Is Balance Bogus?

As practitioners, we must remain neutral and balanced when we diagnose behavior in organizations. There are many sides (perspectives) to every story. When I was a teaching assistant in graduate school, I asked one of the drama students to burst into my class feigning our break up and accusing me of cheating. The drama student was very believable. The students in my class were sucked into this performance like viewers of a TV reality show. At the end of this "performance," I asked the students to write down what they had witnessed...just the facts. The students moved beyond reporting the facts to filling in the blanks with inference. Clearly there was an imbalance; there were biased views. Sides were taken and the story was filled out:

• Some students thought that I indeed was cruel and harsh for having abused the relationship. Clearly I had cheated given the emotional state of the "victim" (the drama student). This group actually imagined me on a date, entwined in a lover's embrace.
• Some students came to my defense in writing as well as in reality. This group was clearly influenced by how calm I was during the "victim's" rant which came close to ending in a physical charge. If it were not for a group of "football" students who lept from their chairs to protect me, I might have been physically attacked.

Do employees, managers and leaders have unbalanced views of each other? Indeed, as humans we are fundamentally flawed in our ability to fairly assess situations and people. We hold onto our personal views to such a degree that we allow them to cloud our judgments...to a point where we sometimes do harm - sometimes physically, sometimes psychologically. We damage careers and reputations. To what end? What will it take for us to be respectful of our differences? What will it take to be balanced and fair in our judgments?

It's History

There is a dramatic sculpture referred to as The Future that sits in front of the National Archives with the inscription, "What is past, is prologue." Soak on that for a moment.

The phrase comes from Shakespeare's, "The Tempest" and is a metaphor that is spoken in Act 2 referencing actions that were described in the prologue of the play. Both the prologue as well as the actions referenced in the prologue are in the past.

Some interpret it to mean the past affects the future....more precisely, the past is just the precursor of what's to come. Wished I'd known that when each adolescent high school romance came to a crashing halt. Indeed, they served as a way to develop my future relationship skills.

What in the past is prologue to our current economic situation? Have the decisions of previous administrations led to the fall of the mortgage industry, for instance? Some would say absolutely and point to the Bush administration. How far in the past is prologue? In a recent issue of Investor Business, a journalist traced decisions as far back as the 1920's during the Hoover administration, that have impacted where we are today. Who would have predicted then that the past was a prologue to what we are experiencing today?

What is happening in our organizations today, that will serve as prologue tomorrow? During this economy, when jobs are being lost and few companies (excluding the government) are hiring, are organizations taking advantage of their employees: overworking them, cutting learning and development opportunities, eliminating benefits?....all in the name of fiscal responsibility. What is this prologue telling us?

Do Corporations Have Soul?

The better question might be do corporations NEED soul? If we equate soul to "moral compass," then ""yes" indeed corporations need souls and indeed many do not have souls. Given the economic conditions that we face as a nation, would having a soul have prevented the financial disasters we witness? Would "greed" have been overcome?

I think woven into this notion of having soul or a moral compass is the concept of self awareness and self-respect. When one's values are centered on integrity, respect and fairness one is authentically centered on these values, how is it possible to lie, to be dishonest, to treat different groups of people differently, to treat people badly? How is it possible?

Yet, I have seen it in organizations where executives are dismissive to front line workers: "Oh, they do not know what they are talking about." I have seen executives sign off on new policies only to exclude themselves from having to adhere to them: "Oh that policy does not apply to me."

I am in search of organizations whose executives do not behave this way. I am in search of examples where there is "corporate soul" and "authentic leadership." Do you know where I can find such examples? In government? In not-for-profits? In healthcare? In law firms?

Optimism, Pessimism, Realism

If you had the choice, would you hang out with Eeyore or Tiger? I have had the "pleasure" of working with both types. At first, your heart goes out to Eeyore. How sad, the poor guy can't seem to get a break. It doesn't take long though for you to figure out that the guy just can't be happy about anything. You stop being flattered that he...or she...stops by to use you as a "sounding board." By they time he or she is finished talking with you, you feel drained. That's because "Eeyore" sucked out all the oxygen in the room with his or her pessimism. On the other hand, there is the guy who is filled with energy and all smiles. His or her presence is almost contagious. Everything is coming up roses. Everything is terrific. Everything. These extremes just don't cut it. You want to hang out with this guy...until you find you just can't keep up.

Should we strive for the balance? Be in the middle? Or does that get dull too? Is being balanced, level-headed? Realistic? Does being balanced, pull you out of depressive times?

I think it is a matter of timing and spectrum. If you wake up one morning feeling like you lost your tail, for heavens sake, appreciate how you feel. Just know that you can't stay there for an extended period of time or you will make yourself sick. Love and appreciate the days you wake up ready to bounce around with joy and happiness because it is unlikely that you will do that every single day of your life....and if you do, I want to know what your formula is.

So talk to me about this notion of optimism and pessimism and realism.

Authoritarian or Authority Figure?

I had the pleasure of hearing Dr. Ron Heifitz speak on leadership. His remarks generated new insights that have helped clarify what I consider a C-Suite condition. As a result of working with and watching talented people rise to positions of greater responsibility, I have been struck by their seeming lose of what got them to these positions. Skills and capabilities like: being personable, open and trusting, caring, thoughtful, good listeners become overshadowed by just the opposite. Dr. Heifitz reminds us that we often confuse being an authority figure with good leadership and vice versa. "Getting to the top" may require that you are the most expert in your field, but it does not always mean having good leadership skills. Likewise, having good leadership skills does not always mean that you are the expert or the "authority" in your field.

But what should we expect from the people at the top of the organization? Expertise? The authority in their field? Or should they have great leadership skills? Some of the answer depends upon the organization. I speculate though that employees who work throughout these organizations want both. If push comes to shove, employees will opt for great leadership skills with the hope that the person in charge would use the employees for their expertise.

Is this making sense?

Choosing to Change

I find it humorous when business leaders ask me to help their employees accept change: "Make them more resilient to change!" The image that pops to mind is shaking employees by the shoulders and screaming into their faces, "ACCEPT THIS CHANGE! BE RESILIENT TO THIS CHANGE. MANAGEMENT DID THIS FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

Aha! There is the rub. Acceptance to change will certainly go astray if management decides to make the change without involving the employees. When asked, managers explain that the employees don't know how to change the operation. Only the managers and supervisors have the needed information to make changes. Really?

When the change impacts the work of the employee, who knows that work better? The manager or the employee? I once worked with a process improvement team at a Steel Mill. Management was stunned when the line workers could report on what was working, not working and more importantly how they could make it better.

There is some truth to employees not having information just as managers don't have ALL the information needed to make change. Depending upon where the change is to occur and what outcomes are desired; indeed designing the change may require putting a lot of heads together. Anyone who has some part in the process has some intelligence on how to improve it. I've seen manufacturing line workers in the room with engineers and marketing and sales people working together to identify product improvements and enhancements. It is pretty amazing what turns out...certainly a better process, improved product but more importantly excitement, commitment and alignment. That is what change is all about.

Choosing to change is emotional. Why do we then just treat it as an intelligent act...and act of thought and of telling people what the change is?

To Type of Not to Type

Intrigued by my having "typed" my dog as an ENFP, a couple of friends shared their thoughts and photos. Charlie, a black lab is described as an ESFJ: He takes in his world through his nose and is very focused on his objectives whether it is fetching the ball or trying to steal a sandwich from a human.

Layne, a yellow lab is typed as an ENFJ: This picture is him wondering where everyone else is and why aren't they having as much fun as he is…..add a ball to this equation and watch out….

You may think we are nuts to play this little game with MBTI but we are just practicing our craft...and having a little fun. We care about our animals and are curious about their behavior. But as practitioners, our curiosity about human behavior cannot be satisfied by whimsy. We have studied and are trained in theories and tools to ensure that when we work with people and teams, we are not making capricious or harmful judgments about why people behave the way they do.

It is human nature to judge people, their personalities and their behavior. Indeed, human beings are curious, social perceivers and it starts very early in life....in the sandbox or even earlier. As social perceivers we develop the skill to judge people and label them using our own individual theories and tools which may actually cause harm to ourselves and to others.

We see it in life every day, at work, at school, on TV. Consider the recent experience of the judges on "Britain's Got Talent" who classified Susan Boyle by her appearance as an old woman with no talent. Until she opened her mouth to sing. We cannot be dooped by our social perceptions because they can lead us astray and leave us lonely and isolated. Have you been misjudged? misperceived? Have you done so to others and missed some hidden treasures as a result?

Rowing on the River

For years now I have worked with different business teams to support their development. The concepts of "teamwork" are pretty standard yet there are thousands of books and articles, each one espousing the best list of ingredients that make for the most successful and productive team. Things like having a common goal, diverse skills and good communication are always on that list. If achieving high performance as a team were so easy, there wouldn't be so many books about it and a good chunk of consultant business would dry up. So why is it so hard?

As a result of a recent experience rowing in an 8 seat crew shell, clearly what gets in the way of team success even after all the right ingredients are in play, is the individual. In simple terms our egos and our minds get in the way of team success. In the business world, we have been trained to look out for ourselves; after all, annual performance appraisal is about rewarding individual performance. Our success is based largely on how well we as individuals think, analyze and communicate. Winning is very individualized.

Put eight high performing and very successful business people who have never rowed before into the same boat and it is a marvel to behold. You can't charm your way to winning or over complicate the strategy to win. The physically strongest person may turn out to be your weakest link. You can try to put your individual force behind your oar but one person's brute force will not win the race. If eight people row at their individual best...well the boat goes nowhere and you have 8 individuals who are exhausted and frustrated.

I found that I needed to let go of my own ego... including that need to be the best thinker, the best rower. Once I recognized that proving my strength was pointless and that I needed to be one not only with the person in front of me but also with the oar, I could feel the boat moving smoothly through the water. It was not about me - it was about the team.

My team won the race that day. We lived up to our common goal: to win...as one. We felt the "sweet spot" of the rowing experience; knowing that is was easier to row once you let go.

What will it take to get teams at work to hit their "sweet spot?"

My Dog is an ENFP

Indeed, I am a Myers Briggs junkie. After being certified, I found it not only a useful tool when working with client groups but it also helped me in my personal relationships. My "ENTJ" is nicely complimented by my spouse's "INTP" and vice versa. Our intellectual bantering is not something we take personally but rather enjoy - now that we know how intuitive thinkers think. It is the "judging/perceiving" that we most need from each other. I have a master list of my lists where my spouse is not encumbered by the need to check things off a list. On the other hand, the openness to all possibilities is disciplined when it is important to reach closure. Of course there is so much more to understanding and appreciating the uniqueness of personality and preferences. There are other tools that are advantageous for individuals and teams to use. But I still like the MBTI as a foundational tool to understanding why we interact the way we do.

As for my dog...the fun loving golden retriever that he is, I am convinced is an ENFP - if you can type a dog. It is fun to watch him flit from bush to bush, to be "in the moment" or in the "second" as it were, and forget what his original objective was...oh yes, the ball....the squirrel...or was it the stick, the scent on the wind...or the sound of my car turning the corner before pulling into my driveway. With all lack of abandon and pure joy and unconditional love, my dog leaps to attention to great me and welcome me home. "Dear God, help me to be the person that my dog thinks that I am.

Tea Anyone?

Today is tax deadline day in the US. Paying taxes is part of the privilege of living here. It's like homeowner fees or condo fees. You turn this money over to some people who for the most part you select to manage how that money is used. In my neighborhood, I can see the outcomes very tangibly. My streets are cleaned regularly, the public spaces are attended to, the playgrounds are complete with fun and safe equipment, even street light bulbs are replaced when they burn out (oh maybe this takes a couple of months but they still get replaced).

So when you look at how your money is managed at the national level....you have to wonder, how are we doing? Do you trust how your money is being managed? being applied? Do you trust the people who for the most part you selected to manage this money?