To improve your work performance, get some exercise.

Posted on

 

 

by Bonnie Hayden Cheng and Yolanda Na Li

Worldwide, 1.4 billion adults are insufficiently active, with one in three women and one in four men not engaging in adequate physical activity. In fact, there has been no improvement in physical activity levels since 2001, and physical inactivity is twice as bad in high-income countries than in low-income countries.

To combat the negative impact of physical inactivity, in 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a global action plan aimed at reducing physical inactivity by 15% by 2030. By promoting physical activity and encouraging individuals to engage in regular exercise, the WHO seeks to maximize the benefits of physical activity: preventing and managing noncommunicable diseases like cardiovascular diseases (including coronary heart disease and stroke), various types of cancer, improving overall physical and mental well-being, sharpening cognitive capacity, and ensuring healthy growth and development.

Although the benefits of physical activity on general well-being are widely acknowledged, there has been a lack of research on how it impacts outcomes at work, including job performance and health. This is all the more important as various emerging work modes have allowed for greater flexibility and convenience. Yet we’re finding ourselves sitting more and moving less, as many of us no longer have to commute to work or walk from meeting to meeting.

How physical activity affects work performance
Given that most of our waking hours are spent working, in an effort to support the WHO’s initiative to increase physical activity, our recent research points to some important work-related implications of physical activity. Continue reading →

28 Questions to Ask Your Boss in Your One-on-Ones

Posted on

 

 

 

by Steven G. Rogelberg, Liana Kreamer, and Cydnei Meredith

 

 

Summary: Good one-on-one meetings between managers and their direct reports address the practical and personal needs of the employee, benefitting their performance, growth, and well-being, as well as the success of their team and the broader organization. However, since managers are typically the ones who run these meetings, the employee’s needs are often forgotten. Then it’s up to the employee to ask questions to get the attention they need. The authors’ research points to twenty-eight questions that can drive the best conversations.

 

When she started a new role, Brianna was told she would be having regular one-on-one meetings (1:1s) with her manager, Jayden. She welcomed this news; she saw it as a great opportunity to get aligned with and supported and mentored by her new boss. But her hopes were quickly dashed. In their initial meeting, Jayden focused only on project updates and then assigned her a few additional tasks. This pattern continued over the weeks and Brianna routinely left their meetings feeling both micro-managed and unsupported in her development.

This story is, sadly, a composite of many we have heard from employees in our research on 1:1s between managers and their direct reports. As one of us (Steve) described in a new book, Glad We Met: The Art and Science of 1:1 Meetings, a good one-on-one meeting addresses both the practical and personal needs of the employee (practical: information, instruction, alignment; personal: the need to be treated with consideration, respect, trust, and support). As such, these meetings are a critical source of growth and support for the employee and promote the thriving and success of teams and the broader organization.

But these benefits are only realized when the meeting includes frequent conversations that address those employee needs. And as 1:1s are typically facilitated by managers, they often devolve into addressing what is front of mind for them, rather than the employee. That’s especially true because it is very rare for managers to receive training on how to run these meetings well, so they often simply recycle dysfunctional practices they themselves have experienced. Continue reading →

The Three Things a CEO Needs to Ensure Their CRO’s Success

Posted on

 

 

 

BY WARREN ZENNA

 

Since emerging over the past 10 years, the Chief Revenue Officer role has evolved into a core executive function within modern B2B businesses.

B2B CEOs in the tech sector now consider CROs to be vital pillars of their leadership structure. It’s the hot new title in the B2B space, and comes with many spoils: prestige, power, credentials, and opportunity.

The appointment, however, also comes with huge expectations and risk. Often, CROs are seen as miracle workers, rainmakers, and movers and shakers coming to the rescue to take the company to the next level of sales revenue growth.

It’s no wonder then that many CEOs have a relatively narrow view on the qualities an effective CRO needs to bring to an organization. Equally, very few organizations prepare themselves properly for their first CRO.

False expectations and under-preparedness can lead to disappointing results, frustrations, and wasted expense, time, and effort. There’s huge risk to appointing the wrong CRO – with huge consequences for the CEO, the organization, and the CRO as well.

At the CRO Collective, we have observed there are many questions about what a CRO’s actual responsibilities are.

  • How does a CRO function, really?
  • Ideally, where should a CRO sit within our organization?
  • To be effective, where should the CRO focus?
  • What are the CRO’s areas of oversight, scope, remit, and accountability?
  • How should CEOs support the success of their CROs?

This lack of clarity can have dire implications for firms currently employing CROs, as well as for those considering adding a CRO to their leadership stack.

Fortunately, while the risks of getting a CRO decision wrong are huge, so are the rewards for getting it right.

To ensure the success of their CRO, CEOs should do three things.

Continue reading →

Are you procrastiworking? Here is how it sabotages your job

Posted on

 

 

 

BY AMANDA MCKINNEY

 

One of the main differences between procrastination and procrastiworking is that procrastiworking is sneaky and often undetected.

 

I pick up my phone instinctively and find myself scrolling Instagram.

I engage with a few accounts, answer the DMs that have come in, and feel good about being intentional with my time. Look at me go, marketing my business and building relationships.

Except . . . that wasn’t what I needed to be doing. I had a deadline for a project that I told myself was top priority as soon as I sat down at my desk. I even had the Google Doc pulled up and ready to go.

In that moment, I had fallen prey to what I call “procrastiworking.”

Procrastiworking is when you’re doing something that could be considered work, so you feel justified in taking the action, but it’s not the thing you need to be doing. It’s you procrastinating by doing other work.

We’re all familiar with procrastination. It’s defined as “to put off intentionally something that needs to be done,” according to Merriam-Webster.

We know we need to do our laundry or we won’t have clean clothes to wear.

We know we need to fix that leaky faucet or it’s going to become a bigger issue.

Instead, we watch another episode of a show, call a friend, or read a book. These things are typically more enjoyable to us than chores or learning how to do something new, which is exactly why we tend to procrastinate on a task.

According to McLean Hospital, the common reasons we procrastinate are:

Continue reading →

Governance in the Age of Technological Innovation

Posted on

 

 

 

 

by Geraldine Ee

 

 

 

 

 

With new technologies redefining the global business ecosystem, how can boards navigate these changes and reinvent their business models?

Today’s boards can no longer afford to solely prioritise shareholders and maintain an inward-focused approach to business. Instead, they need to consider stakeholders and the wider ecosystem that gives rise to complexities, challenges and also opportunities, said Sonia Tatar, executive director of the INSEAD Corporate Governance Centre (ICGC) at the recent INSEAD Directors Forum.

Themed “Governance Complexities in Unprecedented Times”, the forumorganised by the ICGC shone a light onthe evolving role of the board in an increasingly disrupted governance landscape. Philipp Meyer-Doyle, Associate Professor of Strategy at INSEAD, urged board directors to rethink stewardship, their governance model and performance in the face of macro-economic pressures, regulatory tensions, de-globalisation, technological innovation and pressures to align with environmental, social and governance (ESG) expectations.

Of these, technological evolution and innovation were key themes alongside topics such as environmental and social leadership. Keynote speaker Arnoud De Meyer, Chairman of Stewardship Asia Centre and board member of INSEAD, said he has seen artificial intelligence (AI) playing an increasingly important role since he first served as a board director in 1988. But way before AI started to radically change business and our way of life, businesses were already undergoing digital transformation. How then can the board best navigate the challenges and opportunities brought about by technological shifts?

Evolution of the board’s role

Many businesses and consumers are already benefitting from the prevalence of data and analytics tools, which have enabled automation and lowered the transaction costs of search, co-ordination and contracting. For traditional services such as insurance, it now takes online providers – such as Hippo Insurance Services – only four minutes to process a home insurance application, as opposed to an average of two months, said Sameer Hasija, INSEAD’s Dean of Executive Education and the Henry Ford Chaired Professor in Technology and Operations.

The opportunities presented by the increased access to data on revenue generation and earnings are massive, but the board must also understand the risks, said De Meyer. Data breaches experienced by Australian telecommunications giant Optus and private health insurance company Mediabank show that board members may be held individually responsible for such breaches. This means that the board has a clear role in ensuring cyber resilience and providing oversight in cyber risk strategy, risk management and incident planning.

Continue reading →