Great Leaders See, Say, and Do

Whether they involve politics, business, sports, education, science, or any other field of endeavor, the key headlines of 2014 will no doubt focus on leadership. And the defining moments won’t be about position or title. They will be about what real leaders see, say, and do. After all, clear vision, clear communication, and meaningful action are the hallmarks of effective leaders.

Dr. Kathryn D. Cramer is a licensed psychologist and executive consultant. Her previous book Change the Way You See Everything was a New York Times bestseller and landed her two spots on The Oprah Winfrey Show. In her latest book Lead Positive: What Highly Effective Leaders See, Say, and Do  (to be released in March) she shows how leaders can produce better results by shifting what they see, say, and do toward assets and possibilities. Her insights are well worth sharing.

 

You write that leaders build self-confidence and inspire allegiance by acting “intentionally” in key, defining moments. Can you offer some examples?

Let me first explain what I mean by “intention.” Highly effective leaders are always on the lookout for what is valuable, working, strong and possible – at every turn of the bend. In other words, they are actively and intentionally seeking the assets present that will bring them closer to their goals.

As your question suggests, there are key moments when searching for and acting on assets make a big difference in achieving important goals. I often use Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s Journey framework to illuminate these key moments of transformational change. (For a little background, when well-known mythology professor Joseph Campbell conducted comparative research on the timeless stories of heroism found in all cultures, he found similar themes and patterns that he characterized as the Hero’s Journey.)

For example, the first milestone in the Hero’s Journey is “The Call.” It is a time when the leader (i.e., the “hero”) must get very clear about how his particular goals relate to his deepest desires and values, and most importantly, to his sense of purpose (i.e., his “call”). The leader’s internal assets are put front and center to strengthen his commitment and determination to see the entire change effort through.

The second milestone in the Hero’s Journey narrative is called “The Resistance.” Normally, we think of resistance as applying to followers. In this case, Campbell wisely points us again in the direction of the leader. Every leader on a mission is faced with internal resistance – his or her own initial qualms, concerns, and worries. Sometimes this internal anxiety mounts so high that he can talk himself out of pursuing his goals altogether. In Campbell’s model, leaders overcome the resistance by reaching out for support from mentors and guides. This support usually includes feedback that focuses on the leader’s strengths and capabilities, as well as the benefits of achieving the goal. Once leaders are shown how to leverage their own strengths to achieve their goals, the anxiety and the resistance goes away.

You talk a lot about Asset-Based Thinking, or ABT. Exactly what is ABT, and how can it help people be more effective? Asset-Based Thinking is a way of shining the spotlight of your attention on what is strong, valuable and possible in yourself, in other people, and in every situation – welcomed or unwelcome. It is an intentional effort to overcome the brain’s negativity bias, which makes us much more sensitive and reactive to problems, mistakes, and what’s missing than the things that are going right. This focus on the negative is what I call Deficit-Based Thinking (DBT). DBT leads to a “fix-it” mindset, which may be helpful in creating narrow solutions, but leaves a lot of opportunity on the table.

With Asset-Based Thinking, leaders identify and leverage the upside of what they themselves have to offer, what others can contribute, and how the situation can have wide-ranging benefits. This mindset opens you up to creative solutions that help you go further, faster.

Mayor Rudy Giuliani was widely praised for focusing his attention on the positive and the possible during the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. How can that kind of focus be helpful under more common circumstances like running a business?

There are three sources of transformational change: crisis, chance, or choice. Many businesses go through periods of crisis, for example, losing market share, customer complaints, or a disengaged workforce. If you look at crisis through an ABT mindset, you will find that it presents opportunities to come back even better than before. By shining the spotlight of attention on what is being done to redeem the crisis, you rally employees, customers, boards of directors, and other important stakeholders, motivating them to higher levels of performance. This is essentially what Rudi Giuliani did by making the acts of heroism more important than the acts of terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11. In any kind of crisis situation, I believe one of the jobs of the leader must be to make visible what employees and other stakeholders are doing to rise to the occasion.

You suggest that leaders can benefit from carefully analyzing the “return on investment” of a specific initiative or project. What do you have in mind?

It is typical for leaders and people at every level to focus on the quantitative metrics associated with achieving results. This is certainly important. But there are two other variables that are pertinent to the bottom line. The first is lessons learned: No matter if we achieve the results we seek, it is important to harvest the lessons. They are invaluable in replicating success or improving on failure.

The second but most neglected bottom-line variable is: What did we experience? Experience here refers to the emotional quotient of pursuing objectives. How did it feel? If individuals and teams achieve results but experience enormous amounts of stress and anxiety while doing so, there is cause to worry. Why are engagement, productivity and optimism suffering when people pursue tough challenges? In contrast, if the emotional quotient in the process of achieving important goals was positive (e.g., people felt inspired, experienced a high sense of solidarity with their team, and were satisfied with their performance), noting this effort can help build an even more competent and engaged culture.

My recommendation is that leaders think about all three of the bottom lines as they challenge their teams and organizations to reach important goals. The trifecta of achieving results, learning valuable lessons, and having the experience of a “great ride” is a formula for sustainable success.

You differentiate between leading by lightning and leading by listening. Give us examples of each, and tell us what you think of the implications.

I developed this leadership style dichotomy as I was studying the work of Chris Argyris, one of the first business theorists to study organization development, which focuses on the importance of having advocacy skills and inquiry skills to effective leadership.

In my system, leading by lightning is associated with being a strong advocate for a new idea. The new idea pops into the mind of the leader and he is then able to rush in and enroll others in their cause. In contrast, leading by listening is most closely associated with having the probing skills of advocacy. Leaders using this style listen deeply to others who are exchanging ideas, discussing options, and voicing opinions. He is then able to blend what he hears into a coherent picture of the future that takes into account multiple points of view.

In my work I have found that each leader has a home base tendency. By nature and nurture, they are more skilled in one style than the other. For example, being the first-born child in the family may cultivate strong leader by lightning tendencies. Then, other variables, such as personality, gender, peer group status, and leadership opportunities, converge to form one’s home base tendencies. A good balance of leading by lightning and leading by listening is the goal for optimal effectiveness.

In promoting something as seemingly pedestrian as performance improvement, how can a leader “say it with substance, sizzle, and soul” so it doesn’t come across as just another pep talk?
My colleagues and I at The Cramer Institute have created an ABT tool called “Courageous Conversations,” which is useful for giving people feedback about how they can improve their performance. This is a comprehensive process, but I always say, what starts well usually ends well – especially when it comes to feedback people might not want to hear.

The first step in Courageous Conversations is “Tell the Truth Fast.” The framework for this step involves giving people feedback using the following stem sentence …

“When you _________ (fill in the blank with the area for improvement, for example, procrastinate, are late, miss deadlines, etc.) then _________ (fill in the blank with the negative impact of the performance deficiency, for example, others feel left out and unimportant, the standards of the whole team are lowered, etc.).

Then you follow up with:
“I know you don’t want to impact the team’s performance or your own performance in a negative way. Would you be willing to talk to me about how you can change your behavior as well as your impact? I believe we can work this out together and improve your performance so that it is at a level you can proud of.”

In the example, there is plenty of substance around the specific behavior that has specific negative impacts. When it comes to sizzle, the person giving the feedback is doing so with an encouraging tone that is devoid of negative judgments. And perhaps the most soulful aspect of having a “Courageous Conversation” is revealed in the positive image of the future that the leader provides in the closing statements.

Rodger Dean Duncan is the bestselling author of CHANGE-friendly LEADERSHIP: How to Transform Good Intentions into Great Performance.