based response.  But for those members who actually reside closer to the middle or even on the Feeling side of this preference, it generates a much more robust, deeply felt answer.  And what’s amazing to me is that these responses almost always initiate a deeper discussion that many times leads to a different answer than was first proposed.  Also, the Thinking crowd actually begins to engage in their Feeling side which begins to create balance.  Remember, Balance, Balance, Balance is the key to great decision making with Myers-Briggs.

Myers-Briggs In-Depth is a blog series in which I dive into each MBTI function with more detail, providing some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decision making. Click here to read the entire series.
Interested in an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs functions? Click here to read the Using MBTI to Great Advantage series.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Quick deciding vs quick learning
BlogTeam

Quick Deciding vs Quick Learning

by Ron Potter March 12, 2015
Quick deciding vs quick learning

Photo credit: Anne-Lise Heinrich, Creative Commons

I have observed what I believe to be a very detrimental shift in thinking within our corporate cultures over the last 15 years.

We’ve been inundated with instant communication that is with us everywhere 24/7 (I had one of the first Blackberrys as soon as it hit the market in early 1999). To be clear, I’m not railing against this technology. I love it and I couldn’t imagine running my business or staying in touch with my family and the world without it. But it has interjected a sense of speed and quickness that is altering the way we think and decide as we try to conduct business in a globally connected world.
However, this belief that we must decide quickly changes the dynamics of decision making in a detrimental way. Good decision making (See my post on Prudence) requires good deliberation. However, if we’re in a quick deciding frame of mind we get defensive when:

  • someone raises an issue that feels like it is not in line with the current thinking or
  • will open that proverbial “can of worms” if we entertain the idea, or
  • they simply don’t agree with the current approach.

Teams have developed all kinds of behavior to suppress, shut down or discount the questioning view point. This eliminates good deliberation and will lead to an inferior (or even wrong) decision.
The shift we need to make is back to a quick learning attitude and then use a good process to make good decisions. What’s interesting to me is that teams who have mastered this quick learning leading to good decision approach, consistently make decisions quicker than those with the quick deciding attitude (not to mention better decisions).
Get better at

    • Quick learning with a…
    • Team of diverse points of view and…
    • Practicing good deliberation techniques to…
    • Reach great and lasting decisions.

You and your team will feel more productive, less stressed and will also begin to gain the reputation as high achievers.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTeam

Hard Choices

by Ron Potter February 12, 2015

I read Jeffrey Katsenberg’s book, “Hard Things About Hard Things.”

I just listened to Ruth Chan’s TED talk, “Hard Choices.”

So here’s the Hard Thing about Hard Choices:

Ruth explains that any choice that can be quantified is an easy choice because all numeric values can be related to each other based on their comparative amounts but hard choices are based on values.
Values can’t be quantified and compared to each other. Values are based on who we are and who we want to be. Ruth goes on to look at the dilemma from a person’s point of view and concludes that taking the quantitative approach is the safest way out. Making a value based decision forces us to choose who we want to be. I agree. This is a great personal growth philosophy.

But here’s the hard part: I work with corporate leadership teams where I help individuals make their own personal value and growth decisions through my personal coaching. The problem is we also have to make hard team decisions.
I believe most corporate teams fool themselves into believing they only make logical, fact based decisions or believe all decisions can be reduced to a number exercise so that the >=< analysis can be made. But as Ruth explains, hard choices are not quantitative in nature; they’re value based.

So how do you get a bunch of MBA trained financial experts, engineers, marketers, and scientists to make the hard choices based on value?

You need to build team.
Not just a team with defined roles and responsibilities, not just a team with clearly defined interfaces and decision gates. Not just a team of various functions that get together to discuss and coordinate the business. Not a team, but TEAM!
Teams are built on respect and trust. Teams honor and appreciate the diversity of thinking, attitudes, and beliefs that we bring to the table. Teams know who we are and what shapes us and what values we hold dear and what values we won’t violate.

These teams are fully capable of making the hard decisions and are fully capable of making them work.
If you want to build a great company, build a great TEAM.

Have you been fortunate enough to be part of a great team? Share with us how that happened. What made it work? What’s keeping your current team from being a great team?

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogMyers-BriggsUsing MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Work Life

by Ron Potter February 2, 2015

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.


 

Work Life Overview: Judging vs PerceivingMBTI series header

Myers-Briggs (MBTI) calls this your “living” function but I never quite knew how to relate to that word so I’ve modified this slightly to “Work Life”. How do you like your work life structured around you? Our Judging types like their life organized and structured. Plan their work and work their plan. Our Perceiving types like things a little more open ended. Be ready for changes and surprises. React to the moment. Figure it out as you go.

Our business schools and businesses have taught us the need for organization and structure so I tend to see an overabundance of Judging types in the business world, until I ask people how they like their vacations structured. The most organized business person in the world might say to me “Totally unstructured! All I want to do is get away from the rat race for a while and be completely in the moment and do whatever I decide to do at the time. Or maybe simply decide to do nothing!” I find that many people are well trained and disciplined at work but as soon as they can get away from it will revert to their more natural Perceiving type on their own time. We’ll talk about the need for Balance, Balance, Balance in future blogs as well as some deeper and often hidden implications of this function playing out in the work place.

Four Functions and Three Rules. So there you have a quick overview of the four functions of Energizing, Perceiving, Deciding and Work Life and I hope you’ve already gotten the message that the best way to manage these functions is through Balance, Balance, Balance. Teams that accomplish this balance in a trusting, respectful manner are always the best teams. They make better decisions more quickly that are more universally accepted than teams that never figure out how to use their diversity. This is one of the best technique and mental model that you can ever implement for overall better teamwork!

Sixteen Types. It’s also important to understand that it’s not just the individual function dichotomies that make a difference, it’s the combination as well. An Introverted preference may function very differently when it’s part of an ISTJ preference set than when it’s part of an INFP preference set. All of this to say, don’t become the arm chair psychologists and assume you can figure out someone’s type and therefor figure them out. You can’t. Your best bet at success is to master the process that brings out the best of all of the fourteen type preferences.

The Four Functions:
1. Energizing
2. Perceiving
3. Deciding
4. Work Life

The Three Rules:
1. Balance
2. Balance
3. Balance

Over the next several blogs we’ll take a more in-depth look at each of the functions and learn some great techniques to create balance, balance, balance.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Consensus: The Split at the Top

by Ron Potter January 29, 2015

I just love Scrat, the saber-tooth squirrel from the Ice Age movies. He always creates some minor little crack that looks harmless, but as the crack propagates, it begins to create all kinds of havoc in his world with major consequences. Such ‘cracks’ can be destructive and debilitating in corporations.

Image Source: Lars Hammer, Creative Commons

Image Source: Lars Hammer, Creative Commons

I was working with a couple major functional divisions within one corporation, trying to do some team building. These functions needed to cooperate with each other in order for the company to be healthy and thrive, they just couldn’t seem to get along. After a few of the normal approaches to overcome differences didn’t seem to produce any progress, I began to dig deeper.

The story that began to emerge was that the people in the functions had no problem working with each other and, in fact, preferred it. The problem was that their top leaders wouldn’t allow or, more impact-fully, didn’t want the cooperation to happen.

When I sat down with the first of the two senior VP’s that were responsible for one of the functions and asked about the oppositional position he had with the other senior VP, his response was, “Oh, there’s no opposition between us. We worked that out long ago.” I thought great, an answer exists, we just need to get the message down to the functions. So I asked, “Tell me about the solution the two of you worked out.” His response? “We simply agreed to disagree!” Well, that was very gentlemanly (and lady like in this case) of him but very destructive.

The difference between them didn’t go away, but like Scrat’s minor crack, propagated deeply into the organization. As I would talk to members down in either organization, they knew that their ultimate bosses disagreed and many of them took it on as their job to make sure the other function failed in a belief that their particular boss would be vindicated or somehow pleased.

Senior leaders cannot agree to disagree. They must build consensus. (More about how to build consensus later.) They’re part of a leadership team. If members of a team agree to disagree, there is no team.

Have you experienced a peer who just didn’t agree with you but was also unwilling to even work on the issue, preferring to agree to disagree?

How has disagreement of leaders above you on the org. chart impacted how you work with your peers?

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Perspective Changes

by Ron Potter January 22, 2015

In my executive coaching work, both with individuals and teams, one of the most useful techniques is bringing alternate or multiple perspectives. We so easily get entrenched in our own perspective, it can be difficult to see solutions or other possibilities.

I recently experienced heart bypass surgery. During one session in the post op process, I was lying in the hospital bed with the doctor on my right, his physician’s assistant on my left with my two nurses at the foot of the bed, and my wife over my shoulder.

At one point when the pain was severe, even the nurses had to look away. I thought, “I’m not sure how much the human body and psyche could stand more pain than this.”

But my mind immediately shifted to my father, lying in a muddy field hospital, (I’ve seen some of the hospital photos.) 4,500 miles away from home with no family around, with doctors and nurses who I’m sure cared very much, but had no time to spend comforting a patient, having his leg amputated.

Image Source: Ulf Klose, Creative Commons

Image Source: Ulf Klose, Creative Commons

My conditions, while seeming extreme, were nothing compared to what my father had experienced during WWII. My change in attitude and experience at that moment were such that even the doctor noticed and later asked me about what happened.

Nothing really, just a change in perspective. Perspective is very powerful. It can even change the level of pain we’re experiencing.

The next time you’re in that extremely “painful” corporate situation, see if you can help yourself and your team gain a different perspective. It often takes a jarring experience or question. “What would this look like to a chimpanzee? How would this be viewed from a four person jazz band? How about a 100 person symphony orchestra?” None of these questions make sense or they certainly are all out of context. But that’s the point! Get out of your context. Look at this from a new perspective, not just a different point of view from the same context; “How would our competitor view this issue?” Shake it up! Gain a new perspective.

Tell us about the last time that four year old child asked you a question that shook your perspective? Share with us a story or two.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogMyers-BriggsUsing MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Deciding

by Ron Potter January 18, 2015

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.


Deciding Overview: Thinking vs. Feeling

MBTI series header

Now that you’ve “perceived” (the first decision making function) the world around you (see previous MBTI blog), how do you then finally decide (the 2nd decision making function)?

As we work our way through the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), we once again encounter two words that carry a lot of pre-conceived baggage. Most business leaders assume (incorrectly) that business decisions should be made on a purely logical, fact based, “thinking” basis. There isn’t any room for touchy-feely in business decision making.

Well, the Feeling side of this function isn’t necessarily touchy-feely and in fact some of the most hard-nosed leaders I’ve met actually fall on the Feeling side of this equation. It’s not about emotion it’s about values and the “right” thing to do. Our Thinking types can lay out an argument that is purely logical, based on facts, and structured top to bottom building a clear argument for their case. Our Feeling types may look at all those facts and logic and actually agree with the conclusion but at the same time say “Who cares? Is this the right thing to do for our employees, customers, shareholders?”

Emotional Thought. This balancing act is often referred to as “Emotional Thought.” In his book Learn or Die: Using Science to Build a Leading-Edge Learning Organization, Edward Hess says”

 “Neurobiological research has shown that certain aspects of cognition, such as learning, attention, memory, decision making, and social functioning, are ‘both profoundly affected by emotion and in fact subsumed within the processes of emotion.’” (Bolds are mine)

This one is tough. Balancing this one becomes particularly tricky but has profound impact if we achieve the right balance. Also, all of the latest brain research that has been exploding over the last ten to fifteen years points to the fact that we as human beings actually make our decisions based on the Feelings side of this equation and then justify our decision based on logic (Thinking). We’ll have a lot more to learn about this one in coming blogs.

But, once again, the three rules for being more effective at decision making are:
1. Balance
2. Balance
3. Balance

This one may be the more difficult one to personally balance. What have some of your experiences been either successful or unsuccessful?

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Lessons from a Professional Organizer

by Ron Potter January 8, 2015

My wife is a very organized person in most of her life. But like all of us, there are a few areas that just get out of control over time and you usually need help to get it back under control. She hired a personal organizer.

For the most part, I tried to simply stay out of the way, but I admit I was curious. I thought the organizer did a good job of seeing what the issue was, stepping back and looking at the overall picture; noting what was working overall and what portion of my wife’s life felt like it was under control and what portion was not, gaining the bigger picture.

Then she began to dive into the issue and started to ask the very direct, tough questions:
• How long have you had this?
• When was the last time you used it?
• What do you want it for?

After several pointed and pertinent questions, she calls for the decision:
• Trash it?
• Recycle it?
• Donate it?
• Keep it?

If she gets the “keep it” answer, she immediately recycles through some of the previous questions and then comes back to trash, recycle, donate, or keep.

Now here’s what I found interesting, she had provided bins for the three “non-keep” answers and the item would immediately go into one of those bins. At the end of the day, she put all of those bins in her vehicle and she made sure they were trashed, recycled, or donated.

Image Source: Katie Chao & Ben Muessig, Creative Commons

Image Source: Katie Chao & Ben Muessig, Creative Commons

At first I thought this was a nice service she provided, but then she began to explain why she did it. This way the decision was final. No turning back, no rethinking the decision, no second guessing.
This is exactly the issue I was getting at in an earlier blog, “Decide: we’ve got it all backwards.” In that post, we explored the word decide and learned that it didn’t mean figuring out what to do, it means figuring out what to kill.

My wife had made the decision to “kill” certain items into the trash, recycle, or donation bins. The organizer wasn’t going to let those items be an issue any longer—they were gone!

All too often in our corporate decision making, we let things linger, be second guessed, never really put them in the trash or recycle bin. Because of this lack of decisiveness uncertainty thrives. It consumes the resources you need for top priorities. If you will actually “decide” and make sure the paths you’ve decided not to follow are actually killed off, publicly executed, thrown in the trash, you and your organization will become much more productive, nimble and responsive to current needs. We waste a lot of resources because we don’t finally decide.

I remember one CEO saying to me “I’ve tried to kill that initiative three times and it keeps coming back.” His frustration was caused by the continued wasted resources and people’s attention that were being dedicated to a project he thought they were over and done with. But he had never “Publicly” killed the program. He had never made the global announcement that “We are no longer pursuing this initiative!” He simply turned his focus and his team’s focus to the things they had decided to pursue.

I can’t tell you how important this concept is. My clients are constantly looking for resources to pursue much needed projects, changes or new initiatives. But they never really put the needed energy or public face behind killing off the old, outdated, or lower priority issues. Figure out how to decide. It will pay huge dividends.

Take a look at your personal life, home or work; would you share with us some areas that would save you a lot of grief and energy if you simply publicly ended the pursuit? Maybe you do have a very clear corporate situation that emphasizes this very issue. Share with us what caused it and what helped alleviate it (or what should be done to alleviate the issue).

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogMyers-BriggsUsing MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Perceiving

by Ron Potter January 5, 2015

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.


 

Perceiving (Attending) Overview: Sensing vs iNtuitionMBTI series header

We looked at an overview of our Energizing function in the last Myers-Briggs (MBTI) blog. Now let’s look at the Perceiving function.

For many years the MBTI referred to this function as your attending function, “What do you pay attention to? or What is your preferred source of information?” However, more recently they have gone back to Carl Jung’s (MBTI is based on Jung’s original analytical psychology work studying healthy personality types) original description of perceiving, “Through what lens do you perceive the world around you?”

Also note that was not a typo when I identified the second function as iNtuition. Myers and Briggs had already used the “I” indicator for the introverts so chose to use the “N” indicator for intuition. On this function your natural preference will be either an S or and N.

If you happen to be a more natural “sensing” type, you will tend to “pay attention to” facts, figures, what’s in the present, the immediate problem and what’s “real”. This is how you “perceive” the world around you.

If you happen to be a more natural “iNtuitive” type, you will pay attention to the possibilities, how might this play out in the future, what are the implications of the issue we’re dealing with? And maybe more importantly, does this fit into the world as “I believe it should be?”

 

Decision Making Function. This function is the first “decision making” function. It identifies where and how we gather our information, what information we gather and pay attention to and what information we tend to put more stock in when it comes to making our decisions (which will be the next function we discuss). We all have what is known as confirmation bias (the book Learn or Die: Using Science to Build a Leading-Edge Learning Organization by Edward Hess is a good source of understanding) where we tend to look at and accept only data that agrees with our beliefs of how things work (or should work). Understanding your Perceiving function and balancing it with a great team (this one is difficult to balance within us personally so it takes a trusted team to provide the balance) is incredibility valuable to you personally, the team and the company.

Hidden cause of confusion. Like Extraverted and Introverted preferences (previous blog overview) this function is a hidden cause for much team confusion and misunderstanding. Because we use our preferred function to ask and answer questions, if we’re not clear as a team one person may be asking a Sensing question “What is the impact of only hitting 87% of our goal this month?” while someone provides an iNtuitive response “There is no impact at all because the entire market is going to shift over the next three years.” This is like two ships passing in the night. Teams must be disciplined about aligning Sensing and iNtuitive questions with Sensing and iNtuitive answers.

Therefore, the same three rules apply to working more effectively: Balance, Balance, Balance. What I’ve discovered in business is that good leaders have often figured out their need for balance on this one to run a business effectively because if you let this one get out of balance for too long, you will lose the business. It’s great to create balance in the other three functions. It’s critical that you balance this one if you’re running a business.

So remember the three rules:

  1. Balance
  2. Balance
  3. Balance

You can’t be sure of what you’re learning or need to learn unless you balance this function.

Share with us some of your balancing act stories.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Dirty Bathrooms and Annual Reviews

by Ron Potter January 1, 2015

Have you ever noticed that the dirtiest public bathrooms are the ones with the log pasted to the wall with the signature of the person who cleaned it and when? In fact, the log itself looks so nasty that I usually give it a wide berth for fear that something contagious might jump off the page and infect me.

Image Source: Anjana Samant, Creative Commons

Image Source: Anjana Samant, Creative Commons

Why is this so? This culture obviously has rules and regulations and a check list system for accountability and yet the place is filthy! But that’s exactly the point. Is your culture built on rules, regulations, guidelines, and check lists for accountability to make sure people are doing what they’re told? Or is your culture built on ingrained values like, “We want our customers to experience a cleaner bathroom than they would at home!”?

Unfortunately, I’ve seen too many annual review processes work like that bathroom log. The annual review starts with the check list of goals that was created the previous year. Then we check to make sure the employee signed off on each item of the list and the date of accomplishment. There, goals accomplished, bathroom clean!

No discussions about innovative approaches they tried to take to make sure the bathroom stayed cleaner longer. No discussion about lessons learned from failed attempts at trying something new. No discussion about new approaches they are proud of that did work. No discussion about where they would like to apply some of their ideas elsewhere.

Are you really inspiring your employees with values and visions or are you expecting them to do their job and check off their list? How clean are your bathrooms?

Tell us some stories from both perspectives – leaders evaluating people with annual review processes or being the victim (sorry) recipient of an annual review process. What made it great? What made it suck?

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Short Book Reviews

Decisive

by Ron Potter December 23, 2014

DecisiveRon’s Short Review: These guys have a great writing style and cover great topics.  Here they cover the 4 villains of decision making and how to overcome them.

Amazon-Buy-Buttonkindle-buy button

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • Rss
  • About This Site
  • About
    • Clients
  • Services
  • Resources
    • Trust Me
    • Short Book Reviews
  • Contact

About this Site | © 2024 Team Leadership Culture | platform by Apricot Services


Back To Top
Team Leadership Culture
  • Team
  • Leadership
  • Culture
  • Myers-Briggs
  • Trust Me
  • Short Book Reviews
 

Loading Comments...