There’s a hand-wringing ritual every four years during the second week of November. News personalities self-flagellate over their shallow coverage of the presidential election campaign. “Perhaps, we should have spent more time analyzing the candidates’ stances on the issues rather than the horse race?” they ponder out loud. Will it be different this time? Maybe the sharp ideological contrast between the Obama-Biden and Romney-Ryan tickets will finally set the stage for issues-based coverage. Tune in now; there are only 12 weeks until Election Day.
It’s About Trust
I’m skeptical. Ideologues and party loyalists already know where they stand on the issues. To the majority of people not committed to one party’s platform or the other’s (independents, centrists, apolitical types), though, the race isn’t about the issues. It’s about something much more intuitive and gut-based. It’s about trust. Whom do I trust to lead?
This, of course, plays out differently in the corporate world. The idea of a new CEO selected by a popular vote is something for a late night comedy sketch. That said, I am seeing a movement across industries and organizations engaged in talent management and succession planning to incorporate the voices of internal constituents in promotional decisions. Trust matters.
The Building Blocks
It’s long been said that trust is comprised of competence and character. For someone to trust you, they will need faith that you have the talents and abilities to perform the work in question. Second, they will need to see you as someone of integrity who’ll do the right thing. Think of this as task trust and personal trust.
This duality is playing out right in front of us in the presidential race. Undecided voters express the view that as a financially successful businessman, Governor Mitt Romney is well positioned to help the troubled U.S. economy. These same Undecideds also believe President Barack Obama has stronger values and convictions. In other words they attribute competence to Romney and character to Obama. They’re torn.
Which attribute is more important to people, competence or character? It doesn’t matter. Deficiency in either undermines trust. Having said that, I do see one come up more frequently in the corporate workplace.
The Character Deficiency
As I alluded above, I hear from clients who have completed their yearly nine-box “performance x potential” talent review requesting help for some established star surprisingly dinged as not yet promotable to the C-Suite. Typically, this achiever has demonstrated profound competence (usually technical) over a 20-30 year career. There are occasional exceptions, e.g., when one is seen as too risk-averse or operational.
The majority of pleas come when the shortcoming is one of character. Frequent profiles include leaders with low empathy who come off intimidating and unapproachable, push their own agenda, are disengaged from their team, behave too politically, and/or are uninspiring. I am observing an increasing squeamishness among organizational leaders to promote these candidates, despite their impressive track records. Senior execs seem to be realizing that to foster competitive workplaces, they will need leaders who know how to inspire followership. Leaders of character. The good news is that some organizations provide character-deficient candidates with this tough but honest feedback and subsequently support their professional development. The bad news is that others don’t, relegating these high achievers to languish and/or leave.
The Character Reboot
If you’ve recently been passed over for a key promotion having met all or most of your performance targets, chances are it’s due to a perception of character, not competence. Consider following the five-step formula I laid out last year in How to MORPH Your Leadership Brand.
Another – less invasive, but more difficult – option is to ask your HR business partner for the competencies you will need to develop and jointly craft a list of associated behaviors. For example, if one of the competencies is to be more “supportive,” associated behaviors might include: (a) making time for each direct report; (b) investing in their professional development; and (c) allowing more autonomy. Once you’ve done so, assemble a checklist and monitor the frequency with which you’re engaging in these new behaviors. Track your progress.
While you’re probably not going to need to be elected to your next promotion, you do want to engineer it so that you are the easy choice.
Remember, your character’s showing.