going sour in the suite - kaplan...

25 May 2011ABP, London

Going Sour in the Suite 1© 2011 by Robert B. Kaiser. All rights reserved.

Going Sour in the SuiteGoing Sour in the SuiteThe root causes of leadership failure

Robert B. Kaiser, M.S. Robert B. Kaiser, M.S.

© 2011 by Robert B. Kaiser. All rights reserved.

www.kaplandevries.comwww.kaplandevries.com



When a talented executive’s career progression ends unexpectedly

Derailment

"Potential"

p g p y

PlateauTermination


Demotion

Time

How many derail?

50%SearsBentz (1985)

Est.SampleSource

50%SearsBentz (1985)

Est.SampleSource

Bentz (1985) Sears 50%

40%Fortune 1000Lombardo & Eichinger (1999)

50%TopgradingSmart (1999)

60%Public US Co.Shipper & Wilson (1992)

50%CCLWhite & Devries (1990)

40%Fortune 1000Lombardo & Eichinger (1999)

50%TopgradingSmart (1999)

60%Public US Co.Shipper & Wilson (1992)

50%CCLWhite & Devries (1990)White & Devries (1990) CCL 50%

Shipper & Wilson (1992) F 500 High Tech 60%

Smart (1999) Topgrading 50%

Lombardo & Eichinger (1999)

F 1000 companies 40%


40%HBRCharan (2005)

50%+Avg

60%Ex-patriotsMcCall & Hollenbeck (2002)

67%ConsultingHogan & Hogan (2001)

40%HBRCharan (2005)

50%+Avg

60%Ex-patriotsMcCall & Hollenbeck (2002)

67%ConsultingHogan & Hogan (2001)Hogan & Hogan (2001) Literature review 67%

McCall & Hollenbeck (2002) Expatriates 60%

Charan (2005) HBR 40%

~50%



Why do executives derail?


© Associated Press

The research


1970-1985 1983 to present



V. Jon Bentz, SearsWhy do bright, ambitious executives fail?

• Lack of business skills

• Reactive and tactical

• Unable to deal with complexity

• Slow learner

• Bad relationships

• Unable to delegate

• Unable to build a team

• Let emotions cloud judgment


j g

an “overriding personality defect”

Bentz (1985) A view from the top. APA conference

Off the trackCompared 20 successful/20 derailed execsall were men

Very similar; both groups were…

• Bright, motivated, hard working

• Identified early as “high potential”

• Accomplished, had a great track record


McCall & Lombardo (1983) Off the Track: How and Why Successful Executives Get Derailed. CCL.



Off the trackCompared 20 successful/20 failed execs

Successful executives had the “Right Stuff”

• More diverse career history and accomplishments

• Handled stress w/composure, mistakes w/grace

• Focused on solutions and solving problems

• Got along with a wide range of people


Got along with a wide range of people



Derailed executives had the “Wrong Stuff”

• Poor results

• Insensitive

• Cold, aloof, arrogant

• Betrayal of trust

Mi i

• Overly ambitious

• Bad staffing

• Can’t think strategically

• Unable to adapt to change

D d t d t

g



• Micromanaging • Dependent on advocate

“Most frequent cause for derailment was insensitivity to others. Under stress… derailed managers became abrasive and intimidating.”




The dynamics of derailment

• Strengths can become weaknesses

• Weaknesses eventually matter

• Success can go to one’s head

• Bad luck



Bad luck

“The reasons managers derail are all connected to the fact that situations change as one ascends the hierarchy."

What about derailed women?


© Associated Press



Glass ceilingCompared 19 successful to 16 derailedwomen executives

• Similar themes as with derailed men executives

• “Right stuff” mattered more for women

• Some unique “wrong stuff” and differences in importance for men vs women who derailed


Morrison, White, & Van Velsor (1987) Breaking the Glass Ceiling

Gender similarities

Both derailed women and men

• Poor results

• Too ambitious


• Not strategic, too tactical

• Unable to adapt to change

• Unable to lead subordinates (build a team, direct, empower, & coach)



Gender differences

Derailed women

• Poor “image”

Derailed men

• Relationship problems


Quantitative studiesCreated survey measures, used boss ratings to predict derailment

Successful Managers

• Building and leading a team

• Savvy & Composure

• Sensitivity

Derailed Managers


• Bad staffing decisions

• Lack of follow through

C ’t k t iti


Lombardo, Ruderman, & McCauley (1988) Explanations of success and derailmentMcCauley & Lombardo (1990) Benchmarks: An instrument for diagnosing strengths and weaknesses

• Sensitivity

• Handling complexity• Can’t make transitions

• Dependence on a boss



Derailment Derailment across culturesacross culturesDerailment Derailment across culturesacross cultures


United States United States vsvs European UnionEuropean Union

15 U.S. Fortune 500 firms

24 large EU firms (Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, U.K., Spain)

Compared successful to derailed execs

Upshot– Some differences, mostly similarities


– Relationships more important in EU

– Adapting to change increasingly important

Van Velsor & Leslie (1995) Why executives derail: Perspectives across time and culture



Enduring themesEnduring themesRelationship problems: arrogant, abusive,

critical, blaming, non-communicativeesp. in EU: Authoritarian, Dictatorial, & Tyrannical

Poor business results: esp. in EU, “all talk and no action,” don’t deliver

Failure to build/lead a team: not managing through others, micromanager

F il t d t t j b hi h l l


Failure to adapt: to new job, higher level, new company, culture, market changeNot open to feedback or ongoing learning


U.S. vs EUU.S. vs EU

• Same derailment behaviors

• Adapting to change more critical nowAdapting to change more critical now

• Relationships more important in EU

• Cultural values play a role

How well does an executives’ personality and style fit the local customs and culture?


y





McCall & Hollenbeck (2002) Developing Global Executives

Key findings

• Same behaviors derail expatriates as U S and EU executivesU.S. and EU executives

• Paradoxical reasons…

“Some failed expatriate executives were arrogant, while others were too humble; some were autocratic dictators, while others delegated too much; some were mired in technical details and


much; some were mired in technical details and tactical problems, while others were ‘too visionary’ to get anything done.”




A strength in one culture could become a fatal flaw in another

“What worked splendidly in one culture could “What worked splendidly in one culture could p yp ybring disaster in the next. Global transitions bring disaster in the next. Global transitions required reassessing, sometimes letting go, required reassessing, sometimes letting go, sometimes adding to, sometimes both, but sometimes adding to, sometimes both, but rarely staying the course.”rarely staying the course.”



Strengths can become weaknesses

Know thy self

Self-awareness is pivotal

Recent statistical research

Self-awareness is pivotal

• Over-raters are 5x more likely to derail

• Coworker ratings of self-awareness predict derailment 5 years later

• True in U.S., EU, and for execs and middle


managers

Eichinger & Lombardo (2003). 360-degree assessment. Human Resources Planningseveral studies by William Gentry on self-awareness in the EU, among middle managers, etc.

Derailed leaders tend to be self-absorbed, resistant to feedback, and not open to learning



University of MinnesotaDr. Joyce Bono & students

1 P i t t l 6 R i d

Subordinates described “bad leadership”ship”

1. Persistent people problems

2. Poor emotional control

3. Over-controlling

4. Poor task performance

5. Poor organization,

6. Rumor-mongering and inappropriate use of information

7. Procrastination

8. Failure to consider human needs


5. Poor organization, planning, and communication

9. Failure to coach and develop talent

Rasch, Shen, Davies, & Bono (2008). The development of a taxonomy of ineffective leadership



Putting it all togetherPutting it all together


B iB i

Key Derailment Behaviors

Not strategic, too tactical

InterpersonalInterpersonal

LeadershipLeadership

BusinessBusiness too tactical

Doesn’t delegate, include, empower

Bad working relationships


SelfSelf--managementmanagementNot self-aware,

can’t adapt

Hogan, Hogan, & Kaiser (2010) Managerial derailment. APA Handbook of I-O Psychology



Thursday, October 25, 2008

Merrill’s Chief Is Being Held to AccountBy JENNY ANDERSON and LANDON THOMAS Jr.

Interpersonal

Leadership

Self-management

Business

Merrill Lynch said yesterday that it would take a $7.9 billion write-down because of its exposure to collateralized debt obligations, complex debt instruments and subprime mortgages. A result is a

$2.3 billion loss, the largest in the firm’s history.

The loss raised questions about Mr. O’Neal’s leadership d t i ll h


O’Neal’s leadership and most crucially the

ability of his top executives to manage the risky assets on the firm’s balance sheet.

Tuesday, October 30, 2008; Page A15

Wall Street’s Expanding UniverseBy EUGENE ROBINSON

Merrill's board of directors -- most of whose members were chosen by O'Neal has to share responsibility for

Interpersonal

Leadership

Self-management

Business

were chosen by O'Neal -- has to share responsibility for that debacle; it's not as if the board was unaware of how O'Neal was investing the firm's money. Apparently,

though, there was one thing that O'Neal failed to tell the board: that he had approached the chief executive of Wachovia Corp. about a possible merger of the two companies.….


Now that O'Neal is on his way out, of course, people who

worked for him are saying things to reporters -- he was aloof, he was brusque, he didn't tolerate strong-willed subordinates -- that they wouldn't have said to his face.



B iB i

Key Derailment Behaviors

Not strategic, too tacticalCreate stress

Change, complexity, uncertainty…

InterpersonalInterpersonal

LeadershipLeadership

BusinessBusiness too tactical


Bad working relationships

Create stress,

we fall back on what we know,

our strengths become weaknesses,

and our dark side personality comes out.


SelfSelf--managementmanagementNot self-aware,

can’t adapt

Hogan, Hogan, & Kaiser (2010) Managerial derailment. APA Handbook of I-O Psychology

Root Causes of Derailment

• Troubled relationships

• Major changes that require adaptation• Major changes that require adaptation– Versatile leaders rise to the challenge

– Derailers get stressed, become rigid and defensive, and behave inappropriately


??



"A tribe including members who… were always ready to aid one another and to sacrifice themselves for the common good

Descent of Man

sacrifice themselves for the common good would be victorious over most other tribes."

"The survivors of any species are not necessarily the strongest. And they are not necessarily the most intelligent. They are


y g ythose who are most responsive to change."

On the Origin of Species

DERAILMENTDERAILMENTPrevention & MitigationPrevention & Mitigation





Selection

Successful and Derailed are similar

• Bright, motivated, hard working

• Identified early as “high potential”

• Accomplished, great track record


Accomplished, great track record

The “Right Stuff”

• Diverse career history

The “Wrong Stuff”

• Mircomanager/can’t delegate

Distinguishing factors

Diverse career history and accomplishments

• Handle stress w/ composure, mistakes w/grace

• Focus on solutions and solving problems

Mircomanager/can t delegate

• Can’t build a team

• Tactical, not strategic

• Limited business experience


• Lacks self-awareness


solving problems

• Get along with a wide range of people

• A learner

• Lacks self-control

• Integrity issues



• Personality testing is rare in executive-level appointments*

Assessments

level appointments– Used 1/3 the time

– But when used, seen as very important

• When used, almost always bright side– Few dark side personality tools


Few dark side personality tools

– But I know of one… that’s validated…

Sessa, Kaiser, Taylor, & Campbell (1998) Executive Selection. CCL.

• Excitable – emotional and volatile• Skeptical – suspicious and argumentative

HDSHDS dark side personality that disrupts relationships and corrupts judgment

• Cautious – self-doubting and indecisive • Reserved – private and aloof• Leisurely – passive resistance, procrastination• Bold – arrogant and entitled• Mischievous – deviant and manipulative• Colorful – self-dramatizing and distracting• Imaginative – eccentric and odd• Diligent – rigid and perfectionistic• Dutiful – dependent and ingratiating



Development

• Self-awarenessC t t ith d k id– Come to terms with dark side

– Feedback about how it plays out in behavior

• The “Deeper Work”*


Kaiser & Kaplan (2006) The deeper work of executive development. Academy of Management Learning and Education

Detecting Derailment Potential before it’s too late!




-4 -3 -2 -1 0-4 -3 -2 -1 0

Too little Too muchamountThe right

+1 +2 +3 +4Much too little

Barelytoo little

Barely too much

Muchtoo much


U.S. Patent 7,121,830Copyright 2006-2011. Kaplan DeVries Inc. All rights reserved.

LVI & Derailment Behaviors

Not strategic, too tactical

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3too tactical


Bad working l ti hi

Y

Y

Y

Y

Forceful

Enabling

Strategic

Operational


relationships

Not self-awareShortcoming Strengths overusedStrength

YEnabling

Key dynamic: “strengths become weaknesses”




The dynamics of derailment

• Strengths can become weaknesses

• Weaknesses eventually matter

• Success can go to one’s head

• Bad luck



Bad luck

“The reasons managers derail are all connected to the fact that situations change as one ascends the hierarchy."




Better transition management

• Proactive Management of Transitions Id tif i k f t– Identify risk factors

– Create a transition plan

• Spotting the Potential to Derail– Dark side of personality

– Early warning signs


Early warning signs

• Feedback 3 months in

• HDS assessment pre-transition– Identify risk factors– Create a plan for managing stress

and keeping dark side in checkand keeping dark side in check

•• LVI feedback LVI feedback 3 3 months into new months into new jobjob

– Get feedback early enough to course-correct

Too little Too muchamountThe right


Get feedback early enough to course correct– Tone down strengths overused, prevent

regressing into what worked before– Build up shortcomings needed in the new job



Early warning signsEarly warning signsBusiness

Not Strategic

• Narrow perspective

Interpersonal

Poor Working Relationships

• Insensitive, abrasive, and abusivep p

• Overwhelmed by complexity

• Consumed with details

• Too reliant on technical skills

• Unable to prioritize

Leadership

Trouble Leading through Others

• Conflict gets personal

• People avoid working with the person

• Blaming others for problems

• Frequent political missteps

Self-management

Inappropriate or Immature Behavior


g g

• Micromanagement,

• Authoritarian and autocratic

• Inability to motivate and develop

• Poor team morale, high turnover

• Poor staffing decisions

pp p

• Over-reacting and loosing composure

• Unable to handle stress

• Unable to accept responsibility

• Doubtful integrity, loyalty, and sincerity

• Gossiping and rumor mongering

Going Sour in the SuiteGoing Sour in the SuiteThe root causes of leadership failure

Robert B. Kaiser, M.S. Robert B. Kaiser, M.S.



going sour in the suite - kaplan...

Documents