Leadership

Managers as Mentors: Building Partnerships for Learning. by Chip Bell and Marshall Goldsmith. Bell’s book on how leaders must take charge of their people’s development is a great read. So good, in fact, it’s been re-released as a third edition with even more content. It’s worth picking up a new copy and checking out what you might be missing.

Own the Room: Discover Your Signature Voice to Master Your Leadership Presence by Amy Jen Su and Muriel Maignan Wilkins. Leaders need to connect with all of their people and communicate their vision. In this new book, Su and Wilkins reveal how to develop a voice that is both powerful and authentic.

Innovation

Zig Zag: The Surprising Path to Greater Creativity by Keith Sawyer.  Innovation is rarely a linear process. Creativity moves and cycles through various stages as it zig zags from idea to innovation. Sawyer covers those stages and provides exercises for leveraging each one for maximum creativity.

Creative Conspiracy: The New Rules of Breakthrough Collaboration by Leigh Thompson. Despite all those pictures of solitary innovators like Tesla working alone on big ideas, innovation really happens in teams. Thompson takes a deep study of the most creative teams and shares some surprising findings about how innovation happens.

Strategy

The End of Competitive Advantage: How to Keep Your Strategy Moving as Fast as Your Business by Rita Gunter McGrath. The business landscape is changing, and odds are the strategy you’ve crafted needs to change as well. McGrath discusses why the best strategies are ones that can change with the landscape and outlines how to keep your strategy moving.

The Collaboration Economy: How to Meet Business, Social, and Environmental Needs and Gain Competitive Advantage by Eric Lowitt. Lowitt’s approach is less a strategy of how to position against your competitors and more a peak at the future of the economic landscape and how continued prosperity relies more on collaboration with other organizations than a single-minded focus on competition.

In a working paper released last year titled “The Value of Bosses,” Stanford’s Edward Lazaer and Kathryn Shaw, as well as University of Utah’s Christopher Stanton examined the inner workings of a technology-based service firm and calculated the effectiveness of teams and bosses. Because the company used computers to measure the output of teams every hour, it was possible to gather productivity data for nearly 24,000 workers and almost 2,000 bosses for five years. In total, that’s about 6 million productivity measurements. On average, the service teams had nine members and employees changed supervisors four times a year, making it possible to isolate the effects of certain managers.

When they had calculated all of the comparisons, the research team found that adding a tenth worker to teams results in a productivity bump of around 11 percent. However, replacing a low-quality managers with a high-quality one bumped productivity by 12 percent, a significant increase. In their study, the average boss can add 1.75 times the productivity of adding a tenth team member. Clearly, middle managers add value that’s worth of a little recognition.

So what does it take to become a praise-worthy boss?

Teaching. The researchers found that the top-performing managers in the study were more likely to focus on teaching their team solid work skills or habits. They didn’t just supervise employees; they made them better. The results of this study are compelling, not just for middle managers but also for senior leaders. If you are a middle manager, start focusing on how you can better lead your team through teaching and coaching them to improve. If you’re a senior leader, give your middle managers a little praise…then teach them to teach others.

Business Model Canvas

Strategyzer

Listen below or subscribe via iTunes.

This podcast is supported by Audible.com. Get a free audiobook just for trying it at www.audibletrial.com/lead.

To best leverage this principle, these experts offer just the right trinket, or they design an elegant incentive compensation solution tailored to your needs. All of these offers assume that simply having financial incentives triggers people to work harder, which makes performance-based compensation almost a given.

Almost.

According to research from Ian Larkin, assistant professor at Harvard Business School, social comparison — our natural tendency to measure ourselves against our peers — may be the most powerful workplace motivator. So performance-based compensation might not matter as much as how that pay compares with peers in the organization.

Larkin’s research examined sales representatives at an enterprise software firm whose compensation was largely commission-based. Their commission structure also contained a “commission accelerator,” which offered salespeople higher bonuses as they made more sales in a given quarter. However, the company also maintained an annual “President’s Club” recognition program, which rewarded salespeople for being in the top 20% of all representatives.

The commission structure favored salespeople who could close many deals in one quarter, but the recognition program favored salespeople who spread their large sales out over an entire year. Representatives on the borderline of induction into President’s Club often faced a choice: Close the deal in the same quarter as other deals and be paid more, or wait until next quarter and boost their ranking compared to their peers.

Larkin discovered that salespeople who were on the borderline of club induction were willing to buy their way in by sacrificing their commissions. He was even able to calculate their “willingness-to-pay” — the amount a salesperson was willing to forgo in commission to be inducted into the club. The average salesperson was willing to pay $30,000 or 5% of their total compensation, just for the non-monetary recognition of President’s Club.

Organizational leaders need to consider the lessons of social comparison when designing motivational programs and compensation plans. When employees decide how much effort to exude, they don’t merely respond to their own pay but also to how their pay compares to that over their peers.

Strict pay for performance, then, might hold unintended consequences; employees on the borderline of top-level status may cheat or sabotage others to get there — likewise employees who are outside the cutoff may grow to resent their colleagues if they feel their own efforts are underpaid.

The implications of such research are that standardized salary scales and ancillary incentives may serve to better motivate the entire workforce and better encourage team collaboration. Whatever compensation plan is chosen, leaders need to realize the social comparison is a real factor and develop a plan that best leverages what really motivates.

[Editor's Note: This post originally appeared as "Social vs. monetary motivation in the workplace" on SmartBrief on Leadership.]

Think of a leader you know who has a commanding leadership style. Who comes to mind? Is it someone who drives to results, is decisive, and has a keen sense of urgency? Or is it someone who gets the job done but not without using his sharp elbows in the process? When it comes to those with a commanding style, you can’t help but wonder how much their presence contributes to moving the organization forward and how it also is what sometimes gets them and the organization in trouble.

Regardless of how you might feel about the person at an personal level, their approach begs the question: should we emulate their command and control leadership style or not?  Those leaders who veer too much on the commanding side of presence certainly achieve results but often at the expense of relationships and connectivity to their stakeholders. Vice versa, those who overly focus on the needs of others and have more of an accommodating presence may compromise being able to effectively drive to necessary outcomes. Whichever way you lean, neither presence is sustainable in the long run. And herein lies the key: exuding leadership presence is dynamic – - it is not stuck in being one way, the same way all of the time. Leadership presence requires you to be adaptable to any given situation by being both commanding and supportive not swinging the pendulum between the two, not choosing “either/or,”, but instead integrating both strength and compassion.

When we see command-and-control leaders achieve results at the expense of their stakeholders it leaves many of us wondering if that is their only path to success. This is especially consequential for women who ultimately face what researchers at Catalyst termed the “double bind”  – the quintessential “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” quandary as it relates to their presence when they are perceived in extreme ranges of either being too soft or too tough.

But rather than taking on the persona of leaders you see in the news or in your own office, your leadership presence has to start with what is unique to you. Too often, individuals will emulate the overly commanding style they see in others (especially in their bosses) thinking that is their only way to exude presence. By mimicking someone else, you will fail to build on your own strengths. Instead, focus on defining what your distinctive value proposition is to your role, your stakeholder and your organization. By keeping in mind what value you bring to the table and how others can benefit, you will be on your way to building a presence that is confident, engaging and authentic and resonates positively to those around you.

What attributes do you conjure up when you think about a leader that has effective presence? Authentic, engaging, trustworthy, visible, clear, decisive, listener? The fact of the matter is that an effective presence reflects all of those attributes. Having leadership presence requires an unfaltering ability to be authentic to yourself and your message while holding an awareness and attunement to others. In other words, leadership presence means having a voice for yourself, your vision and that of your organization while also giving a voice to others. This is the type of presence that ultimately engenders trust and followership.

One way or the other, a commanding leader’s impact will be etched in your mind one way or another. As you chart your own leadership course, you have the chance to exude your very own authentic presence that is aligned with the impact you ultimately want to make. What will it be?

“Authenticity is doing what you promise, not “being who you are.” SETH GODIN

If authenticity is as Seth defines, then we have a dearth of authenticity in our world today. We routinely make promises every day that we either have no intention of following through or do not consider to be promises. We don’t have an attention deficit disorder pandemic but rather an authenticity deficit disorder one. If we don’t recognize this and take action to consider our commitments more carefully and follow through on those commitments, younger generations that follow and look up to us will reject and distrust our leadership. Rarely do we keep our word if it will cost us, but we should always keep our word . . . especially when it costs us. We are so concerned about our short-term interest (time, money, reputation, etc.) that we lose sight of the long-term trust that will be gained by sticking to our promises. What if your promise will cost you your job or will cause your house to go into foreclosure? Or what if it will cause you to lose your professional license or something else of great value? We all have a price above which we will sacrifice our integrity; my challenge to you is to break that barrier, choosing to never sacrifice your integrity no matter the consequences. Your word, and by extension your name and reputation, is worth far more than money or time.

Show Us, Don’t Tell Us

“No plan is worth the paper it is printed on unless it starts doing. There is too much telling in this life and not enough doing.” WILLIAM H. DANFORTH

We desperately need leaders who will guide us with less talk and more action. Please show us; don’t tell us. God knows we have enough of the opposite. Put another way, “Ignore what people say, watch what they do.” This applies in relationships as well as in companies. How often do dating couples tell each other they love each other, yet their selfish actions prove otherwise. Have you ever had someone apologize for an action, and then turn right around and behave the same way? It is no longer enough to say something if we won’t follow through on our word. When my children approach dating age, I will endeavor to instill this in them, so they can avoid the kind of flaky people who don’t honor their word. Mean what you say, and say what you mean. It is rather simple to explain yet so hard to practice consistently. Another application of this principle is to take time now and then to get your hands dirty at work. Lend help in some area of your organization that involves manual labor or other low-status work. You will prove to others that you are committed to the vision when you roll up your sleeves and get dirty. When people see that you are not above doing any job, they rally behind you. If you get this right, it will breed a fierce loyalty in people that cannot be coerced, controlled, or managed any other way.

Substance Over Style

When I see an unresolved issue, I jump in. When I’m walking around campus, if there’s trash, I pick it up.JACK DANGERMOND

We need more substance over style, since we have a plethora of the opposite in our culture. Flashy looks good on the surface, but a flashy mask is probably covering up a lot of warts. Without deep and substantive leadership, the best-case scenario is that nothing gets done. At worst, lies are told as to what is being done and/or what the real problems are. The world needs more outwardly boring, mundane leaders that get things accomplished and speak with integrity about the problems facing the organizations they are leading. The time has come for transparent leaders who choose substance over style; forget the upcoming election or whatever other threat looms. Let’s choose to do the right thing for the organization and put ourselves in harm’s way if necessary.

Build Icebergs, Not Skyscrapers

The foolish are continually busy building an edifice above the surface, while the wise are building below the surface where no one can see. You may have seen the artist’s image of an iceberg with 90% of it below the water’s surface. You can’t see it normally, but what lies below has an enormous impact. Just ask the captain of the RMS Titanic. We would often rather build something much more noticeable (a skyscraper) because we want to wow others with our outward accomplishments. But what we build for others to notice is usually a façade covering a shaky foundation. With the passage of time, others will be able to see past the façade to the reality of both strategies. Eventually, many will marvel at the wise person’s accomplishments as if they just happened overnight. They will see the creaking, crumbling construction of the foolish for what it is–but only after much time has passed. The wise instinctively know that it is better to build things out of view and then execute their plans with surprising accuracy. The foolish want to be noticed the instant they accomplish anything.

The Bottom Line

Others are watching us leaders to see if we will do what we say we are going to do and whether we will act in our own or the best interest of others. If they find us to be authentic on both counts, then they will trust and follow our leadership.

The most innovative companies pull the right levers to create a culture that leads to exploration, experimentation, and the innovations that positively surprise the market, create competitive differentiation, and drive growth.

So how do you do it?

Needless to say, there’s no simple answer.  Entire books, courses, and graduate school programs have focused on the topic.

This last week at the Front End of Innovation conference in Boston, I shared a presentation on the Strategies and Tools for Creating a Culture of Innovation.  Anyone tasked with leading organizational or culture change initiatives focused on innovation might benefit from the Culture of Innovation Canvas that I shared during my presentation. It’s a simple tool (download PDF or download PowerPoint) for defining the following dimensions of an organization’s innovation culture:

• Leadership – How leaders influence innovation through explicit decisions and subtle behaviors
• Processes – How growth strategies and innovation are executed internally and externally including functional and cross-functional processes, customer engagement, information sharing, product and service development, and other activities
• Structure – The formal and informal organizing principles and functional designs that enable (or inhibit) collaboration and guide mindsets & behavior
• People – The mindsets and skillsets of employees, leaders, external partners and even customers tied to creative thinking, prototyping, and execution of new ideas and opportunities
• Metrics, Rewards & Recognition – The mindsets and skillsets of employees, leaders, external partners and even customers tied to creative thinking, prototyping, and execution of new ideas and opportunities
• Technology – Capabilities and tools that allow employees, external partners and customers to connect, share knowledge, and innovate

There are also a number of resources that can be used to assess your current culture to identify opportunities for infusing a greater innovation focus:

Building Blocks of Innovation (MIT)

KEY Creativity Climate (Harvard)

LEAPS Innovation Leadership Competencies

Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, recently said, “There’s no formula. If there was a formula, a lot of companies would have bought their ability to innovate.”  When it comes down to it, every leader and every company has an opportunity to create their own unique formula for innovation.  That’s the source of real innovation.

The conclusion from the surveys was that the qualities people found to be more feminine were the same qualities that people found essential for a good leader. Examples of the results include:

The book goes on to explain that after The Great Recession, many people all over the world, especially Millenials, believe that the old system of leadership and governance is not working anymore. The masculine traits displayed until now are not enough on their own. There needs to be a balance with the feminine qualities so individuals, families, and communities today can live better lives than those lived by the generations of the past.

The “feminine traits” are exhibited by both men and women, and the examples in each chapter include a mélange of masculine and feminine protagonists from over 13 countries. Interview participants include college students, social entrepreneurs, corporate executives, city officials, presidents, and prime ministers. All these people substantiate the most important point of the book: It’s not about determining the superior sex, men or women. It’s about finding the qualities that are necessary for success in every aspect of life that needs to be pursued more diligently. As it turns out, people (at least 64,000 of them) think that these qualities are more feminine, or more naturally displayed in Women.

I highly recommend The Athena Doctrine, written by two renowned researchers, writers, and critical thinkers. It’s a professional biography of some of the greatest movers, thinkers, and shakers of our times in countries, cities, and towns all over the world. Most of us, 99.9 percent at least, won’t get to be the next Jobs, Besos, Disney, but we could be like these people: People who do what they do in a “feminine” way rather than the “masculine” way to impact our communities and countries around the world. This little change can make all the difference. To get where they got, we got to do what they did: Be a little more feminine.

Listen below or subscribe via iTunes.

This podcast is supported by Audible.com. Get a free audiobook just for trying it at www.audibletrial.com/lead.

A team of researchers led by Sophie Ellwood wanted to examine the effects of a short break on individual creative output. Ellwood and her team assembled 90 undergraduate psychology students and divided them into three groups. Each group was tasked with completing an Alternate Use Test – a common measurement of divergent thinking. Each group was given four minutes to think of as many possible uses for a sheet of paper as they could, but how those minutes were structured varied. The first group was able to focus on the problem for four continuous minutes. The second group was stopped at the two minute mark and asked to complete a different but similar creativity test, before being given their last two minutes to focus on the uses of paper. The last group was also interrupted, but instead of a related test, they were asked to complete the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which was considered unrelated to the creativity test.

When Ellwood’s team analyzed the results, they found that the continuously focused group actually scored the lowest, generating only an average of 6.9 ideas. The group given the other creativity test during their break generated 7.6 ideas. Surprisingly, the group that was interrupted and asked to fill out an unrelated inventory actually generated the most ideas, averaging 9.8 ideas in their four minutes.

One possibly explanation for the results is the concept of incubation, specifically the notion that, during incubation periods in creative tasks, the mind “selectively forgets” what was tried before. Often when we’re told to put our head down and focus on a task, we arrive at the same wrong solution of inappropriate options again and again. Taking a short break and focusing on something unrelated allows our minds to relax and makes it more likely that, when we return to the original work, our mind will explore new possibilities and abandon the old, wrong ideas.

In the modern world of work, interruptions are inevitable. Despite our temptation to fight against them and shut ourselves off from the world to focus, Ellwood’s research suggests that we work with our interruptions – checking emails or engaging in casual chats whenever we’ve hit an impasse and need to let our minds lose focus and gain creativity.

[Editor's Note: The post originally appeared in David's column for Creativity Post.]