What I Learned in Graduate School . . .

Bring Encouragement into the Office Every Day

Luis Guzman
USC Executive Masters of Leadership

In his talk with Executive Master of Leadership (EML) students, Mark Kroeker quoted former Dallas Cowboys football coach as saying, "Leadership is getting someone to do what they don't want to do, to achieve what they want to achieve." Imagine the energy that could be released as leaders encourage the development of everyone's potential! 

Kroeker's remarks are similar to what Dwight D. Eisenhower said..."Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it."  It is said that there are only two kinds of people in this world..."those who get it and those who don't." The former, for both leaders and followers, means that they have connected in a way so as to derive meaning, purpose, and congruence in their respective roles (a win-win). The latter, for both leaders and followers, means that they are still fighting the long fight because they are both mostly interested in only one solution, their own.

Additionally, the younger professional and the experienced professional learn differently and are motivated by different things. When a leader can get either one to internally be motivated, to be self-directed, to be goal driven, to bring their respective wealth of life experiences and share them in a practical, and thoughtful manner for the service others or the organization, is when the possibilities will be bountiful.

How can this be done you asked? It can be done through analysis, planning, implementation, testing, mitigation, measuring, reporting, and reassessing. This all takes time; time that now everyone is willing to invest in.

It took me several years and a few manager positions throughout my career to figure out that it was not "them" but "me" who needed to change. I was a great administrator but not a leader. I had no clue that what my team needed the most was for me to bring encouragement into the office each and every single day. Encouragement opens our creative minds, it connects people to people…this leads to understanding of self and others and more importantly it makes you believe that you can.

Photo: Luis Guzman – Executive Master of Leadership (EML) graduate.

To learn how an Executive Master of Leadership (EML) at the University of Southern California (USC) would benefit you in your career or development as a leader, please visit: priceschool.usc.edu/programs/masters/eml/

Speaking of Leadership . . .

What to do About a Toxic Leader

by Robert B. Denhardt

Director of Leadership Programs, Price School of Public Policy

University of Southern California

Question:  I saw this recently and wondered how you would respond. "New York City Council Speaker and mayoral hopeful Christine Quinn has an idiosyncratic leadership style that involves hurling invective at those around her, threatening to mutilate opponents and yelling so loudly that subordinates were forced to soundproof her office to avoid scaring visitors. Quinn says her robust approach is an effective strategy for breaking through red tape and getting things done.”

Bob:  This “leadership style” doesn’t even deserve the “leadership” label. Leadership depends on connecting with people emotionally in a way that moves them and causes them to act. Screaming is not the way to make connections with others. At best, you might say that this is a “management style,” but even there it’s not likely to be one that’s effective, especially in the long term.  The abusive manager may “break through red tape” occasionally but not for long – because each of their efforts to break through red tape also severely damages relationships. 

One thing to consider is whether the style the leader is exhibiting is just “blustery” or whether it is truly “vindictive.” We all know people who appear noisy and aggressive, but “have a good heart.”  There may be hope for these people to be rescued and to become effective leaders. An “intervention,” hopefully undertaken with several others who feel the way you do, may be effective in turning things around. Leadership educators and personal coaches can also help.

For the truly vindictive person, there is little hope. If you have a manager like this, you might consider talking with her and pointing out the problems she is causing. But, of course, there’s a risk in that.  A vindictive boss might well turn on you and pressure you to leave the organization. Even a modest intervention may result in retaliation.

Some employees will stay because they so believe in the "cause" that they will be willing to take the abuse themselves or stand by as it is directed at others. And others may stay because they are enchanted by power and the thrill of the "kill." (These people may need serious psychological help themselves.)

But, as this plays out, most employees are likely to react first by quietly undermining the abusive manager, then engaging in sabotage, next posing more direct objections, and finally by mounting a full-scale revolt.

For the rest, you might try an “intervention,” again with others who feel as you do, but at some point, you may simply have to look for work elsewhere. You don’t need this in your life.

Robert Denhardt is the Director of Leadership Programs in the Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC) and Director of the Executive Master of Leadership program at USC. He is the author of a dozen books on leadership and management, including, The Dance of Leadership (with Janet Denhardt), Book: Just Plain Good Management, and Book: The Pursuit of Significance.

Speaking of Leadership . . .

Sir William Slim and Organizational Transformation

by Robert B. Denhardt

Director of Leadership Programs, Price School of Public Policy

University of Southern California

Recently I posted a critical view of the notion of organizational vision, especially as the term vision has evolved into specific targets for production or behavioral change.  I talked soon after with my friend John Dick from British Columbia about this and he suggested that I take a look at the life and works of Sir William Slim.

John told me that of one the most outstanding examples of institutional transformation occurred in World War II in Burma and is described in Field Marshal Sir William Slim’s autobiography “Defeat Into Victory”.

To set the historical context:   In early 1942 Slim was appointed commander of Burma Corps, described by a compatriot as “a promotion one would not have wished on an enemy, let alone an old friend”.  In late 1932, he was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the newly organized 14th Army Group comprised of a polyglot of British, Hindu and Muslim Indian, Gurkha, and East and West African formations.

His 14th Army (known as the "Forgotten Army) fought in difficult terrain against a highly committed enemy and did so with limited resources and with one of the most ethnically diverse forces in history. He led that army through a long retreat, restored morale, then led it to victory. 

Slim recognized that one of his first tasks following the retreat would be to strengthen the morale of the defeated and shattered army.  He reasoned that “morale, if it is to endure, must have certain foundations: spiritual; intellectual; and material. Spiritual first, because only spiritual foundations can stand real strain. (Slim wasn't using the term spiritual to refer to a particular religion - and of course he had many different religions represented among his troops.  It is likely he intended something more like "connected to a larger purpose, emotional, intuitive.") Intellectual next, because people are swayed by reason as well as by feelings.  Material last – important, but last because the very highest kinds of morale are often met when material conditions are lowest.

He elaborated the foundations of morale as follows:

1) Spiritual

a) People must be made to feel that they are engaged in a good and noble enterprise that is important to society.

b) The method of achievement must be active.

c) People must feel that what they are and what they do matters towards the goals of the enterprise.

2) Intellectual

a) People must believe that the goals can be achieved; that they are not out of reach.

b) People must believe that the organization they work for is an efficient one that will provide a context for the effective employment of their efforts; that it will not squander their time and emotional resources on useless or irrelevant activities

3) Material

a) People must feel that they will get fair and respectful treatment from their superiors and from the organization.

b) People must be given a voice in decision-making.

c) As far as possible people must be given the legal and material tools to carry out their jobs effectively and efficiently.

From late 1943 to May 1945 Slim totally changed the culture of the 14th Army Group, then fought a brilliant series of offensive battles that led to the defeat of all Japanese forces in Burma – the single biggest land-based defeat of the Japanese in the war.

On rebuilding the moral and effectiveness of the British/Indian army, Slim ascribed the failures of his predecessors to overly rigid strategies that became liabilities when situations were in rapid change.  He defined a good strategy as “a commonly understood and accepted framework or basis from which to adapt to uncertainty and change.”

He points out that a strategy begins to enter obsolescence the moment it’s formulated, and thus is time-limited and must be regularly revisited.  He attributes his successes to the creation of a flexible strategy that provided both enough direction to ensure cohesion and sufficient latitude for his field officers to make plans, take decisions and initiate action based on local conditions and changing circumstances – not a bad objective for any organization!

Slim also wrote about leadership and management: “What is leadership? I would define it as the projection of personality. If leadership is this projection of personality then the first requirement is a personality to project. The personality of a successful leader is a blend of many qualities - courage, will power, knowledge, judgement and flexibility of mind.”

And, finally, he clearly thought of leadership as an art: “Leadership is of the spirit compounded of personality and vision; its practice is an art. Management is of the mind, more a matter of accurate calculation, of statistics, of methods, timetables, and routine; its practice is a science. Managers are necessary; leaders are essential.”

What strikes me is that writing about seventy years ago, Slim captures the essence of the most contemporary thinking on leadership!  Contemporary leaders would do well to listen to this "voice from the past."

Robert Denhardt is the Director of Leadership Programs in the Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC) and Director of the Executive Master of Leadership program at USC. He is the author of a dozen books on leadership and management, including, The Dance ofLeadership (with Janet Denhardt), Book: Just Plain Good Management, and Book: The Pursuit of Significance.

Speaking of Leadership . . .

Leadership: Why Worry?

by Robert B. Denhardt

Director of Leadership Programs, Price School of Public Policy

University of Southern California

Question:  Is it possible to be a leader without worrying? 

I think it is. But there’s lots of evidence and intuition to the contrary. The leader, especially the leader of a large organization, has plenty of things to worry about – the success of the company and its survival, the many forces in the environment that threaten success and survival, and simply how to best manage or lead the employees that have signed on. 

The leader also has many personal things to worry about – am I wearing the right clothes for this occasion, what are all those people looking at me and listening to me thinking, and what will my spouse say when I get home late – again!  It’s no wonder that American presidents (and other significant leaders) seem to age at about five times the rate of others during the time they are in office!

Let’s try to unpack this a little by differentiating between worry and concern. Worry is a strong feeling of anxiety, a vague, unpleasant emotion that is experienced in advance of something happening. As long as worry doesn’t overwhelm the person, worrying is a natural and common response to events that might threaten the person or the organization.  And, even more positively, worrying usually occurs because the leader really cares about the outcome and wants the right thing to happen. 

But worrying can also have a more damaging side. Intense worrying can lead to mental health issues, self-medication through drugs or alcohol, or even more serious “breakdowns.” Too much worrying is itself something to worry about!

But you can control the extent of your worrying.  Stress-reduction techniques, the practice of meditation or mindfulness, and personal counseling can help.  And indeed anything that makes the workplace a happier place to be, for the leader as well as followers, reduces the tendency to worry too much. (I can’t resist this: Hubert Humphrey, senator, vice-president, and presidential candidate was known as the “Happy Warrior.”  Maybe we need some “Happy Worriers.”)

An even better approach, however, is to turn worry into concern.  Being concerned means being interested and engaged in an issue, being attentive to it and striving for a solution.  It doesn’t mean that we are filled with anxiety.  That’s not to say that concern is just an analytic way of looking at problems.  Concern certainly has an analytic side, but it is based in the same feelings of caring and commitment to a cause or an organization that worrying does.  It just manifests itself in more positive ways.

A healthy concern for the organization, your role in it, and how both relate to the rest of your life should not be allowed to evolve into excessive worrying.  As a leader, you need to be compassionate not only to your employees, but also to yourself.  Give yourself a break. At some point you simply have to say: “I’ve done all I can do.”  “It’s out of my hands now.”  “Let the fates decide.”

Worrying about something rarely changes outcomes; indeed, it clouds the process of changing outcomes.  Concern, and the clarity it requires, on the other hand, actually opens up new avenues for success. So, don’t worry, be happy – but better yet, be concerned.

Robert Denhardt is the Director of Leadership Programs in the Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC) and Director of the Executive Master of Leadership program at USC. He is the author of a dozen books on leadership and management, including, The Dance ofLeadership (with Janet Denhardt), Book: Just Plain Good Management, and Book: The Pursuit of Significance.