Wally Bock, citing an article in Forbes, talks about the value of storytelling to get your point across. And it’s true. I frequently use stories to help clients understand a concept more easily or wrap their heads around something that’s very new to them.

Yes, storytelling is an extremely powerful tool, but I see two problems inherent in these discussions.

The first is that the political, religious and business leaders used to illustrate storytelling’s influence are always positive examples and, obviously, plenty of those on the dark side have used it too.

Secondly, there is rarely any information on how listeners can shield themselves from the enthralling effect of the story in order to evaluate the actual ideas being presented.

I remember a friend telling me that he was mesmerized after hearing Bobby Kennedy, who he opposed, use stories to describe a situation and what he would do to change it. The effect wore off, but he found it a frightening experience.

Combine these two and you have a recipe for disaster—Hitler was an expert storyteller from the dark side, which is why he still has adherents.

Business leaders tell stories, called visions, constantly.

But as adults, involved in adult pursuits, we have a responsibility not to suspend our common and critical senses and swallow the story whole.

Here is how you stay balanced.

Enjoy the story, but remind yourself that it is a story and that once the telling is done then the content needs to be dissected and evaluated by the left side of your brain as opposed to embraced in toto by the right.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: kodomut on flickr

In a new series Jim Stroup is exploring what drives our need for “the cult of the superlative individual leader as the cure for our current difficulties” in spite, as Jim points out, of those same cult members having caused many of the current problems.

“We will take the position here at the outset, then, that the family of definitions of leadership that we are discussing is that which incorporates the idea of ineffably sensed forward motion – profound vision, unfathomable wisdom or judgment, courageous decisiveness, a charismatic ability to attract followers, and the like.

After all, it is this type of leadership that we are being told we must place our faith in, so that its exemplars can grasp the reins firmly in their hands, and with reassuring sure-footedness steer we poor, benighted masses out of our barely perceived and dimly comprehended peril. Into which, let it be said again, those exalted exemplars’ predecessors led us.”

Please click over and read this brilliant, irreverent discussion of what leadership has come to be and why it destroys instead of sustains. (Be sure to subscribe to follow it.)

Then check out Wally Bock’s comments regarding the continued idiocy of the leader vs. manager concept.

And  my series on the same topic is worth reading if you haven’t already.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: nono farahshila on flickr

In September, 2007 I wrote Leadership—Nature Or Nature; Joseph S. Nye, Jr., former Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School, and author of The Powers to Lead used the same topic for his 2009 commencement article.

In a comment on my post Wally Bock says, “I do think there’s a “nature” part to people who turn out to be successful leaders, at least there are things that seem pretty much set for most people by their mid-twenties.”

But how much of leadership is the person and how much the circumstances?

As Nye reminds us, “In January 1940, Winston Churchill was regarded as a failed politician, but after the British defeat in France, he was seen as a charismatic leader who could rally the nation. Churchill’s traits did not change in 1940; the situation did.” (Bold formatting is mine.)

If you believe as I do that leadership is not a predetermined act or merely positional then it makes perfect sense that a person who leads in one situation won’t lead in others.

It also doesn’t matter.

If you perform at your personal best, doing everything possible to make a success of the immediate situation, then doing it as a ‘leader’ or a ‘follower’ has no meaning.

Nye says, “Modern leadership turns out to be less about who you are, or how you were born than about what you have learned and what you do as part of a group.”

So perhaps all the personal energy now expended in concern about how you lead or whether you lead could be better spent following the Boy Scout motto of “Be prepared.“

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Be sure to check out the great links at the June 7th, 2009 edition of the Leadership Development Carnival!

(I’ve finally gotten my act together to participate, which means I’ll know when they’re happening and that means I’ll have the link to share with you:)

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: Mark Sardella on flickr

Wally Bock left a comment today on a post at Leadership Turn. In part it said,

“When I was responsible for hiring management trainees years ago, I discovered that grades and degrees and schools didn’t tell me much. What I looked for where two things. Could a prospect write? If not, there was no need to go farther. The other thing I looked for was actual work experience.”

Wally would have trouble hiring anyone these days considering the atrocious stuff written by students and grads who are so busy texting that they can’t be bothered to learn to write readable, coherent, English.

It’s a good thing that writing isn’t most managers make-or-break or offers would be few and far between—and I don’t just mean new grads.

I don’t have a great desire to be forced to decipher hip-hop, Valley Girl, Ebonics, Spanglish, Country-Western, 18-wheeler or all lower case with no punctuation in order to communicate.

None of these may matter in private life, but they don’t contribute a whole lot in the context of what it takes to make it today.

Several years ago I wrote Good writing fast—an oxymoron and last year I asked, “Are most people loosing their minds while I am losing mine? during another minor rant.

I’m not a total dinosaur, if all that’s wrong in most communications is a misplaced semi-colon or an occasional preposition at the end of a sentence who cares?

People don’t realize that, consciously or not, they’re judged by what they write, just as they are by what they wear or drive or went to school—even people whose own writing is terrible will downgrade others for the same thing.

If you can’t write and want a future take classes; if you’re people can’t write send them for training.

And if you won’t/can’t do that, there is one simple thing you can do to improve your writing.

Read. Turn off the computer and the TV; take off your iPod and turn off your phone; pick up a well-written book and READ. It doesn’t matter if it’s great literature, a biography, mystery, or hilarious chic lit.

Read every chance you get and make more chances; pay attention and you’ll be amazed at how fast your writing improves.

Image credit: sxc.hu

Wally Bock over at Three Star Leadership tells a great story about Lufthansa Air Line’s culture, a culture that just assumes that nothing is impossible.

But how do you make that happen?

Whether it’s a team, a department or a company, there are two basics to do at the start that are absolutely necessary

• You must understand your own MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™), because there’s no way that you can implement, enable or live with a culture that your MAP doesn’t support.

• Hire people whose MAP is synergistic to the culture you envision; have the courage to walk away when the MAP is wrong no matter how right the skills are.

The first step is important, but it’s the second that leads to a true performance culture a la Lufthansa and sustains it for the long-term.

Image credit: flickr

On a post over at Managing Leadership, Wally Bock left a great comment that’s germane to my recent posts and to the notion that the idea of ‘leadership’ has been corrupted by the leadership business and the media.

“…people prefer magical thinking to accountability.”

They sure do. That magical thinking is just great for all those who don’t want the responsibility of making their own decisions. It’s wonderful to have a ‘leader’ tell you what to think and how to act. That way, when things get screwed up, it isn’t your fault; it’s the leader’s fault. You get to say, ‘S/he told me to…’ and poof—instant absolution with no strings attached.

“There’s a joke about a professor who says that a certain idea is “fine in practice but may not work in theory. We didn’t have a problem identifying who was the leader before we had leadership theory. Nobody worried about whether that Caesar fellow was a true or real or authentic leader. They just followed him.”

Caesar didn’t worry about it, either. He just did [whatever] and assumed that everyone would follow along. And follow they did, at least until he decided to make his leadership official. At that point their response was direct and very final.

We followers need to do something similar to the leadership movement; not necessarily as final, because it does have its uses.

We need to reform its thinking; recognize that leadership skills are for everyone—not just a select few—and stop it from appointing/anointing those selective few as ‘leaders’.

So, new mantra—everybody is a leader; lead yourself first and don’t worry abut the rest.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: sxc.hu

By Wes Ball. Wes is a strategic innovation consultant and author of The Alpha Factor – a revolutionary new look at what really creates market dominance and self-sustaining success (Westlyn Publishing, 2008) and writes for Leadership turn every Tuesday. See all his posts here. Wes can be reached at www.ballgroup.com.

Are leaders and managers getting dumber or is it just who is assessing them?

Wally Bock’s Three Star Leadership blog led me to a very interesting post by Ken Nowack concerning the discrepancies between self-perception of performance and external assessment for corporate executives. The point of the article was that, as managers move up the corporate ladder, they seem to gain more and more blindness to their real performance.

The “no-clue gene,” as Nowack put it, crosses gender boundaries, but “does seem to be more pronounced as leaders move up the corporate hierarchy.”

Any of us who have worked in the corporate world know what he’s talking about.   And the worst part is that most corporate employees look at the top-most levels of their company and fear that the person at the very top may be one of the clueless ones.

I have seen this at work across all size companies from the largest in their category down to mid-sized regional companies.  Smaller companies are not immune, but there the faults of a leader are far more apparent to everyone involved, including the leader himself.

Ignoring the obvious and all too typical problem of employees naively believing that they could certainly do better at their manager’s simple job, even though they really don’t see what he or she actually does, I have seen three factors that drive such disconnects for managers between self-perception and the perceptions of those around them:

1. Corporate pressures on managers/leaders and internal competitiveness are immense these days, and they create a self-defensiveness that increases significantly as one moves up the corporate ladder.  This pressure creates stress that actually does reduce performance aptitude, while it also creates a greater self-protective need to justify oneself.  Honestly, who would want a top-executive job in most large corporations these days, no matter what the payout looked to be?
2. The demands upon top leaders are so great that they themselves don’t believe they are up to the challenge, so they compensate with apparently extreme conceit.  This is a most natural reaction among most personality types to any self-perception of weakness.  Among driver personalities it can be a positive self-motivator – they have learned that, if you think of yourself as something better, you can become it, so they use this tool to drive themselves to greater performance.  Among other personality types, this compensation usually backfires.
3. Most leaders have bought into the belief that they must be able to walk on water in order to lead an organization or team.  It’s the old military code that a leader never admits ignorance; he just states his opinion with greater confidence.  That is a formula for failure in the corporate world, if I’ve ever seen one.  No one can stand up for long to that kind of expectation.  Yet, when faced with the reality of personal weakness, many positional leaders just can’t or won’t face that truth.

I wrote a post a few months ago supporting Jeffery Immelt of GE, who had just been whipped public ally by his ex-boss, Jack Welch, for not being a clairvoyant about profit in their tumultuous financial services group.  I’m not a big fan of Immelt, but the pressure he was under to perform with perfection in an imperfect environment demonstrates what many top leaders are up against.

This problem only decreases in scope and intensity, as you go down the corporate ladder.

• There far too many persons ready and willing to throw someone else under the bus when they spot any weakness that can be exploited.
• I can’t even guess how many times I’ve heard corporate employees say that they can’t trust anyone.
• The loneliness of business that used to only exist at the top tiers has sifted downstairs throughout the corporate ranks.
•  The fad of 360-degree assessments has only fueled such isolation, because everyone around you suddenly becomes a potential critic who will be heard.

There is certainly incompetence evident in most organizations.  I would suggest, however, that the perceptions of incompetence are often anything but objective, and the causes for the real managerial and leadership weaknesses seen could be addressed through a better model for expectations for leadership and how to assess performance.

When was the last time you trusted a co-worker who could assess your performance?

When was the last time you saw someone in your organization admit weakness?

I had a unique view of this through the 15 years of research I did into dominant companies for my book The Alpha Factor.  I saw it at an even closer level as we conducted the tests with more than 75 companies to see if our findings could create dramatic, sustainable growth.

One of the interesting things I discovered was that there was little direct correlation between ability of a company to create such sustainable growth and the actual competence of top leadership.

Rather, it was the willingness of top leadership to allow the smart, very competent people below them to do smart things that had a far greater correlation than the leader’s personal aptitude.

I recall being more than a bit skeptical about the conclusions of Jim Collins’ book, Good to Great, where his team had decided that leadership approach was the critical factor in defining great companies vs. simply good ones.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: flickr