|
|
Like this article? PLEASE +1 it! |
|
Obtaining Peak Performance
|
| Guest post by: Douglas Long |
Article Overview: First Generation Leaders and Second Generation Leaders have a strong need to be in control. They see their role as that of making and implementing decisions. These men and women show conditional respect – in other words, obtain the results I need in the way that specify, and I will respect you – and they tend to have a low level of belief in the ability of people to manage themselves and to obtain desired results unless they are closely supervised. The result is that, far too often, managers interfere and actually hinder peak performance because of this need to control.
![]() |
Free Download - 3 Pointers to Recruiting and Retaining Good Staff By Douglas Long |
Obtaining Peak Performance
We hear a lot about athletes and the effort
they put in so that they can constantly improve their ‘personal best”. We watch
them as they put everything they have into providing a winning performance for
themselves and for their team. And for many years sport in its various forms
has been used as a metaphor for what is required in organisations. Yet while
sports people and sports teams regularly obtain peak performance, the situation
in the non sporting world tends to be quite different.
Why?
I suggest the reasons are really quite
simple – even if they’re not necessarily what managers and leaders want to
hear.
First, high performing athletes are there because they want to be there.
It takes a high level of commitment to be a
high performing athlete. Obviously you need the appropriate knowledge and
skills in order to perform, but top athletes and teams have something extra.
They have total commitment. You need commitment to your chosen sport. You need
commitment to your personal ambition and goals. You need commitment to your
coach and team. And everyone involved does his or her best to help the athlete
maintain this level of total commitment because everyone else around that athlete or
team is also fully committed.
Mediocrity breeds mediocrity. Athletes and
teams that lack this high level of commitment remain second rate players.
In the non sporting arena we talk about
commitment. We advocate commitment. We punish those we accuse of ‘not being
committed’. Yet so often those who are loudest advocates of commitment are
themselves mediocre time servers who have ‘lost the plot’.
Recently I encountered this situation in
the service department of a car dealership. This dealership has a wide range of
brands from ‘prestige’ (read ‘very expensive’) through to more reasonably
priced brands such as Toyota, General Motors,
or Ford. While I was waiting for attention to my definitely ‘non prestige’
vehicle (the service departments adjoin) the Service Manager of one of the
prestige brands could be heard telling his technicians that the particular
brand he was working for was “crap”. I later discovered that this particular
Service Manager was relatively new to this post and that he had come from a
technical position with a more mundane brand.
You cannot expect or get commitment unless
management at all levels are also totally committed. I won’t be going back to
that service centre – I want the people who work on my car to be committed to
their work and their brand.
Second, high performing athletes operate in an environment that is
conducive to high performance.
High performing athletes and teams operate
in an environment in which there is a balance between all areas of life.
Sporting coaches and managers know that unless there is an appropriate balance
in the life of the sportspeople, then they will ‘burn out’ and crash from the
heights they either have achieved or could achieve. The emphasis is on
achieving goals within a normal ‘working’ timeframe – it’s ‘what you put into
the hours’ that is important: not what hours you put in.
Recently the Australian Institute released
results of a survey looking at working hours in Australia. What they found was
that, although our normal working week is nominally about 37½ hours, the more
normal working week is closer to 50 or 60 hours and many employees feel
pressured to be available by phone or internet on an almost 24/7 basis. The
survey also found that most of these additional hours are worked without any
compensating remuneration or time in lieu. Understandably employees were saying
they wanted a shorter working week – they want to get back to around 40 hours
per week so that they can get some balance in their lives.
When people are required to work long hours
for little or no reward, over a protracted period, then, no matter how much
that person might want to provide peak performance, the simple fact is that
performance drops off. Tired people produce errors. When a person feels under
any form of threat or external pressure, he or she works to avoid punishment
rather than to give their best. It’s not that they don’t want to perform – it’s
simply that their mental state gradually and inevitably moves to a point where
they are unable to perform.
There can be a fine line between reward and
punishment. In fact, reward and punishment are needs related. Initially it may
be rewarding to be singled out for special work or to be the “go to” person,
but when that becomes a habit and others get far less work to do or are under
far less pressure, then the same tasks become seen as punitive.
Unless people are fully engaged with their
work, they cannot remain committed and they cannot provide peak performance.
Third, at the critical stage, athletes are left to get on and to do what
they are supposed to do.
In the sporting arena, once people are on
the field and the game or race has started, it’s up to them. In basketball you
can call ‘time out’ and do some coaching if necessary. In Australian Rules
football you can send ‘runners’ on to the field to give instructions during the
game. But in most sports and certainly in virtually all track and field events,
the coach can do very little if anything until the race is over or there is a
scheduled break. High performing sports people know that, in the end, its up to
them. They are personally responsible for the quality and quantity of their
performance.
First Generation Leaders and Second
Generation Leaders have a strong need to be in control. They see their role as
that of making and implementing decisions. These men and women show conditional
respect – in other words, obtain the results I need in the way that specify, and I will respect you – and they
tend to have a low level of belief in the ability of people to manage
themselves and to obtain desired results unless they are closely supervised.
The result is that, far too often, managers interfere and actually hinder peak
performance because of this need to control.
If we are serious about obtaining peak
performance, we need to be serious about a new approach to leadership – Third
Generation Leadership.
Article Tags: commitment, employee engagagement, peak performance, performance, third generation leadership
|
About the Author: Douglas Long RSS for Douglas's articles - Visit Douglas's website Helping you release potential in yourself and others Author of "Third Generation Leadership and the Locus of Control: knowledge, change and neuroscience" 2012, Gower Publications UK Http://www.dglong.com Click here to visit Douglas's website Tomorrow's leadership |
Related Forum Posts
Share this article with your friends. Fund someone's dream.
Leave a comment below or share on the left and you'll help support entrepreneurs in Africa through our partnership with Kiva. Over $50,000 raised and counting - Please keep sharing! Learn more.
Get advice & tips from famous business
owners, new articles by entrepreneur
experts, my latest website updates, &
special sneak peaks at what's to come!
Email us your ideas on how to make our
website more valuable! Thank you Sharon
from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for
your suggestions to make the newsletter
look like the website and profile younger
entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez.



