What Does Being In “Over Your Head” Look Like?

(pssst . . . it’s the columns on the left)

The “Peter Principle”, nepotism, favoritism, grandfathering, tenure, ‘Good Ol’ Boy” Network, buddy system, and on and on . . .  We have a lot of terms for promoting and carrying leaders that are not performing to expectations.  Very few of them are compliments.  In most cases, this practice reflects a weakness in business leadership

Several common appointment mistakes produce sub-optimized performance when leaders and managers are put into situations where they are literally in “over their heads.” The easiest way to describe this “over-leveraged” condition is that the department’s complexity, or degree of difficulty, exceeds the threshold level where the manager has better than a 50% chance of success.

For a C level talent or ability, this is virtually any management position (regardless of complexity) because their odds of success are only 40% at best, even in the lowest-complexity positions. The decision to appoint C level leadership ability to low-complexity departments should be made only when the obstacles and barriers are easily managed or when the person has some previous experience in managing the day-to-day operations.  If the manager begins to struggle or fail, the reasons are usually very apparent: they are in over their heads.

How about those B’s?

As noted by Thomas J. DeLong and Vineeta Vijayaraghavan in their 2003 Harvard Business Review Article, Let’s Hear it for B Players, B level managers are solid, consistent performers who are competent, experienced, consistent, and loyal.   The average organization has between 50% and 60% of their executives, directors, and managers at the B level of leadership ability. These managers make up the backbone of any organization.  For a B level leadership talent, the ability to manage low – and medium -complexity situations produces favorable results 75% and 60% of the time, respectively (see Odds of Success diagram below).

The only time that B level leaders and managers have low odds of success, when they often are in over their heads, is when they are appointed to complex assignments or departments.  It is here that the odds of success dip below the 50% level to 45%. It’s not that they cannot be successful, it’s just less likely.  If the decision is made to appoint a B level talent to this level of complexity, they really need to be “over-achievers” or at the B+ level to succeed at all costs or a steep price.

• They define success differently, not in purely financially or status terms.
• While they work hard at work, they prioritize “life-work” balance and prefer to work 50 hours per week instead of 70 to 80 or more.
• They are usually excellent team players and avoid the spotlight of self promotion.
• They may have been A level performers at one time and have dialed back their career focus, often due to other priorities or “throttling” down to semi-retirement.
• They have longer tenures in organizations because they are less likely to leap from job to job in order to fast-track or advance their careers.
• They carry a significant amount of an organization’s intellectual capital due to their experience and tenure.

The Performance Management Eye Chart (PMEC) is a visual tool that compares leadership effectiveness and cultural engagement at glance.  Leaders can instantly see which departments have healthy cultures of excellence and which ones are facing difficulties. With a unique style of presenting information in a way that allows both detailed focus and overall vision, the Eye Charts synthesize and present meaning, allowing you to see the complete performance picture.

The truth is, in any organization, it is a smart, disciplined mix of leadership talent that matches the complexity and challenge of each department that best leads to success.   A Level Leaders should be placed in the most challenging roles, but trying to hire only A Level Leaders is expensive, difficult, and creates teamwork problems.  It did not work for Enron and it will not work for anyone else.  B leaders are excellent in the right place, and C Employees make worthy contributions to organizations every day.

Put the right people in the right roles by starting that process with the Performance Management Eye Chart, which will quantify and illustrate the impact that leadership has on overall performance and the existing culture in your organization, one leader and one department a time.

The Ineluctable Impact of Leadership and Cultural Engagement

Today’s obscure but incredible word is ineluctable.  To define, something which is ineluctable is something which cannot be avoided, changed, or resisted: inevitable.  To use it in a sentence: “Given the business practices of past management, disappointing results proved ineluctable.”  Or this sentence: “Once the Hospital’s leadership adopted the Eye Chart Tools and followed through with the recommended courses of action, success was ineluctable!”

Good leadership affects every aspect of operations, including the patient experience, employee morale, and financial results.  Top-performing HealthCare organizations work hard to get it, get more of it, and improve that which they do have.

A study by Success Profiles in July, 2010, examined the leadership performance and cultural engagement index scores of 104 healthcare systems throughout the United States. Continue reading →