Update for Heroes and Legends

It's a bit longer than I planned since my last post here. So, just reminding you that we're still here and hard at work.

Over the last two weeks I have been writing more about the connections and contrasts between Heroes and Legends. As that exploration tightens up a bit more you will see those results here.

A key area that I've been working on has been to more clearly define the Hero. The Legend has always been an area of interest to me and I'm much more prepared to share those pieces in this space, however I will not do that without having both sides to present.

But conversation around Hero has been strong these last two weeks and we're beginning to get the framework built. For anyone lucky enough to already be following our work, expect a post on advanced Hero topics by Friday. And I can promise some more regular posting as we move through that into Legend.

Heroes and Legends Pt 2

On Monday I wrote about my Heroes and Legends Theory and how it ties into the work that we're doing now here at 2-Pros.  You can find that post here.

In Part 2 -- I want to clarify some of what I wrote about their differences.  

As a Response

I look at Hero and Legend both as responses by which to complete a task.  By response I am thinking of a call to action.  Either you "muscle up" and do it the Hero way through max effort, or you go cerebral and use the Legend.  An important distinction here is that Hero and Legend Responses are not mutually exclusive.  It is possible to utilize both methods at the same time to accomplish a task.  However, I have found in my experience in leading different sales and service teams that many people, especially those with low career maturity, gravitate towards the Hero Response and simply try their hardest.  A much smaller percentage of people will consistently use the Legend Response and systematically approach tasks.  Finally, a select few people effectively use both Hero and Legend Responses to maximize effort and a process.

The Pitfalls

As I've mentioned, the Hero Response tends to lead toward inconsistency.  There are many factors ranging from energy levels, to stress, to competition, to understanding, that can affect a person's ability to reach or maintain maximum effort during a task.  When a person consistently chooses the Hero Response, but fails to consistently maximize their effort due to exterior circumstances, they achieve results inconsistently.

The Legend, on the other hand, puts processes in place that nearly run themselves.  Missing from the machine though can be a human element.  When someone chooses the Legend Response, but fails to impart any energy, success is capped at best.

The Benefits (aside from the obvious)

Heroes are inspiring.  Watching a colleague or competitor pour it all out to meet a goal makes us want to join in the fun.  And true to that point, Heroes are often the charismatic leaders of our respective fields.  Their efforts don't only meet goals, they light a fire in our hearts that inspires us to join the mission.  

Legends are marvelous.  We look at the success of Legends and marvel at their ability to produce consistent results without the typical charisma that we see from Heroes.  We marvel at their efficiency, their calm, and their detailed plans.  Then we seek to imitate them.

--

In coming posts on this topic I will begin to explore deeper into the Hero Response and Legend Response independently so that we can begin to really identify what makes each work, where the pitfalls occur, and how to integrate both Responses into our daily process.

A Plug for Narratives

This will be the first time I am linking to and plugging another blog and I have to say its a pretty great post to kick it off with.

Mark Suster posted on his Both Sides of the Table blog this morning about using narrative to make your point. Check it out here.

This post really got my wheels spinning about sales process. The most meaningful word that Mark uses in his post is "connection". It's so important to cross that line when presenting an idea (or selling a product for you sales folks out there). Making an emotional connection with the audience you are speaking to helps them buy into your message and builds irreplaceable rapport.

Mark's narrative on narrative's (loved the set up of that too) details how to build your pitch and does a really good job of it.  He leaves the implementation of it, however, to our own imaginations.  Naturally, having been progressing along with sales process here at 2-Pros I made the instant connection.

The five pieces of narratives that Mark details are:

• Start with a thesis
• Have supporting evidence
• Use analogies
• Keep it human
• Reinforce the storyline at the end

And really, what sales pitch is not enhanced by adding these narrative components?  Even to the most persistent, number-crunching CFOs the addition of a story that includes a human element will help to better connect them to the idea.

Heroes and Legends Pt 1

Perhaps we already share a professional experience.  The best question I have ever been asked in any job interview was “Are you a sprinter or a marathoner?” The question caught me off guard at the time, but my knee-jerk response to it has left me on a path of increasing obsession with systematic process ever since.  In observing myself and others in professional settings I have found that those regarded as most successful are often the most consistently successful.  And those people almost invariably have a process that allows them to respond to all of their goals and challenges.  They are unflappable in the face of ambiguity, and they graciously accept praise for the meeting goals they always knew they would meet. My answer?

“Taking that question into professional context, I would say that it’s about effort. And in that way I feel that ‘Sprinter’ and ‘Marathoner’ are interchangeable with ‘Hero’ and ‘Legend’. The Hero provides awe-inspiring effort, they are the benefactors of epic victories and the recipients of crushing defeats.  They give a task everything they have in hopes of that victory.  The Legend is systematic.  They use foresight to prepare and plan to overcome obstacles.  The most accomplished Legends begin to seek obstacles just to diminish them.  I think there’s a little bit of both Hero in Legend in all of us, but the Legends have the better track records.”

Now I have nothing against sprinters or heroes.  I feel that Heroes display the 100% emotional, physical, even spiritual efforts that humans are naturally drawn to. That's the definition of a hero to me... and when presented with the opportunity, don't we all aspire to be the hero? And truly, heroic actions are often the defining moments for careers even the histories of entire corporations.

My observations in the business world, however, are that the Hero is often inconsistent. Their ability to overwhelm a challenge with pure effort can be parried by stress, peer pressure, misunderstanding of the challenge, or even just a greater, opposing effort.

This is where Legends prevail. The Legend is not susceptible to variance in the way that the hero is, because the Legend has already accounted for secondary obstacles. The Legend, conversely to the Hero is nearly emotionless, they are all system. My observations of Legends are that they are significantly more consistent because they maintain a steady approach to challenges as they happen.

In subsequent parts of this post I will be delving a little deeper into Heroes and Legends to begin to develop a framework for strategic planning.

Book Review: Five Dysfunctions of a Team

One of the ways to keep your process both honed and up to date is to continue your learning.  The master of creativity, the great Pablo Picasso once said, "Success is dangerous. One begins to copy oneself, and to copy oneself is more dangerous than to copy others. It leads to sterility."  So in light of learning from the insight of others, 2-Pros brings you our first book review.


The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni is perhaps the best professional book I have read to date.  In it Lencioni discusses the dysfunctions of Absence of Trust, Fear of Conflict, Lack of Commitment, Avoidance of Accountability, and Inattention to Results.  He really does a phenomenal job of showing how each of these dysfunctions impact one another and how suffering from one can escalate up the list and cause issues in later areas.  He ties the whole thing together with a short story that is simplistic in nature, but provides the right amount of color to really help you absorb the depth of his concepts.


In reading this book I really felt like Lencioni helped me to determine who my teams were in the workplace.  First my management peers at other offices, next my management team in my office, and finally my team of subordinates that I lead.  In my line of work, that concept really got me thinking as to how important it is to ensure that teams operate effectively down the priority scale to ensure that corporate messages are delivered consistently at all levels by ensuring that I don't lead my team in a direction that all other teams are not headed in.  Thus avoiding a separate topic of discerning the fine line between motivated innovation and disregard for corporate branding.  


Once I was able to identify my teams, I was quickly able to start putting the litmus tests together to gauge where each team stood in regards to the five dysfunctions.  Lencionci's concepts were evident and several levels and I'm happy to have been able to define them and put things in place to start pull together those teams for even better performances in the future. 


These additions to my existing team-building structure will largely impact my processes in that area and greatly assist me as I continue to work with teams in the future.  With the exception of those of us who live on deserted islands, who doesn't need a little more focus on team as part of their process?


If you are looking for a great read, I strongly suggest picking this one up.  Because of the short-story nature it is a reasonably quick read, and once you begin to connect the concepts to the teams that you're a part of you will not want to put it down. 

Georges St. Pierre - and preemptive process

I don't intend to inflicting my hobbies on all of you too often as make observations about process and other career development pieces - but last night watching UFC 129 I couldn't help but admire the process of Georges St. Pierre in comparison to many of his colleagues in mixed martial arts.

The fight last night itself is irrelevant here, but in watching GSP's approach to fights leading up to and during his reign as Welterweight champion I have always noticed his approach.  He approaches each fight with a new play designed to exploit his opponents weaknesses and neutralize their strengths.  Now you might say, "wait, doesn't this mean that his approach is inconsistent, reactive, and even lacks process?"  Therein lies the subtle secret ingredient of his process.

GSP doesn't spend weeks in training camp preparing a predetermined combination of strikes and take-downs.  His process isn't self-centered thus using only the knowledge of himself to prepare for the fight.  His process is intentionally designed like a road map to navigate one particular opponent at a time.  His preparations include knowing where he wants to fight his opponent and then preparing himself to make that happen.  Granted, this is all possible because GSP is a gifted athlete who possesses immense strength and endurance, he is also well trained in Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, Karate, and wrestling.  But his process of preparing for an opponent sets him apart from his colleagues.

Now I don't assume that all other mixed martial artists prepare using only a knowledge of themselves for a fight.  They study tape of their opponent's previous fights, even their own and work to exploit weaknesses they find there.  But GSP seems to be one step ahead with this.  Take last night's fight as an example: the challenger, Jake Shields, would have fared far better in a fight on the canvas than in a striking match with GSP, but despite all of the work he probably put into his jiu-jitsu and conditioning training, he never came close to securing the kind of take-down that would push GSP into Shield's comfort zone.  Meanwhile, GSP, knowing that his opponent could only win on the ground was razor sharp when it came to maintaining distance and stuffing take-down attempts.

In this way GSP's process cut off the process of Shields before it ever came to fruition.  The result was exactly as GSP had hoped for in his retaining the welterweight championship.  While the fight itself was likely boring for many to watch, it was, in many ways, a textbook lesson in process.

Things often look clearer for me when I look at them happening in sports.  So how does GSP's "preemptive process" look in the business world?  Well it might be in a salesperson setting a outbound call block for an afternoon when there isn't likely to be heavy foot-traffic.  Or a nurse taking time in the morning to ensure that a hall closet is properly stocked with emergency tools in case something goes awry with the late-morning surgery.

What activities are part of your process that preemptively block out obstacles that you know you will likely face today?