Think about your relationships in the workplace. With whom do you enjoy working or seeking advice? Who do you try to avoid? Relationships at work strongly impact the work experience. These relationships may be positive, negative, or both. According to research recently published in the Academy of Management Journal, the quality of work relationships affects employee engagement, commitment to the organization, and more. 
 
Kyle Ehrbardt (University of Colorado Denver) and Belle Rose Ragins (University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee) explored workplace relationships in three large-scale studies (nearly 700 participants total). They tested a model of how work relationships affect organizational concerns. We have “relational needs” that result in varying degrees of “relational attachment.” The degree of relational attachment is related, in turn, to our organizational commitment, work engagement, turnover, absenteeism, and more.
 
They built on the work of William Kahn (2007) who talked about two types of relational needs:

• instrumental support needs – “help with job tasks and/or making sense of the environment"
• personal support needs – “help with personal challenges”

Workplace relationships can help fulfill these two types of needs resulting in a person feeling more connected to others in the workplace (relational attachment).
 
Ehrbardt's and Ragins's findings supported their model: “relational needs fit predicted relational attachment.” Relational attachment predicted organizational commitment, turnover, absenteeism, and life satisfaction.
 
But as they also predicted, work relationships can be “too close for comfort.” When employees get too much support, it can negatively impact relationships. In other words, work relationships are good to some point but at some point they can become intrusive. That point will vary from person to person.
 
Ehrbardt and Ragins suggest managers and organizations recognize that positive workplace relationships can lead to positive organizational outcomes, but managers need good listening skills and emotional intelligence so they do not become too intrusive.
 
My take-aways:
 
1. Ehrbardt and Ragins have provided a useful model for researchers interested in the impact of positive workplace relationships. However there is a flipside, the effect of negative workplace relationships. I would venture the impact of negative workplace relationships is different than just the absence of positive relationships. 
 
2. I see large individual differences here. Some people are very social and naturally build positive relationships at work. Others are less social and may interact as little as possible. In other words, there are significant differences in the relational needs of employees. My guess is, all things being equal, it should be easy to perceive who is which.
 
3. But all things are rarely equal. You could have very strong work relationships where everyone disagrees with how the organization is being run or even the organization’s objectives. For example, a medical facility, to the disagreement of employees, may put profits above patient care. Congruence between employee perceptions and organizational objectives may moderate the impact of the relationships-commitment linkage.
 
4. For organizations, this research shines a light on the importance of positive workplace relationships in discussions of workplace engagement. The most important of these is the relationship with one’s boss. In my consulting and managerial experience, turnover was most often attributable to a poor supervisor. The importance of positive workplace relationships underscores the need for organizations to stay abreast of what managers are doing in the workplace and the organizational climate they create.
 
5. For me the article caused me to look back over my workplace experiences and think about relationships. Many were instrumental making it easier to get things done. Others were more social, some people becoming close friends. As I say in Decoding the Workplace, “the world of work and the world of organizations are worlds of people.” Or as Ehrbardt and Ragins put it, “Relationships are the threads in the fabric of organizational life.”
 
Ehrhardt, K. & Ragins, B. R. (2019). Relational attachment at work: A complementary fit perspective on the role of relationships in organizational life. Academy of Management Journal, 62(1), 248-282.
 
Kahn, W. (2007). Meaningful connections: Positive relationships and attachments at work. In J. E. Dutton & B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation, 189-206. New York: Routledge.
 
Image, "Brainstorming-workplace-coffee", by mohamed_hassan. Image obtained from https://pixabay.com/en/brain-storming-workplace-coffee-3232627/​ Used in accordance with: https://pixabay.com/en/service/license/

© John Ballard, PhD,  2019. All rights reserved.
_______________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. 

Google how to be an effective manager and the results will mostly be about leading people. Effective management is about achieving goals, getting things done. It is easy to say ineffective management is the opposite, that is, failing to achieve goals. But are there other behaviors that characterize ineffective managers?

Wickham Skinner and W. Earl Sasser thought so. Although their Harvard Business Review article is from over 40 years ago, their observations about behavioral characteristics of less effective managers still ring true:

1. accepting conventional company wisdom without question; example, “we always promote from within”  
2. acting too slowly when changes are needed now
3. tolerating subordinates who are ineffective, hinting at improvements needed instead of taking decisive action
4. not challenging the way things are done, “we have always done it this way”
5. not handling priorities
6. not taking calculated risks, lack of “boldness, nerve, and self-confidence”
7. not asking for help or advice when needed
8. not recognizing their own weaknesses 

My take-ways: 

1. Have you seen managers who exhibit these characteristics? I have many times, even managers who had good people skills and were liked by those with whom they worked. Sometimes they were just too busy putting out fires. Sometimes it just seemed that it would be too much trouble and take too much energy to challenge the status quo. Different reasons for different managers.

2. Often the complacency or lack of initiative is a function of organizational culture. What happens if you take risks and fail? The consequences become part of the culture. Challenge conventional wisdom and get shot down? The consequences become part of the culture. Ask for help or advice and then have this seen as a sign of weakness. Again, part of the culture. Culture is difficult to change but if the culture is not what you want it to be, then as leaders we should act to change it. 

3. I wrote in an earlier blog that these characteristics could be used to develop a good questionnaire or scale to measure effectiveness. Years later I realize these might also make good items to help assess culture. To be innovative, to compete, organizations need people who challenge the status quo, make change where change is needed, hold others accountable, and have enough self-confidence to ask for help when needed. To lead is to do more than just the job. 

Skinner, W. & Sasser, W.E. (1977). Managers with impact: Verstile and inconsistent. Harvard Business Review, 55(6), 140-8.

Image, "Multi-tasking-efficiency-manager", by mohamed_hassan. Image obtained from https://pixabay.com/en/multi-tasking-efficiency-manager-2840792/ Used in accordance with: https://pixabay.com/en/service/license/

© John Ballard, PhD,  2019. All rights reserved.
_______________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. 

Good metrics and good use of metrics can increase effectiveness and efficiency in most businesses. Metrics are outcomes and outputs we measure to track and manage processes, operations, or performance in and across business units. How well are your organization and its units using metrics to make positive differences? Are you getting the most from your metrics management?

With today’s technology, there is very little that cannot be measured. For some, the ease of measurement results in an abundance of data that can be mined to improve performance. However, this ease of measurement can also result in so many measures that the most important metrics do not get the attention they should. To stay on top of your metrics and their use, regardless of your function or level in the organization, consider these questions.

1. Do we know our most important metrics? Not all metrics are equal. Every metric should be clearly tied to a goal, an objective, or strategy. Some, more than others, are indicative of strengths and weaknesses, potential problems, and perhaps opportunities. The better you understand your key metrics, the better you understand how your business is functioning.

2. Are we measuring what we need to measure? Measuring CD sales in an MP3 world does not make sense. Stay abreast of changes in your environment, with your competitors, with your customers, with technology. Reevaluate your metrics on a schedule that makes sense for your business. You should be able to answer, “Why are we measuring this?” or ask, “Why are we not measuring this?”

3. Do we know precisely how the values of our metrics are determined? Every metric needs to be operationally defined and easy to understand. You need to know exactly how the quantitative or qualitative information in a metric got there, the source, the procedure, the form. For example, inadvertently changing a form or data entry criterion may unknowingly change a metric. Some metrics may be too complex or not worth the time consumed to produce.

4. Are we measuring what we think we are measuring? Even well-designed metrics may be subject to manipulation out of self-interest.  For example, consider past reports on the manipulation of waiting times at some VA hospitals.

5. Are we evaluating key metrics in a timely manner?  You may have a dashboard that displays key indicators daily or in real time. Or metrics may be the focus of weekly or monthly meetings. Timeliness will be a function of the type of metric, its criticality, and level in the organization. The key is to know if you are reviewing key metrics in sufficient time that corrective measures can be effectively taken if needed.
​
6. Do our employees participate in metrics management?  Buy-in can elevate a metrics program. People in the trenches know, see, and have information that may make measurement better, more reliable, and more useful.  Likewise, sharing metrics may help build a stronger workforce.

The better your metrics and metrics management, the better your decision-making and greater the probability for business success.

Modified from my original article published online, July 9, 2014, in the American Management Association's Playbook. 

Image by Gerd Altmann. Obtained from https://pixabay.com/en/analysis-pay-businessmen-meeting-680572/
No attribution required. 

© John Ballard, PhD,  2019. All rights reserved.
_______________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. 

To have a good relationship is one thing; to have a good partnership is another. One view of integrative leadership encourages leaders to (1) cultivate good relationships and then (2) nurture these relationships into “full-fledged partners.”
 
In the March/April 2016 issue of EXPLORE: The Journal of Science and Healing, Bonnie Horrigan provided tips for building good relationships (see my previous blog) and then tips for developing those relationships into partners. Here I summarize her tips for leaders concerning partnerships.

1. Ensure people understand and embrace the organization’s vision. “Explain the benefits that will be derived when the vision is realized.” (p. 139)
2. “Create opportunities for others to experience the vision,” to own it.
3. “Encourage new ideas about old things and promote innovation.”
4. “Extend people the space and authority to do their jobs”. . . thus creating “active ‘partners’ rather than passive ‘employees.’ “
5. “Celebrate accomplishments” both big and small, saying thanks “for jobs well done.”

My take-aways:
 
On #1. Employees should understand and embrace both the mission and the vision. The Society for Human Resource Management differentiates mission and vision as follows:
 
A mission statement explains reason for existence, what organization does, its intent, purpose. "A vision statement describes the organization as it would appear in a future successful state . . . An effective vision statement is inspirational and aspirational.” 
 
My guess is that there are enormous differences here among organizations. Do you have a mission statement? A vision statement? Are they current? Still valid? Do people truly understand the mission? The vision? Are they more than words on a business card or sign? Have you hired, developed, and rewarded to create an environment where people want to be part of achieving the mission and vision? 
 
On #2. Part of experiencing the vision is recognizing those moments, those events, in accomplishing the mission where the vision can be glimpsed.  Perception is important here. Without the leader acknowledging or communicating how the current outcome represents what we want to achieve, those experiences of the vision might not be recognized. There will be times when people or teams far exceed current expectations and demonstrate what is indeed possible, the vision. These moments need to be recognized, rewarded, and celebrated.
 
On #3. This seems straightforward but in my consulting experience it was not. I consistently found people had great ideas to solve problems, to innovate, but management was not receptive. A common remark from managers: “If they had good ideas, then why aren’t they in this job and not me.” Leaders build organizational climates and cultures where people share insights and ideas and are rewarded for them.
 
On #4. Empowering employees by letting them make decisions can be motivating for many. In Decoding the Workplace (pp. 33-34) I tell the story of a hotel clerk who did not have the authority to make relatively small decisions that would increase customer satisfaction. Her supervisor had approval authority and was often not available. When the hotel became part of a different hotel chain, she was given that authority and her job satisfaction greatly increased – and probably resulted in more satisfied customers. Even so, it should be noted that not everyone wants more authority.

#5 Herbert Shepard had eight “rules of thumb for change agents.” In a 2012 blog I proposed a ninth, Rule IX: Celebrate the moment. It is easy to let moments, big and small, pass by without celebrating when celebrating would have been good. Sometimes leaders fail to celebrate the successes made possible by those they lead. I had an older graduate student who led an organization that had a very successful year. After we discussed celebrating the moment, he realized that he had not done this with his company, that he barely acknowledged the great year before focusing on the next. The next Monday when he went to work, he corrected that situation. They celebrated the moment. Celebrate the moments, large and small, that unfold to you.

Horrigan, B. (2016). Integrative leadership means partnering. EXPLORE, 12 (2), 139-140. 

In memory of Bonnie Horrigan. Modified from my blog posted April 1, 2016.

Image, "Bonnie Horrigan", courtesy of the journal EXPLORE: The Journal of Science and Healing

© John Ballard, PhD,  2019. All rights reserved.
_______________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. 

Each January I pose the question: What book are you reading now? My experience is the best leaders read. They always have a book from which they develop insights and opinions. And not just books about management or businesses but also books of fiction or creative nonfiction.
 
Lifelong learning is essential to grow as a leader. A habit of reading books is important to that growth. What role do books play in your life? In your learning? Making time to read books is important. I usually have several books in my study that I am working through. On long car trips I enjoy audio books. I have friends who like audio books best. I was very pleased that my book Decoding the Workplace made it to audio in 2018.  
 
The book I enjoyed most in 2018 was the surprising Convenience Store Woman by Sayaka Murata translated from Japanese by Ginny Tapley Takemori. Working in a convenience store, Keiko Furukura finds purpose, fulfillment, and scripts for social interactions while her friends and family encourage her to find a "proper" career. A great read with insights on finding meaning in the workplace and life. 

In 2019 I look forward to reading Êloge de Gantner, a folio about my favorite artist, the late Bernard Gantner. A painter and lithographer in the Alsace region of France, Gantner's landscapes have affected how I see the natural world around me. Great art.

The folio is in French. Foreign languages are not my strength. As my teacher Mrs. Suther said to me several weeks into my first high school French course: "Johnny, I had heard such nice things about you and have been looking forward to having you in my class. You are such a disappointment." Fortunately though, the aptitude for language, while skipping me, landed nicely with my two children. Today we have Google Translate and various apps so I will be able to read Êloge de Gantner.

“The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them”, Mark Twain. 

Or as the comedian Groucho Marx said, “Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.”   
 
What are you reading?

Modified from my previous annual January blogs about the importance of reading,

Image, "Route en Forêt" by Bernard Gantner. Photo © John Ballard

© John Ballard, PhD,  2019. All rights reserved.
_______________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. 

This time of the year I like to revisit a Christmas classic from Thomas Stetz of Hawaii Pacific University, “What Santa Claus Can Learn from I-O Psychology: Eight Performance Management Recommendations.” The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist originally published the article in 2012 and it can be read in full at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology’s website. Here I will summarize (and elaborate upon) Dr. Stetz’s astute observations and recommendations concerning Santa Claus’s questionable performance management system.

1. “Develop refined rating scales.” How does Santa determine whether a child is “naughty” or “nice”? What is naughty? What is nice? How can a child improve performance if the child does not have clear guidelines and examples of the behaviors expected?
2. “Develop SMART performance objectives.” A child needs clear goals to be successful at “nice,” goals that are “specific, measureable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound.” Ideally these would flow from the family strategic plan.
3. “Increase feedback throughout the year.” It’s either a lump of coal or presents one day a year. 364 days with no feedback is just not acceptable in the 21st Century. If feedback is too much for Santa to handle, he should delegate and train others, such as parents. 
4. “Establish a naughty review board.” There may be review boards in organizations that are naughty; this recommendation concerns grievances. What’s a child to do if deemed naughty and considers this an unfair assessment? Is it fair to not have a grievance procedure, especially in the absence of feedback?
5. “Get a handle on rating inflation.” Let’s be real. It seems most children get a “nice” rating and the associated benefits. Refined rating scales would definitely help here.
6. “Explain how he obtains his information.” This one puzzled me as a kid. How does he know if I am being naughty or nice? As Stetz’s very appropriately noted, “at least a consent-to-monitoring statement should be made.”
7. “Decide between developmental or administrative evaluations.” “Under the current system how can naughty children improve. They can’t” (p. 36). There is no feedback. Children simply did not know how to improve their performance. Santa’s performance system is administrative with only “rewards and punishments.”
8. “Institute self-assessments.” Instead of writing letters to Santa once a year, which not all children do, there should be periodic self-assessments from children. This could be an online system with elf’s perhaps providing feedback. Currently children have little opportunity to speak to the naughty or nice question with relevant supporting data.

Stetz concluded Santa would do well to employ an I-O psychologist.
 
My take-away:
 
Can any of the recommendations for Santa’s performance system be applied to your organization? If so, 2019 might be a good year to work toward improvements. Feedback is key to employee development and organizational growth and renewal.
 
Best wishes for the holiday season and a great 2019.
 
Stetz, T. A. (2012). What Santa Claus can learn from I-O psychology: Eight performance management recommendations. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 49 (3), 35-37.
 
Image, Santa, by Jo-B. Image obtained from https://pixabay.com/en/santa-claus-christmas-parties-joy-1827265/ Used in accordance with: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en
​
© John Ballard, PhD, 2018. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. Now also available as an audiobook. 

What does it mean to “find your passion?” A Google search using that phrase in quotation marks yields over 9 million results. “Find your passion” is advice you have probably heard, read, or given. But what does it mean? More important, what do you believe about finding your passion? Do you think interests are innate just waiting to be discovered (fixed)? Or do you think strong interests grow and develop (growth)? 
 
In a 2018 study in Psychological Science, Paul O’Keefe (Yale-NUS), Carol Dweck (Stanford), and Gregory Walton (Stanford) discussed these two implicit theories of passion, fixed versus growth, and reported several experimental studies. They suggested how one thinks about passion has practical implications. 

If a person views interests as fixed, then once interests are found:

• less likely other interests will be explored
• more likely to expect continuing motivation to be high
• less likely to anticipate difficulties or frustration in pursuit of passion

On the other hand, if a person view interests as developing, then:

• “strong interest in one area does not preclude developing interests elsewhere”
• more likely to understand “development may sometimes be difficult”
• more likely to be maintain interest when facing frustration and difficulties

Their research supported these implications. People with a fixed mindset were more likely to experience decline in interest once pursuit of interest was found to be difficult. O'Keefe and his colleagues suggested, “Urging people to find their passion may lead them to put all their eggs in one basket but then to drop that basket when it becomes difficult to carry.” 

Like most psychological research, the participants in the studies were college students. The authors called for future research exploring their findings in “real-life settings” and among different cultures. 
 
My take-aways:
 
1.  I find passion to be a very interesting subject and enjoyed this paper. I concur with the authors that more research is needed. Here are some of my thoughts:

• Can one have both fixed and growth mindsets about passion? Some passions may be innate, got to pursue, whereas other passions develop out of life experiences. 
• Can we measure what one thinks about passion? There are different scales for different types of passionate engagement but is there a more global measure? Perhaps some people tend to find or develop passions whereas others never do.
• If people understand whether they have a fixed or growth mindset about passion, will that help them “find their passion”? 
• What are the implications for counseling and coaching? 
• Does having a passion lead to a better quality of life than not having a passion? Or vice versa?

2. I found this article good for personal reflection. In high school I became very interested in astronomy, learned the stars, plotted meteors, and tried unsuccessfully to photograph a lunar eclipse (would have helped to have loaded film). I applied to colleges and universities to major in astronomy, astrophysics, or physics. My passion was to be an astronomer. But then I encountered calculus, found it more difficult than expected, and at the urging of a psychology professor, pursued another interest – the inner workings of the mind instead of the outer workings of the universe. 
3. So what is your passion? Your passions? 
 
O’Keefe, P. A., Dweck, C. S., & Walton, G. M. (2018). Implicit theories of interest: Finding your passion or developing it. Psychological Science, 29(10), 1653-1664.
 
Image, "Untitled", by Isucc. Image obtained from https://pixabay.com/en/adult-business-businessman-cartoon-1260380/  Used in accordance with: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en
​
© John Ballard, PhD, 2018. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. Now also available as an audiobook. 

How does a narcissistic leader affect an organization? In Decoding the Workplace I differentiated healthy narcissistic leaders from unhealthy ones, stating “healthy narcissistic leaders understand their strengths and know when to seek the advice of others” (pp. 105-106). In a 2014 blog I shared findings from a literature review of narcissists.
 
In a 2018 The Leadership Quarterly article, Charles O’Reilly III (Stanford), Bernadette Doerr (UC,Berkeley), and Jennifer Chatman (UC,Berkeley) concluded “although some researchers have suggested that narcissistic CEOs may have a positive influence on organizational performance . . . a growing body of evidence suggests that organizations led by narcissistic CEOs experience considerable downsides.” Their research focused on “grandiose narcissism” in which the narcissist is highly assertive, extroverted, with high self-esteem. Characteristics include:

•  Inflated sense of entitlement
•  Unrealistic sense of personal superiority
•  Viewing others as inferior
•  Overconfidence
• “Willingness to manipulate others”
• “Hostility and aggression when challenged”

In reviewing studies of narcissistic leaders, they found narcissistic leaders:

• “More likely to emerge as leaders”
• “Charming,” good first impressions
•  More persistent at focusing on task at hand
• “More willing to take chances”
• “Overly confident about own judgment”
• “Discount negative feedback”
• “See others as less competent”
•  Pursue activities and strategies that are self-enhancing.
• “Believe themselves less vulnerable to being penalized for their overconfidence”
• “Lower in integrity”
• “More likely to engage in unethical behavior”
•  More likely “to engage in sexual harassment”
•  More likely to bully others
•  Inhibit the exchange of information among group members

Studies indicate narcissistic CEOs more likely to:

• “Manipulate corporate earnings”
• “Aggressively avoid paying taxes”
•  Produce financial reports “with lower accounting quality”
• “Misreport financial status”
•  To “be at risk of committing fraud”

O’Reilly and his colleagues reported two experimental studies and a field study of 32 technology companies. Their field study found companies with more narcissistic CEOs had “more lawsuits filed against them and the lawsuits” endured “for longer periods of time.” Companies “with more narcissistic CEOs are more likely to be sued and this litigation will take longer to be resolved.”
 
My take-aways:
 
1.  Hiring: It may be difficult to identify unhealthy narcissists when hiring. References may or may not be forthcoming with accurate assessments. In interviewing notice how much credit the potential hire gives to others when discussing accomplishments. There is advice online about how to tell when hiring if someone is a narcissist but I would need to see the research before recommending.
 
2. Promoting: Interestingly highly narcissistic leaders get promoted. They charm, take credit for accomplishments, and so forth. Where input can be obtained from subordinates, such as in a 360-degree assessment, the organization should obtain more information and perhaps a more accurate picture. 
 
3. Managing: Those who supervise a highly narcissistic individual who is damaging the morale or financial health of the organization should do their jobs. Be accountable and hold that individual accountable. Corporate boards should do likewise. 
 
O'Reilly III, C. A., Doerr, B., & Chatman, J. A. (2018). "See you in court": How CEO narcissism increases firms' vulnerability to lawsuits. The Leadership Quarterly, 29, 365-378.
 
Image, "Narcissism", by Jills. Image altered from the original image at https://pixabay.com/en/narcissism-narcissist-shadow-bad-3752409/  Used in accordance with: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en
​
© John Ballard, PhD, 2018. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. Now also available as an audiobook. 

Think about your workplace. Are people happy? Engaged? How is their well-being? In the past decade much has been written about happiness, engagement, and well-being in the workplace. While there is probably some overlap, these are different terms with different meanings – and the definitions of each may vary with different sources.
 
To celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Association for Psychological Science (APS), the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science asked authors of the 30 most-cited articles across all APS journals to contribute an essay about their research. 23 did. One who did was Carol Ryff (University of Wisconsin-Madison) whose work on well-being has been impetus to over 750 studies worldwide. Three of her studies (two with colleagues) have been cited by other researchers over 20,000 times. 
 
Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia is the philosophical inspiration for Ryff’s model. I discussed eudaimonia in one of my first blogs six years ago: “While the definitions vary somewhat, most come down to a distinction between hedonic or pleasure-based well-being and eudaemonic or meaningful, purposive well-being.” Happiness is pleasure-based. Eudaimonia is about knowing yourself and becoming what you can be.
 
So what is Ryff’s model? Well-being has six components:

• Purpose in life: “being meaningfully engaged”
• Personal growth: realizing one’s potential
• Self-acceptance: “experiencing positive self-regard” 
• Positive relations: “being connected to others”
• Autonomy: self-determining, independent
• Environmental mastery: “being capable”, competent

Ryff’s Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWB) has been subject to numerous psychometric studies, translated into other languages worldwide, and used in many research studies. While psychometricians may debate some of the finer points of scale construction (some overlap among components), the scale has high reliability and has lead to meaningful research across disciplines, especially health studies. In the workplace Ryff noted well-being studies related to “whether one was engaged in paid or unpaid work, the degree to which work was stressful, and how work life enhanced or undermined family life.”
 
My take-aways:
 
1.  I was not familiar with Ryff’s model until now. However, I am familiar with the components of the model and I have been writing about them for years directly and indirectly. Here are a few examples:

• Purpose in life - Purpose & Life Themes, On Purpose and Longevity, Christensen, Frankl, & Rychlak
• Personal growth – Maximizing Human Potential, Living a Meaningful Life, Carli Lloyd
• Self-acceptance – Self-compassion, Self-compassion Revisited
• Positive relations – Compassion & the Leader, Value of Chit-Chat
• Autonomy – Authenticity & Autonomy, Autonomy & Burnout
• Environmental mastery – Job Crafting, Letterman & Person-Job Match, Anita Emoff

 
2. Ryff listed several psychologists as “theoretical underpinnings” of the model, including Abraham Maslow. Having read Maslow extensively, I can relate Maslow to much of the model. His hierarchy of relative prepotency (the need hierarchy) is about growth. The higher the well-being, the more higher level needs are satisfied. Ryff’s model fits into the positive psychology/management movement as well as humanistic psychology/management.

3. So where are the practical applications? Well-being is probably related to workplace engagement. According to Gallup, only about one third of employees are actively engaged in the workplace. Over half are “not engaged” with the rest “actively disengaged.” A well-being metric might be useful in assessing psychological health of an organization, or parts thereof. Most importantly, self-assessment and understanding one’s own well-being through reflection could potentially help anyone but especially those who lead, those who set the example. 

Ryff, C. (2018). Well-being with soul: science in pursuit of human potential. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 242-248. 
 
Image, "Aristotle", by Nick Thompson. Image slightly reduced from the original image at https://www.flickr.com/photos/pelegrino/6884873348  Used with permission: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
​
© John Ballard, PhD, 2018. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. Now also available as an audiobook. 

​Are you less productive because of your manager’s behavior and actions? Do you feel that some of your boss-inspired projects are a waste of time? Are others wasting time because of something your boss said? My guess is that managers wasting their employees’ time is common in most organizations.  
 
In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Bob Sutton (professor at Stanford) discussed the ways leaders unintentionally waste the time of their employees. Here are some insights I gleaned from this article, ways managers may cause employees to be less productive. 

• Adopting fads: Jumping on the latest management fad or program, thus disrupting the workplace with “a new round of training, meetings and paperwork.” Employees may react with “fad surfing” and do the minimums to support the initiative while concentrating on getting their jobs done. 
• Not delegating: As organizations grow or change, there is a limit to how much one person can do. Leaders may fail to realize they are overextended and thus fail to delegate responsibilities. They invest their time in tasks others should be doing (“cookie licking”).
• Rewarding wrong people: Boat-rockers (people who always seek to improve operations, challenge old practices) often are not rewarded to the extent that “status quo” employees are. Boat-rockers facilitate organizational learning and renewal. 
• Making “throw away” comments: Some employees (trucklers) will move into action to make something happen based on a boss’s offhand comment, a reaction the boss may never have intended (“Executive magnification”).

Sutton’s advice to leaders: 

• Be skeptical if all news is good news.
• Be careful in making offhand comments or minor complaints. But if you do, add “Please don’t do anything, I am just thinking out loud.”
• Act on employees’ suggestions, feedback, don’t just give “lip service.”
• Reward employees “who end old, obsolete and effective programs and practices” as “star employees.”

 
My take-aways:
 
1. Bob Sutton nails it. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard this employee complaint about time wasted, well let’s just say I’d have a nice wad of cash. Just last week a friend told me about all the time being wasted in his organization because of a fad training program of little or no value in his workplace. Faddism is a problem in organizations. We need more evidence-based evaluations of programs and initiatives, more evidence-based decisions.
 
2. Leaders should work on self-awareness and the effect of our words on others. There will be people eager to please and who will act on your words, regardless of your intent. Self-monitor. Incorporate Sutton’s suggested phrase about thinking out loud into your verbal scripts. I recall in my Air Force days a general commenting offhandedly on the color of a gym. Next visit it was the color he was wondering about. He had just been thinking out loud – and was not happy about the time or expense wasted by those who had it painted. 
 
Sutton, R. L. (2018, August 13). How bosses often waste their employees’ time. The Wall Street Journal. 
 
Image, "Wasting Time", by C x 2. –Image slightly reduced inside from the original image at https://www.flickr.com/photos/c_x_2/23853285506  Used with permission: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
​
© John Ballard, PhD, 2018. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Decoding the Workplace “deals with principles and practices that are timeless . . . Is this a must-have for managers and would-be managers? Yes.” Ron Riggio, Book Review, Academy of Management Learning & Education, June, 2018. Now also available as an audiobook.