HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER

Title: Microtrends (Book)

Competency: strategic planning, change management

Who benefits: planners, researchers, entrepreneurs, HRD professionals

Consultant Usage: self-development; otherwise limited, except for recommendation to clients

What’s it about? January is almost over.  For some of us it is the month we do our personal planning and goal setting.  For even fewer of us, we take a long-range look at our personal or professional lives. 

So let me end my postings for the month with a recommendation for some interesting reading about the future.

Who has been your favorite futurist?  Alvin Toffler (Future Shock– the 70s), John Naisbitt (Megatrends – the 80s); Faith Popcorn (The Popcorn Report– the 90s); or maybe Malcolm Gladwell (The Tipping Point – 2000s).   I liked them all, and they are all still pumping out books.

But I just came across a new face, at least new to me.  Mark Penn has written a book called Microtrends: The small forces behind tomorrow’s big changes.

Penn is the author of the term “soccer mom” and it serves as an example of his style.  He defines his book as “based on the ideas that the most powerful forces in our society are the emerging, counterintuitive trends that are shaping tomorrow right before us.”

Penn is a numbers guy, a statistician, and you will find lots of graphs and charts.  But he doesn’t bore you with numbers; he entertains you with them.

If you are involved in planning for the future or coaching or teaching others who are, give this book a look.  If you are not so involved, you still might read it for enjoyment.  Where else can you find:

–old people who could retire but millions keep on working because they want to (I was about to dispute that then I realized…hey, I am one of them!  But the guy has the stats to back up the claim.)
–3.4 million Americans commute 90 minutes or more a day; 4.2 million Americans stay home in their PJs and work in the home office.  Now if those aren’t polar opposite trends….
–Women are taking over the “wordy professions”: journalism, law, marketing, and communications

Even more importantly, he gives some future analysis of what these trends might mean to business; government; to you, me and our neighbors.  Good stuff to chew on even if you should disagree with him. 

A little about his style.  He writes with a certain degree of whimsy.  I love it; but he risks offending the sensitive.  Here are just a few of the provocative chapter headings:

–Office Romancers
–Ardent Amazons
–Pro-Semites
–Christian Zionists
–Newly Released Ex-Cons

Love him or hate him, it is hard to put this book down.   

Technorati Tags: micro trends, mini trends, futurist, soccer moms, life styles, work life, race and religion, work-life balance, bill bradley, william bradley,   bradley

“A telephone survey says that 51 percent of college students drink until they pass out at least once a month. The other 49 percent didn’t answer the phone.”

 Craig Kilborn

OK, I’ve created a number of surveys myself and confess to being interested in the findings¹. Presenting survey results seem to be the latest marketing and advertising vehicle of consulting firms looking for that “buzz” to viral out their brand to anyone who will listen. 

I sure wish it was easy to find the answers to these questions about survey results published:

1. What questions were actually asked?
2. Who actually were asked?
3. Are the people being asked like anyone else?
4. What’s the motivation of the company conducting the survey?
5. Is the sampling adequate to ensure statistical confidence in the results?
6. How many responded compared to how many were asked to reply?
7. Were differences by demographic groups statistically significant or is the gap just interesting?
8. Are the survey findings cross-sectional or longitudinal?
9. What was the entire response scale that was used?
10. Where did the questions come from?
11. Can you link us to the actual study published?

Just because professional mind readers charge me half-price but that doesn’t totally explain how often I am just left totally confused by all the results from recent polls, surveys and best selling books with their own questionnaires that are summarized that on the market today.

OK, I’m confused–Just how disengaged are employees?

A 2006 Gallup study of US employees found that 59% were not engaged and 14% were actively disengaged.  Or it is it 54% not engaged and 17% actively disengaged as cited in another study? According to a recent Towers Perrin study, only 21% of the workfoce is engaged while 38 % are disengaged.  Finally, in a 2007 ASTD in conjunction with the Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp) and Dale Carnegie & Associates found that only 23% were disengaged or minimally engaged.

OK, I’m confused–Do employees leave companies or bad bosses?

In a recent 2007 World of Work survey by Randstad, one-third (33%) of employees thought it was a good time to look for new job opportunities in 2003 and more than half (55%) feel it’s a good time to start looking in the most recent analysis.

In another poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), 78% of employees reported they were likely to start a new job search. Approximately 65 percent of senior executives reported currently seeking new  employment versus 45% of middle managers. Good to see executives leaving their own leadership!

OK, I’m confused–What Retains Employees?

In a recent survey by my colleague Beverly Kaye of Career Systems International on retention drivers, she found in an analysis of over 15,000 employees in diverse industries that the most critical factors included: 1) Challenging work (48%); 2) Career Growth (43%); and 3) Relationships (38%).  Pay was up there as well but these findings really hammer home the shift from “job security” to the new paradigm of “employability security.”  Or so I thought until I read the most recent survey from the Sociey for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

In the 2007 SHRM Job Satisfaction survey results just published, employees said they want most of all from work: 1) Salary; 2) Benefits; 3) Job Security; 4) Work/Life Balance and 5) Better Communication to Employees from Management.  These findings didn’t even seem to match what human resources practioners thought employees would say was most satisfying top them.  These same practitioners thought that the the “top five” factors contributing to what most motivates employees to be: 1) Relationship with One’s Manager; 2) Pay; 3) Recognition; 4) Company Benefits; and 5) Better Communication to Employees from Management.

SHRM did try to explain the surprising finding of “job security” rated as high as the third most important job satisfaction driver by saying that “this aspect was less important for employees with two years or less of job tenure compared with employees having six to 10 years of tenure.”  If things aren’t still clear about these survey results, maybe Paul Simon’s lyrics to his song “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover” will be a good explanation.

OK, I’m confused–Just how Stressed are Employees?

The same 2007 Randstad Work Survey suggested that slightly more than one-quarter of all employers work fewer than 40 hours a week with 65% averaging between 41 to 60 hours. If you ask supervisors and managers, 9% said they definitely work more than 61 hours per week.

Our own research at Envisia Learning suggests that it might depend on just how you ask the work stress question².  In an earlier set of engagement surveys with diverse clients we consistently found that approximately 65% of all employee reported “I often feel pressure and stress on my job” and 40% reported they disagree or strongly disagree with the statement “The amount of pressue and stress on my job is reasonable and rarely excessive.”  Finally, a recent national survey by the UK based Health and Safety Executive reported that 20% of all employees there report their “job is very or extremely stressful.” 
OK, I’m confused–are omega-3 supplements really cardioprotective ?  Survey says…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: surveys, Envisia, Envisia learing, retention, talent management, engagement surveys, job satisfaction, worklife balance, job stress, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Nowack, K. (1990). Getting Them Out and Getting Them Back. American Society for Training and Development, Volume 44, 82-85 [↩]
2. Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12 [↩]

HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER

Title: What Leaders Really Do (Book)

Competencies: Leadership, Managing Change, Driving Change

Who benefits: Senior managers and students of leadership

Consultant Usage: Coaching

What’s it about? As I sit here writing this entry I occasionally look outside and see the rain coming down.  The rain is a popular topic in this town.  Everyone talks about it.  And after all the talk, it still continues to rain. 

Reminds me a little of leadership.  Is there a more written about or talked about topic in our field?  And does the writing or talking bring change?

Personally, I would like to see more writing and talking about practical steps leaders at all levels can do.  Someone once wrote that there is nothing like a good theory.  I agree.  As far as it goes.  But there is also nothing better than turning a good theory into an effective practice.

I have my personal theory about writing.  I think great writers, especially in the field of human resource development are often given less recognition than they deserve.  They write in a clear, concise and direct manner.  They are easily understood.  Too often we say “Oh, that is just plain old common sense.  Everyone already knew that.”  As I believe I said in an early entry on this Blog, if that is the case, then why hasn’t everyone been doing it?

Such is the case in this book by retired Harvard Professor John P. Kotter.  It is written in simple and easy to understand words (notice I didn’t say “verbiage”!)  It is a straightforward book that lays down some very clear principles.  A note here: This is not a new book.  Its publication date is 1999.  It is a short book, about 180 pages.  And at least two of the chapters were taken from earlier HBR articles (What Leaders Really Do and Managing Your Boss).

This is not a sugarcoated book.  Kotter doesn’t say being a leader/manager is easy.  He says the opposite.  And he makes it clear that being a leader/manager is a fulltime job, not something you do for an hour in the morning and then get on with “your own work”.  (Someone ought to do an article on “title inflation”, the notion of giving a professional a managerial title, two sets of job duties…and not enough time to either properly!)

What makes Kotter’s book unique in my mind is that he clearly states that leading and managing are two sides of the same coin.  No more either/or.  Both.  Simple statement, but he was one of the first to articulate it. 

From there he lays out a number of observations and principles that the leader/manager needs to follow.  He then specifies activities and skill sets the leader/manager needs.  Here are three examples:
1. Setting a Direction vs. Planning and Budgeting
2. Aligning People vs. Organizing and Staffing
3. Motivating People vs. Controlling and Problem Solving

He doesn’t tell you when to pick up the phone, write the email, or walk to the next office or out on the floor.  If you need that much specific information, the curmudgeon in me says you are in the wrong profession.  But if you can use some guidelines and keen observations and supply your own details, this book is a worthy read.

And I suspect that many of you reading this entry have already read the book or at least the articles leading to the book.  For those of you have not, don’t be fooled by the shortness of the book or the fact that it is 10 years old.  It’s solid stuff!

Technorati Tags: leaders, leadership, managing, managing change, driving change, change strategies, leading change, power, effective managers, managing your boss, bill bradley, william bradley,   bradley

“I have yet to hear a man ask for advice on how to combine marriage and a career.”

Gloria Steinem

A recent study by Fiona Jones and colleagues suggest that women under stress at work are significantly more likely than men to exercise less, consume more caffeinated drinks, and eat more unhealthy foods such as high-fat snacks, high sugar treats¹.

For men, it seemed to be moods and not total number of hours worked or the type of pressure jobs they occupied that was associated with poor eating habits or lack of exercise.

The study by Jones was done by asking 422 employees to complete daily diaries measuring moods and health behaviors over a 4-week period. Whereas negative mood was negatively related to health behavior for both men and women, work hours had negative impacts for women only.

This study also verified what has been shown in previous research–jobs with a greater sense of control built into them (even when there is a heavy work load and pressure) are better for a person’s health and that low control and high demand jobs are significantly worse.

For women with multiple roles and trying to balance work and family demands, this study suggests that long hours at work are particularly dangerous to health.  Ideally, employers should continue to support physical activity at work and look at ways to promote healthy snacking.

This study is consistent with earlier research of mine with 879 professional working women². In this study, professional working women most likely to report high levels of burnout included those who:

• High levels of work and life stress
• High levels of Type A behavior (both achievement striving and anger/hostility)
• Low hardiness (sense of control, commitment to work/life and view of change as threatening as opposed to stimulating)
• Poor overall lifestyle habits (e.g., exercise, eating/nutrition, sleep)

For women, it’s still tough to have it all…Be well….

Technorati Tags: work life balance, unhealthy workplace behaviors, stress, coping, job strain, job burnout, health, control, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Jones, F. et al. (2007).  Impact of daily mood, work hours and iso-strain variables on self-reported health behaviors.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (6), 1731-1740 [↩]
2. Nowack, K. & Pentkowski, A. (1994).  Lifestyle habits, substance use and predictors of job burnout in professional working women.  Work and Stress, 8 (1), 19-34 [↩]

HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER

Title: CCL, NTL, SDI

Competency: Leadership, self-development, interpersonal communication styles, managing differences/conflict

Who benefits: Leaders, employees on fast track…or hoping to get on the fast tract, practitioners

Consultant Usage: Coaching, self-development

What’s it about?  It’s still January, not too late to do some self-development planning for the year. 

Here’s my daydream: Boss comes in the office and says, “Can’t give you a raise this year; but you can go to three self-development courses/seminars/workshops of your choosing.  What would you like to attend?”

Well, the no raise part hurts a little, but what an opportunity.  I figure if I pick the right three places to go, if things get a little rough around here I will be in a much improved and more mobile career position. 

Well, I need some goals.  I will keep them simple.  I want to improve my leadership skills.  I want to develop my inter/intrapersonal skills.  I want to be more effective in managing conflict and differences both at work and at home. 

To improve my leadership skills, I would go to the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL).  Since the boss is withholding the raise, maybe I can talk her into sending me to their Brussels campus.  Europe in the Spring.  Not bad.

Why CCL.  Well for starters I love their mission statement: “Our mission is to advance the understanding, practice and development of leadership for the benefit of society worldwide.”  Clear, concise and impactful.  Gotta love it.  And they certainly have high-level recognition from a wide variety of sources (check it out under “quick facts” on their website). 

Now which course to take?  Since I have not previously attended one of their courses, I think I shall go with one of the two “signature” courses: Leadership Development Program, a 360 feedback type program or The Looking Glass Experience, a simulation experience.  Both are appealing.  Hmmm, well I have a few days before I have to make up my mind.

Now, how about Bethel, Maine in the summer.  My second choice is The Human Interaction Laboratory (HIL) from NTL Institute.  The HIL is their core and most requested program. It is an introduction to interpersonal relations, group dynamics, with a focus on developing and practicing effective interpersonal skills and giving and receiving feedback responsibly. 

I attended the Bethel campus in the 70s.  The surroundings were beautiful.  The week was intense, mentally and emotionally challenging and one of the best investments in Me I ever made (well, my employer paid, but still a great investment).  NTL was all about emotional intelligence before there was multiple intelligence, EQ, EI and 360 feedback.  I want to go back for a tune-up and to see what has changed with all the new research, information and insights now available.  My hunch is that the experience today is even better and maybe even more needed.

My third and final destination will be Carlsbad, CA in the fall (just a few miles north of San Diego).  Time to get myself re-certified in the use of the Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI).   Of all the instruments I have used throughout the years, the SDI has been my favorite and most practical.  It’s great for understanding communication styles, how to predict and work with different styles, to honor the diversity of styles, and it is probably the easiest to use. 

And all of the above is good, but it has been most helpful to me as an instructor, as a coach, and in my own personal life as a tool in understanding and managing conflict.  I love you guys!  (If you know the SDI, I am a Blue…we say things like “I love you guys!”)

So boss, you may be stingy with the $$$, but if you will let me go off to those three courses it will be a great year.  

Technorati Tags: leadership, self-development, interpersonal communications, communication styles, managing conflict, managing differences, conflict management, Center for Creative Leadership, CCL, NTL, NTL Institute, Personal Strengths Publishing, Strength Deployment Inventory, SDI, EQ, EI, emotional intelligence, bill bradley, william bradley, bradley

“Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.”

Anonymous

I tried playing baseball when I was in college–pretty good fielder but struck out way too often.  I wonder if it was because my first name starts with the letter “K” instead of another letter? (Note: for non-baseball fans, “K” = strike out)

Maybe.  Some research supports this idea as well as children having first names starting with “A” do better academically then those with “D” of “F” as first names¹.  These authors review 5 studies–each with the same conclusion that people really like their names and initials (often referred to as the Name-Letter Effect). 

Nobody is really sure what’s up with this effect but the findings below on various performance outcomes provides some evidence that name liking impacts life success and outcomes by an implicit and unconscious process.

In their first study reviewing baseball player’s performance from 1913 to the present, those whose names began with the letter “K” struck out at a higher rate (in 18.8% of their plate appearances) than the remaining batters (17.2%), t(6395) = 3.08, p = .002.   No word on whether those on steroids did better though.

In another study, the same researchers explored the relationship between MBA student grades and the initials of their names in a data set from a private University from 1990 until 2004.  They compared students with first or last names starting with “A” or “B” with those with “C” or “D” as well as the rest of the students with names not having these initials.

Students whose names began with “C” or “D” had significantly lower grade point averages than those whose names began with “A” or “B”, (p = .001).  The authors state that “the data for students with initials in the “other” category provide a baseline that shows the effect was driven by students with the initials C and D performing worse than others, rather than by students with the initials A and B performing better than others.”

 In another study, the authors also found that students with names having initials “A” and “B” wound up at much better law schools than others (final sample with 170 law schools and 392,458 lawyers).  To measure law-school quality, they used the 2003 rankings from U.S. News & World Report but categorized them into four groups (low to high). As the quality of schools declined, so did the proportion of lawyers with initials “A” and “B” supporting the “Name-Letter Effect.” However, no word on whether a person who changes their name (e.g., the performer “formally known as….) does well in life.

My Dad’s first initial is an “A” and my Mom’s is a “B” so maybe the genetic combination of their two initials has been helpful to my life and career in some way.  I still can’t hit a curve ball but can still turn a pretty good double play….Be well….

Technorati Tags: surveys, Envisia, Envisia learning, retention, talent management, name-letter effect, unconscious pursuit of performance, academic success, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Nelson, L. & Simmons, J. (2007).  Moniker Maladies: When names sabotage success.  Psychological Science, 18 (12) 1106-1112 [↩]

“Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”

Mark Twain

Another addition of leadership and talent management “facts” from all over the world. Some intuitive and some not….what do you think?

1. CO2 Partners in a recent 2007 Internet survey of over 3,000 employees (90% middle to senior managers) found a supervisor as a source for workplace advice by 11%.  More workers relied on a peer (24%), another senior level employee (15%), a friend outside the company (14%) and mentor or coach (13%).  In response to the question of how often does your boss ask for your advice on solving a problem at work, 3.9% didn’t know, 62.6% said often/occasionally and 32.6% said seldom/never.

2. In a 2006 survey by CCH asking about the effectiveness and use of work/life programs, those rated as most widely used included: 1) EAP 73%; 2) Wellness programs 67%; 3) Leave for school functions 65%; 4) Flu shot programs 64%; 5) Alernate work arrangements 63%; 6) Telecommuting 59%; 7) Compressed work week 58%; Job sharing 51%; 9) Satellite work places 44% and 10) Childcare 44%.

3. In a recent 2007 survey by Robert Half International, 46% of executives surveyed said they rely heavily on instinct when making hiring decisions.  Another 49% follow their gut at least some of the time.

4. In a 2006 Performance Management Survey by the Institute for Corporate Productivity (formerly i4cp, formerly the Human Resource Institute) based on 1,031 respondents in diverse companies 8% said their performance management process contribute in a significant way; 45% said their PM processes contributes but more improvements are required; and 47% were not sure if the PM process makes any contribution at all.

5. In a 2007 survey by McKinsey & Company who asked senior executives of global companies to rank obstacles that prevent talent management programs from delivering business value—the eight most critical barriers included: 1) 54% senior managers don’t spend enough time on talent management; 2) 52% line managers not sufficiently committed to people development; 3) 51% silos discourage collaboration and resource sharing; 4) 50% line managers unwilling to differentiate high and low performers; 5) 47% senior leaders do not align talent management and business strategies; 6) 45% line managers ignore chronic underperformance; and 7) 39% planning or allocation do not match right people to roles.

6. In a 2005 Gallup survey on health, 54% of disengaged employees say their work has a negative affect on their health; 62% of engaged employees feel their work positively affects their physical health but among disengaged workers this drops to 22%

7. The 2007 Performance and Talent Management Trend Survey (SuccessFactors in cooperation with the Business Performance Management Forum and the Human Capital Institute) reports responses of 726 business executives and HR staff that nearly 75% of the respondents agree strongly or very strongly that talent management is a strategic priority at their company but only 57% said their companies have formal talent management plans in place.

8. Sirota Survey Intelligence in 2007 (64,304 workers) reports that employees at all ages and job levels who have been on the job less than a year report 70% satisfaction with their work.  After 2 to 5 years, job satisfaction dropped to 53%.

9. 61% of more than 1,300 executives from 71 countries believe that telecommuting decreases chances of advancing in one’s career despite that finding that over 33% of the executives notes that telecommuters are more productive (2007 Futurestep).  42% of the 1,730 executives said telecommuters were as productive as workers in traditional settings and 36% were more productive.  66% of the 1,944 executives said taking a sabbatical or extended break was “extremely” or “somewhat” beneficial to a person’s career.

10. Fatigued workers cost US employers $136.4 billion annually in health related lost productivity.  Tired workers averaged 5.6 hours weekly in lost productivity time compared to 3.3 hours from other workers (SHRM HR News)
Gosh, if these don’t fit your paradigm, just twist the facts….Be well….

Technorati Tags: talent management, succession planning, coaching, executive coaching, executive development, succession planning, leaderhship development, Envisia, Envisia Learning, surveys, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER

Title: Cognitive Fitness (Harvard Business Review – November 2007)

Competency: Self-development, work/life balance, decision-making, problem-solving

Consultant Usage: Start with self; may be useful in coaching others

Who benefits: Anyone with a brain (really!)

What’s it about? Okay, if you are reading this around the time it was posted you are about 9-10 days into your New Year Resolutions!!  How’s it going?  Sticking to the plan?  Give up smoking (again)? New diet? And the ever-faithful new physical exercise regime? 

But how about this thought: Did you include a cognitive fitness plan?  A what?  A cognitive fitness plan? 

Yes, it seems that the brain needs exercise too.  What are you doing to stay mentally healthy?  Have you scheduled some brain exercises?

According to the latest brain research as reported in this HBR article, our brains don’t necessarily diminish with age as previously thought.  Rather, our brains are like our body, keep it fit and toned and it can even improve with age.

I loved the article’s opening story.  The authors reminded us of Winston Churchill’s propensity for alcohol, chain-smoking cigars, and a physical exercise program that was limited to walking from the office to the meal table and back.  Yet he lived into his 90s.  Of course there were other factors, but staying brain active was perceived to be a significant factor in his longevity. 

Staying cognitive fit is a contributing factor to longevity, stress reduction, and leads to better decision-making and problem-solving. 

So what is the gist of a cognitive fitness plan?  The authors suggest four (overlapping) steps to improve your mental hardiness and capacity.  

(1) Add new experiences to your life.  Take a walk and smell the flowers – you get points for cognitive and physical fitness for that activity.  Go somewhere you haven’t been before and work on your powers of observation.  Are you a hard working manager or leader who doesn’t have time to enjoy a nature walk?  Then practice the long recommended management by walking around.  Talk to your employees and customers instead of just financial analysts and shareholders.  Use your vacation time to go somewhere new.  Join a book club or, who would have guessed this was good for your mental health, participate in a poker night.  Teach a child how to do something.

(2) Work hard at play.  Remember when you used to laugh.  We don’t do that as much as adults.  But we should.  Even Reader’s Digest knew this as those of you who may have read it remember “Laughter Is The Best Medicine.”  Still is. Have fun but take risks.  Do you do a physical activity that you enjoy?  Set improvement goals: A faster time, a few more repetitions, a lower score.  Bridge, chess, crossword puzzles and sudoku all help increase the imaginative power of the brain.  Play expands the “right brain” and helps with innovation and creativity

(3) Search for patterns.  These are “left brain” activities that help us deal with complexity.  Challenge your existing mind set: Seek out and listen to people with a different point of view, seek a second right answer before making a decision, read different kinds of books and articles than you normally do.  Learn a new language. 

(4) Seek novelty and innovation.  This is more “right brain” development.  Be open to new and different experiences.  “Hang” with people who are different than you.  Ask them what they are learning, how they would do something, what is new in their world, how they would make your world better. 

The ideas above are just starting points.  There is a one-page sidebar with a specific list for a personal program of exercising your brain.  If you are more interested in the “what” than the “why” you can skip the article and go directly to the side bar…but you would be missing the opportunity to read something different, which, of course, is the whole point of the article.

Happy New Year and wishing you good cognitive fitness!

Technorati Tags: cognitive learning, cognitive fitness, neuroscience, brain exercises, mirror neurons, power of observation, self-development, managing yourself, bill bradley, william bradley

“Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.”

Albert Einstein

We all know that negative moods are associated with poor physical health and psycholoogical well-being.

Can happiness actually be good for you? 

Can you be too happy?

In a recent study of 2,873 healthy British adults conducted by Dr. Andrew Steptoe, those who reported more positive emotions during the day had significantly lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol that is typically associated with increased blood pressure, immune suppression and obesity¹.

Among women, but not men in this study, positive emotions were significantly lower levels of C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 which are considered indicators of widespread inflammation in the body and independent risk factors for cardiovascular disease.  These gender differences weren’t really explained but the findings on the stress hormone cortisol have been well documented in both men and women. 

These findings support the idea that happiness is protective.  The more difficult question though remains: Is happier always better?

A brand new study has tried to answer this question by analyzing data from 118, 519 respondents of the World Values Study, an intense data collection project with college students entering 25 mostly elite Universities, and four longitudinal data sets exploring the link between self-reported happiness and various outcomes such as educational degrees obtained, income levels, relationship satisfaction and duration ((Oishi, S. et al. (2007).  The optimum level of well-being: Can people be too happy?  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2 (4) 346-360)).  These studies revealed a consistent pattern of results:

1. The optimal level of happiness in the domains of interpersonal relationships is the highest possible level of happiness

2. In contrast, the optimal level of happiness for achievement of outcomes (e.g., salary, income, education) is a moderate (but still high) level of happiness

The authors in this study stress that it is not bad to be very happy nor is it desirable to be unhappy.

They are suggesting that for those individuals whose primary values in work and life focus on achievement, only moderate levels of happiness may be optimal.  For those whose values prioritize close relationships, it is the highest level of happiness possible given one’s genetic set point, situation and daily activities that are desirable.  The benefit of happy moods are also likely influenced by ones’ personality and work/life values and likely to differ across cultures.

In general, most Americans report positive life satisfaction but also tend to report a high level of work and life stress². I guess whether you are male or female, it’s still tough to have it all…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: Envisia Learning, moods, cortisol, stress, happiness, inflammation, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, stress, coping, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Steptoe, A. et al. (2007).  Neuroendocrine and inflammatory factors associated with positive affect in healthy men and women: The Whitehall study II.  American Journal of Epidemiology, 167, 96-102 [↩]
2. Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12 [↩]

HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER

Title: Five Minds for the Future (book)

Competencies: Adaptability, Strategic Problems Solving, Interpersonal Sensitivity/Empathy, Oral Presentation, Technological Leadership, Change Management, Visionary Leadership, Decision Making

Who benefits: This book will be useful to practitioners who derive their work from the concept of multiple intelligences and especially EQ.

Consultant Usage: For the creative practitioner, there are new tools to be developed to measure these cognitive abilities.  For the rest of us, it is a good read to stay current on what is important in human development.

What’s it about?  Tis the time of year when many of us look ahead, make plans, set goals, maybe even dream a little.  So too it may be a good time to look into the future at the next stages of human development. 

For as long as I can remember my heroes have been in the field of human resource development and I admit to looking to their bodies of works for inspiration.  If I had to put someone right at the top of the list, I think I would go with Howard Gardner, author of this book.  What Gardner has given us, more that anything else, is research to back up theories of multiple intelligence.  He has freed us from the notion that IQ is everything.

In a phrase, there is more than one kind of “smart”. 

Harvard-based Gardner’s research and earlier writings have greatly influenced the current trends in human resource development.  His books Frames of Mind (1983) and Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice (1993) serve as data mines for Daniel Goleman’s blockbuster Emotional Intelligence (1995) and all that ensued.

Goleman generously acknowledges Gardner’s contribution to the field and to his own work. 

This 2006 book by Gardner departs significantly from his other works.  Up until this book he has primarily been descriptive in reporting his research and synthesizing others’.   This book, while retaining significant descriptive portions, has a very prescriptive flavor. 

What he is saying is that employees in the future must have 5 specific cognitive abilities if they are to excel in their professions.  For those who don’t have the inclination to read the whole book, I will take the liberty to quote the “five minds”:

· The disciplinary mind – mastery of major schools of thought (including science, mathematics, and history) and of at least one professional craft;
· The synthesizing mind – ability to integrate ideas from different disciplines or spheres into a coherent whole and to communicate that integration to others;
· The creating mind – capacity to uncover and clarify new problems, questions, and phenomena;
· The respectful mind – awareness of and appreciation for differences among human beings; and,
· The ethical mind – fulfillment of one’s responsibilities as a worker and a citizen 

In his final chapter he sums up the 5 “minds of the future.”  His writing is clear, concise and straightforward.  Unfortunately it is such an easy chapter to read that readers may think, “Hey, that’s just common sense.”  I don’t think it is such common sense or we would have put his ideas to practice years ago.  No, I think it is excellent writing that deserves to read and thought about.

For practitioners who find this book of interest, there is still another stage to go and an adventure to be had for the creative mind.  Gardner stops at “What needs to be done.”  Someone out there is likely to make a fortune when they figure out “How to do it.”  Have a great new year. 

Technorati Tags: multiple intelligence, EQ, IQ, future think, howard gardner, daniel goleman, cognitive abilities, the human mind, management education, leadership development, leadership education, bill bradley, william bradley