Measuring Our Work, and Our Lives

I've had the opportunity to work with Clay Christensen several times and as a result heard him speak both informally and in front of very high level audiences - most recently at Microsoft's CEO Summit. I've always been deeply impressed with how human he is, how human he is with others, and how he focuses on the things that really matter.

While certainly the foremost thinker on innovation and disruption theories, I've been most moved by his contemplations on the meaning of life following some serious health challenges. His book, How Will You Measure Your Life, as well as hisTEDx talk and HBR blog post on the same topic, truly get to the heart of reflecting on what constitutes a good life.

So many of us equate satisfaction with achievement, which is clearly reflective of our desire to equate meaning with outcomes that have immediate impact/visibility. Athough it is important to succeed at what you need to succeed at, putting primary emphasis on achievement does not serve us well over time.

On a macro scale, we see how this thinking negatively plays out with companies where the emphasis on short-term results kills the drive for true innovation; creating the environment for disrupters to come up from the bottom of a market and topple major players.

Personally, when we value our life by achievement metrics we can make investments at the cost of things that matter most and take much longer to "pay back" in return - such as sacrificing our time with family and those closest to us. It's so easy to forget that families can be the deepest source of happiness, and harder still to imagine if that hasn't been one's life experience to date.

In the Clay's final analysis, and I think there is great merit in this view independent of your spiritual orientation, our lives at the end of the day will only truly be measured by how we have blessed or contributed to others' lives.

My takeaway from all this is: what we do every day, who we do it with and for, and how much time we spend doing all the things we do, all matter. A lot. Easy to say, much harder to do.

Mixing the Generations, and Making It All Work

In today's workforce, multiple and radically different generations are coming together and often struggling with how to work with each other. I recently heard University of Liverpool's Dr. Paul Redmond, an expert on generational theory, define the key drivers for the three primary generations now in the workforce.

What the research really shows, is that it is not when you are born that defines you - it's what you experienced as you were growing up. So, it's our early lives that drive our core generational attributes.

Here's a short recap of these characteristics, as well as insights into what behaviors work best while working with each generation:

Boomers - 1946-61 - Idealists: These are the folks who define the work world, and are leading it. They are brand loyal. Optimistic. Family-focused. Socially connected, and deeply care about social capital. They work hard, and believe they'll be rewarded. They seek, and commit to, long-term relationships. Focus on:

• Their loyalty gene. It matters to them, and it can be leveraged
• Pay attention to their reputation. They believe it's their most important asset
• Give them respect; they believe they have earned it
• Word of mouth has the most weight with them

Gen X - 1962-77 - Reactive: This generation is fundamentally more complex. Even cynical. They have reduced social capital, and care far less about others. They are digital immigrants. Plus, they feel time poor, and are as a result, driven to convenience. Focus on:

• Emphasizing on how things will help them
• Giving them freedom
• Paying attention to their lifestyle
• Explaining cost benefits

Gen Y - 1978-99 - Civic: No surprise - these people are always connected. Consistently opinionated. Collaborative by design. They want to live "authentically." We know them as the first digital natives. Deeply aware of the environment, and committed to its future. They were the first to blur their public/private lives; work and play. And, they are always brand aware. Focus on:

• Helping them find meaning
• Giving them strong story lines
• Paying attention to experiences
• Delivering integrated "packages"

Leadership Principles to Live By

I recently had the opportunity to hear Sir Terry Leahy, former Tesco CEO and best-seller author, speak on the fundamental principles executives need to live by to achieve sustainable market success.

Here's a quick snapshot of his underlying management philosophy, in 10 words:

• Truth: Find the truth - hardest for people to do. The goal is to see yourself as others really see you. Remember that the deepest research and insight comes in from the "bottom" of an organizations - sales, research - and it often gets trapped, filtered, and repressed. Stay as close to your customers as you can, and listen well and regularly.
• Loyalty: Possessing customer loyalty is the most valuable commodity any organization can own. Figure out how to deeply know your customers, and engage with them, so you can create continuous customer benefits.
• Courage: Courage is always at the center. So, you need to set fear aside, and fundamentally stretch yourself and your organization. People are regularly paralyzed by the fear of losing their jobs or reputations, and this fear can limit organizations in so many ways. Having the courage to break through barriers, and face these fears, is at the heart of enduring success. Take risks. Have big audacious goals.
• Values: While the soft side of management, having a core purpose, mission, and guiding principles, matters more to business and long-term success than the hard side of management, marketing, and finance. Values speak to the heart of an organization's constituencies and keeps them connected as believers and advocates.
• Act: How do things get done? Gather data. Analyze and then make decisions based on them. Build discipline into the organization. Create processes that outline how things need to get done. Then define roles that enable effective implementation and focus on continuous improvement. Systematize so can you scale.
• Balance: For the purpose of landing scorecard objectives, organizations often find themselves with the big problem of taking on singular objectives and pursuing them at the cost of others. Develop tools that capture what's important in an organization, get the data in the hands of people doing their jobs, and those empowered will drive to more holistic results.
• Simple: Focus on clarity - the true definition of simple - so the whole organization can understand what you are doing and stay engaged. Build a culture of simplicity. Not easy, but incredibly powerful in terms of building true connections with employees, customers, shareholders, and the whole ecosystem of market influencers.
• Lean: Lean thinking can lead organizations to sustainable consumption and usage - which translates directly to huge, long-term customer benefits.
• Compete: Play well, while playing to win, because you'll learn a lot from those you compete with. Understanding your competitors force you to do engage with your customers is the best possible ways.
• Trust: Trust is really about leadership. And leaders only really lead after they've built meaningful organizational and market trust. Operate with integrity at all times, and the benefits will be enduring.

To Sell is Human...and We All Are Sellers

I just heard Daniel Pink speak here at Microsoft, promoting his new book To Sell is Human: The Surprising Truth About Moving Others. I've picked up the book, and it's on my stack of New Year books to read along with Karen Kang's new release Branding Pays; I know I'll get to it soon as I've read Drive twice now. Loved that book!

We had Dan Pink speak last year in Miami at one of our global conferences, and one of his stylistic hallmarks - especially with a smaller audience - is how he consistently engages and includes the audience into his presentations. Today he did not disappoint, and it was fun to hear how he made his point to the diverse audience - representing folks from many parts of the company and different disciplines - that like it or not, we're all in sales now.

Today, 41% of the type of work professionals do involves convincing or persuading other people to give up something they value (attention, effort, money, time) for something you can offer. So, to be effective and successful in our work lives, we better know how to sell.

That's hard for a lot of people, because when we think of selling not the best images/words come to mind. In fact, To Sell is Human's research reveals that the vast majority of associations related to selling/sales people are negative: Pushy, difficult, annoying, ugh, yuck, sleazy, and the list goes on.

The reason is that in the "old world order" - before we had access to seemingly infinite information via the Internet/hand-held devices/on-the-go mobility, plus could influence things ourselves via social media - the seller really did have all the power. In technical terms, the seller had the advantage of information asymmetry; the balance of power of more information and channels was on their side.

Not any more. Buyers have choice, information, and can talk back. So the tables have turned and as Pink says, sellers beware.

What do do? It's time to learn about how to move and influence other people, in real ways. Here are Pink's new ABCs of selling:

• Attunement: Aligning with others and taking someone else's point of view/having perspective
• Buoyancy: Being able to float in what will probably be an ocean of rejection
• Clarity: Curating information rather than merely acquiring lots of it

In terms of where to focus, here are the competencies to develop:

• Pitch: All the time, and with questions and via a narrative form
• Improvise: Scripts no longer work, learn how to operate on your feet
• Serve: Switch your orientation and serve first, sell after - and sales will follow

The Power of Emotional, Attitudinal Brands

When I last spoke at The Conference Board's Corporate Identity and Branding Summit, I had the opportunity to listen to a Landor presentation on brand extensions. Below are some insights.

From this leading brand firm's point of view, there are two primary ways to look at extending brands: (1) line extensions, where you are moving your brand footprint in your existing product or market category - think new beverages from Pepsi or Coke; and (2) brand extensions, where you are moving into new product and market categories outside of the current ones your company operates in - think Google who is known for search moving into Google docs, Google+, Android, etc.

In either types of situation the question to answer is: what is the locus of the brand that you are extending? That is, is your brand based on attitudinal or functional values/attributes? Understanding this orientation, informs the development of the brand architecture/tools that support the development and marketing of brand extensions.

Attitudinal brands are grounded by brand attributes/values that revolve around the company's/products' attitude, ethos, and aesthetic. According to Landor, attitudinal brands have strong, enduring emotional connections with customers and markets; examples include Disney, Virgin, or Apple. Conversely, functional brands center on the company's/products' functions, capabilities, price, and quality; those that fall into this definition could be Walmart or BMW.

So, why does one brand extension fail and another succeed? To determine when an extension will add meaningful value to the existing brand - a fundamental requirement to success - these questions must be answered:

• Will the brand extension run counter to customer expectations?
• Does the new brand extension provide competitive advantage in new categories?
• Will the brand extension positively reinforce the existing brand's positioning?
• Will the brand extension make money or defend market share?
• Will the brand extension open up a meaningful new market in terms of audience or category?

Landor believes that creating emotional brand experiences are the most effective ways to reach and impact markets. Always start with a simple, clear brand idea. Then, if you have successfully answered the above questions, make sure you have framed your brand idea in emotional/attitudinal ways and extend into new brand categories.

What Really Motivates Us, In Work and Life

I've had the opportunity to hear Dan Pink speak twice on his research on motivation, and how motivational science is completely different from what we assume. His best-selling book, Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, provides further detail on what really propels people to keep moving forward positively in life and business.

Pink makes the case, via a persuasive summary of applicable research, that what propels people forward (gets them to act in any way) has changed dramatically in the last century, and profoundly from what motivated early mankind. If we start at the beginning, what drove humans to do anything had to basically revolve around survival; biological drives ruled human lives, from scrounging for food to procreation.

As human communities progressed, people needed to work together in increasingly cooperative fashions to achieve more complex goals - like building physical infrastructures, conducting commerce, and organizing for warfare. This led to what Pink calls "Motivation 2.0" where people were primarily focused on gaining rewards and avoiding punishments, to meet societal expectations. But while this psychological approach worked for a long time, it started to break down during the last century when so many underpinnings started transforming - causing routine work to be increasingly displaced by creative and intellectual contributions.

New research conducted over the last 50 years convincingly argues that intrinsic motivation now may have the most power over human behavior. In fact most extrinsic motivation (such as rewards for performance) may actually have the opposite effect on desired behavior because it limits/narrows, as opposed to opens/broadens, the focus of one's actions. If the task/work problem is challenging, and hard to solve, then you want people to feel empowered to truly look outside the box not just within its parameters.

Pink sums it up this way: If/then rewards are OK for rewarding straightforward and short-term tasks, and not good for motivating folks to solve more complex and longer-term challenges.

Ultimately, to respond to the new world order and be prepared to solve its complex challenges, people need to be fully engaged to do so. The "technology" for engagement is self-direction, which is fueled by:

1. Autonomy: The freedom-ability to direct one's own life, and work
2. Mastery: The desire and commitment to get better and better at something that really matters to the individual
3. Purpose: The desire to do work that serves a larger, and meaningful purpose beyond ourselves as individuals

It's not that money isn't important, but once a certain threshold is reached (being paid enough and what's deemed fair for the work at hand) it really doesn't drive people. What really matters, and what truly drives us, is making progress in work we deem meaningful.

The Board Directorship Quest, for Women

Last night I was invited to join the Washington Technology Industry Association's new "community" -- Executive Women in Technology. The inaugural speaker was Debbie Bevier, Chairman, Coinstar, and Director, F5 Networks, who shared her overall career trajectory to becoming a go-to board director in the Seattle area.

What began as a traditional banking career in branch offices, changed dramatically when Debbie was selected to move to her organization's holding company as part of their new diversity initiative in the mid-80's. That is, get more women on the corporate ladder! What seemed initially like a big risk, and departure from customer work that she loved, she quickly was in position to be selected for even greater challenges and the highest level promotions.

As part of her journey, she moved to Seattle and into various CEO roles - and integrated solidly into the community. It was these types of relationships that led to her first board position, and those that followed. Close professional network contacts were the key to Debbie landing board roles; in effect, these contacts became the career sponsors who championed her over time.

Today, Debbie is a full-time director who celebrates life and friends - and thoroughly embraces the flexibility that board director work offers. She's been able to better care for an ailing parent, manage some key personal issues, and still be deeply involved in the companies she helps govern.

She counseled the group to think about why you would want to be a board director, as many times you simply don't know what you are getting into. The job scope requires deep attention to a myriad of details, as well as solid perseverance to get through a wide array of potential political issues. Boards today are dealing with more and more complex challenges in terms of strategic planning, corporate performance, risk and crisis oversight, executive talent development, and CEO succession. In fact, the average board director spends 230 hours/year in role, but that too is highly dependent on the board and issues at hand - it could be a lot more.

So, think about it - is board directorship a responsibility you really want to assume? 
From the perspective of board selection committees, they look for candidates that embody multiple attributes in these priority areas:

1. Corporate leadership experience
2. Specific industry experience
3. Financial acumen
4. Strategy development track record
5. Global expansion experience
6. Risk management

While there is great interest on the part of women to have significant board roles, as Meg Whitman most recently noted "progress in the boardroom has flattened for women." The answers why aren't clear, so clearly this type of dialogue and community effort needs to continue.

The Changing Face of Branding

Recently I have been meeting with a wide range of folks to discuss the shifting foundation of brand management. Whereas many see branding as a superficial marketing function - driven by digital imagery, catchy phrases or splashy ads - dynamic brand management is something much more fundamental to the success of any company, product/service, or individual.

Effective brand management needs to begin during product development. Because strategic branding is based on expressing differentiation and value, brand managers must have a role in actually defining products and experiences. The product/experience is the brand message, and the customer engagement with it needs to be congruent with the desired brand objective.

In short, branding is an action and not a marketing communications deliverable. Brand managers need to act first, and speak later.

Being global - and who isn't these days - also challenges brand managers on how to adapt brands and build consistent experiences. As an example, how wealth is perceived and treated varies greatly by culture and geography. Whereas in some parts of the world the display of wealth (for let's say luxury products) is highly valued and should be featured prominently in the brand, in other places discretion/understatement are the appropriate "brand voices."

So, brand managers must build, with their product counterparts, brand platforms big enough to work across these differences then devise brand segmentation strategies to address different markets. No stock answer works; only awareness, agility, and adaptation.

What Makes Real Talent?

I just heard George Anders speak on his new book, "The Rare Find: Spotting Exceptional Talent Before Anyone Else," where he examined what constitutes the best talent, where to look for it, and how leverage it. Everyone wants top talent, but research shows that hiring successfully is sporadic at best. It's hard to hire strangers, and surprisingly harder still to promote from within.

So, what should you look for in people and how can you improve your assessment process?

For one, traditional interview settings rarely tell us much about the person in front of us. In a face-to-face office interview, you can't really determine a person's core, underlying abilities. You can confirm what's on a resume, and explore conceptually specific scenarios, but these aren't complete indicators of what will happen in real life.

That's why, as an example, the Army Special Forces picks their elite forces based on multi-day, high-risk situations - infused with adversity and ambiguity - where candidates have to actually demonstrate how they confront crises, devise solution strategies, and execute successfully with other team members. Trying to solve the unexpected problem is what uncovers the traits the Army is looking for, especially a person's tenacity and resiliency.

When identifying the top high school athletes to recruit, college coaches gather student athletes together for multi-day camps. Some of the best recruiting coaches say it's seeing the athletes over time, in what is essentially an extended audition, that best informs their decision. These coaches pay close attention to the small stuff, i.e. how does a player handle injury, are they there for the team or themselves, are they demonstrating the attitude necessary for team success? These are the insights that provide the decision-making context for success.

But what's really fascinating, is that the most interesting and ultimately successful candidates may have "jagged" resumes - backgrounds where they may not have finished college, may have had several different types of jobs, may have resume time gaps, or may have explored several different fields. So, instead of focusing simply on conventional achievements and a straight/narrow path, it's imperative to look at the "whole" of a background and evaluate how individuals rank in terms of these types of competencies:

• Resiliency
• Efficiency
• Self-reliance
• Desire to improve
• Curiosity
• Creativity
• Ability to influence others without having full control

Making Your Network Work for You

Last week I led a career development roundtable at Microsoft on effective networking based on a number of sources, including a Harvard Business Review article from Rob Cross and Robert Thomas on "Smarter Networking." While this was more of a facilitated discussion, to engage the group in mutual exchange, I did highlight some key insights from this discovery process that impacted me and are causing me to rethink my approach to networking.

Perhaps the biggest surprise is that research has found that truly effective networks only have a core size of between 12-18 people. While this may make immediate sense to some, I really had to stop and think about this conclusion. Larger network numbers don't provide more value and, in fact, actually decrease the value your network provides. You can so easily dilute your impact by expanding your outreach, versus maximizing the mutual exchange between a more limited set of committed network members.

Makes you think about your LinkedIn/Facebook/Twitter connections. Is all that time well spent?

So, what really matters is your network structure: those 12-18 primary connections that bridge all kinds of smaller groups and cross all sorts of geographies, functional, and hierarchical lines. Additionally, interactions with these core relationships need to emphasize more mutual learning, committed engagement, and personal growth, and less transactional exchange. Maybe most importantly, this newly defined network should be comprised of positive, energetic, and authentic contacts - because if your closest connections exhibit these traits, so will you.

To get started, or revamp your network approach, it's important to ground your commitment to real outcomes that you want to achieve. You can't just network for networking's sake, or in some vague hope that a new contact is going to land you that dream assignment/job/promotion. Be realistic - what do you want to achieve in a six month, 12 month, and 24 month time frame. Then you can more effectively think about your network structure.

Here are some good steps for re-thinking, re-configuring, and living a smarter network:

1. Analyze who is in your network today by categorizing: (1) who provides new information or expertise; (2) those in other groups/locations who share best practices; (3) those who inspire innovation, especially those outside your current environment; (4) people who previously held "powerful" positions who can mentor you, offer political support, and help you analyze big issues; (5)folks who have informal power who can help provide direct and indirect influence; (6) those who help with professional or personal developmental counsel; and (7) people who provide personal support and promote your well-being.
2. Determine who in your network you should "de-layer" by categorizing: (1) people who are energy drains; (2) folks who have too much of you; (3) people who are in a category with too many other people, hence just repeating the same value; and (4) folks who don't provide real value back, or don't really care about the relationship with you beyond being transactional.
3. Connect your network to your professional and personal goals: (1) first, spell out three business outcomes you want to achieve over a year with your network; (2) categorize the "de-layered" or new network connections against your business objectives, by evaluating who can lend appropriate experience, resources, or support.