Minimizing Politics In Your Company

The topic of organizational politics is always a hot one.  I’m sharing a terrific article by Ben Horowitz which speaks to approaches that, when followed, will minimize organizational politics.

This particular article—now over three years old—is definitely centered around the executive suite, but the principles can be applied outside the executive suite as well.

Ben’s blog is one my favorites.  The quality of his writing—and the thinking that drives it—is just terrific. Enjoy.

When Recruiting Don’t Under-Estimate The Impact of Professional Values

The principles from The Power of Professionalism, of course, can be applied in a myriad of ways. Jennifer (Jenn) Schoenhofer, President and CEO of Atlanta-based Axis Teknologies, had a really interesting one.

She was recently hiring for a position that would be a part of her executive team.  Obviously, this is an especially important position.  And if you knew Jenn you wouldn’t  find it surprising she has adopted the ‘we only hire professionals’ philosophy.

She uses that philosophy and makes it integral during the interview process.  Jenn is  clear with each candidate….“Professional values are our north arrow here.  They’re integrated into every facet of how we go about our business.” She especially loves this aspect of the interview –and she reports the candidates respond to it really well too.

Jenn carefully selected her preferred candidate and extends an offer.  The candidate accepts.  You know what’s coming….the candidate’s company counters–financially sweetening the pot.  Then the candidate reneges on their acceptance to Jenn’s offer.  Jenn re-counters, but not with money. She meets with the candidate again and re-emphasizes (of all things) just how Axis’s professional values will enhance the quality of the candidates work life AND how it will drive the company’s success in the future.

Shortly after that the candidate resigned from their company and joined Axis.  Jenn is thrilled and so is the candidate.

This particular candidate left a well-known, well-established leader in the telecom industry. They left a prestigious job for something that they felt had even greater appeal.  Jenn tells me that a significant factor in the candidates decision to leave was Axis’s commitment to professionalism (and all that goes with that).  In fact, she indicated that virtually every candidate she interviewed for that particular job found great appeal in the emphasis Axis was putting on professional values.

The war for talent is real so don’t overlook recruitment as yet another (in a long list) of ways that professionalism makes your organization more competitive.

Thanks to Jenn in her willingness to share…

Helps on the ‘How-To’s In Developing Mind-Set Three

There was a ton of research that went into The Power of Professionalism.  Yet sometimes you miss or overlook a reference that you later wish you would have been able to incorporate into your book.  Carol Dweck’s Mindset is one such reference.

The premise of her book is that mindset has an enormous influence on achievement and success.  Mindset, she believes, trumps talent when it comes to achievement and success.  I couldn’t agree more and have made that very point in The Power of Professionalism.

Dweck believes that there are two primary mindsets—either growth oriented or fixed.   Those with a growth oriented mind-set, she explains, actually expand their intelligence and, of course, their capacity to take on ever-increasing challenges.  Those with a fixed mindset tend to believe that their intelligence is pre-determined –which thwarts them on any number of levels.

Praising children’s intelligence and ability, she argues, doesn’t foster self esteem and can be completely counter-productive in terms of buoying children up over the long term.  She writes that ‘praising effort has a far greater impact’.

To me, Dweck’s book Mindset compliments The Power of Professionalism (and vice versa).

What’s common between the teaching within the two books?

***the emphasis on mindset (especially over talent) as a driver of trust and success.

***the emphasis of one’s view of themselves as a driving determinant in their life.  (Note: In TPOP this is greatly emphasized, although less so in Dweck’s Mindset.)  

*** the commonality (especially) between mind-set three (e.g. professionals know things get better when they get better) and Dweck’s growth mindset.

Are there differences?

***Maybe.  I’m not sure if Dweck believes there are only two core mindsets or there are more than that.  Of course, in TPOP we identify seven.

***In TPOP we identified mindsets (plural) that produced trust. In Dweck’s book her growth-oriented mindset (singular) was focused almost exclusively on ‘success’.  That’s an important distinction…and thus a difference.

***In TPOP we strongly emphasize being something.  Doing something was more the emphasis in Dweck’s Mindset book.

What’s unique about Dweck’s book when contrasted with The Power of Professionalism?   

***the researched based arguments she gives to the ability to grow intelligence.

***the advice she gives to those wishing to instill a growth mindset (or for that matter mindset three) within others.  Especially important–praise effort, not innate ability.

Beefs worth mentioning:

***Just one.  For those that have a ‘success or achievement orientation’, Dweck’s book will be especially pertinent. A great many examples in the book were from people who certainly appear to have had that orientation. Yet there are many who don’t value ‘success’ as the be-all-end-all. For them I’m not convinced that all of what Dweck advances in this book holds true. For instance, Dweck advances the premise that those holding a fixed mind-set begrudge the success of others (page 245 in the paperback version). That’s not my experience at all.

For many ‘personal growth’ is simply not one of their top values. Many of these same people also hold what Dweck refers to as a fixed mind-set. I’ve met many such people in my lifetime. Yet the vast majority don’t begrudge the success of others.

I bring this up as an illustration that, to me, Dweck tends to generalize a bit in this book—the begrudging the success of others being one example.

Bottom line:

Despite some (manageable) differences, the two books complement one another nicely.  Given different circumstances, I would have referenced Dweck’s Mindset book in my first edition. Chapter seven alone (how parents can instill a growth mindset in their kids) is worth the price of the book.  For those achievement-oriented fans of TPOP that want complimentary ideas on how to develop a deeper, stronger mind-set three, this book will help you do that.

Identity–The Secret Sauce For Families

As I wrote about in The Power of Professionalism there is great power in this ‘thing’ we call identity.   Identity answers the question ‘who am I?’ or, in the case of the collective, ‘who are we?’  Knowing who we are (or wanting to become) is a powerful north arrow—especially when things get rocky.

The Power of Professionalism dealt with one’s identity as a professional; although identity is obviously just as powerful in other aspects of one’s life as well.

In a March 2013 New York Times article– The Stories That Bind Us—journalist Bruce Feiler shares how identity becomes the secret sauce for families.  Feiler refers extensively in the article about the importance of family narrative—which formed the basis for the article’s title.  As Feiler points out, family narrative is really important. I wholeheartedly concur.

Yet to me the family narrative is the outward manifestation of family’s all-important identity of themselves.  And that’s the key: when you know who you are a lot of things naturally take care of themselves–whether it’s in the workplace or within a family. Enjoy the article…it’s especially good.

I Really Can’t Put My Finger On It

I recently received an email from a colleague friend who owns and operates a very successful  executive search firm. She’s quite familiar with The Power of Professionalism.  At the very end of her note she added the following PS:  

“I was comparing two people yesterday. I said to myself, ‘Person A is highly professional. It’s not that Person B is unprofessional, but Person A is notably highly professional.’ I really couldn’t put my finger on some detail or example that brought me to this conclusion. Odd.”

Isn’t that the truth?  Often times it’s our intuition that whispers to us how professional someone is. And more-often-than-not the assessment this woman was making is an unconscious process for most of us. 

There’s just something about how the person conducts themselves—which often translates to a lot of little, yet terribly important, things.  Taken in aggregate, it reveals a tapestry that could only have been created by a professional.           

In organizational settings (particularly) we’re prone to compare—it’s the nature of the beast. We compare because we must.  Who do we hire—candidate A or B? Which service provider—A or B–gets the new maintenance contract?       

Differentiating oneself is tough. Yet, I’ve learned that professionalism can be a big differentiator. For trusted professionals the key is to get others to notice—even if the person really can’t put their finger on the ‘why’.       

When Identities Compete

Some of our toughest (and often best) decisions are by-products of competing identities we hold.  For example, a politician courageously acts in the best interests of the nation—rather than acting in the best interests of their political party.

What competing identities, you ask, were in ‘play’ for the politician?  Namely, being an American versus being a Republican.  (NOTE: The example of being a Republican is for illustrative purposes only.  The politician could have just as well have been a Democrat).  In this particular instance, the politician felt the ‘tug’ of being an American outweighed being a Republican (their revered political party).  Thus, the politician was willing to take an unpopular stand—unpopular, at least, from members of their own party.

Recall Stanford Professor James March’s research on decision-making wherein he theorized that our choices are strongly influenced by one of two factors: 1) the consequences one is subject to–what one gets versus what it costs OR 2) an especially important aspect of one’s identity.  The former is quite calculated, the latter is quite intuitive.

Yet, decisions aren’t always rendered exclusively by a comparison between March’s two factors. Sometimes the decision is rendered as a result of a comparison within only one of March’s factors. In the politician’s case, the defining struggle became one of identity.  Which identity (being an American versus being a Republican) was more important?  In the end, the politician made a value judgment in putting the country first, their political party second.

It’s not unusual for one’s most difficult and consequential decisions to be influenced by an especially important identity they hold. That shouldn’t be surprising—given the inseparable correlation between identity and one’s personal values.  And it also shouldn’t be surprising that an identity-based decision is one that, while difficult, is often one that the individual is especially proud of.  After all, it frequently reveals their very ‘best-self’.

Seven Signs An ‘Expert’ Is Slipping

1) they tend to be impatient with ‘mere mortals’

2) they tend to reinforce what they already believe or trust they know

3) they get overly defensive when others challenge them

4) their listening skills have tended to atrophy

5) new ideas are often seen as a threat or source of discomfort for them

6) frequently they tend to hang around with people of similar stature

7) they have become over-reliant on the approach that enabled them to become an expert in the first place

If these signs are prevalent, it portends an expert in decline.

The Ultimate Paradox— When A Leader Voluntarily Steps Down

President George Washington started a precedent, Pope Benedict XVI broke one—both stepped down.  Both did so on their own volition—neither was pushed (think: fired).

Relinquishing one’s responsibilities at the height of one’s power goes against the grain of human nature.   In fact, many may believe that stepping down is a sign of weakness in a leader. That’s not always the case.

I chose to believe that Washington and Pope Benedict did so for the greater good of the entities they led—Washington for the United States; Pope Benedict for the Catholic Church.

In Washington’s case he believed that over time the country would be best served by having a number of people serve as the country’s leader—rather than one person serve indefinitely (as a King would in a monarchy).  Washington was revered; he could have served far beyond his initial two terms. Yet he chose not to.

In Pope Benedict’s case the Catholic Church currently faces many substantive issues.  To effectively deal with those issues, the church’s leader must be both focused and energetic.  It’s no secret that Pope Benedict’s health has deteriorated—largely due to his elevated age (85) —at the time of his resignation.  Today Emeritus Pope Benedict turns 86 with some reporting that he is suffering repeated falls and is nearly blind in one eye. His energy is reportedly waning.  Is it any wonder he chose to step down?

Did these two leaders shirk their responsibilities in stepping down? Not from my perspective! Rather, they did what they felt was in the best interests of the entity they had been entrusted with.  Both were willing to withstand the inevitable second-guessing and criticism that came with their decision.  Isn’t that what we’d expect from someone who realized that “it wasn’t all about them”—consistent with mind-set two?