|
In this edition:
Marshall Goldsmith on "The Skill That Separates"
Patricia Wheeler on "Losing Your Talent?"
May 2006
The Skill That Separates
By Marshall Goldsmith
Two highly accomplished lawyers are sitting at the bar at Sparks Steakhouse in New York. One is my friend's lawyer, Tom, the other is Tom's law partner, Kevin. They're having a leisurely drink, waiting for their table to open up. Sparks is a landmark steakhouse where a handful of New York's rich, powerful, and glamorous are in attendance most nights. On this night, the A-list name is superstar attorney David Boies, who argued the U.S. government's case against Microsoft. He makes a beeline to the bar to say hello to Kevin, whom he knows from previous cases.
Boies joins Tom and Kevin for a drink. A few minutes later, Kevin gets up to make a phone call outside. Boies remains at the bar, talking to Tom for 30 minutes. "I'd never met Boies before," Tom said. "He didn't have to hang around the bar talking to me. And I have to tell you, I wasn't bowled over by his intelligence, or his piercing questions, or his anecdotes. What impressed me was that when he asked a question, he waited for the answer. He not only listened, he made me feel like I was the only person in the room."
I submit that Tom's last 13 words perfectly describe the single skill that separates the great from the near great. When Kevin inexplicably disappeared, Boies stuck around and made a lasting positive impression on Tom. The two attorneys have different practices; the chance that Tom could somehow help Boies one day is virtually nil. Boies clearly wasn't looking to score points. In showing interest, asking questions, and listening for the answers without distraction, Boies was simply practicing the one skill that has made him inarguably great at relating to people.
I'm not sure why all of us don't execute this precious interpersonal maneuver all the time. We're certainly capable of doing so when it really matters to us. If we're on a sales call with a prospect who could make or break our year, we prepare by knowing something personal about the prospect. We ask questions designed to reveal his inclinations, and we scan his face for clues.
The only difference between us and the supersuccessful among us-the near great and the great-is that the greats do this all the time. It's automatic. There's no on-off switch for caring, empathy, and showing respect. It's always on.
So why don't we do it? We forget. We get distracted. We don't have the mental discipline to make it automatic.
Ninety percent of this skill is listening, of course. And listening requires the discipline to concentrate. So I've developed a simple exercise to test my clients' listening skills. Close your eyes. Count slowly to 50 with one simple goal: You can't let another thought intrude into your mind. You must concentrate on maintaining the count.
Sounds simple, but incredibly, more than half of my clients can't do it. Somewhere around 20 or 30, nagging thoughts invade their brain. They think about a problem at work, or their kids, or how much they ate for dinner the night before. This may sound like a concentration test, but it's really a listening exercise. After all, if you can't listen to yourself (someone you presumably like) as you count to 50, how will you ever be able to listen to another person?
Like any exercise, this drill both exposes a weakness and helps us get stronger. If I ask you to touch your toes and you can't, we've revealed that your muscles are tight. But if you practice each day, eventually you'll become more limber.
Once you can complete the exercise without interruption, you're ready for a test drive. Make your next interpersonal encounter-whether it's with your spouse or a colleague or a stranger-an exercise in treating the other person like a million bucks. Employ these tiny tactics: Listen. Don't interrupt. Don't finish the other person's sentences. Don't say, "I knew that." Don't even agree with the other person. If he praises you, just say thank you. Don't use the words "no," "but," and "however." Don't let your eyes wander elsewhere while the other person is talking. Maintain your end of the dialogue by asking intelligent questions that show you're paying attention, move the conversation forward, and require the person to talk (while you listen).
Your only aim is to let the other person feel that he or she is important. If you can do that, you'll uncover a glaring paradox: The more you subsume your desire to shine, the more you will shine in the other person's eyes. You may feel like a dullard as you listen quietly, but invariably the other person will say, "What a great guy!" You'd say the same thing about anyone who made you feel like the most important person in the room.
Originally published in Fast Company, July 2005.
Marshall Goldsmith is a world authority in helping successful leaders achieve positive, measurable change in behavior: for themselves, their people and their teams. He has been named one of the top 50 leaders influencing the field of management over the last century (American Management Association), one of the five most respected executive coaches (Forbes) and among the top ten executive educators (Wall Street Journal). He is the founder of the Alliance for Strategic Leadership and Marshall Goldsmith Partners. Marshall invites you to visit his library (MarshallGoldsmithLibrary.com) for articles and resources you can use. This article was originally published in Fast Company Magazine, February 2005.
Losing Your Talent?
by Patricia Wheeler
We hear so much these days about best practices for talent retention. Many managers still think attracting and keeping the best talent is driven by salary and benefits. Not so, for the most part, the research says. Interviewing 60,000 people over twenty years, the Saratoga Institute found the most frequently cited reason for leaving a job was difficulty with an immediate supervisor. In a 2003 study of 28,000 former healthcare workers, the communications firm J. Walter Thompson found that more employees leave because of bad managers than for any other single, controllable reason.
I had a powerful reminder of this last month when Jim, a former client, called in a panic, concerned he had made the wrong career decision. Jim is a talented senior attorney within a highly technical industry. He had accepted a position offering a substantial salary increase, which would involve relocating his family. He was excited about the prospect of joining a highly visible organization, a recognized leader within his field, and his family was already packing for the move.
Jim told me on the call that he was concerned about the chemistry between himself and his manager. In his profession, Jim is known as an industry expert, highly skilled at working independently and effectively. He's self aware and a moderately good team player. He kept having the nagging feeling that something was amiss in his new position. As he talked with his new manager since accepting the offer, he became increasingly worried about having too little autonomy and control in his new position and that his new boss was a micromanager.
I suggested that he call his new boss, share his concerns, and determine the degree that they could work collaboratively with one another. Jim has spent a great deal of time honing his executive presence and has a good ability to deal constructively with difficult issues. Nevertheless, Jim was concerned about this conversation and practiced this with me in advance of calling his boss. I felt confident that he would convey his concerns in a style that would advance their relationship.
Jim called me back with the news that the conversation had been disastrous. His suspicions were confirmed. Not only was his boss a micromanager, the situation was worse than he thought. The manager, Paul, made it clear that every decision Jim made would have to pass through him, not just at the outset but as ongoing policy. Paul's attitude, he said, had been dismissive, bordering on rude. And he did not convey back to Jim the pressures and stressors that were making him anxious and driving his felt need to control. Paradoxically, Jim's experience and independence would have helped Paul with this complex job. But under stress, Paul returned to his default setting - top down and controlling.
Additionally, Jim found that there was little flexibility in personal time off which would make the family's move more problematic. Jim was at a difficult crossroads. He had already left his previous job and the moving van was on its way.
The next call came from Jim's wife. "Please tell Jim not to take the job," she implored. "I know that he will be miserable working for Paul, and no amount of money is worth that kind of misery. I'll support the family for a while and we'll stay here. Life is too short to be unhappy."
So what's the net result here? A leading organization missed out on the chance to land a great performer. I'll bet the new company's senior leadership will never know why this talented professional did not join their team. Who knows how many gifted employees they may lose to poor leadership? Paul may be confused about what happened as well. As a leader, he may not be adequately self-aware to notice when he resorts to pressure-driven behavior. He needs to consistently act on the knowledge that highly trained, motivated professionals need ample autonomy and flexibility to perform at their best. And this requires clear dialogue to determine expectations, roles and responsibilities, reporting relationships, and degrees of autonomy and empowerment.
What keeps talented people within an organization? Beverly Kaye and Sharon Jordan-Evans, in their survey of over 12,000 workers, found that providing challenging assignments, great co-workers, and opportunities for learning and development were ranked as more important to retention than finances. In my experience coaching smart, highly trained individuals, I find time and time again that talented contributors who feel valued and respected by their leaders, particularly their direct manager, are less likely to leave an organization even when offered a more financially lucrative package.
So as you think about leadership in your organization....both your own style and the style of the managers who report to you.....ask yourself how well you and your reports measure up to the challenge of providing employees with the type of leadership that drives talent retention and employee engagement. If the question is how to attract, keep and develop smart and committed people, the answer is largely about how consciously they are managed, trusted, developed and empowered.
Life is too short to be miserable, and talented contributors know this. Be self-aware and rise to the leadership challenge or risk losing them.
Patricia Wheeler, Ph.D. is an executive coach and consultant who helps smart people become better leaders. As Senior Partner in the Levin Group LLC, she has spent 15 years specializing in organizational systems dynamics and coaching senior leaders A distance-learning expert, Patricia uses an action-oriented and results-based approach to coach teams within global organizations, leading to increased synergy and bottom-line results. She is also a member of the Alliance for Strategic Leadership, a global network of senior executive coaches and consultants founded by Marshall Goldsmith.
Leading News is published by:
Patricia Wheeler, Ph.D.
1609 S. Ponce de Leon
Atlanta GA 30307
404 377-9408
|
