Posted by jlubans on October 17, 2018  •  Leave comment (0)


Caption: Krylov’s tiny pug chasing the elephant. Moscow. 197

ONCE upon a time the Elephant was high in favor at the Court of the Lion, King of beasts.
All the animals of the forest began to gossip, and many were the guesses they made as to how the Elephant had become such a favorite.
"He is not a handsome beast," the animals all agreed, "he is not even amusing.
And as for his habits, he certainly has very bad manners!"
"If he only had a brush like mine," said the Fox, proudly whisking his fine, bushy tail, "I should not have thought it so strange!"
"Or if he had big, strong claws like mine," rejoined the Bear, "it would not have been so extraordinary.
But, as we all know, the poor beast has no claws at all!"
"You don't think, do you, that his tusks got him into favor?" broke in the Ox. "Is it possible that they were mistaken for horns, like mine?"
"Do you mean to tell me," demanded the Ass, shaking his ears, "that you really none of you know what it is that has made the Elephant so popular at Court?
Why, I guessed the reason right away! If it had not been for his beautiful long ears, he would never have got into favor!"
This was not the only time Krylov would use the elephant as a foil for pretentiousness.
His THE INQUISITIVE MAN introduced the phrase, “the elephant in the room”.
And, there’s the one on the
Krylov’s technique is first to show the jealousy of the other courtiers – how could the elephant be popular when he lacks their attributes: a “fine, bushy tail”, or “big strong claws” or the Ox’s horns? Besides he is ill mannered, neither handsome nor amusing!
Case closed!
But, not to be outdone, the Ass knows exactly why. Like himself, the elephant has “beautiful long ears”, the obvious reason for King Lion’s esteem.
Of course, Krylov is mocking the Czar’s courtiers and their petty rivalries and jealousies. Doing so got him into trouble, but being the Czar’s favorite, his excommunications were brief and he returned to have the last laugh.
Let’s leave the Court and take a peek at any C-suite to see who is riding high and who is not.
Is there much difference between Krylov’s animal courtiers and the C-suite denizens? Is the level of envy and jealousy amongst all of those in or out of favor any less in the C-suite?
What then is the leader’s role? Smile and say, “It’s just office politics”? Or does the leader set the standard of never talking behind someone’s back, of never criticizing someone to others?
What would you do?

*Source: Krilof and his fables, by Krylov, Ivan Andreevich, 1768-1844; Ralston, William Ralston Shedden, 1828-1889. Tr. London, 1869.
To purchase a copy of Fables for Leaders, click on this button:

Or, you can buy a copy at AMAZON.

For those with personal libraries full up, borrow a copy at your library. If not on hand, ask them to get a copy.

© Copyright John Lubans 2018

The H Factor Joins Factor C

Posted by jlubans on October 12, 2018  •  Leave comment (0)

Caption: Arrogance knows no bounds.*

A while back I posted about a fascinating bit of research on something called “Factor C” or Collective Intelligence.
Boiled down, the C Factor is essential in helping teams become high performing.
What is it?
“C” is a predictor of group failure or success and includes three elements: participant emotional or social IQ; the number of engaged participants; and, interestingly, the number of women on the team.
What is the H factor? Honesty and Humility.
Sue Shellenbarger concludes in her WSJ essay that “The Best Bosses Are Humble Bosses,” rather than overwhelmingly charismatic, or attention seeking or persuasive ones.
The contrarian research she cites has the H factor composed of attributes like sincerity, modesty, fairness, truthfulness and unpretentiousness.
OK, OK you may be saying, so what?
Well the humble leader gets better results than the ego-tripper!
Interestingly, “Humility is a core quality of leaders who inspire close teamwork, rapid learning and high performance in their teams, …. Humble people tend to be aware of their own weaknesses, eager to improve themselves, appreciative of others’ strengths and focused on goals beyond their own self-interest.”
What’s been my experience?
Not quite so clear-cut. Apart from my more-than-humble self☺, a few of my bosses have been humble, but more so with their higher ups than with their direct reports. Their braggadocious-ness came out when away from the boss’s boss.
Others, slyer than most, made efforts to appear humble to camouflage an all-consuming lust for power. The cloven hooves of arrogance and ambition always popped out when under stress.
So, Factor H is not an easy read.
I do know genuinely humble leaders, servant leaders. But they are humble in different ways all the while being “highly competitive and ambitious.” Yet, “they tend to avoid the spotlight and give credit to their teams.”
Indeed, some very outgoing leaders may appear almost narcissistic; but they never fail to mention how the overall organization has achieved success, not just because he or she is at the helm.
Often, they are heard to say, “We have accomplished” far more than “I have accomplished.” That’s enough for me to believe they are humble in their own way.
And that they understand progress will take everyone getting on board, not just the captain’s.
I mentioned the C factor in the title. The C factor applies to work groups and how they go about getting results.
Group members that exhibit strong humility and honesty probably will do better than members who feel a need to dominate. Call it a social skill, the ability to suspend one’s self-importance for the good of the group, for the good of the cause.
Generally, those groups with high Factor C scores are going to get more done than those with poor Factor C.
So, I tend to believe the research that shows how humbleness gets groups further along than groups with domineering members.
Of course, an emergency might require very strong command and control; a crisis might be best met if someone steps up and takes over and, through good direction, brings along other people.

Take the test: How humble are you?
Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1) I appreciate other people’s advice at work.
2) It’s not my job to applaud others’ achievements.
3) People lose respect when they admit their limitations.
4) I am entitled to more respect than the average person.
5) I do many things better than almost everyone I know.
6) It annoys me when others ignore my accomplishments.
People high in humility tend to agree with Item 1 and disagree with Items 2 through 6.
*My Australian friend and colleague, Steve Ryan, reveals the identity of the cartoon's skeweree: John Howard, prime minister of Australia (1996–2007).
To purchase a copy of Fables for Leaders, click on this button:

Or, while supplies last, you can buy a copy at AMAZON.

© Copyright John Lubans 2018

Lubans Gets Fulbright Award

Posted by jlubans on October 01, 2018  •  Leave comment (0)

A week or so ago, I heard from the J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board that I had been selected for an award. I will be teaching a pilot class at the University of Latvia in Riga in the spring of 2019: “Leadership & Literature”.
The class will make use of the international fable literature and other literary genres to explore teams and teamwork concepts, group dynamics, self-management, leadership and effective followership.
My book, Fables for Leaders, will be the core un-textbook along with films, short stories, poetry, and the performing arts.
The class will pursue answers to these and other questions:
How do literary genres help illuminate complex topics like leadership, self-managing teams and team development?
Are there literary examples of democratic team leaders and what they do? Who and what are democratic followers and what do they do?
How does literature help us to personally understand and adapt to an organization’s behavior?

Another matter:
When your coffee pot blows up, catches fire, or otherwise fails to make coffee, the manufacturer wants to know and may even issue a product recall. Such an undertaking incurs large costs but manufacturers have no choice. To stay in business, they want to fix the problem.
Why then does Facebook (or any other social media vendor) think an apology and a promise to do better is sufficient when someone absconds with your personal and private information?
Most recently, 50 million Facebook accounts were “hacked”. Hacking is stealing, so let’s stop romanticizing this theft of millions of records as if it were the work of Napoleons of Crime. They are crooks.
The thieves sell or otherwise exploit this information.
We may get upset when our political opponents pay Facebook (both political parties do this) to persuade us one way or the other at election time but we should be getting far more concerned when our p&p information is stolen.
So, here’s a modest proposal. Social Media is required to issue a product recall type notice to every person victimized by data thieves. And, the vendor needs to provide each user with a new account with enhanced security and safeguards.
And, they need to monitor how the stolen information is used.
Failure to do this will result in fines and penalties for the vendor.
Of course, we all have the choice to close our accounts, but even then, the vendors may or may not shut down access to our p&p information. No doubt there is a healthy “after-market” in which vendors sell this info.
Finally, the rules and regulations in hundreds of legalese pages used by vendors to cover their liability needs to be boiled down to a few phrases like “We treat your p&p information just the way we would our own”, “You own the information you provide” and, “If you wish to close your account, we will do so and erase all of your information.”
Get it?

©2018 Copyright John Lubans in all forms and formats.