TEAM BUILDING v BUILDING TEAMS

I  always like to start discussions around team building with our clients by drawing their attention to and discussing Patrick Lencioni’s five dysfunctions of a team, namely:

Absence of Trust

Fear of Conflict

Lack of Commitment

Avoidance of Accountability

Inattention to Results

I do this because I think this model provides an excellent basis for building effective teams simply by removing the negative descriptors before the key words. So, for me an effective team achieves the following:

Trust through knowledge and acceptance

Constructive conflict by open communication

Commitment to agreed objectives and goals

Accountability and ownership of outcomes, individually and collectively

Results orientation through focus on desired outcomes

In terms of achieving a truly functional team, as defined above, in which team members are interdependent and supportive of one another; I believe there is little which can be achieved by traditional action learning ‘teambuilding’ events and activities. This is not to say the same have no value, more they tend not to build a team in any sustainable or relatively significant way.

Traditional team building activities ordinarily involve achieving defined tasks, which are not work related, away from the team’s operational environment. This dislocates and disassociates the team from their ordinary working experience and employs them in achieving an outcome which is irrelevant to the team in their operational role. Also, Lencioni’s model is hierarchical insofar as the absence of trust leads to fear of conflict which prevents commitment, and so on. By dislocating, disassociation and irrelevance the foundations of the functional team, that is, trust and constructive conflict are no longer required to achieve commitment to the task in hand. This in turn makes it relatively easy for team members to commit to the (irrelevant) task which can be achieved, more or less, without significant penalty in relation to ownership and accountability. Clearly, skilled delivery and facilitation can enable drawing of parallels and lessons relative to the working environment but the implementation of the same is another matter altogether.

My advice to clients seeking to build an effective team is to do so in their work place and utilising the realities of their environment and day to day work. Doing so smartly can also bring added value in achieving organic development and growth. In advising this I draw attention to the need for leadership and acknowledge the challenges involved in adopting such an approach. There are tools and processes which help in building effective teams in this way but the first requirement is for leadership and in so saying, the following clip by Patrick Lencioni about leadership helps explain why http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sqvWEI1CVg&feature=watch-vrec

HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY- HOW STRATEGY CAN MAKE YOUR FUTURE

In today’s business world if you are a business leader you have two choices. You can shape your destiny or let fate take you to the destination it chooses. All too often we come across businesses that have taken the second option and found they are in a place that they did not want to be.  It’s a tough world out there with a rapidly changing environment with lots of competitors chipping away at your business. You need to ensure your business survives and flourishes through proper planning and preparation. Having some sort of Strategy that includes a vision of where you want to get to. An understanding of what might stop you. An idea of the team you would like to assist you on your way and a means of allocating your scarce resources to the most important aspects of your plan.

There is a time and place for each of these disciplines   but you need to understand the where and when and how and bring all of these disparate activities together into one coherent strategy.

So how do I put together my strategy and where do I start?

Like all good stories you need to start at the beginning by understanding your personal requirements and how these can be met by your business. There is little separation in today's fast moving world between home and office.  This entails asking yourself lots of questions. What is it you want to achieve? (Vision) How will you do this? (Plan) Whose help and guidance do you need? (Talent Management) What resources will you need?  How much will it cost? What’s my time frame to achieve this? (Resource Priorities and Risk Management)

Hone your answers at each stage of the process by continually asking one of the most important but rarely used questions – WHY? Sometimes its best asked five times to get to the real issue or desire!

That’s a lot to take in if you’re also spending most of your time on day-to-day operational business matters. Sometimes it pays to bring someone in from outside your business to look at your strategy with fresh eyes and there are plenty of consultants who can do this. Some may also assist in the implementation of your strategy as you focus on the day to day activities. After all we all work far too much "in rather than on" our business.

But in the words of Rick Page “Hope is not a strategy” Start shaping your future to ensure that you get your business to the place it needs to be to give you the life you want!

CREATING VALUE FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS AND YOUR PEOPLE

Companies often mistake profit for value and assume that the proof of profit within our capitalist society automatically indicates that value has been achieved. However the capitalist system is under siege. Companies are widely perceived to be prospering at the expense of their communities. A big part of the current problem is the stakeholders' and boards adopt a limited approach to value creation and the perception of value by potential customers. Focused on short-term financials, companies overlook the broader influences that will sustain their long-term success. The microscope that has been brought to bear by the economic environment brings with it a far more discretionary customer who is focused on what they get in total for their buck. Clever companies could bring business and society back together if they redefined their purpose as creating "shared value"—generating economic value in a way that also produces value for society by addressing some of its challenges; the old win win rather than zero sum argument.

What is value? Value is an individual perception. It comes from an individual's expectations which are founded in their own experience and beliefs. Value put simply is the positive difference between someone’s' expectation and reality. Just as a lack of value is the negative difference between expectation and reality.  So value comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes and it is here that companies need to get cleverer in their delivery of something. Value will last as long as the item is around it is not just about shiny and new products.

Value needs to be measured through the life of a product. It needs to be measured in all sorts of ways to match the expectations of the audience that is trying to assess it.  Long Term Value is no longer about initial cost but it is also about through life costs and disposal costs, it is also about the environmental impact, local economy impact, societal impact etc etc.

Clever companies are starting to focus their marketing on the other aspects of value that society considers important and those that don't reflect the new principles of non-monetary value will soon find their market dwindling as they look only towards their own profit. Clever companies provide and measure the same value to their employees, after all how good is it to work for a company your proud of!

EMPOWERING UNDERACHIEVERS FOR EFFECT

Every leader has at least one person in their team who isn’t performing. You really want them to do better, but do you sometimes sabotage their progress that by managing them like underachievers? Well perhaps there is another way?

A leader always wants their people to perform at their optimum level. It’s good for every one involved in the team and drives organisational performance. Regardless of the leader’s personal intentions - whether they want to look good as a leader or they want to drive their business forward, all a leader wants is for their people to do their best at work.

As team members start to under perform, start to let the leader down, the leader’s initial impulse is to take back some control. Decrease team members responsibilities, control some of the project, or even micro manage them with a long screw driver just a little in order to make the leader feel more comfortable. This is human nature.  After all a successful outcome is being threatened, so the leader naturally re-assumes control. Good leadership some would say and in certain circumstances that is the right thing to do for the task although it may damage the individual team member.

But stop a moment lets reflect on how this impacts upon the under performer doing the work?

You lead top performers very differently from those under performers and perhaps that may contribute to their lack of success.  Two completely different approaches which achieve different results appear logical on the surface; however, it seems ludicrous when you think you are applying methods that inhibit under performers from learning and developing. Let’s break down the logic:

You do something new - and someone performs really well you give them control and let them get on with it with the belief and freedom that delivers success.

However you have someone that isn't performing well doing the same new thing - and you really want them to do well - so you do something totally different, you take back control pressurising them and hindering their opportunity for learning and development

In other words, we manage high performers like high performers. And we manage underachievers like underachievers - even though we want everyone to become a high performer for the sake of the team and the outcome.

And a big component of this is the leader feeling in control. When we take control away from people, their ability to think critically, to problem solve and to control emotions and behaviours is compromised. As leaders, we tend to give our high performers a lot of control and our underachievers a little. We are imposing our way upon someone who may have a better but different way. Someone who may just need to learn how to do it and the best way of learning is experimentally. Hence our imposition of control might end up driving a self-fulfilling cycle.

In a recent study a group of people were given a problem solving test and their scores were recorded. Each of the participants was then asked to describe a person in their lives that they thought was controlling. For 15 minutes, they were asked to describe the person, their actions and specific situations. After this interview, they were given another (equivalent) problem-solving test and each and every one of them performed about 30% worse.

Interesting that just the thought of someone controlling us decreases our ability to problem-solve by 30%!

But it turns out actual control by the incumbent isn't completely necessary. In many research experiments using computer tasks, just the feeling of control can reignite someone's performance. As with most things, perception is more important than reality. We call this ownership and its all about feeling ownership of an outcome. Effective communication by a leader should leave a team member in no doubt about the expected outcome to be delivered and the boundaries beyond which they have to seek permission to pass in pursuit of that outcome. This creates the impression of control although a good leader will monitor unobtrusively until they have total confidence in that team member.

So as leaders how do we develop our under performers through empowerment through the feeling of more control.

1)    Be more organized in your delegation

To delegate well and give people control, you have to be more organized than when you simply do it yourself. You must clearly communicate expectations (the outcome) and boundaries. Give yourself and your direct reports realistic lead times, which allow them to get their work done, get some feedback and then redo it if necessary. When your direct report gets it wrong too close to the deadline, you have very little choice but to take it back and do it yourself but remember, if you can always, exploit a learning opportunity!

2) Delegate pieces of projects, rather than the whole thing

Remember people do things better if they like doing it.  So you're bound to find things that people are more proficient at. The most effective leader develops their team members using challenge and support - too much of either is a poor recipe for learning. If you do not have total confidence  in someone give them pieces of the project that you are happy for them to control, rather than setting them up to fail by being over ambitious asking them to do too much. Time spent building trust and understanding is never wasted.

3) Create the perception of control

Ownership is important as people always need to feel like they control something. There are always things that we have no control over - such as deadlines. But there are also things that we can make sure people do have control over - that contribute to the way in which the outcome is achieved. Delivery of a small contributing piece of an outcome such as the provision of refreshments or even the colour of the binding for the final report without interference can afford a perception of ownership. These small things can actually make a big difference in the way team members perform whilst enhancing trust and cohesion.

People do their best work when they feel they are trusted; when they have a sense of control. Not when they are operating on fear or over worried about making little mistakes that make them appear stupid. They need to understand what they own and the expectations and boundaries and then be left to get on with it.

These simple things might just help your underachievers become high achievers and valued team members in the future. The value of experiential learning should never be missed!

BUSINESS LEADERS - WHAT STATE IS YOUR CRYSTAL BALL IN?

TURBULENT TIMES

I always say that you have two options at the bottom of a well drown or start climbing. Well many businesses currently sit at the bottom of that well. The events that have transpired over the last four years since the onset of the current recessionary cycle, evidence the turbulent times all organisations face. While uncertainty is troubling, it is also the time of greatest opportunity when business is most turbulent.

Humans are happiest in static times and yet if one looks at when the greatest organisations started, it was during times of upheaval and turbulence. Greats like Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie and J.P. Morgan emerged out of the shift from an agrarian to an industrial society. Companies like Hewlett-Packard, Apple Computer and Microsoft emerged from the shift to an electronic society. This leap to greatness is made possible by the state of turbulence where the traditional paradigms and norms that govern business are shattered. Companies and whole markets are driven to seek out new solutions to their problems as they strive for competitive advantage brought about by the forces of change.

We are well beyond the realms of management and informed creative thinking and decision-making can greatly enhance leaders’ ability to lead. Positivity is key and rather than mourn the loss of business or bemoan internal changes brought about by recessionary pressures or from intensified market competition, leaders need to exploit the new opportunities that present themselves in the prevailing market conditions. One thing is certain: organizations are not going back to the business models that governed them prior to 2007. They are seeking new ways to enhance productivity and profitability, and therein lies the opportunity for any leader who wishes to seek it out. However, each should acknowledge that in times of turbulence, the ability to anticipate problems, situations and opportunities dramatically increases their chances of success. The Sampson Hall Gordian model allows leaders to make informed decisions about their future and the Sampson Hall strategy model enables them to plan in a world of uncertainty. Both are key to an organisations survival in these modern economic times.

If leaders wish to take advantage of the turbulence in their markets they must apply informed creative thinking skills based on reality and yet forward looking to the future. They must step ‘outside the box’ and think imaginatively and yet not naively. Positivity is key and yet credibility is essential. Rigor needs to be applied from a futuristic perspective. The Sampson Hall tools stimulate a shift in thinking that allows leaders to design and develop new solutions to address their workplace and organisational problems. Not only do the tools help with the current position but they enable organisations to understand where they are and how much further they have to go. They identify potential by pinpointing available but oftentimes hidden opportunities. These tools will help the creative thinking process in an organisation, they will allow leaders to take informed decisions whilst understanding and mapping the possible consequences of their decision s and the future problems that they may come across along their path to success. However these tools will only suit organisations that have genuine ambition and the desire to remain competitive amongst their peers. Organisations that have used them do not look back.

VISION and DIRECTION - LEADERSHIP ORIENTEERING

How can leaders at any level, especially at executive or board level, expect to get the best from their people and business or organisation without communicating clearly their vision and direction to their staff? It is not unknown for Sampson Hall to be commissioned to deliver a leadership development programme for a group of middle and senior leaders to find the very people we are helping are being inadvertently ‘hamstrung’ by a lack of vision and clear direction from their executive. This is particularly frustrating for us as we see individuals developing their leadership capabilities and becoming more able to fulfil their potential yet inadvertently prevented from doing so by the very people who have invested in providing the training.

How does vision work and why is it so important? If a leader has not got a clear picture of exactly what it is they are trying to achieve then how can they expect to know when it has been achieved? If a leader has a clear picture of their desired end state but the people they are depending upon to produce that end state do not know what it looks like then how will they know what it is they are trying to deliver? Would you set off to your work place in a morning without knowing where your work place is and what it looks like? A leader without vision is like an orienteer without a map; they are likely to run round in circles getting nowhere fast whilst their competitors get to where they want to be before them.

Not only must a workforce know and understand what is they are trying and expected to achieve but also how to do so. This is why clear, concise and well articulated direction is important. Woolly direction leads to uncertainty and ineffective action which leads to dysfunction and, ultimately, in failure to achieve the desired outcomes. Undoubtedly, when you set off to your workplace in the morning you know by which route you are going and how you are going to get there. A leader without direction is like an orienteer without a compass; they can only follow their competitors around the course and finish the race in last place.

Having a clear vision is only the start. If a vision is to be realised then it must be effectively communicated in a way which has meaning and can be understood by those who need to know what it is. Good direction need not necessarily be detailed but it must be clear and understood by those requiring direction. Also, there is little point in a leader giving direction which is not resourced; a plan must be deliverable and seen to be so otherwise it is no more than a work of fiction which will fail to yield the desired results. Good leadership is like good orienteering. Make sure you have the right map for the ground you are on, acquire and use the necessary equipment correctly to orienteer your way most efficiently and effectively through the course, quicker than your competitors to win the race.

THE KEY PASSIVE COGNITIVE LEADERSHIP SKILLS

Modern leadership in a time when the quick eat the slow has to be different from that which flourished in the industrial era. Sadly very few organisations and academic places of learning recognise the requirement for a softer set of leadership skills. Cognitive leadership is all about understanding the environment in which you lead and then applying the appropriate leadership style, tool or skill to the occasion.  This is beyond the broad definition of situational leading.

The modern leader needs to listen and watch passively to understand their situation and the needs of those they lead. Listening is an underestimated leadership competence that is recognised in some schools of thinking but watching or observing and noticing is rarely considered as a characteristic of leadership. Noticing skills are fundamental to cognitive leadership.

Lessons are learned harder and therefore learned better in failure and a vital component of the cognitive leader is the ability to forgive a mistake as long as it is learned from and not repeated. Humans are fallible and we all make mistakes it is how they are recovered from that makes the difference.

Using your experts many leaders believe they have to be expert at everything to have the right to lead. Experts are with you for a reason, use their expertise allow them to control when the situation is appropriate empower them to make them more effective. With the speed of information flow and the speed of business advisors are often better placed to react rather than just advise allow them the freedom to react appropriately to seize the opportunity before someone else does.

The bottom line in cognitive leadership is the ability to trust and be trusted. You will only be fully trusted by your team if you become a cognitive leader. A cognitive leader is someone who understands what needs to be done when, someone who has the courage and judgement to lead their teams through the toughest of ordeals and environments; someone who uses the cohesive power of the team and all its attributes. To become a cognitive leader you need to have complete faith in yourself and complete faith in those around you. Please do not confuse faith with arrogance.

LEADERSHIP BARRIERS, FAILURES, SHAME AND SUCCESS

As individuals we often stop our quests at barriers and use them as easy get outs so that we can justify our weakness to ourselves and others and yet it is often our fear of failure or lack of a vision of success that prevents us from achieving our quests. I love the quote “Obstacles are things a person sees when they take their eyes off their goals” Anon.

Some of us deliberately create or imagine barriers for fear of possibly failing and yet failure should be viewed more positively as it is often the closest bedfellow to success. Like love and hate they are extremes and yet they can be in very close proximity. "Most great people have attained their greatest success just one step beyond their greatest failure". - Napoleon Hill. It’s having the guts to try and to continue trying, to believe beyond anything in eventual success. "A hero is an ordinary individual who finds the strength to persevere and endure in spite of overwhelming obstacles." – Christopher Reeve. But a hero is an ordinary person who has become extraordinary through sheer will and determination. Failure brings with it shame, a stigma many of us are unprepared to go through.  The shame barrier is self imposed and even though breaking through it may lead to great eventual success it is all too often the end of our endeavours.  Yet we admire others who have overcome shame, we admire others who are prepared to admit weakness and failure and yet we are often unprepared to tolerate it in ourselves. Shame hurts, shame humiliates, shame is a weakness that we would rather not be part of.   And yet shame is the mother of great invention the soul of great conquests and the source of great courage.

Humans are naturally lazy they get away with as little as possible. It is after all a natural phenomenon. Preserving resources and energy for survival purposes and yet “Laziness is the greatest assassin of talent” Pele. We need to think beyond instinct, think about goals and desired outcomes to motivate ourselves through our laziness to success. People who shy away from challenge and possible failure will never stand out; theirs is the greyness of obscurity. To quote two US Presidents “If you run you stand the chance of losing, if you don’t you have already lost” Barrack Obama and “Only one who dares to fail greatly can achieve greatness” Robert F Kennedy. Both men have lead the Western World!

Thomas Edison once said, “Many of life’s failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success before they gave up.” And this is the challenge that today’s leaders who are destined to break barriers must overcome. Success is hard won. It comes to those who stick to their goals longer than others. Those who do not give up but press through their personal barriers and motivate their teams to press through their personal and group barriers stand a better chance than those who don’t; for success comes to those who learn from and respect their failures and shame rather than just attributing the blame.

The key challenge for modern leaders in whatever position or role they occupy is ensuring their response to their barriers, failures, challenges and shame they meet in their leadership positions matches the environment and reinforces their desire for success. They must overcome self doubt, they must create an ethos of success but they must also understand and respect the benefits and lessons that failure delivers. After all when Galileo called self-doubt "the father of all invention" he understood the inevitable challenges on the leadership journey to success.

EXECUTIVE BOARD BUILDING – COURAGE and RESILIENCE

When all is said and done, an executive board or management board are, in essence, a team. For any team leader, the easiest team to build and lead is the one in which all team members naturally get on well with one another. Shared likes, dislikes, views and interests ease the process of establishing rapport and building relationships with reduced likelihood or disagreement and argument. However, effective teams not only need individual members to support one another they also need to be able to challenge one another robustly in order to support one another more effectively.

Unlike lower order teams, where the primary collective output may be more a matter of (say) physical support and or co-operation and or co-ordination, a primary function of executive and senior level management boards is collective decision making. At this level, the phenomena of ‘Group Think’ should be at the forefront of any leader’s mind who is constructing a team at this level, or indeed, at any level where collective decision making is a primary function of the team. The strength of group thinking around problem solving and decision making is that many individual perspectives and strengths can be brought to bear on the issues requiring resolution. A problem examined and scrutinised from multiple points of view drawn from a range of subject matter specialists should enable or facilitate a more substantial and robust solution.

Broadly, Group Think as a decision making and judgement phenomena is where consensus has primacy and prevails over individual thoughts and judgements. In essence, this is when the power of the association with belonging to the group weighs greater in the individuals conscious and subconscious than personal perspectives, thoughts and knowledge. The effect is individual team members normalise their views to that of the collective. Great for harmony and all concerned, especially a strong leader; no arguments and total buy in to what the leader proposes. However; what if the leader’s knowledge and judgement is lacking? How robust is a solution likely to be and what is the likely quality of decision making to be when wrought in such circumstances?

The leader forming an executive or senior management board made up of strong willed, confident and articulate individuals with knowledge, skills and views not shared by him or herself requires significant leadership qualities, not least of all courage and resilience. To drive a business or organisation in the right direction with extremely high personal and collective stakes is difficult and stressful; to expect and want robust challenge in order to do so more effectively is even more difficult and stressful. Given the business environment of today – which is likely to fair better? Those ‘the birds of a feather’ who will undoubtedly get along famously as they crash together, or the bloodied and battered ‘band of brothers’ who invariably emerge stronger and better equipped to deal with life’s most difficult challenges?

TODAY'S BUSINESS LEADERS NEED STRATEGY

Leaders influence, inspire and motivate organisations and teams to a place or situation that may have previously appeared impossible to those team members involved. Leaders are futuristic in their perspective and that is why they stand out from managers. Whilst management was invented to control and optimise production lines and other process oriented ways of working during the industrial revolution, leadership has been around for a good deal longer. Management is about process and metrics, using targets and means of measurement as its tools. Leadership is much more intrinsic in its properties; more about vision and emotion it is much more the art of inspiration rather than the science of measurement. Leadership needs flexibility to match the human instincts it inspires, it needs vision to create and make real the desired end state, it needs trust to create the cohesion and judgement to mange and mitigate the risks and prioritise the available resources.

Strategy is about all this, it consists of four key tenets Vision, Risk Mitigation, Talent Management and the prioritisation of resources. The tenets are interdependent and require an overall strategy to hold them together and keep them synchronised. Strategy is not about two years it’s about 5- 10 years. Strategy is about inspiration and vision in a changing environment, it affords an opportunity to select a course and change a course, dependent upon the situational requirement to map out a route that matches the circumstances and yet still delivers the required end state. Strategy is synonymous with great leadership and it informs and inspires those managers and those teams that work for great leaders. Leaders need to understand and use strategy.

ORGANISATIONAL or CULTURAL CHANGE?

Does your organisation or business need to change? If it is not producing the required profit, productivity and or other performance outcomes required of it then the answer is most likely yes. If change is required, specifically what needs to change and why? If planning change be mindful the easiest change to implement will not necessarily be the best change, especially when considering the desired effect alongside longevity and sustainability. If you are going to implement some form of organisational change, do so cognitively in a considered and reasoned way. Know and understand your organisation or business culture within the complexities of the situation and environment, mitigate associated risks and prioritise actions and resources required to effect change.

Culture, by definition, is the collective of ideas, customs and behaviours of a group; organisational culture can be defined as the basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of the organisation. The challenge in understanding and dealing with organisational and business culture is the reality and difficulty of changing the shared behaviours and beliefs of a group of people. When considering organisational change, culture is ‘king’ and will prevail irrespective of structural and functional developments if not addressed specifically. A leader, whether established or newly appointed, can implement structural and functional change within an organisation with relative ease (not necessarily easily). An externally appointed leader, initially at least, will not be readily accepted by the culture of an organisation and will need to work hard to achieve the required level of trust which engenders followers. Combine both factors to a change management or organisational change initiative and the associated problems are likely to be exacerbated. (If you doubt this consider how many external CEO and MD appointments are terminated within 12 to 24 months).

Strategic development and the change it necessitates can arise, develop and evolve accidentally and deliberately in different ways. Significant change within or of an organisation or business is most often a result of executive level, strategic decision making aimed at achieving some defined effect(s). Understanding and knowing the development process of a strategy and the different perspectives of strategic development is important in implementing effective change. The leadership view will most usually differ to that of the organisation’s cultural view and if an organisation is subject to political pressure or pressure from significant interest groups then the process of strategic development becomes more complex again. These processes and perspectives are not mutually exclusive and coexist to some extent in all businesses and organisations.

If organisational change is to be effected and implemented successfully the following key issues need to be considered:

Developing strategy and implementing change in a complex, dynamic environment, especially where innovation and flexibility are required, is very difficult and traditional practices, structures and models may not apply or be the most appropriate.

What is the leadership and management knowledge and experience within a complex, political and cultural organisational context? If an organisation or business wants to acquire the capability to change and adapt in order to succeed, it needs to consider how best to develop and grow its leaders from within.

THE POWER OF ENGAGEMENT

According to PricewaterhouseCoopers it costs a year’s wages to recruit a member of staff and train them to the level of their predecessor and yet executives are still too busy to get it. Executives don’t pay enough attention to engagement – US statistics variously state that 66% of employees feel disengaged or that 60% are actively looking for new work and yet retention of talent is still underplayed in many boardrooms.

Let’s not just think about the cost of replacement but how much they cost when they are employed. A disengaged employer is far less effective in their role than an engaged employer, Keith Ayres notes that while a disengaged employee may be giving only 50% effort, we still pay them 100% of their salary. This means that a significant portion of payroll costs are valueless to the organisation as there is no effect. How much of your wage bill is frittered away without contributing to your bottom line? 

If the average salary of an employee in a 500 person organization is £25,000 then the annual cost of disengagement is over £4 million and £17, 1200 a day. I think that deserves a CEOs and Board's attention.

Instead of dwelling on the doom and gloom, consider another cost: opportunity. What would your world look like if instead of just studying your employees through your annual survey, you spent time actually engaging them in conversation about what they care about? What if you involved them in decisions that affect their life at work and the welfare of the company at large? What if you empowered them to do,  to connect with each other, recognize one another for great work and truly collaborate? What could those sorts of employees do for your success?

Well this is the sort of opportunity that would be identified with Sampson Hall's Gordian Model. Boards would be able to exploit this and many other opportunities which would be identified in the process as they drive their organisations to success. http://www.sampsonhall.co.uk/services/our-metrics/the-gordian-model.html

Leadership Profit Conundrum

Can leadership prevail in a profit first organisation? Understanding the fundamental differences between leadership and management goes some way to explaining the nature of what I call the Leadership Profit Conundrum.

Though relatively simple the following succinct definitions and broad principles assist in illustrating the conundrum. Firstly, leadership is fundamentally about inspiration, motivation and direction and manifest more in terms of influence and guidance. Secondly, management is fundamentally about control, co-ordination and organisation and manifest more in terms of functional regulation. I believe it is unwise to interchange the meaning and use of the words leadership and management.

In business, leadership is inextricable from organisational performance; by which I mean increasing the bottom line and looking after the shareholders interests first. This is well enough for those at the most senior levels in a business who benefit from performance related bonuses. However, company profit generally does not motivate and influence staff engagement and performance throughout an organisation. In fact, growth linked to actualisation of profit and proportion of profit distributed to workers wages is disproportionate see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17033039 In essence, profit growth has become detached from wages with shareholder dividends and the highest echelons’ bonuses increasing whilst wages have stagnated and regressed in real terms. Those who are producing growth and ergo profit are receiving a decreasing share. This cannot be very motivating for the majority of individuals who are tasked with improving performance.

By definition, management restricts performance by setting limits, controls and regulation; furthermore, you cannot manage the way to achieving exceptional performance above and beyond expectation. On the other hand, good leaders influence and motivate others to perform successfully and achieve exceptional performance. Three questions come to mind here; is business leadership as we have come to know it really just business management? What is the place of customer service in businesses placing priority on profit return to shareholders? Which approach, leadership or management, is most likely to deal best with the challenges of an ever changing and demanding business environment?

The Leadership Profit Conundrum manifesting itself as management will continue prevail whilst profit is ‘king’ even though the enduring economic climate requires good leadership to prevail in order to succeed. Try this exercise to illustrate my point. Draw three columns on a sheet of paper and in the middle column write a list of words and phrases describing the current economic environment. In the left hand column write a list of words and phrases from definitions of management and in the right hand column do the same for leadership. In order to succeed and thrive in the environment of your middle column you can choose only to go left or right – which path would you choose and why?

KICKING THE FEAR OF FAILURE IN THE TEETH

Anyone who watched the television last night will understand how each of us is programmed to ignore the evidence of failure and proceed in a positive way. That's why we often harm ourselves through smoking, alcohol and unprotected sex even though we are fully aware of the consequences. So in our lives we always assume it will never happen to us and yet when it does in business we rarely see failure as a positive.  In life we are programmed to see a positive outcome otherwise we would not take risks and we would not develop and learn as a race. What we have to do is take the positives out of failure and use them in business as well.

When we plan to succeed there are automatic built in components of overcome failure because nothing worthwhile in life comes easy we are all more robust if we have and maintain a vision of eventual success.  Failure is not our enemy; but it is our friend. As a race we don't always like adversity because it hurts. However, think of what adversity has delivered to our society in terms of a hunger and drive for success. It is not adversity that kills businesses. What kills businesses is a lack of understanding and education as to how things such as adversity and failure are actually assets, and not liabilities.  Every organisation if it is to exploit its opportunities should look for the positive in each situation. I like the old Chinese saying “I complained because I had no shoes until I saw a man who had no legs" makes real sense. Often it is only our lack of perspective that allows the fear of failure to control our thinking.  If we maintain perspective in terms of our real situation we can learn as much from failure as we can success.

Failure is not something to be avoided but something to be encouraged, all creative ventures yield to the maximum when failure is embraced rather than shunned.  Failure is often seen perceived as a weakness and yet we all have weaknesses as we are all flawed as humans that is in our nature! It is the strong man that knows his weaknesses. It is only when the limits of anything are known through it breaking or failing that we are we able to understand its flaws and  develop something new, it is only then that we have a  real need to change. That is as Donald Rumsfeld would say when an "unknown unknown" is possible because an "unknown known" has become a "known known". Failure brings us knowledge and development and should always be viewed positively as long as it is not repeated too often because that only exposes an inability to learn the lessons of failure. If you keep on doing the same things you will always get the same results. As Albert Einstein said “the definition of insanity is doing the same things over and expecting a different result".

Leadership without Authority

I most usually start leadership development training by asking delegates “what is leadership?” or “define leadership” and I record their responses on a flipchart. My aims being to obtain some understanding of delegates’ pre training perspective whilst getting them to begin thinking about the subject matter. The recorded responses become integral to the training as they are referred to at different stages. If you have time and are so inclined try the exercise yourself; recording your responses on a blank piece of paper. On completion of recording the responses I invite delegates to note their responses fall into three broad categories; namely, behaviours, personal attributes and job related skills / knowledge. I then record ‘b’, ‘a’ or ‘s’ beside each response, as appropriate, and often these are not mutually exclusive, especially behaviours and attributes. Without exception to date the majority responses are behaviours with some attributes and an occasional skill or knowledge related response. Similar results are obtained by asking delegates to describe ‘a good leader’. So how does such a list correlate to any text book definitions of leadership? Try the exercise and find out for yourself.

We define leadership simply as the ability to influence and motivate others to perform successfully. ‘Measured’ against this definition the significance and importance of behaviour and personal attributes is immediately apparent, especially when considering leadership at all levels, including peer group and self leadership. This is also a definition of leadership which makes no presumption of authority to lead and acknowledges people are not necessarily motivated best by the application of authority. To understand this more fully I ask you to think about the best leader you have personal experience of in getting the most from you in terms of fulfilling your potential. Then reflect on how he or she achieved this. My guess is it was achieved by more ‘carrot’ less ‘stick’ and a good deal of ‘lead by example’ than anything to do with application of authority. Should you choose to do so, it is likely you will find the converse to be true; that is, your worst leadership experience was most likely very authoritarian and fraught with poor behaviour and bad examples.

Leadership without authority – the ability to influence and motivate others to perform successfully is dependent upon balancing behaviour underpinned by personal attributes with some skills and knowledge. Interestingly, skills and knowledge are rarely raised as significant when considering leadership. The leadership conundrum being we as a society tend to promote our leaders on the basis of having proven their skills and knowledge but their relative success will depend upon their behaviour and attributes. The leadership challenge is the difficulty of dealing with and changing behaviour and behaviour related issues; especially ones own.

One final ‘exercise’ to demonstrate my point. Consider all the high profile ‘bad leadership’ stories in the media at present; what are the common denominators, behaviours, personal attributes or professional skills and knowledge?

LEADERSHIP- THE ART OF FORGETTING

A key skill for today's leader is knowing what to remember and what to forget. Sometimes it is good to forget sometimes it is essential to remember this article assesses the importance of forgetting to leadership
Modern Leaders must be able to make clear decisions drawn from myriad bits of information; their decisions need to reflect a big picture understanding. With information becoming so abundant in this modern age, it is very easy to become overloaded and therefore not to comprehend the big picture. Total recall has often been associated with a high level of intelligence and hence achievement but this is not always so. When in a positions of leadership the opposite is more the case. Those with total recall often have difficulty differentiating the information and hence making strategic decisions. They more readily miss-understand the overall point or concept because they get so enmeshed in the detail. Detail is for managers and not leaders as forgetting, it turns out, has enormous value for leaders and big picture thinkers; forgetting and forgiving are both key attributes to good leadership. But timing is essential.
General Sir John Hackett as a commander in the 8th Kings Royal Irish Hussars employed a driver who had failed in battle as his own tank driver so showing compassion and leadership as he knew that the man would give anything not to repeat the experience of such failure and yet Hackett's humanity and compassion would serve his reputation as a leader as they were quickly evident to the rest of his men! General Hackett had chosen to forget and forgive and General Hackett was an outstanding leader.
The other reason for forgetting detail is to enable strategic clarity. One of the greatest exponents of total recall was Solomon Shereshevsky who could recite entire speeches, word for word, after hearing them once. In minutes, he memorized complex math formulas, passages in foreign languages and tables consisting of 50 numbers or nonsense syllables. The traces of these sequences were so durably etched in his brain that he could reproduce them years later.  However, the issue was forgetting them and when Solomon was asked to make decisions, as chair of a union group; he could not see the big picture and tripped up as he was so entwined in irrelevant details.   "Human memory is pretty good," says cognitive neuro-scientist Benjamin J. Levy of Stanford University. "The problem with our memories is not that nothing comes to mind-but that irrelevant stuff comes to mind."
"The act of forgetting crafts and hones data in the brain as if carving a statue from a block of marble. It enables us to make sense of the world by clearing a path to the thoughts that are truly valuable. It also aids emotional recovery after a traumatic incident. 'You want to forget embarrassing things,' says cognitive neuroscientist Zara Bergstrom of the University of Cambridge. 'Or if you argue with your partner, you want to move on.' In recent years researchers have amassed evidence for our ability to wilfully forget. They have sketched out a neural circuit underlying this skill analogous to the one that inhibits impulsive actions".  Wilful forgetfulness aids self confidence and enables forgiveness of others.
Leaders need to learn when to remember and when to forget. Given that the best learning is experiential then the experience of failure must be built upon rather than being dwelt upon. Leaders must learn to accept failure as part of an individual and teams development however, they must also remember failures if they are repeated too often. They must also remember lessons from previous failures in order to prevent themselves from becoming involved in systemic failure. As Albert Einstein said "the definition of insanity is doing the same things over and expecting a different result".
Leaders benefit from selective forgetfulness of their own failings and others failings as well as forgetting detail to enable strategic clarity as detail is the domain of managers. For leaders there's a time to remember and a time to forget!