There is No Maximum to Human Potential

A recent visit to the land of lack

Many productivity challenges that companies are facing today are caused by management not seeing the big picture.  Recently I was meeting with an organization to discuss how to improve productivity in their office.  Their directors and managers had build little fiefdoms and would not collaborate with one another regarding work flow, coaching employees, or anything for that matter.  In talking with them, what stood out immediately was the fact that this culture had developed through a “land of lack” mentality.  This mentality is based upon the belief that resources are scarce and that we need to protect what we have.  Because of the fear of losing headcount or getting employees transferred to other divisions these managers felt they had to protect their scarce resources and not let out any of their secrets.  They would instead be on purpose not to help anyone else on other teams, and would withhold information even if the act would impact the customer.  In talking to the person in charge of these division directors, my curiousity got the best of me when I asked her how she held her directors accountable.  She said that she believes in the “hands off” approach and to let each manager lead in their own way.  The bottom line is she knew it was a mess and had not a clue that her “head in the sand” approach had cultivated the soil for the “land of lack” culture to run abundant in this division. These problems would not exist in any of these divisions if the directors could view their world and see the big picture.  What I am saying is that their participation in not helping has hurt the group overall which they are a part of.  They live in the poor envioronment they created along with their employees which makes everybody's jobs less productive and enjoyable. 

Overall, these directors have small picture thinking.  They think they are somehow gaining advantage trying to put one another at a disadvantage.  The truth is, in the end they are all impacted negatively. After a while, these type of behaviors take on a life of their own and it becomes the “normal” way of doing things. 

The head of this department needs to first pull her head out of the sand.  She needs to lead the team to exchange their small picture thinking for big picture thinking.  These directors need to see evidence of how there is a cause and effect taking place and how working together would actually give everyone a more competitive advantage and a more positive productive work environment. 

This type of behavior is common today in many companies.  These symptoms of poor teamwork, lack of collaboration among departments and managers, all stem from executive management not framing things around the big picture.  If we can work the top levels to frame their ideas and communications on the big picture way of looking at situations people will become accustomed to the big picture thinking.  As a result, they will begin to collaborate, share ideas and information with the intent to help themselves---not to help the others of course.  Who really cares why they do it as long as they do it.  This will counteract the culture of lack and create a culture of striving towards abundance. 

Land of lack

In a sky called economy existed the planet Business.  Business was separated into the northern and southern hemispheres.  The northern hemisphere had the “lack” atmosphere where the southern hemisphere had the “abundance” atmosphere.  People worked in business and based on their atmosphere determined their behavior.  Those living in the "land of abundance" breathed in air everyday that reminded them of the abundance of resources that exist in their land.  They realize that there is more than enough for everyone and that when one person raises up it can cause others to benefit.  Farther south on the other side of the equator existed the “land of lack” where people constantly lived in fear that someone else would take their resources.  They spent most of their energy trying to protect their small amount of resources while trying to think of ways to step on others to gain more ground.  This constant fear and stealing from one another caused everyone in the land of lack to fret and fight constantly.   

In which land does your company habitate? 

We need to get real with ourselves

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.”  –Richard P. Feynman, Nobel price-winning physicist

I recently came across this quote and it made me stop in my tracks and ponder its significance. 

I reflected on a time when I witnessed a manager in a coaching session say that it was the other 249 people at his facility that had a problem and he was just fine.  What prompted this discussion is that the employee hotline had received a record number of complaints about him.  As a result, he was approached with the idea of getting coaching versus being fired.  His response to me right in front of his boss he was just fine and that the other 249 people are the ones who need coaching.

Another example that is more commonly shared is with regard to time.  Something along the lines of, "Well, if I only had the time to do____________ I would be able to _____________.

 

We all know that the first blank is filled with an item that is uncomfortable or requires an effort that they are not presently ready or willing to put forth. 

I could fill the blanks in several ways.  Some of the first that come to mind are...

work out: lose weight

read more: get farther ahead

yardwork:  host BBQ's

get to know my employees:  strengthen relationships in the office

cook:  eat healthier

prospect: get new clients

Let’s use this quote as a reference point or guide to uncover what we might be fooling ourselves about. 

The truth is he completely believed himself to be right when the rest of us know he was only fooling himself.

 

WHAT ARE THE SHARED QUALITIES OF TOP SELLERS?

The Harvard Business School did a study to determine the common characteristics of top salespeople.  The evidence they found is clear that most people can be top sellers if they are willing to study, concentrate and focus on their performance.  Here are the attributes the study found in highly successful salespeople:

•             Did not take “no” personally and allow it to make them feel like a failure.  They have high enough levels of confidence or self-esteem so that, although they may be disappointed, they are not devastated.

•             100% acceptance of responsibility for results. They didn't blame the economy, the competition, or their company for dips in closings.  Instead, the worse things were, the harder they worked to make negatives work to their advantage.

•             Above average ambition and desire to succeed.  This is a key area because it affected priorities and how they spent their time on and off the job, with whom they associated, etc.

•             High levels of empathy. The ability to put themselves in the customer's shoes, imagine needs and concerns and respond appropriately was a habit.

•             Intensely goal-oriented. Always knowing what they were going after and how much progress they were making kept distractions from sidetracking them.

•             Above-average will power and determination.  No matter how tempted they were to give up, they persisted toward goals.  Self-discipline was a key.

•             Impeccably honest with themselves and the customer.  No matter what the temptation to fudge, these people resisted and gained ongoing trust of customers.

•             Ability to approach strangers even when it is uncomfortable.               

How can you determine if a person is coachable?

Executives ask me all of the time how they can tell if someone on their staff is coachable.  Normally they have an employee who is doing a good job overall but they are struggling in one or two areas and this is affecting their overall game.  Dr. Carol Dweck, Stanford Psychologist, recently shed some light on this with her research published in her new book about mindsets.  Now, back to the questions I ask...

Some of the questions I ask the executive are:

1.Is the person aware this area is of concern to you?  to others?

2.If they are aware, do they agree that it is an area for improvement?

3.Does your company culture embrace continuous improvement or are people expected to be perfect? 

Next, when I meet the person (coaching candidate), I first ask them this one question:

1.Do you think a person is born with a limited set of talents or do you think they can grow and improve in areas? 

Their answer to this question really tells me if they are coachable. If they tell me that a person always has room for improvement I can then get into the conversation about their particular areas and we are off to the races. 

On the other hand, if they become defensive or their answer states that a person is born with a limited set of talents we are not ready to leave the starting block.  Normally they then begin to defend their position and explain how others are misinterpreting them.  For example, one manager told me once that it was his 260 employees who had a problem and that he was just fine.  With this fixed mindset, they are not a good candidate for coaching. We first need to attack this mindset before we try to coach them in any areas as if we try to coach first we will face resistance and see little or no results.   

This black and white thinking on the matter may sound harsh, but it is true.  I have found it to be true in my career in coaching and training adults.  Unfortunately, I learned it the hard way over time by working with people who would admit they had a shortcoming, admit it was affecting their career and life negatively, and then resist the coaching.  I would find myself saying things like, "they know their house is on fire and yet they refuse to run out to safety." While I was wondering what was wrong with them, I had not realized there was something wrong with my approach.   

My lession in this area taught via the school of hard knocks was just recently laid out by a top psychologist at Stanford, Carol Dweck.  In her new book, Mindset:  The New Psychology of Success, Dweck most eloquently explains the idea of people having either a growth or fixed mindset.  She found this out by accident when working with elementary school children.  I wanted to jump up and down with relief and excitement as I feverishly turned the pages yelling, "This explains everything I have been experiencing!" It was as if she had been present in many of my coaching sessions. 

So we answer the question, "How can you determine if a person is coachable" with a question:  Do they have a "fixed mindset" or a "growth mindset?" 

Some behavioral characteristics of a "growth mindset" taken from Dr. Dweck's book:

Belief that one can always improve their intelligence.

Belief that one can always change the kind of person they are.

Belief that effort is what makes a person smart or talented.

Belief that if one works really hard they can do something they could not do before. 

Belief that even geniuses have to work hard for their achievements.

People can develop their management abilities and change their skills for managing people.

Some behavioral characteristics of a "fixed mindset" taken from Dr. Dweck's book:

If a person fails it means they are not smart or talented.

It should just happen if you are smart--things should just happen for you effortlessly.

Intelligence is there or not.  You cannot work for intelligence.

There is not much a person can do to change who they are.

Must repeatedly affirm that they are superior.

Want to be the only big fish so when they compare themselves to others they can feel a cut above the rest.

Do not believe in personal or professional growth.  Believe people should just have it when they join the company. 

Belief that people have a fixed amount of management ability and cannot be developed.

References:

Dweck, Carol.  Mindset:  The New Psychology of Success.

Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, Dr. Carol Dweck

Website.

Interview.  (4 minutes)