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:

Mistakes

Absurd!BlogIn-Depth Book Reviews

Absurd!: Organizations Change Most by Surviving Calamities

by Ron Potter February 27, 2017

“Like many men and women who have spent their lives struggling and are in many ways better for it, organizations that struggle develop a sense of pulling together, ways of coping that keep them afloat where others sink.”

I was with a group of men the other day and we were going through a set of questions to force us to think and help us grow. One question was “What encouraged you this week?” After we listened to several stories that covered topics of personal, family, work, aging and others, a very clear pattern became visible. Each story of encouragement started with a situation of great pain and struggle. To Farson’s point, great victories and times of plenty are not the first things we think of when asked about encouragement. Encouragement comes through coping with difficulties.

One of the most powerful books I’ve read is The Road Less Traveled by Scott Peck. The opening sentence in that book is “Life is difficult.” Dr. Peck goes on to explain that avoidance of pain and suffering will lead to mental illness. Life is difficult. We find encouragement dealing with the difficulties.

Farson relates this concept to our corporate world when he says, “Although individuals will acknowledge calamities as important in their development, managers are less likely to cite organizational calamity as the reason for change and growth. Calamities are an embarrassment to management and not likely to be regarded as the key to success.”

Flawless Execution. I’ve heard that concept being promoted in almost every company I work with. Bad idea? Absolutely not. We should always be striving to do our best and execute as quickly and elegantly as we can. Notice that I used the word elegantly, not flawlessly. Take as much friction out of the execution process as you can and operate flawlessly for as long as you can. Increasing your periods of flawless execution is a great goal. But, when you ingrain the idea of continuous flawless execution, you begin to bury the flaws, mistakes, and difficulties that help people and teams grow. You also rob them of encouragement. Encouragement comes through dealing with and overcoming difficulties.

How well do you handle setbacks as a leader? In our work lives, we look at mistakes and setbacks as failures. We need to shift them to learning experiences so that people are encouraged and reduce the number of mistakes and setbacks.

I’m continuing my series on an in-depth look at a wonderful little book that’s twenty years old this year. The title is Management of the Absurd by Richard Farson. You may want to consider dropping back and reading the previous blog posts about ABSURD! I think it will put each new one in great context.

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

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
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
BlogTrust Me

What’s Trust Got to Do With It?

by Ron Potter December 1, 2014

Snoopy, Charlie Brown’s irrepressible dog, once lamented,

“It’s not easy being head beagle.”

And in the wake of recent moral meltdowns at both high and low levels of corporate America, Snoopy’s insight may be more on target now than ever before.

For those who still aspire to lead others well, however, the current leadership climate presents a great opportunity—especially for those who earnestly want to lead right. As never before—in all segments of society—we earnestly want to associate with people who are genuinely trustworthy.

Steve seemed to have it all. He was tough, smart, disciplined, quick on his feet, and an effective strategist. He worked hard and could match anybody’s résumé with an impressive list of business and personal skills. With all that Steve had going for him, why was he failing in his latest and greatest work assignment? Was there a way for him to pull out of his tailspin?

Image Source: The US Army, Creative Commons

Image Source: The US Army, Creative Commons

Before his success in business, Steve had been an Army Ranger. Listening to Steve was like listening to a Tom Clancy audio book, only this was the actual participant reminiscing in real time. Steve’s Ranger training had prepared him to withstand almost anything, including extreme pain, in order to execute a mission. This was one sharp, strong man—Rambo in a business suit. Part of Steve’s extensive Ranger training had included instruction in being a leader at any level of organizational structure. Steve understood both giving and taking orders. He knew how to take charge, size up the situation, and go after the objective.

As part of my consulting approach, I had tested the team Steve was a part of to assess leadership performance. I’ll never forget the afternoon I met with this man who was so discouraged that his whole demeanor drooped. Steve was desperately looking for understanding and some help to regain his footing. What had pierced the strength of this highly trained, combat-proven Ranger?

Steve’s discouragement resulted from feedback he had just received from his peers on his leadership style and how it was affecting his ability to lead, to be trusted, and to be a good team member. He thought his leadership practices were sound, but his peers and those who reported to him directly saw them as oppositional, competitive, and detrimental to the team’s ability to function successfully.

Steve saw himself as a good, competent leader. Before I showed up, Steve assumed he had made all the right moves, had all the right skills, and was doing just great, thank you! Now this devastating feedback from his team told him other-wise. He knew in his heart he had the right stuff, so what was wrong?

What Steve didn’t understand is that skill is only part of the equation. He did have many solid leadership attributes: He was committed and focused, had great integrity, and could endure difficulties. What Steve didn’t understand was that some of his behavior and attitudes were offensive to coworkers. It didn’t matter to them that he was an ex-Army Ranger and had great leadership qualities and a list of achievements to show for it. To them he seemed proud. Steve didn’t understand the difference between being proud of your accomplishments and being perceived as kind of a cocky know-it-all. His air of superiority kept others from feeling they could trust him. Once Steve began to exhibit a more humble attitude in response to his teammates’ feedback and became more attentive to their accomplishments and strengths, trust began to build.

Trust is at the heart of any honest relationship.
Quality leadership is vitally important today, and many people work hard to improve their leadership skills. But all the training and technical skills, as important as they are, will not create an enduring, trusted leader.
Regardless of where you have been and what you have done—or even if you have no experience at all—you can become a leader worthy of trust.

Share with us the leadership behaviors that have prevented you from trusting.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTeam

Getting Past Failure

by Ron Potter March 16, 2012
Image Source: Steven Depolo, Creative Commons

Image Source: Steven Depolo, Creative Commons

I recently participated in my first clinical trial. Fortunately I was in the healthy comparison group and not the afflicted group. While the trial was related to a cancer study, it was focused on the cognitive aspect of cancer and the immune system. I know, I know…. having me in the healthy cognitive group is amusing. However, it was a fascinating study.

During one section of the study that was looking at the ability to stay focused and concentrate even while being distracted, I was asked to watch the computer screen for long periods of time and quickly identify the direction of various arrows when they appeared on the screen while other information was also being displayed. The test itself was simple in nature but it was the instructions provided by the facilitator that fascinated me.

In preparing for the test she talked with me about handling failure. Because the arrows will quickly flash on the screen and I must indicate the direction of the arrow as quickly as possible, there will be times when I make a mistake. However, it was important that I put that mistake behind me and keep going. She explained the pattern they see when people make a mistake (which your brain realizes a split second after the arrow disappears) they will often make several mistakes in a row because they’re still upset about the one they missed. Interesting! This was not about life decisions or major corporate decision, it was simply hitting one key or another indicating the direction of an arrow. And yet, they could clearly see a pattern that when we make a mistake the guilt (horror, worry, embarrassment, or whatever) can often linger and result in several mistakes just because we didn’t quickly get past it.

We all make mistakes: individuals, teams, corporations… The trick is to not let failure lead to several others just because we didn’t get it behind us quickly enough.

So what causes these lingering affects? Several possibilities come to mind:

  • Silence – not acknowledging or talking about a mistake (again, either individually or in a team) can cause the additional mistake syndrome
  • Pride – not willing to admit our mistakes will also cause the escalation of further mistakes
  • Lake of Patience – an atmosphere where mistakes are not tolerated will actually exacerbate the environment of continued mistakes
  • Subsequent punishment of mistakes – Often mistakes or even legitimate decisions don’t turn out to be correct in the end. However, when people are punished later for decisions that turn out bad, it creates an atmosphere of low risk and very low accountability. (This is an interesting one that will probably need to be addressed later as its own topic!)

How are you at getting past failure quickly? Talk about this with your team. I believe you will discover that because you’re not putting legitimate mistakes behind you quickly you are creating additional mistakes and a risk averse, low accountability culture that is not serving you in these times of rapid change.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
  • 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...