Tip 1: Decide on a full stomach
Hunger may adversely impact our ability to make sensible decisions, according to new research by Jordan Skrynka and Benjamin Vincent at the University of Dundee. People were given choices when they had either just eaten a meal or been made to skip one. Across several studies, the researchers found that people who were hungry tended to be more impatient.
In one study, participants were offered a cash reward now or double in the future. Those who were satiated were willing to wait 35 days; in contrast, hungry participants could wait only three days.
Many people know that it is generally not a good idea to go food shopping when hungry as hunger often leads to more indulgent food purchases. However, this new research suggests that we should avoid making important business and career decisions when hungry, too.
Tip 2: Be arrogance-aware
The trait of arrogance can hamper our ability to improve our performance and achieve our long-term goals.
New research led by Nelson Cowan at the University of Missouri proposes that there are three types of arrogance. Individual arrogance is an inflated view of our own abilities, traits or achievements; this is often linked with an unwillingness to believe evidence to the contrary.
Comparative arrogance occurs when we have an inflated ranking of our own abilities compared with other people – for instance, if we believe that we are in the top quartile of employees when objective data may say that we are not.
Finally, antagonistic arrogance occurs when we put down or belittle others based on untrue beliefs that we are better than them.
To avoid falling victim to any form of arrogance, be sure to seek out candid feedback frequently – and listen to it.
Tip 3: Use vivid imagery
A research paper in the journal Organizational Dynamics points to how leaders can more successfully create statements about vision, mission and purpose that drive performance.
Academics Chad Murphy and Jonathan Clark point out that many less effective statements tend to use vague, values-based language such as ‘delivering cutting-edge services in the national marketplace’, ‘to be the world leader in…’ and ‘striving for excellence’.
The problem with these kinds of conceptual statement is that they can be used almost interchangeably for many organisations; as a result, they may end up being less meaningful and motivating for employees.
In contrast, concrete, image-based language such as ‘a smart device in every room of the house’, ‘ensure city-wide delivery within 36 hours’ and ‘ensure that parents can sleep well at night’ tend to be much more memorable and galvanising.
The implication: to motivate employees and other stakeholders, try to use more vivid imagery that allows them to visualise the outcomes you hope to achieve.
Tip 4: Prepare for the day ahead
Studies show that being able to detach from work at the end of each working day reduces stress in the evenings. For example, merely spending a few minutes writing a list of uncompleted tasks before leaving the office has been found to be effective for reducing the extent to which work intrudes into people’s time at home.
A new investigation led by Sabine Sonnentag at the University of Mannheim suggests that deciding to reattach to work each morning may also be beneficial. This involves preparing mentally for the day – for example, by reflecting in the shower on your to-do list or mentally simulating a conversation you intend to have with colleagues or clients while on your commute.
The data showed that employees who engaged in reattachment activities reported feeling more positive and in control while at work. That suggests that some degree of mental preparation or reflection before each workday may help most of us to be more focused and productive.
Tip 5: Think how to say no
Effective managers appreciate that employees may have suggestions that are worth taking on board. After all, employees often receive more direct feedback from customers and tend to have greater insight into how corporate strategies are being translated into action.
However, such managers also understand that they cannot say yes to every idea. A new study led by Danielle King, a scholar at Rice University in Texas, has important implications for how managers should phrase their refusals.
In two experiments, King exposed employees to either vague refusals that were phrased sensitively or specific reasons that were phrased insensitively. Employees were significantly more likely to stop making further suggestions when they were received specific explanations delivered insensitively than when they heard vague explanations expressed sympathetically.
In other words, to encourage your employees to continue speaking up, be sure to focus more on how you turn down their ideas (ie how sensitively you come across) than what you say in particular (ie the specific reasons you provide).
