Unconscious aversion

The 70% factor

I was speaking with a highly experienced board chair who made this observation: “70% of the effectiveness of directors is their ability to build networks of relationships, both inside and outside the board”.

We then both agreed it’s about more than a person’s relational?skills, it’s that the most successful people (whether directors or not) actively seek out?the right people?to network with.

I see that there are three broad types of people most worth recruiting to your networks:

1. Connectors - These are people who know people. The well-known ‘six degrees of separation’ can be reduced to two by a great connector. Often these people cross boundaries: one of my best referrers is someone who is on five boards. She seemingly knows everyone.
2. Energisers - These are people whose enthusiasm attracts others. These people are great to be around, to have in the room and, therefore, people invite them. They motivate, inspire, reinforce, cajole, and speak with passion, often with joy and humour.
3. Contrarians - These people are the critics. Why network with them? Naysayers are valuable to test ideas with and, if you get them on-side, people notice: “Oh, you’ve convinced Charles, have you? Well, that’s not easy”.

I suggest that anyone in a new role (first-time CEO or NED) or shifting to a new geography or industry should?consciously?identify the connectors, energisers and contrarians. Ask them to lunch. Ask them what the issues are. Ask them what they need help them. (And, of course, identify which, if any, of the above?you?are).

Question: Who do you deliberately seek out to network with?

Dirty fingernails

My son Jasper started high school this year and, three weeks in, he’s already at school camp (designed to help with friend-making, resilience and change readiness). But, it also helps my wife and I connect, as five nights of childlessness mean that we’ve eaten out several times.

With COVID lifting, the city is coming to life, with a great many new eating houses. One, which shall remain nameless, is in a signature building in the CBD, it’s near the top of many ‘must try’ lists, and its Google ratings are 4.8 (out of 5).

So, what could go wrong?

Well, this sounds petty, but our waiter had dirty fingernails. Really dirty, like he’d been digging in the garden, or repairing something oily, and hadn’t scrubbed before coming to work.

My wife and I both noticed straight away and we glanced across at one another, both registering a slight reflex of disgust. He served us our drinks and first course and then, to our relief, he was replaced (by someone with clean hands). By the way, the food was perfectly fine (not outstanding), yet, my wife and I readily agreed we’ve no compulsion to go back. Now, was that the food? Or has there been an unconscious aversion installed?

The encounter got me thinking about inadvertent signals that businesses give to us, their customers. It’s how staff behave when they’re not serving people (are they slouching around, scrolling on phones?), the music that plays over the PA (is it too loud to think?), the smell of the premises (a faint whiff of cold fried food?), whether the toilet rolls or hand towels in bathrooms are replaced.

Jasper will likely come home Friday night with very dirty fingernails — but that’s precisely what I’d want.

Question: What inadvertent signals do your staff — and premises — give your customers?

Across, not up

I’m nearly always working simultaneously on strategy with several executive teams and a common feature is getting them to work as?executives?(not managers), and as a?team?(not as individuals, and not as a committee).

I’ve noticed that when one of them goes on leave, the normal practice is to get one of their managers to ‘act up’. This is done on rotation, or sometimes, on merit. I suggested to a couple of my clients that they stop doing this.?

Instead, what they should do, if they want to become true executives, and work as a team, is ‘act across’.

In other words, when the Executive Director, Corporate goes on leave, the ED Operations should take her place. Then, someone ‘acts up’ to fill the ED Ops role. This achieves two things: (i) Executives get to know each other’s roles and pain points and achieve true organisational breadth, not continued specialisation; and (ii) The ‘acting across’ ED gets to see one of their direct reports as a peer. This never happens in the ‘acting up’ model, as they’re always away when their direct reports are in their seat.?

Question: What would you create if you ‘acted across’, not just ‘acted up’ in your organisation??

Feedback makes the world go round, so please make a short comment, drop me a line or, at a minimum, just click the ‘heart’ or ‘like’ button below. I’d love to know what resonates from this week’s 5MSM.

Next week’s edition will come to you from the air (I’m flying to Nairobi on an exciting work project - more on that next week) so until then, enjoy meeting with connectors, energisers and contrarians.

Andrew