• The 60 Second Leader
  • Seven Secrets of Inspired Leaders
  • The Little Book of Leadership
  • Leadership Hub for Corporates
  • Learning to Live with Huntington's Disease
 

Phil's Leadership blog

The four things people want from workplace leadership

Psychologists figured it out long ago. Oliver James, author of the new book Affluenza, says there are four things we need to live our lives in a fulfilled way. I’ll avoid the word ‘happily’ as there’s a whole science of happiness growing up at the moment and I’m not sure about some of it.

Here are the four things:

1. Security (so, no impulsive, volatile, unpredictable managers who like to keep people on their toes, thanks)
2. Community (so let people network to their heart’s content and contribute and be part of things)
3. Effectiveness (People want to do not just be done to, to see what effect they are having and know it is useful. So, again, let them contribute and use the best of their abilities and have a clear line of sight to how that links to the overall aims of the organization)
4. Autonomy and Authenticity (Let people make decisions. Let them be themselves.)

That last point, on autonomy and authenticity – constantly crops up in surveys of what makes a great place to work where people are engaged, inspired and stretch themselves, from McKinsey surveys to Southwest Airlines’ internal surveys of their people.

So, formal leaders in an organisation just need to create that environment and then get out of the way and let people lead the business for you.


FREE Chapter: Love and leadership

There’s a Valentine’s Day present for you if you click on the big red tab at the top of the page that says ‘Feb’s free chapter’. It’s a preview chapter from The 60 Second Leader book called What’s love got to do with it? Should only take 60 seconds to read and contains insights on love and leadership from Rudy Giuliani, Ken Blanchard, Colonel Tim Collins, Herb Kelleher, Niccolo Machiavelli and me.


Leading together: leadership isn’t one person

“When Benjamin Zander took the Youth Philharmonic Orchestra to Cuba in 1999, they began their concert in Havana playing two pieces with the National Youth Orchestra of Cuba. An American and a Cuban child shared the music at each music stand.

The first piece, written by Guido Lopez Gavillan, the conductor of the Cuban orchestra, was colourful and brilliant. Ben Zander had decided not to prepare his young musicians in advance; he wanted them to learn the piece from the composer himself.

Maestro Lopez Gavillan began rehearsing his work, but it was quickly evident that its complex Cuban rhythms were beyond the American kids; they’d never seen anything like it, and they simply couldn’t play it. After giving it his best, the conductor resigned himself to failure. “I’m afraid this isn’t going to work,” he said from the podium. “We have to cancel the performance.”

Ben Zander couldn’t accept this outcome, wouldn’t accept this outcome; one of the most important parts of the tour was the opportunity for the Cuban and the American kids to play together. He leapt to the stage and took over.

Through an interpreter, he said to the young Cuban musicians, “Your job is to teach these rhythms to your stand partner.” And to the Americans, he said, “Just give yourselves over to the leaders sitting next to you. You will get the support you need.”

Then he asked Guido Lopez Gavillan to try again.

Imagine what ensued. The focus shifted from the conductor to the orchestra itself. The young Cubans “became fantastically energized, exuberantly conducting with their instruments, each leading along his American stand partner enthusiastically. The American kids, basking in the lavish attention, gave themselves … to the process, and began to play the rhythms the way they were (meant) to be played.” The maestro was well pleased.

Then it was Ben Zander’s turn. He had chosen to conduct Bernstein’s overture to Candide, a “fiendishly difficult little masterpiece.” The music is so tricky to play that he had sent the score down to Havana three months earlier, to give the Cuban kids a chance to prepare. But asked if they had enjoyed learning it, he got only a blank stare. As it turned out, the music had been languishing at the Havana central Post Office. The Cubans had never seen it.

Maestro Zander felt his panic rise; The American kids had taken months to learn it. Standing before the orchestra, frozen, he suddenly realized that the young musicians seated expectantly before him were smiling. Why not? Now it was the young Americans’ turn to lead. Springing to life, they led their stand partners … and it came off perfectly.”

I’m sure you don’t need any words from me here on the need to take Ben Zander’s core principle and use it to to energize your own approach to leadership – let people teach and lead each other rather than trying to control what they do from ‘above’.

Source: The Cuba story is from The Power of Possibility, by Kim K. Crawford Harvie. Kim’s story is from Rosamund and Ben Zander’s book The Art of Possibility.


‘They need me everywhere’. The myth of the indispensable leader

I’ve been researching the leadership style of Ben Zander, the orchestra conductor , as he is coming to talk at Leaders in London (logo above is a link) in November.

Came across this story that Zander tells:

“The near-mythical orchestra conductor Herbert von Karajan was reputed to have jumped into a taxi outside the opera house and shouted to the driver, “Hurry, hurry!” “Very good, sir,” said the driver. “Where to?” “It doesn’t matter,” said von Karajan impatiently. “They need me everywhere!” SOURCE: Ben and Rosamund Zander, from their book The Art of Possibility. Sound like any managers you know? You, maybe? What, not even a little bit? Spend a couple of minutes on the story from Ben Zander, below, for some insight into how making yourself dispensable rather than indispensable actually energizes your people to take the lead themselves.


Stalin wasn’t Stalin. Lenin wasn’t Lenin. If ‘Gaia’ wasn’t Gaia. What’s in a name?

This post is a musing. Be warned.

My geography professor friend Dave told me recently how James Lovelock came up with the name Gaia for his theory that the earth acts like a living organism, and has regretted the name ever since.

Apparently he was in a pub (possibly – in a village, anyway, so maybe in the village pub)with his friend William Golding (yes, Lord of the Flies author William Golding) and explained the new theory to Golding, who promptly told him he should call it Gaia.

They may have had a few pints beforehand, because Lovelock misheard him and for half an hour was trying to figure out why Golding had told him to name his theory after a water funnel that appears in particular seas in the southern hemisphere (called a ‘gyre’ – I’ve probably mis-spelt it. Geographers chuckle at this kind of thing) and how on earth Golding knew the word.

When the confusion was cleared up – that he should name his theory after the idea of an earth spirit or goddess – he agreed. And now regrets it.

You see Lovelock was a serious NASA scientist – a leader in his field and a master of hard facts. But, that name has trailed mysticism in its wake and ever since he has been ‘tainted’ with the aura of a hippy scientist. This, he feels, hindered his message from getting through to hard-nosed politicians and the rest of the scientific community.

Now we know Gaia theory is probably right. But we might have come to that conclusion ten years earlier if he had given it a different name.

The power of names, it occurs to me, cannot be over-stated. Lenin, Molotov, Trotsky, Stalin…These were not real names. They were acquired. They had to be, as these revolutionary leaders had to disguise who they really were in the years they worked under cover.

But – and I was a historian for a while so this has always fascinated me – would the cult of leadership around Stalin have been quite as unbreakable if he did not go under his chosen name, which means “Man of Steel” and instead was known by his Georgian provincial name of Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili…

Malcolm Gladwell has written convincingly in Blink how we sub-consciously defer to taller leaders, including research that shows if you are tall you are more likely to become a leader and be paid more. These sub-conscious cues – height, sex, even name – carry more weight in success or failure as a leader than we might think they do.

So, maybe the first thing you should do if you aspire to be a successful leader (of yourself and of others) is change your name…


PS…and if Django wasn’t Reinhardt

Dave (see post below) , is a brilliant fiddle player and told me another story…How the Germans were advancing on Paris and Stefan Grappelli knocked on Django Reinhardt’s door to warn him to run, as they would be in Paris any minute. (They were both playing in the Hot Club of Paris, I think, at the time – Grappelli and Reinhardt, that is).

Reinhardt, who had been asleep, stuck his head out the window and said he’d be along in a minute. Grappelli escaped. Reinhardt went back to bed.

Reinhardt woke up to the German occupation of Paris and, being a gipsy, realised this was not a good place to be. He managed to get to the border with Switzerland, hiding in the back of a truck, but was ordered out by an SS officer.

The officer asked his name. “Oh, Reinhardt the famous guitarist?” said the officer, a music lover. And instead of being sent to a concentration camp with every other gipsy the SS captured, Reinhardt was sent back to Paris to play for the Germans.

On such tiny, apparently inconsequential matters do life or death turn. Because, as Dave told me that story, I instantly wondered (see ‘the power of names’, below) if Django’s fate would have gone the other way if Reinhardt had not, by chance, been such a Germanic-sounding name…


Why I don’t like NLP

I’ve just re-found an article on Richard Bandler, the former cocaine addict who was once tried for murder and who admits to being “a little bit sociopathic”…and who is the co-creator of Neuro Linguistic Programming.

It’s by Jon Ronson of the UK newspaper the Guardian and re-reading it reminded me why I do not like NLP and the way it has spread like wildfire through business and is seen by some as a tool to aid better leadership (it’s not).

The article is here. Judge for yourself.


The other 80%: trust and leadership

It’s Davos time of year. The world’s leaders – elected and self-appointed, political and business – meet at the World Economic Forum‘s annual brains trust in the snow.

A snippet from this year on leadership and trust. Philip Edelman, founder of Edelman the global PR company, said this morning at Davos that

30-35% of people at work will trust a frontline worker
50% of people will trust someone they see as a peer (presumably those polled were not frontline workers, then) and…
20% of people at work will trust a Chief Executive

Since the foundation of leadership is trust, ‘Where’s the other 80% and what do I do to get it back?’ is the question chief executives have to deal with.

Anyway, as we all know leadership isn’t confined to the top of the organisation. And, if the trust quotient is anything to go on, that’s where there is, in fact, less of the capital on which leadership is built – trust – than anywhere else in an organisation.


New Year’s present for you – Free book chapter

Ooh, I’ve just finished the 60 Second Leader book manuscript (‘So what!’ I hear you cry: fair enough, but I’m excited anyway).

With the 60 Second Leader I’m trying to pioneer a new form of business book, based on the fact that none of us have time to read business books.

So, each chapter only takes 60 seconds to read. I guess this takes us into ‘when is a book not a book’ territory – that strange place you get into when you try and subvert any form and change it too radically. The publisher, for example, tells me “But, they’re not chapters. You can’t call them chapters.” Well, they are. So, there. I’m too tired and elated to take that line of argument further at the moment. And I don’t want to bore you too much before giving you a freebie for the start of 2007.

I increasingly think business books should be about distillation and essence, not over-elaboration and the laborious building of an argument or proposition chapter by chapter.

Anyway, here’s a free chapter for you so you can see if the idea of a non-book business book full of non-chapter chapters is useful in this time-poor age. Would love to hear whether you find this approach useful and how it could be improved next time.

Leadership and Failure: sample chapter from The 60 Second Leader


Puts things into perspective

“Textbooks would make my job so much easier.”

Miriam Coulibaly, who teaches 195 pupils at a school in Mali, quoted today in the New York Times.

Puts into perspective any resource problems we might feel faced with at work in 2007, doesn’t it. Not wanting to get preachy about it, but there is a great thing called The Reverse Book Club that helps with this situation by the way. I was attracted by its marketing strapline a while back: something like “Four books a month for a fiver and you never get to see a single one of them.”