As we come to the end of Summer, 2016 many business leaders are focusing on closing this current year strong, at the same time they are planning for 2017.  As part of my role helping organizations develop their leadership skills, I spend a lot of time with leaders who are trying to hone their capabilities and apply new skills to deliver the best business results.  Very often, I find well-intentioned leaders overusing the skills of strategic planning, data analysis, understanding customers, and understanding trends.  As Advantexe teaches in our Business Acumen learning journeys, these are great skills to have and should be used every day to maintain a competitive edge and remain successful.  The challenge, however, is spending too much time on the things right in front of you and not enough time listening to the faint weak signals of your business ecosystem that will impact your business in the near future.

In the complex and challenging business world of 2016 and beyond, where everyone is being asked to do more with less, teaching and coaching employees to say “no” may be the most critical skill you develop in your teams and functions.

I was leading a foundational Business Leadership program for front-line managers today and we were discussing the real challenges of being a business in this 24/7 volatile and changing business world.  One of our guest speakers was an executive I truly respect because he is authentic and understands how to manage the expectations of all different types of stakeholders, including sharing his perspectives on saying no.

Every once in a while during a Business Leadership training session the intensity level of an application discussion gets so intense that we lose ourselves in the learning.  During a deep conversation this week, one of my participants in a High Potential Leader program used a term that I had never heard of when she was describing her most frustrating current leadership situation. “I am dealing with a team of people who I call the ‘Almost Engaged’ and I don’t know what to do with them.”  The entire group of 22 participants was curious about the term “Almost Engaged” and asked her to explain and define.  She shared and described a type of employee who seems very happy with their jobs but aren’t producing at the levels they should or could be.  “They love coming to work, they are on time, they are happy, but they just aren’t that productive.”

When business organizations go through significant change – and most of the business organizations in the world are going through major changes these days – leaders must work extremely hard to set and manage expectations through the change process.  Last week while leading a Business Leadership training program for a group of Mid-Career leaders, I had the chance to listen to an executive leader share his expertise and wisdom with my participants about how to lead effectively during times of significant and disruptive change.  What I found most interesting about his dialogue was that the theme was different.  It wasn’t about how great he is, or what are things everyone needs to do to be a great leader.  Rather, he shared his insights about how critical it is to create an organization where leaders feel comfortable and are enabled to “lead up” in an organization going through change.

Earlier this week, I wrote about why organizations should invest in developing talent who has fear.  The premise of that blog is to present options for investing in talent development by segmenting potential participants between those who are identified as “high potentials” and employees who embrace their fears to motivate their learning journey and performance improvement.

One of our readers, an executive with a Fortune 500 firm, sent me a nice note thanking me for the insights and suggested a related follow-up topic.  He shared that one of the biggest issues facing his organization isn’t the lack of high potential training or focusing on special audiences such employees who have a fear of failing; his issue is the fact that his company is as strong as its weakest contributors.  I was surprised to learn during our conversation that he never suggested terminating the weak employees as an option, but rather he was intensely focused on looking for creative and cost effective methods of providing better and scalable foundational skills that can help weaker performers get better.