Here are a few ideas that can significantly contribute to high levels of commitment and work performance if they are implemented with consciousness and humility:

1. Moderate levels of arousal (associated with optimal performance) are more likely to be maintained when individuals feel seen, heard, valued, and respected. Resistance is minimized under these conditions.

2. People only invest in what they themselves create. Involve the workforce at a genuine level as much as possible in major initiatives affecting the company, starting with the vision.

3. Commitment to a relationship or an organization is a function of the possibility of growth. Where there is no growth potential, there is no commitment. Invest in the personal mastery and development of all members of the enterprise, and, as a result, you are likely to be richly rewarded.

4. Where knowledge is the product, the highest levels of performance are achieved by developing and involving the frontal lobes of the brain (both leaders and workers) in the application of functions. This is most readily achieved in an environment where reflection is encouraged and people feel safe in consistently doing the harder thing.

Management consultant Peter Drucker has noted that the number one practical competency for leaders is empathy. Unfortunately, there is a zero correlation between IQ and empathy.

In his paper “The Road to Empathy,” Dr. Frank Lachmann (2008) offered a definition of empathy that may make sense here. Empathy may be thought of as a method of gathering information about the subjective life of another person. It plays a role in understanding what another person is experiencing. In simpler terms, it enables a person to connect with others by putting him- or herself in “another’s shoes.” An important point is that the capacity for valid empathic understanding requires that one take an objective view toward oneself that is generally obtained through reflection. For the recipient of this type of understanding, being seen empathetically releases creative energy that, under the right conditions, can support a steady stream of innovation that contributes to maintaining a competitive edge in the marketplace. Robert K. Cooper recognized that 40 to 50 percent of an organization’s profit margin fluctuations are predictable based on employee feelings and opinions. A quote from “The Road to Empathy” might offer encouragement to those who don’t think they have the capacity for empathetic understanding: “Empathy, like any skill, can be acquired and enhanced by training and learning” (p. 52).

Treating everyone in an organization as if their internal life were inconsequential can result in hidden performance costs to a company.

In his book The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge identifies the core disciplines that must be mastered to create a learning organization. What distinguishes learning organizations from traditional authoritarian types is the mastery of these disciplines: personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision, team learning, and systems thinking.

Personal mastery is the discipline of developing our personal vision by focusing our energies and developing a clearer view of reality.

Mental models are the deeply ingrained beliefs and generalizations that influence how we interpret the world and how we take action. Mastery of these two disciplines can be greatly facilitated by individual coaching.

Building shared vision refers to the need for a vision to be shared, if not co-created, by all members of the organization.

Team learning is the capacity of members of a team to suspend assumptions and enter in a genuine “thinking together” (e.g., a dialogue). Mastery of these two disciplines can be aided with individual coaching but requires structured group participation as well.

Systems thinking, the fifth discipline, is the recognition that organizations are bound by an invisible fabric of interrelated actions.

The beliefs, attitudes, aims, and motives that underlie our behavior are only partially accessible to us at any point in time. A commitment to psychological growth is a commitment to enlarge consciousness. Much of David Whyte’s book The Heart Aroused is devoted to understanding what is required of the individual who wishes to achieve personal mastery and a deeper understanding of his or her mental models. According to him, we are not only required to face our fears but to face the mother of our fears as well.

In general, resistance is minimized in situations in which people feel seen, heard, safe, and respected. Resistance is likely to be maximized in environments in which people feel invisible, unimportant, and controlled and are not treated as a vital part of the enterprise.

For example, an employer who is well-intentioned, compensates his employees well, and rewards merit might be surprised to discover that these same people behave in ways that indicate little commitment to their work. On the other hand, the employer who legitimately offers less tangible rewards but includes employees at each stage of tasks to be accomplished and genuinely demonstrates interest, curiosity, and respect in response to their input minimizes resistance.

What happens inside the individual affects performance—and there is always something happening inside the individual. This relationship can be significantly influenced by external circumstances. Thus, it becomes apparent that business effectiveness can improve with the application of a psychologically sophisticated understanding of human performance. It is also likely that product quality can be enhanced by understanding how human beings function in the workplace.

One of the few relationships in the psychological literature that is reliable enough over a broad range of performance to be labeled a law. The Yerkes-Dodson Law relates a broad range of performance to the general concept of arousal or drive. To simplify, almost any type of performance can relate to arousal, as shown on the curve above.

This relationship is important to business leaders because it shows that performance is optimal at moderate levels of drive. For many, this concept might seem counterintuitive. If a person’s performance does not meet expectation, we generally assume that he or she is unmotivated and that, if we could simply light a fire under him or her, performance would improve.

As shown on the chart above, this is not necessarily true. The fact is that many underperformers are conscientious, often perfectionistic, and even anxious about doing a good job and are overly focused on how their performance is perceived. Rather than being unmotivated, their arousal lies somewhere between modest and high on the curve shown above.

I believe that the vast majority of companies in the twenty-first century will be in the knowledge creation business. Many will be technology or stealth-technology companies or AI companies. Unlike widget manufacturers in the industrial age, knowledge-creating companies require something qualitatively different from their top leaders and their workforce.

This will require the ability to unlock individual creative potential in the individual and the organization.
The less the leader knows themself, the more likely it is that a rigid context will suck the creative air out of the organization and generate a stagnant culture that can produce but not create. As you might guess, the cost-benefit analysis of this context, in terms of human lives (including top leaders), is likely to result in less than optimal results.

It’s a fact that all human beings use only a fraction of their potential.

The difference between our functional ability and innate potential can be thought of as a measure of how much of our capacity we are using to function. Aside from conditions affecting the physical functioning of our body-mind, the greatest restriction to accessing our larger potential is prior learning.

Prior learning often consists of overdevelopment of the parts of us that align with parental imperatives and transformation of the unaligned parts of ourselves in some way that makes them seem to disappear. Although the hidden parts of us can remain silent for decades, they continue to signal us, sometimes faintly, in unexpected ways, often presenting as unwelcome emotions at inconvenient times.

Eventually, and after many rehearsals, we begin to “write” a subjective narrative of who we believe ourselves to be and what we can expect from our lives. Essentially, we are told a story of who we are (often in childhood), then we repeat this story to ourselves and believe the story, until it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Much of this occurs at the subconscious level without us being aware.

Depending on the degree to which individual self-expression was encouraged in our early development, our own perspectives of who we are can range from fairly accurate to almost completely false.
We take this enduring self-definition with us everywhere, and we assess our changing surroundings by how “at home” we feel in the situation. In other words, we seek environments and experiences that validate our self-definition, and we avoid or fail to put energy into those environments that disconfirm that definition—even if it is self-limiting and false. This is how we unconsciously resist change and create self-fulfilling prophecies that prevent us from achieving more of our potential.
The paradox is that our compromises often propel us to excel in narrow ways while simultaneously restricting us from accessing our creative best.

Example : A gifted Olympic athlete who trains for sport and neglects the rest of their development, may win championships but suffer poor relationships and never explore other parts of their potential. We overdevelop the parts of us that we believe are valuable. Business leaders, will often use financial and professional success as the overdeveloped part of the self to validate their beliefs in themselves.

Since we contribute to what we see, we can choose to remain unchanged simply by pursuing those experiences and relationships that validate what we already believe. We all sense that we have more potential than we can access, and all are invited at times to either stimulate or suppress our curiosity about these unknown parts of themselves.

In most business environments, success is measured by indices such as market share, profits, and salary. But rarely is success measured by reduction of the gap between individual (and collective) potential and performance. It should be. Traditional accountability measures would still apply as outcomes, but personal and interpersonal mastery would be added as major goals and objectives.

How much creativity and energy could an organization unlock if each member of the organization was even just 10% better?