Can the strategies that helped someone run a marathon transform the corporate goal-setting process? How are Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, and Truett Cathy redefining leadership? What if the best intelligence, not the best plan, wins? Is there a secret to unlocking work-life balance and rediscovering passion in your job? Ever heard of the Idiosyncratic Rater Effect and how it may be influencing your workplace assessments?

Nine Lies About Work

Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall, both British transplants with impressive careers, bring a unique blend of data-driven insight and real-world experience to the perplexing world of workplace dynamics. Marcus, a data enthusiast from the Gallup Organization, now leads the ADP Research Institute, while Ashley, a practitioner from Deloitte and Cisco, focuses on optimizing large-scale workforces.

Their collaboration began with a provocative Harvard Business Review article critiquing performance appraisals, which led to this book. The book challenges deeply ingrained workplace practices, questioning why certain "settled truths" remain unpopular and ineffective. For instance, the annual goal-setting process often feels disconnected from actual work, and critical feedback is generally unwelcome despite being deemed essential.

Many workplace practices are fundamentally flawed, contributing to low global worker engagement—less than 20%. These practices, which were once effective, no longer boost productivity as they once did. The authors argue that these outdated systems and assumptions stifle individuality and ignore the unique contributions of each employee.

One of the book's core ideas is that people don't care as much about the company they work for as they do about their immediate team. Through research involving thousands of teams, Marcus and Ashley identified critical aspects that drive team performance and engagement. These include clarity of expectations, the opportunity to use strengths, recognition for excellent work, and a shared mission.

A poignant story illustrates this point. Lisa, a corporate communications veteran, left her long-term job at Company A for Company B after extensive research. Despite initial excitement, she quickly realized her new manager's severe and hierarchical style wasn't a good fit. This experience led her to return to Company A, emphasizing that local team experiences, rather than company culture, profoundly impact job satisfaction.

While company culture is often highlighted, it's the local team dynamics that truly matter. For example, in Cisco's Krakow office, a sub-team's daily lunch ritual and impromptu problem-solving huddles contributed significantly to their high engagement and productivity.

Leaders should focus on building great teams by understanding and nurturing these critical aspects. We should challenge the notion that company culture alone drives success, and instead acknowledge the importance of local team experiences.

Ultimately, Marcus and Ashley's work is a call to action for leaders to embrace individuality and foster team environments where unique talents can thrive. By doing so, they can create workplaces that are both productive and fulfilling.

Does Your Immediate Team Matter More Than Your Company's Culture?

George Clooney’s character in "Ocean’s Eleven" had a foolproof plan, or so it seemed. Clooney’s calm confidence reassured his team that, no matter the hurdles, there was a plan in place. This Hollywood heist underscores a key belief in business and military strategy: the best plan wins. But does it really?

For example, General Stanley McChrystal faced a real-world challenge: leading the Joint Special Operations Task Force against a decentralized and agile enemy in Iraq. Despite creating an efficient planning and execution system, McChrystal's team struggled to stay ahead. The enemy's unpredictability demanded a shift from rigid planning to real-time intelligence. McChrystal’s solution was to share information rapidly and broadly, empowering frontline leaders to make informed decisions on the spot. 

This approach mirrors the RAF's strategy during the Battle of Britain in 1940. Facing a formidable enemy, they devised the Dowding system—a real-time intelligence network that vastly improved their interception rates. This system wasn't about having a perfect plan but about reacting swiftly and smartly to unfolding events.

In the corporate world, leaders often find themselves buried in planning cycles, each plan becoming obsolete as soon as it’s drafted. The constant flux demands a dynamic approach. McChrystal’s answer was the Operations and Intelligence (O&I) meeting—an inclusive, daily two-hour session where thousands could share and receive real-time updates. This method boosted operational raids from eighteen to three hundred per month.

For team leaders, the takeaway is clear: frequent, real-time check-ins trump elaborate plans. Weekly one-on-one check-ins with team members, focusing on immediate priorities and obstacles, drive engagement and performance. These conversations should be about current challenges and future actions, rooted in the specifics of the team member’s work.

The frequency of these interactions is more crucial than their perfection. A consistent weekly check-in fosters a culture of adaptability and responsiveness, much like brushing your teeth daily to maintain health, rather than aiming for occasional, perfect cleanings. This practice ensures leaders stay connected to the front-line realities, enabling them to support their teams effectively.

In essence, the best intelligence—not the best plan—wins. Leaders should liberate information, trust their teams to interpret it, and engage in regular, meaningful check-ins. This approach builds a resilient, informed, and agile team ready to tackle the ever-changing challenges of the real world.

From Hollywood Heists to Real-world Battles: Why Real-time Intelligence Trumps Perfect Plans

A friend of the authors decided to run the Prague marathon in seven months. When they asked why, she listed practical reasons like timing and a flat course. But her true goal was to improve her stamina. This detailed goal pulled her off the couch, guiding her through early morning runs and pushing her through self-doubt until she completed the marathon.

In the corporate world, goals should ideally function the same way, pulling people toward what’s most important. However, the typical goal-setting process often falls short. Companies cascade goals down the hierarchy, creating mini-versions of larger goals. This system is meant to align efforts and track progress, but research shows it can limit performance. Take sales quotas, for example: top salespeople often hit their targets early and then slow down, while struggling salespeople feel pressured and sometimes resort to unethical tactics, as seen in the Wells Fargo scandal.

This goal-setting process can also fail to accurately track progress. For instance, a marathon runner’s journey isn’t linear. You’re either done or not done; intermediate percentages are misleading. Evaluating employees based on goal completion is similarly flawed unless goals are standardized for difficulty, which is practically impossible.

Despite these issues, goals can still be powerful if set voluntarily. They should reflect personal values and aspirations, not be imposed from above. The best companies don’t cascade goals; they cascade meaning. Leaders should focus on conveying the mission and purpose of work, allowing team members to set their own goals in alignment with this shared meaning.

Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg at Facebook and Truett Cathy at Chick-fil-A exemplify this approach. Zuckerberg continuously refines Facebook’s mission, emphasizing meaningful social interactions. Cathy’s franchise model at Chick-fil-A focuses on developing local leaders, reflecting his values of community and rest.

To cascade meaning effectively, leaders can use expressed values, rituals, and stories. Facebook’s “Hacker Company” culture, Chick-fil-A’s closed-on-Sunday policy, and Sam Walton’s weekly store visits at Walmart are all examples of rituals that communicate what’s meaningful to the company. Stories, like those about Chick-fil-A’s community operators, add a human touch and reinforce shared values.

In essence, the best leaders unlock their team’s potential by sharing the purpose behind their work and trusting them to set their own goals. This approach fosters genuine engagement and alignment, leading to more authentic and effective contributions.

Does Your Goal-Setting Strategy Mirror Facebook and Chick-fil-A's Success?

Watch Lionel Messi dribble. Head to YouTube, type “Best Messi Dribbles,” and you'll find countless clips of him weaving through defenders with his magical left foot. From his early days in Rosario, Argentina, Messi's extraordinary talent was clear. Scouted by F.C. Barcelona at 13, he overcame growth issues with hormone treatments, but his slight frame remained. Yet, his unparalleled skill—maneuvering the ball as if it were magnetically attached to his feet—made him the best in the world.

The highlight of Messi's genius can be seen in his 2015 Copa del Rey goal against Athletic Bilbao. Receiving the ball at the halfway line, he danced past seven defenders, using his left foot for 17 of 19 touches, before scoring with a cannon shot. His left-footedness is so extreme that even with foreknowledge, defenders are left bamboozled.

Messi's joy in playing is palpable and contagious. This joy isn't just limited to sports. We see it in colleagues who deliver a witty presentation, handle a grumpy customer with ease, or defuse a tense situation effortlessly. This joy stems from activities that make us feel strong, creating a sense of fulfillment and the urge to repeat them.

Stevie Wonder famously said, “Your best work is always joyful work.” This joy translates to high performance, a fact supported by numerous studies. Teams are most productive when members use their strengths daily. Yet, companies often focus on fixing weaknesses, believing in the myth of well-roundedness.

Competency models, which define the supposed qualities for job excellence, are pervasive in organizations. However, these models are flawed because competencies like "strategic thinking" are neither measurable states nor traits. Don Clifton’s research in the 1980s showed that excellence is idiosyncratic. Gallup studies revealed that high performers excel in unique, not uniform, ways.

In sports, Messi’s left foot or Federer’s grace exemplify individual strengths leading to high performance. Similarly, in work, trying to make everyone well-rounded is futile. Instead, focusing on individual strengths and fitting roles to people, like adjusting a pilot’s seat to their size, leads to better outcomes.

The best leaders focus on outcomes, like Messi’s goals, rather than methods. They understand the importance of a team's diversity, leveraging each member's unique strengths to achieve collective success. Competency models should reflect shared values and purposes, not individual assessments.

In essence, excellence comes from embracing and cultivating our unique strengths, finding joy in what we do, and working together to achieve great outcomes.

Leveraging Unique Strengths: Lessons from Lionel Messi's Mastery on the Field

It's a well-accepted truth that feedback is crucial for everyone, not just millennials. The modern workplace offers a vast array of feedback types: upward, downward, peer, 360-degree, performance, developmental, and more. Many organizations have even created classes to teach the art of giving and receiving feedback. But is this perennial feedback obsession really as beneficial as we think?

Take Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund, where Ray Dalio has instituted a culture of "radical transparency." Every meeting is videotaped, all employees rate each other on various attributes, and everyone carries a "baseball card" displaying their ratings. While the firm has achieved outstanding financial success, it also has mixed employee satisfaction and high turnover rates, questioning the actual effectiveness of constant feedback.

Research suggests that people’s need for attention, rather than feedback, is what truly drives performance. Harry Harlow’s experiments with baby monkeys showed that warmth and attention are more crucial than even food. Similarly, the famous Hawthorne experiments in the 1920s demonstrated that worker productivity increased simply because workers felt observed and valued, not because of any specific changes in working conditions.

Gallup’s studies highlight this too. Employees whose managers focus on their strengths are 60 times more engaged than those who receive no attention, and 30 times more engaged than those who receive negative feedback. This data underscores that positive attention, rather than frequent criticism, is key to team performance.

Yet, the common belief persists that people grow from negative feedback. Brain science, however, argues otherwise. Negative feedback triggers the "fight or flight" response, inhibiting learning and creativity. Conversely, positive feedback activates the "rest and digest" system, fostering growth and innovation.

Sports coach Tom Landry exemplified this approach by showing his players highlight reels of their best plays. This not only boosted their confidence but also helped them understand and repeat their successful actions. Similarly, in the workplace, recognizing and building on what people do well can lead to greater learning and development.

So, how can team leaders effectively apply this? By consciously looking for what team members are doing right and giving specific, positive feedback. This approach aligns with the neuroscience of learning, which shows that people build new neural connections more readily in areas where they already have strengths.

When team members ask for advice, the best leaders resist the urge to prescribe solutions. Instead, they guide individuals to reflect on their strengths and past successes, helping them find their own paths forward. This method not only respects the unique wiring of each person’s brain but also empowers them to develop insights that lead to genuine growth.

In short, while feedback is essential, the nature of that feedback matters immensely. Positive, strength-focused attention is far more effective in boosting engagement and performance than constant criticism. By fostering an environment of recognition and encouragement, leaders can truly help their teams thrive.

Is Positive Attention the Real Secret to Boosting Employee Performance?

Imagine this: You work closely with someone every day and start to believe you understand their motivations, their thinking style, and how they relate to others. You might even feel confident rating their performance on a scale. But can you really do this reliably? Research says no.

Let's dive into some captivating findings. A study by professors Scullen, Mount, and psychologist Goff collected nearly half a million ratings from over 25,000 raters. They found that 54% of the variation in scores was due to the unique personality of the rater, not the person being rated. This phenomenon, called the Idiosyncratic Rater Effect, shows that ratings reflect more about the rater than the ratee.

Even with sophisticated systems like the nine-box grid or 360-degree surveys, the data remains unreliable. These methods often lead to "forcing the curve," where ratings are adjusted to fit organizational needs rather than reflecting actual performance.

So, what’s the solution? Shift the focus from rating others to reporting personal experiences. For example, instead of asking if a team member has "business acumen," ask if you would turn to them for extraordinary results. This approach yields reliable data because it taps into personal experiences and intentions, which are inherently more accurate.

Cisco has applied this method, asking team leaders if they would go to a team member for excellent work or choose to work with them as much as possible. This data, adjusted for each leader's rating tendencies, provides a clearer, more reliable picture of individual performance.

Ultimately, you don't want the truth of you misrepresented in a room full of decision-makers. Instead, you want reliable data reflecting your leader's genuine reactions, guiding fair and informed decisions. This humble yet accurate approach ensures you’re seen for your true contributions.

Unmasking the Idiosyncratic Rater Effect: A New Paradigm in Performance Appraisal

Meet Joe. His story is one of resilience and innovation. Despite being demoted from a pioneering role in a yellow-pages company he founded, Joe didn’t give up. His investors deemed him lacking in leadership potential, relegating him to head programmer. 

Unfortunately, his chaotic coding required a complete rewrite by more experienced developers, and he was never seen as a top engineer. Frustrated, Joe left after the company was acquired, starting a financial-services firm that grew large enough to be bought by an even bigger player.

Repeatedly underestimated, Joe turned to mechanical and electrical engineering, where his ventures now employ hundreds and are breaking new ground. Joe’s journey shows that labeling someone as low potential can be a grave mistake. His real name? Elon Musk. His companies, from the yellow-pages service acquired by Compaq for $307 million to PayPal, have made significant impacts. Despite his quirks and controversies, Musk’s reinvention of the automobile and space industries speaks volumes about his misunderstood potential.

This brings us to a broader question: How do we truly gauge potential? Companies often pressure leaders to rate team members on potential, which can be as misleading as it is daunting. Potential is often treated as a fixed trait, but this ignores the diverse ways in which people grow. The concept of potential, as often used, overlooks individual uniqueness and can unfairly label people as high or low performers.

Instead, consider momentum—a blend of who someone is (their mass) and how they’ve moved through the world (their velocity). By focusing on momentum, leaders can help team members understand their current trajectory and explore future paths without the stigma of a “low potential” label.

Take Maureen, a balloon pilot in Scotland, aspiring to be a glider pilot. Instead of questioning her potential, a leader should delve into what she loves about her current job and her skills and performance to date. This approach reveals her momentum and offers actionable insights for her growth.

Andy, a leader at Cisco, embodies this by helping his team explore their ideal jobs, analyze required skills, and integrate new learning into their current roles. This method fosters continuous growth and better aligns personal aspirations with organizational goals.

Ultimately, understanding momentum over potential shifts the focus from a static, often flawed rating system to a dynamic, personalized growth conversation. This not only benefits individual team members but also maximizes the potential of the entire organization.

Is Labeling Elon Musk as 'Low Potential' the Biggest Mistake in Business History?

Work is tough. We're constantly juggling stress, performance goals, and the fear of being replaced by technology. Add commuting and dealing with coworkers, and it's no wonder we feel drained. This struggle is even more pronounced for physicians. Despite their meaningful work, doctors face alarming burnout rates, PTSD, and mental health issues. Mayo Clinic’s studies reveal that 52% of doctors report burnout, and their depression and suicide rates are twice the national average.

Surprisingly, emergency-room nurses face even higher stress levels than doctors. Health systems are starting to address this, offering meditation rooms, support with record-keeping, and even meals out with family. Yet, the notion of work-life balance persists—work is seen as a burden, and life as the remedy.

The idea of balance has historical roots, dating back to ancient Greek medicine, which believed health was a balance of four humors. However, real life is more about flow and less about balance. We need a new mindset, one that embraces the unique processes that make each of us thrive.

Take Dr. Miles, an anesthetist in the UK. Despite the general perception, Miles doesn’t enjoy the follow-up care of patients. Instead, he thrives on the high-stakes stress of keeping patients between life and death during surgery. His passion is his unique thread, and it fuels his joy and effectiveness at work.

The key isn't necessarily doing what you love, but finding love in what you do. Organizations often overlook this, focusing instead on performance metrics. Yet, when employees like Miles find joy in specific aspects of their work, they become more productive, creative, and resilient.

To discover your own red threads, spend a week noting activities that energize you and those that drain you. This simple exercise can reveal what you truly love about your work. Research shows that even spending 20% of your time on activities you love can significantly reduce burnout.

One powerful example is Sergei Polunin, a ballet prodigy who quit the Royal Ballet despite his success. He rediscovered his passion by creating a dance he loved, which went viral and revitalized his career. Like Sergei, you can find your red threads and weave them into your work, creating a fulfilling and resilient career.

In the end, work should help us discover what we love, allowing us to share our unique strengths with the world. So, spend a week in love with your work. Find your red threads, and weave them tightly into the fabric of your life. We’re waiting to see what you create.

Finding Your Red Threads: Rethinking Work-Life Balance and Rekindling Passion in Your Career

Leadership is more than a buzzword; it's a journey. Visiting the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis, Tennessee, plunges you into the history of the African American struggle for equality. 

The experience is a meandering path through landmarks like Jim Crow laws, the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, and a replica of the bus where Rosa Parks famously refused to give up her seat, sparking the Montgomery bus boycott. This pivotal moment was propelled by a young minister, Martin Luther King Jr., whose leadership became central to the civil rights movement.

Leadership isn't merely about possessing a set of skills. It's a complex, often misunderstood quality that some people possess in a way that transcends their technical or interpersonal skills. Leadership is frequently discussed but rarely demystified. It’s about the ability to inspire, create vision, formulate strategy, and execute plans—all while maintaining authenticity and vulnerability. Yet, even the most respected leaders, like Martin Luther King Jr., have shortcomings and are far from perfect.

In 2004, a sheriff’s deputy in Montgomery found old mug shots of people arrested during the bus boycott, including King. These images remind us that leadership isn't an abstract concept but a real-world phenomenon. King’s emergence as a national leader wasn't inevitable but a product of his unique abilities. He wasn't perfect—his skill set wasn't complete. For every quality attributed to great leadership, there are leaders who lack it yet still succeed.

The essence of leadership lies in its idiosyncrasies. Leaders like King didn’t try to round themselves out but focused on their unique strengths. This extremism, or "spikiness," is what draws followers. People follow leaders not because they embody a list of qualities but because they exhibit mastery in something that matters to them. This mastery provides followers with confidence in the future, even amidst uncertainty.

King’s journey, culminating in his tragic assassination in Memphis, is a testament to his unique leadership. His ability to create intensity and focus, to make crucibles out of moments, and to inspire relentless pursuit of justice are what made him a leader worth following. His followers saw his unwavering commitment, which gave them the courage to follow him into the unknown.

In the corporate world, we spend billions on leadership training, often reducing it to abstract qualities. But true leadership is about creating emotional bonds, trust, and love. It’s about understanding who you are and using your unique abilities to inspire others. Real leaders, like King, are not defined by a checklist but by their ability to create a sense of certainty and direction for their followers.

So, we follow spikes. We follow leaders who are deeply good at something that matters to us. This is the real world of leadership—messy, imperfect, and driven by genuine human relationships. If you, as a leader, understand and refine your unique strengths, you will inspire confidence and attract followers. And through this emotional connection, real leadership emerges, making a lasting impact on the world.

Can 'Spikiness' Make You a Leader Worth Following Like Martin Luther King Jr.?

Reflecting on the dynamics of workplace practices and leadership, several key insights emerge. First, traditional workplace methods, such as rigid performance appraisals and annual goal-setting, often fail to boost productivity or engagement. Instead, fostering strong local team dynamics and focusing on individual strengths can significantly enhance team performance.

Real-time intelligence and frequent check-ins are more effective than elaborate plans. Leaders should prioritize adaptability and immediate feedback, valuing the current challenges and successes of their teams. This approach is akin to the practice in military strategy where timely, actionable intelligence trumps a static plan.

Goals should be meaning-driven rather than imposed from above. When employees align their personal aspirations with the company's mission, they are more engaged and motivated. Leaders like Zuckerberg at Facebook and Cathy at Chick-fil-A exemplify how cascading meaning, not just goals, can drive authentic engagement.

Positive attention is crucial in driving performance. Unlike constant, often negative feedback, recognizing and building on what employees do well fosters a more engaged and productive workforce. This shift from criticism to appreciation aligns with brain science, which shows that positive reinforcement encourages growth and innovation.

Furthermore, understanding that ratings often reflect the rater's biases rather than the ratee's actual performance calls for a shift towards more reliable measures. Personal experiences and direct feedback from leaders provide a more accurate assessment of an individual's contributions.

The concept of potential should be redefined as momentum, focusing on an individual's unique trajectory and growth. This perspective allows for a more nuanced and supportive approach to employee development, emphasizing continuous learning and alignment with personal and organizational goals.

Work-life balance should be about finding joy in work rather than merely balancing stress. Identifying and integrating activities that energize us into our daily routines can significantly reduce burnout and enhance overall fulfillment.

Finally, true leadership goes beyond a checklist of traits. Effective leaders inspire through their unique strengths and the emotional connections they build with their followers. Authentic leadership is about creating trust and direction, embodying a vision that draws people in and motivates them to follow.

Home

Trending Books

News & Mags

Relax

Curated

Collections

Key Ideas & Notes

Insights

Highlights & Bookmarks

Listening History

Nine Lies About Work

Marcus Buckingham

Can the strategies that helped someone run a marathon transform the corporate goal-setting process?

How are Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, and Truett Cathy redefining leadership?

What if the best intelligence, not the best plan, wins?

Is there a secret to unlocking work-life balance and rediscovering passion in your job?

Ever heard of the Idiosyncratic Rater Effect and how it may be influencing your workplace assessments?

Key Ideas

#1