The Energizing Power of Gratitude

I read this Thanksgiving post on CNN, which points to several university psychologists and a couple of popular authors in describing the power of gratitude. I had an experience with it a couple of weeks ago, too.

"I think I'm going to drop out of school," began the conversation with one of our students--a scholarship student with great creativity, an engaging personality, and a curious mind. "I just don't think I can continue. When I think of doing this for the rest of my career, I don't think it's for me. I used to wake up excited to go to classes, and now I wake up, and I don't even want to come."

As I pressed for more detail, it became clear that she had a number of concerns about how things were going in her classes, with classmates, and with faculty members.

"What is the most recent thing you can remember about college that you really enjoyed?" I asked.

As she answered, I transcribed her words on a piece of stationery. I handed her the sheet of paper.

"Your assignment," I said, "is to fill this sheet with statements of gratitude over the next week."

The details of the assignment were to write at least once a day, more if desired, and to express gratitude for specific things, events, and people. Additionally, she was to write at least two thank-you notes to members of the department--students or faculty, and give them.

One week later, the same student walked into my office again--burst in.

"It's working!" she exclaimed. "For three days now, I've woken up before my alarm, just excited to come learn and be with these people that I love so much. I just wanted to thank you for the assignment."

We visited for a few minutes more about the details, and I encouraged her to continue her gratitude journaling. As she was leaving, she said, "One more thing...can I do more than two thank-you notes?"

Taking the Fall

NFL organizations receive nearly constant scrutiny and media coverage, and I thought the developments for the New York Football Giants recently have been particularly interesting. The team has been for the past couple of years a league powerhouse, but has lost the last four games in a row, leading to much finger pointing and speculation about who is responsible and what should happen next.

When things go wrong, it is difficult to generate positive energy and be productive, perhaps one of the reasons that losing sometimes comes in bunches (the nice thing is that winning can, too). I imagine what it might be like to be a player, hearing all of the rumors, the blame, and then wondering if my teammates or coaches place responsibility on me. Then consider that there are 53 players and a handful of coaches that each may begin to feel that fear, and you can imagine what the climate of the office is. What can be done to diffuse the pressure, to create space for positive, creative, productive action?

Here is what the head coach said, as reported by Don Banks of Sports Illustrated:

"I thought it was perfectly clear, but let me express it so no longer does anyone else receive any type of blame,'' Coughlin said on Monday. "Let me start out by saying that I'm responsible for all of the decisions that are made with our football team. "The [red] zone decisions are my responsibility. They are nobody else's. No one else made a mistake. The quarterback did not make a mistake. The decision was mine.''

By taking the responsibility publicly and clearly, Coughlin is creating space for his players and coaches to work on things that will prepare them for the next games.

This kind of leadership really costs very little, but it may pay big dividends. Have you been in organizations during challenging times? How to people respond to them with regard to taking responsibility openly, and what were the effects on the group? On the outcomes?

Face-to-Face Leadership

Imagine that you go to a meeting with your colleagues and supervisor. You and your colleagues, in a small meeting room, sit around one end of a rectangular table. Your supervisor comes in, sits down near the other end of the table, and as he speaks, he kicks his legs up on the table, thus occupying most of the workspace.

Would you anticipate coming out of this meeting enthusiastic, empowered to do your best work, likely to spend extra time solving work problems?

Curtis LeBaron spends his time poring over videotapes of leadership interactions, and talked to BYU students about the impact of relationships. Fascinating to consider things that when pointed out make so much sense, but are not always explicitly understood.
Check it out here--you can watch, listen to, or read it.

Curtis LeBaron | Face-to-Face Leadership: As a Man Speaketh unto a Friend | July 28, 2009 | BYU Broadcasting

Shared via AddThis

Draining the Room

I watched the leader of a large group give a keynote address--kind of a "State of..." speech. The speech was informative, clear, and accurate. The floor was then opened for questions and concerns. This is where things became interesting.

One member of the group shared a concern about employee access to tools required for effective work. The question raised, and many in the room nodded their heads. This leader took the question, and said, "I don't know...I won't be coming down over your supervisors' heads...you might be interested to know that you don't have it so bad--other areas have it much worse than you."

When further questions were solicited, none came. Surprised?

Back to work

It has been some time--I've been with my family in Illinois, working on a large outdoor theatrical production for my church. The experience was richly rewarding for each member of the family--hard work, and wonderful friends.

As we were in Nauvoo, I tried to keep observing the many people we worked with. All of them are good people, working hard to become better.

As I observed various interactions between individuals, it seems that a pattern of true caring may be one way to understand the mechanism of energizing others.

When someone really demonstrates a desire to understand another individual, both are ultimately energized.

This post is more clearly to announce that I'll be back building this blog and other materials.

Please send any suggestions, thoughts, etc. What kinds of postings would make something like this really interesting to you?

Employee Loyalty

The Chronicle of Higher Ed has a short post about faculty members leaving soon after receiving tenure at their institutions.  Tenure, in practical terms, is an assurance of employment (I know there are nuances, but that is for another discussion).  For many faculty members, this is a six-year process of intense work trying to demonstrate the value of their contribution to the institution in teaching, scholarship, and citizenship.

One person sent in a particularly interesting comment.  

"If the faculty member is good we get them cheap until someone else forces us to up the ante. Loyalty is just ruse to keep faculty on board. In my 30 years associated with 5 different universities I see little evidence at most that faculty are anything but “primary units of production”—direct quote from former dean."

Contrast that to another comment:

"When I was a tenure-track faculty member, my chair helped me with a reduced teaching load, travel funding, a mentor, and a graduate assistant. Now that I am a Dean, I do the same thing for my tenure-track faculty."

These two deans indicated two different views of the individuals they worked with.  While we don't know which, if either, of these deans would show up as energizers, we might be able to predict our own responses to them.  Which one would energize you the most?  Faculty positions are largely autonomous--as a faculty member, you do your own research, plan your own classes, generally with infrequent feedback from those in authority.  An energizer in the network might be particularly effective, since the motivation needed for continuing excellence in faculty work is generally considered to be self-generated.

Many of the roles you fill don't have specific, immediate, clear rewards attached for doing the job well.  I think of my role as a parent.  While I enjoy my children now, much of the work we do with them is done with the hope that they will grow up to be productive, happy adults.  What happens to my energy when I interact with someone who acknowledges that work?  What happens to yours?

Try This Experiment

Try this, and then post a comment to share how it works.  Think of three people you are likely to have interactions with in the very near future.  What is the main purpose or context of your relationship?  Coworkers? Family? Neighbors?  What will be the likely "main" topic of discussion, or the reason for the interaction?  

Now, think of an interest or project of each of the three people you have chosen outside the main context of your interaction.  Commit to asking each of the three about that outside interest or project as part of your interaction.

After the interaction, write down some of your observations of their responses to you, and reflect on your own level of energy after the interaction.

What did you learn? 

Here's an example:  I'm going to meet with a faculty colleague to talk about redesigning a course syllabus.  I know this colleague has been working on a show with some children, so I'll ask her specifically how it's been.

Fear Energizes Me

I mentioned my research topic to a friend the other day who immediately and enthusiastically replied, "I know just what you mean--I'm an energizer in my work!" He then explained in some detail how he had become a significant irritant in his work unit with what he perceived to be great success.

As you read this, I know you can think of many examples of times when fear, intimidation, coercion, or other negative motivations have been effective. Dr. Roy Baumeister wrote a significant article in The Review of General Psychology called "Bad is Stronger Than Good." There is no question about the immediate and motivating impact of strong and negative stimuli. However, if we think of each interaction we have with another individual as one piece of a large building project, we can start to see the long-term damage that negative interactions inflict on relationships and organizations.

I think of it this way. When I am motivated by fear or other negative impulses (de-energizing), I am essentially trying to avoid negative consequences. In other words, I'm not trying to excel, I'm trying to avoid failure or punishment.

On the other hand, when I am motivated by hope, compassion, courage and other positive impulses (energizing), I am planning for a future of growth and improvement.

Is there a place for fear? Certainly. But if my objective is long-term energy and growth for myself and others in my group or organization, my definition of an "energizer" must be focused on individuals perceived by others as positive, building, and encouraging.

Are we the same in all of our groups?

Someone posted a question that needed to be its own post:  Can an individual be an energizer in one kind of situation or group, and a deenergizer in another?

Nice! I love this question...while my research can't give the answer, one simple way to think about this would be to consider that each individual is a member of more than one group or organization. Let's take some extreme examples. Let's suppose Shirley is a doctor in a trauma center. Many would agree that this can be a high-stress environment. Further, most associations are not by choice, but by assignment. However, if we were to analyze the energy network in the trauma center, we may find that Shirley is a hub. Or not.

Shirley might also be a member of her local PTA. She may 1) behave similarly to the way she behaves in the trauma center; OR 2) take a totally different approach to her interactions with others in the PTA. It becomes easy to see how people in the PTA may have a different experience with Shirley in terms of her energizing capacity than those in the trauma center.

Another question might be: How likely is it that one individual is consistently perceived as an energizer, neutral, or a deenergizer across the groups she/he belongs to? 

In other words, do I have a similar effect or contribution to the energy of all the organizations I am a member of?

Is this subject too soft?

Some might read this and think that the idea of energy is too soft, ambiguous to take seriously if we want to improve a group or organization.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  What kinds of people are most important to organizational success?  People with information? Influence? It turns out that people who energize others are at the center of predictably high areas of productivity--Rob Cross, Wayne Baker, and others have found that these energizers and the networks around them are as much as 4 times more likely to predict high productivity than other perspectives of organizational networks.

Starting to sound interesting?  Think of the people you know, and how you feel after an interaction with them.  Each individual feels something after an interaction with another, and those feelings can become very powerful.

What Kind of People Are Energizers?

When I ask people this question, their first response usually refers to someone who is an extravert (Jung typology) or an activator (Gallup Strength) (although one colleague suggested that an energizer may be the one with the strongest socio-political leverage to make work happen--however, as I mentioned in the previous post, this approach might get work done, but ultimately drains energy from the relationships and doesn't have lasting capacity for excellence).

These kind of responses indicate that when I ask the question, people are responding as observers, rather than participants.  With further probing it becomes clear that the question is referring to how an individual's energy is after an interaction with another.  

For example, write down five people whom you interact with regularly, then answer this question for each of them:  After an interaction with _______, how is your energy?  Most of us find when we do this that personality types may not be a predictor of an energizer.  So the question becomes, what are the attributes of these people, the energizers?  This is the emphasis of my current research.

Case of a Deenergizing Exchange

Let's say my friend Shawn has been planning to hold a meeting in the conference room.  He's made the arrangements and communicated with everyone who regularly uses the conference room.  When he enters the room for his meeting, Carol is there, and says that she'll be 20 minutes over.  Shawn says, "I'm sorry, Carol, but we need to begin our meeting now, and you indicated in your email that you would be willing to move at this time."  Visibly upset, Carol says, "This is very unprofessional, and unfair to my clients, who need to see some consistency from this organization." 

Most of us would recognize that this is not a positive interaction.  But what has happened to each person's energy after the interchange?  We might describe each of them as energized during the interaction as their emotions make them defend their positions.  However, the very specific kind of energy that generates lasting positive results is the energy that an individual feels after an interaction.  Both Carol and Shawn are drained after their emotions settle, and their abilities to perform are diminished.  Additionally, without some kind of reparations, each are now likely to avoid the other in the future, unless work responsibilities require them to interact.

One interaction doesn't necessarily define a person as deenergizing.  But over time and many interactions, patterns emerge, and each of us knows who we are most likely to want to have an interaction with in any group or organization.  Extend this over the network, and we'll find pockets of mutually energizing relationships, filled with energizers, and the most productive areas of an organization.

What is energy?

When I'm referring to energy, I'm not talking strictly about the physics definition, the capacity to do work.  However, it is related in a very real way.  Remember?  After an interchange with _________, how do you feel about your energy?  As you consider this, you are probably thinking of your motivation, your confidence, your positive feelings about your work or other activities.

Physical energy systems in the human body are depleted as you do the work--the more you do, the more you need rest and fuel to regain your energy.  The energy we're talking about here works on a different kind of economics--one person can give another energy, and in doing so gain more themselves!

As you consider your associates, friends, and family, you might consider the question of whether they are energizers, not by simply thinking of them, but thinking of how you and others respond after interactions with them.  

Welcome!

After you have an interaction with _________, do you feel energized, neutral, or deenergized?  If you were to ask each member of your group or organization this question about the other members, you'd be able to generate an energy "map," and the map would show that there are some very dense clusters of energy, and some more diffuse areas.  You could also generate a "deenergy map," which would show how people are connected to deenergizing individuals.

You'd also likely find a very interesting and important connection:  Those dense clusters of individuals who energize each other are the most productive areas of the group!

As you read this, it certainly sounds like common sense, but there aren't many groups that focus on this phenomenon as a key to success.

My objective is to share stories and research that will provide tools for accomplishing these things:

1. Recognizing how really powerful and predictive these "energized clusters" are of success.
2. Understanding what it means to be an energizer for others.
3. Understanding what it takes to become an energizer--and do it!