# data[].attributes.body
A helpful website on transformational leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Have you ever been in a group where someone took control of the situation by conveying a clear vision of the group's goals, a marked passion for the work, and an ability to make the rest of the group feel recharged and energized? This person just might be what is called a transformational leader.

Transformational leadership is a leadership style that can inspire positive changes in those who follow. Transformational leaders are generally energetic, enthusiastic, and passionate. Not only are these leaders concerned and involved in the process; they are also focused on helping every member of the group succeed as well.

Quick Background

The concept of transformational leadership was initially introduced by leadership expert and presidential biographer James MacGregor Burns. According to Burns, transformational leadership can be seen when "leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation."﻿﻿

Later, researcher Bernard M. Bass expanded upon Burns's original ideas to develop what is today referred to as Bass's Transformational Leadership Theory. According to Bass, transformational leadership can be defined based on the impact that it has on followers. Transformational leaders, Bass suggested, garner trust, respect, and admiration from their followers.﻿﻿

Mental Health in the Workplace Webinar

Components

Bass also suggested that there were four different components of transformational leadership.

1. Intellectual Stimulation: Transformational leaders not only challenge the status quo; they also encourage creativity among followers. The leader encourages followers to explore new ways of doing things and new opportunities to learn.

2. Individualized Consideration: Transformational leadership also involves offering support and encouragement to individual followers. In order to foster supportive relationships, transformational leaders keep lines of communication open so that followers feel free to share ideas and so that leaders can offer direct recognition of the unique contributions of each follower.

3. Inspirational Motivation: Transformational leaders have a clear vision that they are able to articulate to followers. These leaders are also able to help followers experience the same passion and motivation to fulfill these goals.

4. Idealized Influence: The transformational leader serve as a role model for followers. Because followers trust and respect the leader, they emulate this individual and internalize his or her ideals.

So what are some typical signs of a transformational leader? Groups led by this type of leader tend to be both successful and loyal. They give a lot to the team and care deeply about the group's ability to accomplish its goals. Turnover tends to be quite low as transformational leaders are able to inspire a great deal of commitment in their followers.

In their classic text, Transformational Leadership, authors Bass and Riggio explained:

"Transformational leaders...are those who stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the process, develop their own leadership capacity. Transformational leaders help followers grow and develop into leaders by responding to individual followers' needs by empowering them and by aligning the objectives and goals of the individual followers, the leader, the group, and the larger organization."

"Research evidence clearly shows that groups led by transformational leaders have higher levels of performance and satisfaction than groups led by other types of leaders," explained psychologist and leadership expert Ronald E. Riggio in an article for Psychology Today.

The reason, he suggests, is that transformational leaders believe that their followers can do their best, leading members of the group to feel inspired and empowered.

What can you do to become a more transformational leader? Leadership experts suggest that having a strong, positive vision of the future plays a critical role. Not only is it important to believe in this vision yourself; you've also got to inspire others to buy into your vision as well.

Link to Well-Being

According to the results of one study, this style of leadership can also have a positive influence on employee well-being.﻿﻿

The study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine involved surveying workers at several different German information and communication technology companies. Researchers asked participants to answers questions about their employer's leadership style.

A score for transformational leadership was then determined based on qualities such as providing intellectual stimulation, giving positive feedback for good performance, leading by example, and helping employees feel like they were making a contribution toward the goals of the group.

The researchers discovered that employees who identified a higher level of transformational leadership in their employers also had higher reported levels of well-being. The effect stayed significant even after researchers controlled for factors that are linked to well-being such as job strain, education, and age.

"The results of this study suggest that a transformational leadership style, which both conveys a sense of trust and meaningfulness and individually challenges and develops employees, also has a positive effect on employee well-being," the authors summarized.

Real-World Applications

So what impact could such results have for managers and workers?

The study's authors suggest that the results are important and can help companies develop leadership training programs that can be used to teach transformational leadership skills. Acquiring communication skills such as resolving conflicts in the workplace and recognizing the needs of employees are an important part of transformational leadership.

"Such training programs can be seen as another essential component of workplace health promotion and prevention efforts and therefore should receive wide support," explained the study's authors.

A Word From Verywell

The transformational style of leadership can be highly effective when used appropriately, but it might not necessarily be the best choice for every situation. In some cases, groups may require a more managerial or autocratic style that involves closer control and greater direction, particularly in situations where group member are unskilled and need a lot of oversight.

One way to improve your own leadership skills is to assess your own current leadership style and think about ways in which your strengths can benefit the group you are leading. By evaluating your own skills, you will be better able to play to your strengths and work on improving your areas of weakness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Do Transformational Leaders Inspire and Motivate Followers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Have you ever been in a group where someone took control of the situation by conveying a clear vision of the group's goals, a marked passion for the work, and an ability to make the rest of the group feel recharged and energized? This person just might be what is called a transformational leader.

# data[].attributes.body
This website has a list of leadership theories, some that aren't in the modules and some that are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over time, a number of different theories of leadership have evolved.

# data[].attributes.body
This scholarly article helps understand the Relational Leadership Theory from Module 3

# data[].attributes.headline
A Systematic Literature Review of Servant Leadership Theory in Organizational Contexts

# data[].attributes.subject
A Systematic Literature Review of Servant Leadership Theory in Organizational Contexts

# data[].attributes.body
A PDF to help with Servant Leadership Theory, Module 3.

# data[].attributes.body
Website used about Charismatic leadership during Module 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many of history's most effective leaders are labeled charismatic. Yet there is a great deal of controversy about whether charisma is made or born, and if charismatic leaders are actually effective. A while back, I was interviewed as part of a celebration of the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. Many of the most frequently asked questions about charismatic leadership were part of that interview.
Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, and Winston Churchill were known as dynamic, charismatic and inspirational leaders. What particular traits or qualities did someone like MLK possess that allowed him to lead and inspire so many people?
Charismatic leaders are essentially very skilled communicators - individuals who are verbally eloquent, but also able to communicate to followers on a deep, emotional level. They are able to articulate a compelling or captivating vision, and to arouse strong emotions in followers.
Is charisma something that you are born with - you either have it or you don't? Do you think most leaders, politicians, and inspirational figures have charisma, and is it that quality which makes them stand out?
Charisma is really a process - an interaction between the qualities of the charismatic leader, the followers and their needs and identification with the leader, and the situation that calls out for a charismatic leader, such as a need for change or a crisis. But when it comes to the charismatic qualities of leaders, the emphasis is on how they communicate to followers and whether they are able to gain followers' trust, and influence and persuade them to follow.

Most politicians, particularly on the national scene, have developed their ability to communicate effectively - to make speeches, "work the room" with potential donors and supporters, etc. So many seasoned politicians have a lot of "personal charisma."
What are the important characteristics every leader should possess?
A model that I think represents the very best leaders, and research bears this out, is transformational leadership. You can think of transformational leadership as going beyond charisma, because two of the components of transformational leadership deal with charisma. They are:

Idealized Influence, or the leader's ability to be a positive (and moral) role model for followers. The transformational leader also "walks the talk," and is on the "front line" working with followers (think MLK Jr.), or leaders who sacrifice along with their followers. In business, the charismatic/transformational leader sometimes serves as the "face" of the company or the movement (think Steve Jobs).

Inspirational Motivation is the second quality, and it is what charismatic leaders are noted for - the ability to inspire and motivate followers to perform at high levels, and to be committed to the organization or the cause.

The other two elements of transformational leadership are Intellectual Stimulation - challenging followers to be creative and think outside of the box - and Individualized Consideration, or being responsive to the feelings and developmental needs of followers.

Transformational leaders are charismatic, but they are also noted for leading high-performing groups and teams and developing followers' leadership capacity as much as for helping the group or organization to change and innovate.
What are some behaviors or traits that might derail a leader/politician's career or stand in their path to success?
The biggest thing that can derail a leader is arrogance, and a lack of concern or responsiveness to followers and constituents. We have seen politicians' and CEOs' arrogance - thinking they are above the law and committing ethical violations lead to their demise. Also, a leader needs to succeed more often than not, and to learn from mistakes and setbacks.
Are leaders born or made?
This isn't something that requires my opinion, because the question has been well researched. Twin studies by Richard Arvey and his colleagues have estimated that leadership is about two-thirds "made" and one-third "born." This makes sense, though, if we see much of leadership as a set of learned skills and competencies - the ability to communicate, to strategize, to problem solve, etc. These take time to develop.

This question would have broad implications for leadership, for if it were all (or mostly) born, then our efforts should be directed toward identifying and selecting leaders, and we would be wasting our time on leader development programs. But, the research suggests that putting resources into leader development makes sense, and recent meta-analyses of these programs suggest that, in general, they work and lead to positive gains.
Follow me on Twitter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Charisma and Charismatic Leadership?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many of history's most effective leaders are labeled charismatic. Yet there is a great deal of controversy about whether charisma is made or born, and if charismatic leaders are actually effective. A while back, I was interviewed as part of a celebration of the life of Martin Luther King, Jr.

# data[].attributes.body
Leader-Member Exchange theory website used during Module 3.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Also known as LMX or Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory)

As a manager, it's not always right to treat everyone on your team in the same way.

For instance, you probably have team members that you've developed a great relationship with: you trust them, they work hard, and they've never let you down. To you, these team members are invaluable, and you make an extra effort to send challenging projects their way.

It's also likely that you have others on your team who you think less well of. They may not have far-reaching career goals, they're less competent, and you simply don't trust them to the same extent. These team members get everyday responsibilities, and are not considered for promotions or challenging assignments.

However, have you ever stopped to analyze why you don't trust certain team members? Rightly or wrongly, do you let that distrust, or the belief that they're unreliable, influence how you relate to them? Do you, even subconsciously, withhold opportunities that might help them grow and succeed?

This situation is at the heart of the Leader-Member Exchange Theory. This theory, also known as LMX or the Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory, explores how leaders and managers develop relationships with team members; and it explains how those relationships can either contribute to growth or hold people back.

What Is the Leader-Member Exchange Theory?

The Leader-Member Exchange Theory first emerged in the 1970s. It focuses on the relationship that develops between managers and members of their teams. The theory states that all relationships between managers and subordinates go through three stages. These are:

Let's look at each stage in greater detail.

Role-Taking

Role-taking occurs when team members first join the group. Managers use this time to assess new members' skills and abilities.

Role-Making

New team members then begin to work on projects and tasks as part of the team. In this stage, managers generally expect that new team members will work hard, be loyal and prove trustworthy as they get used to their new role.

The theory says that, during this stage, managers sort new team members (often subconsciously) into one of two groups.

In-Group: if team members prove themselves loyal, trustworthy and skilled, they're put into the In-Group. This group is made up of the team members that the manager trusts the most. Managers give this group most of their attention, providing challenging and interesting work, and offering opportunities for additional training and advancement. This group also gets more one-to-one time with the manager. Often, people in this group have a similar personality and work-ethic to their manager.

Out-Group: if team members betray the trust of the manager, or prove that they're unmotivated or incompetent, they're put into the Out-Group. This group's work is often restricted and unchallenging. Out-Group members tend to have less access to the manager, and often don't receive opportunities for growth or advancement.

Routinization

During this last phase, routines between team members and their managers are established.

In-Group team members work hard to maintain the good opinion of their managers, by showing trust, respect, empathy, patience, and persistence.

Out-Group members may start to dislike or distrust their managers. Because it's so hard to move out of the Out-Group once the perception has been established, Out-Group members may have to change departments or organizations in order to "start over."

Once team members have been classified, even subconsciously, as In-Group or Out-Group, that classification affects how their managers relate to them from then on, and it can become self-fulfilling.

For instance, In-Group team members are often seen as rising stars and the manager trusts them to work and perform at a high level. This is also the group that the manager talks to most, offering support and advice, and they're given the best opportunities to test their skills and grow. So, of course, they're more likely to develop in their roles.

This also holds true for the Out-Group. The manager spends little, if any, time trying to support and develop this group. They receive few challenging assignments or opportunities for training and advancement. And, because they're never tested, they have little chance to change the manager's opinion.

How to Use the Leader-Member Exchange Theory

You can use the Leader-Member Exchange Theory to gain awareness of how you perceive members of your own team. The following three steps will show you how you can do this by identifying the Out-Group, reestablishing your relationship with its members, and providing means and ways for team members to grow.

1. Identify Your Out-Group

Chances are, you know who's in your Out-Group already. Take a moment to note their names down.

Next, analyze why these people have fallen "out of favor." Did they do something specifically to lose your trust? Do they exhibit bad behavior at work? Are they truly incompetent, or do they have low motivation?

Analyze what they've actually done, and compare the facts with your perceptions. Do these match, or have you (perhaps subconsciously) blown things out of proportion?

2. Reestablish the Relationship

It's important that, as the leader, you make a reasonable effort to reestablish a relationship with Out-Group team members. Research published in the Leadership Quarterly journal in 1995 showed that team members who have high-quality relationships with their leader have higher morale, and are more productive than those who don't. So you, and your organization, can benefit from creating a better relationship.

Keep in mind that this group will likely be wary of any attention or support from you; after all, they may not have had it in the past.

First, meet each team member one-on-one. Take the time to find out if they're happy with their job. What are their career goals? What can you do to make their work more challenging or engaging?

A one-on-one meeting can also help you identify that person's psychological contract with you - that is, the unspoken benefits they expect from you, as their leader. If they're in the Out-Group, they may feel that the psychological contract has been broken.

You also need to discover what truly motivates them. Use McClelland's Human Motivation Theory or Herzberg's Motivators and Hygiene Factor Theory to find out what drives them to succeed.

Once you've had a chance to reconnect with your team members through one-on-one meetings, do what you sensibly can to continue to touch base with them. Practice management by walking around, or drop by their office to see if they need help on projects or tasks. Work on getting to know these team members on a personal level.

3. Provide Training and Development Opportunities

Remember, the biggest advantage to the Leader-Member Exchange Theory is that it alerts you to the preference you might unconsciously - and possibly unfairly - be showing some team members. This allows you to offer all of your team members appropriate opportunities for training, development, and advancement.

Your Out-Group team members may benefit from a mentoring or coaching relationship with you.

You may also want to provide them with low-risk opportunities to test and grow their skills. Use task allocation strategies to make sure you're assigning the right task to the right person. Also, take our Bite-Sized Training session, Setting Goals for Your Team, to learn how to set effective and realistic goals for these team members.

You can also use the Nine-Box Grid for Talent Management to re-assess their potential from time to time, and to give them the right development opportunities.

Warning:

A problem with the Leader-Member Exchange Theory is that it assumes that all team members are equally worthy of trust, prestigious projects and advancement. Although we may like to think that everyone is honest, hard-working and worthy of our esteem, the reality can be different!

Managers need to get the best possible results. This means putting the right people in the right places, and it means developing and reinforcing success. Of necessity, this means that talented people will get more interesting opportunities and may get more attention than less-talented ones.

Use the Leader-Member Exchange Theory to make sure that you're objective in the way that you deal with people, but don't be naïve in the way that you apply it.

Key Points

The Leader-Member Exchange Theory first appeared in the 1970s. It analyzes the relationship between managers and team members.

Team members typically go through three phases in their relationship with their manager: Role-Taking, Role-Making, and Routinization.

Typically, during the Role-Making phase, group members are classified into one of two groups: In-Group, and Out-Group. In-Group team members often receive more attention and support, and more opportunities, from their managers. Out-Group members get very little face-time, and few opportunities.

You can use the Leader-Member Exchange Theory to identify and validate any perceptions that you might have of people on your team.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Getting the Best From all Team Members

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a manager, it's not always right to treat everyone on your team in the same way. For instance, you probably have team members that you've developed a great relationship with: you trust them, they work hard, and they've never let you down.

# data[].attributes.body
These are some things to focus on for emotional intelligence.

# data[].attributes.body
Why are emotionally intelligent people more successful?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research by the respected Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in the U.S. found that the primary causes of executive derailment involve deficiencies in emotional competence. Each year, CCL serves more than 20,000 individuals and 2,000 organizations, including more than 80 of the Fortune 100 companies. It says the three main reasons for failure are difficulty in handling change, inability to work well in a team, and poor interpersonal relations.

International search firm Egon Zehnder International analyzed 515 senior executives and discovered that those who were strongest in emotional intelligence were more likely to succeed than those strongest in either IQ or relevant previous experience. Research that has been done on the relationship between emotional intelligence (EQ) and IQ has shown only a weak correlation between the two.

The Carnegie Institute of Technology carried out research that showed that 85% of our financial success was due to skills in "human engineering", personality, and ability to communicate, negotiate, and lead. They found that only 15% was due to technical ability. In other words people skills or skills highly related to emotional intelligence were crucial skills. Nobel Prize winning Israeli-American psychologist Daniel Kahneman found that people would rather do business with a person they like and trust rather than someone they don't, even if that that person is offering a better product at a lower price.

People would rather do business with a person they like and trust rather than someone they don't, even if that that person is offering a better product at a lower price.

To test out his findings, think of the last time you purchased a major item, a home, automobile, or large appliance where you had to dealings with a salesperson. Was the person someone who you liked and trusted? In my talks, I have found that whenever I asked that question, inevitably the entire audience answered that, yes, the person they bought a large item from was someone they liked and trusted. This theory about why salespeople with the right people skills do better than those who lack them is borne out by a study carried out by the Hay/McBer Research and Innovation Group in 1997. In a study carried out in a large national insurance company in 1997, they found that sales agents weak in emotional areas such as self-confidence, initiative, and empathy sold policies with an average premium of $54,000, while those strong in 5 of 8 emotional competencies sold policies on the average worth $114,000.

Much of the research that has been done on emotional intelligence has been at the executive leadership level. The higher up the organization, the more crucial emotional intelligence abilities are as the impacts are greater and felt throughout the entire organization. There have been some studies, however, that show impacts at all levels.

The higher up the organization the more crucial emotional intelligence abilities are as the impacts are greater and felt throughout the entire organization.

For example, a study by McClelland in 1999 showed that after supervisors in a manufacturing plant received training in emotional competencies such as how to listen better, lost-time accidents decreased by 50% and grievances went down from 15 per year to three. The plant itself exceeded productivity goals by $250,000.

The same principles apply in all areas of life, whether at work or in relationships. Everyone wants to work with people who are easy to get along with, supportive, likeable, and can be trusted. We want to be beside people that do not get upset easily and can keep their composure when things do not work out according to plan.

Self-awareness. The first thing that is essential for any degree of emotional intelligence is self-awareness. People with a high degree of self-awareness have a solid understanding of their own emotions, their strengths, weaknesses, and what drives them. Neither overly critical nor unrealistically hopeful, these people are honest with themselves and others. These people recognize how their feelings impact them, other people around them, and their performance at work. They have a good understanding of their values and goals and where they are going in life. They are confident as well as aware of their limitations and less likely to set themselves up for failure.

We can recognize self-aware people by their willingness to talk about themselves in a frank, non-defensive manner. A good interview question is to ask about a time that the interviewee got carried away by their emotions and did something they later regretted. The self-aware person will be open and frank with their answers. Self-deprecating humor is a good indicator of someone who has good self-awareness. Red flags are people who stall or try to avoid the question, seem irritated, or frustrated by the question.

Ability To Self-Regulate Emotions. We all have emotions which drive us and there is nothing we can do to avoid them. People who are good at self-regulation, however, are able to manage their emotions so that they do not control their words and actions. While they feel bad moods and impulses as much as anyone else, they do not act upon them. People who act upon their negative feelings create havoc, disruptions, and lasting bad feelings all around them. We feel before we think and people who constantly react from an emotional state never wait long enough to allow their thoughts to override their emotions.

People who self-regulate have the ability to wait until their emotions pass, allowing them to respond from a place of reason, rather than simply reacting to feelings. The signs of someone who is good at self-regulation are reflection, thoughtfulness, comfort with ambiguity, change, and not having all the answers. In an interview, look for people who take a little time to reflect and think before they answer.

Empathy. Empathy is another important aspect to look for when hiring. Someone who has empathy will have an awareness of the feelings of others and consider those feelings in their words and actions. This does not mean that they will tiptoe around or be unwilling to make tough decisions for fear of hurting someone's feelings. It simply means that they are aware of, and take into consideration the impact on others. They are willing to share their own worries and concerns and openly acknowledge other's emotions. A good way to look for empathy in an interview is to ask a candidate about a situation where a co-worker was angry with them and how they dealt with it. Look for a willingness to understand the source of the co-workers anger, even though they may not agree with the reasons for it.

Social skills. Social skill is another area of emotional intelligence that is highly important in the workplace. To have good social skills requires a high level of the other skills aforementioned as well as the ability to relate and find common ground with a wide range of people. It goes beyond just friendliness and the ability to get along with others.

People with social skills are excellent team players as they have the ability to move an agenda along and keep focus while at the same time remaining aware of the emotional climate of the group and possess the ability to respond to it. These people are excellent at making connections, networking, and bringing people together to work on projects. They are able to bring their emotional intelligence skills into play in a larger arena. To look for social skills in an interview, ask questions related to projects and difficulties encountered around varying agendas, temperaments, and getting people to buy in.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Emotionally Intelligent People Are More Successful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research by the respected Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in the U.S. found that the primary causes of executive derailment involve deficiencies in emotional competence. Each year, CCL serves more than 20,000 individuals and 2,000 organizations, including more than 80 of the Fortune 100 companies.

# data[].attributes.body
Why is emotional intelligence required for effective leadership?

# data[].attributes.headline
Examples of Leadership Philosophy Statements

# data[].attributes.subject
Examples of Leadership Philosophy Statements

# data[].attributes.body
Found online during Module 7

# data[].attributes.headline
Why you should have a written Leadership Philosophy

# data[].attributes.subject
Why you should have a written Leadership Philosophy

# data[].attributes.body
One of the links from optional resources, Module 7

# data[].attributes.body
Not the full book, but a good summarization of the main points. Read for Module 6

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don't by Simon Sinek

The main message of is simple -- the buck stops at the leader's desk . In other words, those of us that lead may not always understand the impact that our leadership roles actually have on those we lead.

Listen to this book summary on audio

The depth and breadth of leadership cascades down from the executive board to management , which in turn cascades down to the soldiers that march in and out of the battle field of the organization on a daily basis shaping the culture of the environment... which comes full circle back up to the one that leads , as a direct reflection of his or her leadership.

Watch this book summary on video

Summary in a tweet: empathy & trust are the keys to #leadership - show it to those you lead, and it will be reciprocated. (click-to-tweet)

#1. Cultivate your "circle of safety"

"The whole purpose of maintaining the Circle of Safety is so that we can invest all our time and energy to guard against the dangers outside. It's the same reason we lock our doors at night." - @simonsinek

Sinek's Circle of Safety tells us that we should focus on helping each other rather than "one-upping" each another to make management happy. It also tells us that when we know + trust that the people inside the Circle of Safety will look out for us and protect us from the dangers of the outside, we're more likely to freely exchange information and ideas that will move the organization forward vs keep things to ourselves because we're afraid someone might "steal" our idea.

So, what's amongst one of the biggest habits you can develop in order to cultivate your Circle of Safety?

Empathy is a crucial commodity these days, and we need leaders like Johnny Bravo in our corporations and companies; in our businesses and organizations... To truly lead. Because when people know that their leaders are providing protection from above, they can work hard on the ground, without being concerned about the dangers of the outside. (Empathy = the ability to recognize or share the feelings of another.)

- Treat your employees with respect and dignity and you'll see the benefits (as results) in every dimension of your life and business .

- A core tenet of workplace management, human relations, leadership, and basically everything else in life, is that when we feel hopeless and devastated (like many of us do with our work situation) about some area of life, and we feel like we have no control, then the result is rarely positive (at least until we overcome it).

Lack of control at work = stress + . One in three employees considered leaving their jobs in 2010-2011 (according reports from consultancy firm Mercer, LLC). This tells us two things:

1. That there are A LOT of people that want to quit their jobs, and/or

2. People feel like they've got no other option but to stay put (due to money, family, and insecurities about being unable to find other work)

ENVIRONMENT IS EVERYTHING.

- When the environment at work is one of encouragement, and one that meets the basic human needs to live, to learn, to feel valued and significant, we do more than just survive - We soar higher than expected. It's the leadership's responsibility to set up the right conditions/environment for this to happen. We do not have the power to "change people". We must enhance the environment. "Change" -whether good or bad - is the result of environment. And if we want to see "change" - we need to focus less on ourselves and more on others/"the team"/organization/etc...

get more business + leadership book summaries at getflashnotes.com >>

#2. Get to know your "happy chemicals"

"Some believe we should always put others first-that if we don't look out for the group, the group won't look out for us. Others believe we should always put ourselves first and that if we don't take care of ourselves first, then we would be of no use to anyone else. The fact is, both are true." - @simonsinek // grab the full book summary here

Based on the quote above, Simon sets the stage for an all out analysis on why we do what we do. And with his background in biology + anthropology, he starts explaining what makes us tick through the four chemicals in our bodies . 80% of the book is based around these four chemicals and how they drive those of us in leadership roles .

Get to know the four "happy" chemicals in your brain + body >>

Endorphin: the pain-masking chemical

Dopamine: the goal achieving chemical

Serotonin: the leadership chemical

Oxytocin: the chemical of love

We have four chemicals in our bodies that work towards driving our behavior.

Simon calls the first two "Selfish" and the second two "Selfless".

"Selfish" chemicals: Endorphins and Dopamine. These work to help us get things done.

"Selfless" chemicals: Serotonin and Oxytocin. These work to help strengthen our social bonds, fostering connection and collaboration.

Endorphins & Dopamine

the old "command + control" model of management - which has not only been proven NOT to work, but has also been shown to spike our egos and get dopamine surging through our bodies. This often making US feel good at the expense of others. And that's bad. Really bad. It's so bad that it usually bites us in the butt... What's worse, Endorphins + Dopamine are highly addictive.

Endorphin [the runner's high]

Ever hear of a "runner's high"? That's just endorphin surging through your body. It's there to mask the pain we're putting our bodies through when we beat up our muscles in the gym, or run for long periods of time. Endorphin was useful back in the paleolithic era when hunters would go all day long in the grueling heat or freezing cold, hunting for food... Endorphin would kick in at just the right time to mask the pain and make us feel good enough to get our bodies to keep moving, and eventually, to capture the prey... It's likely that hunter-gathers became addicted to hunting, much like some of us become addicted to weight-lifting.

Dopamine [the goal-achieving chemical]

Dopamine is the dangerous chemical - but only when abused. Cocaine, nicotine and alcohol all send dopamine surging through your system.. The reason we get addicted to this stuff is because it provides near-instant gratification/pleasure - which, again, is just dopamine making you feel good.

You know what else sends dopamine surging through your system?

A sense of completion [that extra burst of feel-good vibes that arise when we're approaching the finish line].

Achieving Goals.
Completing Tasks.
Getting things done...

The gratification of crossing off that jar of almond butter on your grocery list.

That awesome feeling you get when you click that little box and see the check-sign show up on your favorite productivity app.

Dopamine is that compelling force that makes you feel like you absolutely NEEDto reply to that little buzz, bing, or flash coming from your phone, notifying you of that text you just got from Lucy ... and regardless of how many miles over the speed limit you might be driving in -- by golly you'll nudge your thumb towards that little green icon marked 'messages' and reply to that text you just got from Lucy, regardless of much of a drunk it makes you look like on the road, because you just feel uneasy if you don't. This reaction is the result of your good friend dopamine surging through your body in anticipation of achieving some task; which, in this case happens to be reading and replying to that text... even if you have to put yourself at risk of getting into an accident to do it.
Dopamine isn't always rational.
Dopamine was put into place by Mother Nature to incentivize us to move forward with what we've committed ourselves to doing by giving us little bursts or "hits" of the dopamine chemical whenever we take a small step towards achieving a desired outcome of some sort.

The problem though, is that even the "good" things about dopamine can get addictive.

For example, consider your to-do list...

Do you add obviously easy tasks to the list just to make it seem like you're getting stuff done? I know I do.

I remember going grocery shopping recently with a list of items to get, and as I was strolling down the aisles picking up my goodies, I saw almond butter on the shelf and remembered that I'd actually forgotten to add it to my grocery list... no problem. I grabbed it and put it in my basket -- and then I wrote 'almond butter' down on my grocery list and crossed it out.

Why'd I do that? Because I've become addicted to the short burst of dopamine that results from checking tasks off of my to-do list - regardless of whether it actually makes any logical sense for me to do so... that's dopamine.

Serotonin & Oxytocin

Serotonin + Oxytocin are the chemicals of contribution,trust + belonging. When we include these two chemicals in our 4-way cocktail, the result is a healthy (and necessary) synergy that results in more cooperation and more collaboration... but those are just poo-poo office words to some people. "What about the tangibles", they say. Well, if you're looking for measurable results and "tangibles" that show up in the "numbers" - you've got to STEP AWAY from the spreadsheets and the computer screen; you've got to get out of the board room, you've got to do more than blast off a memo here and a memo there - you've got to show em' that you care and show em' that you're there. You've got to be there not as a cheerleader for the good times, but as a leader that gives a damn - regardless of the peaks and valleys of the economy.

How Do We Put These Warm & Fuzzy Chemicals To Use?

Sinek tells a great story about a company named Barry-Wehmiller, and their losing battle against a series of economic blows that sent the company tumbling into a financial crisis they just couldn't shake.

Although they were advised to begin instituting massive layoffs to keep their business above ground and help them weather the economic storm - they kept pushing back and refusing to sacrifice their employees in hopes that they could come up with something - anything - that could help them survive this financial hardship and continue to provide the members of Barry-Wehmiler with the job-security they deserved.

Unfortunately enough, the day eventually came when they were left with no other choice but to start laying people off..

Until someone came up with a better idea....

{Side note: do you notice how lay-offs were an absolute last resort with this particular company, as opposed to a quick-fix resolution that CEOs of today jump at without a flinch or hint of hesitation?}

The CEO of Barry-Wehmiller, Bob Champan, decided that he wouldn't be going down the same road most of his peers - both past and present - usually tend to go down when face with similar situations, which is a massive onslaught of lay-offs in the name of "balancing the books"... This particular CEO however, cared about his people and he decided to demonstrate that by coming up with an idea that would avoid lay-offs -- and even bring the organization closer together in the process.
Want to know what he did? He instituted a 'furlough'.
This means that every employee (CEO included) was required to take four unpaid weeks off from work per year in order to balance the inevitable financial blows that threaten the survival of any thriving business or company. Sounds pretty simple, doesn't it? Everyone takes four weeks of unpaid vacation time and the company becomes stable again. Boom.

After reading about this furlough idea, I couldn't help but think "Wow. Duh. Why haven't more of us thought of that idea?"

And then I realized why it's so important for leaders at every level to read this book -- Leaders Eat Last is more than just a catchy title filled with inspiring stories -- it's a testament to the few true leaders in the business world today, and a blueprint filled example after example of how these principles of conscious, caring leadership can be cultivated and applied in the modern businesses of today.

Because of leaders like Bob Chapman, who refused to let his people go when his company hit hard times, the people in the company came together as a unified team to see to it that the organization would make it through the tough times and prosper once again.

And it all began with one person: the leader.

#3. Become a long-term leader

"Good leadership is like exercise. We do not see any improvement to our bodies with day-to-day comparisons. In fact, if we only compare the way our bodies look on a given day to how they looked the previous day, we would think our efforts had been wasted. It's only when we compare pictures of ourselves over a period of weeks or months that we can see a stark difference. The impact of leadership is best judged over time." - @simonsinek
// grab the full book summary here

I love that little nugget of wisdom... Leading for the long-term is a win-win-win for everyone because short-term fixes, though they may seem like the best decisions at the time, are nothing more than shortsighted means of immediate gratification. And when so many CEOs only hold their positions for no more than a few years, they base their decisions on their OWN best interest for their OWN short tenure as leader of the organization.

In other words, when Mr. Joe the CEO leaves his position after only three years - he's more concerned about short-term gain at the cost of the company's long-term health and prosperity. It's selfish.

Why the "Welch-Way" is the Wrong Way

Sinek solidifies his argument that leading for long-term is better than leading for the short-term by comparing two such leaders of two large organizations - both of which you've probably heard of:

The short-term leader: Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric

The long-term leader: Jeff Sinegal, former CEO of Costco

Sinek compares GE vs Costco by measuring profits via the rise and fall of their stocks, and then connecting those ebbs and flows to the decisions made by the leadership.

Here's what he found:
GE / Jack Welch / Short-term leadership:

Profits at GE were like a roller coaster ride due to irrational decision making without regard for long-term implication

Every year Jack would fire the bottom 10% of his managers at GE to balance the books

GE did indeed make profit, but it was more like rolling the dice and gambling with lives of employees for selfish gain - this is not strategy, this is a man on high on dopamine

Costco / Jeff Sinegal / Long-term leadership:

While Welch was striking fear into the hearts of his managers, Jeff Sinegal was concerned about giving his employees a raise - at a time when the US was in an economic crisis... Sinegal would say that they should be helping the employees in bad times, not letting them go.

Costco's stock was (and still is) stable and predictable - nothing exciting about it, just great, clean, predictable progress, performance and profit... when you're the 2nd largest retailer in the country, predictability is better than spontaneity.

Final note

It's also worth noting that he used almost every major financial institution as an example of corruption (Merryl Lynch, Wells Fargo, Citi Group, etc) ... which I see as no surprise, as most of them are aberrant by design, but we won't get in to that here. Sinek also dives into example after example of how major corporations, like Goldman Sachs lost touch with what originally served as the foundation of their success. This happens when the leadership sets up an environment that is the very opposite of the Circle of Safety, pitting employees against one another, which in turn sets up a scarcity-based "me-first" mentality that places priority on profits before people. Bad.

But it wasn't all negative. In fact, almost every example of bad leadership was contrasted with an example of leadership one can aspire to strive towards becoming. Organizations like , 3M, and even the Marines were applauded as extraordinary examples of cooperation, collaboration, and creativity... and they weren't just canned stories either. Many of them were stories of leaders (with and without formal authority) who exemplified the character traits, values and ethics that most of our so-called leaders of today could learn a thing or two from.

Though there weren't any new principles introduced in this book - the traditional leadership theories of yesterday were updated with examples and stories that illustrate the reality of workplace conditions today. And most of the principles were delivered with near-flawless impact. The Circle of Safety is very similar to , who, as Sinek mentions in the acknowledgements of his first book Dr. Stephen Covey's ideas Start With Why, influenced him quite a bit... BUT, if you look at who originally influenced much of Dr. Covey's work , you'll find that a great deal of it originates from books written by Peter Drucker . And if you look into who influenced Peter Drucker (which I haven't), you may find that many of his ideas came about as a result of someone else's influence.

The bottom line is, that very few ideas are actually "new", but the way in which they're actually presented is often worth reframing for the times. That said, Sinek has done a job at crafting stories based on real-life studies and situations that drive his points into the " heads and hearts " of the reader... they certainly did for me.

Like This Book Summary?

How-to guides

Book summaries

free (and meaningful) goodies

NAV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leaders Eat Last by Simon Sinek : Book Summary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The main message of is simple -- the buck stops at the leader's desk . In other words, those of us that lead may not always understand the impact that our leadership roles actually have on those we lead.