Leaders Teaching Leadership

January 9, 2011

I have seen many corporate training applications where top leaders believe stronger leadership is needed throughout the organization’s ranks. They ask the Training Department to develop a leadership development program. Training mangers are not allowed to “staff up” to do the actual training, so they look outside for the faculty to teach various leadership courses. This could be a mistake, because it overlooks the cadre of potential teachers already on the payroll.

For the senior leaders in an organization, the level of involvement in actually helping to train more junior leaders runs the gamut from zero, as described above, to actually doing all of the teaching themselves. Classroom time spent by a senior leader is a sliding scale; what works well in one instance would be a problem in another case. A good benchmark is if the senior leaders do 20% to 40% of the teaching. It is up to the individual leader, along with the development staff or outside consultant, to determine the optimum level of involvement.

I believe higher involvement by senior leaders often leads to better outcomes assuming the top leaders have the credibility and skill to do a good job of teaching lower level leaders. If there are problems at the senior level, then training dollars would be better spent there to make top leaders capable of being credible teachers as opposed to trying to “fix” the lower levels of management with outside canned leadership training.

If you are a leader, you need to make a conscious decision about how much time and effort you will put into the job of training underlings yourself. If you are a training director or consultant, you will need to decide how much you should encourage the senior leader to be involved. There are numerous personal, organizational, and practical factors that go into these decisions.

For example, if the senior leader is cloistered in financial meetings all the time, and the human side of the work is delegated to operations people, having this person do instruction would likely be a poor choice. If the organization is in the middle of a survival crisis or a merger, the top leader may be unable to spare any time for development of underlings. Perhaps the senior leader is just a lousy leader, and it would be foolhardy to have this person teach others how to screw up. Conversely, the senior leader may be outstanding and consider training the next generation of leaders to be his or her highest calling.

Let’s assume the top leadership has built high trust and has the capability to teach leadership in an engaging manner. Under those conditions, there are several advantages to having leadership classes taught by senior leaders:

1. Shows right priority. If the top brass preach that nothing is more important than having great leaders at every level, then they ought to show that with action and their time rather than give lip service to executive development.

2. People pay more attention. If your boss is in front of the classroom, not only does it send a very strong signal about the importance of the training, people listen better because the boss is putting sweat equity into the equation. It is called leading by example.

3. The best way to learn something well is to teach it. If leaders take the time to organize their thoughts about key leadership concepts, they will be more likely to practice the habits themselves.

4. The content is more applicable. The case examples and materials used to teach the lessons are directly applicable to the particular situation managers are facing every day on the job. They are not hypothetical examples brought in by an outside trainer who does not even understand the local jargon.

5. Training your own leaders is uplifting. Taking a personal interest in the development of up-and-coming leaders helps the top brass assess capabilities better and forms a kind of mentoring spirit that is healthy. The caveat here is to avoid being overbearing or intrusive. Young leaders need to experiment with different ideas in safety, so the mentor needs to establish ground rules that ensure a safe learning environment.

6. Control your own destiny. When leaders develop the course content, it will be laser-focused on the local need. If an outside trainer is teaching leadership, it will be less potent and potentially less effective.

7. Those actually in the trench are better at teaching trench warfare. Great leaders have the instincts and knowledge of how to apply concepts in a pragmatic way on the job. Trainers who have not sat in the leader’s chair do not have the in-depth understanding of the realities. They describe the textbook answers that often fall flat in the real world.

These seven reasons are why it is helpful to have leaders be the teachers of leadership. I acquired this tendency myself as I learned that teaching leadership and trust was one of the most important parts of my job as a Division Manager of a large corporation. I gave the activity roughly 30% of my calendar time, and I am convinced it was the best use of my time.

I grant that many leaders would not have the patience or skills required to be good at teaching leadership. Frankly, many leaders do not have the ability to practice what they preach, so their teachings might ring hollow to stronger underlings. This is where the Development staff needs to focus energy. The top leaders need coaching on how to participate in the hands-on work of teaching leadership in their organization. There is plenty of work for consultants to drive this conversion, but once leaders get the idea and have the skills, it is best for them to take their place in front of the classroom.

Several organizations have taken up the banner of having leaders teach leadership. Becton Dickinson is one group that practices this well. There is a good book on this concept by Ed Betof, if you are interested. The title is Leaders as Teachers. It describes the journey at Becton Dickinson and the incredibly positive impact the practice has had on the organization. However, you do not need to read a book on how to practice having leaders as teachers, just advocate it and start doing it. If that seems unlikely in your situation, it may mean that the top leaders in your organization need some remedial leadership training themselves. Spend your training dollars there first.


Leading Up by Example

May 9, 2010

My business is helping to grow leaders with a focus on building higher trust within their organizations. When I work with leaders at every layer except the highest level, they typically get very excited at the potential of working on trust within their area. After some education on the impacts of trust in numerous dimensions occurring simultaneously, they salivate over the improvement opportunities that are ripe for the picking. As we discuss the behavioral changes needed for leaders to foster rather than destroy trust I can see light bulbs going on in their heads.

Then, I often see a kind of sick look come across their faces as reality sets in. After a while some brave soul will offer, “This is great stuff, Bob, but the boss does not believe in this kind of “soft skills” training. He thinks it is a waste of time and money. So we are going nowhere with trust in our organization until we can get a new CEO.” This is wrong thinking because trust can be improved at any level of an organization. Sure, it is infinitely better if the example is set from the top, but if that does not happen, we do not have to wait until a retirement, replacement, death, or murder to start building a culture of trust.

The trick is to start a cell of excellence at your own level and work downward. Nearly all leaders can improve the level of trust in their sphere of influence by changing their behaviors. After a while (and it does not take very long) the improvement in performance will shine like a beacon from a lighthouse.

As the productivity and enthusiasm shout out from your corner of the organization, eventually even the most encrusted manager above you will start asking what the heck is going on in your playpen. Then, you have earned the right to explain that your investment to get some education on building trust for you and the managers working for you has changed the whole paradigm.

The higher in space you look, the more brilliant your shining star will appear to upper management, especially if there are some black holes between you and the top layers.
They will be grateful for the bottom line improvement and maybe even willing to endorse that an improved culture really does have the highest ROI of any potential project.

The impact of trust on organizations is a well documented fact. Stephen M.R. Covey states in his book The Speed of Trust that trust is not some squishy, soft variable but a hard-edged measure that has direct and profound impact on organizational performance. In the 2010 Edelman Trust Barometer, Richard Edelman noted a direct correlation between US trust in business and the S&P 500 Index: “Trust, absolutely, is now a product for companies to pursue and pursue avidly. Why? Because it enables company performance and stock price to prosper. We see an interlinking of share price and trust.”
In my own books, I give several examples of the causal relationship between trust and productivity.

No executive would disagree that trust within an organization is an important component that enables excellence. It is unbelievable that so few top executives actively seek out specific training for themselves and other senior leaders on how to build and maintain trust. It is like they have it all figured out already. But if they know how to act in ways that truly build trust, why is the level of trust within the majority of corporations typically below the 50% level? Either top leadership does not truly acknowledge the relationship or they are blind to the countless trust-busting things they do daily. Were it not for these behaviors, Scott Adams wouldn’t have invented the Dilbert series and might be a plumber today.

The good news is that you can and should create a cell of excellence in building trust at your own level regardless of the attitudes of those above you. Jim Collins, author of Built to Last, Good to Great, and How the Mighty Have Fallen offers a ten point list of things every leader should do to reach his or her full potential. Number one on his list is “Build a Pocket of Excellence.” It means that you have more power than you think you have, and it is a simple matter of leading the boss from below. Rather than trying to convince the boss to spend money on training for improved trust, just show the incredible result, and then admit that you forgot to ask permission to train your managers in the first place. The boss will forgive you and might even be more willing to consider some training at the upper levels.

Another way to think about it was offered by the retired head coach of the Indianapolis Colts, Tony Dungy. His advice is to “Focus on what you can control and do not dwell on what you cannot change.” That advice applies to leading from below as well. If the boss is not convinced of the payoff of improving the culture through training, go ahead and do it anyway in the area you manage. Don’t try to reeducate or convince the boss. Remember the old adage, “Never wrestle a pig, you get all muddy and the pig loves it!” If the boss forbids any such nonsense as culture training, find a clandestine way to accomplish it. Buy some books or DVDs and have managers in your area experience them and get together once a week for a lunch discussion.

There are countless ways you can change the culture in your organization by making small investments of time, and at low cost. If your boss has a negative attitude on investing in people skills for managers, you are not dead in the water. Take the initiative to get involved with someone who can help you on the journey, and you will see amazing benefits in not only performance but in knowing that you are helping everyone in your organization lead a better life.


13 Keys to Reduce Turnover

April 4, 2010

The problem of employee turnover is a conundrum for any organization. One would think that during times of high unemployment, the turnover rate in most organizations would be at an all-time low. The reality is far from that. While there is a lot of variability from one industry to another, if you take all industries together, the total turnover rate in 2009 was a whopping 15%.

We know the cost of employee turnover is more than the annual salary of the individual lost. In fact, most estimates place the total replacement cost at roughly 150% of the employee’s salary. A quick calculation shows that for a company with 1000 people who have an average annual salary of $50,000, the annual cost for employee turnover adds up to over $10 million. These costs go directly to the bottom line.

Reducing employee turnover is not rocket science; however, many companies struggle with very high turnover year after year. The common denominator of high turnover in organizations is poor leadership. Therefore, organizations that stress leadership development have an inherent advantage that can mean the difference between survival and extinction.

Let’s examine several ways an organization can drastically reduce the level of turnover at very low cost.

1. Develop People – Organizations that focus on employee development enjoy higher employee satisfaction, which leads to lower turnover. If each employee has a concrete development plan that is reviewed at least annually and contains a variety of growth opportunities, the employee will have little reason to look for greener pastures elsewhere.

2. Recognize Good Performance – Reinforcing people for doing good work lets them know they are appreciated. Tangible and intangible rewards are a great way to show management appreciation for workers who excel. This improves morale if done well. However, understand that reinforcement can be a minefield if it is not handled properly. Make sure employees receive sincere appreciation by management on a continuing basis.

3. Build Trust – By extending trust to employees, leaders demonstrate their willingness to support them. This pays off in terms of higher trust on the part of employees toward the organization. There is a whole science on how to build trust. By creating a real environment, more trust in an organization will lead to lower turnover.

4. Reduce Boredom – Employees who are underutilized, tend to get bored and restless. If there is a vacuum of activity, people often get into mischief. It is important for managers to craft job duties and responsibilities such that people are actively engaged in the work every day.

5. Communicate More – In nearly every corporate survey on employee satisfaction, the issue of communication surfaces as either the number one or number two complaint. Communication needs to be ubiquitous and consistent. It is not enough to have a monthly corporate news letter or an occasional town hall meeting. Communication needs to take many different forms and be a constant priority for all levels of management.

6. Cross Train – Employees, who have been trained on several different jobs recognize they are of higher value to the organization and tend to be less inclined to leave. Along with the pleasure of having more variety of work, employees appreciate the ability to take on additional skills. Having good bench strength allows the organization to function well, even during times of high vacation or illness.

7. Don’t Overtax – During lean economic times, companies have a need to stretch resources as much as possible. Many organizations exceed the elastic limit of what employees can be expected to maintain long term. This leads to burnout and people leaving for health reasons or just plain quitting in disgust over the abuse. It is important for management to assess carefully how far resources can be stretched, because going beyond the elastic limit guarantees a high level of employee turnover. I believe this rule is habitually violated in many organizations, and they pay for it big time. Stretching people too far is a false economy. If you organization is guilty of this, print out this article and put it on the bulletin board.

8. Keep It Light – When managers apply constant pressure to squeeze out the last drop of productivity, they often go over the line, and it becomes counter productive. If leaders grind people down to a stump with constant pressure for perfection and ever higher productivity, the quality of work life suffers. Employees can tolerate a certain amount of this for some time, but eventually they will break down. It is smart to set very high goals, but very important to have employees believe the stretch goals are attainable. One good way to provide this assurance is to have the employees themselves participate in setting the goals. The best companies find ways to work in a little fun somewhere, even (and especially) in high pressure situations.

9. Feedback Performance – there needs to be a constant flow of information on how all employees are doing in each area of the organization. People who are kept in the dark about their performance become disillusioned and cranky. The simple kindness of letting people know how they are doing on a daily or weekly basis pays off in terms of lower turnover.

10. Train Leaders – All levels of management and supervision need to be highly proficient at creating an environment where the culture is upbeat, positive, and has high trust. This does not happen by accident, or simply by desire. It takes work and lots of emphasis by senior leadership to make sure that there are no weak links in the management chain. In most organizations there is a dud of a manager somewhere between the well intentioned and talented top brass and the worker bees. The result is that great objectives, ideals, and processes are morphed into oblivion by the time they reach the shop floor. The antidote is to improve leadership effectiveness at all levels and remove any dud who is incapable of changing.

11. Hire Right – Putting the right people into the organization at all times is extremely important. One bad apple can really do a lot of damage. Focus on the selection process with some behavioral attitude surveys and make sure you do your homework with previous references.

12. Create Ownership – When people are actually part owners of the enterprise, they have a lot more stake in sticking around. This can be done in hundreds of ways from stock options to including employees in strategy sessions.  Always seek to let people have a real stake in the action. It pays off.

13. Empower People – Actually the correct way to word this is create an environment where people are happy to engage their power for the benefit of the organization.

These are 13 ways in which leaders can lower the level of turnover in any organization. The magic here is not any new discovery; but the consistent application of these principles will make a huge difference in any organization. The good news is that the items mentioned above are not very expensive. They are all common sense – too bad they are often not common practice.

If you study the best companies to work for worldwide, you will discover they have a much lower turnover rate than the average numbers. I believe having the kind of culture where employees are locked in with no desire to leave for any reason is a sustainable competitive advantage. It is easy to achieve if you follow the 10 rules listed above.