Marshall Goldsmith is one of my favorite authors and leadership gurus.  I’ve shared his “feedforward”  concept with leaders for years and recently wrote about the idea in this article.

Feedfoward means giving people suggestions in advance about how to behave rather than waiting for them to fail and beating them up afterwards.  Anyone can give feedforward when they have an idea that may help someone else succeed.  For example, years ago my husband was about to present to his company’s executive leadership team for the first time. His boss gave him great feed-forward about how to dress, when to speak, how much detail to go into, etc.

While I usually talk about giving feedforward, Goldsmith also makes the great point that we can and should ask for feedforward.  If you have a behavior you want to change, try asking others for ideas and suggestions about how to succeed.   Most people who try this technique find that it is fun and they get great ideas.

I often write about the importance of optimism when leading in turbulent times and when leading change.  Researchers such as John Hopkins’  Kay Redfield Jamison, Stanford’s Robert Sutton, and Harvard’s John Kotter have all found that positive feelings such as hope and optimism are critical for rallying the troops and moving forward.

At the same time, optimism can be overdone – especially when optimism turns into overconfidence or turning a blind eye to problems and challenges.

Eric Klein recently blogged about this phenomenon, calling it “the problem with being positive.”  He wrote about leaders who shut down conversation and shy away from conflict by overdoing an emphasis on the positive.

The balance of realism and optimism is critically important for change leaders.   Leaders who squash any expressions of concern or who react negatively to problems run the risk of missing major issues that will ultimately impact performance. For this reason, some researchers have started to use the term “realistic optimism”. Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D.  writes that realistic optimism consists of two parts:

Last week I posted about how important it is for change leaders to build a sense of urgency and act with speed, while at the same time avoiding the dangers of overdrive.  The delicate balance between urgency and overdrive has given rise to a phrase that I often use when teaching leaders how to lead and communicate change, “You’ve got to slow down in order to speed up.”  (Watch a video clip of me talking about this here.)

Interestingly, there are several new books and articles on this topic that are hitting the market right now.  In May 2010 Forum corporation released their new book, Strategic Speed.  The book addresses these critical concerns for leaders:

• What role does speed, or lack thereof, play in the high failure rate of strategic initiatives?
• What are the barriers, or traps, to execution?
• Do faster companies financially out-perform slower companies?
• How can I engage people in accelerating our strategy?

It is finally spring here in the Rocky Mountains.   Back in the east, spring unfolds slowly.  The forsythia blooms in February.  You start to see crocus and daffodils in March.  By April the fruit trees are flowering and by Mother’s Day, the dogwoods and azaleas are in full bloom.

Spring is very different at an altitude of 8700 feet in Colorado.  Two weeks ago our aspens and lilacs barely had buds.  Today everything is gloriously green and the lilacs are literally unfolding their flowers right before our eyes.

The difference in the two springs has me thinking about speed and urgency.  The trees and flowers here know that they only have a few weeks to execute so they make the most of every minute.

While the number of books and articles about change can be overwhelming, there are some universal truths that tend to appear in most.  The one I have been thinking about a lot lately is how important it is to be specific when we are attempting to change ourselves or influence others to change.

In his books, Mojo and What Got You Here Won’t Get You There, Marshall Goldsmith uses the term “criteria” to get at the concept of being specific.  For example, when coaching an executive who wanted to spend more time with his kids – Goldsmith pushed the executive to be specific.  Exactly how much time with which kid? When?  Committing to spending 4 one-on-one hours with each child allowed this executive to track his progress and truly change.

The authors of Influencer present a similar idea in their book – claiming that for change to succeed, we need to get specific about who needs to change which exact behaviors.  They use the term “vital behaviors” to describe the concept and share scores of examples where change succeeded because the leader got specific.

On Friday I had the great pleasure of attending a presentation sponsored by Learning Tree International and featuring Bob Mosher.  Bob calls himself a Global Learning and Strategy Evangelist and I certainly came away from his presentation feeling like a convert!

Bob’s impressive experience includes turns as Director of Learning Strategy for Microsoft, Executive Director of Education for Element K, and several years now with LearningGuide Solutions.  I was excited and intrigued when Bob started his presentation by telling us that one of his three objectives was “to inspire us to go back to our organizations and help establish a holistic ecosystem which features dynamic learning.”

In a nutshell, Bob helped our group acknowledge that learning has changed.  People aren’t going to class to learn as much anymore.  Learners want rapid, adaptable, collaborative, self-directed learning at their moment of need.  He calls this shift Learning 3.0.

Any presenter today faces the challenge of getting and keeping their audience’s attention.  Thomas Airways does a brilliant job of engaging their (often cynical) audience of travelers with this adorable and effective video:

Next time you have to present, consider whether you can use something surprising to keep your audience tuned in!

On Saturday I attended an all-day workshop for educators.  Our first presenter was an attorney who did such an excellent job with his opening that I feel compelled to write about it!

In my experience, if you want to engage your audience, it is critical to begin any presentation with the Three C’s: connection, credibility, and common cause.  Here are a few thoughts on each, along with examples from our attorney.

Connection

With most audiences, I recommend starting with a personal connection.  What do you have in common with the group?  How are you similar in thinking, background, approach, etc?  Our Saturday presenter started his talk by letting us know that he had been a teacher (with Teach for America) and that he is married to a teacher.  You could see the smiles spread around the room of educators instantly!

Credibility

In Myers-Briggs terms I am an EJ.  In the DISC, I am an I/D.  What this boils down to is that I get things done. I work fast. My personality style is often an asset because people can count on me to deliver. On the other hand, I know that my personality can also get in the way of my own effectiveness. I admit that I can be bossy. I sometimes plow ahead too quickly, neglect to get others opinions and ideas, and look past potential problems in the interest of quick wins and accomplishments.

I use the term “Overdrive” to describe this tendency.  Overdrive is basically the overuse of the “get it done” style. Many business leaders I work with move into overdrive without even realizing it and recognizing its consequences.

It so happens that two premier business publications (HBR and the MIT Sloan Management Review) addressed the issue of overdrive this month, using different terms.

You need an adaptable team. One that is clear on its goals and direction, yet able top flex quickly to the market. A team that doesn’t need to wait for direction, but rather initiates and implements great ideas on their own.

I use the term Energized Alignment TM to describe the state of being both “psyched up and in sync.”  The model below shows a simple matrix that can help you visualize the concept.

Think about your own team, department, or entire workforce. A team with high alignment is united by a common goal and agrees on what success will look like. In the two decades that I have partnered with leaders on change initiatives, I’ve discovered that many leaders focused only on getting people “on board” with change.  In other words, they tried to use the old command and control mentality to get people aligned.  

But alignment isn’t enough. Taken to extreme, clear goals and expectations alone may equate to working on an assembly line. Sure, I know what is expected of me, but do I really care? Do I come up with innovative suggestions?  Am I able to react to a sudden change that throws the whole plan off course?