Showing posts with label Leadership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leadership. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

It's Time To Rethink Leadership Development: Building Momentum For A Leadership Culture


Leadership excellence is fundamental to the health and performance of an organisation. Leadership development, however, in most cases is a costly affair. It therefore warrants careful consideration of what organisations hope to achieve when they invest in leadership development. If the point of departure is to help people excel as highly competent individuals, then the criteria for a development programme would be different from one where the goal is to grow people in order to achieve more with and through others - in other words true leadership and teamwork.

Changing perceptions and expectations of leadership

Times change and so do the perceptions and expectations of leadership. If we lived in ancient times when progress meant territorial dominance and hard, hand-fought victories on the battlefield, we would be looking for strong, brave and imposing men with some ability to out-think the enemy. If we lived in the industrial age we would be looking for superior scientific minds. As the world became more ordered, specialised and hierarchically structured in governments, institutions, business and many others types of organisations; technical or functional ability and political astuteness (skilful in tactics and power play) allowed many to rise to the top and thus be recognised as leaders. In this scenario, leadership is typically exercised through command and control complimented by concomitant tactics of intimidation and manipulation. Unfortunately, there are far too many examples with this type of leadership and organisations may be stuck in this old mindset.

Instruments of power

Where command and control still delivers results, the people have resigned themselves to the idea that they are fundamentally either stronger or weaker instruments of power - in some cases they paint themselves powerless for life, in others they believe they are untouchable and as a result often ruin their personal relationships. They fear or respect power for the sake of power. Where those at the top embrace the culture -- and why would they not if they were successful in and beneficiaries of it -- they will more likely than not, consciously or unconsciously, further entrench this culture through the choices they make on training and development. It does not bode well for the future in a world where optimum learning, flexibility and responsiveness are such important factors for success.

The cost

The cost for organisations, and more specifically, when the leadership are poorly aligned with societal changes is immeasurably high. Today's knowledge worker commits themselves when they experience the freedom to be creative and enterprising. In a command and control environment they feel inhibited and frustrated; the result being untapped potential. Moreover, people in such an environment often withhold critical information which ultimately comes at a cost to the organisation.

Another cost factor is that employees who are not intrinsically motivated but prepared to submissively and passively 'sit out' their careers for the sake of a salary cheque, are nowadays difficult and expensive to get rid of. The longer we have command and control environments (as it is experienced by the common worker, since it is seldom acknowledged by the leadership), the more disengaged people will become. Progressive organisations, understand what is required of a modern-day leader, and are quickly pulling away from their counterparts who continue to practice the archaic command and control tactics.

The key shift

Who do we regard as good leaders? Who is climbing the ladder to higher positions of authority and power? Who gets the benefit of the doubt when it comes to filling leadership positions? Is it not those with a strong knowledge base as reflected in their academic qualifications and other certificates? Is it not those with technical know-how and management experience? And is it not those who have demonstrated the ability to use their positional power to get quick results? We believe these are the three criteria most people have in mind when they consider candidates for leadership positions. Whoever fits the bill, can be forgiven if he or she feels superior to the rest. The combination of high intellect, know-how, tactical skill and a robust ego is a powerful one. It is almost inevitable that the leadership challenge ends up to be no more than a battle of wits and ego's in budget, planning and strategy sessions. Teamwork, the key to success, suffers as a result.

How would leadership development programmes be of any use for the above? If it means another qualification to go on the manager's CV, more ideas, theories, models and arguments for the meeting room, and perhaps some insights that could improve personal effectiveness, then it will fit the requirement well. But the question that needs to be asked above all is: what is the value for the organisation as a whole? What is the positive influence on those who work with the leader, their morale, energy, focus, productivity, willingness to take responsibility, innovativeness, and own leadership development? Furthermore, what are the ethical and governance values being driven by the organisation and its leaders, and do management support these? And then, what are the positive changes that others see in terms of the manager's willingness to sacrifice for the cause, openness to feedback, team-orientation, his/her courage to name the real issues that prevent growth in the organisation, and work towards much needed transformation?

i. Culture eats strategy for lunch

The observation is widespread that in spite of various leadership development initiatives, the change that matters most, invariably does not take place. In others words, a change of leadership culture is required and is not being done. More sophisticated strategies, better designs, and the latest performance management tools or tactics to out-maneuver the opposition, can never achieve what a strong leadership culture can. What most people in 'unhealthy organisations' secretly or openly hope to see, is a change of heart in their leadership.

The reason for poor or inadequate performance in organisations very seldom is lack of knowledge, skills or experience. Rather, it is to be found in the leader's lack of attention to behavioural aspects, the general climate, and the alignment in the organisation. When leaders really concern themselves with the character of their organisation, they forget about their ego concerns and personal agendas. To use an analogy from the sports world, we know that when we are in agreement that the team showed character it also means they gave their hearts for the team and the greater cause. Poor character is when a team member puts his own interests before those of the team.

Leadership development for our times need to be in the areas of awareness, 'inner work' (self-mastery) and context-sensitive leadership responses.

ii. Awareness

It is to state the obvious that heightened levels of awareness is needed for real change in mindset, attitude and behaviour. As the emotional intelligence expert Daniel Goleman points out, self-awareness forms the cornerstone for awareness of others, self-regulation and regulation of inter-personal relationships. As obvious and simple as it seems, it is not a given. As a starting point it requires openness, vulnerability and humility to grow in self-awareness. With the 'chips' of knowledge, experience and positional power on one's shoulder, the tendency is very high to filter out signals that might be damaging to the ego.

The three main areas for awareness are personal disposition and discipline, adaption to and need for change, and relationships. The defining, breakthrough moment that leads to heightened awareness and sets 'inner work' in motion, often is the understanding that the use of outside help -- typically from family members to friends, colleagues, books, coaches and mentors -- is not a sign of weakness, but of becoming more authentic and mature.

iii. Inner work (self-mastery)

Awareness is one thing, but challenging conversations with oneself is another. As all exemplary leaders will testify, the 'make or break' in their growth as leaders were the challenges they put to themselves in response to the challenges they experienced from the outside; be they tragedies, major disappointments, lack of results, personal attacks on them, honest but hurtful feedback or overwhelming responsibility. Sometimes 'inner work' demands nothing short of a deep and painful 'inner journey' - going back to unresolved issues and unhealed pain of the past. But most of the time it is nothing as dramatic as that, but being intentional and committed to grow as a person and a leader in all the many wonderful facets of being human.

iv. Context-sensitive leadership responses (use of inner wisdom)

Key to leadership and leadership development is the ability to respond appropriately and more wisely to all kinds of situations. That is why awareness and inner work is so important. To think that reading textbooks will help the leader to do the right thing or minimise damage is shortsighted. Leadership in its proper sense is authentic, spontaneous and from within. Whatever knowledge the leader comes across, it needs to be internalised to make any real and meaningful difference. A leader that has grown out of the command and control style learns the critical importance of adjustment. For instance, to be forceful, courageous and bold is important in leadership. But the context determines when it is appropriate and most effective. Bright ideas at the wrong time or with an insensitive presentation in a particular context can be totally counter-productive. The key to becoming wiser is to consciously and intentionally keep all channels of feedback and learning op en. When we are open and receptive to our environment and to others, our eyes 'open' to the wisdom that we have within but never allowed to guide us. It is at the point where we allow ourselves to be vulnerable, not all- knowing and self-important, that we rise to new levels of understanding and insight.

From a leadership development perspective, it is much more effective to explore leadership responses in conversation with others who share the same context (facing their 'real world') than listening to leadership theory in a lecture room. It is a common complaint that the good and lofty ideas in the lecture room come to nothing the moment a person is back at the office facing 'the real world'. It is different when leaders in a development programme support each other by sharing their leadership thoughts and questions as they face the challenges before them.

For healthy workplace and social structures to thrive, leadership development should facilitate growth in the areas of awareness, 'inner work' and context-sensitive leadership responses. As illustrated below, in many cases a shift in thinking about leadership development from an outdated paradigm needs to take place.

Old Criteria And Development Focus

Knowledge

Experience

Strategic and tactical skills

Strategy before culture

Change of processes and tools

Advocacy

Good for transactional environment

Development Focus For Organisational Health

Awareness

Inner work (reflection and self-challenge)

Context-sensitive leadership responses (use of inner wisdom)

Culture before strategy

Change of heart and attitude

Questioning and shared learning

Needed for transformational environment

Less is more

The best way to grow a leadership culture is to further develop those who already have a positive influence in the organisation. The questions to ask in order to identify them are the following:

- Is the person clearly passionate about the cause and values of the organisation?

- Is it evident that he does not need and does not have to rely on the power of his position to be able to have

significant influence?

- Does he genuinely want to become a better leader?

- Would he be keen to play a part in building a strong leadership culture in the organisation?

- Is he loyal to the organisation, and will he be part of the organisation for at least for the next two to three years?

Such a group of leaders will have an enormous impact if they purposefully support each other and grow their leadership according to the above-stated development principles for organisational health. A wholesale approach where everyone at a certain level is included in a development programme can at times disappoint in terms of its impact for the organisation. Half-motivated people who participate under some form of internal or external pressure dilute the value. As a strategy to grow a leadership culture, a focused approach with a core of motivated people delivers far better and more sustainable results for the organisation..

The example of Nelson Mandela

Late last year, the world appeared to stand still and reflect on the remarkable life and example of Nelson Mandela. One of the most striking and powerful illustrations of his leadership influence is that so many people recalled that nobody could turn down his requests - a manager's dream! It is the best possible illustration of the truth of John Maxwell's axiom: a leader first gives his heart then asks for a hand. The belief that, particularly business leaders, need to hide their hearts from others (and themselves) in order to take hard, calculated decisions and remain resolute in negotiation, is wrong and in truth undermining of their leadership. Passion for and dedication to the cause, is a matter of the heart. And so respect for others, the will to serve -- humility -- the willingness to ask forgiveness, care, trust, compassion, moral conviction, resilience and perseverance are indeed matters of the heart.

Surely, if we recognise leadership excellence in the person of Nelson Mandela, we should endeavour to look for and grow the qualities he lived and demonstrated. For organisations it is not a call to become more 'touchy or feely', but to responsibly address the context within which business decisions are taken and to ensure that these decisions accurately reflect the organisation's heart, mind and soul, be this in its strategy, finance, marketing, technology and corporate social values.




New Era Leadership offers a unique online development program on 32 leadership principles. A one year registration give access to a journey through 32 week modules with blog participation and a journal included. This program can easily be linked to coaching to help you develop your leadership. Coaching can be done on Skype. Register to receive regular articles and key thoughts on leadership and self-development.

Visit my website at http://www.newlead.co.za




Friday, April 3, 2015

Strategic HR - Talent & Leadership Specialist

Strategic HR - Talent & Leadership Specialist London

Shape the MPS of tomorrow

To protect London and fight crime, the MPS must be the best it can be. That means our leaders must be trained to provide support, direction and vision for a truly exceptional team. That’s where you come in. As a Strategic HR Talent & Leadership Specialist, you’ll be the driving force behind our talent programmes, making sure senior figures are fully equipped to excel.

This is an exciting opportunity to design and develop MPS Talent & Leadership programmes. You’ll make sure senior leaders have the experience and skills to fulfil MPS goals, through expert support, interventions and training. You’ll also design assessments that help us evaluate leadership potential. It’s your chance not only to influence the Met at the highest level, but to join Strategic HR, which delivers our overall People Strategy. You’ll bring your expertise to this 45-strong team, working both within and outside your specialism.

An experienced HR professional with CIPD membership (or equivalent accreditation) or equivalent experience, you’ll have worked on Talent and Leadership programmes before. You’ve shaped strategies and designed processes, drawing on your knowledge of current talent management practice. This should cover leadership and development, and selection and engagement. You’re also a skilled project manager, with a proven ability to deliver change. Now you’re ready to use this expertise plus your collaborative approach to create an outstanding leadership team. One that can make a real difference to the Met and, ultimately, the people of London.   

To apply, please visit our website to download a role specific information pack and application form.

Completed applications must be returned by Friday 27th February 2015.

We view diversity as fundamental to our success. To tackle today’s complex policing challenges, we need a workforce made up from all ofLondon’s communities. Applications from across the community are therefore essential.

LocationLondonSalaryc£43,000Reference392357Contact NameRecruitment

Shape the MPS of tomorrow

To protect London and fight crime, the MPS must be the best it can be. That means our leaders must be trained to provide support, direction and vision for a truly exceptional team. That’s where you come in. As a Strategic HR Talent & Leadership Specialist, you’ll be the driving force behind our talent programmes, making sure senior figures are fully equipped to excel.

This is an exciting opportunity to design and develop MPS Talent & Leadership programmes. You’ll make sure senior leaders have the experience and skills to fulfil MPS goals, through expert support, interventions and training. You’ll also design assessments that help us evaluate leadership potential. It’s your chance not only to influence the Met at the highest level, but to join Strategic HR, which delivers our overall People Strategy. You’ll bring your expertise to this 45-strong team, working both within and outside your specialism.

An experienced HR professional with CIPD membership (or equivalent accreditation) or equivalent experience, you’ll have worked on Talent and Leadership programmes before. You’ve shaped strategies and designed processes, drawing on your knowledge of current talent management practice. This should cover leadership and development, and selection and engagement. You’re also a skilled project manager, with a proven ability to deliver change. Now you’re ready to use this expertise plus your collaborative approach to create an outstanding leadership team. One that can make a real difference to the Met and, ultimately, the people of London.   

To apply, please visit our website to download a role specific information pack and application form.

Completed applications must be returned by Friday 27th February 2015.

We view diversity as fundamental to our success. To tackle today’s complex policing challenges, we need a workforce made up from all ofLondon’s communities. Applications from across the community are therefore essential.

Apply now


View the original article here

Management Vs. Leadership - An Assessment of Interdependence


Abstract

Leadership and management have been the focus of study and attention since the dawn of time. Over time leadership and management have been seen as separate entities, but those times have past. It is this paper's intent to prove that good management is incumbent upon the success and quality of the leadership that drives it, and by proxy, so too will poor leadership bring poor management that will lead to poor results, and decreased levels of success.

From the great minds in management theory: Fayol, Taylor, and Weber; homage being paid to Barnard and Mayo, as well as Maslow, Mintzberg, Drucker and Porter; to the great minds in leadership development: Jung, McClelland and Burnham, this paper intends to examine them all and bring them together as is required in this economy and these times.

Much time, effort, and money has been placed into the study of both management and leadership successes. Mintzberg and Drucker have done some of the best and most informative work at bringing management and leadership together; now, with the rising costs of overhead and decreasing profit margins, now is the time to connect the dots, once and for all.

Leadership and management have been the focus of study and attention since the dawn of time. Reference biblical scripture that questions the leadership decisions of King David and the managerial prowess of Moses and his exodus to the "Promised Lands" (Cohen, 2007); Plato helped us to manage the Republic while Machiavelli helped us to formulate our idea of what a Prince should represent (Klosko, 1995); Shakespeare questioned Hamlet's decision making (Augustine & Adelman, 1999) and trumpeted Henry IV's managerial effectiveness (Corrigan, 1999). John Stuart Mill gave us the "shining city upon a hill", while Hegel taught us the "elements of the philosophy of right" and Marx taught us how to manage a people in his overly popularized (and oft misunderstood) manifestos (Klosko, 1995). Thomas Payne rewrote leadership to the basic levels of Common Sense, while Thomas Jefferson acknowledged that in the management of a people, you must remember that "all men are created equal" and that they maintain certain degree of"unalienable Rights". Countless others have come to the surface over the span of time, all promoting a new or improved way to both manage and lead their people. (And hopefully yours, too, if you're willing to pay for it.) However, through it all, one thing has remained constant; people are not autonomous entities that will respond the same to every situation. People are evolving, thinking, emotionally and socially aware of all that is around them; they are motivated through different methods and they are driven by differing levels of success (McClelland & Burnham, 1995). Over time, leadership and management have been seen as separate entities, but no more: it is, therefore, this paper's intent to prove that good management is incumbent upon the success and quality of the leadership that drives it, and by proxy, so too will poor leadership bring poor management that will lead to poor results, and decreased levels of success. In today's fast paced environments, management requires leadership; you cannot have one without the other and still attain the success that you desire.

Reference any management text or publication and you will inevitably come across the obligatory references to the great minds in management theory: Fayol - the first to recognize management as a "discipline" to be studied (Brunsson, 2008), Taylor's scientific management of industrial work and workers (Safferstone, 2006), and Weber's bureaucracy; homage must also be paid to Barnard, Kotter, Bennis, and Mayo, as well as Maslow, Mintzberg, Drucker, and Porter (Lamond, 2005). These great minds have helped to forge the way for the management field and helped to better management teams across the world. The world of "leadership study" carries quite the similar pedigree; ironically, it also carries many of the same names. It is, however, this author's opinion that many of the additions to the pool of knowledge on leadership were not made known until the study of psychology was made more fashionable by the likes of Freud and Jung. Management, it appears, is a tool to better the bottom line and productivity, whereas leadership is one of those studies that is to be improved through the person's ability to be in touch with their personality, traits, motives and effects on the human elements of productivity.

There appears be some coincidence in the timing of the juxtaposition of the terms "management" and "leadership" and the correlation to the fact that most literature post 1950 seems to cross pollinate the two phrases. It is quite possible that this, the historical time for post war boom, is where production was at record highs and management of production was not as key as the management of people Possibly drawn from a social recognition that people were not to be managed, but rather, they were to be valued members of the team, and therefore, to be led - it is speculative, but it appears evident that entering the 1960's, most literature intertwines the "leaders" and the "managers" into the same professional classification.

Carl Jung (1923) posits that people carry specific traits and that those traits cannot be altered. However, much time effort and money has been placed into the study of both management and leadership traits, tendencies, styles, and successes. Why is this? One belief is that Jung only half analyzes the person and that more than your traits influence your leadership potential (de Charon, 2003). This affords the opportunity for you to learn skills necessary to become a better leader, even if that means understanding who you are and what your tendencies are, in order to counteract them. Jung's work with personality traits has become the hallmark to virtually every professional development and personal development course on the market. Jung stipulates that every person has any combination of sixteen different personality types. By definition, knowing these personality types helps you to better negotiate your way through the situation in order to attain the maximum output desired (Anastasi, 1998).

Running in concert to Jung's ideas are those of Henry Mintzberg. Mintzberg stipulates that much has changed since Fayol's assessment in 1916; gone are the days when the "picture of a manager was a reflective planner, organizer, leader, and controller" (Pavett & Lau, 1983). Mintzberg breaks the manager's job into ten roles, divided into three areas: interpersonal, informational, and decisional (2004):

Interpersonal Roles

Informational Roles

Decisional Roles

Figurehead

Monitor

Entrepreneur

Leader

Disseminator

Disturbance handler

Liaison

Spokesperson

Resource allocator

Negotiator

(Lussier & Achua, 2007).





(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Ironically, in today's interpretation of a leader, one would be hard pressed to find a leader whom is unable to do all of the above, and then some. Mintzberg, in later publications, however, goes much further in his assessment of managers and their roles in the organization. In a collaborative effort with Jonathon Gosling, the two determine the five mindsets of a manager (2003). They break the five mindsets into:

1. Managing self: the reflective mindset; where the effective manager is able to reflect upon the history (current and aged) to create a better future moving forward.

2. Managing the organization: the analytical mindset; here referencing a tennis match, where the manager must be cognizant of the crowd and their reaction, but also focusing on the ball itself.

3. Managing context: the worldly mindset; thinking globally and looking for the unorthodox solution.

4. Managing relationships: the collaborative mindset; where the manager is able to engage the employees and moves beyond empowerment [which "implies that people who know the work best somehow receive the blessing of their managers to do it (Kibort, 2004)] into commitment.

5. Managing change: the action mindset; "imagine your organization as a chariot pulled by wild horses. These horses represent the emotions, aspirations, and motives of all the people in the organization. Holding a steady course requires just as much skill in steering around to a new direction" (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2003, p. 54-63).

Gosling and Mintzberg conclude with one very interesting point. They stipulate that, unlike Pavett & Lau (1983) that good managers are able to look beyond the desire to fix problems with simple reorganizations. In fact, they argue that hierarchy plays a very small role in the actual completion of tasks on the unit level and can only lead to more bureaucracy. Which leads one to ask the question: who is to complete those unit level tasks and solve those problems associated with people?

There is no definitive definition of what leadership is, as it appears to change form and focus for each individual study. For the purposes of this paper, however, the definition set forth by Lussier & Achua (2007) seems to fit best: "Leadership is the influencing process of leaders and followers to achieve organizational objectives through change" (p.6). How do we compare leadership and management? The common misconception is that it is something that should be compared "straight up", or "even Steven". Obviously, there are natural leaders and persons in positions of social authority throughout every facility, and yes, it is incumbent upon the managers and leaders to empower those people to support the overall mission. Admittedly, some of these people may never become managers, but their role in the facility is of the utmost importance.

However, as managers are an industry specific entity, it is ridiculous to try and compare leadership to management outside of the constraint of the management role. Recognizing and accepting the constraint of the comparison, it must be acknowledged that in industry, you cannot have good leadership without good management; and in obvious juxtaposition, poor leadership leads to poor success rates for the management. It seems apparent that our management staffs should concentrate on growing employees into leaders, to eventually become managers; but if the managers themselves are not leaders yet, then much difficulties will soon befall upon that company. As Peter Drucker will tell you, it is imperative to build a strong management team, centered around strong leadership. In thinner times, gone are the days of two people for every position. Here are the days when a successful company is able to package good managerial skills into every leader, and good leadership skills into every manager. Failure to do so will result in failure to succeed.

"Drucker devotes considerable effort and space to defining the nature and role of management. This discussion also focuses on the nature and value of leadership in the organization. According to Drucker, leadership gives the organization meaning, defines and nurtures its central values, creates a sense of mission, and builds the systems and processes that lead to successful performance" (Wittmeyer, 2003).

References

Anastasi, Thomas (1998). Personality negotiating: conflict without casualty. Boston University,

Boston, MA: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Augustine, Norman & Adelman, Kenneth (1999). Shakespeare in charge: the bard's guide to

leading and succeeding on the business stage. New York, NY: Hyperion

Brunsson, K. (2008). Some Effects of Fayolism. International Studies of Management &

Organization, 38(1), 30-47.

Cohen, Norman. (2007). Moses and the journey to leadership: Timeless lessons of effective

management from the Bible and today's leaders. Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights

Publishing.

Corrigan, Paul (1999). Shakespeare on management: leadership lessons for today's managers.

Dover, NH: Kogan Page Limited.

de Charon, Linda. (2003). A transformational leadership development program: Jungian

psychological types in dynamic flux. Organization Development Journal, 21(3), 9-18.

Gosling, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2003, November). The Five Minds of a Manager. (cover story).

Harvard Business Review, 81(11), 54-63

Jung, Carl (1923) Psychology Types. New York, NY: Harcourt Press

Kibort, Phillip M (2004). Management vs. Leadership. Physician Executive, 30(6), 32-35.

Klosko, George (1995). History of political theory: an introduction. Volume II; modern political

theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group / Thomson Learning.

Lamond, David. (2005) On the value of management history: Absorbing the past to understand

the present and inform the future. Management Decision, incorporating the Journal of

Management History, 43, 10.

Lussier, Robert N. & Achua, Christopher F. (2007). Leadership: Theory, application, & skill

development, 3e. Mason, OH: Thomson Higher Education.

McClelland D. & Burnham, D. H. (1995) Power is the great motivator. Harvard Business

Review, January, 81(1), p117-126.

Mintzberg, H. (2004, August). Leadership and management development: An afterword.

Academy of Management Executive, 18(3), 140-142.

Pavett, C., & Lau, A. (1983, March). Managerial work: The influence of hierarchical level and

functional specialty. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 170-177

Safferstone, Mark J. (2006). Organizational Leadership: Classic Works and Contemporary

Perspectives.

Wittmeyer, C. (2003, August). The Practice of Management: Timeless Views and Principles.

Academy of Management Executive, 17(3), 13-15




Kevin Vail is a graduate student at Norwich University's School of Graduate Studies, in pursuit of his Masters of Science in Organizational Leadership.

The success he receives in this program is predicated on a highly intensive curriculum, that uses his experiences from military, education, and corporate training environments. Both academic research and personal experiences have led to a wide understanding of leadership styles, traits, and opportunities for development.

Kevin currently serves as the TWI Implementation Manager, for TWI Training Solutions, Inc - a company devoted to the roll out and development of Training Within Industry's programs in the manufacturing industry. Currently participating in his third roll out, in as many years, Kevin has seen an increase of 200% in the Key Performance Indicators, by using the TWI materials to drive Leadership, Training, and Discipline in both the people and the process.

For further information about this article, or anything you have read in this text, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin at kevinvail@train2lead.org, or come visit him at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinvail




Wednesday, June 4, 2014

The Neuroscience of Compelling Leadership: 5 Brain-Based Tools To Boost Accountability, Productivity and Results NOW

Before viewing this webcast, please fill in all required form fields (*) Please select one United States Canada Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Ascension Island Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, Democratic Republic Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia (Hrvatska) Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Czechoslovakia (former) Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France France, Metropolitan French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Ivory Coast Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles Neutral Zone New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda S. Georgia and S. Sandwich Isls. Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent & the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka St. Helena St. Pierre and Miquelon Sudan Suriname Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Uruguay US Minor Outlying Islands USSR (former) Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vatican City Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands (U.S.) Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Yugoslavia (former) Zaire Zambia Zimbabwe Please select one Less than 9 10 to 49 50 to 99 100 to 249 250 to 499 500 to 999 1,000 to 4,999 5,000 to 9,999 Larger than 10,000 Please select one CEO, COO, CFO, CMO, Pres, GM CIO, CTO, CKO, CSO, Technical VP IT/IS Director IT/IS Manager IT/IS Network Administrator IT/IS Database Administrator IT/IS Professional/Admin/Staff Programmer/Developer - Software Programmer/Developer - Web Sales VP/Director Sales Manager Sales Professional Marketing VP/Director Marketing Manager Marketing Professional Business Operations VP/Director/Manager Business Operations Administrator HR VP/Director/Manager HR Professional/Educator/Trainer Finance VP/Director/Manager Finance Analyst Finance Accounting/Controller Consultant Legal Student/Education Professional By submitting this form, you consent to our privacy policy and agree to receive relevant information from the owners of premium content you choose to view on the site. Speaker: Christine Comaford, New York Times Bestselling Author, Leadership and Culture Coach
If today’s leaders want to improve accountability and productivity, they must be better able to communicate with and influence others. And the key to getting there lies inside the mind.

In this new webinar, discover aspects of neuroscience that can be applied to your leadership with remarkable results.

Attend this highly interactive webinar to learn how to:
Get 33-42% of your company to ask for more responsibilityIncrease team productivity by 35-50% in 6 months or less Secure 5-15 hours per week of strategic timeIncrease ownership and engagement by 67-100%

View the original article here