DDI’s Talent Management Intelligence

Defining Done

By Barry Stern, Ph.D.

 For about the past six months, my newfound friend and colleague Russ has an out of office message that simply says "define done."  Easy for HIM to say. Pretty much impossible for me to do, even when I'm mowing the lawn.  In two words Russ has captured one component of my lifelong struggle. I've never been very good at finishing.  It’s rare that anything I touch really seems done. When I write a sentence I can always tweak it. Is the split infinitive bothering me today?  Why did it bother me yesterday but not today? Can it be said in a more parsimonious way?  My life and my career seem to exist in shades of gray.  I envy those decisive people who just seem to know when something is "finished".  Their world, so black and white, so clean.

Perhaps Russ' question is borne from his IT/software background.  I have been surfing the net and found that one possible definition of done in the world of agile software development is that "a feature is implemented, reviewed, and unit tested, but not necessarily documented". 

Ubiquitous communication options and the liquidity of words has made defining done even more challenging. When am I done with participating in the never-ending email thread du jour?  I want to be "first out" or "never in".  More pervasively,  I notice nobody "writes" formal communications any more.  Now we "craft" them, which yet somehow elevates to new heights of verbosity and self absorption.  We are drowning in a world of crafted bits.

What about HR professionals? How do we define done as we develop people? Do our definitions of done limit those who can fly so much higher?  Or place too many undeserving artificial ceilings on folks? Are we really taking the time to systematically identify their apogees?  Can we ever say that a person has been developed, reviewed and unit tested?

How do you "define done" in your work?  When you deftly design that onboarding  experience for your new employees?  When you develop your new competency model?  Do others agree it's done? How are your definitions of done in fact defining you and your body of work to yourself and others?

Rather arbitrarily, I guess I'll stop here.

Barry Stern Ph.D. is vice president, Consulting Services and Delivery for Development Dimensions International (DDI). Follow him on Twitter.

Curiosity. Karma. Whatever You Want to Call It.

By Jazmine Boatman, Ph.D. 

Do you fill out those diner satisfaction surveys they give you with your check at restaurants? I do. Those surveys about “What’s the State of Consumerism today”? Yep, those too. I’ve also filled out customer satisfaction surveys after a few internet purchases I have made.  As someone who, frankly, makes a living out of survey research, I feel compelled (and a little guilted) into doing others’ 5-point ratings to help someone else try to learn a little more about what I think.

Although rating the quality of the beef pot roast last night is a little different than rating the quality of leadership in business today, there’s the same underlying inquisitiveness of wanting to state your opinion and hearing what others have to say. You never know if something juicy (unlike the pot roast) will turn up.

DDI’s last Global Leadership Forecast asked more than 12,000 leaders from around the world what they thought and only 4 in 10 leaders were satisfied with what their organizations offered to develop their leadership capabilities. It was particularly interesting to find that HR professionals and leaders seemed to hold the other primarily responsible for the failure of these development programs. Trend surveys like this are not only practical from a continuous improvement perspective for organizations (What can we do better?) but innately fascinating from a voyeur perspective (What are others doing wrong?).

This year’s Global Leadership Forecast pushes inquiring minds further by asking not only about satisfaction with current leadership practices, but what is needed in the future to be successful, and we also partnered with Gary Hamel to ask about management innovation. Are organizations finally pushing past the status quo to open the doors for more flexibility and innovation that might just be the key to their future survival? Maybe you don’t need to build good survey “karma” like I do, but aren’t you a little curious?

Jazmine Boatman , Ph.D., is Manager of the Center for Applied Behavioral Research at Development Dimensions International (DDI).

The Top 10 Most Annoying Things…

By Mark Dembo

The other night I was watching TV with my kids, (or should I say I was sitting with them while they were “media surfing” between live TV, DVR, computer chat, and text messages; but that’s a topic for a whole other article), and we happened on a special on Nickelodeon – a report on the Top 10 Most Annoying Things Parents Do. The basis for the show, hosted by Linda Ellerbee, was a survey conducted of kids, so it had a very interesting perspective. Their top 10 responses to “It’s so annoying when parents…”

10) …say, “Go ask your mom!” or “Go ask your dad!”
9) …obsess about things that don’t matter.
8)…say, “Because I said so, that’s why!”
7) …say, “When I was your age…”
6) …say, “When you’re older, you’ll understand.”
5) …tell old and really corny jokes to my friends.
4) …treat me like a little kid.
3) …nag me.
2) …say, “Act your age!”

And, finally, the number-one MOST annoying thing kids say parents do is when parents…don’t act their age!!!!

This list got me wondering how many people in our own organizations, if surveyed about their leaders, might have similar things to say. So, taking some creative liberties, here’s what I envision the “Top 10 Most Annoying Things Leaders Do” might look like:

10)…say, “I don’t know why we do that, go ask someone else.”
9)…obsess about the trivial in order to exert control.
8)…say, “Because I said so, that’s why!”
7)…say, “When I was in your role...”
6)…say, “When you’re in my position, you’ll understand.”
5)…tell really corny jokes at staff meetings.
4)…treat me like a little kid.
3)…nag me (e.g. don’t trust me to get my work done).
2)…say, “Act your age” (e.g. don’t complain about things around here).
1)…don’t act in a manner that befits their role (e.g. THEY complain about things).

I think we can see many similarities here in both the actual list, and the somewhat fanciful list I’ve created, yet I’m sure you’ll agree that many of these items ring true.

How can we ensure that we develop effective leaders who can get results, yet not be seen as overbearing, annoying parents? At the most fundamental level, this requires clearly articulating now only WHAT leaders need to do, but HOW they need to do it. And, our experience shows that many while many organizations are good at explaining the “Whats,” it’s the “Hows” where many leaders and organizations struggle.

At DDI, we teach and talk about the “Key Principles” – the essential behaviors and traits that apply whether you’re a leader, an individual contributor, or for that matter, even a parent. These principles, when practiced with authenticity, help leaders become organizational catalysts. Specifically:

1. Maintain or enhance self-esteem.
2. Listen and respond with empathy.
3. Ask for help and encourage involvement.
4. Share thoughts, feelings, and rationale. (to build trust)
5. Provide support without removing responsibility. (to build ownership)

The Key Principles may seem simple – yet they are neither simplistic nor easy to practice. If we all work to align our actions with these Key Principles, imagine how we can improve the quality of our interactions with those we work and live with. Better yet, if we can help others in our organization learn and apply these behaviors, not only can we avoid the “most annoying leader syndrome,” we may actually improve the organizational culture, enhance engagement, and impact organizational results. Now, just need to figure out how to deal with the “corny joke” syndrome”…

And, if you really want to be bold and adventurous – try it out with your kids!

Mark Dembo is a manager for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

“Lost” in the Middle

By Kris Routch

In a month, ABC television will end one of its most interesting and cult-creating shows after seven wild, mind-bending seasons. The show is “Lost” and whether you watch it or not, you probably are aware of the show’s premise. A plane crash strands a group of characters on a strange island in the South Pacific from which there is seemingly no escape while at the same time danger, mysteries, and evolving personal relationships test each of the characters (as well as millions of the show’s followers).   

So how is this relevant here? Well, to understand that let me share with you some personal background. As someone who has spent the better part of the last few years studying the plight of today’s mid-level leaders, I’m starting to realize that their life is more similar to the poor souls on “Lost” than we might imagine. So let me explain why.

Like our “Losties” (as they are referred to by “Lost” groupies), today’s mid-level leaders began a corporate journey that somewhere along the way changed direction and they ended up in a strange place called “middle management” that they neither recognize nor for which they are adequately prepared. As they struggle to survive in their new world, on instincts alone, they get progressively frustrated by not seeing a way to escape their “island” in the middle of the organization. Those that have managed to survive are having to do more with less and are getting more stressed and less effective. Most importantly, while they know they need help, they are having trouble seeing any on the horizon.          

So begins the story of the plight of today’s mid-level leaders. Stay tuned for my upcoming blogs where I will explore how and why they’ve ended up on their “island”, why we should care about them, and what we as organizations can do to rescue them. However, for now, like a good serial television show, you’ll have to wait until the next episode.   

In the meantime, feel free to tell us why you believe your mid-level leaders may be “lost” within your organization.

Kris Routch is an executive consultant for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

How Tying Your Shoes is the Key to Your Long Term Talent Strategy

By Ryan Heinl 

The other day around lunch time I was getting ready to go for quick run on the treadmill and I started to really tune into how I was tying my shoes. It sounds odd, but when was the last time you really focused on tying your shoes (Now that I’ve mentioned it, you will)?  As I watched my fingers dance around the snake-like laces I became keenly aware of how fast and automatically I was doing it.  This made me think of a recent blog post from Mike Hoban on the buildup of research on of the idea of deliberate practice. Books like Outliers, Talent is Overrated, and Talent Code hold up some pretty compelling research pointing to the importance of lots of practice over innate abilities as the critical ingredient for truly talented people. Another key insight from this research seems to be that practice on its own is not enough—you need feedback on your performance which you should improve the next time you practice. I think all of this surfaces some interesting opportunities to consider for talent management strategy.

We need to start finding people very early in their careers that have the ambition, learning agility and discipline to commit to a long-term leadership development program. This program would span over potentially 10 years (or more), which seems to be the length of time that gets you to the magic 10,000 hours of practice, putting you significantly ahead of most other leaders in skill level.  They would also have to submit to constant self-examination and feedback from others in the pursuit of improving interpersonal, leadership, and business skills. As these elite leaders become more and more expert, they would need to be continually confronted with new and more difficult leadership scenarios to overcome—requiring moving geographically and organizationally. As a participant you’d have to be committed…We are talking Chinese gymnastics team committed!

A company that wanted to seriously consider something like this would have to be willing to commit certain resources to each participant over a long period of time and the participants would have to essentially sign over their freedom to the company for a period of time. Sound a bit extreme? Maybe, but it’s really not that extreme or new for that matter. Consider the apprenticeship structure in Florence during the Renaissance where apprentices were committed to master craftsman for many years spawning one of the most creative and productive periods in history. 

With a generation of people entering the workforce and constantly crying out for structured career development and the opportunity for constantly increasing challenges combined with varied experiences, you could quickly use a program like this to make your company THE employer of choice.  I can see it now:  Come work for ABC company can get a chance to be a part of our acclaimed Elite Leadership Development 10 Year Program!

Ryan Heinl is a senior consultant for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

The Path to Carnegie Hall

By Mike Hoban

“How do I get to Carnegie Hall?” the old joke asks. “Practice, practice, practice” was the rimshot response.  And with the 2010 winter Olympics now over, it’s likely there are many medalists who appreciate the investment of the grueling hours, the physical pain and the sleep deprivation of practice, practice, practice. Talent and determination are necessary bases upon which to build, but it’s practice that creates competency, more practice that creates mastery and even more practice that creates performance that’s not just world class, but the world standard.

Several recent best selling biz books have also echoed the theme about the importance of practice, practice, practice. The Outliers - The Story of Success, by Malcom Gladwell, Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin, the popular and ubiquitous Fortune magazine writer, and The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle have all proffered the theme of practice as a key to success. EQ evangelist Daniel Goleman also has written about the topic and a new term “deliberate practice” has become the popularized version of the old “perfect practice makes perfect” aphorism.   

What is “deliberate practice?” Colvin, in one of his Fortune articles, describes it this way:  "It's activity that's explicitly intended improve performance, that reaches for objectives just beyond one's level of competence, provides feedback on results and involves high levels of repetition." In other words, it’s not just practicing what you are already doing well, it’s practicing those things you don’t do well. One article compiles many of the insightful pieces on this topic from the last several years.

The outcomes of practice permeate our daily lives. Most of us fly commercial airplanes regularly. Can you imagine getting on a flight and finding out the pilots have not been required to have practiced many takeoffs and landings and have never stepped foot into a flight simulator? And would you be able to sleep well at night if you knew our armed forces had never drilled or practiced mock attacks? Practice is a no-brainer for demonstrated and sustainable performance in those and most other arenas. How about in the arena of leadership skills?

Management and leadership training courses are often skill-based, meaning participants need to have more than a cognitive understanding of a skill—they need to demonstrate it. And most managers and leaders in the business world would violently agree that it’s not enough for a pilot to simply understand the principles of executing a safe and smooth takeoff, s/he needs to have the opportunity to practice the procedure prior to trying it with people on board.

Yet, some of those same managers in leadership training sessions display an offputting reaction to finding out there will be a skill practice involved in learning about delegation or coaching or whatever the topic is. “That’s role playing – I can’t role play!” is what we often hear. But if the skill practice has a well crafted and pragmatic design, we find that once they begin, most leadership course participants find the experience useful and almost – cringe – enjoyable. But they have to first get over their often preconceived view that practicing a leadership skill is somehow different and less useful than practicing some other type of skill, be it an athletic skill or learning a language. And they usually do get over it when they get into it.   

So the good news is that there is less resistance to classroom leadership skill practices in the last few years, especially when that practice is positioned as analogous to other types of “real” skills that require practice. Practice, practice, practice in leadership classes won’t get someone on the stage at Carnegie Hall but it would certainly help someone manage the business at Carnegie Hall.

Mike Hoban is a senior consultant for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

A Skill in Short Supply

By Mike Hoban

What do you consider to be the most important leadership trait for a CEO to have? Is it “Influencing Skills” or “strategic decision making?” Or perhaps “business acumen” or “talent management” is at the top of your list of CEO right stuff.   All are likely found on the success profiles or job specs of many Chief Executive positions. How about the proven ability to run a large operation with P&L responsibilities? I think one could make a case for any of the above and I’m certain that there are many senior leaders out there working in assignments to develop those skills because the senior talent review team in the organization has deemed those skills or experiences as “must haves” for aspiring CEOs.   

Indra Nooyi, Chairman and CEO of PepsiCo and Fortune magazine’s #1 Most Powerful Business Woman, has another view.

In an interview published in Fortune magazine a few months back, Ms. Nooyi stated her point of view. Call it interesting. Call it even a little provocative. She said:

“The most overrated skill is ‘running a business.’ To me the single most important skill needed for a CEO is strategic acuity.” 

She went on to say that former PepsiCo CEO Roger Enrico had once said “I can get operating executives to run a business. But I cannot find people to help me reconceptualize PepsiCo.” Agreeing with her one-time mentor, she said. “That skill is in shortest supply.”

“Strategic Acuity” is an interesting coupling of words and it’s the first time I’ve seen it articulated as an executive competency. In the physical world, acuity is about sharpness and clarity of perception or vision.  One definition refers to a capacity to “discriminate fine details of objects.” We can speculate – as Bloggers do - about what it means in relation to a business.

With all of the possibilities and choices available to an organization, Strategic Acuity can mean the ability to clearly see a pathway to success, a pathway that is likely to be not apparent to most others. It’s an intellectual quality (“reconceptualizing”) but it’s more than that. I think there is also an EQ (Emotional Quotient) component that compliments the IQ component in Strategic Acuity. EQ capabilities such as Empathy and Social Skills (Goleman) help focus that clarity of vision to provide meaning and context to the myriad nuances of human interaction involving customers, markets, employees, etc. In the business world, there is no Snellen Chart of different sized letters which help us to gauge visual acuity, so context, insight and measurement become all the more important for executing Strategic Acuity. No wonder Nooyi says it is a skill in short supply.

Of course, that’s not to say that experience running a business is not important…

Mike Hoban is a senior consultant for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

¿Habla Virtual Learning?

By Mark Phelps

It’s a fluency we didn’t know we needed a year ago, but now learning professionals utter terms—like virtual breakout rooms, VOIP and annotation tools—that weren’t in our vocabulary before travel budgets were frozen leaving people sometimes hundreds of miles away from training locations.

For example, are you fluent enough to achieve the same learning success that people receive when they’re gathered in a classroom, face-to-face with the instructor and held accountable by their peers? If not, you are probably trapped in a deep hole, created by typical webinars and their ilk, where lackluster learners demonstrate ingrained bad habits of multi-tasking and half listening.

Virtual learning can be successful if we create a total break from the world of lecture-heavy sessions and instead employ learning methods and engaging facilitation, regardless of whether the classroom walls are brick and mortar or bits and bytes. Great content, delivered by engaging facilitators, will keep learners engaged.

Even when learners are separated by rivers—or oceans—we can foster the social connections that come naturally in a traditional classroom and create a genuine learning environment.

Mark Phelps is a practice leader and manager for Development Dimensions International (DDI).

The Leadership Afterlife

By Matt Paese, Ph.D.

Today, professional sports illuminates a contemporary leadership dilemma: what does it really mean to be a team leader?

For those of you with little interest in sports, give me a chance on this.

I should start by saying (with only mild embarrassment) that it’s a tough day for me. Tonight, my all-time sports hero, Brett Favre, will compete against the Green Bay Packers, the team for which he played for 16 years, the team he took to two Super Bowls and repeated playoffs, the team he came to define, the team I’ve cheered for since I was old enough to shout “Go Pack!” My team.

The Packers – a truly unique professional entity, owned by the citizens of an unassuming, unpretentious Wisconsin; the only team that makes you feel proud for eating cheese and wearing it on your head at the same time. Perhaps this un-self-conscious pride in things so mundane, the full ownership of what makes us unique, is part of what defines “the Packer team.” The absence of a glamorous backdrop has long provided Green Bay with a rarified brand of camaraderie. Being a member of our team means that you’re part of the combined Packer-Wisconsin community, and that team stands above anything that we as individuals bring to it.

Sound familiar? The Packers aren’t the only team like that. In fact there are many, and I’m sure you have your own. But tonight, we’re the one that everyone will be watching.

Favre was (I repeat, “was”) perhaps the most quintessential team leader that ever came to Green Bay. Gritty and competitive, boyish with a sense of fun, from similar, unassuming roots, he had a selfless dedication to the team that he showed week after week. He is a winner. He cannot be disputed as one of the toughest players ever to have played the game, never having missed a start in his 16 years as a Packer, or in his 19 games since then with the New York Jets, and now with <choke> the Minnesota Vikings. We Packer fans love Brett Favre, and we always will.

But a Viking? I thought he was a Packer – forever! The Vikings are the Packers’ arch enemy. No region’s newspapers and blogs ever produced more bile-filled anti-Packer and anti-Favre rhetoric than the Twin Cities. Favre, a Viking? This can’t be.

Favre quipped recently that those who are worried about his legacy should be reminded that it’s HIS legacy, not theirs. And this is where he lost me. You see, I’m still on the team, and even though he’s not, the manner of Favre’s departure affects me. Being on a team is one of our most basic needs. To come together to celebrate accomplishment, mourn the lack thereof, and share a common purpose is perhaps one of the great gifts of being human, and leading such an endeavor is an even greater gift.

Leaders move on, especially the great ones, and we expect that. But as they make transitions from one assignment to the next, I hope that leaders always remember that the positive effects of their leadership can long outlast their tenure in the job.

Good luck tonight Brett. We’ll always miss you on the team that used to be yours.

Matt Paese is the Vice President of Executive Solutions for  Development Dimensions International (DDI).

Monday through Friday Morning Quarterbacks

By Bradford Thomas

On the way into work the other day I was listening to ESPN Radio’s Mike and Mike in the Morning Show. The two Mikes were discussing whether it is Tony Romo’s fault that the Dallas Cowboys have not taken it to the next level. This led to an engaging discussion on whether NFL teams could really succeed without their quarterback being the leader. John Elway. Dan Marino. Brett Favre. Leaders.

What about Bradshaw? Was he the leader with all of the vocal members of the Steel Curtain? 

This got me to thinking about office chit-chat. How many times have you heard someone say, “Mary is the quarterback of my sales team” or “Bill really quarterbacks those monthly accounting meetings”?

Most people would replace the word quarterback in both of these sentences with leader or manager without missing a beat. That’s because most of these comments refer to front-line leaders—those managers or supervisors who go into the huddle with their teams each day and run the X’s and O’s of the business.

The words manager and leader may be first-cousins, but they’re not perfect synonyms. Army recruits, marketing associates or defensive linemen may display leadership qualities—think of Ray Lewis pumping up the fans and his teammates before a goal-line stand—but not possess the decision-making skills of the sergeant, marketing manager, or quarterback. On the flip side, an IT manager may be great at planning and organizing, a key managerial competency, but poor at inspiring others, a key leader competency. 

The fact is that most organizations want their current and emerging managers to have leadership potential—an ability to develop good leadership skills in the near future—but they desperately need them to be able to manage on day one. A rookie quarterback, like Mark Sanchez with the Jets, is expected to manage his team’s offense, but he earns the right over time to be the leader.

Let me turn it over to you: Do you feel there is a difference between managing and leading?  Which one takes precedence when your organization is assessing readiness to step into a supervisor role?

Bradford Thomas is a Manager at Development Dimensions International.