Check out the article at http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/738edaa8#/738edaa8/8
Check out the article at http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/738edaa8#/738edaa8/8
I am so proud of my daughter who has been my best student—brings real issues, listens, takes action, and reports what happens. Here is what she wrote in her blog. Please follow her at https://twitter.com/mwdejesus
Dear Fellow Managers,
We suck. Before you curse me and defend yourself, I say this out of love—and it applies to me as well. As a group (supervisors, managers) we are ineffective. For the most part we have been on the job for TEN years before we get any specific leadership training. For years we often are winging it or maintaining crappy systems that our own untrained managers created.
We can’t be afraid to learn what we don’t know OR be critical of what we are doing.
It takes a lot of courage to look at ourselves and see where we are failing. The higher up you go the harder it gets—but the results are that more powerful.
Read the rest at http://www.mwdejesus.com/2013/12/11/3-tips-for-great-management/
Authors Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman said in their book, First Break All the Rules: What The Worlds’ Greatest Managers Do Differently, that people don’t leave jobs, they leave managers.
A survey of 2000 workers by management consultants Orion Partner found that almost half (47%) said “their managers made them feel threatened.”
It is no wonder why we have such a high percentage of Stage Two cultures. (Stage Two is a private conversation that “my life sucks”). My life would suck too if I felt threatened by my manager.
Why do managers behave this way? I believe that most don’t know better. A survey of 17,000 leaders found that “Average age for their first leadership training was 42, about 10 years after they began supervising people, and almost 20 years after they started experiencing leadership in organizations.” (Zenger/Folkman)
We are failing to train the very people that are responsible for our success.
What can you do?
When we have a dyadic relationship, perception is inherently unstable; especially when we disagree or have a difference of opinion.
We get stuck. We argue. We get defensive.
One person is right and the other wrong. The idea is good or bad. Notice that we like people who agree with us and dislike those who don’t.
But openness is being able to listen when we don’t agree. How can we overcome this biological blindness?
The answer is the Power of Triads—two vs three.
A 12 year study of 24,000 people concluded 76% of work relationships are ineffective. (Tribal Leadership 2008)
That’s 3 out of 4 people who are being challenged at work – by dyadic relationships. What’s interesting is that the other 24% had a 3-5 times increase in productivity, less stress, & more fun. They also had one unique characteristic. They did not meet in dyads.” They met in groups of three. They used the power of triads.
A sandbox with two children and one toy—what happens? They fight. “It’s mine!” Add a third child to our sandbox and the dynamic changes. We build a sand castle together.
This is the power of Triads. Three people working together on a common project. There is a shift from mine to ours.
Triads defeat the enemy of openness; Triads pull us from being stuck in the mud of dyads.
Triads move us and others into action.
To create a “we” takes three.
So, the next time you get stuck in a sandbox with just one other person—remember the Power of Triads.
This is a very funny video where Bob Newhart demonstrates a sure fire method to resolve any issue in less than five minutes. You won’t want to miss it!
I loved this short video differentiating transactional leadership from transformational leadership. We define “Tribal Leadership as a journey, in which [people] understand themselves and the people around them better, and as a result, know exactly what actions will affect their workplace.” (Tribal Leadership p 7). We believe that the key is to discover what a tribe (or group of people) stand for (values) and it lives for (noble cause). In this two minute video we see these same leverage points for transformational leadership.
Talk 2 Brazil is the world´ s only English language talk program on business in and with Brazil and is broadcast through LA Talk Radio, Los Angeles California. The audience is international business oriented, native and non native English speakers, mostly in the US, but also Europe, Asia and Brazil. Here is a link to the interview.
In the interview, we talked about what Vistage is and how the economy is doing in the United States. We also talked about Tribal Leadership, triads, and culture.
Through her work as a psychologist at Stanford University, Carol Dweck has been able to identify the one thing that makes the difference between success and failure. In her book, Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, she says there are two mindsets you can have in this world, and the one you choose will make all the difference.
There are many ways to divide the world. Benjamin Barber – an eminent sociologist – says,
“I don’t divide the world into the weak and the strong, or the successes and the failures, those who make it or those who don’t. I divide the world into learners and non-learners.”
This is at the heart of Dweck’s argument. The learners believe that they have the ability to change, and set about learning what they need to do in order to make the change a reality. The non-learners, on the other hand, are quite clear about the fact that “things are the way they are” and that there’s no sense in trying to change them.
There are things that you as a leader can do to help create this mindset in the workplace. The most powerful thing you can do in this situation is always ask what a person is learning. Don’t focus on the success or failure of their work directly, but focus on what they learned through the experience. Fixed mindset people have trouble thinking this way, because to them, that’s not what it’s about. It’s about winning and losing – and looking good or not. However, you should make it clear to them that the only way they will achieve the success they are looking for is by learning. If they want that bonus, raise or promotion, they’ll earn it by proving that they are learning in growing. Of course, this takes more time and effort on your part. You can’t focus only on the numbers and results – you have to focus on the process in how they get there. It’s hard work, but to have a team full of growth-mindset people is the only way to achieve long-term success.
As you go off into your day now, ask yourself the question – which mindset do you choose?
John King and Dave Logan concluded after a ten year, 24,000-person study, that 75% of our corporate cultures are ineffective. (Published as Tribal Leadership 2008) The good news is that it doesn’t have to be that way. One of the great insights of their research was that the 24% of organizations that were effective had one major difference—they met in “triads”. A triad, at its most basic level, is three people that meet together. The objective is to create a peer-to-peer-to-peer relationship for accomplishing a mutual purpose. What follows are the best practices or principles for creating effective triads.
Way of Being:
Value of Triads:
Jim Collins is a legend in the business world, and for good reason. His latest book – Great by Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck–Why Some Thrive Despite Them All – takes a look at some remarkable companies who were able to outperform their industry index by over 10 times over a lengthy span of time. Do you want to know how you can do the same for your company? Get a free 30 day subscription today and watch the summary.
When Jim Collins wrote his best-selling book, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap… and Others Don’t, he became an instant business hero. Executives from around the world aspired to be Level 5 leaders and focused intently on finding their hedgehog concepts. But there was a question that remained unanswered: in a world that is increasingly in financial turmoil and constant change, how do you succeed?
In a methodology similar to Good to Great, Collins and his team studied companies that were in industries where there was a constant state of change, and found that there were some companies that outperformed the marketplace by a significant margin.
He called these the 10x companies, because they all had outperformed their “industry index” by more than 10 times over the span of the study. In fact, on average, the 1 0 x companies outperformed the marketplace as a whole by 32 times. If it sounds to you like these would be some good companies to learn from, you’d be right. What Collins and his team concluded was that there were 4 main attributes of a 10x company: