Narcissistic Leaders

I'm going on some sort of kick with the Harvard Business Review article reviews. This next article that I read Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons by psychoanalyst Michael Maccoby, shows the progression of the research started by Zaleznik mentioned in the previous post.

Maccoby describes what we might call "Rock Star Leaders" or the "twice-born" leaders mentioned previously. I hate to pick on one person so much... but with the recent release of the Jesus-Phone... I mean iPhone... I'm going to pick on Steve Jobs.

I give him credit though; he is a genius. He is also extremely driven to mold the world into his image (something Freud would call narcissistic). And to a certain extent he has succeeded. A generation ago, people would feel naked if they left home without their watches... now people can't seem to get through the day without popping those little white ear-buds into their ears and plugging them into an iPod.

I would say narcissism is almost a logical offshoot of our capitalist society. (We all work hard in order to reap the benefits for ourselves. Nothing is wrong with this. This is what keeps the world turning.) However, at a certain point, narcissism can turn pathological, which will usually lead to the decline of the organization that the "Rock Star Leader" is running.

Narcissistic leaders have great many strengths:

• Great vision - This one is obvious. Usually their vision includes they being worshiped like a god, hence Jesus Phone....
• Charisma - The strength of their personalities attracts followers.
  

Maccoby explains that narcissistic leaders often have the personal charisma and drive that give them enormous strength during times of chaos. (Think Winston Churchill and Mao). However, during the times of peace things don't usually go so well. You need at least some managerial abilities in order to keep all of the boring but important things going as they should.

Their downfall is usually caused by the archetypal weakness of narcissistic leaders:

• Overly Domineering - "My way or no way!" Thats how Jobs was fired from the company he started.
• Thin Skinned / Poor Listeners - Any criticism is seen as a personal attack on their personal "perfection". Consequently, they have selective listening and can't learn from mistakes, eventually making one that they cannot recover from.
  
• Lack of Empathy - Because they are so wrapped up in themselves, they cannot understand why other people may think differently or have different needs from them. They may be masters of politics, but they tend to see people as tools to exploit. In the end, people we become sick of it. (Winston Churchill was voted out of the Prime Minister's office right after he won WWII).
  
• Poor Mentors / Mentees - Well if you're a poor listener and lack empathy, you probably won't do well with mentoring.
  
• Overly Competitive - Having a competitive spirit is great, until you compromise your morals or your team members because of it.
  

How to survive if you are a Narcissistic leader:

• Get a sidekick - No really, a strong, competent, and thick skinned "manager" can help bring balance. (Kinda like the Yin to your Yang).
• Indoctrinate your team - (Use sparingly) If everyone agrees with you and trusts your decisions 100%, you can avoid conflict.
  
• Know yourself - Try to understand your narcissistic personality. Often that may be enough to stop a rant with "Is this really that important to chew out one of my most loyal team members, or am I just being psycho?"

Sorry Steve, but the Lisa, Newton, NeXT, puck mouse, and Apple TV should be good indicators of your narcissism. Get over it and you'll be the better for it. Now how about sending me one of those nice 80GB Video iPods :-).

Managers and Leaders

Back in 1977, Abraham Zaleznik wrote a classic article in the Harvard Business Review called "Managers and Leaders: Are they Different?"

The simple answer was "Yes, they are. But he goes on and elaborates on a number of different points. He dips into some psychology, which is definitely different from the majority of business leadership articles written today. This is a seminal work and definitely worth a read.

So how do Managers and Leaders differ? I would first preface this with saying that all leaders or managers fall on a sort of "Manager / Leader Continuum". There really aren't any "pure leaders" or "pure managers". We need them both, and depending on someone's style, they will use more tools from the leadership toolbox or from the management toolbox.

Well first of all we would typically stereotype managers as lacking creativity and ethics.

Alright, calm down... this is not validation on your suspicions that your manager is a heartless baby candy snatcher... this just means that taking a strict Max Weber-esque definition of a manager, we will see someone who painstakingly follows the rules and does nothing else. They don't have their own self-ethics. (Think someone who will refuse emergency care to a dying patient because they haven't filled out their paperwork). Similarly, they lack any creativity because they are always worried about going by the book and ONLY by the book.

Leaders on the other hand are painted as dynamic and creative, working "for the people". Granted this may be an over dramatization of leadership, but it helps paint a picture of the ideal.

The second stereotype about managers and leaders that Zaleznik discusses is that leaders are proactive while managers are reactive. This dovetails into the stereotype about managers being "tactical" thinkers while leaders are "strategic" thinkers. Again both are merely different spots on the spectrum with both types of thinking being necessary in order to be effective.

Zaleznik also describes managers as being able to "play the game" referring to politics, while leaders are more often tough and direct. He also alludes to theories in psychology, stating that leaders are "twice born", people who have had lives filled with struggle and living with a feeling of being separate and not belonging. Leaders therefore have a strong sense of duty and responsibility to "make things right", while managers who are "once born" are more comfortable with "making things the same".

Zaleznik finishes with an open question about the development of leaders within today's business culture of pitting peers against each other and seeing who come out on top. He rails on the fact that this will merely excessively reward aggressive behavior (something that is ultimately self defeating).

I would say that Zaleznik is at least partially giving a critique of the current status of people who we call "leaders". I would have to admit that many of my own postings have come out my critique. I also find his work to be a great starting point for a discussion on the difference between leaders and managers, however I would have to say that the research has advanced since the time of his writing. Specifically, I would have to say that Zaleznik's critique on "management" is overdone. Most of it would more accurately be pointed towards "ineffective leadership", because I do believe that effective management has its merits.

Thanks for the read, and as always comments are requested and appreciated.

Until next time,
-Jason

Emotional Intelligence

Hi Everyone,

This will a short post on "Emotional Intelligence" the pioneering book written by Daniel Goleman. In a nutshell many would say that the strength of a leader is measured by his/her emotional intelligence.

According to Goleman, emotional intelligence is made up of 5 main categories:

• Self Awareness
• Self Regulation
• Motivation
• Empathy
• Social Skill

More on this in a future post!
-Jason

The One Minute Repirmand

OK, so you can see that I'm on a One Minute Manager kick, but this will be a brief article about the "One Minute Reprimand".

So far I have never gotten a "One Minute Reprimand". I actually have never gotten a reprimand that hasn't turned into a "One hour or two hour reprimand"... though parents have the habit of lecturing their kids a little bit too much.

In the work environment though, I have felt that negative feedback often is vague... and almost always not very constructive. I think the problem is with people using "feedback" as a code word for "tearing someone a new one in a politically correct manner". Shouldn't feedback be about correcting or reinforcing particular behavior?

Maybe that is why so many people are afraid of getting feedback and why so many new managers are very uncomfortable with giving good and useful feedback. Maybe they have forgotten that feedback should be about catching people doing good more so than catching people doing wrong.

At least in the places that I have worked, I see that most "managers" are too "busy" to actually do much managing. It's kind of ironic. Managers are too busy doing their subordinates work (micromanaging) and don't give good feedback for fear of being "micro-managers".

The One Minute Reprimand (in a nutshell)

• Immediate - Give the reprimand immediately. Don't you hate those, "Remember two weeks when you were doing that thing... yeah that wasn't really good." Why couldn't the manager tell me this two weeks ago so that I could have fixed it immediately and not have wasted my time and effort on something she didn't like?
• Specific - Be specific about what the offending behavior is so that the person receiving the reprimand will know what to fix.
• Share your feelings - Let them know how you feel about the offending behavior. Let them know the reason why it is wrong... not just that what they did was "bad" in some vague way.
  
• Reaffirm - Even after using the first three rules, people still won't be happy with any reprimand, so take a second to reaffirm to them that you value their contribution to the team and that they are better than the offending behavior.
  

You don't have to leave these rules at the work place. Try them at home... your friends and family will thank me for it.

Until next time,
-Jason

Making Your Team Happy

I just read this great post at The Happiness Project. It's titled "How employers can boost the happiness of their employees". She gives a number of common sense (but not commonly practiced) tips of how employers can help make their employees happy. Here are some highlights, see the entire post here.

• People need control over their lives to feel happy - It's always much better to have a say in what YOU are doing than to have to do something just because your boss says you "have to"
• Reduce time commuting - I commute over an hour each way everyday. In the past year I have put almost 25,000 miles onto my car. As much as I like driving... I know this is definitely a stressor for me.
  
• Don't waste people's time - You know when you got that thing that you "have to" do by the end of the day, but then you pulled into hours of pointless meetings. Yeah... more stress. (Potential solution - see post on Running Meetings Like Google)
• Allow people to participate in social interaction - ummm... you know that guy whose office was moved into the supply closet.... yeah that's why he looks pissed all of the time
• Take Care of People's Health - healthy team members are happy team members
• Everyone Loves Surprises - OK, not all surprises, but little things to break the monotony of the workday can work wonders to improve morale. Maybe thats why college was so much fun. There was always something wild and crazy going on just down the hall / on campus / downtown.
  

So I'm thinking at least someone out there is thinking, "But all I need out of my people is for them to get the work done. If I'm efficient and effective, everything will be fine."

Not exactly... Human beings are incredibly emotional creatures. We are dramatically swayed by our moods and feelings. Think about it. Can you remember a time when you were extremely motivated. Can you feel the emotion and energy that pulsed through your body? You were going a mile a minute and loving it!

Now think about another time when you were stressed, maybe a little bit upset, or angry. Did you really feel like doing anything that you "had" to do? Most likely not.

In the end this is something like the carrot and the stick. All too often people just reach for the stick to "make" people do what they want. Sometimes this is necessary, but I think we'd all be better if we could reach for more carrots.

Please let me know what you think. As always comments are requested and appreciated.

Until next time,
-Jason

Seagull Managers

So I've been reading Ken Blanchard's new book Leading at a Higher Level. I've actually finished it, but am a little behind on writing posts on what I have learned. But anyway...

"Seagull Management" is a term that Blanchard uses in the book to describe a type of management behavior. Whenever there is a problem, seagull managers, swoop in, make lots of noise, dump on everyone, and then fly away. As you can tell this isn't the the best way to take care of your team. It doesn't do anything to help the team members to succeed, it just succeeds in destroying morale.

We've all seen people do this. A mistake is made. And it makes an impact that is immediately "felt by the leadership". (We already know there will be problems if upper 'leadership' insulates themselves with endless layers of middle management). Then all of a sudden your boss's boss calls your team into his office. He's mad as hell and he wants the head of the person responsible. The poor schmuck raises his hand and he gets railed at. The rest of the team then gets chewed out for allowing him to make such a costly mistake. Meanwhile, no one has learned anything from this. Then, everyone marches out of the office and lays low for the rest of the day. On the bright side this whole incident will make great water cooler conversation for weeks.

"Teach me how to get an A, don't just mark my paper with a B." Maybe if management had thought about putting in stricter controls and checks, the problem could have been avoided. Maybe if the team wasn't over-worked and over-stressed the mistake wouldn't have happened. Maybe, someone should have gotten the proper training before being expected to do the job perfectly.

This all falls back to Blanchard's theory of situational leadership. Leaders need to figure out where their team members are at in terms of development, and take the appropriate action. If the team member who made the mistake was a brand new hire with no experience, he would have needed exact instructions in how to figure out his task. However, if he was already trained in the field, but not in this particular application, it may be helpful for the manager to remind him of the proper procedures and coach him to perform successfully. Though, if he had already been successful a few times, the manager could have taken a more supporting role, in reinforcing this success.

Only when the team member is already a "self reliant achiever" can the manager completely delegate the responsibility. However, the seagull manager just delegates, and apparently hopes for the best. You just can't do that and expect to be competitive anymore.

Anyway, as always comments are welcome and appreciated.

Until next time,
-Jason

The Members Project

Hi Everyone! This is going to be a quick post, but I just wanted to let you know about The Members Project, from American Express. Essentially, it is a project where American Express will donate $1 for every cardholder who joins and donate it to a charitable project that all of the members vote on. Check it out and spread the word!
-Jason

We Don't Need Another Hero

(OK, first an aside. I read an article in the Harvard Business Review titled the same as this post by Joseph Badaracco, though I only have a few notes from it in my notebook. So I would say this post is inspired by that article but probably doesn't have much to do with it.)

We live in an overly dramatized world. Blame it on the media, blame it on ourselves, but gosh darn-it this over dramatization of life has done a lot to do precisely the opposite... create apathy.

Think about it... I would have to say that we have become a country of whiners. Since when did "running out of non-fat, non-dairy, non-sugar creamer at Starbucks" become an earth shattering crisis? I've seen people flip out over such trifles. I would sum this trend up as "If there aren't explosions going off, blaring sirens, or gratuitous nudity... we're not going to pay attention." And as such people have used exaggeration and hyperbole and every sort of explosions, sirens, and nudity to get others to pay attention to them. (Marketers seem to be the best at this).

We've become desensitized to the point that of becoming passionless. We seem to be saving up our efforts and energy for some sort of Grand Mission, like "solving poverty", "curing AIDS", or "becoming a millionaire"... But we don't bother to get our asses off of the couch and exercise, or turn off the TV and read a book, or even take the 1 hour out of our lives every year to get out and VOTE.

I agree with the Joe Badaracco, that we "don't need another hero". Instead we need the everyday people who get up in the morning and give it their all despite all of the obstacles, whatever the season. We need people who will work within the system that we are in and bend the rules in order to get things done, but don't break them outright unless we are truly ready to change them (not just when it's convenient). We need people who will take up a mission and stick with it until it has been completed.

So have a think about it. Sure, the firebrands screaming out "Revolution NOW" may be popular, but when times get tough they will fizzle out quickly. As Thomas Paine famously said, "These are the times that try men's souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it Now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph."

And as always comments are welcomed and appreciated.
-Jason

Charisma and Leadership

I originally wanted to title this post "Charisma versus Leadership" but... on second thought, I don't believe the relationship between charisma and leadership to be adversarial... though often times people confuse one with the other.

For example, I will use the archetypal example of Hitler being someone with great charisma, but I would argue that he was not a "leader" but merely a demagogue. He gave rousing speeches that played off of the base emotions and prejudices of a downtrodden German public. However, he never really thought about what the people really wanted. He was selfish and thought about what he wanted (to be the "emperor" of a 1000 year German empire).

But wait, you might ask, "But didn't he say things like wanting to bring prosperity to the country?" To that I would answer, "Yes, of course he said those things." But did he really bring about what he promised? Wouldn't the logical thing for a leader during those times be to encourage the people to continue along a path to revitalization, even though the road ahead may look tough and the rewards far away? I would think so.

Today we can see similar things in our everyday lives. We might point to the CEO's and CFO's of the Enron's, the Worldcom's, Tyco's, and the Global Crossing's of the world, who broke the rules to "make more money for investors", but in the end were grabbing as much cash as they could to line their own pockets. The more political among us may even point to our current administration and the war in Iraq as another example of demagogues taking on the guise of leadership.

OK, so before you go off screaming "Ahhhh! charisma is bad!" hold on for one minute. First of all I never said that. Secondly, charisma is actually a very good and useful tool in leadership. This is because people are by nature social and emotional creatures. (See MySpace and Facebook as examples of humanity's thirst for social interaction). We like to see what our friends / peers / acquaintances are doing... and more often than not monkey see monkey do. Our emotions also play a big part of our lives. Have you ever tried to convince someone about an emotionally charged topic, oh I dunno like stem cell research, using pure logic? It's not gonna happen. But if you for example used a story about about a child stricken by some terrible disease that could possibly be cured through stem cell research... I'd expect you to be at least some-what more successful.

This is charisma, that ability to connect with people and eventually to influence and persuade them to take up your vision and follow your plan. Leadership, though would use charisma to influence people stick to the team's plan to make the vision happen.

The Power of Appreciation

So this is advice that your mother probably gave you when you went over to your best friend's house way back in kindergarten "Remember your pleases and thank-yous". Unfortunately too few people follow this advice after they've "grown up" and become an adult.

Now I don't mean the gratuitous, "Hey Bob, please do this for me, OK? Thanks," and walk away routine. This is a terrible habit that many people have gotten into. Now a days, people will play passive aggressive games by adding a "thanks" to the end of any request. This totally defeats the spirit of appreciation.

Now let's start from the beginning. One of the most basic of all human needs is the need to be appreciated. You know it and I know it. We all want to feel as though we are valued, and that our efforts have been worthwhile.

Just the past weekend, I went back up to school, just expecting to enjoy a performance by NBC's Last Comic Standing, Dat Phan. However, during the introductions there was a brief awards ceremony where I received an award for my work with the Asian Pacific American Caucus in helping make Introduction to Asian American Studies a permanent course. I was really touched by the gesture and didn't really know what to say. I had done this simply because it was something that I believed in. I didn't "need" to receive the award, but now I feel much more motivated to continue doing more of the same things. (I'm not a psychology major, but I think this all has to do with something like rewards and punishments... and it works).

On the other hand, I have all too often felt under-appreciated by those who call themselves "leaders". How many times have you had something "dumped" on you like the situation above? (These also usually include impossible deadlines, such as "yesterday"). How do you think you would feel if you had other work to do, plans for the evening, a throbbing headache, and your boss comes to your cube asking, "How long will it take for you to do this?" You respond, "Two hours". To which he or she responds, "I need it for my meeting in half an hour... please get it done... oh yeah and I'll try to remember to finish your performance review by sometime next week... thanks." Yeah, not such a great feeling.

How about if instead of that, your boss came to your cube and asked "Hi, how are you doing?" You respond, "Not too bad, just pretty busy finishing up this analysis for the big project we're working on." He or she asks, "So hey, I was wondering if you could do me a big favor. How long do you think it would take for you to do this... I need it for my meeting in half an hour?" You think for a moment and say, "Gee boss, I don't think I could get all of that done by then... it might take me an hour and a half... maybe an hour if I really rush."
"Oh, really... hmmm... well how about if I try to get you these numbers and we don't worry about making these graphs..." you boss offers. Encouraged, you say, "Yeah, I think we can get this done, I'll ask Sally to help me this one part and I think we can get it all figured out." "Thanks Bob, you're a real lifesaver! I'll be sure to add an extra positive note in your performance review for next week!"

So let me break this down for you. In the end, maybe this boils down to Habit #5 "Seek first to understand then to be understood." In the first situation, the boss did not try to understand Bob's abilities or the other situational factors, he didn't seem to care. However, in the second situation, the boss made the effort to understand everything, and had the flexibility to make it happen.

So, I want to thank all of you for reading, and please leave me any feedback in the comments section. I hope you all come back soon!

-Jason