How Top CEOs Cope with Constant Stress

Why We Fail At Leadership

When it comes to studying leadership, the natural tendency is to focus on those leaders whose successes and achievements continue to inspire us and drive so many to emulate them in the hopes of replicating their accomplishments.

Of course, as much as it’s important for us to see what we can learn from those who understand what it takes to succeed at leadership, it’s also valuable for us to examine and consider what causes others to fail in the role of leading people towards a common goal or shared purpose.

To that end, I’d like to share the story of one leader whose example I hope will help us to appreciate one of the key challenges leaders need to address if they are to succeed in this role in today’s fast-changing, global environment.

When Albert* was promoted to head the division he had spent the past few years working for, he naturally jumped into the opportunity with a lot of enthusiasm and ideas of how he’d like the department to operate under his leadership.

Given how Albert was career-driven and had his eyes on playing a bigger role in the organization, he was determined to not only prove his ability to lead this department, but to get his former colleagues to view him as ‘executive material’, in order to support his efforts to move up in the organization.

In no time, Albert was sending out memos detailing new approaches he wanted his former colleagues to employ in order to ‘make things more efficient’ or to ‘make efforts more aligned with corporate policy’ as a way to prove his technical prowess.

He used team meetings to inform his direct reports of his interactions with various groups of executives and VPs to highlight his growing familiarity with those at the executive level in order to prove his comfort level with ‘playing in the big leagues’.

Of course, in his zeal to prove his ability to lead and step up into the executive circle, Albert ended up making a number of missteps which, though seemingly minor, spoke more about the nature of his leadership than those actions he often tried to put in the limelight.

For example, Albert became so focused on building his ‘rising star’ status that when one of his team members expressed concern about the growing number of delays in getting vital data from him to complete their work, he dismissed their concerns because it wasn’t a ‘high visibility’ issue that those in senior management would care about.

He also challenged data findings his team members presented at department meetings – results the senior VPs had already signed off on – as a way to publicly demonstrate that he wasn’t letting anything get overlooked on his watch.

Unfortunately for Albert, he didn’t understand that in his quest to demonstrate his authority in leading this department, he was also showing his team how little he trusted their ability to understand what matters, not to mention their ability to do things right.

In light of these and several other missteps, it’s not surprising that Albert lasted a little over a year in this leadership role, leaving behind a team that was now suffering from decreased productivity levels, a recent history of missed deadlines and mistakes, and crumbling lines of communication between the various team members.

When these moments of leadership failure happen, it’s natural for us to look for some lightening rod moment – some specific event that clearly denotes that critical moment when things began to fall apart. Just as with those who succeed at leadership, when people in leadership roles fail, we want to unravel the specific steps they took to let us know what we need to avoid to prevent a similar fate.

Unfortunately, the reality is that leadership failures are rarely defined by a singular event, like that infamous moment when former BP CEO Tony Hayward expressed his frustration over the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico by blurting out “I’d like my life back”.

And yet, while these two leaders may differ in having that sense of clarity for when their ability to lead fell apart, Hayward’s words and Albert’s actions do share something in common. In both cases, they demonstrated what really mattered the most to them in terms of how they approached their responsibilities and obligations to those under their care.

In Albert’s case, he was so focused on proving how valuable his leadership could be to the organization that he failed to show his team the value he was helping them to achieve as their leader.

It became very clear to everyone in Albert’s department that he viewed leadership as something one achieves because of your title or position. That he expected people to throw their full support behind him simply because of the sign that adorned his office door.

What he failed to understand, though, is that leadership is not dependent on your title, but on your ability to inspire people to follow you. [Share on Twitter] That people believe in your ability to chart a course and guide them to create something of value; something that matters not just to those in charge, but to all involved.

It’s important to note, too, that Albert’s time in this leadership role was short-lived not because he made drastic mistakes like Hayward did. Rather, it was because his actions and behaviour had revealed that his focus was not on how he could bring out the best in those under his care, but on how he could make his own star shine brighter within the organization.

Albert’s story is an important reminder for all of us that if we allow ourselves to get caught up in the busyness of today’s noisy world – or like in Albert’s case, to focus mostly on ourselves and what we personally want to achieve – we can very quickly find ourselves losing touch with how to engage and empower those we’ve accepted the responsibility to guide and to help to succeed in their collective efforts.

As much as we might like to assume that there’s an event we can point to and say that’s when things flew off the rails, more often than not, people fail at leadership in those small, everyday moments. In those moments where they fail to demonstrate to those they lead that they matter; that their contributions and efforts are valuable and important, and that we care about their successes.

To put it simply, leadership is not found in grand gestures, but in those moments where we reveal what we care about. [Share on Twitter] 

And that’s why I wanted to share Albert’s story because leadership is about those little moments, those conversations where we have the opportunity to build relationships with those under our care. To learn and better understand what matters to them, what excites them and makes them feel like they’re making a difference, and then connecting that to the shared purpose that defines our organization.

We need to approach leadership as an opportunity to not simply better ourselves, but to help those we lead become better as well. [Share on Twitter]

Sure, there are many examples of leaders who fall under the weight of their own hubris, caught up in the narrative of their own leadership that they soon forgot their raison d’être – the reason why people rally behind them and willingly follow their lead going forward.

But as with those leadership luminaries we look up to, these fallen-from-grace leaders also have lessons to teach us about what causes people to fail and end up on the other side of that leadership spectrum.

And perhaps the biggest lesson they can teach us all is why we need to be mindful for how we show up in our role as a leader. That we never forget that leadership is not about you – it’s about those who step forward to follow your lead. [Share on Twitter]

*Name changed.

Read more; http://ht.ly/HNCHU

How’s Your Leadership…Positive or Polluted?

“It is a shame that so many leaders spend their time pondering their rights as leaders instead of their awesome responsibilities as leaders.”

 James C. Hunter

General George Washington and General Benedict Arnold were both effective leaders; however, their lasting effects on their organizations were profoundly different. Although both men were heroes of the continental Army, one went on to become the father of our country and is universally viewed today as an exemplar of selfless and inspiring leadership. The other became our nation’s most notorious traitor. His name evoking thoughts of someone who’s pride and self-oriented actions led him to sell out his young nation in hopes of personal fame, glory, and reward.

Two leaders. Both gifted. One added value and left his surroundings better than he first found them. The other’s unchecked ambition and inability to keep his toxic tendencies in check resulted in a legacy of disillusionment, betrayal, and mistrust.

We have all likely endured the overly ambitions boss or overbearing leader.  However, leaders with toxic-tendencies are something more. Rather than creating conditions for people to flourish and thrive and come fully alive, their destructive tendencies sap our strength and steal our joy. Their toxicity is a contagion which, in time, pollutes the culture of the entire organization.

The term “toxic leadership” is often used to describe those who have a profoundly negativeeffect on others. Be it a promise-breaking politician; arrogant or ignorant media personality; greedy corporate executive; demanding and demeaning military leader; or anyone else who routinely undermines, demeans, or micro-manages subordinates, toxic leadership has become all too commonplace. Much like General benedict Arnold, those men and women in positions of power and influence who possess an almost narcisstic preoccupation with themselves and their agendas do much more harm than good.

Richard Wagner, in his book Smart People Doing Dumb Things: The Case of Managerial Incompetence, shares how individuals with toxic tendencies are often the first to take more credit than they deserve when things go well and are often the first to point fingers of blame when they do not.  Rather than leading in a manner that creates strong bonds of mutual trust and respect in order to facilitate mission accomplishment, toxic leaders generate serious and enduring poisonous effects—fostering a climate of fear, distrust, divisiveness, selfishness, and a host of other unhealthy and unproductive conditions.

In their insightful article entitled Narcissism and Toxic Leaders, Lieutenant Colonel Joe Doty and Master Sergeant Jeff Fenlason note that leaders with toxic tendencies are also notoriously:

• Poor listeners;
• Overly sensitive to criticism;
• Willing to take advantage of others to achieve their own goals;
• Intent on seeking every opportunity to be in the spotlight;
• Uninterested in others opinions, ideas or feelings; and
• Prone to conduct themselves with an air of self-importance that’s impossible to miss.

That’s quite a sad list, if you ask me. And the fact of the matter is, toxic leadership is neither new nor limited to a particular industry.

So what can each of us do to help prevent ourselves from exercising or expressing toxic tendencies? Try these simple practices:

Don’t Foster Blindspots. Going through life without asking for feedback is like driving in a foreign country without ever stopping to ask directions. One of the best ways to guard against developing toxic tendencies is to periodically ask those you know for their candid and constructive feedback. Determine if the way you see yourself is accurate with how others perceive you. Assess if your words and your ways, your tone and your temperament, carry tinges of arrogance or hints of haughtiness. Be open and genuinely interested in others feedback about your performance.

Don’t Be a Decision-Deflector. One of the single biggest ways a leader can undermine confidence and breed complacency is to be indecisive. Rather than step into their role as a decision-maker, leaders with toxic tendencies tend to deflect decisions, especially challenging or unpopular ones, for fear of looking incapable or incompetent. If this describes you, stop. Assert yourself when necessary, and take advice when needed.

Don’t Be Emotionally Hijacked:  Don’t allow your emotions to get in the way of your success. Knowing when to practice self-control and self-discipline communicates a sense of consistency and maturity to those around you.

Don’t Dodge Disappointment: Although setbacks, failures and disappointments can be a very real byproduct of leading, those with toxic tendencies often strive to play it safe. Given their insistent need to guard their egos and protect their public personas, toxic leaders prefer to dodge disappointment rather than recognize that risking  the sting of defeat is what could very well unlock opportunities for growth.

Don’t Be Afraid to Raise Your Hand:  Leaders with toxic tendencies are quick to reject responsibility. They refuse to accept the consequences of outcomes anytime doing so threatens their self-perpetuated myth they are too good to err. Don’t let that be you. Remember, sometimes your role as leader means having to shoulder the responsibilities of others’ actions. Are you ready to improve your leadership skills? Adopting some or all of these traits could be a step in the right direction.

Don’t Wield Power Over Others. Leaders with toxic tendencies routinely forget their primary job is to effectively guide others to achieve mutually beneficial goals and objectives. It’s not to indiscriminately wield power over them. If you are operating effectively as a leader, you likely have figured out the value you add is often invisible. It is what those around you achieve that truly validates your role, not what you do to promote yourself. Keep any toxic tendencies at bay by focusing on enabling others to succeed. Strive to liberate their talent and potential then, get out of their way.

Toxic leadership demotivates individuals and damages organizations by decreasing the commitment and motivation of their members. The negative outcomes caused by leaders with unchecked toxic tendencies create lasting and enduring harm to an organization’s culture and climate. As Ron Kaufman reminds us, “The culture of an organization is like a river. It can be fluid, strong and consistent, serving as lubricant while guiding its members in the right direction. In contrast a river can become stale and toxic, silently killing those who drink at its shore.”

What kind of culture are you promoting? Is it positive, energizing and inspiring others to be and do their best? Or is it polluted, stagnant and stifling, draining those around you of their energy, creativity, and potential?

Read more: http://ht.ly/Hg9wN

10 Suggestions to Handle Conflict in a Healthy Way

Where life involves people — whether among family, friends or co-workers — there will be potential for conflict.

Any disagreement there?

Want to fight about it? 

In fact, if relationships are normal, conflict is inevitable. 

But, conflict doesn’t have to destroy relationships. It can actually be used to make relationships better. That takes intentionality, practice — and a whole lot of grace. 

In an organizational sense, conflict is certainly a huge part of a leader’s life. Even in a pastor’s life. 

It seems to reason that learning to deal with conflict successfully should be one of our goal as leaders.

Here are 10 suggestions to effectively handle conflict:

Understand the battle. Make sure you understand the real source of the conflict. Many times we address symptoms, but we really aren’t even addressing with the real issue. That wastes time, frustrates people, and makes the conflict linger longer. It’s usually a heart issue that is controlling everything being said. (Proverbs 4:23) Discovering that is key. Make sure you ask lots of questions and attempt to clarify the root issue of the conflict. (This is where a third party help is often needed.) 

Find the right time and place When emotions are high is not good timing for dealing with conflict. Personal conflict should not be handled in public. Don’t be afraid to schedule a time to address the conflict. 

Examine yourself first. Sometimes the issue is personal to you and you are only blaming others for your problem. That’s not fair, nor does it provide a healthy resolution to conflict. Look carefully at the “plank” in your own eye. (Matthew 7:3-5) 

Consider the other side of the conflict. Put yourself in the other person’s shoes and consider their viewpoint. (Philippians 2:4) Why would they think the way they think? Is it a difference in personal values or a misunderstanding? What if I were in their situation — how would I respond? 

Do not overreact to the issue or overload on emotion. Stick to the issue at hand. When emotions are exaggerated it disarms the other party and a healthy resolution is harder to attain. Control yourself from extremity or absolutes. Avoid phrases like “You always…”. (Proverbs 25:28) 

Do not dance around or sugarcoat the issue or disguise it in false kindness.Sometimes we fail to address the conflict because we are afraid of how the other person may respond or we are afraid of hurting feelings. The avoidance usually will cause more conflict eventually. Be kind, but make sure you are clear, direct, and helpful.(Proverbs 27:5) 

Do not allow the small disagreements to become big disagreements. The way to keep most huge conflict (the kind that destroys relationships) from occurring is by confronting the small conflict along the way. Minor conflict is always easier to handle than major conflict.

Be firm, but gentle. Learn the balance between the two. It’s critical in dealing with conflict. (Consider Jesus’ approach in John 4.) 

Work towards a solution. Never waste conflict. Use it to make the organization and/or the relationship better. Everyone wants a win-win situation, and sometimes that’s possible. Getting to the right decision should always be the ultimate goal. (Proverbs 21:3) 

Grant forgiveness easily. Healthy conflict makes relationships stronger, but to get there we must not hold a grudge or seek revenge. That never moves conflict forward towards resolution. Learn the art of grace and forgiveness. It’s a keeper of healthy relationships. (Ephesians 4:32) 

Conflict is a part of relationships. All relationships. As leaders, we shouldn’t shy away from conflict. We should learn it’s value and how to navigate conflict for the overall good of the team.

Read more; http://www.ronedmondson.com/2015/01/10-suggestions-to-handle-conflict.html

7 Habits Of Highly Inept Leaders

John’s voice shook as he shared his latest third party encounter with his bosses’ boss.

“Apparently I was caught yawning during her presentation. I didn’t even realize I had. The irony is that I was really into what she was saying. This had nothing to do with her. But apparently she gave my boss quite an earful about my behavior.

She didn’t even tell me directly so I could explain. How can I let her know this is not about her? I feel just awful. It’s just that I’ve been travelling so much for work, and I haven’t been feeling well.”

“Get some rest, keep doing a great job, and let it go.” I replied. This is not about you.

A confident, humble leader would have a different response to a yawning audience. Sadly such a reaction likely stems from insecurity and other inept behavior.

Effective Versus Inept Leaders

Stephen Covey has written about 7 Habits Of Highly Effective People. Today I share 7 habits of highly inept leaders:

1. Be Reactive – Respond to the biggest fires first with full on urgency. Pull as many people into the mix as you can. When you’re stressed, make sure your team is stressed right along with you.
2. Begin With What Will Buy You The Most Political Capital – Scratch the right backs and don’t worry about everyone else. Be at the right place at the politically correct time, your team can get work done.
3. Put Yourself First – Your career matters, make sure you always look out for number one.
4. Think Win At All Costs – So you step on a few toes, or cut a few corners. What matters is making your numbers.
5. Seek First To Cover Your Butt – Don’t leave a trail of ineptitude. Cover your tracks.
6. Micromanage – Don’t leave anything to chance. Your team is likely more inept than you. Watch their every move.
7. Sharpen Your Knife – No time for sharpening your saw. Be prepared to go on the offense with naysayers. A little backstabbing never hurt anyone.  Read more; http://leadchangegroup.com/7-habits-of-highly-inept-leaders/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

The Trickle-Down Effect of Deceptive Leadership

 

IMAGE: Getty Images

We see it every day--leaders who mislead their people. The deceit can come from a variety of motivations. Some good, some not so good. For instance, sometimes a leader exaggerates a work situation because they want to motivate their team. Sometimes a leader leaves out the bad news in an attempt to maintain morale. But, sometimes, they deceive out of greed or a misplaced aversion to conflict.

Regardless of the impetus, bad things happen when a leader misleads their staff. These bad things manifest itself through staff behavior in a variety of ways, including:

They Start to "Spin": Staff members model the behavior of their leader. When they see that you "spin" the facts by leaving certain details out or misrepresenting the particulars of a situation, they recognize that they can use the same techniques to manage you.

They Shift Focus to the Inside: The more that your team recognizes inconsistencies between what you say and what they experience, the more they begin to doubt everything that you say. When this happens, they will shift their focus away from the work (i.e., delivering great service and products to your customers) and towards the internal political environment. They feel compelled to focus on the inside for fear that, if they don't pay attention, they could get burned by their leader.

They Don't Do Their Best: Because the focus has shifted from the outside to the inside, the quality of work diminishes. They can't do their best if they're confused, in doubt or otherwise always looking over their shoulder.

They Play Games: At a certain point, deceitful practices can become so rampant within a group that misrepresentation becomes the norm. Once this occurs, gamesmanship develops into a standard practice and all control is lost.

They Don't Share: Once the games begin, it becomes every man for himself. Your team loses cohesion and each member becomes selfish, glory hounds out to prove that they're performance deserves a bigger piece of the pie than their contemporaries. Any sense of "being in it together" is gone for good.

They Lose Faith in Management: Ultimately, you've lost the team because you've lost their trust. But, interestingly, that's not all that happened through your misleading behavior. Personnel will transfer their mistrust to the rest of the management team within the organization. All bets are off for the business, once this occurs.

To close, don't mislead your people. It creates a culture of deception and promotes misconduct that can take years to undo. Instead, deal in facts, state the truth and develop your people so that they have the skills and intestinal fortitude to accept and handle the realities of any situation that your organization may confront.

Read more; http://ht.ly/Ero4w

When Those Who Know Won’t Share

There is no “I” in team, we are told. It’s important for workers to share information and collaborate. So why would employees deliberately hide knowledge from their colleagues? And yet they do, all the time. 

Knowledge-hiding in the workplace is common and takes different forms, some more harmful than others, according to new research by Catherine E. Connelly, an associate business professor at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, and David Zweig, an associate management professor at the University of Toronto, Scarborough. 

Theirs was not a study of inadvertent communication failures. (That’s a research topic in itself.) Rather, the professors examined the deliberate attempt “to withhold or conceal knowledge that has been requested by another member of the organization.” Based on surveys at a range of workplaces, they were able to trace a “continuum of deception” among knowledge hiders, Professor Zweig said in an interview.

On the least-damaging end of the spectrum, employees felt that they were justified in concealing information when, for example, it was deemed confidential. (Indeed, revealing a piece of juicy confidential gossip could be grounds for dismissal in some cases.)

MICHAEL WARAKSA

Further along on the spectrum, the researchers found that workers might withhold knowledge that a colleague legitimately needs by “playing dumb” — saying they will provide the information later and never following through — or by giving incorrect or incomplete information. 

Why would people act in a way so contrary to their employer’s interests? Because the cliché that knowledge is power holds some truth, Professor Zweig said. “Even though every organization touts the benefits of teams,” he said, “we’re often rewarded individually for our performance.” 

But as knowledge hiders guard their individual interests, they may fail to anticipate the negative consequences of their actions. People are often aware that their colleagues are hiding information from them, Professor Zweig said. This may be interpreted as a “rejection episode” in the target’s eyes and result in retaliation against the perpetrator, creating a vicious cycle of concealment, he said. 

According to a 2013 study led by Matej Cerne of the Center of Excellence for Biosensors, Instrumentation and Process Control in Slovenia, knowledge-hiding “prevents colleagues from generating creative ideas, but it may also have negative consequences for the creativity of the knowledge hider.” In other words, you can’t generate new ideas if you’re suspiciously guarding your territory. 

Many people try to rationalize their withholding ways. They may tell themselves that they are thinking of the greater good of the organization, or that they are in danger of losing their jobs if they don’t keep their superior knowledge status intact. 

“Knowledge-hiding is not necessarily intended to harm an individual or the organization,” according to the study by Professors Connelly and Zweig. But in some cases the practice sounds downright Machiavellian, where, as Professor Zweig put it, people look at others as pawns and consider themselves experts in self-serving manipulation. That is something he would like to investigate, he said. 

How can organizations stop the damaging effects of knowledge-hiding? “Put in incentives to reward people on team outcomes versus solely on individual outcomes,” Professor Zweig said. He noted that many companies devote considerable resources to systems that encourage the transfer of knowledge. But if managers continue to reward individual achievement over group efforts, all that expense may well be for naught.

read more; http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/business/when-those-who-know-wont-share.html?_r=0

5 Signs You’ve Taken Your Eye Off the Leadership Ball

It only takes a second. A brief moment when, just for an instant, a receiver in an (American) football game takes his eye off the ball. That fleeting moment of lost focus can not only result in a dropped pass, sometimes it can cost the team the game. It’s no different in the game of leadership. 

READ MORE; http://ht.ly/EJyhS

Transform Your Mind, Change Your Brain

Don't panic! How to deal with disruptions to your business

So what is disruption?  According to The Disruption Machine, New Yorker, 2014, “it’s a rebellious instinct to discard old business clichés and remake the market landscape. They come from nowhere and instantly are everywhere.”

A disruption is an innovation so important that it forces change. It means you must adapt and do so quickly.  It’s not just about markets and products...it's about our thinking, our ideas, our work, our careers and our mind-sets.

Technological disruptions are moving so quickly it’s become difficult to even pay attention (‘next new bright shiny object’ fatigue)! But technology advancement continues to drive economic growth and unleash disruptive change.

Three Disruptions to Note

Disruption #1: Social Media

Not ‘hot off the press new’, but social media is still definitely worthy of mention as many organisations aren’t on top of their social strategy. Traditionally, companies controlled their message and their brand through well-defined media channels. But, not anymore!

Social media lets your customers, your employees, and your competitors all converse in open communities. Using social media they define and redefine corporate and personal brands—in real time.  Companies caught out in their response to social media are seen to have spectacular meltdowns…followed eagerly by thousands.

As a business, your online social brand needs to be controlled. If you’re not in the conversation around your own products, then your customers and competitors will define your brand for you.

This extends to being attractive to, and attracting, high calibre talent. Your online presence is vital for your talent armoury. Without an online presence you are literally gifting your competition the best in the market. 

Disruption # 2: Wearables – ready for the business

Wearable technology has many forms, such as glasses, watches, smart badges, and bracelets. The potential is tremendous: hands-free, heads-up technology to reshape how work gets done, how decisions are made, and how you engage with employees, customers, and partners.

Wearables are entering areas of previously prohibitive scenarios where safety, logistics, or even etiquette constrained the usage of technology. With wearables definitely in the spotlight today, we can expect more businesses to drive acceptance and use these devices – and add to the headaches of the CIO.  BYOD [bring your own device] is about to be stretched to new limits!

The potential uses for wearables are staggering. In Australia, firefighters are being outfitted with a data-transmitting pill that can detect early signs of heat stress. Might health care insurance companies offer policy discounts for members who quantify their healthy lifestyles by wearing fitness-tracking devices?

Disruption #3: 3D printing

Until now, 3D printing has largely been used by product designers and hobbyists and for a few select manufacturing applications, but the performance of this machinery is improving and the price point is declining rapidly. Using 3D printing, an idea can go directly from a 3D design file to a finished part or product, potentially skipping many traditional manufacturing steps. 

Its uses are mind-bending; anything from makeup, food and even ‘bio-printed’ organs are being created using 3D print technology. It has major disruptive potential and it’s growing fast. (TJ McCue predicts 3D Printing will be a $3 Billion industry by 2016).

Question: ‘Should We Panic?’

No. Bring in the creatives! Employ people who will shake the tree, look for new ways, ask questions and offer suggestions that will result in the development of breakthrough solutions. 

Being naturally curious they will look for patterns and apply them to your business. They will interpret trends, use outward thinking, challenge outmoded practices and develop successful responses to outsmart the competition.

Embedding the creative thinking process allows an organisation to protect itself against the onslaught of disruption. The secret lies in an organisations’ ability to identify, hire and house creative thinkers within its walls.

We recently discovered an office in Amsterdam where all furniture is connected to wires and pulleys. By day - a groovy office, by night and weekends (with the furniture raised to the ceiling) - a dance, yoga or community space. Workplace disruption at its best! 

Read more; http://ht.ly/CWZLu

10 Things I Hate About Leadership

Image by Kenny Louie

Leadership comes with it’s own pitfalls. The trappings we all hate. The frustrations of making a tough choice. The terror of stepping forward.

Yet we lead, even with the long lists of things we hate.

1. The added responsibility of leadership: Yup, we all step into leadership and know there’s going to be added responsibility. Sometimes the added responsibility that comes with leadership can be overwhelming.

2. The responsibility to make the hard decisions: Leaders are there for a reason. We’re there to set a course, to plot the way, to make decisions. Not every decision we face will be easy. We’ll have to make some really difficult choices.

3. The unclear path: As a young leader, you’ll be put into situations where you have no idea what to do. The path will be hidden. Still, you’re called to go forward even when you can’t see more than one or two sets in front of yourself.

4. The desires of others:Any leader who has been in the leadership game long enough knows this one. There’s a lot of politics in leadership and people try to push their desires on you. You’ll be tempted to go their way rather than to forge your own path.

5. The failures we experience along the way: I know failures are a great pathway to learning. But I don’t like to fail.

6. The feelings of responsibility: This thing I hate about leadership is similar to #1 but different enough I believe it deserves it’s own spot. A weight begins to fall upon you as you lead and you begin to feel responsible for those under you. Quitting or changing positions can make you feel like you’re abandoning those you lead.

7. The influence of my leadership: Leaders realize every action they take has an impact on those around them. Your influence goes beyond your wildest imagination. Sometimes I don’t want to influence anyone.

8. The passing of the baton: There will come a time in every leader’s life where they will have to step down. The leader will have to pass the baton to the next generation. Even knowing this can be difficult. And I hate that!

9. The transitions of others: You spend a lot of time building up others and getting them into the right positions. Only they move on and begin something new. It’s hard to accept but great knowing they’re having an impact in other places.

10. The desire to see people change: People have so much potential. So often they fail to live up to their full potential. Us leaders, we’re able to see the potential but we’re not always able to draw it out. We learn that we can create change in others, we can only try to coax it out.

Read more; http://ht.ly/CQWVp

How Do Trustworthy Leaders Behave?

Pixar and Disney Animation president Ed Catmull (left) has instituted workshops designed to educate colleagues about how the company views trustworthiness. | Reuters/Regis Duvignau

It can be easy to trust too quickly, especially when a leader is affable, has an impressive résumé, and tells you what you want to hear. In 30 years of surveying senior executives, social psychologist Roderick Kramer has found that 8 out of 10 report being burned at least once because they trusted too much or put their faith in the wrong person at some point in their careers.

It’s important for an organization to build trust among workers for several reasons, says Kramer. Employees who know they can trust their leaders are happy workers who believe in what they are doing. Creating this trust from within can also lead to public trust. “A lot of leaders talk about public trust, then they focus on the impression-management side of things,” says Kramer, “it’s much more important to establish genuine trust within your organization, which leads to trustworthy performance, which then builds over time into a public reputation of being trustworthy.”

With surveys from Edelman, Harvard’s Center for Public Leadership, and others reporting public trust in business and government leaders at near historic lows, Kramer says it’s a good time for leaders to build a trustworthy reputation. “People are looking for leaders they can trust, and so there’s a lot of capital sitting on the table for leaders who can get the equation right.” So how do truly trustworthy leaders behave?

They project confidence, competence, and benevolence.

Research shows that trustworthy leaders demonstrate that they have the skills and knowledge to steer the organization, that they don’t shy from straight talk, and that they are acting in the best interests of the organization, rather than in their own best interests.

“These things sound obvious, but still it’s important to look for ways to communicate them,” says Kramer. “Several people have written about the importance of leading by walking around — being present, accessible. Leaders like this leave a good impression as tangible, real people.”

They say — and show — that trust is an important company value.

In a way, good leaders are trust teachers, says Kramer. “They talk about the importance of trust, so that people know the leader values it, and that there will be consequences if that trust is violated.” He notes that at Pixar, a company known for creating animated films that kids love and parents can trust, CEO Ed Catmull has instituted workshops specifically to educate colleagues about how the company views trustworthiness.

As an example of demonstrating trust in employees, Kramer cites Whole Foods CEO John Mackey and his policy whereby employees directly hire new people to work on their teams, rather than relying on a system of centralized hiring through HR. “He’s pushing the decision-making process from the top down to the people who are going to have to live with the consequences of those decisions, and that doesn’t happen in many organizations,” says Kramer.

They establish clear roles and systems to speed trust.

While one leader’s behavior can set a tone of trustworthiness, the entire company needs to have rules that enable trust to permeate a group’s culture, Kramer has found in his research. “When people know what they’re supposed to do, and they know what other people are supposed to do, then they trust that system of roles to work.”

He points to Pixar’s “Braintrust,” which Catmull describes in his book, Creativity, Inc., the process by which the company’s top minds relentlessly vet creative ideas and identify a project’s problems. Because the system is so rigorous and well defined, it engenders trust in the ideas that are deemed good enough to move forward. “And once you’ve had a history of success with that culture of rules, it becomes a background expectation,” says Kramer, a state he calls presumptive trust, which in turn leads to trustworthy performance.

They share the credit, and they take the blame.

Because leaders are highly visible, people both within an organization and outside the organization tend to overweight their responsibility for successes and failures, a phenomenon the late Harvard scholar Richard Hackman called the “leader attribution error.” For example, look at the success of the late Steve Jobs, says Kramer. “Many creative minds at Apple contributed to the development of the iPhone, but in the mainstream Jobs got the credit.”

Leaders can beneficially exploit this phenomenon to build trust by being out in front of the organization’s decisions, says Kramer, so that when good things happen, people recognize that the leader was in charge of the process, even though he or she might share the credit. “And there’s a little bit of evidence that suggests that when leaders are generous at sharing credit, they actually are more trusted,” he says. “It shows that they are fully confident.” Likewise, demonstrating confidence by admitting full responsibility when something goes wrong — even if the leader wasn’t fully responsible — can in some cases enhance a leader’s reputation.

They don’t mask a crisis.

"One of the fatal mistakes many organizational leaders make is not the initial misstep that causes the crisis; it’s the cover-up — the attempt to spin it or mask the problem,” he says. People quickly lose confidence in leaders who do this, says Kramer, pointing to bankers during and following the 2008 financial crisis. “I think some of the disenchantment with Wall Street was that leaders didn’t really take responsibility for their errors,” he says. “They blamed the system, or imprecise regulation — and people don’t like that because it’s a dodge.”

Instead, Kramer suggests, acknowledge the problem quickly, take swift and decisive action to address it, and put in place measures to prevent its reoccurrence. If the problem involves a defective product, recall it “and make a very public display of the new safeguards or policies that will prevent it from happening again.” In a recent book with Todd Pittinsky, Restoring Trust in Organizations and Leaders, Kramer suggests it is possible for leaders and organizations to regain the public’s trust, but it isn’t easy.

Read more; http://ht.ly/CiJ83