Our Need for "Answers"

Leaders are distinguished more by the questions they ask

than any answers they may have.

We have asserted this to be true since the earliest days of our consulting practice. It sounds good, most of the time. But affirming it in practice is yet another matter. When times are tough and resources scarce, I am struck by how deeply leaders struggle to find the "solution" by imposing on themselves, often unconsciously, the belief that they need to have the "answer", preferably yesterday! Ironically, the more intense the pressure for "answers", the poorer our questions become. Powerful persistent inquiry gives way to paralysis by analysis in search for the "answer".

Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, commented recently, "How do you create a climate in which truth is heard? The first thing is to increase your questions-to-statements ratio. Have someone track it and see if you can double it next year. The leaders in our studies asked lots of questions. They were Socratic. By asking questions, they got the brutal facts, as well as lots of insights and ideas." (Business Week, August 25/Sept 1 , 2008)

We're ready to do just that - track the balance of advocacy and inquiry in a given group or organization - and document the impact over a period of time - as a new component to our Disciplined Inquiry methodology.

How does one know, as leader, when to share the "answer" (if you, indeed have one) and when to pose a new, powerful question? If you're exhausted and feeling way overwhelmed, if not outright discouraged, consider the latter as indeed the more productive way to generate commitment and recover a productive path forward.

Intangible Drivers of Performance

"Not everything that can be counted counts,
and not everything that counts can be counted."

Albert Einstein

When I feel especially frustrated or impatient with those who want metrics for anything and everything of value, I reference this quote from Einstein. The play on words makes it almost too easy to throw it away as just another slick slogan. And I fear that's what our clients often do, regrettably.

I recently heard the CFO of a Fortune 50 company speak to a group of senior R&D executives about the impact of non-financial, intangible factors on how Wall Street analysts make their buy/sell recom-mendations. But when it comes to promoting innovation and enhancing performance, it's remarkable to me how quickly leaders revert to their apparent comfort zone of finding or creating metrics which can be analyzed, scrutinized, and then refined in order to make their case for improved productivity.

There is a great map of intangible assets as part of an article, "Do Intangibles Matter?" in the current issue of Chief Executive. Check it out! As the article notes, only one-third of executives polled "claimed that their companies were proficient in monitoring critical non-financial indicators of corporate performance."

What's required to appreciate more fully the impact of these "intangibles"? One place to begin: ask yourself the question, "What's the difference between inspiration and motivation?"

Facebook and the Military

While I have been a member of Linked In for some time now, I admit to being ambivalent about how much value those connections really generate for me, personally as well as professionally. Then, last night, I get an invitation from my son, currently in Bolivia, to view a virtual album of recent photos on Facebook. But I was not a member. After logging in and completing my user profile, I am now a member of Facebook as well.

The migration to such networking tools is inevitable, if not essential, for those wanting to be in relationship with a new generation of professionals.

Though popular websites such as YouTube, MySpace, and other social network sites have been banned in the military, some senior officers in the U.S. Air Force were recently "appalled to discover a number of junior officers using the still permissible Facebook Web site for the purpose of organizing their squadrons." (Strategy and Business, "Military of Millennials") The article continues: "As current military leaders look more closely at the nature of this new generation, they will discover that it conflicts with both their organizational structures and their communications strategies."

I share a similar concern with regard to many of the R&D organizations with which we partner through our consulting practice. Command and control cultures persist in trying to manage information in a way that is not congruent with how young professionals establish relationships and actively communicate with one another. The rationale for protecting proprietary IP parallels the military's concern for security issues.

Investment in "relationship capital" provides organizations with the most competitive advantage in today's networked society. Engaging new leaders requires learning and adapting to their communication style; that does not come naturally to many of us.