It really does matter what people think of you and how you are perceived – but it shouldn’t be the be all and end all.

The reality of life is that most people can’t help but be affected by other peoples’ impressions of them and therefore how people react to them. If you are in a consulting/advisory/sales/leadership/parenting role, then it matters alot.

The important point to remember is that if you can control others’ perceptions of you, you can control how they react to you.

Consider that the way people perceive you may be very different to your self -perception. In fact, it’s often the case that your self-perception can differ quite radically to the perception others have of you. In some cases it’s quite striking because a person’s self-perception is that they lack confidence but the perception of others is that they are confident. So, these peoples’ self-esteem can sometimes be low for absolutely no reason!

Have you ever thought about how people perceive you?

Getting to the bottom of how you come across to people is key to being assertive, influential and confident at work. Once you know this, you can start to think about adapting your behaviour so that other peoples’ perception of you is what you want it to be. So to feel confident and to get people to listen to you, you need to know how you look and sound; you need to know how you come across.

If you really want to find out how others perceive you … go to http://www.think-confidence.com and complete the Reality Check – this is a free multiple choice questionnaire that others complete on you anonymously – you’ll have no doubt about whether your self-perception is the same as others’ perception of you once they’ve completed the Reality Check.

America’s last competitive advantage — its ability to innovate — is at risk as a result of the country’s lackluster education system, according to research by Harvard Innovation Education Fellow Tony Wagner.

Taking the stage at Skillshare’s Penny Conference, Wagner pointed out the skills it takes to become an innovator, the downfalls of America’s current education system, and how parents, teachers, mentors, and employers can band together to create innovators.

American schools educate to fill children with knowledge — instead they should be focusing on developing students’ innovation skills and motivation to succeed, he says:

“Today knowledge is ubiquitous, constantly changing, growing exponentially… Today knowledge is free. It’s like air, it’s like water. It’s become a commodity… There’s no competitive advantage today in knowing more than the person next to you. The world doesn’t care what you know. What the world cares about is what you can do with what you know.”

Knowledge that children are encouraged to soak up in American schools — the memorization of planets, state capitals, the Periodic Table of Elements — can only take students so far. But “skill and will” determine a child’s ability to think outside of the box, he says.

Over two year of research involving interviews with executives, college teachers, community leaders, and recent graduates, Wagner defined the skills needed for Americans to stay competitive in an increasingly globalized workforce. As lined out in his book, “The Global Achievement Gap,” that set of core competencies that every student must master before the end of high school is:

Critical thinking and problem solving (the ability to ask the right questions)
Collaboration across networks and leading by influence
Agility and adaptability
Initiative and entrepreneurialism
Accessing and analyzing information
Effective written and oral communication
Curiosity and imagination

For his latest book, “Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change The World,” Wagner has extended his studies to address the problem of how we teach students these skills. He has come to the conclusion that our country’s economic problems are based in its education system.
“We’ve created an economy based on people spending money they do not have to buy things they may not need, threatening the planet in the process,” he says. “We have to transition from a consumer-driven economy to an innovation-driven economy.”

In an effort to discern teaching and parenting patterns, Wagner interviewed innovators in their 20s, followed by interviews with their parents and the influential teachers and mentors in the students’ lives. He found stunning similarities between the teaching styles and goals he encountered with these influential teachers at all levels of education and concludes, “The culture of schooling as we all know it is radically at odds with the culture of learning that produces innovators.” He identified five ways in which America’s education system is stunting innovation:

1. Individual achievement is the focus: Students spend a bulk of their time focusing on improving their GPAs — school is a competition among peers. “But innovation is a team sport,” says Wagner. “Yes, it requires some solitude and reflection, but fundamentally problems are too complex to innovate or solve by oneself.”

2. Specialization is celebrated and rewarded: High school curriculum is structured using Carnegie units, a system that is 125 years old, says Wagner. He says the director of talent at Google once told him, “If there’s one thing that educators need to understand, it’s that you can neither understand nor solve problems within the context and bright lines of subject content.” Wagner declares, “Learning to be an innovator is about learning to cross disciplinary boundaries and exploring problems and their solutions from multiple perspectives.”

3. Risk aversion is the norm: “We penalize mistakes,” says Wagner. “The whole challenge in schooling is to figure out what the teacher wants. And the teachers have to figure out what the superintendent wants or the state wants. It’s a compliance-driven, risk-averse culture.” Innovation, on the other hand, is grounded in taking risks and learning via trial and error. Educators could take a note from design firm IDEO with its mantra of “Fail early, fail often,” says Wagner. And at Stanford’s Institute of Design, he says they are considering ideas like, “We’re thinking F is the new A.” Without failure, there is no innovation.

4. Learning is profoundly passive: For 12 to 16 years, we learn to consume information while in school, says Wagner. He suspects that our schooling culture has actually turned us into the “good little consumers” that we are. Innovative learning cultures teach about creating, not consuming, he says.

5. Extrinsic incentives drive learning: “Carrots and sticks, As and Fs,” Wagner remarks. Young innovators are intrinsically motivated, he says. They aren’t interested in grading scales and petty reward systems. Parents and teachers can encourage innovative thinking by nurturing the curiosity and inquisitiveness of young people, Wagner says. As he describes it, it’s a pattern of “play to passion to purpose.” Parents of innovators encouraged their children to play in more exploratory ways, he says. “Fewer toys, more toys without batteries, more unstructured time in their day.” Those children grow up to find passions, not just academic achievement, he says. “And that passion matures to a profound sense of purpose. Every young person I interviewed wants to make a difference in the world, put a ding in the universe.”

“”We have to transition to an innovation-driven culture, an innovation-driven society,” says Wagner. “A consumer society is bankrupt — it’s not coming back. To do that, we’re going to have to work with young people — as parents, as teachers, as mentors, and as employers — in very different ways. They want to, you want to become innovators. And we as a country need the capacity to solve more different kinds of problems in more ways. It requires us to have a very different vision of education, of teaching and learning for the 21st century. It requires us to have a sense of urgency about the problem that needs to be solved.”

Wagner is not suggesting we change a few processes and update a few manuals. He says, “The system has become obsolete. It needs reinventing, not reforming.”

No company will build the same culture, but every organisation should focus intentional effort on building the right culture for them.

Culture starts at the top

Lynn Ann Casey, CEO of arcAspicio: “It is important to sustain our culture with every new hire and with every project and client that we take on. That requires a lot of executive-level oversight of both people and projects.”
Jere Brown, CEO, Dimension Data Americas: “We wanted to emphasise that behaviour starts at the top. Senior executives have to embrace and model the desired behaviours and hold others accountable for them… Today, [High Performance Culture] means more to our employees because they have seen our leaders and their peers living these values in their day-to-day work.”
Lisa Dezzutti, President and CEO, Market Connections, Inc: “Knowing that culture starts at the top, I have to remind myself to stop and celebrate before moving on to the next project.”

Bring Your Values & Goals to Life in the Daily Work

Mark Carrier, Senior Vice President of B.F. Saul Company: “We really put in place a programme to bring new materials to our line staff that helps our organisational goals come to life and re-energise our people. It keeps our core mission at the front of people’s minds whilst simultaneously letting us stay course.”
Mary Naylor, CEO, VIPdesk: “The core values of our culture must continue to be emphasised beginning with the orientation process and continue to be highlighted throughout a team member’s tenure… Our Human Resources effort will be critical in helping us maintain our culture. It begins with recruiting individuals who fit into our organisation and existing culture.”

Make Your Culture Integral to Your Recruiting and Onboarding

Krista McMasters, CEO, Clifton Gunderson, LLP: “We immerse our new hires in our culture the minute they come on board… We want employees that fit our culture – people who are open, principled, and interested in serving clients in exceptional ways. As a result, we recruit employees the same way we develop business.”
Beth Monroe, President, JustinBradley: “We live our culture on an ongoing basis. That makes it easy for new hires to make business decisions, because the road is clear on what our values and ethics are.”

Base Performance Evaluations on Your Core Values

Mary Naylor, CEO, VIPdesk: “We also try to recognise our team members for their contributions as much as possible… Going forward, performance reviews will focus more directly on the core values of the company as it relates to the team member. We continue to tie everything into the core values, mission, and culture of the organisation.”
Doug Layman, Former President & CEO, Kadix Systems (since acquired by Dynamics Research Corporation): “Our twice-yearly formal executive performance reviews included assessment areas for 1) compliance with values, 2) meeting company objectives, and 3) position specific skills.

Nearly every company in the world gives lip service to the idea that “our people are our greatest asset.” Yet when the Conference Board Survey came out earlier this year, employees were the unhappiest they have been in their 22 years of tracking job satisfaction rates. Around the same time, CNNMoney reported a survey that indicated 84% of Americans are unhappy with their current job. And earlier this month, Mercer’s “What’s Working” survey found that one in three US employees are serious about leaving their current jobs.

Why is this lack of happiness at work important? Job satisfaction is not only the key predictor of turnover rates, in The Happiness Advantage, I make the research case for the fact that the single greatest advantage in the modern economy is a happy and engaged workforce. A decade of research proves that happiness raises nearly every business and educational outcome: raising sales by 37%, productivity by 31%, and accuracy on tasks by 19%, as well as a myriad of health and quality of life improvements. Yet even those companies that do take leadership training seriously still ignore the role that happiness plays in leadership effectiveness.

Given the unprecedented level of unhappiness at companies and the direct link between the employees’ happiness and business outcomes, the question is NOT whether happiness should matter to companies. Given this research, it clearly should. The real question is: Can a company do anything to raise the happiness level of an employee?

To test the ROI of investing in happiness, I wanted to find a company in the midst of high challenge. In 2009, I chose the auditing and tax accounting firm KPMG, as they were about to be hit with perhaps the most stressful tax season in decades after the banking crisis in 2008.

January to April is the most stressful time for the managers at KPMG, so in December, half of the managers in the study at the New Jersey and New York offices were provided a three-hour introduction to positive psychology research and how to apply those principles at work. The employees were then evaluated three times — before the training, a week after the training, and four months later in April — using a battery of standard metrics including life satisfaction measures, perceived stress, social support, perceived effectiveness at work and work optimism.

Every single positive metric improved significantly for the trained group between Time 1 (before the training) and Time 2 (a week after the training). This indicated that the training was an initial success, but the real question is whether the training would hold. There is often a “honeymoon effect” after trainings in which respondents feel totally changed, then immediately return back to their previous state as soon as they see their inbox.

Yet in this case, the effect held for the entire four months. Most significantly, the life satisfaction scores, which indicate personal and professional happiness, were significantly higher four months later as compared to how the managers were before the training, and also as compared to the managers in the control group. A brief three-hour training and a non-mandatory invitation to create a positive habit for 21 days created a high ROI not only in the short-term, but in the longer term as well.

Individuals can begin to do two things on their own. First, recognize that happiness is an advantage at work. This will encourage you to seek happiness in the present instead of waiting for a future success. As a result, your brain will have more resources necessary to accomplish your work. Second, you can literally train your brain for higher levels of happiness at work by creating habits shown to increase job satisfaction. In the training with KPMG, we suggested five:

Write down three new things you are grateful for each day;
Write for 2 minutes a day describing one positive experience you had over the past 24 hours;
Exercise for 10 minutes a day;
Meditate for 2 minutes, focusing on your breath going in and out;
Write one, quick email first thing in the morning thanking or praising a member of your team.

Gratitude, focusing on positive experiences, exercise, meditating, and random acts of kindness are all ways to change the pattern through which your brain views work. And if you have other tips you’ve tried on your job, please share them in the comments! This research is only the beginning of understanding how to create and sustain a positive and engaged workforce. These findings clearly indicate that not only can a company influence the happiness of its employees with a short intervention and low investment of resources, but the effects are sustained even in times of great challenge.

To mark the UK release of his latest fascinating book, The Courage Quotient: How Science Can Make You Braver, I caught up again with the “Indiana Jones of Positive Psychology”, long time friend and Capp collaborator, Dr. Robert Biswas-Diener. In this interview, we focused our attention on how courage manifests, and what might be different about it, in both women and entrepreneurs. See below for what Robert has to say about the findings from his research for The Courage Quotient:

AL: In your research on courage, did you find differences in the courage expressed by men and women?

RBD: I think that most people tend to believe that courage – at least stereotypically- is largely the domain of men. Fables, myths and modern movies all favour a fairly macho action-hero style of bravery. But movies such as Erin Brokovich, about a determined whistleblower, suggests that there is a place at the table for women as well. While researching The Courage Quotient I found a number of studies that suggest that women perform bravery as well as – and sometimes better than – their male counterparts. For instance, women are more likely to donate organs and are more likely to serve in risky overseas volunteer positions. It may be that men are placed more frequently in positions that require physical bravery – indeed, men overwhelmingly outnumber women in the military, police forces and in fire departments – but women do well with moral and social forms of bravery. [AL notes: We know from our work with the Fire Service that part of this difference is a result of different physical requirements in the role, which can be difficult, but not impossible, to surmount.]

AL: Why do you think this is? What impact does this have on male and female stereotypes in society do you think?

RBD: Men, because of their larger average size and access to testosterone, have long been at the centre of action especially when that action has been physical. In addition, wars and other physical feats tend to make for good narratives, so stories ranging from epic poems to modern movies tend to lionize the stereotypical form of male bravery. We tend to overlook that women have long been brave, but that women’s bravery has historically been outside of the battlefield. Women have spoken up as courageous advocates and often been the defenders of values. You see modern examples ranging from Benazir Bhutto to Mother Theresa to Maria Montessori. But it is more common that we overlook female forms of bravery because either 1) we do not agree with the values they espouse, or 2) their actions are often less “flashy” than those on the battlefield; taking the form of discussion, passing laws, and pioneering new fields.

AL: What about courage in organisations? Do you think that women need to use courage differently to men in order to succeed in organisational leadership?

RBD: I think that women – especially those in leadership – need to start thinking about themselves as courageous. I am not sure that it matters that their courage is similar to or different from male courage. What I really think matters is that female leaders truly accept the mantle of bravery. In many ways, women have an additional burden in the workplace. It is no secret that women shoulder a disproportionate amount of household and childcare responsibilities, that women are more likely to take time off following childbirth and that women in leadership work against the grain of a traditionally male-centric position. This means, in many ways, that women have to be able to advocate for themselves, speak boldly, and take risks. They will be scrutinized differently and are more prone to have life outside of work interfere with work. At every turn, I see potential for women leaders to bring bravery to the table.

AL: How about courage and entrepreneurship? Did you find that entrepreneurs demonstrate a particular type of courage?

RBD: I am particularly fascinated by entrepreneurship. I have a hunch that those who have an entrepreneurial spirit are actually genetically wired a bit different and are more prone to be extroverted and risk taking. To make the leap into starting up a business, I believe that people also have to be possessed of a certain degree of optimism and self-confidence. It is an interesting case where multiple strengths might converge to create a new meta-strength (let’s just label it “entrepreneurialism”). I think we can learn much from small business owners and those who jump from start-up to start-up. They likely have a very high tolerance for uncertainty and a very high level of confidence that they can handle new situations and even small mistakes and failures. I think the entrepreneurial mindset is a terrific test case for courage.

AL: Based on your findings, do you think anyone can develop the courage to be an entrepreneur?

RBD: I would like to be able to say “yes, anyone can develop courage.” Even the sub-title of my book is “How science can make you braver.” I do believe that – that people have the ability to overcome personal limitations and learn skills around emotion management and other techniques that can make one braver. I might stop short at claiming we can turn someone into an entrepreneur though. Entrepreneurs happen to have a values-based mission that makes taking a risk seem worthwhile. They tend to have an optimistic disposition such that they believe that their idea will become a success. Finally, they have a huge tolerance for uncertainty and can thrive in an anxious state that causes other people to freeze up. Rather than trying to radically transform someone into an entrepreneur I would recommend the strengths strategy that I have often heard from Capp: collaboration and complementary strengths partnerships. If a person is weak in one area, I believe they can counteract this weakness by collaborating with someone for whom it is a natural strength. That is, generally speaking, a good message about courage. Courage need not be an individual phenomenon. We tend to be a little braver and a little less inhibited when we are in groups and when we get support.

AL: Finally, a big question for us to conclude with, what would you like to see people achieve with courage in the 21st century?

RBD: I love this question! I think of courage as being the shortest route to the good life. I think a full and engaged life includes risks and even occasional small failures. In the coming years we will collectively be faced with a number of challenges related to the environment, the structure of capitalism, and ethnic, religious and political conflicts. I believe that it is courage that allows individuals, groups and communities to stand up and demand change, to work for reform, and to make the big changes. I think the courageous leaders of successful movements, such as Martin Luther King, Jr., are terrific examples of how we have to be willing to take personal risks to make worthwhile change.

Executive Grapevine magazine published this case study:

Executive Grapevine magazine Cornerstone Barristers

When you hear the name “Jack Welch,” what do you think of first? “Neutron Jack,” famous for an (often misunderstood) employee differentiation method that resulted in the bottom 10% of performers being let go annually? A powerhouse industry captain who helmed GE for decades?

How about a vastly experienced CEO who puts company culture ahead of results?

Most don’t equate “Neutron Jack” with what many think of as the “soft” side of business. But Jack understands the fundamental power of strong company culture to drive business results, an insight that was also the core tenet of our book, Winning with a Culture of Recognition.

Case in point, a recent article in Fortune by Jack and Suzy Welch in which they say:

“Soft culture matters as much as hard numbers. And if your company’s culture is to mean anything, you have to hang — publicly — those in your midst who would destroy it. It’s a grim image, we know. But the fact is, creating a healthy, high-integrity organisational culture is not puppies and rainbows. And yet, for some reason, too many leaders think a company’s values can be relegated to a five-minute conversation between HR and a new employee. Or they think culture is about picking which words — do we “honor” our customers or “respect” them? — to engrave on a plaque in the lobby. What nonsense.

“An organisation’s culture is not about words at all. It’s about behaviour — and consequences. It’s about every single individual who manages people knowing that his or her key role is that of chief values officer, with Sarbanes-Oxley-like enforcement powers to match. It’s about knowing that at every performance review, employees are evaluated for both their numbers and their values.”

Jack and Suzy go on to argue why you must get rid of the person that brings in the numbers whilst behaving in ways completely opposite the company values. This article in Inc. magazine walks through the four most common excuses for not getting rid of your worst employees and why you must overcome them.

The Fortune article points to several foundational requirements for building a winning culture of recognition that is proven to drive bottom-line business results through increased employee engagement, retention, productivity and performance. Not least of these are:

Making culture an ongoing topic of conversation, training and reinforcement instead of a one-time event
Taking the values off the plaque on the wall and deeply integrating them into the daily work of employees
Clear rewards – and consequences – for how employees reflect the values in their work

Crispin White quoted in this B2B Marketing article