Employee Engagement

I’ve read a lot of articles stating and arguing that the engaged workforce can create competitive advantage. The prime question here is how to engage people?

An engaged employee is ‘a person who is fully involved in, and enthusiastic about, his or her work’.

Now, try to find out from a truthful top executive how many engaged people work in his company and you would probably get an answer ‘about half of them or less’.

Should top executives be concerned about that?

In my post Leadership and “happy” organization I wrote: there is a Gallup-poll of a 1.5 million sampling, and the result is: 30% of employees are happy with their managers, 20% are not, and 50% have disengaged themselves in having any feelings at all. This is when employees show up for work, did what they are told to do, and, at the end of their shift, go home; the same routine would be repeated the next day.

Can Obedience nurture Trust?

Someone told me that blind obedience nurtures trust (my post Disciplines of execution). Let me elaborate this a little more.

I was told once that obedience is the basic issue to foster trust in organizational structure!

I was kind of surprised by such unilateral thinking and explanation of the working environment and could not figure out where from this way of thinking comes. In all my years of working experience I never thought that obedience can or may nurture trust. Just the opposite: I believe that obedience is a one way communication. And trust is definitively a two way issue.

Let me review what I have already written about to clear my position on the subject.

In the post Loyalty at work I stressed that in strictly traditionally hierarchical organizations (companies or even countries) there is only one way of implementing the will or preferences of the leader or owner - it is called a command!

Well I can argue that even in such hierarchical organizations at different incidents employees should always be (are) treated with respect. It is the obligation of the organization to see that individual leaders or managers do not abuse their power or mistreat their subordinates.

In another post Leadership and trust I expressed that trust is vital and is one of the fundamentals of any kind of cooperation between two living beings! I can definitely claim that it is very difficult to expect the trust in leaders that are practically squeezing last drops of effort out of employees with a command.

If we look even on broader scope – our environment – my post To trust the Capital? goes even beyond trust of any living being: can we trust the systems we are implementing and having as the only solution today?

Avoid or not office politics inside the company?

Politics are as old as civilization is. We are all aware of that. The fascination with politics increased in the 16th century when Machiavelli wrote thesis on how to acquire and retain power The Prince.

The question is if politics are meant only for politicians? To be used only at a state (region, city) level? Or are there underlying politics going also in many other fields, say also in organizations?
We know there are. Some of you may have heard or experienced this: ‘There's too much wrangling, gaming and maneuvering going on – I just hate this organizational politicking?’

There are very few employees and even less top managers immune to gossip, having their ideas stolen or being set up by others who want their jobs or statuses.

Very rarely employees or senior managers are reluctant to take part in what is called political games, because most people want to advance their careers or ideas, have job security, earn more and get more recognition.

The term office politics often has a negative connotation. On the other hand the brute truth and reality is that to ensure your own success or your ideas or projects you must navigate the minefield of office politics.

Who is the greatest leader of all time and why?

If you ask the question publicly expect nothing less than argumentative and disagreeable discussions.

We may consider leadership politically, historically, from the business prospective and many more aspects and settings.

This topic has been rolling in my mind for a long time now because I am looking for the best leadership practices and also the people performing them. I was amazed by people’s approach to this question on the internet. It has almost nothing to do with leadership but rather about personalities that important people have or had.  You may find ‘answers’ under the titles like ‘XYZ Things the greatest leaders all have in common’,  ‘Who are the greatest leaders of all time?’ or ‘The greatest leader of all’ and similar.

Are they describing basic leadership methodology and then, based on it, show who the great leaders were (are)? No, they are not! Do these articles have anything in common then? Absolutely yes!

Most of the researches are listing what a leader should not lack. See what I wrote in the blog Added value of leadership names or labels: “Is it all about different behaviors, different styles, or just to give a new label in front of the word leadership?” Those articles just state the “names” (mostly applied in western societies while forgetting the other parts of the world) and what those leaders were great for. Some go deeper and explain what leaders contributed to their societies.

How to (not) energize the team?

How can a leader create a positive energy and still energize the team even when he is not present or feeling hopeless, angry and demotivated?

I should mention that leading people is not a herding livestock as may be too often in many organizations.

Long ago I had a boss who did precisely that. On our regular staff meetings his “normal” manner was to yell at us. Whoever did not perform according to his way of thinking was immediately rebuked. Once, when we were all gathered together, he started with the account department manager and kept on with his offensive manners from “victim to victim”. Instead of helping to clear or solve the situations he kept accusing people of incompetency.  When it was my turn I stopped him by asking “Hey, we are not stock that you yell on us?”

My question provoked a complete silence and a big surprised shock on my boss’ face. In the moment he regained composure he began to yell even louder. I stood up saying that if he does not change the manner I am leaving the meeting. The answer to that was just another hit: “If you leave the meeting you do not need to return any more!” So I left. A big surprise and shock for others and even bigger for him. My coworkers were more afraid for me than I was while I was leaving the room. Not yet far down the corridor I heard my boss’s voice “Come back immediately!” I kept going to my office. The accountant manager was right behind me telling me to immediately return before I was fired. After a few thoughts I said “I would love to see on which grounds” and sat at my desk.

Lesson of Leadership by Biba

To post on the first day of a new year – a challenge in a way. But what else is a leadership if not that too?

Last year was a great year full of changes, challenges and a big loss too. After eleven years of being with us we lost our dog Biba. We've found her in a shelter and since the first moment she made an inseparable and very significant part of our family accompanying us wherever the path took us. She’s always been a very happy dog ready for any kind of action no matter the time, weather conditions or circumstances.

She taught our kids the responsibility for another living being. Yes, it was her doing to teach and to keep watch of our home and ‘our pack.’ She taught all of us how to be happy each and every day, she taught us what a real compassion means, she was watchful and mindful of all and she took her responsibilities with great care.

Loyalty at work

In working environment have you ever wondered about:

• Does a mutual feeling of trust within the organization increase productivity and commitment to set goals?
• Why can’t you handle an employee that frequently appears to undermine your authority or sabotage your projects?
• What is wrong when you entrust to employee and still, because of him, in team there is no teamwork attitude?

Most of the times the answer to the above questions is about loyalty: the quality of “faithfulness” to you as a leader or your principles, your country, organization, work, your vision, your superiors and subordinates.

Loyalty is a two-way street. Majority understands it as being loyal to those above forgetting those below. But, a leader depends on team. All of them should be committed, productive and reliable so that the entire department, company or country could be successful.

To lead people

Have you heard of many great managers of the past? Probably much less than about great leaders. That is why “to manage” and “to lead” are two distinguishing roles. They are both needed in society and organizations.

The verb “to lead” has a great history down to the philosophical writings from Plato's Republic to Plutarch's Lives in which he explored the question “What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?” In one of my previous posts “China’s history and culture impacting Leadership – 1” (and following ) I've written about the Far East’ perception on leadership. And what internet has to say about the verb “to lead”?

The Free dictionary 

• To show the way to by going in advance
• To go first as a guide.

MerriamWebster 

• To direct on a course or in a direction
• To guide someone or something along a way.

Dictionary.com 

• To go before or with to show the way; conduct or escort: to lead a group on a cross-country hike
• To take the initiative; begin.

Learning Leadership from Martial Arts - III

Let me continue this blog miniseries with a leadership methodology.

In one of my previous posts - “The Way” of Leadership I compared two fundamental Chinese philosophies Daoism and Confucianism, the Yin and Yang of Chinese culture. They are well routed in Chinese everyday life, culture, politics and as well in martial arts of which two Wing chun (blog Wing Chun basics 4 Leadership) and Tai Chi (blog Tai Chi Quan Leadership)  I already explained. These philosophies are used as a background to describe ideas on how to use old martial arts wisdom, explained more in previous blog (Learning Leadership from Martial Arts – II), and are now transformed in a leadership.

• Control: We said that only when relaxed a person may possess a self-control. A wise leader, for that matter, creates an atmosphere of clarity, of purpose and a sense of unity. Leader works selflessly and simply allows the team to do what needs be done. Through self-control a leader can influence (control) the outcome and not directly the people.

• Trust: The saying we used in martial arts was about trust in practice. A good leader understands the processes in the team and the fact that leadership does not require the application of force or pressure. There is no room for mistrust either. A remarkable leader trusts his/her people and is consequentially trusted by them. A well led team is not a battlefield of egos, as in teamwork there is no place for individual ‘victories’ or ‘defeats’.
• Stability: Being ‘on the ground’ (well grounded) reflects our terms and our values -- those that a leader expects from subordinates. A respectable leader is focused, firmly and confidently on the ground with his/her decisions and with clear aim in the mind. He does not flip-flop his decisions.
• Adjustment: if you drive yourself too much, this does not produce fruit, if you try to rush into things, this does not lead anywhere. The same is true for leading a team. If the leader is too aggressive, subordinates ‘are suppressed.’ If a manager is too soft, he is not taken seriously. A virtuous leader adjusts correctly to the circumstances and leads by example.

Teaching coupled with Leadership

A teacher should by default be a leader: he/she teaches new things, influences others, has listeners, defines personal growing path, can define task and workload. Anything wrong with it?

Teacher as a leader ensures improvements in instruction he or she gives and thus enhance learning process. But a teacher can (unfortunately) lack autonomy in workplace issues like: (architecture and equipment of lecture rooms), the choice of curriculum material, the scheduling of classes and other resources. Previous teacher training (mostly for university ones) is not the only obstacle they have. Once hired and in the pipeline, young teachers often find that what they have learned in their four or more years of preparation has not equipped them for what they may encounter in their new classrooms say at the Institute for Educational Leadership, Inc. Then the burden of publishing papers and research instead of learning new teaching approaches add to the direct implication of productivity and affect teaching style and capabilities.

On the other hand, teachers lead and assume a wide range of roles in school(s) and in interactions with students, whether these roles are assigned formally or shared informally. Throughout the research process they have to engage in, lead of the research group(s). Within their lecturing there may always be also some student project works that a teacher has to supervise. Teachers teach to collaborate and have to plan their lessons in advance or if needed in partnership with fellow teachers or visiting lecturers. Those are typical leadership roles too.

Leadership and influence

Within lots of studies and researches on and about the nature of leaders, many aspects of leadership still remain a secret. There are books and programs that teach how to be a leader. They give a list of what constitutes a leader. With over 200,000 respondents describing 20,000 leaders Zenger, Folkman, and Edinger conducted a four-year study to determine what makes an outstanding leader. The results showed that the ability to ‘inspire and motivate to high performance’ was the single most powerful predictor of being perceived as extraordinary leader. Why the single most? There definitely are other qualities engaged too.
I believe that there is no recipe or checklist on how to be a leader and how to influence others.

Does a leader firstly need to build an effective interaction to exert influence or is he able to influence people without building relationships first? Is it really necessary to influence others? if we are looking at the public media: Is a journalist able to influence society without having a relationship with majority or every one of them?

Have you ever tuned out on a conference or a meeting because the speaker was too wordy? Is your mind wandering when someone doesn’t get to the point? On a lot of business meetings the importance of getting to the point rather sooner than later is often overlooked. The people that do not comply with it cannot command or influence others. Why, for some people, it is easier to get attention? The key ingredients of it are “listening and hearing”. If you don’t stop talking, you have no way of knowing if you’re being heard. From this one would deduct that ‘if you want to have influence, learn to get to the point quickly’. Not necessarily...

EGO and Leadership?

“The ego” – a positive or a negative feature? Is it a necessary ingredient, an essential to had by an exceptional leader?

We all seem to be able to spot a strong ego in others. Brain studies cannot point to the place in a brain where ego could exist, what could it be? Outside of a few technical papers ego, is still a very poorly defined concept. Animals don’t have it, for them it is only an awareness of self. Studies show that awareness of ‘self’ in humans is allocated to the left brain. Could this be the ‘true’ place for our ego?

A research showed that at least 99% of all human problems are caused by the false opinion of ‘self’. The most obvious and known falsities are about our perceptions of doing right to environmental, in economic and in political issues. There are others false opinion like the ones generated among and within families, different groups or societies, friends and enemies. But does a self-important demonstration of power or ego always give the result one expect by being egocentric? I’m positive that in most cases it does not.

The ego presents one of the biggest barriers for people to work together effectively. When people get caught up in their egos, it erodes their compatibility, emotions, reasoning. It blurs the understanding and cooperation. And we mostly get just the unproductive clash of egos.

Are Leaders Born or Made?

A timeless debate like the age-old controversy about “a chicken and an egg” is more or less applicable also to the question whether leaders are born or made. In the most texts I've so far read the prevalent answer is: a leader is born.

Personally, I’m more for a kind of the in-between position: early genetics shown in childhood is an imprint that is hard to undo. Later, learning and practice bring new qualities and dimensions to leadership. Statistically, leadership capability will definitively fall along the Gaussian distribution.  Some people are, indeed, born leaders but they still need a lot of work and learning to become true leaders and to get even better as they go along. At the bottom of the curve there are others who, no matter how hard they try, simply aren't ever going to be leaders.  They just don’t have the innate wiring. All in between start out with a very good prerequisites and are hard workers and learners but mostly never become outstanding leaders.

It may be true that some people feel more inclined and are better prepared to take on leadership roles and then consequently learn and develop the necessary skills to become a superior leader. Certain basics of good leadership can be self-taught, but a number of useful skills will be acquired through experience developed over a time. Understanding leadership functions is important to develop skills and capabilities to then achieve a successful leadership style matching one’s own character and talents. Therefore, modern theories about leadership involve a combination of personality traits and also specific skills, capabilities learned over time and gained through experience. It is rather a life learning process and not a semester at an MBA school.

Feedback in Leadership

“Don’t come to me with problems – come with solutions ….” is a typical sentence that you can hear from a manager or a boss that is not in favor of receiving a feedback.

Why, indeed, a feedback is so important? Because it gives the transmission of evaluative or corrective information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source.

Feedback is an unavoidable key component in all systems. In the Nature the systems that adjust according to feedback are similar to Darwinian adaptation and to what are called dynamical systems. Feedback in Nature is a normal process of learning of any leaving creature. In Nature what is not useful or too much energy consuming cannot survive a certain period. Feedback example is the V-shape flying pattern of geese. It can be explained by a simple set of four to five adjustment rules and flying efficiency. They change the position when the first goose is tired and goes back to the tail, then the second one takes a lead etc. This V-shape consumes less energy of each goose and permits to fly faster than a single goose could. They've certainly learned it through try and error feedback.

In martial arts listening and then replying accordingly is the name of the feedback game. Jing refers to one of the most important representations in Tai Chi – “listening” or “paying attention” to the opponent’s energy and his mind’s intent. Therefore, “listening” is actually a feedback for the mind of what you can sense and feel with your extremities or your whole body about opponent. Mostly, this can be practiced when in contact with another person: you trying to read or feel what he or she is intending to do, and even how he or she will do it. In one to one or mass battle in order to win a combat this knowledge of feedback reply is crucial. If you are late, you get hit.

Leadership and trust

Trust is vital. It is one of the fundamentals of any kind of cooperation between two living beings.

For the word “trust” Google offers first: 'trust is the leading value-for-money brand for digital lifestyle...'. Only the next shot is the definition of trust by Webster's dictionary.

Unluckily, trust is a rare supply these days. People have trouble trusting each other, according to the AP-GfK poll conducted in November 2013. Furthermore, it seems that Americans are suspicious of each other in their everyday encounters. Only one-third of them say most people can be trusted – down from half of the people who felt that way in 1972. Another study since 1972 is the General Social Survey that has been monitoring societal change and within it also a trust. In the Final Report of General Social Survey 2012 “Trends in Public Attitudes about Confidence in Institutions” a scale covering 13 institutions (adding Banks and Financial Institutions to previous 12) confidence fell from an average of 29.2% to a second low point of 22.6% in 2008-2012. Indisputable is that trust as well as “unquestionable” is a basis of any religion. Modern economic activities are not far from this. Just look at the confidence in the financial sector, market, stock market or values of companies, and the value of money. On 1971 Federal Reserve notes were banned to be redeemable in gold and Executive Order 11615 in August of the same year ended the direct convertibility of dollar to gold. Other nations followed. From there on paper money has the value only if we trust in its “price”. And the money is not the only paper that has the value only because of the trust people put in …

In martial arts trust is the foundation of any practicing. Imagine that you are invited to be a sparring partner in a friendly match with Mohamed Ali. If you do not trust that he is capable of stopping the fist in front of your nose, you’d probably not even enter the ring. The same self-confidence in his abilities must also have Ali, because if he is not able to stop his fist, he’ll probably break your nose. How many partners for training will then he has if breaking the nose with his first hit occurs regularly?

Consultant - Coach

There is quite a selection of titles for people offering services to businesses such as: adviser, consultant, mentor, coach. In the last two decades in organizations business coaching has become increasingly popular to assist executives, managers, and employees in their personal and professional growth. How and what makes us decide that in particular case if we need a business consultant or a business coach?

As both, coaching and consulting process, are built on trust and confidentiality to differentiate them one can pose the following questions:

• Do they question and listen?
• Do they spend most of the time talking?
• Do they offer alternatives and let you make the choice?
• Do they tell you what to do?
• Do they think they know all of the answers?
• Do they appear to ask the right questions?
• Do you learn from them?
• Do you end up wiser or not?

The above questions help, but to determine which business service you actually need, more description is needed.

China’s history and culture impacting Leadership - 2

The second example from China’s history for an outstanding leadership can be taken from the novel: Journey to the West. The main character is Sūn Wùkōng, Brother Monkey or Great Sage. The narrative uses a lot of symbolism and is based on the Daoist philosophy. Brother Monkey represents the heart and resides in fire, which is a fifth Daoist element. He was born from a stone and acquired supernatural powers through Daoist practices on the Mountain of Flowers and Fruits, which is the source of yīn and yang. The whole settlement and the place represent the Daoist theory of five elements where the other four are: Fruit and Flowers represent wood, Water Curtain where Brother Monkey hides refers to water, Iron-Plated Bridge leading to his camp refers to metal, and Rocky hill refers to earth. 

Wing Chun basics 4 Leadership

In the book Leadership by Virtue I refer to martial arts philosophies and Wing Chun principles with regard to a personal growth for those who strive to become an outstanding leader. Here I’d like to share some Wing Chun basics to illustrate this relationship:

Efficiency and effectiveness are both the hallmarks of Wing Chun. Out of these hallmarks spring three main principles: central line, economy of movement, simultaneous attack and defense. And these principles serve right only if you have cultured three roots: balance, structure and stance.

A correct stance is like a bamboo, firm but flexible, rooted but yielding. It gives us power to either deflect external forces or redirect them. Balance is connected to a structure that is embedded within a stance. A correct structure is not important just for the defense, but also for the attack. Being effectively ‘rooted’ or aligned against the ground enables the force of the hit to be taken and absorbed by the ground. Why a good leader has to have a stable stance I have already explained in my Leadership and stability blog post.

Organizational change

Organizational change is, or should be, just one of the processes within the strategy’s frame and company vision. Why then companies have to “struggle” when introducing changes? Why do they need to change? Ever changing environment, markets, products are just pushing the limits of a current stability of the companies and provoke never ending chain of changes.

In his blog Bernard Marr says “a good mission statement articulates the purpose of the company, basically why it exists, what it does and for whom. It should serve as an ongoing guide that spells out what the company is all about. The mission should focus on the here and now.” And where do we see a necessity for a change that a company should follow? In “a vision statement where the goals and aspirations for the future are outlined. It creates a mental picture of a specific medium-term target and should serve as a source of inspiration.”

But are these definitions enough to smoothly drive a change? Company’s organizational culture, as described in the previous blog: “Organizational culture and martial arts,” is the sum of values and rituals defined by rules. It is also a part of a “bigger picture” that surrounds an organization and each of us, as I explained in my TedxTalk. And these substances present difficulties or even block a change. Employees of a company, as others, are perceiving stability as security therefore opposing changes. Consequently, a permanent conflict prevents a peaceful process of change.

Organizational culture and martial arts

Organizations are made for employees to work there and not opposite: employee should fit the organization. As the organization grows larger and more complex, management at the top lead and decide less by firsthand experience, but rather more and more on heavily processed data. From their standpoint they rarely see business flowing in the same way as do people down in production or on the sales floor. To understand huge amounts of data and information that is streaming toward them, after a throughout long training, they finally achieve to see the reality through the distorting glasses they've had to put on. Decisions they make and the responsibility they shoulder relies on tangible data. But these glasses somehow filter out emotions, feelings, sentiments, moods, and almost all the nuances of human situations that are part of everyday organizational culture consequently filtering or better losing all the tacit knowledge that drives business processes.

Organizational culture is the sum of values and rituals defined by rules. It is also a part of a “bigger picture” that surrounds an organization. This poses some problems if organization shock-wave through different cultures.

Four decades ago IBM tried to unify corporate culture in its subsidiaries all over the world. Geert Hofstede carried out a world-wide survey on employee values. The result was very informative and demonstrative. There were other researchers of the same topic too. A common conclusion of all those studies is that “we are definitely different”.