Showing posts with label Core Character Strengths. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Core Character Strengths. Show all posts

Thursday, August 23, 2012

De-Constructing Executive Presence - HBR - John Beeson

by John Beeson
11:00 AM August 22, 2012

"Executive Presence - .... your ability to project mature self-confidence, a sense that you can take control of difficult, unpredictable situations; make tough decisions in a timely way and hold your own with other talented and strong-willed members of the executive team".

If you ask a group of managers who aspire to the C-suite what it takes to get there, they'll invariably mention executive presence, but they aren't always so clear about what it means. Not too long ago I conducted a series of off-the-record interviews with senior executives responsible for executive placement in their organizations. I asked them about the "make or break" factors they consider in making C-suite promotion decisions. Executive presence was one of the handful of decision criteria they cited, but even these experienced executives struggled to define what it is and why one person has it and another doesn't. In an increasingly diverse world where senior executives are no longer all 6 foot 2 inch tall males who look they were sent from central casting, what does it take to create a commanding executive presence? The right clothes? A firm handshake? Those matter, but they don't tell the whole story.

Although executive presence is highly intuitive and difficult to pin down, it ultimately boils down to your ability to project mature self-confidence, a sense that you can take control of difficult, unpredictable situations; make tough decisions in a timely way and hold your own with other talented and strong-willed members of the executive team. If that's the nub of the issue, what style, what behaviors combine to signal that level of self-confidence to others? For some answers consider three talented managers — two of whom didn't make it to the executive level and one who did.

Every manager would love to have a Frank Simmons on his or her management team. Experienced, results oriented, collaborative, and committed to the company, Frank showed up on succession lists for a number of years — but was never promoted. Although a top performer in his area, Frank always looked a little rumpled and his posture was a bit hunched. When he made presentations to the executive team, he was invariably well-prepared, but his lack of comfort was evident in his body language. Normally highly articulate, his presentations were long-winded and rambling. In the Q&A portion of his presentations, he tended to be overly deferential to members of the executive team, and he was hesitant to insert himself into the conversation when the executives got into a debate. As one senior executive said privately, "Frank's an incredible asset to the company, but I just can't envision putting him in front of a customer."

Alicia Wallace was a highly-trained marketing manager who had succeeded in every assignment she'd had. However, when it came time to select high-potential people for promotion to more senior levels, she always missed the cut. As much as the senior marketing executives liked and respected her, they were never quite comfortable moving her to the next level. The reason: her apparent disorganization. People would talk about "Alicia being Alicia" when she arrived late to yet another meeting: rushed, harried, and with her files askew. Was this trivial and petty? Perhaps, but on a visceral level it caused senior people to question her "bandwidth" to manage a larger staff and maintain the necessary focus on implementing key priorities.

If you entered a room filled with twenty managers, Lydia Taylor, a member of the legal department, wouldn't stand out — but that would change once the dialogue started. Although soft spoken and not terribly aggressive, she was highly respected by her peers as well as the executives with whom she worked. Lydia possessed outstanding listening skills and had an unerring sense of when to enter the conversation to make her point. Unrushed, straightforward, and unflappable, she maintained her calm, even demeanor when others got emotional, and she used her dry sense of humor to defuse difficult situations. When challenged by others, she stood her ground in a firm, non-confrontational way. Although highly supportive of her internal customers, she was prepared to put her foot down if anyone advocated a position that might put the company at risk. As a result, Lydia was identified as a top candidate and groomed to succeed the company's General Counsel.

The age-old question is whether executive presence can be developed? The answer is yes — if you have a baseline of self-confidence and a willingness to deal with the unpredictable situations that go with the territory at the executive level. Start by addressing the basics. Find a couple of trusted people who will give you unvarnished feedback about your dress and grooming and the level of self-confidence you project. As noted, dress and grooming aren't the whole deal, but major problems can create an impediment. One highly talented female manager was privately described by her peers as dressing like a "school marm" while others said a hard-charging manager came off like a "used car salesman." The connotations aren't flattering nor are they insignificant. People tend not to trust a used car salesman, and school marms aren't typically thought of as creative and risk taking, two qualities central to leading innovation and change at the executive level.

Look for opportunities to hone your presentation skills. Not only is public speaking an important executive requirement, but your ability to "stand and deliver" to an executive group or large audience is frequently viewed as an indicator of your ability to handle pressure. Rehearse major presentation until you can come off as relaxed and in command, and pay special attention to the Q&A portion since your poise when questioned and ability to think on your feet help you project a sense of self-confidence.

Most important, find your voice as an executive: that is, identify your assets and leverage them to the hilt. Some people are naturally gregarious and can fill a room with their personality. Others, like Lydia Taylor, rely on their listening ability, sense of timing, and ability to maintain their composure when others get emotional. In an increasingly diverse world, executive presence will look very different from one executive to another. However, the constant is building the confidence of others that you can step up as a leader when times get tough.


John Beeson


John Beeson is Principal of Beeson Consulting, a management consulting firm specializing in succession planning, executive assessment and coaching, and organization design. He is also the author of The Unwritten Rules: The Six Skills You Need to Get Promoted to the Executive Level (Jossey-Bass.). Follow him on twitter @johnrbeeson.

Access HBR Website, Article, And Other Great Stuff: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/08/de-constructing_executive_pres.html?awid=7248761852809504214-3271

Friday, March 4, 2011

Post-Traumatic Growth and Building Resilience - HBR IdeaCast - Harvard Business Review

Post-Traumatic Growth and Building Resilience - HBR IdeaCast - Harvard Business Review


Post-Traumatic Growth and Building Resilience




Audio: About 15 min.


[Note from Jim: I'm a fan of Seligman and his work. I've read a number of his books. This 15 minute audio is worth the investment of your precious time - for you and the many around you. Seligman's newest book, Flourish is on my reading list.]


Featured Guest: Martin Seligman, director of the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania and author of the forthcoming HBR article Building Resilience. He is also the author of Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being.



********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

How to Recognize Motivational Strengths (Yours, and Everyone Else's) | Fast Company

How to Recognize Motivational Strengths (Yours, and Everyone Else's) Fast Company


FastCompany

FC Expert Blog


How to Recognize Motivational Strengths (Yours, and Everyone Else's)


BY FC Expert Blogger Heidi Grant HalvorsonFri Jan 14, 2011

This blog is written by a member of our expert blogging community and expresses that expert's views alone.




Why do colleagues working toward a common goal so often fail to see eye-to-eye when it comes to achieving it? At times, you feel like you aren't on the same page, or even the same planet, as your coworkers, even when everyone involved is clearly capable and has a proven track-record of success. Why the disconnect?

The answer is a remarkably simple one: There is more than one way to look at the same goal. Take for example a goal that many of us share: I want to do my job exceptionally well. For some of us, doing our jobs well is about achievement and accomplishment--we have what psychologists call a promotion focus. In the language of economics, promotion focus is about maximizing gains and avoiding missed opportunities.

For others, doing our jobs well is about security, about not losing the positions you've worked so hard for. This prevention focus places the emphasis on avoiding danger, fulfilling responsibilities, and doing what feel you ought to do. In economic terms, it's about minimizing losses, trying to hang on to what you've got.

Promotion and prevention-focused people work differently to reach the same goal. They use different strategies, have different strengths, and are prone to different kinds of mistakes. One group will be motivated by applause, the other by criticism. One group may give up too soon--the other may not know when to quit.

So, do you spend your life pursuing accomplishments and accolades, reaching for the stars? Or are you busy fulfilling your duties and responsibilities--being the person everyone can count on? Start by identifying your focus, and then use the information below to better understand and embrace your strengths, your potential weaknesses, and the strategies that will work best for you.

What Motivates You--Criticism or Praise?

When you are promotion-focused, your motivation feels like eagerness - an enthusiastic desire to really go for it. Eagerness is enhanced by positive feedback --the more you are succeeding, the more motivated you become. Confidence heightens your energy and intensity. Doubting yourself takes the wind right out of your sails.

When you are prevention-focused, your motivation feels like vigilance--you are on the lookout for danger. Vigilance actually increases in response to negative feedback or self-doubt. There's nothing like the looming possibility of failure to get your prevention juices flowing. Over-confidence or effusive praise, however, may lead you to let down your guard, and undermine your motivation.

Do You Embrace Risk, or Avoid It?

"Nothing ventured, nothing gained" pretty much captures the promotion-focused philosophy. The promotion-minded have a habit of saying "yes" to every opportunity, having what psychologists call a risky bias. Prevention-minded people, on the other hand, are cautious. They tend to say "no" more, or having a more conservative bias.

These biases manifest themselves in all sorts of ways. For example, people with prevention goals are reluctant to disengage from one activity to try another, preferring the devil they know to the one they don't. But their conservative nature also makes them less likely than their risk-loving colleagues to procrastinate, for fear that they won't have time to get the job done.

Is Your Thinking Abstract or Concrete?

When people have promotion goals, they feel free to be more exploratory and abstract in their thinking. They brainstorm. They generate lots of options and possibilities to reach their ideals, and are more creative. They are also particularly good at picking up on connecting themes or synthesizing information.

In pursuit of prevention goals, abstraction and creativity seems reckless and time-consuming. Prevention-focused thinking is concrete and specific--you pick a plan and stick to it. The prevention-minded are great with details, and have better memory for what they've seen and what's still needs to be done.

Speed or Accuracy?

Executing any modestly complicated task involves what psychologists call a speed-accuracy tradeoff. The faster you go, the more mistakes you make. But going slow has costs too--particularly if time is valuable and you are in a hurry to get the job done. It won't surprise you to learn that promotion and prevention-minded people end up on opposite sides of this particular trade off, with promotion favoring speed and prevention preferring the slow-but-flawless route.

Are You Better at Getting There or Staying There?

Promotion-focused thinking leads to energetic and enthusiastic motivation in the shorter term, but can be less effective when it comes to long-term maintenance. Prevention-focused thinking, on the other hand, is ideal for making sure your hard-earned gains don't slip away.

Do You Get What You Want?

When it comes to negotiating, having a promotion focus will give you the clear upper-hand. Studies show that promotion-minded negotiators stay focused on their (ideal) price or pay targets, while the prevention-minded worry too much about a negotiation failure or impasse, leaving them more susceptible to less advantageous agreements. When it comes to getting what you want, it pays to focus on what you have to gain, rather than what you might lose.

Armed with an understanding of promotion and prevention, so much of what we do (and what our coworkers do) makes a lot more sense. Perhaps now you see why you've always been a risk-taker, or why you've always avoided risks like the plague. It's clear why you are uncomfortable with being too optimistic, or why you are known for your sunny outlook. You get why some things have always been hard for you, while others came easily.

There's no need to fight it--embrace your promotion- or prevention-mindedness! After all, both kinds of motivation can bring you success, and each brings something of value (e.g., innovation, attention to detail) to your organization. Just remember to take with a grain of salt the well-meaning advice and input from others when it doesn't feel right for you, focus on the strategies that play to your own strengths, and see the value in what your differently-motivated colleagues are bringing to the table.


Heidi's new book Succeed: How We Can Reach Our Goals is available wherever books are sold. Follow Heidi on Twitter @hghalvorson.





********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Fueling Positive Emotions in a World Gone Mad - Tony Schwartz - Harvard Business Review

Fueling Positive Emotions in a World Gone Mad - Tony Schwartz - Harvard Business Review


Tony Schwartz

Fueling Positive Emotions in a World Gone Mad




If there is anything this nasty, fear-driven, dispiriting political season has demonstrated, it's that no politician — Democrat, Republican, or otherwise — has any compelling solutions to what ails us. Even as partisan a figure as Jeb Bush is suggesting voters are feeling "disgust with the political class."

We live in a world that has grown increasingly complex and contradictory, angry and fearful, polarized but utterly interdependent.

How, then, to feel more control over our destiny amid so many daunting challenges and so few clear answers?

Here are four very personal behaviors to consider, offered in a spirit of hopefulness and humility:


1. Practice Realistic Optimism.

There is a powerful principle in psychology called "bad is stronger than good." We're quicker to notice threats to our well-being than we are to focus on what's working well.

Often, it's an instinct that serves us poorly. There is a difference between the facts in any given situation, and the story we tell about them. It's easy to latch onto a negative story in difficult times like these.

The alternative is "realistic optimism." That doesn't mean putting a happy face on every situation, which is just blind optimism. Rather it means intentionally telling the most hopeful and empowering story in any given situation, without subverting the facts.

Just think about your current life for a moment. What are you most worried about? Write down a few examples. Next, ask yourself what's the most realistically optimistic story you can tell about the one of those situations — the best possible outcome given the same set of facts?

Plainly we have a choice about where to put our attention. Exercising that choice effects how we feel. Because emotions are contagious, how we feel profoundly influences how we make others feel, and how effective we are at whatever we do.

2. Build More Bridges

In an era marked by fractiousness and extremes, what connects us rather than divides us? Where can we find common ground? Certainly, there are universal desires we all share: a safe and secure world, people we can love and who love us, a hopeful future for our children.

But so long as our value depends on devaluing what others believe, or judging the way others live, we're in a zero sum game that insures defensiveness, conflict and pain.

I have a good friend with a worldview that couldn't be more different than mine. Still, there is much about him I appreciate: his generosity, integrity, commitment to his family and friends, and incredible intellectual curiosity.

When we have lunch, we don't dwell on our differences. We focus on our shared interests. He enriches my life, and I believe I enrich his. We enjoy hanging out together. Nothing so lifts us up as feeling valued by another human being.

I wish I had more friends like him.

3. Add Value Every Day

After three years of a recession that shows all too few signs of abating, it's no surprise that people are feeling the full range of negative emotions from terror to rage. But to what end?

We derive little value and create even less by complaining and whining, bickering and blaming.

It's an illusion that expressing anger is cathartic. Expressing emotions strengthens them, for better and for worse. Anger simply begets more anger. The more blame we dole out, the better we get at blaming, and the more helpless we feel.

Taking responsibility is the alternative. That means investing energy in what you can influence, and not dissipating it on what you can't.

How, in short, can we find ways to add value to one other and to the commons, every day? The first key is shifting attention from our own immediate desires and anxieties so we're free to focus on the needs of others. Doing so calls on a capacity many of us haven't sufficiently cultivated: deliberately delaying gratification.

You can feel good, effortlessly, by drinking a couple of beers, but it won't last. Adding value takes effort, and sometimes means sacrifice, but it makes us feel good about ourselves in more enduring ways.

I'm not suggesting a life devoted exclusively to selfless service, because that's not realistic. But how much of your energy do you expend right now in anxiety, complaint, envy and advancing your own cause?

What's one very specific behavior could you ritualize in your life to make the world you live in a little better each day?

Paradoxically, the more we give away, the more we get back.

4. Give Yourself a Break

The greater the performance demand, the greater the need for recovery. As the world speeds up, we need to keep a balance between doing and not doing. By building in a true renewal break at least every 90 minutes, you'll feel better, think more clearly, be less reactive and ultimately you'll get better, more considered results.

And finally, at the end of every day, take a few minutes to reflect on what's right in your life.


Tony Schwartz is the president and CEO of The Energy Project and the author of The Way We're Working Isn't Working. Become a fan of The Energy Project on Facebook and connect with Tony at Twitter.com/TonySchwartz and





********************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Take VIA Survey of Character Again to Measure Your Character

Take VIA Survey of Character Again to Measure Your Character


VIA Institute on Character 312 Walnut Street Suite 3600 Cincinnati OH 45202 US



A new leadership training program based on character, developed by Drs. Martin E. Seligman and Christopher Peterson and piloted at West Point, was highlighted in last night's PBS Special: This Emotional Life. According to PBS, the Seligman-Peterson program will soon be required for all soldiers.

Chris Peterson, the VIA Institute's Science Director, bases his work on what he calls the "simple notion" that "If you want to develop character, you have to identify your strengths and use them over and over again." Peterson says, "You can't cultivate the whole of character, but you certainly can cultivate its components."

The components of character were identified by Peterson, Seligman and 55 social scientists. The survey to measure your character strengths is called the VIA Survey of Character and is available, free of charge, to all online at www.viasurvey.org. The VIA Classification of Character Strengths is presented and discussed at http://www.viacharacter.org/.

On the PBS special, Peterson went on to say that, "Most of the interventions that have been created to date are based on the very simple premise that you are what you do. And if you do more of these things you will be more of whatever they represent. So how frequently are you kind? How often are you a leader?" He suggest that you "keep track of that and measure it all along so you can track your progress."

The VIA Institute has found that it works best to know your VIA Survey scores. Peterson and the Institute have developed two reports -- one that is free and gives survey-takers a top-down list of their strengths, with a precise definition of each. The top 5 or 6 strengths are a person's "signature strengths" -- which are innate strengths of character. A more in-depth report -- 17 pages of scores, charts, graphs, with thorough descriptions of signature strengths with ways to use them -- is also available at www.viasurvey.org. Consultants can purchase codes that send their clients' reports directly to the consultant's email.

It's a new year. Perhaps this is the perfect time to spend a year developing your character -- your strengths -- and ultimately your happiness.

Questions? The staff at the VIA Institute on Character, a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing our understanding of character, is available to answer any questions. All proceeds support the work of the organization: research and education.




VIA Institute on Character 312 Walnut Street Suite 3600 Cincinnati OH 45202 US


***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not

What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not


What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not *

Self-esteem is an experience. It is a particular way of experiencing the self. It is a good deal more than a mere feeling—this must be stressed. *

Nathaniel Branden, PhD **
Copyright © 1997, Nathaniel Branden, All Rights Reserved **
This article is adapted from “The Art of Living Consciously” (Simon & Schuster, 1997). *

Four decades ago, when I began lecturing on self-esteem, the challenge was to persuade people that the subject was worthy of study. Almost no one was talking or writing about self-esteem in those days. Today, almost everyone seems to be talking about self-esteem, and the danger is that the idea may become trivialized. And yet, of all the judgments we pass in life, none is more important than the judgment we pass on ourselves. *

Having written on this theme in a series of books, I want, in this short article, to address the issue of what self-esteem is, what it depends on, and what are some of the most prevalent misconceptions about it. *

Self-esteem is an experience. It is a particular way of experiencing the self. It is a good deal more than a mere feeling—this must be stressed. It involves emotional, evaluative, and cognitive components. It also entails certain action dispositions: to move toward life rather than away from it; to move toward consciousness rather than away from it; to treat facts with respect rather than denial; to operate self-responsibly rather than the opposite. *

A Definition ***

To begin with a definition: Self-esteem is the disposition to experience oneself as being competent to cope with the basic challenges of life and of being worthy of happiness. It is confidence in the efficacy of our mind, in our ability to think. By extension, it is confidence in our ability to learn, make appropriate choices and decisions, and respond effectively to change. It is also the experience that success, achievement, fulfillment—happiness—are right and natural for us. The survival-value of such confidence is obvious; so is the danger when it is missing. *

Self-esteem is not the euphoria or buoyancy that may be temporarily induced by a drug, a compliment, or a love affair. It is not an illusion or hallucination. If it is not grounded in reality, if it is not built over time through the appropriate operation of mind, it is not self-esteem. *

The root of our need for self-esteem is the need for a consciousness to learn to trust itself. And the root of the need to learn such trust is the fact that consciousness is volitional: we have the choice to think or not to think. We control the switch that turns consciousness brighter or dimmer. We are not rational—that is, reality-focused—automatically. This means that whether we learn to operate our mind in such a way as to make ourselves appropriate to life is ultimately a function of our choices. Do we strive for consciousness or for its opposite? For rationality or its opposite? For coherence and clarity or their opposite? For truth or its opposite? *

Building Self-Esteem ***

In “The Six Pillars of Self Esteem,” I examine the six practices that I have found to be essential for the nurturing and sustaining of healthy self-esteem: the practice of living consciously, of self-acceptance, of self-responsibility, of self-assertiveness, of purposefulness, and of integrity. I will briefly define what each of these practices means: *

- The practice of living consciously: respect for facts; being present to what we are doing while are doing it; seeking and being eagerly open to any information, knowledge, or feedback that bears on our interests, values, goals, and projects; seeking to understand not only the world external to self but also our inner world, so that we do not out of self-blindness. *

- The practice of self-acceptance: the willingness to own, experience, and take responsibility for our thoughts, feelings, and actions, without evasion, denial, or disowning—and also without self-repudiation; giving oneself permission to think one’s thoughts, experience one’s emotions, and look at one’s actions without necessarily liking, endorsing, or condoning them; the virtue of realism applied to the self. *

- The practice of self-responsibility: realizing that we are the author of our choices and actions; that each one us is responsible for life and well-being and for the attainment of our goals; that if we need the cooperation of other people to achieve our goals, we must offer values in exchange; and that question is not “Who’s to blame?” but always “What needs to be done?” (“What do I need to do?”) *

- The practice of self-assertiveness: being authentic in our dealings with others; treating our values and persons with decent respect in social contexts; refusing to fake the reality of who we are or what we esteem in order to avoid disapproval; the willingness to stand up for ourselves and our ideas in appropriate ways in appropriate contexts. *

- The practice of living purposefully: identifying our short-term and long-term goals or purposes and the actions needed to attain them (formulating an action-plan); organizing behavior in the service of those goals; monitoring action to be sure we stay on track; and paying attention to outcome so as to recognize if and when we need to go back to the drawing-board. *

- The practice of personal integrity: living with congruence between what we know, what we profess, and what we do; telling the truth, honoring our commitments, exemplifying in action the values we profess to admire. *

What all these practices have in common is respect for reality. They all entail at their core a set of mental operations (which, naturally, have consequences in the external world). *

When we seek to align ourselves with reality as best we understand it, we nurture and support our self-esteem. When, either out of fear or desire, we seek escape from reality, we undermine our self-esteem. No other issue is more important or basic than our cognitive relationship to reality—meaning: to that which exists. *

A consciousness cannot trust itself if, in the face of discomfiting facts, it has a policy of preferring blindness to sight. A person cannot experience self-respect who too often, in action, betrays consciousness, knowledge, and conviction—that is, who operates without integrity. *

Thus, if we are mindful in this area, we see that self-esteem is not a free gift of nature. It has to be cultivated, has to be earned. It cannot be acquired by blowing oneself a kiss in the mirror and saying, “Good morning, Perfect.” It cannot be attained by being showered with praise. Nor by sexual conquests. Nor by material acquisitions. Nor by the scholastic or career achievements of one’s children. Nor by a hypnotist planting the thought that one is wonderful. Nor by allowing young people to believe they are better students than they really are and know more than they really know; faking reality is not a path to mental health or authentic self-assurance. However, just as people dream of attaining effortless wealth, so they dream of attaining effortless self-esteem—and unfortunately the marketplace is full of panderers to this longing. *

People can be inspired, stimulated, or coached to live more consciously, practice greater self-acceptance, operate more self-responsibly, function more self-assertively, live more purposefully, and bring a higher level of personal integrity into their life—but the task of generating and sustaining these practices falls on each of us alone. “If I bring a higher level of awareness to my self-esteem, I see that mine is the responsibility of nurturing it.” No one—not our parents, nor our friends, nor our lover, nor our psychotherapist, nor our support group—can “give” us self-esteem. If and when we fully grasp this, that is an act of “waking up.” *

Misconceptions about Self-Esteem ***

When we do not understand the principles suggested above, we tend to seek self-esteem where it cannot be found—and, if we are in “the self-esteem movement,” to communicate our misunderstandings to others. *

Teachers who embrace the idea that self-esteem is important without adequately grasping its roots may announce (to quote one such teacher) that “self-esteem comes primarily from one’s peers.” Or (quoting many others): “Children should not be graded for mastery of a subject because it may be hurtful to their self-esteem.” Or (quoting still others): “Self-esteem is best nurtured by selfless (!) service to the community.” *

In the “recovery movement” and from so-called spiritual leaders in general one may receive a different message: “Stop struggling to achieve self-esteem. Turn your problems over to God. Realize that you are a child of God—and that is all you need to have self-esteem.” Consider what this implies if taken literally. We don’t need to live consciously. We don’t need to act self-responsibly. We don’t need to have integrity. All we have to do is surrender responsibility to God and effortless self-esteem is guaranteed to us. This is not a helpful message to convey to people. Nor is it true. *

Yet another misconception—very different from those I have just discussed—is the belief that the measure of our personal worth is our external achievements. This is an understandable error to make but it is an error nonetheless. We admire achievements, in ourselves and in others, and it is natural and appropriate to do so. But this is not the same thing as saying that our achievements are the measure or grounds of our self-esteem. The root of our self-esteem is not our achievements per se but those internally generated practices that make it possible for us to achieve. How much we will achieve in the world is not fully in our control. An economic depression can temporarily put us out of work. A depression cannot take away the resourcefulness that will allow us sooner or later to find another or go into business for ourselves. “Resourcefulness” is not an achievement in the world (although it may result in that); it is an action in consciousness—and it is here that self-esteem is generated. *

To clarify further the importance of understanding what self-esteem is and is not, I want to comment on a recent research report that has gained a great deal of attention in the media and has been used to challenge the value of self-esteem. *

By way of preamble let me say that one of the most depressing aspects of so many discussions of self-esteem today is the absence of any reference to the importance of thinking or respect for reality. Too often, consciousness or rationality are not judged to be relevant, since they are not raised as considerations. The notion seems to be that any positive feeling about the self, however arrived at and regardless of its grounds, equals “self-esteem.”We encounter this assumption in a much publicized research paper by Roy F. Baumeister, Joseph M. Boden, and Laura Smart, entitled “Relation of Threatened Egotism to Violence and Aggression: The Dark Side of High Self-Esteem,” published in the “Psychological Review” (1996, Vol. 103, 5-33). In it the authors write: *

Conventional wisdom has regarded low self-esteem as an important cause of violence, but the opposite view is theoretically viable. An interdisciplinary review of evidence about aggression, crime, and violence contradicted the view that low self-esteem is an important cause. Instead, violence appears to be most commonly a result of threatened egotism—that is, highly favorable views of self that are disputed by some person or circumstance. Inflated, unstable, or tentative beliefs in the self’s superiority may be most prone to encountering threats and hence to causing violence. The mediating process may involve directing anger outward as a way of avoiding a downward revision of the self-concept. *

The article contains more astonishing statements than it is possible to quote, but here are a few representative examples: *

“In our view, the benefits of favorable self-opinions accrue primarily to the self, and they are if anything a burden and potential problem to everyone else.” *
“By self-esteem we mean simply a favorable global evaluation of oneself. The term self-esteem has acquired highly positive connotations, but it has simple synonyms the connotations of which are more mixed, including … egotism, arrogance … conceitedness, narcissism, and sense of superiority, which share the fundamental meaning of favorable self-evaluation.” *

“[W]e propose that the major cause of violence is high self-esteem combined with an ego threat [which is caused by someone challenging your self-evaluation].” *
“Apparently, then, alcohol generally helps create a state of high self-esteem.” *

Observe, first of all, that there is nothing in the authors’ idea of self-esteem that would allow one to distinguish between an individual whose self-esteem is rooted in the practices of living consciously, self-responsibility, and personal integrity—that is, one whose self-esteem is rooted in reality—and one whose “self-esteem” consists of grandiosity, fantasies of superiority, exaggerated notions of one’s accomplishments, megalomania, and “favorable global self-evaluations” induced by drugs and alcohol. No definition of self-esteem or piece of research that obliterates a distinction of this fundamentality can make any claim to scientific legitimacy. It leaves reality out of its analysis. *

One does not need to be a trained psychologist to know that some people with low self-esteem strive to compensate for their deficit by boasting, arrogance, and conceited behavior. What educated person does not know about compensatory defense mechanisms? Self-esteem is not manifested in the neurosis we call narcissism—or in megalomania. One has to have a strange notion of the concept to equate in self-esteem the trail-blazing scientist or entrepreneur, moved by intellectual self-trust and a passion to discover or achieve, and the terrorist who must sustain his “high self-evaluation” with periodic fixes of torture and murder. To offer both types as instances of “high self-esteem” is to empty the term of any useable meaning. *

An important purpose of fresh thinking is to provide us with new and valuable distinctions that will allow us to navigate more effectively through reality. What is the purpose of “thinking” that destroys distinctions already known to us that are of life-and-death importance? *

It is tempting to comment on this report in greater detail because it contains so many instances of specious reasoning. However, such a discussion would not be relevant here, since my intention is only to show the importance of a precise understanding of self-esteem and also to show what can happen when consciousness and reality are omitted from the investigation. *

So I will conclude with one last observation. In an interview given to a journalist, one of the researchers (Roy F. Baumeister), explaining his opposition to the goal of raising people’s self-esteem, is quoted as saying: “Ask yourself: If everybody were 50 percent more conceited, would the world be a better place?” [1] The implication is clearly that self-esteem and conceit are the same thing—both undesirable. Webster defines conceit as an exaggerated [therefore in defiance of facts] opinion of oneself and one’s merits. No, the world would not be a better place if everybody were 50 percent more conceited. But would the world be a better place if everybody had earned a 50 percent higher level of self-esteem, by living consciously, responsibly, and with integrity? Yes, it would—enormously. *

Awareness of What Affects Our Self-Esteem ***

Self-esteem reflects our deepest vision of our competence and worth. Sometimes this vision is our most closely guarded secret, even from ourselves, as when we try to compensate for our deficiencies with what I call pseudo-self-esteem—a pretense at a self-confidence and self-respect we do not actually feel. Nothing is more common than the effort to protect self-esteem not with consciousness but with unconsciousness—with denial and evasion—which only results in a further deterioration of self-esteem. Indeed a good deal of the behavior we call “neurotic” can be best understood as a misguided effort to protect self-esteem by means which in fact are undermining. *

Whether or not we admit it, there is a level at which all of us know that the issue of our self-esteem is of the most burning importance. Evidence for this observation is the defensiveness with which insecure people may respond when their errors are pointed out. Or the extraordinary feats of avoidance and self-deception people can exhibit with regard to gross acts of unconsciousness and irresponsibility. Or the foolish and pathetic ways people sometimes try to prop up their egos by the wealth or prestige of their spouse, the make of their automobile, or the fame of their dress designer, or by the exclusiveness of their golf club. In more recent times, as the subject of self-esteem has gained increasing attention, one way of masking one’s problems in this area is with the angry denial that self-esteem is significant (or desirable). *

Not all the values with which people may attempt to support a pseudo-self-esteem are foolish or irrational. Productive work, for instance, is certainly a value to be admired, but if one tries to compensate for a deficient self-esteem by becoming a workaholic one is in a battle one can never win—nothing will ever feel like “enough.” Kindness and compassion are undeniably virtues, and they are part of what it means to lead a moral life, but they are no substitutes for consciousness, independence, self-responsibility, and integrity—and when this is not understood they are often used as disguised means to buy “love” and perhaps even a sense of moral superiority: “I’m more kind and compassionate than you’ll ever be and if I weren’t so humble I’d tell you so.” *

One of the great challenges to our practice of living consciously is to pay attention to what in fact nurtures our self-esteem or deteriorates it. The reality may be very different from our beliefs. We may, for example, get a very pleasant “hit” from someone’s compliment, and we may tell ourselves that when we win people’s approval we have self-esteem, but then, if we are adequately conscious, we may notice that the pleasant feeling fades rather quickly and that we seem to be insatiable and never fully satisfied—and this may direct us to wonder if we have thought deeply enough about the sources of genuine self-approval. Or we may notice that when we give our conscientious best to a task, or face a difficult truth with courage, or take responsibility for our actions, or speak up when we know that that is what the situation warrants, or refuse to betray our convictions, or persevere even when persevering is not easy—our self-esteem rises. We may also notice that if and when we do the opposite, self-esteem falls. But of course all such observations imply that we have chosen to be conscious. *

In the world of the future, children will be taught the basic dynamics of self-esteem and the power of living consciously and self-responsibly. They will be taught what self-esteem is, why it is important, and what it depends on. They will learn to distinguish between authentic self-esteem and pseudo-self-esteem. They will be guided to acquire this knowledge because it will have become apparent to virtually everyone that the ability to think (and to learn and to respond confidently to change) is our basic means of survival—and that it cannot be faked. The purpose of school is to prepare young people for the challenges of adult life. They will need this understanding to be adaptive to an information age in which self-esteem has acquired such urgency. In a fiercely competitive global economy—with every kind of change happening faster and faster—there is little market for unconsciousness, passivity, or self-doubt. In the language of business, low self-esteem and underdeveloped mindfulness puts one at a competitive disadvantage. However, neither teachers in general nor teachers of self-esteem in particular can do their jobs properly—or communicate the importance of their work—until they themselves understand the intimate linkage that exists between the six practices described above, self-esteem, and appropriate adaptation to reality. “The world of the future” begins with this understanding. *


Who is Nathaniel Branden? ***

Psychotherapist and philosopher Nathaniel Branden, Ph.D. is a lecturer, practicing psychotherapist, and author of twenty books on the psychology of self-esteem, romantic love, and the life and thought of Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand. His work has been translated into 18 languages and has sold over 4 million copies, and includes such titles as Taking Responsibility, The Six Pillars of Self Esteem, and My Years with Ayn Rand. *

The name Nathaniel Branden has become synonymous with the psychology of self-esteem, a field he began pioneering over thirty years ago. In that time, he has done more than any other theorist to advocate the importance of self-esteem to human well-being, a mission which began with his involvement in Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand's "Inner Circle." *

Download Article As a PDF**: http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/pdf/what_self_esteem.pdf *


Access Article** : http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles.php?page=5#

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Judging Character: When We Fall Short , Mayerson - CharacterFallingShort

MayersonCharacterFallingShort

Judging Character: When We Fall Short ***
(Dec. 14, 2009) **
By Neal H. Mayerson, Ph.D.**
Chairman, VIA Institute *

There have been books written about why bad things happen to good people and why good things happen to good people. Now what we need is a book that talks about when good people do bad things, such as when an honest person lies. *

We readily talk about how the 24 VIA character strengths each occur along a continuum of strength as opposed to existing categorically as black or white. The VIA Survey reports scores along a continuum and we have been attending to what the presence of those strengths mean in our lives. But the flip side of that coin is a critically important one for us to consider. *

The flip side of possessing a character trait at some strength is that we also do NOT express that character trait to some degree. Though we may usually be open-minded, there are times when we can be stubbornly closed. I can often be honest, but sometimes not. What happens to our judgments of ourselves and one another when we observe these infractions of character? *

A large literature on actor-observer bias tells us that we all have a tendency to excuse our own misbehavior by noting all sorts of circumstantial reasons, while others judge our misbehavior as reflecting stable dispositions. Herein are two problems. First, this attributional asymmetry allows us all to fall short of our values without damaging our self-esteem. It may be difficult to correct this side of the actor-observer bias. Like someone with bulimia whose restraints on eating dissipate when a purging solution becomes viable, our ability to rationalize can keep us from having a governor on misbehaving. Thankfully, though, we seem to have an intrinsic motivation to act good to compensate for the fact that our psyche has developed a loophole that allows bad behavior through. *

We may, though, be more able to manage how we judge others when we observe character infractions. First, we can be cognizant of our tendency to under-recognize situational factors and try to be more balanced. We can do a better job of looking for factors in the situation that might have pressured the person to misbehave and considering the validity of those factors. Stealing a loaf of bread to feed one’s family is a more valid reason than stealing just for the fun of it. Second, we can recognize that ALL of us fall short of our values sometimes – “to err is human” – and find some compassion and forgiveness in that realization. *

We can also look at the seriousness of the infraction, knowing that all infractions are not equal. A “misstatement” is less egregious than a bold-faced lie. A rude remark impugns one’s “kindness” less than an affair with one’s best friend’s spouse. Finally, character is a trend and not an event. So, we need to consider the consistency of a person’s behavior over time and across situations to find the truth of someone’s character. *

As we become better at judging the character of ourselves and others, we will be growing a more compassionate world in which to live. *


ABOUT VIA ***


11/17/08 *


The VIA* Institute on Character (www.viacharacter.org) was founded as a non-profit organization in 2000 by Dr. Martin E.P. Seligman and Dr. Neal H. Mayerson. Dr. Seligman was, at the time, President of the American Psychological Association and is considered to be the “father of positive psychology.” Positive psychology is the scientific study of what enables individuals and communities to thrive. Dr. Mayerson is a psychologist and noted philanthropist. Together they formed VIA Institute to create an intellectually and scientifically rigorous classification of character strengths and a way of measuring such strengths. *



Dr. Christopher Peterson, from the University of Michigan, and one of the most cited psychologists of our time, was brought on board to help develop the VIA Classification of Strengths, the VIA Survey, and to write, with Dr. Seligman, Character Strengths and Virtues, published by Oxford University Press. Their work has been lauded by noted psychologists. Dr. George Vaillant of Harvard University said the publication of our work “is destined to become a classic both in the social sciences and in the humanities”. Dr. Howard Gardner, Hobbs Professor of Education and Cognition, Harvard Graduate School of Education, said VIA’s work is “...one of the most important initiatives in psychology of the past half century”. *


Access Article: http://www.viacharacter.org/MayersononCharacterWhenWeFallShort/tabid/305/Default.aspx *
----------------------------------

Approximately 1 million people worldwide have taken the VIA Survey on Character Strengths and it has been translated into 10 languages. *

The VIA Classification identifies 24 character strengths that have been found to be universal – characteristics that define what’s best about people. The VIA Survey is the measurement tool that has undergone significant scientific validation. The Classification and Survey resulted from a three-year dedicated effort involving 55 noted social scientists. *

*The acronym VIA formerly stood for "Values in Action." Dr. Mayerson and others came to believe the most important aspect of the study of the VIA character strengths and virtues was "character." The Institute's name was changed to the VIA Institute on Character in 2007. *


Access VIA Institute and VIA Survey: *** http://www.viacharacter.org/Home/AboutVIA/tabid/59/Default.aspx
------------------------------------

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

How Weird Are You? - Corner Office - Tony Hsieh of Zappos - Celebrate Individuality - Question - NYTimes.com

Corner Office - Tony Hsieh of Zappos - Celebrate Individuality - Question - NYTimes.com

New York Times **
January 10, 2010 **
Corner Office *On a Scale of 1 to 10, How Weird Are You?*

This interview with Tony Hsieh, the chief executive of Zappos.com, was conducted and condensed by Adam Bryant. *

Q. What are some of the most important leadership lessons you’ve learned? *

A. After college, a roommate and I started a company called LinkExchange in 1996, and it grew to about 100 or so people, and then we ended up selling the company to Microsoft in 1998. From the outside, it looked like it was a great acquisition, $265 million, but most people don’t know the real reason why we ended up selling the company. *

It was because the company culture just went completely downhill. When it was starting out, when it was just 5 or 10 of us, it was like your typical dot-com. We were all really excited, working around the clock, sleeping under our desks, had no idea what day of the week it was. But we didn’t know any better and didn’t pay attention to company culture. *

By the time we got to 100 people, even though we hired people with the right skill sets and experiences, I just dreaded getting out of bed in the morning and was hitting that snooze button over and over again. *

Q. Why? *

A. I just didn’t look forward to going to the office. The passion and excitement were no longer there. That’s kind of a weird feeling for me because this was a company I co-founded, and if I was feeling that way, how must the other employees feel? That’s actually why we ended up selling the company. *

Financially, it meant I didn’t have to work again if I didn’t want to. So that was the lens through which I was looking at things. It’s basically asking the question, what would you want to do if you won the lottery? For me, I didn’t want to be part of a company where I dreaded going into the office. *

So when I joined Zappos about a year later, I wanted to make sure that I didn’t make the same mistake that I had made at LinkExchange, in terms of the company culture going downhill. So for us, at Zappos, we really view culture as our No. 1 priority. We decided that if we get the culture right, most of the stuff, like building a brand around delivering the very best customer service, will just take care of itself. *

Q. So how do you do that? *

A. About five years ago, we formalized the definition of our culture into 10 core values. We wanted to come up with committable core values, meaning that we would actually be willing to hire and fire people based on those values, regardless of their individual job performance. Given that criteria, it’s actually pretty tough to come up with core values. *

Q. Tell me what happened. *

A. We spent a year doing that. I basically sent an e-mail out to the entire company, asking them what our values should be, and got a whole bunch of different responses. The initial list was actually 37 long, and then we ended up condensing and combining them and went back and forth and came up with our list of 10. *

Today, we actually do two separate sets of interviews. The hiring manager and his or her team will interview for the standard fit within the team, relevant experience, technical ability and so on. But then our H.R. department does a separate set of interviews purely for culture fit. They actually have questions for each and every one of the core values. *

Q. Can you give me an example *

A. Well, some of them are behavioral questions. One of our values is, “Create fun and a little weirdness.” So one of our interview questions is, literally, on a scale of 1 to 10, how weird are you? If you’re a 1, you’re probably a little bit too strait-laced for us. If you’re a 10, you might be too psychotic for us. *

It’s not so much the number; it’s more seeing how candidates react to a question. Because our whole belief is that everyone is a little weird somehow, so it’s really more just a fun way of saying that we really recognize and celebrate each person’s individuality, and we want their true personalities to shine in the workplace environment, whether it’s with co-workers or when talking with customers. *

I think of myself less as a leader, and more of being almost an architect of an environment that enables employees to come up with their own ideas, and where employees can grow the culture and evolve it over time, so it’s not me having a vision of “This is our culture.” *

Maybe an analogy is, if you think of the employees and culture as plants growing, I’m not trying to be the biggest plant for them to aspire to. I’m more trying to architect the greenhouse where they can all flourish and grow. *

Q. Did the process of developing those core values go smoothly? *

A. Honestly, there was a lot of resistance to the core values rolling out, including from me. I was very hesitant, because it just felt like one of those big-company things to do. But within a couple of months, it just made such a huge difference. It gave everyone a common language, and just created a lot more alignment in terms of how everyone in the company was thinking. If I could do it all over again, I would roll out our core values from Day 1. *


Q. What other things did you do at Zappos to sort of reinforce and build the culture? *
A. Probably the most important thing I did was try to encourage employees to come up with their own ideas for building the culture. The actual ideas that I’ve personally come up with are few and far between. *

Q. But what were those? *

A. For example, for our offices in Las Vegas, it’s a big building. We’ve probably got 700 employees in Vegas. The previous tenants had multiple doors where you can exit, and the parking lot is in the back. We made the decision to actually lock all the doors so everyone has to go through the front-entrance reception area, even though that means you might have to walk all the way around the building. The reason for that is to create this kind of central hub that everyone has to pass through to help build community and culture. *

And the free lunch we provide for employees is really meant less as a benefit in terms of a free lunch, and more to get employees to interact with each other. But most of the stuff that happens in our office is really about some employee coming up with an idea and, whether it’s me or other managers, saying, “If you’re passionate about it, just run with it.”

At some point, it kind of just snowballs, because once employees see other employees just doing stuff, then that lets them feel like they have more permission to run with their ideas. *

Q. Any other examples? *

A. One of our teams — the outdoor team in our merchandising department — decided to decorate one of the conference rooms, and transform it so that when you’re inside, you feel like you’re in a log cabin. They spent the weekend tearing up the floors and putting in a fake fire and all this stuff. It was pretty cool. *

But then, the week after, the team sitting next to them said, we can outdo them. The next thing we knew, within two or three months, all 20 or so conference rooms were all decorated by different teams. *

Q. What else is unusual about Zappos? *

A. We have a culture book. We put it together once a year and we ask all our employees to write a few paragraphs about what the Zappos culture means to them and, except for typos, it’s unedited, so you get to read the good and bad. It’s kind of like customer reviews you might read on Web sites, but these are essentially employee reviews of the company and our culture. We make it freely available to visitors and anybody who asks for a copy. *

Q. If you’re hiring a senior executive, reporting directly to you, what kind of questions would you be asking them? *

A. It’s pretty hard to interview senior executives, because they’re in that position for a reason. They do many interviews themselves. It’s hard to tell from an interview. So I’m not sure there’s that much you can get out of the in-office interview. They need the relevant skill set and experience and so on. But far more important is, are they going to be good for the culture? Is this someone we would choose to have dinner or drinks with, even if they weren’t working for Zappos? *

Hiring senior-level talent is very hard, it’s hit or miss, and they can do a lot of damage to the culture. We’ve had bad experiences with that. So we have this thing called the pipeline, which is our vision for how we want to grow as a company. We’re hoping five years from now the vast, vast majority of all hires will actually be entry-level, but we’ll provide all the training and mentorship so that, over a five- to seven-year period, they can become a senior leader within the company. That will help protect our culture and also give all the employees a growth path professionally. *

Q. But again, if you had to hire someone from the outside for a senior job, what would you do? *

A. It’s not just a single day with them and you make a decision. We’ll invite them to barbecues on weekends and they bring their families, and just hang out, or go to dinner or happy hour or whatever. It’s more just about trying to get a sense of who they are outside the office, I guess, and whether you feel like you can actually get to know them on a personal level or if they’re very professional and standoffish. *

If it’s the latter, then it’s probably not going to be a good fit for us because, at the end of the day, what matters most is how deep of a relationship you can develop with them. For someone who’s not comfortable being themselves, that kind of puts limits on how close of a relationship you have. *

Q. If you could ask only one or two questions to get a sense of a person, what would they be? *

A. “If you had to name something, what would you say is the biggest misperception that people have of you?” Then the follow-up question I usually ask is, “What’s the difference between misperception and perception?” After all, perception is perception. *

Q. What are you trying to discover with those questions? *
A. I think it’s a combination of how self-aware people are and how honest they are. I think if someone is self-aware, then they can always continue to grow. If they’re not self-aware, I think it’s harder for them to evolve or adapt beyond who they already are. *

Access Original Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/10corner.html *



***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway® | GiANT Impact

Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway® GiANT Impact


Giant Impact - John Maxwell >

By Dr. John C. Maxwell
Used with permission of Susan Jeffers, Ph.D>
Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway® >

By Dr. John C. MaxwellUsed with permission of Susan Jeffers, Ph.D.Franklin Delano Roosevelt was born into wealth and prestige, and as a young Harvard graduate, he seemed destined for success. By the age of 30 he was elected as a state senator, and a few years later he was appointed as Assistant Secretary of the Navy.>

However, shortly before Roosevelt turned 40, tragedy struck when he contracted polio. It's hard to imagine the fear he must have felt upon suddenly losing motion in his arms and legs. FDR could have let the fear of living with polio debilitate him, but he rose above it. Through therapy, he regained the use of his hands, and he learned to walk with braces. Eight years later he became Governor of New York, and he was eventually elected President of the United States.>

Interestingly enough, when Roosevelt became President, the American nation was paralyzed. How appropriate that a person who had personally conquered fear would lead a nation filled with fear. In steering the country through the Great Depression and World War II, FDR put his stamp on society and gained notoriety as one of the greatest American leaders of the 20th century. >

Facts about Fear >
1) Every generation experiences fear. >

In the past 100 years alone, Americans have felt the fears of World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, the prospects of nuclear war with the Soviet empire, international terrorism, and the present financial recession. Our fears change with the time in which we live, but every generation has fears. >

2) Every individual has fears. >

Each person has something they're afraid of. Commonly held phobias include public speaking, sickness, insects, heights, loneliness, or financial problems. Leaders aren't immune to fear, either. Peter the Great trembled and wept whenever he had to cross a bridge. Julius Caesar was terrified by thunder and would hide in a cave during severe storms. >

3) Fear is destructive >

Upon taking office, FDR saw the crippling effects of fear creeping across the USA. That's why, in his first inaugural address, he famously told Americas, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Let's look at some of the ways fear undermines leadership.>

Destructive Effects of Fear >
1) Fear breeds more fear >

By avoiding what we're afraid of, our fear breeds lack of experience. In turn, inexperience breeds ignorance, which results in even more fear. It's a vicious, downward cycle.>

2) Inaction >

Fear paralyzes and immobilizes us. In the words of John F. Kennedy, "There are risks and costs to a program of action, but they are far less than the long range risks and costs of comfortable inaction.">

3) Divided thinking >

Fear removes focus from a person's life. Like worry, fear divides the mind and prevents concentrated thinking. >

4) Isolation >

We withdraw from others in an effort not to have our fears exposed. As Michael Pritchard said, "Fear is that little darkroom where negatives are developed." >

5) Procrastination >

We delay what we're scared to do. In my opinion, the only person worse than a quitter is the person afraid to begin.>

6) Misused energy >

Fear is the energy to do your worst in a new situation. I compare fear to gunning the engine when your car is in neutral. You're making lots of noise, but there's no accomplishment.>

Three Responses to Fear
1) We Can Avoid Fears
2) We Can Wait for Fear to Magically Disappear
3) We Can Face Our Fears and Overcome Them >

Of course, there's only one healthy response to fear-facing it courageously. Fear undercuts personal dynamism. Instead of self-confidently emitting enthusiasm, fear causes charisma to erode and gradually robs a leader of influence. >

How to Constructively Face Fear
1) Discover the foundation of fear.>

Fear usually resides in feelings rather than facts. Drill down into your emotions to figure out the basis of your fears.>

2) Admit your fears >

We never help people by trying to cover up our failures. Admit them and realize you'll make them. Something about owning up to our failures helps us deal with the fear of making them. >
3) Accept fear as the price of progress. >

We have the terrible idea that we can eventually rid ourselves of fear. However, if you want to grow, then you will encounter fears the rest of your life. The good news: each victory over fear adds to your confidence and helps you to overcome fear again in the future. >

4) Develop a burning desire within you. >

Get red hot. Desire propels you to go where you're afraid to go and to do what you're scared to do. >
5) Focus on what you can control. >

For example, I can control my attitude, but I can't control the actions of others. I can control my calendar, but I can't control life circumstances. Remember: it's not what happens to you, but what happens in you that counts. >

6) Feed the right emotion and starve the wrong one. >

We have both fear and courage within ourselves. Here's what I've learned: you cannot purge either one. However, you can weaken the emotion of fear by starving it. Whichever impulse we feed dominates. When we feel fear, but act anyway, we deprive fear of nourishment and strengthen the impulse of courage inside of us. >

CLOSING
I'll close with a quote from FDR's wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, a fantastic leader in her own right. >

"You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, ‘I lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along.' The danger lies in refusing to face the fear, in not daring to come to grips with it. If you fail anywhere along the line, it will take away your confidence. You must make yourself succeed every time. You must do the thing you think you cannot do." >

About
Dr. John C. Maxwell
John C. Maxwell is an internationally recognized leadership expert, speaker, and author who has sold over 16 million books. EQUIP, the organization he founded has trained more than 2 million leaders worldwide. Every year he speaks to Fortune 500 companies, international government leaders, and audiences as diverse as the United States Military Academy at West Point, the National Football League, and ambassadors at the United Nations. A New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Business Week best-selling author, Maxwell was named the World's Top Leadership Guru by Leadershipgurus.net. He was also one of only 25 authors and artists named to Amazon.com's 10th Anniversary Hall of Fame. Three of his books, The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, Developing the Leader Within You, and The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader have each sold over a million copies.>

Susan Jeffers
Few people have helped change as many lives as much-loved author and leading self-help authority Susan Jeffers, Ph.D., who first captured the world's heart with her acclaimed book Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway.

Sales of Susan's numerous best-selling works are in the millions, reaching more than 100 countries and translated into over 35 languages. A renowned workshop leader and celebrated speaker, Susan has appeared on Oprah, Montel, the Michael Jackson Show and many other radio and television shows both nationally and internationally.

Susan is particularly known for her teachings on overcoming fear, healing relationships, and moving forward in life with self-confidence, joy and love. Filled with practical tools, sensitivity, humor and wisdom, Susan's 17 titles to-date include Feel the Fear and Beyond, End the Struggle and Dance with Life, Embracing Uncertainty, Opening Our Hearts to Men, The Little Book of Confidence, The Little Book of Peace of Mind, I Can Handle It! (a manual for young children) and Life is Huge! Susan has also authored a Fear-less series of affirmation books and tapes. You can learn more about her on her website at susanjeffers.com.>

"This article is used by permission from Leadership Wired, GiANT Impact's premiere leadership newsletter, available for free subscription at www.giantimpact.com."

Read Original article: http://www.giantimpact.com/articles/read/article_feel_the_fear_and_do_it_anyway/
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Emotional Intelligence: Skills Worth Learning - BusinessWeek

Emotional Intelligence: Skills Worth Learning - BusinessWeek

Emotional Intelligence: Skills Worth Learning

A five-year rise in emotional intelligence in the workplace reversed course in 2008. Here's how to keep emotionally fit during hard times
By Nick Tasler and Dr. Travis Bradberry

Excerpts:

- Contagious Skill Set
What makes this discovery so special is that prior to having their emotional intelligence tested, very few, if any, of the people in our sample had ever received formal emotional intelligence training or emotional skills development. Yet average EQ scores still increased. It's as if emotional intelligence skills—much like emotions themselves—seem to be contagious. The more you interact with empathetic people, the more empathetic you become. The more time you spend with other people who openly discuss emotions, the more skilled you become at identifying and understanding emotions.

Keeping emotionally fit during hard times requires practice in two key areas:

- Recognizing Your Emotions
Your body always responds to emotions physically even if you aren't consciously aware of them. So, take note of the physical signs that accompany a particular feeling. Do you sweat? Does your heart beat fast? Do you feel numb? Keep a close eye on these symptoms and then try to discover why you react the way you do. Ask yourself what is it about the person or situation that elicits this response.

- Managing Your Emotions
In times like these, uncertainty about the future is the ultimate emotional saboteur. Will you lose your job? Will your company go under? Will you be able to pay your mortgage? The anticipation of disaster ends up taking a greater toll on your functioning than the actual occurrence of disaster. Lay your emotions to rest by preparing for change, instead of worrying about it. Set aside some time in your day for problem-solving and work on being flexible and adaptive in the face of change.
Admit to yourself that you can't change reality, but you can control how you react to your new circumstances. Lastly, jot down a list of positive outcomes that still exist despite the uninvited changes that might happen. Use that list to keep motivated as you focus on achieving your goals.

Read full article: http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/mar2009/ca20090327_860041.htm?chan=careers_managing+index+page_top+stories
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Courage, Goal Attainment & Self-Affirmation: A strategy for mentoring goal achievment

Strategies for Mentoring Goal Acheivement

Self-affirmation: A strategy to reduce self-control failure Psychology Today Blogs

Self-affirmation: A strategy to reduce self-control failure

By Timothy A. Pychyl, Ph.D. on March 26, 2009 - 4:04am in Don't Delay

The research evidence across four new studies reveals the importance of affirming one's sense of self to bolster our depleted self-control. I think this research underscores the deeply existential issue of self-affirmation and "courage" in relation to the self-regulation failure we know as procrastination.

Brandon J. Schmeichel (Texas A&M University) and Kathleen Vohs (University of Minnesota) report on a series of interesting studies in the upcoming issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. This is a long article, so my intention is only to provide a very brief overview of the rationale and main findings of their research. If you're interested in this article, you can read it here.

These psychologists have both studied with Roy Baumeister, a name familiar to readers of this blog, and anyone else interested in social psychology. Schmeichel and Vohs have extended the self-regulation depletion (willpower-is-like-a-muscle) paradigm developed by Baumeister and his students with an explicit focus on factors that can reduce the likelihood of self-control failure. Their focus was on self-affirmation as an intervention strategy.

Self-affirmation refers to behavioral or cognitive events that sustain, support and strengthen the perceived integrity of the self (Steele, 1988, cited in Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009). Examples of self-affirming events include:

- receiving positive feedback from others
- reflecting upon positive aspects of oneself

Another, and perhaps the most powerful, mode of self-affirmation is expressing one's core values. In fact, this is what Schmeichel and Vohs used in their study.

What can we take away from this in terms of procrastination?Given that procrastination is a quintessential form of self-regulation failure, a key strategy to bolster self-regulatory strength to act on our intentions is to focus on our core values. This self-affirmation, as Schmeichel and Vohs have demonstrated, can fortify the self-concept and boost self-regulatory function. Of course, it will also simply make life more worth living. It will be your life, one deeply rooted in your sense of self. As Tillich writes, "Joy accompanies the self-affirmation of our essential being . . . Joy is the emotional expression of the courageous Yes to one's own true being" (p. 14).

Read Full Article: http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/dont-delay/200903/self-affirmation-strategy-reduce-self-control-failure
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, January 1, 2009

I Resolve To Take Benjamin Franklin Seriously | Psychology Today Blogs

Psychology Today
Christopher Peterson, Professor of Psychology, University of Michigan

Benjamin Franklin, The Cultivation of Character Strengths & Virtues

Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) is of course widely acclaimed as a statesman and scientist, but he may also deserve credit as America's first positive psychologist. Not only did he enumerate thirteen praise-worthy character strengths (virtues), but he also took on the challenge of cultivating each of them, using himself as a research subject (Franklin, 1962).


I Resolve To Take Benjamin Franklin Seriously Psychology Today Blogs

***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Perseverance

Leadership Wired, December 2008, Issue 2

Leadership Wired is available via email on a free subscription basis. You can subscribe by clicking here. Questions about document transmission or editorial comments should be directed to feedback@giantimpact.com.

Perseverance
By Dr. John C. Maxwell

Perseverance is not an issue of talent. It is not an issue of time. It is about finishing. Talent provides hope for accomplishment, but perseverance guarantees it.>

Running Past Failure>

As a small child, Vonetta (Jeffrey) Flowers dreamed about being in the Olympics. She ran everywhere she went, and gained a reputation among her school friends for being quick. At age nine, Vonetta learned she had special talent. While trying out for an inner-city track club in her hometown of Birmingham, she shocked coaches by posting the best sprint time for Jonesboro Elementary School - running faster than boys two years older than she was! >

Vonetta's immense talent carried her to the University of Alabama-Birmingham on a track-and-field scholarship. While at the university, she continued to pursue her goal of gaining a spot on the Olympic team. She practiced meticulously to perfect her stride, spent hours in the weight room adding strength, and ran grueling intervals to shave seconds off her sprint times. Thanks to her combination of talent and discipline, Vonetta ended her college career as a 7-time All-American, competing in the 100 meter and 200 meter sprints, long jump, triple jump, heptathlon, and relays.>

With her college career finished, Vonetta set her sights on the 1996 Olympics. Unfortunately, she failed to qualify for the team, running slightly behind the leaders. The failure stung, but Vonetta was determined not to give up. She found a job as an assistant coach and continued her regimen of training.>

For the next four years, Vonetta put her body through punishing workouts with an eye on the 2000 Olympics in Sydney. In her words, "I devoted countless hours to lifting weights, eating right, and staying mentally tough. I knew that my time as an athlete was coming to an end, and I'd hoped that the 2000 Olympic trials would prove to be my year to finally find out what it's like to be an Olympian.">

In June 2000, Vonetta lined up again to run at the U.S. Olympic Trials. Unfortunately, Vonetta placed 13th, and she failed to make the Olympic squad. Although one of the fastest women in America, she wasn't in the select group to represent the United States in Sydney. After 17 years of training, she had come up empty in her quest for the Olympics.>

Two days after her second painful failure in the Olympic Trials, Vonetta's husband spotted an advertisement for tryouts for the United States Olympic bobsled team. He convinced her to go to the tryouts. Growing up in the South, Vonetta was not accustomed to cold and snow, and she knew next to nothing about bobsledding. However, at the tryouts her unusual blend of speed and strength proved to be ideal qualities for a brakewoman (the person who pushes the bobsled to give it initial momentum and then hops in with the driver). Vonetta was chosen for the team.
Vonetta's decision to join the bobsled team came with a price - two more years of a strict diet, sore muscles, and countless hours dedicated to attaining peak physical fitness. It also meant delaying her dream to be a mom. However, her years of perseverance paid off. Not only did Vonetta achieve her lifelong goal of competing in the Olympics, but she also became the first African-American to win a gold medal in the winter Olympics!>

Perseverance punctuates talent>
Vonetta's talent seemed almost limitless, but it wouldn't have carried her to the Olympics without an admirable measure of perseverance. Life seems designed to make a person quit. For even the most talented individual, obstacles abound, and failures are commonplace. Only when a person matches talent with perseverance do opportunities become avenues of success.>

Perseverance means succeeding because you are determined to, not destined to
If Vonetta had seen her Olympic dream as a matter of destiny than she likely would have given up after her second failure to make the track and field team. After 17 years of training, the results signaled that her dream wasn't meant to be. She had no natural reason to be hopeful about her prospects. However, she pressed on, determined to find a way to take hold of her goals, and in the end, she was rewarded with success.>

Perseverance means stopping, not because you're tired, but because the task is done
Perseverance doesn't come into play until a person is tired. A year or two after college, Vonetta still was riding the excitement of her collegiate track and field championships. She was young, energetic, and optimistic about the future. Nothing was telling her to stop, and consequently she needed nothing extra to keep going.>

However, after a taste of disappointment at the Olympic Trials, fatigue and discouragement crept up on Vonetta. The mountain of work in front of her began to look more and more daunting, and her dream began to be a little harder to imagine. Nonetheless, Vonetta persevered. She kept believing, she kept training, and she kept running until she finally caught up with success.>

About
John C. Maxwell is an internationally recognized leadership expert, speaker, and author who has sold over 16 million books. His organizations have trained more than 2 million leaders worldwide. Dr. Maxwell is the founder of EQUIP and INJOY Stewardship Services. Every year he speaks to Fortune 500 companies, international government leaders, and audiences as diverse as the United States Military Academy at West Point, the National Football League, and ambassadors at the United Nations. A New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Business Week best-selling author, Maxwell was named the World's Top Leadership Guru by Leadershipgurus.net. He was also one of only 25 authors and artists named to Amazon.com's 10th Anniversary Hall of Fame. Three of his books, The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, Developing the Leader Within You, and The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader have each sold over a million copies.>
Get Leadership Articles Delivered Right to Your Inbox! >

Every two weeks Leadership Wired goes out to over 400,000 leaders worldwide, showcasing the newest content from GiANT Impact.

Find out more or sign-up today!
Recent Articles

PerseveranceBy Dr. John C. Maxwell
Leading Well & Starting StrongBy Steve Shelby, MBA
PeaceBy Justin Pinkerman
A Life That CountsBy Dr. John C. Maxwell
Give Up Comfort to Grow Up As a LeaderInterview with Wendy Higgins
Leadership Lessons Driven Home by the Struggles of U.S. AutomakersBy Justin Pinkerman



***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Monday, December 1, 2008

Character Is Sexy

Character Is Sexy
By Christopher Peterson, Ph.D. on November 19, 2008 in The Good Life

I have been a college professor for more than thirty years, and an important part of my job is working individually with graduate students who are writing doctoral dissertations. Over the years, I have supervised about fifty of these, learning to be one part cheerleader and two parts crossing guard: Bring it on, but look both ways. Dissertations are difficult, if only because the first one a student writes is usually the last one. Doctoral students cannot learn from experien
ce they do not have, and it falls to me to warn them of pitfalls along the way.

Without doubt, procrastination is the biggest threat, and there are lots of ways for a student to procrastinate. One can always alphabetize one's spice rack. Or clean one's apartment. Or sharpen one's pencils. Or update one's computer software. Or read everything ever written about anything remotely related to the topic of one's dissertation. And a dissertating student can always check out the personal ads in the newspaper and dream about a "real life" when the "unreal life" of graduate school is finally over.

One of my best students at the University of Michigan was Tracy Steen, who never procrastinated while completing her dissertation, even thought she spent a huge amount of time reading personal ads. The secret was that she was researching the ads for her dissertation to see how people described themselves to potential mates and to learn what they in turn wanted.

Other psychologists have studied personal ads, often from an evolutionary perspective that expects differences between males and females. Males presumably seek females who can successfully bear children -- accordingly, women should be young and attractive; females presumably seek males who can successfully protect and provide for children -- accordingly, men should be ambitious and successful. The data usually support these predictions.

However, the research findings also show a pattern even more striking than the "looks and a whole lot of money" exchange highlighted by evolutionary theorists. Character is sexy, and if we can judge by what the personal ads say, good character actually trumps physical attractiveness and occupational achievement, both in what the advertisers proclaim about themselves and in what they are seeking in a romantic partner. These results hold for men and women.

What Dr. Steen did was simple. She read hundreds of personal ads in a local Ann Arbor newspaper and coded what each said, about the person placing the ad and about what that person wanted. She used a positive psychology perspective and was especially interested in the mention of character strengths.

The language of good character figured in almost every ad. Even within the severe word limits imposed by these ads, it was notable that the young adults who placed them explicitly mentioned character as often as they did. The following positive traits were frequently sought in others: capacity to love (36%), a sense of humor (30%), enthusiasm (25%), kindness (24%), and curiosity (19%). When describing themselves, those seeking romance used similar character language: humor (39%), capacity to love (36%), enthusiasm (29%), curiosity (25%), and kindness (23%).

These findings are interesting in their own right, but I mention them to make a point about character. It is not a concern of fuddy-duddies. Character is sexy, and there is a reason why it is sexy. Good character makes relationships of all sorts possible, including romance but also friendship and the relationships that matter at school or at work, around the neighborhood, and of course in the family. Bad boys and mean girls are celebrated by the media, but they should be avoided like the plagues they are.

Steen, T. A. (2002). Is character sexy? The desirability of character strengths in romantic partners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-good-life/200811/character-is-sexy