WHAT MAKES A LEADER?

When asked to define the ideal leader, many would emphasize traits such as
intelligence, toughness, determination, and vision--the qualities traditionally
associated with leadership. Often left off the list are softer, more personal qualities-but they are also essential. Although a certain degree of analytical and technical
skill is a minimum requirement for success, studies indicate that emotional
intelligence may be the key attribute that distinguishes outstanding performers
from those who are merely adequate. Psychologist and author Daniel Goleman first
brought the term "emotional intelligence" to a wide audience with his 1995 book of
the same name, and Goleman first applied the concept to business with this 1998
classic HBR article. In his research at nearly 200 large, global companies, Goleman
found that truly effective leaders are distinguished by a high degree of emotional
intelligence. Without it, a person can have first-class training, an incisive mind, and
an endless supply of good ideas, but he or she still won't be a great leader. The
chief components of emotional intelligence--self-awareness, self-regulation,
motivation, empathy, and social skill--can sound unbusinesslike, but Goleman,
cochair of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations,
based at Rutgers University, found direct ties between emotional intelligence and
measurable business results.

THE WORK OF LEADERSHIP

More and more companies today are facing adaptive challenges: Changes in
societies, markets, and technologies around the globe constantly force businesses
to clarify their values, develop new strategies, and learn new ways to operate. The
most important task for leaders in the face of such challenges is mobilizing people
throughout their organizations to do adaptive work. In this HBR article from 1997,
the authors suggest that the prevailing notion that leadership consists of having a
vision and aligning people with it is bankrupt; this approach ignores the fact that
many work situations are adaptive rather than technical. Heifetz and Laurie instead
offer six principles for leading adaptive work. The authors say leaders should be
able to spot operational and strategic patterns from high within the organization
and set or create a context for change rather than get caught up in the field of
action. They need to pinpoint just how a company's value systems or methods of
collaboration must change as well as to regulate the inevitable distress that
adaptive work generates. They also need to maintain disciplined attention among
employees as well as give the work back to people, letting employees take the

initiative in defining and solving problems. And finally, they need to protect the
voices of leadership coming from below. An example of adaptive change at KPMG
Netherlands, a professional services firm, illustrates these principles.

WHY TEAMS DON'T WORK

This article includes a one-page preview that quickly summarizes the key ideas and
provides an overview of how the concepts work in practice along with suggestions
for further reading.
The belief that teams make us more creative and productive - and are the best way
to get things done - is deeply entrenched. But Hackman, a professor of
organizational psychology at Harvard and a leading expert on teams, is having none
of it. Research, he says, consistently shows that teams underperform despite all
their extra resources. In an interview with senior editor Diane Coutu, Hackman
explains where teams go wrong. Shockingly, most of the time members don't agree
on what the team is supposed to be doing or even on who is on the team. The belief
that bigger is better also compounds problems; as a team grows, the effort needed
to manage links between members increases almost exponentially. Leaders need to
be ruthless about defining teams and keeping them small (fewer than 10
members), and some individuals (like team destroyers) should simply be forced off.
The leader also must set a compelling direction for the team - but in so doing, may
encounter intense resistance that puts him or her at great risk. Hackman explores
other fallacies about teams - for instance, that teams whose members have been
together a long time become stale. In fact, research reveals that new teams make
50% more mistakes than established teams. To avoid complacency, though, every
team needs a deviant - someone who is willing to make waves and open up the
group to more ideas. Unfortunately, such individuals often get thrown off the team,
robbing it of its chance to be magical. Leaders can't make a team do well. However,
by being disciplined about how a team is set up and managed, instituting the right
support systems, and providing coaching in group processes, they can increase the
likelihood that a team will be great.

HOW TO BUILD YOUR NETWORK

Many sensational ideas have faded away into obscurity because they failed to reach
the right people. A strong personal network, however, can launch a burgeoning plan
into the limelight by delivering private information, access to diverse skill sets, and

power. Most executives know that they need to learn about the best ideas and that,
in turn, their best ideas must be heard by the rest of the world. But strong personal
networks don't just happen around a water cooler or at reunions with old college
friends. As Brian Uzzi and Shannon Dunlap explain, networks have to be carefully
constructed through relatively high-stakes activities that bring you into contact with
a diverse group of people. Most personal networks are highly clustered--that is,
your friends are likely to be friends with one another as well. And, if you made those
friends by introducing yourself to them, the chances are high that their experiences
and perspectives echo your own. Because ideas generated within this type of
network circulate among the same people with shared views, a potential winner can
wither away and die if no one in the group has what it takes to bring that idea to
fruition. But what if someone within that cluster knows someone else who belongs
to a whole different group? That connection, formed by an information broker, can
expose your idea to a new world, filled with fresh opportunities for success.
Diversity makes the difference. Uzzi and Dunlap show you how to assess what kind
of network you currently have, helping you to identify your superconnectors and
demonstrating how you act as an information broker for others. They then explain
how to diversify your contacts through shared activities and how to manage your
new, more potent, network.

MAKE YOUR VALUES MEAN

SOMETHING
Take a look at this list of corporate values: Communication. Respect. Integrity.
Excellence. They sound pretty good, don't they? Maybe they even resemble your
own company's values. If so, you should be nervous. These are the corporate values
of Enron, as claimed in its 2000 annual report. And they're absolutely meaningless.
Indeed, most values statements, says the author, are bland, toothless, or just plain
dishonest. And far from being harmless, as some executives assume, they're often
highly destructive. Empty values statements create cynical and dispirited
employees and undermine managerial credibility. But coming up with strong
values--and sticking to them--isn't easy. Organizations that want their values
statements really to mean something should follow four imperatives. First,
understand the different types of values: core, aspirational, permission-to-play, and
accidental. Second, be aggressively authentic. Third, own the process. Finally,
weave core values into everything. Living by stated corporate values is difficult. But
the benefits of doing so can be profound; so can the damage from adopting a
hollow set of corporate values.