Side by Side Leadership: When 30 Minute Discussions Created $5 Million

Perhaps you are like other leaders, who know that they should have individual performance improvement discussions with each person on your team, but do not know how to do it. In a set of hard data studies conducted by Graen and his colleagues, supervisors were trained in how to facilitate structured, one-on-one meetings with their contributors to improve performance. The supervisors who used the structured one-on-one meetings achieved 15% greater productivity than the control group and groups where the leaders unilaterally attempted to improve working conditions.

The leader was trained to conduct a 30-minute discussion with each contributor on how together they could improve performance. In one of the studies, the leader and the team members were from a data processing group. The leaders were taught the following structured one-on-one format that you might want to use yourself to improve productivity with individuals you work with:
1. The leaders asked the contributor to state any of their concerns, dislikes, and expectations about their job, the leader's job, and their current working relationships;
2. The leader listened and checked their understanding of what the contributor said by summarizing the contributor's key points;
3. The leaders suspended their own viewpoints and the top-down authority frame of reference and just listened;
4. Then the leader presented his or her own expectations and concerns about their own performance, the contributor's performance, and their current working relationships.
5. The leader and the contributor together identified and agreed to actions to improve performance.

Did you notice that the supervisor was taught to set aside their authority position and conduct the discussion as equals? When the supervisors and managers approached their subordinates person to person to improve their relationships and the working conditions performance improved 15%.

The above hard data studies proved how average managers and supervisors can improve as leaders. An important follow-up study was conducted with supervisors who were failing. These supervisors had poor relationships with their followers. They were taught the same steps as above to facilitate an interactive one on one discussion with the contributors with whom they were having relationship problems. In this study, productivity shot up greater than 15%. The organization improved results a documented $5 million when the leaders established a more equal relationship with their team members.

When Leaders Facilitated a Structured One-On-One Discussion, the Result: 15% Improvement in Performance

Isn't it amazing to find that a 30-minute meeting can improve performance 15%? There were four keys to the success of the discussion:
1. The interaction was two-way and mutual;
2. The leader's point of view, while coming after the contributor's talking was equally important;
3. The leader was once again taught and required to practice excellent interpersonal listening; and
4. The conversation was structured

One of the concerns that I've noted is that bottom-up leadership was actually no better than the prevalent top-down model in increasing productivity. The research I have shared with you begins to show us both a third alternative of leadership - two-way shared leadership. An interpersonal leadership approach that is mutual will promote 15% improved performance.

This third way of leading is different than top-down in that the leader asks for and listens to the ideas of the contributor. The third alternative is also different than bottom-up leadership as the leader has an equal level of participation with the contributor. The leader and contributor are both actively sharing and listening to each other equally on how to drastically improve performance, a leadership practice you and I could bet our careers on.

----
i Graen, George, Novak, Michael A. and Sommerkamp, Patricia (1982). The Effects of Leader-Member Exchange and Job Design on Productivity and Satisfaction: Testing a Dual Attachment Model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131.
ii Scandura, Terri A. and Graen, George B. (1984). Moderating Effects of Initial Leader-Member Exchange Status on the Effects of a Leadership Intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 3, 428-436.


*When 30-Minute Discussions Between Leaders and Contributors Created $5 million*
Perhaps you are like other leaders, who know that they should have individual performance improvement discussions with each person on your team, but do not know how to do it. In a set of hard data studies conducted by Graen and his colleagues, supervisors were trained in how to facilitate structured, one-on-one meetings with their contributors to improve performance. The supervisors who used the structured one-on-one meetings achieved 15% greater productivity than the control group and groups where the leaders unilaterally attempted to improve working conditions. The leader was trained to conduct a 30-minute discussion with each contributor on how together they could improve performance. In one of the studies, the leader and the team members were from a data processing group. The leaders were taught the following structured one-on-one format that you might want to use yourself to improve productivity with individuals you work with: 1. The leaders asked the contributor to state any of their concerns, dislikes, and expectations about their job, the leader's job, and their current working relationships; 2. The leader listened and checked their understanding of what the contributor said by summarizing the contributor's key points; 3. The leaders suspended their own viewpoints and the top-down authority frame of reference and just listened; 4. Then the leader presented his or her own expectations and concerns about their own performance, the contributor's performance, and their current working relationships. 5. The leader and the contributor together identified and agreed to actions to improve performance. Did you notice that the supervisor was taught to set aside their authority position and conduct the discussion as equals? When the supervisors and managers approached their subordinates person to person to improve their relationships and the working conditions performance improved 15%. The above hard data studies proved how average managers and supervisors can improve as leaders. An important follow-up study was conducted with supervisors who were failing. These supervisors had poor relationships with their followers. They were taught the same steps as above to facilitate an interactive one on one discussion with the contributors with whom they were having relationship problems. In this study, productivity shot up greater than 15%. The organization improved results a documented $5 million when the leaders established a more equal relationship with their team members. When Leaders Facilitated a Structured One-On-One Discussion, the Result: 15% Improvement in Performance Isn't it amazing to find that a 30-minute meeting can improve performance 15%? There were four keys to the success of the discussion: 1. The interaction was two-way and mutual; 2. The leader's point of view, while coming after the contributor's talking was equally important; 3. The leader was once again taught and required to practice excellent interpersonal listening; and 4. The conversation was structured One of the concerns that I've noted is that bottom-up leadership was actually no better than the prevalent top-down model in increasing productivity. The research I have shared with you begins to show us both a third alternative of leadership - two-way shared leadership. An interpersonal leadership approach that is mutual will promote 15% improved performance. This third way of leading is different than top-down in that the leader asks for and listens to the ideas of the contributor. The third alternative is also different than bottom-up leadership as the leader has an equal level of participation with the contributor. The leader and contributor are both actively sharing and listening to each other equally on how to drastically improve performance, a leadership practice you and I could bet our careers on. ---- i Graen, George, Novak, Michael A. and Sommerkamp, Patricia (1982). The Effects of Leader-Member Exchange and Job Design on Productivity and Satisfaction: Testing a Dual Attachment Model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131. ii Scandura, Terri A. and Graen, George B. (1984). Moderating Effects of Initial Leader-Member Exchange Status on the Effects of a Leadership Intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 3, 428-436.