Where do you get your power as a leader?

My favorite definition of leadership, which has been widely attributed, is “the ability to get others (to want) to do what you think needs to be done.” I inserted the parenthesis, because the best leaders inspire us to be committed to a particular course of action - not just do it.

In organizations, there are many ways leader are empowered. Most draw their power from more than one source. Here are a few of the most common:

Legitimate power: leaders can derive some (or all) of their power simply from the position they hold in the organization, which gives them the authority to make decisions and choose actions on their own. A director has more “legitimate” power than a manager, who in turn has more than a supervisor, who in turn has more than a lead, and so on. While legitimate power is, by definition, legitimate, it is a weak leader who leads simply from his or her authority. It’s usually not enough to create committed followers. Leaders who fall back on their legitimate power will hear themselves saying, “Why do you have to do it? Because I said so, that’s why!”

Expert power: Some people have leadership power because they possess an expertise or skill that others do not have. If you choose to climb a mountain, for instance, you will want to find a guide who’s been there, and done that. He or she will have an enormous power source based on their experience, and you will willingly follow their lead based on your confidence in their competence.

Coercive power: A leader can derive power from his or her ability to deliver a negative sanction, or to make people fearful. When I’m pulled over by a traffic cop, he (or she) has lots of power, and yes, I’m afraid to challenge it. A leader in an organization can get results by making people afraid of the consequences if they don’t produce. That said, this is a short-term strategy and is widely understood to be ineffective in the long run.

Reward power: On the other hand, people willingly follow leaders who have the ability to deliver rewards, both extrinsic (promotions, salary increases, bonuses, public recognition, etc.) and intrinsic (making people feel better about themselves. What leaders who use reward power understand is that “what gets rewarded gets repeated.”

Information power: Some people are leaders because they have information that others want to have (or they have access to it). Information is power, and the laws of supply and demand work here as well. The more highly regarded the information is, the more power the owner of that information can be, because he or she can decide who gets to have that information.

Connective power: As the saying goes, it’s not who you are, but who you know. Leaders can create power based on their relationships with others. The administrative assistant to the CEO can (and often does) have enormous power, because he or she is the person who acts as the gatekeeper for the CEO. No one gets access to the CEO without going through the administrative assistant. Likewise the Chief of Staff, the Assistant Director, and so on. The risk for people who build power based stemming from their connection is obvious, however. If the person to whom they’re connected leaves - there goes their source of power!

Referent power: Last, and perhaps most important, is the leader’s own personality and skill as a visionary and communicator. Great leaders always have a referent power base - we want to follow them because of who they are. Sometimes we identify this as their charisma, and then make the mistake of believing that leadership is something one is born with. But I believe Warren Bennis had it right when he said, “Charisma is the result of effective leadership, not the other way around.”

If you want to take your leadership practice to the next level, focus on ways to increase your referent power. Keep this thought in mind: “When I left the dining room after sitting next to Mr. Gladstone, I thought he was the cleverest man in England. But after sitting next to Mr. Disraeli, I thought I was the cleverest woman in England.” - A women when asked her impression of the two English statesmen Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone after dining with them.

I found this cartoon on this website. Good prescription!

Next week, I’ll be driving down the west coast from Seattle to San Diego, taking the “scenic” route. Won’t be posting to The Almanac, but I suspect I’ll have lots of thoughts, insights, and fresh thinking along the way. As leaders, it’s vital to take some time, occasionally, to take a “time out” to recharge those batteries. I’m often suggesting to those I coach to remember to pause occasionally and take stock. Now it’s my turn!

I’m so looking forward to smelling some roses for a while!

In yesterday’s post Teamwork or Guesswork, I discussed the differences between teamwork and guesswork.

While fostering teamwork isn’t automatic or easy, it is possible to create conditions where people will rally around a goal, work cooperatively and efficiently to accomplish that goal, and achieve far better results than any other method could yield. Leaders who want the best return on investment for their teaming strategies are those who:

• Thoroughly understand the dynamics of teams in organizations, including how and when to choose a team as the means to accomplish a particular goal, how to choose team leaders and team members, and how to include teamwork in their performance management system.
• Invest in the continuing development of their team leadership skills.

The Three Ps of Effective Team Leaders

Preparing a team

• Assembling the right players
• Clarifying the expectations of the team sponsor
• Drafting a team charter which sets the boundaries, includes a team mission and vision, clarifies team roles, and establishes linkages in the organization
• Securing support and resources

Processing on-going teamwork

• Building trust and commitment
• Establishing and maintaining the “rules of engagement”
• Facilitating effective meetings
• Making appropriate process interventions
• Fostering team-based decisions
• Recording and communicating action plans

Performing as a team

• Establishing a project plan
• Achieving milestones and targets
• “Moving the ball” between meetings
• Providing on-going performance feedback
• Rewarding individual and team performance
• Disbanding the team while capturing the lessons learned

What’s More, Good Teamwork Costs Nothing

Leaving teamwork to guesswork may be common practice in organizations, but it is not common sense. The costs of guesswork are staggering, whereas the time and financial resources invested developing team leaders will produce a handsome reward on the bottom line of the organization. The greatest irony for team-based organizations may be that team training costs nothing as teams begin producing substantially better results, in less time, while increasing employee morale and retention.

Alex was asked to lead a team which would develop a sensitive recommendation on whether to consolidate two facilities into one.

The first meeting had been scheduled to begin ten minutes ago and five of the seven new team members were gathered in a conference room. One or two were on their cell phones, a pair was engaged in a lively conversation near the back of the room, and the other sat quietly at the table, glancing at his watch. One of the two missing participants was known for habitual lateness; the other was simply unaccounted for. Alex fidgeted with a white board marker, then cleared his throat. “I guess we’ll begin,” he said…

Mary’s team had been meeting for six weeks, wrestling with issues related to reorganizing staff functions to improve processes and increase efficiency.

While the team had made some progress, it was bogged down because team members were torn between completing team assignments and the pressing priorities at their day-to-day jobs. The effort was in danger of simply fizzling out, and Mary was expected to deliver a final presentation in two weeks. As someone began yet another speech about being overworked, Mary thought to herself, “I guess it’s time to read them the riot act…”

Spencer’s team had developed three proposals to address a thorny customer service problem, and were meeting to choose their final recommendation.

The team was deeply divided and people were beginning to get irritated, interrupt one another, or simply withdraw. Consensus seemed doubtful. Spencer let the dialogue continue for as long as he could stand it. Finally, he stood up, faced the group, and said, “I guess I will make the final decision since we can’t agree. Any of you have a problem with that?” There was a palpable silence in the room…

What do these three team leaders have in common?

They were under pressure, they felt stuck, and they didn’t really know what to do. So, they guessed. In the absence of knowledge, skills or experience people have to guess what action to take. If we’re lucky, everything will work out. Far too often, however, when we guess, we guess wrong.

Let’s take a closer look at some differences between guesswork and teamwork.

Guesswork is:

• Choosing a coincidental group of people based mostly on availability and hoping for the best
• Getting a vague sense of the team sponsor’s objectives for the team and jumping into the task
• Having no idea what the team effort will cost the organization or what impact its effort may have on the bottom line.
• Frequently urging the team to do more with less, and to work smarter, not harder
• Assuming that everyone who’s been chosen for the team wants to be on the team
• Wondering what it takes to get people to really commit to the team goal
• Reminding team members that “there is no ‘I’ in teams”
• Ignoring, denying, overlooking, or out-shouting team members in conflict
• Running meetings without a plan, clarifying agreements or action items
• Relying on one or two methods to make decisions: the leader decides, or everybody votes

Teamwork is:

• Relying on organizing principles which practically compel a team to pull together for high performance
• Creating a team charter which can be used as a performance metric and team motivator
• Being able to calculate the investment and the bottom line ROI for the team’s effort
• Positioning the team to get maximum resources, effectiveness and impact
• Galvanizing people who often report to different supervisors and who come with unique personal agendas
• Having a proven methodology to take a team with average performance to a substantially higher level
• Creating opportunities for team members to have individual achievements and a sense of belonging to a team
• Eliminating counter-productive tension and conflict between team members
• Skillfully facilitating effective, productive, action-oriented meetings
• Making rock-solid, reliable, committed team-based decisions using a methodology that fits the situation

Great teams are mostly “made,” not born. That is, they acquire skill sets that equip them to meet the challenges of working together. But far too often, team leaders are chosen for the wrong reasons - their technical skills, or by the happenstance of having a lighter workload for the moment, or because no one else was willing or available.

Compounding the problem, they often are given a coincidental collection of employees who may also have been selected for inappropriate reasons - mere availability, slack workload, even as a way of getting a poor performer away from his or her supervisor for a while. The result can be a team leader who is asked to do the impossible with the unwilling or unable. And when problems arise, inadequately prepared leaders are given little choice but to guess how to handle them.

I’ll post tomorrow on ways for leaders to take the guesswork out of teamwork.

When a new leader assumes responsibility for a team, or a department, division or even a whole organization, people react by asking themselves, what’s in it for me?

Productivity can suffer as people sort out who you are, and what that means for them. Conversations occur around the “water cooler” as people compare notes and pass along anecdotes they have heard about you.

Admittedly, much of what they want to learn about you are not things you discuss often. But they are important questions, as people take their measure of you - just as you are taking your measure of them.

Many of the questions shown below form the basis for unspoken ground rules - the way you like to conduct business. Unfortunately, many ground rules remain unconscious and are only discovered by being broken. Early in my career, I discovered my boss hated email updates only by sending her emails (which I thought was a great way to keep her in the loop). She preferred her staff to pop in her office from time to time with a quick update. (This isn’t to argue in favor of one communication method over the other - the point is we each have preferences, and our team will be more productive more quickly if they know what they are.)

Here’s a list of the kinds of questions that will be on their minds. As you take charge, you might want to be mindful of questions like these, and put your answers on the table early and often. Remember, in the absence of good information, people often make assumptions - and those assumptions can be wrong.

1. How do you describe your job?
2. What are three or four words that describe you as a person?
3. What are three of four words that describe you on the job?
4. Personally and professionally, what are your hopes for the coming year?
5. Personally and professionally, what concerns you about the coming year?
6. In terms of your transition into the new job, what do you have to gain from the change? What do you have to give up?
7. As a leader, what are your major strengths as you understand them?
8. What aspect(s) of your leadership practice would you like to develop further?
9. What are three or four of your core values? How do they play out on the job?
10. What’s the hardest thing you have had to do as a leader?
11. What are your pet peeves?
12. What are your idiosyncrasies?
13. How do you like to make important decisions?
14. How do you act when you’re angry?
15. How will people know if you think something is important?
16. How will people know if you’re dissatisfied?
17. What are the ground rules about calling you at home or after hours in general?
18. If you’ve planted your stake firmly on an issue, and someone wants you to re-address the issue, how should they approach you?
19. If someone thinks you’re making a mistake, what should they do?
20. How do you prefer to get critical information - orally? In writing?
21. What are your professional priorities? How do you go about organizing your time?
22. How do you delegate authority and responsibility?
23. How do you feel about conflict(s) within the team?
24. How do you personally like to handle conflict?
25. What do people have to do to earn your trust?
26. What are your initial impressions of the team (department, division, or organization)?

Yes, it’s a lot of questions, and the list isn’t exhaustive. But if you’ll take the time to reflect on these questions, and share your answers with your staff, you will mitigate much of the angst and often indirect methods your staff will use to understand what they want to know: who are you, and what’s in it for me?

There are four kinds of truth, and three sides to every story.

In the movie The Kid Stays in the Picture, Robert Evans offers this thought: “There are three sides to every story: my side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying.”

I’ve long believed there are actually four kinds of truth: My truth, Your Truth, Our Truth, and THE Truth.

My truth is how I see the world. Your truth is how you see it. In the famous optical illusion, I might see an old lady, but you see a young lady. Who’s right?

In a conflict, I sometimes forget that “my” truth isn’t necessarily “the” truth, and when I persist in that belief, the other guy often gets more passionate about sticking to his truth.

A leader is one who can explore both sides of the story openly, and, while planting his or her stake, can also be open to moving the stake. In an authentic conversation, both parties can explore the common ground - “our” truth.

Whether our truth is really THE truth is probably unknowable - and not all that important anyway. Leaders help people move from having sides to having common ground.

The Wall Street Journal reported a survey of over 4,000 employees in a wide variety of organizations, public and private. Respondents were asked to rank-order what factors contributed to their loyalty to the organization. (By the way, I believe people are loyal to their leader who often represents what they believe of the organization.)

Here’s the list as given to the respondents:

1. Opportunity for advancement
2. Control over work content
3. Flexible work hours
4. Fringe benefits
5. Job security
6. Nature of the work itself
7. Open communication
8. Salary / pay
9. Size of the organization
10. Stimulating work

The results may surprise you. When I’ve asked leaders in organizations to predict how the survey turned out, for instance, they invariably place “salary” in the top three.

Here’s the actual results:

1. Open communication
2. Nature of the work itself
3. Control over work content
4. Job security
5. Stimulating work
6. Fringe benefits
7. Flexible work hours
8. Opportunity for advancement
9. Salary
10. Size of the organization

The good news is that as a leader, you have enormous influence over the three most important factors - open communication, the nature of the work itself, and control over work content.

Clear, honest communication is critical, and obvious. But what can you do about the nature of the work itself and the work content?

Great leaders elevate their people with their passion for the work - the reason it’s important, the difference it makes in the world, and how everyone’s contribution helps the organization actualize it’s vision.

Think about the people who volunteer their time to stuff envelopes for a political campaign. I doubt most of them do it because they love the nature of the work itself. No, they do it because they are inspired by the vision of a better world. (And, by the way, clearly they aren’t doing it because of the salary!)

What about work content? This is where the issue of “micro-managing” rears its head. Great leaders empower, others delegate without letting go of the details. Remember the adage “What does down, how goes up.” Your role as the leader is to paint the broad picture of what needs to be done. Their role is to determine how it gets done. When you stick your fingers too deeply into the “how” people react with resentment. Coach them, to be sure, and then let go and trust that they will find the way to get it done.

By communicating freely and honestly, helping people see the value in what they’re doing, and giving them the freedom to manage their tasks themselves, you will be leading and inspiring fierce loyalty from your team.

Someone sent me this YouTube today. What superb examples of everyday acts of leadership!

Without doubt, most leaders want to do a good job. Indeed, most were promoted into management precisely because they were terrific individual contributors, and someone figured that an employee with savvy technical skills would be a natural candidate for leading others.

But the fact remains that far too often one hears the lament, “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of management!” Too many managers fall short in their leadership practice by doing things that limit their effectiveness, often without realizing what they’re doing wrong. This is an account of five leadership practices that lead to employee apathy, poor morale, and lackluster performance.

One: Poor leaders strive for compliance, not commitment

Employees do what they do for one of two reasons: because they have to, or because they want to. Leaders who rely on their positional power use fear to drive performance. They strive for compliance – they manage by command. They avoid employee involvement, they don’t share decision-making, and they are quick to point out what’s wrong. They will get a certain level of performance – enough to avoid a painful consequence, but rarely will they get much more.

Fact: Research has shown that the typical employee is given 16 pieces of negative feedback for every positive.

Leaders who understand that outstanding performance stems from commitment know that people thrive in an environment characterized by a clear vision and mission, a set of shared values, and a pervasive belief that people want to make a contribution, accept responsibility, and excel at their jobs.

Two: Poor leaders are almost always poor listeners

In study after study, when employees are asked the characteristics they most desire in their manager, the one that tops the list is the feeling of being heard when they communicate. Poor managers often say they listen, but they are really faking it – pseudo-listening at best.

Authentic listening may be the most important skill for a leader to develop. We trust and are much more willing to follow people we believe take a genuine interest in our concerns. Good listeners are able to encourage dialogue by asking open-ended questions, paraphrasing and summarizing, and conveying in their own words both the message and the feelings attached to that message.

Three: Poor leaders confuse intention with impact

A leader attends a meeting with one of her staff, who is there to give a brief presentation. Afterwards, as the two walk back to the department, the leader decides to share some feedback with the employee on how he could improve his presentation skills.

Unfortunately, she begins her coaching on a crowded elevator. When they exit the elevator, the supervisor walks toward her office, feeling good about helping her employee improve. The employee returns to his desk, seething with embarrassment and anger. What went wrong?

The supervisor confused her intention (which was good) with her impact (which was awful). Without realizing it, she’s created a resentful employee.

Four: Poor leaders deliver negative consequences for desired performance

Managers sometimes scratch their heads and wonder why employees aren’t stepping up to the plate to “give 110%.” Perhaps it’s because they are given negative consequences when they do:

• The employee who makes a problem-solving suggestion at a brain-storming meeting is tasked with the responsibility to head up a task team to solve the problem.

• The overworked employee who is great at getting things done under pressure is the first one the leader delegates the next unexpected assignment.

• The employee who manages his time well and completes assignments on time is rewarded with sarcastic comments about whether she has enough work to do.

Behavior is a function of consequence. Leaders must be careful that when they get the behavior they’d like (ideas at a brainstorming, grace under pressure, good task management skills) they don’t deliver a negative consequence which will extinguish the behavior over time.

Five: Poor leaders offer positive consequences for poor performance

Jim nearly always comes to staff meetings late. Mario fails to turn in production reports on time. Susan has a poor attitude, constantly bad-mouthing her co-workers, gossiping about others, and putting in a minimum effort.

Why? Because their manager actually rewards their poor performance by giving each of them a positive consequence. By ignoring Jim’s attendance problems and not addressing the issue, he gives Jim more free time to pursue other interests. By working around Mario’s late reports, he relieves Mario of any deadline tension. And, by not coaching Susan because he’s uncomfortable with difficult conversations, he gives her freedom from being held accountable for her performance.

Leaders need to look within themselves from time to time to see whether they are a contributing factor to employee apathy, poor morale, or lackluster performance.

One of the questions I’m most often asked is: can leadership skills be learned? The answer is an unqualified YES!

Here is an overview of choices available to the individual or organization wanting to explore leadership development:

Self-development
Some leadership skills can be addressed by working alone with self-development resources, including books, audio and video tapes, workbooks, computer-based training, etc. Most of these re-sources are convenient, inexpensive, and offer scheduling flexibility.

Formal educational programs

Colleges and universities offer a wide range of for-mal educational programs which teach leadership practices. Many leadership competencies are (finally being) ad-dressed in business schools. Formal education is a long-term leadership development process.

Mentoring or Coaching

Formal mentoring or coaching with a leader’s own manager or another resource within the organization is an excellent way to develop leadership skills. Nearly every leadership competency can be im-proved by an active mentoring process with a skilled coach. The clearer the expectations established by both the mentor and the individual seeking development, the more successful the coaching rela-tionship is likely to be.

Internal training

Many organizations offer a variety of specific programs offered by staff leadership development professionals (or external consultants hired to provide tailored training for the organization). Internal training programs usually address those de-velopment needs most often experienced within the organization. Most training (internal or external) is highly fo-cused, offering advantages of minimal time, opportu-nity for practice and fresh, contemporary perspec-tives on issues.

External training

External training is an option beyond the internal training effort. External training makes sense when nothing similar is offered internally, when leaders have specialized needs, or when time and schedul-ing is an issue (i.e. internal training will not be avail-able in time). External training can be more expen-sive and more general, but it offers the unique ad-vantage of enabling leaders to “network” with leaders from other organizations, which often means new perspectives can be brought home.

Cross Training

One way of broadening a leader’s perspective and enhance his or her skills is to cross train in other departments for short periods of time. Cross training can also be a way of putting a leader together with another who is particularly skilled in the identified area. The leader being cross-trained will get the opportunity to witness the skill being applied in the workplace.

Job Rotation

A longer version of cross training is job rotation. This is the actual transfer of a leader into another de-partment as a “permanent” job. Over an extended period, leadership skills are developed by expo-sure to business issues from several perspectives — engineering, marketing, finance, etc.

Special Assignments or Projects

Often, a leadership skill can be enhanced with a project that requires the manager to flex specific leadership muscles. For example, task teams can be excellent ways to develop problem analysis skills. These projects are normally short-term, and are most helpful if another leader, skilled in the identified area, acts as a coach for the manager being developed.

Corporate or other divisional exposure

Sometimes, the best way to development leadership skill is to widen the leader’s perspective with corporate or other divisional exposure. This can help a leader see other ways business issues are be-ing addressed and get a sense of the “bigger pic-ture.” It can be an excellent method of improving customer service/quality skills as leaders go di-rectly to their customers.

More time on present job with a specific focus

Sometimes, leadership skills are best addressed by continued “seasoning” on the job. For instance, a leader may want to develop skills used to conduct effective team meetings. Coupled with formal training and/or mentoring, the leader can plan to focus on his or her meetings over a period of several months with a deliberate effort to employ skills first learned in the training or from the mentor. This developmental option will only succeed if the fo-cus is maintained as a conscious, deliberate effort.

Can leadership skills be learned? Yes!

If you’d like help crafting a personal leadership development program, or installing a leadership development academy in your organization, give me a call.