Although the agency requires only an annual, formal performance appraisal, Carolyn makes it a point to have quarterly informal performance discussions with each of her staff. She finds this more frequent approach helps head off problems before them become major issues. With a team of six employees, Carolyn has one of these quarterly discussions about every week or two. She will be meeting with Sally in a couple of days. As she thinks about Sally’s performance, she notices that when a major new project is on the horizon Sally becomes quite tentative about her ability to handle the new assignment. Sally may even resist having the task delegated to her or put off starting on the new assignment. In situational leadership terms, Sally is generally “Able and Willing” to perform well and does so except when she is given responsibility for taking on a new project assignment. In the previous three months Carolyn has given Sally two projects to work on; both of which require Sally to plan and implement tasks she has not done before. Both times Sally was reluctant to get started on the project and put off doing so, claiming she had not had time because of her workload.

As Carolyn thinks about how to approach Sally about this issue, she comes to the realization that there is something about these assignments that is outside of Sally’s comfort zone. Otherwise, why would a solid performer be so reluctant to take on these assignments? Carolyn understands that Sally either lacks the Ability to perform well in these situations, or she is lacks the Willingness to take on the projects and run with the ball. As the leader, Carolyn has to decide how to raise the issue with Sally. The initial options Carolyn comes up with include:

• Find another employee who knows how to do the new project assignment and have them act as a resource or mentor for Sally, or
• Carve out a piece of the new project that is related to Sally’s present workload so she can have a small “win” to rebuild her confidence, or
• Reinforce her confidence in Sally’s abilities and find opportunities to support and assist her to get over any hurdles she might encounter along the way.

Using the situational leadership approach means matching her leadership style to Sally’s readiness level and understanding that it is Carolyn – the leader – who must adapt to the current behavior of Sally – the follower – not the other way around.

In this case, Carolyn decided to simply discuss the two project assignments with Sally and describe her observations about Sally’s behavior. Carolyn’s approach was non-confrontational and consisted of basically saying, “Here is what I see; let’s talk about what occurred and see if we can figure out what is going on.” During that discussion Carolyn learned that Sally saw the two projects as overwhelming and too big – she had never planned and implemented a big project on her own and felt insecure in her ability to do so. Sally was confident in her ability to get things done when somebody else (usually Carolyn) was responsible for figuring out what needed to be done and how to do it; then handed off the tasks to Sally. After discussing the situation, Carolyn and Sally decided that Sally needed some training on project planning and a bit of hand-holding on the first of the two projects to get things rolling.

It turned out that Carolyn’s decision worked out well. Within a couple of weeks Carolyn was able to step back and watch Sally perform. After that, Sally was able to take on new project assignments much more easily. Another “win-win” for Leading as well as managing.

My next action was clear; grab a pad of paper, my pen, and do a dump of everything that is on my mind, unfinished, incomplete, I’d like to have happen, needs to get started, etc.

Lo and behold, I discovered about 30 different items lurking in my head! Everything from calling an old friend I haven’t talked to in awhile, to picking up shirts at the laundry, to setting a strategy meeting to discuss our plans for next year and beyond. The list pretty much covered the waterfront from little errands to big-picture strategic kinds of items and everything in between.

You may not be waking up at 4:00 in the morning, but see if you catch yourself tracking off somewhere during that staff meeting or while someone else is talking to you. Is it because the staff meeting is dull-boring? Or is it because you have three (or 30) things floating around in your head that are not captured in your system?

When is the last time you invested a half-hour in dumping things out of your head?

Not only are employees encouraged to grow and advance, but Jane and her staff supervisors remind employees to “think résumé” so when an employee picks up a new skill, participates on a project team, or receives an accolade, it gets added to their résumé. If a higher level position becomes available in the organization and the employee expresses an interest, Jane or one of her supervisors will review the posting, the employee’s résumé with them, and even help the employee practice in a mock-interview setting. The results are several, such as: 

• Lower-level employees throughout the bank see Jane’s department as a place where they will be supported and encouraged to advance.
• Jane’s department has turnover that is significantly lower than other departments.
• When an employee does leave, they are usually doing so for a promotion that takes advantage of their skill-set.
• Jane has former employees working in virtually every area in the company; as a result, she knows just who to call an inter-unit issue arises.

There a several winners in all of this; the bank because they have intensely loyal employees who aren’t interested in leaving the organization just to get a promotion, the employee because they see they have a future within the organization, the bank’s customers because they deal daily with well-motivated and positive individuals who see the organization as really caring about them, and the department’s management because they don’t have a revolving door when it comes to filling and retaining employees. Everybody wins!

The nonprofit world has been hard-hit by this global recession. The twin whammys of a lot more demand for their services at the same time the funding available has shrunk considerably. It’s a good reminder for all of us that are working and still in business – as tight as it is, don’t forget that we are better off than a lot of our neighbors next door and our cousins across the country. Don’t forget to get that checkbook out at least quarterly and support a nonprofit in your community.

After all, we’re all in this together. And it will take all of us to work our way out of it. Do the Right Thing.

I expressed my concern about Jack’s style to the CEO who retained us for the assessment, and he suggested that I take a look at Jack’s team firsthand. So, I went into the plant at 11 p.m., 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. over the course of a week, and hung out with the team. I learned a lot. First of all, I learned that the 3^rd shift paint line was the “dumping ground” for the rest of the plant; if a factory worker was unsuccessful in getting along with people in other units or shifts, he was often assigned to Jack’s crew as a last step before being fired. Second, I discovered that of the dozen people on this team, about two-thirds of them had criminal records and had been behavior problems in other areas of the plant. Third, I had one of Jack’s employees tell me, “hey, we can get out of hand sometimes and Jack has to take us out behind the building and smack us around a bit, but we get the job done.”

Frankly, I was confused. I expected Jack’s employees to be sullen, resentful, and unproductive. They weren’t. I had expected them to dislike Jack as a supervisor. They didn’t. More research revealed that Jack’s turnover record was substantially better than the rest of the 3^rd shift, and better than most of the 1^st and 2^nd shift units. His productivity and quality numbers were better than 2^nd shift’s and nearly as good as 1^st shift.

As I considered all of this, I discovered I had learned a Lesson in Leadership.

• Leaders use different styles. The style that I would use and the style that you would use in the same situation may be different.
• The style that works well in one situation may not work in every situation.
• If the turnover on the team is not excessive, and the productivity and quality results are up to standard, then the style being used may be appropriate.

Jack turned out to be a pretty good supervisor. He might not be my cup of tea if I worked for him, but the team he led did a good job, had jelled pretty well as a team, and generally thought Jack was a pretty good guy.

Think about your own team or business. How are you doing on those measures? Staff turnover, productivity, quality of output. Is the style you are using getting you the results you need?

Our mental model prevents us from recognizing that our present way of operating is not likely to get us the results we want. We often redouble our efforts along the same path without grasping that the path has changed. We either do not see that the world around us is now different or we rail against the changes that surround us and pronounce them as wrong. For example, those who warned us about climate change were roundly dismissed and derided for sounding the alarm until the success of An Inconvenient Truth brought the issue to the attention of a wide audience. Our mental model simply could not accept the notion that the need for a reduction in the use of fossil fuels required concerted action now.

Our mental model also prevents us from seeing ourselves as engaged in a process that will result in a new behavior or new approach. We are often so invested in our current perception and behavior patterns that we are unable to see that we can change. We see the changing world around us as threatening and hostile; a bad place to be resisted at all costs. In essence we see ourselves as the victim of change rather than the agent of change in our own life.

Because the changing situation is either ignored or viewed as a bad thing, our mental model keeps us from developing change strategies that help produce and reinforce the new behavior or method of operating. We fail to see how to change and are often unable to create a plan for how to successfully adapt ourselves and our behavior. As a result we will often abandon our efforts to change at the first hurdle or roadblock.  Sustaining the new behavior in the face of setbacks and resistance from others and from within ourselves becomes so difficult or impossible that we give up.

Organizations also have mental models. The rapidly changing and fluid environment in which business, government, and nonprofits operate call for flexible, adaptive, forward-focused organizations. Perhaps no better example of excessively rigid corporate mental models exists than the Big Three U.S. auto manufacturers. Their resistance to improving vehicle quality in the 1980’s created huge opportunities for Japanese and German automakers. Once again, the Big Three’s mental models caused them to resist calls for higher fuel economy and alternative fuel vehicles even as petroleum prices skyrocketed in recent years.

So, why do so many change initiatives fail so miserably?

• We do not understand the nature of change (see Sustainability I).
• We fail to grasp the fact that change is a process
• We neglect to identify our own (and our organization’s) mental model
• We do not determine the stage of change we are currently in
• We give up too easily on the new approach – our desire for a “quick-fix” makes us impatient 

The relative success of a change initiative depends upon the individual’s or the organization’s readiness for change and willingness to be flexible.

Creating the kinds of working relationships that will help to take you, your team, and your organization to new levels of success and accomplishment takes hard work and constant effort. When your working relationships are effective, you are able to truly lead your team to get the job done. When your relationships are poor, you simply won’t be able to get the results you and your organization need. And, in all likelihood, you will have a team that is not actively engaged in doing a good job. Your people will not be happy and productive; they may well “vote with their feet” by leaving. Research clearly shows that employees do not leave jobs, they leave managers.

What do you expect of your key relationships – employees, co-workers, boss, spouse, family – in your life? Do you expect those relationships to be relatively positive most of the time? Do you expect your employees to perform well consistently? Do they actually perform well most of the time? Do you expect your boss to keep you in the loop, communicate well and thoughtfully, give you opportunities to grow, and help you in your career?

On the other hand, do you expect your employees to be lazy, unengaged in their work, and generally perform poorly? Do they act that way? Do you expect your boss to be a jerk? And does he/she behave like one?

I submit that in both cases you are getting the result you expect. It is the expectation itself – a belief you hold that has not yet come true – that at least partially causes that expectation to become reality. People tend to live up (or down) to our expectations of them.

Think about the expectations you have for the people around you. Are your expectations results-oriented with a positive focus? If so, your odds improve that the successful outcome you want will become true.