Talk with Tom
Get the dispatches from the new world of work
Push or Pull
I have been thinking about the various blogs on leadership lately, and it strikes me that there is a difference of opinion amongst our community on whether employee performance is best improved by pushing or pulling. I believe the best leaders incorporate both into their style. Two sources of data influenced my recent thinking: an oldie but goodie, Daniel Yankelovich and John Immerwahr's 1983 research report, "Putting the Work Ethic to Work," and SuperBowl XLI! Yankelovich and Immerwahr discovered that there was approximately 70% discretionary effort available in most employees. The discretionary effort being the difference between what they have to do to keep their jobs and what they could do if they brought forth all their talent and effort. Then, I was thinking about the difference between the Colts and my team, the Detroit Lions. The Lions have been in the enviable position of having first shot in the draft since I can remember. But largely, the talent they have recruited has been less than stellar. The results stand as a testament to that. [The Lions have never played a Super Bowl.—CM]
It seems to me then, that a leader or manager's first job is to pull out that discretionary effort. This starts with clearly identifying the ambition of the organization and helping each and every employee see their part in realizing that ambition. I still believe that one thing we want from our talent is the sense that they make a difference. In my years as a first-line supervisor, I was always amazed at my weakest performers on the job who did amazing volunteer work after hours. Clearly they had the work ethic; we just didn't define an ambition for them worthy of their best efforts.
Then, there's the Lions. In recent years we have witnessed round one draft picks missing practices, reporting overweight, battling off-field demons, engaging in various criminal behaviors, etc. It seems a little push is in order here. Creating a culture of engagement does not mean letting everyone do their own thing. There is a need for discipline and standards, and for strong management efforts to insure everybody lives up to them. For many of us, our best performance has benefited by a friendly push now and then. Tony Dungy doesn't yell at his players, but he does instill a performance culture. Play your best, or you won't play at all.
So, I would argue for balance. Our talent has to be engaged in a cause, and we must manage performance closely to move in the quickest and straightest line towards our ultimate ambition.
What do you think? Push, pull, or both? Examples? Advice for the Lions?
ARCHIVES
Before blogging became all the rage, Tom was posting book reviews and Observations (essentially early blog posts) to this site. You can find the archives below.
What Tom's Reading Archives
OBSERVATIONS ARCHIVES
right now
What we're talking about
on the front page.
Comments
At the risk of annoying some for the continued football references, I must bring up Belichik and the Patriots. He (and the Patriots organization) recognize the need to have employees fully committed. A good example is the tremendous talent (and fan favorites) that have been allowed to walk away when they are holding out for more money (Deion Branch, Willie McGinest, Adam Vinatieri). While these individuals were top performers, their discretionary effort was not focused on the team's ambition, but rather their own. Perhaps a truly great manager communicates the fact that 100% effort towards the team goal is individually rewarding as well (the line worker/volunteer found his/her personal reward in the volunteer work, rather than the job). Then their talent will be aligned with the ambition of the company.
Posted by Nick Adams at February 8, 2007 9:58 AM
1. Chris - interesting Super Bowlesque dilemma - I feel for your Lions - last year our Seattle Seahawks @ "Super" [lost] for 1st [& maybe last time].
2. Cool thing about Super Bowl Champion's Tony Dungy: at celebrations he mentioned how proud he was of the "men" that made it happen ... that they were fine family guys, citizens, etc.
3. Detroit challenge may be that it is a tough place to want to live! Agree 100% about performance culture & being prepared - free enterprise can do more to educate [fill the gap public schools miss].
Posted by sean_seahawks at February 8, 2007 10:01 AM
Mike--as a fellow long-suffering Lions fan, I have come to the conclusion that it's the same for them as it is for any other business--the rot starts at the top. Is there any connection between Ford losing market share and busloads of money and the poor performance of the family football team? Surely they are two parts of the same business mentality. Since the owner can't be fired, the next best thing would be to put Matt Millen back on his Harley and point the way out of town. (And I wonder if Wayne Fontes is looking for work?)
Engaging employees in a cause is vital, but it will never happen for ALL employees. Many grew up believing the normal situation was for "labor" and "management" to be at odds. Or, that the accepted work ethic was to do as little as possible without being fired; or that the owners of the business were just exploiting their labor, and etc. Maybe the Lions' players don't perform because they know that is the quickest way out of town? Could be.
Posted by Mike at February 8, 2007 10:17 AM
1. Mike & Mike - I agree on the money aspect - Paul Allen co-founder of Microsoft bought the Seattle team a few years ago ... and the new stadium & higher player salaries & private jet, best trainers, organic dining, et al seem to make a difference
Posted by sean_seattle at February 8, 2007 11:06 AM
Hi Tom,
Our management company made a leadership video a short while ago for use primarily in our own training seminars. Just recently we decided to unleash it on the world via YouTube and it has sparked up some quite contraversial debates.
We wanted to create an unbiased leader quote video and to do this we searched out around 100 quotes from leaders who had encouraged a wealth of followers whether right or wrong. We then surveyed a whole bunch of our clients, asking them to pick their top five. From that we chose the top 22 in order not to make the video too long.
Some of them use push, some of them use pull and some both. I'd say a really great leader knows which to use and when to use it and makes good use of both.
The video is designed to evoke an emotional response and also suprise and shock the viewer with some unexpected quotes.
I'd be interested in knowing your thoughts on the video, you'll find it here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4lko1LuJ2o
Posted by Shaune at February 8, 2007 11:27 AM
"approximately 70% discretionary effort available in most employees"...the discretionary component is highly job-dependent. In a highly-Taylorized mass production plant it might be 20%; in a flexible manufacturing operation it might be 50%. For programmers who also have design responsibility, it is probably 80%. It is also probably around 80% for salespeople in most industries.
Posted by david foster at February 8, 2007 12:09 PM
I agree, it's push AND pull. Leaders can only pull so many people for so long; it's not an effective longterm management strategy.
Leaders need to know who to push and how far, because everybody responds differently and not all favorably. This is really the art of Leadership, knowing when to push, knowing when to pull and knowing when to just let be.
Team construction and dynamics are complex and fascinating. As a leader, I have always attempted to draft the best available talent, people with similar work ethics and values, and give them the support AND freedom to do their jobs. Sports are obviously different but having a plan, believing in it and sticking to it can often produce the results envisioned.
From another Patriot fan re the Lions, Good Luck!
Posted by Peter A. Mello at February 8, 2007 1:14 PM
Mike, I think there's a book in here for ya, football metaphors and all. Here's a working title: "Herding Lions - Business Management in the New Economy."
Posted by John O'Leary at February 8, 2007 1:14 PM
Could it be as simple as setting expectations and then managing to those expectations? Every year the Yankees expect to win the World Series and when/if they fall short, the fans and media want to know "why?" They have a culture of WINNING. Looking at the Cubs, do they have a similar attitude? Do they begin the season expecting to "win?" The fans expect them to LOSE and they have a history and culture of LOSING. Set the expectation and then manage to the expectation. If you want employee participation, set that expectation. If you want ideas to boost productivity, invite ideas and work as a team to implement these ideas.
BTW: I'm an A's fan. They win without the money NY throws at their players. They rebuild every year. It's not about money.
Posted by Craig Penno at February 8, 2007 5:00 PM
We used to have a soccer player in the UK called Stan Collymore, usually described in the press as a, "wayward talent." In other words: a terrific soccer player but with a man with a reputation for getting into trouble and being difficult to manage.
He was traded from club to club a few times and, in the early days, the big clubs would take a gamble on him. After leaving one such club he made a very perceptive comment: he felt this club had bought him without any clear idea of what style of play they wanted from him (either to build a team around him or to get him to adapt to something) and he had generally been managed in too loose a way. "What other business would spend millions of £ on an asset without any clear idea of how to use it or how to maintain it?" he asked.
A very good question, but the answer was and probably still is: too many.
Posted by Mark JF at February 9, 2007 3:52 AM
Hi Mark
Carrying on the soccer theme, I had the immense pleasure of seeing my soccer hero - the late immortal George Best – play for Manchester United on many occasions. George was a ‘wayward genius’ and many fans say that George was not at the top long enough because of his wayward behaviour and how we fans were therefore in some way ‘robbed.’ It was summed up well by a friend who said ‘watching 10 years of George Best was worth more than watching 20 years of the average footballer.’ As a Man United fan I am biased but of course would agree. No manager (other than perhaps Sir Matt Busby when George was a youngster) could ever ‘control’ Besty – he was a one off. I suspect if anyone had succeeded in ‘controlling’ him then George would not have become the legend he still is though sadly now departed - again largely due to his wayward behaviour.
Posted by Trevor Gay at February 9, 2007 6:50 AM
One thing I see more and more is the drive to standardise the management of people. Consistency is the watchword - must treat people the same. Must bonus them on the same criteria or it's not fair
Anyone with even a tiniest amount of talent starts looking elsewhere.
Consistency should be around values and understanding and not treating people as clones
Posted by PaulH at February 9, 2007 8:05 AM
1. Richard - "it is the War stupid" seems more like it with ancillary liberal democrat issues [since they won '06 elections & narrowly control Congress] of "healthcare" & education
2. Liberal democrats have big union stranglehold on USA education - to the incredible detriment of K-12 public school systems - super taxpayer expensive - poor ROI
3. Poll after USA poll have Iraq as key '06/08 election issue - economy doing fabulous for investors/consumers [thank you] - PS - Oakland Raider black & silver sports clothes = the best & coolest
Posted by sean_peace at February 9, 2007 9:35 AM
Sean
Yes of course "its the war stupid"... But if I am in a Presidential Campaign bunker I have the cross-tabulations of those Polls not the raw data and I know who they blame for the War.. That is the important thing about Polls - who do they blame... In this case they blame George W Bush - when he goes the War goes as an issue....
If I was a White House Staff leader in the next administration Democrat or Republican (not a bad gig actually - given the complex and intractable policy issues facing the USA - but regrettably I am too old and like to have time with my kids far too much to apply for a job HOWEVER many of you on this blog should look seriously at taking on such a Leadership Role it is one the best things you could do in your working life) I would get into bed with whomever to make Healthcare and Education the best in the world by a long, long way... All the time I would be going around telling everyone - now Bush is gone - its the economy, the economy, the economy...
Richard
Posted by Richard Lipscombe at February 9, 2007 3:33 PM
Obama = Political Toddler
Posted by J D Duncan at February 10, 2007 12:55 PM
JD – I hope you will allow me to give an impression from my side of the pond. In the murky waters of politics you are probably right about Mr Obama being a ‘toddler.’ I am still an idealist and carrying on the ‘toddler’ theme I believe ‘toddlers’ are wonderful - innocent, refreshing, creative and of course wonderfully honest ... so you are probably right and he won’t make it in politics. I love his speaking from the heart, the freshness, the enthusiasm and the charisma. Whether these qualities will be enough of course history and democracy will record. I wish him well. He has a ‘freshness’ I have not seen in politicians for decades on either side of the pond to be frank.
Posted by Trevor Gay at February 10, 2007 6:28 PM
Obama Fresh, Trevor? His speeches outline the same tired old nanny-state ideas. He is pro-union, pro-entitlement, pro-big gov't, and anti-business. He is also espousing a completely unworkable pull-out plan for the Iraq situation. Dig a little deeper and don't be lulled into believing the drive-by media hype.
Posted by Mike at February 12, 2007 7:28 AM
1. Mike - totally agree & sent Trevor several points on Hussein Obama, including: chainsmoking, marijuana-coke use, extreme experience lack esp. for international terror - and now he's insulted the Australian president - be fun to watch him self-destruct.
Posted by sean at February 12, 2007 11:11 AM
Mike, I agree that leadership is both push and pull, but in addition to the type of organization and employees, there is the consideration for the style of the leader. Your reference to Tony Dungy is a great example of someone who gets the most out of his organization by most effectively understanding and using his personal style. There have been other coaches who fall into the tyrant category who have been equally effective - Bobby Knight comes to mind - in getting the most out of their teams.
The same holds true for business. I tend to look at succession and see if the person following a strong, effective leader tries to emulate their style. My unscientific observation is that those who exhibit their own style are more effective than those who try and be their predecessor.
As for the Lions - at least they're not the Arizona Cardinals or the LA Clippers.
Posted by Andrew Hayden at February 12, 2007 11:14 AM
...or the Boston Celtics.
Speaking of Bobby Knight, we may never know how much of his effectiveness as a coach comes from his encyclopedic basketball knowledge, his inspirational ability, and his commitment to hold players accountable for their performance. Distinct from that, his abusive, tyrannical management style may or may not be contributing to his overall effectiveness.
Posted by John O'Leary at February 12, 2007 12:30 PM
Actually, I am a Bobby Knight fan. I have an acquaintance that was recruited by Bobby. He was Mr Basketball in Indiana, and a very talented kid. He spent one year at UI, then transfered to another Big Ten school. The reason? Bobby sees his team as student athletes, with emphasis on the student part (check out his graduation rate and compare it to Higgins). Well this young man didn't study, and Bobby benched him. So I kind of like his pushing....
Posted by Mike Neiss at February 12, 2007 4:36 PM
The obvious answer is 'its some of both', since from time to time those of us with more experience have to provide a context for discontinuous results. However, the last 7 years, working in an organization that is actually 'functional' with folks who are DETERMINED to get the work done, I find my job is more and more about neither pushing or pulling. It is about setting a shared expectation, providing the appropriate feedback mechanisms and infrastructure, and just GETTING OUT OF THE WAY!
Nowadays I spend a lot of time keeping the lid on the team's expectations of themselves, so they can remain balanced as well as productive. In our business environment today people are conditioned to work excessively, when that is simply not the best overall solution for the organization. If we as managers can be realistic we can have both the business result and the team's lives be sustainable at all times.
Posted by Rich at February 12, 2007 7:53 PM
Well, I am not sure what is worse these days, being a Lions fan or being a Cowboy fan, but that is a different story ...
As for "pushes" and "pulls" I think Rich has a good point. If pushes and pulls correspond to sticks and carrots, or punishments and rewards, then I would have to say that in healthy work environments these would have little impact.
I am not sure what folks around here think of Jim Collins, but I am a big fan of his work, and I think he has the rights of this issue: Get the right people on the bus (and get the wrong ones off), and create a shared vision. There is more to it, but the essence of his approach (at least to me) is to get the right folks and the right vision, and the rest pretty much takes care of itself.
The one thing I would add to the mix is that in my view all human work is fundamentally about relationships. You build the right kind of relationships, and the rest is straightforward. This is a big reason why the Level 5 Leader succeeds, because his or her behaviors are conducive to relationships and development.
Posted by David Cross at February 12, 2007 9:05 PM
Tom
I read with interest the many discussions on the Super Bowl and the managment styles of the various coaches. However, my interest in the Super Bowl was primarily the commercials. Companies spent $2.6 million per 30 second spot, and missed 40 percent of the audience--women. I know you have long been a proponent of Economic Opportunity #1--Women! But in my opinion, many advertisers and their clients still don't get it.
I recently wrote an article that is posted on www.marketingprofs.com and my website www.advisorylink-dfw.com about the lastest round of Super Bowl commercials, and wondered what your opinion is. I felt many were so strongly aimed at men, that women didn't relate at all, even though they make more than 80 percent of all purchases, including the products advertised on the Super Bowl.
I would enjoy talking with you about this issue, among other things, and to getting a quote from you for a future article I'm working on.
Gerry Myers
Posted by Gerry Myers at February 14, 2007 11:30 AM
‘Obama Fresh, Trevor? His speeches outline the same tired old nanny-state ideas. He is pro-union, pro-entitlement, pro-big gov't, and anti-business. He is also espousing a completely unworkable pull-out plan for the Iraq situation. Dig a little deeper and don't be lulled into believing the drive-by media hype.’
’Mike - totally agree & sent Trevor several points on Hussein Obama, including: chainsmoking, marijuana-coke use, extreme experience lack esp. for international terror - and now he's insulted the Australian president - be fun to watch him self-destruct.’
Hi Sean and Mike - Just back from traveling for a few days. Wonderful to be back to more controversy – I missed it so much :-)
I hear what you say and I would still rather allow my ‘naivety’ to rule my head. I think it is wonderful to see someone with freshness and optimism. Give me someone who is idealistic and ‘person centred’ over someone frankly boring and consumed and obsessed by measurable processes. At the moment I’m reading Ernest Shackleton (Shackleton’s Way) – a truly great leader - who believed one of the greatest qualities of a leader is optimism and this was confirmed by his followers.
Posted by Trevor Gay at February 15, 2007 5:53 PM
Trevor, that is exactly why Obama is the wrong person--he isn't really fresh, optimistic, or person-centered. His positions read exactly like Mrs. Clinton and all the other tired old folks in that party (as well as many in the other).
Posted by mike at February 16, 2007 12:06 PM
Hi Mike - Mr Obama seems pretty impressive from what I've seen and read from over here. Many of your US colleague citizens don't seem to support your summary if I am to believe these two randomly chosen Google searches I’ve followed through.
First;
BBC News Website:
'When he made his first trip to the state of New Hampshire - one of the first to choose its candidate for president - the governor joked that he had booked Mr Obama for an appearance because he would sell more tickets than the Rolling Stones.'
Second;
Mr Obama’s Blog
The numbers don’t lie
BY JON JONES - FEB 13TH, 2007 AT 2:17 PM EST
'There is definitely something special happening here. From our count, over 40,000 people came out to see Barack Obama over the last three days from Iowa to New Hampshire. Everyday folks who want a new brand of politics braved sub-freezing temperatures, long lines, and long road trips to hear what Senator Obama had to say. And that doesn't even include the 14.2 million people who tuned into 60 Minutes on Sunday night or the now 70,000 of you who have joined the BarackObama community.'
Posted by Trevor Gay at February 16, 2007 4:11 PM
1. Cleary Trevor you'd [grand dad?]be pro Adolf too in the early 30's - ah... he is so charismatic & such a fresh, fine speaker ...
2. Barack Hussein O is no Hitler - but his insults to Australians & USA & coalition troops [England] are noteworthy so early in a "campaign" ..
3. Condi Rice if she'd run would be fresh & experienced & worthy - whereas B Hussein is like a House of Lord member at midnight trying to give himself a huge raise
Posted by sean_pro_condi at February 18, 2007 4:08 PM
Sean - My dear late Grandad fought against Hitler ... my memories of Grandad's stories to me as a young man lead me to believe he was quite the opposite of an Adolph fan.
You might like to see this .....
It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three candidates.
Candidate A - Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists. He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.
Candidate B - He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.
Candidate C - He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.
Posted by Trevor Gay at February 19, 2007 7:53 AM
1. Trevor - bless your Grandad
2. A-C though were light years gone by in history - almost 100 years - Google nanosecond times demand outstanding
3. 2009 the leader of the free world must be outstanding in - a. terror war & b. worldwide economics & c. forming an outstanding Executive branch & d. appointing outstanding judges
4. It is no time for a young Kennedy - who failed in his 1000 days - except 'outstanding' cheat on Mrs. ... quanity his thing here v. quality "... the best 20 seconds of my life ..." some women's comments!
Posted by sean_grand_dad at February 20, 2007 1:43 PM
Trevor--that's the point--many people want some fresh politico to come along and are fooled by the likes of B. Obama, who is just a new face on the same tired old song and dance. There's nothing new or fresh about him. Go by vote record, position papers, speeches, even his book. Do not go by lazy drive-by media sources like the BBC, who at their best are only trying to drive their own agenda and at their worst are too lazy and ignorant of real journalistic practices to develop the truth out of the hype (and that goes for just about 99% of all British, Canadian, Mexican, and American "news" sources). If you want fresh ideas, fine, but look for them somewhere else. They don't exist in B. Obama's political ambitions.
Posted by mike at February 20, 2007 3:44 PM
1. Thanks Mike - perfect - and now Barack Hussein in Hollywoood ... soaking up their lazy ilk offerings
2. Cool deal is that B Hussein may be peaking far too early ... and this '08 election cycle his last in that his "foot in mouth disease" is growing exponentially
3. Once the main stream dinosaur media proclaims a star - lock up the gold & girls - trouble ahead - Trevor shall get it one of these days
Posted by sean_anti_hollywood at February 21, 2007 9:34 AM