The Executive and the Elephant

A Leader's Guide for Building Inner Excellence

Richard L. Daft

• Publisher: Jossey-Bass
• Year: 2010
• Print ISBN:
  9780470372265
• Edition: 1
• eBook ISBN:
  9780470636688
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Management
• Index: Business

Lessons for leaders on resolving the ongoing struggle between instinct and the creative mind

Kings, heads of government, and corporate executives lead thousands of people and manage endless resources, but may not have mastery over themselves. Often leaders know that right action is important, but have little (if any) understanding of what prevents them from acting in accordance with their intentions. In this important book, leadership expert Richard Daft portrays this dilemma as a struggle between instinct (elephant) and intention (the executive) using the most current research on the intentional vs. the habitual mind to explain how this phenomenon occurs.

• Based on current research and real-life examples
• Offers leaders a method for directing themselves more productively
• Written by an expert in leadership, organizational performance, and change management

Through real-life examples and recent studies in psychology, management and Eastern spirituality Daft provides guidance to all of us who struggle finding our own balance and cultivating the behavior of others.

PART ONE

The Two Selves

1

The Problem of Managing Yourself

I am dragged along by a strange new force. Desire and reason are pulling in different directions. I see the right way and approve it, but follow the wrong.

— Medea

He that would govern others should first be the master of himself.

—Philip Massinger

BOB WAS HEAD OF A CORPORATE manufacturing division located in East Tennessee. Because his division was relatively small, Bob made all the hiring decisions himself. After receiving feedback from corporate and reading books about the importance of delegation, Bob realized his deficiency and made a pact with himself to engage others in key decisions. Calling in the sales director, Bob asked him to meet with several candidates for the customer service rep position and make the hire. Three weeks later, that director brought his top choice to Bob’s office, along with an offer letter for Bob to approve. Dumbstruck, Bob mumbled that he wanted to meet the final three candidates himself. He was unable to go along with the director’s choice, as he felt no rapport with the woman or her thin resume. After meeting the other candidates, Bob hired the man at the bottom of the director’s list. No matter how badly he wanted to delegate the decision, Bob could not let go. No matter how much Bob wanted the director to hire his own person, something compelled Bob to make the decision himself. “My mind has a mind of its own,” he said. The decision was a disaster both for the now resentful director and for the new customer service rep. It was no surprise when both quit within six months.

Bob was experiencing an internal struggle with himself that he had neither explicitly acknowledged nor ever discussed before. Bob did see that he had failed to lead himself to do what he had promised himself to do. He somehow chose the unwanted controlling behavior over his intended delegation behavior.

Martha was a young sales manager for an advertising agency. She was fairly new at the advertising firm and was promoted to sales manager after her boss abruptly resigned. Martha inherited a difficult employee who was a strong producer but whose competitiveness caused resentment among other team members. The difficult employee’s behavior seemed to get worse after inexperienced Martha took over. She said her intention to correct the employee was like “getting in my car to go east and the car insisted on going west, and I couldn’t do anything about it.” Martha did the right thing by getting her facts together and scheduling a meeting. “As I broached the subject of the prima donna’s behavior, his reaction was defensive, and I backed down.” That was her car turning toward California. “My sense of empathy or my desire to please others overrode my ability to be assertive and provide strong direction for him.” She was clearly disappointed in herself. “I missed my chance. I later tried giving him ‘motherly’ advice, but he did not change.” Martha’s vivid image of her car turning in the opposite direction against her wishes illustrates the gap between her intention and action. A part of Martha knew what to do, but the other part would not comply.

An obvious question is, why are these leaders not behaving as they intended? They had the right idea each time, but somehow sidetracked themselves into undesired behavior. It is a puzzle why leaders choose unwise behavior when they are often aware of a smarter choice. That puzzle is the focus of this book.

The Conflict Between Knowing and Doing

Kings, heads of government, and corporate executives have control over thousands of people and endless resources, but often do not have mastery over themselves. From a distance, larger-than-life leaders may look firmly in control of their businesses and their personal behavior. What about up close? Personal mastery is a difficult thing. For example, can you think of any politicians in recent years whose personal behavior was revealed as opposite to their espoused values? Or consider Fortune magazine’s article a few years ago about why CEOs fail.¹ The records of thirty-eight ineffective CEOs revealed that all were good at cognitive stuff—vision, strategy, ideas, and the like. Things broke down during execution. The CEOs’ behavior did not follow through on their thoughts and words. Action did not follow intention. Things as simple as sitting too long on decisions, not confronting underperforming subordinates, or not delivering on commitments ended up harming the company. The CEOs had plausible excuses, but it seemed clear that their actual behavior did not reflect their stated intentions. They seemed to know what to do but were not doing it.

Have you ever had a clear intention and then failed to follow through? Jeff Pfeffer and Bob Sutton wrote a book called The Knowing-Doing Gap, in which they described the many ways in which corporate talk substituted for corporate action.² The same gap exists for individuals. I think that all managers and professional employees know what they should be doing, how to do it, and why they should do it. We know or can figure out the correct thing to do. Yet often we do not act accordingly. Our intentions and behaviors often refuse to align. In my consulting and executive teaching, I have come across dozens and dozens of internal conflicts between knowing and doing. One part of a manager wants to do one thing; another part wants to do something else.

I put off writing my monthly report until the last day every time, said the publisher of a food magazine. This procrastination drove him crazy because he could not understand or control it. He finished most other tasks on time, and the last-minute pressure on the report was extremely unpleasant. Each month he tried to start the column earlier, but failed to do so.

I often tell my direct reports I will do something and then I don’t follow through. This bank manager did not know why she made casual promises she did not keep. The bad habit extracted a price in annoyed and frustrated direct reports, and they let her know about it. She was genuine in her intention each time she made a promise, but something often got in the way of follow-through.

I am reluctant to recognize and celebrate people’s accomplishments. Why make a fuss over people doing what they are supposed to do? Celebrating accomplishments was a blind spot for this plant manager. He did not “get it” about the value of public praise and recognition. From others he had gradually learned that he “should” provide verbal recognition, but was slow doing so.

Listening is my biggest fault. Shortly after someone comes into my office, I tune out and start to think about e-mails. People who visited with this utility manager complained when he worked on e-mails while they talked. He tried to pay attention, but he typically lost the struggle after five minutes or so—a habit he believed made him a less effective manager. Why did he not listen to people when he believed that was the right thing to do?

I am mentally critical of others. I point out their flaws and failures. I am just trying to help people, but they do not appreciate it. Most managers do not realize that their thoughts toward others are disproportionately negative, so give this engineer some credit for seeing his own criticalness. He understood and admitted to his negative bias, but he did not know how to change it. He said he wanted to soften his critical approach, but never did.

Something will tick me off and I react. Often it is something small and then I have a mess. I know it would be better to hear the other side of the story before reacting, but I don’t do it. This manager was a weekend Executive MBA (EMBA) student who reacted sharply and negatively to an e-mail I sent to fifty students in the class reminding them about a deadline. He took it personally and sent me an angry e-mail. When I called him, he apologized when we discussed the reason behind his e-mail. As we talked, he told me a story of recently calling a direct report into his office and accusing her after hearing a customer complaint. He was later chagrined to learn that the complaint was not valid. He said he understood there were two sides to every story and that the impact of his reactions on direct reports could be devastating. He wanted to change, but continued to overreact.

What is going on with these managers? Have they no self-discipline or willpower to be better leaders? Are they mentally weak or lazy? Do they lack resolve? I appreciate their stated desire to do right, but their behavior looks stupid because they admit to doing the wrong thing when they know the better choice. They are caught in something within themselves that they do not understand or know how to manage.

The big challenge in leadership is not in figuring out what to do but in actually doing the thing you know will produce great results. The challenge is learning to lead yourself to do what needs doing when it needs doing. Personal mastery aligns your behavior with your intention, and it is far, far harder to achieve than it looks.

The Universal Failure of Willpower

The behavior of these managers does not seem so unusual when you consider the failure of willpower in everyday life. I gave my MBA class an assignment to change something about themselves over a period of three weeks, and several students opted for healthier eating habits. One in particular decided to give up sodas. Ten days into the project, he was invited to a friend’s house for pizza. The smell and taste of the pizza made him crave a soda “more than I have ever craved something in my life. There was something in my mind that directly linked the pizza with the soda, and the link was so strong I could not resist it.” One part of him lost out to the other part. Personal resolve and willpower lost out to desire. This student was not alone. Most of the MBA students failed in their quest to improve themselves during the three weeks, and the remainder faded shortly after the assignment ended.

I have my own failures. One evening over dinner, I told my wife I was going to use the free evening to grade papers. Getting those papers finished would feel good and be a win-win for me and my students. With grading finished, I would have the next morning free to prepare for class, and I would be able to return the graded papers in class. As I left the dinner table, something pulled me toward the sofa in the living room to rest for a few minutes. Without my realizing it, my right hand reached for the remote and turned on the TV. “But I want to grade papers,” a part of me protested. Dancing with the Stars was on, so I decided to watch it and then for sure I would grade papers. After thirty minutes, something pulled me out to the kitchen for a snack despite my not being hungry. I did not want that ice cream, but I ate it anyway. When the program finished, I noticed that American Idol was on next. The part of me that wanted to watch it was stronger than the part of me that wanted to grade papers. Grading papers would be much more satisfying than watching TV, but I lost the argument. Finally, late at night, I started grading papers, and then I got up early in the morning to finish them. Despite losing sleep, I was unable to finish the papers before I had to prepare for class. The students did not get their papers back in class. My mind had a mind of its own. My “stupid” behavior won out over my good intentions. My inner excellence was not at the level I would have liked.

Perhaps there is comfort in finding esteemed company in the failures of intention. Here is what the Apostle Paul said about himself:

I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.³

“Everyone has the same amount of self-discipline, almost none,” says Jim Loehr, a sports psychologist who runs a corporate athlete program that is popular with Wall Street executives and others.⁴ People mistakenly think they can change their lives if they just try harder and summon enough willpower. It seldom happens. Just ask Opera Winfrey. She got her weight down to 160 pounds four years ago. Now she is back up to 200 pounds. “I didn’t just fall off the wagon, I let the wagon fall on me,” she wrote in O magazine.⁵ Something like two-thirds of weight lost by dieting is regained within a year, 90-plus percent within two years, and over 99 percent in five years.⁶ What is the delusion that makes people persist in buying weight-loss books and believing this time they will lose weight? Of course, their hopes are no more foolish than the 90 percent of owners of health club memberships and exercise machines who do not exercise. Their good intentions led to a purchase but not to new behavior.

Personal resolve apparently is not enough to change a bad habit, even with impending death to focus the mind and motivate action. Several studies of patients who underwent coronary bypass surgery and were given doctor’s orders to change their diet and lifestyle to extend their life found that only about one in ten people adopted healthier day-to-day habits, such as proper diet and exercise.⁷ Cardiovascular surgeons give diet and exercise advice expecting that patients will not follow it. The patients clearly understand the life-extending value of changing their behavior, and still do not follow through.

These examples show, first, that our mind can be unreliable when it comes to regulating our behavior. When we really want to use our willpower, it is likely to desert us. There seems to be a universal gap between what people think they will do and what they are actually doing. Managers, for example, often know the correct behavior to get results, but find it hard to change their behavior pattern. Second, they show that it takes two parties to have a conflict, and, metaphorically speaking, “both are within me.” An internal division causes people’s frustrations—the part that wants to do the new or better thing and the part that refuses or has something else in mind. This divided self is the key to understanding how to lead yourself to gain mastery over your behavior.

This book will explore the knowing-doing breakdowns that plague and mislead leaders and professional employees, and then describe practices that will strengthen one’s higher intentions to assert control over personal behavior. These practices can reduce the gap between the divided self to create a more united and reliable self that chooses the wise behavior. To get started, let’s look more closely at the divided self.

The Divided Self: Executive and Elephant

Think again about the list of inner conflicts expressed by managers and others so far in this chapter. The internal struggles revealed a divided self, with one self supposedly guiding and giving instruction to the other, which refused to cooperate. One self seemed stronger than the other, and too often the “wrong” self seemed in charge. A human being seems composed of...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Dedication
• PART ONE - The Two Selves
• PART TWO - Ways You May Mislead or Delude Yourself
• PART THREE - How to Start Leading Yourself
• PART FOUR - Become Aware of Your Inner Resources
• PART FIVE - Reach for the Heights
• PART SIX - Can You Lead from a People Frame of Reference?
• Notes
• About the Author
• Exercise Index
• Index