Everybody knows bad leadership can be costly.
It leads to turnover, workplace stress, and decreased cooperation which costs US businesses billions each year. But can bad leadership kill you?
This week, the Wall Street Journal reported that United Airlines is calling in all 12,000 of its pilots for extra safety training over the next 3 months. This is due to a series of serious safety incidents. None of the incidents led to an accident, but there were several close calls.
One of the key components of the training is increased teamwork on the flight deck. One of the stated goals is to “encourage veteran captains to more-effectively mentor co-pilots, and to help junior aviators be more assertive with senior captains if they spot problems or dangers.” The training is also intended to improve situational awareness and “bridge” the generation gap.
United is focusing on exactly the right place if it wants to improve safety on its planes. More important, they are likely to see numerous other business benefits.
Anyone who has seen my leadership keynote or workshop knows I talk a lot about plane crashes. We listen in on the final conversation between the co-pilot Roger Pettit and captain Larry Wheaton on Air Florida Flight 90, which crashed in the icy Potomac River in 1982 killing 78 people. Listening to that conversation is chilling, not just because you hear the crash, but you see it was completely avoidable. The relationship between the first officer and the captain was the problem.
The reason I play that conversation is to illustrate the life or death consequences that are possible if there is a gap between leaders and those they lead. There are a lot of reasons for these gaps. Malcolm Gladwell, in his book Outliers, talks about cultural power-distance gaps (Asian and Latin cultures tend to avoid confrontation with power more than people from Western European cultures, for example) and how they contribute to plane crashes and near-miss accidents. United Airlines is focusing mostly on generational differences.
Listening in on the Air Florida flight recording illustrates how these gaps show up in subtle ways, and how important it is for both the leader and follower to take steps to shrink that gap. In that conversation the co-pilot Pettit (who was “on stick” and in charge of the takeoff) suggests to captain Wheaton that he sees a problem. But Pettit is not direct (“I don’t think that’s right”). Captain Wheaton dismisses him and Pettit briefly tries to make his point a second time. But then he backs down (“Aww, maybe it is.”) This fatal decision cost both pilots their lives (along with 76 other souls).
Why wasn’t Pettit more forceful? Why did he back down? Why did Wheaton dismiss Pettit? After all, neither one of these men wanted to die in a plane crash that day. The reason they did was because of the gap between the high powered captain and the lower powered co-pilot. Pettit used what is called “mitigated speech” when he noticed that the pressure readings were out of whack and that the plane might not be going fast enough to take off. When Wheaton dismissed him without trying to learn more Pettit questioned himself. After his second, even less forceful attempt to get his leader’s attention he feebly gave up. Seconds later they were both dead.
The gap between Pettit and Wheaton exists in nearly every power relationship. There are two ways to shrink that gap. The leader in the higher power position must be as approachable as possible. The person in the lower power position then must accept the offer and make the approach. It’s a two-way street. But the leader behavior is typically the key.
As a frequent passenger on airplanes I am glad to see United Airlines take this important step to reduce power-distance gaps in its own cockpits. They are focusing on exactly the right thing: approachability. But I predict they will enjoy substantially more benefits than just improved safety experience. Approachable leaders create many other positive changes in organizations, from reduced turnover to increased enthusiasm and organizational citizenship.
Now it’s your turn. Have you ever seen a safety problem caused by a power distance gap? Do you ever notice people afraid to confront their leader? What steps have you taken to “shrink the gap” and encourage someone to speak up about safety or any other issue? Please comment on LinkedIn or Twitter.
“Training pays.”
Seth Godin says this in his recent article on “the infinite return on investment” of talent development and training. He provides this example:
Imagine a customer service rep. Fully costed out, it might cost $5 for this person to service a single customer by phone. An untrained rep doesn’t understand the product, or how to engage, or hasn’t been brought up to speed on your systems. As a result, the value delivered in the call is precisely zero (in fact it’s negative, because you’ve disappointed your customer).
On the other hand, the trained rep easily delivers $30 of brand value to the customer, at a cost, as stated, of $5. So, instead of zero value, there’s a profit to the brand of $25. A comparative ROI of infinity.
And of course, the untrained person doesn’t fall into this trap once. Instead, it happens over and over, many times a day.
I believe this comparative ROI is exponentially greater when you talk about leadership talent development (I know, I know, you can’t have an ROI better than infinity, but I went to law school so cut me some slack). The customer service agent most often handles a customer experience just once or at most a few times in their life cycle. A leader handles the employment experience over and over again with each individual they lead. Being a little better leader pays off again and again.
Why then, do we choose to invest so little (if anything) in the talent development of our leaders?
I hear a lot of answers. Most common is the expense. Not just the cost of training (hard costs and lost time), but those dollars are competing with a lot of other business needs. Others complain they’ve been burned doing training that didn’t “stick” with supervisors. Some fear that once you train someone they might walk out the door, causing you to lose the whole investment.
Godin’s response is the same as mine: consider the alternative. “What’s the danger of NOT training the people who stay?”
You must invest in your leaders if you want your organization to grow, if you want to provide quality employment experience (not to mention a quality customer service experience). Do you want to be successful and, yes, profitable? You better be developing your leaders.
The ROI of Talent Development
The question isn’t whether to invest in developing leaders. The question is how to ensure that investment gets the highest return possible, and that it stays in the company. We humbly submit that your best bet is investing in developing approachable leaders.
Recent research has shown that employees of approachable leaders are 72% less likely to quit their jobs.
Seth Godin and us aren’t the only ones who know the value of training. The Association for Talent Development’s annual State of the Industry Report shows that the number of organizations investing in talent development has increased two years in a row.
Here are a few other statistics from the hundreds of companies that contributed to the report:
- $1,229 – the average direct learning expenditure per employee annually;
- 32 – the average hours each employee spent in training annually;
- 13% – the portion of all training that was spent on Management and Supervisors;
Let’s say you are a 200 employee location with 20 supervisors. This means if you want to be average you will spend around $32,000 per year developing those leaders (you are spending that much, right?)
This ATD report also explains that 25% of companies outsource their talent development, and most of those ask a live facilitator/consultant come in to do the training.
Here is some good news. Four days of delivering our Approachable Leadership Learning System (the Workshop plus follow-up modules) is a significantly lower investment than the average company described above. Not only that, the training sticks. It is practical and simple to understand and apply. It gets proven results (if you haven’t already, grab our eBook on The ROI of Approachable Leaders to see all the numbers).
I recognize that with $30 per barrel of oil a lot of companies are cutting everywhere they can. But just last week I trained the Approachable Leadership workshop to groups of leaders at two different companies. Each has faced huge cutbacks due to the historic drop in energy prices. These companies are doubling down on their leaders during the down time and I guarantee they will be miles ahead of those who are trying to cut their way to success.
I am obviously an avid supporter of training and talent development, and I am biased about ours. There are a lot of great leadership development options out there. The key point is to explore the options and then invest in the one that is right for your company. But whatever you do, make the investment. The ROI might not be infinite, but it is huge.
What has your experience been with developing leaders? Do you have any stories of small leader investments that paid off big dividends? What are some of the things you have tried to make sure that training sticks and has a solid return? Please share your experiences with us on Twitter or LinkedIn. Be sure to #ApproachableLeadership
The way you treat employees directly impacts their quality of work.
People work harder for approachable leaders. It’s a proven way to get better business results. Want to know a related way you treat employees that is just as important? What people believe they can do is a critical factor in performance. This belief is tied directly to their self-concept. Put simply: Winners win.
Recent research from Harvard Business School confirms that, “by activating people’s best-self concepts and highlighting examples of them making extraordinary contributions, we find positive changes in their physiology, creative problem solving, performance under pressure, and social relationships.”
Pretty solid results. So how can you, as a leader, play a part in activating your employees’ “best-self concepts?”
- You remind them of what they are capable of;
- You tell them when they’ve done a good job (or a great job);
- You show them that you trust their ability to take the reigns;
- You give them bigger projects; and, most important,
- You do not micromanage.
This idea of “best-self activation” is a take on the Pygmalion research we point to in our Approachable Leadership workshop. Best-self activation says that our assumptions about ourselves increase our performance. The Pygmalion effect focuses more on how other’s assumptions about us affect our performance. Specifically, that “higher expectations lead to an increase in performance.”
This understanding shows up in the first question of our “3 Questions Tool.” The question we encourage leaders to ask is:
“Do you have what you need?”
When you ask someone if they have what they need you are making one very important assumption: if they had everything they need they would perform great work. Further, if someone is having a performance problem coming at the challenge from this angle tells the person you know this isn’t a personal failure. You’re letting them know you believe in them, that they do amazing work, and that the only thing that could explain any other result is a resource problem.
The other way to think about this is: Nobody wakes up hoping to do a crappy job. If you believe this about every one of your employees you’ll see great changes in behavior.
This is huge. Many leaders can get caught up in the assumption that an employee who is having problems is just a “bad apple.” I’ve caught myself doing this from time to time in my leadership career. But when I look back on those times, I realize that many times my assumption led to me behaving in a distrustful and micromanaging way. Not surprisingly, that kind of behavior builds up resentment and feeds the problems I’m concerned about. Kind of a dumb way to get people performing their best, huh?
What I’ve had to realize on my own journey is that being more approachable means being more proactive. I can’t just assume everyone has everything they need. As leaders, we have a responsibility to ask. Not just once a year or once a quarter – all the time, as a regular conversation.
I know this sounds like a tall order, just another thing to add to your plate. It may seem time consuming and low-reward. But in the end this is your “one thing” as a leader. The other thing you’ll notice is once you start the conversation and follow up a few times the conversation will continue without extra effort. You won’t always have to touch base with everyone. People will start coming to you.
When people feel like winners they win. Problem is in today’s workplace a lot of us don’t feel like winners. That is the number one communication job of leaders – remind people they are winners. Then stand back and watch them win.
Do you have any examples of times your belief in someone held them back? How about times that your belief in someone helped them to perform in ways they didn’t even think possible? Has anyone’s belief in you ever torn you down or raised you up? Share your story with us on LinkedIn or Twitter by clicking one of the buttons below. Be sure to use #ApproachabLeleadership.
Most important strengths of a leader – charisma or individual consideration?
A recent study looked at two of the most admired strengths of a leader – charisma and individual consideration. You may be surprised which one came out on top.
Have you ever gotten a call like this: “All hell is breaking loose here, what should we do?”
I won’t say I love to get that call, but it feels good to step up and handle a situation where a client, coworker or consultant is feeling overwhelmed. Leaders are supposed to be strong, charismatic and have their act together. Never let them see you sweat, right? I’ll admit, I consider it one of my strengths – keeping cool under pressure, calm during the storm.
The study looked at which leadership trait was more likely to support emotional expression at work. Emotional expression is not just about how individuals express their own emotions. It also has to do with how they influence or experience the emotions of others. This is important in the work environment for at least two reasons.
Reason One: You interact with your employees (and they interact with each other).
Reason Two: Your employees interact with your customers.
The fact is “emotions exert an incredibly powerful force on human behavior.” According to Psychology Today, emotions are also associated with “temperament, personality, mood, and motivation.” As the leader of my own small business, I can assure you these are all areas I want my team members (not to mention myself) to have balance.
Which of the strengths of leadership increased emotional expression? Individual consideration. Leadership charisma actually reduced expression of emotions.
An interesting find, isn’t it? One would think that a leader with great personal charm would naturally develop stronger relationships with her employees. I think the kicker here is something our Approachable Leadership Team has been touching on for a while. Leadership isn’t about the leader. It’s about the individuals who work for the leaders.
Of course folks enjoy energy and charm. But charisma isn’t something most people learn. I’m not saying it can’t be developed, but it is more about your own self-confidence and less about your people. To develop a relationship with an individual is a different kind of effort. As a leader, it shows that you care.
Maybe you’re a charismatic leader who is good at getting people to do what you want. But when you look at your relationships with employees or business partners do you feel like something’s missing? Don’t worry, you aren’t alone. The first step to developing these relationship is to be more approachable.
Here are three ways you can start being more approachable today:
- Tone down the charm a bit and get real. Say what is really on your mind, not what the “got it together” leader would say.
- Let them see that you’re not as put together as you come off. Go ahead and let them see you sweat.
- Stop worrying so much about what kind of impression you make. Worry instead about how others are doing. Ask them. Is there anything you can do to make their work better?
Do you have any experience with charismatic versus leaders who give individual consideration? Which side of the scale do you feel is your natural place? Have you seen charismatic leaders with less than stellar work relationships?
We’d love to hear from you. Share your thoughts on LinkedIn or Twitter by clicking one of the boxes below the post. Be sure to use #ApproachableLeadership
After Phil gave CUE’s Fall 2015 Conference attendees a taste of approachability with the Approachable Leadership Workshop, the employee relations organization is officially a believer!
Click here to read CUE, Inc.’s shoutout to Phil or here if you are interested in attending the next AL Workshop (scheduled February 23rd and 24th in Tulsa and OKC).
