Monday, September 5, 2011

Being a Leader or a SuperDoer...

Greetings,

A couple of weeks a go, my new leader (only of about 6 months, but have worked together since 2005) made an interesting observation about our leadership culture. He said "Are we creating leaders or SuperDoers...because it looks like SuperDoers..."

I thought this was an incredibly powerful statement that has really caused me to reflect about my own leadership skills in the last 10 years...specifically back to my leadership journey that started on September 11th, 2001.

At the time, I was a U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer stationed in Bahrain supporting Commander U.S. Naval Central Command on the watchfloor. Recently chosen for promotion to Lieutenant Commander, I was doing what I do best...intelligence analysis, while working with my watch team. I remember it being a little after 3pm local time when CNN interrupted our normal routine with what was happening back in the U.S. It was certainly an eye opening day as we dealt with activities in U.S. and starting to get our resources and plans in place even then.

Unknown to me until the next day was the fact that the plan that hit the Pentagon took out Naval Intelligence's premiere watchcenter named Chief of Naval Operations Intelligence Plot (CNO-IP). The loss of life, while significant for the U.S. that day, saw our Naval Intelligence family loose eight people that day. A huge and devastating loss that included the Officer-in-Charge, Commander Dan Shanower, Assistant Officer-in-Charge Lieutenant Commander Otis "Vince" Tolbert (A classmate of mine), and six others.

I had successfully built a reputation during my career upto that point as an analyst and high performer, that in August 2002, I got a call asking me to change my orders back to the U.S. and take orders to CNO-IP as the Assistant Officer-in-Charge working for Commander Robert "Bob" Rupp as the new Officer-in-Charge. We would be the permanent replacements for those volunteers filling the roles. It was a great opportunity and one that I looked forward to with great anticipation.

Upon arrival just two weeks after Commander Rupp, what we found was a group still in shock from the events from September 11th, 2001. There were three distinct groups of people...those in the building that had survived, those that were part of CNO-IP, but not in the building, and then those that were thrown into the breach after the tragic loss of life. What this group needed was leadership from me specifically. As I reflect...I think what I really did was become a SuperDoer because that is where I was comfortable.

This is not unlike many organizations where we identify people that are excellent performers because of their technical expertise. They may not be adequately prepared for these roles and instead of being leaders and leading...they revert back to what they are comfortable with which is being a SuperDoer. For many they may not even know the difference...

For me...I did and made the changes in my leadership capability to be a leader and not a SuperDoer. While I continue to learn much about leadership and myself as a leader everyday...I have learned so many valuable lessons as we approach the 10 year anniversary of September 11th, 2001.

1. Humility as a Leader - I could have been much more of a leader when at CNO-IP. I know that now. As leaders, we all need to understand that our roles as leaders are about leading people and understanding the impact we have on people as leaders. While I haven't asked those who I led at CNO-IP...I would think that I could have been much better.

2. What got you there won't take you forward - Being a SuperDoer is great...but that will not take you or your team forward in the future. Being able to assess your leadership capabilities and gaps is vitally important in your metamorphosis from that role into a leader.

3. Develop others as SuperDoers and create Leaders - Once you make that transition to a leadership role...your job is to develop and create SuperDoers and help those few with leadership potential to make that transition from SuperDoer to leader.

I have been extremely blessed to be able to reflect on my leadership experiences and evolve my leadership skills and be a better leader of people. I think it is what I owed those I have led and those we lost ten years ago...I thank them for opening my eyes.

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Global Talent Management Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change...He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Google+, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Google+: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

Looking for the Right Leaders for Growth


Greetings,

It is great to be back after a hiatus getting through the Summer activities, work and my Doctorate program at UPenn.

Let's get down to business.

In July, our friends at McKinsey completed and posted a study titled "Do you have the right leaders for your growth strategies?" In this study, McKinsey looked at the linkage between leadership competencies and revenue growth. This is important research. In my efforts working on my Doctorate, there is a lack of conclusive research just on the linkage between leadership and organizational performance. I wrote about that in a previous blog post titled "Leadership and Organizational Performance...Lack of Linkage." So it is great to see other organizations like McKinsey taking a crack at this important topic.

The big takeaway is that leadership quality is critical to growth. You might say..."Well that is a no brainer Keith." You are probably right. The real issue is identifying the right set of leadership competencies needed for future business capabilities...like growth...and then identifying current leadership capacity in those competencies. Not just from an individual leader perspective, but from an organizational leadership capability. The key is to identify the leadership behaviors you need...in this study McKinsey focused on eight.

Thought Leadership
Market Insight
Strategic Orientation

People and Organizational Leadership
Change Leadership
Developing Organizational Capability
Team Leadership
Collaboration and Influencing

Business Leadership
Customer Impact
Results Orientation

The difference between executives in top quartile companies by revenue growth versus bottom quartile companies across all eight competencies was statistically significant. The study also found relevance in companies with multiple growth strategies vice singular growth strategies had excellence in a range of leadership skills of managers across multiple levels of the organization.

This is an important point when compared with another key aspect of the report dealing with Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A). It specifically states:

"By contrast, companies in the top quartile of M&A-driven revenue growth had top-leadership teams that excelled at a broad range of skills. The first is market insight—in other words, looking beyond a company’s current business landscape to discern future growth opportunities. That competency no doubt supports the identification of deals, while another competency crucial for M&A-driven growth—a well-honed orientation toward achieving results—helps in post merger integration."

There is a significant gap in research on the importance of leadership at the organizational-level, not just the C-suite, in M&A activity. Specifically, are there specific organizational leadership behaviors that would indicate a M&A has potential to be more successful or less successful.

As this research indicates, there appears to be key leadership behaviors associated with critical business areas like growth. The key for Human Capital Management leaders and leadership development professionals are to identify these key leadership behaviors based on the business needs, context and environment of the organization and then create them either through hiring or developmental activities.

If you take this approach, you and your organizations are better positioned to communicate the importance of leadership development and your effectiveness at doing it...explicitly.

Nuff Said!

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Global Talent Management Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change...He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Creating Talent Champions...


Greetings,

I had a very interesting conversation this past week with a Senior Vice President of Talent at a Fortune 500 company. The intent of the conversation was to get a good understanding of how their organization developed talent and integrated it into the overall strategy of the organization. We focused on leadership development specifically during our conversation, but it was obvious that this organization's culture had the concept of talent and development embedded in its DNA.

As I reflected on that conversation this weekend, it became apparent that this organization didn't get to this point overnight. It is unlikely that it started with Talent Champions, but over time has created them and ingrained it into their culture.

The key for organizations in this new talent war is to create Talent Champions. In this new war for talent it is not just a Human Resources (HR)/Human Capital Management (HCM) or a line responsibility. It is a shared responsibility

Why is this important? Corporate Leadership Council research titled "Creating Talent Champions" explains...

"While few business leaders are Talent Champions, most business leaders have the skills necessary to become Talent Champions. HR’s role is not to develop a new set of skills in business leaders but instead to help business leaders apply their existing business skills to talent management. When accomplished, HR can improve business unit revenue by as much as 14%."

Additionally, CLC indicates that the HR/HCM-Line partnership accounts for 68% of talent management program effectiveness.

It is not about creating talent management programs for the sake of having talent management programs. They need to be connected to business strategy and positioned where line managers can leverage the programs to successfully meet their business needs. In many organizations, the partnership piece is missing. To get to that partnership requires healthy HR/HCM engagement. Leading and educating line managers that also helps build a climate and culture that creates talent that flourishes.

Our organization's success depends on it.

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Global Talent Management Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change...He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Leadership Development in a Funk...


DDI recently released their Global Leadership Forecast 2011 - Time for a Leadership Revolution. The good news is that the study points to the continued importance of leadership in organizations and on a global scale. Leadership is recognized as driving employee engagement, organizational performance, and creativity and innovation.

"Today’s leaders make decisions in an increasingly unpredictable business environment. In a recent IBM study of 1,500 CEOs worldwide, more than 60 percent believed that their businesses today were more volatile, uncertain, and complex (IBM Global Business Services, 2010). It’s no wonder that the quality of leadership can make or break the sustainability of any organization. The difference between the impact that a top-performing leader and an average leader has on an organization is at least 50 percent, according to leaders participating in Global Leadership Forecast 2011. This degree of difference is staggering, considering the hundreds (or possibly thousands) of leaders employed at any given organization. In fact, this research demonstrates that organizations with the highest quality leaders were 13 times more likely to outperform their competition in key bottom-line metrics such as financial performance, quality of products and services, employee engagement, and customer satisfaction. Specifically, when leaders reported their organization’s current leadership quality as poor, only 6 percent of them were in organizations that outperformed their competition. Compare that with those who rated their organization’s leadership quality as excellent—78 percent were in organizations that outperformed their competition in bottom-line metrics."

The bad news is that we continue to think we are not good at developing future leadership capability. Whether organization leaders or Chief Human Resource Officers (CHROs), most feel the same when addressing the dichotomy between importance of leadership and leadership development and effectiveness of creating leaders. I consistently ask these two questions at speaking engagements and had the same opportunity a couple of weeks ago. The importance of leadership development graded at a 4.62, while the effectiveness to develop leaders graded at 2.21 for this group. These are similar numbers from IBM's 2010 Global CHRO Study.

So we are still in some kind of funk.

Elliott Masie and the Masie Center's Learning CONSORTIUM just concluded his first LeadershipDev conference in Las Vegas last week where he brought leadership development people together to discuss assumptions, rituals, investment decision making and new models for development. Why is this important? It is estimated that just in the United States we spend $14B on leadership development. That is a lot of money not to be getting it right. To help determine some answers the current University of Pennsylvania Chief Learning Officer Doctorate Program is conducting a series of quantitative and qualitative data collection to understand how leadership development investment priorities and content decisions are being made to better understand what is driving this perspective. The results of this study will be shared in a series of white papers from my fellow Doctoral candidates and myself.

My hypothesis at this point about the consistent gap in Importance and Effectiveness is this...We are are making assumptions because we don't really know whether we are effective at developing leaders. How you respond to the Effectiveness question is almost totally dependent on what you know...when you don't know and are unsure...uncertainty creeps in and your answer is less confident.

I discussed this in a blog post last year on the lack academic research linking leadership and organizational performance and by default leadership development titled "Leadership and Organizational Performance...Lack of Linkage." I recently revisited it in February with this Corporate Leadership Council research that I also wrote about titled "Now We Know...Why CHROs Don't Think They Are Effective at Leadership Development."

The age-old question has consistently been how do we measure learning investments. Typically we perceive it as too hard to do,,,I am here to tell you to get off your butt and just do it. I am not talking about Return on Investment, because quite frankly...I find that a huge waste of time. No one else has to prove ROI...why should we? Read my concept of measuring leadership capability here...

Studies indicate we have been in this funk for at least the last 5-10 years. Time to get out of it and meet the expectations that leaders have for our efforts.

Nuff Said!

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Global Talent Management Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change...He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Sunday, June 5, 2011

Creative Leaders...Are We Biased Against Them?


Greetings,

Last year IBM's Global CEO Study titled "Capitalizing on Complexity" was released. It discussed the concept of creative leadership and CEO's perspective that it would be very important in the future to have creative leaders in the organization based upon an uncertain and complex future. I wrote about the implications of the study in this blog piece late last year...Are CEOs and CHROs Aligned on Leadership?

I personally think that the CEO and CHRO studies brought the important and salient points of what kind of leaders we need to develop in our organizations.  During the recent recession, this type of leader really had the spotlight as the economic environment required new ideas and ways of conducting business in constrained resource situations that many organizations found themselves.  Additionally, creating growth opportunities then and now require leaders with the creativity and ability to manage the innovation process.  In fact, I would say having this type of leader actually positioned to lead the organization in the future might be something that organizations may want and strive for...

Guess what...that assumption may be incorrect.

Academic research conducted by Jennifer S. Mueller (University of Pennsylvania, The Wharton School), Jack A. Goncalo (Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations), and Dishan Kamdaris (Indian School of Business) is shedding light on what we really think about creative leaders.  The same ones that CEOs think they need for the future.  You can read the research here "Recognizing Creative Leadership-Can creative idea expression negatively relate to perceptions of leadership potential?" or a synopsis of it here at Knowledge@Wharton - "A Bias against 'Quirky'? Why Creative People Can Lose Out on Leadership Positions" 

But here is the gist and some highlights from the research...

Basically...we say we value creative leaders, but after three experiments that is not really the case.

"By integrating attributional theories of creativity and prototypical theories of leadership, we demonstrate that the expression of creative ideas can trigger impressions which, at least for leadership potential, are not automatically positive. Unless charismatic leadership is brought to mind or is chronically accessible, creativity might not necessarily signal leadership capability."

So if we don't also consider creative leaders as charismatic or transformational leaders in our organizations...our initial impressions are these people are not the kind of leadership potential we are looking for in the organization.

Additional findings included the following...

"Our findings also suggest that organizations may face a bias against selecting the most creative individuals as leaders in favor of selecting leaders who would preserve the status quo by sticking with feasible but relatively unoriginal solutions. This may explain why in their analysis of scores of leaders, IBM's Institute for Business Value found that many leaders expressed doubt or lack of confidence in their own ability to lead through times of complexity. Our results suggest that, if the dominant prototype of leadership favors useful, non-creative responses, then the senior leaders in the IBM study may have been promoted based on this prototypical perception of leadership and now find themselves in a world that has vastly changed, one that requires much more creative responses and thinking. Indeed, this bias in favor of selecting less creative leaders may partially explain why so many leaders fail and why so many groups resist change, as the leaders selected may simply lack the openness to recognize solutions that depart from what is already known."

So what are the implications to organizations, Human Capital Management (HCM) leaders and creative leaders themselves? For organizations...you might want to rethink your position on creative leaders and their overall potential to lead your organization...not just the creativity and innovation efforts. You also have to keep in mind that you want leaders with different strengths, so creativity is just one strength, but you should take a measured approach from a succession planning approach to look at the whole leader and not bias decisions on just one strength.

For HCM leaders, your job is to help organizational leadership identify these leaders in the organization and make sure your organizational leadership is not just asking questions, but asking the right questions about their contribution to the organization. Additionally, think about the creative leaders that are on your team...how do you think about them from a leadership potential perspective? This research may change your ideas about what these creative leaders bring to your team.

For creative leaders, you may not want to hang your hat just on your ability to be creative and innovative...particularly if you have aspirations to be the CEO one day. You have to sell the collective you and ensure that your bosses know all of your strengths. Think of yourself from the actor perspective...do you want to be typecast as a creative leader or a transactional leader?

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Fearless Transformational Global Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change...He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Looking for Great Fossils and Great Leaders...


Greetings,

I am writing this week's blog while on vacation in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina this week with my family. It has been time to relax and reflect on two things that are important to me...fossil hunting and creating great leaders.

It may not be readily apparent to you the similarities between these two very different topics, but let me share with you what part of my vacation includes. This week I will get up early and drive two hours away to meet a guide and other people with similar interests. I will get taken to an area, given insight on the area and the history, given tools to dig and sift through mounds of mud and sand to find those key nuggets of a fantastic past. It will be hot, tiring, and back braking work...but the payoff in pride and satisfaction will be amazing.

Now let's look at identifying great leaders. Those in this line of work usually are up early and working with teams. You and your team get and create information on the role of talent and leadership capability in the organization that provides a sense of the context and environment you are working. You bring with you sets of tools and processes to dig through the mountains of data available on leaders in your organization with the goal to find those great leaders or those with the potential, as early and as broadly as possible, to be great leaders in the future. It is hard and tiring work.

Like my fossil hunting trip this week...your search for great leaders in the organization may be for naught. Leadership and leadership development continues to be an important topic for many organizations. Recently, Deloitte published their Human Capital Trends 2011 study layout a number of areas of revolutionary and evolutionary approaches to human capital management (HCM) and human capital development (HCD). In the study, it references another Deloitte study from 2010 titled Talent Edge 2020: Blueprints for the new normal. When executives were asked about their most pressing talent concerns, developing leaders and succession planning came out #2. This concern is unlikely to change anytime soon. Identifying and developing leaders has been a consistent talent challenge raised by CXOs across a multitude of studies in the last five years.

So what do we do about it is the key question. There are estimates that we collectively spend over $14 billion on leadership development. A previous blog post from me indicates that academic research has not firmly made a connection between leadership and organizational performance (Leadership and Organizational Performance...Lack of Linkage...). So we know we have challenges and enormous expectations from our customers on what it is we are doing and the impact it is having.

Organizations that are better able to manage expectations, develop and identify great leaders will be the winners of the future. Diligent and consistent preparation will put you and your organization in position to succeed...just like it will for my fossil hunt this week.

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Fearless Transformational Global Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change…He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: J. Keith Dunbar
Blog: DNA of Human Capital

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Sunday, May 8, 2011

The Osama bin Laden OP...Leadership and the Long-View


About a week ago we got the news that I didn't think we would see...a successful effort against our #1 threat...Osama bin Laden It was going on over 10 years since September 11, 2001 and the scars from that fateful day are still long and raw...But there is a lesson in this successful operation for public and private sector organizations. That is taking the long-view...

In many organizations we are so tied to the here and now and achieving short-term results and generating immediate self-gratification that strategy or long-view activities are really not a factor in discussions. Like you...I have seen it time and time again. That is why the Osama bin Ladin operation is so important from a leadership lesson in achieving long-term success of an organization.

Soon after the events of September 11th, our primary goal became to bring Bin Ladin to justice. While much has occurred in the intervening days that were both short-term wins and setbacks, we continued to focus on that long-term goal. Resources and planning were dedicated to this one goal that would represent a culmination of a nation's need to bring closure. Through three different presidencies...this has never waivered.

A leader must consistently balance the need for short-term results with planning and preparing for events that provide long-term success of the organization. My perception is that we sometimes forget this...whether Wall Street or 4-year Presidential terms...people that can envision and enable a long-term strategy are worth their weight in gold...even at today's prices. These people need to be identified and put in positions to use their skills to enable organizational success...not this instant...but at a point in the future.

Look around your organization and think of the numbers of people that operate as tactical, day-to-day task oriented people and the numbers in the organization that can truly develop a vision and long-term strategy for organizational success. There are PLENTY of the first and FEW of the latter. The few that you have are probably not being utilized for the strength they bring to the organization and if your leadership falls into the "PLENTY" category...unlikely that they will see it or value it. That has to change...

Take this lesson from the bin Laden OP and take a different perspective in your organization...you will be amazed at what results you will achieve.

Cheers,
Keith

J. Keith Dunbar is a Fearless Transformational Global Leader...Creator of Talent, Leadership Capability, and Culture Change…He can be found connecting and sharing knowledge on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Twitter: JKeithDunbar
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jkeithdunbar
DNA of Human Capital: http://dna-of-humancapital.blogspot.com/

The opinions or views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the Defense Intelligence Agency.