The Leader's Dilemma

The world is random. You can predict trends and even certain events. But it's harder to predict when exactly something will happen. And what the exact consequences will be. For example, everybody knows that there's going to be a major earthquake in California. Or that the earth is heating up almost catastrophically. Or that the baby-boomer generation is getting older and a major health-care crisis looms large. But it's harder to predict the exact consequences (will the Sahara become greener as a result of redistribution of rain patterns?)

Leaders in government and corporations make bets based on their perspective or point of view. If the bet pans out and these leaders turn out to be right, they are lauded as heroes. If the bet fails, they are demonized and treated poorly. For example, President George Bush made a bet that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If these weapons had been found, and if a major plot to attack the United States had been averted (preferably in the nick of time and with a lot of drama!), he would have exited office as a hero to most people in the world. Unfortunately, that did not happen.

Now let's look at how people generally think. If a leader displays certainty and confidence, people follow him / her. There's sufficient research in evolutionary biology to support the claim that the chest-thumping, testosterone-pumping, over-communicating, tall, handsome and aggressive individual is the one who will be treated as a leader. So for a leader to successfully gain the trust of his followers needs to be mildy deluded. He needs to believe with certainty that his point of view is correct. That he is lucky. That he will prevail in the long run. And most arm-chair reviews of successful leaders is plagued by the problem of survivor-bias. We tend to look at only those leaders who are visible to us as a result of the fact that they survived. What caused their survival (most likely randomness) is over-looked and too much importance is given to the perceived causes behind their survival and success (such as how hard they can work, or how charismatic they are.)

There is also another idea known as preferential attachment. This basically means that the more successful you become the more successful you tend to become. For example, if you are a Warren Buffet, you will see more deals being offered to you at a sweeter-than-market price just because of your position.

So the enlighted leader has a dilemma (or two or three). He needs to:
1. Pick a point of view with full knowledge that the point of view may be wrong.
2. Work his tail off knowing that all of his efforts may come to nought.
3. Motivate his team members to also work their tails off (or risk their lives) knowing that he may be leading them down the path to disaster.
4. He needs to project confidence and certainty with the knowledge that he is faking it!

So how do you reconcile this dilemma? What should a good leader do to lead effectively?

Well, if you look at great leaders they tend to instinctively grasp the uncertain nature of the world. For example, many of the leaders featured in the book Good to Great by Jim Collins attribute their success to luck.

When great leaders encounter randomness, they do not get paralyzed by fear. They don't get stuck in analysis-paralysis mode. They pick a direction and begin moving in that direction knowing that the next step will be revealed to them at the appropriate time. They also realize that, the next step may be a U-Turn. So they have the humility to turn back if the need arises.

Many of the sages and saints tend to surrender to the randomness. They become like dry leaves on the jungle floor, going where the wind takes them. Great leaders do not subscribe to this point of view. They focus on a target and attempt to influence the wind to take them toward their goal (much like expert sailors.)

So if you are a leader the advice is simple. Analyze as much as you can, then pick a direction and keep moving. If you find out you are wrong, don't hesitate to admit your mistake and change directions. It's possible that your admission of failure will get you heavily penalized. But that is better than compounding your mistakes by pursuing actions direction that has been proven to be wrong. Ignore sunk costs and cut your losses.

The Importance of Being Lazy and Ambitious

Epitaph on the Grave of Johnny The Fly

Here lies the body of Johnny the Fly
Who thought it was enough to just try, try and try.

He died stuck behind a closed glass window
Even though he worked hard and made a show.

Banging himself again and again at the hard glass
Until he lay down and let precious life pass.

Not knowing that the open door and fields of May
Was just two feet away!

Hard-work is a two-edged sword. It can help you attain success. But it can also give you a false sense of hope. Let's say that you've been working on a project that has gone over the scheduled launch date. Should you push your team-members to work harder and longer. Or should you take a step back to think about what's causing the delay and if possible cut out a few of the deliverables from the project in order to make it more attainable?

I know of a friend whose start-up company has not been doing too well. Rather than take a step back and re-examine his strategy, competitive positioning and starting premise, this friend is opting to crowd out his evenings and weekends with ... you guessed it "more hard-work!"

The most successful people are those who are ambitious and hard-working in the right direction. These are the go-getters who populate the pages of Business Week and Time magazines. The second most successful set of people are those who are ambitious but lazy. They spend their time thinking about what needs to be done and figuring out the shortest, least-resource-intensive way of doing it. They don't make "to-do lists." They make up "not-to-do" lists. They don't spend their time launching new projects. They spend it cutting out unnecessary projects. The people who follow them also tend to be like them and walk on the path of least resistance. These organizations which are mostly small, very successful businesses (like 37 signals) are usually leaders in their own small niches. I call this set of people as being lazy and ambitious.

It is this second set of people that I personally love to study. They usually reside outside of large corporations and work for smaller companies or run their own businesses or become investors in other companies.

I hope that more people will start adding the line, "Ambitious and Lazy" to their resumes!

How To Implement Effective Change

This brilliant blog post by Peter Bregman suggests that if you want to make effective change focus on only one thing. Peter lost 18 pounds in one month by focusing on just one change (cutting out sugar from his diet.) And he talks of various situations where better results were achieved by focusing on just one thing.

Obviously, for this idea to work, it becomes very important to spend time upfront understanding which factors will have the greatest impact. It's like the Pareto principle which states that 80% of results come from 20% of inputs. So figuring out what is the one thing that works becomes even more important.

Peter's idea carries great importance for 360-degree feedback. We've seen some of our clients measure so many dimensions (0r competencies.) Some of them have over 10 competencies with around 100 items (questions.) The problem with this approach is that it seems to suggest that each of those dimensions carries equal importance or weight in terms of impacting job performance. In reality, only one or two competencies are probably much more important than all of the other competencies. Perhaps a case must be made that consulting firms (which usually help design the survey instruments in conjunction with top management) must spend more time culling out all unnecessary competencies and focusing on the one competency that will make a difference to the organization.

Why Are Army Recruiters Killing Themselves?

This Time magazine article talks about the dark side of recruiting. Persuading young people to join the army when a war is on is always challenging. But the pressures on recruiters in this Texas battalion has caused 4 recruiters to commit suicide.

Pushing people to work 15 hour days for the long term is a sure fire way to create a highly demoralized environment. And that is what appears to have happened here. Add to this a culture that focuses more on the stick than on the carrot (decorated soldiers were being berated openly in monthly meetings if they did not make numbers) and you have all the ingredients required for a tragedy.

While very tragic, this extreme story gives us a glimpse into what not to do when setting up an organizational culture. Definitely worth a read for somebody interested in leadership and performance management.

An Interesting Book

A Dream Testimonial for Ascendus

We received this email yesterday (from a client servicing a large automobile manufacturer.) Rishabh (from our Ascendus team) was the lead on this project and was supported by other members of Ascendus (the client details have been obfuscated due to NDA requirements.)

"Thanks a ton rishabh for all your effort…
It has always been a pleasure to work with a professional and dedicated team like ascendus...
Thanks once again for a wonderful experience… really appreciate the extra hard work and effort put in by all of you to meet our demands.
Look forward to work with you again...
Regards…
(P.S – Please let me know incase there are any delays on the payment front… )"

As the head of a company, there are several elements in this email that are pleasing to me:

1. Rishabh who worked on the project has been with us for about a year now. During this short period, he's been able to understand the Ascendus culture of satisfying the client - whatever the effort required (thanks Rishabh!)

2. The client testimonial came to us without us asking for it. In other words, it's a genuine outpouring of customer satisfaction!

3. The last line by the client offering to help out if there are any delays on the payment front is particularly gratifying! We've always believed that if a client is satisfied, they are eager to pay for the services rendered. If they are not fully satisfied, they still make payment but more as a matter of obligation. We prefer it if the client makes payment with a smile on their lips and joy in their hearts :)

So the Ascendus way works. And it works everytime!

Inspired Versus Required Action

I saw this great article a few days ago by Admiral Thad Allen. It's filled with nuggets of leadership wisdom. Thad suggests that inspired action by employees happen when people know why they are doing something and how their work fits into the larger mission. When people are simply asked to do something because the boss says so, it becomes required action. Inspiring people is hard work and Thad also offers a few pointers here including the importance of writing down your organization's mission, working harder on the mission than your people, knowing more than (or at least trying to know more than) your people and recognizing (and rewarding) positive actions from team-members. A highly worthwhile and short read!