Closing the Collaboration Gap on Your Leadership Team

by: Sarah Miller Caldicott

0

Tweet

In an age of smart devices and breathtaking changes to familiar business models, innovation continues to magnetize our attention. Every day the business press is packed with information on how to innovate more effectively. Sage advice ranges from transforming an entire organizational culture to shifting accepted go-to-market practices, or adopting radically new business models.

And lots of this advice is really good. Much of it is well written, and well researched.

Consider the huge body of material from respected innovation champions like Gary Hamel , Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble, IDEO mavens David Kelley and Tom Kelley, Faisal Hoque, or the man who – in the eyes of many – first positioned innovation as a discipline worth studying, Clayton Christensen.

So, with all this good guidance, why aren’t we doing better at innovation? Why don’t we see successful innovation initiatives being hailed everywhere we look?

THE COLLABORATION GAP

I believe there’s a crucial gap in our approach to innovation: we’ve forgotten that collaboration plays a vital role in the process. In fact, I would go even further and say we’re lacking a baseline sense of what collaboration really is. This gap is especially dangerous given the expanding connection between human beings and virtual technologies…globally.

I’ve had a chance to deeply research the process of collaboration for my new book Midnight Lunch . The book takes a focused look at what I call ‘true collaboration,’ and offers specific action steps we can employ to engage collaborative innovation in our digital era. (If you’d like to delve into key themes from the book, Midnight Lunch is featured in the December/January edition of Fast Company magazine.)

Why is collaboration such a big gap in our innovation efforts? For one thing, collaboration is quixotic. It’s hard to measure. Collaboration requires meshing ‘soft skills’ like communication, inspiration, and leadership with hard skills like software programming, manufacturing prowess, or scientific acumen.

Because collaboration engages shoulder-to-shoulder processes which often make leaders squeamish, we don’t hear the C-suite mentioning collaboration in their organization’s core values. (Maybe it’s also because we rarely find real collaboration in the C-suite at all.)

So, where can we go to get some solid collaboration basics?

I recommend we look to one of the world’s greatest innovators: Thomas Edison. Odd as it may sound to those who still falsely describe Edison as a solo-preneur, Edison offers today’s executives a solid model for collaboration – especially in our digital age.

While we cannot draw a straight line from Edison’s era to our own, there is much we can learn from a man who spearheaded the development of 6 industries in less than 40 years. Working collaboratively with dozens of workers in his storied Menlo Park and West Orange, New Jersey laboratories, by 1910 Edison and his teams had churned out patents and industries valued at more than $6.7 billion – a figure that today would exceed $100 billion.

Although patent law at the turn of the 20th century only allowed a maximum of two people to appear on a patent, it’s clear from Edison’s notebooks that he served as a crucial catalyst for innovations derived in collaboration with a myriad of folks in his labs. Contrary to the popular lore that brings Edison to mind alongside tales of American inventors working solo in their garage, Edison collaborated with others even when he was a teenage inventor – and never stopped.

WHAT IS A “MIDNIGHT LUNCH?”

We can find the foundations for Edison’s collaborative culture stemming from a compelling practice called “midnight lunch.” Midnight lunch was the affectionate slang Edison’s Menlo Park crew used to refer to the meal Edison ordered in at about 9 PM on nights when workers stayed late at the lab to complete their experiments.

Edison would often finish his workday at 5 PM, head home for dinner with his family, then return to the lab if he had projects to oversee, or if he wanted to check on how key experiments were progressing. Starting at about 7 PM, all who were still present at the Menlo Park lab would roll up their sleeves, and share insights about the experiments they were undertaking. This meant that employees from any specialty could mingle with others holding completely different backgrounds, and learn from them. Often these casual, unstructured conversations yielded deeply creative outcomes.

After an hour or two, there would be a pause in this heady dialogue. Edison would order in sandwiches and beverages for everyone from a local tavern. Everyone present would kick back, eat, sing songs, tell stories, play music, and generally let their hair down — regardless of title or tenure, there were no limits on participation.

During midnight lunch, no one was ‘monitoring’ things. No one was dreaming up something to put on your performance appraisal. From apprentices all the way up to Edison himself, during midnight lunch, everyone simply engaged their best thinking in a casual, hands-on environment. In short, workers became colleagues.

Midnight lunches formed the foundation for what I call ‘true collaboration’ – a process outlined in depth in my new book Midnight Lunch: The 4 Phases of Team Collaboration Success, from Thomas Edison’s Lab (Wiley). The practice of midnight lunch forms a crucial part of Phase 1 – Capacity, where the core underpinnings of collaboration are established.

Today, with the global proliferation of smart devices and the rise of virtual teams, we need to remember the power of simple rituals like midnight lunch. We need to draw forward the principles and practices that create ‘invisible glue’ and collegiality between team members. Turning on a computer monitor and logging into an online meeting is not enough. A foundation for collegiality must also exist.

Keep these factors in mind when seeking to build collegiality within your own collaboration team:

• Create opportunities for team members to meet and ‘talk shop’ while socializing in a casual environment
• Ensure that hands-on project engagement is a part of your efforts
• Listen for – and use – language that is “we” focused and not “me” focused

Read more from Sarah here.

Tags: Sarah Miller Caldicott, Staff, Structure, Team

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

The Danger of Outranking Your Team

by: Michael Warden

0

Tweet

I was enjoying a meal with a well-known Christian leader a few weeks ago. He is a brilliant man who leads a large team of great people. We were discussing a particularly entrenched dynamic on his team that he didn’t understand and didn’t like. It seemed every time he wanted the team to wrestle with a difficult challenge their organization was facing, the team would always haltingly poke around for the “right answer”–the solution that the team believed their leader had already thought of. To them, it wasn’t a discussion so much as a test to see if they could or would come up with the same answer the leader had already decided on.

Only, this really wasn’t the leader’s intent. He really did want them to wrestle together to find solutions to creative challenges, and he really didn’t already have an answer in mind. But no matter how often he would say that, the team didn’t seem to believe him. They would keep trying to uncover the “right answer” as he saw it rather than offering their own unvarnished opinions and ideas. All of this was doubly frustrating because this happened to be a team full of creative powerhouses!

So what was really going on here?

It’s difficult to unravel dynamics like this without first understanding the notion of “rank” on a team. Rank is a way of describing a person’s level of authority on the team within a particular arena. Every member of a team has some form of rank. The kind of rank we’re most familiar with is positional rank. The leader in this story, for example, is the boss over everyone on his team. So he has the highest positional rank.

But there are many other kinds of rank that exist on a team, and these often carry more weight than positional rank. For example:

• intellectual rank (who’s the one that the team holds as the smartest among them?),
• emotional rank (which team member’s emotional state matters most to the team?),
• spiritual rank (who is seen as the wisest spiritually?),
• social rank (who is the one who holds the group together as a relational community?)

…and so on.

There are as many types of rank as there are arenas of authority. Having a particular kind of rank in a team is not the same thing as playing a particular role; in fact, sometimes there can seem to be little connection between a person’s rank and their role on the team. The person taking the notes (a role) may be the one with the greatest emotional rank on the team (i.e. when he’s happy, everyone’s happy; when he’s upset, the group stops everything to “make it better” for him). Or the person with the lowest paid job may have the highest social rank (i.e. she’s the one who has the power to either include or exclude anyone on the team from the social community within the team or the organization).

So back to this leader’s story. His problem was that he was carrying too much rank in too many arenas within the team, and that was effectively shutting down the team’s capacity to function creatively. Besides having positional rank on the team, he also had the highest intellectual rank, and the highest emotional rank. He was the boss. He was seen as smarter than anyone else in the room. And everyone on the team was bent on keeping him emotionally happy. No wonder the team couldn’t have open creative discussions!

Now that he knows about his rank (most people are unaware of the rank they hold within a team), he is able to intentionally “give it away” it to others on the team. For example, he’s shifting the organizational structure so that others on the team have more positional authority. He’s also begun to consciously defer to the team’s collective intelligence in many key decisions as a way of transferring his own intellectual rank to others on the team. Finally, he’s learning to better manage his emotions to avoid inadvertently hijacking the team’s creative process when he feels frustrated or sad.

What about your team (or teams)? How do you notice “rank” impacting your team?

Read more from Michael here.

Tags: Michael Warden, Staff, Staff Leadership Roles, Team

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

5 Leadership Lessons from Abraham Lincoln

by: Trevin Wax

0

Tweet

When I discovered a new movie on the life of Lincoln was in the works, I was curious to learn more about Lincoln’s administration and his political career. The fhit movie is based on Doris Kearns Goodwin’s popular book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, a masterful telling of Lincoln’s story that follows the lives of each of his cabinet members.

Here are a few leadership lessons from the life of Lincoln as described in the book.

Lesson #1: Know When to Act and When to Wait.

Lincoln knew when to speak and when to remain silent. He knew when to act and when to wait.

In reading the book, I found myself on occasion wanting Lincoln to hurry up and make a decision, only to later discover that making his views public too soon would have sabotaged his chances for seeing lasting change. Whether he was hiring or firing, giving speeches or staying silent, he had an uncanny ability to gauge public opinion. He usually waited for the public to catch up with him before making pronouncements.

At the same time, Lincoln wasn’t afraid to lead. When he knew his actions would likely sway more people to his point of view, he got out in front of them and acted. But he only did so when he was sure he wouldn’t lose the people lagging behind. He was keenly aware of what Malcolm Gladwell called “the tipping point.”

Lesson #2: Don’t Take Things Personally.

Lincoln was hard to offend even when offense was warranted. For example, consider the brashness of General McClellan, who once kept Lincoln and secretary of state William Seward waiting in his parlor until he decided he wasn’t up for visitors and went to bed. As the reader, I wanted to climb into the pages and get in McClellan’s face to yell, “This is the president of the United States!”

Likewise, when cabinet member Salmon Chase undermined Lincoln and sought in vain to replace him on the Republican ticket in 1864, Lincoln shrugged off Chase’s ambitions, saying, “He has the White House fever.” Not only did he choose not to begrudge Chase’s antics, Lincoln later recommended him for the Supreme Court as Chief Justice.

And who can forget William Seward’s arrogant snubbing of his future boss? Seward received more than forgiveness; he received a lifelong friendship.

Though others were astonished at Lincoln’s forgiving spirit, Lincoln knew his responsibilities were too important to let personal squabbles keep him from the task at hand. By not seeking to establish his honor, Lincoln became all the more honorable.

Lesson #3: Be Strategic in Your Diversions.

Some cabinet members muttered about Lincoln’s frequent attendance at the theatre. The times were too serious for such trivial pursuits, they thought.

But Lincoln chose to be refreshed precisely because the times were serious. Compare pictures of Lincoln during the first year of his presidency compared to the last. It’s obvious the horror of war and the personal loss of a child weighed heavily on him.

To maintain his vibrant spirit, Lincoln planned a daily carriage ride every afternoon with his wife – a few precious moments to unwind and hear of other things. He frequented the theatre, where he would lose himself in the humorous plays and musicals of the day. It was because Lincoln took his job so seriously that he looked for ways to relieve the pressure of his office.

Lesson #4: Tell a Story and Paint a Picture.

Lincoln’s oratorical skills are legendary, but not everyone in his day was impressed. Many thought he was a hick, a country “railsplitter” from Illinois who wouldn’t amount to much as president.

But Lincoln knew the power of a story. That’s why his speeches are full of analogies, pictures, and anecdotes. Being a “commoner” was a badge of honor that helped him communicate to the men who gave their lives on the battlefield, the families who buried their young, and the slaves who desired their freedom.

Lincoln had plenty of practice in story-telling. His humor is well-documented by his contemporaries. He kept his kids up at night with tales of adventure. Though pictures often show him looking dour and depressed, the real Lincoln was a jovial man who knew the power of a story.

Lesson #5: Do the Right Thing Even When It is Costly.

There are times when Lincoln was under enormous pressure to fire members of his cabinet, to make changes in personnel, or to hold back on issues related to emancipation. Lincoln could have succumbed easily to outside pressure. Quick decisions might have given him immediate popularity.

But Lincoln understood the fickle nature of politics and refused to bow to the heat of the moment. He decided to do the right thing and accept the fallout. He took responsibility for his administration’s mistakes even when his subordinates were at fault. At personal cost to himself, Lincoln chose the high road, sometimes paying for it in initial political strategy, only to find respect from his countrymen increasing over time.

Conclusion

Lincoln was a great president because he was a great man. Team of Rivals shines light on the wisdom of his strategies and decisions.

Read more from Trevin here.

Tags: Leadership Development, Team, Team of Rivals, Trevin Wax

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

The 10 Best Teams Ever Assembled (and What We Can Learn From Them)

by: Best Degrees

0

Tweet

Tags: Best Degrees, Structure, Team

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

Creating Teams

by: Bruce Hodes

0

Tweet

Performance within groups typically does not just happen.  For a group to really perform well it needs practice. The group needs to understand the best way to organize itself for performance. This concept is commonly understood by sports teams and the military. They clearly see the need to give groups opportunities to practice.  Boot Camp for the military and pre-season workouts for sports teams are the norm.

It is interesting to note in business that there is far less interest or appreciation of group development and the need for practice. Team practice, for the most part, is not factored into the business or corporate world. We form groups in business and march them into the corporate battle zone expecting them to perform and when they fail we are surprised.

This whole process was once again revealed to me as my business, CMI, went through the process of putting together a high performance work team.   In 2008, we expanded our organization by one. A full 25% change growth in our employee numbers.  This growth caused a change in our work mix and demands.  In essence, we needed less administrative work and more research and marketing.

As we went through the expansion process, some basic truths about teams, groups, and performance helped me traverse this territory:

1. The essence of good work team performance is not good communication or good relationships.

But a focus on performance and an agreed upon appreciation of what this means.

Typically in the work place people relate to each other socially. This means they are concerned with getting along and staying out of each others hair.  This is not how team players relate to each other.

Basically, the difference is between how one relates to people at a barbecue and how one relates to the work group who is trying to win a big contract? The nature of the relationships is quite different. The first is based on the social context of let’s all just get along while the latter is based on the context of let’s get something remarkable done and perform together so that specific results occur.

2. Teams enjoy and play games.

The vast majority of employees go to work because they have to in order to survive. That is the culture most adults live in. This is different than in the world of sports. People voluntarily play the sport because they want to and like the game. When members of teams fundamentally do not like the games or feel connected to the game the group is playing, there will be real performance issues for the group.   However, when teams of employees are into the game of making their customers raving fans, magic occurs, and they start enjoying the game.

3. The definition of real teams from “The Wisdom of Teams” by John Katzenbach and Douglas Smith is accurate.

They define teams as a small number of people with complementary skills who are equally committed to a common purpose, goals, and working approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.   Real teams are a basic unit of performance.   Mischief comes from team members who are equally responsible for the result.  This is quite different than how most of the work world is organized.

In the typical work place each employee is accountable for their job and they are often formally measured on their performance in the yearly appraisal process.  No group or team performance is formally measured or expected. The pretense is that if each employee just does his or her thing it will work out perfectly.  Unfortunately the work world is more complicated and in many cases customers are impacted by a group of employees. When a group takes on being mutually accountable for their customers’ experiences, the group can generate profit and customer loyalty.

4. In sports different games constitute different types of teams.

Soccer, because of the nature of the game, will require a different type of team than baseball. Work related teams are similar. Depending on the work output of the team and the dynamics of the workplace the type of work team that is required is different. The rules and dynamics that govern the work team will also be different.

5. Teams develop in stages.

It is good for participants to be aware of these stages because they normalize the experience of growing and developing into a high performance team.  The stages are as follows:

Stage A – This is the birth of the group and there is typically some excitement and anticipation about the potential and possibility of the group.

Stage B – This is when reality sets in about how group life can be demanding and hard work. It is no longer fun and there is finger pointing between employees.  Mutual accountability by most is seen as an empty concept and team members look at who to blame.  This is where most teams die and where there is the need for the most support and focus.  Commitment needs to be generated to work through the issues.  This is also where the employee’s love of the game is needed and counted.  For most groups Stage B is where the real work counts and is necessary.

Stage C – Getting behind the game stage.  This is when everyone begins to align behind the group performance and what needs to happen in order to allow the group to succeed. Real group performance results are for the first time seen.

Stage D – This is the high performance stage, where the team is really using its group structure to produce some remarkable results.

I hope the above insights are valuable to you and your work groups. They have been valuable to me as I seek to establish a high performance team in my office. I invite you to share your experiences in building high performance teams.

Read more from Bruce here.

Tags: Bruce Hodes, Structure, Team

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

Interdependence Day

by: Jon Mertz

0

Tweet

It may seem odd to discuss interdependence when many people are celebrating independence this week on July 4. In leadership, however, independence may be inadvisable. The reality is interdependent leaders are the ones enabling happiness in their organizations, teams, and communities.

Leading with interdependence means two or more people or things are mutually dependent upon each other. Interdependent leaders are stronger than independent ones because of the relationships built and maintained.

Here are four interdependent relationships to enable leaders to succeed more fully and purposefully.

1 – Learning Interdependence.

Good leaders learn. There is a mutual dependency on books, mentors, and other leaders to stretch our minds, our attitudes, our motivations, and our approaches. Leaders who do not have an interdependent learning relationship become stale and outdated, stuck in old ways and inadequate traditions.

It is more than the taking in of information and ideas though. It also is in the giving. Leaders who teach and share lift up all leaders within their circle of influence. It is a give-and-take relationship in learning, which energizes strong, interdependent leaders.

2 – Team Interdependence.

Teams contain all sorts of characters. The best teams are the ones where everyone brings their strengths along with their humility, best listening skills, and finest ideas. Teams that are self-managing are the most interdependent group of leaders possible. Nonetheless, even if there is a single leader designated for a team, the leader can only be successful if the team works well together.

Interdependence of human skills and insights is what will bring out the best in all team leaders.

A team of independents will lead to an entanglement of egos and a frustration of efforts. A team of interdependent leaders will lead to empowered achievement.

3 – Community Interdependence.

Interdependent leaders know community is where the next generation of leaders will spring. Leave our communities alone and the talent will slip backwards rather than upwards. Communities feed off of solid leaders, and leaders feed off of solid community. The tighter the interdependence, the higher the potential for long term advancement. The advancements come in the form of:

• Greater involvement in activities
• More commitment to people
• More conversations on how to lead
• Higher learning, raising the standards in knowledge and insights

4 – Integrity Interdependence.

Integrity translates into leadership and life values; it is the way to lead and live in a non-harmful and inspired way. Our leadership values need to be defined and then fully practiced in everyday situations. Integrity and values need to be our high standard of conduct – something to strive to and be held accountable for. Herein is the crux of integrity interdependence.

A leader without integrity is an independent, soulless one. Integrity without leaders is just a concept.

For integrity to come alive, leaders need to embrace it. For leaders to lead effectively, integrity needs to be upheld. More than the relationship between leader and integrity is the need for both to be demonstrated actively in our teams, organizations, communities, and families.

Leadership interdependence…

• Are you ready to celebrate it and see the true joy in leadership?
• Are you ready to embrace your leadership interdependencies?

I hope so. Happy Leadership Interdependence!

Read more from  Jon here.

Tags: Jon Mertz, Leadership Engine, Team

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >