Category Archives: Leadership

Leadership

Executive Presence: “Gravitas,” Communication…and Appearance?

Professional advancement requires demonstrated knowledge, skill, and competence, coupled with perceived “cultural fit,” “collaboration,” and “executive presence.”

Sylvia Ann Hewlett

These requirements appear prone to subjective definition and biased judgments.
What is “executive presence”? How is it measured?

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, CEO of Center for Talent Innovation, conducted 18 focus groups and 60 interviews to investigate behavioral and attitudinal aspects of Executive Presence (EP).

Perceived Executive Presence includes three components:

“Gravitas” – Authoritative Behavior

- Confidence, composure,
- Decisiveness,
- Integrity,
- Emotional Intelligence: Self-awareness, self-regulation, interpersonal skills,
- Personal reputation,
- Vision for leadership,

Communication

- Speaking skills: Voice tone, articulation, grammatical speech conveying competence,
- “Presence,” “bearing,” “charisma” including assertiveness, humour, humility,
- Ability to sense audience engagement, emotion, interests,

Appearance

- Grooming, posture,
- Physical attractiveness, average body weight,
- Professional attire.
  According to Hewlett’s interviewees, “Executive Presence” accounts for more than a quarter of factors that determine a next promotion.

Harrison Monarth

How can Executive Presence be developed?

Harrison Monarth suggested that Executive Presence behaviours can be cultivated with Image Management tactics including:

-Maintaining a positive personal reputation to influence others’ favourable perceptions and willingness to collaborate,

-Effectively managing online “brand”,

-Gaining followers online and in the “real world,”

-Influencing and persuading others,

-Demonstrating “Emotional Intelligence” through self-awareness, awareness of others (empathic insight), and regulating one’s own emotions.

He focused less on appearance than Hewlett and Stanford Law School’s Deborah Rhode, who summarized extensive research on Halo Effect and “The Beauty Bias”.

Deborah Rhode

Rhode estimated that annual world-wide investment in appearance was close to $USD 200 billion in 2010.
She contended that bias based on appearance influences career and life outcomes and is:

Is prevalent,
Infringes on individuals’ fundamental rights,
Compromises merit principles,
Reinforces negative stereotypes,
Compounds disadvantages facing members of non-dominant races, classes, and gender.

Executive Presence is widely recognized as a prerequisite for leadership roles, yet its components remained loosely-defined until Hewlett’s investigation and Rhode’s human rights analysis.

-*Which elements seem most essential to Executive Presence?

See related posts

©Kathryn Welds

Costs of Workplace Incivility

4 Replies

Christine Pearson

A single incident of incivility in the workplace can result in significant operational costs, reported Christine Pearson of Thunderbird School of Global Management and Christine Porath of Georgetown University.

Additional consequences of workplace incivility include:

Decreased work effort due to disengagement,
Christine Porath
Less time at work to reduce contact with offensive co-workers or managers,
Decreased work productivity due to ruminating about incivility incidents,
Less commitment to the organization,
Attrition.

P.M. Forni

Other organizational symptoms include:

Increased customer complaints,
Accentuated cultural and communications barriers,
Reduced confidence in leadership,
Less adoption of changed organizational processes,
Reduced willingness to accept additional responsibility and make discretionary work efforts.

Workplace incivility behaviours were described as “rude and discourteous, displaying a lack of regard for others,” noted Pearson and Lynne Andersson, then of St. Joseph’s University.
“Uncivil” behaviors were enumerated in The Baltimore Workplace Civility Study by Johns Hopkins’ P.M. Forni and Daniel L. Buccino with David Stevens and Treva Stack of University of Baltimore:

Refusing to collaborate on a team project,
Shifting blame for an error to a co-worker,
Reading another’s mail,
Neglecting to say “please,” “thank you”,
Taking a co-worker’s food from the office refrigerator without asking.

Respondents classified more extreme unacceptable behaviors:

Pushing a co-worker during an argument,
Yelling at a co-worker,
Firing a subordinate during a disagreement,
Criticising a subordinate in public,
Using foul language in the workplace.

Gary Namie

Workplace bullying was included in Gary Namie’s Campaign Against Workplace Bullying.
He defined bullying as “the deliberate repeated, hurtful verbal mistreatment of a person (target) by a cruel perpetrator (bully).

His survey of more than 1300 respondents found that:

More than one-third of respondents observed bullying in the previous two years,
More than 80% of perpetrators were workplace supervisors,
Women bullied as frequently as men,
Women were targets of bullying 75% of the time,
Few bullies were punished, transferred, or terminated from jobs.

Costs of health-related symptoms experienced by bullying targets included:

Depression,
Sleep loss, anxiety, inability to concentrate, which reduced work productivity,
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) among 31% of women and 21% of men,
Frequent rumination about past bullying, leading to inattention, poor concentration, and reduced productivity.

Widespread prevalence of workplace incivility was also reported by Forni, who suggested ways to improve workplace interactions and inclusion:

Assume that others have positive intentions,
Pay attention, listen,
Include all co-workers in workplace activities,
Acknowledge others,
Give praise when warranted,
Respect others’ opinions, time, space, indirect refusals,
Avoid asking personal questions,
Be selective in asking for favors,
Apologize when warranted,
Provide constructive suggestions for improvement instead of complaints,
Maintain personal grooming, health, and work environment,
Accept responsibility for undesired outcomes, if deserved.

More than 95% of respondents in The Baltimore Workplace Civility Study suggested, “Keep stress and fatigue at manageable levels,” a challenging goal for leaders who shape workplace cultures.

Organizational change recommendations include:

Institute a grievance process to investigate and address complaints of incivility,
Select prospective employees with effective interpersonal skills,
Provide a clearly-written policy on interpersonal conduct,
Adopt flexibility in scheduling, assignments, and work-life issues.

-*How do you handle workplace incivility when you observe or experience it?

©Kathryn Welds

Defining “Executive Presence”

3 Replies

Sylvia Ann Hewlett

Communication, “Gravitas”, and Appearance were frequently-cited attributes of Executive Presence in a study by Sylvia Ann Hewlett of the Center for Talent Innovation.

Gavin Dagley

More characteristics of executive presence were identified in interviews with 34 professionals, conducted by Perspex Consulting’s Gavin Dagley and Cadeyrn J. Gaskin, formerly of Deakin University.

Caderyn Gaskin

Five “executive presence” qualities were observable during initial contact:

Status and reputation, similar to “gravitas” discussed by Hewitt,
Physical appearance, mentioned by Hewitt,
Confidence,
Communication ability, included in Hewitt’s “executive presence” triad,
Interpersonal engagement skills.

Five additional presence features emerged during repeated contacts:

Interpersonal integrity,
Values-in-action,
Intellect and expertise,
Outcome delivery,
Use of coercive power.

These qualities combine in different ways to form four presence “archetypes”:

Positive presence, based on favorable impressions of confidence, communication, appearance, and engagement skills plus favorable evaluations of values, intellect, and expertise,
Unexpected presence, linked to unfavorable impressions of confidence plus favorable evaluations of intellect, expertise, and values,
Unsustainable presence combines favorable impressions of confidence, status, reputation, communication, and engagement skills plus unfavorable evaluations of values and integrity,
“Dark presence” is associated with unfavorable perceptions of engagement skills plus unfavorable evaluations of values, integrity, and coercive use of power.

Philippe De Backer

Another typology of executive presence characteristics was identified by Sharon V. Voros and Bain’s Philippe de Backer.
They prioritized elements in order of importance for life outcomes:

Focus on long term strategic drivers,
Intellect,
Charisma, comprised of confidence, intensity, commitment, care, concern and interest in others,
Communication skills,
Enthusiasm for work,
Cultural fit with organisation and team,
Poise,
Appearance.

Fred Luthans

University of Nebraska’s Fred Luthans and Stuart Rosenkrantz with Richard M. Hodgetts of Florida International University investigated the relationship between “executive presence” and career “success.”
These researchers observed nearly 300 managers across levels at large and small mainstream organizations when leaders:

Communicated,
Engaged in “traditional management” activities, including planning, decision making, controlling,
Managed human resource issues.

Richard Hodgetts

Communication and interpersonal skills, coupled with intentional networking and political acumen enabled some managers to rapidly advance in their organizations.

These rapidly-advancing managers were identified as “successful” leaders because they achieved a higher organizational level compared with their organizational tenure.
In contrast, “effective” managers demonstrated greater managerial skill than “successful” managers, but were not promoted as quickly.

“Effective” managers spent most time managing employees’ activities including:

Motivating and reinforcing desired behaviours,
Managing conflict,
Hiring,
Training and developing team members,
Communicating by exchanging information,
Processing paperwork.

Stuart Rosenkrantz

Subordinates of “effective” managers reported more:

Job satisfaction,
Organizational commitment,
Performance quality,
Performance quantity.

Differences in advancement and subordinate reactions to “successful” and “effective” managers were related to differing managerial behaviors.

“Successful” managers spent little time in managerial activities, but invested more effort in networking, socializing, politicking, and interacting with outsiders.
Their networking activities were most strongly related to career advancement but weakly associated with “effectiveness.”

Few managers were both “successful” and “effective”:
Only about 10% leaders were among the top third of successful managers and effective managers.
This suggests that effective managers who support employee performance may not be advance as rapidly as managers who prioritize their own career over their employees’ careers.

Gender differences in gravitas, communication, and political acumen may explain why men more often are seen as possessing “executive presence.”

Women who aspire to organizational advancement benefit from cultivating both gravitas and proactive networking to complement communication and interpersonal skills.

-*Which behaviors and characteristics are essential to “Executive Presence?”

Related Posts

©Kathryn Welds

Creating Productive Thought Patterns

13 Replies

Albert Ellis

Leaders’ actions actions are influenced by unspoken self-talk.
Sometimes, these thoughts are self-critical and provoke anxiety.

Aaron Beck

Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT), developed by University of Pennsylvania’s Aaron Beck, provides a systematic way to notice and restructure “irrational self-talk.“
Similar approaches were developed by Albert Ellis in Rational-Emotive Therapy (RET), and David Burns in his synthesis of CBT and RET.

David Burns

Arizona State University’s Charles Manz and Chris Neck translated these self-management processes to managerial development.
They outlined a Thought Self-Leadership Procedure as a five-step circular process:

Charles Manz

1. Observe and record thoughts,

2. Analyze thoughts for potential errors in reasoning (jumping to conclusions, exaggeration),

3. Substitute alternate positive, realistic, plausible, acceptable thoughts,

4. Monitor personal reactions to these thoughts,

5. If more negative thoughts appear, continue to substitute the more productive thoughts.

John Crimmins

Other recommendations to manage thoughts about stressful situations were distilled by John Crimmins of Behaviour Institute in coaching people at work.

He suggested asking the following questions:

How do I know if this thought is true?
What evidence do I have to support this thought or belief?
How can I test my assumptions/beliefs to find out if they’re accurate?
What would a trusted friend say about these thoughts?
How is this thought helpful now?
What other ways that I can think about this situation?
What would a friend say when I blame myself in this situation?
What would I say to a friend who was in this situation?
What would a friend say to me when I take this situation personally?
How can I consider this situation on a continuum rather than in either-or terms?

-*What practices do you use to develop and apply productive thought patterns?

©Kathryn Welds

Followers’ Role in Enabling Bad Leaders

“High-Commitment” Workplaces Enhance Creative Problem Solving, Innovation

1 Reply

Richard E. Walton

Some organizations have implemented suggestions by Harvard’s Richard E. Walton to cultivate a “high-commitment work systems (HCWS)” as a “lever” to positively influence employee productivity, retention, and innovation.

High-commitment employee benefits are designed to elicit employees’ reciprocal commitment and intrinsic motivation to support the organization’s objectives.
These programs include:

Employee participation initiatives,
Team rewards,
Profit sharing,
Career development training,
Internal transfer opportunities,
Internal advancement opportunities, with preference over external candidates,
Employment ”security.”

Song Chang

Organizations with these programs, measured by High Commitment Work System Scale, had employees who provided more innovative solutions to complex tasks in a study of more than 50 technology firms in China by Song Chang of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, with Nanjing University’s Liangding Jia and Yahua Cai, and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology’s Riki Takeuchi.

Zhixing Xiao

“High-commitment work systems (HCWS)” can occur in organizations with varying approaches to human capital management, described by China Europe International Business School’s Zhixing Xiao and Anne S. Tsui of Arizona State University:

Anne Tsui

Mutual-investment (or organization-focused) strategies combine:
–Economic exchanges with
–Social exchanges including implied trust and reciprocity leading to
–Expectations of employment security,

Quasi spot-contract (or job-focused) philosophies based on:
-Economic-exchange model with
-Market-like flexibility that
-Enables employers to easily hire and discharge employees.

In the United States, “at-will employment” permits employers to terminate any employee at any time for any reason or no reason without warning, noted Miami University’s David Walsh and Joshua Schwartz.

David Walsh

Although this job-focused approach does not imply trust or reciprocity, many contract employers offer employee benefits similar to those in “high-commitment” workplaces.

Joshua Schwartz

This contrast between employers’ implied social contract by offering high-commitment benefits with at-will employment may appear incongruous to employees.
The result may be confusion, cynicism or disengagement.

High-commitment benefit programs can enable “creative situations,” where individual motivation can contribute to commercial innovation.

Teresa Amabile

Organizations that establish creative work situations typically offer some high-commitment employee programs, according to Harvard’s Teresa Amabile:

Job rotation,
Training to increase subject matter expertise,
Job autonomy,
Working in teams to solve problems and deliver products,
Participative management.

Despite not guaranteeing employment tenure, these programs were associated with:

Egalitarian culture,
High trust,
Support for disrupting status quo.

High-commitment employee programs can lead to increased innovation and related commercial opportunities.

However, organizations with at-will employment practices and high-commitment benefits can benefit from clearly communicating the limits of their commitments to avoid adverse employee reactions.

-*What are most effective ways to integrate coexisting at-will employment policies with “high-commitment work systems”?

 RELATED POSTS:

Leader Self-Efficacy Beliefs Determine Impact of Challenging Work Assignments

1 Reply

Stephen Courtright

“High potential” employees often receive “stretch assignments” to expand their organizational knowledge, skills, and contacts.

Amy Colbert

Personal leadership self-efficacy (LSE) expectations about ability to deliver successful outcomes determine the actual results, reported Texas A&M’s Stephen H. Courtright, Amy E. Colbert of University of Iowa, and Daejeong Choi of University of Melbourne in their study of more than 150 managers and 600 directors at a Fortune 500 financial services company.

Daejeong Choi

Individuals develop self efficacy, according to Stanford’s Albert Bandura, in response to:

Personal accomplishments and mastery,
Observing others’ behaviors, experiences, and outcomes,
Corrective feedback from others via coaching and mentoring,
Mood and physiological factors.

Albert Bandura

Bandura proposed that people’s expectations about their personal efficacy determines whether they:

Use coping behavior when encountering difficulties,
Apply exceptional effort in meeting challenges,
Persist for long periods when encountering obstacles.

These behaviors lead to the “virtuous cycle” of increased self-efficacy beliefs.

Laura Paglis Dwyer

A measure of leadership self-efficacy (LSE), developed by University of Evansville’s Laura L. Paglis Dwyer and Stephen G. Green of Purdue University, evaluates a leader’s skill in:

Direction-setting,
Gaining followers’ commitment,
Overcoming obstacles to change.

Sean Hanna

Two additional Leader Self Efficacy characteristics were proposed by United States Military Academy’s Sean T. Hannah with Bruce Avolio, Fred Luthans, and Peter D. Harms of University of Nebraska:

“Agency,” characterized by intentionally initiating action and exerting positive influence,
Confidence.

Jesus Tanguma

Women demonstrated significantly lower leadership self-efficacy beliefs than men in research by University of Houston’s Michael J. McCormick, Jesús Tanguma , and Anita Sohn López-Forment.

However, these lower leadership self-efficacy beliefs can be modified with training, coaching, mentoring, and cognitive restructuring practice.

Courtright’s team reinforced that beliefs result from previous experiences can determine future outcomes, suggesting the importance of monitoring and managing these self-efficacy beliefs.

-*How do you maintain robust Leadership Self-Efficacy expectations even after disappointments and setbacks?

RELATED POSTS:

©Kathryn Welds

Anxiety Linked to Risk of Behaving Unethically

“Evolved” Leaders in an Era of Self-Interested Leadership

4 Replies

Jim Collins

Organizations that are “built to last” are guided by “Level 5 Executives,” argued Jim Collins in Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap… and Others Don’t.

This style of leadership requires both personal humility and personal will, a combination not favored in the current US national leadership.

Collins proposed a developmental leadership hierarchy including:

Level 1: Highly Capable Individual, who applies knowledge, skills, abilities, and commitment to achieve team goal,
Level 2: Contributing Team Member, who contributes to team goal achievement through effective collaboration,
Level 3: Capable Manager, who sets plans and organizes others to achieve goals,
Level 4: Effective Executive, who inspires others to act toward the shared vision,
Level 5: Level 5 Executive combines personal will to achieve the organizational improvement goal, tempered with personal humility.

Modesto Maidique

Drawing on developmental psychology theories by Jean Piaget as well as Harvard’s Lawrence Kohlberg, and Robert Kegan, Florida International University’s former President, Modesto A. Maidique proposed a six-level Purpose-Driven Model of Leadership,

Jean Piaget

Leadership is service to others, organizations, and ideals, and follows a related developmental path:

Level One: Sociopath, who serves no one, exhibits low empathy, and destroys value and undermines others.
Well-known examples are Muammar Gaddafi, Adolf Hitler, and Saddam Hussein.

Lawrence Kohlberg

Level Two: Opportunist, who serves himself or herself, often at others’ expense by focusing on “What’s in it for me?”
Examples include Bernie Madoff and Jeffrey Skilling.
Level Three: Chameleon, who “flip-flop” and cater to as many people as possible.
Examples include Senator John Kerry, former Florida governor Charlie Crist, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

Robert Kegan

- Level Four: Achiever, who often achieves business goals through energetic focus.
  Peter Drucker
  
  Peter Drucker characterized this leader as “monomaniac with a mission,” driving toward a goal without fully considering the broader mission.
  Examples include former H-P CEO Mark Hurd.
- Level Five: Builder, who seeks to build an institution, not just to achieve a goal.
  Examples include IBM’s Tom Watson Jr., GM’s Alfred P. Sloan, and Harpo’s Oprah Winfrey.
  They have a clear vision, energize others, manage for the long term, and not swayed by short-term profit or stock market valuations.
Level Six: Transcendent, who focus on broader social benefit beyond their personal affiliations.

Examples include Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and the Dalai Lama.

These frameworks provide a structure to evaluate the words and actions of current political and business leaders, and suggest potential leadership vulnerabilities.

-*What level of leader do you observe in the highest levels of your work organization?
-*What practices are you implementing to develop your next level of leadership skill