Check Assumptions about What
Motivates People
Brad’s competitive nature clouded his ability to value
relationship development. He seemed to hold a common misperception
that too much praise made his people soft. He believed in
hiring people who shouldn’t need constant praise and
encouragement, and further, he feared that that if he over
praised them, they would lose focus and their performance
would suffer. Research has proven that this is not the case.
Over a 25 year period, the Gallup Organization interviewed
more than a million employees to determine core commonalities
in the strongest workplaces. People who answered “yes”
to the questions: “In the last seven days, have I received
recognition or praise for good work?” and “Does
my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as
a person?” were found to have higher levels of productivity,
employee engagement, customer satisfaction and profitability.
Andy Pearson, CEO of PepsiCo. —once named one of the
ten toughest bosses in America—said:
“If the need for recognition and approval is a fundamental
human drive, then the willingness to give it is not a sign
of weakness. Great leaders find a balance between getting
results and how they get them. A lot of people make the
mistake of thinking that getting results is all there is
to the job. Your real job is to get results and to do it
in a way that makes your organization a great place to work
– a place where people enjoy coming to work, instead
of just taking orders and hitting this month’s numbers.”
Leading high performing teams requires empathy. It requires
the willingness and ability to see the world from someone
else’s perspective. This doesn’t mean that leaders
should adopt other people’s emotions as their own and
try to please everybody. That would be a nightmare –
it would make action impossible. As Daniel Goleman says, empathy
means taking employees’ feelings into thoughtful consideration
and then making intelligent decisions that work those feelings
into the response. And, most crucially, empathy makes resonance
possible; lacking empathy, leaders act in ways that create
dissonance.
Focus on Strengths Not Weaknesses
Brad’s intense focus on making people “better”
was backfiring. Research by the Gallup Organization shows
that people don’t change all that much during the course
of a career. Trying to put in what was left out is a waste
of time. A leader’s time and energy is much better spent
developing existing strengths. Brad and his team utilized
Gallup’s Strengths’ Finder Assessment which identifies
each person’s top five strengths. The results of the
Strengths’ Finder can be used as a way to learn about
and leverage individual strengths.
Brad’s top five strengths turned out to be Achiever,
Analytical, Competition, Focus and Learner. As Brad’s
coach, it was tempting to incorporate into his coaching feedback
that he needed to be more empathetic and relational. However,
if any credibility is to be given to the Strengths’
Finder, the coaching opportunity is not in making Brad something
he’s not, but in helping him build on his unique talents,
which do not include high empathy. Understanding these strengths
and discovering how they intersect with the overall needs
of the team would serve him best. For example, his competition
strength can fuel him to figure out what’s going to
be most important in creating winning conditions for the team.
And his learner strength can drive him as he seeks investigates
alternative approaches to employ with the team.
Supported by coaching, and driven by his desire to win and
his thirst for knowledge, Brad discovered a combination of
books that helped him learn the importance of adapting his
style based on the individual team member. Then his focus
strength triggered his ability to spend focused time with
each of his reps to ask them specifically what they needed
from him and how he could best support them.
Strong Leaders Employ a Variety of Leadership
Styles
Brad also wanted to identify additional leadership styles
that he could incorporate into his natural leadership style.
In the article Leadership That Gets Results, published in
the Harvard Business Review, author Daniel Goleman describes
six distinct leadership styles, each springing from different
components of emotional intelligence. The article shares that
leaders often fail to appreciate how strongly the work climate
is influenced by leadership style and suggests that the most
effective leaders understand the need to shift and adapt their
style based on specific circumstances.
As stated previously, Brad naturally defaults to the pacesetting
style. According to Goleman, pacesetting leaders set high
performance standards and exemplify those standards. When
leaders use the pacesetting style exclusively or poorly, they
lack not just vision, but also resonance with their employees.
Too often, such leaders are driven by numbers alone –
which aren’t always enough to inspire or motivate people.
Goleman’s research revealed that leaders who have mastered
four or more of the six leadership styles have the best work
climate and business performance.
The “affiliative” leadership style is marked
by a “people come first” attitude. This style
is quite useful in building team harmony and increasing morale.
And the “coaching” style focuses more on personal
development than on immediate work or performance related
tasks. The coaching style works well when employees are already
aware of their weaknesses and want to improve. Both the affiliative
and coaching styles were appropriate for Brad’s team,
and he worked to develop these and regularly incorporate them
so that he had more tools in his leadership toolbox. As Brad
masters more styles, he’ll be better equipped to effectively
lead through a variety of situations. As he continues to switch
back and forth between pacesetter, affiliative and coaching
styles, he will create optimal conditions for his team to
succeed.
Following a six month program of one on one and team coaching,
both Brad and his team are confident in their ability to perform
at a much higher level. Early performance indicators show
that results have improved markedly on all key metrics and
both Brad and his team credit coaching for their improvement.
By letting go of old assumptions about how to motivate his
staff, focusing on maximizing strengths versus improving weaknesses
and incorporating additional styles into his leadership, Brad
was able to connect with each team member and more effectively
harness their individual strengths into a collective result
that was much greater than what had previously been achieved.
If you would like to learn more about how leadership and
team coaching can work to improve the performance of your
organization, please give us a call at 316.634.2328. We’d
love to talk!
|
