A trusted friend and former colleague of mine at Morgan Stanley recently praised Andy Chan’s work at Wake Forest University to help students understand and develop character, then discover their passion and a career path to match it. Here’s a great article about Chan’s work from the Chronicle of Higher Education entitled “Finished College. Now What?”

Chan’s work fits well with our mission to develop strength of character and connection in organizations (you can learn why we believe character strengths are so important for individual, organizational and societal health in the Connection Culture Manifesto that was published by changethis.com). I’ll be learning more and writing future blog posts about Andy Chan and Wake Forest’s work so stay tuned.

We learn best when we think, feel and do.  That’s the message of Dr. Adele Diamond, a cognitive developmental neuroscientist who currently teaches at the University of British Columbia in Canada.  We might refer to this as “whole body learning.”  According to Dr. Diamond, the executive function of the brain — the prefrontal cortex — works best when we go beyond the rational mind by also involving emotions and physical behaviors.  That makes sense since the more we involve other parts of the brain, the more neural connections we make that reinforce learning.

The implications are wide-ranging.  It reminds me of Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences and Robert Sternberg’s identification of different thinking styles. The more we incorporate different approaches to learning that speak to diverse individuals who are wired to learn differently, the greater the probability they will in fact learn.

Are you using more than analytic, rational methods of learning?   Do you use stories to move people emotionally?  Do you employ exercises that require people to behave in ways that will help them learn?

For those who want to go deeper, there a fascinating hour-long interview of Dr. Adele Diamond by Krista Tippett of American Public Radio’s “Speaking of Faith” program that you can hear at this link.

The US Navy and U2 in the same article! Huh?

That’s right.  It’s true. Check it out for yourself.

The Leader to Leader Institute just posted an article on its website that Jason Pankau and I wrote for the Summer edition of the Leader to Leader Journal. The article features the stories of the US Navy’s former Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Vern Clark, and Bono, the lead singer of the rock band U2.  The article is about the topic of connecting with “core employees” to boost strategic alignment, employee engagement, productivity and innovation.  Here is a link to the article entitled “To Boost Performance, Connect with the Core.”

The Leader to Leader Institute was founded by the late Peter Drucker and is headed by Frances Hesselbein, two individuals whom Jason and I respect and admire for their competence, character and positive contributions to society.  The Institute was formed to promote strong leadership in the social sector. Jason and I support the Institute’s work by sharing our work and ideas related to Connection Cultures.  Recently the Institute added Jason and I to its Thought Leaders Gateway and last week I filmed a video interview for the Leader to Leader Institute’s Leadership Dialogues website.  The interview was about the importance of connection to human beings and how many leaders sabotage themselves by not investing time to connect with other human beings.  The interview was conducted by another thought leader whose work we admire, Mark Thompson.

Here is an outstanding session from the Aspen Institute’s Ideas Festival where Dov Seidman and Tom Friedman discuss the importance of individual and corporate character in a connected world. I was fortunate to attend the first Aspen Institute Ideas Festival some years back where it seemed all the speakers touched on the issue of connection. In a future blog post, I plan to share some of my thoughts related to connection that I recorded in my personal journal following that event.

Jason Pankau and I were recently guests on LeaderLab’s podcast interviews available online or at iTunes. LeaderLab’s podcasts are hosted by David Burkus. David’s past guests on LeaderLab’s podcasts have included Marshall Goldsmith, Daniel Pink and Steve Farber. Check it out.

One reason so many leaders fail is that they become isolated.  We all need good friends who “have our back,” as my friend and business colleague Jason Pankau likes to say.  Good friends tell us the truth, they are willing to speak up if they believe we are wrong, and they support and encourage us through the inevitable difficult seasons we all experience in life.

A couple summers ago, I shot the above photograph of the William Seward statue in New York City’s Madison Square Park knowing that one day I would write about him. Seward was a onetime political rival of Abraham Lincoln’s who became a member of Lincoln’s cabinet and one of Lincoln’s best friends.  Doris Kearns-Goodwin wrote about their friendship in her wonderful book Team of Rivals. Frequently, Lincoln went to Steward’s residence in Washington D.C. where the two men talked for hours. Seward’s friendship was a lifeline for Lincoln during his struggles with depression, challenging periods he faced during the Civil War, his wife’s mental illness and the grief he felt following the death of his son.

Ask yourself if you have a few good friends who have your back at work and in life outside of work.  If you do, why not reach out to them and let them know how much you appreciate their friendship.  If you don’t have close friends, take out pen and paper then write down the names of individuals who have the potential to become good friends. Consider the following questions when selecting potential good friends:  Is he trustworthy?; Does he share your interests and values?; Does he live near you so that you can meet on a regular basis? Now that you have a few names, prioritize them then reach out to see if they are willing to meet you over a meal or coffee.  If the meeting goes well, ask if he would consider meeting on a regular basis. In my next post, I’ll write about the types of interactions that will make your meeting time with good friends worthwhile for each of you.

I’m dedicating this post to one of my best friends, Jason Pankau.  Here is a picture of us when we spoke recently at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas (Jason is on the right side of the picture). We are standing in front of the Mission Control center for the International Space Station.

With the recent firing of General McChrystal as commander of American forces in Afghanistan over his insubordination, I thought it would be an ideal time to reproduce here what I wrote in Fired Up or Burned Out about one of the greatest military leaders in history, America’s Army Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall.

Marshall created a culture that stands in stark contrast to the culture created by General McChrystal as reported in a Rolling Stone magazine article entitled “The Runaway General.” Defenders of McChrystal argue he was speaking truth to power.  General Marshall was known for speaking truth to power but, unlike McChrystal, he recognized the need to respect legitimate authority and to always be respectful in dealing with the people he interacted with whether they were fellow soldiers, diplomats or representatives of foreign governments.

Because Marshall possessed humility of character, he knew that he was not always right and had to defer to the decisions of his superior in the chain-of-command then put extra effort into executing such decisions. As a result, Marshall had the complete confidence of the leaders he reported to such as General John “Blackjack” Pershing and President Franklin Deleno Roosevelt.

Marshall should be one of the role models all leaders strive to emulate. The title of the chapter I wrote about General Marshall was  ”Soldier of Peace.”  You can read it below.

Soldier of Peace

George C. Marshall was one of the most extraordinary individuals to have lived during the twentieth century. Born in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, in 1880 and trained at the Virginia Military Institute, Marshall was a career military man who will forever be remembered for his efforts to promote peace and bring about a strong connection between America and Western Europe.

Reading the comments of Marshall’s many admirers is awe-inspiring. Winston Churchill called Marshall “the true organizer of victory” for his efforts during World War II as army chief of staff for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The British chiefs of staff sent Marshall a message that read, in part, “Your name will be honoured among those of the greatest soldiers of your own or any other country . . . Always you have honoured us by your frankness, charmed us by your courtesy, and inspired us by your singleness of purpose and selfless devotion to our common cause.” President Harry S. Truman said Marshall was “the greatest military man this country has ever produced—or any other country for that matter . . . the more I see and talk with him, the more certain I am he is the great one of the age.” Time magazine named him Man of the Year twice.

As army chief of staff during World War II, Marshall was credited for building America’s underprepared military infrastructure so that it would be in a position to win the war. After Marshall recognized that America was falling seriously behind Germany in military preparedness, though it would be another three years before America was attacked, he worked incessantly to revitalize American military strength. The energy and effort Marshall put into his work led Senator Henry Stimson to say, “I have never seen a task of such magnitude performed by a man.”

Throughout his remarkable career, Marshall’s actions encouraged connection among people. He increased human value in several ways. When FDR put the Civilian Conservation Corps during the Depression under Marshall’s command, he developed an “absorbing interest” in helping the young men by educating them and taking care of their health-care needs. According to Marshall’s biographer, he “kept his men intelligently occupied . . . giving them tasks that would awaken their interest.” Married soldiers and their families suffered real economic hardship during the Depression so Marshall started a program that allowed every military family to pay only fifteen cents a meal. To avoid the perception that the program was a “condescending charity,” he and Mrs. Marshall ate the meals too.

One of the best known examples of Marshall’s passion for human value was celebrated in the movie Saving Private Ryan that starred actor Tom Hanks. After learning that James Ryan’s mother had lost three of her four sons in battle, Marshall sent a squad to France specifically to retrieve Private Ryan and return him to America and to his mother.

Perhaps the greatest example of Marshall’s increasing human value came after World War II when President Truman asked Marshall to become secretary of state. He accepted the role because he envisioned the opportunity to remove the causes that led to war. For two years he set about to persuade Congress and the American people of the need to provide assistance to the war-torn economies of Europe where famine and disease were rapidly spreading. That was no easy task, considering the human inclination to avenge former enemies rather than help them. To his credit, Marshall knew that ignoring human suffering was  wrong and  would lead to bitter resentment and potentially to a future war. During a commencement speech at Harvard, General Marshall told the world: “Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, desperation, and chaos.” Marshall redirected his tireless efforts from waging a war to helping the very nations he had fought against. The Marshall Plan, as the reconstruction effort became known, was an overwhelming success. You can still visit European towns where merchants sell postcards that show the destruction following World War II, in stark contrast to the beauty of these same towns today.

For his humanitarian actions, he was the first career soldier to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953. The British were so moved by the compassion and efforts of Marshall that when he entered Westminster Cathedral to attend Queen Elizabeth II’s coronation and people in attendance spotted him, they stood in his honor.

George Marshall also increased knowledge flow in cultures by speaking truth to those in power. During World War I in France, General John “Blackjack” Pershing once criticized then Major Marshall’s division commander in front of his subordinates over a mixup that was actually the fault of Pershing’s office. As Pershing tried to walk away, Marshall refused to let him leave, even grabbing his arm to stop him, until Pershing heard the truth. The officers present thought Marshall’s behavior would surely end his career. To Pershing’s credit, however, he appreciated Marshall’s candor and courage. Eventually, Pershing promoted Marshall to colonel, making him a part of his personal staff, and later promoted him to become his personal aide.

Another incident shows Marshall’s commitment to openness and honesty. Years later when Marshall was attending his first conference with FDR, the president asked for his opinion on a subject that everyone else in the room had already agreed on. To the president’s surprise, Marshall opined, “I’m sorry, Mr. President, I don’t agree with you at all.” Somewhat surprised, FDR abruptly ended the meeting. Afterward, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau approached Marshall and said, “Well, it’s been nice knowing you.” As it turned out, FDR appreciated Marshall’s integrity and his willingness to say what he really believed. A little over a year later, FDR made Marshall the army chief of staff reporting directly to him.

George Marshall increased knowledge flow by valuing education. One theme running throughout his career was an “insatiable desire to learn, to know, [and] to understand.” Stationed in Tientsin, “he . . . [became] an authority on Chinese civilization, history, and language . . . [and was] the only American officer who could examine Chinese witnesses without the aid of interpreters.” Marshall’s awareness that Hitler was building a huge military industrial complex led him to warn of the Nazi threat and America’s vulnerability.

The inspiring identity that George Marshall spread to others was one of a dutiful public servant to a worthy country that he loved. When the time arrived for the Allies to invade Europe, General Marshall had hoped to be the one to lead the effort as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces. The position would be based in Great Britain. FDR, however, felt he needed General Marshall with him in Washington, D.C. Although he was personally disappointed, Marshall remained working for the president as army chief of staff and appointed Dwight D. Eisenhower to the position of supreme commander of Operation Overlord. While Marshall served in a less visible but nonetheless important role, Eisenhower’s success as supreme commander served as a springboard to the presidency. It takes an extraordinary personal sense of one’s duty for someone to make a sacrifice of the magnitude made by General Marshall.

George Marshall once said, “The less you agree with the policies of your superiors, the more energy you must direct to their accomplishment.” This attitude gave FDR confidence that he could always count on Marshall, and the president expressed this confidence by saying, “When I disapprove [of Marshall’s recommendations], I don’t have to look over my shoulder to see which way he is going . . . I know he is going . . . to give me the most loyal support as chief of staff that any president could wish.” It takes an uncommon degree of integrity and humility to do this.

A soldier of peace, George C. Marshall left as a legacy strengthened  connections among peace-loving nations. His work laid the foundation for the unprecedented spread of liberty in the last half of the twentieth century.

Review, Reflection, and Application

General George C. Marshall increased inspiring identity by becoming a role model of a soldier-statesman who was dedicated to his country and worked hard to do his best in the positions he held. He increased human value by standing up to General Pershing and defending the men in his command when he felt they were treated unfairly. General Marshall increased knowledge flow by learning what was going on outside America so that he could be prepared to respond to external developments.

What qualities of George Marshall do you see in yourself? FDR said of Marshall, “I don’t have to look over my shoulder to see which way he is going . . . I know he is going . . . to give me the most loyal support as chief of staff that any president could wish.” Would your supervisor say the same about you?

Sources:

Carl Joachim Hambro, Nobel Peace Prize Presentation Speech—George C. Marshall, http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1953/press.html (accessed 11 March 2005); Howard Gardner and Emma Laskin, Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 148–63; Charles Colson with Harold Fickett, The Good Life: Seeking Purpose, Meaning, and Truth in Your Life (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 2005), 5; Geoffrey C. Ward, American Originals: The Private Worlds of Some Singular Men & Women (New York: Random House, 1994), 184–90.

Below is the text of an article Jason Pankau and I wrote for the Leader to Leader Journal that uses examples of CNO Admiral Vern Clark of the US Navy and Bono of he rock band U2.  

To Boost Organizational Performance, Connect with the Core

Michael Lee Stallard and Jason Pankau

It is essential to every organization’s long-term success that employees align their behavior with organizational goals and give their best efforts.  These issues are referred to as strategic alignment and employee engagement.   Few leaders are strong in these areas. Long-term research by the Gallup Organization shows that 75 percent of American workers are disengaged and 15 percent of this group are so disengaged they regularly work against their organization’s goals.  In addition, Corporate Executive Board research shows that 40 percent of engaged employees are not aligning their behavior with organizational goals,  The bottom line is that only one out of ten employees are both engaged and aligned with strategy.  These sobering statistics represent a drain on productivity that leaders can no longer afford to ignore.

Organizations with aligned and engaged employees clearly have a competitive edge.   Research from the Corporate Executive Board shows that engaged employees are 20 percent more productive than the average employee.  That’s like an extra day of work each week. Compounding this advantage over several years results in a considerable difference in productivity and performance.  And productivity is only one of several benefits that come from having an aligned and engaged workforce.

Leaders consciously or unconsciously lump employees into three categories:  the “stars” consisting of those in management as well high potential employees, the much larger “core” made up of solid contributors, and the rest, employees whose contributions and fit with the organization are questionable. Stars typically feel connected to the organization because they have power or influence.  Core employees typically don’t feel connected. And because they don’t feel connected, over time a significant portion of them show up for the paycheck but stop caring and stop giving their best efforts.  In addition, they stop fully communicating.  As a result, decision makers don’t get all the information they need to make optimal decisions.  This breakdown in communications, in turn, results in sub-optimal decision-making and organizational underperformance.

In addition to the negative impact on decision-making, diminished communications from the lack of connection reduces the marketplace of ideas inside the organization, which in turn reduces innovation.  This is the case because innovation occurs when an individual sees a potential connection between two previously unrelated ideas e.g. shoes + wheels = roller skates.  A diminished marketplace of ideas reduces the likelihood the innovative connections will be made to birth new products, processes and businesses.

If the sense of connection that exists between leaders and the stars does not extend to the core, what can be done? A study by the Corporate Executive Board has shown that emotional factors are four times as important as rational factors when it comes to the amount of effort employees put into their work. In our research, we have learned that leaders whose organizations achieve high levels of employee engagement and strategic alignment understand the power of emotional connections to engage and align employees and they are intentional about making core employees feel connected to them and to the organization. They have learned to build bridges that extend the feeling of connection to the core.  These bridges come in three distinct forms that together create a “Connection Culture.”

The Vision bridge makes employees feel proud to be members of the organization.  Leaders build the Vision bridge by developing and communicating a mission, set of values, and reputation that connect with employees.   Employees are inspired by the way the leader describes the organization’s identity, including its mission and core beliefs.

The Value bridge makes employees feel valued as human beings, and for their unique strengths and contributions to the organization. Leaders build the Value bridge by developing a culture where everyone respects the dignity and worth of individuals, appreciates their strengths and contributions regardless of their position in the organization’s hierarchy, and helps them achieve their potential.  Employees who are well-treated will reciprocate.

The Voice bridge makes employees feel informed and that their opinions and ideas on matters that are important to them are heard and considered by decision makers. Leaders build the Voice bridge by developing processes and practices that keep employees “in the loop” and give them regular opportunities to express their views.   Knowing that their input has been factored into a leader’s decision is motivating and it positively impacts their future participation.

Connecting the U.S. Navy

One example of a leader who intentionally developed a Connection Culture using all three bridges is Admiral Vern Clark, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) from 2000 until his retirement in 2005. Over the course of 2009, I (Michael) met with and interviewed Admiral Clark and several of the Naval officers who reported to him.

The CNO is the head of the U.S. Navy.  He is the principal naval adviser to the President of the United States on the conduct of war.  When Admiral Clark assumed the CNO role, the Navy was not meeting its sailor retention goals. This is problematic when you consider the Navy’s sophisticated surveillance, navigation and weapons systems and the importance of maintaining the readiness of national defense.  Aware of this and concerned about its impact on military preparedness, Admiral Clark made winning the war for talent the number one priority of his “Top Five” priorities.

Following are a few of the ways Admiral Clark and his leadership team built bridges so that everyone felt connected and a part of the Navy.

The Vision Bridge

Admiral Clark employed the Vision bridge and connected with sailors by communicating that the Navy’s mission is to take the “war fighting readiness” of the United States to any corner of the world at a moment’s notice.    He said it was “our turn to make history” by “building a Navy for the 21^st century” that would be “strategically and operationally agile, technologically and organizationally innovative, networked at every level, highly joint (with the other services), and effectively integrated with allies.”

Admiral Clark’s description of who sailors are as members of the U.S. Navy made them feel proud and connected to him as their leader.  He would tell them: “What we do matters.  What we do is hard work. We intentionally put ourselves in harm’s way. We are away from our loved ones for months on end. We do it because it’s important and we are people of service. We are committed to something larger than ourselves: the protection of America’s interests around the world and democracy.” Rear Admiral Frank Thorp, who served on Admiral Clark’s  personal staff, recounted an occasion when he spotted a sailor with tear-filled eyes after hearing Admiral Clark speak.   Admiral Thorpe approached the young man to see what was wrong.  The sailor told him that he was going to ask his Commanding Officer to rip up the discharge papers he had recently submitted.  Admiral Clark’s message had reached his mind and heart and, for the first time, he said “a leader told me why I should stay in the Navy.”

The Value Bridge

Admiral Clark described his strategy as using the Navy’s “asymmetrical advantages” of the “best technology in the world” combined with the “genius of our people.” He made certain the Navy’s plans and budgets were aligned with his priorities. There were many ways in which Admiral Clark demonstrated that he valued all sailors as human beings, independent of their rank,

To begin, Admiral Clark strongly supported an increase in pay that was approved by the President and Congress.  When Navy budget officials proposed cuts related to training and developing people as part of the annual planning cycle, Clark wouldn’t allow it.  Instead, he increased the training budget. As part of what Clark called the “Revolution in Training,” he established the Naval Education and Training Command with twelve Navy Centers of Excellence. He required everyone in the Navy to have a personal development plan. He changed the performance appraisal system to provide constructive feedback for everyone and added the requirement to leaders’ performance appraisals that they help sailors learn and grow. To make his point about how much he valued personal growth and continuous improvement, Clark liked to say, “if you are not growing, you’re dead.”

In the Navy, sailors who are part of the enlisted class can at times feel like second-class citizens (the “core”) as compared to the officer class (the “stars”).  Clark understood this and made it one of his priorities to “blur the lines” in some respects between the officer and enlisted classes while still maintaining the necessary decision-making chain of command. When he traveled to commands and bases around the world, Admiral Clark only infrequently held “all hands” calls, preferring to meet with leaders to share with them what he expected.  He not only met with Commanding Officers but also met with Master Chiefs (who are the leaders of the enlisted class).

He intentionally reached out to the Master Chiefs to show them he valued them and he asked the Master Chiefs to value the sailors under their leadership and see to it that they prospered. Clark told the Master Chiefs “these young sailors under our command swear to support and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies and we as leaders need to make promises in return. We need to give them the training and resources to enable them to fulfill their promise.  We need to give them an opportunity to prove what they can do.” Clark encouraged the Master Chiefs to mentor the enlisted sailors and he often told a story about when he was on his first ship following Officer Candidate School.

“I didn’t know the pointy end of the ship from the blunt end.  It was scary, really.  But fortunately there was a Master Chief there who took a liking to me, Master Chief Leedy.  For some reason, I don’t know what possessed him, but after I had been there about a week he came up to me, and put his arm around me, and he said, ‘Mr. Clark, I’m going to help make you into a fine officer.’ ”

Admiral Clark said the advice and encouragement from Master Chief Leedy helped make him a better officer and he needed, and our country needed, the Master Chiefs to mentor and encourage today’s young sailors in that same way.

Clark liked being with the Master Chiefs and he connected with them. Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy Jim Herdt, the head of all of the Master Chiefs, told me that the Master Chiefs around the world had the general attitude that “Old Vern (Clark) is counting on us and we can’t let him down.”  Clark’s comments made the Master Chiefs feel valued and when they in turn reached out to help those under their command learn and grow, it helped the sailors feel valued too.

Clark changed legacy systems that made sailors feel devalued. One such system was the Navy’s job assignment process. Under Clark and a program he dubbed “the revolution in personnel distribution,” the system was changed to a job bidding approach with incentive compensation provided to the jobs and locations that were in the least demand.  As a result, the percentage of sailors forced into positions or locations they didn’t want was reduced from 30 percent to around 1.5 percent.

The Voice Bridge

In group meetings with leaders, Admiral Clark encouraged participants to speak up. His own approachable, conversational speaking style set the tone for others to share their ideas and opinions.  He asked everyone to “challenge every assumption,” “be data driven,” and “drill down” into the details. He challenged them to “have a sense of urgency to make the Navy better every day” in order to deliver greater efficiencies and readiness for the dollars America invested in the Navy.

Clark was more concerned about getting it right than being right himself.  He encouraged what he referred to as “constructive friction.”  This made it safe for people to disagree and express views that were outside of the consensus view.   As a result, Clark’s leaders felt connected to him and to the U.S. Navy, and they emulated his leadership style, which made the sailors under their command feel more connected.

Vice Admiral Tim Lafleur, the former head of the Navy’s surface community, recounted  that when data was presented to Admiral Clark showing that a program Clark initially supported was not performing as expected, he shut it down even if it meant job cuts.  This made everyone feel more empowered that they could bring about change so long as they made their case supported by data.

Admiral Clark also increased connection to senior civilians who served in the Navy.  He was the first CNO to invite senior civilians to attend the Annual All Flag Officer Meeting with active and reserve admirals. In these meetings Clark typically walked around and asked various participants whose actions were aligned with the vision to share with the group what they were doing.  Clark called this “letting others take victory laps.” Again, this was an opportunity to express one’s voice.

Results

Vern Clark is quick to say that he’s not perfect.  Nonetheless, the Navy achieved some impressive gains during his tenure as CNO and the naval leaders I interviewed praised his leadership and positive impact.  In a little more than a year after Admiral Clark became CNO, first term re-enlistment soared from less than the Navy’s goal of 38 percent to 56.7 percent.

As the Navy improved sailor retention and developed greater alignment with Admiral Clark’s vision, it became faster and more responsive.  Within a matter of hours following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, aircraft carriers, Aegis destroyers and cruisers were in position to protect America’s shores. This was due in part to the fact that naval leaders anticipated what had to be done and took action before they received orders. At the Pentagon in Washington D.C. command and control of the Navy was quickly reestablished and planning for America’s response began while the embers of the fire from the terrorist attack still smoldered a short distance away.

Connecting U2

The principles we are discussing are equally important in a smaller, less hierarchical organization.  Consider something completely different from the military: a rock band.

U2 has been awarded a remarkable 22 Grammy awards, more than any band in history.  The band is comprised of four musicians who have known each other since they were teenagers in Dublin, Ireland: lead singer Bono, lead guitar player “Edge,” bass guitar player Adam Clayton, and drummer Larry Mullen, Jr. These guys have been together for more than 30 years when most other bands eventually fall apart, often because one member becomes recognized as the star and the resulting disconnection breaks down the group.  Not so with U2.  Bono is clearly the band’s megastar but the Vision, Value and Voice bridges are in place and his fellow band members feel like partners rather than his supporting cast.

The Vision Bridge

Bono has articulated a clear vision of U2, including its mission and core values.  U2’s mission is to improve the world through its music and influence. Bono calls it “the spark.” He feels it sets U2 apart from many other bands. U2’s songs address themes the band members believe are important to promote such as human rights and social justice. The band values excellence in the music it produces and in its concert performances. Bono has described this value as a desire to achieve the band’s potential. U2’s members value continuous improvement to achieve their own potential, never feeling satisfied that they can’t become even better.   Another core value of the band is that its members value one another and this established the Value Bridge.

The Value Bridge

Bono further unites the members of U2 by appreciating their strengths. Bono has said that although he hears melodies in his head, he is unable to transfer them into written music.   Considering himself a “lousy guitar player and an even lousier piano player,” he relies on his fellow band members and recognizes that they are integral to his success.  To Bono, U2 is “the best example of how to rely on others.”

Like all human beings, the members of U2 have experienced difficult periods in their lives.  These experiences have shaped them in important ways. Bono’s mother died when he was 14 years old. Bono describes the period following her death as one in which he felt alone and abandoned. Although he longed for the emotional support of a family, his grief-stricken father was unable to comfort his son. Having experienced what it was like to suffer alone, when Larry Mullen’s mother died when he was 16 years old, Bono reached out to console him.  This began a close, supportive friendship.  When Edge went through a difficult divorce, the band members were there to support him. When Adam Clayton became addicted to alcohol and drugs, the band members reached out to help him recover.  Bono has stated that when one of the band members is in need, the band rallies around to support him and they put that need above the performance of the band. It’s no wonder that one of U2’s most popular songs is entitled, “Sometimes You Can’t Make It on Your Own.”

The most dramatic example of this came when U2 campaigned during the 1980s for the observance of a Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in America. Bono received a death threat that warned him not to sing the song “Pride (In the Name of Love),” a song about the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., at an upcoming concert.  Bono described in an interview that as he sang the song, he closed his eyes.  At the end of a verse when he opened his eyes Bono discovered Adam Clayton literally standing in front of him to shield him from potential harm.

Bono describes U2 as a tight-knit family and community.  He has said that “people with a strong sense of family and community…are always very strong people.”   The commitment to support one another extends beyond the four members of the band.  The members of U2 are part of a larger community that includes their families, crew members and collaborators. Many of them have known each other for decades.

The economic profits from U2’s work are split equally between the four band members and their long-time manager Paul McGuiness. That might surprise some. Given Bono’s status as a megastar, it would not be inconceivable if he claimed more than an equal share of the band’s profits. What better way to show your team members that you value them than to treat them and their unique contribution as economic equals?

The Voice Bridge

U2 is further unified by its participative, consensus-oriented decision-making style.  The members of U2 argue relentlessly over their music, which reflects their passion for excellence. Bono has stated that this approach is frustrating at times but that U2 feels it is necessary to achieve excellence. Everybody has a voice to express their ideas and opinions.

Conclusion

Feeling “fired up” or “burned out” are emotional states that have a direct bearing on productivity. As we pointed out earlier, research from the Corporate Executive Board shows that emotional factors are four times as effective as rational factors when it comes to the amount of effort employees put into their work.

Leaders at any level should build Vision, Value and Voice bridges to make core employees feel like partners and thereby increase strategic alignment and employee engagement. Three areas to focus on are as follows:

• Identify and communicate your group’s identity (i.e. mission and values) that make the members of your group feel proud,
• Develop a culture where everyone feels valued for their strengths and feels supported during the inevitable difficult periods in their lives.
• Develop a participative, consensus-oriented decision-making culture that makes everyone feel that they are informed and have a voice in the decision-making process.

Connecting with core employees is essential to a leader’s long-term success. A.G. Lafley at Procter & Gamble, Anne Mulcahy at Xerox, Howard Schultz at Starbucks, and Ed Catmull at Pixar Animation Studios  are a few of the leaders who have been profiled in the press who clearly have connected with employees at large. When leaders are intentional about connecting with the core, their organizations realize higher levels of strategic alignment and employee engagement.  This, in turn, results in higher productivity, better decision-making and, ultimately, superior performance.

Today, The Economic Times in India published an article I wrote about Jim Goodnight and SAS Institute.  The article is based on an interview I conducted with Goodnight at Giant Impact’s Leadercast conference in Atlanta.  You can read my article at The Economic Times‘ website or below.    

Has Jim Goodnight Cracked the Code of Corporate Culture?

Michael Lee Stallard

Most of the leaders I meet believe the people they lead are aligned with strategy and engaged in their work. The data suggest otherwise. The Conference Board released research in January that concluded employee satisfaction and engagement in America were at the lowest point since it began surveying more than 20 years ago.  The report also concluded that the downward trend began long before the Great Recession. Another well-respected organization, the Corporate Executive Board, released research last year that concluded 75 percent of the employees were not engaged and giving their best efforts and of the 25 percent who were engaged, 60 percent were not aligned with organizational goals. The bottom line is that 90 percent of American employees are either not engaged or aligned with strategy.

The potential productivity boost from improving employee engagement and strategic alignment is staggering.  Unfortunately, most leaders have a blind spot when it comes to these areas. Jim Goodnight, co-founder and CEO of SAS Institute, is not one of them. Recently, SAS was named number 1 on Fortune’s “100 Best Companies to Work For” list for 2010. SAS has made the list every year, five times ranking in the top five.

Goodnight, a 6-foot 4-inch tall North Carolinian with a Ph.D. in statistics, founded SAS more than 30 years ago with colleagues from North Carolina State University. Today, SAS is on a roll with annual revenues of approximately $2.3 Billion, a truly global business, a worldwide workforce in excess of 11,000 and an enviable long-term record of revenue and profit growth. Harvard Business School named Goodnight as one of the “20^th Century’s Great American Business Leaders” and he was named one of “America’s 25 Most Fascinating Entrepreneurs” in Inc. magazine’s 25^th anniversary issue.

Earlier this month, I met with Dr. Jim Goodnight to talk about his views on corporate culture and how it affects strategic alignment, employee engagement, employee retention and overall performance. What stood out to me as I observed Goodnight is that he loves to think about how to crack the code of difficult problems.  During our conversation it was evident that he is proud that SAS is developing software to solve problems in a broad range of fields.  He spoke of using parallel processing, a form of artificial intelligence, to create new solutions that address thorny risk management issues faced by financial services institutions such as banks and insurance companies. Education is another field he mentioned. Already 30,000 teachers are using the educational software developed by SAS that the company makes available to teachers online at no cost. Topping Fortune’s “Best Companies to Work For” list, it would appear that SAS and Goodnight are cracking the code of corporate culture too.

When Goodnight founded SAS, he already knew that work environments affect employee productivity and retention.  He has also stated that he believes the work culture is key to the creativity inherent in knowledge work.  Earlier in his career when he worked for a NASA subcontractor on the Apollo program, he observed the dismal environment of employees working in cubicle farms and how it contributed to annual employee turnover of around 50 percent.  It didn’t take a rocket scientist to see the negative effect that work environment had on organizational performance.

From the start, he treated SAS employees as he had always wanted to be treated. This common sense approach is all too uncommon in practice. In return, he expected they would be more likely to stay as well as to align their behavior with organizational goals and give their best efforts. Few companies can boast of a performance record like SAS’s and Goodnight believes the firm’s culture is key. Its annual employee turnover rate of approximately four percent — versus the typical 20 percent experienced by companies in the software industry – provides additional data that support Goodnight’s approach.

At a time when most companies are laying off workers, expecting their employees to work longer hours, and cutting back on benefits, SAS is a different story. A relative degree of job security distinguishes SAS from other organizations. During the difficult business environment in 2009, Goodnight reassured employees that there would be no layoffs at the privately-held company.  His rationale was that he was in a better position financially to weather the storm than employees were.  He did, however, explain to them that SAS was not in a position to pay raises last year and he asked everyone to help reduce costs.  Employees responded by indentifying and implementing cost cuts that reduced SAS’s expenses by 6 to 7 percent.  SAS employees work 35 hours in the average week out of offices on a bucolic campus with 6,000 pieces of corporate artwork.  Perks on the property include a health club, health center, subsidized cafeterias and a child care facility on site. To help employees learn and grow, SAS encourages participation in industry conferences.

Employees also benefit from an unusual degree of autonomy. SAS has no dress code, no set work hours nor any limitation on annual sick days. Employees appreciate SAS’s culture of informality and openness where Goodnight holds “Java with Jim” sessions for employees to sit down with him for coffee and ask him any question they like.  The culture also has an egalitarian feel to it.   Everyone there knows that Goodnight, in addition to his CEO duties, spends time writing code like many of them.

The culture Goodnight has fostered at SAS works because it meets human needs that are necessary to thrive at work: respect, recognition, belonging, autonomy, personal growth and meaning.  When these needs are met, people thrive, individually and collectively.  When they are not met, people seek means to meet them on their own, oftentimes in ways that work against the organization.

Goodnight clearly knows that he has identified a competitive edge and he’s not about to be pressured into following the crowd that he views as irrational when it comes to corporate culture.  When most entrepreneurs would have gone public long ago, Goodnight decided it didn’t make sense.  He didn’t want analysts on Wall Street telling him how to run his business and forcing him to cut out the elements of SAS’s culture that give it an edge.

As we concluded our conversation, Goodnight was looking forward to getting back home to Cary, North Carolina where he and his wife live in a home on SAS’s campus.  Who can blame him?  In an oftentimes less than rational and volatile world, SAS Institute is an island of sanity and stability.  Just what Dr. Goodnight ordered.

__________

Michael Lee Stallard is president of E Pluribus Partners, a leadership training and coaching firm.  He is the primary author of Fired Up or Burned Out: How to Reignite Your Team’s Passion, Creativity and Productivity. Additional information at www.michaelleestallard.com.