No surprise! Americans' confidence in their leaders has declined to another low.

According to the 2011 National Leadership Index produced by the Harvard Kennedy School's Center for Public Leadership, 77 percent of those surveyed said there is a crisis of leadership in our country. An equal number believe that "unless we get better leaders, the United States will decline as a nation." Only 21 percent believe that our leaders are "effective and do a good job."

Given that our nation remains mired in the aftermath of the Great Recession and there is political gridlock in Washington, these results are not surprising. The challenge is what to do about them.

Perhaps the answer lies in the only two sectors of public life where confidence in leadership remains above average -- the medical and military establishments. (Although even both of those areas saw some decline, the survey shows.) But a common factor in both medicine and the military might be their adherence to a strong sense of purpose and values.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from the Purposeful Leader for CBS/MoneyWatch

If you want to be a leader 20 years from now, you will need to speak more than one language, be willing to work outside your native country, learn to spot talent, and be attuned to climate change.

And that's just for starters! You will also need to master multiple roles -- executive, mentor and fence-mender.

That's the conclusion I drew from reading a report based on the Hay Group's Leadership 2030 report. Some of the conclusions drawn by Hay Group, a talent management firm, are predictable, such as the importance of globalism and talent scouting, but the focus on individualism is not.

As far-reaching as global businesses have become, the need for non-conformity remains strong. We see this today in the millennial generation that is now taking its place in business. Their worldview is different from that of their parents. They are more mobile, diverse and more flexible, and if this research is to believed, that attitude will persist when they take their places in the ranks of senior and middle management.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from the Purposeful Leader for CBS/MoneyWatch

If you want to be a leader 20 years from now, you will need to speak more than one language, be willing to work outside your native country, learn to spot talent, and be attuned to climate change.

And that's just for starters! You will also need to master multiple roles -- executive, mentor and fence-mender.

That's the conclusion I drew from reading a report based on the Hay Group's Leadership 2030 report. Some of the conclusions drawn by Hay Group, a talent management firm, are predictable, such as the importance of globalism and talent scouting, but the focus on individualism is not.

As far-reaching as global businesses have become, the need for non-conformity remains strong. We see this today in the millennial generation that is now taking its place in business. Their worldview is different from that of their parents. They are more mobile, diverse and more flexible, and if this research is to believed, that attitude will persist when they take their places in the ranks of senior and middle management.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from the Purposeful Leader for CBS/MoneyWatch

Among the reasons that companies hire executive coaches is to provide senior leaders with a sounding board.

While this is something I have long suspected, I was pleased to see it confirmed by the results of a small survey of veteran executive coaches conducted by Alexcel Group, a coaching network to which I belong. Two thirds of the coaches surveyed said their engagements involved being a trusted advisor able to provide much needed objectivity.

A reason for serving as a sounding board is rooted in trust. Not too long ago I did a seminar for CEOs of small businesses. In the course of my talk I mentioned that none of the attendees had any real friends inside the companies they owned and operated. That comment provoked a strong negative reaction.

I held my ground and challenged the group to consider that each of them had the power to hire, reward, and terminate any employee in their organization. Then one CEO looked to his colleagues and said something like, "He's right! We may not have as many friends as we think we do!" I don't think that I won over any converts but at least they allowed me to continue speaking.

Many CEOs with whom I speak talk about it being lonely at the top. They are not asking for pity—when you have access to the corporate jet, life is not all bad. But the wise executives I know realize that being in charge means you are always making decisions that have big consequences for others.

Most executives love the impact their decisions have, but at times, they know that decisions they make about opening or closing facilities, promoting this executive over another, or deciding which business to pursue or which to pass on, has real impact on people's lives. As Shakespeare wrote in Henry IV, Part 2, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown."

To paraphrase the Bard, I would say senior executives do not readily surrender their crowns but from time to time like to take them off. Enter the executive coach. His or her role is to encourage the executive to look less royal. That is, take a frank look at themselves and their roles in the company.

Good coaches I know do not pull punches with feedback they deliver. They seek to be honest brokers with ideas, opinions, and suggestions they gather from stakeholders. Coaches also listen and learn from what an executive says, and seek to share expertise in helpful ways, especially to challenge assumptions.

The obstacle for the senior leader is the desire for straight talk beyond the coach.

The man or woman at the top of the pyramid must work hard to enable people to speak truth to power. That is not easy. None of us likes push-back, especially when we are working hard to get things done right. But for those who report to a senior executive telling them the truth may be what's most important.

And so let me close with a story that General Omar Bradley recalled about his former boss, General George C. Marshall, who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff during the Second World War. In 1939, as America began to mobilize for the eventuality of war, Marshall chastised his junior officers for their failure to disagree with him about his planning strategies. Marshall made it clear that he did not want yes men on his staff; he wanted officers who were not afraid to question his decisions.

That's a good lesson for every leader to keep in mind.

First posted on Inc.com on 1.11.12

When an employee crosses an ethical line, it is wholly appropriate to terminate that person. But it might also be an opportunity for forgiveness.

That's what happened to Tim Goeglein, former aide to President George W. Bush, who was caught plagiarizing a column for his hometown newspaper, something he had done twice previously. As reported by CNN.comand as described in his book, Man in the MIddle: An Inside Account of Faith and Politics in the George W. Bush Era, Goeglein resigned from the administration to save it further embarrassment.

What Goeglein did not expect was a meeting with the president in the Oval Office. Goeglein tried to apologize but Bush interjected, "I have known mercy and grace in my own life, and I am offering it to you now. You are forgiven." The two have stayed in touch.

Forgiveness is not limited to those who abide by principles of their faith; it is something that everyone, certainly everyone in a position of authority, should abide. To forgive is not to forget, nor is it to excuse. Goeglein lost his job and was labeled as a cheat. But as the saying goes, "To err is human; to forgive, divine."

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Iowa may be best known for producing corn and pork, not to mention failed presidential ambitions, but it has one other thing to boast about—16 head coaches and assistants working in Division I NCAA football, more than any other school.

To be specific, I am referring to the University of Iowa. As the The Wall Street Journalreported, the reason is simple—82-year old Hayden Fry, a native Texan. Under his head coach tenure at Iowa he developed a cadre of players and assistants who today carry his legacy. They include Bob Stoops (Oklahoma), Bret Bielema (Wisconsin) and his successor at Iowa, Kirk Ferentz.

Fry is a colorful figure, literally. He changed the uniforms of Iowa to make them more like the aggressive black and gold of the Pittsburgh Steelers and he painted the visitor locker room pink—as a calming influence on opposing players. But there is no gimmick in the way he coached and especially developed his assistants. 

One of the most overlooked aspects of leadership development is how a manager develops those underneath him. In the landmark book, First, Break All the Rules, one salient feature culled from the mammoth Gallup study of then 80,000 managers, was the fact that good managers develop their people. These managers may have stayed in middle management but in doing so they got a reputation for grooming and promoting subordinates.

Fry's method of identifying talent and nurturing it to succeed is rooted in his upbringing. As a youngster he grew up on a ranch in Texas and before going to school his chore was to round up the cows, no mean feat when the ranch was 2,000 acres. When young Hayden protested, his daddy cut him short. "All you have to do is drive out and listen," Fry told the Journal his father said. "One cow is the leader, the bell cow. Find the bell cow and you find the whole herd."

In football it works like this. Find the players who are the natural leaders. Use them to reach the other players and in doing so you reinforce teamwork and better yet commitment. For Fry, these were "player coaches." And for those who expressed an interest in coaching, Fry hired them as graduate assistants, the entry-level position.

The curious thing, however, as many coaches told the The Wall Street Journal, is that Fry did not treat his assistants as gofers—a typical practice in major football programs. He expected them to coach, that is, figure things out for themselves. He was also looking for potential head coaches.  And he was their biggest advocate when they came under consideration for head coaching positions.

Managers seeking to develop their own cadre of future leaders can follow Fry's example by doing the following:

1. Identify those with a potential to assume more responsibility.

2. Provide them with opportunities to show what they can do.

3. Evaluate their progress.

4. Advocate for their advancement. 

5. Keep in touch with them as they move up in the organization.

Fry exemplifies what it means to leave a legacy. The young men he developed have gone on to success that has not only helped Iowa but also expanded his positive influence throughout college football.

Legacy is not something that occurs just before you sign retirement papers; It begins on day one of a new job. And for leaders, legacy matters a great deal in how you develop the talents of those who report to you.

First posted on Inc.com on 1.04.12

Practice makes perfect... but only if you are willing to practice.

Doug Conant, former CEO of the Campbell Soup Co., makes this point clear with a story he tells about himself in his new book, "TouchPoints," co-authored with Mette Norgaard. As the fiscal crisis of 2008 was unfolding, Conant was worried about the effect it would be having on the people in his organization. In response, he made a practice of walking around the facilities, from the offices to the loading docks. Everywhere he went he engaged folks in conversation to get a feeling about what they were thinking. Typically, as measured by his pedometer, he would clock 10,000 steps a day.

Conant's conduct is similar to that of the best leaders I have known. Such leaders know that you cannot lead others unless you know what is on their minds. As much as it falls to the leader to set the direction for others, there's no guarantee they'll follow unless the leader knows how others will react to it.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Recuperation is a good opportunity to reflect on the nature of free time—that is, time you cannot spend working. I should know because I recently passed my waking hours seated in a chair and keeping my surgically-repaired foot elevated.

So what did I do with all this down time? Thank goodness for streaming video, and two great new biographies.

I still have more than 150 more episodes of Star Trek: Voyager to watch. But I am nearly through the second season of David Simon's masterful The Wire. (I began the series with Season 3 so I am catching up.)

There are plenty of leadership lessons in both series.Voyager, for the uninitiated, concerns the stories of a Federation crew that have been lured into the Delta Quadrant on a rescue mission only to find themselves marooned 70,000 light years from home. (Even at Warp 10—ten times the speed light—that's quite a distance.) In one episode the captain must decide between getting home via stolen technology or abiding by Federation regulations. She opts for following the rules though she wonders if she did the right thing; after all is not a captain more responsible for her crew than the rulebook?

The Wire focuses on the trials and tribulations of specially formed police unit trying to round up an entrenched drug gang. A lasting lesson of the series is that people in senior positions consistently sell out those under them as a means of holding on to power (police) or more money (drug gangs). In other words, power corrupts. The heroes of the piece are those that buck the system—be they petty criminals or beat cops and detectives.

I also caught up on my reading. These two biographies are must-read for any student of leadership: Walter Issacson's Steve Jobs and Chris Matthews' Jack Kennedy: Elusive Hero. In the Jobs biography there are as many (or more of) what not to do's as well as what to do's when it comes to leadership. Mercurial as he was creative Jobs was a force of energy that as he sought to do "put a ding in the universe." Jack Kennedy, as book's subtitle implies, is a hero not simply for his wartime bravery but for living each day—despite pain and infirmity—without complaint but with much conviction.

Free time—even when enforced by doctor's orders—should not be taken lightly.

"Time," wrote the late leadership author Jim Rohn, "is more valuable than money. You can get more money, but you cannot get more time."

First posted on Inc.com on 12.21.11

Sometimes our best intentions get the better of us, and we end up failing to do our jobs. Often it's because we ignore the simple things.

Jim Collins and Morten Hansen write about the virtues of simplicity in their new book, Great By Choice. One concept they posit is dubbed SMaC -- "Specific, Methodical and Consistent." As the authors explain, "SMaC is not the same as a strategy, culture, core values, purpose or tactics."

Rather, it is a "set of durable principles that create a replicable and consistent success formula." In other words, if it works, is repeatable and it adds value to what you do, it is worthwhile following.

SMaC, as the authors explain, "also includes practices 'not to do.'" This exclusion is helpful because it enables the manager to limit the options and focus on what to do and when to do it.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

"Empathy," writes philosophy professor Jesse Prinz, "is not a major player when it comes to moral motivation."

David Brooks, who cites Prinz in a recent column in The New York Times, adds, "Empathy makes you more aware of other people's suffering, but it's not clear it actually motivates you to take moral action or prevents you from taking immoral action."

Empathy in leaders, however, can be problematic. Those who must make decisions about the fates of others must not dwell on the personal implications.

For example, managers who feel high degrees of empathy can have a tough time making people decisions about whom to promote and especially about whom to demote or dismiss. They allow the effect those decisions will have on the lives of those who do not get promoted or those who are terminated impact them. "Good guy" managers are especially vulnerable to manipulation by those who seek favor and know how to play the empathy card so the manager will take it easy on them.

A good-guy manager can be paralyzed into inaction and in doing so subjects the department to putting up with less than capable colleagues. Such managers hold these people to lower standards which means that everyone else must pick up the slack and work harder to cover for an incompetent or lazy coworker.

Effective leadership requires toughness. You need be able to make the hard choices, especially when it comes to doing what is right for the business. Failure to do so will not protect any one, in fact it may harm more people. That is, if you keep on underperformers you overwork good employees, which in turn undermines morale as well as encourages them to look elsewhere.

But you can use empathy to your favor. Good leaders I know can be tough when it comes to the business but their empathy kicks in afterward. Let me explain. Empathy by itself is inert, as the literature Brooks cites in his column, asserts. Leaders translate empathy into action when they act with compassion.

Business conditions may dictate trimming headcounts but compassionate leaders do it with dignity. They seek to provide options for individuals as well as severance. They also understand the toll that layoffs have on employees and the community. They engage their people in ways that will prevent future layoffs, perhaps even cutting pay (for themselves and others) as a means of saving jobs.

Total lack of empathy is not a positive. Nowhere is this more evident than with military commanders. During the First World War French generals relegated empathy to an extreme when they secluded themselves from the front lines so as not to see the trauma on life and limb they were subjecting their troops, the poilu. Such callousness on the part of commanders was a key factor in the French Army Mutinies of 1917.

Empathy is the ability to have a heart, but leadership is the attribute to act on that heart when it matters. "When I was young, I admired clever people," wrote Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel. "As I grew old, I came to admire kind people." Those we respect are those who translate kindness into actions that benefit others.

First post on Inc.com on 12.13.11 

Harry Morgan was an actor who let his work do the talking for him.

"Appearing on a talk show to focus on himself because he was Harry Morgan," his son Charles told the New York Times after his father passed away Friday at age 96, "was not nearly as natural as appearing in a role as Pete Porter or Bill Gannon or Colonel Potter, or as the cowboy drifter who wandered into town with Henry Fonda and got wrapped up in a vigilante brigade in Ox-Bow Incident."

That focus on letting his work speak for him makes Mr. Morgan a model for successful corporate performers; leaders should focus on their accomplishments, not their opinions.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

To a degree disagreement is a good thing; it is an indication of a healthy relationship when a boss is open to alternative points of view, and the employee can offer them without fear of reprisal.

But when the situation deteriorates to the point that a boss and employee are not speaking or their friction threatens office harmony, then it is time to act.

The first step is to diagnose the situation. Conflicts over issues may be healthy, but conflicts over personality and work style are not. These call for the right person to intervene. The boss’s supervisor must act. Discover why the boss and direct report are in disagreement.

For example, is the boss a micromanager who is always checking over the subordinate’s work to a degree that makes the employee feel picked on? Or is the employee acting in a passive-aggressive manner that dares the boss to act? Conflicts can arise for many reasons, including insubordination or incompetence. What is important is for the boss’s boss to become involved before a conflict disrupts productivity and workplace harmony.

Typical management protocol dictates that the boss has the upper hand; as the one with title he holds the authority. But all too often the subordinate is one whom colleagues and others in management come to regard as the more valuable of the two. Then what do you do?

When this occurs, it’s good to call an outside expert, perhaps an executive coach or an HR specialist who is outside the manager’s sphere of authority. What the coach will do is observe, first getting perspective from the two parties who disagree but also from colleagues who witness the two.

Then there’s a conflict resolution model that works and was recommended to me by Val Markos, an executive coach based in Atlanta. The first thing that Val advises is to ask the boss and subordinate privately if each really wants the relationship to survive. If neither is committed to saving it, then the conflict can be resolved quickly by separating the two. (I’ll get to more on that later.)

If the two parties are willing to work to a resolution, here are three questions to ask:

• Which of your behaviors is damaging the relationship?
• Which of the other’s behavior is damaging the relationship?
• Would you be willing to stop doing one of your damaging behaviors if the other is willing to do the same?

The outcome of such an intervention does not rest on words. The two parties must commit to resolution and prove it through their actions. It may take time to show results but small steps can be a good sign. For example, the manager will begin to hold his tongue when offering suggestions, or the employee must stop acting defensive when constructive criticism is offered.

But if no resolution is forthcoming, it will be up to the supervisor in charge–the boss’s boss–to take immediate action. If the manager is not doing his part, then the boss’s boss must remove him from a position of authority. Or if the employee is not working toward an agreement, the supervisor can allow the manager to remove the employee from his team.

Conflicts such as these are not easy to resolve but they must be resolved because the good of the team should not have to suffer for the conflicts of its members.

First posted on Inc.com 11.30.11

As the television camera caught a close up of a clearly annoyed Brian Kelly, ESPN analyst Kirk Herbstreit joked that the Notre Dame football coach's demeanor sometimes made even him afraid.

Notre Dame officials have reprimanded Kelly for his sideline temper tantrums. And to his credit Kelly has toned down his act, but he can still get himself worked up when things go wrong for his team.

College football players are accustomed to being yelled at publicly, and what may seem to outsiders as cruel and unusual is accepted as normal in sports. Yet constant histrionics become tiresome, and when players don't fear a coach's wrath, counterproductive things happen: one, they stop listening; and two, they lose respect for the coach. Neither are good outcomes.

Managers, too, are under the same spotlight. So for that reason it behooves a manager to keep his or her cool, especially when the going gets tough. Work is hard enough without having to put up with an angry boss.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

In my research into the origins of organizational purpose one thing impressed me about those leaders in the social service sector.

When asked to define the purpose of their organization they could rattle it off in a flash. For example, one educator told me it was to improve the ability of children to learn, another in health care told me it was to improve levels of access and quality, and another from the military told me it was to bring all his troops home safely.

Each of these knew their purpose and there is a reason. Each was living in a culture where vision, mission, and values were crystal clear. And so when thinking about the purpose of an organization is good to take a moment to define it. Not as an exercise in thinking, but as a means of discovering it so that it can be put to good use.

Defining purpose is a straightforward proposition. In its simplest form, purpose is the organization’s reason for being. As I explain in my newest book, Lead With Purpose, it is a combination of vision, mission, and values.

To define the purpose, you want to ask three questions:

What is our vision? This question is aspirational. What do we want to become. Just as young people ask this question upon choosing a career, organizations need to do the same. Vision emerges from the sense of purpose. It forms the why, but it also embraces the future as in “to become” the best, the most noted, the highest quality, or the most trusted.

What is our mission? Very often this is the easiest to answer because all you need to do is look around at what you are doing. Your mission is the what of an organization. For example, if you work in mental health facility, your mission is to care for and provide therapy to those who suffer from conditions that inhibit their ability to learn, study, work, and get along with others.

What are our values? Neither vision or mission mean much if they are not reinforced by strong values. Values shape the culture—that is, the way people behave toward others. Ethics and integrity must be a given. But people want more than good behavior; they want to work in a place where cooperation and collaboration are norms. They want also to know their work matters and they will be recognized for it. Values enforce the behaviors that employees cherish.

Now that you know the questions, what can you do about it? Make time at staff meetings to discuss and debate. Some organizations find it valuable to create off-site meetings around purpose. The intention of such gatherings is to find out what colleagues think. Leaders have influence over purpose but they do not define it nor sustain it. Only when employees embrace ownership of purpose will it matter.

Answers to these questions will provoke thinking and discussion. Defining purpose, if one does not already exist, is an exercise in leadership. It is a means by which an organization comes to grips with how it sees itself.

True purpose does not exist in a vacuum. It must be put to good use. Leaders communicate it as a means to fulfilling the vision, mission, and values. It also points people in the right direction so they can achieve results for the organization, for the team, and for themselves.

The majority of this piece was excerpted from John Baldoni's book, Lead with Purpose. 

These are hard times we live in, and that creates special challenges for leaders.

Fewer than half of Americans (44 percent) believe that the country will be "doing very or fairly well" a year from now. That, according to a CNN/ORC poll, represents a drop in optimism of nearly 20 percentage points since 2009.

Not only is that bad for incumbent elected officials, it is also not good for business.

Such unease not only weakens hopes for retailers, it should also send a signal to leaders of all organizations that people -- and that means employees -- are feeling uneasy. For example, the number of people who expect they will get a raise is minimized by the fact that twice as many feel their pay will be cut.

There's no doubt about it: businesses and employees are gloomy. So what's a leader to do?

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

If you are stumped on your next project, try working with your adversaries.

That is a thought I am borrowing from a David Brooks column on the ideas of Daniel Kahneman, a psychologist emeritus at Princeton and author ofThinking, Fast and Slow.

Kahneman, a 2002 Nobel Laureate in Economics, offers an insight that many of those who seek to lead their colleagues' need to heed. So often when pushing for change, especially when you do not have such authority, it is important to listen to the forces of no. But with Kahneman's dictum in our heads why not push for more? Why not seek to work together?

So often studies of leadership focus on what management guru Jim Collins describes as "executive leadership," that is one that conforms to the rules of hierarchy. Peer leadership is essential for a variety of reasons but chief among them is that the global economic currents operate 24/7 and companies need nimble thinkers and doers who can respond with agility and street smarts. You need people who can respond quickly but also have the leadership capacity to bring colleagues together for common cause.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Most executives understand the importance of the open door policy, but what about an open mind? Would Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, have avoided a public relations nightmare if he'd had that? 

According to reporting in the New York Times, when Hastings told a friend that he was thinking of splitting the service into two parts, one for DVD delivery and another for streaming video, his friend, and Netflix subscriber, told him the idea was "awful," adding "I don't want to deal with two accounts." Had Hastings listened he might have saved Netflix from losing 800,000 customers.

For a long time, Hastings was a poster boy for great business leadership. Fortune named him CEO of the year for 2010. Yet as this latest debacle shows, Hastings-- like even the greater leaders--is fallible. [To his credit, Hastings admits he was overly sure of this decision and was "moving too quickly."] When everyone is telling you how good you are, it's sometimes hard not to believe it.

That is why senior leaders, be they CEOs or presidents, need to surround themselves with straight talkers. But it's not simply a matter of ensuring that you break out of the bubble; it is a matter of listening--and not just to the people who agree with you. Some suggestions:

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Are things getting better for employees or are employees staying put like proverbial frogs in boiling water? [See disclaimer below.] 

That was a question that came to mind as I reviewed the2011 Employee Engagement Trends Report published byPeople Metrics, a consulting firm. Employee engagement has long been cited as a key driver of workplace productivity and so its study is something of a cottage industry.

The new People Metrics study contains a section that offers three theories on current trends in employee engagement. Each reflects the impact of the recession on employees and therefore is worthy of exploration.

Theory One: Relativity. In 2007 the last time People Metrics conducted this study "most employees had a friend, neighbor, family member or colleague who had job-hopped for more pay, better benefits or a promotion." Today that same colleague may know folks who have been laid off and are out of work. Hence, the grass is not greener so I am happy staying where I am now.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

One thing savvy leaders learn pretty early in their careers is that leadership is not about self-aggrandizement. It is more about enabling those around them and putting them into positions from which they can succeed.

Key to that mindset is the ability to make others around them better. Two basketball legends mastered this better than most: Magic Johnson and Larry Bird. As a point guard for the Los Angeles Lakers, Johnson was the master of dishing the ball to an open man to make a basket. Larry Bird as a forward for the rival Boston Celtics was similarly team oriented.

You don't have to look to the NBA for similar stories. The team leader in the seafood department of my local Whole Foods embodies this ethos. The other day I asked him about a power failure that had swept through out neighborhood and he replied, "The team really did a great job. They got all of the fish off the counter and into the cooler. We didn't lose anything." He said nothing about himself; only the team's timely response. Knowing this manager as I do, it is clear that he has made his fish-mates better.

So just how does a leader make others better? Let me offer four suggestions.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Atten.... shun! 

Behaviors perpetrated by officers seeking to undermine the dignity of their soldiers will not be tolerated. All those deemed as unsatisfactory in their behaviors will be afforded coaching. And those who do not cease and desist such negative behaviors including bullying will be summarily dismissed. 

The U.S. Army is now instituting a mandatory 360-degree evaluation program for all its officers. And while the above bulletin is fictional, it is rooted in reality. According to a survey that was reported in the Army Times, one in five soldiers (including Army civilians) views "his superior as 'toxic and unethical.'"

The extensive evaluation program that Army implemented on Oct. 1 is necessary to, according to General Martin Dempsey, now chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "change the culture of the Army to embrace the 360s."

The 360 evaluation process has been around for decades and over the years has become standard tool for evaluating managers. And as enthusiastic as I am about the 360 process and use it regularly in my coaching work, it is important to keep a few things in mind.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

A great many organizations invest a significant amount of money in trying to improve themselves. This commitment to getting better is laudable, but many times organizations overlook something within their organization that, when tapped, can sharpen focus, tighten alignment, hone execution, and — in the process — deliver better results. It's called purpose.

While a veritable tsunami of resources — many of them first-rate — exist to help individuals discover purpose, a mere trickle of resources are available to help organizations discover theirs. This dichotomy led me to research ways to help organizations discover their purpose, and upon discovering it find ways to put it to good use. The result isLead With Purpose, Giving Your Organization a Reason to Believe in Itself.

Purpose, as savvy leaders know, is the foundation for creating vision, executing the mission, and abiding by the values of an organization. Culture emerges from purposeful organizations, because purpose is what shapes individual's beliefs and organizational norms. That foundation is essential, because it opens the door for organizations to do four important things, all of which are vital to success:

1. Instill purpose in employees. Employees may be very good at compliance, but in today's global competitive marketplace, going through the motions is not good enough. Organizations need employees who are engaged; that is, they come to work with a sense of purpose that comes from knowing that what they do matters to others. When employees are engaged in their work, they enjoy what they do and tend to be more productive.

2. Provide clarity. We live in uncertain times. In fact, uncertainty is becoming the norm, at least in contrast to previous generations. Call it ambiguity. But, is it necessarily a bad thing? Fearing ambiguity leads to narrow thinking and reactionary behaviors. But, leaders to whom I spoke talked about ways to make ambiguity an ally. Embracing it can open the door to allowing employees to see possibilities that they wouldn't have otherwise seen. Purpose then drives clarity because it "connects the dots" for employees. They know what is expected of them and why.

3. Stimulate innovation. Knowing what an organization stands for can open the door to purposeful. I say "purposeful" because it enables employees to think of new ways of doing things for a reason — that is, to meet the mission of the organization. That depends upon purpose.

4. Groom the next generation of leaders. Organizations that survive more than a generation are typically those that have developed a leadership cadre who inherited the mission, but have been shaped by core values. Purpose leads to intentional development. Leaders whom I interviewed were very explicit about their commitment to employee development. So much so that they invested their own time in working with younger employees who would someday — sooner than later — run the company.

As important as these four factors are, they need to be developed and nurtured by leaders. That can only occur when leaders at the top are sure of their own purpose. In my experience, such leaders know what they want and how to get it; but they may lack focus when it comes to driving purpose throughout the organization.

One very meaningful way that leaders can instill purpose is to communicate it through their behaviors. When employees see their leaders doing for others — especially when it comes to the heavy lifting — any excuse they may have for not participating is negated.

Such leaders are engaged in the process of leadership. They spend time mixing in at all levels of the organization. They are passionate about what they do and they convey that passion through their words, as well as through their actions.

Purpose is not something that should be allowed to sit on a shelf to be admired. Rather, it can be a catalyst for stimulating creativity, engagement and strategy in ways that drive results.

First published Harvard Business Review 11.11.11

In your most recent book, you express the importance of "defining purpose." Tell us more about what this means and how to work through the process.
Purpose is the catalyst for the organization. It provides the why and the how. Why is what we want to achieve. How is the means by which we will do it. Defining these words becomes the impetus for action. Purpose is also the trigger for vision, mission and values. Vision is what you aspire to achieve; it is the process of becoming. Mission is what you do; it is the process of doing. Values are what hold the organization together; it is the foundation for individual and corporate accountability. Knowing your purpose provides clarity. Leaders must work hard to "connect the dots" between what an individual does and how that enables the organization to succeed. Too often we take that for granted but, trust me that while most employees know their job function, too few know how what they do matters to others—especially to the organization.

Read the entire interview here:

It was my honor to be a featured guest on Million Dollar Mindset hosted by Marla Tabaka.

Our interview touched a number of themes that I explore in my new book, Lead With Purpose, Giving Your Company a Reason to Believe in Itself.

Click here to listen to the podcast

About Marla Tabaka
Marla Tabaka is a life and business coachwho helps entrepreneurs and owners of small businesses grow their companies faster. She serves as a Success Coach for Make Mine a Million and helps award recipients grow their businesses to $1 million and beyond. Marla has 25 years of experience in corporate, start up and entrepreneurial ventures.

When organizations succeed it is because its people know what they do and why they do it. We say such an organization has “purpose.” You can define purpose very simply as the impetus to meaningful action, what gets your organization up and moving toward its goals.

When you enter a place where people are purposeful it is palpable. Be it a hospital or a manufacturer, when people know what their job is and how it connects to the mission, they are engaged. They want to come to work and do their job, because they derive meaning from it.

Seeking to quantify what purpose is and how leaders can use it led me to write Lead With Purpose: Giving Your Organization a Reason to Believe in Itself (Amacom 2011). As I interviewed chief executives and thought leaders, and coupled what I learned with survey research, I discovered that purpose is a great untapped reservoir that leaders can use to achieve sustainable results.

Purposeful organizations value their people, innovate more freely, and link results to employee effort. They also know how to develop the next generation of leaders, and thereby lay the foundation for continued success.

Purpose Begins With People
Leaders instill purpose in people by putting them first. This means the entire organization is focused upon harnessing the talents and skills of the organization.

A great example of this is Vineet Nayar, the CEO of HCL Technologies, a global IT service firm. Vineet told me he sees himself as responsible for helping his people innovate. He is a servant leader to his people and holds himself accountable as such.

Same applies to Nancy Schlichting, CEO of the Henry Ford Health System, located throughout southeast Michigan. Her approach to management is personal accountability. Her door is open to anyone in the organization. Holding that standard for herself puts everyone else in the health system on notice that personal accountability is the norm.

Behavior matters. When employees see their leaders go out of their way to speak to employees, listen to them, invite their suggestions, and encourage them to think and do creatively, they come to believe that the leader has their best interests at heart. That is a form of purpose that resonates most clearly.

Purpose Provides Clarity
We live in uncertain times. Likely no more uncertain than in previous generations, but uncertain nonetheless. People therefore look to their leaders to provide a kind clarity for our times. Theylook for someone to hold up the light so they can see to the end of the tunnel and know that it opens into someplace good.

At the same time ambiguity should not be feared. The acceleration of economic development is putting new stresses on companies and societies alike. We can no longer count on what we once did to help us achieve what we need to do. Ambiguity therefore is a certainty. That is, it is with us. Good leaders capitalize on ambiguity and challenge their people to embrace it. There is no point in fearing it. You have to find ways to make it work for you.

We live in a fast-changing world. What worked before may not work again, so we need to continue think of new and different ways of doing our work. That is just to stay current. Innovation is applied creativity. It can be about process improvement as well as a product or service development.

Purpose becomes the door opener. It gives leaders permission to say, hey, let’s try something new. Then in turn leaders push that door open further to allow people to innovate at their own pace. To innovate you need to allow people to think and do differently. You need to give them the freedom to propose different points of view as a means of discovering new ways of doing things. It falls to the leader to create the conditions for people to innovate.

Purpose also needs to be nurtured. It gains resolve when faced with adversity. The need to overcome obstacles and challenges is daunting, but when met it gives us a great feeling of achievement. At the same time we need to nurture purpose by exposing ourselves to new opportunities. We need to learn continuously, and we need to teach what we learn to others.

Leaders also need to feel such purpose in themselves. Tom Draude, a retired Marine general and now head of the Marine Corps University Foundation, has what he calls the Sunday night test. Leaders should ask themselves, “Are you looking forward to Monday morning?” Leaders who can answer that in the affirmative are the ones who can lead themselves, their teams, and their organizations to good purpose.

First published on Forbes.com 11.07.11

One thing emerging leaders struggle with is the concept that management can be liberating. They are often so busy trying to manage that they end up drowning themselves in too much work.

Alice Waters, founder of famed restaurant Chez Panisse, understands that feeling and offers some advice. Speaking to Terry Gross on Fresh Air, Waters explained how Chez Panisse, which is open six days a week, has two chefs who each work three-day weeks but are paid for five days. This enables each to be more energetic as well as creative. It also frees Waters herself; knowing that the restaurant is in good hands, she is free to continue to grow and develop her talents and in turn, help her businesses prosper.

There is wisdom in Waters approach. While few businesses can afford to pay part-time employees as full-timers, the concept of giving your employees ample time to be creative is something managers can consider. The payoff is not only good for the business; it is good for the manager because she can focus more on the long-term than on the short-term. Here are ways to put this concept into action.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

You don't have to like baseball to enjoy Moneyball. 

While the film, based on the bestselling book by Michael Lewis, centers on the story of Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland As, its theme is change, or more specifically challenging the status quo.

Watching how Beane seeks to effect change provides an outline for any executive who wants to transform his or her organization and for that reason it is worth exploring what Beane did.

Embrace the new. As the executive of a "have not" team with one of the lowest payrolls in major league baseball, the A's need to do something different. Rather than relying on a century's worth of tried and true methods of player evaluation, Beane triessabremetrics, a form of statistical analysis pioneered by Bill Jamesthat seeks to measure a player's value in terms of output.

Prepare for resistance. Professional baseball has been played for more than 150 years and its traditions define it. The team's manager and its scouts think Beane has gone off the deep end. Managers must understand that employees may not like change and those who can resist will do so.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader at CBS/Moneywatch

Leave it to comedian Ricky Gervais to put things into perspective in an essayfor the Wall Street Journal.

“If I’d sent off the script [for The Office], it would still be in an executive’s drawer. ‘Bloke who’s never written, directed or acted before plays a bloke who thinks he’s funny but isn’t, makes bad jokes, touches his tie and looks at the camera.’ Doesn’t exactly jump off the page, does it?”

No matter. What Gervais did next is relevant to anyone, especially in middle management, who is trying to sell an idea “upstairs.” Gervais shot the pilot himself with a group of friends to illustrate his concept. It sold and in time it spawned an even more successfulU.S. version starring Steve Carrell. Gervais himself is now a mega-star as an actor, writer, director and producer.

Persuading others to back a project, an initiative or a new product that you have developed is not easy. It is particularly difficult if the people you are seeking support from have authority over you. But, as Gervais and most other creative talents demonstrate, it is not impossible. Here are some guidelines.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Leadership is a choice. Pure and simple.

When you assume a position of authority, either formally as a manager or informally as a team leader, you make the choice to lead. Management is the discipline of getting things done right. Leadership is the art of doing what is right for good of the organization. In other words, management is execution; leadership is inspiration.

Inspiration emerges from purpose, knowing what you do and why you do it. Organizational purpose emerges from the vision, mission and values of an organization.

Apple is fine example of a purposeful organization. Its leadership under Steve Jobs at the helm was focused on producing well-designed products, easy to use as tools of productivity or means of entertainment. Everyone in Apple has been focused on this mission. You could say much the same about the Ritz-Carlton hotel chain. Everyone from top to bottom, and that includes maids and wait staff, knows how to deliver a superior guest experience.

Among the ways leaders instill purpose in an organization, according to research conducted for my book, Lead With Purpose, Giving Your Organization a Reason to Believe in Itself, is through communicating the vision, tying customer benefits to employee contributions, and linking work to results.

Click here to read more:

Kevin Kruse, executive director of the Society of Pharmaceutical and Biotech Trainers (SPBT), invited me for an interview about my views on what it takes to lead today.

Highlights included:

-Making the decision to lead

-Leading others in a rapidly-evolving marketplace

-Learning to lead from the middle

-Finding the virtues of compromise

Our interview also touched one the reasons why I wrote my newest book, Lead With Purpose, Giving Your Organization a Reason to Believe in Itself

Click here to read the interview

About Kevin Kruse
In addition to his role as executive director, Kevin Kruse is successful entrepreneur and co-author of the New York Times bestseller, We: How to Increase Performance and Profits Through Full Engagement. Email Kevin at kkruse@spbt.com

Leaders operate most effectively when they understand not just the situation (what’s going on now) but also the history (what’s happened before). Context will dictate how the leader can and should respond to any given challenge. That is, there will be times when what happened previously will dictate a response or it will indicate that it is time to do something very different.

We see context come to the fore when organizations face a crisis, particularly when what was done previously is not working any longer. General Motors, for example, never did make the hard decisions about how to manage its operations until it went bankrupt and was rescued by the federal government. By comparison, Apple has faced multiple crises throughout its 30+ year life span, but has found ways to reinvigorate itself with visionary leadership and breakthrough products and services (as well as a $150 million loan from Microsoft in 1997).

The reason that context is so important to change is that it gives clues to how current situations and challenges have arisen as well as how such issues have been dealt with in the past. The leader has the choice of operating as before or breaking the mold. 

Since context is essential, leaders can ask three questions to help them get a feel for it. Answers to these questions will help the leader consider next steps.

How does our culture tolerate change? So many initiatives fail because leaders take for granted that they will succeed because they want them to succeed. Nonsense. Saying something is like waving a magic wand. You need to sell the idea by putting it into context, that is, how it will affect individuals and the company.

What are the obstacles facing our initiative? Not every initiative is a positive. Be up front when you are asking people to sacrifice time, money, or autonomy. The first two are straightforward, but the last one gets to the heart of why initiatives fail. Managers fear loss of power and influence and therefore either stonewall or fail to support them. 

What can I do to effect a positive outcome? Once you have itemized the obstacles, develop a plan of attack. Enlist the support of your colleagues. Plan to be front and center. You need to think of how you will spend your time and how you will be available to support the efforts of everyone.

It is important to note that while context can give clues as to future direction, it cannot give answers. Sometimes a leader aligns direction with the past; other times they go in a new direction. Current circumstances dictate current responses, and so it is up to the leader to make the tough decision.

Yet context is important because it gives insight into what has gone on before and so what people inside and outside the organization might be expecting. Knowing this in advance helps a leader to frame the message, that is, the same as before or new and different. 

Context also gives an indication as to how people may perceive the message, and if it’s new and different, the leader must do spadework to prepare people for the new direction. Announce, yes, but give people voice into the project, and let them digest it. Too often leaders announce initiatives without context, and so they hit people out of the blue. It throws them for a loop, and it is no wonder that they react poorly, and, as a result, initiatives die.

First published in Life Science Leader September 2011

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water.

That was the tag line to the sequel to the blockbuster Jaws. And while Jaws II was scary, it did not carry the wallop of the first movie. I am thinking the same about the financial crisis the US is facing today with falling prices in the capital markets. What the country is experiencing today is not a repeat of 2008, but it is frightening enough.

And when there is fear, the demand for leadership intensifies.

In my last post, I discussed the need for courage and leadership in Congress. But business leaders also need to step up and explain the situation to your teams. Be upfront–but don’t push people into despair.  You can provide reassurance by sharing what you know. Keeping people informed is a positive act, even if the news you share may not be so rosy. The act of communicating positions shows you’re  a straight shooter, one who can be trusted. And to quote legendary basketball coach John Wooden’s maxim, “Don’t let what you cannot do interfere with  what you can do.”

Click to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

“He changed the world” was the first thing my wife said when I told her that Steve Jobs had died.

While few would disagree with that comment, Gail has a perspective different than most. In a very real way, our family — especially me — has been changed by what Jobs and Apple have wrought.

In the very early ’80s, Gail was working with a health care startup whose founder was convinced that what were then called “microcomputers” were the future for optimizing productivity. He opted to use Apple IIs as the company’s computing platform and for a time my wife’s company became Apple’s first value-added dealer. Gail even had the opportunity to meet Steve.

As did I, a year or two later. I interviewed Steve as part of the marketing communications support Apple was using to support the launch of a brand-new computer — Lisa. This device was the first to my knowledge to feature an integrated operating system and suite of productivity programs, a precursor to the product everyone at Apple was then speaking about — and within my earshot — Macintosh.

My interview with Steve went well, and when it was concluded, I showed him a marketing brochure for my business — the first that I had done — featuring a photo of me posed with my Apple III and its dual stand-alone floppy drives. Steve was visibly delighted.

Years rolled past, and I opted for the IBM-PC world because my corporate clients were all on it and it made exchanging files (no e-mail then) easier. As my own career evolved from communications to leadership development, I followed Steve’s career with great interest. In 2003, I wrote a profile of him for a book that my editor omitted for space reasons, but which we later included in a subsequent book, “How Great Leaders Get Great Results.” In it, I explored Jobs’ ability to translate his vision of how things should work into sleek products that made lives simpler and more enjoyable.

On the family side, we bought our daughter an iPod for her 16th birthday and even had it engraved with her initials. When it came time for college, we bought her a MacBook in part because I said I didn’t want phone calls at 3 a.m. saying my computer does not work. And that mantra held up.

Today, Gail is happy with her Mac Air and my son finds his iPad to be an indispensable tool when traveling. I too gravitated to a MacBook Pro II laptop and later added a Mac Mini as my desktop. No only do I appreciate their good looks and intuitive interfaces, syncing my contacts and calendar are a snap for a techno-slouch like me.

I never crossed paths with Steve again, but over the years I have regularly written a column or two mentioning him or Apple for nearly every publication to which I have contributed. Most often I cited Steve’s vision or Apple’s innovative spirit and infectious communication skills.

Looking back now, it is important to remember that both Steve and Apple experienced near-death experiences that temporarily weakened them but did not undermine their drive and perseverance. And while Steve has sadly succumbed, his company and his vision have not.

Change the world, you bet.

First posted on Smart Blog 10.07.11

What makes a great CEO? That question came to mind recently when I read the news that Chief Executive magazine had named Alan Mulally of Ford Motor Company its 2011 CEO of the Year. It’s easy to understand why Mulally was chosen. After all, he presided over one of the more remarkable corporate turnarounds in recent memory.

But a look at the magazine’s criteria gives some insight into what makes a great CEO truly great. Some of the criteria was typical: the honoree had to show evidence of looking ahead, driving value, focusing on people, fostering corporate citizenship and sustaining business results.

But one factor was unusual: the winner had to maintain a “stable, consistent ‘moral landscape.’”

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Looking at the pictures of the four past CEOs of Hewlett-Packard stretched across the top of the New York Times business section, I thought of what Casey Stengel used to say about his New York Mets ball club - “Can’t anyone here play this game?”

That is the questions that new HP CEO Meg Whitman, who made her name at eBay, will have to ask herself and her team as she becomes the fifth CEO since 1999. Of the five, only Lewis Platt was an insider, promoted from the ranks. And therein may lie part of the problem. The last three have all been hired from the outside.

H-P’s current woes may stem from the very top. As former H-P director Tom Perkins told Times columnist James B. Stewart, “It has got to be the worst board in business history.” The latest CEO, Leo Apotheker, a former CEO of SAP, was hired somewhat sight unseen; some members of the board had never even met him. While there is sometimes a good reason to go outside for a CEO, all too often it does not work out so well.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Conventional wisdom about how to fire someone and how the person should react to it was thrown out the window in the wake of the publicity over the sacking of Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz.

After having been summarily dismissed, Bartz informed employees via email that she had been canned over the phone.  In a subsequent interview in Fortune, Bartz complained that her termination notice sounded scripted. Later in that same interview, she used an expletive to trash Yahoo’s board of directors.

Firing someone over the phone almost begs retaliation. It is a sign of disrespect and shows callous disregard for the other person’s humanity. And when you do this to the senior most executive in the company it can have very bad consequences. If the CEO can be sacked so callously, employees will be thinking “what about me?”

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

The best way to manage from the middle is to:

- Enable others around you to succeed – 79%

- Make your boss look good – 0%

- Take credit for what your direct-reports do – 0%

- Look for opportunities to advance your own career – 21%

Managing from the middle is no cakewalk. While there many ways to do it, enabling others around you to succeed is a good way to demonstrate your leadership abilities. In this way you call attention to what you do through the actions of others. That is a true mark of leadership.

To answer the next poll question, click here:

The urge to be bigger, broader, faster may sound like a description for an NFL power play. It also sounds a lot like the average CEO’s business philosophy.

Just look at the recent experience of Bank of America, which announced layoffs for 30,000 employees on top of thousands already laid off in the previous few years. It was the brass ring of former CEO Ken Lewis to make Bank of America the dominant player in financial services. But as happens so often, the growth went a step too far – and now CEO Brian Moynihan’s job, in essence, is to scale back and clean up the mess.

CEOs are under tremendous pressure to generate earnings. Sit in on any analyst call and you’ll hear a number of questions put to the CEO about what he or she is doing to grow the business now. Wise CEOs, and I am of the opinion that most are, know that the best growth is organic; it comes from nurturing each market segment to deliver proper returns as justified by proper investments. Still, that does not always satisfy the Street, which relishes quick hits and easy wins.

And so it’s no wonder that some CEOs start to look like Gollum from The Lord of the Rings, blinded by golden opportunities too good to pass up. This is the spirit that fuels mergers and acquisitions. You can double the size of your business with the stroke of a pen, rather than through many years of organic growth.

The urge to grow is also inherent in the CEO business psyche. Few rise to the top by patiently waiting on the sidelines. Most CEOs are people of ambition, driven by the need to succeed. And when they finally do, they then channel that personal drive into corporate ambition. Hence the desire to enlarge the company footprint.

Legacy, too, plays a critical role in a CEO’s quest for growth. We all want to be remembered – and not as the guy who maintained the status quo. Like the pharaohs of ancient Egypt, today’s corporate leaders want to build a bigger pyramid than their predecessors. Ironically, also like pharaohs, in doing so they may end up digging themselves and their businesses a grave.

It’s now been three years since the height of financial meltdown, and this hindsight makes it easy to criticize. Bank of America’s 2008 purchase of Countrywide Financial, which had tens of billions tied up in home loans that would soon become insolvent, looks absolutely ludicrous, if not worse. As Rebel Cole, professor and former Federal Reserve economist told NPR, “Ken Lewis wanted to show those guys on Wall Street that this North Carolina bank could be the biggest, the best and the baddest bank in the country.”

But with the heady myopia of pre-default days, considerations of catastrophe did not seem credible. Those who wanted to grow threw caution (as well as fiscal prudence) to the wind and pursued whatever course they could. No doubt, growth is imperative to business. What we’ve been seeing, though, smacks something of Napoleon’s invasion of Russia.

It was not simply the snow that did Napoleon in, it was his own ego. Prior to entering Russia, the emperor seemed invincible. Hubris fueled his quest, but to what aim? Even after taking Moscow, the czar still ruled Russia and Napoleon was forced to retreat to Paris to thwart a coup, abandoning his troops in the process.

Likewise the question every CEO must ask is this: What is our purpose? Grow, yes, but at what cost? I recall the story of a company whose executive team became infatuated with the idea of attaining a 50-percent market share. They never achieved it, but striving for it distracted the company from growing in a reasonable way. They wasted time, resources and manpower in pursuit of an impractical goal.

So what are CEOs to do? Frame personal ambition less around what is good for self and more around what is good for the business. And the irony: in doing so, CEOs will still get to write that great legacy. They’ll long be seen as good stewards who left the business in better shape than when they arrived.

First published in the WashingtonPost.com on 9.19.21

Sic transit gloria mundi.

This adage – “worldly glory is fleeting”– may be ringing in the ears of Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix. Last December he was Fortune magazine’s cover boy as CEO of 2010. Now he – or more specifically his company – is incurring the wrath of subscribers after announcing a 60% percent hike in subscription fees. (For the record, rates for DVD only or video streaming only will remain the same, but if you want both you must pay $15.99, 60% over the $9.99 fee for both.)

Savvy leaders I know never get too high or too low about news facing their company. After all, a sense of equanimity is essential to effective leadership. The organizations they lead need them to keep things on an even keel.

Here are some suggestions for doing so.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

It’s too bad Betty Ford is no longer with us. She might be just the person to bring our national politicians to order, or to an after-hours party.

Cokie Roberts noted in her regular appearance on NPR’s Morning Edition that Mrs. Ford had arranged for her to be one of the speakers at her funeral. Mrs. Ford also dictated the topic of her eulogy – recall the times when politicians on both sides of the aisle met and mingled as friends. Ms. Roberts herself is the daughter of politicians of that same era – Hale Boggs and Lindy Boggs who succeeded him upon his death, and noted that Mrs. Ford’s request seems almost prescient, given the stalled status ofdebt ceiling negotiations.

When her husband became president in 1974, upon the resignation of Richard Nixon, her public persona blossomed. She spoke out for the Equal Rights Amendment, spoke frankly about sexual mores (hers and her daughter’s) and more importantly after suffering breast cancer addressed it openly.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

It was my honor to be a guest on Business Building for Bankers with Rob Brown.

Rob is a talented consultant and terrific interviewer. Our conversation touched on the following points:

- Inspired leadership is simply doing what the organization needs you to do.

- Why now is the time for your leadership to truly make a difference.

- Need for men and women of resilience in these tough times, particularly in the financial sector.

- Need for accountability and connecting in inspired leadership.

- How the great leaders make things happen for others.

Click here to listen to the podcast

About Business Building for Bankers
Business Building for Bankers (BBB) was founded in 2010 by motivational speaker and best-selling author, Rob Brown.

BBBbrings you an expert panel of top global experts who speak with authority, expertise and credibility to a banking audience. With regular audio podcast interviews and teleseminars, you can access the business and reputation building strategies and insight you need to be in the top 5% of banking professionals around.

If the satirical newspaper the Onion were to do a story on Tim Cook, newly anointed chief executive officer of Apple (AAPL), it might headline the story: "Best Job in America Given to Unknown Man from Alabama."

In reality, Cook is anything but unknown. Technology mavens largely credit him with having enabled Apple to deliver superior products on time and on budget. Cook is a talented engineer with a gift for optimizing operations. The only problem: He is not Steve Jobs, the iconic visionary who transformed the way people think and interact with their computers.

The challenge for Cook is not running Apple. That he has been doing, at least operationally, for some years now. The hurdle for Cook is to expand the business, to ensure a flowing pipeline of new products that consumers want.

Fortunately for Cook, as New York Times business columnist Joe Nocera noted on CNN, Apple has a robust lineup of products on tap. This will ensure strong sales for the near term. What comes next will determine the company’s future. And that responsibility now falls squarely into the lap of Tim Cook.

Coming up with future iterations of the current lineup of products remains important, to be sure. The bigger challenge will lie in devising new "gotta have ‘em" products—such as the iPhone, iPad, and iTunes—that consumers cannot live without.

So with that in mind, here’s what Cook, as well as any other CEO taking over from a legend, needs to do.

1, Be yourself. Jobs is "a dreamer and innovator who is also a doer and executor and … a kind of creative and business genius at the same time," as leadership author Michael Useem said on NPR last January, when Jobs stepped way from day-to-day operations. Cook has strengths. He has proven himself and seems to have the trust of senior management and the board of directors. That should give him the confidence to continue managing.

2. Look for hitmakers. In this regard, Cook approximates the head of an entertainment company responsible for generating popular songs, TV shows, and movies. He must find ways to make Apple a place at which talented engineers and designers want to work.

3. Be more public. Cook lacks Jobs’s presence but is a fine public speaker. As head of an iconic company, he must make himself and his senior team more visible. This will reassure the Apple community that the company they have known will continue. Cook should also find ways to give more prominence to the design team. Let the public see who is developing the products.

There is a hint of good news in Jobs’ resignation letter in that he remains chairman. Cook can rely on Jobs for advice and ask him to lend his presence at new product introductions.

The proof will be in performance. Apple has succeeded not only by virtue of Steve Jobs’s leadership but also because he attracted and retained talented innovators who developed products that delight consumers. Cook has a foundation that he helped to build. It’s now his opportunity to continue building it.

First published in Bloomberg/Businessweek 8.26.11

“They get the big jobs done and don’t talk about it.”

That’s a description of the U.S. Navy SEALs found in the July 4^th edition of Fortunemagazine’s “100 Great Things about America” list. Of those on the list — Colin Powell, ESPN, Kindle and even Budweiser (premium not light) — the SEALs are the only ones cited for their “mum’s the word” profile.

In an era where celebrity chest thumping (literal and figuratively) is the norm, it is reassuring to know that the mantra in our nation’s elite military is to do your duty and keep it to yourself.

Lately the SEALs, notably Team Six, which took out Osama bin Laden has received much praise from the President on down. But none of us knows the names of the team members. They are known to one another and likely throughout the entire SEAL cohort but not to the general public.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

It’s one of those famous sayings in sports: “You don’t want to be the guy who follows a legend. You want to be the guy who follows the guy who follows the legend.”

This adage circulates in coaching circles and often evokes the name of Gene Bartow, who was UCLA’s coach after basketball legend John Wooden retired. Bartow has kind words for Wooden but says that every loss at UCLA was treated as a “major catastrophe.” After two seasons, Bartow left and become athletic director at the University of Alabama-Birmingham.

Bartow’s experience is relevant these days as Leon Panetta takes over from Robert Gates at the Department of Defense. Having served two presidents and presided over two wars, plus Libya, Gates gained a reputation as a tough guy when it came to tackling bureaucracy and helping to shape strategy but a soldier’s best friend when it came to dealing with troops.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

My colleague and friend, Dave Summers, invited me for an interview for his popular Busted Missive blog site.

Dave is an insightful commentator on the state of management and leadership. I find his views occasionally contrarian but always worth reading. Our conversation focused on the meaning of integrity in today’s workplace.

Click here to read the post:

About Busted Missive
Busted Missive presents a refreshingly alternative view of how managers lead and how employees respond in an organizational world that does not always recognize the role that individuals and teams play.  By day Dave is director of new media for the American Management Association. 

Ten years after four airliner crashes in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, many are reflecting on how those events changed the course of history. But it was not 9/11 itself that changed history: it was our reactions to it — for better and for worse — that altered history. While many have analyzed the actions of our national leaders in response to those terrorist attacks, I'd like to focus in this post on the actions of leaders who did not make the headlines but did make a difference. We can all learn from their example.

For instance, Joe Kearns Goodwin. Kearns, who graduated college in 2001, enlisted in the Army on September 12 of that year. When asked on NBC's Meet the Press by host David Gregory how 9/11 had defined his generation, Goodwin demurred and said 9/11 did not define his generation anymore than Pearl Harbor had defined the Greatest Generation who fought in World War II.

Goodwin, a former Army captain who served two tours, one in Iraq and another in Afghanistan, responded as one who has been in a leadership position. Events do not define the leader; events create the context for the leader's response. When events unfolded, Goodwin responded by deciding to serve.

This distinction is necessary when considering a leader's role in a crisis — especially as the years of the previous decade now seem so bleak, marred as they have been by two wars, a dismal economy, and miserably high rates of unemployment. If we're in a state of perma-crisis, the answer is not to dwell on the negative, but to decide how we will respond. We must own the consequences of our actions in moments like these; we must hold ourselves accountable. History certainly will.

Consider the examples of leadership and service seen in the very minutes after the attack on the Twin Towers, when first responders raced to the scene. As we know now from multiple investigations, New York City fire officials knew soon enough that the towers could not be saved, but that lives could be — that is why so many firefighters raced up the doomed skyscrapers to bring as many people as they could to safety. Some 16,000 workers were evacuated, many owing their lives to 343 firefighters and paramedics who died when the buildings fell.

Remember also the more than 2.3 million who have served overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan. Over 7,400 have been killed, tens of thousands seriously wounded, and perhaps a majority altered forever by memories of what occurred in the battle zone. They have been changed by these events, but these events do not define them. All were volunteers; when events happened, they decided how to respond, and how to lead.

September 11, 2001 was a seminal day in history and a terrible tragedy. The decade that followed has left a grim legacy. But it has also seen the kind of leadership that comes from putting service ahead of self.

As we recall memories from 9/11 — where we were, the people we lost, and all that came after — let's also reflect on that.

Published in Harvard Business Review 9.09.11

Imagine you have a “Do Not Disturb” sign on your door, with a line drawn through “not.”

This is the advice of Jim Shepard, a former CEO of Canfor, a Canadian lumber company. In an interview in the Globe and Mail, he explained the philosophy that helped him lead his forest products company through tough times: “Make certain you don’t surround yourself with people who are afraid to give you bad news…You need a few to say, “Boss, you’re not going to want to hear this, but we have a serious problem here.’”

Shepard’s advice may be common sense but that does not mean it is commonplace. All too often well-intentioned leaders allow themselves to be walled off from the life of the organization they lead. Often they do it not because they feel privileged (although that is a sentiment) but because it is easier and more efficient to work with a small team of folks with whom you are comfortable.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

It was my honor to be a featured guest on People and Projects with host Andy Kaufman.

Andy is a talented consultant and terrific interviewer. Our conversation focused on what it takes to lead and manage up. Influencing from the middle is a skill that managers are wise to cultivate as a means of making a positive difference.

Click here to listen to the podcast

About the People and Projects Podcasts
The People and Projects Podcasts is a series of interviews with leading thought leaders focusing on management issues designed to provide listeners with insights they can put into practice. These podcasts are produced by Andy Kaufman, PMP, is a much in-demand speaker and leadership consultant and coach.

Irene Rosenfeld, the CEO of Kraft, is a capable executivewith over a quarter century experience in the food business. But when it comes to public relations, she and her company could use some help.

The first lesson of public relations is: do not pick a fight with those who buy ink by the barrel. Her decision to skip a Parliamentary hearing, despite her belief that “public relations is critical to Kraft,” is not conducive to mending fences. “Appearing before the panel,” she wrote, “was not the best use of my personal time.”

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

The best way to motivate others is to:

Stage an annual awards banquet – 0%

Create conditions for employee to succeed – 57%

Institute bonus plans – 0%

Increase base compensation – 43%

Creating conditions for employees to succeed is essential to motivation. That is what leaders must do. At the same time, as so many respondents noted, you must address compensation needs. Failure to do this creates resentment. Success for an organization depends upon a well compensated, and well motivated, workforce.

To answer the next poll question, click here:

The subject of this column isn’t new. And what I’m about to say has been said before, but it all bears repeating. Most of the people I’ve spoken to who sift through cover letters tell me that way too many are just boring, vague or ineffective. Those land in the trash.

So what does a cover letter need to get noticed? Here are 7 tips:

1. Remember to sell yourself. A cover letter is a sales pitch. And while you may think you are too good to sell yourself, get over it. All of us who believe in something important are selling – be it a proposition, an idea, or maybe ourselves. This, by the way, doesn’t mean you steal credit–just that you emphasize your  very real accomplishments.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Looking at the pictures of the four past CEOs of Hewlett-Packard stretched across the top of the New York Times business section, I thought of what Casey Stengel used to say about his New York Mets ball club - “Can’t anyone here play this game?”

That is the questions that new HP CEO Meg Whitman, who made her name at eBay, will have to ask herself and her team as she becomes the fifth CEO since 1999. Of the five, only Lewis Platt was an insider, promoted from the ranks. And therein may lie part of the problem. The last three have all been hired from the outside.

H-P’s current woes may stem from the very top. As former H-P director Tom Perkins told Times columnist James B. Stewart, “It has got to be the worst board in business history.” The latest CEO, Leo Apotheker, a former CEO of SAP, was hired somewhat sight unseen; some members of the board had never even met him. While there is sometimes a good reason to go outside for a CEO, all too often it does not work out so well.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Speaking on CNN’s “In the Arena,” David Gergen, an advisor to four U.S. presidents, spoke of his belief that a leader’s job is to address tough issues.

Gergen, author of Eyewitness to Power, The Essence of Leadership Nixon to Clinton, a superb study of presidential power, is correct that the measure of a leader is the willingness to confront problems and seek solutions. That comes down to two factors that are essential to leadership success:

The commitment to action: Action begins with the decision to address a serious issue. You know the issue is a big problem when it has the potential to wreck your business, or alternately, when few people are willing to tackle the issue for fear it will wreck their careers.

The strength to follow through: Courage plays a part in this because it takes guts to stand up for what you believe, especially when your views are contrary to those in charge.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

You don’t have to be Irish or Catholic to appreciate the work that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin is trying to do in Ireland.

As Maureen Dowd reported in theNew York Times, Martin is taking the pedophile priest crisis to heart and in doing so, setting an example for leaders facing scandal anywhere. Bishop Martin is leading what seems to be a one-man crusade on behalf of abuse victims. He listens and learns from them. His apology is backed by his advocacy for their cause.

Martin is not only using his authority as a bishop to clean up the mess but he’s also personally invested himself as a man of the cloth to help the survivors come to grips with the scandal, which, as Martin notes, has ruined so many lives.

From Bishop Martin, leaders can glean four lessons:

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

It was my honor to be a guest on Leadership Caffeine with Art Petty.

Art is a talented consultant and noted author and as you will note from our conversation a talented interviewer.  Here are some show highlights:

- Building a leadership legacy

- Power of Pragmatism

- Art of the Compromise (it’s not capitulation!)

- Is Your Staff Too Nice?

- Leading and Managing in Tough Times

- What John reads to recharge

Click here to listen to the podcast

About The Leadership Caffeine Podcast:
The purpose of Leadership Caffeine podcast is to connect with leaders, management thinkers, authors, educators, entrepreneurs and anyone else passionate about improving and innovating in leadership and management.

Compromise is something that leaders do when they:

Are about to surrender – 0%

Can achieve a win-win outcome – 100%

Fail their organization – 0%

Want to play nice but don’t really mean it – 0%

Those who answered the poll this week understand the value of compromise. They voted unanimously that compromise is a mean to achieve something for both sides. It is too bad that some in positions of power seek to play the winner take all game. That’s not leadership; it’s dictatorship.

To answer the next poll question, click here:

The debate over raising the debt ceiling is not about our national debt. It’s not even about the catastrophe that may ensue if the limit is not raised. It is about power—that is, who rules Washington.

Sure, it might be appropriate to cite historic examples of compromise in our history; we are after all a nation built, brokered and developed on compromise. But I would prefer to draw upon the wisdom of one whose insights our elected officials might listen to and actually use.

I offer the words of Casey Stengel, a pretty good ballplayer and exceptional manager who skippered the Yankees to seven World Series championships in twelve years. His nickname was the Old Professor, for his wry and sometimes wacky verbal ramblings. Beyond being a gifted quipster and master storyteller, Stengel was a shrewd baseball manager who knew how to mold a disparate group of men together to win ballgames and championships. Just the kind of person we need in Washington these days.

So without further ado, here are fiveStengel-isms—translated for our leaders in Washington.

"Been in this game one-hundred years, but I see new ways to lose 'em I never knew existed before."

There couldn’t be a better description of the gridlock in Washington these days. It’s amazing how many new  ways we seem to be finding to lose our cultural, historic and economic advantages. Our nation may be the world’s only real superpower, but listening to the rhetoric in D.C. you’d think we’re teetering on the verge of catastrophe. Ideologues on both sides seem to be getting more and more creative about destruction.

"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided."

John Boehner, this one’s for you.  His job right now is to manage the unmanageable, that is, the self-righteous rancor that swirls around him. Boehner needs keep those in his party who care only about their electoral base from rubbing off on those who want to do what is right for the nation.

"Managing is getting paid for home runs someone else hits.”

The president actually has been following this advice well. He has sought compromise with Republicans, so much so that even those in his own party are accusing him of betrayal. Obama seems to understand that, though he’s the leader, he can accomplish very little by himself. Still, for this metaphor to really work, someone’s got to start hitting a few home runs.

"They say some of my stars drink whiskey, but I have found that ones who drink milkshakes don't win many ball games."

Politicians are not saints. Our elected officials are reflections of us – human beings subject to frailties. Remove those who harm their office, but respect those who are trying their best.

"If you're playing baseball and thinking about managing, you're crazy. You'd be better off thinking about being an owner."

Another one here for the president. No one has the authority that you do. Only you can call the make-or-break decisions that guide the nation. No president owns the country, but he does own his legacy. Think ahead, plan for the future, but act in the now. Just like any owner.

Stengel wasn’t all talk. Hall of Fame manager Sparky Anderson put it best when he said, “Casey knew his baseball. He only made it look like he was fooling around. He knew every move that was ever invented and some that we haven't even caught on to yet.”

That’s something Obama might want to keep in mind as he goes forward. Stay above the fray, Mr. President, but keep your eye on good moves—even if they’ve yet to catch on in Washington.

First published in WashingtonPost.com on 7.27.11

You don’t have to be Irish or Catholic to appreciate the work that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin is trying to do in Ireland.

As Maureen Dowd reported in theNew York Times, Martin is taking the pedophile priest crisis to heart and in doing so, setting an example for leaders facing scandal anywhere. Bishop Martin is leading what seems to be a one-man crusade on behalf of abuse victims. He listens and learns from them. His apology is backed by his advocacy for their cause.

Ireland, as Dowd reports, may be the nation suffering most from abusive acts perpetrated by priests; one in four is said to have been abused by priests at sometime in their lives. The hierarchy’s failure to own up to the crisis is harming the Church; attendance at Sunday mass in Ireland is declining. As Martin explains, “Denial will not generate confidence.”

From Bishop Martin, leaders can learn four important lessons:

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

The chief executive asked his audience of engineers how many were using an iPhone or Android phone. A few brave souls raised their hands. Brave? They need not have been. The inquisitive CEO is Stephen Elop, who is in his first year as head of Nokia.

"That upsets me—not because some of you are using iPhones," a recent Bloomberg Businesweek story quotes Elop as saying, "but because only a small number of you are using iPhones. I’d rather people have the intellectual curiosity to see what we are up against."

Nokia faces significant challenges, which accounts for its hiring of a CEO from the outside, one from Microsoft, no less. So it should come as no great surprise that one of the first things Nokia did under Elop’s leadership was drop Symbian, its programming language, in favor of Microsoft’s mobile platform.

The success of that move will play out over time, but Elop’s belief in the virtues of curiosity is something that has stood the test of time. Many large organizations get stuffy inside and musty on the outside. Employees seem to spend more time going through the motions than seeing if the motions make sense. Churn replaces change.

Curiosity, by contrast, is the spark of wonderment that fuels creativity. It begins with questions like "why" and "what if?" It will not take a simple "no" for an answer, and it drives people to push for answers to questions they never knew existed. In my career, I have had the opportunity to work with a few genuinely curious people. It seemed that adulthood never squelched their curiosity gene as it has for so many adults.

The good news is that you can turn it back on with a little effort. Here are three suggestions for doing so:

• Network outside your organization.Make a habit of attending industry and professional trade association gatherings. They are a good place to hear alternate points of view as well as exchange ideas with colleagues.

• Immerse yourself outside your culture.Nokia was once widely praised for its marketing research. Its designers and engineers spent lots of time outside Finland, in places like New York and Los Angeles, to get a feel of what young people were doing, saying, wearing, and creating. Observations led the Nokia of the 1990s to become a trendsetter in mobile handsets.

• Read, read, read.Keep abreast of the news and trends in your industry. But also expose yourself to fiction and drama as well as publications outside your field. And yes, you can get a great deal of such information in downloadable audio formats—suitable for listening on the commute to and from work.

Of course, curiosity has its limitations. The person who is always asking —why?" can turn into a nuisance, more like a 3-year-old who asks it as a matter of rote rather than as a matter of inquisition. Too much curiosity can lead to endless questioning that is as wearying as the staid culture it seeks to alter.

Curiosity will not add ballast to the balance sheet or solve all the vexing issues businesses face. But here is what it can do: energize your workforce. It can infuse a spirit of change that challenges people to think about what they could do differently. Not for the sake of change, but for the sake of the future.

As Walt Disney once said, "When you are curious, you find more and more interesting things to do."

First published in Bloomberg/Businessweek 7.08.11

Good news, middle managers! Your staff likes you more than they do senior leaders. Unfortunately, that’s not saying too much, so whether you’re in senior or middle management, you’ve got some work to do.

At least according to a new survey conducted by Harris Interactive for CareerBuilder.com. Nearly six in ten employees said they thought their managers were were doing a “good or great” job, while only half said same about their senior leaders. Those who follow Gallup research first published in the book, First Break All the Rules, will not be surprised that employees have higher regard for immediate supervisors than those in high positions.

According to the CareerBuilder survey, employees had issues with senior leaders in the following areas:

• Not addressing morale/not listening enough (40%)

• Not enough transparency (33%)

• Making major changes without warning (30%)

• Productivity demands unreasonable (27%)

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

What do you think is holding you back from being the leader you want to be?

1. My boss -- 11%


2. Myself -- 67%


3. My company -- 11%


4. My cubicle mate -- 11%

It seems that those who took this survey hold themselves accountable. Leadership is a matter of personal responsibility. Certainly there will be obstacles or a situation where your leadership is not desired.  The challenge for those who wish to lead is to find a circumstance and opportunity when you can lead.

To answer the next poll question, click here:

It is often said that leadership is a hard job.

Such a truism came to mind as I watched a 60 Minutesinterview with outgoing Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. He makes it a practice to write a condolence letter to the families of fallen service members. Rather than generate a pro forma letter Gates asks his staff to gather “hometown news accounts,” a photograph and recollections of people who knew the service person. “So I feel like I know them. In some ways, it makes the job harder. But I want the parents or the wives or spouses to know that I care about every single one of ‘em.”

The measure of a leader so often is not what he or she does when things are simple it is what that leader does when times are tough. Fortunately Gates’ example is not unique. Many of the best leaders I have worked with are cut from a similar mold. Not only do they do their management jobs well, they excel as leaders. They go out of their way to connect personally and individually with their employees, especially when that employee is going through a tough time.

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Click here to read more:

The chief executive asked his audience of engineers how many were using an iPhone or Android phone. A few brave souls raised their hands. Brave? They need not have been. The inquisitive CEO is Stephen Elop, who is in his first year as head of Nokia.

"That upsets me—not because some of you are using iPhones," a recent Bloomberg Businesweek story quotes Elop as saying, "but because only a small number of you are using iPhones. I’d rather people have the intellectual curiosity to see what we are up against."

Nokia faces significant challenges, which accounts for its hiring of a CEO from the outside, one from Microsoft, no less. So it should come as no great surprise that one of the first things Nokia did under Elop’s leadership was drop Symbian, its programming language, in favor of Microsoft’s mobile platform.

The success of that move will play out over time, but Elop’s belief in the virtues of curiosity is something that has stood the test of time. Many large organizations get stuffy inside and musty on the outside. Employees seem to spend more time going through the motions than seeing if the motions make sense. Churn replaces change.

Curiosity, by contrast, is the spark of wonderment that fuels creativity. It begins with questions like "why" and "what if?" It will not take a simple "no" for an answer, and it drives people to push for answers to questions they never knew existed. In my career, I have had the opportunity to work with a few genuinely curious people. It seemed that adulthood never squelched their curiosity gene as it has for so many adults.

The good news is that you can turn it back on with a little effort. Here are three suggestions for doing so:

• Network outside your organization.Make a habit of attending industry and professional trade association gatherings. They are a good place to hear alternate points of view as well as exchange ideas with colleagues.

• Immerse yourself outside your culture.Nokia was once widely praised for its marketing research. Its designers and engineers spent lots of time outside Finland, in places like New York and Los Angeles, to get a feel of what young people were doing, saying, wearing, and creating. Observations led the Nokia of the 1990s to become a trendsetter in mobile handsets.

• Read, read, read.Keep abreast of the news and trends in your industry. But also expose yourself to fiction and drama as well as publications outside your field. And yes, you can get a great deal of such information in downloadable audio formats—suitable for listening on the commute to and from work.

Of course, curiosity has its limitations. The person who is always asking —why?" can turn into a nuisance, more like a 3-year-old who asks it as a matter of rote rather than as a matter of inquisition. Too much curiosity can lead to endless questioning that is as wearying as the staid culture it seeks to alter.

Curiosity will not add ballast to the balance sheet or solve all the vexing issues businesses face. But here is what it can do: energize your workforce. It can infuse a spirit of change that challenges people to think about what they could do differently. Not for the sake of change, but for the sake of the future.

As Walt Disney once said, "When you are curious, you find more and more interesting things to do."

First published in Bloomberg/Businessweek 7.08.11

“I worry about hurricanes, earthquakes and volcanoes, but I don’t worry about you.”

That is a paraphrase of something Mark Grace, long-time major league ballplayer and now a color analyst for Fox Sports and the Arizona Diamondbacks, said when talking about what players can say to buck up a teammate going through a slump. His comforting words demonstrate the confidence one player might express for another going through hard times. While Grace was talking baseball, his advice is worthy of passing along to the wider world of management.

While there is much focus on a leader’s responsibility to shore up the confidence of employees, often scant examination is given to what colleagues could do for each other.

Toward that end, here are some suggestions for bucking up a colleague going through tough times.

To read more click here:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

These days you would be hard pressed to find a leader who does not know that a large part of his job is to coach his employees. Nor is it hard to find evidence that the companies with the strongest leadership cultures are those that develop people at every level.

And yet you don’t have to look too far to find managers who ignore this vital part of their job description. Why? The culture in which they work may not insist on it, and many managers also find the idea uncomfortable.  The idea of talking one on one to an employee about how she is doing and what she could be doing better makes them uneasy. So they develop rationales for not coaching.

Here are the most common excuses I’ve heard, and my rebuttal to them.

1. “I don’t like getting personal with my employees.”

Reality: Coaching is a conversation. It focuses on how an employee is performing in the workplace. It need not get into an employee’s personal life. The focus should be on what is happening on the workplace.

2. “I am a manager, not a therapist.”

Reality:Coaching is not therapy. Behavioral issues that affect performance are a manager’s concern but it is not your role to solve them. You should coordinate with human resources to find a licensed therapist or executive coach to provide assistance.  But if the behavior is affecting other employees, you have an obligation to intervene and ensure the safety and welfare of direct reports.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Contrary to the adage that there are no second acts, our country is full of them.

Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Walt Disney are three entrepreneurs who succeeded in subsequent ventures – entertainment, philanthropy and theme parks respectively.

While there may be no hard and fast rules for how to succeed a second time or in a second career, traits of serial (and successful) entrepreneurs are this:

One, resilience. Entrepreneurs never stop at the first no; they expect to be turned down and, in some odd way, they turn the forces of negativity into the power of positivism by refusing not to persevere.

Two, contagious enthusiasm. Success breeds success. People want to associate with winners. A successful entrepreneur is one who bubbles with enthusiasm; and very often in the early stages of a business venture, a salient feature is the excitement the entrepreneur conveys.

Three, belief in oneself. Those who strike it big the first time are often helped by luck, or being in the right place at the right time. Doing it twice requires a fundamental belief in one’s own ability to create something new and different that others will want to join, buy or patronize.

Four, smarts. Most new businesses fail. An entrepreneur who builds a successful new business is one who has incorporated the lessons from previous ventures so that he or she is smarter and wiser, but more especially this entrepreneur knows how to pick opportunities that have the possibility of delivering a strong return.

Oprah Winfrey manifests all of these traits, and many more. After all, the establishment of OWN is her third or maybe fourth act. She began in television news, created her own talk show run by her own production company (Harpo), and began a magazine that bears her name. She also starred in and produced films.

Oprah’s faith in herself is rooted in tenacity and perseverance. She believes in her ability to make things happen, and she is not one who gives up when she thinks she is on the right course.

First published in the Washington Post 5.13.11

For all the good news emanating from the elimination of Osama bin Laden, there is one aspect of the mission that is receiving relatively little coverage. And it is too bad because there is a lesson in what is being overlooked.

Last summer U.S. intelligence sources noted the possibility that a “high value target” may be living in walled luxury in a remote town in Pakistan. In September the President, chief aides, national security officials, CIA officials and military leaders began holding regular meetings. In time it was learned that the target might be bin Laden. Yet not once during this long period of meetings – when not everyone was in agreement – was security breached.

Loyalty to the Big Cause

In Washington where leaking information is blood sport, this is remarkable. It is a tribute to the President’s ability to head a multi-disciplinary team and keep everyone focused on a single goal. But it also is a tribute to the men and women – military, civil servants, and yes, politicians – maintaining a code of secrecy in pursuit of a mission. Why did they do it?

The obvious answer is national security and the ability to bring the world’s most high profile outlaw to justice. But that’s not the full story. And here’s where it matters to leaders outside government. These men and women were loyal to a cause greater than themselves. From this cause they drew hope and applied their professionalism to see that the job was well done.

To read more, click here:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Welcome to the advice-giving season. We all think we have something wise to pass along to recent graduates. I am no different.

“Don’t let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do.” That is a lesson that John Wooden passed along to the young men who played basketball for him. It worked. The last 12 years he coached, his teams won 10 NCAA titles. But for decades prior to that championship run, Wooden’s teams never won anything. Yet during those lean years Wooden did not stop believing in his ability to coach.

Obstacles will always come your way. The challenge is what you do about them. Those who achieve their dreams find ways through, over or around those obstacles. So too can you, if you are willing to consider what you can achieve by applying your abilities to fulfill your dreams.

There will always be those who will want to say no to your dreams. Only you can decide if that no is final, or the just beginning of your journey to fulfillment.

[Dedicated to Paul who received his MBA and Ann who earned her BS.]

First published in the Washington Post 5.09.11

New York Yankees captain Derek Jeter recently learned a lesson that all people in leadership learn soon enough: You cannot always be friends with those you lead.

Yankee catcher Jorge Posada took himself out of the lineup one day. Posada was not hurt; he was miffed that he was batting ninth, a position he seemed to think was beneath him, despite a woeful slump. Posada has since apologized but, as reported in The New York Times, Jeter said Posada did nothing wrong. General Manager Brian Cashman did not agree and had a subsequent conversation with Jeter about the situation.

Calling out Jeter, who has been nothing but a class act for the Yankees for nearly 17 seasons, might ruffle some fans, but Cashman did what was necessary. Jeter cannot stick up for a friend who is not doing his part to help the team win.

The lesson for the rest of us who don’t play Major League Baseball is that leaders, more often than not, need to divorce themselves from personal feelings when it comes to making tough decisions about people. Often, this occurs when a manager is called upon to manage former peers. Friendship can be strained when suddenly the guy who used to be your workplace pal is telling you what to do. It is even harder when you thought you should have been promoted.

So what advice do I give for those who have to manage former peers?

Address the elephant in the room. Make it clear to everyone that you are the boss. You once were a peer, but as the person in charge, you are responsible for getting results; so, too, are your direct reports.  Success will come only if you and your team collaborate. If you got the job over a rival, have a one-on-one conversation with the person and affirm how much you need that person’s contributions. It will not be easy, but you, as the manager, must make the first move.

Invite feedback. Your leadership should be based on give and take, especially at first. Advise colleagues that you want their input as well. Soliciting it does not mean you must act on it, but it does commit you to listen to what colleagues have to say. Also, invite your peers to give feedback on your performance. It might be awkward at first, but it can open the door to greater understanding.

Stay vigilant. Being in charge is never easy, and doubly so when you are managing people with whom you used to pal around. Do not expect to be invited to post-work gatherings. It might occur, but if it does not, be prepared. Recall how you and your colleagues might have complained about the boss. Well, now you are the boss. Your presence might be uncomfortable.

When a manager is in charge of former peers, it does not mean he or she must stop being friendly. It simply means the peer-to-peer relationship forged in the workplace is over. It is time to develop a new professional relationship. A friendship might be strained, but if it is true friendship, it will not only survive but also strengthen.

Many of those passed over for promotion realize they might not be best for the position and come to terms with it. There might be initial friction, but often it dissipates, especially if the executive affirms the value of the former peer.

Leadership is not about friendship; it is about doing what is right for the team.

First posted on SmartBlog on 6.09.11

What are we to make of a leader like William Donald Schaefer who died the other day at age 89?

A career politician with a fifty-year history of elected service, Schaefer was a larger than life character who transformed his hometown of Baltimore from an aging city on the downswing to a vibrant city with a revitalized downtown. As a brash, outspoken and pushy mayor, Schaefer seems more in common with big city mayors of a century ago. What he wanted he got and in the process, he was re-elected four times (not including the two terms he spent as governor).

Schaefer is not the kind of leader most of us in leadership development field write about these days. And that is too bad because if we trace the arc of his career, we can discover four useful traits that leaders today can put into action and achieve great things.

Bullheaded Pragmatism:When Schaefer became mayor in 1971, Baltimore was the kind of city people avoided due to its crumbling housing, crime rates, and sense of hopelessness. Schaefer bulldozed the blighted, invited urban homesteaders and got federal funding for his projects. He saw a problem and he tackled it. Every leader needs to what he or she can to make a positive difference.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

I don’t know Warren Bennis personally, but after reading his latest book, “Still Surprised: A Memoir of a Life in Leadership,” I feel I do. And this is only right, since I have quoted him often in my own work.

Bennis is a giant in the world of leadership development, and this book is a welcome addition to his canon. It begins with the title. “Still Surprised” is an apt description of a man who is truly a seeker, one looking not just for answers but for experiences that will lead to greater understanding.

Born in Brooklyn in 1925, Bennis joined a military training program in high school that led to his becoming. likely. the youngest second lieutenant in World War II. His first assignment was daunting, as a replacement platoon commander during the Battle of the Bulge. His first lesson was to defer to the experience of those he knew more than he did, namely his first sergeant and his captain. Later, he learned how to stand up for them when he ordered a tank commander to provide support for his men who were to take a Bavarian town in April 1945, just days before the war’s end. That action earned him the Bronze Star.

The book blends the story of his life with that of his career as an academic, provost, and university president. For the past three decades, he has been teaching and leading at the University of Southern California. What comes to mind for me are five key insights that all who are in charge can take away from this book:

Be curious. Academics ask questions in the search for knowledge. They must be willing to research, as well as be open to, new sources of information. Curiosity for leaders comes as a means of ascertaining the status quo as well as a means of questioning it. At times this will be liberating, but other times, it will cause discomfort because leaders must be change agents, a term Bennis coined decades ago.

Be collaborative. So much of what a leader accomplishes is not through command but through influence. Bennis brings this lesson to life by retelling the story of heading a committee to choose a new president at USC. As head of a committee of 19, Bennis deftly demonstrates how leaders listen patiently, cajole gently, challenge appropriately and even flatter in order to bring people into agreement.

Be a networker. Any memoir of a famous personage will contain details of acquaintances and friendships with other famous people, and so a cursory reading will seem like a collection of anecdotes. Not so with this work. Bennis is by nature a networker. Leaders need to network purposefully, both as a means of determining the current situation as well as the capabilities of the people in the organization.

Be self-aware. Bennis is candid about his failings as a husband as well as his shortcomings as an administrator. The university president at the State University of New York at Buffalo, who recruited Bennis, betrayed him. And his presidential tenure at the University of Cincinnati ended prematurely due to partisan politics. His candor is refreshing and reminds us that a leader who does not know himself will have trouble getting others to follow his lead.

The final chapter, “The Crucible of Age,” is a frank assessment of the aging process but also one that is full of hope “I see the world with the same wide-eyed wonder [of children] because everything is different than it was 25… 50… or 75 years ago. I can’t wait to find out what happens next.”

Good advice for every leader.

First published in SmartBlogs on 6.03.11

Presidents, like all senior leaders, do not have the luxury of focusing on their priorities and only those priorities.

President Obama campaigned on a platform of health-care reform as well as focusing our military efforts on Afghanistan rather than Iraq. Getting bin Laden was also a priority, but it was down the list of things the president had to do.

Recall in January 2009 when Obama came to office, his first priority was to help right the economy, and that included managing the bailout of auto companies and banks as well as initiating an economic stimulus plan.

But as the president made clear in his speech announcing bin Laden’s death, bringing the terrorist mastermind to justice was always a priority.  It was in the form of a direct order to CIA chief Leon Panetta.

What leaders can learn from our government’s pursuit of bin Laden is that leaders need to multi-task. Those with large staffs can do so easily, but delegation is not the same as execution. Just because there is a standing directive does not mean it will be implemented. Leaders need to stay engaged on issues of importance otherwise the organization becomes distracted.

This is where managing priorities comes to the fore. Franklin Roosevelt prided himself on his ability to get many things going at the same time. In fact, in reference to mobilizing the nation for war, he once referred to himself as “a juggler.”

Where executives get into trouble, and at times FDR fell victim to his own inconsistencies, was in having too many things going at the same time. This is very distracting to the organization, because its members follow the leader’s initiative. If the leader is focused on one thing, it may mean loss of interest in another. And so folks slack off.

For example, if a CEO is committed to reducing costs, some employees may assume it is a cover for easing up on quality. Or vice versa, an emphasis on quality may seem to incur greater costs. Perceived inconsistences make it difficult not only for the leader but also for employees and customers.

The challenge for leaders is to focus on what is important to the institution and follow through on it. But at the same time, to make certain that doing one thing at a time is not acceptable. Leaders need to challenge their management teams to follow through on their objectives, even when senior leadership is focused elsewhere.

Getting bin Laden is a tribute to our president’s ability to get things done; but it also is a tribute, as the president said, to the many intelligence and military personnel who made this priority reality. 

First published in the Washington Post 5.02.11

When Bill Gates was CEO of Microsoft, he typically took a “Think Week,” a week or so retreat by himself to a secluded location to think about issues facing his company, catch up on his reading and reflect on next steps.

The idea of taking time away to reflect on current situations is something that many management cultures seem to discourage it. Many companies pride themselves on being “action-oriented,” and that has produced great achievements. But sometimes the urge for action pushes aside the need for thought both in planning and in reflection.

So you want to try an off-site retreat? Great, but before you do, do some advance planning so you take full advantage of the time.

• Figure out your agenda. Assess where you and your company stands, and what issues you want to focus on during the retreat.  Just as it is necessary to consider what you want to accomplish, it is important for you to examine the future of the organization. Does the company vision still resonate? Is the mission still applicable? What opportunities are you overlooking?

Click here to continue reading:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Two years ago I wrote a column about what I would say to the MBA of 2009 if I were selected to deliver a commencement address. That graduation occurred just as the savage effects of the Great Recession were unfolding. Millions had lost their jobs and millions more would fear losing them. Business confidence was nonexistent. More often than not, you heard executives say they'd not seen anything like that before.

So to the MBA class of 2011, let me offer my congratulations. We have turned the corner on the Great Recession. Companies are back in the black and even giving bonuses. Yet too many millions remain unemployed or underemployed.

The world that newly minted MBAs—my son is one—inherit is different from the one my generation faced. Yours is a world of diminished expectations. In some ways, this is very good. You have experienced the worst economic meltdown since the 1930s and you have survived. In a way you have more in common with your grandparents' and great-grandparents' generations. You have known hardship. Sadly, many your age have gone to war.

Today, the world differs greatly from the one our ancestors lived in during the last cataclysmic economic meltdown, the Great Depression. There is a curious though oppositional parallel, however. President Franklin D. Roosevelt created the New Deal to rescue the nation. Prior to FDR, no one expected the government to do much of anything. Today the government is expected to do much, but it has far less— its budget is crimped by entitlements, defense, and debt service.

TODAY'S BIG GENERATIONAL CHALLENGE

Once again it will fall to private enterprise to right not just the economy, but the entire nation and ultimately the world. You will be the generation challenged to accomplish that. The challenge may seem overwhelming, though you have the smarts to do it. Brainpower is not enough; you need to engage with others to make it happen. Let me offer two suggestions.

One, be pragmatic. The engine of American enterprise is not our smarts; it's our can-do spirit. We know how to make things work. One of my favorite stories comes from car-industry legend Bob Lutz, a veteran of each of the Detroit Three as well as BMW (BMW:GR). When asked why Chrysler, for whom he worked in the eighties, had bought American Motors, Lutz said—partly tongue in cheek—that American Motors (which had been in financial distress for years) had been doing so much with so little that the expectation was it might make things out of nothing. Chrysler incorporated AMC's pragmatism into its operations and helped save itself one further time.

FDR's mantra was: Try something, try anything, but by gosh, do something. Don't expect perfection. Make things happen. That is what pragmatists do.

Two, be willing to compromise. Too bad the word has fallen into disrepute, chiefly due to the ideologues who pose as politicians. They have conflated principles with policies and made it shameful to cooperate and collaborate. Fortunately, the business world does not heed Washington in this regard.

NO SHAME IN COLLABORATION

Savvy businesspeople make collaboration an art form. Today we see strategic alliances among competitors. In some fields it is not uncommon for competitors to be one another's customers, as well as vendors, and still maintain competition in certain areas. Supply-chain integration is all about compromise, working with the best providers to help you deliver the best products and services.

As bright and savvy—not to mention aggressive and ambitious—MBA graduates, you can find many more things to add. And as you make your way in the world, remember to stop and enjoy it. Work is hard; that's why they call it work. You are entitled to take some time off.

As an MBA graduate, you have proven that you know how to grind it out. Now show us how you can do something else. Spend time in the pursuits that interest you most. Pursue your passion. Indulge in free time. Do not overlook your family. And find ways to give back to your community. The final two are tall orders, yes. As you have done with challenges in the past, you will figure out how to do it.

Good luck and Godspeed. The world is counting on you to succeed.

First published in Bloomberg/Businessweek 5.24.11

Leaders prove their mettle when the headwinds are against them, not behind them.

Social pressure is one such headwind, and while it can focus a leader’s attention on what the group wants, it can also prevent the leader from doing what is necessary in favor of what is expedient.

When it comes to elected office, leaders tread a line between representing their constituency and standing up for what they believe is right. This was the dilemma facing Senator Edmund G. Ross of Kansas whose Republican Party wanted to oust Andrew Johnson from office in 1867. No fan of Johnson, Ross understood that the trial was about politics rather than crimes, and so he bucked his party and voted not to convict. The example shown by Ross, whose vote cost him reelection, 90 years later prompted John F. Kennedy to include him in Profiles in Courage.

Ross followed concepts put forth by 18^th century statesman-philosopher Edmund Burke. It was Burke who made a case for politicians exercising individual conscience. As a member of Parliament, Burke supported the rights of the American colonies in opposition to George III.

Standing up for what you believe is right is not reserved for politics. How often do we see executives put corporate interests ahead of customer or shareholder interests? For example, medical-device companies have come under fire in recent years for promoting products that management knew jeopardized the health of patients. And last year Toyota was forced to recall millions of its vehicles over safety concerns.

Sometimes we have only ourselves to blame. We may fail to stick up for a colleague who gets into hot water because some senior executive wrongly singles him out for blame.  Keeping quiet may be politically expedient, but it does not say much for our character.

Yet we expect such righteousness in our leaders. While they are subject to human frailties, the good ones make more good calls than bad. When they make a mistake, they admit it and seek to make amends. Standing tall against the forces that push you down is not easy, but it is what leaders do.

Leaders create their own legacy. When defining that legacy, one question should arise: Did you leave the place in better shape than you found it?

How a leader answers that question says much about his or her ability to be responsible and accept consequences. One who takes ownership of the tough issues is much preferred to one who avoids them.

First published in the Washington Post 4.26.11

There is a condition afflicting organizations that often goes undiagnosed because it is perceived as benign. The truth, it is corrosive.

I call it the “disease of nice.”

To those of you more accustomed to working in offices where people are more often thrusting daggers than smiles, the very mention of too much niceness might seem laughable. A bad joke. It’s not. When I say “niceness,” I don’t mean politeness. Niceness in an organizational setting is the avoidance of conflict.

Note I said “avoidance,” not absence.

Dag Hammarskjold, one-time head of the United Nations, got to the heart of why niceness is a problem when he said, “It is easy to be nice, even to an enemy — from lack of character.” In other words, those who act nice lack backbone; they are either pretending not to care or really don’t care about the issues or worse the organization for which they work.Both are unhealthy.

While non-confrontation may seem more desirable – and it is on an interpersonal level – when it becomes part of the culture, it can wreak havoc. Case in point is General Motors. For a generation at least, its senior management avoided addressing the key problems facing the company – high fixed costs in manufacturing and a bloated distribution system (too many brands for too few customers). Both issues would have involved tackling labor costs and dealer relations; failure to address either sank the company into bankruptcy.

How do you know if your company has fallen into the too-much-niceness syndrome?  Here are some tip offs.There is a condition afflicting organizations that often goes undiagnosed because it is perceived as benign. The truth, it is corrosive.

I call it the “disease of nice.”

To those of you more accustomed to working in offices where people are more often thrusting daggers than smiles, the very mention of too much niceness might seem laughable. A bad joke. It’s not. When I say “niceness,” I don’t mean politeness. Niceness in an organizational setting is the avoidance of conflict.

Note I said “avoidance,” not absence.

Dag Hammarskjold, one-time head of the United Nations, got to the heart of why niceness is a problem when he said, “It is easy to be nice, even to an enemy — from lack of character.” In other words, those who act nice lack backbone; they are either pretending not to care or really don’t care about the issues or worse the organization for which they work.Both are unhealthy.

While non-confrontation may seem more desirable – and it is on an interpersonal level – when it becomes part of the culture, it can wreak havoc. Case in point is General Motors. For a generation at least, its senior management avoided addressing the key problems facing the company – high fixed costs in manufacturing and a bloated distribution system (too many brands for too few customers). Both issues would have involved tackling labor costs and dealer relations; failure to address either sank the company into bankruptcy.

How do you know if your company has fallen into the too-much-niceness syndrome?  Here are some tip offs.

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Urgency may be the most overused word in the modern management lexicon. Too many managers make all issues urgent, thereby watering down the impetus for action.

Yet the FAA’s failure to act expeditiously has imperiled the safety of airline crews and their passengers. Instilling a proper sense of urgency involves a hands-on approach from senior management. For example:

Look for trouble. No organization hums along without difficulties. If things seem too good to be true, they are. Senior executives need to look for problems, not expect them to be delivered on their doorstep.

Find solutions. Henry Ford is famous for saying you should find solutions, not blame. Too often the search for blame takes precedence over solving problems. This was one reason the clean up from last April’s Gulf oil spill took so long to organize.  Federal authorities rightly affixed blame to BP and then acted as if blame alone would prod BP into clean-up mode. As a result, timely clean-up actions by state and federal agencies were delayed and more damage to the coastline occurred.

Monitor progress. When big problems occur, rarely does one fix do the trick. Solutions require months and months of sometimes tedious work to implement. Management must stay close to the problem to make certain that it’s truly addressed.

Conduct after-action review. After urgency of the crisis passes, it is wise to conduct a debrief with the principals as well as with frontline staff to determine root causes. Very often problems in large organizations fester as a result of people ignoring the issue because they perceive it to be someone else’s issue.

Finally, once the burning issues have been extinguished, it is time to be proactive. Examine the way problems are reported to senior executives. Many large organizations have hotlines for big problems, but the inertia within the system (or meddling from middle management) turns those lines cold.

Make it safe for frontline employees to raise serious issues. Too often those closest to the problem feel they cannot report it for fear of making their boss look bad. That requires senior management to be vigilant.

“The problems that exist in the world today,” said Albert Einstein, “cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.” Senior leaders today need to take that advice to heart. Act with urgency when it matters, but create a system where problems can be solved before they become urgent.

First published in the Washington Post 4.19.11

There are three words no executive should ever utter:not my job!

Such a thought came to me as a colleague was relating a story about an executive who had gotten in the habit of ignoring assignments that she perceived were not worthy of her time. As a result this executive was causing an already overburdened staff to work even harder. No matter. This executive continued to doing less while others did more.

Leaders do what the organization needs them to do and so even when they perceive that such a task – give a presentation to a community group, visit a low-volume customer or participate in employee orientation – is not worthy of their executive attention, they do it. Failure to do it lets the organization down.

The “not my job” syndrome is destructive to an organization. What can you do to prevent it from hurting morale?

Click here to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Contrary to the adage that there are no second acts, our country is full of them.

Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Walt Disney are three entrepreneurs who succeeded in subsequent ventures – entertainment, philanthropy and theme parks respectively.

While there may be no hard and fast rules for how to succeed a second time or in a second career, traits of serial (and successful) entrepreneurs are this:

One, resilience. Entrepreneurs never stop at the first no; they expect to be turned down and, in some odd way, they turn the forces of negativity into the power of positivism by refusing not to persevere.

Two, contagious enthusiasm. Success breeds success. People want to associate with winners. A successful entrepreneur is one who bubbles with enthusiasm; and very often in the early stages of a business venture, a salient feature is the excitement the entrepreneur conveys.

Three, belief in oneself. Those who strike it big the first time are often helped by luck, or being in the right place at the right time. Doing it twice requires a fundamental belief in one’s own ability to create something new and different that others will want to join, buy or patronize.

Four, smarts. Most new businesses fail. An entrepreneur who builds a successful new business is one who has incorporated the lessons from previous ventures so that he or she is smarter and wiser, but more especially this entrepreneur knows how to pick opportunities that have the possibility of delivering a strong return.

Oprah Winfrey manifests all of these traits, and many more. After all, the establishment of OWN is her third or maybe fourth act. She began in television news, created her own talk show run by her own production company (Harpo), and began a magazine that bears her name. She also starred in and produced films.

Oprah’s faith in herself is rooted in tenacity and perseverance. She believes in her ability to make things happen, and she is not one who gives up when she thinks she is on the right course.

First published in the Washington Post 5.24.11

The first 90 days for any executive taking a new job are challenging. The challenge only grows in magnitude when you’ve been hired from the outside. Some managers are overwhelmed by the position can never seem to get their sea legs.

This, according to the New York Times, is what happened to Cathleen Black.On her 95^thday as chancellor of New York Schools, she resigned, deeply unpopular with both parents and administrators. While it is easy to see the missteps a person made in hindsight, the fact is, Ms. Black’s failure is not uncommon.

According to research compiled by theInstitute for Executive Development, the rate of failure of new managers within 18 months is as high as 40 percent (and higher for outside hires). What’s more seven in ten CEOs are pushed out. Clearly these are problems that go well beyond the Black case, and so it is worthwhile looking at how an outside executive can succeed.

Listen and learn.Hold town hall meetings and invite people to ask you questions. Explain your background but also talk about how much you have to learn. Spend more time listening than speaking. Be accessible. And here’s the big question that always works: ask your people what you can do to help them succeed. This question works wonders because it positions you as one who is interested in the success of others, not simply your own.

Click to read more:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

At last, we know the truth about President Barack Obama’s heritage: He’s Javanese.

Culturally speaking, of course.

According to Janny Scott, author of “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mother,” a biography of Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, the Javanese attribute the president’s coolness under fire to his upbringing in Indonesia. (Java is its largest island.) As Scott said on NPR’s “Fresh Air,” young Barry, as Obama was then called, might have honed his composure in reaction to being teased mercilessly by classmates, some even throwing stones at him. His “crime”? Being darker-skinned than other children. Obama endured.

Javanese regard such composure as a symbol of strength, and so do I, though no person I know would condone the harsh treatment Obama endured as a child. Obama might have gained insight into what it means to rise above the fray as a child, but it takes some of us years to develop or, in the case of hotheads, not develop at all.

Composure is a desired leadership attribute. I have often told the story of battalion commanders on the scene of a major fire. Amid the smoke and fire and heat, commanders radiate sheer calmness. Emotions might be roiling inside, but outwardly they are cool as a cucumber.

Their coolness leads to something I call the clarity to see complexity. By not succumbing to a maelstrom of chaos, they keep their heads clear to think through the possibilities. It is noted that during preparations for the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, President Obama, amid the tension, radiated calmness. That is a leader’s job. Giving into emotion would be counterproductive. One, it would frighten subordinates, and two, it would muddy the mind’s ability to focus on the options.

For some leaders, composure is a birthright. They take to coolness like a duck to water. It comes as second nature. For others, it must be cultivated — and not easily. As an executive coach, I urge executives to learn to control their emotions through a few simple techniques.

• Breathe deeply. In the heat of the moment, there is a tendency to breathe rapidly. So take a deep breathe. Feel the breath come into your lungs. Exhale, then repeat a few times. It slows things down.

• Relax your facial muscles. Tension is evident on our faces. So be conscious of how you look. Rub your cheeks and flex them. Smile if appropriate, as a means of reassuring others.

• Keep your voice lower. When tension rises, people speak more quickly and with more emotion. A leader’s job is to keep calm. So speak slowly and at a lower pitch. Others will notice and maybe follow suit.

And here’s one technique a colleague of mine, Donald Altman, a psychotherapist and author of “The Mindfulness Code: Keys for Overcoming Stress, Anxiety, Fear, and Unhappiness,” taught me. Raise your arms and bring your hands together. Join your fingertips together. Then close your eyes and think about the stress you are feeling. Press your fingers together tightly, then hold it. After a moment, begin to release pressure slowly, starting with your upper arms and ending with your fingertips. You will feel the physical tension — and maybe the stress — ebb away.

Remaining composed under pressure is not the answer to all leadership challenges, but for my money, I would rather follow an executive who keeps it together than one who is wild-eyed and restlessly pacing.

First appear on Smart Blog on Leadership 5.10.11

If you ever find yourself having to persuade others of the goodness of your cause, you can do no worse than to follow the example of the actor, Kevin Spacey.

In Washington to deliver the 24^thannual Nancy Hanks lecture on Arts and Public Policy, Spacey took time to advocate for continued federal funding of the arts, which, like many cultural and social programs, is on the chopping block. Spacey’s advocacy in Congress and to the Washington media was an example of how to present yourself and your case in ways that make people sit up and take notice. Watching Spacey on MSNBC’s Hardball was like taking a master class in persuasion.

Be accessible.Spacey, a two-time Oscar winner as well as an accomplished director and producer, was masterful in his ability to present his advocacy. Absent was stridency and table-thumping and accusatory rhetoric. Spacey also dressed right. He wore a simple business suit and in doing so came across more like the guy next door, more accountant than actor.

Know your facts. When we feel passionate about the issue, there is a tendency to rely on the emotion of the argument rather than the business case. Here Spacey demonstrated mastery of the facts about funding and its impact on the local communities, notto mention what arts say about us as a people.

Click here to continue reading:

Excerpt from The Purposeful Leader @CBSi/BNET

Representatives are not elected to office to make friends. Nor are they elected to make enemies. Given the acrimony of political discourse these days, it would seem that many representatives believe the path to recognition is to turn anyone who disagrees with you into an enemy.

Too often the halls of Congress seem to have more in common with middle school behaviors than a place where grown men and women of good intention can discuss, debate and disagree in a spirit of service, not political partisanship. Partisans on either side of the aisle are more interested in embarrassing the other party than they are in doing what they were elected to do: serve the people.

The great irony that is lost in the rhetoric is how little members of Congress care about the institution they spent millions and a lot of sweat equity to join. In this regard, they seem more like owners and players of professional sports teams who insult one another prior to collective bargaining agreements. While they believe this posturing may help them in the court of public opinion, all it does is turn fans off. And so is it any wonder that Congress is held in such low regard? If its members do not respect it, why should the public?

While politics can be public theatre, it is my belief that members of both parties have crossed the line. Their repeated failure to find compromise in session after session is a blemish on our national will. When the issues facing us are so big–two wars, a struggling economy and a rising deficit–it is time to retire the rhetoric in favor of serving the nation.

In the opening segment of Ken Burns monumental Civil War, historian Shelby Foote notes how our nation was built on compromise, and the one time it failed to compromise resulted in a war that tore the nation apart. Too many in Congress view compromise as a dirty word. Congress then becomes a venue where the petty trumps statecraft. Anyone can throw stones; it takes strong individuals to build bridges.

Will Rogers once opined, “Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.” Imagine what a different world it would be if we held our Congress in the same regard as we do our comedians. That will only happen when our elected representatives act like men and women chosen to serve, rather than self-selecting ideologues who put partisanship above citizenship.

First published in the Washington Post 4.5.11

Sometimes the best way to put yourself forward is to take a step back.

Leadership is an act that requires stepping forward as a means of asserting authority. When it comes to leading peers, you can demonstrate authority by showing that you are willing to share your authority with others.

Peer leadership is something that is often overlooked in leadership circles because, most often, we focus on what and how leaders lead their followers. This is appropriate, but much of what’s accomplished within an organization is because of people in the middle who get things done. Sometimes it requires leading up — what you do for your boss — but often, it requires what you do with and for your colleagues — leading peers.

Throughout history, we have seen seemingly ordinary folk step up and take charge. Call it the “Cincinnatus model.” Cincinnatus was a Roman farmer who left his land behind to serve as Rome’s leader when the city was threatened by warring tribes. When peace was restored, Cincinnatus resigned his post and returned to his farm. Selfless service by Cincinnatus served as inspiration for George Washington, who followed his example. Leadership from the middle need not be an act of heroism, but it should be done with forethought and planning.

The first thing to understand about leading peers is that it is a means of exerting control over someone else. If you have brothers and sisters, or if your children do, then you know the frequent complaint: “You’re not the boss of me.” With peers, you do not boss — you lead — and most often you do it by setting the right example. Let me offer some suggestions:

• Find the pain. Sometimes the need to act is urgent; it will hit you with the force of a two-by-four across the face. Crises provoke the need for immediate action. But you do not need to wait for a burning platform to step forward. Sometimes the need to act comes from what is not being done — processes that are malfunctioning, employees being misdirected, or customers not being served. That may call for action from the middle.
• Listen more than you speak. Before you go too far, listen to others. Get their assessment of the situation. Find out if they want or need help. None of us like a meddler. If people do want help, do not pull a “command and control” act. Listen to what their needs are, and identify the true problem before you act. When trouble brews, it may only be a symptom of a larger issue. Therefore you need to size up the situation and assess what you can do.
• Stand back. If you have the power to act, do it. But work with people — not in spite of them. Think like a film director. You are the one behind the camera. The actors are doing the work. You are simply providing some direction, but they are doing the work. Be willing to lend a hand but do not try and take over. Remember that you are a colleague, not a boss.

Peer leadership is fraught with peril. Too often, those who try to do it get burned. Sometimes this is because they have overreached, or because they do not have the authority to do what they want to do. Often there are rivalries among peers, such as two or more people going for the same job. Navigating that terrain can be treacherous.

There is no easy way around such issues, but one method is to lead with your project. Let what you are seeking to accomplish — your project, your initiative, your process — be the star. Demonstrate its benefits for the organization. This way, you show that you are more interested in helping the company succeed than in shining your own star.

Leading peers, of course, is a good way to get noticed. When done correctly, it positions you as someone who knows how to make things happen. It’s even better when your peers support you. Then, you demonstrate that you have the support — and most often — the trust of others.

Those who lead from the middle are a rare breed, but one that is essential to the success of any enterprise.

First appeared in Smart Brief on Leadership Blog on 3.31.11

One of the things leaders come to understand soon enough is that being is charge is tough work.

Getting people to pull together for common cause is not for the faint hearted. It requires a sense of the big picture as well as an attention to detail and in between you may need to play alternating roles of cajoler as well as challenger, all the while making certain you set the right example.

Two leaders I know exemplify what it means to walk that talk.

The first is John Wooden, the legendary basketball coach. His record is unequalled, ten NCAA titles in twelve years at UCLA. He retired at age 65 at the top of his game and spent the next 34 years of his life till age 99 sharing his wisdom with the rest of world.

The second is Pat Williams, author (with Jim Denney) of a fine new tome, Coach Wooden: The Seven Principles That Shaped His Life and Will Change Yours. What comes through in the book are not just the stories of how Wooden took individual boys and molded them into championship teams but the lessons of life that he taught.

Like Wooden, Williams is a man of sport. He was a baseball player in the Phillies organization. He then switched sports becoming a highly successful NBA executive with the Philadelphia 76ers and now serves as Senior Vice President of the Orlando Magic.

As an NBA executive, Williams hired another basketball legend, Chuck Daly--the only coach to win an NBA title and an Olympic gold medal as coach--to his first pro contract. Williams also drafted Shaquille O'Neill, one of many superstars to play for Pat's teams.

Like Wooden, Willliams is an inspirational speaker. As a much in-demand speaker, Pat can regale audiences with his stories and his lessons. A favorite quote of mine from Pat is "Can you fake passion? Sure, for about two weeks." Leaders need to back their beliefs with actions. Many of Pat's speeches are based on his treasure trove of books--some eighty titles to his name.

Like Wooden, Williams is man of deep and abiding faith. But unlike some who keep their beliefs to themselves, Pat has put his faith into action. He is the father of 27 children. Three are birth children, the rest -- all from disadvantaged environments --have been adopted. Pat has joked that he knows tough times--at one time he and his wife had fifteen teenagers living under one roof.

Pat Williams, not unlike the coach he admires, is generous with his time. I know because I am the recipient of such kindness. Nearly a decade ago, in the course of researching a book, I wrote to Pat asking some advice he might want to share about public speaking. Pat sent back a long and detailed, handwritten reply sharing some lessons he had learned from his years on the speaker circuit. Pat did not know me from Adam nor did he have any expectation that what he would share would end up in print. As fate would have it, the book was published but sans Pat's fine contributions. No matter Pat and I stayed in touch.

And now Pat is facing a tough battle of his own--a rare form of blood cancer. True to his nature, Pat has responded with his usual vigor--he has competed in more than 20 marathons--and with his doctors attacked the disease aggressively. So far so good!

Getting an email from Pat these days is a form of inspiration. His attitude his upbeat and his message is simple. "The Mission is Remission." As I have told Pat, I feel better just hearing from him.

Coach Wooden said, "Do not let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do." Pat Williams lives that lesson everyday and in the process teaches us how to do the same.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 4.5.11

Mediation is a skill that requires patience, fortitude and wisdom. But when it comes to mediating between NFL owners and NFL players, I would add something even more important--an ability to act serious when all you want to do is laugh out loud.

Consider for a moment.

We have 32 ownership groups and fewer than 2,000 active roster players. None of whom can agree on how to divide $9 billion in television revenues. Get real. Forget the fact that such a sum could be put to better use--or any use--other than keeping billionaires and millionaires happy.

Nowhere on the planet is so much energy being expended when so little is at stake. True, $9 billion is a great sum of money, but the reality is that owners have already staked their claim to the first billion and now are simply negotiating over how to split the remaining $8 billion.

Right now the players want to maintain the 60/40 split: $4.8 billion for players, $3.2 billion for owners. A 50/50 split guarantees $4 billion for each. This means that both parties are fighting over a difference of $800 million, not the full $9 billion.

Yes, there are peripheral issues like a rookie salary cap and a proposed 18 game schedule. Likely the first will pass (players don't want unproven players making more than they do), and the second will die (fans want quality competition not more games).

Therefore the negotiation process is little more than public theater--albeit behind closed doors. Cynics might call it a charade; skeptics might call it "manufactured" publicity to keep the game in the public eye.

The challenge for George Cohen as mediator is to apply his well-honed skills as a negotiator to instill a common sense on the proceedings.

After all if a mediator cannot feign patience with owners who live for the spotlight, fortitude with players who act as if a million-dollar salary is a minimum wage, and wisdom for both parties who seem clueless, then what hope is there for a settlement?

Cohen will need all the resolve he can muster to help both parties understand that negotiating revenue split is easy compared to what might come next.

The most serious issue facing the NFL has nothing to do with money; it is player health. As medical evidence mounts about the destructive nature that a game rooted in collision wreaks on the brain mounts, owners, managers, coaches and players need to focus on ways to protect players.

Otherwise future rounds of collective bargaining will not require mediation because television executives will not want to pay licensing fees to a sport that no one wants to watch.

And that's no laughing matter.

First published in Washington Post  3.8.11

Imagine at this time of year, as winter drifts slowly into spring, you heard comments such as:

"Sam's banging out big numbers this year. You can tell he's much more focused."

"Susan's presentation has extra zip this year. It's clear she's been practicing more."

"The team seems more together this year. Everyone knows his or her role and is executing well."

Consider for the moment that these observations were heard at an annual off-site meeting where everyone was focused on self-improvement and bettering the team.

In baseball, there is such a tradition; it's called spring training. Major league teams convene either in Arizona or Florida to get in shape for the upcoming season. Management evaluates talent. Players focus on the fundamentals of their positions. And the team integrates new players into the roster.

What emerges from such practices is a team that knows what it does well and what it needs to do to improve, and for that reason organizations far from the world of sports would do well to borrow a few lessons from the training regimen. Here are three suggestions.

Reconnect to team.Players need to know the role the team expects them to play. Leaders can provide a blueprint of how employees' roles contribute to the success of the enterprise. It is also a time to discuss what challenges lie ahead and how the company plans to address them.

Reinforce the fundamentals.Players come to spring training to practice their craft. Employees may find it necessary to learn new skills. Maintaining the status quo skill-wise means you are falling behind. What new things must employees learn to stay current as well as to help themselves advance and their teams succeed?

Reevaluate where you stand.For players, spring is a time to consider how much work they need to do to get back into playing condition. Similarly, employees need to find time to measure their performance against the corporate strategies and tactics. How are their actions helping the team succeed? Managers need to link individual contributions to organizational mission.

The advantage of conducting such activities in an off-site environment is the opportunity to get away from the day to day—as managers, coaches, and players do—to put one's energies into improvement. For organizations, senior leaders need to deliver key messages as well as meet and mingle with employees. Breakout sessions for functional teams are a good way to address issues and raise questions. And unlike training sessions, these meetings will feature no cuts; everyone who attends the conference will keep his or her job. This reaffirms that everybody, at every level, is in this endeavor together.

We must not overlook something else that baseball, coming as it does in the spring, perhaps does best: renew purpose. For players and managers as well as fans, spring training is all about hope. It is a time to focus on the "what might be" scenarios, be it win the division, the pennant, or even the World Series.

This makes a good lesson for management. As important as it is to concentrate on business, it never hurts to connect to potential and possibilities. Leaders need to dispense hope that comes from organizational purpose. Understanding that purpose gives people a sense of mission as well as a direction. For example, if you know your business makes cars and trucks that customers love, it gives you a sense of pride. Or if you know your hospital is a premier place for cardiac patients, you take pride in delivering care that helps patients not only survive but live better.

Coming together to renew purpose is an essential part of the organizational mission, and for that reason any organization would do well to make time to bring people together to focus on the work but also celebrate the possibilities of what you do well.

First published in Bloomberg Business Week on 3.22.11

Few things can top the exuberance of the annual NCAA basketball tournament. Sixty-eight teams enter and three weeks later a champion emerges. To the delight of many Butler, a small university in Indiana, will face another less famous basketball school, Virginia Commonwealth, in a Final Four matchup. What is not to cheer about?

Unfortunately the other side of the bracket features two schools helmed by coaches who know what it means to cross the line, as in breaking the rules. University of Connecticut's head coach, Jim Calhoun, has won two national titles but more recently has been reprimanded for recruiting infractions. He will serve a three-game suspension next season for those transgressions.

UConn faces a legendary basketball powerhouse, the University of Kentucky. Its current head coach John Calipari may not have written the book on cheating in college basketball but he has certainly added a footnote--the only coach to have two Final Four appearances at two different schools (Massachusetts and Memphis) vacated due to NCAA infractions.Calipari himself was not found guilty of wrongdoing, but it strains credulity to think he did not know, or chose not to know, of the rule breaking that occurred under his watch.

Fans of such schools may say, "Every college cheats." And they may be right to a degree. Earlier this month Ohio State gave its head coach Jim Tressel a slap on the wrist after he lied to the NCAA about infractions his football players had committed.

Cheating is cheating, and when schools go along with it, they betray the trust that students put in them as institutions of higher learning. By condoning, or in the case of Kentucky, hiring a coach with a questionable past, says it's all right to cut corners. Wink, wink, nod, nod.

A good friend of mine is fond of saying, "There are no virgins in big time college athletics." He is not referring to sexual mores, but to recruiting and retention practices that schools perpetrate in order to keep athletes eligible to compete. Why? Because such athletes bring in millions to the school in revenue. It's about the money, pure and simple.

Every once in awhile a hue and cry is raised about corruption in collegiate athletics, but after the shouting dies down little is down. Sanctions may be imposed, but cheating continues at other schools.

The right thing to do is ban the cheaters. Indiana University kicked out Kelvin Sampson after he committed recruiting violations, after doing the very same at Oklahoma State University. The legendary program still has not recovered its winning ways, but it maintains its integrity. This year the University of Tennessee showed its backbone by dumping its successful, and popular, head coach Bruce Pearl after he had lied to the NCAA.

Ultimately college athletics must stand for something more than wins and losses. The responsibility to its student athletes means more that ensuring they do not cheat. It means ensuring those in positions of authority hold themselves to even higher standards of accountability.

Discipline those coaches who break the rules by banning them from the game.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 3.29.11

"Let me tell you about the very rich," F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote famously. "They are different from you and me."

The question of whether the despots of the Middle East, or anywhere for that matter, will give up power as a means of making things for their people is moot. They will fight to hold onto power because their authority does two things: keeps them in charge and allows them to dispense the wealth to those who will support their regime. Such despots are driven from power; they do not surrender it willingly.

What should happen is what is happening now. Those who have been suppressed are rising up demanding a share in the economic pie as well as a voice in how they are governed. Neither will happen without a struggle.

The situations of such power-made potentates has a parallel to self-made entrepreneurs who once having built a business and a fortune have difficulty handing off control to others, be it family members or professional managers. (There is one major difference; entrepreneurs have earned their fortune honestly, not stolen it from the public.)

Dealing with such entrepreneurs on management--that is, doing what is right for the business rather than right for their own ego--is a dicey proposition. Most self-made tycoons have woven their esteem and power inextricably. They believe that they and only they are capable of running the business properly. Typically money is not the issue; they have made enough. Power is their elixir.

The way to reach such independent business folks is by appealing to their legacy. It falls to family members or professional managers to address how the entrepreneur wants to be remembered: as one who built a business and handed it over gracefully, or one who built it and ran it into the ground.

This was Henry Ford's problem. He would not relinquish the reins to his only son, Edsel. Henry's constant upbraiding and disapproval drove the son, who had the talent to lead but not the constitution, to an early grave. It took his grandson, Henry Ford II, to wrest control and rescue the company, which he did upon becoming its president in 1945.

Not all family-run enterprises run afoul. Many entrepreneurs want to see their children run the business and so they groom them for leadership roles from an early age. Typically such apprenticeships include a lot of grunt work; that is, doing the jobs of front-line employees to get a feel for the business and its customers.

Despots could learn from such entrepreneurs in another way: ensuring that the business will treat its employees well. Dictators view their populace as fools to be exploited not as citizens to be respected. This is the reason they are so despised. After all, despots are different from you and me. 

When you suffer a defeat, the tendency to want to withdraw is powerful. That is especially true when the setback occurs in public. The only trouble is that if you are a manager, the last thing you can do is withdraw. You have other responsibilities.

This thought came to me as I was watching the behavior of losing coaches in the NCAA basketball tourney. The experienced ones know how to accept defeat and to a coach they all say they want to get back into the locker room with their players. This is not a hide-and-seek game they play with the media. It seems sincere.

The lesson for managers is that when a team you lead falls to achieve a goal, the time for you to exert your presence is now, not later. You may be feeling awful, even worse than your employees, but you need to spend time with your team. Your own career may even be on the line and that is all the more reason to delve into details with your team. Here are some suggestions.

Affirm their contributions. When good employees put themselves out to achieve a milestone they have a personal stake in the outcome. If the team falls short, then they feel personally dejected. The leader who spends time with individual employees is one who can buck up the entire team.

Pick apart the mistakes. Focus first on process. Mistakes were made. Figure what went wrong. Then assign responsibility. But do it with a spirit of investigation, not finger pointing. When people are down there is a tendency to point fingers. That will do little to diagnose the problems.

Discuss what to do next. Not everything likely went wrong. It is important to diagnose the positives and decide how they can be repeated. There may be a feeling that you have to begin from scratch and do it all over again. That is not always the case. And if it is so, you are still ahead of where you were earlier because you have the experience of what works and what does not.

Follow through. Leverage what you have learned from the review process to figure out next steps. Very often the manager will need to find more resources or maybe more time. Sometimes the team may need new blood. Whatever is necessary the manager must plan for it and put the plan into action.

These steps are a form of an after action review, something our military does after every major engagement. But what is different is the investment of the leader in his or her people. A winning team needs a coach less when they are rolling and more when they are losing. The same applies to management. A manager's job is to keep things running smoothly but when there are bumps in the road, it falls to the manager to smooth them over.

Being available for your team that has suffered defeat is not an excuse for going soft. The expectation for success remains. What the team does next matters and it will only be able to fulfill that expectation if the manager steps forward to do whatever necessary to focus the team on the goal and to provide them with what they need to succeed. Especially when what they may need is a strong manager.

Perhaps there is comfort in the words of the Roman poet, Horace, who wrote,"Adversity reveals genius, prosperity conceals it."

First posted on FastCompany.com on 3.23.11

The decision whether to act tough versus to offer concessions is a matter of negotiation, not a matter of compromise. Negotiation is a tactic to gain a favorable outcome. Compromise is a strategy that embraces respect for others.

Political partisans like to disparage compromise. This hard-line stance may play well with political donors, but it is a distinct turnoff to the electorate who expect elected officials to do more than posture. Voters want elected officials to govern, even when it means working with the other side.

Politicians might learn something from management and labor negotiators. While both sides may talk tough, seldom does rhetoric cause the other side to blink. There is always room for compromise on assumptions and positions. Saying you will not compromise is rarely a sign of strength; it is hubris.

We all want to do things our own way. Leaders are no different. But somewhere along our human development process, say kindergarten, we learn that life does not play by our rules and only our rules. We learn that to get along with others you need to demonstrate a degree of understanding for what others want to do, too. This is how high-performing teams succeed; it is because people come together for common purpose in order to achieve results they all want to achieve.

Those who look prejudicially on compromise often confuse it with appeasement. Compromise is ensuring an agreement that mutually benefits both sides. Appeasement is capitulation and by nature a zero-sum game.

Compromise by contrast ensures that both sides get something for their efforts, and as a result each side can maintain a healthy sense of self-respect. This also establishes a platform upon which future cooperation, and ideally collaboration, can occur.

Inherent in compromise is sacrifice. That is, giving up something that you would like to do in order to achieve something the entire team would like to do. I know plenty of examples of team leaders stepping back from the process to allow others to contribute their ideas and solutions so that the project can be finished on time and on budget. Such team leaders also make a point of staying out of the way when accolades are being handed out; they want others on the team to be recognized.

There is an exception. Strong leaders do not compromise their principles, that is, their values. Compromising on ethics and integrity erodes something that is hard to win back: trust. However, the mistake some in power make is equating policy with principle. Policy is negotiable; principles are not. Principles should shape policy, not the other way around. Failure to distinguish between the two is an indication of a compromised intellect.

First published in Washington Post  2.14.11

It is not often that you see an organization come apart at the seams on television. But that is exactly what happened in February when the head coach of the Detroit Pistons got thrown out of a game in Philadelphia and the players on the bench laughed. Like all organizational implosions, this one had been building for a time and so when it came to a head it was more pitiful than unexpected.

As removed as NBA basketball may be from real life, it is worth examining the reasons for the Pistons dysfunction because they are not unique to professional sports. We see them all too often in the corporate and public sectors. Not long ago the Pistons were an exemplary team; they were in the NBA Eastern Conference finals for six consecutive years, and won the NBA title in 2004. Detroit fans loved the players and its management for its workman like approach to the game; few stars just a lot of discipline and hard work. All that is lost now and so let's examine what happened.

One, no leadership at the top. Karen Davidson is the owner. She inherited the team when her husband, William, an octogenarian billionaire entrepreneur/philanthropist died in 2009. She has shown little of the passion for the team that her husband did and to her credit has tried to sell the team. Her preparations for sale, however, have hampered the team's competitiveness because she seems unwilling to invest acquiring the right players and the right coaches.

Two, poor decision-making in management. Joe Dumars, the president and general manager, was twice voted the NBA's executive of the year and deservedly so. In years past, he put together a set of players who played as an ensemble, each one willing to do what was necessary to win. He also hired good coaches, notably Larry Brown who coached the team to a championship. Dumars also fired Brown the following year when it was clear that he had lost the trust of his players. But since that time Dumars has selected poorly in the NBA draft and traded away key players who might have helped the team remain competitive. In fairness the failure of ownership to pony up for good talent has hindered Dumars.

Three, weak front-line management. John Kuester is a first-time head coach; his career has been as an assistant. Based on team's performance on the court and their comments expressed off it, the players show him little respect. When seven of them failed to show up on time (or at all) for a shoot-around, Kuester benched them, leaving the Pistons with only six players available to play. It was in this game that Kuester was ejected.

Four, undisciplined players. Richard Hamilton was once considered a key player but since late last year he has been benched. Recently it was reported that Hamilton lost his temper at a practice and berated the Kuester in front of other players. This insubordination eroded team with veteran backing Hamilton and younger players siding with the coach. The net result is dispirited play and mounting losses, including one game to the league's worst team, the Cleveland Cavaliers.

Five, fan malaise. Not surprisingly fans are not supportive of the team. Attendance has been declining, not simply because of the poor economy in Southeast Michigan, but also because the fans are unwilling to spend their hard earned dollars on a team that has given up on itself.

These five factors are not the sole reason for the Pistons' demise but they go along way toward explaining how a team on top could fall so quickly. Jim Collins cites what he calls the Gerstner Philosophy (in reference to Lou the CEO who rescued IBM) in How the Mighty Fall,"The right leaders feel a sense of urgency in good times and in bad, whether facing threat or opportunity, no matter what."

Every manager who cares about his team and his organization needs to be vigilant against complacency but also against thinking that bad things cannot happen to good organizations. Of course, they do, and that is why savvy managers should do that they can to instill leadership, groom tough managers, instill on performance, and hold everyone accountable for results.

The status quo is unacceptable; total renewal is the only path forward.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 3.16.11

Savvy leaders know that everyone in their organization is watching them. Now with the proliferation and popularity of social media, everyone in the world can be watching too. It is not the proverbial Big Brother they fear, it's millions of little brothers and sisters armed with smartphones that can take pictures and videos and disseminate them worldwide in minutes.

Dictators deserve the scrutiny; social media from China to the Middle East is revealing the discontent with strong-arm governments that favor those in power at the expense of those without it. Social media can be an accelerant to change, but whether it can bring about democracy and economic prosperity remains to be seen.

Social media is more well entrenched here at home. Consumers have used it as a means of expressing dissatisfaction. Recall the case of Dave Carroll, the musician who did a music video about the way his guitar was damaged by careless baggage handling. It went viral in days, forcing United Airlines to apologize for its negligence and make restitution. More common are customer complaints that ripple through social media sites creating a wave of nasty publicity for companies.

So what can leaders do to lead in the age when social media is not only ubiquitous but also perceived to be more credible than mainstream media? Here are some suggestions.

One, lead with integrity. Of course no leader will admit a lack of integrity; but as we witnessed in the financial meltdown of 2008, many senior executives in the financial community were managing their enterprises with little regard to sound risk management and instead putting their own self interests first. Never assume integrity is a bedrock principle until you live it. Everyday. And insist that everyone else in the organization does likewise.

Two, be transparent. Assume everyone is watching, because they are. Leaders need to be open and honest with those they lead. They need to explain their actions and hold themselves accountable. One executive I've come to respect is Vineet Nayar, CEO of HCL Technologies. His leadership life is an open book, so much so that he posts his own 360 performance evaluations online for anyone in the company to read. As a CEO, he regards himself as responsible for managing the company so it can succeed.

Three, befriend social media. It makes no sense to fear social media. The challenge is to understand it so you can make it work for you rather than against you. Find ways to use social media to connect with stakeholders in new and different ways. Some senior executives write blogs about what they and their companies are doing. Others use Twitter and Facebook to disseminate their views.

The trick is to do more than produce content, such as advertising and public relations; the challenge is to connect with stakeholders in ways that are meaningful. That means listening, responding, understanding and reacting in ways that demonstrate you get what others are saying and you will consider their ideas.

These suggestions are for starters. Remember too that in our age of social media, just as in every age, bad news travels more quickly and is often believed more readily than good news. That is life. No leader can change that perception.

What leaders can change is how they respond. Seeking to distance oneself from bad news makes a leader look small. Using it as an opportunity to make amends makes a leader seem human and compassionate.

Leadership never was, nor never will be, for the faint of heart. Today good leaders also need a strong stomach to cope with what they cannot control, as they seek to do what is right in a world where everyone is watching.

First published in Washington Post  2.7.11

Football coaches love to say that the game builds character. Indeed it takes a strong person to step onto a football field and willingly endure the kind of punishment that players inflict upon one another.

But character is not something that you learn just from playing a game; it comes from learning right from wrong, too. This lesson came to mind as I watched Jim Tressel, coach of the Ohio State football team, explain why last April he had not reported possible NCAA violations to university authorities.

This explanation contradicted his public statements that he had learned only last December that Ohio State players had sold memorabilia for cash and tattoos. As a result, the players were suspended for five games for the coming season, but allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl. Failure to disclose such improprieties is something that the NCAA considers a major violation and something for which a coach could be dismissed.

At the press conference Tressel apologized and said he would learn from the experience. The athletic director defended him, as did the president of the university, Gordon Gee. In fact Gee brushed aside any consideration of dismissal saying that Tressel had done much good work for the community as well as being a good coach who has won a national title for OSU.

Tressel is one more example of an executive with a blind spot. When confronted with a breach in the rules, he looked the other way. [This is something he has been accused of doing for years at Ohio State and at his previous employer Youngstown State.] Tressel will be suspended for two games and docked $250,000 in fines and may be subject to further discipline from the NCAA.

Tressel's conduct makes him human, but does not make him exemplary. And that is precisely what the administration at Ohio State sought to do at its press conference. Administrators, professors and coaches set the example for students to follow. They are responsible for them; we call it "in loco parentis," Latin for college officials acting like parents. But when the university president bends over backwards to praise a wayward coach, he validates the notion that big-time sports trump academics. Certainly this must be dispiriting to the school's many fine professors and hard-working students.

Decades ago humorist James Thurber, a loyal Ohio State graduate, satirized academic integrity with his comic vignette about Bolenciecwcz, OSU's All-American tackle. Bolenciecwcz was a godlike on the gridiron but woefully human in the classroom.

Not all schools act like Ohio State. Just last month, Brigham Young University dismissed a star basketball player for having premarital sex with his girlfriend. In a school run in the Mormon tradition this is taboo. It is also a violation of the school's honor code--something to which all students agree to abide. BYU's athletic department did not hesitate in removing the player from the team, even though the suspended player might have helped the team win a conference title and advance deep into the NCAA basketball tourney.

I would not advocate that any school, certainly not a state-run institution, adopt BYU's value system. But I would argue that athletic departments that do play by the rules do a better job of instilling character than those that do not. After all, a measure of a person's character is not what he does when everyone is watching, but what he does when he thinks no one is.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 3.9.11

Change is never easy, especially for those in charge.

When you are on top, the view is pretty good; everyone else is looking up at you. For an autocrat, this is intoxicating. In time they believe in their power and entwine the future of the organization with their own capacity to lead. They surround themselves with those who will are willing to sublimate themselves to this power. Such people are incapable of change because their sense of self worth is linked to their autonomy. Change is akin to death.

Strong leaders, unlike autocrats, are capable of change because they have the wisdom to see that their leadership needs the support of other strong-minded people. They are open to alternate points of view and are willing to act on those points of view if they believe that change is necessary.

Hosni Mubarak is an autocrat and will not change without being forced. An indication of his inability to acknowledge his people's pain was the appointment of the former head of the security services as his new vice president. This man may be the most despised person in Egypt, if not for Mubarak himself. Such is the case with autocrats. They do what they want to do, not what needs to be done.

We have examples of many strong leaders who have changed over time. Franklin Roosevelt was a master of change. His management of the federal response to the Great Depression was to try multiple approaches to evolving problems. As the nation inched toward war, Roosevelt realized that he would need the support of industry, and to gain genuine commitment he knew that he would have to allow businesses to make a profit for the work they did. Thus the friend of the workingman also became the friend of the industrialist.

Leaders must do more than allow change; they must push for it. Otherwise it is cosmetic; that is, it only affects appearances not substances. Such is the case with Mubarak. His cabinet shuffling seems little more than window dressing. He remains in charge and that is the problem. The corrupt system he oversees is opposed to the aspirations of Egypt's citizenry, most especially the young and the educated.

If a leader is the problem, he must step aside. This is hard for an autocrat to do because his view of self is linked to the destiny of his organization. He persuades himself that to give up power is a form of surrender.

Strong leaders on the other hand know when it is time to step down. Reportedly George III remarked that if Washington gave up his command after beating the British at Yorktown he would be the most powerful man in the world. He was not, of course, but he set the example for future American leaders to consider. One who understood this concept implicitly was Abraham Lincoln, who said, "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

Autocrats do not lack for power, but their exercise of it demonstrates a failure of character. Strong leaders know that character is the ultimate test of power: not to hoard it but to use it to affect positive change.

First published in Washington Post  2.1.11

One day last November as I was waiting for my delayed flight to take off from Terminal 3 of JFK airport, I noticed a television monitor carrying a message from the Port Authority proudly claiming that some 440 million passengers per year use the New Jersey and New York airports and train stations. Given that I was waiting in a crowded terminal with few amenities the thought of half-billion people milling about was not a comforting message.

The disconnect between message and environment is not unique. As consultant I am privileged to visit a number of work environments. How a facility looks says a great deal about how employees feel about it.

When a facility is run down--that is, lighting is dim, carpets are worn, walls are in need of new paint, cubicles are sagging, and conference rooms unkempt--it sends a signal that management does not care how people feel when they come to work. On the other hand when the facility is up to date--bright, clean, and spacious--it radiates a sense of energy. People know that management cares how the place looks and is willing to invest in its maintenance.

In fairness older facilities are harder to maintain and many organizations lack the funding to keep them in tiptop shape. Yet there are some things management can do to communicate to employees that they care enough to create a pleasant work environment.

One, provide adequate light. Natural light is best; newer buildings have huge panels of glass that create atrium like effects in their offices. The light seems to breathe life into the building, and in winter this can be comforting. In summer it makes working inside more tolerable. Older facilities can improve light by creating more open spaces and installing lighting systems that provide healthy amounts of illumination.

Two, put a shine on the place. One office facility adjacent a factory painted the hallways and put art on the walls. It was not a huge investment but it made a difference with employees. They liked it. It made employees feel that management was thinking of them.

Three, create commons areas where people can gather. Recently I visited a financial services company located in a high rise. One of the middle floors of the building was dedicated as a central meeting area complete with meeting rooms as well as a coffee bar. It was airy and open, and popular place for employees to gather.

Four, make the cafeteria inviting. Years ago cafeteria food was like prison food--bland, overcooked and to be avoided. Now in some places I go out of my way to eat in the cafeteria because the choices are healthy, savory and affordable. They also offer great variety from entrees to salads as well as choices of Asian, continental and traditional. When the cafeteria is an inviting place people want to congregate; this builds a sense of community informally.

True enough not every company can transform itself overnight but it can make an effort to make facilities more amenable. One facility that impressed me recently was the headquarters of the National Parks and Recreation Association headquarters in Ashburn, Virginia. The office building is styled like park visitors center with a tasteful combination of stone, wood and glass. Its grounds are landscaped and include walking trails as well as a couple of ball fields. You know in an instant that management understands the impact of environment on employees.

Inside the lobby you will find an inscription that reads: "Leave it better than you found it." This mantra of the Boy Scouts applies to campgrounds but it also should resonate with leaders. Do what you can to make the work environment better and your employees will help you make the place achieve more than what you expected.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 3.2.11

The shootings in Tucson struck with surprise yet somehow seemed tragically familiar. While the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords made headlines, six people died, including a judge and a nine-year old girl. Giffords was critically wounded doing her duty: speaking to her constituents.

It is easy to ascribe political motives to the shootings. After all, our history has been shaped by assassinations of presidents. Judged by what passes for political discourse--with partisans on both sides hurling invectives--it would be tempting to blame extreme partisanship for the tragedy. That would be sad if true. Ms. Giffords is a conservative Democrat, a gun-rights supporter and, as her friends and colleagues said on Meet the Press, she is one who sought to build bridges not burn them.

Speaker John Boehner was wise to say, "An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve." Partisanship has its limits. So what are the alternatives?

First, respect people in public office. Politicians make easy targets for vitriol as well as ridicule. Sure, they may say things we don't agree with, but that does not excuse us from calling their motives into question. Most politicians I know spend lives that few of us would envy. They work long hours, spend evenings at political or community gatherings, and spend time asking (sometimes begging) for money.

Second, understand the dangers. Those who run for political office already run the risk of having their lives opened to public scrutiny. Having their public safety at risk too would be a tragedy. We need men and women of good intention, and all political persuasions, to feel they can run for office.

Third, hold people accountable for their words. When people in public life can say whatever they want--or post it on the Internet--without fear of contradiction, it fuels prejudice and hatred. As the saying goes, we are all entitled to our opinions; we are not entitled to our facts. Failure to distinguish between the two fuels hyper-partisanship and its resulting fear, prejudice and hatred.

Next week marks the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy's inauguration. He was struck down by an assassin, and so the words of his inaugural address should give us pause. "United there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided there is little we can do--for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder."

Those words were addressed to America's allies, but they could apply equally to us today. Divided we invite hostility. United we can find solutions.

First published in Washington Post  1.11.11

As we mark the occasion of Ronald Reagan's centenary it is important to remember what he taught us about what it means to lead.

When Reagan became President in 1981, the prime rate topped 20% and would rise even higher. A lingering recession kept unemployment rates higher than normal, 7.5% in 1981. It was the worst recession since the Great Depression. Many businesses could not seem to find a way to compete against more agile and quality-conscious competitors from Japan. To many Americans it had seemed we had lost our way, especially in the wake of the Iranian hostage crisis.

Yet none of this could extinguish Reagan's faith in the nation and in its people. After all, Reagan's gift was not just an upbeat attitude; it was his salesmanship of the American dream. Yes, he was a great communicator. And he worked hard at it. [Now that we have access to his correspondence we see what a prolific writer he truly was.]

The salesmanship came from selling the American people on the same dream that Franklin Roosevelt, a Reagan hero, had sold to us in the depths of the Great Depression. We can succeed if we put our minds to it. Kenneth Duberstein, a former Chief of Staff to Reagan, put it best when he said that Reagan got us to believe in ourselves again. People believe in themselves and in a cause greater than themselves they can achieve great things--as long as they have a well-intentioned leader to point them in the right direction.

But Reagan was no happy-go lucky salesman. He was not afraid to make unpopular decisions. As a proponent of smaller government, he lowered the top income tax rate (from 70% to 29%), but he also raised taxes eleven times and increased the size of federal government. The national debt also nearly tripled under his tenure. As presidential historianDouglas Brinkley told CBS News, "Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes. He knew that it was necessary at times."

It takes a strong leader one confident in his own convictions to persuade others to follow his lead, even when he sometimes might deviate from a desired goal. That does not make him less credible; it makes him a pragmatist. And I would argue that when trust their leader they will grant him discretion to make hard choices.

No president, no leader for that matter, can accomplish much by himself. He or she must harness the power of others, to bring people to common cause. Reagan was the master at this. His positivism was contagious. Even his political enemies, notably Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill, liked him personally. Reagan's winning personality even softened the stiff diplomacy of the Soviets. Premier Mikhail Gorbachev did not like Reagan at first but in time found him impossible to dislike personally, even when they could not agree over limiting the number of nuclear weapons.

Getting others to see the virtues of your point of view is what every leader must strive to achieve. And when leaders face long odds it may do them well to recall the example of our former president who sought when possible to look on the bright side because to do otherwise was for him to give in to the forces of defeatism.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 2.9.11

Mediation is a skill that requires patience, fortitude and wisdom. But when it comes to mediating between NFL owners and NFL players, I would add something even more important--an ability to act serious when all you want to do is laugh out loud.

Consider for a moment.

We have 32 ownership groups and fewer than 2,000 active roster players. None of whom can agree on how to divide $9 billion in television revenues. Get real. Forget the fact that such a sum could be put to better use--or any use--other than keeping billionaires and millionaires happy.

Nowhere on the planet is so much energy being expended when so little is at stake. True, $9 billion is a great sum of money, but the reality is that owners have already staked their claim to the first billion and now are simply negotiating over how to split the remaining $8 billion.

Right now the players want to maintain the 60/40 split: $4.8 billion for players, $3.2 billion for owners. A 50/50 split guarantees $4 billion for each. This means that both parties are fighting over a difference of $800 million, not the full $9 billion.

Yes, there are peripheral issues like a rookie salary cap and a proposed 18 game schedule. Likely the first will pass (players don't want unproven players making more than they do), and the second will die (fans want quality competition not more games).

Therefore the negotiation process is little more than public theater--albeit behind closed doors. Cynics might call it a charade; skeptics might call it "manufactured" publicity to keep the game in the public eye.

The challenge for George Cohen as mediator is to apply his well-honed skills as a negotiator to instill a common sense on the proceedings.

After all if a mediator cannot feign patience with owners who live for the spotlight, fortitude with players who act as if a million-dollar salary is a minimum wage, and wisdom for both parties who seem clueless, then what hope is there for a settlement?

Cohen will need all the resolve he can muster to help both parties understand that negotiating revenue split is easy compared to what might come next.

The most serious issue facing the NFL has nothing to do with money; it is player health. As medical evidence mounts about the destructive nature that a game rooted in collision wreaks on the brain mounts, owners, managers, coaches and players need to focus on ways to protect players.

Otherwise future rounds of collective bargaining will not require mediation because television executives will not want to pay licensing fees to a sport that no one wants to watch.

And that's no laughing matter.

First published in Washington Post  3.08.11

As the economy shows distinct signs of recovery, companies are making a more conscious effort to communicate with stakeholders and as a result many are actively planning their annual meetings. These meetings are terrific opportunities to fire up the faithful--those who have a stake in your future.

Based upon successful meetings of the past, here are some things to consider when you plan and stage your next off-site meeting, be it an all-employee meeting, a vendor/supplier meeting or a franchise dealer event.

Have a purpose. People need to know why they are coming to the event. Create a specific agenda and theme it to the mood of the moment. Create a slogan about what you believe in and what your organization stands for. People can use the theme as a rallying point.

Create excitement. You are inviting people to travel to your event. Dress the hall with appropriate theme décor. Give it a festive ambiance.

Stick to the agenda. Keep the activities moving. Keep general sessions short and to the point. Use breakout sessions to encourage two-way conversation. Keep that conversation going after the formal activities. This is where good ideas spark and good business can be struck.

Celebrate the event. Don't forget to have fun. When you bring people from out of town, spring for good food and drink. Hire entertainers, if appropriate. It could be extravagant as a Las Vegas-style show, or as simple as a three-piece combo. A little music helps people feel more welcome and lightens the mood.

Rev 'em up. Never forget that when you invite people to an event, they are your guests. Treat them with respect. The respect you show them will be repaid a hundred times over. Participants always leave successful events thinking, "Wow, we must be special because the company paid for us to be here." Understand the motivation is intrinsic; it is not what you say; it is how you enable people to respond.

There is something else to consider. Be flexible. Outside events can alter the mood of your gathering. The 2010 Golden Globe Awards event was upstaged by the earthquake in Haiti. Around the clock television coverage of the devastation on the island cast a somber mood over the typically upbeat Hollywood event so organizers toned down the glitz and turned the event into telethon-style fundraiser for Haitian relief.

Bringing your people together at a meeting is a terrific opportunity to demonstrate common cause with the goals and objectives of your organization. But it will only succeed if you have strong purpose, keep it running smoothly, and go with the flow when the outside world intervenes.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 2.2.11

Gaining power is not the same as gaining wisdom. With power comes authority but also responsibility. Undoing the work of a predecessor makes for good sound bites, but it may not make for sound governance.

Governance is hard work. It involves putting the needs of others ahead of your own. For leaders, that often means turning down their own egos in an effort to work with other, even bigger, egos in order to achieve positive results.

A leader of any organization must strive for common purpose. This does not mean shirking tough decisions that will have negative consequences for some (executives close facilities; lawmakers may cut services), but it does mean putting aside partisanship for the greater good of the organization.

A challenge for any leader assuming power over a new organization is to ask one simple question: How can I make things better?

This question raises challenges that are related to the present (What must I do now?) as well as the future (How will I be remembered?).

For the present, leaders must deal with the pain first--that is, stop making things worse. What we do today affects what we will be tomorrow. Fiscal discipline is essential to the integrity of both public and private sectors, but so too is the creation of new jobs that will enable people to build their own futures.

For the future, leaders must look for new ways of doing things. What works for us may not work for our grandchildren. This means leaders of today must be looking for ways to deliver solutions that ensure economic, social and environmental gains.

In his inaugural address on January 1st, the new governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder, said, "The old unbelievable needs to become the new achievable." That notion embraces not only innovation as it relates to business, but innovation as it shapes governance.

Innovation requires an open mind--one that listens to ideas, embraces what is possible and acts for results. Instead of playing against one another, we need to play with one other. Now is the time for leadership in service to the nation, not politics in service to partisanship.

The problems before us demand bold thinking and even bolder actions. The solution to our problems requires well-intentioned men and women in the public and private sectors working creatively to turn what is possible into what is practical.

First published in Washington Post  1.04.11

We are in love with the image of an athlete who guides his team to victory against bigger, faster, and more skilled opponents. We like it best when that player is a quarterback, banged up and bloodied yet plays through pain to will his team to victory.

This hero story took a hit when Jay Cutler, quarterback of the Chicago Bears, allowed himself to be taken out of the NFC championship game because of an injured knee. Cutler admitted that his sore knee prevented him from playing at his best and so he went along with the coaching and medical staff’s decision to remove him from game. But, as Jim Trotter of SI.com reported, Cutler became visibly upset when told that other NFL players had questioned his toughness.

Bears head coach Lovie Smith, along with two players, came to Cutler’s defense. And the next day it was revealed that he had suffered a sprained medial collateral ligament, an injury that weakens the knee’s stability and hinders a quarterback’s ability to run and throw.

Never mind Cutler has missed only one game in his career. And due to the porousness of the Bears offensive line he is one of the most sacked quarterbacks in the game. Nonetheless Cutler must live with the image, at least until he returns to play next year, of being soft.

Too bad because Cutler has just given us a good example of a leader knowing his limits and removing himself from the field of play, not so he could rest but so his team could win. The Bears did not, but the backup QB Caleb Hanie did a credible job in directing a couple of scoring drives.

What we learn from Cutler’s example is that as much as a leader wants to succeed sometimes it is better to step aside for others. Cutler made his decision in minutes but others in leadership positions have much longer time to contemplate.

When the decision to quit is the leader’s own to make--and not the organization’s – here are three questions the leader must ask.

Am I able to help the team win? Physical limitations or illness can make the decision easy, but no less painful. Limitations resulting from a failure to perform and a loss of confidence may be more compelling reasons to quit.

Am I hurting the team’s ability to succeed? This question gets to the heart of capability. If circumstances prevent a leader from delivering his best, or at least helping others to do their best, then stepping aside may be the only recourse.

Can someone else do a better job? Very often a leader with limitations remains the best option but if there is someone more equipped for the current challenge then the reason to step aside becomes more imperative.

Leaders by nature are not quitters; they are achievers. Their drive for results is impressive and often comes at great sacrifice to themselves, that is, they put aside a more orderly life in order to attain their goals. That is why we love them. For such a leader the quest produces a high and that is why it can often be hard to step away from the action.

Good leaders know when to say when and in the process allow their team to achieve something they must deny themselves--the opportunity to succeed. That sacrifice often cuts more deeply but when done for the right reasons strengthens the leader for the next big challenge.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 1.25.11

Integrity is the cornerstone of sound leadership. It is what gives managers the character they need to insist on doing the right thing, as well as doing it the right way.

Integrity is not a process; it is a value that is practiced by individuals, managers and employees alike. So it matters what employees do and how they do it. As a veteran executive once told me, hire for character. Don't expect to develop something that is not there. If a person lacks a moral compass, don't think you can give him one.

Managers, like all of us, want to succeed; and since their success is based upon getting the best people they can to work for them, good managers are on the look out for talent for their teams. It is easy to be dazzled by an individual's success--be it the attainment of a sales goal, the launch of a new product or the successful adoption of a corporate initiative.

These accomplishments merit attention, but it is always wise to peek behind the curtain to see how these successes were achieved. And to do it, consider three questions:

How well does the individual work with others? Teams need leaders who are willing to work with others. The ability to cooperate is essential to team work. From it can emerge collaboration that is essential to team success.

How does the individual deal with adversity? Setbacks are inevitable. A leader must be one who can address an obstacle with a clear head. Knowing how to deal with adversity is a measure of a leader's ability to achieve.

How do others regard this individual? Everyone wants to be liked, but affinity comes second to respect. Respect is rooted in integrity and reinforced by competency and credibility.

Simple questions, yes, but their answers will give you insight into the character of the individual. Character is a reflection of integrity; it is the framework upon which a person's behavior is based.

Judging character is not a mystery; it is a matter of watching how a person interacts with others and the effect that individual has on others. A truism in drama is that character is action; the same holds for leadership. How an individual acts defines who he is.

Perfection is not what managers should look for. "The first time you see Winston Churchill you see all his faults," said Lady Lytton, "and the rest of your life you spend discovering his virtues." Churchill could be abrasive, cantankerous and impetuous, but he was also faithful, magnanimous and valiant.

Managers therefore may do well to tolerate an individual who exhibits quirky habits, so long as those quirks do not harm others or the team. And never should an employee (or manager) be allowed to cross ethical boundaries in business or in personal relations. Character matters.

Managers who hire people without integrity not only imperil their teams but also the character of their organizations.

First published in Washington Post  12.13.10

No one knows how long Steve Jobs will be absent from the helm of Apple. The challenge for Apple one day--and I hope it is decades from now--is to find a new CEO. Right now the decision would be straightforward. Tim Cook, the current COO, is a skilled operations man, and according to The New York Times very much "in charge" at Apple. He is the ideal person for the job.

Finding a replacement for Steve Jobs, as the Times noted, the breakthrough innovator, dealmaker and person of influence, is frankly impossible. And so Apple would do well to forget trying to find one. Rather, as many have pointed out, it would be wise to turn to a committee of people to do what Jobs has done.

Steve Jobs is irreplaceable as was another innovator-entrepreneur, Walt Disney. He began his career as a cartoonist but early in his career turned his talents to thinking and creating and running a creative department. The Walt Disney Company became the tour de force in animation. Walt's genius was in storytelling and in getting so many other talented artists to go along with his ideas and work together. He shepherded the Imagineers, creative types who thought out of the box but were willing to work collaboratively to create the most exciting entertainment products their day.

Disney was also restless. If you could create fantasies on celluloid, couldn't you do it in real life? Thus was born Disneyland where so many of his characters came to life in 3D in the form of walking characters and amusement park rides. Disney also created and hosted a television series on ABC as a means of promoting the park as well as finding an outlet for the many Disney films, including specially produced nature films.

Disney's attention to detail ensured that his park would not be the sleazy carny style he knew from boyhood but would be very different. Customers were called "guests" and cleanliness, service and hospitality were paramount. When Walt died in 1966, plans for his next big thing, Disney World in Orlando, were well under way. The park opened in 1971. A succession of CEOs ran the company as caretakers, doing what Walt would do operationally but not what he would do creatively. They were not innovators.

It took a new generation of management, headed by Michael Eisner, to take the Walt Disney Company to new horizons. Eisner's lieutenant, Jeffrey Katzenberg, let the company's return to producing animated features. It also expanded its theme parks and found new sources of revenue in merchandising its characters and in the steady release of its film library on videotape and later DVD.

The company acquired Capital Cities, which owned ABC television and ESPN. [It even bought Pixar, a company headed by Steve Jobs.] Eisner unlike Disney eventually drove off senior talent and was replaced by Robert Iger. Today the Walt Disney Company remains an icon force in entertainment, theme parks and retail.

Walt Disney, like Steve Jobs, was a once in a lifetime executive. Companies do not replace them. They prepare for their departure by promoting the cadre of people of many different talents and do what Walt did better than anyone--get them all to work together to create something valuable that consumers will want to experience.

That challenge will be one that will define Apple's future.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 1.18.11

The tough part of management is not administration; it is people. Well-managed systems may run themselves. People, on the other hand, are not to be managed; they must be led.

Part of the governance process in any organization is getting people to go along with ideas they themselves have not initiated. Good leaders know that most people, if not all, are motivated by self-interest.

While politicians cater to the interest of voters, true leaders understand that governance goes well beyond communication. Good governance requires an ability to see both sides of an issue and work toward an outcome that a majority will support. That requires compromise.

One man who understood the nature of compromise was Dwight Eisenhower. Although Ike knew how to give an order and expect it to be carried out, he was wise enough to realize that life did not operate according to an Army field manual. He learned this first-hand as Supreme Command of Allied Forces in Europe where he had to balance the wishes of his superiors, Roosevelt and Marshall, with the dictates of Churchill and DeGaulle--not to mention the egos of Montgomery and Patton. None (save for Patton) could be ordered; they needed to be placated. That required something that expert leaders do well: listen, learn and understand.

Later in life, Ike, no doubt after serving as president, said, "There have to be compromises. The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters." This statement echoed one by statesman-philosopher Edmund Burke. "All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter."

Effective compromise is not capitulation; it is a process of accordance with another point of view. We all like to believe that our ideas and opinions are superior but reality dictates they seldom are. Few organizations will run well with one person in charge; smart organization accommodates ideas from all sectors, because in doing so they meet the needs of the people (customers or constituents) they serve.

Compromise does not preclude tough decisions. While it is important to listen to other points of view, a leader is under no obligation to agree. Standing up for what you believe to be the right decision is the very definition of leadership. But standing tall for every idea you have is delusional. Doing so repeatedly drives good people way from you, not to you.

There is an exception to compromise, and Eisenhower knew it well. As preface to his above comment, Ike said, "All human problems, excepting morals, come into the gray areas." Note the exclusion of morality. Trading in values for expediency--be it for profit or re-election--is what gives compromise a bad name. The rule that good leaders who know how to run an organization follow is simple: compromise on issues, yes; compromise on values, never.

Issues will change by the day. Values--truth, honor, integrity--are forever.

First published in Washington Post  12.06.10

Some decisions take more deliberation than others.

Leadership requires followership, but it is up to leaders to set the agenda for others to follow. This is especially true about big, bold ideas that might prove initially unpopular.

Take for example Civil Rights. President Truman issued the order to integrate our military in 1948. This is not something generals asked for, and in fact a number of them opposed it. Nor was integration a popular topic in the civilian world. Yet Truman's decision had the moral imperative, particularly since so many African Americans had served honorably in World War II and in every war prior to it. Truman did not wait for public opinion; he decided and pushed it forward.

Leaders can exert moral authority over issues large and small when they seek to right a wrong or prevent one from happening. Reducing the size of the federal budget is necessary; and one can argue that if it is not reduced in a timely fashion then it will imperil the health, safety and security of our nation. So then reducing it, some may argue, becomes a moral imperative.

Labeling an issue this way can be an exercise in word play if it is not followed up by action. Members of the bipartisan commission on federal debt reduction have hit upon a unifying factor, one that works for everyone: shared sacrifice. Exact cuts in spending that affect all but the poorest, so that everyone learns to do without something. This means that everyone will need to give up a little for the good of the nation.

This is where leadership once again becomes imperative. Squabbling over what gets cut and who does the cutting may quickly degenerate into partisanship. To avoid excessive partisan rancor, it may be instructive to look how some companies reacted during the early days of the Great Recession. Many companies imposed a freeze on merit increases, including those for senior executives. True enough executives make more than rank and file, but a freeze is a freeze. On a broader scale, we saw examples of managers and employees cutting their pay to avoid lay offs. In both instances pain was shared.

Shared sacrifice reinforces the moral imperative of any leadership proposition. And we have a word for men and women who put themselves and their ideas forward for the good of the organization, even when it may mean they have to give up something. We call them leaders.

We measure their legacy by what they have achieved in tough times when it might have been easier to walk away. Such is the case with all great challenges. It falls to leaders to point us in the right direction and then lead us together until the challenge is met. And this is especially necessary when the going gets tough.

Maybe the toughest thing in management to do is persuade others to go along with you when you have no authority over them. I once heard Jim Collins, the leadership expert and author of Good to Great (Social Sector), analogize this situation as the equivalent of Lyndon Johnson leading in the Senate.

As Senate Majority Leader in the Fifties, Johnson was able to drive through legislation through the power of his persuasion. He was a good talker, but he was also a great listener. And as Johnson's biographers Robert Dallek and Robert Caro point out, Johnson was able to read others. That is, he got to know what makes them tick and what was close to their hearts. This way he could pitch his legislation toward what appealed to their interests.

We as leaders in the corporate sector must do the very same. Say you are challenged to implement an initiative across multiple functions. What will you do?

One, do your homework. Find out what your colleagues in different functions think about the initiative. Likely they will oppose it for any number of reasons that we can label the "don'ts." As in "Don't like it. Don't want to change. Don't want more work."

Two, make your case. Demonstrate how the initiative will make things better in the long run. Acknowledge short term pain for longer-term gain. Argue the business case.

Three, listen, listen, listen. Pay attention to what your colleagues are telling you. Let them digest the change but listen to how you can adjust the initiative to meet their specific requirements.

Four, push hard. If this initiative is important and if senior management is counting on you to drive it through, and then keep on it.

Five, be there to follow up. This is critical. Make it known up front that you will be available to help implement the initiative. You, or your team, will help the team get the new initiative up and running.

Driving things across the enterprise is never easy, but you can do it if you are willing to listen, learn and act on what you know.

First posted on FastCompany.com on 12.09.10

Sometimes a leader may reverse a key decision or hold fast to the chosen course. Knowing what do to and when defines a leader's legacy.

Examining a decision in context is essential to determining its efficacy. Asking four questions will help a leader gain perspective.

Why is this decision important? Big decisions require deliberation over time. Typically part of the equation involves testing assumptions, as in, "What is the cost of not doing what we propose doing?" Revisiting why a decision was made is a good first step because it will confirm why you did what you did. sound decisions affirm the organizational mission.

Who benefits from the decision? There are winners and losers in every decision because decisions provoke change. Consequences of the decision may mean some people gain power and influence; others may lose it. Or many more may suffer inconvenience. Resistance is to be expected; how to deal with resistance is a measure of leadership. It may require more active participation by the leader to ensure that everyone pulls together for the good of the organization.

What is the cost of reversing the decision? There are risks in reversing a significant decision, especially if time and resources have been invested in their implementation. This can make the organization look unfocused, even wishy-washy. At the same time, pulling back might be prudent because it will save the company from throwing good money after bad or from alienating stakeholders.

What is best for the organization? The challenge leaders face everyday is doing what the organization needs them to do. When a decision proves unpopular, it may make sense to hold course because the long-term pain outweighs the short-term gain. We see this often with corporate reorganizations.

These questions will help the leader get to the heart of the decision and what should happen next. There is one other aspect to consider: the effect on the leader. Sometimes a reversal would mean the end of a job, especially if the decision has proven to be wrong and done harm to the organization. In parliamentary systems, this is what happens to party leaders who are given a vote of no confidence.

Reversals can also illuminate a leader's ability to be an honest broker. This can be a sign of strength as well as intelligence because it demonstrates that the leader understands what is best for the organization. This is precisely what Roberto Goizueta did as CEO of Coca Cola when it became evident that the reformulation of New Coke was wrong-headed. The company reversed its decision and, in the process, grew market share for what became known as Classic Coke.

There is one area in which leaders cannot reverse: integrity. You can change policy, but you cannot compromise principle. As straightforward as this seems, all too often we have seen companies short-change employee relationships due to a shift in business conditions. Cutting back to save a company going through a tough patch is part of business. Exacting those cuts only on employees while sparing management is unprincipled.

Reversing a decision because it is not working is what good leaders do when the decision proves unworkable or impractical. In this way the leader puts the organization first and ego second. At the same time, holding fast to an unpopular decision because it is good for the organization in the long run affirms the mission as well as the resilience of the leader.

First published in Washington Post  11.22.10

The reasons for the fall of General Motors are legion. Poor management. Undisciplined unions. Uninspired products. But there is one reason that is often overlooked, though it bedevils many companies: insularity.

As the one-time largest company in the world, and long a dominant economic force in its home state of Michigan, General Motors grew accustomed to seeing the world as it wanted to see it rather than how it really was. When imports from Asia arrived in great numbers in the early '70s, automotive executives at all of what were then called the Big Three dismissed them as little more than fads. But when it became clear that consumers actually preferred makes from Honda, Toyota and Nissan, General Motors executives just shook their heads in dismay.

As noted auto analyst and author Maryann Keller has pointed out, GM executives simply could not comprehend why consumers would prefer vehicles not made in the United States. They overlooked the fact that then-young baby boomers would prefer cars and small trucks that were more reliable, durable and smaller--not to mention more affordable--than products made by domestic manufacturers.

Failure to confront reality doomed General Motors, as it has many other companies. When you are really big, you tend to lose the hunger for excellence that many smaller companies have. In its early days, General Motors was a formidable competitor. It understood its customers and, under legendary leader Alfred Sloan, developed a tiered product line--or as Sloan said, "a product for every purse." That led to the development of brands that ran nearly autonomously.

With size grew contentment, as well as resentment. Unions wanted their piece of the pie and received it. But General Motors never developed the more healthy relationship with unions that Ford and Chrysler did. There was always an undercurrent of discontent that permeated both sides, which never truly respected one another. Such a resentful posture delayed the company's response to embracing quality and developing new products that consumers actually wanted, rather than what executives thought they would like.

Over time, General Motors did become leaner and more efficient; but the legacy of insularity and defensiveness crippled the company for decades and, in the process, contributed to its loss of a generation of car and truck buyers.

General Motors's bankruptcy in 2009 was the direct result of failing to tackle the hard questions related to labor, product and fixed operational costs. Its last independent CEO, Rick Wagoner, tried valiantly to shake things up, but his efforts were too little too late. Wagoner never succeeded because he could not see beyond the reality that had shaped General Motors. We're big, we're rich, and we will survive.

A new, leaner General Motors, which has had a significant amount of its debt erased, is poised for success. Current leadership, having experienced failure, understands that success depends upon embracing the future and shaping it rather than seeking to deny it.

First published in Washington Post  11.16.10

So often when a newly hired or promoted employee does not perform, he or she remains in place because removal would reflect negatively on the executive who hired the candidate. Fearing for his or her own reputation, the boss procrastinates instead of acting on the problem.

This is shortsighted thinking, because bosses who promote incompetent managers already look bad. People notice the poor performance and soon enough link that insufficiency to the person who hired him. The only way for the boss to redeem his reputation is to remove the person, and do it sooner rather than later.

If this happens, ask four questions, especially when you are the person who did the hiring or promoting.

1. What has happened since the manager assumed control? Consider how the department is performing. Is it reaching its objectives in ways the complement the mission as well as the values of the organization? For example, if the new boss is "making the numbers" but driving people crazy in the process, there is a problem. Likewise, if the department is deficient but employees seem happy, trouble is brewing.

2. What assistance have you provided the manager? Managers ultimately must sink or swim, but you cannot expect them to stay afloat without assistance. This holds especially true for more senior managers; they need the company to help them transition into new positions. Executive coaching can help but so, too, can a coordinated transition program that provides the newly promoted with access to the colleagues and mentors who can teach the person the ropes. You as the boss must help the manager adjust, too.

3. What will happen if you get rid of the manager? So often when a company removes a poor manager, employees will ask the boss "What took you so long?" Ask yourself whether workers will say the same to you about their current manager. Talk to direct reports as well as to your peers. Get their views to assist you in making the final decision.

4. What will you do about the situation? If the answers to the above questions point toward getting rid of the bad manager, you must set aside your own ego. Be honest with yourself. You made the wrong choice and now you must act. Failure to act represents a failure of your leadership.

Note of caution: Never begin the process of transferring or severance without consulting your human resources department. Failure to do so may prolong the agony of underperformance as well as the possibility of a lawsuit.

Lack of foresight accounts for promoting employees to a level of incompetence. All too often companies move workers up on the basis of past accomplishment rather than on future performance. Why? Because that is all we know how to assess comfortably. We cannot predict the future, so we rely on past indicators. This is especially troubling when promoting people into management for the first time. They may have served as stellar engineers, accountants, or salespeople, but management is a separate discipline. Without proper development and training, managers will fail.

Never let your ego trump the need to right a situation that's wrong.

First published in Bloomberg Business Week on 1.11.11

Attention recruiters: If you are looking for men and women to fill senior leadership positions in a decade or two, look no further than Teach for America.

This thought crossed my mind as my wife who was writing a recommendation for an applicant read me what the federally sponsored teacher development program desired in its candidates.

There are no slackers in Teach for America. It looks for men and women who show "evidence" of such things as: achievement, perseverance, critical thinking, organizational skills, respect for others, interpersonal skills and a "desire to work relentlessly in pursuit of our vision."

Of all of these desired attributes two command our attention, not only for teachers but also for the leaders of today and tomorrow. They are perseverance and critical thinking.

Perseverance is