Neuroleadership

Neuroleadership – A fad whose time has come?
By Lucille Greeff and Johan Greeff, Treetops Management & Development Consultants

Introduction
The past 25 years of consulting and managing organisation and transformation processes have taught us that a prerequisite for successful change is to assist individuals to willingly change their hearts and minds - easier said than done. This can only be achieved by engaging individuals, creating a sense of security and, in so doing, gaining commitment. At times our successes, frustrations and perceived failures surprised us!

In our leadership programme we focus on aligning the individual leader’s intention with his behaviour, and the importance of the power and skill dynamic (how to use power gracefully). Yet under pressure good intentions and common sense exits the arena.

In our work with teams we focus on emotional intelligence, spiritual intelligence, team dynamics and mutual expectations with varying degrees of success. Our understanding of the above dynamics took a massive leap when we acquainted ourselves with Neuroleadership. It allowed us to better understand what is going on in the so-called hearts and minds of clients and created the connection to the wonderful work of Peter Block Richard Barret and Covey’s “Speed of Trust”.,

With this, an introduction to this great topic “Neuroleadership”. We hope to follow it up in future articles with case studies and practical tips and insights.

History
Neuroleadership is an emerging field within Organisation and Personal Development. At the forefront of this field are people like David Rock who first coined the term “neuroleadership” as well as Dr Al Ringeb, Dr Yiyuan Tang, Jonah Lehrer, Marco Iacoboni, Dr Jeffrey Schwartz and Daniel Siegel.

The first Neuroleadership Summit was held in Italy in 2007. Since then the annual event has grown in stature and the interest it attracts. It has led to the formation of the Neuroleadership Institute which supports education and international research and collaboration within the field. It has also spawned a journal dedicated entirely to it, books, blogs aplenty and a whole new set of coaching practices and workshops.

So what is Neuroleadership?
Neuroleadership is the field of practice that applies neuroscience research findings to the context of Organisation Development and Leadership. According to the Neuroleadership Institute it is a “movement intended to help individuals and organisations of all types fulfil their potential through better understanding how the human brain functions at individual, team and systemic levels.”

Think white lab coat meets power dressing in the Boardroom.

The premise that neuroleadership is built on, is that a greater understanding of the brain and how it works enables us and by implication the teams and organisations within which we work, to function more effectively. The first building block in building this insight is to understand the basics of brain physiology. The second building block is to apply the findings of neuroscience to the everyday world we live and work in. The other building blocks lie in the application of this knowledge on an intra-, interpersonal and systemic level.

Neuroleadership has strong roots within research. In this lies one of its greatest values. It gives managers and OD practitioners the scientific evidence and theory to substantiate practice and theory in fields like change management and team effectiveness. It provides the reason “why” some things work and others don’t. It is a bridge. On the one side of this bridge lies what is kindly referred to as “soft skills” or more bluntly referred to as “fluff” and a “waste of time”. On the other side, we find the hard, factual world of science. It takes “soft skills” into the realm of proven fact and “clinical, hard reality”. It lends credibility to what has instinctually and through trial and error evolved as individual leadership philosophies across industries and organisations.

The potential application of neuroscience in the field of organisation development is a gold mine of possibility that we have only recently started to explore. At the present moment, consensus is that there are four domains within the field of neuroleadership, namely:
•Problem Solving and Decision Making
•Change Management
•Teamwork
•Emotion Regulation

Neuroleadership and Change
The work of Gordon, Lieberman, Eisenberger and others helps us to make sense of change and the challenges of facilitating change in teams. Social neuroscience has shown us that much of our social behaviour is ruled by the principle of minimising threat (“away” response) and maximising reward (“toward” response). At the same time the brain networks that govern these “away” and “toward” responses, are the same brain networks activated by our primary survival needs.

Neuroscience has found that there are five key levers that lead to the human brain activating the “away” or “toward” responses. These levers are summarised in the SCARF model as coined by the author Rock: Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness.

•Status is about relative importance in relation to others, the social hierarchy or perceived “pecking order”.
•Certainty is about the ability to predict the future.
•Autonomy provides a feeling of being in control of events or decisions.
•Relatedness is about belonging and safety in relation to others; a feeling of being among friends.
•Fairness is a perception that there is equality and justice in the exchanges between people.

If one applies the findings of social neuroscience to the domains of the SCARF model, it becomes clear that a threat to your status or autonomy would activate the same circuits in your brain as a threat to your life would. No wonder people are often “up in arms” when the company is restructuring! Scot Peck aptly put it “People don’t fear change, they fear loss”.

As managers we’ve all had to manage change within our teams, business units and organisations. We know how individuals resist change, become emotional when confronted with the need for change and act in counterproductive ways. If we’re completely honest with ourselves, we can admit that the same is true for us too. So how do we counteract that instinctual response to change?

Applying the SCARF model
The neuroleadership perspective enables us to use the five levers to nudge our teams towards the change required if managed well. As a leader, I need to be able to see how my positioning of what is required directly leads to the threat response “away” from the required change, or alternatively leads to the reward response “towards” the desired goal.

How do I do this? Firstly, if I can decrease the extent to which people feel that their standing in the team or organisation is being threatened by the change, I’m halfway there. If I can increase the individual’s relative standing in the team, I’m doing even better.

There are many experiences that could reduce a person’s perception of their status: advice, behaviour correction, giving instructions, even the mere suggestion that a person’s approach to a task is ineffective. These experiences may all lead to that instinctual threat response. Performance discussions and feedback also fall into this category.

If I want to increase a person’s status, creating a reward response in the brain, I can start thinking of promotion, salary increases, opportunities for training and skills development or the simpler things like positive feedback and public acknowledgement.

I can also create the “towards” response by creating certainty. What is the timeframe? What are the steps in the process? How specific can I be about the outcome and how quickly can I move through uncertainty? If people are waiting to hear whether they will be losing their jobs, waiting 1 week is less painful than waiting 2 months. Make the announcement, provide certainty about process and get on with doing it...

We can apply the same type of thinking to the areas of Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness. How can I reduce the threat created by a lack or decrease in the perception of these elements and how can I increase the reward response by increasing them in turn.

Is neuroleadership just a fad?
This angle on change management may not feel like a big AHA! What does create that AHA response, is knowing that there is scientific proof that explains why these levers are the ones that need to be managed. It creates a sense of control over change and our response to it, providing certainty and autonomy, which in itself promotes the “towards” response. As leaders, we need to maximise the amount of time we spend in this “towards” state as a team. It reduces conflict, increases productivity and enhances the social fabric of the organisation. The SCARF model can also help us build change management strategies and make decisions we feel confident about.

The leadership guru Warren Bennis has been quoted as saying that neuroleadership has potential but that it is “filled with banalities”. He may well have a point. Neuroleadership is a fledgling frame of reference that is still developing in the depth of insight it provides us as leaders. It may feel like a new angle taking us to old, well-known conclusions. It may be science masquerading as explanation to behaviour that is already understood well enough. Yet it also holds the potential of enhancing leadership practice and OD in amazing ways, and that is really exciting!

Neuroleadership is definitely a fad; only time will tell whether it is more than just another OD craze. One thing it for certain though, it is definitely a fad whose time has come!

About the authors:

Lucille Greeff is a Chartered OD Practitioner with the SABPP and a Director at Treetops Consulting specialising in leadership development, change management and employee engagement.

Johan Greeff is an OD Consultant, Psychologist and Executive Coach. He is the Managing Director of Treetops Consultants and a founder member of IODA.

Look out for this article in May's edition of Management Today