Introduction

Definitions

Webster’s says that:

-“Competent” is “having the requisite qualities or abilities”

-“Competency”: is “…a sufficiency  of means…”

Montgomery Van Wart says more generally that:

For ease, traits, skills, and behaviors can all be called competencies…..Job competencies are the traits, skills and behaviors most important for a specific position or class of positions. 

To clarify: to have the “job competencies” for the any “specific” position of Leadership or the general “class” of leadership positions, you need not only the five core “traits” and other qualities that permit you to be the required “type” of Leader, but you need other “skills” and “behaviors” so that you can use any “style” of Leadership.

The sum total of your traits, skills and behaviors are your leadership competencies.

Kinds of Competencies 

Emotional Intelligence

Task and organizational competencies are normally acquired and developed based on education, training and practical work experience. Success in those efforts is usually determined by peoples' innate intelligence and their desire and ability to learn. Their intellectual capacity to do so is often reflected by their Intelligence Quotient (IQ).   

On the other hand, people-oriented or inter-personal competencies or behaviors are normally acquired and developed based on family or cultural socialization and life experience. Success in developing those skills is usually determined by peoples’ personality and commitment to self-improvement. That level of social maturity is frequently described in terms of “Emotional Intelligence” and measured by “Emotional Quotient (EQ)”.

Emotional Intelligence is a concept first defined by John D. Mayer, a Professor of Psychology at the University of New Hampshire, and Peter Salovey, a Professor of Psychology at Yale University, in the early 1990s.  It gained wider attention based on the 1995 book, Emotional Intelligence, by Daniel Goleman, a psychologist at Rutgers University Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, and was subsequently explained and applied to Leadership by his articles in the Harvard Business Review.

The originator defined Emotional Intelligence:

From a scientific (rather than a popular) standpoint, emotional intelligence is the ability to accurately perceive your own and others’ emotions; to understand the signals that emotions send about relationships; and to manage your own and others’ emotions.

Goleman, the popularizer, originally defined Emotional Intelligence as::

Emotional Intelligence–[is] the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively–[and] consists of four fundamental capabilities: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and social skill. Each capability, in turn, is composed of specific sets of competencies  . [i.e., certain behaviors and skills that must be mastered.] 

He described the four “fundamental capabilities”: 

      -Self-Awareness: Recognizing who you are and who you want to be.
      -Self-Management: Learning to control and manage your behavior to make the most of  your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.
      -Social Awareness: Moving out of your personal comfort zone to apply your new personal knowledge and understanding to understanding others.
      -Social Skill: Developing relationships to support Leadership.

In later versions, Emotional Intelligence was said to consist of “five components”: “Self-Awareness”; “Self-Regulation”; with “Motivation” and “Empathy” replacing Social Awareness; and “Social Skill.

Of the capabilities or components, Self-Awareness is the basis for all the others and is, therefore, considered the most important for developing Emotional Intelligence. 

Goleman further has defined Self-Awareness as the:

Ability to recognize and understand your moods, emotions and drives as well as their effect on others.

He also says:

Self-awareness means having a deep understanding of one’s emotions, strengths and weaknesses, needs and drives....People who have a high degree of self-awareness recognize how their feelings affect them, other people, and their job performance.

Once you understand yourself, it is then possible to begin the development necessary for controlling your feelings and managing the way you behave and relate to other people.  That is Self-Management or Self-Regulation, which has been defined as the “ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses and moods.” It includes “the propensity to suspend judgment, to think before acting.”

Goleman says it also:

...is being able to motivate oneself and persist in the face of frustrations: to control impulse and delay gratification; to regulate one's moods and keep distress from swamping the ability to think; to empathize and hope.

When you have undertaken a Self-Assessment (For guidance go here____.) you will have taken the first step in this process and will have undoubtedly gained greater Self-Awareness.  From that Self-Assessment, in addition to identifying personality characteristics that will provide strengths and weaknesses contributing to building the core traits (as was suggested in the previous topic “Types of Leaders and Styles of Leadership”) you will likely also have discovered some other characteristics or behaviors inherent in your personality or temperament that can cause problems at the interpersonal level for your leadership efforts. For example: perhaps, because of your personality or temperament you are excitable and not very patient; or perhaps you are overly sensitive and take disagreement as criticism; or possibly you are shy and not very outgoing in a group.  All of those behaviors can affect the way you deal with other people and, thereby, affect your Leadership.

You probably don't want to, and usually can’t, change your personality.  Indeed, while some, including Goleman, have listed personality characteristics such as “empathy”, “intuition”, “optimism”, “self-confidence” and “tolerance” that contribute to Emotional Intelligence, Mayer pointed out that

…diverse personality traits, however admirable, don’t necessarily add up to a single definition of emotional intelligence….Certainly these personality traits are important and (sometimes) enhancing them can be useful.  But recent research makes it clear that these characteristics are distinct from emotional intelligence as it is scientifically defined.

In essence, having or developing Emotional Intelligence is not so much as having certain personality characteristics, as understanding which ones you have or don’t have, knowing what affect they can have on dealing with others and then controlling them or using them as appropriate to facilitate your relationships with others.  Based on a Self-Assessment, you will understand what you need to do to exercise Self-Management/Self-Regulation or, just, self-discipline in your dealings with and reactions to others.  Thus, your next step should be to create a Personal Leadership Development Plan to begin to develop and practice those Self-Management/Self Regulation competencies. (For guidance, go here____.)

As you are developing your Self Management/Self-Regulation competencies so that you can deal with other people in a way that facilitates good inter-personal relations and Leadership, you should also be thinking about building your Social Awareness or your knowledge and ability to understand people and what motivates them.

Because of your past organizational affiliation—military, civilian, defense, non-defense, intelligence, other national security—you have already developed a level of Social Awareness that allows you understand empathize with and motivate  people in organizations like yours and who are like you. In the future you will have to work with a broader spectrum of people from other kinds of organizations and, thus, will want to understand their organizational traditions, ways of working and their individual professional needs and wants so that you can better empathize with and motivate them. In short, as you become more senior you must also have greater Social Awareness of a broader more generalized type because you will have a need to empathize and motivate a broader and more diverse group of people. Thus, in your Personal Leadership Development Plan you should include a commitment to take opportunities to broaden your contact with a broader spectrum of organizations and people and learn about them.

Based on that Social Awareness you will be able to develop the Social Skills so vital to Leadership.  Some of the “competencies” —some behaviors and some skills— listed by Goleman that you will need are to:

            -effectively delegate tasks in ways that empower and enable followers,

-develop people through feedback and guidance,

-communicate effectively,

-manage conflict and,

-build relationships which create bonding and teamwork.

Social Awareness: Understanding People

Since, especially the 1950s, behavioral scientists have been studying people and theorizing about what motivates them. In 1943, Abraham Maslow had written an article entitled “A Theory of Human Motivation”.  He described a “hierarchy of needs” in a pyramid:

Since, especially the 1950s, behavioral scientists have been studying people and theorizing about what motivates them. In 1943, Abraham Maslow had written an article entitled “A Theory of Human Motivation”.  He described a “hierarchy of needs” in a pyramid:

 based on

·         Psychological needs

and moving upward through

·           Security needs

·           Belongingness needs

·           Esteem needs

to the peak of

·           Self-actualization needs

 More recently, Stephen Covey has reemphasized this same set of needs, in his own unique style:  He says that what “lights the fire within” people—inspires them—is the opportunity:

·  To Live: physical and economic fairness and security

·  To Love: social and emotional kindness and respect

·  To Learn: mental and intellectual development and use of talent

·  To Leave a Legacy: spiritual and holistic meaning and integrity.

Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal emphasize the same ideas.  They suggest that "Leading is giving" and, that beyond job security, there are “four gifts” a Leader must bestow on the people of the organization to meet their higher level needs:

·  Love: A sense of caring that stems from listening, understanding and accepting.

·  Authorship: The authority for subordinates to solve problems on their own.

·  Power: The opportunity for subordinates to affect change in the organization.

·  Significance: The feeling of pride from contributing something to the organization.

These prescriptions emphasize what people need and want to receive in order to be motivated. They need to feel that they have a secure career, that they belong to a quality organization and that they are valued so that they will be given opportunity and authority to perform.  Thus, they want to be to be treated with a sense of caring, fairness, kindness and respect.  They want to be listened to and be given the opportunity to develop their talent and to use it to make a contribution to the organization. This is confirmed by a survey that found that 75% of all employees said they want to work in an organization on a “long-term basis” and 90% said that “true success is about being trusted to get the job done.”

But, as Maslow’s pyramid emphasizes, this is a “hierarchy of needs.  As Martin and Shell say:

Maslow arranged these needs in a hierarchy, with the lower needs taking on predominant importance; once satisfied, the next level of needs assumes greater importance”.

People will not respond and be motivated by their higher level needs (or wants) until their lower level “psychological” and “security” needs are being met.  These are foremost on peoples’ minds and apparent on a daily basis in the workplace.  In that regard, Frederick Herzberg found that there are, indeed, two categories of needs—“hygiene factors” and “motivators”—and people respond to them differently.

Hygiene Factors = job security, working conditions, policies and procedures, supervisors, co-workers. These fall into the “psychological” and “security” needs at the bottom of the Maslow pyramid.
Motivators = the job, achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, growth, which equate to the “belonging”, “esteem” and “self-actualization” wants at the higher levels of the Maslow pyramid.

It was Herzberg's view that when Hygiene Factors or environmental factors such as

…an annoying boss, a low salary, an uncomfortable workspace or stupid rules. [Are] Managed badly [they] make people miserable and they certainly can be demotivating.  But, even if managed brilliantly, they don’t motivate anybody to work harder or smarter. 

While hygiene or environmental factors are what people complain about, when you fix them, it will only stop them complaining. It will not motivate them to improve their performance. As Herzberg recognized that it is only Motivators that will stimulate people to higher performance:

People are motivated, instead, by interesting work, challenge and increasing responsibility.  These intrinsic factors answer peoples’ deep-seated need for growth and achievement. 

Thus, if an organization wants motivated people, it must first insure that it provides an organizational environment that meets peoples’ lower level psychological and security needs—a steady job, potential for a career, in a comfortable and happy workplace.  But, having done that, the managers should not expect people to be motivated to do more than come to work and do their job.  If the organization wants to motivate people to improved higher levels of performance, it needs Leaders who will meet people’s higher level wants for esteem and self-actualization.

But, while all people are the same in terms of their basic needs and higher level wants that will motivate them to improved performance; generational, gender, and professional and individual personality differences are important for Leaders to understand as they interact with the people of the organization.

Generational Differences

Much is now being made by popular commentators of the generational differences in the workforce these days, especially about the differences between the generation now coming of age and entering the workforce and those who must Lead and manage them. Some believe that the workplace will become a “psychological battlefield” in which “bosses will have to be half-shrink and half-diplomat”.   This is of special concern to the Intelligence Community which suffered a Post-Cold War ten-year hiring drought and has recently undertaken a 5 year hiring binge.  For that reason, Leaders and aspiring Leaders need to have a better understanding of the nature of the generations now in the workforce.

William Straus and Neil Howe who “pioneered” the study of generations with their 1991 “seminal” book: Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069 maintain that; “As a social category, a generation probably offers a safer basis for personality generalization than other such social categories as sex, race, region or age.”  Strauss and Howe theorized that all Americans alive at any time have belonged to one of four types of generations that have repeated sequentially throughout American history and continue to do so today and will into the foreseeable future. 

Since that time, as others have built on the work of Strauss and Howe, they have slightly adjusted the dates that define the generations.  But, as Strauss and Howe admitted when they originally set the generational dates: “Like all other social categories…generations can be imprecise at the boundaries.”  Recent commentators have also changed the names of the most recent generations.  Thus, today it is commonly considered that the generations that make up the American population are:

-The Silent Generation: The children of the Greatest Generation (which has almost totally died out) who are now in retirement and aging.

--The Boom Generation (Boomers); now in their 50s into their mid-60s who are senior in organizational tenure and often rank. 

-Generation X (Gen Xs); now in their late 20s s and into their late 40s who are the bulk of mid-level employees.  

-Generation Y (Gen Ys); some now in their 20s who are the new employees entering the workforce and others still in school who will be the employees of the future. (Sometimes, today, this generation is discussed as having two parts with the younger wave, those not yet of working age, called the Millennials.)

These generations are not all the same size.  Because of the way various authorities calculate the generational time-period and because of the “baby boom” after WWII, the Boom generation is the largest generation.

They constitute about one-fourth of the population….inevitably, they have created a kind of bottleneck, in the work world, in politics, in power.  The frustration this poses for the young and talented should be obvious.

 Generation X is only about half the size of the Boom generation.  Generation Y, the children of the Boomer generation is almost as large as the Boomer generation. “The class of 2009 will be almost the largest in America’s history.  More than 3m students….”

In the Intelligence Community workforce, Boomers are currently the largest generational component and will continue to be if they postpone retirement in order to rebuild their retirement accounts.  Gen Xers are the smallest component, not only because of the smaller number of people in their generation, but because fewer were hired in the downsizing of the post Cold War era.  As more and more Gen Yers are hired, they will eventually become the largest component of the Community workforce.  With Boomers perhaps postponing retirement and Gen Yers rapidly being hired, one might say that, when it comes to leadership opportunities, Generation X is caught in the middle.

Based on their theory of the sequential nature of four types of generations and their study of history, Strauss and Howe named and defined the “peer personality” of each of those four generations at various stages of their life cycle.  Having done so, they forecast the peer personality-based characteristics and relationships that they expected the three generations in the American workforce would have today.

To see those amazingly prescient forecasts of the current characteristics and relationships of the three generations now in the workforce. and gain a better understanding of the workplace situation and tensions that will influence the career prospects of your generation, go here______.

From that summary, you have probably recognized that the generation to which you belong will significantly influence your opportunities for achieving Leadership and will determine the nature of the Leadership that you will be called upon to exercise.

Most recently, commentators have focused on describing the generational characteristics of  the Generation Y/Millennial generation. For example, Morley Winograd and Michael Hais say that compared to  “culturally polarized Baby Boomers or cynical Gen-Xers”… “Surveys show people born from 1982 to 2000 are the most civic-minded since the generation of the 1930s and 1940s….a generation of activist doers.”

Don Tapscott has recently overseen a study of 8000 members of Gen Y from 12 countries.  He describes them as the “Net Geners” who have “Grown Up Digital”.   He “…identifies eight norms that define Net Geners,  which he believes everyone should take on board. 

Net Geners value freedom and choice in everything they do.

They love to customize and personalise.

They scrutinise everything.

They demand integrity and openness, including when…deciding where to work.

They want entertainment and play in their work and education….

They love to collaborate.

They expect everything to happen fast.

And they expect constant innovation.

These patterns have important implications for the workplace….Two out of three Net Geners feel that “working and having fun can and should be the same thing”.  That does not mean that they want to play games all day, but they want the work itself to be enjoyable.  They also expect collaboration, constant feedback and rapid career advancement based on merit.

In a description of the Generation Y that seems to make them a perfect fit for the Intelligence Community, Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams say that:

The Net Gen spends time searching, scrutinizing, authenticating, collaborating and organizing….The Net Gen’s modus operandi is networking.

Ken Blanchard and Marc Muchnick “…did a major study together of what does this interesting Y generation—the young people of today—want from leaders….” They found:

Number one, they want integrity…these young people will walk if they see people “say one thing and do another.”  The second thing they want is a partnership relationship.  They hate superior/subordinate….they want to be treated as partners….at least a psychological partnership where they can bring their brains to work and make decisions….Then, finally, they want affirmation.  They not only want to be caught doing things right, but they want to be affirmed for who they are.  They want to be known as a person, not as a number. 

The former DNI, Mike McConnell understood much of that.  He told members of this new generation of hires that he saw them as:

The best educated, most technically literate of any generation of Americans. You know no limits. You feel like you’re entitled to everything.  You are highly creative and technologically advanced. You believe anything and everything is possible. You crave teamwork, you crave fun, and you demand social relationships with everyone to include your boss.

Likewise, speaking of the younger members of that generation, Dr. William Nolte, a long time and widely experienced intelligence professional, described these new hires as:

·  More team oriented and naturally collaborative

·  More likely to take initiative to reach out and across boundaries

·  Less sensitive to organizational constructs

·  IT-savvy...

·  Fast learners, able to search and discover information adeptly

·  Less likely to reflect on the significance of data and communicating import (“telling the story”).

All those, except the last, sound like outstanding characteristics for the intelligence professional and just what the Community needs today. 

Not all commentators are so positive about the traits of Gen Yers, especially the second wave.  To see some of their descriptions, go here_____

Other commentators see both the good and the bad and suggest that some adjustment in leadership styles will be necessary.

Their defenders say they are motivated, versatile workers who are just what companies need in these difficult times.  To others, however, these members of “Generation Y”—those born in the 1980s and 1990s, otherwise known as Millennials or the Net Generation—are spoiled narcissistic lay-abouts who cannot spell and waste too much time on instant messaging and Facebook.  Ah, reply the Net Geners, but all that messing around online proves that we are computer-literate multi-taskers who are adept users of online collaborative tools and natural team players.  And, while you are on the subject of me, I need a month’s sabbatical to recalibrate my personal goals.

This culture clash as been going on in many organizations and has lately seeped into management books.  The Net Geners have grown up with computers; they are brimming with self-confidence, and they have been encouraged to challenge received wisdom, to find their own solutions to problems and to treat work as a route to personal fulfillment rather than merely a way of putting food on the table.  Not all this of this makes them easy to manage.  Bosses complain that after a childhood of being coddled and praised, Net Geners demand far more frequent feedback and an over precise set of objectives on the path to promotion.

…compromise will be necessary on both sides.  Net Geners will certainly have to temper some of their expectations and take the world as it is, not as they would like tit to be.  But their older bosses should also be prepared to make concessions.

Nevertheless, Jennifer Deal argues, that despite the differing opinions, overall, the different generations are more alike in terms of their basic needs and higher level wants that will motivate them to improved performance.

…..The Generations now of working age value essentially the same thing….Here are 10 intergenerational truths:

1. All generations have similar values.

2. Everyone wants respect.

3. Leaders must be trustworthy.

4. People want leaders who are credible and trustworthy.

5. Internal politics is a problem at any age.

6. No one really likes change.

7. Loyalty depends on the context, not the generation.

8. It is as easy to retain a young person as it is to retain an older one.

9. Everyone wants to learn.

10. Almost everyone wants a coach.

Likewise, a recent survey reinforces that view.  While there is a:

“…stereotype of young workers as being afraid of hard work---more American Idle than American Idol.…a survey of 4200 young graduates from 44 countries…found that they want many of the same things from work as previous generations, including long tenure with a small number of employers.  And they are willing to put in the hours to get them, if they are treated will.

While despite generational differences, all people in the organization have the same human, organizational and leadership needs, not all generations are alike in the relative emphasis they place on those needs because of their tenure in the workforce.  One recent survey found that people of different generations and, therefore, with different lengths of service in the workforce, place their priorities differently. In early years, learning new skills starts out as more important than pay and career path, but declines with length of service.  Desire for a secure career path and pay or promotion increases in importance until mid-career, when expectations for all those things decline.  At that point a desire for respect becomes most important.  Another survey found that beyond the broad agreement on a desire for long-term employment and for trust: current Gen X employees—those who have about 10 up to 20 years of service and have acquired a mortgage and are getting ready to send children to college and have suffered from recent economic events—“greatest psychological need” was “security”.  On the other hand, the newest Y employees—those just entering the workforce and, increasingly, postponing marriage and focusing on career success—place priority on opportunity to “develop skills” and “seek promotion”.

In summary:  Generational differences loom large in Leadership.  Aspiring Leaders, especially those of the much smaller Generation X, will have to understand the attributes of Boomers in order to persevere and achieve Leadership and understand the attributes of Gen Yers in order to exercise and, perhaps cede much of it during a coming crisis. On a more detailed level of exercising Leadership to motivate the individual, the Leader, especially Boomers, will need to understand which basic needs and wants to emphasize in seeking willing cooperation and support from their followers.

Gender Differences

While men and women are all alike in terms of their basic needs and higher level wants that will motivate them to improved performance, they are also different in important ways that Leaders must understand as they interact with the people of the organization.

Janet Hyde, a professor of psychology and women’s studies has “…collected all the important meta-analyses that have been conducted on differences between the sexes.” She has done a statistical analysis and has concluded “…on the whole men and women are much more alike than they are different.”

Nevertheless, the prestigious National Academy of Sciences recognizes that “Sex matters. Sex, that is, being male or female, is an important basic human variable that should be considered when designing and analyzing studies in all areas.”  Thus, Leaders designing efforts to Lead their followers should consider gender.

It should be no surprise that gender makes a difference in peoples’ behavior on the job.  Neuro-psychiatrist and controversial author, Louann Brizendine says “…there are his and her brains….There is no unisex brain, and it follows these two brain models can produce quite different behaviors.”  “University of California-Irvine professor Judy Rosener says brain scans prove men and women think differently.” Sandra Witelson, a neuro-scientist agrees with respect to the differences in male and female brains, saying:

There are clear differences in the brain between men and women, both in structure and chemistry, which includes hormones and neuro-transmitters and what’s connected to what.

Thus, some studies show that, as a result of brain “structure and wiring”

…men use only one side of the brain to process some problems while women employ both sides…

These differences…do not appear to have any influence on intelligence as measured by IQ tests.  It does, however, seem that the sexes carry out these tests in different ways….

More generally, men seem to rely on their grey matter [the nerve cells] for their IQ, whereas women rely more on their white matter [the connections between nerve cells].

It seems,

…there are indeed structural and biochemical differences between maile and femaile brains.  But since boys and girls, and men and women, live very different lives and are treated differently b=first by parents and then by society, it’s impossible to attribute those differences to innate biology rather than experience….discoveries in neuroplasticity have shown that brains of any age can change their structure and function in response to experience.

Regardless of the reason, birth or experience,  men and women often take different approaches to achieve the same results.  Just one commonly remarked on difference is navigating. “Women tend to rely on remembering landmarks, whereas men rely on their geometric skills to work out direction and distance.”  Or, as most married couples probably have discovered, when apparently lost, women want to stop and ask for directions, while men want to figure it out with a map and continue driving.  Clearly, there is an implication here that intelligence professional  Leaders should understand that their men or women followers might take a different approach to dealing with a seemingly intractable analytical, technical or bureaucratic issue and, therefore, a different style of Leadership might be appropriate depending on gender.

 With regard to both brain structure and chemistry, Canadian psychologist Susan Pinker:

Using the latest neurological and biological findings of brain imaging and sex-hormone studies…adds scientific ballast to the anecdotal truisms that women are more consensus- minded and team-oriented, and are better at reading human visual cues, interpreting feelings, and maintaining relationships and relationship networks than men.

Thus, it would seem that, as a gender, women have a higher innate EQ than men.  As a result they also likely expect their Leader to have a high EQ and will respond better to Leaders with high social awareness and social skills.

One pertinent difference that Leaders should recognize is how men and women react to anger and stress.  Studies have shown that while there is “no difference in the…frequency of incidents of feeling angry….women tended to report anger that was more intense and prolonged.”  But, when angry, while both men and women seem to be equally “aggressive”, men tend to rely on “physical aggression” whereas women rely on “social aggression”.

But, in an office setting it is not especially wise for a person to be physically or socially aggressive when angry. That, of course, builds stress.  In reacting to stress, the same male physical and female social reaction still seems to apply.  In such situations, based on the work of Deborah Tannen it is commonly said that: “Men walk, Women talk.” Or, as John Gray says, “Men go to their caves.  Women talk.” More specifically, for men it is a “fight or flight approach to avoid verbal conflict by withdrawal from a difficult situation”.  On the other hand, for women, it is a “tend and befriend” approach which leads them to start “asking for directions” and to “seek social support during stressful periods”.  These different responses may be wired in the brain and created by hormones or they may be the result of social influences.  Nevertheless, an analysis by Professor Laura Cousino Klein has indicated that, based on a review of more than 1000 behavioral and biological studies, there may be a valid basis for believing that such gender differences exist.

A wise Leader will understand these responses when delivering critical feedback on performance.  As will be pointed below, critical feedback should take place “immediately” after a failure.  But, “immediately” may mean waiting at least until the male has had a chance to leave the office to take a break and go to the gym and hit the bag; and the woman has had a chance to phone a friend and vent, which may mean waiting until the next day. Likewise, when the critique is given, a Leader may want to consider that men usually have been raised and trained to operate in a hierarchical structure, to compete and to make points directly.  Further, as indicated above, they may like to figure out the route to improvement for themselves.  And, so critical feedback is most effective when delivered from boss to subordinate, couched in terms comparative to the performance of others and stated clearly, but without much specific direction on how to improve.  On the other hand, women are often raised to operate in an equalitarian structure, to be supportive of others and communicate indirectly.  So, critical feedback can be most effective when delivered from team Leader to team member, couched in terms related to supporting the performance of the team and delivered considerately along with casual suggestions and subtle guidance on how to improve.

Given the publication dates (mid 1990s) of the books from which the foregoing descriptions of the responses of men and women to anger and stress were drawn, they likely represent the behavior patterns of those in the work force during the 1980s and early 1990s—i.e., the Boomer Generation, those now nearing retirement and the older members of Generation X who form the bulk of the workforce today.  Most likely, those generalizations will not represent the behavior of the new hires from Generation Y.  And, no matter what the generation, clearly not all men or all women are the same.  Thus, is important to know each person as an individual.  But, as a starting point for that individualized understanding, a general “social awareness” of the affects of gender is important.  

When it comes to Leadership, it also appears that men and women are more alike than different.  A recent study found that 69 percent of a group comprised equally of men and women “…ranks women equal or better than men in seven of eight leadership traits....including [the core traits of] honesty, intelligence, compassion and creativity.  But, it may be also that gender makes a difference and, perhaps, for the better.  For example, Joseph Nye points out that:

In terms of gender stereotypes, the masculine leadership is assertive, competitive, authoritarian, and focused on commanding the behavior of others.  The female style is collaborative, participatory, integrative, and aimed at coopting the behavior of followers.  Leadership reports the increased success of what was once considered a “female style of leadership.

Professional and Individual Differences

But, is not just people of different generations or genders that you will be Leading in the Intelligence Community, it is “professionals”.  Do the following observations by textbook authors Desmond D. Martin and Richard L. Shell describe you, or more importantly, do they describe those you will be leading?

Professionals as a group tend to have a strong sense of self worth….

….they are particularly concerned with ego and status needs….

Professionals attempt to protect their status position by exhibiting behavior purposely designed to influence others to perceive their work as being difficult and important and they resist all kinds of communication that downgrade the importance of their work or the abilities that they possess….

Thus, while other peoples’ basic psychological, security and belongingness needs may be fulfilled if they are treated fairly and with equality, given a good job in an organization they can respect, it seems that the psychological, security and belongingness  needs of professionals require that special attention be given to how the Leader nurtures their ego and enhances their sense of special status in the organization.  If not, they may spend more time working to convince others of their importance than performing to prove it

Furthermore, Martin and Shell say that studies indicate, and you personally are well aware and understand, that:

 …professionals prefer large amounts of autonomy and work best in an environment that is conducive to responsibility, growth, and recognition.

They expect considerable freedom and autonomy in performing their work.  Also, they expect and respond well to interesting and challenging assignments.

They seek recognition for good work, and a relatively free environment in which they can set out to attain or achieve that recognition.

This suggests that Leaders must also pay special attention to the esteem and, more importantly, the self-actualization needs of professionals.  Because as Martin and Shell have noted, and you may have observed in some of your organizations:

There is much evidence…to support the conclusion that many environments do not provide this freedom or the much needed recognition.  Consequently, many professionals become frustrated….

When an employee is frustrated because of an environment that is impeding personal needs satisfaction, and that environment is fostered by an upper level management….One adaptive response is to strengthen informal group ties with professional colleagues….

Groups of professionals constitute greater threats to management efficiency and effectiveness than do individuals.  They can either upset or enhance cooperation with the organization because they can facilitate or reduce motivation among their members.

In short, while professionals have the same basic needs and wants as anyone else, they expect and require that the Leader give more attention to meeting them.  And, to achieve desired behavior and results from professionals, the Leader must.  Leading professionals is a tough job. 

But, these professionals are also individuals. Despite generation, gender, or prfessional status, it is best to know people as individuals, to know their individual personality, and treat them as they would like to be treated.

It has been reported that:

About 20 years ago scientists established that combinations of five basic dimensions---extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness to new ideas and experiences account for all personalities….The five dimensions can be reliably be measured with questionnaires.  Armed with the resulting data, scientists are showing that personality predicts such important outcomes as health, job performance and academic success….In some cases the trait plays a direct casual role, as when a lack of conscientiousness torpedoes workplace success.  In others, the connection is indirect, as when being disagreeable leaves you with no social network, which can cause stress….

Intelligence Community organizations use a variety of questionnaires to assess the personality of employees and provide feedback so that employees can understand their personality and its specific characteristics so that they can work to build on their strengths and overcome or compensate for weaknesses. This course emphasizes the use of the Myers-Briggs Test Instrument (MBTI).  In addition to using the MBTI for their own Self-Assessment (as recommended above), aspiring Leaders may want to study the Myers Briggs material to understand personality types in general and the different characteristics of each that shape the behavior of that type person in the workplace.  It is safe to say that, by being informed and sensitive to the differing personality types and their characteristics, even without knowing the specific personality types of their followers; as Leaders get to work with and know their followers, they will be able to identify the follower’s general personality type and, thereby, understand how to work with and Lead that person on an individual basis.

For example Martin and Shell point out that:

A major characteristic of professionals who are internally oriented  [ISTJ administrators and INTJ analysts] is the tendency to take personal credit for job success and responsibility for future job performance.  Professionals with internal orientation exhibit a strong relationship between motivation and overall job satisfaction, i.e., satisfaction with pay, promotion, supervision, etc.  Consequently managers need to pay attention to these variables as they impact on performance among professionals with strong internal orientations as compared with other subordinates that are externally oriented….

who are more likely to be  ESTJ-organizers or ENTJ-strategists and can be motivated by more direct, external approaches, requirements and challenges.

In Summary:  A well-developed Social Awareness will allow the Leader to understand that, while all people are the same in terms of their needs, they place different priorities on those needs, depending on their generation, and time of service, gender, their status as professionals and individual personality.  Thus,  remember the Golden Rule and treat others as you want to be treated—with security and fairness, kindness and respect, opportunity to learn and advance, and make a contribution. But, also remember the Platinum Rule and make sure that you treat people as they would like to be treated, by generation, gender, personality.  And, most importantly, get to know people as individuals and know them well enough to know how they would prefer to be treated.  Remember, most of all, Leadership is about people.  When, relating to the people of the organization, the Leader must recognize that the guidance should not be “one size fits all” but rather “different strokes for different folks”.

Motivating the Organization

As discussed previously (Topic: Types of Leaders and Styles of Leadership), today all organizations, especially those in the Intelligence Community, need both Transformational and Transactional Leaders at the same time.  Transformational Leaders are required to bring organizational change, improvement and revitalization.  To do so, they must motivate the organization as a whole.

Thus, Marcus Buckingham says that: 

Great leaders discover what is universal and capitalize on it.  Their job is to rally people toward a better future.  Leaders can succeed in this only when they can cut through differences….and tap into the very few needs we all share.

Thus, organization-wide motivators are often those that focus meeting the higher level needs emphasized by Maslov:

-Belonging needs

--Shared Vision: Creating the opportunity for the people of the organization to help define the goals of the organization.
--Empowerment: Offering the people of the organization the opportunity and the responsibility to contribute to achieving the shared goals.

            -Self Actualization Needs

--Enabling: Providing the people of the organization with the necessary training and resources required to achieve those goals.
--Personal Development: Mentoring and providing assistance to individuals in achieving personal goals.

            -Esteem Needs

--Providing individuals with recognition, advancement based on performance.

Motivating Individuals

Marcus Buckingham says that the job of a “manager”, or a mid- or lower-level Transactional Leader, is the exact opposite of what he said that “great leaders” do.  As he says, while “great leaders seek out the universal and capitalize on it”:

The job of a manager, meanwhile, is to turn one person’s particular talent into performance.  Managers will succeed only when they can identify and deploy differences among people, challenging each employee to excel in his or her own way.

That doesn’t mean a leader can’t be a manager or vice versa.  But to excel at one or both, you must be aware of the very different skills each role requires.

Based on its work, including work in the government, the Gallup organization says that managers must “set clear expectations for employees and revisit them regularly”’ and then “insure that the employees have the tools and support” they need.  Then, as Leaders, they need to “offer people recognition and praise, the opportunity to contribute and clear evidence that the organization cares about their development.”

To sustain the motivation of an individual to perform at a continuously high level and, especially, to motivate an unmotivated individual requires the Leader to meet the specific personal “self-actualization” and “esteem needs” of that individual by providing:

-a job and work that is interesting to that person,
-support for achievement through training,
-non-judgmental guidance and advice and encouragement,
-recognition and appreciation for a job well done,
-increased responsibility when ready,
-opportunity for professional advancement and growth.

While that may be enough to keep the typical follower motivated, Martin and Shell emphasize that because “Professionals are often learners, achievers, independent, status and esteem oriented….” they require even more. Thus they need:

- not only “work that is interesting” but “enriched jobs that utilize all their learned skills”.

-not only “training” but “development”

-not only “guidance and advice and encouragement” but “participation”.

-not only “increased responsibility when ready” but “goal setting”

-not only “opportunity for professional advancement and growth” but “upward mobility”.

Clearly, people perform best when they are doing something they are interested in and enjoy—i.e., when they are “happy”. Jim Larranaga, the coach of the George Mason University basketball team that performed so well in the 2006 NCAA Tournament, has been quoted as believing that “People perform better when they are happy.”  Mihaly Czikszentmihalyi of Claremont Graduate University and one of three scholars working on the “Good Work” project conducted a survey of thousands of people, asking them to log their “mood” at work whenever they wanted to do so.  He found that people were happiest or in a state he called “"flow” when they were engaged in work that stretches a person without defeating him; work that provides “clear goals”, “unambiguous feedback” and a “sense of control”.  

Obviously, training is also important as a motivator of top performance. In 2005 when the government Merit Systems Protection Board surveyed 37,000 federal workers in 24 agencies, the results showed:  while 64% said that they received enough training to do their job, 46% said that they would like more training so that they could improve their work. Unfortunately, only 48% said that their supervisors were providing those opportunities.  

But, you can’t always give someone a job that they find interesting and enjoyable or all the training or liaison travel that they may want, although you should never stop trying.  After all, they are “at work”.  So, the next best thing that the Leader can do to motivate an individual is to provide encouragement, recognition and appreciation for doing the job that they have to do well. Kouzes and Posner call this “Encouraging the Heart” by “recognizing contributions” thorough showing appreciation for individual excellence and “celebrating values and victories” of the group.   As emphasized earlier (Topic: Leadership Traits and Qualities. “Leading Change Requires Inspiring People”.) Thus, there is probably nothing more inspiring for people than for them to realize that the Leader knows who they are, knows what they are doing, thinks it is well done and valuable. The most inspiring words that you can use as a Leader are the person’s name followed by “great job” and “thanks”.   

For that reason, Leaders must get out of the office and walk around the organization.   In giving advice to military Leaders, General Perry Smith told them that they should spend half of the day out of the office walking around.  Tom Peters and Nancy Austin call walking around the “technology of leadership” and recommend that Leaders spend 25% of their time “wandering, listening, empathizing, staying in touch.”

Most of you have probably heard the advice: “Management by walking around.” That has been a common management technique since at least the 1920s/30s when Elton Mayo and a group of Harvard Business School researchers conducted studies at the Hawthorne plant of Western Electric and found that productivity went up when attention was being paid to people (a motivator) and not because of some environmental or physical change such as better lighting (a hygiene factor).  Managers walk around in order to be on the spot so that they can supervise, direct and, hopefully, encourage the people of the organization in carrying out the on-going processes of the organization as necessary. That is their job. They do it by speaking.

But, Leaders should be out walking around to do different things.

-First of all they should be getting to know the people of the organization:

--to show that they truly care about them as people and professionals by listening to their personal and professional concerns and needs and displaying an understanding and caring approach toward resolving those issues.

--to tell them that they value and appreciate them for making a contribution and thank and compliment them for a job well done.

There is nothing more inspiring or motivating for people than for them to realize that the Leader knows who they are, knows what they are doing, thinks it is well done and valuable and cares about resolving issues, concerns and needs that affect them as people and professionals.  To start now practicing to walk the organization to motivate and inspire people in that way, go here for guidance_____.

-Second, they should be restating the vision and goals of the organization and relating them specifically to the work of the people with whom they are speaking.

--They are keeping the people of the organization informed.

--Then, they are encouraging feedback and contributions from the people.

-Finally, they are sensing the mood and the health of the organization.

--They are getting an understanding of what people think and feel.
--They are getting background information that they need for decisionmaking.

Furthermore, by becoming acquainted with the people of the organization on an individual level the Leader will find that certain people can be motivated in certain individualized ways.

For example, in any organization there are many people who are performing well but who are not the superstars who will get the top evaluations, frequent promotions, awards and bonuses.  Nevertheless, there are individualized motivators that can be used recognize and show appreciation for their steady performance but also motivate them to up their performance level.    

Then, there are other people who are performing poorly because they are unmotivated.  Offering these people something special to improve their performance is falling into what has been called the “great jackass fallacy”. That is using what Joseph Nye calls “hard power” and giving carrots and brandishing sticks. While especially tempting, it is least useful in the Civil Service in which carrots are easily given: good evaluations, promotions, etc.  But sticks are limited and hard to use:  poor evaluations, disciplinary actions, removal.   If the Leader is not careful, the follower can often get the carrot and then avoid the stick by coasting at the same level: because the next promotion is a way off, or because a poor evaluation , disciplinary action or attempted removal can be fought and characterized as some kind of discrimination and nullified by using the example of the previous carrot.

Thus, these individuals, also need individualized motivators but of a different kind.  Nigel Nicholson, in discussing “How to Motivate Your Problem People” says that these chronically unmotivated people can be motivated if the Leader approaches the issue from their point of view and finds out what is really blocking their motivation, not what they are complaining or criticizing about (Herzberg's “hygiene factors”). This approach emphasizes the critical role of the lower and mid-level Leaders in one-on-one motivation, as described above, and the need for the senior organizational Leader to empower them to carry out that role by insuring that the policies are in place and the incentives available so that they can do so.

For some ideas about individualized motivators for the various kinds of people in the organization, go here_____.

When it comes to motivating individuals, as Nido Qubein points out; “The best way to get people to pay attention to your goals is to pay attention to them.” He notes that “...all people are motivated but that people do things for their own reasons, not yours.”  Likewise, Marshall Goldsmith and Mark Reiter call “self-interest” a “natural law”.  They claim that:

People will do something, including changing their own behavior—only if it can be demonstrated that doing so is in their own best interest….the hot button is self-interest.

Your job as a Leader, especially at the lower and mid-levels of the organization is to find that “hot button” that individualized motivator that will turn the person on to better performance.

To successfully accomplish any of these motivational efforts, individual or organizational, a number of key Social Skills are required.  

Social Skills for Motivation

Ken Blanchard briefly sums up most important motivating skills as being able to: 

·  Delegate by one minute of goal setting.

·  Provide one minute of praise at the end of each project.

·  Provide one minute of feedback when mistakes or failures occur.

·  At evaluation time, coach or counsel.

Spending one minute is certainly better than doing nothing.   But a Leader will have developed the skills to a high level and will spend all the time required to use them effectively.

Delegation

As has been highlighted, the basis of Leadership is trust. Initially, that trust is a trust of the people of the organization in the Leader, based on the Leaders reputation for integrity, competence and courage. To sustain that trust, the Leader must not only continue to demonstrate those core traits but must also demonstrate trust in the people of the organization. Mutual trust is required for successful Leadership.  As Lieutenant General Gus Pagonis USA (Ret) says:

One of the leader's continuing goals is to build trust; and one way to do that is to demonstrate that you are willing to place your trust in someone else. Recognizing and placing value on the intellect of subordinates, granting them autonomy in defining objectives and meeting them is a key motivational device--and it doesn't cost anything. Give them enough guidance so that they don't flounder and waste time, and then get out of their way.

One of the best ways for the Leader to demonstrate trust in the people of the organization is by delegation. We all know that bosses should and must delegate. And most bosses think that they delegate; they tell someone to do something.  But, do they delegate correctly?  Many do not.

And, it may be especially hard for intelligence professionals.  As Martin and Shell say:

Professionals are often promoted into management from the technical functions that they now supervise.  While technical knowledge is useful and necessary, particularly at lower echelons of management, these managers must learn when and where not to apply it.  There is a natural tendency for those managers, whose educational training and experience is similar to their subordinates, to be highly reluctant to delegate important job tasks and to continue to perform those duties as managers.  A strong conscious effort to learn when and how to delegate is particularly important among professionals, because failure to delegate is often regarded as managerial interference by subordinates.

Leaders not only show trust in the person and build the person’s trust in them but also foster improved performance by the person.  Recent research by psychologists suggests that

…simply putting someone into a weak social position [as happens when a boss “directs” a subordinate to do something] impairs his cognitive ability. Conversely, “empowering” him…sharpens his mind. 

Experiments show that correct delegation improved concentration, memory, planning ability and fewer errors.

Managers, always suckers for jargon, talk a lot about empowering their workers.  However, they often fail to do so in practice.  This is another reason why they should….

Delegating correctly is important. But, it is a skill that can be learned. For some suggestions of how to do it, go here_____.

Praise and Feedback

Coaching and Counseling 

Communication

To do all of these things: delegate, praise, provide feedback, coach or counsel, you must be a good communicator.  As Martin and Shell say:

…communication makes the organization work.  It determines the direction the organization will take and impacts on both the motivational level of employees and the understanding that employees have of organizational purpose and goals.  Communication in essence, is ….a fundamental management task.

Montgomery Van Wart emphasizes, “communication is a fundamental part of the process and therefore a key skill in the leader repertoire.”   He cites Lieutenant General Paul Van Riper, USMC, formerly a Director of Marine Corps Intelligence, as saying “effective organization men are masters of language.”  It is important that a Leader be a clear, logical and dynamic speaker to inspire or motivate people.

But, communication is a two-way process.  As emphasized by Terry Pearce, it means not only talking to the people of the organization but listening to them as well.  Martin and Shell emphasize that the ability for followers to provide the Leader with:

…feedback is necessary for effective communication among professionals.

Since professionals usually have a large investment in their education, they are sensitive to interpersonal relationships that do not permit their involvement. Consequently, communications that limit [their opportunities for] feedback are often ineffective.

So, if you want to get feedback you have to drop any “façade” and encourage your followers to provide unfiltered information by asking questions.  Thus, the best Leaders do not talk “at” people or even talk “to” people. They must talk “with” people.  

That is where the second part of communication—listening—comes in. Listening is an important skill that many people must develop to support their leadership efforts. Leaders need to use "active" listening or, even better, "empathetic" listening. Those manners of listening require a skill that must be developed because it does not fit the way most of us have been listening in the past.

For some tips on listening, go here_____.

Once you have listened to what the person has to say, you must respond.  In many cases, your response can just be “Thanks” and appreciation and a comment showing understanding.  On the other hand, you may be inclined to say that you will think about it, consider it, or look into it, implying that you will take some action.  If you do that, then you must get back to the person with an explanation soon.  This point on feedback is important. As Marshall Goldsmith points out: 

Leaders who respond to feedback, promise change, then do nothing different are perceived...as less effective. Raising expectations without delivering results is a formula for increased dissatisfaction and decrease respect. Even a little follow up has a positive impact.

Martin and Shell highlight that professionals are very often turned off when managers do not respond to their suggestions. But, if you respond to the feedback you receive, even privately, that will become known and appreciated throughout the organization.

Time Management

As can be see from the foregoing; learning, practicing and using these skills can be time consuming. Given that the senior of any organization is in demand for a myriad of meetings, for performing a wide range of management activities and for liaison outside the organization, how does that person get the time to be a Leader? The answer is time-management. Time management is a skill that is critical to Leadership, but it is so specific to each person and each position that it must be relearned every day and practiced and used full-time. The bases for effective time management in Leadership are:

·  A focus on Leadership vice management.

·  Prioritization of activities.

·  Delegation of less important tasks.

·  Maintaining a daily/weekly schedule developed on that basis.

·  The courage to stick to that schedule despite pressures to be at the beck and call of outside persons and issues, even seniors or the daily crises.

Martin and Shell “summarize” effective time management in a similar way:

1. Establish clear-cut goals for yourself and your unit.

2. Set time priorities in accordance with those goals….

3….a willingness to delegate authority to subordinates.

4. A proactive planning stance is preferred to a reactive or ‘fire-fighting’ stance….

5. In both setting priorities and being proactive, it is often necessary to refuse some specific requests for help by both superiors and subordinates….

6. Take steps to avoid time wasting….

7. Finally, both a to-do list and a daily time log…can be helpful….

As Peter Drucker has said

If there is any one “secret” of effectiveness, it is concentration....Concentration--that is, the courage to impose on time and events one's own decision as to what really matters and comes first--is the executive's only hope of becoming master of time and events instead of their whipping boy.

As the boss of an organization, you are indispensable as a Leader. You are not indispensable for the all the other functions of an organization. Others can help. Delegate!

Conclusion

Having well-developed traits of integrity, competence and courage give the Leader the self-confidence to take risks and to deal with major leadership challenges and issues.  The self-confidence to maintain self-control and to deal with the many lesser challenges and frustrations faced by a Leader every day comes from well-developed interpersonal skills.  Work to develop and maintain them.