When Managers Can't Collaborate Effectively -- What Is the Main Cause?

Earlier this month, Andrew S. Humphries and Linda McComie published a book entitled Why Managers Don't Collaborate: Revealing the Myths and Truths. The purpose of this book is to dispel the baseless myths that are preventing managers in organizations from moving forward and reaping the benefits of collaboration. 

When I spoke with Andrew this past week, I asked him: "What has been the main cause preventing managers from collaborating effectively?" Here is his complete answer:

The main cause preventing managers from collaborating effectively is their belief that no special arrangements, skills, or structures are needed to collaborate. Our book makes this point repeatedly and forcefully.

Across the underlying research, managers consistently claim they are collaborating, but in practice, they behave exactly as they always have: “they have claimed they are collaborating, but in reality, it was not happening,” and this false confidence forms the First Big Myth. Managers assume that existing processes, governance, and attitudes will somehow deliver collaborative outcomes, even though these were never designed for joint working.

The Second Big Myth reinforces the problem: managers “believe that they do not need to make special arrangements to collaborate successfully.” They fail to recognize collaboration as a professional discipline requiring investment, leadership, relationship management structures, and new ways of working. This leads to avoidance, excuses, and a reliance on habitual practices that undermine joint performance.

The book explores the deeper drivers behind this misconception:

• Short‑termism and management myopia, where immediate operational pressures overshadow long‑term value creation.
• Organizational resistance to change and fear of losing control, especially in governance-heavy environments.
• Vested interests in functions like sales, commercial, and finance that resist new ways of working.
• Over‑reliance on technology as a substitute for relationship management.
• Lack of champions and leadership, leaving alliances without direction or accountability.

In conclusion, the real fault lies with senior leaders “who do not understand the power of collaborative management,” leaving managers unsupported and unprepared to adopt the additional responsibilities collaboration demands.

In short, the main cause is a pervasive misunderstanding of what collaboration requires, leading managers to believe they are already doing it -- or that it is unnecessary -- while failing to invest in the structures, skills, and leadership that make collaboration succeed.

Do you agree with Andrew's perspective that managers fail to collaborate effectively because they do not understand that collaboration requires a distinct professional discipline? That is, a discipline that demands long‑term thinking, structural investment, behavioral change, and dedicated leadership, and instead relies on myths, assumptions, and excuses that keep them locked into traditional, siloed management practices.

If so, have you seen managers make this mistake in your company? Were these mistakes corrected?

Has Navigating Change Become More Difficult?

Mitchell Kusy co-authored a book with Mike Valentine and Gilles Benoit entitled The Playbook for Leading Change: Proven Strategies for Success, which was published this December. This book explains how leaders continually receive multiple messages on how to lead successful organizational change. The confusion created by these multiple messages has contributed to a high failure rate in change initiatives, as organizations struggle with watered-down approaches that offer generic solutions instead of tailored, practical guidance. This book functions as a compendium of simple, easy-to-implement change strategies that work.

When I spoke with Mitch earlier this month, I asked him, "Why has navigating change become more difficult? What are the major challenges?" Here is his complete answer:

Ever tried spreading peanut butter on toast? You know how it goes. Every inch gets the same layer, whether it needs it or not. That’s the way some organizations approach change: a one-size-fits-all method that doesn’t consider the unique textures of the situation. But change isn’t toast, and a blanket approach rarely works.  We created this book with three goals in mind: 

• Beat the odds for change success. Too many change efforts fail. We help you succeed. Even in unfamiliar change territory, we help you understand what's needed, why, and how.
•  Cut through the “noise” of change with confidence. Change can be messy. Let’s bring some clarity to the chaos and give you the confidence to tackle it.
• Keep it practical with strong evidence. No heavy theories—just real, research-backed strategies that we distill into everyday practices you can actually use. 

One of the many experiences we have had helping organizations and teams lead change is that leaders sometimes bypass three important dimensions of change: 

• Self as the Instrument for Change. How can each person’s commitment fuel success? 
• Team as the Instrument for Change. What’s the team’s role in making the change happen? 
• Organization as the Instrument for Change. How well is the change aligned with the system that needs to carry it? 

Some researchers have demonstrated a 60% to 70% failure rate; others have 50% to 75%. “Why does change fail so often?” Sometimes, leaders don’t realize how complex change really is. Other times, they may fail to link their big vision to real execution. Maybe they forget to involve the people who need to bring the change to life. In some cases, they include people too late. And often, they miss the chance to connect change efforts with larger business goals. Sometimes leaders focus so heavily on the change itself that they neglect the transition people must go through to make it work. These are just some of the many issues that fueled our book. 

In the Playbook, we share how to address the four major change challenges leaders face:

• Organizational and team transitions/restructures. 
• Strategic alignment.  
• Team development and the capacity for change. 
• Work culture change, especially toxic work cultures. 

What has been your experience with change management and team building? Do you agree with Mitchell's points? What were some of the mistakes you saw with the initiative within your organization? 

Kurt Lewin's Change Model -- Does It Benefit Businesses?

In July of this year, Gilmore Crosby published a new book titled Leadership and the Frontline Workforce: Lessons from the Targets of Change. The book explores methods of organizational change through the real-life experiences of frontline workers. While leadership and management theory have traditionally been written from the top down, Crosby highlights a notable exception: Kurt Lewin, whose action-research demonstrated that those on the frontlines are often best positioned to initiate and sustain meaningful change.

Through a series of interviews, the book captures the voices of workers who lived through Lewin-style transformations -- before, during, and after the change process. Their stories reveal the full spectrum of experience: the good, the bad, and the often-overlooked challenges of being the targets of change within complex systems.

When I spoke with Gilmore in August, I asked him, “What is Kurt Lewin-style change and how does it benefit a business?" Here is his complete answer:

As noted in the book, Kurt Lewin’s change model is in many ways simple and often misunderstood. It begins with the simple premise that everyone wants to influence the systems they are in, at work and outside of work.

Lewin conducted simple research to test his theories. With group after group, he demonstrated that when people were told what to do without any chance to influence, they were less likely to do it, or if they did it, less likely to do it well.”

The book goes on to give examples of Lewin’s work, including when the government wanted farmers to irrigate differently during the Dust Bowl years.

The farmers who were simply lectured at did almost none of what was suggested. The farmers who engaged in group dialogue, who were genuinely allowed to influence, and who thought about their own solutions, implemented a high percentage of what they came up with. The same results occurred in all of Lewin’s studies, including with workers in an industrial setting.

The results of his studies were and continue to be groundbreaking. When people come up with their own solutions, they are far more likely to be committed to them.

The consistent result is higher morale and productivity. The book illustrates how, through interviews with executives and with hourly workers who went through change efforts led by me, my father, and my colleagues. The interviews bring to life conditions before, during, and after such a change. The methods can be applied to any organization and to society. 

In a nutshell, most leaders and consultants try to do most of the thinking. They fail to tap the knowledge and pride of the people who are actually doing the hands-on work. Furthermore, because they over-function in terms of thinking, leadership is further handicapped by the dilemma of handing off, imposing, or selling their solutions to the organization. The entire approach is a huge mistake, resulting in crappy implementation of potentially effective solutions, tension, blame, and low morale. This book teaches a better way.

What are your thoughts on Gilmore’s perspective? Are the leaders and managers in your organization familiar with Kurt Lewin’s change management methods? Do frontline employees have meaningful channels to share their insights and suggestions for process improvement?

The Toyota Production System (TPS) -- What Are the Misconceptions?

Earlier this month, Sarah K. Womack published a very interesting new book entitled Toyota's Improvement Thinking from the Inside: From Personal Transformation to Organizational Transformation, which describes how Toyota, through its coaches and leaders, develops its members’ capabilities through a series of continuous improvement (kaizen and problem-solving) activities. For many members of Toyota, this process results in a personal transformation that ultimately leads to organizational transformation.

When I spoke with Sarah this past week, I asked her: "What are the biggest misconceptions about Toyota’s continuous improvement methods and management system?” Here is her complete response:

The biggest misconception I personally had about Toyota’s continuous improvement methods and management system was a degree of personal development and deliberate challenge required to learn how to improve.  It was a journey of mastery of improvement tools, business needs, and how to work with members of your team to accomplish daily objectives.  For most members, that mastery was deeply personal and demanded humility and continuous reflection to transform our mindsets.  And, while there was some talk about Toyota’s philosophy of respect for people, respect is a social construct and difficult to understand from outside of the group.  Once I was inside, I saw how much emphasis there was on reducing team member burden towards the end of reducing waste and creating value for customers. 

More generally speaking of the field, I find many misconceptions about how the entire system works together.  Organizations tend to over-emphasize or de-emphasize the Toyota Production System (TPS) tools for improvement when a successful approach lands at a healthy balance.  The TPS tools are good entry points for people development and continuous improvement.  Value stream mapping, for example, is a tool to chart how material and information flows within a system, show waste, and tell a kaizen story (of waste reduction).  Even if a system is not very complex, learning it through deep study then articulating that learning visually is a special skill set developed over time.  You can feel confident in your skill set when you are able to use such a tool to tell the story of your improvement work.

Finally, I would highlight the misconception around standardization.  Many organizations, within and outside of manufacturing, think it is too rigid to work successfully.  However, Toyota and others have shown that by deeply studying processes and standardizing them, continuous improvements in safety, quality, and other performance outcomes are achievable.

What do you think about Sarah's experience? Has your company implemented a Lean initiative based on the Toyota Production System? Was is transformative?

Can Business Leaders Learn to See the "Invisible"?

In October, Michael Bremer published a new book entitled Learn to See the Invisible: How to Unlock Your Potential as a Leader, which describes four key foundations and 25 different actions leaders can practice to become more effective in training their eyes to see things tomorrow that are currently invisible. It helps leaders and managers to become better observers of their current reality by practicing getting better at getting better. 

When I spoke with Michael this month, I asked him directly: “What does ‘learning to see the invisible’ mean regarding leadership, and how does it actually benefit leaders and their abilities?” Here is his complete answer:

Let me begin answering your question with a short story.  

You and your spouse go to a big box shopping center with a large parking lot.  Right after you exit your car, you trip over one of those concrete blocks intended to block car tires. Your spouse looks at you and asks, “Are you OK?”

What is your response?  If you are like me and the 1000s of other people with whom I’ve asked this question, you respond, “I’m OK!”  Even though your toe is killing you.  Why?  You feel like an idiot, and you are embarrassed.  Plus, a host of other emotions.

It’s a very similar challenge inside an organization when a leader asks, “How are things going?”  Even when our intentions are good, there are a variety of reasons that people do not openly share their thoughts.  If a leader truly wishes to better understand the actual reality of what is happening, it requires some effort.

"Learning to see the invisible" in leadership means developing the awareness and skills to recognize factors, patterns, and dynamics that are not immediately obvious but that profoundly influence team performance, organizational culture, and decision-making. These "invisible" aspects lay hidden due to assumptions, biases, unspoken issues, underlying motivations, and systemic inefficiencies that might be overlooked in the daily flow of work. Leaders can make more informed, empathetic, and effective choices by learning to see these hidden elements.

How Does "Seeing the Invisible" Benefit Leaders and Enhance Their Abilities?

1. Improved Decision-Making: Leaders who can see beyond the surface make more informed and nuanced decisions. They understand the broader context and implications of their choices, which leads to better outcomes for the organization and their team.

2. Greater Empathy and Connection: Leaders build stronger relationships by recognizing their team's true needs and motivations. Empathy fosters trust, increases engagement, and enhances collaboration, as team members feel understood and valued.

3. Increased Agility and Adaptability: Leaders who are aware of invisible factors are better prepared to adapt to change. They are attuned to internal and external shifting dynamics and can pivot strategies or approaches in response to new information or challenges.

4. Empowering and Developing Others: Leaders who understand the hidden potential in their team members can provide targeted support, coaching, and growth opportunities. This empowerment leads to a more capable, engaged workforce, with team members who are better equipped to take the initiative and contribute in a more meaningful way.

How Do You Unlock this Potential to Become a Better Leader?

When you look at professional athletes who become champions in their sport, how do they get there?  They get there through hours of practice and constantly strive to improve the way they play their sport.  If your profession is leadership, shouldn’t you also consciously practice getting better at what you do?  

Learning to See the Invisible lays out four foundational elements for leaders to practice:

Step 1: Reflection – Understand how you currently lead and identify your starting point. 

Step 2: Unifying Purpose – Create a meaningful purpose that motivates and guides change. 

Step 3: Build Relationships – Foster trust and open communication while empowering your team. 

Step 4: Visual Leadership – Implement visuals that inspire improvement and facilitate discussions about progress against the purpose you seek to accomplish.

The book lays out 28 different actions leaders can practice to get better at doing the above. 

Leaders who adopt this transformative mindset can improve their relationships and take decisive steps toward becoming a champions. They exhibit a vulnerability through their curiosity and willingness to learn.  That vulnerability creates space inside an organization where other people can feel more secure in responding to the questions they are asked. 

The world needs better leaders, and I genuinely hope readers embark on this journey.

What do you think of Michael's perspective on leadership awareness and its effect on decision-making and workplace culture? What is the state of leadership in your organization? Are they making choices based on assumption or "confirmation bias"? Or are they truly understanding some of the hidden aspects that might be driving the true workplace culture of their organization?  

Humility -- Does It Affect Leadership Effectiveness?

In August, Andrew J. DuBrin published a book entitled Leadership Humility: A Characteristic that Enhances Professional Effectiveness, which describes an opinion about the most relevant aspects of humility as it applies to leadership and professional effectiveness, yet the emphasis is on leadership. Humility as it relates to leadership and professional effectiveness is covered from many angles. Among these topics are the many meanings and components of humility and how leadership humility impacts group member performance and behavior.

When I spoke with Andrew this month, I asked him:  “How does humility actually increase leadership effectiveness?” Here is his complete answer:

An appropriate degree of humility is essential for leadership effectiveness because today’s effective leader is expected to demonstrate humility in addition to standard leadership attributes such as self-confidence, high-level cognitive skills, creativity, charisma, and the ability to articulate visions. Leadership effectiveness is enhanced when interspersed with other key leadership attributes including assertiveness, a sense of humor, and strategic thinking ability. Many brash, aggressive, and successful leaders would be even more successful if they sprinkled their leadership approach with humility.  

Another way in which humility increases leadership effectiveness is that being a little humble has an impact on performance. The performance, or results, could be at the individual, group, or organizational level. Leadership humility can improve a leader’s decision-making. Intellectually humble leaders are likely to gather multiple inputs before making a decision because they do not think they have all the answers. Leaders who express humility often enhance the creativity of group members because they set up a climate conducive to imaginative thinking. A humble leader will often create a psychologically safe environment, meaning that staff members feel safe to take the risk of making a mistake. The person who feels psychologically safe believes he or she will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes.

A leader with humility helps establish a group climate in which people can learn and develop. A climate of this nature enables group members to invest more of themselves into their jobs, and therefore be engaged in their work. Leadership humility often has a big impact on team performance. The humble leader seeks the cooperation of all team members, shows openness toward their ideas, and encourages them to become actively involved in solving problems the team is tackling. One of the many ways in which leadership humility improves organizational performance stems from workers observing that their strengths are appreciated.

What do you think of Andrew's perspective on humility and leadership? What role does humility play in your company's leadership and management training?

Your Workplace Culture -- Is It "Sick"?

This month, I had a very enlightening conversation with Robert B. Camp about his most recent book, Workplace Culture Matters: Developing Leaders Who Respect People and Deliver Robust Results. Written in a novel format, this book addresses the challenge of changing  "sick" cultures that exist in many organizations -- That is, it is directed at those organizations that wake up one day and realize they have become something they never intended. Their employees run scared. There is no innovation, only blind obedience. There are warlords within the ranks of management, and they fight over turf without considering the best interests of customers, their employees, or their organization as a whole.

During my conversation with Robert, I asked him specifically: "What are the most common causes of ‘sick’ workplace culture? Here is his full response:

Cultures become sick when leaders no longer care about their people, when they put products, clients, or profit ahead of the vehicle through which they achieve those things: employees (people).

Factories don’t make anything.  They’re just buildings. Machines, including computers, don’t make anything.  Without proper guidance, they are just inanimate objects. 

It is no coincidence that Toyota lists Respect for People among the two factors critical to its success (Toyota-global.com; Toyota Way 2001).   

In Workplace Culture Matters, there is a dialog that takes place that elucidates this concept.  Jim, the VP of Operations for Friedman Electronics, explains the following to Jack, the Branch VP of a troubled organization.

“At Friedman, we believe our future starts with hiring the right people,” Jim explained.  “While there are exceptions, we tend to hire for attitude and train skills."

“Wait,” Jack interrupted, “how do you know you’re getting people who can actually do the job   you’re hiring them for?”

“Good point, Jack,” Jim conceded.  “First, we try to grow talent within, so most of our openings are entry-level.”  

“Also, we have created step-by-step instructions — what is called Standard Work — for all our   jobs, so even if someone had come in already having done that job somewhere else, we’d have to retrain them to do it our way.  We’ve learned that, if we hire self-disciplined people with the right attitude, we can challenge and grow them for the rest of their careers.”

As Workplace Culture Matters makes clear, a healthy culture starts with healthy leaders, leaders who agree to common objectives and hold themselves accountable to them, before they hold anyone else accountable.  They then tailor and cascade those objectives down through the organization as a way of aligning everyone and giving them a way of independently knowing how they are doing.  

Finally, leaders of healthy cultures get out of their offices and go to where work takes place, both as a way of knowing what problems their people face and of engaging in dialogs that build bonds of trust and bi-directional loyalty.

What do think of Robert's view on how workplace culture becomes "sick"? How does the leadership in your organization function? Does it encourage or hinder a healthy culture?

Why is the Failure Rate of IT and Change Management Projects So High?

 A few weeks ago, I had the chance to me with Scott R. Coplan in New York City and discuss the release of his new book, The Integrator: A Change Management Framework for Achieving Agile IT Project Success. This book defines change management as the single overarching methodology integrating Agile IT and project management. It does this because all projects are about change – significant organizational and personal change. The people involved – their participation in and understanding and support of these changes – ultimately determine IT projects success or failure. In fact, while all IT projects are about change, successful projects change human behavior.

During our conversation, I ask Scott, "Why is the failure rate of IT and change management projects so high?" Here is his complete answer:

There’s only one reason projects fail — leadership. You know who I’m talking about. Most of us have worked for that problematic project leader. 

Everything stems from a project’s leadership. They are the principal players or sponsors responsible for guiding each participant in completing the project successfully or failing miserably. 

A successful project requires a chain of sponsorship, including authorizing and reinforcing leaders. Authorizing sponsors have the power to approve, fund, and allocate resources to achieve a project supporting the organization’s clearly defined purpose. Reinforcing sponsors uphold, strengthen, and execute the project on behalf of the authorizing sponsor. 

The pervasiveness of project sponsorship problems stems from one fact. Just because an individual holds a leadership position doesn’t mean they know how to lead. They need guidance. 

In these instances, the problematic sponsor’s boss or a change agent must start by working with that struggling project leader. While having a meeting about their inadequacies is never easy, it is necessary. 

Most problematic leaders feel inhibited in a sponsorship evaluation meeting with their boss. As a change agent of 45+ years, I’ve conducted hundreds of meetings as the boss’s proxy.

This requires preparation before the meeting, including clarity about what the problematic sponsor must do, described in safe language. It’s typical for a sponsor to have little idea of what sponsorship means. I always start by taking time to listen and understand the problematic sponsor’s viewpoint, particularly about their role and what fulfills them in performing it. That sponsor’s input and my response may help them grasp the importance of their role and improve their performance. 

I’ve encountered sponsors that still don’t understand their role, requiring other options, like routinely assessing the sponsor’s performance and providing feedback. At times, I’ve recommended guidance from an effective peer in the problematic sponsor’s development process.

In severe cases, I’ve recommended replacing the sponsor. Their departure offers an opportunity for me to help the organization’s leadership find a suitable replacement. This is an individual who starts by engaging with their direct reports, establishing a shared purpose defined by enterprise-wide collaboration, followed by aligning their beliefs and abilities with that purpose. 

What do you think of Scott's perspective? Have your IT and change management projects been successful? Have there been leadership issues?

An Enduring Business versus a Successful Business -- What are the Misconceptions?

At the beginning of this month, Rebecca Morgan published an interesting book for manufacturers entitled Manufacturing Mastery: The Path to Building Successful and Enduring Manufacturing Businesses. This book is a dynamic guide for manufacturing leaders who want to develop a realistic, progressive, and responsive thinking process that enables success. It provides a business operating system framework that is the foundation for connecting the many pieces of a manufacturing business into an effective, profitable operation. Rebecca walks through the elements, relationships, capabilities, and mutability 21st-century manufacturing requires. 

When I spoke with Rebecca recently, I asked her: "What are leaders’ biggest misconceptions about an enduring business versus a successful business?" Here is her complete answer:

Most of us consider a business successful if it is profitable. And if it’s profitable over several years, it must be enduring. But endurance isn’t simply a run of profitable years. It is the result of intention and commitment.

Businesses that endure focus on a mission that matters, not on building a bigger today. Perhaps that distinction is why so few manufacturing businesses stand the test of time.

Of course, an enduring business earns profits to fund its future but distinguishes accounting profits from strategic profits. They focus not on maximizing profits, but on leveraging profits in alignment with core values to accomplish the mission. Earning, saving, and investing strategic profits facilitate forever. Maximizing today’s profits does not.

Endurance requires growth. Not the financial growth that many view as success. Growth for the leader and every employee. Relationship growth with all five constituencies. Growth in value provided. Growth of capabilities, of thinking, and sometimes into a more evolved mission. 

Successful companies are profitable today; businesses that last are continually perceived as integral to a healthy future. That confidence does not reflect technical capabilities, but rather attitude, exploration, and sharing, and true partnering to develop expertise in anticipating and addressing opportunities. 

A significant distinction is the commitment to serve the mission by always preparing the organization for passing the company baton to the next generation of leaders. “Don’t drop the baton” is very different thinking from “if it hits the ground, we’ll just run a different race.” 

That commitment is an eternal challenge for the enduring business. It relies on developing strong leaders with an unwavering focus on mission and core values, never forgetting that baton. It can all be ended by one poorly prepared or chosen leader not quickly addressed. The mission is bigger than any one person.

What do you think of Rebecca's perspective? Does your company leverage profits in alignment with core values?

Why Do Most Companies Fail When They Strive to Become More Efficient and Resilient?

At the beginning of this month, Brian Strobel published an intriguing new book entitled Pursuing Excellence: A Values-Based, Systems Approach to Help Companies Become More Resilient, which interestingly posits that a company doesn’t implement Operational Excellence as a methodology, model, or tool. Instead, a company realizes Operational Excellence. It does so by integrating effective leadership, teamwork, problem-solving, systems thinking, and continuous improvement. It achieves this by aligning strategies, empowering employees, optimizing business processes, and improving the customer experience.

When I spoke with Brian recently, I asked him: “Why do most companies fail when they strive to become more efficient and resilient?” Here is his full answer:

I think the fact that people are starting to ask questions like this proves there’s a growing recognition our previous ways of doing things aren’t working.

The way that we’ve managed our companies has remained largely unchanged since the 18^th century. Since then, different philosophies have come and gone, but the central ideas for what it takes to manage our companies have remained fairly consistent.

And our approach to achieve continuous improvement must also change.

I believe that our legacy approaches to continuous improvement, to include Lean and Six Sigma, are failing to consider the whole system and account for the leadership principles necessary for success. These previous methods placed too much emphasis on the specific improvement methodology, without proper consideration for the entire system and surrounding culture, systems and structures, values and beliefs, and the particulars of our marketspace..

As I write in my latest book Pursuing Excellence, “our companies are struggling with ways to become more competitive, to reduce costs, and the chase unobtanium in their never-ending pursuit to do more with less. But to survive, this focus on efficiency must not come at the expense of innovation, agility, and moving fast."

The world is now a new place, with new rules. Succeeding will require new ways of looking at our problems. And the lens of operational excellence can help us view these things from a different perspective.

A lens is something that bends and refracts light to alter our vision. It allows us to see things differently. The right kind of lens takes what’s already there, and through convergence and divergence, provides a different perspective to view the subject. It focuses our vision on those things we need to see with more clarity.

These ideas that make up the lens of operational excellence, as shown here, provide us the context for what must be considered as we move towards driving change with a fundamental understanding that we must have everyone aware of why we need to change. In this regard, the lens helps guide the vision for our companies to become more resilient and move closer to achieving excellence.

What do you think of Brian's thoughts? How have continuous-improvement initiatives affected your company? 

Developing Your Employees While Achieving Business Results -- Is it Possible?

Just this month, Lisa J. Koss published an engaging book entitled Leading for Learning: How Managers Can Get Business Results through Developmental Coaching and Inspire Deep Employee Commitment, which addresses a universal problem for many managers -- With so much "real work" to do every day, how can they also carve out time to learn, engage, build relationships, tap motivation, encourage development, and inspire?

When I spoke with Lisa a few weeks ago, I asked her: "What causes the barriers that block the concurrent development of employees and business results?" Here is her complete answer:

I personally don’t know of any manager who doesn’t want to get results – both in business and in leading others.  Managers care about both.  No one wants to feel unsuccessful in either realm.  Making a difference is the stuff of positive self-regard and feelings of self-worth, whether regarding the work product itself, or developing more capable leaders. 

What gets in the way of people managers doing both -- getting business results while developing people?  In my view, with 25 years in the field of leadership development, there are numerous reasons.  Here are three: 

First, people managers often don’t want to be.  Often promoted for their technical or business acumen, people managers often know little about people management.  They think they can gain status but ultimately stay committed to getting their own work done, emphasizing management of the business versus leading people.  Despite accepting a position with the word “people” embedded, most managers I’ve known don’t seem to contemplate the implications.  “People management” simply becomes another task, or set of problems to solve, instead of considering the role as an entirely different way to impact the business.  Consider, for example, that workplaces are actually schools… for everyone.  People managers have the great opportunity -- and responsibility -- to support others to stay relevant, to innovate, and to maximize their potential.  Whether the manager’s people learn slowly or quickly will depend, in large part, on the manager’s orientation to her role. 

Second, some people managers assume that spending time to develop others really doesn’t pay off.  The research in the social sciences say otherwise.  What’s lost in the discussion is the focus on what really matters – engagement.  Engagement is important because it can be measured with the phenomenon called “discretionary effort”.  Discretionary effort is the 15-25% more effort that employees (including you) devote to their work when feeling engaged.  These gifts to the workplace often come in difficult-to-quantify packages – like arriving to work 10 minutes earlier, reviewing one’s work again, or taking the time to recognize a colleague – but constitute a substantial increase of value and productivity in the business. 

Finally, people managers might think achieving business results and people development are incompatible has nothing to do with mindset but relates to skills.  Humans are messy…and results can be hard to measure.  The thought of “developing others” can evoke unpleasant thoughts such as:  risk-taking, the lowering of standards, or wading into unpredictable, emotional conversations. Managers can, however, can learn the skills which release these kinds of anxieties. 

When life gets overly busy and complex, embracing a more holistic approach to leadership may seem counterintuitive.  Instead of managers thinking “either-or,” people managers can do both at the same time and experience double the success.

What do you think of Lisa's perspective? Are these the types of problems and mindsets held by many mangers in your organization? Lisa clearly and directly addresses these issues in her new book. 

Becoming a New Supervisor -- What are the Challenges?

During May, Hugh Alley published a book that introduces the central skills that any supervisor must master with, at least, a basic working competency: instructing, leading, and making improvements in their own area. It is entitled Becoming the Supervisor
Achieving Your Company's Mission and Building Your Team, and it presents some of the more widely used tools that a new supervisor may need. More importantly, it ties these tools and skills to solving particular problems.

I spoke with Hugh this month and asked him: “What are the common mistakes many new supervisors make?” Here is his complete response:

I’d say that there are three common mistakes among new supervisors.

First, they are not clear enough with their employees when they assign work. They’ll describe what need to be done, but they’ll skip over the details of how the work is to be done. These details are what set the orders apart, and they are where the mistakes happen. You need to go over them with your employee. And you need a conversation about how long the work will take. When that happens, both supervisor and worker can agree, and the supervisor’s stress goes down.

Second, they act without thinking through a situation when something is amiss. Usually that’s because they don’t have a structured way to approach this sort of problem. In the book, Julie, the GM, introduces Trevor, the young supervisor to the Job Relations approach, which gives a nice structured way to think about any situation. I’ve seen team leads charging across the floor to “deal with” someone stop in their tracks and reconsider when they remember the steps of the Job Relations program. It’s very powerful.

Third, they don’t pay enough attention to standard work. They don’t make sure that people are using the best way to do a job that the organization currently knows. That consistency will typically increase productivity by 10%. The best route to that is a good job breakdown, and the concepts of the Job Instruction module from Training Within Industry are very helpful here. In the book, Trevor learns how to do this, and it solves several problems. I’ve seen it reduce the time to get new staff up to speed from three months down to one month.

If new supervisors can get those three skills nailed, they’ll be much better off. From there, they can learn all the other skills. 

What is the quality of the leadership training within your organization? Do you agree with Hugh's assessment of common mistakes by new supervisors? Has your company experienced the benefits of a training within industry (TWI) program?

The "Blendification" of Your Organization's Culture, Strategy, and Execution

Early in June, Dan Bruder published an exciting new book entitled, The Blendification System: Activating Potential by Connecting Culture, Strategy, and Execution. By focusing on the unifying purpose within each organization, this book promotes alignment between leadership and employees setting a clear, strong foundation in which every individual can thrive.

During a recent conversation with Dan, I asked him a series of questions about the book and the connection between employees, customers, and communities. Here are the important questions followed by Dan's answers:

“What is the connection between culture, strategy, and execution and why are most companies not embracing it?”

Companies are at the forefront of fostering growth within society and communities. In the US, adults spend over 50% of their waking time in work- or work-related activities.  Work is where people come together on a regular basis with the primary purpose of identifying and satisfying society’s needs.  For companies to realize their potential, they must break away from the model of oversimplification and internal silos. Human beings can accomplish tremendous outcomes when motivated, challenged, and connected.  Unfortunately, business has diminished employee motivation by relegating people to functional silos and meaningless task-oriented behaviors.

"Why aren’t companies embracing the connection between culture, strategy, and execution?"

There are three primary components that are critical for organizations to realize their potential.  They are culture, strategy, and execution.  Historically, there has been little intentionality around designing an exceptional culture while strategy has been something the executive elite do every year or two and it typically is not cascaded through the organization.  Similarly, execution has not been embedded in the culture or aligned with the strategy and employees do not see how their jobs make a difference. Generally, there has been little focus on deliberately designing culture, strategy, and execution as a connected system where each complement and complete the other.  This is primarily related to executive leaders and founders not fully grasping the potential of a united team and their ability to truly make a difference.  Essentially, it is easier to pursue profit than potential.

"Why should companies embrace the connection between culture, strategy, and execution?"

Culture, strategy, and execution are seamlessly designed and implemented together in The Blendification® System.   When these three business components are purposefully created and connected, companies experience substantial growth in engagement, innovation, and outcomes.  As the entire company aligns on a common cultural cause, the strategic platform becomes the path for employees to realize their human potential.  Finally, the execution of the strategic platform enables employees to align their work with making a positive impact on their communities.  Thus, the systematic blending of culture, strategy, and execution enables companies to be at the forefront of advancing society through their employees, customers, and communities.

What do you think of Dan's ideas? Does your company suffer from disconnects among the culture, strategy, and execution platform? 

What Is Missing from the Current Leadership Mindset?

This past June, Payal Nanjiani, published a thought-provoking book entitled Success Is Within: The 21 Ways for Achieving Results, Prosperity, and Fulfillment by Changing Your Leadership Mindset, which argues that success depends on changing one’s mindset in key ways. She essentially encourages business professionals to "mind the mind." 

I spoke with Payal this month and asked her, "What Is missing from the current leadership mindset?" Here is her complete response:

We are in an age where companies struggle to compete in today’s fast-paced, complex global economy where information about leadership, success, and business is right at the tip of our fingers. Resources are bountiful and communication is swift. Despite all of this, when we look around us, we only see a handful of people that reach the top of success in corporations and businesses. These are the people who achieve their goals and progress ahead. They lead fulfilled career lives. They not only survive, but they thrive in this challenging global economy.

The reason for this gap between the “successful few” and the “unsuccessful many” is not a matter of lack of passion, hard work, or training. Rather, the gap exists because the “unsuccessful many” have not applied the wisdom of the right techniques to achieve success. We all possess this wisdom, but we seldom tap into the right insight at the right time and the right place in our work-life. Tapping into the success within our selves makes all the difference in our end results. Wisdom must guide our thinking, our karma (actions), and our mindset. 

"Success Is Within" is my mantra. My new book presents 21 ways to activate this mantra, to achieve the success that is already within our selves. We must all claim the power of this mantra so that we activate wisdom. We must condition our minds to take control over our karmas (actions) so that we achieve our desired results. 

During a time when businesses and brands are being disrupted with great speed, our mindset is the only element that will help us navigate and define our place in a complex corporate world. Mindset is that hidden aspect within ourselves that shows up in our results. If we tap into it, then it gives us an edge over others. I believe that we are all destined to win regardless of our circumstances. We can all become the “successful few."

Whatever comes and goes in our professional lives, we can take strength from within ourselves, trust ourselves, and achieve unstoppable success. Once we take this strength, we achieve what we want and deserve: we achieve results, prosperity, and fulfillment. We become leaders who have changed our mindsets to move from becoming the “unsuccessful many” to become the “successful few.”

What do you think about Payal's ideas on attuning our minds with specific actions?  Do you agree that "success comes from external factors" is a prevailing myth?