Latest news with #LeadershipIQ
Forbes
5 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
The Dark Side Of Employee Happiness That Nobody Talks About
The Dark Side of Employee Happiness That Nobody Talks About For years, 'employee happiness' has been treated as a corporate North Star. HR programs tout it, executives chase it, and pulse surveys are built to measure it. But if you're trying to build a high-performance culture, 'make people happy' may be one of the most misguided goals a leader can adopt. Let's be honest: happiness is fleeting. It's easily influenced by external perks and momentary moods. You can have employees who are 'happy' because no one pushes them too hard. But does that mean they're reaching their potential? Or even doing great work? Here's the hard truth: you can have a workforce that's happy, but unmotivated. And that's a major problem. The Hidden Risk of Happy But Unmotivated Employees Leadership IQ discovered that 8% of employees fall into the Happy But Unmotivated category. These folks recommend their company as a great organization to work for, but they're not actually motivated to give 100% effort. It's a disturbing statistic. You've got employees who like their job but aren't striving, growing, or pushing boundaries. Why? Because too many organizations prioritize comfort over challenge. They create conditions where people feel good but aren't being asked to do anything great. And the data supports this. When we asked employees if their goals would help them grow and develop, the truly engaged employees strongly agreed. The Happy But Unmotivated group? Not so much. They lacked goals that stretched them or clarified expectations. Unlocking Potential Is Better Than Chasing Happiness If we want better results—not just from our people, but for our people—we need a new leadership goal: unlocking potential. This means giving people the tools, feedback, challenges, and clarity to do the best work of their lives. The study 'Are SMART Goals Dumb?' found that only 13% of people believe their goals will help them maximize their full potential. But among those who set difficult goals, the majority felt like they were doing great things. These aren't minor bumps in performance, this could mean a 100% to 500% increase in people recommending their company as a great place to work. In other words, difficult goals don't demoralize people, they energize them. High Performers Want More Than Perks The best people on your team aren't looking for an easier ride. They want to stretch, grow, and feel a sense of progress. In fact, employees who are always learning new things are ten times more likely to give their best effort at work. But here's the kicker: only 42% of employees say they're frequently learning on the job. That gap represents a massive leadership opportunity. The most effective leaders (especially those who embody the Idealist leadership style) combine high expectations with deep care. They don't coddle their teams in the name of happiness. They challenge them to reach their full potential while offering support and encouragement along the way. If you want to become a high-impact leader, ask every employee: 'What do you want to get better at this month?' That one question sets the tone that growth is expected, supported, and celebrated. When Happiness Obscures Accountability Another troubling finding is that in 42% of companies, low performers are actually more engaged than high performers. That's not a typo. In nearly half of the 207 organizations we studied, high performers reported lower engagement scores than the people delivering the least value. How does that happen? Often, it's because low performers enjoy the status quo—they aren't held accountable, aren't challenged, and sometimes even receive unearned praise. Meanwhile, high performers feel invisible, unrewarded, and powerless to steer their own career trajectory. High performers want to know that the company values effort, rewards contribution, and has a clear plan for growth. And when they see poor performers skate by while their own accomplishments go unnoticed, they disengage (and eventually leave). What Great Leadership Looks Like If you want to retain and grow your top talent, stop managing to happiness. Instead, lead toward potential. Here's how: The Real Irony of Employee Happiness If you stop chasing happiness and start unlocking potential, you end up creating the very conditions that lead to long-term satisfaction, pride, and meaning. Employees don't need you to make them happy. They need you to help them become great. So let your competitors hand out branded hoodies and bland perks. You've got a better mission: unleash the brilliance that's already sitting on your payroll, just waiting for the right challenge.
Forbes
23-07-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Leaders Need To Stop Managing Change And Start Creating It
Leaders Need To Stop Managing Change And Start Creating It Our language reveals our mindset. For decades, we've talked about "change management" and "change readiness"; terms that betray a fundamentally reactive stance. We manage what happens to us. We get ready for what's coming. But what if this entire framework is outdated? New research suggests that organizations clinging to reactive change models are setting themselves up for obsolescence. The winners in today's AI-accelerated landscape won't be those who manage change well, they'll be those who actively seek it, create it, and move before disruption forces their hand. The Persistence of Change Denial A recent Leadership IQ AI Readiness study of 1,251 business leaders reveals a troubling paradox that perfectly illustrates why reactive approaches fail. While 79.5% of executives now personally use AI tools, (up from virtually no experience just two years ago), a shocking 46.2% still don't believe AI will significantly impact their own roles. Even more concerning: 56.4% of leaders either don't expect AI to replace any employees in the next three years or remain uncertain about it. This represents virtually no shift in executive thinking since 2023, despite witnessing AI's explosive capabilities firsthand. This "persistence gap" between personal AI adoption and strategic understanding reveals the fatal flaw in reactive change models. Leaders are using transformative technology daily yet failing to anticipate its implications. They're managing today's AI integration while remaining blind to tomorrow's disruption. If executives can't see massive change coming when they're literally holding it in their hands, how can they possibly position their organizations to thrive? The Need For Change Proactivity The landmark study on why CEOs get fired found that "mismanaging change" tops the list. But deeper analysis reveals the problem isn't just poor execution of change initiatives, it's the entire reactive framework used to think about change. The most successful organizations studied don't wait for change to happen to them. They actively seek disruption, challenge their own assumptions, and move before external forces demand it. They've shifted from asking "How do we manage this change?" to "What change should we create next?" This isn't just semantics. When organizations are proactive about change: Building Proactive Change Capability Research involving thousands of organizations and their change efforts has identified key strategies for shifting from reactive to proactive: Leadership IQ studies show that only 15% of employees understand the rationale behind their organization's strategy. This catastrophic communication gap exists because leaders spend months analyzing markets, attending conferences, and studying disruptions, and then announce changes without sharing that intellectual journey. Proactive leaders do something different. They make their thinking visible in real-time. They share what they're learning at industry events, what competitors are doing that's interesting, what customer behaviors are shifting. When change happens, it feels logical, not sudden. Research demonstrates that employees who are always learning new things are ten times more likely to be inspired. But here's the key: proactive organizations don't wait for change to force learning. They make it constant. Successful organizations implement weekly one-on-ones where managers ask: This builds self-efficacy, the belief that employees can successfully meet future challenges. When change comes (or better yet, when the organization creates it), teams already believe they can handle it. Every organization has influential employees (i.e., "Champions") that others naturally turn to for advice and perspective. Studies consistently show that starting change efforts with these Champions dramatically increases success rates. But in proactive organizations, Champions don't just support change, they help spot opportunities for it. They become early warning systems for market shifts, customer needs, and competitive threats. Organizations must cultivate these relationships before they need them. The test 'What Motivates You?' reveals that 48% of employees are primarily driven by Security (predictability, consistency) or Affiliation (relationships, belonging). These employees won't naturally seek change, they'll resist it. Proactive leaders recognize this and design change approaches that address these motivational needs. They maintain team cohesion during transitions, create predictable processes for unpredictable changes, and help security-driven employees see change as a path to greater stability, not less. Critical Change Warning Signs Organizations shifting toward proactive change should watch for these failure predictors: Data shows executives are 66% more likely to enjoy taking risks than frontline employees. In proactive organizations, leaders don't just push their risk tolerance onto others, instead, they build organizational risk capacity gradually and deliberately. Relatedly, only 38% of people like leaving their comfort zone. But proactive change requires it constantly. Successful leaders make discomfort productive by connecting it to growth and opportunity, not just survival. The AI persistence gap perfectly illustrates this: leaders can use transformative tools daily yet fail to grasp their implications. Proactive organizations build mechanisms to convert awareness into strategic action, like regular scenario planning and systematic opportunity scanning. The Competitive Reality The choice between reactive and proactive approaches to change isn't academic, it's existential. Change management research consistently shows that organizations stuck in reactive mode experience: Meanwhile, proactive organizations report employees who actually seek out new challenges, suggest improvements unprompted, and view change as opportunity rather than threat. Moving Forward After years of studying why change efforts fail, evidence strongly suggests the entire change management paradigm needs disrupting. Organizations need to stop managing change and start creating it. Stop preparing for disruption and start being the disruptor. Stop building change-ready cultures and start building change-seeking ones. The organizations that will dominate the next decade won't be those with the best change management processes. They'll be those that make proactive change-seeking part of their DNA. In a world where AI can transform industries overnight, waiting to react isn't just slow, it's fatal.
Forbes
25-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Are Your Best Employees The Ones Most Likely To Leave?
Are Your Best Employees The Ones Most Likely To Leave? A Leadership IQ study reveals that managers believe only 36% of employees are delivering great work. And an even more dangerous discovery shows these high performers are often less engaged than their underperforming colleagues, creating a dangerous cycle that threatens the entire workforce. These studies deliver a sobering wake-up call for companies: The small group of employees carrying the heaviest load, solving the toughest problems, and driving organizational success are sometimes the most likely to be looking for the exit. The Champions Who Carry the Load In most organizations, the 36% who deliver great work aren't just performing their own jobs exceptionally, they're compensating for the 64% who aren't. They stay late fixing problems created by others, take on extra projects when deadlines loom, and serve as the unofficial mentors and problem-solvers their colleagues depend on. While adequate performers complete assigned tasks, great performers take that crucial extra step: they help colleagues succeed, volunteer for challenging assignments, and turn problems into learning opportunities for entire teams. But when only one-third of employees operate at this level, those high performers become organizational life support systems. And life support systems, no matter how strong, eventually break down under constant pressure. The Recognition Paradox One cause of this is the recognition paradox. High performers report that their exceptional work is often viewed as "expected" rather than celebrated, while low performers receive disproportionate positive attention because managers spend more time coaching struggling employees. This creates a perverse incentive structure where mediocrity gets attention and excellence gets taken for granted. High performers begin to feel invisible despite carrying disproportionate responsibility, a recipe for disengagement and eventual departure. The Accountability Vacuum Another critical factor is the absence of accountability for poor performance. When low performers face no consequences for substandard work, high performers become the default solution for every problem. This dynamic creates a "performance subsidization" where high performers unknowingly subsidize low performance by cleaning up messes, covering gaps, and ensuring organizational objectives get met despite widespread mediocrity. High performers consistently report low confidence that leadership holds people accountable for their performance. They watch colleagues deliver subpar work without consequences while simultaneously handling increased workloads to compensate for others' shortcomings. The Career Control Crisis Also alarming is the finding that high performers increasingly feel their career success depends on factors beyond their control. Despite consistently delivering excellent results, they see advancement opportunities going to less qualified candidates, witness poor performers receiving the same raises, and observe organizational decisions that seem to ignore merit entirely. This loss of what psychologists call "internal locus of control" is a powerful predictor of turnover. When high performers conclude that excellence doesn't drive career outcomes, they typically decide that excellence isn't worth the effort or they find organizations where it is. The Multiplication Effect The 36% problem becomes exponentially worse when these champions start leaving. High performers don't just take their individual contributions with them, they remove the stabilizing force that enables the other 64% to maintain even adequate performance. Projects they were quietly shepherding suddenly face delays, quality standards they maintained through informal leadership begin to slip, colleagues who relied on their expertise struggle with complex problems, and remaining high performers face even greater workloads and pressure. Organizations can quickly spiral from having 36% great performers to having 20% or fewer, as the burden on remaining champions becomes unsustainable. Breaking the Cycle Any number of interventions can reverse this pattern. Organizations need behavioral recognition systems to identify and celebrate the specific behaviors that distinguish high performers. This means creating formal processes to recognize not just what great performers achieve, but how they achieve it, i.e., the extra steps that create exceptional results. Performance differentiation requires establishing meaningful consequences for both excellent and poor performance. High performers need to see that excellence leads to different outcomes than mediocrity. And this demands honestly auditing what actually happens to your highest and lowest performers in terms of recognition, advancement, compensation, and opportunities. Another option, career clarity, involves providing transparent pathways that directly reward continued excellence. When advancement seems random or political, high performers lose motivation to maintain exceptional standards. Organizations must show top performers specific examples of how excellence has led to advancement within the company. And workload management means resisting the temptation to overload high performers simply because they can handle more. This requires either improving the performance of others or redistributing work more strategically, including auditing high performers' actual workloads and identifying which tasks could be redistributed or eliminated. The Strategic Imperative These findings reveal a critical challenge: organizations are simultaneously under-utilizing their workforce potential while burning out their most valuable contributors. The 36% who deliver great work aren't statistical outliers, they're organizational lifelines. Losing them doesn't just reduce performance; it can trigger a performance collapse as the remaining workforce loses the informal support system that enabled their performance. Companies that solve this paradox will gain enormous competitive advantages. They'll not only retain their champions but create conditions where the other 64% can rise to higher performance levels. The question isn't whether organizations can afford to address the engagement gap among high performers, it's whether they can afford not to, especially when their future success depends on the very people who are increasingly questioning whether their excellence is worth the effort. The 36% champions aren't asking for special treatment. They're asking for organizational systems that value excellence as much as they do.
Forbes
09-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
4 Mistakes To Avoid When Starting A New Job
4 Mistakes To Avoid When Starting A New Job Starting a new job is an exciting and rewarding journey. You meet new people, adapt to a new environment, face new challenges, and explore new opportunities for growth. However, that excitement comes with the fear of making mistakes or leaving a bad impression. The truth is, you need not know everything right away. Having the right mindset and behavior matters more. In fact, a study by Leadership IQ revealed that 89% of hiring failures are due to poor attitudes, not lack of skills. To help you start strong, here are four mistakes to avoid for a smoother transition into your new role. One common mindset when starting a new role is, 'It's too early to demand or negotiate. I should just follow along for now.' But that's a big, costly mistake. Yes, you've worked really hard acing every interview, and now that you've finally landed a new job, you might not want to risk anything. However, by delaying things, you're missing out on a lot of money and the opportunity to build credibility early on. So, don't be afraid to bring up salary, bonuses, performance reviews, and other things to negotiate. For example, if you didn't get your desired salary, you can ask for additional paid time off or a more flexible schedule. Talk about training opportunities, or suggest a more reasonable timeline for performance reviews. You might not always get what you ask for, but you will gain respect for speaking up. It also reflects your confidence, strong communication skills, and commitment to your role. When we say onboarding, we often think it's the job of HR or the team to help us learn the ropes. Sure, they will conduct orientations, walk us through tools and programs, and train us on different parts of the job, but it doesn't stop there. A successful onboarding process requires new hires' active participation. Being a newbie doesn't mean you should just keep quiet and wait to be told what to do. Instead, ask questions, especially when you're unfamiliar or still confused about certain processes. For example, if you're having difficulty using a project management tool, approach any team member. Ask for tips and best practices to help you get the hang of things faster. By being honest and proactive, you save time for everyone. It also shows your eagerness to learn and contribute to the team. So stay curious and engaged! While there's a lot to look forward to in a new job, don't forget the less exciting but equally important matters. Take time to understand taxes. Ask about Form W-4 and other documents you need to accomplish. Review your employment contract thoroughly, including the probationary period, termination and notice provisions, confidentiality clauses, and non-compete agreements, if applicable. These may sound boring and technical, but you should know what you're getting yourself into and your respective rights and responsibilities. Ask HR for any clarifications regarding leave requests, work hours, health insurance, and other benefits. Staying informed helps prevent unnecessary conflicts and allows you to focus on excelling in your new role. The first few weeks or months are crucial in making a positive impression at your new job. Your responsibilities will grow, and regular evaluations will show your progress — or the lack of it. So spend your time wisely, and connect with the right people. For instance, instead of reading all available resources or finding the perfect design for a presentation, talk to your manager and the people you'll be working with. Get involved early on by asking these questions: What are the team's biggest problems right now? What areas do you need help with? How can I contribute to the team's goals? Keeping your efforts aligned with the team's mission and vision helps position yourself as a dependable team member. Finding a new job is already a big win. But you don't want to waste that opportunity on mistakes that are easily avoidable. So, be more proactive, understand the boring but important aspects of the job, and channel your energy into contributing to the team while growing professionally. Rooting for you!
Forbes
28-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Why Only One-Third Of Your Team Is Delivering Great Work, And How To Change That
Why Only One-Third Of Your Team Is Delivering Great Work A new study reveals that managers across 484 companies believe only 35.7% of their employees are delivering great work. This isn't just a performance problem—it's the biggest untapped opportunity in corporate America. Leadership IQ's new research surveyed 7,225 managers with one simple question: "What percent of your employees do you think are delivering great work right now?" The results should alarm and inspire every leader. Nearly two-thirds of managers (62%) believe that fewer than half of their employees are performing at their potential. For most executives, this finding lands somewhere between devastating and puzzling. After all, these aren't problem employees being discussed; these are the solid performers, the ones who show up, complete assignments, and keep operations running. Yet managers see them as capable of so much more. Study: Only One-Third Of Your Team Is Delivering Great Work The conventional wisdom suggests that great performance requires superhuman talent—the Michael Jordan or Serena Williams of the corporate world. This belief creates a dangerous blind spot: it assumes great work is reserved for the naturally gifted few, leaving organizations to accept mediocrity from everyone else. The reality is far more encouraging. In nearly every organization studied, the difference between good work and great work isn't supernatural ability—it's a set of simple behavioral choices that anyone can make. Consider this real example: A CEO struggling with technology adoption noticed two distinct groups during the rollout of a new ERP system. The "good work" employees supported the change, saying things like "Okay, I'll give it a try" or "I'm excited to learn this new skill." The "great work" employees did something subtly different. When they heard negativity from colleagues, they actively encouraged others, redirecting conversations toward the positive and helping teammates focus on what they could control. The difference required no additional training, no special talent, and virtually no extra time. It was simply a choice to take one step beyond personal compliance toward helping others succeed. An engineering firm focused on accuracy provides another telling example. Good performers who found mistakes would report them to supervisors and propose solutions; solid, responsible behavior. Great performers did all of that, then took one additional step: they shared their mistakes with the entire team, creating learning opportunities that prevented others from making the same errors. Again, the distinction wasn't about technical skill or intelligence. It was about choosing to elevate the performance of others, not just completing individual tasks. These patterns repeat across industries and roles. Good work means accepting assignments; great work means volunteering for them. Good work means supporting changes; great work means championing them and bringing others along. Good work means completing tasks; great work means helping teammates succeed. The mathematical implications are staggering. Organizations currently operating with roughly one-third of their workforce performing at peak levels are leaving massive value on the table. Consider the potential impact if that percentage moved from 36% to 60% (that's a 67% increase in great performers). The research suggests this isn't wishful thinking. In many cases, employees already possess the skills and knowledge needed for great work. They simply lack clarity about what great work looks like in their specific context, or they operate within systems that inadvertently discourage the initiative and collaboration that characterize peak performance. The most successful organizations in the study had leaders who could clearly articulate the difference between good and great work using what researchers call "word pictures,' (i.e., specific, observable behaviors that distinguish performance levels). These leaders didn't rely on vague concepts like "exceeding expectations" or "going above and beyond." Instead, they painted clear mental snapshots of what great work looked like in action. When a new software system required adoption, they could describe exactly how a great performer would respond differently than a good performer. This clarity serves two crucial purposes: it gives employees a concrete target to aim for, and it helps managers recognize and reinforce great work when they see it. The research reveals that most performance gaps aren't about ability, they're about environment. Organizations with higher percentages of great performers share several characteristics: They define great work behaviorally, not just by outcomes. Rather than focusing solely on numbers and deliverables, they identify the specific actions that create impact beyond individual tasks. They connect daily work to organizational impact. Employees understand how their contributions matter and how great work in their role drives broader success. They remove barriers to great work. Many well-intentioned policies and procedures inadvertently discourage the initiative, risk-taking, and collaboration that characterize peak performance. They provide frequent coaching, not just annual reviews. Great work develops through ongoing guidance and real-time feedback, not periodic formal evaluations. The study's findings suggest that hidden within most organizations is a reservoir of untapped potential. The question isn't whether employees can do great work—it's whether leaders are creating the conditions for it to flourish. This represents a fundamental shift in how executives think about performance management. Instead of assuming that great work is rare and difficult to achieve, leaders can recognize it as an accessible choice that becomes more likely when people understand what it looks like and feel supported in pursuing it. The companies that figure this out first will gain an enormous competitive advantage. While their competitors accept that only one-third of employees can deliver great work, these organizations will systematically move that number higher by making the invisible visible and clearly defining the small but powerful behaviors that separate good from great. The 36% problem isn't really a problem at all. It's an opportunity disguised as a challenge, waiting for leaders bold enough to unlock the potential that's been there all along.
