Tag Archives: Leadership

It’s the Emotions, Stupid!

 

Have you ever seen a scenario like the following play out? Someone new joins the company. After the newness wears off, the new hire finds someone with whom he can identify and begins “sharing” concerns about the workplace. The things he brings up, purportedly, are meant to help. After a while, the observations being offered shift from seemingly inane to almost accusatory about other members of the team. Eventually, the newbie may feel emboldened to make suggestions about hiring, firing, and everything in between as though having the authority and credibility to make such changes.

Over time, the positive culture in your department or broader category begins to turn negative at times. Other staff members come to you as a manager and let you know that they, too, have been approached by the newbie with complaints.  At this point, it is not uncommon for us to feel embarrassed, frustrated, or angry about what’s happening. We can become justifiably fearful that one person is poisoning many others. Like a contagious disease, negativity can soon permeate an organization if unchecked.

Even when organizational performance is sky high, a pervasive negative attitude can sap your group of the energy needed to sustain success. Emotions are an important part of the workplace–on both good and bad ways. Many of us have been victims of horrid customer service from employees of organizations who clearly do not enjoy what they do for a living. Contrastingly, we all hopefully have had the experience of a “Ritz Carlton” type experience where the employee loves serving customers.

Tony Schwartz, writing for the Harvard Business Review Blog Network, decided to let go of (just such a) negative executive, “both because he’d lost the trust of our team, and because I didn’t believe he was capable of changing. The day I made the move, it was as if a cloud had lifted and the sun came back out.”

Lessons Schwartz took away from this experience:

  • The emotions people bring to work are as important as their cognitive skills, and especially so for leaders.
  • Because it’s not possible to check our emotions at the door when we get to work — even when that’s expected — it pays to be aware of what we’re feeling in any given moment. You can’t change what you don’t notice.
  • Negative emotions spread fast and they’re highly toxic. The problem with the executive we let go was not that he was critical, but rather that he was so singularly focused on what was wrong that he lost sight of the bigger picture, including his own negative impact on others.
  • Authenticity matters because you can’t fake positivity for long. It is possible to put on a “game face” — to say you’re feeling one way when you’re actually feeling another — but the truth will ultimately reveal itself in your facial, vocal, and postural cues. We must learn to monitor and manage our moods.
  • The key to balancing realism and optimism is to embrace the paradox of realistic optimism. Practically, that means having the faith to tell the most hopeful and empowering story possible in any given situation, but also the willingness to confront difficult facts as they arise and deal with them directly.

In working with organizations on development issues and advising them on strategy, I have found that emotions are often the elephant in the room, undiscussed but omnipresent. For this reason, I often lead workshops on the topic of emotional intelligence (EQ).  When it comes to high potential leaders, EQ mentoring can help change behaviors and create a more healthy environment in which better decisions are likely to be made. 

From Think to Execute

“The ability to convert ideas to things is the secret of outward success.”
– Henry Ward Beecher

It is not enough to simply have a good–or even great–idea. Ideas are plentiful. I have them. You have them. The bum on the downtown street corner has them. People whose faces grace the covers of business magazines have them. Why are they on the cover and not us? Quite simply, they have become very proficient at executing their idea(s).

Brad Feld, of The Foundry Group and TechStars says that he gets emails all the time from would-be entrepreneurs with the latest software and internet ideas:

Often these entrepreneurs think their idea is brand new – that no one has ever thought of it before. Other times they ask me to sign a non-disclosure agreement to protect their idea. Occasionally the emails mysteriously allude to the idea without really saying what it is. These entrepreneurs think their idea is special and magic. And they are wrong.

The great entrepreneurs are already focused on the implementation of their idea. They send me links to their website or software. They describe the business they are in the process of creating (or have already created). They point me to what they’ve done to implement their idea and show real users who validate that the idea is important. And they quickly move past the idea to the execution of the idea.

Google? Not the first search engine. Facebook? Not the first social network. Groupon? Not the first deal site. Pandora? Not the first music site. The list goes on. Even when you go back in time to the origins of the software industry: MS-DOS – not the first operating system. Lotus 1-2-3 – not the first spreadsheet.

The products and their subsequent companies became great because of execution. First, they had to execute on building a great product. Next, they had to execute on building a great business. Finally, they had to execute on scaling, sustaining, and evolving a great business.

Notice what Feld says…

  1. Execute on building a great product. As you move from Ideation to Conceptualization, it is important to vet the commercial and market value of the idea. Determine whether the “back of the napkin” math shows that the idea has promise to anyone other than yourself.
  2. Execute on building a great business. Creation is the process of doing one’s initial research and development, followed by producing a prototype or beta version of the product or service. The work done here will reveal what not to do and what to do as you go about determining what you plan to take to market.
  3. Execute on scaling a great business. Evaluation of your strategic plan and markets, validating them and building a strong team around you will allow you to grow with less problems down the road.
  4. Execute on sustaining a great business. Preparation for the launch and Commercialization of your product or service require thinking through what you plan to do with a systems and process mentality so that procedures can be developed that help the business to run itself.
  5. Execute on evolving a great business. Commercialization looks differently at later stages of business growth. Sales organizations and operations must change and  as market data is analyzed and new opportunities for competitiveness emerge.

Be someone known for execution rather than ideas–even if you are not trying to impress a venture capitalist, you will meet with greater success in all that you undertake!

 

You’re No Omni; Nor Am I

 

Rugged individualism is highly overrated. There’s a reason why many successful business owners have either an equally strong co-founder or a significant other who is a top cheerleader. It’s because most people are simply not omniscient, omnipotent, or omnipresent. We need others. When we are willing to become transparent and admit that need, we then are taking a requisite step towards success and away from failure. 

Transparency is akin to vulnerability and is one way trust is built. Determining that you would benefit from the input of another requires humility and is hard to do. Those who dare to become interdependent, however, are amazed at the benefits. Interdependency equals collaboration. Collaboration, by definition, means that we no longer have to carry a burden–positive or negative–alone.

“The fact that I don’t have any technical background means I’m not impeded by my knowledge of what it’s going to take to build something, so I’m free to just dream up features and ideas,” says Cyrus Farudi, founder along with Omri Cohen of Capsule, a web and mobile app built for event planning, group interaction and photo sharing. “Luckily, my partner, who has a technical background, has a very ‘yes, it can be done’ attitude. There have been screaming matches when I’ve tried to get too involved in something on the tech side.”

“Collaborating is about co-laboring,” says Nilofer Merchant, innovation expert, Harvard Business Review columnist and author of The New How: Creating Business Solutions Through Collaborative Strategy. “It’s not about hugs. I think people think about it as this positive thing, but it’s really about how you solve tough problems that neither party could solve on their own.”

If you’ve chosen someone based only on skills and intelligence, there might be a personality conflict that, under normal circumstances, could lead to a standoff. But you’re a team, so conflict over personalities would be distracting and frivolous. Sure, the tension of your differences might push both of you right up to the point of failure (the brink of doom, we’ll call it). But there are two reasons you’re not likely to go over the brink of doom: One, your fate is connected (by the handcuffs of mutual interest, for lack of a better metaphor); and two, because a lot of great ideas happen right before people fail–a kind of adrenaline kicks in, which keeps you from creative inaction (the abyss of “Man, we got nothin'”). The point is: Collaboration is harnessed conflict.

-Ross McCammon on entrepreneur.com

McCammon describes collaboration as “harnessed conflict.” It is important to realize that the best partnerships (not necessarily legal co-owners of a business, but in the general sense) pit people together whose worldviews can be decidedly different. Finding a way to respect one another and build consensus on how to move the organization forward is not just an internal exercise–it yields fruit outside the company in other key relationships as well!

When you set out to have a meeting with someone for collaborative purposes, here’s some advice from those who have gone before you:

  • “You have to have the difficult conversations first,” says Jim Moran, co-founder, president and COO of Yipit, a New York-based deals aggregator and recommendation service. “You have to determine who is better at what. That transparency will make everything flow.”
  • The habit of reflecting back to the other person what you have observed being communicated is a good way to build cohesion. “It’s nonverbal behavior beneath people’s awareness, but you can get skilled at doing it deliberately,” says Steve Kozlowski, professor of organizational psychology at Michigan State University and editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology. “You mirror the subtle behaviors of others during an interaction. It’s part of the attraction process. It tends to build rapport.”

Go find a new collaborator for your project/business!

 


Founders Overdose on “Sweets”

 

How can too much of a good thing be very very bad in management? Imbalance, for one, is a perfect example of “overdosing” on what, in isolation, is innocuous. In the Research Triangle Park area of North Carolina, like the Bay area of California, or a certain part of Massachusetts, technology companies abound and the media is in love with the fruits of the labors of the company founders. Certainly, without the contribution of needed jobs, tax revenues, and similar benefits, the local economies in these regions would suffer. But, on a far more local level–that of the management of a team of people–there can be an inherent problem that is both insidious and solvable.

The concentration of too much emphasis on software development skills, for instance, to the exclusion of other needful disciplines can become a company’s undoing in an imperceptible yet profound way. We must acknowledge that, as human beings, we are most comfortable surrounding ourselves with others who think similarly to us, have homogeneous backgrounds, and understand what we’re trying to communicate  quickly. The danger, though, is one of management myopia. Without a team of executives who bring complementary viewpoints–that are different yet legitimate in their own right–it becomes easy to suffer from the group-think phenomenon like a bunch of lemmings.

Organizations that allow themselves to be managed by cookie cutter leaders are often blindsided by development that Porter’s Five Forces, a SWOT analysis, or common sense in the eyes of an outsider could have anticipated. Market shifts–whether in the realm of sales, finance, operations, or a myriad of other subsets–when realized too late can lead to a company’s fall into a type of death spiral. Turnaround practitioners far and wide have witnessed the phenomenon more times than they’d like to admit and cringe upon encountering it because they know it could have been avoided.

One of the great turnaround consultants I studied in performing research that led to the establishment of the Turnaround Management Association was Donald Bibeault. Bibeault wrote that, “A special case of imbalance in the top team–particularly at the board level–is a weak finance function. This may appear through the company as a general phenomenon, resulting in inadequate financial and accounting controls. But even when these systems are perfectly adequate, their message may not be heard at board level because the finance function is not strongly represented there.”

What should we make of such an observation, then, in our own companies? Firstly, that true outside boards of directors with balance can be a great asset to an organization. These veterans have “been there, done that!” Secondly, as one goes about building a team, become more self-aware of the temptation to populate the organization with a clique of robots, who while very intelligent in their domain, are ignorant on many other topics. Thirdly, consider the value of co-founders and mentors whose life experience is very different than one’s own–albeit they should have been successful in whatever they have previously pursued.

Don’t overdose on what is sweet–do what is nutritional for your organization!

What Can EQ Do For You?

Whether your executive team is trying to evaluate cultural fit, develop a post-merger integration strategy, or simply run a business, emotional intelligence is the key to decision making.  Some proof of the benefits of superior emotional intelligence:

1. The US Air Force used the EQ-I to select recruiters (the Air Force’s front-line HR
personnel) and found that the most successful recruiters scored significantly higher in
the emotional intelligence competencies of Assertiveness, Empathy, Happiness, and
Emotional Self Awareness. The Air Force also found that by using emotional
intelligence to select recruiters, they increased their ability to predict successful
recruiters by nearly three-fold. The immediate gain was a saving of $3 million
annually. These gains resulted in the Government Accounting Office submitting a
report to Congress, which led to a request that the Secretary of Defense order all
branches of the armed forces to adopt this procedure in recruitment and selection.
(The GAO report is titled, “Military Recruiting: The Department of Defense Could
Improve Its Recruiter Selection and Incentive Systems,” and it was submitted to
Congress January 30, 1998. Richard Handley and Reuven Bar-On provided this
information.)
2. Experienced partners in a multinational consulting firm were assessed on the EI
competencies plus three others. Partners who scored above the median on 9 or more
of the 20 competencies delivered $1.2 million more profit from their accounts than
did other partners – a 139 percent incremental gain (Boyatzis, 1999).
3. An analysis of more than 300 top-level executives from fifteen global companies
showed that six emotional competencies distinguished stars from the average:
Influence, Team Leadership, Organizational Awareness, self-confidence,
Achievement Drive, and Leadership (Spencer, L. M., Jr., 1997).
4. In jobs of medium complexity (sales clerks, mechanics), a top performer is 12 times
more productive than those at the bottom and 85 percent more productive than an
average performer. In the most complex jobs (insurance salespeople, account
managers), a top performer is 127 percent more productive than an average performer
(Hunter, Schmidt, & Judiesch, 1990). Competency research in over 200 companies
and organizations worldwide suggests that about one-third of this difference is due to
technical skill and cognitive ability while two-thirds is due to emotional competence
(Goleman, 1998). (In top leadership positions, over four-fifths of the difference is
due to emotional competence.)
5. At L’Oreal, sales agents selected on the basis of certain emotional competencies
significantly outsold salespeople selected using the company’s old selection
procedure. On an annual basis, salespeople selected on the basis of emotional
competence sold $91,370 more than other salespeople did, for a net revenue increase
of $2,558,360. Salespeople selected on the basis of emotional competence also had
63% less turnover during the first year than those selected in the typical way (Spencer
& Spencer, 1993; Spencer, McClelland, & Kelner, 1997).
6. In a national insurance company, insurance sales agents who were weak in emotional
competencies such as self-confidence, initiative, and empathy sold policies with an
average premium of $54,000. Those who were very strong in at least 5 of 8 key
emotional competencies sold policies worth $114,000 (Hay/McBer Research and
Innovation Group, 1997).
7. In a large beverage firm, using standard methods to hire division presidents, 50% left
within two years, mostly because of poor performance. When they started selecting
based on emotional competencies such as initiative, self-confidence, and leadership,
only 6% left in two years. Furthermore, the executives selected based on emotional
competence were far more likely to perform in the top third based on salary bonuses
for performance of the divisions they led: 87% were in the top third. In addition,
division leaders with these competencies outperformed their targets by 15 to 20
percent. Those who lacked them under-performed by almost 20% (McClelland,
1999).
8. Research by the Center for Creative Leadership has found that the primary causes of
derailment in executives involve deficits in emotional competence. The three primary
ones are difficulty in handling change, not being able to work well in a team, and
poor interpersonal relations.
9. After supervisors in a manufacturing plant received training in emotional
competencies such as how to listen better and help employees resolve problems on
their own, lost-time accidents were reduced by 50 percent, formal grievances were
reduced from an average of 15 per year to 3 per year, and the plant exceeded
productivity goals by $250,000 (Pesuric & Byham, 1996). In another manufacturing
plant where supervisors received similar training, production increased 17 percent.
There was no such increase in production for a group of matched supervisors who
were not trained (Porras & Anderson, 1981).
10. One of the foundations of emotional competence — accurate self-assessment — was
associated with superior performance among several hundred managers from 12
different organizations (Boyatzis, 1982).
11. Another emotional competence, the ability to handle stress, was linked to success as a
store manager in a retail chain. The most successful store managers were those best
able to handle stress. Success was based on net profits, sales per square foot, sales
per employee, and per dollar inventory investment (Lusch & Serpkeuci, 1990).
12. Optimism is another emotional competence that leads to increased productivity. New
salesmen at Met Life who scored high on a test of “learned optimism” sold 37 percent
more life insurance in their first two years than pessimists (Seligman, 1990).
13. A study of 130 executives found that how well people handled their own emotions
determined how much people around them preferred to deal with them (Walter V.
Clarke Associates, 1997).
14. For sales reps at a computer company, those hired based on their emotional
competence were 90% more likely to finish their training than those hired on other
criteria (Hay/McBer Research and Innovation Group, 1997).
15. At a national furniture retailer, sales people hired based on emotional competence had
half the dropout rate during their first year (Hay/McBer Research and Innovation
Group, 1997).
16. For 515 senior executives analyzed by the search firm Egon Zehnder International,
those who were primarily strong in emotional intelligence were more likely to
succeed than those who were strongest in either relevant previous experience or IQ.
In other words, emotional intelligence was a better predictor of success than either
relevant previous experience or high IQ. More specifically, the executive was high in
emotional intelligence in 74 percent of the successes and only in 24 percent of the
failures. The study included executives in Latin America, Germany, and Japan, and
the results were almost identical in all three cultures.
17. The following description of a “star” performer reveals how several emotional
competencies (noted in italics) were critical in his success: Michael Iem worked at
Tandem Computers. Shortly after joining the company as a junior staff analyst, he
became aware of the market trend away from mainframe computers to networks that
linked workstations and personal computers (Service Orientation). Iem realized that
unless Tandem responded to the trend, its products would become obsolete (Initiative
and Innovation). He had to convince Tandem’s managers that their old emphasis on
mainframes was no longer appropriate (Influence) and then develop a system using
new technology (Leadership, Change Catalyst). He spent four years showing off his
new system to customers and company sales personnel before the new network
applications were fully accepted (Self-confidence, Self-Control, Achievement Drive)
(from Richman, L. S., “How to get ahead in America,” Fortune, May 16, 1994, pp.
46-54).
18. Financial advisors at American Express whose managers completed the Emotional
Competence training program were compared to an equal number whose managers
had not. During the year following training, the advisors of trained managers grew
their businesses by 18.1% compared to 16.2% for those whose managers were
untrained.
19. The most successful debt collectors in a large collection agency had an average goal
attainment of 163 percent over a three-month period. They were compared with a
group of collectors who achieved an average of only 80 percent over the same time
period. The most successful collectors scored significantly higher in the emotional
intelligence competencies of self-actualization, independence, and optimism. (Selfactualization
refers to a well-developed, inner knowledge of one’s own goals and a
sense of pride in one’s work.) (Bachman et al., 2000).

-Cary Cherniss, Ph.D., Rutgers University

What role does emotional intelligence (EQ) play in your organization’s management? How can it become more integral?