Stepping up to leadership
• Pride
• Personal success
Why
leadership? • Organizational success
• Responsibility
• A skill that can be mastered
A good A bad
leader leader
you’ve had you’ve had
When our future MBAs do this exercise,
what would they think of you?
Tec
hn
Relative Importance
ica
l Ski
lls
ills
l Sk
na
rso
rpe
e
Int
Career Trajectory
Tec
hn
Relative Importance
ica
l Ski
lls
ills
l Sk
na
rso
rpe
e
Int
Career Trajectory
Tec
hn
Relative Importance
ica
l Ski
lls
ills
l Sk
na
rso
rpe
e
Int
Career Trajectory
Interpersonal skills become
more important over time
Tec
hn
Relative Importance
ica
l Ski
lls
ills
l Sk
na
rso
rpe
e
Int
Career Trajectory
Interpersonal skills become
EVERYTHING
Tec
hn
Relative Importance
ica
l Ski
lls
ills
l Sk
na
rso
rpe
e
Int
Career Trajectory
We can’t do it alone
• Organizations are set up to achieve
large-scale goals
• Our success = our ability to attain goals
that only groups, not individuals, can
attain
Leaders have financial responsibility
to their organizations
Watson Wyatt’s Human Capital Index Report (2002)
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without”
Is leadership common sense?
• Gallup’s 2024 State of the Global Workplace:
• ??% are engaged or inspired at work
• ??% are either not engaged or actively
disengaged
• Gallup’s Engagement Qs = having clear expectations, getting recognition,
feeling that work is meaningful, feeling connected to the work and people
at the workplace, getting regular and meaningful feedback, having
opportunities for personal growth
23% engaged or
inspired
77% not engaged or
actively disengaged
% engaged
• 78% say their managers do not
motivate them to do outstanding
Leadership is work
not common • 73% say that managers do not
sense include them in goal setting
• 77% do not trust the leadership of
their organization
Costs of discontent at work:
Relative to engaged employees, unengaged
employees are:
• 41% more likely to miss workdays
• 24% higher turnover
• 17% lower productivity
• 20% lower sales
• 2X likelihood of being in unsuccessful business
units
It is costly to have
de-motivated workers
• Unengaged employees ~50% more likely to leave
• Estimated replacement costs:
• Entry level: ~30% - 50% of annual salary
• Mid-level: ~100-200%
• Senior level: > 300%
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without.”
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
(if they were common sense, everyone would be engaged in
their work)
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without.”
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
(if they were common sense, everyone would be engaged in
their work)
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without”
Is leadership something you’re
“born with”?
• There are personality traits that are more likely to appear
in leaders (we’ll talk about this in Week 3)
Is leadership something you’re
“born with”?
• There are personality traits that are more likely to appear
in leaders (we’ll talk about this in Session 3)
• …but the correlations are generally relatively low
• Most importantly: There are systematic and predictable
stages to team formation that you can learn and master
Is leadership something you’re
“born with”?
• There are personality traits that are more likely to appear
in leaders (we’ll talk about this in Session 3)
• …but the correlations are generally relatively low
• Most importantly: There are systematic and predictable
stages to team formation that you can learn and master
Stages of Team Formation
Forming Storming Norming Performing
-Team members -Team members -Some teams never -The team is in flow
are unsure of the feel comfortable to reach this stage and performing to
team's purpose, start to challenge its full potential.
how they fit in, one another. -Conflicts are
and whether they resolved and -Team members
will work well with -Hierarchy, status, different opinions effectively utilize
one another. and working are tolerated their capabilities
routines are and perspectives to
-Excited & curious established -Shared sense of get work done
common goals is
-But insecure -Conflicts arise due established -Little formal
to personality supervision is
-On their “best clashes or task -Focus is not on needed
behaviour”; avoid disagreements preventing conflict
conflict but on resolving it
(Tuckman, 1965, 1977; Bonebright, 2010)
Stages of Team Formation
Forming Storming Norming Performing
-Everest Case -Influence -Motivation / -Moon Rover
(Week 1) (Week 3) NUMMI + Semler Landing (Week 7)
cases (Week 5)
-Negotiations
-Flyzone Case (Week 4) -Personal & Group -Final Course
(Week 2) Feedback (Week 6) Assignment
-Team Contract
Assignment
Our course is organized to build skills for each of
these stages
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without.”
Common
objections
• “leadership skills are basically common sense”
• “leadership is something you’re either born with
or born without.”
(there are typical stages to team formation that any leader can build
skills to master)
Who I am
Background
• Consulting alum
• M.B.A. (Booth)
• Ph.D. in behavioral science (Booth)
Among the topics I’ve studied
• Reputation
• Lying and truth-telling
• Arrogance and humility
• Ghosting
• Introductions
• Professional networking
What I expect from you, and you
from me
ü On time
ü Prepared
ü ENGAGED (defying the average in Europe)
ü Class participation is encouraged!
üComments in class = For everyone to learn
from
üOutside of class = comments / questions that
apply only to you
Pre-class reading Qs (individual)
• Commitment device
• Count towards your grade
Homework Team contract (team)
this period • Team building for your study group
• Implement course insights
Final assignment (team)
• In-depth analysis of an organizational
issue
• Select and apply knowledge from
course
Climbing
the Everest
None of us is as
smart as all of
us
Consultant Ken Blanchard
…but only if
we as leaders
bring out the
best in
everyone
Key challenges of leading teams
Differences in information Differences in interests
Key challenges of leading teams
Differences in information Differences in interests
Differences in information
• Goal: Relevant information must be shared and irrelevant
information ignored
• Problem: Already-shared information gets talked about
more than unshared information
• Study: University students chose a student
body president from 3 candidates
• Candidate A is best
1000%
980%
960% Positive Pieces of
940%
920%
900%
880%
860%
840% Information
820%
800%
780%
760%
740%
720%
700%
680%
660%
Neutral Pieces of
640%
620%
600%
580%
560% Information
540%
520%
500%
480%
460%
440% Negative Pieces of
420%
400%
380%
360%
340%
320% Information
300%
280%
260%
240%
220%
200%
180%
160%
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Candidate A Candidate B Candidate C
Stasser & Titus (1985)
• Study: University students chose a student
body president from 3 candidates
• Candidate A is best
1000%
980%
960% Positive Pieces of
940%
920%
900%
880%
860%
840% 8 8 8 Information
820%
800%
780%
760%
740%
720%
700%
680%
660%
Neutral Pieces of
640%
620%
600%
580%
560% Information
540%
520%
500%
480%
460%
440% 4 4 4 4 4 4 Negative Pieces of
420%
400%
380%
360%
340%
320% Information
300%
280%
260%
240%
220%
200%
180%
160%
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Candidate A Candidate B Candidate C
Stasser & Titus (1985)
If you change which information is initially
shared by group members…
100%
83%
80% 71%
60% 53%
40% 35%
24%
20% 11% 12%
6% 5%
0%
All information Shared information Shared information
shared in favor of candidate in favor of
B candidates B and C
Stasser & Titus (1985)
If you change which information is initially
shared by group members…
100%
83%
80% 71%
60% 53%
40% 35%
24%
20% 11% 12%
6% 5%
0%
All information Shared information Shared information
shared in favor of candidate in favor of
B candidates B and C
Stasser & Titus (1985)
If you change which information is initially
shared by group members…
100%
83%
80% 71%
60% 53%
40% 35%
24%
20% 11% 12%
6% 5%
0%
All information Shared information Shared information
shared in favor of candidate in favor of
B candidates B and C
…this will change the decisions of who
gets hired
Stasser & Titus (1985)
Shared information bias
also occurs in executive search
Shared by all
Mentioned in Influenced
group
discussion hiring decision
members
.26 (.11) ** .15 (.03) **
Numbers are regression coefficients (std. errors in parentheses)
** indicate p < .05
Abel et al. (2005)
What causes
shared information bias?
What causes
shared information bias?
1. Basic probability works against you
2. Mistakenly judging shared information as more
important than unshared information
3. Desire for social harmony
4. Mistakenly assuming others know what you know (self-
anchoring)
What causes
shared information bias?
1. Basic probability works against you – if people picked topics
to talk about at random, they end up talking about things they already
know
2. Mistakenly judging shared information as more important
than unshared information
3. Desire for social harmony
4. Mistakenly assuming others know what you know (self-
anchoring)
What causes
shared information bias?
1. Basic probability works against you
2. Mistakenly judging shared information as more
important than unshared information – just because a lot of
people know something, this doesn’t mean it’s actually important for
the task
3. Desire for social harmony
4. Mistakenly assuming others know what you know (self-
anchoring)
What causes
shared information bias?
1. Basic probability works against you
2. Mistakenly judging shared information as more
important than unshared information
3. Desire for social harmony – talking about something other
people don’t know can feel awkward
4. Mistakenly assuming others know what you know (self-
anchoring)
What causes
shared information bias?
1. Basic probability works against you
2. Mistakenly judging shared information as more
important than unshared information
3. Desire for social harmony
4. Mistakenly assuming others know what you know (self-
anchoring) – leader must manage the information communicated
within the team
What can
you do
about it?
1. Leader as information manager
2. Establish mission of maximizing
group performance
What can 3. Establish norms of psychological
safety (cf. Google reading)
you do
about it?
Leaders as information managers
a tactical example
Using the screen to share information
and stay on track
Psychological Safety
The comfort level of taking risks in group discussion
• Everyone always asks themselves: “If I disagree or
speak up, how will my colleagues react?”
• Will they judge me?
• Will they accept my argument?
• Will they censor me?
Psychological Safety
The comfort level of taking risks in group discussion
• Important for tasks that involve uncertainty
• Important when tasks are interdependent
(rely on contributions from all group members)
To promote psychological safety, the norms you establish
and actually follow as leader should be:
ü Predictable
ü Explained
ü Promote engagement
*** Norms = Expected & acceptable behavior
In your Everest simulation:
Correlation between % of goals achieved and
psychological safety = -0.34
What doesn’t work
1. More discussion ✗
2. Bigger or smaller teams ✗
3. More information ✗
4. Individual accountability ✗
What doesn’t work
1. More discussion ✗
2. Bigger or smaller teams ✗
3. More information ✗
4. Individual accountability ✗
Let’s talk about this one a bit more
The trouble
with accountability
high
Psychological
safety
low
low high
Accountability
The trouble
with accountability
high
Psychological
safety
Apathy
low
low high
Accountability
The trouble
with accountability
high
Complacence
Psychological
safety
Apathy
low
low high
Accountability
The trouble
with accountability
high
Complacence
Psychological
safety
Apathy Anxiety
low
low high
Accountability
The key is accountability +
psychological safety
high
Collective
Complacence
Learning
Psychological
safety
Apathy Anxiety
low
low high
Accountability
Key challenges of leading teams
Differences in information Differences in interests
Differences in interests
What challenges do differences in interests present?
Differences in interests
What challenges do differences in interests present?
• Not everyone gets their way
• Tension between individual goals and group goals
Not everyone gets their way:
How can you avoid
frustrated teammates?
Answer: Fair process of making
decisions beats getting what you want
High Fairness in
Process
Employee
Low Fairness in
commitment to
Process
the organization
(Perceived) Fairness in Outcomes
McFarlin & Sweeny, 1992
Remember: Fair process of making
decisions beats getting what you want
High Fairness in
Process
Employee
Low Fairness in
commitment to
Process
the organization
People who didn’t get what they
wanted were more committed to the
org than people who got what they
wanted in an unfair way
(Perceived) Fairness in Outcomes
McFarlin & Sweeny, 1992
In the Everest simulation:
Correlation between % of goals achieved and
perceptions of fair process = 0.47
Tension between self-goals and group
goals: How do you resolve it?
When does sacrificing for the team
stop being worth it?
3 Evaluations of a person who gave $X out of $6.00
2
0
$0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6
-1
-2
-3
Klein & Epley, 2014
When you give so much as to harm
yourself
3 Evaluations of a person who gave $X out of $6.00
0
$0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6
-1
-2
-3
Klein & Epley, 2014
When you give so much as to harm
yourself
3 Evaluations of a person who gave $X out of $6.00
0
$0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6
-1
“It pays to be a little bit
-2 nice, but not really nice”
-3
Klein & Epley, 2014
Managing pro-social vs.
pro-self goals
Also true
across cultures
Klein et al., 2015
Summary of
takeaways
Leaders are effective when they
overcome team differences in
information and interests
Differences in information Overcome shared information bias
Differences in interests Must balance individual goals &
group goals
To overcome
differences in information
1. “Leader as an information manager”
2. Model and encourage information sharing
• Even (and especially) when information goes against group
consensus
3. Demonstrate that the group is a psychologically safe place
• Acknowledge your own imperfections and errors
• Frame task as learning problem rather than execution problem
4. Establish and reinforce group mission
5. Ask: “is there anything we’re missing here?”
To align
different interests
1. Directly ask about group members’ interests
2. Focus on creating a fair process and get buy-in, not
necessarily on equal outcomes
3. Encourage people to contribute group goals but not to
the extent they are harming their individual goals
“It pays to be a little bit nice, but not really nice”
”Before you are
a leader,
success is all
about growing
yourself. When
you become a
leader, success
is all about
growing
others.”
Jack Welch
former CEO,
General Electric
