The HR Whisperer

I was watching an old Cesar Milan rerun the other day on how to train puppies and in it he introduced a new pitbull puppy named Junior.  Now for anyone who watches the Dog Whisperer, you know that his all time fav and constant pit companion, Daddy, passed away in February of this year at the ripe old dog age of 15.

In Cesar’s Way magazine, Milan discusses his selection of Junior:

“…when the time came – about a year-and-a-half ago – I took Daddy along. Any newcomer in our house would first have to get Daddy’s approval. That’s how we wound up at the home of a friend whose female pit bull had given birth to a litter about two months earlier. One puppy, all gray with just a little dash of white on his chest, caught my attention immediately. Some people – the Dali Lama, for instance – have this calm energy. So do some dogs. Daddy has it. And I quickly realized that this little gray puppy had it too. In fact, he reminded me of Daddy when he was a puppy…”

This got me thinking about succession planning.  That is what Milan was doing when he found Junior – preparing for a new Daddy or top dog.

When was the last time you had succession planning on the agenda?

Executive transition is a crucial moment in any organization’s life and should be broached even when nobody’s anticipating a change in leadership.  Think back to 2004 when McDonald’s CEO Jim Canalupo died from a heart attack; the company named Charlie Bell six hours later.  Then a few weeks after that, Bell was diagnosed with cancer and the board again needed to make a replacement.  Sometimes a company has time to prepare – and sometimes they don’t.

Without a plan, an executive leaving can be uncertain, painful and difficult, both operationally and politically.  It’s hard to think strategically when you’re busy putting out a fire.  So, here’s three things to think about in preparing for succession.

Have a bus book.  Robert VanHook and Jackie Eder-VanHook call this the “what to do if the executive is hit by a bus” plan.  A bus book is a compendium of critical information about an organization.  While it doesn’t take the place of succession planning, the book can help an interim executive get up to speed while the organization assesses its next step.  Bus books should include contact information, organizational policies and procedures, financial statements, audits, budgets, board minutes, staff lists and resumes, important contracts, etc.  Remember, it’s a supplement to the succession plan, not a substitute.

Ensure that there is a succession contingency plan. With a plan in place, the organization will have coverage while leadership decides what its next step should be.  The plan should include an assessment of where the organization is, where it wants to go and what kind of leadership it needs to help it get there.  The plan should also include an outline and timeline of succession procedures, a communications plan that discusses who should be told of executive departures and when, a plan for how the leader will be replaced and a financial plan for covering the costs of replacement, whether the successor comes from inside or outside the organization.

Align the succession plan with the organizational strategy from a people as well as a business perspective.  This is key.  There are a ton of examples out there of senior leaders brought into place in a succession arrangement – and failing spectacularly.  Emotional intelligence is just as important as business acumen.  Think of when Sam Walton retired in 1988 and put David Glass in place.  Wal-Mart did great financially, but from an emotional intelligence perspective, not so much.  Same thing with Carly Fiorina and HP.  Great culture shift when she took over the reins, but at a huge cost to employees.  It was no surprise that employees at one of the HP plants passed out Ding Dongs to announce “the witch is dead” when Carly was fired in early 2005. 

Finally, make sure that your succession plan has a process to recruit high potential employees, develop their skills and abilities and prepare them for advancement.  Succession planning is not just for senior leadership positions; it is often the mid- level positions that are the most crucial to the organization in terms of business and cultural success.  These mid-level positions are a great feeder pool and often are ignored in favor of bringing in someone new in. 

Planning takes energy and time but it’s worth it.  Do you have a Junior ready in your organization?

It kills me, just kills me, when I read about HR-related issues in BusinessWeek magazine.  I know  it is a business-related sheet and all, but they don’t always make me feel all warm and fuzzy when they start talking about the human side of things.  It’s not often that an article will catch my eye, but in this case one did and so is the inspiration for this week’s blog. 

The October 5^th article, “The No-Cost Way to Motivate,” by Patrick Lencioni who also wrote The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, focuses on the fact that no matter who you are or what you do, everyone wants someone to be interested in them, both personally and professionally.  Lencioni says:

                “One of the greatest causes of misery for employees is the feeling that the person they work for isn’t interested in who they are and what goes on in their lives, personally or professionally. Regardless of how much money people make and whether their jobs suit them, if they feel anonymous they’ll dread going to work – and return home deflated…a manager needs to be interested in employees from a professional standpoint too, not only in job details, but also in motivation. And a big part of this is helping people figure out why their job matters to someone, somewhere in some way large or small.”

The famous Hawthorne Studies of 1924 found that if managers paid a more attention to employees and seemed to care about them, it raised morale and increased productivity.  That was followed by an additional 80+ years of research that essentially told us the same thing.  Then in 2008, Towers Perrin did an employee engagement study that found that  firms with the highest percent of engaged employees increased income 19% and earnings per share 28%. 

So it seems everybody is getting on the bus.  Even BusinessWeek.  So why don’t we see it in practice then?

As the HR Whisperer, this particular concept is one that I have been preaching about for years.  To be motivated at work, everyone needs what I call the EDA:  exercise, discipline and affection.*  You’ve got these, then you’ve got engagement.

Want to motivate employees and get them engaged?  Then use EDA:

Exercise – Give employees the opportunity to improve their skills and capabilities.  There are a ton of ways to do this, such as through education and training,  job enrichment or enlargement, coaching and feedback.  Provide opportunities for folks to have input into decision-making and to be innovative in their thinking or problem solving.  Exercising the brain keeps people interested and involved.

Discipline – Work with employees to set goals and strategies to achieve those goals.  The discipline of planning the work and working the plan creates that line of sight for achievement.  Additionally, provide challenging work assignments that not only broaden skills, but can serve as career advancement opportunities.  This will demonstrate to employees that stick-to-itness will reap rewards.

Affection – Employees continually tell us they want senior management interested in their well being and good relationships with their supervisors.  Lack of a good supervisor relationship is the number one reason people leave their jobs.  In Social Intelligence and the Biology of the Pack Leader, I talk about the importance of the supervisor-employee relationship.  To me, this is the biggie — and Lencioni agrees.

Of course there is no sure fire, quick fix.  Motivation depends on the individual’s perception of what is a valued motivator to them.  But even BusinessWeek tells us that if we pay attention to our employees and work to meet their needs, we’re going to get a pretty decent return on our investment.  And that’s a no brainer.

*I must give credit to Cesar Millan, whose catch phrase for creating a balanced canine is “exercise, discipline, and affection.”

Once again I must thank my mentor, Cesar Millan, for the inspiration for this week’s blog.  He said that “when humans bring a dog into their lives, they are most often looking for a companion; what they may not realize is that they are getting a teacher as well.”  This is true in a business sense, too.  When we bring a potential leader into our organization, we should be getting someone who can teach or positively influence others.  But teaching goes both ways…is it really possible to teach someone to be an effective leader or is it just genetics coming into play?

Many organizations decide they want to implement a leadership development program because they need better leaders or people who could be put into some kind of succession plan.  The HR department gets the charge to put “something together” and manages to get someone to run the program, get people into it and maybe even toss in a measure or two to try to link the success of the program to a business goal–all within a few months.  Is it any surprise then, that so many of these programs lose steam after one year or fall flat due to budget cuts?  Aside from the timing and operational issues, the real question centers on whether or not leadership development programs truly teach people to be good leaders.

Leadership by its definition is a very complex.  Some say that leadership is a natural thing, that we are born with the innate qualities it takes to be a leader.  Psychologists have continuously searched for the personal attributes that would describe leaders and differentiate them from the rest of the pack.  A large body of research supports the theory that the “Big Five” of personality traits underlie all others and encompass most of the significant variation in human personality. In addition to providing a cohesive framework, research has also found strong relationships between the Big Five and job performance, especially in terms of successful leadership.  It’s no surprise then that tools like the Myers-Briggs’ MBTI® or DiSC® tend to be a part of LD programs.

More recent research shows that effective leaders have emotional intelligence (EI).  Daniel Goleman found that high levels of EI predicts high performance.  I would even go so far as to say that the combination of EI and the Big Five trait of extroversion defines charisma.  A definitive study conducted in 1999 on the personalities of two executive management teams found that over a period of five years the charismatic personality of the executive manager and of the team he selected was key to understanding a company’s rise or decline in the market.  

Hmmm.

Now on the other hand, behavioral theories focus on identifying the specific behaviors that differentiate leaders from nonleaders, which implies that these behaviors can be taught, i.e., leadership is a competency that can be broken down into concrete sets of trainable skills.  The most comprehensive of the behavioral theories resulted from research conducted at Ohio State University in the late 40s where the researchers narrowed a thousand different leadership dimensions into two categories: (1) task/structure and (2) relationship/consideration.  The managerial grid developed by Blake and Mouton and the contingency leadership theory developed by Hersey and Blanchard in the 1960s serve as the landmarks for situational leadership theory today.  The Hersey-Blanchard theory in particular focuses on the leader being able to select the right behavioral style based on followers’ willingness and ability.   

So, in my mind good leadership really is a combination of personality and environment. Which brings us back to our original question:  can people be trained in leadership?  The answer to me is an unequivocal yes.  Strong, results-driven leadership development programs worth their salt screen for the necessary Big Five personality traits and then provide adult-centered interventions to develop the skills necessary to:

• Run the task/structure of a business, such as strategic planning and financial management.
• Develop the relationship/consideration in teams, such as communication and conflict management.
• Understand the self and corresponding behavior by opening the Johari Window through extensive feedback, coaching and 360° profiling.

Another question:  if “nature” and “nurture” are important elements of leader effectiveness then, how does experience play a part?  Many believe that the value of on-the-job experience is a strong predictor of leadership effectiveness. Research, however shows that experience alone is usually a very poor predictor of leadership.  There have been numerous studies of military officers, shop supervisors, and school principals that demonstrate that experienced leaders tend to be no more effective than leaders who have little experience.  The problem seems to be in the variability of the situations a leader finds himself in that influence whether or not the experience will transfer to that situation.  Another problem is the assumption that the amount of time a leader spends in a particular position is really a true measure of experience.  So, LD programs need to provide education, training and experience through action learning.

Remember the heroes of September 11?  They may not have had the particular experience of being attacked by terrorists, but may have had the necessary personality traits and training in leading others and influencing them to action.

And that’s what we really need in any LD program.