Fear: The Growth Inhibitor

Due to very interesting conversations I have had this week, I wonder how many of us go through the challenge of dealing with the internal conflict of showing self and at the same time trying to become what our bosses expect us to be. How many of us have to live with the edict that "this is how we do things here"; "do not rock the boat";"questioning is a career-limiting move".

This has occupied my mind because this experience that many have to go through shows the contradictions that are inherent in organisations. Almost to a fault, all of them will proclaim that they seek to have the best people; they want people to be free to express themselves and contribute to new ideas; that they want to create the best environments for their people to succeed, and thus want the best of their minds and creative potential. Some actually do try and get the best people. But what we often forget is that organisations do not, to a fault, only reward the best amongst the best. Being a social being or system composed of people with different interests, and having an environment external to itself to which it must respond, an organisation will not simply behave the way it proclaims through some form of religious edict. It will respond to the culture that has developed, and that culture itself is informed by the behaviours that are rewarded, or those that are disincentivised. Paying a critical role in this, given their role in shaping the mannerisms through their control of reward systems, are those who have been given supervisory responsibilities, whom we call managers. Sometime people think these managers are leaders, but as we know, the 'leadership' honour bears no relationship to the title but is informed by the behaviour of the individual over time.

In this environment, what happens to you as the individual who thinks that your voice is an important part of your character? If this organisation has recruited you on the basis of your character, and gives you this promise of an environment that allows you to realise who you are, get involved in shaping an important dialogue and make you feel like a valuable member of a team? How do you respond when you think that this character that you have may not always be aligned to the culture that has developed either in the whole organisation, or that part that you are exposed to? Would it be fair to your family that you stop worrying about any negative impact to your reward or growth if you act as per an organisation's promise when you know this is not rewarded in practice? Does it not mean that you should change and try as much as possible to 'fit in' so that you can succeed?

Dealing with this issue in my view requires that we appreciate the paradoxical situation that the individual has been placed in. In order to succeed, the individual has to not only perform, but also show how they are different to others. This difference cannot happen without the individual displaying their unique strengths and capabilities, which may include showing those things about an organisation that the seniors may either be blind to or not understand. Some of these things may go against the assumptions or plans that the seniors have of the business, but the individual,  because of character, ability or principle, will not want to hold back from expressing what he or she sees. If, on the other hand, the individual decides to hold back, if it happens in future that which the individual sees really does have an impact that would have been foreseen had the individual spoken, they are unlikely to be recognised. Paradoxically, keeping silent has a short-term benefit, but potentially a long-term negative consequence. This is because, at a time when an organisation goes through very difficult moments, and now starts to really exhibit the behaviour of seeking ideas, that individual would not be on anybody's mind because there will not be a record of them showing leadership, notwithstanding the fact that in the past that may not have been rewarded.

Hence my approach is to err on the side of originality. That means being true to one's beliefs, opinions, observations and thoughts. It also means being open to a dialogue that may make you change your perspective. The alternative is suffering from a huge internal conflict because you are now trying to become something you are not, and over time this impacts your own morale, and thus your work. You become one of those individuals so defeated by situations that your head is always down, and everyone sees you as a source of demoralisation. The same seniors who wanted a meek behaviour from you start to judge you as an individual who lacks energy and enthusiasm.

In his book, Strong and Fearless: The Quest for Personal Power, Phil Nuernberger warns us about the twin demons that may inhibit us from displaying the best of ourselves and inhibit us. These demons are self-hatred and fear. Self-hatred is about guilt which reflects the past. Fear is about the future and reflects a response to an anxiety of what may happen. He tells us that an inherent characteristic of those who seek to control others is to instill fear, which leads to stress, and builds on the myth some managers have that stress drives performance. He tells us that fear destroys concentration, and when we go through fear, our minds are not as conscious and thus not focused. Why would I want to have a less conscious mind at work and how can I produce the best in that situation?

I like the advice he gives that we should focus on the present. What is it that I can do now that makes me build to the future I want to create? My words I always give in conversation are: "do now that which you want to become". And you will not do that by simply following a script that someone else has written and which has a very limited shelf life. You will not do that by closing your eyes to what you see which is not to the benefit of the business in the long term, no matter how uncomfortable to those who hold a senior responsibility in an organisation at present. The alternative is you being part of a slow decline that may eat both you and your seniors. It is a tough place to be in, but better than being one of the "timid souls" that, in the words of former US President Theodore Rooselvelt in "The Man in the Arena", "neither know victory nor defeat".

Do not be timid. Let your growth not be inhibited by fear.

Remaining Relevant for Sustainable Growth

I had a very revealing conversation with a colleague recently about the meaning of staying relevant as a root for a sustainable and growing career. This conversation was triggered by reports of leadership changes in a leading South Africa-based corporation which has operations both throughout our continent and in other markets in the Middle East. The vexing question for us was why did it seem that most people that were being sourced to lead its strategic business transformation were all coming from outside, some who were seen to reverse its progress towards a more diverse leadership.

We reflected how it had become successful by growing people from within. We could only speculate as to why but it seemed obvious to us that the answer was much deeper than we could know from outside. This discussion was also more relevant noting this apparent reversal of progress towards a more diverse leadership group, a critical question for a South African business in particular noting our apartheid past and the aspirations expressed in the 1996 Constitution.

Whilst we did not know what could have caused the internal candidates in that situation not to be the ones considered for the new roles, we reflected more in other situations that we know. We noted situations where people get to join or grow in organisations because they have particular characteristics, knowledge and potential for further growth. How sometimes these individuals show a depth of excellence that builds a promise for the future. In some cases, the organisations they work for do give them the support they need to grow, or sometimes the situations are frustrating for them.

But we then could see there are situations where some individuals become comfortable where they are, because the trappings of success start to consume them. The hunger for learning starts to fade away as they start to enjoy the material benefits of what they have achieved. The yearning for further development starts to disappear as they start to believe they have arrived. In a changing and complex world, which requires ongoing understanding of the external impacts on the business, they build on past success and internal relationships, blind to all that is happening around them. Holding to all they know and the relationships they have built to where they are now, they forget what had gotten them to the successful position they would be in.

Suddenly, the organisation faces an external shock so deep that it starts to look at ways to change its trajectory dramatically. And as it starts to look at its next generation of leaders, it finds that it cannot rely on them to deal with this new world. That they have not build the necessary complex set of skills or process of understanding new questions enough in a way that will help lead to the critical answers needed. That its next generation of leaders have been so internally focused; so driven by building internal power bases; so taken up by the ego of position, that they cannot be trusted with the critical transformational tasks that are so necessary for the organisation not to self-destruct.

And in many cases, as we proceeded with the dialogue, we could see that, as people grow, they forget that they need to stay relevant. That always they need to be who they always thought they were. And they cannot be that unless they continuously re-invent themselves; deepen their learning; always seek to understand the changes that are taking place in the world around them; build new external relationships whilst strengthening the existing ones; and take new opportunities that stretch their lateral experience which is a key building block for the future.

We wondered whether in the organisation we started conversing about it was not likely that some individuals did not continue to stay relevant. All we could was speculate. But more importantly, we could draw comfort for ourselves that this was a critical lesson nonetheless.

For you to have the staying power necessary for growth, it is critical to stay relevant. It is not only in the successful execution of the tasks of the present that this will happen. It is also in showing readiness to deal with the changes that come with an uncertain future that this will happen. Otherwise, the forces of change will cause you to miss out on growth opportunities which would have been yours for the taking.

Learn. Discover. Connect. Stay relevant. Grow.

Be the Creator of a Happy Career Future

I have had the fortune of truly revealing conversations that focus on the issue of happiness in a career. Truly revealing for me as I realised how much one can take this for granted.

From my own personal reflection of where I am and where I want to be; to the young professional who indicated her desire for her chosen long-term profession and is preparing to take a salary cut to get to where she wants; a friend who has gone through a negative experience in her company but in the process discovered a gap in organisations that requires her skills and experience, which is leading her to create her own advisory business; a friend who is about to embark on a career change so fundamental it both scares and excites her; a young man about to leave a lucrative career in investment banking and join a leading strategy advisory consultancy because that will stretch his mind more.

In all this, I learnt that the real issue we face is not always about the frustration of the present; it is not on the inability of others to give us what will make us happy. It is not in the failure of organisations to advance our careers and interests the way we would have expected. In saying that, I am not discounting the long-term risks that organisations face by failing to take care of their people. My reflection is on you and me as individuals who exist inside organisations and not just because of them.

The real issue is that we should focus on that which we desire, rather than that which we do not like. As one leadership professor told me, “If you get rid of what you do not want, it does not follow that what remains is what you want”. If it does not exist but is desired in society, how do we make sure that it is apparent and we get an opportunity to do it? Focus on roles, responsibilities and opportunities that we will both have an impact and enjoy.

The most profound lesson for me though is from the friend who is about to embark on a fundamental career change. She has been working for about twenty years. Having consulted a career counsellor, a retired university professor, he has told her she will never have a happy corporate career. And he emphasised that this was not about competence. That she is likely to thrive on a different environment which he has given her useful ideas on. At the end of their dialogue, he gave her this simple but powerful conclusion: “you must know if you are going the route I advise, you might earn less money than you earn now. But the guarantee is that you will be happy." She is now on a different journey altogether and creating a path to real career happiness.

Each one of us reaches those moments where we need to let go of the frustrations and apparent stability of the present for a happy yet unpredictable future. It does not all have to result in sacrifice of income. All of us as individuals actually did this when we looked for our first job.

It is better to spend your energy on positively defining your future than on the challenges of the present. Lest you lose your confidence, creativity and character.

Conversation on Family and Career Progression

In the last two weeks I was blessed by having two separate conversations that enriched me slightly on how I think of the role of family in our careers.  And they were both triggered by people who thought I would know more on the matter. What was so enriching about them was that the individuals were at different stages of their careers.

One was of a young professional woman whose children are starting to demand a lot of parent time, and both she and her partner are working. She was in her mind battling with balancing the time she must give her children and the need to put effort at work so that she could progress in her career as well. The question she asked herself was whether, in making this balance, she would not be a failure if her career did not go as fast as it would if she did not focus on her children as much. I must emphasise here that the issue of how she shares these duties with her partner was beyond the scope of our conversation and was not one I was qualified to comment on.

My only response was that she must do what is best for her and family without giving up her career. That if it means some of the achievements would be slower over the next two to three years, say, but enables her family to have the right foundation, she must make that choice. And I emphasised that success in life could not be measured simply by how fast one climbed the corporate ladder. Raising a family was a successful venture as well. Being an example to the young ones in her extended family was a measure of success. And my last point was that she must see the next three years, if she decides to give more attention to her children in their formative years, as a mini-sabbatical period during which she would use the time to both reflect and study further so that she was more armed to tackle the intensive corporate commitments that would come later.

I must admit here that my conversation with the individual above was influenced by one I had had with another young professional. Her conversation with me was different but complementary to the one above. She indicated that she had spent the last three to four years focused on her young children and was now ready to focus more on her corporate career. And it was clear in the conversation that she did not see this period as having been wasted. Our discussion focused on how she should be looking for the right growth opportunities now that she felt she could devote more time than she could have in the recent period. What I did not know at the time was that this conversation would be so influential to the one I started with above.

I was reminded of an experience I had when my previous employer sent me on a senior executive programme to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 2006. In attendance at this programme were seventy six other senior executives from all parts of the world. One of the assignments we were given was to dream of the future, by imagining ourselves on the cover of Fortune magazine ten years into the future. That we must imagine what kind of project or initiative we would have done, probably for our companies, which would lead us to be on the cover of Fortune magazine, how it started, and what we did. We all put our minds to document our individual dreams, and duly submitted to the professor leading that module. When we had the group feedback session, the professor commented on the good quality of projects and initiatives as well as the approaches used to define the reasons for success. But he then made a comment that led to an embarrassing and reflective silence in the room, and I paraphrase him: “I read these stories and how you imagined putting your dreams in practice. But in all the assignments I read, over the imagined 10 years, none of you spoke about what happened to your families”. All seventy seven of us had said nothing about our families!!! And he went on to tell us how, in our quest for success, we forget those who matter most and provide the anchor for what we are to become. In many instances, they are the reason we put such efforts to succeed.

In all this, it is clearer to me that we cannot claim to succeed if this is not positively impacting our families. It does not matter how you define family, but if you have one, as one leadership writer says, make them your number one customer.

I am touched that the conversations with the two professionals I spoke about served to bring this issue to my head again. And I honour them and many others like them on this Mother’s Day.

Leaders Should Make Heroes of Others: The Cynical Observations of Bertolt Brecht

I have had conversations in the last month with various individuals focused on the issue of recognition and the tendency to attribute success of team-driven efforts to individuals. This may happen either through the positions such individuals hold or the privilege of being those who have to tell the story.  In a world that may promote individualism, we see corporate leaders, or leaders of business units, or line managers, who become identified as being the only drivers of success of initiatives. 

Some will happily take all the work done by others, and appropriate it for themselves. This leads to those who engage in this behaviour to start framing whatever they do as being about them and them only. In the process, they may leave behind excellent individuals who have made a contribution but do not have the voice or the space to tell the story of their role. This is a prevalent form of corporate plagiarism.

The result is that all of us try to become this superhero because that is what the world seems to reward. We tend to forget that it is not possible for anyone to do everything themselves or without the help of others. That it is in trying to lift everyone in a team that you are able to achieve true success. And more importantly, it is in ensuring that you give credit, rather than take it, that your true leadership potential is shown. This requires one to go against the instinct of seeking all glory for oneself, and none for the other.

On the other hand, I have witnessed powerful experiences of the positive impact of giving credit to those who may not always speak about their roles. How internal and external stakeholders find it exciting to know that those who may not always hold very senior positions are behind significant and ground-breaking work. How that at times translates to a deeper relationship with clients who now have a better appreciation of the depth of the organisation they are dealing with and that there is no dependency on a person. If then the experience of not simply making those in front heroes has this impact, we may wonder why it is not the universal practice in organisations.

German playwright and theatre director Bertolt Brecht tackled this in what is one of my favourite poems. It is fair to quote the whole poem in this conversation.

Questions From a Worker Who Reads (Bertolt Brecht, 1935)

Who built Thebes of the 7 gates?

In the books you will read the names of kings.

Did the kings haul up the lumps of rock?

And Babylon, many times demolished,

Who raised it up so many times?

In what houses of gold glittering Lima did its builders live?

Where, the evening that the Great Wall of China was finished, did the masons go?

Great Rome is full of triumphal arches.

Who erected them?

Over whom did the Caesars triumph ?

Had Byzantium, much praised in song, only palaces for its inhabitants?

Even in fabled Atlantis, the night that the ocean engulfed it,

The drowning still cried out for their slaves.

The young Alexander conquered India.

Was he alone?

Caesar defeated the Gauls.

Did he not even have a cook with him?

Philip of Spain wept when his armada went down.

Was he the only one to weep? 

Frederick the 2nd won the 7 Years War.

Who else won it?

Every page a victory.

Who cooked the feast for the victors? 

Every 10 years a great man.

Who paid the bill?

So many reports. 

So many questions.

Brecht makes simple what is really the most obvious. In his own style, he forces the reader to come to terms with the reality of how life really works. If we think about this in the context of the corporate world, how many go through periods of frustration because their work is not recognised; that those who have positions or access are the only ones glorified; and that only the favourites of certain leaders are the ones whose names are promoted.

Looking at it from another perspective, how many who have leadership positions are prepared to ensure that their team or members of their team get recognition rather than themselves. How many would be prepared to be the ones who are the ambassadors of their team’s achievement, rather than the ones who lead Brecht to have so many questions.

This problem is a challenge both for those who seek individual glory at the expense of others, or those who do not get the glory they deserve. If you are the one who is not getting the benefit or recognition for their work, think of what do you need to do to ensure that this is known without seeming arrogant? What can you do to find your own voice or how can you get others to give your voice a space? 

For those with a leadership responsibility, how do you to start to see the benefit from your team advancing rather than only yourself; how do you ensure you play the role of positioning your team vs positioning yourself as a leader.  Allowing them to attend that all-important meeting that would expose them to senior officers in their organisation. Enabling them to showcase their work with clients. All in all playing the respected role of a sponsor to your team and its members.

It is more obvious to those who are the victims of this behaviour that the alternative is better. Those who have a managerial responsibility have to travel a long internal leadership journey to see the benefits.

Maybe if this happened Brecht would have more answers than questions.

To Cause Change We Need to Lead with Courage

Through conversations I have had in the last two weeks, and especially on the back of the continuing racism in my country, my mind has been occupied by the issue of leadership particularly in the private sector. I mention the South African private sector in particular because of the real challenge we have, of a sector of the economy that still in the main maintains white racial domination.

In my mind I have asked myself the question as to what kind of leadership would allow a situation to continue that does not allow all forms of talent to thrive simply because people to continue with discrimination. On the other side, I have asked myself why would those who were historic victims of apartheid, and have a chance to be in senior management positions, do not do more to confront and change these historic tendencies. Noting the nature of corporate organisations, and the difficulties that come with going against the grain, I have been thinking more about the kind of leadership traits that would be necessary for the change that is so necessary.

I do not want to write a long treatise on leadership as there are too many texts on this. Mine is really a call to action for those of us in this generation who have been blessed with this responsibility. Contemporary leadership studies pioneer Warren Bennis (1925 – 2014), whose essays are a joy to read, summarised what he saw as four essential competencies of leadership in his famous paper The Alchemy of Leadership. He listed these as adaptive capacity, engaging others by creating shared meaning, voice and integrity. He found that leaders who had these qualities had a winning combination.

What struck me when I read this essay, however, was Bennis’ observation that an individual may have the requisite qualities for leadership and little or no opportunity to use them. He also makes this very interesting statement: “who knows how many people with the necessary gifts for extraordinary leadership are stifled by class, racism, and other forms of discrimination…”. He concluded that great leaders emerge only when they can find “a forum that allows them to exercise their gifts and skills”.

I have always felt that there was some characteristic of leadership Bennis identified in this paper was not explicit about it. In my view, buried in his essay is the important question of courage. Courage sounds simple, but is very difficult to practice. It is difficult because one always runs the risk of being unpopular and creating enemies if you go against a dominant practice. However, I know of no leader who was critical in a process of change but never had courage. It is actually the lack of courage that makes many of us not to do the obvious things we know need to be done.

Courage is not about being reckless. It needs to be exercised with tact; demands of you to engage others by creating shared meaning; wants you to have a voice which shows your purpose and character; requires of you to draw on your integrity; needs you to have the adaptive capacity which includes resilience, being a noticer (especially of talent!!!), learning, creatively and always seizing opportunities. If we become such leaders, it means we refuse to surround ourselves with Yes-Men (gender specificity deliberate). Courage means we should be comfortable with contrary opinions and be obsessed with creating diversity which enriches the work organisations do. Courage means we should be comfortable in saying no to people in our closest social circles if they do not meet criteria that are required for an opportunity. Courage is in being able to offer a contrary opinion to your senior if you believe their course of action is to the detriment of the organisation (you only do this if you voice and integrity). Courage is in being able to give opportunities to young people and not being imprisoned by fear of failure. Courage is in being able to think less of self and more of other.

Those of us, who have some leadership responsibility, should ask ourselves whether we have the courage to pursue and do the things we know are necessary. To cause the change that impacts on the many whose hopes and dreams are in our hands.

We need to lead with courage to cause change.

Is Growth Synonymous with Getting a Title?

I recently had a discussion with a friend that has had a profound impact on how I view growth. Maybe I should have known this, but the dialogue we had made it clearer.

For those of us pursuing a career, particularly in corporate life, we easily fall into the trap of thinking that growth will be defined by having a position in a bureaucratic structure. Generally, this involves being either head of something, all the way up to being the CEO if you have such capabilities and networks, with networks being the operative word. This is also not helped by the fact that organisations seek to reward on the basis of these titles in a number of cases, and not on the basis of contribution. It is only natural therefore that one may seek to get a job with a title as an affirmation of progress. Needless to say, this also means better income, benefits and all the things that go with it.

As we had a discussion, we were thinking about where I am now, and where I could grow. In the discussion we now had to confront the issue of whether I see myself being at the most senior level in an organisation. Even though I said yes, the most striking part of the conversation was when he asked me to explain why. The more we spoke, the more he seemed to create confusion in my mind. This he did by getting me to confront who I am, and what it is that people seek or value in me. His question was whether having a responsibility in a bureaucratic structure does not take away something that I already am contributing to the world.

We moved the conversation from being about me to a general discussion on people’s approach to careers. In that discussion we started to look deeply at the meaning of happiness and satisfaction in a career. It was through that dialogue that it became re-emphasised in my mind that having a bureaucratic title may not necessarily be the best thing for everyone who seeks growth. In essence, my friend argued that growth is a comprehensive process, of which organisational structure captures only a part. Growth is also an intellectual and emotional process.

The challenge we have generally is that, whilst it may be true that growth is not the same as getting a title, the world we are in starts to reward only that form of growth. The onus is on the individual to re-frame their growth story to the things that have meaning for them. If it is about leading others, is it possible to do this through a series of multidisciplinary projects, of high impact, that involve people, which are valued by one’s organisation? If growth is about intellectual recognition, is it possible to increasingly get assignments that require you to show thought leadership, and thus be recognised on that basis.

Of course, the above growth paths do not have to be mutually exclusive. You can lead others and show thought leadership at the same time. The point, however, is about one being able to define for themselves what is the meaning of growth for them and thus to take the path that will lead to real satisfaction. Whilst this process is harder because we always struggle to get to know ourselves very well, it is much better than expanding energies fighting a corporate battle for a title that may not lead to your happiness.

I have seen how, in the quest to satisfy an ego by getting the next highest position, or trying to get someone you like to get the next highest position, organisations have lost valuable people who may have been better capable but were either ignored or deliberately frustrated. This focus on titles can lead to unbelievable waste of talent and loss of focus.

Whilst my discussion with my friend did not solve all questions about the long-term growth path, it did illuminate for me the things I need to think about and also understand better what the world values in me. It may be that a title might be what I need to have, but it does not have to be. I am much wiser.