In a recent book chapter, Hogan's Jarrett Shalhoop and Michael Sanger explore the nature of Chinese leadership through the lens of personality and values and explain how these differ from leadership styles of three countries with large trade interests in China -- the U.S., Germany and Australia. For organizations that must select managers for cross-cultural assignments, recognizing the divergent traits and behaviors inherent in Chinese managers, and how they play out with their manager, direct reports and colleagues at a similar level, is needed to ensure that individuals are placed into the right management roles.

Read the full article from Yahoo! News

 

The HR world is already atwitter with a brand new batch of buzzwords. But wait! Here are five of last year’s biggest buzzwords that will still matter in 2013. 

LEADERSHIP
“To me, there is only one talent management issue, and it never changes: leadership. What also never changes is the fact that businesses don’t understand this, which is why they put so many self-serving assholes in leadership positions.”  - Dr. Robert Hogan

After what seemed like a never-ending election cycle, the last thing anyone wants to keep talking about is leadership. But it’s something we can’t afford to ignore. Competent leadership is crucial for a company to succeed. Yet, research indicates that two-thirds of the leaders in corporate America will fail. Why? Check out this free ebook to find out.  

GAME CHANGERS
At any given organization, 20% of employees account for 80% of productivity. They are the game changers, and in 2013, companies are going to have to work hard to attract, develop, and retain employees capable of creating value and driving growth. How would Hogan do it? Download From Potential to Performance to find out. 

MULTI-GENERATION WORKFORCE
Although they aren’t necessarily the entitled slackers the media made them out to be, Millennials (Generation Y) and Digital Natives (Generation Z) work differently than older generations. Organizations need to work to separate fact from fiction when it comes to generational differences in order to leverage the experience of their older employees and build the talent bench of the future. Need a place to start? Check out this blog. 

TALENT ANALYTICS
The HR world was all abuzz with talk of Big Data last year, and rightly so; many organizations are sitting on a mountain of data about their people. This year, the challenge is for those companies to find a way to effectively analyze, understand, and leverage those data to make their organizations run better. What kind of data do we have? Check out the Hogan archive. 

ENGAGEMENT
Employee engagement matters. Engaged employees are more satisfied and more productive, and productivity ties directly to the bottom line. In 2013, we hope to see a reduction in Hawaiian-shirt Fridays and a genuine effort by organizations to identify and fix the root cause of low engagement. Here’s a hint: it’s their leaders. Want more? Check out our free white paper. 

You manage things; you lead people.

Leadership is a combination of strategy and character. If you must be without one, be without the strategy.

-General H. Norman Schwarzkopf

In the month of October, Hurricane Sandy dealt a devastating blow to the East Coast. Major flooding, power outages, structural damage to business and homes, and fatalities are the only remnants of the ruinous storm.

With some states still reeling from the effects of the hurricane, it is impossible to turn on the television, open the newspaper, or search social media sites without witnessing the aftermath. During this traumatic event, many prominent public figures have stepped up to provide resources, assistance, and support to those affected by the hurricane. For example, Barack Obama cancelled his campaign in Ohio to assess the storm damage of New Jersey, and Lady Gaga donated $1 million to the American Red Cross to support storm relief efforts. Although individuals’ benevolence, selflessness, and service-orientation is vital to picking up the pieces of Hurricane Sandy, it raises an important question: why does this inspiring and energizing leadership appear more frequently in times of a crisis?

As Ron Ashkenas’ article notes, leaders typically modify their day-to-day behaviors during a sustained crisis. As a result, they tend to appear more willing to collaborate and communicate across boundaries, accelerate the decision making process, eliminate standard procedures and restrictions, and volunteer their time to hands-on service activities in order to help alleviate or resolve the crisis. These behaviors, however, slowly dissipate as the crisis begins to stabilize, immediate problems are solved, and the sense of urgency diminishes.

According to Ashkenas, there are two main reasons we witness extraordinary leadership during unordinary conditions. First, a crisis accelerates a leader’s ability to act decisively because there is not much time to evaluate, plan, or brainstorm. As such, a leader must be disposed to take action or effectuate a solution. Second, a crisis forces a leader to think creatively and quickly, while circumventing standard procedures and policies. In this case, fast, bold, and sometimes risky actions override predictable and safe ideas.

Demonstrating this type of passion, influence, and action-orientation may be beneficial for leaders in the corporate world, even when a crisis is not present. Subordinates and colleagues are typically drawn to these inspiring and energetic behaviors. You can identify what may motivate or influence leaders to respond to a crisis and how they may manage or approach a crisis and accompanying stress simply by looking at their Hogan assessment results. From this information, you can see a glimpse into how your leaders are likely to act during the good, bad, and ugly times organizations can face.

As more organizations are forced to do more with less, speed coaching provides a fast, agile and cost-effective way to enhance the performance of key employees before they derail.

The viability of an organization depends upon the quality of its future leaders, yet limited resources often pose significant obstacles to providing them with necessary coaching and development. During her session at GSC SHRM, titled “Speed Coaching – Limited Resources but Unlimited Development,” Patricia Kellett, director of the Hogan Coaching Network, shared several strategies for using speed coaching to develop future leaders.

Trish discussed how speed coaching can be effective in changing behavior by sharing a case study of Bob, an employee who was recently promoted to supply chain manager for his company. Although Bob knows the business well and is effective at relationship building, his supervisor hears from team members that Bob’s meetings tend to go on for too long, and that he is indecisive, not open to new ideas, and gets overwhelmed by a more assertive employee.

As Bob is proficient in several key areas of his role, she explained, it would be a waste of time and resources to have him go through the typical linear development cycle. Instead, it is more effective to provide him with speed coaching in the few areas in which he needs improvement. By providing targeted speed coaching that builds on his existing strengths and develops his competency companions, or the existing skills that can be used to improve his performance in other areas, he can be a more effective leader.

To ensure an organization has a pipeline of future leaders it can count on to assume key positions, it is imperative to understand the assets and liabilities of these individuals. As each company has several team members who may not be perfect, but are still too good to lose, their supervisors need to provide targeted development that prepares them to meet future needs. Through speed coaching, they can provide their high potential employees with fast and effective development that drives their performance, but won’t drain financial resources.

Out of all the things we expect of leaders—taking charge, setting strategy, empowering people, driving execution, you name it—what one single behavior would you guess is most often neglected or avoided among executives? Seeing the big picture? Nope. Delegating? Nope. Mapping out detailed project plans? Nope. Although many upper-level managers don’t do these things enough, the single-most shirked responsibility of executives is holding people accountable. No matter how tough a game they may talk about performance, when it comes to holding peoples’ feet to the fire leaders step back from the heat.

In our database of over 5,400 upper-level managers from the US, Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific gathered since 2009, 46% are rated “too little” on the item, “Holds people accountable—firm when they don’t deliver.” Remarkably, the result holds up no matter how you slice the data—by ratings from bosses, peers, or even subordinates. It holds up for C-level executives compared to Directors and Middle managers. It is about the same in different cultures too—although accountability is a bit more common in some countries than others, it is still the most neglected behavior within every region we have studied.

When we first observed this trend, it struck us as counterintuitive. An epidemic of letting people off the hook is incongruous with the view of senior managers as tough, hard chargers intent on getting results. But episodes of Mad Men notwithstanding, this stereotype of executive leaders is seriously out of date. Abraham Zaleznik wrote about this myth over 20 years ago in his classic HBR article, “Real Work.”  Zaleznik chronicled how he saw American managers, influenced by the rising popularity of the human relations school, turn increasingly from the substantive work of organizations—creating products and services, cultivating markets, pleasing customers, cutting costs, and getting stuff done—to what he termed “psychopolitics.” What he meant was that in the 1980s American managers became obsessed with managing their popularity and were more concerned with greasing the skids, avoiding tough conversations, and maintaining a favorable image. Interest in productivity gave way to process. Controversy and conflict about what needs to get done and how to do it was replaced with the ambiguity of politeness, political correctness, and efforts to not offend.

We think this trend has continued, and perhaps even been intensified as the workforce has become more diverse and especially as it has gotten younger. Over the last year blogs at US News, Daily Finance, Forbes, and articles like this one in the New York Times have questioned the work ethic and entitlement mentality of generation Y. The youngest members of the workforce, especially in the US, have grown up in a sheltered environment; they expect praise and recognition and can be indignant when it is not forthcoming. They are not particularly open to critical feedback. No surprise, then, that at a time when talent retention and engaging employees is de rigueur we get silly advice to management such as, “don’t give employees a hard time about their weaknesses, celebrate their strengths.”

But there is an even deeper explanation for the lack of managerial courage to hold employees to account for their performance. The evidence comes from experimental studies of cooperation and the problem of “free-riding” which reveal the individual- and group-level outcomes that accrue when some team members don’t carry their weight and drag on the performance of others. The first lesson from this research is that within a group, free-riders and cheaters often get ahead of hard working contributors: they enjoy the benefits of group membership without making the personal sacrifice.

However, groups of cooperative contributors outperform groups of cheating free-riders. Thus, it is no surprise that groups in which free-riders are punished for their loafing outperform groups in which they are not. But the interesting finding in all of this is that the person who does the punishing actually pays a personal price in terms of lost social support. In a nutshell, group performance requires that someone plays the role of sheriff, but it is a thankless job. It is another one of those sticky cases where what is good for the group can be bad for the individual. You know, the kind of stuff that in another era was considered commendable because it served a greater good than self-interest.

In this light, it is easy to see why so many people in positions of authority are soft on accountability. In an age of career management and “psychopolitics,” where personal interest reigns supreme, who wants to risk being the bad guy? The unfortunate consequence, however, is that no matter what short-term costs an upwardly ambitious manager avoids by not playing the sheriff, they are overshadowed in the long run by lackluster organizational performance and a culture of mediocrity. Add this up over time and across departments and business units and the aggregate costs of neglecting accountability can be staggering for everyone.

Submitted by Guest Bloggers:

Rob Kaiser rob@kaiserleadership.com 
Darren Overfield darren@kaplandevries.com

Rob Kaiser is president of Kaiser Leadership Solutions. Darren Overfield is a senior consultant at Kaplan DeVries Inc.

It’s that time again. The leaves are turning, the clocks need changing, and the air carries that crispness that can be associated with only one thing: a mustache. Dustin Hunter, blogged last year publicly announcing Hogan’s involvement in Movember. Participation in Movember is simple - register and grow a badge of honor on your upper lip to raise awareness and funds for prostate cancer research.               

At Hogan, we know a lot about leadership. Our passion is to understand its many dynamic facets and to scientifically identify an individual’s propensity to be successful. To honor this passion and our commitment to the study of leadership, I thought it only fitting to take a quick glance at some of the great mustaches in leadership history.

Theodore Roosevelt A decorated war hero, acclaimed big game hunter, and renowned president, Teddy exhibited leadership strengths that earned a chiseled spot in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Would his Rough Riders have followed his charge or bears fallen to his knife had his upper lip been shorn? I think not.

Don Mattingly He did serve as captain of the New York Yankees for four seasons and was awarded countless accolades for his sporting achievements. Mattingly was well known for a successful leadership style based around humility, simplicity, and excellence. In addition to the now retired number 23 on his jersey, Mattingly also proudly displayed a thick Box Car style mustache.

Genghis Kahn Opinions of Mr. Kahn vary, but no one can deny his leadership skill and tactical expertise. His leadership put Mongolia on the map and established some of the greatest horse cultures in human history. Would his confederation of tribes have united to form a force worthy of China’s Great Wall had he lacked his fuzzy stamp of machismo? Highly unlikely.

Abraham Lincoln This man was so influential he not only led this country through some of its darkest times, he also revolutionized the mustache by sporting the skin stache (full beard sans lip hair). Known for his honesty, eloquence, and untimely death, Lincoln and his reverse mustache have been immortalized in marble, alongside his mustachioed brethren in South Dakota, and on our national currency.

Mahatma Ghandi The guy sported a stache when he coined the phrase “be the change you wish to see in the world.” Enough said.

Albert Einstein Without that upper lip fur the “C” might not have ever been squared. Although Einstein might not have been a true people leader, no one can doubt his leadership in visionary thought. Besides, leadership is all relative.

The list could go on to include the likes of Martin Luther King, Jr., Wyatt Earp, Reggie Jackson, Mike Ditka, and countless others. It isn’t proper, however, to laud the positive accomplishments of those above without considering the darker role mustaches have played in leadership history.

Perhaps the most infamous derailed mustache was that worn by Adolf Hitler. The actions taken by Hitler do not merit a recap, but if leadership is defined as an ability to unite people toward a common goal (good or evil) then he must be acknowledged. Runners up include Atilla the Hun, Joseph Stalin, and Saddam Hussein.

Personality is, of course, a much more accurate (and legally defensible) way to assess an individual’s leadership style and potential than is their choice of facial hair. I’ve poked around our research archive and haven’t yet discovered any solid correlations between handlebar mustaches and high performing leaders, so we’ll stick to what we know and do best.

The Importance of Values to Leadership and Business Performance

The story of a smart, talented individual hired to repair an ailing company, only to fail and cost the company dearly in the process, isn’t unfamiliar. When values of a leader don’t match up with those of the company, leader-subordinate relationships may spiral out of control, taking the whole company down with them.

Download The Culture Clash and discover the impact values have on motivation, culture fit, leadership style, and biases within a work environment.

People look for four essential characteristics in leaders. In previous posts, we discussed the importance of integrity and judgment. The third and fourth essential characteristics of good leaders are competence and vision.

Good leaders are perceived as knowing what they are talking about, as being competent in the team’s business. The term “empty suit” refers to people who are in charge but don’t know what they are doing. In hunter-gatherer tribes, leaders are distinguished by their moral qualities, their judgment, and their superior hunting ability. These characteristics garner respect and loyalty from their subordinates.

Also, good leaders explain to their team the significance of their mission and how it fits into the larger scheme of things. This vision clarifies roles, goals, and the way forward, thereby facilitating team performance.

By adopting a vision, people can transcend their selfish interests and develop impersonal ends for their actions.

To learn more about the essential characteristics of good leaders, check out our free e-book, Leadership: You're Doing It Wrong.