Leadership

The Enemy of Effective Execution

There are a lot of smart people in the business world, and they come up with plenty of good strategies to grow revenues, gain market share, increase productivity and improve profitability. And they usually create a plan which details the tactics that need to be executed in order to achieve that strategy. But as we all know, there is a big difference between creating a good strategic plan and executing it effectively.

The strategic plans that are developed generally make sense, but often get derailed by a couple of realities. To begin with, a new strategy often requires a change in perspective and a change in direction. It is essential that everyone on the team makes these shifts. In addition, a sense of urgency is often needed to achieve the objective of the strategy and gain the advantage the strategy offers. This urgency requires a certain amount of intensity and persistence.

And if those realities weren’t challenging enough, the final truth is that the business landscape is perpetually changing. The specifics that make sense at the start of execution may no longer make sense as the plan unfolds. In order to keep things moving forward smoothly and quickly, plans sometimes need to be changed and tactics modified. New, creative solutions need to be developed to overcome obstacles that arise. Attitudes must remain positive in the face of difficulties. With the right team in place, these strategies can be executed.

But to be executed effectively, there needs to be one more important piece in place.

One more piece needs to be in place, because the enemy of effective execution is a disengaged workforce. A poorly engaged workforce won’t be as flexible as it needs to be. A workforce that isn’t engaged won’t be especially productive, nor will it be as persistent as it needs to be. Weak engagement also causes people to focus on obstacles rather than solutions, and it dampens the creative spark needed to solve the problems that arise.

The enemy of effective execution is weak engagement.

How do you elevate employee engagement? Unfortunately, employee engagement can’t be improved overnight. Improved engagement is something that needs to be attained well before the need for execution exists. It’s analogous to digging a well for water. The best time to dig a well is before you need the water. Additionally, engagement is not something you “do” to employees. Instead, it’s the result of effective leadership and an effective culture.

If you’ve hired correctly, people are already engaged when they come to work for you. They don’t need to “become engaged”. The key to high employee engagement is to avoid the disengagement that occurs when leaders and managers treat people poorly, when they don’t respect and value people, and when they treat people like “things” rather than like people. Conversely, effective leadership and culture will keep a team engaged and will bring out the best in people.

Strategies can be effectively executed, but it takes an engaged workforce, focus, persistence, flexibility, creativity, and a desire to succeed. If you’d like help evaluating the current state of engagement within your workforce or would like help setting the stage for effectively executing your strategies, please contact me.

3 Keys for Bringing Out the Best in People

Bringing out the best in people is the essence of effective leadership. Although there are many important competencies required for effective leadership, there are three essential behaviors which play the greatest role in bringing out the best in people. These three keys are: Treat People Like People, Treat Adults Like Adults, and Show Appreciation. Let me explain why…

Treat People Like People
The issue here is the importance of treating people like people rather than like “things”. When a leader regards the members of their team as people, they acknowledge that everyone – regardless of position or tenure – has hopes and dreams, fears and stresses. They understand that people generally want to do a good job. And when results aren’t what the leader expects, he or she addresses the issue as one person to another, rather than to dish out a “scolding” or respond in a manner which treats people simply as an “asset” or a “resource”. In effect, good leaders treat people like they themselves want to be treated.

The adage, “Things get managed. People get led,” is true. The statement is an acknowledgement that people have feelings and respond accordingly. A leader who treats people like “things” lacks empathy. The consequence of leaders treating people in an impersonal way is that they’ll get a level of response from people, but not nearly the response and results they want.

In order to bring out the best in people, treat people like people.

Treat Adults Like Adults
The issue here is the importance of treating adults like adults rather than like “children”. A leader treats people like children when he or she insists that things be done their way. (“Do what I say, because I’m the parent, that’s why…”) A leader treats people like children when he or she micromanages. Micromanaging sends the message that a leader doesn’t trust the quality of a person’s work, their creativity, or their judgment. And when a leader lets people know they’re not trusted, the team quickly learns not to trust their leader.

In contrast, leaders who treat adults like adults grant plenty of autonomy. They also get to hold people highly accountable. When a leader grants autonomy, he or she communicate that they trust people to be professional, hardworking, and responsible. It shows that they trust their judgment and that they trust the work will be done as promised.

In order to bring out the best in people, treat adults like adults.

Show Appreciation
The issue here is the importance of appreciating the efforts people make rather than taking their efforts for granted or offering insincere recognition. The need for the esteem and respect of others is a key element of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

It’s fairly self-evident that having one’s effort taken for granted can be disheartening. If a leader wants people to do and be their best, it’s important to demonstrate that he or she values them. That much is clear. But there is a difference between appreciation and recognition, and the distinctions are important to understand. Recognition is often provided under the guidelines of a recognition program which defines the parameters under which a person is entitled to some form of recognition.

On the surface, this seems like a reasonable approach which would encourage best effort. But there are two fundamental problems with recognition programs. The first problem is that a “structured” approach becomes impersonal and somewhat insincere. Recognition ends up bestowed upon someone because the program dictates that recognition be offered. The second problem is that recognition is offered to acknowledge a person’s achievement rather than their effort.

Most people want to be appreciated for their efforts more so than for their accomplishments. Appreciation is generally personal and heartfelt, given from one person to another. And it’s often spontaneously shown as a response to the effort someone put into completing a task. It is an expression of gratitude for someone’s effort, and its impact is immediate and long-lasting.

Telling someone you appreciate their effort in completing a project over the weekend has a far greater impact than offering a token of recognition for the end result. Plus, the degree of appreciation expressed is generally in direct proportion to the effort and/or sacrifice made by the person.

In order to bring out the best in people, show sincere appreciation for their efforts.

Eliciting excellence is the essence of exceptional leadership. If you want exceptional results, treat people the way you’d like to be treated, grant plenty of autonomy, and show sincere appreciation

Problem Leaders Are Expensive

We all know that problem leaders cause upset and drama, but the toll their behavior takes on an organization is not always obvious. It manifests itself in a number of ways and can be very costly.

First off, it affects results by creating a compliant team, rather than a team that’s committed to success. A committed and engaged workforce produces far better results than one that is simply complying with the commands of a poor leader. The Gallup Organization has conducted studies that show the ROI of an engaged organization is 2.5X greater than that of an organization with weak engagement. Problem leaders drive disengagement, which undermines results.

Secondly, problem leaders drive excessive turnover. Some turnover is expected, but high turnover is expensive. There’s the loss of productivity due to understaffing, the cost of recruiting, and the cost of low productivity during on-boarding and training. Plus, it slows progress quite a bit. Problem leaders cause high turnover and are expensive.

The next issue is that problem leaders drive “quiet quitting” – the dynamic where people “check out”. They don’t quit. And they show up to work every day. But they do the minimum required. Quiet quitting can become pervasive in a team led by a leader who’s always causing upset. Studies have shown that quiet quitting can be as high as 50% of a workforce. The impact, of course, is slower growth, missed deadlines, and mediocre results. Problem leaders are expensive.

The final issue relates to culture. Most people think of culture as the values and behavior a company aspires to. But in fact, a company’s culture is defined by the values and behaviors a company tolerates. When an organization tolerates things like bad behavior, a lack of mutual respect, poor communication, emotional outbursts, micromanaging, and treating people like things, a dysfunctional culture evolves, causing widespread disengagement. Problem leaders create a weak culture and are expensive.

Unfortunately, many companies wait until the situation becomes unbearable before they get help for a poor leader. Don’t make that mistake…

The Hidden Cost of Quiet Quitting

Quiet quitting is one of the issues being talked about on a regular basis these days. It’s where someone becomes disengaged at work but doesn’t actually quit. Instead, they show up every day and do what’s asked of them, but nothing more. They basically do just enough to keep from getting fired. The Gallup organization estimates that quiet quitting comprises as much as 50% of the workforce in many companies! Obviously, this behavior curtails productivity, slowing a company’s growth, and causing lost revenue and profits.

But there is another, more expensive cost to the organization. And this cost is not obvious at first. It’s hidden until it reveals itself, which by then, is too late to fix.

It causes your best employees to quit.

Let me explain the dynamics and what you can do about it.

Typically, most organizations who have an intentional culture (meaning a culture that’s by design rather than by default), value things like professionalism, showing mutual respect, having integrity, being solution-oriented, and being collaborative. When a leader and/or an organization tolerates the behaviors associated with quiet quitting, it undermines the culture of the company.

Doing the very minimum is not only lazy, but it’s unprofessional. Professionals don’t need to be told in detail what needs to be done. They want to do a good job and will usually do whatever it takes to ensure the work gets done accurately and timely. But, when a leader tolerates a poor work ethic, it sends the message that there’s no need to work hard. Doing the minimum has no negative consequence.

Additionally, in order to meet deadlines and the needs of the organization – because the quiet quitters are slowing progress – the better, more engaged, more professional team members end up working harder to pick up the slack. After all, that’s what professionals do – whatever it takes to get the job done correctly and on time.

The consequence of all this is that many of your best employees will either become quiet quitters themselves or will quit and find a company who has a better, more positive culture.

So, how do you address and reverse the whole situation, so you avoid losing good employees and re-engage the quiet quitters?

Your initial instinct might be to take a harder line with quiet quitters and require them to step up their game or get fired. But this approach would be misguided. And it’s misguided because:

Quiet quitting is a symptom, not a problem.

When you take steps to address a symptom, it usually makes matters worse. The key, therefore, is to identify the underlying problem causing quiet quitting. And that brings us back to the well-known phrase: People don’t quit companies, they quit bosses.

Quiet quitting is caused by the way they are treated by the people who lead them. If people are treated like things, engagement drops. If adults are treated like children, engagement drops. If people are not treated with respect, engagement drops. If leaders lack integrity, engagement drops. And if leaders are unappreciative, taking people for granted, engagement drops.

Most leaders want to do a good job and want to be an effective leader, yet many fall short. They usually fall short for one or more of these reasons:

1. The skills needed to lead aren’t the same skills that got them where they are.
2. Many leaders model the same poor behavior they saw in the leaders who proceeded them
3. Regardless of intellect, education, or years of experience, we all have blind spots and can’t see what we’re missing.

The key, therefore, to reversing quiet quitting and all its implications, is to improve the effectiveness of the leaders and managers. Let me know if we can help you improve your team’s leadership effectiveness.

Leadership Training is Ineffective

I know I’m not going to make any friends within the leadership training community with this statement, but here it is…

There’s no such thing as leadership “training”.

Leaders can’t be trained. Leadership competencies are developed over time. Let me elaborate.

Over the years, I’ve given lots of thought to why leadership makes a difference. And although developing good strategies and making smart decisions are important, they don’t make someone a good leader. We all know smart executives who are poor leaders.

Good leadership is about people skills, not technical knowledge or processes. Good leaders bring out the best in people. When a leader becomes good at bringing out the best in people, engagement increases, productivity improves, turnover drops, and the organization gets better results.

Another reason leadership training is ineffective is that we all have blind spots. In my 20+ years as an executive coach, I have never met an executive who thought they were a poor leader! The reason, of course, is that we all have blind spots and can’t see what we’re missing. If we can’t see our weaknesses, we don’t know they need to be addressed and/or improved. Therefore, most people will dismiss much of what’s being offered in leadership training as being irrelevant. They don’t see how they’re being ineffective, so they don’t see the need to change. (Or they think they are already great leaders …)

Additionally, what a leader thinks of his or her abilities is fairly irrelevant. What matters much more is what others think of them as a leader. It’s the main reason we generally start a coaching engagement with a 360° assessment. It’s important to get an objective picture of how a leader is viewed throughout the organization.

And finally, developing effective leadership competencies takes practice. That’s why the process is developmental. Coaching conversations occur over a period of months and addresses real-world situations and the underlying issues. After that, it’s a process of implementation and refinement.

Specifically, in order to be effective, leaders need to learn how to earn people’s trust, earn people’s respect, treat people like people, treat adults like adults, show appreciation, and effectively develop people

In my experience, many leaders think they do all of that, but in fact, don’t do them very well.

In summary, providing training is good for people who are new leaders. It helps them become aware of the principles of effective leadership. But after they’ve been in a leadership role for a while, training becomes ineffective. Instead, they need someone to point out their blind spots and help them improve. It’s why executive coaching is so widely used.