Google Ad #1 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #3 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #1 - mobile - 300x200

Google Ad #3 - mobile - 300x200

ATD_Half_Page

Googel Ad #1 - Side Bar - Content pages

ATD Footer Logo

Daniel Conti

Diversity Inclusiveness and Executive Order 13583

Why is continuous learning so effective, and how can organizations leverage it effectively? Let’s dive in.

Building a Culture of Continuous Learning: The Key to Employee Retention

July 2010 - TD Magazine

To Be Continued: Using Social Media for Training Conversations

Here are some tips to help build our EQ as we continue to build our leadership capabilities.

EQ as a Leadership Predictor

This is the first post in a three-part series examining leadership. (See post 2 and post 3.)  “With each new day in Africa, a gazelle wakes up knowing it must outrun the fastest lion or perish. At the same time, a lion stirs and stretches, knowing it must outrun the fastest gazelle or starve. It is no different for the human race. Whether you consider yourself a gazelle or a lion, you simply have to run faster than others.”— from “My Vision: Challenges in the Race for Excellence”by His Highness Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum,Vice President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai There is little argument that leadership is comprised of many facets. For many, leadership is the key aspect of a manager’s job—as well as a critical component of any directing function. More importantly, many agree that a main role of leaders is to empower others to work toward specific objectives. Accordingly, leadership is a constant process, rather than a “product” that happens overnight. In addition, leadership is focused on making other people feel more energetic and determined to work. In other words, leadership is a “contact sport” that routinely occurs via positive social modeling and continuous learning and development. Apart from this “relationship” dimension of leadership, there is an emphasis on accomplishing purposeful tasks, improving performance, and achieving results. What the Research Tells Us International research consistently shows that investing in leadership development and management capabilities is the key to achieving sustainable organizational growth and success. Indeed, the evidence touting the value of leadership development is compelling. A major case-based European HRD research project examined learning and development (L&D) practice in nearly 200 “learning-oriented” enterprises (most employing between 500 to +1,000 employees) in seven European countries: Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. The study found that it takes a learning culture to produce a learning culture, and its development could be traced to such factors as organizational leadership, a strong push for innovation in the workplace, and future learning capacity development (Tjepkema et al., 2002).According to research, led by Birkbeck, University of London, about management training and development approaches in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Norway, and Romania, there is strong statistical corroboration for management development leading to superior organizational performance across companies of all sizes, sectors, and national location (Mabey and Ramirez, 2004).Research into National Vocational Education and Training (NVET) systems in the Netherlands, Germany, France, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan found that NVET strategies impact both workforce upscaling and re-skilling, and are the foundation of success in the knowledge-based global economy of the 21st century (Harrison and Kessels, 2004).A Harvard Business School/Hay Group research project that examined more than 100 senior teams around the globe revealed that effective teams can significantly contribute to their enterprises, yet only one in five are extremely good, while one-third are mediocre, and 42 percent are poor. The study identified “a clearly defined senior leadership team” as one of the conditions for effective operations—rather than a heroic CEO (Wageman et al., 2008).Another study found that ineffective management is estimated to cost, for example, UK businesses more than £19billion per year in lost working hours. More importantly, the data showed that bad management by company directors is the source of 56 percent of all corporate failures (BIS, 2012). Clearly, leadership is one of the most loaded, not to mention well-established, issues in management today—whether we are dealing with a global corporation, government institution or a start-up in Abu Dhabi, London, Minneapolis, Moscow, Mumbai, Shanghai, Silicon Valley, or Toronto. And even though we have been studying “leadership” since the time of Plato, the same questions emerge: Are leaders born or made?How are we doing as leaders?   How we thought about leadership and its development, though, has changed over the years. Let’s now explore the journey of leadership. Trait Approaches to Leadership Trait approaches seek to uncover what makes a leader_—_in contrast to those who are not leaders. The typical assumption is that that some people simply possess the “right stuff” to be leaders, while others do not. The implication is that good leaders are, in fact, “born to lead.” These "born leaders" possess unique traits that are not equally present in all individuals. For example, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) researched the regularity of certain traits in leaders, such as:energypersonalized vs. socialized leadership motivationhonesty and integrityself-confidence (including emotional stability)cognitive abilityknowledge of the business. The study found weaker support for other traits commonly touted as necessary leadership traits, including charisma, creativity/originality, and flexibility. Meanwhile, Daniel Goleman (1998) produced a meta-analysis of leadership competency frameworks in 188 different enterprises. He found that it is the “emotional” competencies—a combo of traits and abilities enabling people to work with others and lead positive change—that make an effective leader. His research found that five emotional intelligence (EQ) competencies (self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill) were twice as significant as other capabilities, specifically: technical skills (accounting or business planning) and cognitive skills (big-picture thinking or analytical reasoning). Research, however, has demonstrated little consistency in these “bundles” of personal capabilities among power leaders who drive organizational performance far above the norm. Leadership Behaviors and Styles for Different Situations Along a different vein, other leadership analysts have shifted the emphasis of study from “what the leader is” to “how leaders behave.” For example, McGregor (1960) held that the leader determines the style they manage staff, and thereby, successively determines how the staff behaves. Leaders who buy into “Theory X” believe that people are naturally irresponsible and uncooperative, and must be rewarded or punished to add value. Leaders who subscribe to “Theory Y” believe that followers are naturally energetic, growth-oriented, and interested in being utilitarian. Though the model admittedly plays up and groups leadership behaviors along an orientation toward employees, it offers little concrete basis for action. Furthermore, Blake and Mouton (1964) created the “Managerial Grid,” which is based on two facets of leadership behavior: people and production. This grid then produces four leadership styles:Authority-Compliance (High on Production, Low on People)Country Club (High on People, Low on Production)Impoverished Management (Low on People, Low on Productivity)Team Leadership (High on People, High on Productivity). However, although this framework is significantly more inclusive (the assumption being that leadership involves learning leadership behavior) and numerous leadership development interventions have been built on it, it fails to account for events and circumstances that cannot be predicted with certainty. Finally, situational leadership, a contingency model by Hersey & Blanchard (1988) provides a remedy for adapting the leadership style to fit the demands of the environment. Having diagnosed the developmental level of the followers, as well as their needs, this model contends that the leader works through the four styles:Directing (telling)Coaching (selling)Supportive (participating)Delegation (empowering). Again, many current leadership development solutions are being designed around this model of leadership. Perhaps, though, it is time to move onto a post-heroic view of leadership that offers an L&D orientation of leaders. This will be the focus of my next post in this series on leadership. Stay tuned...

Leadership: Trends and Dead Ends

8.4 trillion dollars.That's how Jean-Marc Laouchez quantified the impact of the talent crunch on today's organizations. Laouchez leads the Korn Ferry Institute and the Korn Ferry Academy, and recently delivered the opening keynote at Degreed’s annual innovator’s conference, LENS.So how best to make sense of such a staggering figure?Insight #1: People are your number 1 capital.In his welcome message at LENS, Degreed CEO Chris McCarthy reminded leaders that "technology and products can always move faster than organizational change."There is still a disconnect between what learning and development (L&D) leaders communicate as a top priority to the CEO (investing in people) and what the board/shareholders prioritize (investing in technology). \[4\] That there is disparity between how these two stakeholder groups view strategic priorities is unsurprising. In fact, even in high-performing companies, it's estimated that less than 30% of employees correctly identify organizational strategy. \[5\]The advantage of clearly communicating to all audiences that "people are the #1 asset" is that this clarity empowers employees to move quickly and confidently in alignment with goals. In their book, Talent Wins, Charan et al. go further to emphasize that executives and boards must recognize that talent, even more than strategy, is what generates value. \[1\] Laouchez laid out a clear plan of action that challenges organizations to pursue change by understanding how to "maximize internal talent to capture future value." \[4\]Insight #2: Define and develop the right skills, for the right jobs, for the right talent.Laouchez shared a study that Korn Ferry conducted with the World's Most Admired Companies (WMACs), where less than half of those organizations felt their talent had the right skills and capabilities to execute strategy. \[3\] This finding aligns with PwC's 21st Century CEO Survey where "80% of CEOs say they’re worried and 38% are extremely concerned about availability of digital skills in their country." \[9\] The conversation around the skills gap is complicated by the argument that employers should focus on increased wages—oversimplifying the problem to one of supply-and-demand driven primarily by the price of labor. Gartner's Marcus Chiu explains that for the many employers who are already willing to pay more, this solution is fraught with diminishing returns. \[2\]So what happens when there's a high supply of workers? The LinkedIn Workforce Report for September 2018 analyzes migration trends between major U.S. cities and which cities present the largest skill gaps. Interestingly, although Austin, TX gained the most workers in September 2018, this city also ranked among the top 10 cities with the largest skill shortages. \[6\] This suggests that an influx of workers is not always enough to solve the mismatch between the skills workers have and the skills employers need.It is worth noting that "more than one-half of employees rated opportunities to use their skills and abilities at work as a very important contributor to their job satisfaction." \[10\] This signals a shared value: Both workers and employers want to match skills to roles. Everyone now has access to the millions of courses, books, articles, videos, apps, podcasts, social networks, and other learning content. Key to building the skills needed to win is for employers to connect that content to skills, and then connect those skills to jobs.Insight #3: Make learning work by balancing outcomes, capabilities, and purpose.Culture—this is what ties it all together. A digital learning strategy that connects content to skills and skills to jobs must be anchored in a strong culture. If the digital building blocks for a highly-skilled workforce are firmly set on the cornerstone of a talent-first agenda, the organizational culture can thrive. \[1\] A culture of continuous learning is a competitive advantage, and is key to attracting talent—especially Millennials. \[8\] Laouchez outlined a three-point framework for how employers can drive a strong learning culture \[4\]:● Purpose: Come and work with us, and be who you are.● Capabilities: Do what you are good at, or do what you like, and master it.● Outcomes: We are going to put the needed resources behind you to achieve the desired results.Technology alone is not the magic bullet. In this paradigm, technology is an enabler—one that helps drive a disproportionate return on talent. This framework is also about nurturing trust between the organization and its talent to capture future value. Shane O'Leary references Daniel Coyle to explain that organizations like IDEO, Google, and Pixar integrate purpose and profit because they "build a common purpose, share vulnerability, and create psychological safety." \[3\] \[7\] Another way to build trust is to reward the talent that generates outsize value for the organization. Developing a roster of top-skilled talent is not just about the talent at the top. Further, those value creators can be many positions distanced from the CEO. \[1\] A flash of genius almost never sparks in alignment with organization hierarchies, but instead comes "from a volume of random ideas by lots of different people with different perspectives." \[3\]Want to learn more? Check out this pathway that includes the sources cited throughout the post.\*\*\*Charan, R., Barton, D., & Carey, D. C. (2018). Talent wins: The new playbook for putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.Chiu, M. (2018, June 4). Can US Employers Close the Skills Gap With Higher Wages Alone? Probably Not. Retrieved from https://www.cebglobal.com/talentdaily/can-us-employers-close-the-skills-gap-with-higher-wages-alone/COYLE, D. (2017). CULTURE CODE: The hidden language of highly successful groups. S.l.: BANTAM.Laouchez, J. (2018, October 4). L&D Strategy: How to Win the Battle Between People and Profits. Keynote speech presented at LENS 2018 in New York, New York.Leppert, J., & Kotter, J. (2014, June 9). When CEOs Talk Strategy, 70% Of The Company Doesn't Get It. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkotter/2013/07/09/heres-why-ceo-strategies-fall-on-deaf-ears/#240067ed3663LinkedIn. (2018, September 11).LinkedIn Workforce Report | Atlanta | September 2018. Retrieved from https://economicgraph.linkedin.com/resources/linkedin-workforce-report-september-2018O'Leary, S. (2018, July 8). The surprising reason why IDEO, Pixar & Google prioritise 'psychological safety' to win the battle for better ideas... Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/surprising-reason-why-ideo-pixar-google-prioritise-safety-o-leary/?lipi=urn:li:page:d\_flagship3\_profile\_view\_base\_recent\_activity\_details\_all;sdxb2rg3S8mRhNOmIoT35A==&licu=urn:li:control:d\_flagship3\_profile\_view\_base\_recent\_activity\_details\_all-linkPalmer, K., & Blake, D. (2018). The expertise economy: How the smartest companies use learning to engage, compete, and succeed. Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2018, January 22). Key findings on talent: 21st CEO Survey. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/ceo-agenda/ceosurvey/2018/gx/deep-dives/talent.htmlSHRM. (2016, November 16). 2016 Employee Job Satisfaction and Engagement: Revitalizing a Changing Workforce. Retrieved from SHRM.

What the World's Most Admired Companies Are Extremely Concerned About

Approach-Avoidance Conflict and the BrainApproach-avoidance conflict is a term used to describe a major decision that has both appealing and unappealing elements to it. Since most people inherently mistrust salespeople, nearly every major purchase decision falls into this category. How can we feel good about a deal we’ve just made with a perceived devil? Neuroscience suggests that the less we trust the salesperson, the more risky we believe the purchase decision and the less likely we are to act, regardless of the product’s benefits.The Brain on TrustEverything we think or feel is generated in the brain as an electrochemical response to outside stimuli interacting with previous memories. While this statement is an oversimplification, it will work for the purposes of this post. Neuroscientist Paul Zak was one of the first to identify the neurotransmitter oxytocin as an indicator that we are feeling a high degree of trust toward a stranger, as exhibited by heightened levels of oxytocin. Oxytocin and other “messenger molecules” are released in response to internal and external stimuli, flooding specific parts of the brain and triggering specific emotional reactions. Daniel Goleman, expanding on his initial work in emotional intelligence, has discovered that the brains of two people who trust each other have a remarkable symmetry—their brains are so in sync that they exhibit high levels of brain activity in the same parts of the brain at the same time. The same synchronicity has been found in couples dancing and musicians playing duets. Experienced sales professionals may have sensed this syncing of brain waves when things are going extremely well in the sales process.Zak found that the more oxytocin coursing through your brain, the more likely you are to trust people. It stands to reason that if we can stimulate oxytocin in the buyer’s brain, we can overcome the deeply ingrained tendency to distrust a sales representative. Here are a few behaviors that stimulate oxytocin and make us believe that an individual is trustworthy.The Power of TouchBeing touched by another human being stimulates oxytocin and other transmitters and increases the feelings of trust toward that individual. Zak found that hugging, in particular, generates high degrees of trust in both participating brains. Handshaking can also improve the degree of trust between two individuals and make the prospect of striking a deal more likely.Each Purchase Increases the Likeliness of the Next PurchaseWhen we make a purchase, we feel good about it because our brains reward us with oxytocin. This feeling becomes associated with the person, company, and product that has been purchased, making future sales more likely. Each time the customer goes back over the same pathway, the reward response increases in a virtuous cycle, ramping up the trust level and making each sale more likely than the previous one. For this reason, many online marketers promote low-cost entry-level products, knowing that the buyer will continue to move up to higher-cost items as long as the customer experience remains positive.All Decisions Are EmotionalWhile many sales professionals believe that certain types of purchases, such as those made to support a business, are completely logical processes, the truth is that every purchase decision is emotional at first. The “reasons” for the purchase are often concocted by our neocortex—the seat of rational thought—to help us accept a decision that may have originated in the amygdala, the seat of emotional response.Storytelling Builds Trust and ConnectionStories have a profound effect on the brain. Brain imaging studies have shown that when we are immersed in a story, our brains respond as though we are the protagonist of the narrative. Therefore, stories about others buying and using the product can help buyers see themselves making the purchase decision and generate positive emotions about the product and the salesperson.You Can’t Fake TrustworthinessThe results above suggest that we should train sales professionals to touch their prospects more often, start with smaller sales and lead the buyer to increasingly larger purchases over time, and use stories to appeal to the emotions of the buyer. If only it were that simple. Remember, our brains are highly tuned survival machines, and at some point in our evolution it became necessary to detect lies in order to stay alive. Today, our brains are capable of detecting false statements or actions within milliseconds. We may not be able to express the reaction in words, but we know at “a gut level” (really a brain level) that some people are not genuine. Trustworthiness cannot be faked; your brain will give you away every time.ConclusionIf you review the top 20 sales training organizations, you may see a familiar pattern. To me, their content seems to focus on external behaviors that will make salespeople appear more credible. Neuroscience seems to indicate that we should focus instead on teaching sales professionals to be genuine, sincere, and trustworthy—a much bigger challenge with a much greater payoff.

Overcoming the Sales Credibility Gap

Daniel Burrus is considered one of the world’s leading technology forecasters and innovation experts, and is the founder and CEO of Burrus Research, a research and consulting firm that monitors global advancements in technology driven trends to help clients understand how technological, social and business forces are converging to create enormous untapped opportunities. He is the author of six books including The New York Times best seller Flash Foresight. He is also a top 50 Influencer on Linkedin.

Daniel Burrus

Daniel McDonnell is content marketing manager for Culture Amp.

Search results for 'Daniel Conti'

Categories

Refine By