What We're Reading

Why this book?

Stakeholder Centered Coaching is about improvement. As the environment and world changes, our knowledge, skills, and applications will have to keep pace. This book identifies some reasons why people stay with what has been working believing it will always produce good results, strategies that will help leaders get feedback on what is working and what is not, barriers to behavioral change, and “feedforward” to increase productive results.

Goldsmith, M. (2007). What got you here won’t get you there. New York: Hyperion

In leadership, read the latest book by the gurus and voilá, the answer appears. This book spurs our thinking on why organizations and people continue to look for the “holy grail.” What seems to be occurring in life is “there is no magic pill.” The only real advantage is continual learning. As Goldsmith writes, “The Trouble with Success, it prevents us from achieving more success.” Once an answer is found, many quit looking for new answers. As De Witt Jones said, “look for the second right answer.” Maybe it is better to look for multiple right answers.

Unfortunately, many people, and leaders in particular, do not have a clear idea of how their behavior affects themselves and others. A list from this book follows:

• They think they have all the answers, but others see it as arrogance.
• They think they are contributing to a situation with helpful comments, but others see it as “butting in.”
• They think they are delegating effectively, but others see it as shirking responsibilities.
• They think they are holding their tongue, but others see it as unresponsiveness.
• They think they are letting people think for themselves, but others see it as ignoring them.

Left unchecked, these quirks become larger problems that extend farther into the organization. The higher up the leader, the more widespread the effect. The major focus of this book is how to work with successful people to receive honest feedback and suggestions to make behavioral change a more positive environment. As Goldsmith points out, “My job is to help them identify a personal habit that’s annoying their coworkers and help them eliminate it.”

The following process for improving skills is outlined below. There is no correlation between an individual’s standing in the corporate pyramid and what his coworkers think of these interpersonal skills:

1. Get 360° feedback
2. Help them understand what everybody really thinks about them.
3. Show them a process for how to improve.
4. Help them apologize to everyone affected by their flawed behavior (it is the only way to erase the negative baggage).
5. Advertise their efforts to get better because you have to tell people that you’re trying to change.
6. Follow up every month or so with their colleagues.
7. Listen without prejudice to what their colleagues, family, and friends are saying. Listen without interrupting or arguing.
8. Whenever they benefit from input from others show gratitude, by saying “thank you”
9. Feed forward – “special sauce” for eliciting advice from people on what they can do to get better in the future.

Dr. Goldsmith uses golf as a metaphor. No matter what the handicap, 36 or scratch, all golfers want to get better. This is what John Carse (1986) calls an “infinite game.” The goal of the game is to keep getting better as opposed to finding one way that works and ending any further improvement (finite game).

Most people in organizations delude themselves about their achievements and contributions. These false assumptions are more likely to occur because of their success than the failures. When something works, we believe it was because of our knowledge, skills, and application rather than a combination of many others and events.

Some of the beliefs caused by this delusion are:

• I succeeded and it is because of my contribution. This is fundamentally called “attribution error.” Over 80% of people rate themselves in the top 20% of performers.
• I can succeed so they take greater risks. They will always believe they will succeed. Unfortunately, “if you are born on third base, you think you hit a triple.”
• I will succeed. Most overestimate what they can handle. Then, if success doesn’t happen, they say, “I meant to….” They always think they will get to the issues eventually.
• I choose to succeed. Successful people are self-sufficient which can be a very good thing or add to the delusion of how much they are responsible for success.

As Marshall mentions in the book: “one of my greatest challenges is helping leaders see that what got them where they are is not because of all of their behaviors.” He helps them see that they are confusing ‘because of’ and ‘in spite of’ behaviors; and, he helps them to get out of the ‘superstition trap’ where they attribute their success even to their actions that have nothing to do with that success.

Two things that can get in the way of improvement is clinging to the notion that their success is linked totally to their behavior and the fear of overcorrection that will stop future success. “People will do something, including changing their behavior, only if it can be demonstrated that doing so is in their own best interests as defined by their own values.”

In section two Goldsmith, outlines twenty habits that keep successful people from being more successful and, thereby, even more valuable to their organization. These are habits mainly related to interpersonal issues rather than knowledge and skill deficits. “The higher you go, the more your problems are behavioral.”

Goldsmith is clear, he doesn’t work with bad people and if a person can’t reflect of issues and be honest, there is a low chance of improving performance. And the same applies to those who work with the leader. They are key to helping the leader change and they need to adhere to four requirements to be effective stakeholders to the process:

Here are four requirements for providing help:

1. Let go of the past. Focusing on future behavior will be the most valuable.
2. Tell the truth. The stakeholders must provide honest feedback to be helpful.
3. Be supportive and helpful. Continuing to be judgmental will not be helpful.
4. Pick something to improve yourself. Choosing a behavior that will improve leader performance will be critical.

As Marshall points out: “Getting feedback is the easy part. Dealing with it is hard. Stop asking for feedback and then, expressing your opinion. Treat every piece of advice as a gift or a compliment and simply say, ‘Thank you.’ No one expects you to act on every piece of advice. If you learn to listen and act on the advice that makes sense, the people around you may be thrilled.”

“You Do Not Get Better Without Follow Up” – Ed Koch, Former Mayor of New York City, who was famous for riding the subways of his city and asking “how am I doing.” Lots of research exists concerning ongoing feedback and reflection. Without follow-up, most initiatives are short-lived. The following are thoughts expressed in the book:

• Follow-up is how you measure your progress.
• Follow-up is how we remind people that we’re making an effort to change, and that they are helping us.
• Follow-up is how our efforts eventually get imprinted on our colleagues’ minds.
• Follow-up is how we erase our coworker’s skepticism that we can change.
• Follow-up is how we acknowledge to ourselves and others that getting better is an ongoing process, not a temporary religious conversion.
• Follow-up makes us do it.

Goldsmith outlines his conclusions on change. “Does anyone who goes to these leadership classes ever change? In polling 86,000 participants. Three conclusions emerged.

First Lesson: Not everyone responds to executive development, at least not in the way the organization desires or intends. Some people are trainable and some are not. In a major research study, a year later 70% of direct reports said the boss did some things different. 30% said nothing changed. They said they were too busy.

Second Lesson: People don’t get better without follow-up. Follow- up was defined as interaction between would-be leaders and their colleagues to see if they were improving their leadership effectiveness. Those that followed up made improvements. Those who didn’t, didn’t improve. Elton Mayo (Harvard) identified the “Hawthorne Effect.” He posits that productivity tends to increase when workers believe that their bosses are showing a greater interest and involvement in their work.

Third Lesson: There is an enormous disconnect between understanding and doing. Nobody ever changed for the better by going to a training session. They got better by doing what they learned in the program. Doing involves follow-up. Becoming better leaders is a process, not an event.

So, if you want a coach, what are some things to consider?

1. It shouldn’t be a chore for your coach to get in touch with you. Making excuses won’t make the process valuable.
2. Your coach should be interested in your life and have your best interest at heart. There are many people out there calling themselves coaches. Choose wisely.
3. Your coach asks questions about your goal. They are not there to judge you.
4. Pick an issue in your life that you’re not happy with and that you want to improve. Make a list of daily tasks that will help you getting to your goal.

Marshall Goldsmith coined the term “Feedforward” for leaders and those who want to help the leader get better. It is focused on what you are going to do differently. There is nothing you can do about the past. There is an enormous opportunity about how you will behave differently and for the better in the future. Here are four simple steps:

1. Pick one behavior that you would like to change which would make a significant, positive difference in your life. e.g. I want to be a better listener.
2. Describe this objective in a one-to-one dialogue with anyone you know. The person you choose is irrelevant. Some of the truest advice comes from strangers.
3. Ask that person for two suggestions for the future that might help you achieve a positive change in your selected behavior. I want to be a better listener. Would you suggest two ideas that I can implement in the future that will help me become a better listener?
4. Listen to the suggestions. Take notes if you like. You are not allowed to judge, rate, or critique the suggestions in any way. You can’t even say something positive. The only response you’re permitted is, Thank you.

A trait associated with successful people is high internal locus of control. Describing the beliefs of leaders Marshall coaches: “Successful people love getting ideas for the future. Successful people have a high need for self-determination and will tend to accept ideas about concerns that they “own” while rejecting ideas that feel “forced” upon them.”

“When it comes to our flawed past, leave it at the stream. To change you need to be sharing ideas for the future. Race car drivers are taught, “Look at the road, not the wall.” That is what Feedforward does.”

Here are Eight Rules that Goldsmith uses to get a better handle on the process of change:

Rule 1: You might not have a disease that behavioral change can cure. You may think you have lung cancer when you have a pulled muscle. Is it a behavioral problem or a skill problem?

Rule 2: Pick the right thing to change. Wanting is different from choosing. There is a difference between miswanting and mischoosing. One of my first tasks is helping clients distinguish between what they want in life and how they choose to reach that goal.

Rule 3: Don’t delude yourself about what you really must change. I have learned there are five reasons people do not succeed; for instance, with their diet and fitness goals.

1. Time – it takes longer than expected
2. Effort – it is harder than expected
3. Distractions – they don’t expect a “crisis” to emerge
4. Rewards – they don’t get the response from people they want
5. Maintenance – it is hard to sustain

Rule 4: Don’t hide from the truth you need to hear. People get afraid of the answers they may get. If we don’t ask for critiques of our behavior, then no one has anything critical to say. This thinking defies logic. It has to stop. You are better off finding out the truth than being in denial.

Rule 5: There is no ideal behavior. Benchmarking is one of the biggest hazards in getting people to change for the better. Sometimes the desire for “perfect” can drive away “better.” The perfect benchmark for being a human being does not exist.

Rule 6: If you can measure it, you can achieve it. The “soft values” are hard to quantify and are as vital as any hard number we can come up with. They demand our attention.

My 9-year old child nailed me with; when you are home you spend time on the phone, watching TV. You don’t spend any time with me. YIKES. I said, “thank you, daddy will do better.”

Rule 7: Monetize the results, create a solution. An executive put in a “swear jar.” Monetizing the punishment makes you notice more acutely.

Rule 8: The best time to change is now. I have learned a hard lesson trying to help real people, change real behavior in the real world. There is no “in a couple of weeks…”

One of the best ideas for leaders expressed in this book is when a leader wrote a memo to his colleagues. Memo to Staff: How To Handle Me (page 199). You can find the memo in the book. This self-disclosure, honesty, and focus on how to communicate in the best way possible sets the tone for positive working relationship and increases trust. Most of the organization will be watching to see if you are serious about behaving this way. Any deviation will end up being a reason to discount the commitment to your new goal.

Peter Drucker suggests instead of a “to-do” list, we also create a “stop doing” list. Here are the 20 Unrecognizable Habits that all leaders would benefit to avoid, or stop doing:

1. Winning too much: the need to win at all costs and in all situations – when it matters, when it doesn’t, and when it’s totally beside the point
2. Adding too much value: The overwhelming desire to add our two cents to every discussion
3. Passing judgment: The need to rate others and impose our standards on them
4. Making destructive comments: the needless sarcasms and cutting remarks that we think make us sound sharp and witty
5. Starting with “No,” “But,” or “However”: The overuse of these negative qualifiers which secretly say to everyone, “I’m right, You’re wrong”
6. Telling the world how smart you are: The need to show people we’re smarter than they think we are
7. Speaking when angry: Using emotional volatility as a management tool
8. Negativity, or “Let me explain why that won’t work”: The need to share our negative thoughts even when we were not asked
9. Withholding information: The refusal to share information with others to maintain an advantage over them
10. Failing to give proper recognition: The inability to praise and reward
11. Claiming credit that we do not deserve: The most annoying way to overestimate our contributions to any success
12. Making excuses: The need to reposition our annoying behavior as a permanent fixture so people excuse us for it
13. Clinging to the past: The need to deflect blame away from ourselves and onto events and people from our past; a subset to blaming everyone else
14. Playing favorites: Failing to see that we are treating someone unfairly
15. Refusing to express regret: The inability to take responsibility for our actions, admit we’re wrong, or recognize how our actions affect others
16. Not listening: The most passive-aggressive form of disrespect for colleagues
17. Failing to express gratitude: The most basic form of bad manners
18. Punishing the messenger: The misguided need to attack the innocent who are usually only trying to help
19. Passing the buck: The need to blame everyone but ourselves
20. An excessive need to be “me”: Exalting our faults as virtues simply because they’re who we are

Maybe focusing on “learning” as the goal will help the organization as the environment keeps changing.

References:

Carse, J. (1986). Finite and infinite games. New York: Ballantine Books.

Grant, Adam. (2016). Originals: How Non-Conformist Move the World. New York: Viking.

In some circles there is a belief that non-conformists can be hazardous to the organization. In the area of accounting, that may be true. Companies are finding creativity as the lifeblood to fuel innovation. The question is how to benefit from the mavericks in the organization while focusing on results.

The risk involved for the non-conformist and the organization. George Bernard Shaw’s quote seems to fit, “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”  Of course, there are limits to anything. The book concentrates on the advantages of being open to creative ideas and people.

“Research demonstrates that it is the most creative children who are the least likely to become the teacher’s pet.” This is also an issue for managers and executives. Managing a creative is not easy. Author William Deresiewicz wrote a book called Excellent Sheep (2xxx) which postulates students are taught to follow direction (ah, Taylor is still in vogue) as well as organizations who want conformance as the standard.

Here is a story in the book, “an angel investor offered $250,000 to Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak to bankroll Apple in 1977. It came with an ultimatum: Wozniak would have to leave Hewlett Packard. He refused. ‘I still intended to be at that company forever,’ Wozniak reflects. ‘My psychological block was really that I didn’t want to start a company. Because I was just afraid,’ he admits. Wozniak changed his mind only after being encouraged by Jobs, multiple friends, and his own parents.”

When we look to the Steve Jobs and Bill Gates of the world, we think they are just different, more self-assured, and lucky. Not True. It may seem like they look for risk, in fact, they avoid it. Page and Brin of Google stayed at Stanford because they didn’t want to drop out of the Ph.D. program. They actually tried to sell Google for $2,000,000 in 1997. They offer was rejected. Lucky for them.

There are many other examples in the book of very successful people who kept their day job while working on new ideas. Endeavor cofounder and CEO Linda Rottenberg observes “They take the risk out of risk-taking.” Most of these creators don’t like risk any more than you do.

A growing body of evidence suggests that entrepreneurs don’t like risk any more than the rest of us. They tend to plan out scenarios, hedge their bets with what-if plans and have Plan B or C or D ready to go. “Originality is not a fixed trait. It is a free choice.”

Scott Adams said, “Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.” Many times geniuses don’t recognize when they have a good idea developed. They just keep kissing frogs and eventually a great idea pops out. One lesson in the book is having many great ideas increases your chance of the major hit rather than waiting for the one big earth-shattering product. “Mozart composed more than 600 pieces before his death at thirty-five, Beethoven produced 650 in his lifetime, and Bach wrote over a thousand. In a study of over 15,000 classical music compositions, the more pieces a composer produced in a given five-year window, the greater the spike in the odds of a hit.” Edison’s “1,093 patents notwithstanding, the number of truly superlative creative achievements can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand.”

“If you’re gonna make connections which are innovative,” Steve Jobs said back in 1982, “you have to not have the same bag of experience as everyone else does. Having a wide range of experiences also helps in the production of new ideas. The data on Nobel Prize winners by researchers at Michigan State follows:

Artistic Hobby                                                                             Odds for Nobel Prize winners v. scientists

Music: playing an instrument, composing, conducting                                      2X

Arts: drawing, painting, printmaking, sculpting                                                   7X

Crafts: woodworking, mechanics, electronics, glassblowing                              7.5X

Writing: poetry, plays, novels, short stories, essays, books                                12X

Performing: amateur actor, dancer, magician                                                       22X

Interest in the arts among entrepreneurs, inventors, and eminent scientists obviously reflects their curiosity and aptitude. Here are some more thoughts from the book:

1. Time living abroad didn’t matter: it was time working abroad, being actively engaged in design in a foreign country, that predicted whether their new collections were hits.
2. The more the foreign culture differed from that of their native land, the more that experience contributed to the director’s creativity. An American gained little from working in Canada, compared to the originality dividends of a project in Korea or Japan.
3. The most important factor was depth—the amount of time spent working abroad. A short stint did little good, because directors weren’t there long enough to internalize the new ideas from the foreign culture and synthesize them with their old perspectives.

Intuition has some strengths and also some weaknesses. Steve Jobs made many great decisions based on intuition. He also made a foolish decision about the Segway. Erik Dane, a researcher says that intuition is helpful within the domain where we have experience. However, the same confidence can be negative when we apply over confidence in areas where we have little or no experience. Any strength overused can be a negative.

There is an old adage that says, go out on a limb, that is where the fruit is. It seems to us we should be on a familiar tree before going too far out. At the same time expressing creative ideas can be risky within an organization if there is not enough ecological safety. Einstein’s quote may help, “Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds.” Keep reminding yourself that hubris about your thinking can also get you in trouble. There is a balance because surrounding yourself with people who stroke your ego can be as debilitating. The following quote by Howard Tullman explains, “Familiarity doesn’t breed contempt, it breeds comfort.”

“Do you believe you can effect change, and do you care enough to try? If you believe you’re stuck with the status quo, you’ll choose neglect when you’re not committed, and persistence when you are. If you do feel you can make a difference, but you aren’t committed to the person, country, or organization, you’ll leave. Only when you believe your actions matter and care deeply will you consider speaking up.” Charles Garfield (1986), Peak Performers, says that internal locus of control, or efficacy, is the number one contributor of the best performers on the job. Efficacy is the belief that you can do something about the situation. It is the opposite of “learned helplessness.”

Leadership is essential since it affects the system, “At work, our sense of commitment and control depends more on our direct boss than on anyone else.” This was born out by the Gallup Organization (1999) First Break All the Rules, where they posit people leave managers, they don’t leave organizations.

However, if you are able to attract a curmudgeon of a manager to your viewpoint, they can be your best support. “Disagreeable managers are typically the last people we seek when we’re going to go out on a limb, but they are sometimes our best advocates.” “It is often the prickly people who are more comfortable taking a stand against others and against convention.” As a Google employee put it, disagreeable managers may have a bad user interface but a great operating system.

Bill Gross, Idealab wanted to find out what drove success versus failure. “The most important factor was not the uniqueness of the idea, the capabilities and execution of the team, the quality of the business model, or the availability of funding. The number one thing was timing. Timing accounted for forty-two percent of the difference between success and failure.” So, having experienced people with political savvy can be as important as having a great idea. “Sprinting is a fine strategy for a young genius, but becoming an old master requires the patience of experimentation to run a marathon.”

There is more discussion in the book about timing, those who take longer to think through issues (some people call this procrastination). There are distinct advantages of reflective thought as well as intuitive quick thinking. Daniel Kahneman (2013) Thinking, Fast and Slow, goes into great detail of the advantages of both types of processing.

Another creative tool is espoused by Karl Weick. He says, “putting old things in new combinations and new things in old combinations.” When you remember some of the heuristics found in life, this may be one of the most important. Synthesizing, recombining, and reframing a problem can be extremely beneficial. There are many examples in business from Post-It Notes, Velcro, and Air Bags (hand grenade technology),

Here is another provocative point. “Enemies Make Better Allies Than Frenemies.” The book outlines how enemies are more consistent and overt with the objections. Those who are friends may have more hidden agendas that might be a surprise down the road. Michelle Duffy, University of Minnesota, explains, “It takes more emotional energy and coping resources to deal with individuals who are inconsistent.” This is a concept we encourage you to read more about.

There are interesting statistics and research about birth order. This is an area we were not expecting but worth the read and reflection

In another set of book notes coming up the Bridgewater company is referenced about their culture. “In 2010, Bridgewater’s returns exceeded the combined profits of Google, eBay, Yahoo, and Amazon.” Bridgewater created a transparent organization structure that sustains safe, open dialogue to create the best possible future. “Before you criticize people, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away and you have their shoes.”   Diversity of ideas is expected and nourished. “If you hire people who fit your culture, you’ll end up with people who reinforce rather than challenge one another’s perspectives.”

Ray Dalio, Bridgewater points out, “The greatest tragedy of mankind comes from the inability of people to have thoughtful disagreement to find out what’s true.”

Anger can create a sense of urgency but just reacting with anger might get you in trouble. Debra Meyerson and Maureen Scully suggest that the key is to be “simultaneously hot and cool-headed. The heat fuels action and change; the coolness shapes the action and change into legitimate and viable forms.” “But once the heat is on, how do we keep our cool?”

Creating a safe culture to express, talk out ideas, and have a support system that honors diversity of thought is crucial in generating new solutions to problems that exist. “Research shows that surface acting burns us out: Faking emotions that we don’t really feel is both stressful and exhausting. If we want to express a set of emotions, we need to actually experience them.”

The book ends with recommendations for schools.

References:

Buckingham, M. & Coffman, C. (1999). First break all the rules. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Garfield, C. (1986). Peak performers. New York: Avon Books.

Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farr, Straus and Giroux

Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R.  (2000).  The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action.  Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

The term GAP is used to indicate many differences between what we say or believe and what actually happens. Pfeffer and Sutton provide a very helpful template to more fully understand what gets in the way of behaving in alignment with your espoused goals and values.

Anyone who has sat through endless meetings, long planning sessions, or been involved with the reverse “butterfly effect” (a great deal of energy with little result) will see the one or more of the five elements playing out in real time.

Knowing different theories is important AND insufficient. The importance to transfer knowledge into action, apply useful ideas, and focus on to adapt new learning, is summed up by Lew Platt, once the CEO of HP, “I wish we knew what we know at HP.” If we can’t apply knowledge into useful application to the organization, the work gets stymied or at least delayed. If we learn by doing, the gap between knowledge and action shrinks. People learn to swim by getting into the water, not by reading books on swimming.

A point made early in the book offers a reason so many efforts to get results do not produce in a timely manner.  Systems built by consulting firms, information technologists, and knowledge gurus are separated from those who are closest to the work. Pfeffer and Sutton say, “Social interaction is often crucial.” This also leads to ineffective use of budgets, intellectual capital of the people working, and sometimes an arrogance of knowing what’s best from the office.  Watch a couple of episodes of Undercover Boss on CNBC network.  You will be amazed at what you learn when you walk in the shoes of the frontline colleagues.

Another idea suggests that “knowledge” is viewed as a noun.  This finite description can   or will limit our thoughts.  What if we focused on “learning” as an alternative?  This active verb signals an ongoing process. Herb Kelleher, SW Airlines said, “We hire for attitude.”  He said he can teach ticketing processes but he can’t teach attitude.  Sounds like he is on to something.

Here is are the five elements:

1. When Talk Substitutes for Action
2. When Memory Is a Substitute for Thinking
3. When Fear Prevents Acting on Knowledge
4. When Measurement Obstructs Good Judgment
5. When Internal Competition Turns Friends into Enemies

When Talk Substitutes for Action. There are distinct advantages from talking about problems, processes, and purpose. Without taking action we cannot see whether or not the proposed plan works or wastes time and energy.  Unfortunately, some people are content going to meeting and talking.  How many of you have been in meetings that are Déjà vu.  We have talked about the same issue month after month with no action which would give feedback.

When people think talking about something is taking action, valuable resources in time, money, and ideation suffer. Even when a decision is reached about a problem, that is not enough.  “A decision, by itself, changes nothing.”  Preparing written reports without action does not produce feedback that is beneficial to the organization.

Pfeffer and Sutton warn us, “Mission statements are among the most blatant and common means that organizations use to substitute talk for action.”  They go on to say, “There seems to be little connection between how much effort an organization devotes to planning or even how well it does planning and how well it performs.” Planning without actions is an academic exercise.  When hiring, do we talk to the person and see if we like them?  Do we actually have them do something so we can see what they do with an issue?

When Memory Is a Substitute for Thinking. “People in organizations that use memory as a substitute for thinking often do what has always been done without reflecting.” You hear, “we tried that before and it didn’t work.”  Well, what did we learn from that initiative?  What has changed in the context that it may be worth trying again?  Do we have different staff with different skills?

A quote in the book by Stephen Quesnelle stated: “Sacred cows are the barriers that everybody knows about but that nobody talks about…They’re the policies and procedures that have outlived their usefulness – but that no one dares touch.”

Premature closure is a way to get out of meeting which avoids facing problems. It also suck the positive energy out of the room.  The ‘devil’s advocate’ on one hand can be beneficial.  It also can become a barrier to any positive approach. People don’t like uncertainty so they run to conclusion as fast as they can.

The authors quote David Kelley: “This is the best we can think of right now.  But the only thing I am sure of is that it is temporary and it is wrong.  We just have to keep experimenting so it keeps getting better all the time.” This quote signals learning continual because the landscape keeps changing.

“As their successes accumulate, organizations grow complacent and learn too little,” as stated by the authors. Richard Pascale (1990), Managing on the Edge, said in his opening line, “nothing fails like success.”  We get lulled into believing we have arrived at the right answer and we resist ongoing reflection and thinking.

When Fear Prevents Acting on Knowledge.  Remembering one of W. Edwards Deming’s principles was Drive Out Fear the authors reminds us that without a safe place, ideas will stay hidden. In The New IQ by Chris Coffey (2015) he explains the need for having ‘safe spaces’ to create places for deeper conversations. Taking risks must be honored and sometimes rewarded. A great deal of time is spent formulating new plans and the results, overall, are dismal.  Most plans are not fully or not at all implemented.  The waste in consultants and meetings is in the billions.

When fear exists, people don’t talk as much and they certainly will not take a risk on an innovating idea. Here is a quote which can have a dampening effect: Samuel Goldwyn: “I don’t want yes-men around me.  I want everyone to tell me the truth – even though it costs him his job.” This quote from the book is an example of why people will not give honest feedback.

The alternative is what David Russo said in the book: “We punish nothing.  We reward creativity.  Very much like Maria Montessori, we believe creativity should be followed, not led.”

The following suggestions are quoted in the Knowledge Doing Gap for driving fear out of the organization during Hard Times:

• Prediction: Give people as much information as possible about what will happen to them and when it will happen.
• Understanding: Give people detailed information about why actions, especially actions that upset and harm them, were taken.
• Control: Give people as much influence as possible over what happens, when things happen, and the way things happen to them; let them make as many decisions about their own fate as possible.
• Compassion: Convey sympathy and concern for the disruption, emotional distress, and financial burdens that people face.

When Measurement Obstructs Good Judgment.  “You might think that firms would recognize the commonsense wisdom expressed in a line from Otis Redding’s song,” “Sitting by the Dock of the Bay” on the need for fewer, focused measurements: “Can’t do what ten people tell me to do, so I guess I’ll remain the same” as written by the authors.

This is an example of, meet your sales numbers or find another job.  You might get the numbers and lose the relationships with customers and colleagues. Another example is why GE, Microsoft, Google and others abandoned the ‘rank and yank’ measurement system for employees. Ranking everyone and eliminating the bottom 10 percent, in theory, would increase productivity.  The result was eliminating some of the most creative team members and fear was created among those who still had a job. The cost of human resource replacement is high in money, time, and organizational knowledge.

When measurement obstructs good judgment there are many short term consequences for the people and the organization.   “Morale governs motivation which is key to timely product development; strong culture fosters a healthy work environment” and that “employees need rewards for key contributions and successes.”

Whatever the metrics, they should be used as guides for actions since we can never have absolute control of all variables.  The metrics should also be aligned with the behavior we want to see.  Measuring sales at the expense of relationships may not be a long term success indicators.

The authors make it that “Real control does not come simply from having a plethora of outcome measures.  Control and improvement come from measures that provide information about processes, measures that give people immediate and understandable information about how they need to act.”

Metrics should be relevant to organizational values, long term success, and be as controllable as possible by the person who is being held to the standards.

“Too many leaders confuse feedback with paperwork.”  “Filling out a form is inspection, not feedback,” says Kelly Allan… “History has taught us that relying on inspections is costly, improves nothing for very long, and makes the organization less competitive.”

When Internal Competition Turns Friends into Enemies. “The beliefs about competition are so ingrained that they serve as mindless, automatic, but powerful principles for organizing and managing individual behavior.” We have to be careful that the metrics don’t spur on internal competition where to win, your colleague has to lose.  That short sighted process will ultimately defeat the system.

Motivation has been studied by Herzberg (2008), Pink (2009), and Deci (1995), (to name few).  Motivation is key to individual success which will drive organizational success.  Learn what others do and improve it. “Internal competition makes it even more difficult for people to put knowledge into action and to learn from each other.

Firms That Surmount the Knowing-Doing Gap.  Those companies that have been successful have created the space for conversations that lead to action.  That action is collected and used for reflection for continuous improvement.  It takes leaders, leadership, and honest conversations about important issues to create a culture good for the people working in the system and ultimately the customers.

Turning Knowledge into Action.  The following quotes from the Knowing Doing Gap seem to capture why action is so important.

 “CEO David Kelley likes to say that “enlightened trial and error outperforms the planning of flawless intellects.”

“There is no doing without mistakes.  What is the company’s response?”

“Reasonable failure should never be received with anger.”

“Clayton Christensen: “What companies need is a forgiveness framework, and not a failure framework, to encourage risk taking and empower employees to be thinking leaders rather then passive executives.”

Close the GAP – Release new energy for yourself and others to put great ideas into action..

References:

Deci. E. (1995).  Why we do what we do.  New York: Grosset Putnam, Inc.

Herzberg, F. (2008). One more time: how do you motivate employees? Boston:  Harvard

Business Press.

Pascale, R.  (1990).  Managing on the edge.  New York:  Simon and Schuster.

Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R.  (2000). The knowing-doing gap: how smart companies turn

knowledge into action.  Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Pink, D. (2009).  Drive.  London: Riverhead Books.

Pfeffer, Jeffrey. (2015). Leadership BS. New York: Harper Business

As you might have guessed from the title, this book is not for everyone. While it should be, it is not. After all, there are many executives in many industries who feel that there is little reason to think about or analyze their leadership. That may have a long-term impact on their effectiveness as a person and the success of the organization. Call it “hubris” if you will.

But there are those, however, who see life as a never-ending series of growth and learning opportunities. Call that “humility” if you will. But these are the executives that will profit most from Pfeffer’s book. Leadership BS is for those who have a keen interest in improving their performance daily and over time- personally and professionally.

One additional note — reading this book is easy because of its organization — copious supporting factual references and stories accompany all his major points. The challenge of this book is to think about, seriously and deeply, how the subject matter relates to your own experiences in your organization. What possibilities open for you as you read? It might be helpful to have another individual or two to think about the ideas in the book collectively and verbalize your thoughts about leadership and its challenges.

The opening sentence in the Preface introduces Pfeffer’s intention for the first part of this book: “If we want to change a world with too many leadership failures, too many career derailments, and too many toxic workplaces, we must begin by acknowledging the facts and understanding why we are where we are. Only then will we begin to enjoy long-delayed progress.” So Pfeffer will look at facts, scientific evidence, studies, stories and other evidence to determine where we are with respect to the practice of leadership.

It’s clear that leadership is important to many people — leaders, practitioners, scholars and the general public. Leadership has been written upon extensively and has been the subject of many films. For example, when he searched Google (“leadership”), he obtained 140 million links to the term; an Amazon search of “leadership” produced 117,000 entries. People clearly see the topic as being very important.

Pfeffer likens the practice of leadership now to the practice of medicine at roughly the turn of the 20th century. At that time, “almost anyone could practice medicine “…as no credentials, experience, or particular knowledge [was] required”. Furthermore, “…conceptual confusion and imprecision abound in the leadership industry.” And many medical schools were more interested in financial gain than in the science of medicine.

Abraham Flexner was tasked by the Carnegie Foundation to inspect the medical landscape and issue a report. He did so in 1910. Flexner and the report were credited with revolutionizing the medical profession operating on “…the biomedical, scientific foundation” it is today.

Having realized that leadership practice was similar to the practice of medicine at the turn of the 20th century, Pfeffer’s goal in this book is to survey the field of leadership practice, including the teaching about leadership. This book amounts to a “report” of the realities on the ground (as it is now taught and practiced) in hopes that people will rethink and redesign leadership development in light of more scientific evaluations.

Pfeffer’s initial argument is that things are pretty bad. He argues that leaders fail customers. For example, airline executives in creating unpleasant experiences for their best customers, Amazon not carrying certain products because of arguments with suppliers, and banks inaccurately foreclosing on homes.

Leaders fail their stockholders. For example, Rick Wagoner leading General Motors into bankruptcy, Richard Fuld leading Lehman Brothers to nonexistence, and Ed Lampert taking an iconic Sears into mediocrity.

And leaders also fail their employees at Merrill Lynch, Hewlett-Packard, and airlines across the board (except Southwest Airlines) as wages are reduced, the number of workers is cut, and pension funds are imperiled.

Accompanying the many public failures of leadership is the failure of an enormous leadership industry existing for many years, ostensibly teaching leaders how to perform better and instructing initiates new to the field. What has emerged over the years is a set of amorphous agreements about how the best leaders should act: tell the truth, be authentic, inspire trust, serve others, be modest, and exhibit an understanding of emotional intelligence. These industry-wide “recommendations” about what leaders should be stand next to the evidence describing workers as disengaged and dissatisfied to the point where they’d like to leave. So there is very little evidence that the teachings of the industry have made much of impact on the workplace.

The author goes on to describe leadership training and development as not so much science as “lay preaching.” Inspiring stories about heroic leaders and exceptional organizations often make participants in conferences and training sessions feel good but are unlikely to translate into long-term behavior changes on the ground to improve the craft of leadership practice or that mollify disengagement and distrust to improve the experience of working.

He concludes that, despite the large and relatively old leadership development industry, there are “too few good leaders, [and] too many bad ones.”

Pfeffer proceeds to take a look at the common shibboleths regarding leadership practice of the leadership industry. With story, studies, and facts he dismantles their apparent “truths.”

1 – Why inspiration and fables cause problems and fix nothing

So what’s the problem with telling stories of unique and successful individuals and/or using those as inspiration to teach about leadership? Pfeiffer tells a wonderful story about being accosted at dinner one evening in a restaurant by a participant in one of his training programs. The program participant approached Pfeffer’s table and, in a rather loud voice, complained that, while Pfeffer taught what the research literature says, the program was inadequate because “… I came to this program for inspiration.” Pfeffer’s rather amusing response is illustrative of his faith in science and the intellectual pursuit of answers to problems. “If you want inspiration, go to a play, read an inspiring book, listen to great music, go to an art museum, or read some great treatises on religion or philosophy. I am a social scientist, not a lay preacher.” Pfeffer concludes by writing that he was surprised at the participant’s word — “inspiration” — and that he didn’t “…see many medical schools, architecture programs, physics departments, engineering schools, law schools, or computer science departments advertising their classes as ‘inspiring.’ Useful, rigorous, well-delivered, innovative, scientifically-based courses and programs that provide a foundation of knowledge for effective professional practice — certainly. But inspiring? Probably not.” If you are sincerely interested in changing the nature of work and leadership in a productive organization you are in need of facts, the latest research, and new ideas. But the leadership industry is keen on delivering what the customers want, excluding social science.

Of course, the problem of leadership development by fable and interesting stories is compromised further by the reality of stories – they may be fabricated, filled with self-deception, exaggerated, and incomplete as they lack the scientific scrutiny of data surrounding actual events.

When people go back to their work environments and measure inspiring stories against the reality of daily life in many organizations, they can become cynical — another downside of the story/fable approach by the leadership industry. As the author concludes, “In our quest for inspiration over insight, we wind up with neither.”

The author continues to describe other serious and injurious consequences to using the story/fable approach to leadership development over the studied, scientific approach. There is much to learn from the failures of leadership and he concludes that inspiration doesn’t produce lasting change.

2 – Modesty? NOT!

Modesty is another often-identified trait by the leadership industry that successful leaders supposedly practice. Pfeffer quotes Sen. Bill Bradley and Jim Collins who cited modesty as one of the qualities leaders need to be effective. Pfeiffer also quotes a Yale management professor, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, who focuses on Donald Trump’s leadership style as being immodest when he calls it “puffery, pushiness, and deception” in a Wall Street Journal editorial.

It’s easy to see why modesty seems so important. People, in general, aren’t going to work as hard for the “leaders project” as they will for their own or their team’s project. People prefer having the ability to work on projects that are theirs so they can creatively apply their talents and have others associate them with the project. Leaders who hog the spotlight and credit are often seen in a negative light and people who work for them will reduce their efforts given that the project is not theirs. Those leaders who are more modest our better liked and admired and so are likely to have their workers more enthusiastically climb on board.

Related to these points is research that shows boastful presenters are the least effective in garnering positive evaluations while those who temper their modesty about their abilities garner better evaluations at the end. In addition, leaders who spend lots of their time publicly promoting themselves are seen as wasting valuable time, while they could be working productively on company or project goals.

Pfeiffer cites lots of studies and statistics to prove the above points. However, he also cites Michael Maccoby (2007) Narcissistic Leaders that equates visionary leaders with some reasonable degree of narcissism. Pfeffer notes the dictionary definition that narcissism includes a grandiose sense of self-importance, arrogant behavior or attitudes; a preoccupation with fantasies; a strong fixation on associating with high-status people and/or organizations — to name just a few characteristics. Given these elements, he includes Michael Eisner, Ken Lay, Joseph Stalin and Pres. George W Bush in this category. (And from what was said about Donald Trump earlier my guess is he would include Trump as well.)

As leadership roles are often ambiguous, questions frequently arise as to what a leader should do after she’s chosen. Was she the best person for the job? Pfeffer indicates that in this milieu “confirmation bias” operates with a “vengeance”. Confirmation bias is the tendency of people to seek out and interpret information that will confirm their biases. Discrepant information is devalued or ignored.

Pfeiffer points out that narcissists (self-aggrandizing and self-promoting) generally are more extroverted and have higher self-esteem than other people. So they tend to be noticed and chosen as leaders to fill a void. And once chosen as a leader (again practicing self-aggrandizement and self-promotion), “confirmation bias” tends to reinforce the idea that you are “the” leader for the job.

While the above may be seen as positive leadership behavior, Pfeffer points to research that shows grandiose narcissism “… tied to independently rated and objective indicators of presidential success [and] is associated with several indicators of negative presidential performance, especially in the ethical domain [and] is more elevated in U.S. Presidents than in the general population.” So much for modesty as a characteristic of a successful leader.

3 – Authenticity: misunderstood and overrated

Another leadership capacity that seems to be the consensus in the leadership industry is “authenticity,” which is “…being in touch with and exhibiting their true feelings.”

Regardless of how they personally feel at any given moment, leaders need to show, with great energy, that they understand and are in control of situations. Further, they need to pay attention to information and people in order to decide which is the proper way to react. Public face is important to leaders and must be preserved.

The author then points out that the last thing that a leader needs to do is act “authentic” when there are important demands that the leader must recognize and deal with. In other words, the leader needs to be true to the situation at hand, not him/herself. What do a situation and the people around them require to ensure that the situation is dealt with successfully?

While there are many organizations that ostensibly teach leaders to be authentic, a closer look shows that authenticity involves value-laden judgments; prescriptions characterized by lots of “should,” “oughts,” “need tos,” and “musts” may be “…fundamentally misguided.” There are no base rates that explain how frequent or pervasive “authentic leadership” is. And base rates are needed to estimate the impact on behavior change to answer the question, “how would one know if authentic leadership development, leadership training, writing, speaking, coaching, or teaching was doing any good if there were no comparisons between the initial state of the world and what happened as a consequence of all these activities?” Taking another swipe at the “leadership industry,” Pfeiffer says “… in medicine, people seem to believe that it might be important to understand the scope, ecology, and geographic incidents of a phenomenon, none of which seems to be of concern to the leadership industry.”

“Leaders need to be and do what their followers and society require, not what the leader feels like being or doing at the moment. … the simple fact is that as a prescription for leadership, being true to your role, fulfilling your obligations regardless of your wants and desires, doing what will make you successful in the environment in which you are working, our behaviors are likely to be much more useful than being true to yourself and your feelings at the moment. After all, what if your real self is an a!#hole”? (Reference to another book Pfeffer’s collague at Stanford, Bob Sutton, favorably cited previously in the text.) And there may come a time as one advances in one’s career that you need to put aside personal dislikes so a team can work successfully for the organization.

“True to yourself” changes over time. Experiences change your values and perceptions over time. So what is “authenticity” as learning and adapting never cease?

One of his concluding thoughts is the necessity to become “usefully inauthentic”. That is, “…confidence as much as competence determines success, and successful people are not bashful about promoting themselves and eschewing any feelings of modesty in the process.” “One of the most important leadership skills is the ability to put on a show, to act like a leader, to act in a way that inspires confidence and garners support — even if the person doing the performance does not actually feel confident or powerful.”

4 – Should leaders tell the truth and do they?

From many directions comes the belief that lying is awful. Pfeffer points to the story of George Washington who could not lie when confronted about who cut down the cherry tree. It is a story familiar to most and it is told to youngsters to inculcate the value of truth-telling no matter what. As it turns out, Parson Weems, who was a book agent and author, apparently concocted the story in order to boost sales of a biography he wrote about Washington. Interesting that a lie points to a “truth.”

In addition to the story cited above to emphasize the importance of telling the truth for everyone, including the first President of the United States, truth-telling is often a foundational belief of religion. And many sources of leadership advice tell readers that candor, honesty, and transparency are very important values in the practice of leadership.

Besides all that, practicing honesty in leadership positions seems to be incredibly important to success. After all, if subordinates or bosses or peers find out you have lied, you’ve squandered their trust, also very important in leadership. Also, if leaders lie, how will anyone in the organization know what the truth is and how to best to react to crises, not being able to ascertain reality.

Pfeffer, however, points to studies that consistently show over time that lying is a common and customary amongst people. Also, leaders from all sorts of organizations also lie (e.g. TEPCO, one of numerous examples cited). There are few consequences for lying and, as Pfeffer points out, positive results very often accrue from not telling the truth.

Many stories related in the text point to an unmistakable fact: lying (or not telling the whole truth) is common across many industries and occupations. As Pfeffer points out: “…sometimes survival demands that you do what prevails in the ecosystem in which you are competing.” So, if others are not telling the truth, so-called “fudging the facts,” then, in order to compete successfully, we need to do the same to survive. Lying helps people get powerful positions as well. Lies occur in negotiations; public service; scientific experiments; business and banking; Silicon Valley; online dating. Misrepresenting reality (not telling the full truth, fudging the facts, overlooking some evidence) may, in fact, be a leadership skill.

The author concluded by warning: “But by ignoring the evidence, the social science facts about deception, or, for that matter, any other topic pertaining to leadership, by pretending that common behaviors aren’t really that common, we miss the important opportunity to understand the social world as it is—the first step on the road to changing it.”

5 — Trust: where did it go, and why?

Trust is in short supply generally when it comes to average people trusting government entities and business leaders. So much of what we see on TV and read about in the popular press reinforces those views. Despite this exposure to untrustworthiness, “People expect trustworthy, honest behavior and react when they don’t see or receive it.” And despite the ubiquitous dearth of trust in leadership and organizations, most organizations continue to operate though trust is minimally present. While there are very public and large or massive abuses of trust, there also “…seems to be only limited consequences for violations of trust.”

Despite all of this—media exposés and the veritable lack of adverse consequences to those who abuse trust—people generally expect trustful behavior of others, a kind of “unwarranted optimism.”

Pfeffer concludes: “So yes, trust is a quality widely touted as being helpful, indeed essential, for good leadership. There’s only one problem: it is largely missing in most leaders and in most work organizations. You need to understand why, so you don’t get fooled again.”

6-Why Leaders “Eat” First

Among the topics that Pfeffer takes on here is Servant Leadership- the belief that the leader’s job is to look after the well-being of the followers as opposed to looking after organizational wellness. And his criticism about the lack of science is repeated: it is the measure of the impact of this leadership style on an organization’s culture.

Pfeffer also points to numerous leaders who have “messed up” yet leave with very lucrative severance packages while regular employees experience job and/or wage cuts. And he cites a study that confirms 725% growth in chief executive compensation from 1978 to 2011 while worker compensation increased 5.7% during the same period.

These and other studies validate the idea that leaders really do think of maximizing their own economic position rather than eating “last”. There are some organizations (e.g. Ben and Jerry’s) who specify executive salary related to a percentage higher than front line workers pay.

There is too much richness in Pfeffer’s Leadership BS to tell all here. While he spends much of the book taking apart the unscientific nature of leadership training, he does suggest throughout the book various corrective measures that organizations can institute to begin a new, more knowledgeable and scientific approach to leadership development. And, maybe most important of all, he gives advice to leaders who are sincerely interested in learning more about themselves as leaders. For example, he credits Marshall Goldsmith for his executive coaching program because Goldsmith asks executives to question themselves daily and to rate themselves on specific behaviors “…that have the greatest impact on their personal and professional objectives. Systematically and regularly reflecting on behavior, and even better, measuring such behavior, is much more likely to produce substantive change than mere storytelling…”

Flexner, maybe not. But there are crucial thoughts in Leadership BS that help us see why our approach to leadership development has yielded a paucity of results. Framed as it is in this book, it’s clear we have a lot of different work to start on and, in that regard, this is a book for every leader and organization.

References:

Maccoby, M. (2007). Narcissistic Leaders: Who Succeeds and Who Fails. New York: Crown.

Sutton, R. (2007). The No Asshole Rule. New York: Business Plus.

Glaser, Judith. (2014). Conversational Intelligence. Brookline, MA: Bibliomotion, Inc.

An opening quote, Buckminster Fuller, in the introduction sets the tone for this book. “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” This is the essence of continuous progress.

What I have learned in over 40 years in education is this: “If it isn’t working, try something else.” As Einstein said years ago, continuing to do what isn’t working is insanity. Judith Glaser provides some useful graphics to help our conversations be more productive. For example, on page 159 there is a chart titled Trust Changes Reality that outlines brain functions that increases or decreases trust. The connection to current brain research strengthens her application to build constructive results.

One of the points that registered with me is Glaser’s Tell – Sell – Yell Syndrome. Yes, telling is easier and, from my experience, is short term at best. If tell doesn’t work, we try to sell people on an idea. Finally, when selling (sometimes manipulation) isn’t helpful people start yelling. Yelling gives the impression that we can force conformance. We know from multiple sources (Pink, Deci, Ryan, Amabile, etc) that threat and fear get short term compliance and is not conducive to long term knowledge work. This helps me discern the mode in which the other person is operating.

Glaser gives a matrix with three different kinds of conversations. Level 1 is transactional, asking and telling that exchanges information. Level II is positional- advocating and inquiring strategies that explore others’ ideas that is an exchange of power. And, Level III, is characterized as transformational – using share and discover as the interaction resulting in exchanging energy. As we all know, depending on the desired outcome, you may need all three in your repertoire.

Expanding on brain research, most of us know about the reptilian, limbic, and neocortex parts of the brain and their functions. Glaser expands this view to five parts of the brain, adding the heart/brain and the prefrontal cortex (executive function). This pushed my thinking to see people in more ways than only in a survival, emotional, and/or thinking mode. This may give you another perspective to consider as well.

As many authors and researchers before have noted, trust is a foundational attitude for learning in Glaser’s view. The protocols and graphics included in Glaser’s book are well worth the investment—both in buying the book and time spent developing skills in becoming more Conversationally Intelligent.

Rookies Smarts

By

Liz Wiseman

My first reaction is buy this book.  Ms. Wiseman’s previous book, Multipliers (2010), was full of anecdotes and research on why some leaders get better results than others. The metaphor for Mutipliers is that the best leaders multiply talent, creativity, collaboration, and are able to attract other high performers.

Rookie Smarts (2015), her latest book, addressed an issue that most organizations, especially education, are dealing with.  How do you bring in new talent, keep them engaged, and benefit from their skills, while keeping experienced staff engaged?  Barry Johnson, Polarity Management (1992) suggested you cannot have all young crusaders or all tradition bearers.  The best is a blend, with learning both from each point of view.

Wiseman pinpoints the positives and challenges of both rookies and experienced knowledge workers.  Rookies do not have the same limitations in thinking, since they have fewer experiences.  Therefore, they enthusiastically try new approaches.  Experiences staff may not have the same creative outlook AND they have political savvy and leadership skills.  This is not aged related.  It is more of a state of mind – attitude.

Experience can limit thinking because of successes in the past.  Robert Pascale, Managing on the Edge (1990) said, “Nothing fails like success.”  Unfortunately, what worked in the past may not work as well now, because the environment changes and the current rate of change is complex and volatile.

Wiseman does an excellent analysis of the four different mindsets of rookies. Each are motivated differently.

1. Backpackers – travel light and are very flexible. They are not constrained by what has been done in the past.
2. Hunter-Gatherers – look at the culture, go out and find the expertise they need, and keep learning from experienced people
3. Firewalkers – are more cautious, taking small steps and are continually looking for feedback from experienced staff to help them stay on track
4. Pioneers – are constantly moving into uncharted territory. They don’t need much to keep learning and producing because they will find what they need along the way.

Obviously there is much more specific information and research in this book.  Trying to blend the best of both, the rookies and experienced staff, will continue to be a cultural and leadership issue organizations have to confront and fashion solutions for staff in schools, districts, and communities.

Goldsmith, Marshall. (2015). Triggers. New York: Crown

If you haven’t read What Got You Here Won’t Get You There: How Successful People Become Even More Successful (2007) and Mojo: How to Get it, How to Keep It, How to Get It Back If You Lose It (2010) by Marshall Goldsmith, we highly recommend both. The first book focuses on taking your skill level and extending it. The second book is about keeping the spirit and engagement alive in your work.

For those who are interested in continuing to develop your coaching skills, Triggers is the book for you.   Having been to his Stakeholder Coaching Institutes, I can tell you that Dr. Goldsmith is incredibly sincere about helping others grow.

He starts with two truths. This is NOT the game of two truths and one lie. First, change for human beings is hard, and second, no one can make us change. Most of us underestimate what is takes to change, and especially a behavior that might have had success in the past.

Goldsmith outlines fifteen triggers that get in our way of accomplishing sustainable change. Those of us who have coached others for a while know these triggers too well. ***Excuses abound.

One of the tenets of his work is, what are triggers according to Dr. Goldsmith? What are the triggers that keep us from changing and responding — doing the same thing over and over again even if it doesn’t work. Triggers set off our automatic response system. In education sometimes power and authority trumps good thinking. Remember, Einstein said you can’t solve the problem with the same kind of thinking that created the problem. Be aware of personal triggers that divert your thinking and behavior.

So, what are your triggers that send you in to an automatic response process? Is that making the problem better or worse? Are you getting the results you want or not? Triggers can come from our background and experiences. They can come from internal thought processes or external events. What we have learned in about 100 years of education is: Bottom line, if it isn’t working, try something else.

Chapter 6 talks about how we are excellent planners and not so good doers. This reminds me of Pfeffer and Sutton’s work, The Knowing-Doing Gap. Talk substitutes for action.

One of our favorite quotes in the book is from Mike Tyson, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” Ah, theory meets reality! John Dewey said years ago we need theory and practice. That is still true today.

The final concept to mention is “Active Questions.” This was a huge wake up call for us. Lots of us are elegant question askers. Here is a question, “does your questions lead to action?” Yikes! To quote Marshall Goldsmith, “people don’t get better without follow up.”

Here are the examples used in the book of the difference between passive and active questions.

Passive questions:

1. How happy were you today?
2. How meaningful was your day?
3. How positive were your relationships with people?
4. How engaged were you?

Active questions:

1. Did you do your best to be happy?
2. Did you do your best to find meaning?
3. Did you do your best to build positive relationships with people?
4. Did you do your best to be fully engaged?

Yes, these questions can be answered yes or no. The follow up questions about what did you do that indicates you did your best today can be very enlightening.

There is much more in this newest book that will people learn, grow, and coach more effectively. We highly recommend it for personal and/or professional use.

Here are some of Deresiewicz’s key points in his words and ours (summary). The book contains much more than we report here and deserves to be read (maybe even with a book group of educators).  Excellent Sheep provides a yummy meal of food for thought!

• “The system manufactures students who are smart and talented and driven, yes, but also anxious, timid, and lost, with little intellectual curiosity and a stunted sense of purpose: trapped in a bubble of privilege, heading meekly in the same direction, great at what they’re doing but with no idea why they’re doing it.” Kindle, loc 47

• “A double major, a sport, a musical instrument, a couple of foreign languages, service work in distant corners of the globe, a few hobbies thrown in for good measure: they have mastered them all, …” Kindle, loc 78 When you look below the surface, however, “what you often find are toxic levels of fear, anxiety, and depression, of emptiness and aimlessness and isolation.” loc. 86 Endless hoop jumping, giving parents what they require and plan for — “the clubs, bands, projects, teams, APs, SATs, evenings, weekends, summers, coaches, tutors, “leadership,” “service”—left them no time, and no tools, to figure out what they want out of life, or even out of college.” loc. 128. They’ve learned to play the game of school, not use their minds well. Safety is key and discourages risk-taking and growth from failure.

• The “practicality police” (Kindle, 1016) have hijacked much of the common discourse about “education” and what it is for. “…athletics means no more now than physical training; music means technical proficiency; service means charity; leadership means climbing to the top.  loc.: 771

• No wonder they’ve lost their souls. “…for what college ought to be providing but is not: for a larger sense of purpose and direction; for an experience at school that speaks to them as human beings, not bundles of aptitudes; for guidance in addressing the important questions of life; for simple permission to think about these things and a vocabulary with which to do so.” loc., 992

As we’ve said, there is a plethora of ideas here to be explored with and among educators. If one slips on the glasses of “What resonates in these pages for us as educators (not simply college professors)”, we’re certain you’ll discover and implement concrete ideas and protocols to reach a higher level of consciousness about learning and why it is important to a satisfying life.