Risk & Business Magazine Cooke Insurance Magazine Summer 2018 | Page 17

BAD HABITS OF SMART LEADERS S ome leaders are too clever for their own good BY: DR. MARSHALL GOLDSMITH, AUTHOR While we often consider the blessings that accompany a high IQ, we seldom think of the challenges that come with extreme intelligence. Yet there are many. In my role as an executive coach, I have had the opportunity to work with more than 150 major chief executives. As a group, they would score well above the norm on any standard definition of intellectual intelligence (I am not referring to ‘emotional intelligence’, ‘artistic intelligence’ or other forms of intelligence). Although, like any group, chief executives may do stupid things, they are seldom stupid people. 1. PROVING HOW SMART WE ARE For 10 years, I had the privilege of being on the board of the Peter F. Drucker Foundation. This gave me the opportunity to spend more than 50 days with the man who is – to my mind – the greatest management thinker who has ever lived. I would definitely put Drucker in the ‘super- smart’ as well as ‘super-wise’ category. Compared to him, I would consider my intelligence and wisdom to be that of a child. One of the lessons taught to me by Drucker was: “Our mission in life is to make a positive difference – not to prove how smart we are.” It is amazing how many leaders fail to grasp this basic lesson. One of the ‘super-smart’ leaders who I coached gained two simultaneous doctorates from one of the most challenging schools in the world, one in science and one in the humanities – with honours – within five years. When the brains were handed out, he was not lurking near the back of the line! an ass. You are a very good person. You just have an incredibly high need to prove how smart you are. Perhaps, in the future, you could cut back on this a little?” How deep must be a person’s drive to prove they are smart for them to gain two simultaneous doctorates from one of the top schools in the world. Very deep. Does this ‘prove I am smart’ need disappear when they gain the qualifications? Not really. They don’t have enough degrees in the world! I have asked thousands of leaders to answer this question: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF ALL INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS TIME IS SPENT ON: A. People talking about how smart, special or wonderful they are – or listening to others do this? B. People talking about how stupid, bad or inept other people are – or listening to others do this? The answers are amazingly consistent around the world – approximately 65 percent. How much do we learn pointing out how smart we are? Nothing. How much do we learn pointing out how stupid other people are? Nothing. How much do we learn listening to this? Nothing. So how much interpersonal communication time is wasted on this? About 65 percent. Smart people are generally considered smart because they have proven how smart they are in their journey through life – over and over again. They have been given lots of positive recognition for being ‘smart’. The first time I interviewed him, I took copious notes. After an hour I said: “Dr. Smith, let me read back to you how often you have told me how smart you really are. I don’t think I am as smart as you are, but I am not stupid. I read your bio. Did you think you really needed to point out your brilliance to me six times in the past hour?” Any human – or any animal – will tend to replicate behavior that is followed by positive reinforcement. The more we repeat the “I am smart – I get recognition” cycle, the harder it can be to remember the excellent advice from Peter Drucker: As I read back his verbatim comments, he was so embarrassed. “What an ass!” he said of himself. I replied: “You are not 2. PROVING HOW RIGHT WE ARE “Our mission in life is to make a positive difference – not to prove how smart we are.” One night, I had dinner with a top, four- > 17