Do you know your purpose? In a 2012 best-seller Clayton Christensen (Harvard Business School) and his co-authors posed the question, “How will you measure your life?”  People vary in how a sense of purpose affects their lives.

• Some people have lives of purpose but cannot articulate what that purpose is.
• Others struggle with determining their purpose.
• A few know exactly what their lives are about.
• Many just live their lives as they unfold without thinking about purpose and possibilities.

60 years ago AT&T committed to a 20-year longitudinal study of its managers. In 1988 Ann Howard and Douglas Bray reported the results in the classic book Managerial Lives in Transition. One assessment was about purpose. Each manager had a 2-4 hour interview with a psychologist in which the manager just talked about life. The eminent psychologist Joseph Rychlak analyzed detailed notes from over 350 interviews. Rychlak (1982) identified nine major life themes that emerged in conversation, patterns that reflected priorities and interests. Here are those themes in my words (as I listed in an earlier blog):

• Occupational. People for whom work was the true center of their lives. They talked mainly about their work and getting ahead. 
• Financial-acquisitive: People occupied with accumulating wealth, property and other possessions. People with this theme desired symbols of their success. 
• Locale-residential: For some, where they lived was the key. They liked their city, their community, their part of the state. Living where they lived was what they wanted most.  
• Service: People heavily involved in community activities (of a nonreligious nature), or serving the nation in the National Guard or Reserves.
• Ego-functional: Those mostly interested in self-development, such as pursuing more education, reading, physical activity, health.
• Religious-humanism: People engaged with their church, synagogue, mosque, or expressing humanistic values.
• Recreational-social: For some, enjoying their hobbies, going to movies, or socializing occupied their time. Work was a means to an end.  
• Marital-familial: People talking mostly about their spouse, children, in-laws. 
• Parental-familial: People talking mostly about their parents, siblings, old friends.

In the best-selling The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey (1989) conveyed pretty much the same ideas but in more popular language. Instead of life themes, he discussed centers or centeredness stating, “Each of us has a center, though we usually don’t recognize it as such.” Covey’s centers were spouse, family, money, work, possessions, pleasure, friend, enemy, church, self-centered, or principle centered. Given a list of Rychlak’s life themes and Covey’s centers, it is easy to match them. Only enemy centered seems unique to Covey.

Take-aways:

1.  My guess is that you may be able to identify your dominant life theme or the life themes of others. My dad was born and raised in the Piedmont of North Carolina. After he came back from the Korean War, he was stationed briefly in Monterey, California. He was discharged and returned to the Tar Heel State. Decades later I visited Monterey while doing some consulting. I was overwhelmed with the beauty of Monterey Bay and Carmel. I called my father. “Dad, this place is so beautiful. Why didn’t you just settle here?” After a short pause, he answered: “I missed my home.” My dad could not leave the red dirt of the Piedmont.

2. While we probably have a dominant life theme if we look closely, life themes may vary across a lifetime.  The person for whom the work is primary may find that over time family becomes most important.

3. Purpose and success are related. Howard and Bray found life themes were good predictors of the level managers would achieve over 20 years. Not surprisingly, those managers with the highest scores on the occupational life theme advanced fast and far. In the first several years the life theme differences among managers were small but around the fourth year, occupational life theme scores started to move apart. By year seven, the occupational life theme corresponded to the highest managerial level eventually to be attained. Those with the highest scores were headed to the senior levels whereas those with the lowest scores were destined to stay at first level managers. In many, if not most, organizations, those who “eat, live, and breathe their jobs” are more likely to rise to the top.
 
Adapted from Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations.
 
Bray, D. W., & Howard, A. (1988). Managerial lives in transition. New York: Guilford.
Christensen, C. M., Allworth, J., & Dillon, K. (2012). How will you measure your life?. New York: HarperCollins.
Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 habits of highly efiective people. New York: Fireside. 
Rychlak, J. F. (1982). Personality and life-style of young male managers: A logical learning theory analysis. Elsevier.
           
© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review



 

A recent blog at www.tinypulse.com had the caption, “Managers need to do everything within their power to keep their employees happy in the aftermath of a mass layoff.” The blog by Sabrina Son was titled “So How Exactly Are You Supposed to Motivate Your Staff After Sharing the Bad News?” 

The blog suggested:

1. Keep people informed about the whys of the decision.
2. Conduct small groups oriented toward future.
3. Listen and address concerns.
4. Be empathetic.
5. “Tell your workers why they made the cut by recognizing the strengths they bring to the team.”
6. “Be courteous and gracious.”

 
The blog noted, “no matter how they appear on the outside, chances are your employees will be torn on the inside.”
 
My take-aways:
 
1. Any significant organizational change, including downsizing, will cause bereavement in many employees. Bereavement simply means a person is deprived of something. Usually we think of that as grieving but it could also be joyful. I am reminded of a woman who tragically lost her husband but showed no remorse. Her reaction: “Now I don’t have to divorce the horse’s rear end.” Some people will be pro-change and expect to benefit.
 
2. But for many, the sense of loss will initiate Kübler-Ross’s classic stages of grieve: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and finally acceptance. The process may be short or very long depending on the person and the situation. Leaders should understand this is not business as usual. Human relations should be part of the planning and mental services may be considered. Son’s blog acknowledges that employees may be “torn on the inside.”
 
4. I agree with the list above except for #5. The employees may know that some of the best workers were fired. Employees know best who contributes and who doesn’t. Many factors besides individual skill sets and productivity can contribute to layoff decisions.
 
5. Job satisfaction and high employee engagement are desirable goals. Management can affect some factors affecting these but ultimately happiness comes from within the individual; it's not externally created. Empathy, active listening, and acting on concerns are all important. Where possible, try not to think of people as costs. Think of them as assets. Hire well, invest in people, and reward – one formula for success.

Image, "Don't grieve. anything you Lose Come Round in Another Form" by Marcela.
Retrieved from: https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcelamcgreal/18338078549
Used with permission: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.

Author of Decoding the Workplace, BEST CAREER BOOK Next Generation Indie Book Awards.
 _________________________
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review

Are there differences among people that predispose some toward becoming leaders? In the first half of the last century, researchers tried to find traits common to leaders. The idea was leaders were born. When this approach produced mixed results, researchers moved on in the 1950s and 1960s to identifying behaviors of leaders, the classic studies at Ohio State and Michigan. We concluded leadership was mainly situational.
 
But are there traits that might differentiate potential for leadership? Robert House and Mary Baetz  (1979) suggested it makes sense that some individual differences play a role in leadership. 

Leadership is a social process. It occurs with respect to others. Therefore leaders are more likely to have:

• social skills
• speaking skills 
• a predisposition to be influential

​Leadership occurs in relation to accomplishing goals. Therefore leaders may have more:

• intelligence
• task-related ability
• energy  

​
My take-aways:

1. Leadership is clearly a social process so factors affecting social interaction should be important in leading. I think of great leaders and most were superb speakers.

2. Energy is not a topic that I have read about in the academic leadership literature. But it makes sense, especially if you look at the biographies of great leaders. People have different levels of energy. I have been amazed at times in my life by people who seem to do it all, do it all well, and have time left over. You have probably known a few. You may be one. About 1% to 3% of the population need only four hours of sleep a night. These people seem to do so much they appear to have a permanently installed “on” button. 

3. Research focusing on these six factors and leadership might produce interesting results. My guess is most of us can identify these factors in leaders we know. Or in ourselves.
         
Robert J. House and Mary L. Baetz, “Leadership: Some Empirical Generalizations and New Research Directions,” in Research in Organizational Behavior Vol.1, ed. Barry M. Staw (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1979), 341-423.

Adapted from Decoding the Workplace, Best Career Book - Next Generation Indie Book Awards 2016.

Image “Leader of the Pack” by Sudosurootdev.
Obtained from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leader123.jpg
Used with permission: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en

© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
________________________
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

Does the sex of a leader affect the bottom-line of an organization? At a bar after a few drinks, you might encounter differences in opinions. The political correct answer is "of course not." But what really is the answer. That is an empirical question.
 
Over 25 years ago I took a hard look at this question with a graduate student, Jane Farrell. I will state my bias up front. I think the management style and effectiveness of all people in leadership positions varies widely, far more than it might between men and women – and frankly I doubted that our research would show a difference. As a social scientist, I put my bias on the shelf and collected data. What is the relationship between sex of the leader and the bottom-line?
 
We examined 20 years of studies using Psychological Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, and the Defense Technical Information Center. Additionally we did a manual search of several academic journals. We were conducting a meta-analysis, which looks at results across studies and computes the average effect size. We identified 70 studies. Our criteria for including a study were (1) measures of group performance under both male and female leaders and (2) enough detail that we could calculate an effect size. Of the 70 studies, only 9 met our criteria. Some were field studies; several, laboratory.
 
The average effect size was .08 with a variance of .03. Given the small effect size we concluded it does not really matter to the bottom-line whether the leader is a woman or man. It is the person and that person’s leadership that matters.
 
My take-aways:
 
1.  Many studies have been done in the past 25 years relating to the sex of the leader. Researchers have studied many factors but I have not found one asking our question, the relationship between sex of the leader and the bottomline. More recent research by others has shown the positive effect of women on the decision making of corporate boards.
 
2. The most important criterion for any manager is results. Results can shape opportunities. We were surprised how few studies had been conducted focusing on the leader’s sex and results. On the other hand, it may be a positive sign that this is no longer seen as a topic worth researching.
 
3. At the time of this study, I grew tired of hearing less-than-positive comments about women leaders from both men and women. It is the character of leaders that matters, their attitudes toward followers, their authenticity, the level of trust they create, and their ability to truly listen. Both women and men have the potential to be great leaders.
 
Ballard, J. A., & Farrell, J. A.  (1989, August).  Group performance and sex of the leader: A meta-analysis.  Paper presented at the 97th annual convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.

Image “Women Lead” by geralt. Obtained from pixabay. Public domain: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en

© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace, BEST CAREER BOOK Next Generation Indie Book Awards.
 
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
 
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

Many leaders do not make a distinction between organizational climate and organizational culture. Most organizational behavior scholars do. I see climate and culture related but with important differences. As a consultant and as a manager, I have found climate much easier to change. Culture is deeply embedded and very difficult to change.
 
Schneider, Ehrhart, and Macey wrote an excellent review of organizational climate and culture for the 2013 in the Annual Review of Psychology. The difference in their words:

• Organizational climate - concerned with  “the meaning employees attach to the policies, practices, and procedures they experience and the behaviors they observe being rewarded, supported,  and expected” (p. 381) 
• Organizational culture – concerned with “implicit values, beliefs, and assumptions that employees infer guide behavior, and they base these inferences on the stories, myths, and socialization experiences they have and the behaviors they observe (especially on the part of leaders) that prove to be useful and promote success” (p. 381).

They noted that executives commonly use the term culture for both and “have little concern for the distinctions” (p. 378).  What is important to executives:

• Knowing the culture: if you know your culture, you can compare it with the culture of other organizations, such as those in the same industry, and benchmark.
• Changing the culture: “Somewhat limited direct influence on effecting change” but can initiate interventions “to reduce gap between existing and desired cultures” (p. 379).
• Leveraging culture for competitive advantage: Make culture an asset through “unique mission statement enacted by support for the unique processes necessary to embed the mission’s values . . .” (p. 380).

 
My take-aways:
 
1. Leaders may find it useful to see climate and culture differently. Leaders at every level affect climate profoundly:

• the degree to which employees participate in decision-making
• the level of employee engagement,
• aspects of job satisfaction
• factors affecting workplace stress

Studies show that replacing a manager perceived negatively by employees with a manager perceived positively can change the climate. Climate can be changed. Culture – very difficult.
 
2.  Organizational feedback surveys are a good way to assess aspects of climate. I used these for many years as a consultant. Gather the information, summarize, and then cascade back through the organization. Where issues are identified, form action teams to work the issues. Do these annually and demonstrate that they have a positive impact and each year the quality of the feedback will improve.
 
3. In The Optimistic Workplace Shawn Murphy noted that “people in positive work environments outperform those who work in negative work climates by 10 to 30 percent” (p. 9). Most importantly Murphy lays out a roadmap for leaders, even those not in leadership positions, to effect positive workplace climate change through workplace attitudes and behaviors. If you want to change the climate of your workplace, this is a good place to start.
 
4. In Decoding the Workplace I discuss the impact of culture and how difficult it is to change: “It is the bedrock of the organization and it could take an earthquake to shift the landscape” (p. 93). Culture is pervasive. We are like fish in water unaware of the water. “Culture gives members of an organization a common lens to look through to make sense of events around them” (p. 97). We can often see the surface aspects of culture if we are attentive but the underlying assumptions may be hard to see. 
 
5. For leaders looking for a competitive advantage through culture, I suggest taking a good look at how employees are treated. Do you see employees as costs or as assets? The organization’s underlying assumption about its people is telling. As Wayne Cascio (University of Colorado – Denver) has demonstrated, treating employees as costs can result in layoffs often with “disastrous” consequences, especially in knowledge-based organizations. I highly recommend his book, Responsible Restructuring.
 
Ballard, J. A. (2015). Decoding the workplace: 50 keys to understanding people in organizations. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
 
Cascio, W. F. (2002). Responsible restructuring: Creative and profitable alternatives to layoffs. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
 
Murphy, S. (2015). The optimistic workplace: Creating an environment that energizes everyone. New York: AMACON.
 
Scheider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture.  Annual review of psychology, 64 (361-388).
 
Image “Office Work” by Veronica Therese. Used with permission, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
 _________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace, BEST CAREER BOOK Next Generation Indie Book Awards.
 
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
 
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd
​

Our world is perceptual. You may be the best performer who has ever been in your position, but your boss may perceive your work very differently. Sometimes employees receive feedback that is surprising, feedback totally inconsistent with their self-perceptions. As I wrote in Decoding the Workplace, “how others view you in the world will determine much of your success at work and in life. Perceptions affect job opportunities, relationships, performance, promotions, physical health, mental health, and more” (p. 23).
 
Some perceptions seem to be innate. We tend to perceive taller people and more attractive people as more competent, and thus they tend to be more successful in obtaining promotions and opportunities. Some of these perceptions are based on sex-related real differences. One sex-related difference we usually do not consider is the pitch of our voice. Pitch is the rate at which our vocal cords vibrant. Men have thicker, longer vocal cords and lower pitch. On average women’s vocal cords vibrant twice as fast as men and hence the higher pitch. Pitch is one of the largest sex-related differences between men and women.
 
David Puts (Penn State) talked about pitch and sex differences at a symposium in 2015 at the International Convention of Psychological Science meeting in Amsterdam. Puts described the physiology of pitch, its probable evolutionary role in human mate selection, and implications for the workplace.

• We tend to lower the pitch of our voice when we command others to do something; we raise the pitch when asking questions.
• We tend to perceive people with lower pitch as leaders; we treat with more respect. 
• A 1 Hertz decrease in pitch may increase annual salary by $8500.
• Pitch may play a role in the socio-economic prospects for women since most have higher pitch.

Puts’ work and that of others suggest leaders should be aware of a possible, unintentional bias based on the sound of a voice.
 
My take-aways:
 
1. There is a growing body of research that supports the role of voice pitch in workplace success. Duke University business professors found CEOs with deeper voices ran larger companies and earned larger salaries.
 
2. My own experience has been that people with voices with lower pitch tend to be perceived as more confident, both men and women. Research has shown confidence consistently as a leadership trait.
 
3. If you have a voice with a higher pitch, you may be able to lower the pitch with practice. When you talk, notice where the air vibrates in your mouth. The farther back in your mouth and throat the vibration, the deeper the voice sounds. 
 
4. I think the larger issue here is the unintentional bias that may exist in the workplace that limits opportunities for women and some men, not based on ability but the sound of their voices. As leaders this should enter into our judgments and decisions. We should not unintentionally deny opportunities to those who might be very successful given the opportunity.

Puts, D. (March, 2015). Human sexual selection: What our voices tell us. Paper presented at the International Convention of Psychological Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 

© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
__________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace, BEST CAREER BOOK Next Generation Indie Book Awards.
 
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
 
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

For the past four years I have shared insights from academic research, popular media, and workplace insights in my blog, Leadership, Management, and Life in the Workplace. I thank those who have followed my blogs over the years and welcome those new to my website. And I thank those of you who have read Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations, just announced as the 2016 winner best career book by the "sundance" of indie books.

Recently I have been asked what are my favorite blogs from the past four years. An interesting question I thought. So here are some of my favorites in no particular order. Somewhere in these you may find something useful. 

• The importance of beneficiary contact  
• Finding time to be proactive
• Creating a successful workplace
• The importance of conscientiousness
• Exiting through the entrance
• On Gary Player and Nelson Mandela
• On Greg Popovich and Henri Fayol
• On Coach K
• The Messy Office
• On life-long learning and reading
• On grit
• On perseverance
• On the importance of acquiring talent
• On authentic and servant leadership
• The most googled leadership theories

​
© John Ballard, PhD,  2016. All rights reserved.
__________________________
Author of the award-winning Decoding the Workplace.
 
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . . An absolute 'must' for community, corporate, and academic library Business Management Studies collections, Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
 
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

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:
 
#1. To have engaged employees, people 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? Is it 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? Leaders create buy-in and engaged employees.
 
#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. Leaders praise, reward, and communicate these moments.
 
#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.
 
#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 their jobs enriched.

#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. In that blog I wrote: “Sometimes leaders fail to celebrate the successes of their units. I had a student who led an organization that had a very successful year. After we discussed celebrating the moment, he realized that he had not done so 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. 

​Image by Gerd Altman from https://pixabay.com/en/meeting-businessmen-personal-1219530/. In Public Domain. https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en​

© John Ballard, PhD,  2015. All rights reserved.
__________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace.
 
"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . . An absolute 'must' for community, corporate, and academic library Business Management Studies collections, Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review
 
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

What does integrative leadership mean? I have been researching this question for the past several weeks and a consensus opinion I have not found. This quest was stimulated by an article in the March/April 2016 issue of EXPLORE: The Journal of Science and Healing. Bonnie Horrigan wrote a brief but thought-provoking summary of key points about integrative leadership from a healthcare perspective.  Horrigan is editorial director at EXPLORE and teaches in the Leadership Program in Integrative Healthcare at Duke University.
 
Horrigan drew parallels between integrative healthcare and integrative leadership. Integrative healthcare requires partnerships between healthcare professionals and their patients. These partnerships are built on relationships. Likewise integrative leadership builds on relationships and partnerships. Here I will summarize her recommendations for leaders concerning relationships. In a later blog I will summarize her recommendations concerning partnerships.
 
On relationships: “As a leader, you do not want pawns that you move, you want people who move themselves in the right direction” (p.139). To make this happen requires that leaders have real relationships with those they lead.
 
Horrigan then offers “tips for establishing good relationships with the people with whom you work.”

1. “Be present in all your interactions . . . do not think about or do other things.”
2. “Discover other people’s strengths.” Ask questions “that uncover and strengthen another’s highest potential.”
3. “Build trust . . . by being honest, unwaveringly reliable, and strong.”
4. “Be a multiplier not a diminisher.” Leaders who are diminishers think they are “the smartest and most important” people in the room. Leaders who are multipliers give “a sense of ownership” and amplify the energy of those with whom they work.

 
My take-aways:
 
#1 is active listening. It is very difficult to do all the time but unquestionably a key to maximizing leadership. As I discussed in Decoding the Workplace: “You cannot actively listen to every conversation . . . But the key is to actively listen when the conversation is important, if not for you, then for the person speaking” (p.158-159). If you are formulating your response as the other speaks, you are not actively listening. Many people think they are good listeners when in fact they are not.
 
#2, discovering strengths, requires a sincere interest in others or, at least, a sincere belief in the value of others to the mission. You may work with someone for years and unless there is frequent and real interaction, you may not really know the capabilities of that person. Get to know your people.
 
#3. If you want engaged employees, trust is foundational. Leaders of integrity create supportive, trusting cultures – and probably sleep better than leaders with less integrity.
 
#4, Are you a multiplier or a diminisher? Do you know? Being a multiplier is at the heart of leadership. The multiplier inspires others to go above and beyond job requirements. The multiplier builds engaged followers, supports them, and cares about them as people. Be a multiplier.

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

Image from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Geneticcounseling.jpg. In public domain.
 
© John Ballard, PhD,  2015. All rights reserved.
__________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations.

"Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations is as informed and informative a read as it is thoughtful and thought-provoking. . . . An absolute 'must' for community, corporate, and academic library Business Management Studies collections, Decoding the Workplace should be considered critically important reading for anyone working in a corporate environment." —Midwest Book Review

Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd

Burnout is chronic stress on steroids. It can affect our work, our relationships, our health, even our brain structures. So what does it mean to be burnt out? Complete emotional exhaustion and an attitude of cynicism. Burnt-out employees feel “I don’t have anything else to give.” They develop negative attitudes toward themselves and those with whom they work. Burnout is especially prevalent in work settings where involvement with others is intense. Healthcare settings are frequently used as examples (e.g., physicians, nurses) but burnout can occur anywhere.
 
In the February 2016 issue of the Association for Psychological Science’s Observer, Alexandra Michel discussed burnout research and the effect of burnout on the brain. Here are highlights from Michel’s article:

• Burnout characteristics: “extreme fatigue, loss of passion, and intensifying cynicism and negativity” (p. 28)
• 2013 survey of human resource managers in the United Kingdom – 30% reported burnout widespread in their organizations
• All demanding jobs with long hours do not lead to burnout
• Burnt-out employees may have “crisis in feelings of professional competence”
• “Ultimately, burnout results when the balance of deadlines, demands, working hours, and other stressors outstrips rewards, recognition, and relaxation” (p. 28)
• Major contributors: work overload, lack of autonomy (too much control over work by others), few healthy relationships in the workplace, perceived unfairness (lack of trust, openness), incompatibility between individual values and company values.
• Burnout accelerates the normal thinning of the frontal cortex (cognitive functioning).
• Burnout negatively impacts “creativity, problem solving, and working memory” (p.29)

 
My take-aways:

1.  Burnout is an issue for leaders. They should be aware of their own potential for burnout, but more important, they should understand their role in mitigating burnout among those they lead. There are clearly individual differences toward burnout but it is also clear that organizational culture and climate are major players. The leader sets the tone. Be open. Be trusting. Set healthy norms about work hours. Insure those leaders who work for you do the same.
 
2.  Know your people well enough to recognize possible burnout. How does your organization help those suffering from burnout? Are those who make use of HR policies concerning burnout viewed negatively?
 
3. It is possible to be burnt-out and not know that you are. Others will often recognize the change in your attitudes, the negativity, before you do. Be open to feedback. Recognize we are all human and have limits. We are not supermen and superwomen.
 
4. Manage your stress before it becomes chronic and debilitating. Find ways to relax. Exercise, exercise, exercise. I agree with Abraham Maslow that we all have much potential. Sometimes we just have to work harder to take care of ourselves.
 
Michel, A. (February 2016). Burnout and the brain. Observer, 29 (2), 27-31.
 
Gaither, C. (October 14, 2014). “6 Job Mismatches that Cause Burnout.” Retrieved from http://www.clarkgaither.com/6-job-mismatches-that-cause-burnout/

Image by Geralt. https://pixabay.com/en/despair-stress-alone-being-alone-862349/. In public domain. https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en 
 
© John Ballard, PhD,  2015. All rights reserved.
________________________
Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/johnballardphd
On Twitter: @johnballardphd
__________________________
Author of Decoding the Workplace: 50 Keys to Understanding People in Organizations
Available at leading online bookstores such as Amazon.com