Are you a collaborative leader?

Social media and technologies have put connectivity on steroids and made collaboration more integral to business than ever. But without the right leadership, collaboration can go astray. Employees who try to collaborate on everything may wind up stuck in endless meetings, struggling to reach agreement. On the other side of the coin, executives who came of age during the heyday of "command and control" management can have trouble adjusting their style to fit the new realities. In their research on top-performing CEOs, Insead professors Ibarra and Hansen have examined what it takes to be a collaborative leader. They've found that it requires connecting people and ideas outside an organization to those inside it, leveraging diverse talent, modeling collaborative behavior at the top, and showing a strong hand to keep teams from getting mired in debate. In this article, they describe tactics that executives from Akamai, GE, Reckitt Benckiser, and other firms use in those four areas and how they foster high-performance collaborative cultures in their organizations.

Why men still get more promotions than women.

Though companies now invest heavily in mentoring and developing their best female talent, all that attention doesn't translate into promotions. A Catalyst survey of over 4000 high potentials shows that more women than men have mentors-yet women are paid $4600 less in their first post-MBA jobs, hold lower-level positions, and feel less career satisfaction. To better understand why, the authors conducted in-depth interviews with 40 participants in a mentoring program at a large multinational. All mentoring is not created equal, they discovered. Only sponsorship involves advocacy for advancement. The interviews and survey alike indicate that, compared with their male peers, high-potential women are overmentored, undersponsored, and not advancing in their organizations. Without sponsorship, women not only are less likely than men to be appointed to top roles but may also be more reluctant to go for them. Organizations such as Deutsche Bank, Unilever, Sodexo, and IBM Europe have established sponsorship programs to facilitate the promotion of high-potential women. Programs that get results clarify and communicate their goals, match sponsors and mentees on the basis of those goals, coordinate corporate and regional efforts, train sponsors, and hold those sponsors accountable.

Women and the vision thing.

Are women rated lower than men in evaluations of their leadership capabilities because of lingering gender bias? No, according to an analysis of thousands of 360-degree assessments collected by Insead's executive education program. That analysis showed that women tend to outshine men in all areas but one: vision. Unfortunately, that exception is a big one. At the top tiers of management, the ability to see opportunities, craft strategy based on a broad view of the business, and inspire others is a must-have. To explore the nature of the deficit, and whether it is a perception or reality, Insead professor Ibarra and doctoral candidate Obodaru interviewed female executives and studied the evaluation data. They developed three possible explanations. First, women may do just as much as men to shape the future but go about it in a different way; a leader who is less directive, includes more people, and shares credit might not fit people's mental model of a visionary. Second, women may believe they have less license to go out on a limb. Those who have built careers on detail-focused, shoulder-to-the-wheel execution may hesitate to stray from facts into unprovable assertions about the future. Third, women may choose not to cultivate reputations as big visionaries. Having seen bluster passed off as vision, they may dismiss the importance of selling visions. The top two candidates for the Democratic nomination for U.S. president in 2008 offer an instructive parallel. The runner-up, Hillary Clinton, was viewed as a get-it-done type with an impressive, if uninspiring, grasp of policy detail. The winner, Barack Obama, was seen as a charismatic visionary offering a hopeful, if undetailed, future. The good news is that every dimension of leadership is learned, not inborn. As more women become skilled at, and known for, envisioning the future, nothing will hold them back.

What's your story?

When you're in the midst of a major career change, telling stories about your professional self can inspire others' belief in your character and in your capacity to take a leap and land on your feet. It also can help you believe in yourself. A narrative thread will give meaning to your career history; it will assure you that, in moving on to something new, you are not discarding everything you've worked so hard to accomplish. Unfortunately, the authors explain in this article, most of us fail to use the power of storytelling in pursuit of our professional goals, or we do it badly. Tales of transition are especially challenging. Not knowing how to reconcile the built-in discontinuities in our work lives, we often relay just the facts. We present ourselves as safe--and dull and unremarkable. That's not a necessary compromise. A transition story has inherent dramatic appeal. The protagonist is you, of course, and what's at stake is your career. Perhaps you've come to an event or insight that represents a point of no return. It's this kind of break with the past that will force you to discover and reveal who you really are. Discontinuity and tension are part of the experience. If these elements are missing from your career story, the tale will fall flat. With all these twists and turns, how do you demonstrate stability and earn listeners' trust? By emphasizing continuity and causality--in other words, by showing that your past is related to the present and, from that trajectory, conveying that a solid future is in sight. If you can make your story of transition cohere, you will have gone far in convincing the listener--and reassuring yourself--that the change makes sense for you and is likely to bring success.

How to stay stuck in the wrong career.

Everyone knows a story about a talented business person who has lost his passion for work, or a person who ditched a 20-year career to pursue something completely different and is the happier for it. "Am I doing what is right for me, or should I change direction?" is one of the most pressing questions for today's midcareer professional. A true change of direction is hard to swing. Many academics and career counselors contend that the problem lies in basic human behavior: We fear change and don't want to make sacrifices. But author Herminia Ibarra suggests another explanation. People most often fail, she says, because they take the wrong approach to finding new careers. Indeed, the conventional wisdom on how to change careers is a prescription for how to stay put. Most of us have heard that the key to a successful career change is figuring out what we want to do next, then acting on that knowledge. But change actually happens the other way around. Doing comes first, knowing second, because changing careers means redefining our working identity--our sense of self in our professional roles, what we convey about ourselves to others and, ultimately, how we live our working lives. Who we are and what we do are tightly connected, the result of years of action. And to change that connection, we must first resort to action--exactly what the conventional wisdom cautions us against. Many successful career changers use a test-and-learn model of change, putting their possible identities into practice and then working and crafting them until the identities are sufficiently grounded in experience to guide more decisive steps. To make a break with the past, we must venture into the unknown.