Is your company ready for a great comeback story? Then you as a manager are going to need to coach a comeback player of the year. In essence, you need to help them to reinvent their career. To do that, you need some specialized tools in your reinventor’s toolkit.
When I advise the CEO of a company about a derailed executive, I warn him or her that comebacks don’t happen overnight. But with persistent actions on the part of the manager/coach and the executive, it can happen. I have seen it time and again.
Meet Bill, Comeback Executive of the Year
Take Bill for example. In my book The Prodigal Executive I talk about Bill (real story, but not his real name) who was president of a marketing entertainment business that is a subsidiary of an international company. The skills that enabled him to succeed early on in his career backfired on him, derailing him from his career track.
Bill was a driver. He was very achievement-driven and wanted the best for the company. He was willing to do whatever it would take for the team to be successful. Bill believed that the only thing in business is getting the job done. He believed that emotions do not belong in business and if someone can’t get the job done they need to be replaced.
When I met Bill there were quite a few negative comments coming from his direct reports. His boss at the parent company was being briefed on a weekly basis on what a horrible leader he was, and there was starting to be some turnover. So the boss called me and said, “What can you do?”
So I went in to see him and went over the entire process as an overview with Bill. We found during an initial assessment stage that Bill had no idea what leadership was about. He thought that leadership was nothing but results, and his results were outstanding. So his belief system was that as long as he got the numbers to work, he was okay.
What Bill came to realize is that he could get better numbers, and he didn’t have to be seen as a cold, distant, aggressive leader to do it. Truth was, Bill actually wanted to be seen as a personable, likable, engaging leader. He just never had a higher-up sit down with him and tell him how to do it. So Bill and I worked together for about six months and did a lot of work around him spending more time with each of his staff on a regular basis, asking about their career and really showing an ongoing interest in the welfare of each individual.
I shared with Bill a couple strategies for a comeback. One, you’re going to have to act for a while. The second thing is that I started off small. In psychology there is a model for behavior change called Successive Approximation. What that means is that if you want to change your behavior, you break the larger behavior up into smaller segments. You get the person to have some successes in small ways so that when they get to the big ways they’re feeling more comfortable.
So Bill and I started off about five minutes a day with just one of his direct reports, and that went well. So we added another one. Then we added team meeting, which he had never done. He learned how to make them more sociable, like by having food at the meeting. Bill did these steps on faith and then just started noticing that it was working. He was getting more positive feedback, and people were more productive.
Bill is a classic example of a derailed executive getting back on track with the help of a coach. He was such a great contributor, the management of his company just assumed he would make a great leader too. Wrong assumption. But with guidance, Bill made it back.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Take a lesson from the USC Trojans
People don’t really self-develop. To illustrate, my son and I went to the USC football practice awhile back and were struck by something at the practice field.
At every practice there are four cameras set up on stilts that are recording the action. The players are improving by constantly looking at film afterwards with the coaches. Together they look at what they did in a situation and discuss what they should have done differently. In addition there are also coaches at the practice giving the players ongoing feedback on how to improve. If the team doesn’t provide that kind of coaching, players won’t know what to change, and they won’t be inspired to do it.
USC has won the national championship several times in the last few years. So the question is: “Why are they practicing? They know how to play football.” The answer of course is that there is so much at stake they want to rehearse and go over the plays. Likewise, there is so much at stake for these derailed executives. They need to run the plays when it’s not in a game situation. Where else can they do that but with a coach who can give them feedback?
There is a common idea in the business world that you should stick with what works. There are a number of old sayings that reinforce this, from “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” to “Don’t change horses mid-stream.”
The reality for executives is that when you rise through the ranks of an organization, you’ll find that each individual level has a different set of rules because you have a different function. So what works at a director level is not going to work at a vice president level. The issue is that no one ever sits down and tells you the rules and then tells you how those rules change.
For example, when you’re not doing the work, but rather being the strategist to get the work done, the unwritten rules and expectations are different.
To use another sports analogy, when you’re in single-A, minor league baseball, the game expectations are one thing. But when you start to get to triple-A or the major leagues, it’s a whole different ballgame (pardon the pun). And if you don’t make those adjustments, you don’t survive.
Some derailed executives say they can’t change and reject coaching. But why?
First, let’s tackle that word can’t. To my thinking here’s no such thing as “can’t.” There’s either “I won’t do it” or “I don’t know how to do it.”
In my experience as an executive coach, “can’t” means the person is afraid and just doesn’t know how to change. But even if somebody knows how to change, for them to self-develop and make the change on their own is very difficult. We all need feedback, and we all need support and encouragement. Unless we know what we did and what we need to do and somebody teaches us how to do it, we can’t improve.
For derailed executives there is a useful theory called the Stages of Change Model about the mind/body stages we go through when we do change. The Stages of Change Model was originally developed in the late 1970s by James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente at the University of Rhode Island when they were studying how smokers were able to give up their habits. According to the model there are a number of steps: precontemplation to contemplation to determination.
The idea behind the change model is that behavior change does not happen in one step. Rather, people tend to progress through different stages on their way to successful change. You first say to yourself, “Well, I don’t have a problem. And if I don’t have a problem, I don’t need a solution.” Then you get information feedback and data, such as complaints, and you begin to say, “Maybe there is a problem.” So you start to contemplate that there is a problem. If you get even more strong data and a coach comes in, then you have to go from contemplation to determination and decide, “I need to do something about this.”
On one hand it is easy to understand why some derailed executives would reject coaching. Many derailed executives don’t understand why they should change because the company has promoted them three or four times for being the way they are. Why is someone coming in now and telling them that what got them to that spot is not going to keep them there? Naturally there is a resistance to change an approach that has been so successful for so long. It is a very legitimate concern to wonder why you should take the leap of faith and change. Will this new behavior prove equally successful?
At every practice there are four cameras set up on stilts that are recording the action. The players are improving by constantly looking at film afterwards with the coaches. Together they look at what they did in a situation and discuss what they should have done differently. In addition there are also coaches at the practice giving the players ongoing feedback on how to improve. If the team doesn’t provide that kind of coaching, players won’t know what to change, and they won’t be inspired to do it.
USC has won the national championship several times in the last few years. So the question is: “Why are they practicing? They know how to play football.” The answer of course is that there is so much at stake they want to rehearse and go over the plays. Likewise, there is so much at stake for these derailed executives. They need to run the plays when it’s not in a game situation. Where else can they do that but with a coach who can give them feedback?
There is a common idea in the business world that you should stick with what works. There are a number of old sayings that reinforce this, from “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” to “Don’t change horses mid-stream.”
The reality for executives is that when you rise through the ranks of an organization, you’ll find that each individual level has a different set of rules because you have a different function. So what works at a director level is not going to work at a vice president level. The issue is that no one ever sits down and tells you the rules and then tells you how those rules change.
For example, when you’re not doing the work, but rather being the strategist to get the work done, the unwritten rules and expectations are different.
To use another sports analogy, when you’re in single-A, minor league baseball, the game expectations are one thing. But when you start to get to triple-A or the major leagues, it’s a whole different ballgame (pardon the pun). And if you don’t make those adjustments, you don’t survive.
Some derailed executives say they can’t change and reject coaching. But why?
First, let’s tackle that word can’t. To my thinking here’s no such thing as “can’t.” There’s either “I won’t do it” or “I don’t know how to do it.”
In my experience as an executive coach, “can’t” means the person is afraid and just doesn’t know how to change. But even if somebody knows how to change, for them to self-develop and make the change on their own is very difficult. We all need feedback, and we all need support and encouragement. Unless we know what we did and what we need to do and somebody teaches us how to do it, we can’t improve.
For derailed executives there is a useful theory called the Stages of Change Model about the mind/body stages we go through when we do change. The Stages of Change Model was originally developed in the late 1970s by James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente at the University of Rhode Island when they were studying how smokers were able to give up their habits. According to the model there are a number of steps: precontemplation to contemplation to determination.
The idea behind the change model is that behavior change does not happen in one step. Rather, people tend to progress through different stages on their way to successful change. You first say to yourself, “Well, I don’t have a problem. And if I don’t have a problem, I don’t need a solution.” Then you get information feedback and data, such as complaints, and you begin to say, “Maybe there is a problem.” So you start to contemplate that there is a problem. If you get even more strong data and a coach comes in, then you have to go from contemplation to determination and decide, “I need to do something about this.”
On one hand it is easy to understand why some derailed executives would reject coaching. Many derailed executives don’t understand why they should change because the company has promoted them three or four times for being the way they are. Why is someone coming in now and telling them that what got them to that spot is not going to keep them there? Naturally there is a resistance to change an approach that has been so successful for so long. It is a very legitimate concern to wonder why you should take the leap of faith and change. Will this new behavior prove equally successful?
Monday, October 12, 2009
Three Tips to Avoid Bad Executive Hires
Of course, nobody likes to terminate an executive. So here are my three tips for avoiding the problem from my book The Prodigal Executive.
Tip # 1 -- Hire Great in the First Place.
By screening potential employees for past behaviors and attitudes, you can dramatically reduce the costs of hiring bad people, and make your workplace more productive, happier, safer, and more profitable. Combine an efficient prescreening assessment with an effective pre-employment background check, and you can cut your risk by half or more.
Tip # 2--Hire and Promote for Job Fit.
A well-documented study, published in Harvard Business Review concludes that "Job Match" is by far the most reliable predictor of effectiveness on the job (Greenberg and Greenberg, "Job Matching for Better Sales Performance." Harvard Business Review, Volume 58, No. 5, Sept 1, 1980). The study considered many factors including the age, sex, race, education and experience of approximately 300,000 subjects. It evaluated their job performance and found no significant statistical differences, except in the area of "Job Match." The conclusion was this: "It's not experience that counts or college degrees or other accepted factors; success hinges on a fit with the job."
If success is determined by job fit, your challenge is to predict that fit. This requires that you measure thinking style, behavioral traits, and occupational interests, and that you do so in a cost-effective way. Assessments are an efficient way to predict job fit. With an assessment, an employer can assure that the people hired fit their new jobs; that the people promoted can succeed in the new position; that employees can identify a career path likely to work; and that newly opened jobs can be filled from within, with a high probability of success.
Tip # 3--Improve Managers and Keep Your Best People.
People quit people, they don’t quit jobs. Guess which people they are most likely to quit? Hint: Managers have the most significant impact on a worker’s daily activities, the mood of the work setting, and the reward structure on the job.
Identifying the strengths and weaknesses of your managers, and improving their most critical skills, is a key component of keeping your best people. In this economy, budgets for training have been curtailed, making it difficult to find the money to improve management skills. Many companies are concerned about wasting money on training employees that will leave. As author, salesperson and speaker Zig Ziglar said, though, “If you think it’s expensive to train people and lose them, try not training them and keeping them!”
Unfortunately there will always be know-it-alls, bullies, prima donnas, and passive aggressors. But don’t tolerate them for one day. If they were exceptional once, then coach these prodigal executives to return to greatness.
Tip # 1 -- Hire Great in the First Place.
By screening potential employees for past behaviors and attitudes, you can dramatically reduce the costs of hiring bad people, and make your workplace more productive, happier, safer, and more profitable. Combine an efficient prescreening assessment with an effective pre-employment background check, and you can cut your risk by half or more.
Tip # 2--Hire and Promote for Job Fit.
A well-documented study, published in Harvard Business Review concludes that "Job Match" is by far the most reliable predictor of effectiveness on the job (Greenberg and Greenberg, "Job Matching for Better Sales Performance." Harvard Business Review, Volume 58, No. 5, Sept 1, 1980). The study considered many factors including the age, sex, race, education and experience of approximately 300,000 subjects. It evaluated their job performance and found no significant statistical differences, except in the area of "Job Match." The conclusion was this: "It's not experience that counts or college degrees or other accepted factors; success hinges on a fit with the job."
If success is determined by job fit, your challenge is to predict that fit. This requires that you measure thinking style, behavioral traits, and occupational interests, and that you do so in a cost-effective way. Assessments are an efficient way to predict job fit. With an assessment, an employer can assure that the people hired fit their new jobs; that the people promoted can succeed in the new position; that employees can identify a career path likely to work; and that newly opened jobs can be filled from within, with a high probability of success.
Tip # 3--Improve Managers and Keep Your Best People.
People quit people, they don’t quit jobs. Guess which people they are most likely to quit? Hint: Managers have the most significant impact on a worker’s daily activities, the mood of the work setting, and the reward structure on the job.
Identifying the strengths and weaknesses of your managers, and improving their most critical skills, is a key component of keeping your best people. In this economy, budgets for training have been curtailed, making it difficult to find the money to improve management skills. Many companies are concerned about wasting money on training employees that will leave. As author, salesperson and speaker Zig Ziglar said, though, “If you think it’s expensive to train people and lose them, try not training them and keeping them!”
Unfortunately there will always be know-it-alls, bullies, prima donnas, and passive aggressors. But don’t tolerate them for one day. If they were exceptional once, then coach these prodigal executives to return to greatness.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Prodigal Executive Now Available on Amazon.com
Some derailed executives create toxic workplaces that cause good employees to flee. Other former star employees cause customers and peers to complain in ever increasing numbers. So why not just fire them?
Ah, that is the dilemma. Often these prima donnas are extremely valuable employees. Some bring in millions of dollars to the company. Others have an irreplaceable specialized skill or body of knowledge.
So what is a company to do? According to new research, 8 out of 10 of these derailed executives can be coached to get back on track.
“Before you as a manager get involved in any kind of coaching of a derailed executive or employee, you should ask if this particular person has been given feedback about their obnoxious behavior" says Bruce Heller, Ph.D., author of “The Prodigal Executive: How to Coach Executives Too Painful to Keep, Too Valuable to Fire” (Author House, July 2009)
Dr. Heller reports that in two decades of experience throughout corporate America helping toxic bosses and star employees whose star has fallen, only about half have been given feedback on their errant behavior. He advocates these four ironclad coaching rules:
Ironclad Rule 1. When you do give feedback, make sure that it is data based, and behavioral based. Make sure it is not hearsay. For instance, what is the exact behavior the individual is showing that causes concern?
Ironclad Rule 2. Always use the sandwich technique. Open with positive feedback, then give the negative feedback, and then close with positive feedback. Work toward salvaging some of the self esteem of the individual, by saying :"You're quite a valuable component of our company. You're highly successful and we want to do everything we can to salvage our relationship. However, we have some concerns, and our concerns are: A B, C, D, and E."
Ironclad Rule 3. Your goal should be to gain some buy in from the individual. One of the mistakes supervisors make after giving some coaching feedback is that they don't schedule the next meeting. Before both of you leave after the feedback, say "Let's you and I meet next Friday morning at 8:30 am and let's continue this conversation."
Ironclad Rule 4. There needs to be some consequence so the person doesn't just blow off the feedback session. So you put the idea of separation out there. They need to know their behavior could lead to termination. If employees don’t have a consequence, they don’t take the coaching seriously.
In his book Dr. Heller explains how eight out of 10 derailed executives can be saved; six myths that hold many companies back from coaching; when to keep 'em and when to fire 'em; how to give feedback to toxic bosses and derailed executives; three keys to an executive comeback, and how to help derailed executives out the door if they really need to go.
Ah, that is the dilemma. Often these prima donnas are extremely valuable employees. Some bring in millions of dollars to the company. Others have an irreplaceable specialized skill or body of knowledge.
So what is a company to do? According to new research, 8 out of 10 of these derailed executives can be coached to get back on track.
“Before you as a manager get involved in any kind of coaching of a derailed executive or employee, you should ask if this particular person has been given feedback about their obnoxious behavior" says Bruce Heller, Ph.D., author of “The Prodigal Executive: How to Coach Executives Too Painful to Keep, Too Valuable to Fire” (Author House, July 2009)
Dr. Heller reports that in two decades of experience throughout corporate America helping toxic bosses and star employees whose star has fallen, only about half have been given feedback on their errant behavior. He advocates these four ironclad coaching rules:
Ironclad Rule 1. When you do give feedback, make sure that it is data based, and behavioral based. Make sure it is not hearsay. For instance, what is the exact behavior the individual is showing that causes concern?
Ironclad Rule 2. Always use the sandwich technique. Open with positive feedback, then give the negative feedback, and then close with positive feedback. Work toward salvaging some of the self esteem of the individual, by saying :"You're quite a valuable component of our company. You're highly successful and we want to do everything we can to salvage our relationship. However, we have some concerns, and our concerns are: A B, C, D, and E."
Ironclad Rule 3. Your goal should be to gain some buy in from the individual. One of the mistakes supervisors make after giving some coaching feedback is that they don't schedule the next meeting. Before both of you leave after the feedback, say "Let's you and I meet next Friday morning at 8:30 am and let's continue this conversation."
Ironclad Rule 4. There needs to be some consequence so the person doesn't just blow off the feedback session. So you put the idea of separation out there. They need to know their behavior could lead to termination. If employees don’t have a consequence, they don’t take the coaching seriously.
In his book Dr. Heller explains how eight out of 10 derailed executives can be saved; six myths that hold many companies back from coaching; when to keep 'em and when to fire 'em; how to give feedback to toxic bosses and derailed executives; three keys to an executive comeback, and how to help derailed executives out the door if they really need to go.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Scientists Are Prodigal Executives Too
One of my interests is working with scientists and people who have advanced degrees with a strong analytical bent (possibly because of my own background). One reason why I like coaching these technical executives is that these individuals make such a meaningful contribution. The common reality is that these individuals who are technical professionals are promoted because they were so good at what they did. One of my missions is to help them transition from the technical professional to a leader.
Many of them go into the science because they want to build things not work with people. Management was probably something they did not study in college or grad school. For instance, there was Bill (real story, not his real name). Bill was a senior scientist who went through a coaching program after it discovered he did not have a calling for managing people. His request was to return to be a senior scientist and not continue to pursue a role of manager.
Bill ended up being very successful as a scientist and his experiment with managing people was a good experience. He now had clarity about his true career calling, and that management was not surely for him. His curiosity had been satisfied. Bill learned his course as a scientist he had his calling and he could focus on being the scientist possible.
The moral of the story is, technical competence does not always yield managerial competence.
All companies hunger for superstar employees. They hunger for superstar employees leads to promoting them into managers. Companies also hunger for superstar managers and leaders. In order to help a superstar successful transition from employee to manager without derailing they need to be coached.
But be careful. Many times superstars have a strong ego and are not aware of their need for help. So, one convincing strategy is to tell them the best get better by ongoing coaching and development. You need to sell them on the idea that to truly be set up to succeed they could benefit from coaching.
Many of them go into the science because they want to build things not work with people. Management was probably something they did not study in college or grad school. For instance, there was Bill (real story, not his real name). Bill was a senior scientist who went through a coaching program after it discovered he did not have a calling for managing people. His request was to return to be a senior scientist and not continue to pursue a role of manager.
Bill ended up being very successful as a scientist and his experiment with managing people was a good experience. He now had clarity about his true career calling, and that management was not surely for him. His curiosity had been satisfied. Bill learned his course as a scientist he had his calling and he could focus on being the scientist possible.
The moral of the story is, technical competence does not always yield managerial competence.
All companies hunger for superstar employees. They hunger for superstar employees leads to promoting them into managers. Companies also hunger for superstar managers and leaders. In order to help a superstar successful transition from employee to manager without derailing they need to be coached.
But be careful. Many times superstars have a strong ego and are not aware of their need for help. So, one convincing strategy is to tell them the best get better by ongoing coaching and development. You need to sell them on the idea that to truly be set up to succeed they could benefit from coaching.
Friday, July 31, 2009
How to Create A Culture That Prevents Executive Derailment
When you conduct objective benchmark meetings, your company creates a culture that prevents executive derailment instead of trying to correct the derailment. I'm a firm believer that companies should have a 360 process on an annual basis for all of their managers and executives to make sure how they're doing. A 360 degree assessment is like going to your doctor for an annual checkup. The old adage is true that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
If a manager can see that an executive is derailing and get help to them early, then there is a higher probability that the behavior without can be corrected without significant damage to the organization, the culture or the individual's executive’s brand. Benchmarking with 360 degree management surveys and Web surveys is not that expensive to do. A company can begin with an outside source and after a while the managers can be trained to give the feedback.
Another pet peeve. Companies have a tendency to change their 360 degree feedback survey test on an ongoing basis. Typically a new HR person comes in or the manager hears of a new 360 and changes it. I'm not a big believer in changing which test you use, but I am a big believer in finding one that really works for the company and using it at least two or three times. Every time you change the 360 degree feedback survey you're starting off with a new baseline. If the managers keep switching the survey tools then the company won’t be getting any longitudinal data.
If a manager can see that an executive is derailing and get help to them early, then there is a higher probability that the behavior without can be corrected without significant damage to the organization, the culture or the individual's executive’s brand. Benchmarking with 360 degree management surveys and Web surveys is not that expensive to do. A company can begin with an outside source and after a while the managers can be trained to give the feedback.
Another pet peeve. Companies have a tendency to change their 360 degree feedback survey test on an ongoing basis. Typically a new HR person comes in or the manager hears of a new 360 and changes it. I'm not a big believer in changing which test you use, but I am a big believer in finding one that really works for the company and using it at least two or three times. Every time you change the 360 degree feedback survey you're starting off with a new baseline. If the managers keep switching the survey tools then the company won’t be getting any longitudinal data.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Getting the Prodigal Executive Back On Track
While almost all the companies use external coaches, especially for the C-level suite like CEO and CFO, about 60% were now using internal coaches. “External coaches often are used to ‘save’ an executive from failure when it's too late: like closing the barn door after the horse has already gone.” (McDermott, Levinson and Newton: “What Coaching Can and Cannot Do for Your Organization,” Human Resource Planning, June 2007).
According to a study of 55 large companies (95% with annual revenues of more than $1 billion), organization that address derailment risks through the greater use of internal coaches report positive outcomes.
The study went on to conclude that “using internal coaches in derailment cases, in contrast, may signal that the company takes performance issues seriously and is willing to invest the time of its own people, not just dollars, in supporting an employee's efforts to improve.” Never sell yourself short as an internal coach, because you may be better positioned to leverage other company resources and people to help solve the issues that led to derailment.
According to a study of 55 large companies (95% with annual revenues of more than $1 billion), organization that address derailment risks through the greater use of internal coaches report positive outcomes.
The study went on to conclude that “using internal coaches in derailment cases, in contrast, may signal that the company takes performance issues seriously and is willing to invest the time of its own people, not just dollars, in supporting an employee's efforts to improve.” Never sell yourself short as an internal coach, because you may be better positioned to leverage other company resources and people to help solve the issues that led to derailment.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Waiting for Time to Heal The Prodigal Executive
"Someday this bitter ache will pass, my sweet. Time wounds all heels."
This Groucho Marx line, from the 1940 film "Go West", is more than the ingenious reversal of the popular cliche "Time heals all wounds.” This is a myth that trips up many companies who have an executive who is too good to fire and too bad to keep.
(By the way, Ann Landers, the most widely syndicated columnist in the world, is also credited with coining this phrase. In 1955, Eppie Lederer was a 37-year-old well-to-do housewife and mother who had never published a word when she entered a contest to write an advice column under the pseudonym Ann Landers in the Chicago Times. She beat out 27 other entrants, many of them professional journalists, with a column that began “Time wounds all heels” and went on writing for nearly 50 years.)
In my book The Prodigal Executive, I discuss the misguided belief that time will work it out. The organizational hope is that the executive will eventually quit causing the pain, suffering and havoc.
So the leaders do nothing. Typically the board of directors or the CEO doesn’t want to confront the pain-in-the-assets executive. This inaction does more harm than good, because silence is reinforcing the executive’s negative behavior (“If they aren’t saying anything, then what I am doing must be okay” they reason).
Typically I am called in when the company can’t wait any longer for time to wound the heel. They feel they have run out of options and the situation has reached a crisis because of problems like high turnover, customer defections and even lawsuits for misconduct like sexual harassment and hostile work environment.
Nope, time isn’t going to be the answer.
That was the case with Larry, a big guy with a gruff, gruff exterior. Larry was good at alienating people and creating the impression they knew nothing he knew everything about his area of specialization. Despite repeated warnings from senior executives, Larry was not changing.
In organizations, there are many ways to communicate symbolically. There are ceremonies, awards, logos, icons, contests and oft-told stories. And there are real-life leadership behaviors that “speak” volumes.
My showing up created two pieces of symbolic communications for Larry. One, he didn’t believe his job was threatened until an outsider showed up. I was not afraid to confront him and tell him that he was inches away from being shown the door. The other message he got from my presence was the company was willing to make investment in him to be a more effective leader, so he had better pay attention. Happily, in Larry’s case, he did pay attention and lost the negativity.
This Groucho Marx line, from the 1940 film "Go West", is more than the ingenious reversal of the popular cliche "Time heals all wounds.” This is a myth that trips up many companies who have an executive who is too good to fire and too bad to keep.
(By the way, Ann Landers, the most widely syndicated columnist in the world, is also credited with coining this phrase. In 1955, Eppie Lederer was a 37-year-old well-to-do housewife and mother who had never published a word when she entered a contest to write an advice column under the pseudonym Ann Landers in the Chicago Times. She beat out 27 other entrants, many of them professional journalists, with a column that began “Time wounds all heels” and went on writing for nearly 50 years.)
In my book The Prodigal Executive, I discuss the misguided belief that time will work it out. The organizational hope is that the executive will eventually quit causing the pain, suffering and havoc.
So the leaders do nothing. Typically the board of directors or the CEO doesn’t want to confront the pain-in-the-assets executive. This inaction does more harm than good, because silence is reinforcing the executive’s negative behavior (“If they aren’t saying anything, then what I am doing must be okay” they reason).
Typically I am called in when the company can’t wait any longer for time to wound the heel. They feel they have run out of options and the situation has reached a crisis because of problems like high turnover, customer defections and even lawsuits for misconduct like sexual harassment and hostile work environment.
Nope, time isn’t going to be the answer.
That was the case with Larry, a big guy with a gruff, gruff exterior. Larry was good at alienating people and creating the impression they knew nothing he knew everything about his area of specialization. Despite repeated warnings from senior executives, Larry was not changing.
In organizations, there are many ways to communicate symbolically. There are ceremonies, awards, logos, icons, contests and oft-told stories. And there are real-life leadership behaviors that “speak” volumes.
My showing up created two pieces of symbolic communications for Larry. One, he didn’t believe his job was threatened until an outsider showed up. I was not afraid to confront him and tell him that he was inches away from being shown the door. The other message he got from my presence was the company was willing to make investment in him to be a more effective leader, so he had better pay attention. Happily, in Larry’s case, he did pay attention and lost the negativity.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Tell The Prodigal Executive The Bad News
Of course, it is human nature that people don’t want to give other people bad news. That is why there are expressions like, “Don’t shoot the messenger.” Deep down people want to be seen as likable, the nice guy or gal. Because they want to be nice, giving people negative, but necessary, feedback is the hardest thing for them to do.
The classic example is the senior executive who gave performance appraisals in the restroom. This manager would see the employee in the restroom and hand the person a folder with things they're doing well and not well.
Regardless of the reason, if you are a manager and you don't give somebody in your organization negative feedback, it borders on being unethical. You're carrying information the employee needs to know for their career survival. If that person doesn't succeed but could have if they had the information, then you as their manager have set them up for failure.
The other problem that happens in executive organizations is that the higher up you go, the less feedback you get.
In the words of Dr. Marshall Goldsmith, the author of 19 books on leadership, “All other things being equal, your people skills (or lack thereof) become more pronounced the higher up you go. In fact, even when things are not equal, your people skills often make the difference in determining how high you go” (“behave Yourself,” Talent Management Magazine, July 2007).
The feedback a high level executive receives is so sanitized because of the politics it is of scant value. So many times executives, when they do finally get this level of feedback that they're potentially derailing, they're very surprised. And some of the comments are, "Well why wasn't I told this before?" And part of that is the fear of telling the boss there's a problem.
The classic example is the senior executive who gave performance appraisals in the restroom. This manager would see the employee in the restroom and hand the person a folder with things they're doing well and not well.
Regardless of the reason, if you are a manager and you don't give somebody in your organization negative feedback, it borders on being unethical. You're carrying information the employee needs to know for their career survival. If that person doesn't succeed but could have if they had the information, then you as their manager have set them up for failure.
The other problem that happens in executive organizations is that the higher up you go, the less feedback you get.
In the words of Dr. Marshall Goldsmith, the author of 19 books on leadership, “All other things being equal, your people skills (or lack thereof) become more pronounced the higher up you go. In fact, even when things are not equal, your people skills often make the difference in determining how high you go” (“behave Yourself,” Talent Management Magazine, July 2007).
The feedback a high level executive receives is so sanitized because of the politics it is of scant value. So many times executives, when they do finally get this level of feedback that they're potentially derailing, they're very surprised. And some of the comments are, "Well why wasn't I told this before?" And part of that is the fear of telling the boss there's a problem.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Coaching A Toxic Boss Is Important, But Assessment Is Urgent
In coaching a toxic boss, before you can prescribe exercises to change behaviors, you need to make a diagnosis identifying the nature or cause of the real malady. Here the term truly means “knowledge through and through.” The more information you get the better.
But don’t think that taking time to do the important work of assessing does not mean you are not doing the urgent work of coaching. Even when you are making the assessment, you are beginning the coaching process. This is much like when you go to the doctor you feel better even before a prescribe treatment. Why? Because you know you are doing something to solve the problem.
One part of the assessment is to determine if the person is actually coachable. That requires some coaching to begin with. So give them something to work on and see if you get some traction on positive change. This will provide another data point. Typically a lack of traction means the person may not want to change.
So how is your bedside manner? Like a physician, one aspect of being a coach is to provide the results of the lab work (assessments) in a way that is motivating to the derailed executive. Giving feedback is both an art and science. The art is that the style, tone, and personality of the words need to fit the personality of the person. If not, the information can be experienced as harsh and hurtful. Instead, you want to present the information in a way that will engage the person you are coaching.
Another aspect is that when the facts are stated in a way that is not acceptable, the derailed executive is apt to become defensive and has a greater chance of rationalizing the information away. When you give feedback, remember the derailed executive needs to feel supported and not attacked. This will also be important so the information will help the person see their behavior from a different perspective.
But don’t think that taking time to do the important work of assessing does not mean you are not doing the urgent work of coaching. Even when you are making the assessment, you are beginning the coaching process. This is much like when you go to the doctor you feel better even before a prescribe treatment. Why? Because you know you are doing something to solve the problem.
One part of the assessment is to determine if the person is actually coachable. That requires some coaching to begin with. So give them something to work on and see if you get some traction on positive change. This will provide another data point. Typically a lack of traction means the person may not want to change.
So how is your bedside manner? Like a physician, one aspect of being a coach is to provide the results of the lab work (assessments) in a way that is motivating to the derailed executive. Giving feedback is both an art and science. The art is that the style, tone, and personality of the words need to fit the personality of the person. If not, the information can be experienced as harsh and hurtful. Instead, you want to present the information in a way that will engage the person you are coaching.
Another aspect is that when the facts are stated in a way that is not acceptable, the derailed executive is apt to become defensive and has a greater chance of rationalizing the information away. When you give feedback, remember the derailed executive needs to feel supported and not attacked. This will also be important so the information will help the person see their behavior from a different perspective.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Firing the Prodigal Executive
There are two schools of thought when it comes to letting somebody go. One is to create transition time so the executive can find a new job. The other approach is that once the decision is made, do it as quickly as possible. My recommendation is to terminate the relationship in a speedy fashion. Once a decision has been made, and the details (severance, etc) have been worked out, make it happen now.
You hire slow, but you fire fast. The reason is when a person is kept in an organization when they know they're going to be leaving, there is the lame duck syndrome. These executives a rarely productive. Plus, if they've been derailing anyway and are negative or hostile, there's really no reason they have any more value to the company. Keeping them around can create more problems than it's worth.
The message the senior leader making the decision should communicate is that the decision has been made. Once the person is gone everybody can breathe a big sigh of relief. Thankfully, it's time to move on.
Applying This to the Manager Coach
If you are the manager who is coaching the derailed executive, how do you know if this executive can get back on track? There are a several criteria.
The first criteria is whether they even want the coaching. If the executive doesn’t want it, you shouldn't waste your time or your money. The second criteria is that within a short period of time, usually within 4-6 weeks, if you don’t see any change then there's a probability this executive is not going to mentally engage in the coaching. The third criteria is if you ask the individual to go through the steps of the assessment or 360 degree feedback survey, and you get constant pushback, then the person is not coachable at this time.
In today's world we live in a new corporate environment. The issue of loyalty always comes up and I applaud the companies I work with because they cover all their bases to try and keep the individual within the organization.
There's been an evolution. In the 1940 to 1960s it was an implied cradle to grave contract. If you started working for IBM, then you ended your career with IBM.
Not any more. Because of this new reality the loyalty issue becomes very confusing, even on the executive level. Many executives help companies get to a certain point and when they get to that point it's time to move on. There's more fluidity and mobility, and there just isn't the same loyalty aspect there used to be.
With layoffs and downsizing of organizations, the implicit contract has changed to become more of a free agency model. Individuals in this generation, having seen their parents being laid off, don't feel that same sense of loyalty. Companies know that when times are good they bring in lots of bodies, and when times aren’t good there are layoffs or outsourcing to countries where the work is cheaper.
Just remember this: It's a business decision, not a personal decision.
You hire slow, but you fire fast. The reason is when a person is kept in an organization when they know they're going to be leaving, there is the lame duck syndrome. These executives a rarely productive. Plus, if they've been derailing anyway and are negative or hostile, there's really no reason they have any more value to the company. Keeping them around can create more problems than it's worth.
The message the senior leader making the decision should communicate is that the decision has been made. Once the person is gone everybody can breathe a big sigh of relief. Thankfully, it's time to move on.
Applying This to the Manager Coach
If you are the manager who is coaching the derailed executive, how do you know if this executive can get back on track? There are a several criteria.
The first criteria is whether they even want the coaching. If the executive doesn’t want it, you shouldn't waste your time or your money. The second criteria is that within a short period of time, usually within 4-6 weeks, if you don’t see any change then there's a probability this executive is not going to mentally engage in the coaching. The third criteria is if you ask the individual to go through the steps of the assessment or 360 degree feedback survey, and you get constant pushback, then the person is not coachable at this time.
In today's world we live in a new corporate environment. The issue of loyalty always comes up and I applaud the companies I work with because they cover all their bases to try and keep the individual within the organization.
There's been an evolution. In the 1940 to 1960s it was an implied cradle to grave contract. If you started working for IBM, then you ended your career with IBM.
Not any more. Because of this new reality the loyalty issue becomes very confusing, even on the executive level. Many executives help companies get to a certain point and when they get to that point it's time to move on. There's more fluidity and mobility, and there just isn't the same loyalty aspect there used to be.
With layoffs and downsizing of organizations, the implicit contract has changed to become more of a free agency model. Individuals in this generation, having seen their parents being laid off, don't feel that same sense of loyalty. Companies know that when times are good they bring in lots of bodies, and when times aren’t good there are layoffs or outsourcing to countries where the work is cheaper.
Just remember this: It's a business decision, not a personal decision.
Friday, May 1, 2009
You Have To Break A Few Eggs to Make An Omelet, or Executive Derailment is Inevitable
A popular myth is that executive turnover is inevitable. To make a great company you need to weed out the executive troublemakers, regardless of the value they bring to the company.
There is an old proverb that says you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. This means that in order to achieve something it is inevitable and necessary that something should be destroyed. Some credit New York Times Pulitzer-Prize winning reporter Walter Duranty with popularizing the phrase in describing Joseph Stalin’s rule in the Soviet Union in the 1930s. For the record, in Russian, the proverb is “when the wood is cut, the chips fly.”
So let the chips fly where they may. You can nickname this management style as churn, baby, churn. If the executive derails, then just get rid of them before it turns into a full blown train wreck.
This just doesn’t make economic sense, because companies today must compete to find, develop and retain top talent. Given the estimates that the costs of replacement of highly skilled workers and those in leadership roles can run up to 200 percent of the employees salary, the incentive for retaining talent is enourmous (Nowack, Envisa Learning White Paper, “Coaching Competent Jerks: Can Zebras Change Their Stripes?” 2006).
There is an old proverb that says you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. This means that in order to achieve something it is inevitable and necessary that something should be destroyed. Some credit New York Times Pulitzer-Prize winning reporter Walter Duranty with popularizing the phrase in describing Joseph Stalin’s rule in the Soviet Union in the 1930s. For the record, in Russian, the proverb is “when the wood is cut, the chips fly.”
So let the chips fly where they may. You can nickname this management style as churn, baby, churn. If the executive derails, then just get rid of them before it turns into a full blown train wreck.
This just doesn’t make economic sense, because companies today must compete to find, develop and retain top talent. Given the estimates that the costs of replacement of highly skilled workers and those in leadership roles can run up to 200 percent of the employees salary, the incentive for retaining talent is enourmous (Nowack, Envisa Learning White Paper, “Coaching Competent Jerks: Can Zebras Change Their Stripes?” 2006).
Sunday, April 26, 2009
The Prodigal Executive and the Myth of Once a Jerk, Always A Jerk
Have you met a competent jerk?
A colleague, Dr. Kenneth Nowack, describes the competent jerk as someone who is difficult to work with or lacks interpersonal skills, but is highly knowledgeable and capable. Sometimes they are “unwavering in their convictions (mostly having to do with them being right) that they are unwilling to take counsel and see absolutely no reason to change their ways” (Envisia Learning White Paper, 2006, “Coaching Competent Jerks: Can Zebras Change Their Stripes?).
Now this is tricky because many executives have been so rewarded for being a jerk throughout their career, being a jerk has exquisite value. The jerk’s position is, why change? They see no benefit to be gained from transforming from being a jerk to becoming a decent human being. In fact they have much to lose.
The competent jerk’s reluctance to change is understandable. This always reminds me of the story of a very nice man, Bob Newhart, the former accountant who mined his nervous stammer and deadpan demeanor for comedy gold. As a stand-up comedian, Newhart’s underplayed delivery and gentle stammering earned him three Grammys and the first comedy album to reach #1 on the Billboard charts. His unique brand of humor translated well to television, where he starred in two of the best-loved sitcoms of the 1970s and 1980s.
When he was doing The Bob Newhart Show, one of the producers pulled him aside and said that the shows were running a little long. The producer wondered if Newhart could cut down the time of his speeches by reducing his stammering. "No," Newhart told him. "That stammer bought me a house in Beverly Hills."
For many executives, being a jerk got them where they are today. Actually being a jerk can work under certain circumstances or life cycles of an organization. For instance, this can work well when a company needs someone to take charge in a turnaround situation or crisis mode, but doesn’t work so well when you are in growth mode.
The poster child for the competent jerk boss is Al Dunlap, author of Mean Business: How I Save Bad Companies and Make Good Companies Great (Dunlap with Bob Andelman, 1997). His tough, tell-it-like-it-is persona stems from humble beginnings in Hoboken, New Jersey. ``My parents couldn't afford to send me to college,'' he says, ``so either I got a scholarship or I wouldn't get an education.'' A West Point graduate, he believed in screaming at and purposefully humiliating his employees like, including top management. Dunlap was so ruthless in downsizing corporations for short-term shareholder profit that he earned nicknames such as "Chainsaw Al" and "Rambo in Pinstripes."
Wall Street loved Dunlap at Scott Paper, where he laid off thousands, but then hated him at Sunbeam, where he himself was finally fired. Another book, Chainsaw, by John A. Byrne (2003), dramatically documents the rise and fall of Dunlap, the havoc he wreaked on companies and people's lives, and how he came to power in the first place. Dunlap, unhappy about Byrne's reporting, once said of the Business Week writer, "If he were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him." It's a charming quote that Byrne uses to kick off his last chapter.
In my experience, even the competent jerk can change. For me this conjures up images of someone I coached named Stuart, a boss that yelled and screamed, purposely to make people feel intellectually inferior. Stuart was leading the company during a turnaround crisis and he wanted the company to act with urgency. He saw himself like an emergency room physician attending a bleeding trauma patient. In that world there is no time to be nice.
Stuart’s management style worked, in the short run. But when things turned around at the company, that behavior didn’t work any more. If Stuart wanted to continue to lead he needed to learn skills like persuasion and inspiration. When finally confronted with the honest truth (“you either get an executive coach or an outplacement specialist to help you find a new job”), Stuart found the inspiration to change his ways.
A colleague, Dr. Kenneth Nowack, describes the competent jerk as someone who is difficult to work with or lacks interpersonal skills, but is highly knowledgeable and capable. Sometimes they are “unwavering in their convictions (mostly having to do with them being right) that they are unwilling to take counsel and see absolutely no reason to change their ways” (Envisia Learning White Paper, 2006, “Coaching Competent Jerks: Can Zebras Change Their Stripes?).
Now this is tricky because many executives have been so rewarded for being a jerk throughout their career, being a jerk has exquisite value. The jerk’s position is, why change? They see no benefit to be gained from transforming from being a jerk to becoming a decent human being. In fact they have much to lose.
The competent jerk’s reluctance to change is understandable. This always reminds me of the story of a very nice man, Bob Newhart, the former accountant who mined his nervous stammer and deadpan demeanor for comedy gold. As a stand-up comedian, Newhart’s underplayed delivery and gentle stammering earned him three Grammys and the first comedy album to reach #1 on the Billboard charts. His unique brand of humor translated well to television, where he starred in two of the best-loved sitcoms of the 1970s and 1980s.
When he was doing The Bob Newhart Show, one of the producers pulled him aside and said that the shows were running a little long. The producer wondered if Newhart could cut down the time of his speeches by reducing his stammering. "No," Newhart told him. "That stammer bought me a house in Beverly Hills."
For many executives, being a jerk got them where they are today. Actually being a jerk can work under certain circumstances or life cycles of an organization. For instance, this can work well when a company needs someone to take charge in a turnaround situation or crisis mode, but doesn’t work so well when you are in growth mode.
The poster child for the competent jerk boss is Al Dunlap, author of Mean Business: How I Save Bad Companies and Make Good Companies Great (Dunlap with Bob Andelman, 1997). His tough, tell-it-like-it-is persona stems from humble beginnings in Hoboken, New Jersey. ``My parents couldn't afford to send me to college,'' he says, ``so either I got a scholarship or I wouldn't get an education.'' A West Point graduate, he believed in screaming at and purposefully humiliating his employees like, including top management. Dunlap was so ruthless in downsizing corporations for short-term shareholder profit that he earned nicknames such as "Chainsaw Al" and "Rambo in Pinstripes."
Wall Street loved Dunlap at Scott Paper, where he laid off thousands, but then hated him at Sunbeam, where he himself was finally fired. Another book, Chainsaw, by John A. Byrne (2003), dramatically documents the rise and fall of Dunlap, the havoc he wreaked on companies and people's lives, and how he came to power in the first place. Dunlap, unhappy about Byrne's reporting, once said of the Business Week writer, "If he were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him." It's a charming quote that Byrne uses to kick off his last chapter.
In my experience, even the competent jerk can change. For me this conjures up images of someone I coached named Stuart, a boss that yelled and screamed, purposely to make people feel intellectually inferior. Stuart was leading the company during a turnaround crisis and he wanted the company to act with urgency. He saw himself like an emergency room physician attending a bleeding trauma patient. In that world there is no time to be nice.
Stuart’s management style worked, in the short run. But when things turned around at the company, that behavior didn’t work any more. If Stuart wanted to continue to lead he needed to learn skills like persuasion and inspiration. When finally confronted with the honest truth (“you either get an executive coach or an outplacement specialist to help you find a new job”), Stuart found the inspiration to change his ways.
Monday, April 13, 2009
The Prodigal Executive Myth That You Can't Teach An Old Executive New Tricks
The proverb “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” explains why people who have long been used to doing things in a particular way will not abandon their habits. This expression is often used in the workplace to describe how difficult it is for someone who has been doing something one way for a long time to learn how to do it a new way.
Here is some food for thought from my book, The Prodigal Executive. There is some scientific backing to this concept about an older person’s inability or lack of desire to learn about new and modern things.
A protein normally associated with the immune system could hold a clue to one of the great puzzles of neuroscience: why you can't teach old dogs new tricks. The Harvard medical School study, published in the journal Science, could even create hope for people suffering spinal cord injuries and brain damage.
Plasticity in the brain is its ability to rewire internal connections as a result of experience. Normally this plasticity is largely restricted to critical periods of development early in life, meaning puppies are more receptive to learning tricks.
Now Harvard researchers have shown that adult mice who lack a certain protein have brains that retain the plasticity of much younger mice. Put another way, mice that have protein are less able to make new connections (Science, Aug. 25 2006, “Learning Induces Long-Term Potentiation in the Hippocampus”).
Historically executive incompetence has been conceptualized in terms of a manager not having the characteristics of success (Bray and Howard, Longitudinal Studies of Adult Psychological Development, 1983). These included the tricks of being able to delegate, to maintain relationships with peers and direct reports, and to build a team.
However, I believe the notion that executives are set in their ways and unable to learn is just not true. My experience is working with top executives, helping the best of the best to get even better through some season of derailment. I have found that the best want to learn more so they can be the best that they can be.
So how do you teach these old dogs new tricks? You have to do it in small amounts so they get success along the way. You also need to help them see how these new skills will help them reach some higher goal they desire.
This reminds me of story of virtuoso violinist. An interviewer asked him, what is your number one regret? He replied, “I should have become the violinist I knew I could have become.”
The interviewer said in disbelief, “But you are the maestro of maestros, the best of the best.”
What the world-renowned violinist wanted was to be even better. Likewise executives. All top executives are success driven. They are constantly trying to get better at their craft and become all that they can be.
Take Peter, for example. Peter, president of a Fortune 500 subsidiary company, was the most creative genius I have ever met. His level of intuition and ability to analyze problems were superb. He was also one of the best negotiators I have ever seen. Peter picked up subtle nuances and would instantaneously have the perfect retort ready.
With all of those skills it was amazing why the corporate vice president of human resources invited me in to coach Peter.
Peter never listened to anybody who worked for him. He felt because he was the smartest person in room (no doubt true), listening just wasted time because he already knew what was best. Not surprisingly, there was a mass exodus of top talent from the company.
I coached Peter to listen using small steps. First, I just had him practice not talking for awhile while his subordinates spoke. Next we had him practice nodding while others spoke. Then, while going through the motions, something amazing happened. He actually heard what they were saying. “I sure learned a lot more listening than when I was talking.” For Peter, listening was a whole new trick and he continued doing it.
Here is some food for thought from my book, The Prodigal Executive. There is some scientific backing to this concept about an older person’s inability or lack of desire to learn about new and modern things.
A protein normally associated with the immune system could hold a clue to one of the great puzzles of neuroscience: why you can't teach old dogs new tricks. The Harvard medical School study, published in the journal Science, could even create hope for people suffering spinal cord injuries and brain damage.
Plasticity in the brain is its ability to rewire internal connections as a result of experience. Normally this plasticity is largely restricted to critical periods of development early in life, meaning puppies are more receptive to learning tricks.
Now Harvard researchers have shown that adult mice who lack a certain protein have brains that retain the plasticity of much younger mice. Put another way, mice that have protein are less able to make new connections (Science, Aug. 25 2006, “Learning Induces Long-Term Potentiation in the Hippocampus”).
Historically executive incompetence has been conceptualized in terms of a manager not having the characteristics of success (Bray and Howard, Longitudinal Studies of Adult Psychological Development, 1983). These included the tricks of being able to delegate, to maintain relationships with peers and direct reports, and to build a team.
However, I believe the notion that executives are set in their ways and unable to learn is just not true. My experience is working with top executives, helping the best of the best to get even better through some season of derailment. I have found that the best want to learn more so they can be the best that they can be.
So how do you teach these old dogs new tricks? You have to do it in small amounts so they get success along the way. You also need to help them see how these new skills will help them reach some higher goal they desire.
This reminds me of story of virtuoso violinist. An interviewer asked him, what is your number one regret? He replied, “I should have become the violinist I knew I could have become.”
The interviewer said in disbelief, “But you are the maestro of maestros, the best of the best.”
What the world-renowned violinist wanted was to be even better. Likewise executives. All top executives are success driven. They are constantly trying to get better at their craft and become all that they can be.
Take Peter, for example. Peter, president of a Fortune 500 subsidiary company, was the most creative genius I have ever met. His level of intuition and ability to analyze problems were superb. He was also one of the best negotiators I have ever seen. Peter picked up subtle nuances and would instantaneously have the perfect retort ready.
With all of those skills it was amazing why the corporate vice president of human resources invited me in to coach Peter.
Peter never listened to anybody who worked for him. He felt because he was the smartest person in room (no doubt true), listening just wasted time because he already knew what was best. Not surprisingly, there was a mass exodus of top talent from the company.
I coached Peter to listen using small steps. First, I just had him practice not talking for awhile while his subordinates spoke. Next we had him practice nodding while others spoke. Then, while going through the motions, something amazing happened. He actually heard what they were saying. “I sure learned a lot more listening than when I was talking.” For Peter, listening was a whole new trick and he continued doing it.
Friday, April 3, 2009
The Prodigal Executive Myth That A Leopard Can't Change Its Spots
There is an old adage that says “A leopard can’t change its spots,” which means we cannot change our innate nature. The saying has been around for thousands of years and is derived from the biblical Book of Jeremiah: “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?”
While there is much truth in that adage, it is not true 100 percent of the time in the workplace. I’ve found again and again that toxic executives can change their personality, even if they have been that way for a long time. Personality is malleable if there is a reward for doing so. Prodigal executives can manage the personality they are given if there is a good reason.
Meet Beverly, an executive with a large financial institution. She was exquisitely ambitious, highly focused, task driven, willing go the extra mile to make sure everything done and done correctly. Beverly truly was a star performer in anyone’s business model. However, she was seen as unapproachable and devoid of any emotion by the people around her.
What got her off track was not unusual. When we over use our strengths they become a weakness. Beverly was so task oriented she forgot to take care of people around her. This caused conflicts with her direct reports and a noticeable drop in their productivity. She wasn’t making a personal connection with her business connections.
When it comes to improving and maintaining our relationships with others, Stephen Covey’s metaphor of the Emotional Bank Account is probably one of the most helpful ideas ever created for the developing personal relationships at work (Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, 1989).
Covey says anyone with whom we have a relationship with, whether it be our coworkers, family or friends, we maintain a personal “emotional” bank account with them. This account begins with a zero balance. And just as with any bank account, you need to make deposits before you can make withdrawals. Deposits are things like sincere compliments and personal interest in the other person’s goals. When you ask direct reports to work late or do extra work, that is a withdrawal. If you haven’t made the deposits beforehand then you have nothing to withdraw and the account becomes overdrawn. As a general rule, the formula is you need to make five deposits for every withdrawal. Because Beverly was not doing this, her direct reports greatly resented her.
Sometimes all that is needed to change is new information. With coaching Beverly was able to show more interest in people. She now views the people equation as another part of her job, a necessary component to get the job done.
While there is much truth in that adage, it is not true 100 percent of the time in the workplace. I’ve found again and again that toxic executives can change their personality, even if they have been that way for a long time. Personality is malleable if there is a reward for doing so. Prodigal executives can manage the personality they are given if there is a good reason.
Meet Beverly, an executive with a large financial institution. She was exquisitely ambitious, highly focused, task driven, willing go the extra mile to make sure everything done and done correctly. Beverly truly was a star performer in anyone’s business model. However, she was seen as unapproachable and devoid of any emotion by the people around her.
What got her off track was not unusual. When we over use our strengths they become a weakness. Beverly was so task oriented she forgot to take care of people around her. This caused conflicts with her direct reports and a noticeable drop in their productivity. She wasn’t making a personal connection with her business connections.
When it comes to improving and maintaining our relationships with others, Stephen Covey’s metaphor of the Emotional Bank Account is probably one of the most helpful ideas ever created for the developing personal relationships at work (Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, 1989).
Covey says anyone with whom we have a relationship with, whether it be our coworkers, family or friends, we maintain a personal “emotional” bank account with them. This account begins with a zero balance. And just as with any bank account, you need to make deposits before you can make withdrawals. Deposits are things like sincere compliments and personal interest in the other person’s goals. When you ask direct reports to work late or do extra work, that is a withdrawal. If you haven’t made the deposits beforehand then you have nothing to withdraw and the account becomes overdrawn. As a general rule, the formula is you need to make five deposits for every withdrawal. Because Beverly was not doing this, her direct reports greatly resented her.
Sometimes all that is needed to change is new information. With coaching Beverly was able to show more interest in people. She now views the people equation as another part of her job, a necessary component to get the job done.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Does the Derailed Executive Want to Change?
There's an old joke: How many psychologists does it take to change a lightbulb?
The answer is just one, but the lightbulb has to want to be changed.
Before you can help a derailed executive you have to determine if they want to change.
The other evidence the person doing the coaching should look for is if the derailed executive makes the initial coaching session very short and really isn't willing to open up and take risks. If this happens, that person is usually a poor candidate for coaching, and I let the company know. That way I don’t waste my time or the company's money.
A couple things happen in those first coaching sessions with a derailed executive who is coachable. In most cases the derailed executive tells me they want to be changed. They say things like, "I don’t want to be seen as a bully. I don’t want to be seen as a negative. I don’t want people to think I am a prima donna."
There are three types of responses derailed executives have:
1. The first is the type that acknowledges there is a discrepancy between the view other people have of them and what they have of themselves. These derailed executives put it out there that they do want to be become the best leader or executive they can be. They just don't know how to change, what to say or what to do.
2. While that's the majority, there are is a minority percentage who are skeptical because they're scared. These executives have worked with other people before and they want to know how working with an executive coach will make any difference.
3. A small fraction of derailed executive are a combination. Sometimes I don’t know what I'm going to say until I've tried a few things and see what hits the mark with this group.
A question I sometimes as during a structured interview is, "At your retirement dinner, what do you want people to say about you? At your funeral, what do you hope the mourners would say?”
The answer is just one, but the lightbulb has to want to be changed.
Before you can help a derailed executive you have to determine if they want to change.
The other evidence the person doing the coaching should look for is if the derailed executive makes the initial coaching session very short and really isn't willing to open up and take risks. If this happens, that person is usually a poor candidate for coaching, and I let the company know. That way I don’t waste my time or the company's money.
A couple things happen in those first coaching sessions with a derailed executive who is coachable. In most cases the derailed executive tells me they want to be changed. They say things like, "I don’t want to be seen as a bully. I don’t want to be seen as a negative. I don’t want people to think I am a prima donna."
There are three types of responses derailed executives have:
1. The first is the type that acknowledges there is a discrepancy between the view other people have of them and what they have of themselves. These derailed executives put it out there that they do want to be become the best leader or executive they can be. They just don't know how to change, what to say or what to do.
2. While that's the majority, there are is a minority percentage who are skeptical because they're scared. These executives have worked with other people before and they want to know how working with an executive coach will make any difference.
3. A small fraction of derailed executive are a combination. Sometimes I don’t know what I'm going to say until I've tried a few things and see what hits the mark with this group.
A question I sometimes as during a structured interview is, "At your retirement dinner, what do you want people to say about you? At your funeral, what do you hope the mourners would say?”
Friday, March 6, 2009
Helping Prodigal Executives Get Back on Track With Feedback
In my book about derailed executives, The Prodigal Executive, I use Mark’s story to illustrate the point. His goal was to be a leader of his company. This is the goal he wanted to reach, but he kept getting off course. Like his own personal career GPS, I assisted him to find his way.
Mark (real story, not his real name) was a very bright, articulate, engaging and ambitious senior leader. He was educated at one of the finest universities in engineering. He thought like an engineer and had a long impressive resume with major international manufacturing companies. When I met Mark, I was called in to provide coaching to upgrade his skills so he could be part of the leadership of the company.
After a 360 degree feedback survey, the message back from his direct reports was that he did not show enough strength as a leader. He was not decisive enough to make tough decisions. Therefore, he allowed too many people issues to slide by. The result was resentment. Since he was trained as an engineer, he had not taken the time to develop his emotional intelligence.
Now Mark could have given up and just accepted a technical role in the organization.
During our coaching, I suggested to him that being stronger was part of being an effective leader. Showing strength was going to be critical. Since he truly wanted to be a leader, he took risks. As we worked together I kept giving him signals if he was on course or of course. There was one situation where he actually stopped an interview because he felt it was a waste of time for everyone. He stopped the interview with professionalism, but the message to his team was that he was strong enough. His leadership capital increased exponentially.
Mark (real story, not his real name) was a very bright, articulate, engaging and ambitious senior leader. He was educated at one of the finest universities in engineering. He thought like an engineer and had a long impressive resume with major international manufacturing companies. When I met Mark, I was called in to provide coaching to upgrade his skills so he could be part of the leadership of the company.
After a 360 degree feedback survey, the message back from his direct reports was that he did not show enough strength as a leader. He was not decisive enough to make tough decisions. Therefore, he allowed too many people issues to slide by. The result was resentment. Since he was trained as an engineer, he had not taken the time to develop his emotional intelligence.
Now Mark could have given up and just accepted a technical role in the organization.
During our coaching, I suggested to him that being stronger was part of being an effective leader. Showing strength was going to be critical. Since he truly wanted to be a leader, he took risks. As we worked together I kept giving him signals if he was on course or of course. There was one situation where he actually stopped an interview because he felt it was a waste of time for everyone. He stopped the interview with professionalism, but the message to his team was that he was strong enough. His leadership capital increased exponentially.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Where Do You Find Prodigal Executives
Where do you find prodigal executives? These are the managerial train wrecks that are too painful to keep and too valuable to fire. Many people also know them as derailed executives.
You find them everywhere. Some of my clients have included the CEO of a high tech manufacturing firm, a CEO of a $10 million bio- technology company, the Chief Technology Officer of a $27 billion international technology company, senior executives at a bio-medical research company, and executives from a Fortune 500 bio-medical pharmaceutical company. I also have experience working with organizations that are being blended because of a merger or acquisition. Once I was involved with the integration of the San Francisco Examiner into the San Francisco Chronicle. I have facilitated retreats on strategic planning for The Los Angeles Times, St. Luke Hospital, Century City Hospital, Midway Medical Center, Giga-tronics, and Northrop-Grumann. I have also facilitated offsite retreats for Disney Consumer Products Organizational Development Department and an architectural firm start-up.
Derailed executives are everywhere. The good news is 8 out of 10 can get back on track with the right coaching. Prodigal executives can make it back home.
You find them everywhere. Some of my clients have included the CEO of a high tech manufacturing firm, a CEO of a $10 million bio- technology company, the Chief Technology Officer of a $27 billion international technology company, senior executives at a bio-medical research company, and executives from a Fortune 500 bio-medical pharmaceutical company. I also have experience working with organizations that are being blended because of a merger or acquisition. Once I was involved with the integration of the San Francisco Examiner into the San Francisco Chronicle. I have facilitated retreats on strategic planning for The Los Angeles Times, St. Luke Hospital, Century City Hospital, Midway Medical Center, Giga-tronics, and Northrop-Grumann. I have also facilitated offsite retreats for Disney Consumer Products Organizational Development Department and an architectural firm start-up.
Derailed executives are everywhere. The good news is 8 out of 10 can get back on track with the right coaching. Prodigal executives can make it back home.
Monday, February 16, 2009
When to Fire The Prodigal Executive
You can’t save everybody. Nor should you. Many derailed executives are just daring you to fire them.
One day a CEO said to me, "I just can't get Byron to step it up."
Byron (real story, not his real name) was a director of engineering for a technology company. He was a long term employee. The company, which started off as an entrepreneurial family-based business that grew very fast, handled high amounts of high tech manufacturing.
Now the production lines were getting stuck, the company wasn’t getting product out the door fast enough, and they were having too many returns. Because Byron had been with the organization from day one, the CEO did not want to fire him.
“When you start off with a family-based business like ours,” said the CEO, “there's a strong sense of loyalty.”
A consultant was brought in to help with the engineering and I was brought in to see if I could help Byron improve his leadership skills. The first couple sessions went well and then all of a sudden Byron started changing his appointments. Following that he began to show total disinterest. So I told the CEO that I wasn't sure he was going to be engaged n the process. He might have a different agenda and it is getting in the way. Two weeks later the CEO called me to tell me that he was firing Byron.
What I told the CEO surprised him. “In a few months Byron will call you up and tell you that he's happier where he's at, and everyone will be able to move on. The CEO did hire a new director of engineering that was extremely sharp. Sure enough, Byron found a better job that was more in line with his skills. In truth, this worked out better for everyone.
The moral of the story is that sometimes it's better for everyone to move on.
The focus of my book, The Prodigal Executive, is on the 80% that are able to get back on track after being derailed. However there are 20% of derailed executives who, for a variety of reasons, fail to get enough traction to strike the balance between "too painful to keep" and "too valuable to get rid of.”
Invariably, one of two scenarios transpire.
The first scenario goes something like this. During the assessment process the derailed executive realizes that part of the derailment was an unconscious wish to disengage from the company in the first place. So there's a voluntary departure where the individual says "Because I couldn’t pull the trigger myself and was unhappy, I was alienating other and decided it was time to leave."
This scenario plays out in many situations. Most decide not to go through the coaching process. As coach, if I define it early on I say to the executive, "You don’t need me, you need a replacement consultant or you need a conversation with the CEO in order to work out a smooth transition that's in everybody's best interest. But to make yourself miserable and everybody else miserable really doesn’t make much sense."
The second scenario is rare. This occurs with individuals who, for whatever reason, are recalcitrant to changing their behavior. Many of them are in complete denial and feel the problems are all about everybody else. These executives really are uncoachable. For me it is important to find this out as early as possible, because, as the coach, I'm not there to do outplacement to help people leave, I'm there to help them stay. Often times the company decides this person is causing too much pain, and the risk and investment in the coaching is too high. In this case, everybody would be better off if this person disengaged from the company.
I've only had two of these rare recalcitrant situations. In both instances I think the executive was still in the wrong job. The executive was truly unhappy and didn't see any value for making any substantive changes so they could get back on track. In one case the person rejected the coaching outright. He didn't want to do what it took to increase his ability. So the CEO called and said, "Time for him to leave" and I agreed.
One day a CEO said to me, "I just can't get Byron to step it up."
Byron (real story, not his real name) was a director of engineering for a technology company. He was a long term employee. The company, which started off as an entrepreneurial family-based business that grew very fast, handled high amounts of high tech manufacturing.
Now the production lines were getting stuck, the company wasn’t getting product out the door fast enough, and they were having too many returns. Because Byron had been with the organization from day one, the CEO did not want to fire him.
“When you start off with a family-based business like ours,” said the CEO, “there's a strong sense of loyalty.”
A consultant was brought in to help with the engineering and I was brought in to see if I could help Byron improve his leadership skills. The first couple sessions went well and then all of a sudden Byron started changing his appointments. Following that he began to show total disinterest. So I told the CEO that I wasn't sure he was going to be engaged n the process. He might have a different agenda and it is getting in the way. Two weeks later the CEO called me to tell me that he was firing Byron.
What I told the CEO surprised him. “In a few months Byron will call you up and tell you that he's happier where he's at, and everyone will be able to move on. The CEO did hire a new director of engineering that was extremely sharp. Sure enough, Byron found a better job that was more in line with his skills. In truth, this worked out better for everyone.
The moral of the story is that sometimes it's better for everyone to move on.
The focus of my book, The Prodigal Executive, is on the 80% that are able to get back on track after being derailed. However there are 20% of derailed executives who, for a variety of reasons, fail to get enough traction to strike the balance between "too painful to keep" and "too valuable to get rid of.”
Invariably, one of two scenarios transpire.
The first scenario goes something like this. During the assessment process the derailed executive realizes that part of the derailment was an unconscious wish to disengage from the company in the first place. So there's a voluntary departure where the individual says "Because I couldn’t pull the trigger myself and was unhappy, I was alienating other and decided it was time to leave."
This scenario plays out in many situations. Most decide not to go through the coaching process. As coach, if I define it early on I say to the executive, "You don’t need me, you need a replacement consultant or you need a conversation with the CEO in order to work out a smooth transition that's in everybody's best interest. But to make yourself miserable and everybody else miserable really doesn’t make much sense."
The second scenario is rare. This occurs with individuals who, for whatever reason, are recalcitrant to changing their behavior. Many of them are in complete denial and feel the problems are all about everybody else. These executives really are uncoachable. For me it is important to find this out as early as possible, because, as the coach, I'm not there to do outplacement to help people leave, I'm there to help them stay. Often times the company decides this person is causing too much pain, and the risk and investment in the coaching is too high. In this case, everybody would be better off if this person disengaged from the company.
I've only had two of these rare recalcitrant situations. In both instances I think the executive was still in the wrong job. The executive was truly unhappy and didn't see any value for making any substantive changes so they could get back on track. In one case the person rejected the coaching outright. He didn't want to do what it took to increase his ability. So the CEO called and said, "Time for him to leave" and I agreed.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Prodigal Executives Are Too Painful to Stay, Too Valuable to Go
One hotline call I got was to meet Wayne. Like all names in my book, The Prodigal Executive, his name has been changed. As regional vice president of an international company he managed several regional mangers and was responsible for thousands employees. Wayne’s role model as an executive was a Marine drill instructor barking orders during boot camp. He was known as a loud, intimidating, foul mouthed bully who could make people feel about two feet tall.
Wayne knew he was a bully and was proud of it. He actually felt the more intimidating he could become the more productive. Hostile work environment complaints began to mount and good people began to flee.
“Can you help us?” asked the chief administrative officer when he called in a panic. “We don’t want to lose him. He was once well respected, but he can’t continue here like this.”
So I flew in to see Wayne. As promised, he was crude, rude and had a nasty attitude. He verbally tested me to see if I was tough. For me, Wayne was not that unusual. For 15 years I have been busy with Waynes all across corporate America. They scream at me. They heap abuse on me. They drop the f bomb, the s bomb and every profanity bomb imaginable. They say things like “who the hell do you think you are to come in and coach me?”
Good question. I am an executive coach with a Ph.D. in psychology. Some try to bait me by calling me a company shrink, but I’ve been called worse. Before my work with corporate clients I helped people overcome drug and alcohol addictions. There is an old adage that says people who need help the most seem to deserve it the least.
Actually, I liked Wayne. He was extremely intelligent and articulate. When I told Wayne my job isn’t to terminate people but to help the best to get better, that calmed him down.
“Wayne, why do think I am here?” I asked him.
He replied, maybe people find me intimidating.
“No Wayne, you are intimidating,” I told him. “But you are the best at what you do. Tiger Woods only got better when he went to a coach. Whatever you are doing isn’t working. It is up to you if you want the coaching your company is willing to pay for. Your only hope to stay here is work with me to create a new executive brand for you.”
Wayne knew he was a bully and was proud of it. He actually felt the more intimidating he could become the more productive. Hostile work environment complaints began to mount and good people began to flee.
“Can you help us?” asked the chief administrative officer when he called in a panic. “We don’t want to lose him. He was once well respected, but he can’t continue here like this.”
So I flew in to see Wayne. As promised, he was crude, rude and had a nasty attitude. He verbally tested me to see if I was tough. For me, Wayne was not that unusual. For 15 years I have been busy with Waynes all across corporate America. They scream at me. They heap abuse on me. They drop the f bomb, the s bomb and every profanity bomb imaginable. They say things like “who the hell do you think you are to come in and coach me?”
Good question. I am an executive coach with a Ph.D. in psychology. Some try to bait me by calling me a company shrink, but I’ve been called worse. Before my work with corporate clients I helped people overcome drug and alcohol addictions. There is an old adage that says people who need help the most seem to deserve it the least.
Actually, I liked Wayne. He was extremely intelligent and articulate. When I told Wayne my job isn’t to terminate people but to help the best to get better, that calmed him down.
“Wayne, why do think I am here?” I asked him.
He replied, maybe people find me intimidating.
“No Wayne, you are intimidating,” I told him. “But you are the best at what you do. Tiger Woods only got better when he went to a coach. Whatever you are doing isn’t working. It is up to you if you want the coaching your company is willing to pay for. Your only hope to stay here is work with me to create a new executive brand for you.”
Thursday, February 5, 2009
How To Coach A Failing Executive
As a manager providing coaching feedback to an employee, remember the need and significance of consequence. If the executive that is derailed does not feel that there is a sense of consequence in their behavior continuing, then they’re likely not to be as motivated.
People are either motivated by greed or by fear, and if they’re not afraid that something could truly happen, then there’s really no reason for them to change.
Some derailed executives say they can’t change and reject coaching from an outside coach or their manager. But why? First, let’s tackle that word can’t. To my thinking here’s no such thing as “can’t.” There’s either “I won’t do it” or “I don’t know how to do it.”
In my experience as an executive coach, “can’t” means the person is afraid and just doesn’t know how to change. But even if somebody knows how to change, for them to self-develop and make the change on their own is very difficult. We all need feedback, and we all need support and encouragement. Unless we know what we did and what we need to do and somebody teaches us how to do it, we can’t improve.
People don’t really self-develop. To illustrate, my son and I went to the USC football practice awhile back and were struck by something at the practice field. At every practice there are four cameras set up on stilts that are recording the action. The players are improving by constantly looking at film afterwards with the coaches. Together they look at what they did in a situation and discuss what they should have done differently. In addition there are also coaches at the practice giving the players ongoing feedback on how to improve. If the team doesn’t provide that kind of coaching, players won’t know what to change, and they won’t be inspired to do it.
USC has won the national championship several times in the last few years. So the question is: “Why are they practicing? They know how to play football.” The answer of course is that there is so much at stake they want to rehearse and go over the plays. Likewise, there is so much at stake for these derailed executives. They need to run the plays when it’s not in a game situation. Where else can they do that but with a coach who can give them feedback?
For derailed executives there is a useful theory called the Stages of Change Model about the mind/body stages we go through when we do change. The Stages of Change Model was originally developed in the late 1970s by James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente at the University of Rhode Island when they were studying how smokers were able to give up their habits. According to the model there are a number of steps: precontemplation to contemplation to determination.
The idea behind the change model is that behavior change does not happen in one step. Rather, people tend to progress through different stages on their way to successful change. You first say to yourself, “Well, I don’t have a problem. And if I don’t have a problem, I don’t need a solution.” Then you get information feedback and data, such as complaints, and you begin to say, “Maybe there is a problem.” So you start to contemplate that there is a problem. If you get even more strong data and a coach comes in, then you have to go from contemplation to determination and decide, “I need to do something about this.”
On one hand it is easy to understand why some derailed executives would reject coaching. Many derailed executives don’t understand why they should change because the company has promoted them three or four times for being the way they are. Why is someone coming in now and telling them that what got them to that spot is not going to keep them there? Naturally there is a resistance to change an approach that has been so successful for so long. It is a very legitimate concern to wonder why you should take the leap of faith and change. Will this new behavior prove equally successful?
There is a common idea in the business world that you should stick with what works. There are a number of old sayings that reinforce this, from “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” to “Don’t change horses mid-stream.”
The reality for executives is that when you rise through the ranks of an organization, you’ll find that each individual level has a different set of rules because you have a different function. So what works at a director level is not going to work at a vice president level. The issue is that no one ever sits down and tells you the rules and then tells you how those rules change.
If that doesn’t motivate them, then sad to say you need to work on their exit strategy. This is the time to lay down your cards and fold.
People are either motivated by greed or by fear, and if they’re not afraid that something could truly happen, then there’s really no reason for them to change.
Some derailed executives say they can’t change and reject coaching from an outside coach or their manager. But why? First, let’s tackle that word can’t. To my thinking here’s no such thing as “can’t.” There’s either “I won’t do it” or “I don’t know how to do it.”
In my experience as an executive coach, “can’t” means the person is afraid and just doesn’t know how to change. But even if somebody knows how to change, for them to self-develop and make the change on their own is very difficult. We all need feedback, and we all need support and encouragement. Unless we know what we did and what we need to do and somebody teaches us how to do it, we can’t improve.
People don’t really self-develop. To illustrate, my son and I went to the USC football practice awhile back and were struck by something at the practice field. At every practice there are four cameras set up on stilts that are recording the action. The players are improving by constantly looking at film afterwards with the coaches. Together they look at what they did in a situation and discuss what they should have done differently. In addition there are also coaches at the practice giving the players ongoing feedback on how to improve. If the team doesn’t provide that kind of coaching, players won’t know what to change, and they won’t be inspired to do it.
USC has won the national championship several times in the last few years. So the question is: “Why are they practicing? They know how to play football.” The answer of course is that there is so much at stake they want to rehearse and go over the plays. Likewise, there is so much at stake for these derailed executives. They need to run the plays when it’s not in a game situation. Where else can they do that but with a coach who can give them feedback?
For derailed executives there is a useful theory called the Stages of Change Model about the mind/body stages we go through when we do change. The Stages of Change Model was originally developed in the late 1970s by James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente at the University of Rhode Island when they were studying how smokers were able to give up their habits. According to the model there are a number of steps: precontemplation to contemplation to determination.
The idea behind the change model is that behavior change does not happen in one step. Rather, people tend to progress through different stages on their way to successful change. You first say to yourself, “Well, I don’t have a problem. And if I don’t have a problem, I don’t need a solution.” Then you get information feedback and data, such as complaints, and you begin to say, “Maybe there is a problem.” So you start to contemplate that there is a problem. If you get even more strong data and a coach comes in, then you have to go from contemplation to determination and decide, “I need to do something about this.”
On one hand it is easy to understand why some derailed executives would reject coaching. Many derailed executives don’t understand why they should change because the company has promoted them three or four times for being the way they are. Why is someone coming in now and telling them that what got them to that spot is not going to keep them there? Naturally there is a resistance to change an approach that has been so successful for so long. It is a very legitimate concern to wonder why you should take the leap of faith and change. Will this new behavior prove equally successful?
There is a common idea in the business world that you should stick with what works. There are a number of old sayings that reinforce this, from “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” to “Don’t change horses mid-stream.”
The reality for executives is that when you rise through the ranks of an organization, you’ll find that each individual level has a different set of rules because you have a different function. So what works at a director level is not going to work at a vice president level. The issue is that no one ever sits down and tells you the rules and then tells you how those rules change.
If that doesn’t motivate them, then sad to say you need to work on their exit strategy. This is the time to lay down your cards and fold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
