领导力案例：如何拯救一个差劲的领导？

最近，许多有关领导者的描写都很负面，说他们无能、傲慢、道德缺失、贪得无厌，种种恶劣品质不一而足。

毋庸置疑，员工、股东和选民提到领导者时都满腹怒火和牢骚。生活中遇到问题时，人们很快把种种不顺归咎于领导，又常常指望领导者改变现状。

这么做是否合情合理？或者说，我们指责管理者时是不是在转移自身的问题？现在，我们是不是应该承担应负的责任，采取行动做出改善？

我们生活的世界并不完美，充斥着暴力、贫富差距、工作岗位不足，腐败，病痛，劣质产品等等。虽然我们迫切希望根除所有弊端，但领导者也没办法轻松解决问题。

与此同时，政界领袖为了获得广泛支持煽动大众的怒火和疑心。24小时滚动播出的新闻不断放大他们言辞的影响，媒体又在拼命强调治理弊端的紧迫性以赢得观众。

这种氛围造成了恶性循环。我们所做的不过是在加剧种种差距，穷人与富人之间、保守人士和自由人士之间、自由贸易者和保守主义者之间、以及鹰派和鸽派之间。下一届美国总统在消除差距方面再有能力也没法比两位前任做得更好。指责媒体也无济于事，因为媒体的激励机制就是做出能增加观众的报道。

在商界，主动投资者能迫使董事会接受一些简单的短期解决方法，如拆分企业、提高资产负债表的杠杆，或者通过削减实现企业战略成功所需的投资来回购股票。这类投资者在任何一家公司都能挑出毛病。为了股价短期内走高，股东往往也会鼓励他们挑刺。

可是，有害的领导方法会让企业付出巨大代价。不善领导的人会激发员工采取错误的做事方式，拖累所有人。就像恶性肿瘤一样，领导传递的负能量会在整个企业蔓延，最后人人都会责怪别人，出现问题后逃避应负的责任。一旦出现这种状况，企业就走上了自我毁灭之路，将给员工和股东等造成莫大的伤害。到那时，企业就无法持续生存，开始土崩瓦解了。美国老牌百货公司西尔斯、通用汽车、雷曼兄弟、柯达和其他政治争斗、疑心病和短视的受害者就是这样走向末路的。

与上述例子相反，真正的领导者会设法让下属展现最优秀的一面。他们的目标是发掘他人的潜能，充分授权下属为个人行为负责，充满合作精神并努力改善所有人的状况。多年前，罗纳德•里根、富兰克林.D.罗斯福、纳尔逊•曼德拉等伟大的政界领袖就是这么做的。这也正是今天商界、医疗卫生、非盈利组织、学术界、当然还有政界领袖需要做的，他们要团结所有人，让生活变得更好，并改进种种弊端。

任何一种有意义的持续进步都要经历多次试错和众多磨难。而优秀的领导者会想办法庆祝前进道路上每一次的小胜利。正如我在近作《正确的方向：发现可信的领导》中强调的，新近科研结果显示，积极向下属授权是领导者必备的素质。总体来说，我熟知的领导者都做到了。领导者应当竭尽所能鼓励下属成长、奉献、过上幸福而且有意义的生活。用作家亚当•格兰特的话说就是，要当“给予者”，不是“索取者”。

这种方式与心理学家马丁•塞格利曼倡导的积极心理运动一致。积极心理有以下三大目的：

•增强实力

•让人生活充实

•培养身边的人才

丹尼尔•戈曼在自己的《专注的力量》一书中介绍了多个实验，展示了积极互动对员工的影响。其中一个实验显示，如果以热情、鼓劲的口气表达消极的反馈，员工会更容易接受。反之，如果用消极的口吻传达好消息或者积极的反馈，员工在讨论结束后会感觉很不好，不会为自己的成功高兴。塞格利曼的研究显示，要保持健康的职场关系，应该让积极与消极的言论比例达到三比一。

当企业遇到拦路虎的时候，员工自然士气受挫，通常怒火也会滋生，但解决不了任何问题。《正向力》的作者希尔扎德•查米恩说，每个人内心的“圣人”和“破坏者”都会无意之间对话。如果领导者能意识到这种对话的存在就会警惕，避免负面的反应损害健康的关系。如果领导者多积极询问而不是简单地下指令，就能在企业面对的挑战中找到机会。借此，领导者也能与周围依靠他们解决问题的同事改善关系。

领导力案例：艾伦•穆拉利如何在福特汽车转型中发挥作用？

在严峻的挑战中把握方向需要强有力又胆色过人的真正领导者。这就是艾伦•穆拉利在福特汽车展现的特质。

穆拉利2006年出任福特汽车首席执行官。上任第一天，他要求参观赫赫有名的Rouge汽车厂，也就是该司创始人亨利•福特一手打造福特T型车的地方。一位高管告诉穆拉利：“我们的领导不会直接和厂里的员工讲话。”他没有听取这个建议，而是立即走访工厂，和一线工人交谈。

穆拉利还规定，每周管理层必须开周会。他将这类会议称为企业流程再造（BPR），目的是让高管深入探讨公司长期存在的问题根源是什么。他很快发现，福特汽车的挑战远不止财务亏损，企业文化已经崩溃，公司需要大转型。他表示：“福特实质上已经破产40年，但没人愿意面对这个现实。”

为了解决种种问题，穆拉利启动了“一个福特”计划，基于“通过专注、团队合作和全球一致的方式，让员工都朝着同一个目标努力。”他从重新设计内部会议着手。据穆拉利传记《勇者不惧》的作者布莱斯•霍夫曼所述，过去的内部会议都是员工努力保护自己的“决斗场地”，每个人都在指出别人计划的缺陷，而不是为想办法解决问题。穆拉利将会议的性质由负面变为正面，营造了一种安全的氛围，人人都可以坦诚讨论，畅所欲言，不怕遭到指责。穆拉利没有批评把问题拿到会上讨论的高管，而是鼓励大家联手解决问题。他注意到：“如果有共同的目的，又有人人都愿意帮助他人成功的环境，问题很快就能得到解决。”

穆拉利在每周BPR里启用了“红绿灯”系统，与会高管会用红、黄、绿三色标示重要计划的进展。开过四次会议后所有计划都被标示为绿色，穆拉利向团队发难：“我们今年会亏损180亿美元，究竟有没有进展不利的计划？”现场一片死寂。

接下来一周，福特的北美区总裁马克•菲尔德斯带来了一个红色信号，代表一款新车要推迟问世。其他高管都以为，菲尔德斯会因为报告坏消息而被解雇。穆拉利却开始鼓掌，并且说：“马克，很有远见。”他又问管理团队：“我们怎样才能帮助马克解决问题？”他经常对手下的高管说：“你自己没有问题，只是遇到了麻烦而已。”

穆拉利称自己的领导风格是“正面领导——传递一种车到山前必有路的观念”。他说，正面领导的关键是“强化人人参与的观念。当大家觉得人人有责的时候，做事情也更有意思。在一个相互支持的环境下共事收获也更多。”

凭借坚定的决心和正面领导的作风，穆拉利打造了有效解决问题和团队合作的企业文化。最终，他的管理团队带领福特走出破产危机，提高了福特汽车的设计水平和产品质量，扭转了市场份额下降的局面，将海外工厂的就业机会带回美国，福特在成本方面与国外同行相比竞争力大大提高，盈利能力也增强了。

不力的领导者眼里只盯着下属犯的错，而像穆拉利这样的优秀领导则努力让下属发挥出最大潜力。卓有成效的领导者遵循积极心理的法则，确保与员工的互动既正面又有建设性。尽管面对挫折，他们对未来仍保持乐观，让人更相信前路总有希望。（财富中文网）

比尔•乔治曾任全球医疗科技巨头美敦力董事长兼首席执行官，现任哈佛商学院高级研究员，著有《正确的方向：发现可信的领导》一书。

译者：Pessy

校对：夏林

Much that is written about leaders these days seems to be negative: they are incompetent, arrogant, unethical, greedy, the list goes on and on.

No doubt, there is a great deal of anger and cynicism from employees, shareholders, and voters. When things go wrong in our lives, we are quick to place the blame for our ills on our leaders, and we often expect our leaders to fix things.

Are we justified in doing so? Or are we externalizing our problems by blaming those in charge? Is it time to accept responsibility for our lives and take action to make things better?

We live in an imperfect world, filled with violence, income inequality, a lack of jobs, corruption, ill health, and defective products. As much as we would like to eradicate these ills, there are no easy solutions that leaders can apply to make such problems disappear.

Meanwhile, political leaders are fanning the flames of anger and distrust in order to gain popular support. Their words are intensified by the 24-hour news cycle, with every outlet looking to gain viewers by highlighting the urgency of these ills.

This atmosphere brings out the worst in us. All we are doing is further dividing the country between rich and poor, conservatives and liberals, free traders and protectionists, hawks and doves. The next American president will be no more able to eliminate these problems than the last two have been. And blaming the media doesn’t solve anything because their incentive structure is built on giving people stories they want to grow the size of their audience.

In business, activist investors assault corporate boards with simplistic, short-term solutions to break up companies, leverage their balance sheets, or buy back stock by cutting investment required for their strategic success. These investors can find something to criticize at every company. And shareholders often give them the benefit of the doubt in order to see near-term bumps in stock prices.

But toxic leadership comes at a great cost. Such leaders create environments that bring out the worst in people and drag everyone down. Like malignant tumors, negative attitudes spread throughout organizations until everyone is playing “the blame game” and avoiding responsibility for the problems they create. Once this happens, organizations are on a path to self-destruction, creating in their wake enormous harm for employees and shareholders alike. At this point, the organization is no longer able to sustain itself and begins to unravel. That’s what happened to Sears, General Motors, Lehman Brothers, Kodak, and other victims of politics, cynicism, and short-term thinking.

Authentic leaders, by contrast, try to bring out the best in people. They aim to see others’ potential, to empower people to take responsibility for their actions, and to work together to make things better for all people. That’s what great political leaders like Ronald Reagan, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Nelson Mandela have done in years past. It is what today’s leaders in business, health care, nonprofits, academia, and yes – in politics – need to do to bring us together to make life better for all people and to ameliorate our ills.

Sustainable, meaningful progress of any kind comes with a multitude of trials and tribulations. Yet the best leaders find ways to celebrate the incremental victories. As I highlight in my latest book, Discover Your True North, recent scientific research shows that positive approaches to empower people is amust-have leadership trait. By and large, the leaders I know are doing just that. They are doing their best to encourage people to grow, contribute, and live happy and meaningful lives. To use the words of author Adam Grant, they are “givers,” not “takers.”

This approach is consistent with the positive psychology movement pioneered by psychologist Martin Seligman. The three aims of positive psychology are:

Building human strength

Making the lives of people fulfilling

Nurturing the talent that resides in all of us

In his book Focus, Daniel Goleman describes multiple experiments that demonstrate the impact of positive interactions with employees. One experiment showed employees perceived negative feedback more favorably when it was delivered in warm, supportive tones. When good news or positive feedback was delivered in negative tones, employees left the discussions feeling poorly, instead of feeling elated by their successes. Seligman’s research shows a 3:1 “positive-to-negative” statements ratio is necessary for healthy professional relationships.

When organizations hit roadblocks, people naturally get upset, and often their anger shows, but that doesn’t resolve anything. As Positive Intelligence author ShirzadChamine says, there is an inner, often unconscious dialogue going on between your “sage” and your “saboteurs.” As leaders recognize this dialogue, they will be alert to avoiding negative responses that sabotage healthy relationships. By inquiring rather than directing, leaders can find opportunities within the challenges their organizations face. They also can build better relationships with colleagues who count on them to help solve problems.

Alan Mulally’s Positive Transformation at Ford

Navigating severe challenges requires strong, courageous, and authentic leaders. That’s what Alan Mulally offered at Ford Motor.

On his first day as Ford’s CEO in 2006, Mulally asked to tour Ford’s famous Rouge plant where Henry Ford created the Model T. Mulally was informed by one of his top executives, “Our leaders don’t talk directly to factory employees.” Ignoring that advice, he went to the plant immediately to talk to front-line workers.

Mullaly also set up mandatory weekly management meetings he called the business process review (BPR) for his top executives to get to the root cause of Ford’s long-standing problems. He quickly discovered that Ford’s challenges went way beyond financial losses: the culture at Ford was broken and in need of massive transformation. He observed, “Ford had been going out of business for 40 years, and no one would face that reality.”

In response, Mulally developed One Ford, an initiative based on “focus, teamwork and a single global approach, aligning employee efforts toward a common definition of success.” He started by redesigning internal meetings. As described in Bryce Hoffman’s American Icon, meetings had become “arenas for mortal combat” in which employees practiced self-preservation, trying to identify flaws in each other’s plans instead of recommending solutions to their problems.

Mulally reframed these meetings from negative to positive, fostering a safe environment where people had open and honest discussions without fear of blame. Instead of attacking executives for the issues they brought to the table, Mulally encouraged collaborative approaches to problem solving. He noted, “If you have a common purpose and an environment in which people want to help others succeed, the problems will be fixed quickly.”

Mulally introduced a “traffic light” system to weekly BPRs in which executives indicated progress on key initiatives as green, yellow, or red. After four meetings in which all programs were labelled green, Mulally confronted his team, “We are going to lose $18 billion this year, so is there anything that’s not going well?” His question was met with stony silence.

The following week, Ford’s North American President, Mark Fields, showed a red indicator that a new vehicle launch would be delayed. Other executives assumed Fields would be fired over the bad news. Instead, Mulally began clapping and said, “Mark, that is great visibility.” He asked the group, “What can we do to help Mark out?” As he frequently told his leaders, “You have a problem;you are not the problem.”

Mulally describes his leadership style as “positive leadership—conveying the idea that there is always a way forward.” He says a critical part of positive leadership is “reinforcing the idea that everyone is included. When people feel accountable and included, it is more fun. It is just more rewarding to do things in a supportive environment.”

With determination and positive leadership, Mulally created a culture of effective problem solving and teamwork. As a result, his team kept Ford out of bankruptcy, reversed market share losses with improved auto designs and quality, brought jobs back to the U.S. from overseas plants, and restored the company’s profitability by becoming cost competitive with foreign producers.

Weak leaders focus on all the things that are going wrong. Great leaders like Mulally bring out the best in us. The most effective leaders apply the principles of positive psychology, ensuring their interactions with employees contain a healthy balance of positive and constructive feedback. They maintain an optimistic outlook despite the setbacks, reinforcing that there is a hopeful way forward.

Bill George is Senior Fellow at Harvard Business School, former Chairman & CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.