Leadership

The Hidden Cost of Quiet Quitting

Quiet quitting is one of the issues being talked about on a regular basis these days. It’s where someone becomes disengaged at work but doesn’t actually quit. Instead, they show up every day and do what’s asked of them, but nothing more. They basically do just enough to keep from getting fired. The Gallup organization estimates that quiet quitting comprises as much as 50% of the workforce in many companies! Obviously, this behavior curtails productivity, slowing a company’s growth, and causing lost revenue and profits.

But there is another, more expensive cost to the organization. And this cost is not obvious at first. It’s hidden until it reveals itself, which by then, is too late to fix.

It causes your best employees to quit.

Let me explain the dynamics and what you can do about it.

Typically, most organizations who have an intentional culture (meaning a culture that’s by design rather than by default), value things like professionalism, showing mutual respect, having integrity, being solution-oriented, and being collaborative. When a leader and/or an organization tolerates the behaviors associated with quiet quitting, it undermines the culture of the company.

Doing the very minimum is not only lazy, but it’s unprofessional. Professionals don’t need to be told in detail what needs to be done. They want to do a good job and will usually do whatever it takes to ensure the work gets done accurately and timely. But, when a leader tolerates a poor work ethic, it sends the message that there’s no need to work hard. Doing the minimum has no negative consequence.

Additionally, in order to meet deadlines and the needs of the organization – because the quiet quitters are slowing progress – the better, more engaged, more professional team members end up working harder to pick up the slack. After all, that’s what professionals do – whatever it takes to get the job done correctly and on time.

The consequence of all this is that many of your best employees will either become quiet quitters themselves or will quit and find a company who has a better, more positive culture.

So, how do you address and reverse the whole situation, so you avoid losing good employees and re-engage the quiet quitters?

Your initial instinct might be to take a harder line with quiet quitters and require them to step up their game or get fired. But this approach would be misguided. And it’s misguided because:

Quiet quitting is a symptom, not a problem.

When you take steps to address a symptom, it usually makes matters worse. The key, therefore, is to identify the underlying problem causing quiet quitting. And that brings us back to the well-known phrase: People don’t quit companies, they quit bosses.

Quiet quitting is caused by the way they are treated by the people who lead them. If people are treated like things, engagement drops. If adults are treated like children, engagement drops. If people are not treated with respect, engagement drops. If leaders lack integrity, engagement drops. And if leaders are unappreciative, taking people for granted, engagement drops.

Most leaders want to do a good job and want to be an effective leader, yet many fall short. They usually fall short for one or more of these reasons:

1. The skills needed to lead aren’t the same skills that got them where they are.
2. Many leaders model the same poor behavior they saw in the leaders who proceeded them
3. Regardless of intellect, education, or years of experience, we all have blind spots and can’t see what we’re missing.

The key, therefore, to reversing quiet quitting and all its implications, is to improve the effectiveness of the leaders and managers. Let me know if we can help you improve your team’s leadership effectiveness.

Leadership Training is Ineffective

I know I’m not going to make any friends within the leadership training community with this statement, but here it is…

There’s no such thing as leadership “training”.

Leaders can’t be trained. Leadership competencies are developed over time. Let me elaborate.

Over the years, I’ve given lots of thought to why leadership makes a difference. And although developing good strategies and making smart decisions are important, they don’t make someone a good leader. We all know smart executives who are poor leaders.

Good leadership is about people skills, not technical knowledge or processes. Good leaders bring out the best in people. When a leader becomes good at bringing out the best in people, engagement increases, productivity improves, turnover drops, and the organization gets better results.

Another reason leadership training is ineffective is that we all have blind spots. In my 20+ years as an executive coach, I have never met an executive who thought they were a poor leader! The reason, of course, is that we all have blind spots and can’t see what we’re missing. If we can’t see our weaknesses, we don’t know they need to be addressed and/or improved. Therefore, most people will dismiss much of what’s being offered in leadership training as being irrelevant. They don’t see how they’re being ineffective, so they don’t see the need to change. (Or they think they are already great leaders …)

Additionally, what a leader thinks of his or her abilities is fairly irrelevant. What matters much more is what others think of them as a leader. It’s the main reason we generally start a coaching engagement with a 360° assessment. It’s important to get an objective picture of how a leader is viewed throughout the organization.

And finally, developing effective leadership competencies takes practice. That’s why the process is developmental. Coaching conversations occur over a period of months and addresses real-world situations and the underlying issues. After that, it’s a process of implementation and refinement.

Specifically, in order to be effective, leaders need to learn how to earn people’s trust, earn people’s respect, treat people like people, treat adults like adults, show appreciation, and effectively develop people

In my experience, many leaders think they do all of that, but in fact, don’t do them very well.

In summary, providing training is good for people who are new leaders. It helps them become aware of the principles of effective leadership. But after they’ve been in a leadership role for a while, training becomes ineffective. Instead, they need someone to point out their blind spots and help them improve. It’s why executive coaching is so widely used.

All Leaders Have Blind Spots

In truth, we all have patterns, habits, and beliefs that limit us. The challenge is that we generally can’t see how those thought-patterns and beliefs hold us back.

Blind spots can severely impact a leader’s strategic vision, their course of action, and their rate of success. Blind spots can impact decision-making and creativity, and they act to limit the strategic initiatives we are willing to consider. They even affect how we relate to others – hampering our leadership effectiveness, our political adeptness, and our executive presence.

It doesn’t matter how experienced we are, what our background is, our age, level of education, or intelligence. We’re all subject to blind spots. Leaders, like everyone else, acquire blind spots from life, but as leaders, they suffer additional blind spots caused by their need to operate within the corporate environment.

Blind spots show up in our beliefs, our thoughts, and our actions. When it comes to our thoughts, the same thinking that got us where we are can’t take us further. If we keep thinking in the same way, we’ll keep coming up with the same kinds of solutions. Our thinking becomes stagnant without outside stimulation. The only way to expand one’s thinking is to get fresh, outside perspective.

When we get attached to the process of how we imagine success will be attained we become blind to other possibilities. And when that happens, we’re like a fly incessantly beating its wings against a pane of glass trying to reach its goal. It doesn’t matter how hard we try if we’re pursuing success in an ineffective manner. When we’re not willing to consider other courses of action, we limit our success. How does one distinguish between dogged determination and blindness? It usually requires input from an outside, unbiased source.

Additional blind spots within the corporate world arise from two sources. The first source is corporate culture – corporate culture in a general sense as well as the specific “culture” of an organization. We hold beliefs about how organizations should function, how they should be structured, and which behaviors are valued. Every organization has its own special culture – either by design or by default. And while a corporate culture can be an asset, it often acts to create blind spots with executives. The second source of blind spots arising from the corporate world stems from the need of leaders to achieve productivity through others. As executives, we run the risk of our thoughts and beliefs being influenced by the thoughts and beliefs of the people under our guidance.

Breaking free of limiting thoughts and beliefs is essential for achieving the results we want, however, there are some inherent challenges in releasing blind spots. Many blind spots are so deeply ingrained within our make-up, we’re no longer aware they control us. Without outside perspective, these beliefs appear to be truths. It’s important to keep in mind that generally these limiting beliefs are YOUR truths rather than THE truth.

It is critical that leaders identify and release their self-limiting blind spots. To that end, it requires outside perspective and input from someone who can point out what they can’t see for themselves.

Please give us a call and let us help you and/or your leaders move past their blind spots, and achieve the success they want and the organization needs.

Avoiding Disengagement

“People don’t quit companies, they quit bosses.”

When most people begin working at a company, they have high expectations and high aspirations. They’re excited to be there, enthused about the work they’ll be doing, and they’re imagining how they’ll make a difference in the company. In short, people are highly engaged when they start.

Therefore, as a leader, we don’t need to worry as much about how to engage people as much as how to keep people from becoming disengaged!

Why does disengagement occur? Disengagement most often occurs because a leader does or says things that cause people to become disillusioned and less engaged.

Here are the five leading causes of disengagement and what to do about it.

1. Treating People Like Things
When a leader treats people like things, it sends the message that they are unimportant and that they just don’t care about them. And when people sense a leader doesn’t care about them, they start not to care about the leader. When the company tolerates leaders who don’t care about people, people tend not to care about the company. And when people don’t care, there is no engagement.

What does “treating people like things” look like? It’s when a leader is insensitive to people and interacts with them as if they have no feelings. A leader treats people like things when he or she ignores the fact that everyone has hopes and dreams and fears and stress. And leaders treat people like things when they don’t show respect for people or value their contributions, efforts, and potential.

A good leader understands that people’s hopes, dreams, fears, and stresses are real and matter to them. A good leader inspires people. A good leader interacts with people as people, helping them to be their best. A good leader has empathy. A good leader relates to people the way they themselves want to be treated. And a good leader helps people achieve their own goals.

2. Treating Adults Like Children
How does a leader “treat adults like children”? Think for a moment about how we relate to children and why we relate that way. We generally tell children what they need to do and when they need to do it by. And we do that because we don’t trust their judgment, their sense of responsibility, and/or their self-discipline. We regularly check up on children because we don’t trust them to follow through on their commitments. We don’t trust them to be responsible.

When a leader doesn’t trust people to do what needs to be done, and doesn’t trust their judgment, they are treating them as if they are children. When they micromanage people, they are treating them like children. It shows a lack of respect and trust. And when people feel they aren’t respected and trusted, they lose respect for the leader. When people feel they aren’t respected and valued, there is no engagement.

If someone doesn’t know what to do, then our job as a leader is to develop their knowledge and abilities. The shortcoming lies with the leader, not the follower. If someone lacks the necessary judgment for a task or decision, then our job as a leader is to develop their judgment. If their judgment remains inadequate, then either we aren’t as competent a leader as we need to be, or we just have the wrong person on our team. Either way, resorting to treating someone as a child is a poor course of action.

3. Not Treating People with Respect
The impact of showing respect is powerful, but not nearly as powerful as what happens when a leader does not show respect for others. When a leader doesn’t respect people, they lose respect for the leader.

We demonstrate respect to others by what we say, what we do, and by the actions we take. People want to be respected for their ideas and their efforts. We demonstrate our respect for them by listening to them and valuing their perspectives – regardless of whether you agree with them or not. In addition, we show respect by giving someone our full attention. When we do something like read and respond to emails while someone is conversing with us, we send the message that they’re just not that important to us. Instead, either stop multitasking and give them your full, undivided attention, or ask them to come back in 5 or 10 minutes so you can complete your task. By giving someone your undivided attention, you communicate that what they have to say is the most important thing at that moment.

4. Not Having Integrity
A leader who lacks integrity has a difficult time influencing and inspiring people. People assess us by our words and actions over time. A leader earns trust by how he or she acts in everyday situations. A leader’s words and actions will carry more weight and have greater impact if they’ve earned the trust (and respect) of others in advance.

Acting with integrity means doing what we say we’ll do. Committing to a deadline creates an opportunity to demonstrate your integrity. Regardless of the importance of the task, fulfilling your commitment on time cements your level of integrity in the minds of others. Only when you have consistently demonstrated that you are a person of your word can solid trust be established.

Acting in integrity is slightly different than acting with integrity. It’s about how we conduct ourselves and it relates to the values we claim matter to us. Acting in integrity means that if we say that treating other with respect matters, we are always respectful of others – regardless of the situation or the person’s position. Acting in integrity means that if we say that honesty matters to us, we are honest – regardless of the situation. If you say that work/life balance matters, then you go out of your way to strike that balance – not only for you, but for the people you lead.

Your values apply not only to your personal actions, but to the entire team you lead. We always lead by example. We establish “who we are” by our every word and action. I call these “moments of apparent insignificance.” To us, these moments are incidental, but they leave an impression on those around us.

5. Taking People for Granted
The issue here is the importance of appreciating the efforts people make rather than taking their efforts for granted or offering insincere recognition. The need for the esteem and respect of others is a key element of engagement.

Having one’s effort taken for granted can be disheartening. If a leader wants people to do and be their best, it’s important to demonstrate that he or she values them. There is a difference between appreciation and recognition, and the distinction is important to understand. Recognition is offered to acknowledge a person’s achievement rather than their effort. However, appreciation is offered for someone’s effort.

Most people want to be appreciated for their efforts more so than for their accomplishments. Appreciation is generally personal and heartfelt, given from one person to another. And it’s often spontaneously shown as a response to the effort someone has put into completing a task. It is an expression of gratitude for someone’s effort, and its impact is immediate and long-lasting. Telling someone you appreciate their effort in completing a project over the weekend has a far greater impact on engagement than offering a token of recognition for the end result.

If you’d like my help strategizing about how to improve engagement, please contact me.

How to Effectively Lead Professionals

There’s an art to leading professionals. It’s something I’ve mastered over the years as an executive coach by helping my clients become more effective in leading their teams.

We’ve all seen leaders who do a poor job leading people. They micromanage. They don’t engage or listen to their teams. They don’t create a trusting environment. They treat adults like children. And they even treat people like “things”.

Leaders who are effective go about leading in a different way…

I first began honing my approach after interviewing Jody Thompson and Cali Ressler. Jody and Cali had been tasked with creating a differentiated approach to the idea of the workplace and called it the Results-Only Work Environment® (ROWE®). ROWE is built on a foundation of autonomy and accountability for every single person. People are focused solely on getting work done. Hours worked don’t matter. Showing up at the office doesn’t matter. Time off doesn’t matter. Everyone gets crystal clear on the results they are expected to achieve, and managers manage the work, not the people.

The results were remarkable. Teams were clear on the important results to be achieved, engagement scores skyrocketed, and wellness scores jumped. Productivity rose significantly and voluntary turnover essentially dropped to zero. (Who would leave a culture like that?)

There’s quite a bit that needs to shift in order to implement a true ROWE culture. But to me, an essential aspect of why it works comes down to how leaders lead professionals.

The key to effectively leading professionals is to treat professionals like professionals.

At the heart of this approach is the reality that the vast majority of professionals want to do a good job. They want to produce professional results.

Consequently, a leader doesn’t need to constantly monitor the work and progress of a professional. Instead, they need to ensure that the person is clear about what needs to be done, what the outcome needs to be, when the task needs to be completed, and the relative priority of the work. The leader needs to be available to answer questions and the team member needs to know to let the leader know if there is a problem or a delay. (Obviously, if something is extremely urgent or time-sensitive, there needs to be more two-way communication.)

But once all of this is established, the leader needs to leave them alone to complete their work. They can (and should) wait for and expect the results to be delivered with quality and on time.

The most effective way to lead professionals is to treat them like a professional.

Do team members ever screw up? Do they ever act unprofessionally or produce inferior work? Of course. But it should be a rare occurrence and should be dealt with in an appropriate manner.

When professionals are treated as professionals, the quality of work improves, engagement increases, and turnover drops.