Perspective – Influencing and Problem Solving by Mike Lehr

Perspective Archive

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

Change Management Strategy #4: Change Jobs, Reduce Tenure

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 4 of 5 in the series Change Management Strategy

As we acquire knowledge and experience, we tend to become wedded to the status quo. Tenure compounds this effect as Xueming Luo, Vamsi Kanuri, and Michelle Andrews report in their article, “Long CEO Tenure Can Hurt Performance” (Harvard Business Review, March 2013 edition). While they focus on CEO’s, their reasoning applies to other jobs within the organization. In short, some of the employees most resistant to change will be those who have been in their jobs for a long time.

Thus, a change management strategy could entail moving people to other parts of the organization. This could dovetail nicely into the firm’s leadership development program and into consolidating the 5% supporting change. These authors found that long CEO tenure yielded:

Less risk taking
Less adaptability to change
Increased reliance on existing networks and ideas
Less exposure to new contacts with new ideas
Less attunement to the marketplace
Increased preference for avoiding losses over pursuing gains
Increased personal stake in the success of existing strategies and projects even if they aren’t effective

The authors did find that long CEO tenure tended to yield stronger management-employee relationships. Yet, this could have the negative effect of unifying employees around failing strategies, thus making change even more difficult for successors. Again, while the authors focused on CEO’s, these tendencies hold true for executives and managers of all ranks.

Of course, we could easily abuse this strategy by removing older talent, but we should not underestimate how much a change in perspective influences people’s decisions and behaviors. Moreover, since the above tendencies are predictable, we can plan for them by altering incentives and managerial oversight (coaching) to avoid them.

Yes, changing jobs can be refreshing for managers and improve long-term standings of both companies and managers.

Be the first to comment

Work, Life are Like Heartbeats

By Mike Lehr

One upon a time a service rep for a financial firm shared her story about having to deliver some bad news to an elderly client. The news was that she had discovered that a unrelated professional to the financial firm was skimming money from her accounts. The client was extremely upset and hurt to learn she had misplaced her trust with a long-term relation. The service rep wondered how she could have better delivered the news.

I drew a straight line on the flipchart as said, “We often like and strive for this: a calm, peaceful, steady event. However, does anyone also know what this also represents?” There was no answer from the group, so I drew another line (Figure 1). I asked, “Does anyone know what this represents?”

Several did answer, “Heartbeats.”

Figure 1: Like Heartbeats

“Okay, if this represents ‘heartbeats,’ what does this straight line represent?” Again, there was silence, so I answered, “It represents a flat EKG!” Pausing to let this sink in, I then continued, “Now, if we look at the entire cycle of a resting heartbeat (B), we will find that close to 85% of it (C) is calm and very flat. However, this part doesn’t keep us alive. It’s the remaining 15% (A) that does.”

“So now, let’s return to your story. Every day you must have many aspects of your job that are fairly routine, that you can do almost without much thought. I also have to believe that events such as you had with this client are rare?” The service rep nodded her agreement.

“However, what really gives your job life, what really makes your talents valuable, is what happens in this part of your job (A) not in this part (C). Without this (A), your job is lifeless, boring. So, what I’m suggesting is that these parts of your job (A) are only a natural occurrence in the performance of your job (B).

I would also extend this to life in general: life is like a heartbeat. What keeps it going, what keeps life lively is the 15% not the 85%. So, my question to you is this: Do you want your life to be like this (the flat line) or this (Figure 1)?”

Be the first to comment

Categories: Analogies, Arbitrariness, Career, Change, Competence, Confidence, Emotions, Inspiration, Inspiration (Series), Performance, Perspective, Series, Training
Tags: good job, Heartbeat Analogy, Inspiration (Series), Job, medical, motivation, Performance, training

Imperfect Music is Perfect Music

By Mike Lehr

Musical Notes on Water

A while back I read “Why Music?” (The Economist, December 18, 2008 edition) and the first sentence of the concluding paragraph hit me:

The truth, of course, is that nobody yet knows why people respond to music.

It’s mysterious how something so prevalent can be so unknown. Yet, while today it remains true, people like Daniel Levitin are increasingly showing how we respond to music. Adam Gopnik explores his work in “Music to Your Ears” (The New Yorker, January 28, 2013 edition) and writes about one way:

Expressiveness is error. . . . Levitin could show what really moves us in music is the vital sign of a human hand, in all its unsteady and broken grace. (Too much imperfection and it sounds like a madman playing; too little, and it sounds like a robot.)

Levitin discovered this by comparing human piano playing to that of a computer. When a computer perfectly played each note, we liked it much less than the human who didn’t. Now, if the error is too great, more and more of us will decide the artist is just banging.

A great example of this tension is Jimi Hendrix’s Star Spangled Banner at Woodstock. From a robotic perspective, Hendrix’s is playing it very wrong; however, from a humanistic one it’s expressiveness, the same expressiveness we apply to our clothes and even our jobs. To some it’s just noise. To others it’s tearful beauty.

Expectations play a role though. If we expected a more traditional rendition, then Hendrix’s would likely disturb us. So, in effect, if imperfect music is perfect music, then since music reflects our personalities, the imperfect human is the perfect human. Therefore, what we interpret as imperfections in others is really expressiveness.

Yes, I know, quite a leap for the workplace.

Be the first to comment

Predictability as Hell: A Problem-solving Perspective

By Mike Lehr

Businesses strive for predictability. Standardization helps them achieve that. Still, many employees like their jobs for their variability, “It’s something different every day.” Herein is a paradox.

On one hand, we have predictability containing expenses by minimizing surprises. On the other hand, work’s variability gives us pleasure. Could predictability make us wealthy but miserable too? Walter Kirn touches on this paradox in his article “Knowledge of the Future Is Messing With the Present” (The Atlantic, July/August edition) by asking:

Has making life more explicable actually made it any more pleasurable?

Perhaps by understanding predictability better, we could appreciate change better and strip its fearsomeness. The The Twilight Zone episode, “A Nice Place to Visit,” can help.

The main character, Rocky, is a petty thief who dies. A divine guide finds him to deliver the news and show him to his new “home.” At first, Rocky can’t believe his luck for in this place he gets whatever he wants. In poker, all the cards go his way. With women, none deny him. Despite his long list of sins, Rocky figures God granted him heaven.

However, after a while, he becomes bored with the predictability of succeeding at whatever he attempts, poker, slots, women, robberies, billiards etc. Finally, he approaches his divine host and says, “If I gotta stay here another day, I’m gonna go nuts! Look, look, I don’t belong in Heaven, see? I want to go to the other place.”

The divinity rebuts, “Heaven? Whatever gave you the idea that you were in heaven, Mr. Valentine? This IS the other place!”

By imagining extremes, we alter our perspectives, permitting a more realistic assessment of our conditions. Not only do these perspectives influence our emotions (i.e. reducing fear of change) but also they improve our problem-solving skills.

Entire episode (approx 25 min.): The Twilight Zone “A Nice Place to Visit” (Original Broadcast Date: April 15, 1960)
Climatic scene (approx 1 min): Ending “A Nice Place to Visit”

Be the first to comment

Creative Innovation (Pt 13): Overcoming Biases

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 13 of 15 in the series Creative Innovation

One of the points Giovanni Gavetti makes in “The New Psychology of Strategic Leadership” (Harvard Business Review, July-August 2011 edition) about associative thinking but holds true for all aspects of creative innovation and decision making are our own biases. As a result of “the human mind’s confirmatory nature,” “Strategists often look selectively for evidence that supports the analogy” they’ve formed in associative thinking.

In other words, when doing our research we are more inclined to focus on evidence, or types of evidence, supporting our points rather than contradicting them. For instance, we might value statistical evidence over anecdotal or empirical evidence. We might value evidence produced by the scientific method rather than an alternative process such as trial and err. Yet, in both cases, accepting different types of evidence or evidence produced by different processes, stimulates creativity. Moreover, by holding the team to these things, such as requiring quantification, not only do we restrict creativity but we reinforce the status quo, inertia.

However, it’s difficult for people to come out from under their own biases. This means it becomes incumbent for the managers of these teams to be prepared and have the talent to lead the change that innovation brings. One thing that truly distinguishes leadership from management is the degree to which each must promote change. That includes change in evidence and processes the team will consider in evaluating options.

Thus, while diversity in our creative innovation teams is important, diversity in our approaches and processes to tackle problems and to make decisions are too. We can look at an organization’s policies and processes as a form of “group bias” that can impose itself on our teams and drastically negate their inherent advantages.

Beware of not only individual biases but institutional ones too.

Be the first to comment

Creative Innovation (Pt 2): Disruptive Personalities

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 2 of 15 in the series Creative Innovation

We often forget that innovation is born from people. Thus, since children are often like their parents and most innovations cause disruptions, innovation is likely to be born of disruptive people. Even though research supports the role of dissenters in improving businesses, integrating disruptors with other talent requires a higher quality manager.

For example, consider what Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple, told David Kushner for his article, “Machine Politics,” (The New Yorker, May 7, 2012 edition) about the notorious hacker, George Holtz, arguably the best of our time:

I understand the mind-set of a person who wants to [hack], and I don’t think of people like that as criminals. In fact, I think that misbehavior is very strongly correlated with and responsible for creative thought.

Buttressing the analogy we have the popular idea of disruptive innovation (aka disruptive technologies) originally asserted by Clayton Christensen of Harvard University (see Larissa MacFarquhar’s article “When Giants Fail” [The New Yorker, May 14, 2012 edition]). Yet, I’m sure disruptive innovation is far more popular in business than disruptive personalities are.

In business we tend to favor those who view their glass half-full rather than half-empty even though the latter is more likely to go and get more water. Consider that it often takes crises to trigger change: Who’s more likely to see a crisis – the “half-full” or “half-empty” person? Also, we often grow weary of the person who bucks rules and questions conventions; yet, attacking such things is important in innovation.

Of course, it’s important to distinguish disruptive from destructive. The line isn’t always clear, and only reinforces the need for better management. This could likely be a more sensitive manager, a manager adaptive to a broader array of personalities and aware that disruptive employees might be the most creative.

Be the first to comment

Feelings, Emotions & Intuition: The Difference

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 1 of 1 in the series Feelings, Emotions, Intuition - Difference

A commenter (Roger) to my post on the difference between emotional intelligence and intuition wanted more elaboration, especially between emotions and feelings:

It’s also not clear what the difference between Emotion and Feelings are in your article and also in reality, these are often used interchangeably.

Using a food analogy, feelings are ingredients, emotions are foods and intuition is what the food tells us about the meal, event or us. Thus, feelings form emotions, and emotions move us (e-motion) to think, do or say something that gives us insights into things, events, people and ourselves.

For example, yeast, salt, water and flour make bread. These four ingredients are feelings and the bread an emotion. How the bread is made and used can tell us much about what’s going on. A large loaf might mean many people; a loaf with a soft crust might mean sandwiches.

Foods tell us much about the meal, the event and the people. Whether it’s junk food, comfort food or breakfast food, or a formal meal, an ethnic meal or a vegetarian one, we learn something. Intuition works the same; it helps us learn what our emotions are saying. For example, if I’m sad (feeling), I might want to buy something (emotion). What I buy says something (intuition) about my state or even myself.

Any event can produce many feelings in us, sometimes conflicting. For instance, a friend’s good fortune might produce feelings of happiness and envy. Together they produce an emotion that might move us to arrange a celebration for the friend (happiness) but it’s more subdued than we could have done (jealousy). Then, intuition helps us learn what our emotions are saying about our relationship with our friend.

Thus, to understand the differences among these words, think food!

Related sites:

Be the first to comment

Problem-solving Technique: Argue the Opposing View

By Mike Lehr

When I was on the debate and student congress team in high school, practice would often entail arguing an opposing view. Often I would find arguments I had not considered and holes in my own that I hadn’t discovered. The main “AhHa!” point was just how much I missed by being comfortable in my own perspective.

Clay Johnson in a PBS NewsHour interview about his book, Information Diet, rhetorically asks, “Who wants to hear the truth when they can hear that they are right?” This applies to experts too. For instance, Daniel Klein wrote “I Was Wrong, and So Are You” in the December 2011 edition of The Atlantic about problems he incurred in his polling by altering the questions’ perspectives: it turned his original conclusions on their head.

Of course, this question assumes there is a best way, which isn’t necessary true, or at minimum, isn’t easily discerned. Still, even though Johnson and Klein speak and write with more of a political focus, their points apply to business: people tend to prefer information that reinforces their views over that which erodes it.

This can translate into an array of poor business decisions such as choosing a lesser option that we know fits our:

Skills over a better one that will require learning new ones
Managerial style over a better one that doesn’t
Expertise over a better one that has us relying upon others’ expertise

By arguing an opposing view, we vest in it, providing us with the motivation to dig where we had not. It might not change our minds, but we will discover problems, giving us a preemptive advantage; and, a different perspective that might allow us to find solutions to them where we could not see previously.

Be the first to comment

Relationship Building Technique #8: Reflection

By Mike Lehr

This entry is part 8 of 8 in the series Relationship Building Technique

We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur in relationship building.

Reflection phrases our assessment of the other person’s emotions and feelings in a nonjudgmental way. It’s similar to summarization but with a focus on emotions, how others are feeling. This puts us in a better position to assess how others are interpreting our message while letting others know we are in tune with their feelings. Reflection is extremely helpful in venting as part of a conflict management.

Examples of reflection include:

“You seem very pleased with the assignment.”
“It’s obvious that you enjoy working with Bob.”
“It appears that something about this project displeases you.”
“I can tell that this subject upsets you.”
“It looks like you’re very happy with the results.”

From a relational perspective, reflection conveys the feeling that we are:

In tune on a deeper, human level
Appreciating their feelings
Finding their emotions important and worthy of discussion
Grasping the seriousness or importance of the conversation’s subject matter
Aware of their emotional state

The effect of reflection is to:

Lower emotional barriers preventing a positive conversation
Establish an emotional connection
Encourage additional conversation on a more open, truthful level

Reflection is the most difficult of the relationship techniques because emotions are fuzzy, making them difficult to assess and verbalize. As with summarization, it’s used less frequently, but covers a lot of ground. It does a great job of uncovering underlying emotions because even if we’re wrong, others will likely correct us by stating their true feelings.

Since emotions often determine people’s interpretations, reflection is a very important technique in an integrated, holistic package of relationship building ones.

Be the first to comment

Influencing and Problem Solving by Mike Lehr

Perspective Archive

Top Seven Sun Tzu Quotes: #6 Seeking Victory

Change Management Strategy #4: Change Jobs, Reduce Tenure

Work, Life are Like Heartbeats

Imperfect Music is Perfect Music

Predictability as Hell: A Problem-solving Perspective

Creative Innovation (Pt 13): Overcoming Biases

Creative Innovation (Pt 2): Disruptive Personalities

Feelings, Emotions & Intuition: The Difference

Problem-solving Technique: Argue the Opposing View

Feeds

Series

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Blogs I Follow

Direct Affiliations

Archives

Categories

Perspective Archive

Feeds

Series

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Recent Comments

Tags

Blogs I Follow

Direct Affiliations

Archives

Categories