Versatile Leadership

It is well documented that people who understand differences in communication preferences, and learn to adapt their own communications to make others more comfortable, are more effective leaders. This skill is called Versatility, and it is the core of Wilson Learning’s Social Style capability. But how does that actually work? What are the kinds of adjustments managers and employees need to make in order to increase their Versatility and make their work unit and organization more effective?

In an attempt to better understand how managers and employees express their Versatility, and the needs that different employees and managers have, Wilson Learning conducted a set of in-depth interviews with both managers and their employees, each lasting at least one hour. In all, 82 interviews were completed from 35 different organizations in various industries. These interviews provided detailed information about the style preferences of managers and employees, and the impact of Versatility on their relationships.

The results indicate that leaders need to pay attention to a number of factors in order to increase their Versatility. For leaders, Versatility is most critical during performance review sessions and when dealing with conflict. Individual employee expectations regarding performance objectives, feedback, and support all differ according to the Social Style of the employee. How a leader approaches these issues can greatly affect individual and organizational performance.

What Are Social Style and Versatility?

Effective communication between managers and their direct reports is critical, both for the success of the organization and the success and satisfaction of employees. The most common reason people give for leaving a job is poor communication or a poor relationship with their manager. Good communication skills are associated with success in sales, sales leadership, negotiations, and a host of other areas.

Versatility is key to effective communication.

Versatility is based upon Wilson Learning’s Social Style model. Nearly half a century of research has shown that people are divided equally across four primary communication styles. These four Social Styles are called Driver, Expressive, Amiable, and Analytical. When you find that a person is easy to communicate and work with, it is often because you share the same Social Style. When a person seems difficult to work with, it is often because your styles are different.

Because each style represents about 25% of all people, managers only share a Social Style with about one-fourth of their employees. As a result, almost all managers are faced with the dilemma of creating effective communication with the remaining three-fourths of the workforce. The Versatility skill allows managers to do just that.

Understanding the Causes and Consequences of Leader Versatility

To help leaders develop Versatility, we needed a clear understanding of how a manager’s actions affect the performance of the four Social Styles. That was the purpose of this study.

Our primary objective in this study was to truly understand how the things leaders do and say affect employee performance. Therefore, we felt that an open-ended interview procedure was the best approach. While this does not provide statistical or numerical results, it does provide a rich description of situations and actions that can guide organizational leaders toward increased Versatility. This study had some important and unique characteristics:

• We needed to interview both managers and their employees to have a complete picture of communication patterns.
• We needed to know the Social Style of both the managers and their employees.
• We needed a balance of all four styles.
• We needed a representative sample across a range of organizations and industries.

Each interview lasted at least one hour, and many lasted much longer. Our questions covered a wide range of topics, including how different Social Styles manage people; how different Social Styles prefer to be managed; situations in which Versatility was most valuable; the impact of Versatility on trust; and how managers and employees build and lose trust in each other.

In total we interviewed 82 people, evenly divided among the four Social Styles and between managers and employees. These 82 people came from 35 different organizations, representing several different industries, including high-technology, pharmaceutical, financial services, insurance, telecommunications, and automotive.

The results provide a rich description of how Versatility skills can affect the manager-employee relationship and the important role of communication in building high performance. In this paper, we will focus on two major outcomes: the impact of Social Styles on the manager-employee relationship and the role of trust in the manager-employee relationship.

What Do Leaders Need to Pay Attention to?

We start by describing the results relative to the impact of Social Style on key elements of the relationship between a manager and employee. It is important that leaders know Social Style and how it impacts their employees’ performance.

The Ideal Manager

Style of the employee	Ideal characteristics of managers
Driver	Is sincere and direct
Expressive	Is friendly, open in communication, trusting, and empathic
Amiable	Shows confidence in employees; is honest and trustworthy
Analytical	Is knowledgeable and shares information openly

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

Employees with different Social Styles see different characteristics as being descriptive of an ideal manager. While all employees express that ideal managers give them clear objectives and the autonomy to carry them out, the following characteristics tend to be related to the style of the employee:

A manager needs to be aware of his or her own behavioral tendencies and the expectations of different employees. For example, an Analytical manager who does not express empathy and an open sharing of feelings may not be meeting the needs of all his or her employees.

Managers’ Weaknesses

Style of the employee	Weaknesses of managers
Driver	Giving too much or too little direction. Too little makes the task too vague to be effective; too much keeps employees from using their personal discretion.
Expressive	Being closed-minded. Expressives do not like managers who see only one way of doing things and are closed to discussing options.
Amiable	Not expressing personal concern for the employee. Amiables do not like managers who show little personal interest in them.
Analytical	Giving too much or too little information. Analyticals do not like to be told things they already know or that are irrelevant to the task; at the same time, they don’t want gaps in the information that the managers could have provided.

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

Parallel to views of the ideal manager, the primary weaknesses of managers are also style related. While all employees express that a common weakness of managers is supervising too closely (“micro manager,” “looks over my shoulder too much”), each Social Style describes slightly different characteristics as weaknesses in managers.

Thus, effective leaders balance the amount of information, direction, options, and expression of concern for their employees and match that to the style of their direct reports.

Giving Support to Employees

Style of the employee	Support expected from managers
Driver	They want advice but not direct intervention. They want the freedom to solve problems themselves.
Expressive	They want a sounding board; someone with whom to discuss and evaluate options and choices. They want managers to support and back up their ideas.
Amiable	They want a manager to guide them down the right path, checking in and expressing confidence in them and making small course corrections along the way.
Analytical	They want managers to give them direct feedback on their decisions and provide a clear and full acceptance of their decisions.

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

From time to time, all employees need support from their managers. The employees interviewed said that managerial support—in the form of advice and removing organizational barriers—was critical to their performance. But, different Social Styles also expressed some differences in the types of support they want and expect to receive from their managers.

Managers who give support in the way they would want to be supported (that is, as their own Social Styles would want to be supported) may not be providing the kind of support the employee needs to be most effective. Managers need to be aware of their own tendencies and adjust them to the varying needs of their employees’ Social Styles.

When Is Group Involvement Needed?

Style of employees and managers	When to involve the group in a decision
Driver	When the decision or action affects the responsibilities of any individual in the group, or for coordinating work efforts
Expressive	When the whole group is affected
Amiable	Anytime the group can contribute to brainstorming, problem solving, or planning
Analytical	When decisions or actions affect them directly

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

When to involve a group or team in a decision is a common dilemma for managers. When asked what situations are appropriate for group involvement, the answers by both managers and employees were consistent and differed by Social Style.

Managers’ Biases for Giving Employees More Responsibility

Style of the manager	When they provide more responsibility
Driver	Tend to give more responsibility to employees who repeatedly exceed expectations on current tasks; that is, based upon a demonstration of desire to do more
Analytical
Expressive	Give more responsibility to employees who ask for it and directly express a willingness to do more
Amiable

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

One clear finding that may affect the success and advancement of different employees is how managers of different Social Styles tend to give additional responsibilities to employees. In this case, Drivers and Analyticals (both being more task-directed) gave similar answers, as did Expressives and Amiables (both being more people-directed).

Of course, in all cases, the primary factor is the employee’s ability to do the job. But if you are an Expressive or Amiable manager, don’t assume that those employees who don’t ask for more responsibility don’t want it—they may be trying to communicate their desire for more responsibility by working hard to exceed your expectations. Similarly, if you are a Driver or Analytical manager, pay attention when people say they want more responsibility.

How Employees Judge Their Own Performance

Style of the employee	Criteria for judging own performance
Driver	Tend to focus on measurable criteria. Driver and Analytical styles (Task-Directed Responsiveness) base their own performance on indicators such as deadlines, number of mistakes, tasks accomplished, etc. They place less emphasis on the positive reactions of others.
Analytical
Expressive	Tend to base their self-judgements on feedback from others—coworkers, managers, and customers.
Amiable

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

Employees will perform based upon both their manager’s and their own criteria for good performance. An employee’s criteria for judging his or her performance also seems to be closely related to whether they are more task-directed (Drivers and Analyticals) or more people-directed (Amiables and Expressives).

While neither group ignores the quantifiable indicators of performance, or the reactions of others, it is clear that when employees are asked to judge their own performance, they will likely make reference to Social Style-specific criteria.

When Is Knowledge of Social Styles Most Helpful?

Most managers and employees indicated that knowledge of Social Styles is useful in any interaction. However, there were three specific situations in which both managers and employees agreed that knowledge of Social Styles was most helpful:

• Conflict situations: Whether the manager is dealing directly with a conflict or is helping others deal with conflict, almost all of the people interviewed indicated that knowledge of Social Styles is very helpful in addressing these situations. This knowledge helps people focus less on the emotions of the situation and more on the resolution of the conflict, and helps identify the differences that are at the root of the conflict.
• Performance reviews: Knowledge of Social Styles was also seen as greatly helpful during performance review or appraisal meetings between a manager and an employee. Social Styles knowledge can help put the employee more at ease during performance reviews and can help focus the discussion on areas of particular concern for both parties.
• Efforts to persuade: While more an issue for employees than managers, knowledge of Social Styles was also seen as critical when presenting information in an effort to persuade a specific course of action or decision. Knowledge of Social Styles can help in addressing interests that are highly important to the other person and, as a result, increase success in efforts to persuade.

A Common Misperception: The Social Styles of Top Management

Style	Employees’ perception of top managers’ dominant style	Wilson Learning’s Database: Percent of top managers by style
Driver	53%	25%
Expressive	14%	39%
Amiable	6%	17%
Analytical	20%	19%
Mixed/ don’t know	7%

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

One common misperception we identified through the interviews was employees’ assumptions about the Social Styles of top management. While we did not know the Social Styles of the executives in each of the organizations, when asked their perceptions of the dominant style in top management, the majority of employees indicated that Drivers dominate. However, the actual results from our database of Social Style Profiles tell quite a different story. As the chart at right shows, Expressives actually dominate top management positions. In addition, Amiables are much more frequent in top management positions (17% of all top managers profiled) than was assumed to be the case by the employees interviewed.

Trust in the Manager-Employee Relationship

One of the most critical elements of effective leadership is trust between the manager and the employee. The more trust a manager has in an employee, the more autonomy and job responsibility he or she gives the employee. The more trust an employee has in a manager, the more open and honest the communication is, and the employee has more commitment to the organization. Knowing how to build trust is an important skill for all people.

When Do Employees Lose Trust in a Manager?

	Causes of Lost Trust
Style of the employee or manager	Employees’ views	Managers’ assumptions
Driver	Breaking confidences or making poor decisions	Failure to answer questions or resolve problems
Expressive	Failure to back up employees	Breaking confidences
Amiable	Failure to adequately address requests for support	Misinterpreted behavior
Analytical	Lack of manager competence, inconsistency in providing feedback	Monitoring work too closely, not consulting with the employee

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

Managers need to know what kinds of actions might cause employees to lose trust in them. Unfortunately, there are two potential blind spots. First, the Social Style of the employee affects what he or she sees as the primary causes of low trust. Second, the manager’s Social Style affects what he or she assumes leads to low trust. The chart at right summarizes the primary causes of an employee losing trust in a manager.

None of these causes are unique to a particular style—they all cause lower trust for all styles. However, the style-related actions represent manager behavior that is more likely to cause a loss of trust for that style in particular. The fact that employees and managers have different perceptions of what causes a loss of trust is an interesting finding and can greatly influence manager-employee relationships.

The Impact of Lost Trust

	Impact of Lost Trust
Style of the employee or manager	Employees’ responses	Managers’ assumptions
Driver	Anger and defensiveness	Need to supervise more
Expressive	Less contact and communication	Need to supervise more
Amiable	Anger, defensiveness, and less communication	Termination of relationship
Analytical	Expectation that time is required to smooth over the issue	Loss of employee responsiveness

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

When trust is lost (the manager losing trust in the employee, or the employee losing trust in the manager), it affects both parties. In all cases, there is increased strain and tension in the relationship. In addition, there are style-related effects, noted in the table at right.

One clear finding had to do with efforts to re-establish trust. For both Amiables and Analyticals, re-establishing trust inevitably involves the passage of time. In other words, Amiable and Analytical styles expressed that efforts to re-establish trust immediately after an incident will fail and that only “time heals wounds.” This is particularly important information for Driver and Expressive leaders, who may attempt to re-establish trust too early, only to increase the resistance of the Amiable or Analytical employee and further delay the re-establishment of a productive relationship.

Conclusions

Employees don’t leave companies; they leave managers!

Numerous studies have shown that the most common reason people give for leaving a job is a poor relationship with their manager. Turnover, productivity, performance, and employee satisfaction are all tied to a manager’s ability to build effective relationships with employees.

Versatility is the key. While several studies in the past have shown the link between performance measures and Versatility scores, this study shows in more detail how Versatility actually works in the manager-employee relationship. A manager who is sensitive to the style of his or her employees, and takes steps to adjust his or her behavior to meet the needs of employees, will communicate more clearly and establish a more trusting relationship.

You Might Also Be Interested in:

 Building Relationship Versatility: Social Styles at Work

About the Author

Michael Leimbach

Michael Leimbach, Ph.D., is Vice President of Global Research and Development for Wilson Learning Worldwide. Dr. Leimbach provides leadership for researching and designing Wilson Learning’s diagnostic, learning, and performance improvement capabilities. He has managed major research studies in sales, leadership, and organizational effectiveness, and developed Wilson Learning’s learning transfer, impact evaluation, and return on investment models. Dr. Leimbach has consulted for a wide variety of global client organizations, serves on the ISO Technical committee for development of ISO 29999 Standard for Learning Service Providers, and is Editor-in-Chief for Advances in Developing Human Resources. Dr. Leimbach has authored six books, published over 100 professional articles, and is a frequent speaker at national and global conferences.

Share your Morals

THE MORAL COMPASS: HONESTY, INTEGRITY, FIDELITY, AND ETHICAL BEHAVIOR

A moral compass guides the actions people choose and is based on meeting the needs of the greater good. One aspect of the moral compass ishonesty. An example of a wavering moral compass was seen with Lance Armstrong, who started his professional cycling career in 1992. In 1996, he was diagnosed with cancer from which he recovered. When he returned to his career in 1998, he had the support of legions of fans who admired his spirit. However, in 2012, as a result of doping charges (which he initially denied), he was banned from the sport. Armstrong justified his usage by stating others were doing the same thing.

A different scenario occurred with golfer Brian Davis. In a championship game, he called a penalty on himself. Since the official did not see Davis’s error, they watched the action in a slow-motion replay, which revealed it. Although his honesty cost him the game, his demonstration of integrityearned him the respect of colleagues and fans.

Fidelity describes people who demonstrate faithfulness. In May 2013, Edward Snowden leaked top-secret papers about Internet-surveillance programs. Some felt his actions were wrong. He defended himself by stating his intent was right because he wanted to inform the public about questionable actions of the government. The answer to whether he acted with fidelity depends on who is asked.

George Everly Sr.’s family came to America in the late 1600s and farmed for 300 years. Although farming was a long tradition in his family, he chose to attend college and join the Army. When he spoke of his service in WWII, he focused on duty and camaraderie rather than the stories of destruction that are inherent in any war. When he was offered a D-Day medal in 1994, he was reluctant to accept it because he was simply doing what he said he would do, being guided by his moral compass. This is a sharp contrast to today’s modern world, where many people expect a trophy just for showing up.

Ethical behavior is demonstrated by people who do the right thing. It is a natural response for those who operate with honesty, integrity, and fidelity. Tylenol demonstrated ethical behavior in 1982, after seven people died from taking their capsules. When it was revealed that those tablets were laced with cyanide, Tylenol recalled all the products still on the market. They also implemented tamper-resistant packaging to prevent this from occurring again. Although the financial costs were huge, Tylenol become known as an ethical brand.

People who are not comfortable with their past actions can form a new moral compass by:

*Believing in themselves. People must realize that they can act with a moral compass. When they make an effort, they will eventually find that honesty and integrity become intrinsically rewarding. When reward results from an action, it increases the likelihood of that action occurring again.

*Surrounding themselves with people who operate with honesty and integrity. Individuals who operate with a moral compass encourage others to do the same. Spending time with such people makes it natural for all members of the group to operate with a moral compass.

*Receiving encouragement and support from others. A peer group is important beyond the teenage years and needs to be composed of quality people.

*Learning to manage impulsive behaviors. This helps people develop a better sense of control and reinforces the positive actions they are capable of. Small successes helps people believe they can have even more success.

Knowledge should be Maintained

Coupled with the ability to understand what others find meaningful, knowledge mining involves building a body of knowledge to draw upon in the future. This involves six different concepts:

1. Embodiment. Each person embodies unique knowledge, life experiences, and social connections. People can be the embodiment of their generations, their communities, their cultures, or the human race. While embodiment is not essential to creating, it constitutes a pool of knowledge to draw upon.

2. Immersion. People can tap into knowledge through immersion in another culture. By assimilating into another culture, someone can learn almost everything there is to know about that culture. A shallower immersion, such as a taking a class or researching a culture, may provide enough knowledge to work with while reserving the time to learn about other cultures as well.

3. Connecting the dots. Calling upon past experiences to inform similar projects is a way of connecting the dots. This method relies on people’s ability to see similarities and links between seemingly unrelated experiences. It also depends on the insight to recognize which dots are important and which ones are not.

4. Casting for ideas. Ideas are everywhere, but not every idea is a good one. The key to catching a good idea is to remain open to unexpected inspiration. The person who can recognize and harness innovative ideas can use them to create something completely original.

5. Mining the past. The most successful creators do their homework before launching a new idea. They find out about the history of their fields, what has worked in the past, and what has not. Building a body of knowledge helps people see where they came from, where they are going, and what is missing and needs to be filled in.

6. Donut knowledge. Sometimes, the missing piece is more important than the rest of the puzzle. Cultivating the ability to see what is not there, like a donut hole, is another way to gather knowledge.

Discovering people’s dreams is a more powerful strategy than asking about their needs. It reveals what is truly meaningful in their lives. Mining for knowledge is not just a fact-finding mission; it is a quest to discover what others find meaningful, and the most successful innovators deliver the meaning that people long for. This requires compassion, connection, and engagement.

Just like many companies are not capitalizing on their employees’ vast knowledge, many individuals overlook their own skills and experience. The first step in building a foundation for creativity is becoming more familiar with them. The next is becoming receptive to creative thoughts by freeing the mind, disconnecting from the rest of the world, and thinking.

Framing

Putting a traditional idea into a new context reframes it into something new. For example, Kickstarter, an online funding site that lets people contribute to and participate in creative projects, reframed the idea that artists and their supporters are separate entities, encouraging group alliances for project funding.

Everyone holds beliefs about the world that are equivalent to different frames. Creative people redefine or discard these frames, changing the way people see the world. By practicing framing and reframing, people can learn to change their perspectives and become more innovative.

Narrative reframing changes the way people do a particular thing. For example, a medical team reframed the way the hospital routinely conducted chemotherapy sessions to make them more comfortable and convenient to patients. Reframing a narrative often depends on switching the point of view to allow someone else to tell the story.

The Internet and social networking have reframed engagement on a larger scale. Whenever interaction occurs, the potential for innovation arises. Each group has its own rituals and etiquette as well as its own protocol for entrance. For example, friend requests on Facebook are a way of “knocking at the door” of the social network.

What-if framing challenges the status quo and explores other possibilities. Strategizing about the future encourages multiple perspectives that may lead to collaboration with people outside of familiar peer groups and cultures. What-if framing helps people imagine the unimaginable.

Basic framing skills help people adjust to changes and maintain control of their destinies. The ability to reframe helps people make sense of the world and gives them direction for defining the future.

Playing

During play, people set aside the rules that govern their everyday lives. They improvise and take on new roles. Among creative entrepreneurs, playing is key to building strategy, and companies like YouTube, Flickr, Instagram, and Apple are among the results.

Serious play among players who trust each other produces the best ideas. Serious play has rules, incites competition, and produces winners as well as losers. It transforms problems into challenges that are fun and have several possible creative solutions.

Establishing a “magic circle,” or room that is separated from normal activity and governed by a separate set of rules, is essential to enhancing a work team’s creativity. The people who play there should trust each other enough to suspend judgment while experimenting.

Making a game out of a task that people typically put off encourages action. For example, the 12-week Keas program engages employees into a fitter lifestyle by using a gaming platform and competition via social networking. Such programs access the power of fun and friendly competition to drive results. The most successful programs build in an element of choice that is essential to play.

Game designers distinguish between simple and complex games. Simple games, like crossword puzzles, do not offer game-changing options. Complex ones, such as poker, feature changing dynamics that depend on players’ choices. Complex games mirror the ambiguity of the real world and provide valuable lessons in strategizing. The creative advantages of complex gaming include:

*Dynamism and adaptability.

*A dependence on possibility, not probability.

*The use of scaffolding that provides increasing complexity.

*Deceptive simplicity that requires smart choices.

*The ability to change the rules.

Although play is a complex behavior, it is something that anyone can relearn. Stepping outside a normal comfort zone to find the right team or partner is often essential to constructive play. Games help people explore and break through their boundaries.

Making

A new maker movement has emerged since the turn of the 21st century, with people preferring to be active rather than passive. Making involves mastering the tools, such as computers, that convert creative ideas into reality. Corporations as well as communities are adopting a go-local philosophy. Even industry giants like GE are returning some of their offshore manufacturing facilities to the U.S.

The combination of a maker philosophy and low-cost, simple to use digital tools is driving the maker trend. 3-D printers facilitate turning ideas into prototypes. Being funded, such as by an online community like Kickstarter, results in going into production sooner. Online publicity and social network sharing sells the product.

The first step in becoming a maker is visualizing a satisfactory result. The next is realizing that it is easier to make something than most people think. Plenty of classes and workshops are available to help. Finally, established online platforms like eBay and Etsy provide forums for marketing products.

Pivoting

Designers everywhere are becoming entrepreneurs, pivoting from the creative to the business worlds. Many young people are pivoting from curating online spaces to creating physical products and launching businesses. Widespread pivoting from product concepts to business creation is also driving urban revival in cities like New York.

Pivoting describes the movement from inspiration to production. It involves transforming intangibles like dreams and desires into tangible, marketable products. Pivoting bridges the gap between social and market norms, requiring skills not usually characteristic of the business world.

Products that have embedded meaning are more attractive to an audience that shares the meaning. For example, Apple products have a “cool” aura as a result of the company’s ability to produce innovative, attractive, and quality products. When pivoting from creativity to creation, a prime consideration is making the product relevant to its audience.

Because pivoting from creativity to creation requires capital and markets, the assistance of a person who can make the right connections is a must. This person is a “wanderer” who may be a talent scout, a coach, or an agent, but he or she is the link between creativity and practical necessity.

Building a pivot circle of supporters also helps bring an idea to fruition. Many entrepreneurs start out with the help of family and friends, and then expand their circles through social networks and other media. The goal is to leverage creativity through the support of those who see the value in an idea or product.

Some creators are serial entrepreneurs who specialize in ideas and then leave development to someone else. Others prefer to see an idea through the developmental stages and into the marketplace. Some startups, such as YouTube, pivot by selling to a larger platform like Google. Other entrepreneurs prefer to build their companies by themselves through platforms like Etsy.

Charisma is a powerful tool for entrepreneurs because it inspires a larger following. Some people view charisma as an internal light that the lucky are born with, but anyone can learn to become more charismatic. One common trait of leaders with charisma is the drive to achieve more than just profits. They follow a calling or a higher interest. They understand that the relationship between leaders and followers is the promise of meaning in their lives.

To be successful, an entrepreneur needs a product with an aura, a wanderer to help bring the product to the world, a pivot circle or network, and the charisma that comes from learning to clearly articulate a calling.

We all need to RESPECT Creativity

As one of the most innovative companies in recent years, Apple does not fit any of the traditional criteria for innovation. It does not invest large amounts of money into research and development, nor does it have a formal innovation funnel. Instead, it produces a small number of innovative products. The social dynamics leading to Apple-style innovation, including serendipity, connection, discovery, networking and play, are more typical of a college campus than a big corporation. According to a 2010 IBM survey of 1500 CEOs, creativity ranks among the most valuable management skills in the contemporary business environment. It has become something to train for and an accessible skill.

The work of Teresa Amabile of Stanford University in the 1980s revealed that creativity has a social context. People in different career fields interpret the ability for original thought by different criteria, making domain knowledge a prerequisite for creative innovation.

Cognitive psychology theories about the mental processes of creative people produced psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s idea of “flow”–a distinctive, cognitive state of mind people enter when they create. The elements of flow include:

*Absent sense of time

*Extraordinary focus

*Feeling of great confidence

*Intrinsic motivation

*Absent fear, hunger, and fatigue

*Joy or rapture

In the 1990s, brain imagery technology showed psychologists images of brain functions while people were creating. It debunked the belief that creativity is exclusive to the right brain. In fact, during a creative task, a person’s entire brain is involved.

The best way to decode creativity is to learn from creative individuals and organizations. In Florence, Italy, during the Renaissance, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Botticelli, and Donatello were at the forefront of a group of great painters who frequently collaborated in a society highly appreciative of their work. The super creativity of this group of masters was largely due to the social and cultural context in which they were working.

Three elements are essential to creative teams:

1. Trust
2. Familiarity with each other
3. Shared commitment to similar goals

If cognitive psychology and neuroscience have shown that individuals have the ability to be creative, then a sociocultural approach demonstrates how to act within groups to foster creativity. Rather than search for a specific spot in the brain where an individual’s creativity originates, people should team up with others to multiply their creative abilities.

Creative intelligence exists across several disciplines and in all spheres of life. It is a social activity that grows through collaboration and sharing. With the rise of social media networking, corporations, schools, hospitals, and all other large organizations must adapt to social technology or be phased out.

Facing an uncertain future, people must be innovative and agile. They must seek ways to create things that change their lives. Five competencies are essential to this endeavor:

1. Knowledge mining to discover what is meaningful to themselves and others.

2. Framing, a lens that helps people focus and adapt to changing situations.

3. Playing to open up creativity, free people from rules, and find new ways to solve challenges.

4. Making products locally.

5. Pivoting to bridge the gap between innovation and creation.

People using creative intelligence are building a new business model called Indie Capitalism. It is free of many of capitalism’s traditional constraints, and it is a social system that is local rather than international.

Creativity is not a lightning bolt, but a light bulb. It can be common and routine. It is a means of expressing humanity and the uniquely human ability to create, connect, and inspire.

Respect Emotions in Negotiation

Negotiation is one of the most common and constructive ways of dealing with conflict. It can be defined as the joint decision making between interdependent individuals aimed at resolving a perceived divergence of interests (Pietroni et al., 2008). Negotiation is a part of our life and we negotiate every now and then, consciously or subconsciously, for creating value and/or claiming value. We negotiate in an informal way with our friends and family or we take a formal approach to negotiation in a work environment which includes business deals, dispute settlement, conflict resolution etc. But wherever we negotiate or whenever we negotiate, just like any other social interaction emotions are inherent to negotiation. Negotiations involve people and people are indispensable from emotions. The things that people care about are not just the outcomes but also respect, power and identity which are bound to incite strong emotions.

As an emotion emerges, it entails coordinated changes in physiology, motor readiness, behaviour, cognition, and subjective experience. Emotional reactions emerge in response to perceived or actual alterations in the person’s environment (Mayer et al., 2007). Emotions intertwine with rational thoughts to make us human. Reasons cannot easily operate without feelings, or vice versa. We need to understand, channel and learn from our emotions in order to adapt to the situation at hand and engage others successfully. The key to a successful deal most often lies not in technical details, or even in price, but in the proper treatment of the emotion and psychological motivations that drive the buyer or the seller (Garai and Pravda, 1993). Even when the economies or the strategies are right, a transaction can break down if critical personal concerns are not recognized and addressed (Garai and Pravda, 1993). Being emotionally prepared is as important as any other aspect of the negotiation planning.

Effect of Emotions on Negotiation

In Greek myth, many of the ills that plagued mankind were creatures of emotion, such as revenge, spite, and envy. Released by the goddess Pandora, they sought to torment the world (MacDonald and Matthew, 2008). To be able to use emotion as a weapon in negotiation, we must first understand the effect of emotions on negotiation. Acknowledging the critical role emotions can play in the negotiation, more and more studies are focussing on emotive other than cognitive aspect of the negotiation.

Both cognitive and emotional approaches to negotiation have highlighted not only outcomes related to the negotiable items on the table, but also outcomes related to the social relationship between the parties at table (Kopelman et al., 2006). Effect of emotions on negotiation can be studied as intrapersonal effect of emotions on a negotiator and interpersonal effect of emotions on other negotiators around the table. Various models such as affect-as information model, affect-priming models, affect infusion model etc. have been developed guiding the research on intrapersonal effect and various models such as motivated information processing model, social information model, actor-partner independence model etc. have been developed guiding research on interpersonal effect.

Intrapersonal effects of emotions in negotiation is the influence of a negotiator’s emotional state on his or her own behaviour (Van Kleef et al.) Studies have shown quite consistently that negotiators experiencing positive affect tend to be more cooperative and conciliatory, whereas negotiators in a negative affective state tend to be more competitive and reluctant to make concessions. Positive affect of emotions has shown to increase concession making, stimulate creative problem solving, increase preferences for cooperation, reduce the use of contentious tactics, and increase the use of cooperative strategies. Conversely, negative affect has been shown to decrease initial offers, decrease joint gains, promote the rejection of ultimatum offers, increase use of competitive strategies and decrease desire to work together in future (Van Kleef et al.).

Negotiation is a complex process which demands high level of attentiveness and awareness of the environment. Emotional effects of a negotiator are not only intrapersonal but also interpersonal that is our emotions not only influence us but also people whom we are interacting with. Negotiation is a social phenomenon whereby emotions of one negotiator not only affect themselves but also their counterparts (Van Kleef et al.). Negotiators use their opponent’s emotions to infer the location of his or her limits and subsequently used this information to make a counteroffer (Van Kleef et al.). In other words, negotiators who are confronted with an angry opponent estimate the opponent’s limit to be high, and to avoid costly impasse, they place low demands and make the large concessions. Conversely, negotiators with a happy opponent, judge the opponent’s limit to be low, feel no need to concede to avoid impasse, and accordingly place high demands and make small concessions. But anger is considered to be a negative emotion and negative emotions are highly contagious that they can anger the opposite party resulting in an impasse.

Disadvantages of communicating anger in a negotiation could be that the negotiator may be perceived with a negative personality, may anger the counterpart and/or negatively affect the future relationship. But communicating anger can have positive affects financially with the angry party claiming higher concessions. Studies by Beest et al. (2008), revealed that communicating anger has profound impact on multiparty negotiation and may trigger negative impressions in multiparty negotiation. But if the parties are forced to include an angry counterpart then the angry party tends to claim higher value than others.

Positive emotions lead to better cognitive thinking and result in better results whereas negative emotions influence the parties to focus on distributive approach resulting in one party gaining more than the other or reach an impasse.  Negotiations are best when they are integrative and result in added value instead of a fixed pie approach. Fixed –pie perceptions lead negotiators to engage in distributive negotiation[i] and to forego possibilities of an integrative negotiation[ii], typically resulting in sub-optimal agreements (De Dreu, 2003). But there may be some instances where fixed pie is an actuality and distributive bargaining is the most appropriate approach to take. In these negotiations strategic display of anger can yield better results for the party expressing anger.

The effect of emotions in negotiation cannot be generalised but is influenced by various other factors

Effect of Power

Negotiation parties often differ in terms of power, and power differences exert an important influence on the way in which negotiation processes develop and conclude (Van Kleef et al.). The effect emotions have on a negotiation depends on the power level of the parties involved in the negotiation. The party with a higher power will be more expressive of their emotions and less or not affected by the emotions of the counterpart. This resonates with the theory that negotiators with higher power are found to be more demanding and less conceding since their BATNA[iii] is relatively stronger.

Effect of Epistemic Motivation[iv]

The effectiveness of the use of emotional deception as a strategic ploy depends on whether the target of the influence attempt is motivated to think about the implications of the other’s emotions for his or her goal attainment (Van Kleef et al.). Negotiators’ tendency to concede more to an angry opponent than to a happy one is moderated by individual differences in epistemic motivation. The epistemic motivation is another factor that governs the extent to which emotions play a role in negotiation.  The higher the epistemic motivation the more the parties will be willing to achieve an outcome. Hence, the parties will be more receptive to emotions.

Whether individuals will engage in a systematic and thorough information processing depends on their epistemic motivation – the desire to develop and maintain a rich and accurate understanding of the world, including negotiation task (Van Kleef et al.). Epistemic motivation depends upon need for cognitive closure, attractiveness, environmental noise, mental fatigue, time pressure.

Effect of Emotional Transition

In a negotiation, a party can maintain a steady state emotion of being happy or angry throughout the negotiation or transition from a happy to angry or angry to happy emotional stage. The transition from happy to angry has been found to be the most effective where the negotiator started with a happy emotion transitioning to angry emotion (Filipowicz et al.).

Managing Emotions in Negotiation

History is riddled with instances where emotions overpowered reasoning. In contrast to the historically dominant view of emotions as a negative influence in human behaviour, recent research in neuroscience and psychology has highlighted the positive roles played by emotions in decision making (Shiv et al., 2005). The automatic emotions triggered by a given situation help the normal decision-making process by narrowing down the options for action, either by discarding those that are dangerous or by endorsing those that are advantageous (Shiv et al., 2005). This process can be lifesaving in certain events but when it comes to negotiation, relying on automatic emotive triggering can lead to damaging results. Here, we must inhibit the trigger and take a cognitive approach with emotions being used strategically. Emotional Intelligence (EI) [v] will enable us to accurately perceive and express emotion in the self, recognize and appraise the emotion in others, regulate emotion in the self, and use emotions to facilitate performance by guiding them towards constructive activities and personal performance.

Before walking into a negotiation, every negotiator must assess and accept the emotional complexity of the negotiation. They should follow the six-step warm-up exercise suggested by Kimberlyn Leary (2013) to emotionally prepare themselves for negotiation.

Strategic Control of Emotions

People sometimes are unable to control the emotions sparked by a negotiation. More often than not they end up conceding major concessions to the opposite party or the negotiation fails to materialize. The two most intense emotions that confront negotiators are fear and anger (Adler et al., 1998). Anger and fear in negotiations can be good and bad. The emotions in themselves are not negative; they affect us negatively if we let the emotions control us in situations which also demand certain level of rationalisation, whereas if we are aware of our emotional state, control it and use it for our own benefit, results can be positive. Adler et al. (1998) have suggested following ways to successfully deal with anger and fear arising in conflict situation:

DEALING WITH OUR OWN ANGER- ·         The critical need for self-awareness ·         Determine situations that trigger inappropriate anger ·         Decide whether to display anger ·         Behavioural techniques to reduce anger like calling for a temporary break ·         Express anger and disappointment affectively ·         Avoid “negotiators bias” ·         Try to promote trust

DEALING WITH OUR OPPONENT”S ANGER- ·         Defuse beated emotional buildup ·         Assess the significance of angry displays ·         Address an opponent’s anger ·         Respond to anger in strategic ways ·         Help an angry opponent save face ·         Involve a mediator where we anticipate anger

DEALING WITH OUR OWN FEAR- ·         Know your warning signs ·         Understand that fear is often a normal reaction ·         Determine how visibly you display fear ·         Determine situations that trigger fear ·         Behavioural techniques to reduce feelings of fear like thinking about a positive thought from the past ·         Careful preparation reduces fear (refer to (Kimberlyn Leary, 2013)) ·         Act confident even if you do not feel so ·         Avoid quick agreements motivated by fear ·         Try to reduce stress level by exercising etc.

DEALING WITH OUR OPPONENT’S FEAR- ·         Monitor all negotiations for emotional build-ups ·         Show flexibility in how we react to your opponent’s fear ·         Where helpful, share your fears and anxieties with your opponent ·         Help your fearful opponents save face

Emotions as Strategic Information

Negotiators must use the information about the other’s emotion to design their own negotiation strategy. When negotiators lack information about counter parties, they bend towards distributive negotiation instead of an integrative negotiation (assuming win-win situation is a possibility). Studies by Paul Ekman, helps us understand the basic emotions and universal language of facial expressions. The study can be very helpful in face-to-face negotiation (assuming counterparts do not maintain a poker face[vi]) which is the most common setting especially for high level negotiations, dispute settlements and conflict resolutions.

Even though negotiators may not explicitly and deliberately inform others about the structure of their preferences and payoffs, an emotionally intelligent negotiator may extract this information from other’s emotional displays. Accurate recognition of particular patterns of emotional expression may help negotiators to revise their fixed-pie perceptions and discover mutually satisfying win-win agreements (Pietroni et al., 2008). For example, if a counterpart expresses anger in response to a particular issue, the focal negotiator can infer from the emotion that the issue is of high importance to the counterpart, and vice-versa. Hence, by gaining information about the high importance and low importance issue, the negotiators can work towards an integrative agreement.

Strategic Display of Emotions

Both cognitive and emotional approaches to negotiation have highlighted not only outcomes related to the negotiable items on table, but also outcomes related to the social relationship between the parties at table(Kopelman et al., 2006).  Emotions are deliberate behavioural strategy that is available to the negotiator. Strategic display of emotions refers to emotions intentionally expressed by the focal negotiator to attain a desired outcome. The displayed emotions may convey information and may influence strategic information processing or it may pursue the counterparty to act in a different way they would not have acted otherwise. This strategic display of emotions can be achieved by deep acting where internally experienced and externally displayed emotions are aligned or surface acting where displayed emotions are purely strategic and are at odds with internal experience. In his research (Kopelman et al., 2006), has shown the effects of strategically using positive or negative emotions or maintaining neutral emotion. His study resonates with the effects discussed above.

Conclusion

We have discussed the powerful role emotions play in the negotiation and how emotions can be manipulated and used as a weapon in tough negotiations. Strategically using emotions can be argued to be an unethical approach to a negotiation. But I feel that it is an art that negotiators develop to achieve better outcomes and since the emotions are used under a controlled setting the rationale is never lost.  So, instead of accepting the consequences of uncontrolled real emotions, the approach of gaining strategic information from emotions and using emotions strategically are tools which should be cognitively practiced by the negotiators.

Two goals primary in negotiation situations are those of creating value and claiming value. We talk about creating value in a negotiation but at the same time we must stress upon effectively claiming that additional value. Effective negotiation depends on the ability of parties to manage both the integrative and distributive component  of the task (Kumar, 1997).  Many of the abilities within emotional intelligence that assist negotiators in creating joint value might also assist in claiming individual value for themselves (Foo et al.).  Hence, negotiators must work on raising their Emotional Intelligence.  A research by Peter Salovay (2002) shows us how we can improve Emotional Intelligence.

Still a lot needs to be done in assessing the role of emotions in different scenarios.  The studies and information on which this essay is based has been conducted in specific settings in an experimental environment with limitations, hence the results cannot be generalised but helps us in getting a fair idea of the role emotions play in negotiations. One important limitation in the studies on effect of emotions on negotiation is that they do not take into account the social or cultural diversity of the experimental group which is another important indicator in this area. Cross-cultural negotiations are very important in today’s globalised environment. Hence, a negotiator should work on developing his or her Cultural Intelligence (CQ)[vii].

[i] Distributive negotiation is also sometimes called positional or hard-bargaining negotiation. It tends to approach negotiation on the model of haggling in a market. In a distributive negotiation, each side often adopts an extreme position, knowing that it will not be accepted, and then employs a combination of guile, bluffing, and brinksmanship in order to cede as little as possible before reaching a deal. Distributive bargainers conceive of negotiation as a process of distributing a fixed amount of value. BRAZEAL, G. 2009. Against Gridlock: The Viability of Interest-Based Legislative Negotiation. Harvard Law & Policy Review (Online), 3, 1..

 

[ii] Integrative negotiation is also sometimes called interest-based or principled negotiation. It is a set of techniques that attempts to improve the quality and likelihood of negotiated agreement by providing an alternative to traditional distributive negotiation techniques. While distributive negotiation assumes there is a fixed amount of value (a “fixed pie”) to be divided between the parties, integrative negotiation often attempts to create value in the course of the negotiation (“expand the pie”). It focuses on the underlying interests of the parties rather than their arbitrary starting positions, approaches negotiation as a shared problem rather than a personalized battle, and insists upon adherence to objective, principled criteria as the basis for agreement. . Ibid.

 

[iii] Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement

 

[iv] Epistemic Motivation can be defined as the desire to develop and maintain a rich and accurate understanding of the world, including the negotiation task. DE DREU, C. K. W., CARNEVALE, P. J., DE DREU, C. K. W. & CARNEVALE, P. J. 2003. Motivational bases of information processing and strategy in conflict and negotiation. ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL 35, 35, 235-291.

 

[v] Emotional intelligence concerns the ability to carry out accurate reasoning about emotions and the ability to use emotions and emotional knowledge to enhance thought. MAYER, J. D., ROBERTS, R. D. & BARSADE, S. G. 2007. Human Abilities: Emotional Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507-536.

 

[vi] A face on a person that shows no emotion, often called poker face because in the game of poker it would be foolish to show any emotional traits that might screw the game for you.(www.urbandictionary.com)

 

[vii] Cultural Intelligence is defined as an individual’s capability to adapt effectively to situations of cultural diversity. IMAI, L. & GELFAND, M. J. 2010. The culturally intelligent negotiator: The impact of cultural intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 83-98.

Preparation required for becoming Leader

Only a few star performers deliver exceptional results and valuable ideas within their organizations. These individuals define the talent levels that their organizations need to gain crucial advantages. However, to be their best, these stars require strong organizational structures and effective leadership.

Leaders who lead exceptional individuals must understand that while such stars offer more, they also expect more. Stars want to work on teams made up of other stars and for organizations that define themselves by their excellence. They also want to work for strong leaders and within cultures that:

* Foster growth.

* Pave clear pathways for success.

* Create day-to-day experiences for them to achieve their goals and satisfy their need for accomplishment.

Great organizations understand and embrace their paradoxes. They respond quickly to changing global conditions, yet hold fast to their missions and values. They preserve their defining principles while replacing outmoded aspects that no longer serve. They manage the risk of innovation and acknowledge that past performances and traditional best practices can no longer be relied on to gauge the future and overcome their competition.

Five changes in the global economy have created what Henman refers to as paradoxical organizations:

1. Workforce changes. Employees no longer stay with singular organizations throughout their entire careers, and companies no longer want the same skill sets indefinitely. Organizations must leverage specialist talent, which in the future will be handled less by HR departments and more by senior executives.
2. New rules of the road. Big data will increasingly be a significant and disruptive factor in innovation, productivity, value creation, and expansion. Leaders will need to create advantages by successfully managing new environments that are characterized by speed and uncertainty.
3. Global tilt. Emerging economies are changing global competitive dynamics. A lack of global governance rules means that leaders must adapt to trends beyond their own geographies, including the role that foreign governments play and how changing global demographics determine markets and resources.
4. Fear. Since 2008, fear fed by sensational media reporting has become a great force, affecting both markets and the decisions of businesses and governments. Social media platforms spread innovative ideas as well as fear, instability, and violence.
5. Change. Innovation itself is less important than the ability to temper innovation with discipline. Speed and agility are crucial, but it is even more crucial to know when to proceed with haste and when to be cautious.

Exceptional organizations that acknowledge these changes in turn display four traits:

1. Strategy. Leaders anticipate numerous possible futures and invent strategies to respond to different scenarios and requirements.
2. Culture. Organizations create cultures independent of talent. They hold on to the elements that make current stars want to join them while simultaneously adapting to change to attract future talent.
3. Excellence. Organizations commit to excellence by realizing that they are only as good as their least-excellent performers who occupy key positions. Every employee should represent a high standard of performance.
4. Talent. Mere retention is no longer a goal. Leaders must learn to quickly and accurately size up talent, recognizing three essential traits in top performers: integrity, intelligence, and drive.

Employee Satisfaction

Now, more than ever, organizations need to engage employees. Rapid market change, disruptive technologies, and opportunities available to your key talent have forced organizations to reexamine the connections between business performance, leadership, and employee satisfaction.

Over the past several years, many organizations have focused on reigning in key financial indicators. By searching the global labor market for the most efficient resources, creating process improvements, and using technology to speed up operations, companies have improved financial performance and created competitive advantages. But downsizing, outsourcing, and off-shoring will soon reach upper limits on their ability to improve organizational performance. In addition, these actions are available to all competitors—making them, at best, temporary sources of competitive advantage.

So, where will the next force for performance improvement come from? Where can organizations find sources of sustainable (not temporary) competitive advantage? In a series of 14 individual studies, Wilson Learning Worldwide has found one answer—Fulfillment Satisfaction. Our research has repeatedly shown that there is a direct correlation between employee Fulfillment Satisfaction and job performance. These studies have shown that, on average, 39% of the workforce bottom line can be attributed to employee Fulfillment Satisfaction.

This research could not be more timely. A Gallup poll showed that 55% of employees say they are not engaged in their work, and turnover among executives and managers is at an all-time high (SHRM research). Furthermore, our research has clarified the greatest source of employee fulfillment. The single most important factor in creating a sense of fulfillment is the leadership skills of an employee’s manager. This finding has significant implications for the importance of the role of the manager and how effective he or she is in creating Fulfillment Satisfaction.

Redefining Satisfaction

Employee satisfaction means different things to different people. While we intuitively believe that employee satisfaction is necessary for high performance, studies in the past have not supported this belief. Several years ago, Wilson Learning Worldwide began asking why and concluded that the problem was in the definition of satisfaction.

The dictionary defines satisfaction as “gratification of an appetite and pleasure.” In general, people most often associate satisfaction with happiness and comfort. It is likely that in most of the previous studies, people responded to the question “Are you satisfied?” by interpreting the question as “Are you comfortable in your work? Do you feel secure and content?” While this may not have been the intent of the question, this understanding of the question does suggest why organizational performance has not been linked statistically to employee satisfaction. We don’t often associate high performance with contentment, security, and comfort.

However, we do tend to associate high performance with enjoyment of the work, fulfillment in accomplishment, and effective work relationships. Therefore, the researchers at Wilson Learning Worldwide decided to explore a new definition of satisfaction, one that taps the elements of fulfillment, empowerment, and engagement. In the process, we have identified a powerful tool for creating a high-performance, high-fulfillment work environment.

Fulfillment Satisfaction

We call our approach “Fulfillment Satisfaction” (or just “fulfillment”) to differentiate it from the traditional definition of satisfaction (that is, satisfaction as being comfortable). It is our belief that if you can identify and measure a more meaningful definition of satisfaction, you will find a closer causal relationship to organizational performance. We began our research by identifying the principal elements of fulfillment, empowerment, and engagement. We identified five principal elements:

• Satisfaction with the job: To be fulfilled, people need to value their day-to-day work activities. People need to have a sense of accomplishment or pleasure from the work itself.
• Satisfaction with relationships: People also need to value the relationships they have on the job to be fulfilled. People want to like working with their coworkers. While people know that conflicts will arise, they want to be assured that the focus is not on the interpersonal differences, but the task differences.
• Satisfaction with leadership: If people do not think they are being managed or led effectively, it is hard to have fulfillment in the work.
• Knowing that others are satisfied in their work: One of the key findings from our research is the importance of the open expression of fulfillment in the workplace. Knowing that others gain fulfillment in their work is a powerful motivator.
• Knowing that others are satisfied with the organization’s leadership: It is difficult to be fulfilled if there is not open trust and support for leadership. Equally, when that open trust and support is present, it helps create an environment where people feel empowered and willing to give their full engagement.

This combination of both personal satisfaction and communication of group satisfaction is a critical distinction between Fulfillment Satisfaction and traditional definitions of satisfaction. In today’s work environment, few objectives are met solely through one individual’s efforts. In addition, as people work together in group settings, they are likely to influence each other’s attitudes and beliefs. Because of the roles that teamwork and joint effort play in organizational success today, tapping into these elements seems critical. One might feel personally satisfied, but not perceive satisfaction in others. As a result, the overall sense of fulfillment that one feels will be diminished. Organizations that encourage open communication, where employees discuss their level of satisfaction, promotes high performance.

Studying the Relationship Between Fulfillment, Performance, and Leadership

From the work above, we were able to develop a reliable and valid measure of fulfillment. However, measuring the relationship between fulfillment and business performance requires reliable measures of performance in addition to a measure of fulfillment. It is nearly impossible to identify measures of performance that are consistent across industries, or even across organizations within an industry. As a result, the relationship between satisfaction and performance was examined in 14 separate studies, with each study using a unique measure of performance.

We conducted each of these 14 studies in a similar way. For each study, we worked closely with a team from the organization to identify existing measures of performance or devise new measures if appropriate ones did not exist. We had three criteria for the performance measures:

Table 1: Summary of Study Populations

Company’s Industry		Measures of Performance	Number of Work Units
1.	Savings and loan	Percent change in total savings Average size of new and transferred accounts	55 branches
2.	Insurance	Total first-year premiums Increase from previous year in first-year premiums Total premiums	10 agencies
3.	Banking	Customer ratings of the accuracy, courtesy, and timeliness of service	20 branches
4.	Insurance	Percent of targeted production Total production	14 sales units
5.	Banking	Customer ratings of friendliness and efficiency of service	53 branches
6.	Insurance	Number of life premiums Total volume Production credits	12 agencies
7.	Automotive sales	Customer satisfaction Sales volume Area registrations	10 dealerships
8.	Transportation center	Percent of sales volume goal Length of sales cycle Salesperson retention	15 sales units
9.	Automotive sales	Customer satisfaction Sales volume	33 dealerships
10.	Transportation center	Customer ratings of friendliness and efficiency	13 centers
11.	Computer manufacturing	Chip rejection rate Communication of downtime	57 shifts
12.	Technology service	Customer ratings of friendliness and efficiency	9 branches
13.	Telecommunications	Gross margin Percent of quota achieved	19 sales offices
14.	Hospitality	Room occupancy Repeat business Customer satisfaction	8 hotels

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

• The measure was meaningful to the organization’s business success
• It was measurable at the individual work unit level
• The measure had a direct impact on bottom-line performance

Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the organizations participating in these studies. The organizations were distributed across three broad industry groups: financial services (banking, S&L, insurance), manufacturing (computers and automotive), and service (transportation and hospitality). Performance measures consisted of sales revenue, profit margins, customer satisfaction, production targets, market share, quality control, and repeat business. Since each organization used different performance measures, we treated each as a separate study.

The same method was used in all studies. Fulfillment data were collected from all work unit members. Work unit performance measures were gathered for roughly the same time period as the fulfillment data. An effort was made to secure data from several performance periods (e.g., several shifts, several weeks of customer satisfaction data) to ensure reliable indicators. All employees in a work unit were involved in the study. Each work unit contained between 3–10 employees; the total study population consisted of approximately 2,000 employees across the 14 studies.

The fulfillment and performance data were submitted to a multiple regression analysis to determine the degree to which work unit performance can be predicted from the work unit’s satisfaction level. Multiple regression analysis results in a value (called R) that indicates the degree of association between fulfillment and performance. The higher the R value (the closer to 1.00), the more fulfillment predicts the performance outcomes.

More About Multiple Regression

A multiple regression analysis results in a regression coefficient (R), which is an indicator of the association between satisfaction and performance. Regression coefficients have a range of -1.00 to +1.00. Values close to 0.00 indicate that the variables are unrelated. Negative values indicate that when one variable increases the other decreases. For example, as the hours of light in a day increase, the hours of darkness decrease (R = -1.00). When variables both increase, the R values are positive. For example, as the number of minutes increases, the number of seconds increases (R = +1.00). In this study all R values are positive, indicating that the two variables increase or decrease together. The higher the positive value (that is, the closer to 1.00), the stronger the relationship. For studies of this type (behavior studies), a value between 0.00 and 0.30 indicates a minimal relationship. Any value over .30 is considered meaningful, because at this point approximately 10% of the difference in one variable is shared with a change in the other variable. Values between .30 and .60 are considered moderately strong. Values between .60 and 1.00 are considered very strong. In this study, a regression coefficient value above .60 indicates that over 35% of the difference in performance can be attributed to differences in fulfillment.

Results: Fulfillment and Performance

The following graph shows the average R value across all 14 studies. The R value of .63 indicates that there is a very strong relationship between Fulfillment Satisfaction and the business performance measures. This is remarkable considering the number of other factors affecting business performance that are unrelated to Fulfillment Satisfaction.

Table 2: Satisfaction to Performance Multiple Regression Results

Company’s Industry		R	Percent of Variability
1.	Savings and loan	.63	40%
2.	Insurance	.89	79%
3.	Banking	.50	25%
4.	Insurance	.84	71%
5.	Banking	.44	19%
6.	Insurance	.85	72%
7.	Automotive sales	.82	67%
8.	Transportation center	.94	88%
9.	Automotive sales	.32	10%
10.	Transportation center	.56	31%
11.	Computer manufacturing	.49	24%
12.	Technology service	.50	25%
13.	Telecommunications	.38	14%
14.	Hospitality	.59	35%
Average		.63	39%

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

Table 2 shows the results for each of the studies individually. While the average R value was .63, the table shows that there was actually great variability among the studies. R values ranged from R = .32 (Study 9) to R = .94 (Study 8). Thus, even with the lowest R value, the studies indicate that the relationship between satisfaction and performance is at least moderately strong and, in many cases, very strong.

The majority of studies had regression coefficients between .50 and .85, suggesting that the relationship between satisfaction and performance is moderate to very strong. It is likely that different organizations and different industries will place differing emphasis on satisfaction and therefore variability among studies should be expected.

Table 2 also shows a “Percent of Variability” column. This is another statistic produced by the multiple regression analysis that shows exactly how much of the difference in performance is caused by differences in fulfillment. Thus, averaging across the 14 studies, 39% of the difference in work unit performance can be attributed to differences in fulfillment. Said in another way, the Percent of Variability can be used to predict how much performance will change if you improve a work unit’s fulfillment. On average, improvement in fulfillment could increase performance by 39%.

In summary, these 14 studies indicate that there is a significant and meaningful relationship between business performance and fulfillment. The results suggest that organizations, regardless of industry, could improve organizational performance by improving fulfillment among employees.

Results: The Leader’s Role in Improving Fulfillment

If organizational performance is strongly affected by employee fulfillment, as these studies indicate, then understanding what characteristics contribute to fulfillment can be critical in improving organizational success. Of the things an organization can do to impact employee fulfillment, we focused on the day-to-day interactions between an employee and his or her manager. We hypothesized that fulfillment is largely determined by the work environment and sense of teamwork created by the leader of the work unit.

When we measured fulfillment in the 14 studies described above, we also measured employees’ perceptions of their leader’s actions and how those actions affected the employee. We analyzed 28 separate leadership behaviors. Employees rated each behavior in terms of the actions of their direct manager. These behaviors defined five critical leadership practices:

Direction	Does the leader create a work environment that links the employees’ actions to an important and inspiring organizational purpose or mission?
Goals	Does the leader define challenging but achievable work objectives for the employees?
Feedback	Does the leader provide information and direction needed to track and improve performance?
Recognition	Does the leader provide the appropriate consequences to improve and maintain high performance in the work unit?
Support	Does the leader show a concern for the development of employees and provide support and coaching to improve individual performance and abilities?

We used the same multiple regression technique to determine the relationship between leadership practices and employee fulfillment that we used to determine the relationship between fulfillment and performance. The overall result of this analysis is shown in the following graph, along with the fulfillment-performance results shown earlier. There is a very strong relationship (R = .83) between leadership practices and the Fulfillment Satisfaction of the employees.

Table 3: Leadership to Satisfaction Multiple Regression Results

Company’s Industry		R	Percent of Variability	Greatest Contributor
1.	Savings and loan	.78	61%	Direction
2.	Insurance	.81	66%	Recognition
3.	Banking	.90	81%	Recognition
4.	Insurance	.81	66%	Support
5.	Banking	.89	79%	Recognition
6.	Insurance	.84	71%	Direction
7.	Automotive sales	.81	66%	Support
8.	Transportation center	.91	83%	Recognition
9.	Automotive sales	.89	79%	Goals
10.	Transportation center	.80	64%	Recognition
11.	Computer manufacturing	.75	56%	Feedback
12.	Technology service	.85	72%	Feedback
13.	Telecommunications	.84	71%	Support
14.	Hospitality	.77	59%	Feedback
Average		.83	69%

© Wilson Learning Worldwide Inc.

The results for each of the 14 studies is shown in Table 3. There was much less variability between studies in this analysis than there was in the relationship between fulfillment and performance. All of the regression coefficients were between .75 and .91, indicating that between 56% and 83% of the variability in fulfillment can be attributed to the leadership practices of the work unit’s manager. On average, 69% of the variability in employee satisfaction is attributable to the actions of the work unit leader.

The multiple regression analysis also allowed us to identify the individual leadership practice in each study that contributed most to the relationship with fulfillment. These practices are also listed in Table 3 in the “Greatest Contributor” column. There was significant variation between organizations as to which leadership practice contributed most to predicting fulfillment. Each of the five practices was the largest contributor for at least one of the studies. Recognition was the one most frequently identified (five studies); Feedback and Support were also frequently identified (for three studies each), as was Direction (two studies). Goals was identified as the largest contributor in one study.

Conclusions

In a business environment that requires employees who are flexible, creative, and willing to take risks, it is necessary to find ways to help employees feel fulfilled and empowered in their work.

At a time when research is showing that job satisfaction is at an all-time low (Conference Board, Towers Perrin) and that less than half of all employees feel a sense of loyalty to their organization, Wilson Learning Worldwide’s research could not have come at a better time. Our research suggests that the single biggest contributor to these feelings of fulfillment, empowerment, and satisfaction lie in the day-to-day relationship between employees and their managers. These 14 separate studies show:

• Managers and leaders have the major impact on the Fulfillment Satisfaction of employees and, consequently, on how well they perform.
• Between 56% and 83% of fulfillment could be predicted from the skills and practices of the manager or leader.
• When employee fulfillment was high, so was performance; when employee fulfillment was low, so was performance.
• All 14 studies showed a significant relationship between employee fulfillment and work unit performance.
• 39% of bottom-line performance can be attributed to employee fulfillment.

Clearly, while organizational leaders are rethinking how to manage the corporation, they must also rethink how they lead the people who drive it. We found that leadership skills directly related to employee satisfaction include having a clear direction for the group; having realistic and clear objectives; and being able to give appropriate feedback, recognition, and support. Perhaps most importantly, the results emphasize empowering and developing employees so they can do the work themselves and eliminate barriers to getting the work done. Managers who have the leadership skills to accomplish these conditions will create a high level of fulfillment in their employees with a direct impact to the bottom line.

These studies suggest that a person’s manager is the primary contributor to fulfillment in an organization. Pay, compensation, work conditions, promotions, and benefits are important, but are more often associated with creating dissatisfaction than with fulfillment. In other words, when people feel their salaries are not fair, work conditions are poor, or the benefits are insufficient, they feel dissatisfied with the organization and their job. However, even if these conditions are perfect, this elimination of dissatisfaction does not mean that employees feel fulfilled, only that they no longer are dissatisfied. And it is employee fulfillment, not satisfaction, that predicts performance. It is the individual manager who creates, or fails to create, fulfillment.

Understanding the connection between business performance, leadership, and employee fulfillment can measurably impact the future competitiveness of a company. Employee satisfaction impacts the bottom line and is largely determined by employee day-to-day interactions with managers. Of all the factors an organization can improve to impact employee satisfaction, improving individual leadership is the most effective. Those leaders who see their role as a developer of people, and who are skilled in the new leadership practices, will have high-performing employees. Managers who do not are well advised to reconsider how they lead. If a company is prepared to invest in new equipment and new processes, then why not in the company’s human assets who drive those initiatives and the people who lead them.

References

“Linking Employee Satisfaction with Productivity, Performance, and Customer Satisfaction.” Corporate Executive Board, 2003.

“Creating a Highly Engaged and Productive Workplace Culture.” The Gallup Organization, 2001.

“Working Today: Understanding What Drives Employee Engagement.” Towers Perrin, 2003.

Beverly Kaye and Sharon Jordan-Adams, “Building Loyalty and Commitment in the Workplace.” Career Systems International, 2002.

More information about the Negotiating to Yes program is available from Wilson Learning Worldwide.

Proud to be Holstin britto’s

Feels motivating

THE PRISM PHILOSOPHY

View original post

Proud to be Holstin britto’s

Share with your star performers team

Companies become great because of the contributions of key star performers. Successful teams are like “constellations of stars” that work harmoniously together. When leaders recruit teams made up entirely of stars, they often underperform. This is because stars tend to want to work alone as solo contributors and often take time to learn that collaboration leads to success. Leaders must forge strong, individualistic personalities into cohesive groups, building team cohesion right from the moment teams are assembled.

Henman offers a talent assessment model that leaders can use to identify how specific individuals would work as a team. It ranks each person from one to four, focusing on behavior, aptitude, and experience, with the highest ranked candidates successfully combining all three qualities. These candidates, however, will need the guidance of leaders to manage the inevitable turbulence found with virtuoso teams.

Teams of stars can easily flounder if leaders do not set expectations and define roles and responsibilities. Therefore, leaders should pay close attention to the eight functions that structure star teams:

1. Trust
2. Accountability
3. Decision Making
4. Conflict Resolution
5. Communication
6. Clear Objectives
7. Collaboration
8. Leadership