On leadership: Genius makers vs. vampires

Writing for the Chronicle of Higher Education, Allison Vaillancourt distinguishes between the “genius makers” and the “vampires” of academic leadership (link here):

The genius makers are “excited about revealing others’ smarts,” “open to creating a shared vision,” and engaged in “creating organizational energy.”

The vampires are “obsessed with proving” their own smarts, focused on others’ flaws, and committed to “sucking the lifeblood out of innocent people.”

She offers these characterizations in connection with a mini-review of Liz Wiseman with Greg McKeown, Multipliers: How the Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter (2010). While the book has earned very positive reviews, Vaillancourt’s own dichotomy nicely wraps it up in a bow for me, and certainly applies well beyond the Chronicle‘s academic readership!

On creating organizational culture: What if your boss simply doesn’t care?

We talk about good leaders who strive to create healthy organizational cultures, the places where people want to work. We talk about bad leaders who crack the whip, bully, and treat others as expendable parts.

But what about bosses who don’t think much at all about the quality of work life within their organizations? What if notions such as supportive work environments, fair compensation structures, and organizational justice don’t cross their radar screens? What if all that matters to them are profits/revenues, avoiding liability, pleasing their boards & superiors, and getting ahead?

A common practice

I suggest this is quite common — especially in occupational settings where people are hired into leadership positions based, at least in part, on performance factors that have little to do with their ability to manage an organization.

In my twin realms of higher education and law, this happens all the time.

The consequences

Bosses who practice benign neglect when it comes to organizational culture create a giant void that others fill. If, for example, the immediate lieutenants are attentive to nurturing a psychologically healthy workplace, then everyday working conditions may be pretty decent for the rank-and-file.

By contrast, if those lieutenants are clueless about managing a workplace effectively, then a lot of people may suffer. And if a manipulative, bullying type of individual seizes power within that void, a good number of people will suffer.

Recycling: Meaningful books about career and life planning

This week, something seems to be drawing me to write about authors and books! So I’ve gone back into the blog archives to dig out some posts that discuss titles that I have found inspirational over the years:

1. Seth Godin, Tribes

Entrepreneur and author Seth Godin is one of my favorites. In this 2008 book Tribes, he describes how people are coming together around common interests, projects, and values in ways that transcend traditional organizational and geographic boundaries. In this 2010 blog post, I explain how “Godin identifies three things that organizations and individuals do: React, respond, and initiate.” Reacting and responding are easy, but initiating is “what leaders do.”

2. Steven Levy, Hackers and Barbara Sher, Wishcraft

A book about the early days of the computer revolution and a pioneering self-help guide led me to the path I’ve been pursuing since 1991. In a 2011 blog post, I talk about these two books and their influence on me. Here’s a snippet:

Twenty years ago, I found myself yearning to do something different with my work life. I had been practicing as a public interest lawyer since graduating from law school, and although I liked certain aspects of the work, I didn’t see myself as being a litigation attorney for the rest of my career.

…It was around that time that I encountered two books that encouraged me to think more expansively about my career. One was Steven Levy’s Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution (1984; now in a 25th anniversary 2010 edition).

…I also got hold of a self-help book, Barbara Sher’s Wishcraft: How to Get What You Really Want (1979; now in a 30th anniversary 2009 edition). Wishcraft helps readers identify their strengths and interests and overcome resistances to change, a terrific mix of inspirational and practical advice.

3. David W. Galenson, Old Masters and Young Geniuses

In his book Old Masters and Young Geniuses: The Two Life Cycles of Artistic Creativity (2006), economics professor David W. Galenson writes about “sprinters” who make their signature contributions earlier in the lives and “marathoners” whose breakthroughs may classify them as late bloomers.

In this 2009 blog post, I wrote how Galenson’s ideas helped to inspire me as I approached age 50.

Is “being too inclusive” really such a common mistake for bosses?

In a piece for Forbes, Kate Harrison identifies what she sees as common mistakes that “turn good people into bad bosses,” and first on her list is “Being too inclusive.” She explains:

I grew up in an ultra-liberal, huggy, “everyone wins” environment, and so my default position is to seek lots of advice and build consensus when facing a difficult decision. . . . However, the desire to get everyone to agree can backfire when there are significant differences of opinion, strength of character, ability to express themselves, and orneryness in a group. Instead of moving forward efficiently, consensus building can actually derail a team, engender resentments, and lead to stagnation.

Yeah, I’ve been there

Harrison’s bio line describes her as an eco-friendly writer and entrepreneur who has built a business around helping people to plan “green friendly” weddings. She’s obviously traveled in some of these crunchy granola circles, and I can sympathize.

I agree that consensus building approaches can go too far. There are times when a leader has to make a decision, and there are times when it’s time to call for a vote — instead of going around the room for more endless yammering that only prolongs the misery.

But here’s the bigger problem

Nevertheless, I submit that being too exclusive is a much more common mistake for so many people in leadership positions.

Sometimes bosses start that way, coming in with an agenda based on biased impressions or inaccurate information. They’ve already pre-programmed themselves to disregard certain points of view about how to best run the organization.

Others start out being somewhat more inclusive, but then they circle the wagons and stop listening to voices that offer different viewpoints or perspectives. For some this occurs almost unconsciously; inside, they still think of themselves as “inclusive” leaders.

And the more inexperienced and insecure the boss, the more likely this is to happen.

It’s about balance

Being an organizational leader is difficult work, whether it’s in a small department or a large institution. Achieving the right balance between inclusivity and exclusivity is one of the toughest challenges of all. Maintaining an ongoing awareness of that tension is the best that most of us can do.

Great bosses and leaders: What distinguishes them from the rest?

Let’s face it: Heading up an organization, department, or working group is difficult, challenging work. Doing it well requires a thorough knowledge of the work that must be done, a deep understanding of the organization’s culture, and a megaton of emotional intelligence. On many occasions I’ve written about what makes for great bosses and leaders. I’ve collected a few of the more apt posts here:

Positive qualities of my best bosses (2012) — “They earned respect quietly, expressed appreciation when it was merited, and brought out your best. A word of praise could make my day, because I knew it was sincere and meaningful.”

Leadership as light  (2012) — “…(G)ood leadership is a product of both reflection and action, and is grounded in a moral core.”

Great organizational leaders enable and empower others (2011) — “But when it comes to leading organizations, the ability and willingness to encourage, support, mentor, inspire, and permit others to do quality work is the key to success. These leaders allow people to run with things, responsibly but enthusiastically, and sometimes the results can be extraordinary.”

Want a better company? Listen to your employees! (2010) — “Insecure organizations and leaders quietly implement the suggestions of others and don’t provide proper recognition; it’s called stealing credit.  Confident organizations and leaders, however, eagerly bestow appropriate accolades and compensation and build a culture of genuine participation.”

You want good leaders? (2010) — “Attention organizations: If you want good leaders, then don’t promote the kiss ups, the kick downs, the scheming hoop-jumpers, and the ambitious conformists.  Instead, select folks of genuine vision, courage, character, and good judgment. Don’t take my word for it. . . .”

Popular posts from 2012

I’ve collected a dozen of the more popular 2012 posts from Minding the Workplace. Especially if you missed them the first time around, I hope you find them interesting.

1. Gaslighting as a workplace bullying tactic (December) — “It can range from petty mind games to severe, twisted harassment and stalking. The goals are to undermine a target’s confidence, keep the target off-balance, and instill fear and paranoia.”

2. Not “Set for Life”: Boomers face layoffs, discrimination, and bullying at work (November) — “The bottom line? For many workers, the American Dream is no more. The assumption that working hard and playing by the rules would lead to a relatively comfortable retirement has been demolished.”

3. Are some workplaces “bullying clusters”? (September) — “So here’s the hypothesis: Bullying behaviors are not evenly distributed among all employers. Rather, bullying behaviors are disproportionately concentrated in a smaller number of toxic workplaces.”

4. Positive qualities of my best bosses (August) — “I’ve been giving some thought to the personal qualities of the many bosses I’ve worked for, going back to high school and extending to the present day. A handful stand out as being especially good, and I’ve come to realize that they shared a lot of positive characteristics. Here goes….”

5. Do “almost psychopaths” help to explain the prevalence of workplace bullying and abuse? (July) — “While the true psychopath may have trouble functioning in regular society, the almost psychopath often can navigate life successfully, including — perhaps especially in – the workplace.”

6. Cruelty on a school bus (June) — “A group of junior high school students from Greece School District in Rochester, NY, subject bus monitor Karen Klein to a profanity-laced stream of humiliating insults and threats.”

7. A movement emerges: Will unpaid internships disappear? (May) — “Now there’s an emerging movement against unpaid internships (especially in the private sector), and here’s evidence of its coming out party….”

8. Workplace bullying 2.0: Psychology and mental health (April) — “Of all the major disciplines relevant to studying, preventing, responding to workplace bullying, the fields of industrial/organizational psychology and its emerging sibling, occupational health psychology, rank first in terms of research and practice.”

9. Maryland teachers sue for bullying and harassment (March) — “Teachers in Silver Spring, Maryland, are suing their principal and the school board for ongoing bullying and harassment.”

10. Workplace wellness and workplace bullying (March) — “When you hear the term ‘employee wellness,’ do you also think about “workplace bullying”?”

11. Burnout in the non-profit sector (February) — “Non-profit employment attracts those who are drawn to changing society for the better. . . . However, it also feeds burnout tendencies that are exacerbated during difficult times.”

12. “Puppet master” bullying vs. genuine mobbing at work (January) — “Let’s start with what I call puppet master bullying. In these situations, a chief aggressor’s power and influence over a group of subordinates may be sufficient to enlist their participation in mistreating a target, creating what looks and feels like a mob. . . . By contrast, genuine workplace mobbing occurs when the malicious energy is shared among the many, who proceed to go after the few.”

“Lincoln” on political leadership

The movie “Lincoln” is getting so many kudos right now that I’m a little embarrassed to jump on the bandwagon. But I can’t help myself: This is a fascinating historical piece and a dramatic civics lesson built around America’s 16th President and the legislative battle to ratify the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery.

Daniel Day-Lewis, directed by Steven Spielberg, provides us with what may be the definitive screen portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. Although media accounts tell us that Spielberg — not wanting the movie to be interpreted as an overt political statement — intentionally withheld release of the movie until after the election, it is hard not to watch Day-Lewis and to wonder how Mr. Lincoln would do as President today.

Indeed, while “Lincoln” is a great film standing on its own, it also is a modern-day telegram to the current American President — and I’m sure that Barack Obama was always Spielberg’s desired recipient. President Obama is said to be enamored of Mr. Lincoln. However, during his first term, Mr. Obama all too often resembled George B. McClellan, the superbly organized but overly cautious Union general who frustrated Lincoln to no end and ran against him for President in 1864.

The takeaways of “Lincoln” to the President? I can think of at least three: Fight smart and bold, seize the moment when it presents itself, and get your hands dirty with the grime of politics when necessary.

Unlike our current chief executive, Mr. Lincoln had little formal education. And yet, beneath his outward folksiness, Lincoln was one of our most cerebral Presidents, having absorbed the likes of The Bible, Shakespeare, Euclid, and Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England. He blended with his intellect a feel for people and a willingness to throw himself into the bloody war of politics.

President Obama has wowed many with his intellect, but he needs to do much more. He must translate that eloquence and intelligence into strong leadership. America and the world are still reeling from the economic downturn, the effects of climate change appear to be previewing even scarier things to come, and international armed conflicts abound. If the President needs a role model, he would do well to emulate his hero.

For Veterans Day: Leadership and heroism

In honor of America’s Veterans Day, a couple of recent posts and an older one recognizing leadership and heroism by those serving in uniform:

Cuban Missile Crisis 1962: Cooler heads prevailed on and under the sea, as well (2012)

Great leadership rarely appears overnight (2012)

When your job requires courage and sacrifice: Here’s to the Fighting 442nd (2009)

Cuban Missile Crisis 1962: Cooler heads prevailed on and under the sea, as well

U.S.S. Waller (from http://www.usswaller.com)

This month marks the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, a two-week period during which the United States and the Soviet Union stood on the brink of nuclear war.

After American intelligence discovered that the Soviets were building nuclear missile sites in Cuba, the two nations engaged in a diplomatic and military chess match that threatened to start a third world war. The fact that war and possible nuclear annihilation were avoided is seen as the most significant triumph of the administration of President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy resisted calls by his civilian and military advisors to bomb and/or invade Cuba. We also now know that Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev resisted pressures to escalate the conflict, while continuing to seek a diplomatic solution.

While our public leaders deserve much credit for avoiding nuclear holocaust, other heroes are part of the story as well. Chief among them are the U.S. Navy officers and enlisted men who helped to stop Russian military supply ships from reaching Cuba.

Quarantine

With intelligence photos showing that nuclear missiles capable of destroying American cities were close to being operational, Kennedy ordered a naval quarantine of Cuba to prevent Soviet ships from delivering supplies and matériel to the Cuban base.

The U.S. Navy not only tracked and intercepted Soviet supply ships, but also played an extraordinarily tense cat-and-mouse game with Russian submarines.

A dear friend of mine, Brian McCrane (U.S.N., retired), served as a senior officer on a destroyer, the U.S.S. Waller, that participated in the quarantine. Brian recently shared with me some of his experiences during that event, and it is clear to me that one slip up, lapse of judgment, or loss of nerve by those in a position to deploy a weapon or to order to do so could’ve started us down the path to nuclear catastrophe.

Thanks to their courage and steadiness in the clutch, it didn’t happen.

The same can be said of some of the Soviet submariners. Unbeknownst to the Americans, the Russian subs were carrying nuclear weapons. Indeed, we now know that they came perilously close to using them, as this article describing the brave actions of a single Russian officer explains.

Cooler heads

In the finest tradition of Navy officers, my friend Brian is beyond modest in describing his military career. But I know from letters of commendation and correspondence he received that his leadership and performance contributed toward keeping the peace during this dangerous time in world history. He would go on to serve as captain of the U.S.S. Calcaterra and the U.S.S. Joseph P. Kennedy, the latter of which is a part of the Battleship Cove Museum in Fall River, Massachusetts.

And herein lies lessons for all of us in terms of leadership, sound judgment, and courage under pressure: We often hear about the heroic actions of those who rose to the occasion after a crisis situation erupts, and justly so. But we don’t hear enough about those who helped us to avoid these situations in the first place. Often modestly and without fanfare, they contributed to steering us out of harm’s way.

Here’s to those quiet heroes and the examples they set.

***

For more about the Cuban Missile Crisis

This Christian Science Monitor piece by Harvard international affairs professor Graham Allison tells us how close we came to nuclear war.

Katharine Whittemore reviews six non-fiction books about the Cuban Missile Crisis for the Boston Globe, here.

If you want to learn more, but would prefer not plowing through a book or two on the subject, “Thirteen Days” (2000 motion picture) and “The Missiles of October” (1974 TV docudrama) have received positive reviews and are readily available for your viewing pleasure.

Before the Fall of 2008: It seems like another epoch ago

Think back to four years ago.

Spurred by a corrupt housing market and easy credit, the economy was in a nosedive amidst credible fears of a total collapse. By October 2008, billions of dollars of wealth had disappeared, a lot of it from the already modest retirement accounts of everyday people.

The world of work was about to be profoundly affected. Job losses and layoffs started mounting quickly, first in the private sector, then in the public and non-profit sectors. Within a year, the official unemployment rate would edge on double digits. Those fortunate to keep their jobs would experience added stress at work and, very possibly, reductions in pay and benefits.

The presidential campaign was occurring against this backdrop. There remained the looming question of whether America was ready to elect a black President. Sarah Palin would experience a meteoric rise and fall, the latter with a big assist to Tina Fey. The Tea Party and Occupy movements weren’t even a part of our vocabulary.

For me, before the Fall of 2008 looks a lot like September 10, 2001: The day before our world changed.

Fast forward

Four years later, we’re still paying for the greed, excess, and irresponsibility that led us into this mess. And I challenge anyone, regardless of political affiliation, to find anything genuinely uplifting in the substance and rhetoric of the current campaign season. As for many of our business leaders, they continue to rake it in — the wealth gap in American keeps widening — while they vigorously oppose regulatory safeguards intended to prevent yet another meltdown.

I honestly don’t know how we’re going to chart a new course, but I’m certain that we must if the coming decades are to be good ones for the vast majority of people. As I’ve suggested before, for a lot of reasons — political, economic, psychological, environmental, spiritual, you name it — we’re at a fork in the road, choosing between a New Enlightenment and a New Dark Age.

I fear the latter but hope for the former.