Monday, November 11, 2013

Study Finds 66% of CEOs Don't Get Coaching - Yet 100% Say They Are Receptive to Feedback?

More than 200 CEOs, board directors, and senior executives of North American public and private companies were polled in the 2013 Executive Coaching Survey that Stanford University and The Miles Group conducted this spring. The research studied what kind of leadership advice CEOs and their top executives are – and aren’t – receiving, and the skills that are being targeted for improvement.
 Key findings from the survey include:
 Shortage of advice at the top – Nearly 66% of CEOs do not receive coaching or leadership advice from outside consultants or coaches, while 100% of them stated that they are receptive to making changes based on feedback. Nearly 80% of directors said that their CEO is receptive to coaching....  see full article at:

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Leadership Derailment Article Recommended at Chief Learning Officer...

Three Lessons to Beat Leadership Derailment

 -  11/6/13
High levels of leadership failure cause heightened levels of employee dissatisfaction. Proactive leaders must learn three key lessons to win in today's competitive marketplace.

Leadership failures of all kinds happen on a weekly basis, with management derailment studies showing that business leaders fail at an alarming rate. Research published in July 2013 in the International Journal of Business and Management found that 30 to 67 percent of leaders fail.
What’s more, the Gallup Business Journal in June 2013 reported that 70 percent of employees are not fully engaged in their jobs. A 2012 Dale Carnegie report also showed that effective leadership creates a culture that powers employee engagement. Carnegie’s study showed that just 29 percent of employees are fully engaged. According to Gallup, this leadership failure costs companies in the United States an estimated $450 billion to $550 billion a year.
For full article: 

Clearly, leadership derailment is severe and costly.  There is GOOD news.  Leadership Risks for Derailment can be managed, neutralized and kept in check to avoid these costly damages to the bottom line.  The first step is -- identifying and recognizing each leader's inherent risks.  We have an assessment tool designed to do just that:  CDR Leadership Risk Assessment for Derailment.  To learn more, contact me at or call 918.488.0722 and go to    Our break-through assessments can stop the negative toll on your bottom line.  Also, we add value by accelerating results as well.    Nancy Parsons, President, CDR Assessment Group, Inc., 

Friday, November 1, 2013

The ODD Leadership Risk Factor that can Derail Success

Of the eleven inherent Leadership Risk Factors we measure that can lead to derailment, the most misunderstood is “Eccentric.”  When coaching or training leaders and professionals, they often question us as to why this trait is even a risk factor in the first place.

Being “Eccentric” implies to most as someone who is odd, quirky, free spirited, whimsical, inventive, envelope pushing, and nonconventional.  At the surface, this trait seems quite benign with regard to leadership or professional effectiveness. It is true that often times the peculiarities do not impact overall performance in a substantially negative way.  These individuals are frequently viewed as fun or irreverent characters with some unusual ways of expressing themselves or in the ways they dress or act.

Let me caution you to not cavalierly dismiss the derailment danger awaiting the Eccentric leader or professional who may step beyond the boundaries.  They can create costly or embarrassing problems for businesses, relationships and that can be damaging to their own careers.  The weirdness sometimes hinders what we like to term “common sense” thinking or the ability to stay within appropriate social expectations.  Here are some actual examples:
1)     The Nutty Professional.  Some years ago we were at a business proposal meeting with a major energy company’s executives and the highly esteemed, well-regarded expert (Ph.D.) consultant we brought with us stepped over the line.  He was obviously getting bored and blurted out,  “Well it is a slow process…  it is like watching two old people screw.”  It was no surprise that we did not land the project.  Lesson learned:  we never brought this highly eccentric consultant with us again for a client or prospect meeting.
2)     The Too Much Information Communicator.  We worked with an executive coach who didn’t know when to say when. As soon as a particular leader client started to mention having had a tough childhood during a coaching session, this well trained coach, began injecting his own personal stories of abuse and ranting about societal evils.  Obviously, the coach lost credibility, the session went down hill, and the coach was removed from any further coaching on the project.
3)     The “Doesn’t Fit The Part” Guy.  An executive was reviewing candidates’ CDR profiles to screen for the position of vice president of business development. Out of the four experienced candidates we reviewed together, one (Sam) was an exceptionally good fit based on his assessment scores. The other three did not remotely fit the job profile. As it turned out, the executive client rejected this one best-fit candidate, who incidentally, was the only internal candidate.  The executive explained, “Sam just does not fit in as an executive with ABC Company.” I prompted a discussion to see if there wasn’t something that could be done in terms of image coaching, wardrobe support, etc. that could help this obviously gifted employee “fit” as an executive. This discussion was a no go.  The candidate was a high Eccentric and had alienated the executive culture just enough to be an unacceptable weirdo.  The sad part was, Sam had the business and customer knowledge, loyalty, (CDR) profile and capability – but his oddness was over the top and knocked him out of consideration.
These three cases were very costly.  The first was a large business project opportunity lost. The second resulted in a client complaint, reputation damage for the coach, and loss of revenue for future work that had been contracted. The third case prevented a highly capable employee from being awarded a promotion to a job he and the company could have mutually benefited from.
So the next time you think Eccentric is just a silly, unimportant tendency that is left to musicians and artists with nose rings and tattoos, think again.
By Nancy Parsons                  
©2013, CDR Assessment Group, Inc., All rights reserved