The high incidence of mediocre performance suggests that the route to remarkable does not lie in the typical approaches to managing, training or developing people. One key is strong and relentless focus on putting people’s strengths to best use. But organisations can develop ingenious ways to mask mediocrity.

Incompetent - what a useful word! Shorthand for useless, inept, hopeless, bungling, unskilled, and ineffectual, organisations strive to avoid or overcome incompetence at any cost. But, as a strategy, is it worth the effort? In the words of Peter Drucker:

 “It takes far more energy and far more work to improve from incompetence to low mediocrity than it takes to improve from first-rate performance to excellence… The energy and resources - and time - should go into making a competent person into a star performer”.

Competency: a useful but limiting concept? While competent is certainly an improvement on incompetent, we intuitively recognise that the concept describes something far from remarkable performance. Think Tiger Woods! Think Yo Yo Ma! David Beckham! Gary Kasparaov! In describing these remarkable performers, ‘competent’ would be a woefully inadequate term.

It is my sincere belief that most people do not go to work with the intention of achieving mediocre performance. But something happens as a result of how they work, how they are trained, managed, and developed. Developing the skills and discipline to achieve remarkable performance is not an easy route - but then it seems the road from incompetent to mediocre is no short-cut either. Some navigation tips can certainly make for an easier journey.

Click here to link to the whole article

For most Senior Managers and their organisations, times are tough. So tough, in fact, that paying attention to internal relationships can seem an indulgence. But, it gets worse. There’s growing anecdotal evidence that some managers use today’s business pressures as an excuse to neglect staff or to be rude.

If the managers reporting to you do not evidence this problem that’s just great. If, on the other hand, even just one of them shows a pattern of incivility you have to take action. So, why the urgency? This toxic behaviour of incivility corrodes performance.

Professors Christine Porath and Christine Pearson set themselves the task of gauging the impact of incivility on performance. As they put it, ‘”To understand the impact of incivility on performance, we polled several thousand managers and employees from a diverse range of US Companies about their responses to rudeness at work.”  They learned that among those at the receiving end,

             48% decreased their work effort,

            47% decreased their time at work,

            38% decreased their work quality,

            66% said their performance declined,

            80% lost work time worrying about the incident,

            63% lost time avoiding the offender, and

            78% said their commitment to the organisation declined

 At a time when organisations have no resources to spare (people, goodwill, money), we can ill afford incivility by managers.

There are many surveys reporting that most workers are largely unhappy, frustrated and demoralised. Sometimes it goes so far as people turning up to work simply because they still have a mortgage to pay. They have become perilously (for the employer) disconnected from their job. I know.  I have often asked these people the question “What do you really like about your job and about working here?”  Many of the surveys mentioned above suggest that at any given time over 60 percent of these disgruntled employees are looking for another job.

Have you encountered this retired on the job problem? If so, what do you think explains it and what are some possible solutions?

Abraham Lincoln remains one of the main influences for President Obama. Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin is probably the leading authority on Lincoln. In her book Team of Rivals, she emphasises the following about Abraham Lincoln:

• Abraham Lincoln’s genius was to manage the ambitions and egos of his rivals to form a team that could confront the challenges of the civil war
• He demonstrated great ability to create a team of rivals which was rooted in an extraordinary level of emotional intelligence. He learned from his mistakes, he shared responsibility for the mistakes of others, and he did not hold grudges
• Lincoln’s experience, like that of other presidents in times of emergency, gives hope that the United States and other democracies will weather the current crisis

These are quite challenging qualities but does that mean Lincoln had no weaknesses? Goodwin says:

“He had flaws, of course; every leader has flaws. Lincoln’s greatest flaw came out of his strength, which was generally liking people and not wanting to hurt them. He always wanted to give somebody a second or even a third chance. This weakness proved disastrous with George McClellan, who was head of the Union Army for some months near the beginning of the war.  Lincoln should have fired McClellan within weeks of seeing how narcissistic and insubordinate he was. In part, Lincoln didn’t because at the time he didn’t have enough confidence in his understanding of military affairs.”

So, back to the question, in terms of your leadership journey, do you have a Lincoln equivalent and what would be the benefit of that? (Click title to comment)

Team away-days (it seems to me) can be real fun and as an objective this can be valuable in its own right.  In many cases however, managers and their teams go into these experiences needing and expecting far more than a brief detour from the harsh realities of day-to-day business.  The aim is sometimes stated as, “…creating a more resourceful and collaborative team environment that is not restricted to ‘away-days’ only”.  Somehow, something is lost in translation.  

In respect of this problem, I find Jim Collins’ idea about discipline really helpful.  He talks about organisations needing: Disciplined Thought; Disciplined People; and Disciplined Action.  Otherwise, great promises and plans degenerate into something of a Bermuda Triangle where ideas disappear without trace.  Of course, measurement is crucial in terms of making and keeping things happen.  That is, if we measure the right things and not too many things!!  

What are your observations and experience?

Voluntary groups come in all shapes and sizes from the large corporate organisations with prestigious offices and a national reputation to the small, local community, faith or voluntary organisation - often referred to as the third sector. The challenges remain constant - how do you get good performance out of people who do are volunteers - or have small salaries? How do you tap their expertise and passion to best effect?  In short how do you engage them?

Leaders in voluntary organisations have to spend a disproportionate amount of time on engaging their teams. Without this they can not deliver. RNIB have just completed a programme looking at values. They recognise that shared values give people the drive and motivation to come to work, and an ability to make a positive impact on other people’s lives can be a key driver of staff engagement.   They have identified six shared values and want to see them reflected at all levels in the organisation. (People Management magazine 26 February 2009)

In our experience many organisations in the voluntary sector have “assumed values”; there is lots of good will around but in reality the values are unclear and that lack of clarity can cause tension. Being deliberate about values has a huge impact on effectiveness. With clear values people know what is expected of them, standards can be encouraged, behaviour can be challenged, and people are energised to make a difference through what they do.

In Caret we practice what we preach and have been reviewing our own values - it is good to see what gets us excited about the work we do, what drives our commitment to go that extra mile, what unites us as a team. It may seem a strange time to be talking about values in a recession, but values give you a constant in times of great change. More than that they can give the energy and passion, and the determination to get through the current difficulties. One of our long established clients is St Basils who work with homeless young people - they will constantly ask how this decision impacts the lives of young people. This can impact the mundane admin as well as complex strategy - values make the difference for St Basils - and give them the determination and focus to succeed. It’s a determination that could make a real difference for all organisations in every sector.

Warren Bennis (one of the world’s leading authorities on leadership) recently said:

‘In discussing various approaches to leadership, I often note a distinction made between two nineteenth-century British prime ministers. It was observed that when you had dinner with William Gladstone, you left thinking, “That Gladstone is the wittiest, the most intelligent, the most charming person around.”  But when you had dinner with Benjamin Disraeli, you left thinking, “I’m the wittiest, the most intelligent, the most charming person around!” Gladstone shone, but Disraeli created an environment in which others could shine.  The latter is a more powerful form of leadership, an adventure in which the leader us privileged to find treasure within others and put it to good use.’

When you think of the really effective leaders you have known, how many could be characterised as Gladstones and how many as Disraelis? What made them warrant the label you have given these leaders?

Poor “Big Phil” Scolari - the impatient owners of Chelsea left him with the team his two predecessors built and expected wonders. Given his impressive record with Brazil you can see why their expectations were high. He has had precious little time to build his team, create a new culture and set new standards. He had more time than Tony Adams who also suffered from having some of his best players sold and a team that produced some good battling displays against the leagues top teams. Is there anything we can learn for leadership in organisations on the fate of “Big Phil” and Tony?

The first lesson is the impatience of people at the top for results. The second is that things could get better if you bring in a new leader. Does that make you feel a little uncomfortable if you are in a leadership/management role? It should do, because in both these cases I suspect both people gave the job everything they had - lots of experience, passion, energy, commitment - and it did not satisfy their Eastern European owners.

Let’s look at Martin O’Neill. I have to confess a bias here - I am a Villa fan but Martin has been given the time and the backing from his boss. Indeed the support has been wonderful and Martin has repaid it with thoughtful signings and attractive play. We use Jim Collins work on ‘Good to Great’ in Caret and he talks about getting the right people on the bus. O’Neill has done that - he has not gone for the highest of profiles but he has gone for people who are good team players. Combined together these team players become confident, committed, and happy. You see them out and about together in Birmingham - they support and value each other and Martin continually goes out of his way to praise their excellence. Villa is definitely a team where synergy is at work. They are better than the sum of their parts.

Chelsea are not better than the sum of their parts and the question is - was Scolari given enough time to make this happen? He certainly created a strong team spirit in Portugal and Brazil when he managed their national sides. But this is not a football blog - it’s about leadership. The challenge to us as we lead in challenging times is: have we got the right people on the bus? Is my team better than the sum of its part? Have I got the backing of my boss to keep improving this team? Are they aware of my standards? Do I regularly encourage them when I see good performances? The world of work needs more Martin O’ Neills who realise that a laser-like focus on team commitment can bring great results. How’s your team doing?

Senior Managers did not get to be Senior Managers by being stupid… okay, there are a few exceptions to the rule but they really are exceptions. Senior Managers are technically competent, they bring a lot of expertise and awareness to their roles. All things being equal, however, technical competence does not separate the good from the great - or the quick from the dead!

Relationships are key. Great Senior Managers are differentiated not by what they know, but by how they act. They do not constrain their capable people, take them for granted, or expect the impossible.

But they do challenge, release, enable. At times like these we need clarity of thinking, great decisions and excellent implementation. Great Managers realise the onus is not on them to provide these themselves, but to release them in others.

I remember an excellent Sales Director I worked with. We worked hard to produce a proposal for him that we really thought was the best way forward. He made us go back and trim something off it and we thought we were doing the impossible! But, as we worked at it we found ways to address his concerns. He had got us thinking ’til our brains hurt - and he was right to do so.

What is the value of sharp thinking to your organisation right now? What impact will it have if you can have some “breakthrough” ideas? How can you enable innovation? Your ability to enable your team “to bring their brains to work”, to fully engage the challenges and opportunities facing you, will have far more impact than your personal expertise alone. Peter Drucker once said, however:

“Half the leaders I have met don’t need to learn what to do. They need to learn what to stop”.

We often have behaviours that get in the way - we may be very competitive and hold others back, we may need to add our ideas and imprint to things and stifle objectivity, we may undermine others by our remarks, we may come across as negative - the list goes on. Do you understand the flaws that you have that can hold others back?

At Caret we see sharp thinking, new radical ideas, issues linking together, problems solved every day in our privileged role as organisational consultants. We also see many barriers to effectiveness, but we are convinced the talent, the ideas, and the need to succeed are there - go out and tap into it!

One of the great pitfalls leaders can fall into during the Credit Crunch is the belief that previous success guarantees future happiness - or, that what has worked in the past will work in the future. Clearly, the context many leaders are operating in is different. Not least are the changes in confidence, commitment, knowledge and awareness of their teams.

Indeed, Marshall Goldsmith - in his challenging book What Got You Here Won’t Get You There - argues that:

 “successful people become great leaders when they learn to shift the focus from themselves to the performance of others”.

He demonstrates how a high proportion of senior people overestimate their own contribution and skills and ignore many of their failures and errors.

The pressure is on leaders to step up to the mark, issue dictats, make heroic decisions. But greatness lies in recognising our own gaps and by skillfully utilising the expertise around us. George W Bush gives us a good example of how not to do it - as reported in The Guardian, 26/11/08:

“Bush could not tolerate any dissent, once telling a luckless economics adviser that any decision the President made was, by definition, good policy.”

Barack Obama seems to prefer strong characters, robust discussion, good listening, and then he will make decsisions.

We need new answers and new solutions. Of course, the past provides guidelines and principles, but they need to be tested out against the new risks, and barriers to success need addressing. Just looking to past successes contrains our thinking.

The challenge is to enable others - to motivate them to take diffcult decisions and think through the short and long term consequences. You need buy-in from key stakeholders. A key issue is that whilst the decisions you make are important, the implementation of those decisions is where “the rubber hits the road”.

Great leaders enable their organisation to implement and they consider the current capacity to make implementation work - not what happened in the past.