Is the office coffee maker half empty or half full? Does simply ‘thinking positively’ help to achieve the desired outcome, or does being too upbeat remove your ability to critically analyze and learn from business and life situations? Does pessimism allow you to spot the obstacles lurking ahead in the distance?
Tag Archive for: work tips
By Aimee Hansen
Every June is celebrated on the diversity calendar as Pride Month in many corporations and we also like to update you on the progress being made for LGBT professionals and shine a light also on how straight allies can help advance talented individuals who may identify as LGBT in your office.
Out Now’s LGBT 2020, the world’s largest LGBT research project, puts a $9 billion a year cost on not paying attention to this issue. That’s how much the US economy could save if organizations were better at implementing diversity and inclusion policies for LGBT staff, or to make it clear, if LGBT employees felt more comfortable.
The “LGBT Diversity: Show me the business case” research measures the financial savings for companies who foster an inclusive work culture where LGBT employees are comfortable to be themselves. The research reveals that LGBT staff who are open with all co-workers about their sexuality are significantly more likely to stay in their job than those who are not out to anyone at work, creating a rewarding staff retention dividend.
Ian Johnson, Chief Executive of Out Now, says, “This report for the first time enables companies to see exactly why investing in a more equitable and supportive workplace for everyone is a sound business investment that demonstrates solid returns.”
Corporate Culture is Key
The degree to which formal corporate LGBT diversity & inclusion policies are effective may come down to how well they are truly reflected informally within the corporate culture.
The aforementioned LGBT2020 study found that among a diverse range of workers in the USA, 38% were out to everybody (and more likely to strongly disagree with leaving their job in the near future) while 35% of people were out to nobody or a few trusted people.
The researchers saw a 6% drop in those “out to all” (38% vs 44%) over the last two years, stating “This represents a significant and worrying fall, especially when LGBT workplace diversity has been placed on the agenda of an increasing number of larger US companies during this time.” They speculate this could reflect a toning down related to the saliency of marriage equality being pitched against religious beliefs. Half of those LGBT employees surveyed reported overhearing homophobic comments at work.
Being fully out correlated with a 30% productivity benefit. Among USA employees “out to all”, 67% strongly agreed they were “respected as a productive and valuable team member.” But among those “out to no one”, only 38% felt so.
When it came to feeling that coming out could impact upon future promotions in the workplace, 24% of lesbians, 30% of gay men, 40% of bisexuals, and 55% of transgender employees agreed. And while 80% of employees rated diversity policies at their next company as fairly or very important, only 45% would feel comfortable to ask about those policies in an interview. That highlights the subtle difference between corporate policies and corporate culture.
Discriminative Nuances of the Corporate Closet
The LGBT 2020 statistics echo the findings of HRC’s Cost of the Closet survey of 800 LGBT workers. This research reported an “invisible workforce” of 53% of LGBT employees “having to hide in plain sight”. The study showed that employers are losing talent and engagement due to “treatable problems with workplace environment or culture.”
The study identified overseen dynamics that contribute to social exclusion, since work culture largely consists of informal conversations and cues: “The primary influences on workplace cultures are so ubiquitous, they are almost easy to miss.”
For LGBT employees, daily non-work related conversations about weekend and dinner plans and photos on your desk create an identity-related dilemma. While “81% of non-LGBT respondents feel that LGBT people ‘should not have to hide’ who they are in the workplace,” the reality is that “less than half of non-LGBT employees would feel comfortable hearing LGBT workers talk about dating.”
So it’s no surprise that 35% of LGBT employees felt compelled to lie about their personal lives, many reporting exhaustion and distraction.
The researchers reported, “This double standard emerges in our study, where frequent personal conversations occur among coworkers, and LGBT employees are receiving the message that their contributions are not welcome, or worse, inappropriate. In fact, 70% of non-LGBT workers agree that ‘it is unprofessional’ to talk about sexual orientation or gender identity in the workplace.”
While sharing is an intrinsic part of any corporate culture, not everyone’s sharing is received equally: “When sharing the same day-to-day anecdotes with co-workers, LGBT people are seen as over-sharing, or forcing their ‘lifestyle’ upon co-workers.”
Missing Out on Networks
An Italian study found a culture of silence, “prevents LGBT employees from constructing a work identity which encompasses their sexual identity and prevents the organizations from achieving their aim of being fully inclusive workplaces.” It would appear so does a cultural of cues of subtle disapproval.
The HRC researchers point out that not being able to be open at work “can isolate a person and erode valuable rapport with co-workers, managers and would-be mentors.” Some of the top reasons for not coming out include making co-workers feel uncomfortable or losing connection with them, but when LGBT employees feel compelled to hide their lives, they are already cut off.
This matters to career development. LGBT employees risk being excluded from informal networks that can lead to career advancement, the invisible channels through which individuals build trust and rapport with colleagues and get noticed for sponsorship and advancement by senior management. This kind of social exclusion doesn’t require official discrimination, just the right amount of invisible cues and signals.
Corporate Non-Discrimination Policies Are Improving
The Corporate Equality Index compiled by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) for 2015, the national benchmarking tool on LGBT corporate policies and practices, reports that a record 366 businesses (20% increase on 2014) have earned a top score of 100 percent and distinction of “Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality.”
The criteria is based upon equal benefits for same-sex partners and spouses, ending benefits discrimination for transgender employees and dependents, firm-wide organizational competency on LGBT issues, and public commitment to the LGBT community.
This is nearly double the companies who earned that ranking three years ago in 2012 and the report notes that transgender progress is greatest – with a rising number of companies offering healthcare, transition support, and gender-identity non-discrimination.
Federal Non-Discrimination Policies Are Lacking
Chad Griffin, President of the HRC Foundation, remarks there’s still a long way to go. “Despite 66% of all Fortune 500 companies now including gender identity in the employment protections, we know that this does not always translate into everyday inclusion of the transgender community. While many companies are leading the way, our nation’s federal non-discrimination protections are lagging behind. Critical cultural shifts need to take place to foster greater inclusion.”
This is true for LGBT inclusion broadly. Sarah McBridge at the Center for American Progress, introducing her co-authored We The People report for governmental LGBT non-discrimination, illustrates the atmosphere of uncertainty for LGBT employees: “In 14 states, individuals can legally marry their same-sex partner on Sunday and then legally be fired from their jobs on Monday simply for exercising that right.”
It turns out that “out and proud” are valuable words indeed. The opposite is costly both to LGBT individuals and to organizations.
Evolving digital technology demands more communication and accessibility from all employees, which leads to a culture of multi-tasking. But as leaders face increased communication demands, it’s important that they retain the value of listening.
Listening is Getting More Difficult
Active listening has been identified as one of the ten attributes of embodied leadership. Effective listening by leaders has been noted as the first step in creating trust within organizations. Also research shows that supervisor listening contributes to employee job satisfaction, satisfaction with the supervisor, and fosters a strong and beneficial exchange between leaders and team members.
Yet according to Accenture’s #ListenLearnLead study of 3,600 business professionals across 30 countries, the vast majority of professionals (64%) feel that listening has become more difficult in today’s workplace.
While nearly all (96%) of global professionals judged themselves to be “good listeners”, nearly all (98%) also report multi-tasking at least part of the day.
The study found that eight in ten respondents said they multi-task on conference calls with work emails (66%), instant messaging (35%), personal emails (34%), social media (22%) and reading news and entertainment (21%). In fact, professionals report distracted listening and divided attention unless they are held directly and visibly responsible within the context of the meeting.
“Digital is changing everything, including the ways in which we communicate. In turn, the way we communicate is changing how we listen, learn and lead in the workplace,” says Nellie Berroro, Managing Director, Global Inclusion & Diversity at Accenture. “Today, truly listening means not just watching our nonverbal cues in face-to-face meetings, but also maintaining our focus on conference calls, staying present, and resisting the urge to multi-task with instant messages and texts.”
Multi-Tasking Means More Quantity, But Less Quality
The attraction to multi-tasking seems to be a double-edged sword in the workplace that pins quantity against quality.
In Accenture’s study, 64% of Millennials, 54% of Gen Xers, and 49% of Baby Boomers reported multi-tasking during at least half of their work day. While 66% of professionals agreed multi-tasking enables them to get more done at work, 36% report that distractions prevent them from doing their best work. Millennials were at the extreme on each – feeling multi-tasking meant getting more done (73%) and yet distractions prevented them from doing their best work (41%).
However it’s traditional interruptions imposed by others (telephone calls & unscheduled meetings & visitors) rather than technology that were reported as most disruptive, perhaps due to the lack of control over these distractions.
What suffers? The trade-offs reported include decreased focus, lower-quality work, and diminished team relationships. But can leaders afford these trade-offs, too?
Despite the Benefits, Are Leaders Too Accessible?
“Our survey found technology both helps and hinders effective leadership,” says Borrero. On the positive side, 58% of survey respondents saw technology as a benefit for leaders enabling them to communicate quickly with their teams, allowing both time and geographic flexibility (47%) as well as accessibility (46%).
However, 62% of women and 54% of men felt technology made leaders over-stretched by being too accessible. 50% of respondents felt it forced multi-tasking and 40% felt it distracted from culture and relationship building. 55% felt a top challenge for leaders is information overload.
Borrero recommends practicing discipline when needed in disengaging from other technologies to give full focus to the material in front of you, such as putting your mobile device on silent during phone conferences and actively noting key points. “When you face information overload,” she says, “become comfortable with turning off technology. For example, you might disconnect at night, so you can recharge, and decide not to look at your phone until the morning.”
Importantly, when it comes to effective leadership and overcoming barriers to it, focusing on quality of communication and connection matters most – and that may very well start with listening.
The most important leadership attributes identified by the study were the “soft skills” of effective communication (55%), ability to manage change (47%), and ability to inspire others and ideas (45%), closely followed by understanding team members.
Yet this is also where skills suffer: the two most commonly perceived obstacles to effective team leadership were a lack of interpersonal skills (50%) and a lack of communication skills (44%).
Getting Better At Listening
While digital technology brings many advantages, leaders who compromise at listening may compromise their ability to lead effectively.
A Westminster Business School report highlights, “Listening is an essential skill in all situations and it is particularly important for leaders and managers to actually hear what others say, not simply what we think we hear them say…All great leadership starts with listening. That means listening with an open mind, heart and will. It means listening to what is being said as well as what isn’t being said.”
Despite its importance to leadership, leaders are too often ineffective at truly listening according to an HBR article by Christine M. Riordan. She notes, “The ability and willingness to listen with empathy is often what sets a leader apart.”
Riordan outlines three key behaviors leaders can practice that are linked with empathetic listening:
1) Hearing with all of your senses and acknowledging what you’ve heard.
This means “recognizing all verbal and nonverbal cues, including tone, facial expressions, and other body language.” It’s as much about listening to what is not said as what is said, and probing a bit deeper, as well as acknowledging others feelings or viewpoints and the act of sharing them.
2) Processing what is being shared and heard.
This means “understanding the meaning of the messages and keeping track of the (key) points of the conversation.” Effective leaders are able to capture and remember global themes, key messages, and points of agreement and disagreement.
3) Responding to and encouraging communication.
This means “assuring others that listening has occurred and encouraging communication to continue.” Acknowledging others verbally or non-verbally, asking clarifying questions, or paraphrasing reflects consideration of their input. This can also mean following-up to ensure others know listening has occurred.
According to Accenture’s Borrero, “Leaders are role models employees emulate, so it’s important for them to set a good example. In our increasingly hyper-connected digital workplace, we all need to practice ‘active listening,’ including paraphrasing, taking notes and asking questions. At Accenture, we offer a number of courses in effective listening, which is critical to our company as we focus on serving clients.”
In today’s leadership context, where effective leadership means showing social awareness not just self-awareness, leaders may employ technology to help them do it, but one way or another, it’s important they find a way to truly listen.
By Aimee Hansen
As a leader, do the values of your organization speak through your actions?
A recent article in The Journal of Values-Based Leadership reminds us that Steve Jobs said, “The only thing that works is management by values.” It’s no surprise that companies like Apple who foster a values-based approach in their leadership culture create connections that have a significant impact on company performance.
Your ability to focus on and motivate through core organizational values can have an impact on your effectiveness as a leader, too.
HOW FOCUSING ON ORGANIZATIONAL VALUES HELPS YOU AS A LEADER
Raises you to a leadership perspective
The Financial Times defines value-based leadership as “Motivating employees by connecting organizational goals to employees’ personal values.”
A Harvard Business School paper asserted that when leaders focus on the technical or administrative side of their work, they become too fixed on short term returns. The paper stated, “If leaders instead sought to uphold values and maintain integrity, they could establish the long-term perspective and commitment to innovation necessary for sustaining their competitive position in an increasingly global economy.”
Effective leaders keep focused on the visions and values of the organization as a compass for action. Indeed, having women in the boardroom has helped at aligning corporate action to company values. International research has shown that “the positive impact of women on the board on financial performance, and on ethical and social compliance, indirectly affects firm value.”
Also, keeping your eye set on organizational values, and above the daily tasks, may help you from getting too drawn into office housework that can be peripheral to your leadership goals.
Increases bonding with you as a leader
Building relationships with those who work with you is important, but when they’re built through a common bond around organizational values, it strengthens your position as a leader.
The ability to compellingly communication organizational values is a key attribute of leadership success. Communication research shows that optimized messages can garner a “shared sense of purpose, which is achieved when multiple employees possess the same understanding of the purpose of the work.” In particular, the combination of “a large amount of vision imagery with a small number of values” increases performance by creating a shared sense of organizational goals and coordination towards them.
Effective leaders also create a motivational sense of belonging. Leadership research shows that people feel more bonded to a leader with which they feel a “shared social identity” that is representative of their in-group. Leaders who effectively convert organizational values to a shared identity would seem able to create deeper commitment from those they manage.
In fact, values coach & author Joe Tye asserts that values-based leadership can create a culture of ownership rather than a culture of accountability, which he asserts relates to motivation, productivity, and retention.
Affirms your leadership integrity
Values are meaningless unless put into action, and the standard for integrity within an organization is set by its leaders.
Speaking to values-based leadership, Mark Fernandes, Chief Leadership Officer at Luck Companies, says “In order for these values to be authentic within the organization, it’s imperative that the leaders be fully committed to demonstrating the values in everything they do. There’s a level of inauthenticity that associates will notice and it can erode their trust in the leadership if they’re not actively seeing the behaviors exhibited in the actions and words of their leaders.”
The HBS paper asserted that by embodying the values they espouse, leaders enable employees to find meaning and value in their own work: “Members’ interactions with the organization and their actions on its behalf are not just transactional but are imbued with meaning. As members internalize the organization’s purpose, to the extent that their own actions further this purpose, they come to regard these actions as meaningful. They further view themselves as part of a valued community. They are motivated to exert effort on behalf of that community, to defend it when threatened, and to advocate on its behalf.”
Being able to connect individuals to the values of your organization is especially important when it comes to motivating Gen Y. Research has shown that for Millenials, job fulfilment hinges partially on believing in the vision and strategic direction their organization is pursuing in the world and feeling personally connected to it.
If leaders don’t uphold the values the company espouses, employees lose faith and begin to disengage. If they do, they inspire.
Ignites your potential and the potential of those around you
When your personal ambition is aligned with your company’s vision, you are more engaged, more productive and more able to reach your potential according to research. This is true not only for you, but for those you manage and motivate. When you feel corporate values are more closely aligned to your personal values, it creates intrinsic motivation.
Fernandes focuses on igniting the full potential in others, “Values-based leadership is defined by living, working and leading in alignment with your core values, principles, beliefs and purpose to, in turn, ignite the extraordinary potential in those around you.”
Values-based leadership has also been linked to creating a culture of creativity and innovation. The Journal of VBL article states, “When an individual has a personal and professional commitment to align personal values with those of the organization he or she works for, a powerful connection is created. This connection creates numerous possibilities for both individual growth and company productivity.” The article suggests that motivating a “work culture or atmosphere that sparks creativity” is increasingly a matter of customizing motivational strategies to align employee values with organizational values.
WALK THE WALK ON VALUES
So given how values-based leadership can positively impact your leadership potential, how do you begin to walk the walk? Perhaps the first question to ask yourself is what the organizational values really mean to you.
Conscious Manager recommends to, “Develop a personal understanding of your organization’s values. Think about what the company’s values really mean to you and to your unique leadership style. You need to know which of your behaviors demonstrate those values. If the business’ beliefs and principles don’t have meaning for you, you won’t be able to make them meaningful for anyone else.” Ultimately, it’s your actions, not your words that speak to how well you represent values – in being a role model, in teaching the values, and in recognizing them. “Bringing values to life is a behavioral issue.”
Embodying Values is one of five key behaviors of great leaders, says Author Ken Blanchard. He asserts, “Leaders must establish, articulate, and enforce the core values of their organization. More important, they must model the behaviors that support the values.”
He suggests leaders ask these four questions:
“How can I integrate our core organizational values into the way my team operates?”
“What are some ways I can communicate our values to my team over the next thirty days?”
“How can I create greater personal alignment with our values on a daily basis?”
“How can I recognize and reward people who actively embody the values?”
Inspiring leaders motivate us towards a common goal. Values-based may be less a type of leadership, and more a requirement of it.
By Aimee Hansen
Currently, Boards Are Underperforming and a recent article in HBR went further to declare that “boards aren’t working.” Boards are failing at “their core mission: providing strong oversight and strategic support for management’s efforts to create long-term value.”
Bartman & Wiseman reported that boards are at the top of the blame list for pressuring companies to focus on short-term financial results, with board members being the first to admit so. A previous McKinsey study among board directors revealed serious gaps in understanding company strategies, how firms create value, and in-depth knowledge of industry dynamics.
As a core part in how to address this issue, the authors stated, “Part of the lack is in deep, strategic understanding of the business… If the aim is fostering the proper long-term view, what matters most is the quality and depth of the strategic conversations that take place.”
So, boardrooms are broken? How can gender diversity help?
Increasing the number of women directors changes boardroom dynamics, says a recent article in the Harvard Business Review penned by Laura Liswood, Secretary General, Council of Women World Leaders – who reflects upon ongoing progress.
Real Gender-Diversity Creates Results
The impact of gender diversity on results has been repeatedly demonstrated. Recently a French study found that women in boardrooms has a “significant and positive impact on economic performance” and that “gender diversity even reduces corporate inefficiencies and enables firms to come closer to their optimal performance.” Studies show that corporations with more women in the boardroom experienced greater financial performance.
Beth Brooke-Marciniak, Global Vice Chair of Policy at Ernst & Young, stated, “The evidence abounds: In 2012, Ernst & Young reviewed 22,000 audits that our member firms were performing in four countries on three continents. We found that gender-balanced teams were much more successful than other teams. They don’t just outperform other teams in quality – they also bring back better returns…Research shows that companies with at least one woman on the board have a higher return on equity, higher earnings and a stronger growth in stock price than companies with all-male boards. Bringing diverse voices to the table improves the solutions we see.”
Critical Mass Matters
Many studies demonstrate that a critical mass of women on the board, not just tokenistic representation, leads to better financial results and a greater impact on boardroom dynamics. As an article in Forbes put it, “Forget ‘one and done’ or ‘two and through’ – put three or more women on the board and the financial results are even better.”
A study by Thomson Reuters across 4,255 public companies found that while 64% had women on the board, only 20% had boards with over 20% women – while indices made up of mixed boards performed better. Debra Walton, Chief Content Officer, writes, “One idea in particular resonates for me. It’s called the ‘Power of Three’: One woman is a token, two are a presence, and three are a voice. Some would argue that company boards — which, after all, exist to offer insight on important strategic decisions — need that power because of the potential it offers.”
Some studies assert that women in insignificant numbers impact insignificantly on board performance, whereas the inclusion of at least three women on the board has a positive impact on firm value. Organizations like law firm Herbert Smith Freehills aim for 30% representation. Global Head of Mergers and Acquisitions Stephen Wilkinson said, “Just about every respectable study that has come out in the last ten years shows organisations which have a greater gender balance at management level are financially more successful.”
Impacts of Critical Mass on Boardroom Dynamics
Featured in the HBR and in his book Challenging Boardroom Homogeneity: Corporate Law, Governance and Diversity, Dr. Aaron A. Dhir’s work provides an insider look into Norwegian boardrooms and illustrates the impact of having at least 3 women in the boardroom. Dhir identified seven effects of gender-based boardroom heterogeneity for work, governance, and group dynamics:
- Enhanced dialogue
- Better decision making, including the value of dissent
- More effective risk mitigation and crisis management, and a better balance between risk-welcoming and risk aversion behavior
- Higher quality monitoring of and guidance to management
- Positive changes to the boardroom environment and culture
- More orderly and systematic board work
- Positive changes in the behavior of men
He also noted outsider status and independence were powerful influences, opening up closed social groups and network dynamics and restructuring social bonds between directors, the CEO, and high-level management.
Enhanced Dialogue & More Thorough Decision Making
Dhir found that many women brought “a different set of perspectives, experiences, angles and viewpoints” than their male counterparts. Lisswood noted, “Board members also observed that female directors are ‘more likely than their male counterparts to probe deeply into the issues at hand’ by asking more questions, leading to more robust intra-board deliberations. Most women appeared to be uninterested in presenting a façade of knowledge and were loath to make decisions they did not fully understand.”
Female directors tended to foster a different approach to engagement – seeking the opinions of others and working to ensure everyone had a say in the matter.
The importance of diversity in decision-making is paramount. Research has found that homogenous groups don’t reach better decisions, but they’ll think they have. Heterogenous groups arrive at better decisions, but won’t think so. Experience and outcome are two different things.
INSEAD research postulates that in-group and out-group dynamics in a diverse group lead to more contentious and comprehensive discussions, and results in “more thorough, more comprehensive decisions” when women are on boards.
The importance of diversity in decision-making is paramount.
Diversity Disrupts Groupthink
Groupthink is defined as a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics – a serious liability of homogenous boards. Disrupting it is a big asset of women in the boardroom, even if and especially if they disrupt the existing dynamic.
“Groupthink seriously imperils the board’s decision-making process as it introduces decision biases and blind spots into the process. This is mainly attributed to directors’ endeavor to maintain cohesiveness and solidarity within the board at all costs. Such group pressure compels many directors to ‘go with the flow’ instead of challenging the dominant view in the boardroom,” states Fause Antelo Ersheid, Economist and Senior Corporate Governance Analyst & Researcher at the Abu Dhabi Center for Corporate Governance.
Ersheid recommends, “To overcome this decision-making impediment, companies need to implement a comprehensive diversification program in the boardroom; the board should be as diverse as the company’s client base and perhaps more.” He recommends gender, age, racial, and professional diversity and individually-appointed directors, underlining chairs must champion diversification.
As Thomson Reuter’s Walton states, “Diversity of gender brings a diversity of thought. Getting more women involved reduces groupthink, unlocks fresh perspectives, and fosters innovation and organizational creativity – ultimately emulating a diverse customer base. Only with a broad range of viewpoints can a board make governance and advisory functions meaningful and offer a balanced approach to risk management.”
Not a pipe dream?
According to Liswood, “The Norwegian experience has provided a window into what might happen if and when board leaders and companies elsewhere decide to seriously commit to making sure their boards are truly diverse, moving consciously from homogeneity to heterogeneity.”
By Aimee Hansen
It’s all about giving good people chances—not about whether they’re a man or a woman.
That’s the philosophy of Dave Meisel, who manages the full lifecycle of transportation needs at PG&E, from vehicle specification to maintenance to disposal. Starting his career as a mechanic, Meisel has worked in corporate America with a series of national utility fleets including Roadway Express, Frito-Lay and Consumers Energy before joining PG&E.
Breaking His Own Notions
He admits his career has been honed in a male-dominated industry, where for many years, he primarily worked with men—aside from a woman or two in administration roles. And yet, even with that background, diversity has always been important to Meisel from a personal and professional standpoint.
“I grew up in a house full of boys in the 1960s, and you learn a certain set of rules that are different than today,” Meisel says, adding he now has a house full of girls. “I quickly realized I didn’t know much about girls.”
He believes even more passionately that just because they’re girls, they shouldn’t have to work harder or be denied the same opportunities as boys, even though he grew up in a time when gender roles were more defined.
In fact, he says he has been surprised to find his girls had different interests than he had expected.
“My girls are good at lots of things that aren’t traditional,” he says, citing his youngest daughter who loves to hunt. “After seeing their interests, I figured out there wasn’t as big of a difference between boys and girls as I thought or had been taught, and that changed my view.”
He was able to take what he learned with his own girls, and apply it to interacting with the women with whom he works. “And along the way, I’m sure I learned more from them than they learned from me,” Meisel says.
He has increasingly seen smart women coming out of college and conquering the workplace in what has typically been a male-dominated industry.
“Even though they weren’t familiar with our industry, they exhibited a legitimate desire to learn it,” Meisel says. “With that, they brought a different perspective on what “good” looks like—they raise the bar.”
Sponsoring Talent
Over the years, Meisel has mentored lots of men and women, helping them learn about other parts of the company and acting as a sounding board.
But he knows the difference between being a mentor and sponsor, where you invest yourself more completely in their success. Meisel says he has helped many women over the years rise from clerical positions into technical or management roles when others hadn’t bothered to see their potential.
“I really believe most people just need a chance. I’ve tried to be vigilant about not stereotyping,” Meisel says. “When I know this person is smart and they can do well in a certain role, I develop a plan to help them reach that goal. And along the way, I make sure to give them support. I would never leave them to sink or swim.”
He says the women he works with perform as well or better than the men, describing them as smart, bright, articulate, and thirsty to learn. “They don’t take anything for granted, whereas some men might believe that since they’re in a men’s business they deserve the growth opportunity.”
PG&E attracts lots of diverse candidates—men and women, different ages and different cultures. And since there are so many different types of jobs at the company, they can start in one area and be moved around. “We’re fortunate in the quality of people we attract and how hard they work when they’re put in those roles,” he says.
Choosing Teams
Meisel knows the prevailing viewpoint in the company is to be collaborative. “We try to actively engage people other than those we traditionally work with. When we put a diverse group on a project, we get so many views that are different than we would otherwise get and ultimately, a better result. The bottom line is if you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got.”
Meisel says it’s easy to tell if a team is suitably diverse: Look at the people you’re working with to solve problems. If they all look like you, then that’s the problem.
“As a leader, you have to stand up and say, ’I want more opinions. I want more diversity.’ We’re more successful when we have a broader based view than when we don’t. The ultimate goal is to run the business well, and a diverse view of the world helps us run the business better. You can’t keep perpetuating the same old team if you want different opinions.”
Taking Chances
Meisel thinks many companies worry too much about “taking a chance” when they promote someone. “Smart people are smart people, and they don’t have any boundaries. Good people get to where they are because they’re hard workers, so moving them one level higher isn’t really taking a chance. They are where they are because they performed and there’s no reason to expect they won’t continue to perform.”
Meisel has also found it’s in everyone’s interest to mix up roles. If there’s something they traditionally thought men could or would do better, leaders might be surprised when they find women are every bit as willing and successful in the tasks. “If no one gives them a chance,” he says, “how do you expect them to grow?”
And Meisel finds diversity extends to age, and how impressive he finds the electronic savvy of young people. “I don’t consider myself technically illiterate and yet their skill set is so far beyond mine,” he says. “You have to look at that skill set and say it doesn’t matter how old they are. If they can do the task, give them the chance.”
Ultimately, Meisel says there’s truth in the adage that you can’t judge a book by its cover, even though many people still do. “Often the book is so much better than the cover.”
By Cathie Ericson