Leadership Network Diagnostic
•
3 likes•1,526 views
This document discusses the importance of leadership networks and diagnosing your own network. It finds that leaders with strong networks that are structurally diverse, cross critical boundaries, and have quality relationships tend to be high performers. However, 80% of leaders have closed networks lacking these qualities. The document provides a framework to diagnose your network and questions to identify ways to strengthen it, such as introducing connections or investing in important relationships.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (15)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (13)
Similar to Leadership Network Diagnostic
Similar to Leadership Network Diagnostic (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Leadership Network Diagnostic
- 1. LEADERSHIP NETWORK DIAGNOSTIC RICH TALLMAN & PHIL WILLBURN CENTER FOR CREATIVE LEADERSHIP CXO VIP RECEPTION APRIL 18TH 2013
- 2. Lonely at the top? – I headed up a division with 7k employees and $500 million budget. Piece of cake compared to the CEO role I now have. – No one sees it the way I do and sometimes they don’t want to… – Only when I need to know the real story… then everyone seems to disappear – There are only a few that I can talk to and I don’t see them much. – Yes…help!
- 3. The advice – Get a truth talker – Mentors/advisors early in your career – Build a network
- 4. Today’s Topic 1. Why networks matter 2. What the top 20% of high performers networks look like 3. Diagnose and map your own network
- 5. A Network Perspective Adapted from Rob Cross – What is O.N.A.?
- 6. A Network Perspective Courtesy of http://www.jarche.com
- 7. Leaders with strong networks • Hear new information early and are able to capitalize on opportunities that require merging of disparate expertise and insights • Are likely to be in an organization’s top 20% of high-performers • Tend to be promoted more rapidly, enjoy greater career mobility, and adapt to changing environments more successfully
- 8. Effective Networks Leaders who have an effective network: 1. Structurally Diverse 2. Cross Critical Boundaries 3. Quality Relationships
- 9. Structural Diversity = Non-Redundant Ties = Number of contacts who don’t know each other = Number of different groups you belong to
- 10. Which network provides more opportunities? Person B Person A Closed Network Open Network
- 11. Structural Diversity Closed Open Bonding Brokering Increases Groupthink Increases Group Innovation Fails to adapt to new Adapts to changing situations environments Lack of job/career Enjoys greater career opportunities mobility Influence decreases Influence increases
- 12. Open Vs. Closed Which network type is most common among leaders? 80% of all leaders that have taken the Network Assessment show signs of a closed network
- 14. Boundary Spanning Program Manager Division Manager
- 15. Weak vs. Strong Relationships Weak Ties Strong Ties One-Way Bi-Directional Directed Benefits Mutually Beneficial Give OR Take Give & Take Reciprocity Trust is Optional Trust Loose Commitment Strong Commitment Responsiveness Expected Sometimes Responsiveness No Disclosure Necessary Intimacy Self-Disclosure Inconsistent/Sporadic Ongoing Interaction No expectation of Expected contact Within last 6 months Outside of 6 months Frequency
- 16. Diagnosing your Network Where should I be investing my limited time and energy to make the most effective network?
- 18. 28 DH MC CM LQ JA RS NP BB CC B. LQ BB MC RS B. CC NP JA DH CM
- 19. 28 N=10 28 45 .62 38
- 20. JSC MOD A. Corp LQ MC B. NP BB RS CC CM DH JA LQ EA
- 21. JSC MOD S.N. Corp A. Corp MC B. NP BB RS Private Partnership CC CM DH Move into Intel JA LQ Intel EA Mentor
- 22. Common Traps
- 23. The Disconnected Expert or the Biased Learner Insular
- 24. The Best Friend Syndrome Somewhat Insular
- 25. The Surface Networker Diverse
- 26. The Bottleneck Too Diverse
- 27. Key Questions • Is there a boundary or area that I need to create a new relationship in that is either underrepresented or missing? If so, what is that boundary/area? • Is there an introduction that I can make that would benefit the people who work on this project? If so, who would I introduce? • Is there a relationship where I could invest in and strengthen that would positively impact the success of my project? If so, who would this be? • Is there a relationship that I need to transition from an active state to a more latent state because the relationship is no longer mutually beneficial or is having a negative impact on the rest of my work relationships?
Editor's Notes
- Big Idea1. We are living in a networked society, but our mindsets are still set in hierarchies.2. The people who think in networks have a distinct advantage to the people who think in hierarchies? Why is a network perspective so important anyways?The way we work has changed and we need to adapt to this. Pre 19th Century we were an agrarian culture – our work required little collaboration – most of the work was done within tribes The 20th century brought the industrial revolution and the coordination of work from a central location in hierarchyIn the age of the internet and knowledge work, we need to collaborate and partner with each other in order to accomplish our work. – if your mindset is still of a hierarchy you won’t thrive in this new networked economy – since networks are about creating, managing, and leveraging relationships, we each individually must learn how to do that.
- Outcomes of well constructed networksI define good networks as … structural diversity, crossing critical boundaries, having quality relationships You can tell if you have a really good network if these things are happening …. How Top Talent Uses Networks and Where Rising Stars Get Trapped by Rob Cross & Robert J. Thomas. (2008) In Organizational Dynamics, Vol 37, No.2 pp. 165-180.Rob Cross, Professor at McIntire School of Commerce, and former IBM Research Manager, conducted a 6 year research project aimed at understanding the personal networks of high-performers, his team worked with hundreds of organizations to collect network data and compare them to their organizations performance review data – what they found was that leaders who had focused, structurally diverse networks were likely to have the following outcomes in their careersHear new information early and are able to capitalize on opportunities that require merging of disparate expertise and insightsAre likely to be in an organization’s top 20% of high-performersTend to be promoted more rapidly, enjoy greater career mobility, and adapt to changing environments more successfullyMuch of Rob’s research supports the research Ron Burt, Professor of Sociology and Strategy at the U of Chicago Booth School of Business, who in the 1990’s conducted a series of research projects on entrepreneurs and found, that entrepreneurs with better networks (more structurally diverse, mix of strong and weak ties) were able to raise more capital (4:1) than those entrepreneurs with not so good at building etworks. Burt, Ronald S. (1992). Structural Holes. The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press.A famous study done by Ron Burt and Don Ronchi at the U of Chicago, as part of their leadership training, he compared a leadership development program that taught executives the principles of building good networks vs. same level executives that didn’t attend the course. They followed these executives for 2 years to see if training leaders on the science of networking improved the executives performance, what he found was yes it did. In fact program graduates were26-42% more likely to receive top performance evaluations43-72% more likely to be promoted42-74% more likely to be retained by the company
- New information earlyIn an organization’s top 20%Promoted more rapidlyenjoy greater career mobilityAdapt to changing environmentsHow Top Talent Uses Networks and Where Rising Stars Get Trapped by Rob Cross & Robert J. Thomas. (2008) In Organizational Dynamics, Vol 37, No.2 pp. 165-180.People with less network redundancy:Hear new information early and are able to capitalize on opportunities that require merging of disparate expertise and insightsAre likely to be in an organization’s top 20% of high-performersTend to be promoted more rapidly, enjoy greater career mobility, and adapt to changing environments more successfully
- Second important thing about high-performers and their networks is that they cross critical boundaries – or have relational diversityHigh-performers in Cross’ original studied contacts with a variety of different peopleYip, J., Ernst, C., & Campbell, M.Boundary spanning leadership: mission critical perspectives from the executive suite. Greensboro : Center for Creative Leadership, 2009.From 2008 to 2009, the Center for Creative Leadership surveyed 128 senior executives who participated in CCL’s Leadership at the Peak program. The executives served at the senior most levels of their organizations, with more than 15 years of management experience and responsibility for at least 500 people. This survey focuses on pressing trends and challenges affecting their organizations, and the role of leadership in spanning vertical, horizontal, stakeholder, demographic, and geographic boundaries.A recent study on boundary spanning behaviors shows that individuals who span horizontal boundaries improve their team’s overall effectiveness, and a person who spans vertical boundaries improves their own individual performance. (a recent study I conducted) 1058 executives across the world … showed the biggest impact on team performance was Horizontal boundaries, then vertical for individual performance.
- Cross boundaries in a network I examined at SAIC. This was a division of about 120 people with 100 million in revenue. Talk about how one leader was deposed by another leader. How DM came from one team that was focused on producing communication productsThe other one came from a consulting background.
- Move intimacySome Quick Examples of Latent and Active TiesLatentFormer boss who you get a beer with once a year just to catch up (you never know where a future job might be) – LOW-FREQUENCYActiveYour current boss, whom you talk to – FREQUENCY (or are at least responsive to him/her) and sometimes you even like him/her – INTIMACY/TRUSTLatentAn associate in one of your competitors – you attend an annual conference and meet with him/her to discuss industry trends, sometimes you share news articles with each other about the developments in your market – MODERATE-RECIPROCITY; LOW-FREQUENCY; NO INTMACYActiveA friend in another function who you use to gauge to navigate the different functions culture and personnel, likewise he/she uses to better understand how his/her goals can be better realized through your knowledge of your function HIGH-RECIPROCITY; SOME-INTIMACYSize of Latent and Active NetworksLatent Networks can be very large, especially if you have had a long career in multiple areas – In a in-depth study on managers on in the US Aerospace sector showed that Latent networks ranged from 36 to 412 (all contacts in their contact list, plus any in their cell phones)In the same sample, the active contacts ranged from 15 to 39 (all contacts whom they felt were critical for them being a leader in their organization)Rob Cross’s work actually showed that in a cross-sectional analysis of Multiple Large companies, the average active network ties were from 12 to 20.
- Example: does this reflect what mission teams start to look like?