Another excellent article worth reading in its entirety:
https://hbr.org/2019/08/hire-leaders-for-what-they-can-do-not-what-they-have-done
High Trust Organizations, Innovation & Performance, Humour & Leadership
Maybe he’s floating
In most of the turnarounds / ramp ups I do one of the major cultural shifts that holds companies back is the blame environment they foster. Management has to replace their outdated toxic behaviour (& harassment lawsuit liability) to build an environment where all employees & staff are comfortable and encouraged to be open about problems and ideas. While to many this is common sense, executives do not always make the connection; here are some stats from a fast co. article (link below) quantifying performance results in firms with safe environments, and some of the psychology behind it:
There is a wealth of research that links high-trust organizations to innovation and performance. The 2016 HOW Report, a comprehensive study of organizational effectiveness, concluded that employees who work in high-trust environments are 32 times more likely to take risks that might benefit the company.
They’re also 11 times more likely to see more innovation relative to competition,
and 6 times more likely to outperform others in their industry.
managers perceived to have a sense of humor are rated by subordinates as 23% more respected and 25% more pleasant to work with.
In contrast, a 2018 Gallup study found that nearly 50% of Americans have left a job to “get away” from a manager. Employee turnover has increased 88% over the last decade, costing companies billions.
Reorienting towards humor is a fundamentally profitable enterprise that today’s leaders can’t afford to miss. One study found that adding a lighthearted line at the end of a sales pitch—like “my final offer is X, and I’ll throw in my pet frog”—increases customers’ willingness to pay by 18%. Another set of studies found that employees who rate their leaders as having a sense of humor—any sense of humor—are 15% more satisfied with their jobs and rate their leaders at 27% more motivating. A set of studies run by Brad Bitterly, Allison Wood Brooks, and Maurice Schweitzer demonstrate that when people use humor at work, they’re attributed 37% higher status, and seen as more competent and more confident.
We can chalk this up to the (brain) cocktail these teams are serving up. When people laugh, a neuro-chemical response is activated: their brains flood with dopamine (which increases happiness), endorphins (which increases resilience), and oxytocin (the same “trust hormone” released during sex and childbirth—plus a way to do it that’s more HR-friendly). These hormones make us feel calmer, more confident, and more resourceful—which lowers stress and unlocks more creative thinking.
Humor is such an important leadership trait we teach it at Stanford’s business school
As trust in authority figures erodes, teams want leaders who are inspiring and relatable.
Senior Management's Willingness Determines Success or Failure
Michael Balle is an excellent resource to learn from:
“Lean systems are really about establishing the conditions for learning - this is the key to a deeper understanding of lean.”
“From a leadership point of view this requires balancing the focus between today (solve problems now or you won’t have a tomorrow) and tomorrow (worry about the next product or you won’t have a tomorrow either). This never is simple and, again, can be learned only through experience.”
“In the end, the success or failure of any serious effort hinges on THE WILLINGNESS OF” senior executives “TO ADOPT revolutionary…”
great comment also: “people confuse a system to produce value more efficiently with a system to add value: continuously develop people to find better ways”
The Modern Leader Creates the Conditions for a Problem Solving Culture
another great piece by Jim Luckman here:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/modern-leader-creates-conditions-problem-solving-culture-jim-luckman
Coaching is Work - David Verble
Coaching is not about making ourselves feel good through sharing knowledge and wisdom; coaching is about helping others arrive at their own knowledge and wisdom.
Don’t Demonize Employees Who Raise Problems
They hired her to make the firm better, but the firm’s leadership wanted to believe they were already great.
Some management demonize people, accusing them of being the problem instead of solving the problem that is being raised.
It’s not comfortable to see your shortcomings; this discomfort causes leaders to deflect and defend, and when leaders do this, they limit whether their organization advances.
article here: https://hbr.org/2020/01/dont-demonize-employees-who-raise-problems
Burnout Is About Your Workplace, Not Your People
quotes from article, my comments in italics
"Instead, business leaders may need to change how their organizations operate.
One great way to start?
Ask employees what small changes will help them most."
When was the last time you engaged your employees?
Successful turnarounds often start with the (new) CEO meeting everyone in the business, getting to know them on a 1 to 1 basis, and what problems they experience. Involving themselves in the business helps them understand what impedes it, so they know what needs to be worked on and how they can facilitate it.
One reason people get burnt out is from banging their heads against the wall with issues senior management fails in addressing.
“When Stanford researchers looked into how workplace stress affects health costs and mortality in the United States (pdf), they found that it led to spending of nearly $190 billion — roughly 8% of national healthcare outlays — and nearly 120,000 deaths each year. Worldwide, 615 million suffer from depression and anxiety and, according to a recent WHO study, which costs the global workforce an estimated $1 trillion in lost productivity each year. Passion-driven and caregiving roles such as doctors and nurses are some of the most susceptible to burnout, and the consequences can mean life or death; suicide rates among caregivers are dramatically higher than that of the general public — 40% higher for men and 130% higher for women.”
“FACT: companies without systems to support the well-being of their employees have higher turnover, lower productivity, and higher healthcare costs, according to the American Psychological Association (APA). In high-pressure firms, healthcare costs are 50% greater than at other organizations. Workplace stress is estimated to cost the U.S. economy more than $500 billion dollars, and, each year, 550 million work days are lost due to stress on the job. Another study by the APA claims that burned-out employees are 2.6 times as likely to be actively seeking a different job, 63% more likely to take a sick day, and 23% more likely to visit the emergency room.”
“gold standard of measuring burnout — the eponymous Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) — and the coauthor of the Areas of Worklife Survey. Maslach worries about the new WHO classification in the IDC11.” “Categorizing burnout as a disease was an attempt by the WHO to provide definitions for what is wrong with people, instead of what is wrong with companies,” she explains. “When we just look at the person, what that means is, ‘Hey we’ve got to treat that person.’ ‘You can’t work here because you’re the problem.’ ‘We have to get rid of that person.’ Then, it becomes that person’s problem, not the responsibility of the organization that employs them.”
“a survey of 7,500 full-time employees by Gallup found the top five reasons for burnout are:
Unfair treatment at work
Unmanageable workload
Lack of role clarity
Lack of communication and support from their manager
Unreasonable time pressure
The list above clearly demonstrates that the root causes of burnout do not really lie with the individual and that they can be averted — if only leadership started their prevention strategies much further upstream.”
“It’s hard for leadership to then ignore needs after witnessing them first-hand.”
Leadership: A New Paradigm for Organizations
“How you behave in your leadership role will impact the final outcome”
“A command and control approach is likely to receive push back from multiple directions and will have limited ability to do either command the direction of the team, or control individuals who make it up. Leaders who attempt this approach find themselves forever tightening control mechanisms with diminishing effectiveness. The more you “police” the work of your team, the less responsibility and accountability they have for their own work. You end up creating a group of individuals and companies who have limited ability to contribute, and are forced to follow orders, defend their actions, and watch out for the interests of their own companies over those of the project.”
Some great introductory points in this write up, and alternatives to being a problematic command & control manager (even though article ends with a link to buy their book).
full article: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/exponential-leadership-new-paradigm-project-driven-klaus-lemke