4 Behaviors the Newest Royal Couple Can Teach Leaders

Leadership

Leadership is not a position, or a title, it is action and example. ~Cory Booker

It was hard not to see or hear about the royal wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The event dominated every news (and entertainment) medium for a week. While listening to a Monarchy expert being interviewed on NPR, their perspective on the newest royal couple made me think about what it means to really lead.

This person said that they believed Harry and Meghan would have more influence as to how the Monarchy is viewed or perceived than would Prince William and Kate. Even though, it’s William who is in line to be king. As I’ve contemplated this statement, I thought of four behaviors I’ve seen from Harry and Meghan that could cause this prediction to become reality.

Behavior 1: Challenge the status quo. Their relationship alone is a challenge to the Monarchy status quo. The CNN headline says it all, “Prince Harry and Meghan Markle marry in trailblazing ceremony.” However, I would add, they were always very respectful. I think that Travis Bradberry’s quote about influential people describes the new royal couple. “Influential people are never satisfied with the status quo. They’re the ones who constantly ask, ‘What if?’ and ‘Why not?’ They’re not afraid to challenge conventional wisdom, and they don’t disrupt things for the sake of being disruptive; they do it to make things better.”

Behavior 2: Let your passions be known. Even before the couple was engaged, I was aware of Harry’s passion for wounded warriors and Meghan’s passion for women’s issues. They weren’t shy about their passions. Steve Jobs said, “You have to be burning with an idea, or a problem, or a wrong that you want to right. If you’re not passionate enough from the start, you’ll never stick it out.”

Behavior 3: Be relatable. One of the reasons the Monarchy expert on NPR believes that Harry and Meghan will be so influential is because they seem to be the most relatable of any of the royal family. And people are more likely to follow someone with whom they can relate. John C. Maxwell describes the importance of being relatable: “Leaders must be close enough to relate to others, but far enough ahead to motivate them.”

Behavior 4: Be authentic. Brene’ Brown defines authenticity as, “the daily practice of letting go of who we think we’re supposed to be and embracing who we are.” Ann Fudge said that “Authenticity and knowing who you are is fundamental to being an effective and long-standing leader.” And from the bride herself, Meghan Markle: “The people who are close to me anchor me in knowing who I am. The rest is noise.”

It will be interesting to see how history unfolds for the Monarchy and the newest royal couple. I have a feeling this won’t be the last time Harry and Meghan will be leading on the world’s stage and challenging all of us to think and move in new directions.

Challenge the status quo. Let your passions be known. Be relatable. Be authentic. Leadership is not a position, or a title, it is action and example.

What distinguishes leaders from laggards?

Leadership, Strategy,

What distinguishes leaders from laggards and greatness from mediocrity is the ability to uniquely imagine what could be. ~Robert Fritz

“The Spirit of Progress”

When I first moved to my condo in Chicago I had a bird’s eye view of The Montgomery. This is a condo building that was once home to the retail giant Montgomery Ward. I remember watching the transition; at one point it was stripped to the concrete pillars and I could see all the way through the building. This image resurfaces whenever I hear someone say their organization could have X number of clients, customers, or sales without even trying (i.e. laggards). It could be that Montgomery Ward believed that to be true as well.

What still remains atop the former Montgomery Ward Administration Building across the street is the statue, somewhat ironically entitled, “The Spirit of Progress.”

Another building, just north of the Administration Building is the former two million square foot Mail Order House (a single floor covers six acres). The interior contained miles of chutes, conveyors, and storage lofts. At one time the building had its own post office branch and a ground-floor shipping platform that could accommodate 24 railroad freight cars. Today, this is where you’ll find Groupon HQ, and yes, many more condos.

In my last post, I quoted Sue Barrett’s definition of strategic: Being strategic means ensuring the organization’s core competence is consistently focusing on those directional choices that will best move the organization toward its new future. Something that Montgomery Ward did not do.

In 1962 Everett Rogers, a professor of communication studies, published a theory in his book Diffusion of Innovations. His theory outlines a process by which an innovation is adopted over time. It’s the shape of a bell curve beginning with the innovators (2.5%), then on to the early adopters (13.5%), early majority (34%), late majority (34%), and finally closing out the bell curve with the laggards (16%). [Rogers’ book is in its fifth edition and continues to be frequently referenced.]

I think it’s easy for organizations to become comfortable with making directional choices based upon their laggards—the people (customers, clients, etc.) who will always be there. It feels “safe” in the short term, but could be very risky in the long term. There’s a reason they are laggards; they don’t like change. Consequently, it’s likely that the laggards are the most vocal when you make directional choices that don’t mirror the past.

Directional choices (i.e., strategy) should be moving the organization toward its new future. That means leaders’ strategic choices need to focus on the initial part of the bell curve – the innovators, early adopters, early majority.

When I read about the history of Montgomery Ward and compare and contrast that with what Amazon is looking for in its HQ2, it’s unfortunate that Montgomery Ward made choices to serve their laggards. In many ways their basic mission and even infrastructure isn’t that different from Amazon. The difference is that Amazon is constantly making directional choices to move the organization toward its new future – they have a dynamic strategy.

Strategic leaders don’t build their strategy based on their laggards. They make directional choices to always be moving the organization toward its new future.

5 Steps to Build a Strategy

Strategy

The corporate role is not to see over the horizon but rather to imagine what one might find there, and begin preparations accordingly. This frees the crew to focus its full attention on the shoals and treasures that are already in view. ~Michael E. Raynor

Strategy is an organizational hot potato. I see the ownership of organizational “strategy” being tossed from the CEO to senior leaders, to managers, to board members, and so the cycle continues. It doesn’t matter if the organization is for-profit or not-for-profit; the challenge of “strategy” seems to perplex all sectors.

I believe part of this challenge is coming to a shared understanding as to what is strategy. There are many definitions (one source indicated a Google search for strategy resulted in 85 million definitions). Sue Barrett, a sales consultant from Australia, researched many definitions and concluded that this definition encapsulates the similarities she found.

Being strategic means ensuring the organization’s core competence is consistently focusing on those directional choices that will best move the organization toward its new future, with the least risk and in the most orderly fashion. [Note, she didn’t say no risk.]

The strategy comes from the leader(s) as Michael E. Raynor described: “not to see over the horizon but rather to imagine what one might find there, and begin preparations accordingly.” Or as Sue Barrett said, “focusing on directional choices…” That may be easier said than done. Barrett provides 5 steps to help map out what a strategy might look like.

  1. Decide what challenge(s) you’re solving: Once there is a clear sense of the challenges being addressed, they can start being addressed.
  2. Answer the value proposition question: “How can we provide a uniquely valuable customer (client, member, etc.) experience that drives our success?” Look at your core competence and decide what the value proposition is. Make sure it answers the question. [Andy Stanley provides some thoughtful insights about being uniquely better. He says that “every industry (again, both for-profit and not-for-profit) has shared assumptions. Every industry is ‘stuck.’ However, somebody, somewhere is messing with the rules to the prevailing model. Someone is creating a uniquely better”]
  3. Know where you’re starting from: Once you’re clear on your challenge, it’s important to have an accurate picture of the current reality.
  4. Be clear about your new future: In difficult times it’s always easy to retreat into survival mode. However, having a clear, bold sense of the future gives employees a positive frame and offers an antidote to fear.
  5. Face the obstacles and determine the brutal facts: Now look at the possible obstacles to the vision in a dispassionate/objective way. What are the brutal facts you can control and which ones can’t you control? Facing the obstacles in a clear-minded manner allows the organization to assess the situation well and take appropriate action to overcome them.

 Create your strategy by imagining what might be over the horizon, and begin preparations for a uniquely valuable customer experience.

Change one word; change your leadership.

Leadership

It is widely assumed that introspection—examining the causes of our own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors—improves self-awareness. Yet, people who introspect are less self-aware and report worse job satisfaction and well-being. ~Tasha Eurich

I’m continuing with more findings from the research study on self-awareness I quoted in my last post. Now that I’ve had some time to ponder this next finding, it seems so obvious, especially for leaders.

Eurich says that “the problem with introspection isn’t that it is categorically ineffective—it’s that most people are doing it incorrectly.” She suggests that the most common introspective question is “Why?” That’s the question we tend to ask ourselves when we are trying to figure out our emotional reaction, our behavior, or our attitude. “Why did I respond so rudely? Why am I so adamantly against my boss’ approach?”

Here’s the reason Eurich says that asking “why” is ineffective when it comes to self-awareness. We don’t have access to all of the unconscious thoughts or feelings we are striving to uncover. Consequently, we invent answers that “feel” right, but probably more often than not, are wrong. For example, following an out of the ordinary demeaning email from their boss, a new employee may jump to the conclusion that they must not be cut out for their new job. When the real reason could be because their boss just got off the phone with their child’s principal, again.

When attempting to be introspective, asking why can also encourage unproductive negative thoughts. Eurich’s research found that “people who are very introspective are also more likely to get caught in ruminative patterns.” For example, I worked with someone who had completed a 360 review for the first time. Someone wrote a negative comment, and he went on a [witch] hunt asking everyone if they were the person who wrote that comment and he wanted to know why. He wasn’t even thinking about a more rational assessment of his strengths and weaknesses.

Which leads to the more productive introspective question, which is “What?” The reason is that “what” questions help us to be more rational, future-focused, and even empowered to act on this newly acquired knowledge.

The person with a negative comment on his 360 review could have been asking himself, “What are the situations where that comment might be true?” Or, “What are steps I could take to ensure that perception doesn’t occur again in the future?”

The point here is not to completely stop asking yourself “why” questions. But maybe consider what you are gaining by asking “why” questions. If you are only becoming more anxious, frustrated, or even depressed, then maybe it’s time to switch your introspection from why questions to what questions.

I would venture a guess that leaders who spend their introspective time asking themselves more “what” questions are more likely to be moving their organizations forward.

Leaders: Experience and Power Hinder Self-Awareness

Leadership, ,

Even though most people believe they are self-aware, only 10-15% of the people we studied actually fit the criteria. ~Tasha Eurich

Experience and power hinder self-awareness. Yes, that’s correct. While for some leaders, they do learn from experience. For others, all that experience and power has a negative impact on their self-awareness and leadership effectiveness. Referencing the findings of this research study, it may be the vast majority (85-90%) of leaders who fall into that second category.

Self-awareness in this study is defined as how clearly we see our own values, passions, aspirations, fit with our environment, reactions (thoughts, feelings, behaviors, strengths, and weaknesses), and impact on others. And, understanding how other people view us in terms of these same factors.

I was fascinated by this study and article by Tasha Eurich in HBR because I’ve often wondered if this might be the case. I’ve seen leaders proudly proclaim their self-awareness and ability to hear and receive feedback. Then, I’ve also seen these very same leaders fire and force out the very people who provided them with that valuable and generous gift of honest and kind feedback.

James O’Toole, author of numerous books on leadership and culture said “As one’s power grows, one’s willingness to listen shrinks, either because they think they know more than their employees or because seeking feedback will come at a cost.”

How does this happen? Eurich says that once we see ourselves as highly experienced, we do less homework, stop seeking disconfirming evidence, and no longer question our assumptions. This experience can also “make us overconfident about our level of self-knowledge.”

In one study of more than 3,600 leaders, higher-level leaders more significantly overvalued their skills. This included competencies of emotional self-awareness, accurate self-assessment, empathy, trustworthiness, and leadership performance.

So, how do we become one of the 10-15% who truly are self-aware? Eurich says to “Seek frequent critical feedback.” I’d suggest a slight modification based upon my experience with leaders. I’d say, “Seek frequent critical feedback and receive and accept it graciously.”

Here’s a feedback tip. Be specific. I frequently recommend Sheila Heen’s suggestions (author of Thanks for the Feedback). Her two suggested feedback questions are:

  1. What’s one thing you appreciate about…?
  2. What’s one thing you see me doing, or failing to do, that’s causing me to be less successful than I could be? And you could be even more specific like: What’s one thing you see me doing, or failing to do, when I conduct our staff meetings that may be causing those meetings to be less effective than they could be?

Be a more effective leader by increasing your self-awareness. Increase your self-awareness by seeking frequent critical feedback.