Influencing and Problem Solving by Mike Lehr

May

Leadership as a Dependent of Conditions

By Mike Lehr

If we awoke one day with amnesia with life totally scrambled, would we have the same leaders? In his article, “The Turnaround Trap” (The New Yorker, March 25, 2013 edition), James Surowiecki discusses the ouster of Ron Johnson as CEO of J.C. Penney after his very successful stint at Target and finds that psychologists recognize:

. . . “the fundamental attribution error” – our tendency to ignore context and attribute an individual’s success or failure solely to inherent qualities.

Additionally, Claudio Fernández-Aráoz, Boris Groysberg, and Nitin Nohria include in their article “How to Hang On to Your High Potentials” (Harvard Business Review, October 2011 edition) under their heading “Align Development to Strategy” this conclusion:

. . . flexibility is key . . . companies that set rigid goals about the type or number of high potentials, instead of taking a dynamic approach, become complacent and don’t get much out of [high potential] programs.

If strategy is conditional and talent is conditional to strategy, then leadership talent is conditional too. However, we tend to ignore this. That’s why great players on losing teams are unlikely to receive “most valuable player” awards, why future CEO’s strive to lead hot, growing divisions, and why employment candidates from good companies receive preference.

We like to believe we have more control than we do. Attributing success directly to a person gives us comfort, security and certainty, providing clarity without having to integrate life’s fuzzy truths.

Thus, in rising to leadership do not underestimate the power in “being at the right place at the right time.” Surowiecki states this more negatively by concluding with this quote from Warren Buffett:

When a manager with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for poor fundamentals, it is the reputation of the business that remains intact.

Be the first to comment

May

Why Problems Occur (Alert #1): Easy over Difficult

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 1 of 1 in the series Why Problems Occur

When problems occur or when trying to anticipate them in problem solving, I look for seven alerts. While no single one automatically creates a problem, two or three get me there. The first alert is when I find people tending to do the easy over the difficult.

“You only get out what you put in,” is a common refrain. If true, the easy doesn’t net much. For example:

Driving three miles is much easier than running them, but we don’t get nearly the health benefits.
Emailing someone is much easier than meeting someone in person, but we don’t get nearly the relationship building return.
Training classes are much easier than one-on-one instruction, but they are not nearly effective.
Telling people what to do is much easier than listening, but relationship building suffers.
It’s easier to just do the work than it is to document it, but we’ll end up explaining ourselves more.
It’s easier to be nice to bad employees than to be honest, but then they don’t improve.
It’s easier to avoid conflict, but then important issues are unresolved.
It’s easier to just follow the rules or process than it is to stop and think there might be a problem.
Avoiding those we don’t like is easier, but projects extend themselves.
It’s easy to procrastinate when we don’t like the task, but all the unlikeable stuff piles up.
It’s easy to budget against a history, but then we avoid new endeavors.
Glossing over details is easy, but they usually come back to haunt us.

So, when I see the easy trumping the difficult too much, I become alarmed. Either there is a reckoning, underachievement or . . . all the difficult rolls downhill to some poor soul’s desk.

Be the first to comment

May

Online Connections as Your Personality Indicators

By Mike Lehr

We can assess personalities through everyday discussions. Everything we think, do and say are personality indicators. Friend selection works this way too. All can help us distinguish between “who we think we are” and “who we are.” This is important to marketers and advertisers because what we say we’ll buy is often different from what we actually buy. Thus, the expansion of social media offers businesses a wealth of marketing information and insights that allows them to predict our buying decisions.

The article “Stat Oil” (The Economist, February 9, 2013 edition) is but one example of this application. By analyzing our online connections, banks can predict our credit worthiness. If our online connections are creditworthy, then we are likely to be too. Such algorithms are progressing rapidly in all businesses.

The article mentions several other correlations between online activity and credit risk:

Connections can indicate how quickly one can find a job after losing one.
Applicants who type in only lower-case or upper-case letters are higher risks.
Connections having good jobs or living in nice neighborhoods make one a better risk.

However, the analysis is progressing beyond mere connections and digging deeper into online comments, since our word choice and phrasing can say much about us. For example, banks are currently exploring if racist comments correlate to lack of creditworthiness.

Of course, we don’t need algorithms to do this. The essence of real-time personality assessing involves examining such things as word choice and requires no algorithms. The difference is that social media are transforming a manual, personal process into a quantifiable, algorithmic one, allowing for far more data crunching much quicker. Consequently, we’ll soon be learning things about our personalities that we never knew . . . and so will everyone else.

Be the first to comment

May

Solving the Nonproductiveness of Telecommuting Workforces

By Mike Lehr

The article “Face Time” (The New Yorker, March 18, 2013 edition) by James Surowiecki discusses telecommuting’s downsides by focusing on its interpersonal challenges. For instance, studies find in-person informal and spontaneous interactions are extremely productive, and managers suffer from accurately valuating the work of telecommuters. All hurt telecommuters’ productivity.

For example, Sociometric Solutions’ CEO, Ben Waber, found:

Digital communication tends to be very good for planned interactions, like formal meetings. But a lot of the value of working with people comes from all those interactions that you didn’t plan.

And Surowiecki writes:

. . . studies show that managers often view telecommuters, accurately or not, as uncommitted.

Additionally, he found studies showing non-telecommuting employees jealous of telecommuting ones, fostering distrust. Studies find face time remains the most effective way to build relationships, which are extremely critical to innovation and problem solving.

Of course, elimination of telecommuting and mobile workforces is not the solution. Continuing to refine the work model to offset its negative side-effects is the solution. For instance, Surowiecki cites studies indicating that having employees meet in person helps to ward off distrust and increase performance.

Some other solutions include:

Training managers regarding their inherent biases in evaluating telecommuters’ performances
Scheduling more in-person meetings but integrating informal networking periods such as breaks, meals, entertainment and activities
Assigning telecommuters to formal committees, teams and initiatives that have the potential for informal in-person interactions
Helping telecommuters balance their in-person interactions between new and existing relationships
Ensuring that office staff know, acknowledge and welcome telecommuters by name when they visit

To date, nothing has replaced the effectiveness of in-person interactions in relationship building. The solution to the nonproductiveness of telecommuters is helping them integrate new modes of communication with old, not choosing one over others.

Be the first to comment

May

Top Seven Sun Tzu Quotes: #6 Seeking Victory

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 3 of 3 in the series Sun Tzu Top 7

1982 Reprint
Oxford University Press 1963

At number six in my list of top seven Sun Tzu quotes from The Art of War, I have:

Therefore, a skilled commander seeks victory from the situation and does not demand it of his subordinates.

One aspect of Sun Tzu that I find frequently ignored is his integrated perspective of events. Many factors influence them, yet we often behave as though life is only a stage upon which humans play. In reality, life is an organism, meaning that in our analogy that stage is alive and constantly moving.

Putting this in a practical business perspective, I often find that managers feel as though they are actually doing something when they say something as, “I told them they had to get this done.” Such orders do not help subordinates deal with the situation, and thus, violates Sun Tzu’s quote number seven.

Yet, this is the danger those who strongly believe in free will and in our control over events pose. They can reach a point at which Pollyannaism takes over, and they believe will alone is enough to solve problems. In reality, this quote of Sun Tzu emphasizes the need to do real problem solving (victory) by looking at the situation. Otherwise, we arrive at situations similar to the one in the movie Gallipoli where we force the fastest man in the world to charge a machine gun nest over open land and expect . . . or at minimum demand . . . success.

In effect, Sun Tzu is saying that the solution to squeezing water from a rock is not demanding employees to do so. He requires leaders and managers to apply real problem-solving skills.

Note: Versions of this quote usually appear in the 21^st paragraph of the fifth chapter, Energy.

Be the first to comment

May

Identifying Psychopaths in the Workplace

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 2 of 2 in the series Psychopaths in Workplace

Psychopaths work to amass their power. Emotion is not in the equation. Therefore, they’re immune to the feelings of others, including their own. They won’t hesitate to suffer what might be humiliating to others as long as it advances their power. This might appear as an unabashed “yes person” willing to do anything to advance. Consequently, egotists and narcissists, who possess a more emotionally centered self-view, are different in this way.

In addition to being an unabashed “yes man,” psychopaths in the workplace are likely to:

Be male (three times more likely)
Establish tight control over their environment and others
Create and enforce policies, procedures and rules to their advantage, punishing violators harshly
Break the very rules they enforce upon others
Think or say something such as, “Nothing personal, this is business”
Prize objectivity almost exclusively
Lie even when it’s obvious they are
Have a bottom-line orientation, meaning relationships won’t sway them
Lose no sleep in making adverse employment decisions such as terminations, demotions, etc.
Surround themselves with “yes people”
Create homogeneous work cultures, avoiding diverse personalities
Possess average to above average intelligence
Exhibit charisma especially in one-on-one and group situations
Function awkwardly in small, diverse groups of three to eight people
Work extended periods with little concern for impact on family and friends
Spread negative news and attributes of those who threaten their power
Undermine those with strong personal relationships
Extend their power by “constructively criticizing” others’ ideas
Focus on taking credit for the creativity of others rather than exhibit creativity themselves

Admittedly, no single characteristic makes a psychopath. All of us, at various times, can exhibit several of these. However, if several persistent frequently, then we are warned.

Be the first to comment

May

Confidence as a Psychological Weapon of Leadership

By Mike Lehr

Confidence frequently indicates incompetence. However, leadership often requires confidence. Since people often fear uncertainty, they naturally gravitate to people who provide certainty, and confidence is a form of certainty. We can partially resolve this paradox by asking, “Is the person confident or merely being confident?” This question allows us to see confidence as a psychological weapon of leadership.

In school, we learn debate is rooted in arguments supported by evidence, an objective battle won by stronger facts and arguments. In real-life, we learn it’s more of an emotional contest. Political debates are excellent examples, but even our daily work environments contain examples.

Again, it’s more than good emotions battling bad emotions because people frequently don’t behave the way they claim they do. For instance, people say they value trust and honesty, but in reality, eloquence trumps both. In the end, conviction is often more potent than logic.

Confidence is a form of conviction about outcomes. Martyrs are examples of the power behind convictions. Someone willing to die for what something influences us immensely. Therefore, in many business debates, conviction around weak arguments and facts can easily overrun strong but hesitant, hedging ones. Moreover, since how we feel about the messenger influences how we interpret the message (more), people, especially leaders, can easily influence us if they have conviction and a good relationship with us . . . even when the facts contradict what they say. We sometimes experience this at work when we say someone has great will or will power.

We protect ourselves by being aware of the power confidence holds over us. Raising this to a conscious level is the key. This is true for many subliminal influences. So, next time you run into confidence, ask yourself “Are they using confidence as a smoke screen for incompetence?”

Be the first to comment

Categories: Analogies, Awareness, Certainty, Competence, Confidence, Conscious, Emotions, Influence, Interpretation, Leadership, Logic, Power, Relationship Building, Subconscious, Techniques, Unawareness, Uncertainty, Unconscious, Unknowns
Tags: certainty, confidence, facts, honesty, Influence, interpretation, leadership, logic, martyrs, message, power, psychology, subconscious, trust, uncertainty

Apr

Education Bias (Pt 5): Understanding vs. Appreciation

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 4 of 4 in the series Education Bias

Someone once asked, “Mike, do you think people understand you?”

“No,” I answered.

“Does that bother you?”

“No.”

“Why not?”

“Well, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to understand yourself let alone someone else. Heck, even science doesn’t understand completely how we work. So, to expect someone to understand you not only seems unrealistic but unfair. Besides, appreciating other people is more important.”

“Is there really a difference?”

“Oh yes, a very big difference, it’s the whole watch analogy: understanding how a watch works is quite different from appreciating what it does for you. The same is true with people. I might not understand someone or how he does something, but I can certainly appreciate what we does. I can appreciate the value of him and his work.”

“But don’t you gain appreciation through understanding?”

“Yes, but it’s not necessary. This happens all the time with new technology. How much of that do we understand? Yet we have a great appreciation for what it does for us. In fact, there are cases where our appreciation increases when we don’t understand, as with magicians. The fact I can’t figure out how he did the trick often increases my appreciation. How often do we say to people when they do something amazing, ‘I don’t understand how you can do that!’?

“Also, just because we understand, doesn’t mean we appreciate. An inventor might understand the technology, but that doesn’t mean he appreciates what it can do for others. I might understand how an artist paints or a musician plays, but that doesn’t mean I appreciate their work.

“Our emphasis on ‘understanding someone,’ shows our bias towards education as an all-purpose solution for whatever ails our appreciation of life and people. In reality, it takes much more than education to gain such appreciation.”

Be the first to comment

Categories: Analogies, Cognition, Education, Education Bias (Series), Relationship Building, Series, Talent, Technology, Words
Tags: appreciation, education, Education Bias Series, people, understanding

Apr

Change Management Strategy #5: Two Pictures of Change

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 5 of 5 in the series Change Management Strategy

For any change management strategy, it’s important to identify how we and the culture we’re impacting conceptually picture change. This helps us manage expectations. While perhaps initially puzzling, the article “When in Chinatown, You Really Do Think More Chinese” (Harvard Business Review, March 2013 edition) helps by exploring the ways Westerners and Easterners picture change differently. I describe them as linear and cyclical change.

Linear change:

Moves in a particular direction
Has varying speeds, even halting at times
Is a temporary phase between two states
Has set principles, rules, guidelines making it work
Appears unpredictable

Cyclical change:

Has repeating patterns such as birth-life-death or as “history repeating itself”
Is in constant motion
Occurs even when we can’t perceive it
Has principles, rules and guidelines that vary with circumstances
Appears predictable if we understand the cycle

Analogously, we can combine the two as the lives of a man and a woman producing a child. That child lives on as a version (a change) of the parents. The child then goes through his own birth-life-death cycle. In this sense, we combine the progressive, forward feel of the linear change model with the circular feel of the cyclical one.

This combinative approach corresponds to the idea of creative destruction. For companies, this means reinventing itself by holding onto the good from the past (parents’ genes) and by incorporating the new (mutated genes) to thrive in the new world (which is also changing). This gives birth to a related – but different – version of the company.

These two pictures of change help us set realistic expectations, make change more predictable and reduce the uncertain anxiety workforces feel with change. In short, our change management strategy becomes more effective.

Be the first to comment

Apr

America’s Faith-based Economy

By Mike Lehr

When I read articles like “Toss a Coin” (The Economist, January 12, 2013 edition), I’m reminded that our economy relies on faith. After all, as the article indicates, the U.S. Treasury prints money to satisfy its debts.

Of course, it prints purposefully to avoid the extremes of inflation and contraction. If the Treasury did not print money, our economy would slowly stop as our population expanded. It’s analogous to adding more oil to an ever-growing car engine so it won’t lock up.

However, the money is simply paper. Nothing tangible supports it. For instance, we can’t exchange dollars for gold. Only the U.S. Government supports it (“This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private”), and our faith supports the government. Since this seems so certain, it’s tough to see this as faith until we experience its loss.

For me, this occurred in the last two weeks of 1989 when visiting Poland for familial reasons. The Communists were transferring power to a democratic government on New Year’s Day. In those two weeks, the Polish zloty went from 3,000/U.S. dollar to 10,000. Knowing we were Americans, cab drivers began demanding payment in U.S. dollars; faith had vanished.

The importance of this prompts the question: How can we apply rationale to something rooted in faith? Do we rationalize religion? This is why neoclassical economics faces the challenge from behavioral economics. It incorporates emotions of which faith is a form. It means business is uniquely human not objective. It’s faith in each other with the U.S. Government (“We the People”) merely a conduit for that faith. Consequently, this dual anchor of people and faith makes business . . . well . . . personal.

What happens when we lose faith in each other?

Be the first to comment

Influencing and Problem Solving by Mike Lehr

Leadership as a Dependent of Conditions

Why Problems Occur (Alert #1): Easy over Difficult

Solving the Nonproductiveness of Telecommuting Workforces

Top Seven Sun Tzu Quotes: #6 Seeking Victory

Identifying Psychopaths in the Workplace

Confidence as a Psychological Weapon of Leadership

Education Bias (Pt 5): Understanding vs. Appreciation

Change Management Strategy #5: Two Pictures of Change

America’s Faith-based Economy

Feeds

Series

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Blogs I Follow

Direct Affiliations

Archives

Categories

Feeds

Series

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Recent Comments

Tags

Blogs I Follow

Direct Affiliations

Archives

Categories