© Dean Kashiwagi
Leadership
P PP Performance erformance BBased ased SStudies tudies RResearch esearch GGrouproup
www.pbsrg.com
PBSRGGLOBAL
Kenneth SullivanWilliam BadgerMarie SullivanJacob KashiwagiJohn MichaelDean KashiwagiAvi Wiezel
© Dean Kashiwagi
LAWSThe Number of Laws of Physics
= =
100%
Laws
100%
Laws
100%
Laws
Laws are not created…they are discovered
Past Present Future
© Dean Kashiwagi
Initial conditions
Final conditions
An Event
Time
Laws Laws
© Dean Kashiwagi
Perceive
Process
Apply
Change
Cycle of Learning
100%Information
© Dean Kashiwagi
Perceive
Process
Apply
Change
Learning SpeedsAll Individuals Learn At Different Speeds
100%Information
© Dean Kashiwagi
“Types” of Individuals
Perceive
Pro
cess
Apply
Ch
an
ge
100%100%InformationInformation
Perc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
A
C
0%
100%
B
© Dean Kashiwagi
Perc
ep
tion o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
A
Simplicity: Who perceives more information?
C
0%
100%
© Dean Kashiwagi
RSRS
LSLS
Time
Info
rmati
on
Level
0%
100%
AA
CC
How to Create a KSM Left Side (LS) (Type A) vs. Right Side (RS) (Type C)
+ =
RSRS
LSLS
© Dean KashiwagiTime
Info
rmati
on
Level
0%
100%
AA
CC
Where is Control?Where is Control?
No
In
form
atio
n
Info
rmat
ion
LS RS
No
Co
ntr
ol
Co
ntr
ol
© Dean KashiwagiTime
Info
rmati
on
Level
0%
100%
AA
CC
Where is Management?Where is Management?
No
In
form
atio
n
Info
rmat
ion
No
Co
ntr
ol
Co
ntr
ol
LS RS RS
Lea
de
rsh
ip
Man
ag
emen
t
© Dean KashiwagiTime
Info
rmati
on
Level
0%
100%
AA
CC
Decision Making?Decision Making?
No
In
form
atio
n
Info
rmat
ion
No
Co
ntr
ol
Co
ntr
ol
LS RS
Lea
de
rsh
ip
Man
ag
emen
t
RS
No
De
cisi
on
Mak
ing
RS
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g
© Dean Kashiwagi
Plot the Following Characteristics
• Leadership• Alignment• Efficiency• Change the behavior of others• Believe in chance• Emotion/Passion• Becomes the expert in the organization• Technical• Continuous Improvement• Freedom • Believes in range/diversity• Proactive
LS
LS
LS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
RS
© Dean Kashiwagi
Plot the Following Characteristics
LS
RS
• Logical
• Overview/Process
• Details
• Understands “why”
• Understands “what”
• Measures
• Accountable
• Reactive
• Telescope “in and out”
• “What if”
• Genius
• Maximize information flow
• Loves meetings
LS
LS
RS
LS
RS
LS
LS
RS
LS
RS
LS
RS
RS
© Dean Kashiwagi
Plot the Following Characteristics
LS
RS
• Does not believe in being controlled
• Captain of their own ship
• Can change others
• “Mirror” so others can see themselves
• “Source of Light” or wisdom to influence all
• Can influence anyone
• Believe in randomness
• No control over their destiny
• Feels controlled
• More activity
• Incentives
• Looks inside to improve environment
• Has a more conducive environment to change
LS
LS
RS
LS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
LS
LS
© Dean Kashiwagi
Leader At All LevelsPerc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
0%
100%
© Dean Kashiwagi
“Leaders must be close enough to relate to others, but far enough ahead to motivate them.”
John Maxwell
© Dean Kashiwagi
Leader At All LevelsPerc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
0%
100%
© Dean Kashiwagi
Leader At All Levels
• Leadership has no unique traits
• There is leadership in every environment
• No two leaders are the same
• Every leader is defined by the time, the environment, the people they lead, and their own characteristics
• Type A’s are leaders who are more visionary and have Type A characteristics
• The majority of people are Cs so the majority of leaders will have Type C characteristics
• The only universal definition of a leader is “anyone who people are following” (next)
Perc
ep
tion o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
0%
100%
© Dean Kashiwagi
Characteristics of Leaders
• Every leader has every characteristic
• Every leader has a relative degree of every characteristic
• No two leaders are the same
• There is a leader in every group
• The leader is his environment
• The masses pick their leader
• The leader picks the masses (next)
© Dean Kashiwagi
Traditional Function of a Leader
Wor
ker
Cap
abili
ty
Leadership
© Dean Kashiwagi
New Leadership Model
• Leaders have no influence over the capability of others
• Leaders increase productivity of the group through changing alignment/function of resources
Wor
ker
Cap
abili
ty
Leadership
Pro
duct
ivity
of
Gro
up
Leadership
© Dean Kashiwagi
Does a Leader Have Influence?Does a Leader Have Influence?
Leader Follower
© Dean Kashiwagi
Individual Controls his Environment
Leader Follower
Friends
Stranger
© Dean Kashiwagi
Accountability, agency, self control, location of the abused
OppressorSlaves
Slaves
Partners in crime
© Dean Kashiwagi
Does a Teacher Influence the Students? What evidence do we have?
TeacherStudents
© Dean Kashiwagi
Who passes more information, Type A or Type C Teacher?
TeacherStudents
© Dean Kashiwagi
Does a Leader Have Does a Leader Have Influence?Influence?
Influence
• Chance
• Being controlled or able to control others
• Blame others when things go sour
No Influence
• Accountable for their own actions
• When something goes wrong, they look inside first
• Control their own destiny
• Cannot control others
Leader Follower
Leader Follower
Friends
Stranger
Influence
No influence
© Dean Kashiwagi
How do different people match up?
Leader Person 1
Friends
StrangerLeader Person 2
Friends
Stranger
© Dean Kashiwagi
“Types” of Individuals
Perceive
Pro
cess
Apply
Ch
an
ge
100%100%InformationInformation
Perc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time
A
C
0%
100%
A
© Dean Kashiwagi
Measurement (relationship with information)
Individual
• Resources
• Education
• Family
• Birth order
• Friends
• Hobbies
• Size
• Race
• Religion
• Government
• Historical time
• Job
• Perception
Contractor
• Number of projects
• OT rate
• OB rate
• Customer satisfaction
• Change order rate
• Change order amount
• Size of projects
• Private/public sector
• Number of years in operation
• Performance of subvendors
• Performance of site superintendent
• Performance of project manager
• Ability to minimize risk
© Dean Kashiwagi
Who is on my molecule?
• What is on my molecule
• When is on my molecule
• Why is on my molecule
• Where is on my molecule
• How much is on my molecule
• The molecule identifies the individual
Perc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time0%
100%
A
© Dean Kashiwagi
Charles B. Ehrlich, 53, Ehrlich, has a criminal record in Florida. Fined $60,000 last year by the SEC, and ordered to pay back a half-million dollars.
Clarence J. Stewart, 53, Pleaded guilty to a drug-related charge in the late ’80s.
Walter Alexander, 46, A golfing buddy of Simpson.
Michael F. McClinton, 49, Police seized two handguns and an assault rifle from his home. plead guilty in 1999 to possession of a controlled substance.
Alfred Beardsley, 46, Arrested this week for violating parole for stalking by leaving CA.
Charles H. Cashmore, 40, Received probation in the late 1990s after he was charged with felony theft in Utah.
“The Juice”
Thomas Riccio, 44, Four time convicted felon, Eight years in prison.
There’s got to be trend here,
If I can just find it………………………
© Dean Kashiwagi
Different Perspectives
• Who identifies who is on their molecule so they can react to the parties?
• Who looks at their molecule to identify where they can improve?
• The movement from C to A requires someone to look at who they are instead of who they interact with
• The secret to leadership is example and not influence
• It is accepting reality for what it is and aligning the resources
Perc
epti
on o
f In
form
ati
on
Time0%
100%
A
C
© Dean Kashiwagi
Director
Contractor 1
Contractor 2
Contractor 3
Contractor 4
Contractor 5
Contractor 6
Contractor 7
Contractor 8
Contractor 9
Contractor 10
Contractor 11
Contractor 12
Contractor 13
Contractor 14
Contractor 15
Contractor 16
Risk Management by Contractor
Procurement Officer 1 Procurement Officer 2
PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4M
C
P
D
© Dean Kashiwagi
Division Overview
DIVISION OVERVIEW 2/3/2006
Total Awarded Budget $100,000,000
Current Cost $120,000,000
Over Budget $ 20,000,000
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Total Number of Projects 100
% Projects On Time 90%
# of Jobs Delayed 10
% Projects On Budget 90%
# of Jobs Over Awarded Budget 10
AVERAGE PROJECT
Project Budget $ 1,000,000.00
# of Days Delayed 20
Number of overdue risks 2.1
Owner Rating 9.8
Risk Number 1.56
D
© Dean Kashiwagi
ContractorsC
© Dean Kashiwagi
PM/PI Performance LineOVERVIEW PM 1 PM 2 PM 3
Total Awarded Budget $50,000,000 $10,000,000 $45,000,000
Current Cost $51,250,000 $10,000,000 $45,800,000
Over Budget $1,250,000 $0 $800,000
OVERVIEW OF PROJECTS
Total Number of Projects 15 3 6
% Projects On Time 87% 100% 83%
# of Jobs Delayed 2 0 1
% Projects On Budget 93% 67% 100%
# of Jobs Over Awarded Budget 1 1 0
AVERAGE PROJECT
Project Budget $3,333,333 $3,333,333 $7,500,000
% Over Awarded Budget 2.5% 0.0% 1.8%
# of Days Delayed 15 0 11
Number of overdue risks 0.51 1.20 0.92
Owner Rating 9.81 9.71 10.00
Risk Number 1.80 1.40 1.03
M
© Dean Kashiwagi
Law of Harmony
One should be in harmony with, and not in opposition to, the strength and force of the opposition. This means that one should do nothing that is not natural….. the important thing is not to strain in any way.
Bruce Lee
© Dean Kashiwagi
Leadership Change
• Instead of management, use natural alignment
• Position strengths in the optimal location
• Nature does not have a manager
• The environment optimizes itself
© Dean Kashiwagi
Inefficient Leadership Model: Influence
• Focus on changing people
• Followers are the constraint
• Requires lots of resources
• Relieves management from accountability
© Dean Kashiwagi
No-Influence Leadership Model
• Alignment
• Requires Understanding
• Leader is the constraint
• Focus is on changing the system
• Efficient
© Dean Kashiwagi
No Influence Story
© Dean Kashiwagi
Modified Modified No Influence Story
© Dean Kashiwagi
Current Leadership Development
Ability to Influence
MotivationManagement
Training Psychology
Charisma
Skill Sets
Servant ListeningMentoring
Development Programs EvaluationsHuman Behavior
Social Factors IncentivesStandards
Conflict Resolution
Physiology
© Dean Kashiwagi
Research Results
• No-influence principles had more documented empirical data
• Almost all successful programs followed concepts of no-influence
• Even though many prominent leaders claimed a belief in influencing others, their techniques were based off of no-influence principles.
© Dean Kashiwagi
What would a Leader Do?
• Maximize Training
• Praise Workers for their contribution to the work
• Promise rewards for good work
• Delegate as much work as possible
• Keep track of everyone’s progress
• Motivate through powerful emotional speeches
• Create a rigid structure for his employees to follow
• Create lots of instruction pamphlets and guides
• Look for only Type “A” personnel to hire
• Collect lots of performance data of employees
• Hire managers to make sure employees stay on task
RS
LS
RS
LS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
LS
RS
© Dean Kashiwagi
Leadership Conclusions
• Leadership is alignment and not influence• Leadership can be put into a process/structure• Leadership minimizes management activity (direction, control,
inspection)• Leadership based process/structure is efficient and effective• Leadership based process/structure solves the larger problem of having
a lack of leaders instead of focusing on creating leaders• This is a huge change in philosophy, structure, and operations