Leadership – Page 8 – New Horizon Partners

“The Servant Leader” by James A. Autry

This book, “The Servant Leader: How to Build a Creative Team, Develop Great Morale, and Improve Bottom-line Performance,” by James A. Autry, is very much a how-to book, describing the way to implement servant leadership in many aspects of leading an organization. James Autry was president of the magazine group for Meredith Corporation and later a business consultant and speaker.

The author begins with a list of five attributes that describe servant leadership. A servant leader must –

Be Authentic – be real or be who you are in every situation. This includes the concept of honesty and integrity, not fudging or giving yourself some wiggle room around the truth.
Be Vulnerable – being honest with your feelings in the context of your work, being open with your doubts and concerns about an idea, and being able to own and admit your mistakes.
Be Accepting – assigning value to and accepting every person around you regardless of style or personality. This doesn’t require accepting every idea or never disagreeing, but refers to accepting of the person.
Be Present – be fully available and attentive in human interactions. Be centered rather than distracted or attempting to multitask.
Be Useful – in other words, be a servant. Be a resource for your people, helping them to be productive and successful.

With this foundation defining servant leadership, the rest of the book applies these traits to the daily practice of leadership. An overarching principle of the book is that servant leaders guide their team or organization to also practice servant leadership principles. Therefore, the team members, following the example of the leader, serve each other.

The book is divided into four parts, with the first devoted to describing servant leadership as noted above. The second part describes how servant leadership shows up in the daily activities of the leader such as hiring people that will fit with the culture of servant leadership, building servant leadership practices into the organization, and managing performance through job descriptions, performance standards, and performance appraissals in a way consistent with the principles.

The third part of the book suggests methods consistent with servant leadership principles in dealing with issues that arise in leadership. This includes dealing with organizational issues such as firing people, closing or relocating operations, or re-focusing a business; personal issues such as dealing with illnesses, either of employees or within their families; or legal issues such as lawsuits and harassment.

The fourth part of the book deals with the circumstances in which servant leadership can be put to the greatest test such as during economic or market downturns, in dealing with the balance between work and family, and dealing with conflict. In discussing conflict the author presents a number of tools for identifying, preventing, and encouraging resolution of conflict.

The servant leader is a steward of both the organization and the people within the organization. As such, he/she is frequently in the position of weighing the interests of various parties versus policies and practices of the organization. The author makes the point that dealing positively with people is most often the best choice for the long-term health of the organization. A servant leader leads in such a way as to build community of service within the organization that leads to a healthy and productive team.

This is a good book on the subject of servant leadership with lots of practical advice and examples of application.

Disagreement vs. Conflict

Call it what you will – discussion, debate, disagreement, argument, conflict, confrontation – as a leader you face the task of keeping these encounters productive for the organization and preventing them from becoming debilitating. To gain the maximum benefit, the organization wants to promote the free flow of ideas and information. To prevent damage to the organization and its people, we want to refrain from personal battles. Only with a strong culture and a lot of practice are we able to accomplish both. The leader needs to guide the organization and keep debates and disagreements from becoming conflict and confrontation.

The cardinal rule: separate the idea from the identity. It is always good to consider and build ideas; it is not acceptable to damage identities.

Culture should establish the rules of engagement. What do we as an organization believe about people and what do we believe about ideas? What is acceptable or encouraged? What is out of bounds in the way that we deal with people?

Exploring ideas, gathering the best thoughts from the organization, is generally the best route because it adds value. Gathering thoughts from a range of people provides different perspectives, perhaps even different views of truth. Building thought upon thought makes the process robust and adds value. Challenging thoughts and facts drives us to the most likely truth. Exploring together helps each participant to think deeper. And the conclusion after an energetic and full discussion is more likely to produce buy-in from the group. There may still be opposing views in the group, but everyone should be able to unite behind the group’s decision, having had their opportunity to voice their ideas and to be heard and considered by the team. Thus, a culture that values the full presentation and exploration of information without bias and hierarchy adds the greatest value to the organization.

The danger in an energetic discussion of ideas is that it can sometimes turn into a personal battle. We can lose sight of the idea under discussion and slip into the “my idea versus your idea” mode and then into a “me versus you” conflict. If we are able to separate the idea from the identity and maintain the focus on the inanimate idea, the organization wins and there are no winners and losers among the team members. If the discussion or disagreement regarding ideas moves to conflict, then someone (or both parties) falls into the winner-loser battle.

Of course, conflict is not just rooted in a discussion of ideas, it can grow out of any sort of damaged interpersonal relationship. Whatever the source, conflict needs to be resolved before it festers between the two parties and grows into conflict between their allies, departments, etc. Conflicts can sap the energy out of an organization and cause all sorts of problems throughout the organization if they are allowed to continue.

Some organizations actually have a culture which will not tolerate interpersonal conflict and pressures the participants to quickly recognize and resolve their conflict. Unfortunately, this is the great minority of organizations. There are other organizations that won’t tolerate open conflict but won’t push for identifying and resolving it. And, of course, there are organizations that relish conflict, in a “survival of the fittest” mindset.

Most organizations recognize that conflict is harmful to the organization and gets in the way of progress and productivity. Often, the responsibility for facilitating conflict resolution falls to leadership. For many people, it is scary to step into a conflict and force resolution. But avoiding conflict, a more natural human tendency, has a high cost to the organization.

An effective leader has a keen radar that identifies interpersonal conflict and steps in to encourage or force resolution. Of course, the leader, as a third party, cannot resolve the conflict. His/her role is to confront the conflict, point out that it is unacceptable, and facilitate a discussion between the parties aimed at their resolution of the issue. Stepping into conflict is not an easy task and requires courage and skill on the part of the leader to bring the parties together and to facilitate a productive discussion. Resolving conflict does not mean that the parties involved are going to be friends or like each other. But the organization suffers if the people are unable or unwilling to respect each other and to work together productively. Therefore, as a steward of the organization, the leader needs to surface conflict and see that it is resolved.

Does your organization’s culture encourage exploring and challenging ideas while protecting its people?

Congruity in Leadership

Congruity is a quality of agreement and appropriateness. Where there’s congruity, things fit together in a way that makes sense. In terms of our leadership, congruity is being the same person or leader in every situation.

Leaders who lack congruity believe that they need to lead differently in various contexts of their life. For example, a person might believe that in the work context he/she must be the hard-charging, driven, command-control boss that gives out orders and expects them to be followed quickly and without question. When they are at home, they might be a caring and compassionate leader showing high empathy. And when they are in a leadership role in their church or community, they might be something different yet, perhaps the deep thinker seeking to weigh everyone’s input and building consensus. Sometimes we see a lack of congruity between when someone is leading up in the organization’s hierarchy as opposed to when they are leading down in the hierachy.

A character trait closely related to congruity is integrity. Especially thinking here of the broader definition of integrity, which is the quality or state of being complete or undivided. Integrity carries the concept of consistency of actions, values, principles, expectations, and outcomes. In other words, integrity means we act or behave in a way that is consistent with our values and principles.

When a leader lacks congruity, behaving in a different way in different contexts, there are problems. First, there is a lack of integrity. Our values are deeply embedded, and we can only have one set of values in which we truly believe. Therefore, the different ways that we show up cannot be consistent with one set of values. To operate without integrity, causes an inner conflict as our values subconsciously question our actions. Additionally, in an effort to maintain different leadership personas, they will naturally blend into each other. The people who we are trying to lead, when they get glimpses of the alternate leadership personas or a gap between our values and actions, will be unsure of who we really are and what we actually believe. Therefore, the relationship of influence is weakened.

To build and maintain congruity requires that we, as leaders, first clearly know our values. Secondly, we need to be confident in our ability to lead from our values. Then we need to transition from any inauthentic leadership styles to our true leadership. This process may cause us to re-examine our values or it may cause us to re-assess the various contexts in which we lead. If we believe that they require a different style of leadership than our true leadership, perhaps we don’t belong in those situations.

Practicing congruity in our leadership brings energy and peace to our lives. And we are most effective in our true leadership. Congruity and integrity are key building blocks of effective leadership.

Do you have congruity across your various leadership roles?

Ask, Don’t Tell

One of the best ways for a leader to empower team members or the team is to adopt the practice of “ask, don’t tell.” This concept, sometimes called coaching for performance, moves decisions or solutions from solely the leader to a shared process between leader and team member. “Ask/ don’t tell” is a fundamental skill for coaching but also for leadership. Leaders should often wear their coaching hat when interacting with their team members to develop and to draw out their team members.

It is a human tendency, and especially true for leaders, that we tend to give solutions. We even give solutions when they aren’t requested or desired. Reference any recent discussions with your spouse or children. In the workplace, leaders are quick to give direction and solutions for a number of reasons:

It is a developed habit.
The hierarchy dictates that the answers come from above.
A need or desire to hold the power.
It seems the most expedient route to cut to the chase and provide the solution.
The leader believes in his/her experience and expertise to provide the “right” answer. (Call it self-awareness or call it arrogance. There is a fine line.)

Breaking the habit and switching to a practice of “ask, don’t tell” probably takes some effort and time.

To implement the “ask, don’t tell” practice means responding to requests for direction or a decision with a question like, “What are some of the options that you are considering?” or “What would you recommend in this situation?” This should lead into some follow-up questions regarding the thoughts behind the choices or the pros and cons of various options, questions like “What are the costs and benefits of these alternatives?” or “What information do you need to gather for making a decision?”

Using the “ask, don’t tell” practice doesn’t mean that the leader abdicates the responsibility for the decision. It simply means that the leader is willing to share the power. If the recommendation that results from discussion and the flow of questions is of equal value to what the leader would have decided, both parties can be satisfied. If the leader is not comfortable with the team member’s recommendation, further questions can be used to dig deeper and resolve the difference in thought. In any case, the leader maintains the responsibility for decisions from his/her team and may need to overrule.

A similar thought relates to meetings. How often do we see the attendees at a meeting posturing their comments as they attempt to determine where the leader will come down? Historically it was often only the opinion of the leader that mattered in a meeting. An effective leader turns this dynamic on its head by only asking questions, drawing out the thoughts of all attendees. Only when the entire team has weighed in and all available information is on the table, will the leader speak. Decision-making becomes a group process. Not necessarily a democracy but a process in which all participate.

The practice of “ask, don’t tell” provides several benefits to the organization and to the team:

It empowers team members. Sharing the power that may have been historically held by the leader lets the team members feel a greater contribution and greater control over their work and their lives. They are valued when their input and opinions are drawn out.
It builds a relationship of trust and respect. When team members are entrusted with the ability to think deeper and make greater decisions, they feel respected. Leadership is built upon a relationship of trust and respect, but this sort of relationship only works as a two-way street. Therefore, having greater trust and respect for team members comes back around to greater trust and respect for the leader.
It develops team members. One of the responsibilities is the development of their people and preparing the next generation of leadership. Drawing out their thoughts through powerful questions develops their thinking process and decision-making skills. As their input is valued, they grow in confidence.
It creates better decisions. The “ask, don’t tell” process generates a more robust discussion of an issue, developing different perspectives. In this process, more information is brought to the discussion and decision.
It provides an opportunity to evaluate talent and capability. On the other side of the relationship, the “ask, don’t tell” practice provides an opportunity for a leader to see the team members in action as they gather and present logic for decisions. Are these people ready to grow, take risks, and exercise good logic?

The “ask, don’t tell” practice is a powerful way to build the capability of a team and its members. In fact, this practice is effective in building stronger relationships in every part of our lives. It is a better alternative to the practice of constantly providing solutions.

How highly do you value your thoughts relative to those of the people around you? Are you more prone to tell or to ask?

“The World’s Most Powerful Leadership Principle” by James C. Hunter

Jim Hunter’s previous book, “The Servant,” was an allegory that told the story of a business leader whose life was spiraling out of control in every arena. He attends a leadership retreat where the instructor, a former businessman now monk, leads him to realize that true leadership is not built upon power, but on influence or authority, which results from relationships, love, service, and sacrifice.

This second book from Hunter, “The World’s Most Powerful Leadership Principle: How to Become a Servant Leader,” is just that, a how-to book describing Hunter’s thoughts for growing into a servant leader.The goals that Hunter establishes for this book are to: 1) define servant leadership and 2) provide a map for implementation of servant leadership.

The author defines leadership as “the skill of influencing people to enthusiastically work toward goals identified as being for the common good.” The first few chapters discuss the concept of leadership and build out the definition of servant leadership. Leadership is not management and it is not based on power or position. True leadership is influence (the author calls it authority) that is built upon skills and character.

Love is the critical difference that underlies the relationships, service, and sacrifice of servant leadership. This love is not the warm, fuzzy feeling that today’s culture has redefined love to be; rather, it is the other-focused verb that has been the definition of love for eons. The author defines love in leadership as “the act of extending yourself for others by identifying and meeting their legitimate needs and seeking their greatest good.”

The author uses 1 Corinthians 13 to describe the characteristics of love in a servant leadership context. Leadership requires patience, kindness, humility, respect, selflessness, forgiveness, honesty, and commitment. None of these characteristics are soft or wimpy, but are strong and positive.

For most people, the practice of servant leadership requires significant character growth that makes these practices a normal part of daily habits. The author presents a simple model of change or character growth, with three steps. Step 1 is called Friction, where pain or discomfort is felt from the difference between the practices that result from current character and what might result after some character growth. Step 2 is Insight, which involves the development of an understanding of the impact that character growth can produce. Step 3 is the Will = Intention + Actions phase, in which a committed practice of new behavior is used to change character over time.

The author points out that, despite the awesome responsibility of leadership of an organization’s most important asset, many do not see the importance of investing in the development of leadership. Nor do they realize the benefit that results from good servant leadership as it better meets the needs of workers in the organization.

This is a good book that presents servant leadership well. It is always difficult to adequately describe the effort required to make the character change that is often necessary to be effective as a servant leader.

Leadership and the Peter Principle

Most people are familiar with the Peter Principle. This principle was first published in a 1969 book, The Peter Principle, by Laurence Peter and Raymond Hull. The Peter Principle observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to their own level of incompetence. That is, people are often promoted based on success in a previous position, until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent. Most often this is because the skills that they used to prove their competency at one level do not translate or stretch to the requirements at the next higher level.

Often the reason for reaching the Peter Principle position of incompetency is that the organization has promoted a person, who was very capable in a technical or functional role, into a management or leadership position. For example, a company might promote their best salesperson to a sales management position, such as regional manager or director of sales. Or, an organization moves their best engineer into an engineering management role. Or, the firm moves a successful accountant into a controller or other supervisory position.

The problem in these types of career moves is that the skills necessary to be successful in a functional or technical role are only a small part of the skillset needed at a higher, managerial level. Organizations often rely on the fact that the person has been successful in a functional role as one of the most important criteria for promotion. The promotion might be viewed as the reward for excellent performance at the previous level. In doing so, organizations often neglect to assess whether the candidate has the necessary capabilities to perform at a supervisory level or they fail to provide the training and development resources to prepare the candidate to be successful.

The cost of making such mistakes can be large. Take the example of promoting the best salesperson into a sales management role. Relationship skills are needed in both positions, but the relational skills needed to deal with customers can be quite different from the relational skills needed to lead a sales team. If the person fails at the higher level, the organization will frequently have lost both the best salesperson and the potential sales leader, meaning that the organization now needs to fill two important roles.

Part of this problem can be that firms have defined career paths in which the only way to move up to higher responsibilities and higher compensation is to move away from functional roles into managerial roles. Not everyone desires or is suited for such a move. Sometimes organizations have developed parallel career tracks, offering the option of moving higher in a functional role or moving into more managerial responsibilities. For example, a firm might have an engineering career track in which the highly-qualified and experienced engineers could have the option of moving into a role such as an engineering sage, in which the person becomes an internal technical consultant or resource for the engineering function.

For those star functional performers that desire moving into a managerial role, the Peter Principle highlights the need for assessment and training. The organization has a responsibility, and is a good steward of their people, when they make every reasonable effort to assure success at the next level. This means clearly understanding the capabilities of promotion candidates and comparing with the criteria for success at the next level. An important part of a leader’s responsibilities is preparing people for future success. The Peter Principle can be averted when organizations are aware and proactive in developing their people.

Does your organizational adequately invest in the future success of its people?

Seeking and Accepting Feedback

Some years back I heard the story of a well-known minister and his response to feedback. After preaching, he would greet the members of the congregation as they exited. Of course, many of them simply offered a greeting of “Good morning” or something similar. But there would always be some who would gush about the wisdom of the sermon or the pastor’s gift of presenting. And then there would be others who were quick to point out their better understanding of the passage or the weaknesses in the pastor’s ability to explain or relate to the congregation. For both groups that offered feedback, the pastor had the same response: “Thank you!” He responded in a clear attitude of humility and gratitude both to affirmation and criticism.

As a leader we should value opportunities to receive feedback from those around us, be they peers, superiors, or subordinates on the organization chart. Feedback, whether it be affirmation or criticism, provides a different perspective. We are often blind to certain weaknesses that could use some growth, or we denigrate strengths on which we should more often capitalize. Research has demonstrated that the most effective leaders value and seek feedback. There seems to be a cause and effect relationship here. Effective leaders get to that level because they are intentionally and consistently growing. Feedback is an important tool for identifying and prioritizing our growth opportunities.

While we should value and seek it, requesting feedback is not the easiest thing to do, especially when this is a new habit that you are seeking to develop. Here are some steps that lead to effective feedback:

Lay the foundation through open dialog.Feedback is only of value when it is honest and accurate. Before someone will be willing to give you feedback, especially if that person is a subordinate, they must experience you as an open listener. They must be completely comfortable that you are able and willing to hear honest feedback without repercussions. Without a context of safety, your request for feedback will only prompt platitudes or responses that are postured to please you. Before seeking feedback, develop a culture or reputation of communication, safety, and connection.

Ask for feedback in a context of learning.Another step toward receiving honest and accurate feedback requires proper posturing of the request. When seeking feedback, first explain the purpose and motivation. To simply blurt out “I’d like some feedback” leaves the observer hanging. Instead the request should begin with something like: “I am working to improve___ and I want to learn ____. Would you be willing to provide me with some honest feedback?” An explanation of your motive behind the request reduces the risk experienced by the observer and sets the context for the feedback that you are seeking.

Ask the hard people for feedback.It’s easy to ask a friend for feedback and that can be helpful, but don’t stop there. Seek input from those that are sometimes critical or with whom you haven’t been able to build a connection. Their input might be on the growing edge and the discussion may help build the relationship.

Be ready for feedback and be an active listener.The feedback that you receive may be positive or negative. Positive feedback tells you what is going well or identifies strengths, but negative feedback identifies behaviors or traits on which you’ll need to work. Being surprised or responding defensively is the worst reaction one can have when receiving feedback—especially when it was feedback that was requested. A poor response demonstrates to the observer that you really have no interest in hearing honest feedback. When seeking feedback, you need to be ready for either the positive or the negative. In either case, the best response to feedback is generally: “Thanks. Please tell me more about that or give me some examples or suggestions for alternative behaviors so that I can better understand.” The first statement of feedback is often a general statement. The purpose of seeking feedback is to find actionable descriptions that guide your development plans. Therefore, when seeking feedback, you need to be ready to hear, explore, and understand. Summarize and use the great question, “Please tell me more.” If you sincerely seek feedback, your part is listening to understand, not explaining, defending, or judging.

Know that it is not about you.Well, it might seem to be about you, but it should be about your behavior, attitude, or words. If it feels too much about your personality or character, ask the questions that will identify the behaviors that you need to understand. Be sure to keep perspective and purpose in mind if you feel yourself ready to defend. Handle your emotions off-line. If you have a reaction to something said, you might respond with a “wow, that’s tough to hear” as long as you thank them for their candor and express your appreciation for their input. Then, find a separate place and person where you can deal with the emotions.

Take action on the feedback.If you seek feedback, take the time to process the input received, to develop a plan of action, and to actually work on growing. This may require sorting out the feedback that you hear and prioritizing the areas that will provide the greatest impact on your growth in effectiveness as a leader. There will be input that you decide to discount or ignore but be sure you are truthful with yourself. Sometimes the thing that strikes us the most identifies a blind spot with which we need to deal. But don’t ask for feedback and then ignore it or get too busy to use what you have learned about yourself. To do so devalues the provider of the feedback and communicates that we weren’t serious.

Circle back to encourage the culture.Once you have received feedback and begun a growth plan, circle back to express your appreciation to those who have provided honest and helpful responses. Perhaps offer a short description of the action that you are taking or ask them to hold you accountable and provide more feedback in the future. By doing so, you demonstrate the reality of your desire to grow and positively reinforce their willingness to provide feedback.

It is common for people around us to avoid the volunteering of feedback, either because of a fear of backlash or because they expect that we may not be interested. An effective leader seeks to grow and improve and they value other people and their opinions. Therefore, they are always open to feedback. Leaders accept feedback with humility and gratitude. Sometimes we need to “prime the pump” by seeking it out. Once we establish a reputation of positive acceptance of feedback, we may even find team members willing to volunteer comment when they see areas for growth. A leader’s ability and willingness to accept and act upon feedback from those around us helps in our growth and also in building the relationship of trust and respect that is necessary for effective leadership.

Are you receiving regular feedback from a variety of sources? How does it guide your growth and development?

Leading from Behind

In recent years the phrase, leading from behind, has become popular. People often mention Nelson Mandela as a person who popularized this leadership concept. In his 1994 autobiography, “Long Walk to Freedom,” Mandela described his model of leadership in this way: “a leader…..is like a shepherd. He stays behind the flock, letting the most nimble go out ahead, whereupon the others follow, not realizing that all along they are being directed from behind.”

In the more traditional view of leadership, it was the leader who was out front, or in the spotlight. The leader provided direction and instruction for his/her followers. The followers dutifully (or sometimes reluctantly) waited for commands and carried them out. The leader received credit for the accomplishments of the team.

In a 2010 article in the Harvard Business Review, Dr. Linda Hill described the changing business environment and the impetus provided for changing from the traditional view of leadership to a lead from behind model. Dr. Hill cited two major drivers. First, “the psychological contract between companies and employees is changing. Among other things, people are looking for more meaning and purpose in their work lives.” She went on to say that people “increasingly expect to be valued for who they are and to be able to contribute to something larger than themselves.” They expect to receive credit for their contribution. Secondly, the article described the increasing importance of innovation in determining a firm’s competitiveness. The necessary innovation is increasingly the result of successful team effort. This team effort is most effective with a lead from behind model of leadership.

The best leaders are continually working to reproduce themselves. One of their priorities is the growth and development of their followers into effective leaders. Effective leaders are not seeking the spotlight but value each team member and their contribution.

Leading from behind is not sitting on the sidelines, watching the team from afar. It is not passive leadership. Nor is it shirking the responsibilities of leadership. Those that lead from behind are not detached from their team members.

Instead, leading from behind is active leadership but with a different mindset than the traditional view of leadership. The traits, practices, or beliefs for leading from behind include the following:

View leadership as a collective or collaborative effort. While one person may appear in the organizational hierarchy as the leader, leadership is shared within the team. The functional leader is intentional about developing the leadership abilities of team members and each one has the freedom to take a leadership role when their capabilities suggest doing so.
Actively work on team dynamics. The lead from behind leader seeks to maximize the effectiveness of the team by assuring that all members have their voice and that the team operates with respect and mutuality. The leader seeks to build the relationships within the group and to assure that no one hijacks the group.
Incorporate the group’s combined intelligence and talents. The combined capabilities of the team exceed the sum of the parts. The leader assures that the team draws out and adequately weighs the input of each member. The leader models the valuing the contribution of each team member.
Practice humility. While functionally responsible for and in charge of the group, to lead from behind requires that the leader values all of the team members and seeks to recognize and reward the team’s effort and the contribution of each member. “Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it is thinking of yourself less.” The leader’s voice is of equal weight with every team member.
Ask, don’t tell. To lead from behind sometimes requires that the leader draw out the input from the team members. This often means utilizing the coaching technique of asking powerful open-ended questions, rather than offering suggestions.
Speak last. To prevent team members from deferring to the leader’s opinions, especially in the early days of building a lead from behind environment, the leader often must withhold their input until the other team members have all weighed in with their input. It is easy for some team members to simply accept and follow the opinions of the leader.
Don’t confuse assertiveness with leadership. There will be times when assertiveness is required to keep the process on track, but leadership is about influence built on a relationship of trust and respect. And in the lead from behind model, team leadership is a shared function. Therefore, assertiveness must frequently be held in check.
Assure that the vision and goals are on target. While the moment by moment leadership is shared amongst the team, leading from behind does not mean abdicating the responsibility for keeping the team on track. If the team begins to wander off course, the leader must remind them of their goals and re-focus them.
Step forward in key moments. While leading from behind can be the general philosophy or model of leadership, there are certain times when the hierarchical leader must assert him- or herself. These could be instances when the team dynamic becomes unhealthy, when the team gets off course, when the sense of urgency gets lost, etc. And a general rule is that successes are attributed to the team and failures are shouldered by the leader.

To operate as a true team and maximize the synergy of thought and action, functioning as a group of equals is necessary. Leading from behind allows the functional leader to step out of his/her position of authority and operate on common ground with the rest of the team.

Are you able to effectively lead from behind? In what ways do you struggle to do so?

Feedback and Character

How to Deal with Character Issues when Providing Performance Feedback

One of the most important guidelines for providing effective feedback is to focus on behavior or action and the results or effects that follow. This guideline makes feedback effective because it deals with facts that can then be examined and discussed. The result of the discussion is to identify behavior that produced positive results and encourage continued development along this line or to identify the results of behavior that is unacceptable or below standard and develop a plan of action for improvement.

How do you deal with a team member who has a character issue that is causing problems in performance? What sort of feedback do you give this person in an effort to identify and turn around the character issue? Can you simply call out the character issue, for example saying, “You are rude”?

The guideline still applies, performance feedback needs to be grounded in performance and results. Calling out the character issue directly runs the risk of creating a personal battle or devaluing the person. The best solution is to follow the guidelines for effective feedback and then use the discussion as a springboard into some character coaching.

Here is an example feedback session where there is a significant underlying character issue, one in which a team member does not value other people:

You: “I need to discuss a behavior that is causing a problem in our team meetings. I sometimes notice that you roll your eyes and sigh heavily when some of the other team members provide input. This behavior causes them to feel devalued and they stop providing input. The team is most effective when we can bring together all ideas to build the best solution and each team member needs to feel that they are a valued part of the team. Are you aware of this behavior?”

At this point you may think that you have made it clear what behavior is unacceptable and why. You need to first verify that the other person understands the behavior and that it is unacceptable. A response here might be either unawareness of the behavior or some comment about the value of other people’s ideas. Some further explanation of the behavior and the results may be required. When there is a clear understanding, it is time to move to the next step.

You: “In my experience, people are sometimes unaware of the habit of rolling their eyes, but it is generally interpreted by others as derision. Since it interferes with the functioning of the team, I am asking you to refrain from this behavior in the future. I think that we have two choices for our discussion now. In either case, the end result needs to be that you don’t roll your eyes or express your disapproval of other people’s ideas in our meetings. One choice would be to discuss your plan of action to break this habit. The second choice would be for us to have a deeper discussion of what might lie behind this behavior. There may be something deeper that produces this behavior and you might be well served in understanding and working on the deeper issue. That could involve some coaching on my part to perhaps help you understand why you roll your eyes. Which direction would you prefer for our discussion? Would you allow me to provide some coaching to help you deal with this issue?”

You have made it clear that you cannot allow this behavior to continue and that a solution needs to be defined. The choice is an action plan, skirting the character issue, or confronting it through some one-on-one coaching. Coaching about character issues should only be done with permission or when invited, so the question needs to be asked.

At this point the other person needs to decide whether he/she will simply stop the behavior (a difficult thing to do in these situations) or if they trust you enough and value the relationship enough to let you help them understand the character issue and begin work at that level. In either case, you need to be clear that the behavior needs to stop and the consequences if it does not stop.

The discussion does not end here. If they choose the route of just curbing the behavior, the two of you need to define (best to let them define with some guiding questions from you) and agree to the plan of action for improved behavior. If they allow you to help them dig into the character issue, you need to agree to a specific plan for how that coaching will take place.

Providing feedback for behaviors are fairly straightforward. If someone doesn’t meet the schedule, there are implications and an action plan for improving the ability of working to a schedule. If the quality of someone’s work is deficient, there are implications of the low quality and an action plan for improvement. On the other hand, if the behavior is a result of a character issue, an action plan addressing the behavior alone may be difficult. Yet, we cannot change someone’s character and attempting to do so would be problematic without the invitation of the person. The best route for such a problem is to build a position of trust and respect in which people are ready to allow or even invite the leader to coach them to a new goal in the area of character.

How do you deal with character issues that affect the workplace? Are you able to address them in a positive way?

The Best Bosses Are Humble Bosses

“After decades of screening potential leaders for charm and charisma, some employers are realizing they’ve been missing one of the most important traits of all: humility.” Thus begins an article by Sue Shellenbarger in an article written for The Wall Street Journal in October 2018. She goes on to say, “Humility is a core quality of leaders who inspire close teamwork, rapid learning and high performance in their teams.”

The entire article is worth a read but here are some key points:

The article cites research supporting the headline and anecdotal reports of companies that now are making the demonstration of humility a key factor in hiring or promotion decisions for leaders. Companies are using personality profiles and the interview process to judge the level of humility in candidates.

Companies with CEOs that demonstrate a high level of humility are said to develop management teams that work more effectively with each other. In general humility in leadership results in lower employee turnover and absenteeism, due to the relationships that are established.

Teams are more effective because of the relationships established. However, leaders with high humility often fly beneath the radar because they are quick to step back and give the credit to the team members. Humble leaders also are not afraid to ask for help and listen to feedback from others. They set an example that causes subordinates to do the same.

Traditional thinking often was that leaders should be charismatic, attention-seeking and persuasive. Instead, those that grab the spotlight can demotivate those around them. As the workplace increasingly moves to team-based work, the advantage of humility in leadership becomes more obvious.

See some of our articles on humility such as Humility and Leadership, Be a Better Leader by Avoiding the Arrogance Trap, and an article that describes the difference between Humility, Confidence, and Arrogance.