James Surowiecki writes in a recent issue of The New Yorker about “Status Quo Anxiety” as it relates to the US debate on health-care reform. He points to studies that show humans love what they already “own” juxtaposed to political polls that reveal Americans are simultaneously dissatisfied with their health-care services and reluctant to change in any significant way.

The academics Ziv Carmon and Dan Ariely showed the same thing in a real-world experiment: posing as ticket scalpers, they phoned people who had entered a raffle to win tickets to a Duke basketball game. People who hadn’t won tickets were willing to pay, on average, a hundred and seventy dollars to get into the game. But those who had won tickets wanted twenty-four hundred dollars to part with them. In other words, those who had, by pure luck, won the tickets thought the ducats were fourteen times as valuable as those who hadn’t.

—From “Status Quo Anxiety” by James Surowiecki,The New Yorker, August 31, 2009

Surowiecki goes on to suggest that the concept of status quo is, itself, at best tenuous. For most Americans, if you lose your job, you lose your health care insurance. The security we all cling to may not be a complete illusion, but it is definitely ambiguous.

"The Gulf Stream," Winslow Homer

Uncertainty, the natural human response to ambiguity, causes most people to look for certainty and that usually involves clinging to the familiar. But if a familiar approach hasn’t worked in the past or got us into trouble, it’s like staying with a sinking vessel.

In your work, are you willing to abandon a bad idea even though you “own it”?

Dr. Randall P White, yachtsman, in Miami regatta. Randy—evidently with a GOOD idea out front in number 42—is in the middle, sitting.

Randy White offers this audio clip on the drawbacks of strengths-based leadership in this podcast session for Training Magazine.

Training Magazine Network provides a lively social networking environment for learning executives. You may need to log in to hear the podcast.

In this era of uncertainty, we’re watching our greatest leaders emerge. These are folks who ignore the pessimistic attitudes around them, the too many cashed reality checks on the state of the global economy, and the risk and do something completely new. They move toward the unknown as a deliberate leadership strategy. They have to: it’s the only way they know how to behave.

Although we don’t always know what these leaders will do, new research shows that leaders like these share a set of measureable behaviors, including a penchant for risk, a dauntless attitude, relentless curiosity, and great skills—and while some are teachable, many are not.

We recently studied executives around the world using an assessment instrument called Ambiguity Architect. The instrument measures an executive’s tolerance for ambiguity and rapidly changing situations. As we move toward increasingly uncertain times, it’s essential to know an executive’s ability to manage uncertainty.

We find that those who are most adept at leading through uncertainty perform better than their peers, have a greater likelihood of being promoted, and are comfortable leading an organization through the uncharted waters of change.

Surrounded by support
As president, Joe Leonard helped AirTran recover from one of the worst airplane crashes in history and shape the company into one of largest low-cost carriers in the nation. READ FULL ARTICLE.

Dr. Randall P. White: "It's a good time to be an 'ambiguity leader.'"

We’re crossing the globe—in the last 30 days, India, England, South Africa, France…Upstate New York, Ohio and Texas—and can attest, there is a world-wide glut of talent.

One client tells us there has never had so much good talent to recruit from. The short list of candidates for top management positions looks like a C-level all-star team. Clients who have been searching for months for high level specialists are suddenly discovering ideal candidates eager to move almost anywhere.

On the other side of the desk, organizations are struggling to retain their top talent through bonuses and incentives.

Dr. Sandra L. Shullman: "It's a good time to be a recruiter."

And it’s one of those ambiguity leadership moments…no one has ever been in this position before, so the entire script of talent development is being written right now.

Training-wise, open enrollment executive education is moribund. And it may never return. At least, not as we knew it. Remember, if we can be without you for a week, we can be without you!

If there’s a fork in the road, take it: Leaders who used uncertainty to their advantage
by Dr. Randall P. White

Uncertainty is an increasing reality for today’s executives. Those who can thrive as they charge toward the unknown share a predictable mix of savvy, attitude, and behavior.

In this era of uncertainty, we’re watching our greatest leaders emerge. These are folks who ignore the pessimistic attitudes around them, the too many cashed reality checks on the state of the global economy, and the risk and do something completely new. They move toward the unknown as a deliberate leadership strategy. They have to: it’s the only way they know how to behave.

Although we don’t always know what these leaders will do, new research shows that leaders like these share a set of measurable behaviors, including a penchant for risk, a dauntless attitude, relentless curiosity, and great skills—and while some are teachable, many are not.

We recently studied executives around the world using an assessment instrument called Ambiguity Architect. The instrument measures an executive’s tolerance for ambiguity and rapidly changing situations. As we move toward increasingly uncertain times, it’s essential to know an executive’s ability to manage uncertainty.

We find that those who are most adept at leading through uncertainty perform better than their peers, have a greater likelihood of being promoted, and are comfortable leading an organization through the uncharted waters of change.

Surrounded by support
As president, Joe Leonard helped AirTran recover from one of the worst airplane crashes in history and shape the company into one of largest low-cost carriers in the nation.

AirTran’s predecessor, ValuJet, lost a DC-9 when it crashed and burned in the Everglades, killing more than 100  people. Years after the crash, skepticism was still high regarding low-cost carriers, and AirTran was strapped for cash. Things were so dire that most executives would have said “liquidate.”

But Leonard isn’t known for going by the books. He’d risen through the corporate ranks on the engines-and-rivets side of the business, and according to a story on Leonard in USA Today, he thrived on challenges. He was literally raised near the airport and took flying lessons at 13. To pay for them, Leonard would gas and park the planes.

Leonard illustrates a key behavior we discovered in our research on executives that can handle uncertainty: once he started at AirTran, he surrounded himself with support. Leonard quickly reached out to acquaintances from the industry, all veterans of commercial air carriers. He learned about AirTran’s assets and defects, and years of experience helped him realize that the airline still had good routes and a loyal team.

“We were all extreme risk takers,” Leonard told USA Today about AirTran’s reinvention. And, of course, they were tenacious—“never give up” was their key mantra.

Doing the unthinkable
In 2007, when many newspaper organizations either braced for or announced lay-offs, the Norway-based media company Schibsted had good news. Its earnings rose 28% in the fourth quarter. Online operations will generate about 20% of the company’s revenue this year. Meanwhile, many traditional news industries are folding, according to the New York Times (“While Others Struggle, Norwegian Newspaper Publisher Thrives on the Web,” February 19, 2007).

Schibsted’s success started in 1995 when the newspaper industry faced a career-breaking decision: go with the wave of new media or wait and see how it would all shake out.

Schibsted didn’t hesitate. As other organizations quibbled over how to charge readers for what they read online, Schibsted invested heavily in new media. Then the company did the unthinkable: gave its print edition away for free.

Schibsted continued investing in building the credibility and content of its online newspapers. It started charging companies to pay for ad space and let the readers read for free.

In 2000 and 2001, Schibsted didn’t bail out of its new media investments, even as many other organizations did, according to the Times article. Leaders in the company said they recognized early that the Internet would forever change the traditional print industry. They stayed true to that vision.

The trouble with technology is it seemingly changes just as people get the hang of it. Not so with Schibsted. In our research, we call leaders like these future scanners. They possess an almost intuitive sense about technology—the way many other executives have an intuitive sense about strategy. You can’t always train a future scanner, but you can find them. They are the ones who can take advantage of even the faintest signals of what the future can be.

Tackling tough issues
Google faces a different kind of uncertainty. Company buy-outs and mergers have brought growing pains and created a slew of sewn-together, fast-fix solutions for sales processes, according to a recent story in The Wall Street Journal, (“Google Push to Sell Ads On YouTube Hits Snags,” July 9, 2008).

So when Google’s ad revenues fell slightly short of stellar expectations, coupled with complaints from salespeople about a slow, paper-heavy process of purchasing ads, Google listened and then got busy.

In March, Tim Armstrong, Google’s head of advertising and commerce in North America, moved himself from his executive office to smack dab in the middle of the ad team’s cubicle spaces. He was determined to figure out Google’s YouTube sales process, according to the Journal. He emerged a month later with a list of 105 fix-its.

It would have been easy to pass off the work of tackling a tough problem to someone else. Instead, Armstrong launched Project Spaghetti to figure it out himself. It’s one of many oddly named projects Google launches (including Weed Days and Project Drano) to get to the source, not the symptom, of the problem.

Leaders like Armstrong do the dirty work. No one wants to get ensnared in a process like that, but everyone breathes a big sigh of relief when it’s done. You can teach an executive the strategy, but you can’t always teach them the “wanna.” Armstrong and other leaders like him have the wanna. It’s a behavior.

Armstrong, Leonard, and Schibsted probably all learned and developed the behaviors that made them successful long before they wore an executive suit. In fact, our research finds that most of these tell-tale behaviors started in childhood.

And there’s no doubt that with the uncertain times ahead, you’ll find some of your greatest leaders—especially if you know what to look for.

Dr. Randall P. White is co-author of the book Relax, It’s Only Uncertainty and is a co-developer of an assessment instrument called Ambiguity Architect. This instrument measures an executive’s tolerance and comfort for ambiguity and rapidly changing situations. For more information, visit www.edgp.com.

Published Monday, 01 December 2008 in American Executive.

By Dr. Randall P. White

Is God left-handed?

It’s a question I heard a few days ago during an NPR interview with the guy running the Mars Lander project. The interviewer asked a tough question, and the subject said, “That’s like asking if God is left-handed.”

That’s a phrase people use when they’re dealing with difficult questions. The current difficult question is probably, “What’s happening to my 401-K?” or, “When can I retire?”

Smart companies let people ask the tough questions. Even smarter companies address these fears and concerns with financial planning, counseling, even career training. Yet these programs are the first to go on the financial chopping block when money gets tight.

Most companies won’t ask the tough questions because it’s hard to say, “I don’t know.” Try this instead—say “I don’t know.” Then it’s not so worrisome when people ask the tough questions. You’ve already admitted you don’t have the answer. That’s human.

Even if you don’t have the answer, let people ask. Asking tough questions gives legitimacy to their concerns, fears, and frustrations. And for the first time, we need to get used to saying there might not be an answer; and what might be the best answer today, might not be the best answer tomorrow.

In the meantime:

• Accept the idea of not knowing
• Commit to trial and error
• Commit to learning from every possible source
• Trust your gut.

Do that, and you don’t have to worry about the answer, because you’re actually working toward a solution.

Executive coaching is a relationship in which a consultant helps a client achieve a mutually identified set of goals in order to improve his or her job effectiveness and job satisfaction. The focus is on effective behavior in a professional setting. If you’re thinking about using an executive coach, here are some of the common traps people fall into and some ideas for avoiding those traps. These are not, I’m sorry to say, the only misconceptions people can have about coaching, but they are 9 of the common ones. The traps are in quotes at the start of each section.

“I know what I need to work on.” Benjamin Franklin said “Three things are extremely hard—steel, a diamond, and to know oneself.” College students can predict the longevity of their roommates’ relationships much better than they can predict the longevity of their own relationships. Navy officers can predict which of their peers will be promoted early but can’t predict their own promotion.”

More on The Center for the Health Professions