One of the chief reasons that so many people are uncomfortable with change is because it happens to them not for them. This point was made to me in an interview with personal branding expert, William Arruda . It was in reference to a company that had relocated its offices from one city to another. Many employees were quite discomfited by the move.

Employees of course have two choices when faced with significant changes -- a move, a reorganization, or even a denial of promotion. They can leave and find work elsewhere, or they can remain and seek to make the best of it. Simple choice yes but unless employees take ownership of their decision they will easily revert to victimhood.

Taking ownership shifts the onus from something being done to you to something over which you have control. Asserting control over one’s destiny is critical if ownership is to survive. Such advice is particularly important during times of personal disruption. How you assert yourself is critical to your ability to survive but also thrive. So here are three questions to ask yourself when faced with disruptive change.

What do I do now? Understand you have a choice. You can opt out and not accept the change. Of course we may feel for financial reasons (or to maintain health benefits) we cannot do so, but do understand that, unless you have been sentenced to jail, you can decide what to do. Making the decision to stay for whatever reason means that you have made a decision. Likewise if you decide to leave, that is a decision.

What do I do next? Make your boss aware of what you have decided to do. If you are staying in, you want to make certain your boss knows that you are still part of the team. If your disappointment is evident, as it might be with a loss of a promotion, acknowledge it but do not dwell on the negativity. Reassure the boss that you are still in the game and want to be considered as a contributor. Such behavior will mark you as one who has a strong sense of self and can deal with disappointment.

How can I make this work for me? Look for ways to turn the “sow’s ear into a silk purse.” Avoid the “coulda, woulda, shoulda” self-talk; that’s self-defeating. Look for ways to turn the change into new opportunities. For example, a corporate reorganization may have put a rival into another spot. Now is your opportunity to show what you can do. Find ways to assert your can-do spirit. Be proactive. Look for ways to make a positive difference.

These questions are very simple to articulate and but the answers they provoke are not necessarily easy to execute. As Harvard professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter has taught us: we only change when it hurts too much not to change. A corporate reorganization, a transfer, or failure to win promotion are changes that may be perceived as a loss of something: position, location or opportunity.

None of us is comfortable losing anything, particularly our pride. So it’s okay to feel down or sorry for yourself for a day or so. But then you must come to terms with the change. You need to make a decision about what you will do.

Change is part of the human condition; it is an organic process. And within an organization of human beings it is a dynamic that alters the status quo. How you deal with the change says much about your ability to cope as well as your ability to navigate circumstances that may not be the most favorable to you. Owning the change, and making it work for you, is critical to your ability to demonstrate resilience as well as an ability to move forward. It is very definitely a mark of leadership.

Posted FastCompany.com 3.30.10

"Most new leaders advance in their careers due their proficiency with technical skills, but they don't necessarily have the leadership abilities needed for success in their higher-level positions," says Steve Cohen, senior vice president with Right Management. Bingo, Steve!

Time and again, I have witnessed talented and productive employees move into management not only without the necessary training, but also without a real desire to manage others. This phenomenon is particularly acute among employees with technical skills such as design, engineering or science. It also appears in high-producing sales people who can make more selling than they do managing.

Moving into management is a huge leap of faith. First, for many employees, it means giving up what they really love doing. That's why they're considered promotable in the first place, because they're good at their jobs. But too frequently managers-to-be are not asked if they really want to move up, and worse they're not prepared to manage others. So before you consider promoting a competent employee ask three questions:

Why does this person want to manage? Technically competent employees typically enjoy their jobs. Many want to continue being designers, engineers and scientists; management to them is administrative, not something worthy of their skill set. Ask the prospective manager if he actually wants to manage and, if so, why? More money and prestige may be incentives but they aren't enough to sustain a career.

What additional contributions can this person make as a manager? Employees who are contributing at a high level are hard to find. Sometimes organizations forget that promoting the high-level performer into management means she will not be doing her old job. On the other hand, other organizations will prevent a good employee from advancing because she is too productive. For employees who do not want to advance, the answer is to leave them be; for those who want to advance, organizations need to find ways to let them grow and develop. Otherwise they will leave to work for another company.

How will we support this new manager? If a 2008 study by Right Management is any indication, the answer is, "not well." Just three in 10 new managers receive coaching, even less than the 35% that senior leaders (including CEOs) receive. Coaching is not the only solution; support can come in the form of professional development via executive education courses. In-company mentoring is another solution. Regardless, the newly promoted manager needs some help, sooner than later.

Some employees have the gumption (as well as the self-knowledge) to say no to the promotion. They know that they enjoy pursuing their chosen passion rather than becoming a manager. On the other hand, those who do want to manage eventually discover one of the hidden pleasures of management: leading a team for results. Those who succeed in this endeavor are called leaders!

First published by Harvard Business Publishing 08.11.2008

Artists who seek to influence political discourse fail more often than they succeed because they lack credibility. We view them as artists not as people we want to embrace for their political points of view.

An artist's job is to tell a good story. Principals in critically acclaimed movies like The Hurt Locker and The Messenger have been very clear to separate their personal views about war from the stories they tell about their subjects. By focusing on the human stories, the filmmakers provide insights into the physical and emotional toll that war exacts on soldier's lives. Both films succeed because they are finely executed dramas not because they espouse a political point of view.

A lesson for leaders who seek to persuade is to bring people to your side, not alienate them. That is why storytelling is so powerful. It puts a human face on what you wish to communicate. The best stories are those narratives that include your stakeholders, that is, customers, employees and others who stand to benefit from what you propose, be it a product, a service or a program. You show people consequences rather than dictate them. In a drama, the characters have a life of their own; in a polemic the characters move in step with an agenda.

For leaders this means you argue your point of view with a respect for those who listen. Effective leaders are those who trust their followers to come to the right conclusions if they are shown the benefits of the leader's point of view. Those who seek to manipulate points of view from either the right or the left demonstrate contempt for their followers; they do not trust the people to make up their own minds.

A classic film about political manipulation made in 1957 is A Face in the Crowd in which Andy Griffith plays Larry "Lonesome" Rhodes, a country singer-turned-populist moralizer. Rhodes' motivation is personal greed. Filmmaker Elia Kazan does not preach; he lets his characters move the story forward to its inevitable conclusion: living a lie has consequences.

Likewise in the recently released Invictus , the movie makes clear that the apartheid system in South Africa was morally wrong. The power of the film comes through not in its polemics but in the way that Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and Matt Damon as South African Rugby team captain Francois Pienaar connect as human beings and mutually inspire each other. Director Clint Eastwood depicts Mandela's nobility and Pienaar's steadfastness in dramatic terms that underscore humanity over politics.

When it comes to art and politics, many artists would be wise to leave the preaching to pastors and the hectoring to pundits. As Shakespeare put it, "Better a witty fool than a foolish wit." Focus on telling a good story and let the public draw its own conclusions

First posted WashingtonPost.com/On Leadership 3.09.10

One reason that General Motors might be on the right track to becoming a viable business once again may be the result of something its former CEO, Fritz Henderson, did before he was sacked. Last year, according to an article in BusinessWeek , CEO Fritz Henderson asked consulting firm, Booz & Co., to help department chiefs identify middle managers who are not averse to taking risks. Not surprisingly, most of candidates identified were not high powered executives or those on the “fast track.” Rather these folks were often maverick types who know how to get things done by manipulating the system in order to get things done right.

What GM is doing is mining the talent of its leaders in the middle. To lead up effectively, there are three characteristics you need to leverage.

Credibility.You must know your stuff especially when you are not the one in charge. When you are seeking to make a case to senior manager, or even to colleagues, what you know must be grounded in reality. At the same time, so often, as is the case at GM, you need to be able to think and act differently. So your track record reinforces your credibility. That is, what you have done before gives credence to what you want to do in the future.

Influence. Knowing how to persuade others is critical for someone seeking to effect change. If you do not have line authority, how else but through influence can you succeed? Your influence is based on credibility, but also on your proven ability to get things done. Sometimes persuasion comes down to an ability to sweet talk the higher ups as well as put a bit of muscle on colleagues (nicely of course) in order push your initiative through.

Respect. Mavericks, which GM said it was looking for, may not always be the most easiest people to get along with on a daily basis. After all, they are ones seeking to buck the system. But mavericks who succeed are ones who have the best interests of the organization at heart and in time earn the respect of thier colleagues.

One maverick I know who has been pushing to change the way the U.S. Army trains and promotes its officer corps is Don Vandergriff . A former Army major and twice named ROTC instructor of the year while at Georgetown, Vandergriff has tirelessly badgered the Army’s senior leadership to institute changes that would recognize and promote officers who knew how to lead from the middle.

And now, after more than a decade of his writing and teaching, it is paying off. West Point has become the latest but perhaps the most prestigious Army institution to teach principles of adaptive decision making that Don developed. Many of Don’s students have implemented such lessons successfully under combat situations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There are no guarantees that effective leadership from the middle will save a dying enterprise. After all, aside from such super achievers, there are a great many other people who are incompetent, ones who through neglect or ignorance or both allowed the company to drift into mediocrity and failure. Such people are typically not the kind of folks who know how to mastermind a turnaround.

Savvy leaders in middle management, however, are essential for a turnaround, but speaking more broadly are responsible for successful companies overall. Senior leaders are seldom the ones doing the real work; that falls to men and women who by dint of diligence and intelligence translate the strategies into tactics and follow through on them to keep enterprise afloat. As such it is good practice, as GM is doing, to identify such people and learn from them so that they can teach others how to think and act creatively for the good of all.

Posted FastCompany.com 3.16.10

When The First 90 Days was first published in 2003, author and Harvard professor Michael Watkins said that “learning about the culture and politics of a new organization” was the most difficult challenge for a manager from the outside assuming an executive position. As Watkins told Martha Lagace , “It’s so easy to fall into pitfalls in these areas and really damage your credibility.” Since that time, the book has become a best‑seller and a classic that many rely on for advice on navigating transitions.

Since landing a new job in a tight economy is challenging enough, you want to get off to the right start. Addressing the issue of getting to know the culture is a good starting point, and perhaps it is one that many executives overlook because they are so absorbed with learning the job that they may inadvertently overlook the people aspect. After all, their new boss is not evaluating the newcomer on how many friends he has gained, he is evaluating him on results.

So how would you go about learning the culture? Perhaps we can take a page from what cultural anthropologists do: observe and reflect. Here are some suggestions.

Keep your eyes open. Watch how people interact with each other. Are they open and sharing, or are they closed and hoarding? The first is a sign that people are comfortable; the second is a sign that something is drastically wrong.

Ask questions. If you do not know something, ask. It is a sign of intelligence to ask questions, and as many have remarked, when you are beginning a new job, there is no such thing as a dumb question. The converse may be true; not asking questions demonstrates ignorance, and maybe some arrogance.

Determine consequences. What happens when people do things right? Are they recognized or ignored? And if they screw-up, how are they treated? Like pariahs or as someone who needs a helping hand? It is important to figure these things out if you expect to make your way.

Change is always difficult, but it is especially difficult when you seem to be the only one changing. Working in a new culture thrusts you into a hyper learning mode. Everything is new and different and you are constantly adapting to the here and now.

One piece of advice for this transition, and something that Watkins notes in The First Ninety Days. Do not forget what got you here. Assuming that your new job is an increase in responsibility, you have earned it by demonstrating competency and gaining results in your previous positions. Therefore, you are good at what you do; you may adopt new processes but your core skills of judgment, decision-making and evaluation are sound.

And if perchance this job is a demotion of sort, then recall what mistakes you made. Now you have the chance to do things right and wipe the slate clean. In both instances you need to keep your eyes and ears open. [Keeping a copy of The First Ninety Days handy would not be a bad idea either.]


Posted FastCompany.com 3.09.10