“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”

Albert Einstein

How trusting are you?

Here is a quick quiz to test your level of trust:

1. I usually count the number of items in another person’s cart when I stand in the 10 item or less express lane at the grocery market.

True or False

2. I usually remove my automatic garage opener from my car when I valet park.

True or False

3. I always double check my bill at restaurants when it is given to me.

True or False

4. I always cut up and discard old credit cards after they have expired.

True or False

5. When colleagues at meetings are text messaging, I often think they are writing about me.

True and False

You probably want a scoring key right? In fact, you probably trusted me to provide you with some interpretation of how trusting you really are based on these questions. OK, your scores range from gulible to paranoid (if you also heard voices while taking this trust quiz please don’t contact me).

Trust involves numerous aspects of our daily lives, from work interactions, business dealings and interpersonal interactions with family and friends. Exactly why we trust some in certain instances but not others is really not understood very well. Surveys of trustworthiness show enormous differences across countries, from 3% in Brazil to 65% in Scandanavian countries such as Norway.

We trust leaders who create a compelling vision of a better future. We also tend to trust cult leaders, sociopaths and executives who seem to ultimately lack a moral compass. Why do some leaders play better with others?

Could there be a biological basis for trust?

In some absolutely fascinating research headed by Dr. Paul Zak who is founding Director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies and Professor of Economics at Claremont Graduate University these questions are being asked — and answered¹.

Zak has designed a series of studies to explore why some people are indeed more collaborative, cooperative and trusting of others. In his studies trust and trustworthiness are measured using a sequential anonymous “trust game” with monetary payoffs between participants. In his first set of studies Zak demonstrated that participants who were most interpersonal trusting had a significantly higher level of a pro-social peptide in their blood called oxytocin (the same hormone associated with the “tend and befriend” stress effect I wrote about in an earlier blog).

This is a wild finding but nothing compared to his second round of studies where he provided extraneous oxytocin to one group using nasal spray of the peptide (and verified through blood tests that it was indeed elevated) and a placebo to another group and had them repeat the “trust game.” In this study, the group with elevated oxytocin levels demonstrated signifcantly higher levels of collaboration compared to the placebo controls².

In the study, the participants were paired up, and one person in each pair was randomly assigned to play the role of an “investor” and the other to play the role of a “trustee.” Each participant received 12 tokens, valued at 32 cents each and redeemable at the end of the study.

The investor in each pair decided how many tokens to give to the trustee. Both participants, sitting face to face, knew that the experimenters would quadruple that investment. The trustee then determined whether to keep the entire, enhanced pot or give some portion of the proceeds —- whatever amount seemed fair back to the investor.

Among the investors who had inhaled oxytocin, about 50% gave all their tokens to trustees, and most of the rest contributed a majority of their tokens. In contrast, only 20% of investors who had inhaled a placebo spray gave up all their tokens. Oxytocin influenced only investors. Trustees returned comparable amounts of money after inhaling either spray.

We are collaborating with Paul in a new study exploring trust and resilience using a specific scale from our StressScan assessment called Cognitive Hardiness. This scale measures leaaders who perceive change as a challenge rather than a threat, feel a sense of control over the outcomes of their actions, have high self-esteem and are socially oriented. I will let you know in a future post what we learn.

For now, if I could find a way to create a cologne that emotionally incompetent leaders would smell, organizations might not only run with a lot less conflict but we might even enjoy working with those competent jerks a whole lot more….Be well….

Technorati Tags: pro-social peptide, trust, oxytocin, neurobiology of trust, immune system, health promotion programs, employee wellness, stress management, psychoneuroimmunology, collaboration, team work, neuroeconomics, altruism, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Zak,P., Kurzban, R., and Matzner, W. (2005). HORMONES AND BEHAVIOR. 48, 522 – 527 [↩]
2. Zak,P., Kurzban, R., and Matzner, W. (2004). The Neurobiology of Trust. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1032: 224-227 (2004). doi: 10.1196/annals.1314.025 Copyright © 2004 by the New York Academy of Sciences 7 [↩]

“Honesty may be the best policy, but it’s important to remember that apparently, by elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy.”

George Carlin

I think we can all agree that we’d like leaders (and all talent) to possess a high degree of trustworthiness, honesty and integrity. If only we could figure out the best way to measure and predict these traits in leaders!

A sizeable body of research has accumulated on honesty/integrity assessments and a fairly recent issue of Personnel Psychology contains the fifth in a series of comprehensive reviews on the “state of the art” of testing in this area¹.

In general, integrity and honesty tests can be “overt” (e.g., theft attitudes and admissions of wrongdoing) or “covert” (typically personality based assessments attempting to get at underlying traits and qualities that might predict dishonesty, counterproductive work behavior, etc.).

Four highlights of this wonderful update are worth noting:

1. Honesty/Integrity Assessments Do Predict Counterproductive Behavior: More research suggests that these tests do a pretty good job of predicting fraud, theft, stealing, absenteeism and even academic cheating.

2. Peers May Be Valuable at Predicting Integrity: Some recent research has found that peer reported integrity correlate with interview ratings of integrity (r = .28).

3. You Can Fake Honesty Tests But Not Much Evidence that Leaders Actually Do: One interesting finding in this review suggests that “coaching” someone to fake one of these assessments is really no more effective than asking a respondent to fake. Even more interesting are questions that are invasive in nature: items rated as more private and invasive are less fakable.

4. Integrity Assessments Tend to Engender More Negative Reactions Than Other Types (e.g., personality, interviews): In previous research even graphology (handwriting analysis) had a better image but as the authors point out this often cited study might be hard to generalize since it was based on “perceptions” of which selection approach was most favorable.

Implications for Leadership and Talent Management Selection:

1. Maybe more talent management/succession ratings should consider including peer ratings specific to “integrity” of future leaders.

2. Most unstructured interview processes don’t add much to predicting future leadership success–they have poor “incremental validity” beyond personality and intelligence (OK, I know everyone uses them anyway) so maybe more time should be spend trying to measure key relationship intelligence and collaboration factors that are negatively associated with counterproductive work behaviors.

3. Double check references and focus on peer ratings for supplementing data you have on “handicapping” leadership success and future performance.

4. Most of the current generation “five factor” personality inventories don’t explain much variance in predicting honesty so it’s best to use both an overt personality measure (e.g., “Big 5″ assessment) and covert honesty test to do a better job of predicting dishonesty and counterproductive behavior in applicants at all levels.

5. Get to know candidates outside the formal application process and work setting. The game of “mutual seduction” is pretty compelling and with the current leadership pipeline shortage everyone tells each other what they want to hear. You learn alot about a person outside the formal selection interviews so take a walk and head to lunch to learn more about their experiences, passions and signature strengths.

If you haven’t heard, a fairly recent study study for the Center for Academic Integrity at Duke University found 56 percent of MBA students acknowledged cheating, compared with 54 percent in engineering, 48 percent in education and 45 percent in law school. Maybe we need to start earlier in the honesty/integrity assessment process…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: interviews, integrity, honesty, counterproductive work behaviors, dishonesty, theft, cheating, absenteeism, performance, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Berry, C., Sackett, P. & Wieman, S. (2007). A review of recent developments in integrity test research. Personnel Psychology, 60, 271-301 [↩]

“Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger.”

  Franklin B. Jones

At nine months of age, all guide dog puppies go in for their a formal evaluation.  It really is feedback to the volunteer puppy raisers about how we are doing–a form of 360 feedback.

Feedback can be really helpful  useful to improve our performance or it can be damaging. One of the most cited research studies on performance feedback is based on meta-analysis by Kluger and DeNisi who reviewed over 3,000 studies (607 effect sizes, 23,633 observations) on performance feedback¹. They found that although there was a significant effect for feedback interventions (d=.41), one third of all studies showed performance declines.

Indeed, if performance feedback was a drug many of us could be easily sued for malpractice.  Some new research has emerged which helps clarify ways to make feedback received more positively and constructively.

1. Ask the Right People for Feedback and Ask for the Right Type of Feedback

A new study by In-Sue Oh and colleagues suggests that feedback about interpersonal sensitivity, empathy and agreeableness might not be very useful for leaders².  Their research suggests that this “five factor” concept of “agreeableness might not always be a desirable trait for managers except in “getting along environments” (non-profits, community based organizations) so feedback on other task related behaviors might be more important.  Second, their study suggests that peer, and not directs reports, is more accurate in predicting actual performance.  It appears that raters have unique perspectives and each are utilizing different lenses to observe and evaluate behavior.

2. Be More Prescriptive In Interpreting Feedback for Others

A interesting study by Robert Hooijberg and colleagues looking at what makes coaching effective surveyed 232 managers from diverse organizations³.  One of their key questions asked, “What did your coach do that you found effective?” 

From the view of the client or participants, three major categories determined feedback success: 1) Interpreting results (34.8%), 2) Inspiring action (27.5%) and 3) Professionalism (23.3%).  The majority of clients thought the best coaches were those who analyzed strengths and weaknesses, helped assimilate feedback and make concrete developmental recommendations.

This study really seems to contradict much of the coaching literature and suggests that participants using 360 feedback expect and want their coach to take a more active role in interpreting their results and making developmental recommendations.  This finding IS consistent with the concept of “feedforward” by Marshall Goldsmith who suggests letting us know what we can be doing more, less or differently in the future to become better and more successful.

Well, our feedback report on Ajax our guide dog puppy in training was positive overall but highlighted a few areas we need to keep working on for him to move ahead in his developmental journey.  Back to work with him to help ensure he gets the best training from us to succeed….Be well….

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

1. Kluger, A. & DeNisi (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, meta-analysis and preliminary feedback theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-285 [↩]
2. Oh, I., & Berry, C. M. (2009). The five-factor model of personality and managerial performance: Validity gains through the use of 360 degree performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1498-1513 [↩]
3. Hooijberg, R. & Lane, N. (2009).  Using multisource feedback coaching effectively in executive education.  Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 483-493 [↩]

“Statistics are like bikinis.  What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.”

 

Aaron Levenstein

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

1. A recent 2009 survey of 372 human resources professionals by industry publication Workforce Management were asked about their experiences in conducting layoffs.  Over 50% reported they have suffered from sleeplessness, 35% have considered changing their careers and 23% have occasionally used a “substance” to cope.  Only 9% reported using their own employee assistance program (EAP) services to deal with their own work and life stress.

2. A 2009 telephone survey of 1,000 senior executives conducted on behalf of staffing firm Accountemps revealed that just one typo in a resume can cost you a job.  40% reported they wouldn’t hire a candidate who had a typo at all. I’m glad I’m not out actively looking for a new job…..

3. A 2009 poll of 2,261 U.S. adults by Harris Interactive on behalf of employer information website Glassdoor.com found that unemployed husbands and wifes reported more stress than single job seekers (81% to 51%, respectively).  Two thirds of the respondents said that the stress affected other areas of their jobs and 40% said it hindered personal relationships with friends and family.

4. A recent 2009 Executive Quiz results released today by The Korn/Ferry Institute reveal that nearly half (47 percent) of employed executives are either somewhat or very dissatisfied with their current position.

5. In the same Kron Ferry International Executive Quiz a surprising 31 percent of executives stated they do not trust their boss. Despite this, however, three-quarters gave them favorable performance ratings: excellent (19

percent), above average (35 percent) or average (22 percent). Even worse, 36 percent of executives reported they do not trust their CEO. In fact, when asked if their current CEO is the best person for the job, only 38 percent said “absolutely,” while 34 percent responded “somewhat” and 28 percent said “not at all.”

6. Women control almost $12 trillion in consumer spending, 65% of the global total. By 2028, they will control 72% of worldwide consumer spending. But contrary to stereotype, a BCG survey of over 12,000 women in 22 countries found that only 5% of women say shopping makes them extremely happy, compared to pets (42%), sex (27%), and food (19%).

7. People who suffer from insomnia take sick days twice as often as those who do not, according to a report by The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest. The study found that over a six-month period, the condition cost employers an average of 4.4 days of wages for each untreated sufferer, plus indirect costs due to lower productivity and mistakes made because of lack of sleep.  Better get your zzzzzz tonight!

8. Both men and women put on weight in response to work-related stress and difficulty paying bills, according to a longitudinal study published this month in the American Journal of Epidemiology. Men also gained weight because they felt they lacked decision authority or skill discretion (the ability to learn new skills and to choose to do new or different tasks) at work. For women, weight gain was also likely to be associated with a feeling of constraint in their lives in general and having difficulty with family relationships. During the 9.2 years of the study, men added an average of 1.37 kg/m2 to their body mass indices, while women added an average of 1.57 kg/m2 (Note: kg = 2.204623 lb).

9. A 2009 survey by the Trust for America’s Health found that The rate of physical inactivity among adults increased in 9 percent in U.S. states last year. (Physical inactivity is defined as engaging in no exercise other than their regular jobs for 30 days.) Except for New Jersey, the states with the highest rates of physical inactivity also rank among the top 15 in obesity. The least inactive states included Minnesota (16.3% adults are inactive) and Oregon (17.6%) and the most inactive states included Mississippi (31.8% are inactive) and Kentucky (30.4%).

10. Workers who use the web for entertainment while at work — whether they’re tweeting, watching YouTube videos, shopping, or catching up with the news — are 9% more productive than those who don’t, according to a recent study by Professor Brent Coker at the University of Melbourne. (As long as they don’t spend more than 20% of their time in the office doing what Dr. Coker calls “workplace internet leisure browsing”.) Why? People need quick breaks in order to maintain a high level of concentration throughout the day.

11. In a 2009 survey by CareerBuilder, laid-off workers are finding ways to make the best of a difficult time, according to a recent CareerBuilder survey of 1,800 unemployed American adults. In addition to looking for work, 22% are spending more time with family and friends, 15% are fixing up their homes, 14% are exercising more, 11% are finally taking time to relax, 8% are volunteering, and 7% are going back to school.

12. Women are under-represented not only in the C-suite, but also in the high-potential leadership development programs that would help them get there, according to an analysis of 12,000 leaders in 76 countries by Development Dimensions International. Researchers found 28% more men than women in early-career high-potential programs and 50% more men in executive-level high-potential programs.

Back to research some new talent development facts….Be well….

Technorati Tags: talent management, succession planning, leadership development, succession planning, micromanage, performance review, performance appraisal, overweight, obesity, wellness, coaching, executive coaching, executive development, surveys, kenneth nowack, Envisia, Envisia Learning, leadership development, ken nowack, Nowack

“Make sure that team members know they are working with you, not for you.”

John Wooden

The last few Blogs have introduced a powerful performance coaching model that can be used to engage and develop talent at all levels. 

I’ve provided this case study and reflective questions in the spirit of seeing how well you have applied the model and coaching strategies associated with: 1) Performance Improvement Coaching; 2) Performance Acceleration Coaching; 3) Performance Management Coaching; and 4) Performance Enhancement Coaching. 

Performance Coaching Case and Questions

Sam, the Senior Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing was referred to you by the Human Resources department who highly recommended you as an executive coach having done previous work with you elsewhere in the organization.  The Senior Executive Vice President contacted you about working with one of the senior managers of the department named Chris who was recently promoted as International Vice President of Sales and Marketing about 6 months ago.  Chris, has worked for the company for 4 years and has been a strong producer overall.  Chris had previously managed the domestic sales and marketing team but was recently promoted to coordinate both domestic and international operations.  Sam was interested in having you work with Chris in a coaching capacity to “fix” some critical personality and interpersonal “flaws” that had always existed but were largely tolerated until now. 

Sam described a number of customers and staff members who perceived Chris as very intimating, aloof, overly confident, moody, insensitive, confrontational and a poor listener.  At least one or more groups of employees had written human resources complaining of Chris’s “toxic” leadership and interpersonal style last year.  Chris has had tremendous “bottom line” results over a number of years—senior management respects Chris’s technical knowledge, experience and ability to increase profitability for the company.  Chris has been regarded as a “high potential” employee with tremendous skills and ability to achieve “bottom line” results.

Sam wants to have you work with Chris who has expressed some hesitation about working with “a shrink.”  Sam wants to have you share your impressions about Chris with human resources when you are done “just in case Chris doesn’t work out here.”  Sam also wants to know whether you think Chris can change leadership behavior and communication style to reflect the collaborative and team oriented culture of the company.  Sam mentions that if things don’t work out that perhaps you could assist Chris with outplacement and career counseling as well.  Sam is familiar with a number of assessment instruments that might “help Chris really see the light” but will let you decide which ones might be appropriate, if any.  Chris has 12 direct reports—all regional managers—who can be interviewed if you want to speak to them.

Sam also shared with you information about a recent sexual harassment complaint that is currently being investigated by two female managers reporting to Chris.  Sam thinks there probably isn’t much merit to the complaints but wanted you to be aware of the situation.  Overall, Sam would really like to assist Chris become successful in the new senior management role.  Sam is committed to offering coaching to Chris and is optimistic that with effective coaching that Sam will become more aware of specific behaviors that are currently creating a performance problem.  Sam just completed the annual performance appraisal for Chris and mentioned that coaching was something that is necessary for ongoing professional development.  Chris expressed only mild interest but announced that if it would make Sam happy they would be willing to participate.

COACHING CASE STUDY QUESTIONS

1. Who is the client? 
2. What potential ethical/professional issues exist with this coaching situation?
3. What approach to coaching makes the most sense given the facts of this case?
4. What types of assessments, if any, might be used?
5. What “best practices” should be used to ensure that the coaching will be a success?
6. What are the potential barriers or “road blocks” to success?
7. What are the coaching issues: skill deficit, differences in expectations, knowledge deficiencies and/or overall performance?

I’d be interested in your thoughts, reactions and answers!  Be well…..

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

“A good objective of leadership is to help those who are doing poorly to do well and to help those who are doing well to do even better.”
Jim Rohn

Each week the Guide Dog trainers work with the volunteer puppy raisers to focus on one specific skill or behavior that the dog really needs to work on.  With Ajax we have been working hard to get him to remain calm when greeting people or when a new dog approaches him.  This type of “coaching” is often referred to as Performance Management coaching and surely is one of the more common skills that leaders learn to develop. 

Being able to diagnose what skills, knowledge or experience is needed to improve performance in talent and then to design a way for them to acquire them is something that great leaders do naturally.

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT COACHING (Low Performance/High Interpersonal Competence)

Talent demonstrating generally one or more deficiencies in specific competency areas (e.g., planning, oral presentation, writing, delegation, time management) but seen as basically collaborative and likable can best be developed further by utilizing a Performance Management model of coaching.  These clients are highly responsive to coaching specifically geared to facilitate key competencies and skill areas that might be preventing high performance.

In this model, the focus of improvement is developing specific techniques, skills and abilities.  Coaches might utilize more interactive approaches to model behavior, video tape clients in action and use employee simulations to help facilitate learning (e.g., Inbasket simulation, role plays).  

Most coaching assignments will be task focused and shorter in duration based on demonstration of skill acquisition by the client and to key stakeholders within the organization.  Such clients will typically have high emotional intelligence and respond to specific instruction and more pragmatic techniques and tools.

Performance Management Coaching Strategies

• Skill based training programs (internal or external)
• Utilize strategic developmental experiences to enhance specific competencies related to performance
• Model desired behavior, provide instruction, support skills practice and reinforce desired behaviors
• Consider short-term skill based coaching

Evaluating Performance Coaching Interventions

It is important to think about metrics and approaches to evaluating coaching at the beginning of the intervention.  Each of the four performance coaching models should be evaluated based upon the specific agreed upon goals of the intervention.  Some of the following should be considered as part of your performance coaching evaluation scorecard:

• If you are using a 360 degree feedback assessment as part of your performance coaching, analyze change scores in pre-post scores (10 to 18 months following the first administration)
• Analyze the progress made on the client’s professional development plan to come out of the coaching intervention
• Analyze post-then change scores from the client on self-perceived changes in knowledge, skills and behavior (”post-then” is a particular approach to evaluation that measures self-perceived skills at the end of the coaching intervention  which is the “post” and how the client sees themselves before the coaching began which is the “then”)
• Analyze post-coaching progress viewed by key stakeholders within the client system (e.g., the client’s manager, human resources)

Well, I  have to get Ajax out to practice a particular “come” command where he sits in front of me and then returns, sitting down, at my side….I’ve got some good pointers from the Guide Dogs of America trainers on how to do this with him so its off to practice, practice and practice….Be well….

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.”

John Quincy Adams

Each week when we attend our guide dog puppy training with Ajax it’s pretty easy to pick out the “winners” from the “losers” (OK, we have been wrong many times before).  The “winners” seem incredibly mature, well-behaved, attentive and seem to have all the “right stuff” to on to become an outstanding guide dog. 

I’m not sure how much impact the puppy raisers really have but they seem to be the “best in class” (but it ain’t a “show” with guide dogs) and demonstrate both technical competence and a loving quality that make them attractive and successful. These are the puppies that are termed “high potentials” and are the ones the trainers want to make sure that the volunteer puppy raisers do the right things to ensure their long term success.

Like guide dog puppies, organizations have their “high potentials” that we can’t afford to lose today in our globally competitive marketplace.  In fact, most organizations look for developmental opportunities, “stretch assignments” and other ways to help “accelerate” their growth and future potential. 

Coaching these high potential individuals requires a bit of a different model and techniques to “sharpen” key competencies and facilitate specific skills and experiences.  This type of coaching is referred to as Performance Acceleration coaching.

PERFORMANCE ACCELERATION COACHING (High Performance/High Interpersonal Competence)

Talent demonstrating a high level of performance and demonstrating interpersonal competence can further developed by utilizing a Performance Acceleration model of coaching.  These “high potential” clients are the “lovable stars” that organizations want to retain over time. 

In this model, the focus is on leveraging the strengths of these clients and enhancing their “star” potential.  Generally, coaches will utilize diverse approaches to assessment including targeted interviews with critical stakeholders, personality/style tools and skill based multi-rater feedback instruments. 

Most coaching assignments will be maximized with a moderate engagement of 4 months or more with an emphasis on ongoing readings, case discussions and situation analyses.  Such clients are expected to be fairly responsive, open and eager to learn making the coaching engagement typically easier.  Such clients will be looking for greater specificity in feedback and targeted resources to facilitate his/her development.  Such clients will tend to keep coaches challenged because they are motivated and interested in learning as much as possible to leverage what they do well and become even better.

Performance Acceleration Coaching Strategies

• Engineer “stretch assignments” and developmental activities
• Consider using an executive coach to enhance “signature strengths”
• Look for more opportunities to provide more specific feedback
• Encourage work-life balance
• Champion their future career potential with other senior managers

 These individuals will tend to grown and develop independently as they appear to have the right personality and “signature strengths” to become even more successful.  However, with the right kind of coaching and mentoring, these individuals can accelerate their potential development.

I think we have a “high potential” in Ajax….I just hope in my role as a volunteer puppy raiser that I don’t mess it up….Be well…..

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

“Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.”

Peter Drucker

It’s fun to watch all the guide dog puppies in training get together each month for their training.  Some seem like “naturals” and you just get a sense they will go on to become successful guide dogs.  Others you can spot early are likely to be destined for a “career change” (sometimes you can be surprised as they mature though!) as their current performance is in need for immediate correction if they are going to succeed. 

With these puppies, what is required is Performance Improvement coaching.  The goal is simple–correct the current problem(s) contributing to poor overall performance on the job.

In this particular coaching model, the focus is on immediate and significant performance improvement of the employee.  These employees are often in the lower performing 10% that many companies look to eliminate by offering specific outplacement and severance packages. 

Such poorly performing and low potential employees can cripple morale, interfere with team functioning and take tremendous management time away from high performers.  Coaches who work with such employees typically have concrete and specific developmental action plans that support the efforts of management to “turn these employees around” and enhance current performance.

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT COACHING (Low Performance/Low Interpersonal Competence)

Clients demonstrating generally low job performance and also being characterized as less likable or interpersonally difficult can best be helped by utilizing a Performance Improvement model of coaching.  These clients are often offered coaching as a last resort before outplacement by many organizations.  The use of outside coaching services should at least be questioned as these low performers typically show little return on investment for such interventions. 

Coaches approached by companies asking for help with such employees should carefully contract with the client system to clarify potential issues around assessment, confidentiality and the role of human resources in the coaching intervention.

 Often, organizations believe that offering coaching services to these chronically poor performers will help minimize any possible wrongful termination lawsuit that could develop.  This is another reason that coaches should carefully structure the intervention if they decide to proceed with this type of client and presenting issues.  It is easy for coaches to feel “pressured” by the client’s manager, or even human resources, for his/her candid “evaluation” about the suitability or “fit” of the client. 

Make sure that as a coach you don’t become a natural part of the progressive discipline process by simultaneously playing an evaluation and coaching role with the client system and client, respectively.  Too many non-experienced (and experienced) coaches have been tempted by these type of requests for help by an organization only to realize too late that the hidden agenda was not to truly the client but to gather additional information confirming that he/she was a poor fit.

Performance Improvement Coaching Strategies

• Diagnose if the performance deficit is due to lack of knowledge, skills or motivation
• Seek human resources consultation about documentation and your progressive discipline process
• Set concrete performance goals and expectations
• Seek ongoing feedback informally from internal customers and stakeholders about their performance
• Follow-up regularly with these individuals and “check in” to monitor and track their progress
• Reinforce and Reward Desired Behaviors

Only about 50% of the guide dog puppies in training actually make it to become a guide dog leader.  Some “wash out” during their training due to physical problems but the vast majority are just not a great “fit” with the stringent requirements to become a functioning guide dog. 

Organizations can save a lot of time, money and effort by identifying these individuals early on and looking for constructive ways to “vote them off the island.”  There really isn’t anything wrong to encourage them to move on to “shine” with a competitor of yours….Be well….

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

“I forgot to shake hands and be friendly. It was an important lesson about leadership.”

Lee Iacocca

Like people, there is a great diversity of “personality” and ability to learn in guide dogs.  Some guide dogs seem to be almost “robotic” in their competence but may not be as warm and lovable as others.  Others are very challenging to train but incredibly playful and loving–particularly those who undergo a career change and wind up in a loving family but can’t make the grade to actually become a guide dog.

We all know talent who get a lot done but how they go about doing it might be described as “cut throat”, overly competitive and lacking in core interpersonal warmth and empathy.  They get a lot done but can often leave “dead bodies” behind.  These type of individuals are often referred to as competent jerks.  Coaching these individuals is always a challenge because they will often throw up their accomplishments, achievements and “numbers” as metrics of “success.” 

Indeed, they often have a long history of very solid performance evaluations that make it difficult to constructively confront these individuals and reveal to them that they could be even more productive and successful if they further developed their social competence and interpersonal skills.

PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT COACHING (High Performance/Low Interpersonal Competence)

Talent demonstrating generally high job performance (i.e., they meet or exceed objective standards of performance) but characterized as less likable or interpersonally competent can best be helped by utilizing a Performance Enhancement model of coaching. 

These clients are at risk for potential “derailment” at some point in their career and might be described as “competent” but “difficult” to deal with.  As a result, others may find collaborating and interacting with these individuals quite challenging and actually attempt to avoid them when possible.

In this model, the focus of improvement is developing social, interpersonal and communication skills that seem to almost always describe the “difficult” part of the client.  Generally, coaches will utilize both personality/style and multi-rater feedback assessments (e.g., a focus on emotional intelligence) to help illuminate the interpersonal “blind spots” of the client.

Most coaching assignments will require a lengthier intervention to ensure that client’s fully understand how they are being experienced and perceived by others and the potentially negative impact of his/her leadership, communication and interpersonal style. 

Such clients are expected to be somewhat defensive and challenging as they sometimes lack the “self-awareness” or self-insight characterized by relatively low emotional intelligence (see www.eiconsortium.org for additional resources and information on the topic of emotional intelligence).

Performance Enhancement Coaching Strategies

• Provide direct and candid feedback asking for what you want the person to do more, less or differently particularly in the interpersonal area
• Consider utilizing mentors and internal coaches to help them to avoid derailment
• Utilize a 360-feedback process and development plan focusing on enhancing interpersonal competence
• Measure/monitor team, department and staff engagement (climate)
• Introduce and utilize a “balanced scorecard” to emphasize both task and interpersonal factors associated with performance

These aren’t the easiest coaching assignments–I’ve failed more times than I am willing to admit.  However, using some of the techniques of the Performance Enhancement coaching model you might just find the ” crease” with some to help them to become more aware of how their style, approach and personality impacts others. 

It’s so interesting that when we are “working” with Ajax by putting on his guide dog “bib” he becomes much more obedient and less “puppy like.”  Take the bib off and he returns to that 10-month year old puppy fool of energy, playfulness and warmth that makes him so adorable and loving….Be well….

Technorati Tags: guide dogs, seeing eye dogs, Guide Dogs of America, leadership, executive coaching, performance, layoff, social support, mastery, expertise, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack, Envisia Learning, deliberate practice

HOT READS FOR THE PRACTITIONER

Title: How Did That Happen?: Holding People Accountable for Results the Positive, Principled Way

Competencies: trust, conflict management, two-way feedback, performance management, coaching, interpersonal effectiveness, empowering others

Who benefits: employees at all levels

Consultant Usage: must read for all executive coaches, counselors, should read by organizational consultants

What’s it about? Let’s begin with my disclaimer.  I have not read this book.  But I am going to recommend it anyway for two reasons.  First, the topic.  It is about accountability in the work place.  Think for a brief moment what the impact would be on business and government if everyone was really held accountable for their actions and their productivity.  I can’t even begin to imagine how different the world would look.

Here’s what the book jacket says about the topic: “The economy crashes, the government misfires, businesses fail, leaders don’t lead, managers don’t manage, and the people we count on for the results that affect our own performance don’t follow through, leaving us asking, ‘How did that happen?’”  That question deserves a book.

I am having my own personal sidebar moment here, LOL, thinking what would happen if the news media were also added to the list of those who should be held accountable.  Within days pundits would be in short supply!

Anyway, I said I had two reasons for recommending this book.  The second reason is because the authors are the same authors of one of my all time favorite business books: The Oz Principle.   I am putting together my own top 10 all-time favorites and The Oz Principle easily makes the list.  It is a book about personal accountability where How Did That Happen is more about organizational accountability.  I suspect they are very complementary.

The book was just released in August.  You still have a few weeks to be the first in your organization to get a copy, read it and then pass it around the organization with just the slightest bit of smugness.

Catch you later. 

Technorati Tags: accountability, personal accountability, organizational accountability, the oz principle, the oz factor, bill bradley, william bradley, bradley