Stuck in NY on 9/11. I was driving to SFO to get on a plane headed to Nice France to join a global management meeting with about 20 of my colleagues. I got the call about 6:45 am from my manager that a plane had been flown into one of the world trade towers and that air travel had come to an abrupt halt. I turned around for home and sat riveted to the TV.

Meanwhile, Chris was watching the events from close up. He had flown into Manhattan a couple days earlier to speak at a conference before heading on to France. With the jolting news of the attack, the conference dispersed. After calling home and the office to let everyone know he was OK, Chris wandered through the crowded streets. It was a surreal experience as people cleared the city. Unclear what to do or where to go, Chris returned to his hotel and started making calls to find a way out of New York. Air travel had locked down completely. Trains had stopped running. Rental cars in NYC had been snatched up — people were buying cars to drive home. Chris waited hoping options would open up. He began to quickly sink into his first experience with depression.

“You are Smart and Will Figure it Out.” Chris remembers two particular phone calls. The first was from me (and my manager John) checking on his latest whereabouts. Chris recalled, “At this point I felt stuck and helpless and I had no idea what to do, so I was just waiting. But then you said emphatically, ‘Chris, you need to get home. Get yourself out of Manhattan and start heading west. We’ll take care of the rest.’” Chris continued, “But behind your words, your message was clear. I knew you were telling me was that I was smart and would figure it out. I just needed to get moving.”

Chris found a train running to New Jersey. He then found a rental car agency that had a car. He started driving west and called in his whereabouts to me regularly (while rationing his precious cell phone battery life). I pressed the VIP desk at Oracle Travel into service, and we scrambled to find airports opening up departing flights.

The second call he vividly remembers came about a day later. It went like this:

Liz: “Chris, are you coming up to Columbus, Ohio yet?”
Chris: “I just passed the sign that says, ‘Welcome to Columbus.’”
Liz: “Good, drive to the airport. I’ve booked you a reservation on every flight leaving Columbus today. Get on one of them.”

Despite the fact that Chris was apprehensive about surrendering the keys to the car that have moved him west and nervous to board an aircraft, he took the flight. He got home safely and 2 days earlier than most everyone else stuck on the east coast.

In hindsight, I had a different perspective on the events. I don’t recall the “kick in the pants” nor the “smarts reminder.” But, I remember vividly how rewarding it was to focus solely on the success of a colleague for 2 days. It was a chance to get out of my own head, my own challenges, and truly enable someone else.

Hearing Chris’ side of the story was a poignant reminder that that team of travel agents and I didn’t get Chris home. Chris got himself home. But, it came with the encouragement of someone serving as a Multiplier in a moment when it mattered most for him.

Multiplier Practice: We can be Multipliers just by reminding people that they are smart and will figure it out!

Never Turn Away a Question. Contrast this with the late Rajeev Motwani, a professor of Computer Science at Stanford University.  Despite being described by Ron Conway, a renowned technology investor, as “one of the smartest people who has ever existed in Silicon Valley” Motwani developed a reputation for building other people’s genius.  The Guardian newspaper explained that he would, “Never turn away a question.  [He would go out of his] way to help any entrepreneur who asked him for advice.”  He was, “Confident, but not brash.”

My Curiosity Was Piqued.  One former student wrote, “Every time I saw Rajeev, my curiosity was piqued, my mind was challenged.” He continued to explain that Motwani spent so much time with him and was so focused, it was as though “it was just me.  [But] then I came to realize Motwani was giving countless others the same attention.”  That this [awkward] former student was Sergy Brin, of Google fame, speaks volumes about the kind of impact a Multiplier can have.

Google Emerged. The impact wasn’t just general, it was practical too.  When Brin wanted to understand more of the intricacies of data mining, an area that Rajeev had deep knowledge in, he organized a group that would meet regularly on the subject.  Brin adds, “Later, when Larry and I began to work together on the research that would lead to Google, Rajeev was there to support us and guide us through challenges, both technical and organizational.  Eventually, as Google emerged from Stanford, Rajeev remained a friend and advisor as he has with many people and startups since.”

Leading@Google. When Liz Wiseman and I were invited to speak at the Leading@Google series here, it was fascinating to reflect on the impact of Motwani’s Multiplier leadership.  Is it possible that there wouldn’t be a Google today if Motwani had been focused only on his own genius?  When we think of intelligence as a hierarchy we tend to think of genius taking the top spot.  But someone like Motwani challenges that assumption.  At the top of the intelligence hierarchy sits the Genius Maker not the Genius.

Multiplier Practice: Be curious about other people’s interests and interested in other people’s curiosity. Ask people, “What would you like to learn about?” or “What are you interested in?”  Or simply pause to be perceptive.  Ask yourself, “What does this person read about without being asked?”  or “What subjects does this person talk about in animated terms?”  Follow up with a few questions to learn more about what they know and why these subjects have a gravity pull for them.  Then when natural opportunities arise where their interests map to business issues you can make the connection for them and tap into their natural curiosity.

An Eye for Multipliers. One of the panel members was Tom Friel, former CEO and Chairman of the Board at Heidrick & Struggles who was known for creating an environment there that was both open and intense. But, Tom’s interest in the Multipliers ideas goes beyond his own leadership and says it explains much of what he noticed when placing CEOs and other C-levels executives across his career in executive search and assessment. In his endorsement for Multipliers, Tom says, “In over 30 years of evaluating executives it was clear to me that some achieved much more than others, but it wasn’t always clear why. Multipliers presents a compelling analysis of how Multipliers create value while others destroy it.” If anyone has an eye for spotting Multipliers, it is Tom.

2 Great Questions. Tom shared two simple questions he uses to spot the people who will lead like Multipliers:

1. Tell me about your team? (Then listen for how much they talk about themselves vs. others.)

A Diminisher will begin by talking about their team, but the conversation will quickly shift back to them and their own successes. A Multiplier can talk at length about the capabilities and the contributions of the people on their team. As Tom said, “They light up like a Christmas tree!”

2. Who is here (at your current job) because of you?

Multipliers are Talent Magnets who attract talent and then use it at its fullest. Because people are stretched and grown (and recognized) when they work for Multipliers, the Multiplier quickly builds a reputation as “the boss to work for” and people eagerly follow them to the next opportunity. Multipliers can easily recruit people out of their network. Diminishers end up recruiting people through job posts and ads – most people would do anything before working for them again.

Tom’s questions are brilliant both for their simplicity and their capacity to reveal a candidate’s core assumptions.

This week’s Multiplier practice: In your next interview, try out these two questions.
1) Tell me about your team. (Then start the stop watch to see how long the conversation lasts!)
2) Who is at your current company/organization because of you?

Thanks Tom Friel for sharing your genius!

I got to the scenario about the “gift of gab,” knew I was guilty and scored myself high. I got to the “idea person” and felt the sting of truth again and gave myself a high score. And, when I read the scenario about the “rescuer,” I had to confess that I sometimes take fall into this trap.

The Need for Speed. When I got to the “quick decider” scenario, I paused for a moment. I re-read the question twice thinking about how I love agility and speed. I wondered if this might be a blind spot for me, but I quickly convinced myself otherwise. So I gave myself a relatively low score. I finished up the quiz, and received my overall score and the report which detailed my vulnerabilities.

I then called Greg (my co-author and work partner) and asked him to complete the Accidental Diminisher quiz on me. We had intended the quiz to be used only as a self assessment, but I thought a second opinion would provide an interesting learning opportunity. Greg was delighted to oblige! In fact, so much so that he dropped what he was doing, completed my quiz and called me back within 4.5 minutes eager to compare results. But I was not so delighted to learn that his score for me was 4 points higher (toward the Accidental Diminisher side) than my self assessment! What drove this 4 point difference? His version of Liz showed an additional area of vulnerability – the “rapid responder.” Greg could see what I couldn’t (or really just didn’t want to see). My need for speed makes me prone to rushing decisions. I had to agree that I might just be accidentally diminishing people in the process.

Multiplier Practice. Multipliers know that some decisions need to be slowed down initially so the organization can speed up later. It is a truth that all important decisions get debated – it is just a matter of when and where that debate takes place. Diminishers make hasty or isolated decisions that leave the rest of the organization confused to quietly debate the decision at the water cooler or in closed offices. Multipliers invest the time in debating the decision up front with key players and with facts. This allows people to get smart on the issues, which in turn allows them to implement these decisions swiftly.

If you share this “need for speed,” invest time in debate upfront and enable your team to execute with agility and speed. You will speed up the whole cycle and build a smarter team.

A Surprising Confession. Perhaps the most surprising confession I heard came from KR Sridhar, CEO of Bloom Energy, and one of the Multipliers we studied and featured in the Multiplier book as both a “Liberator” and a “Challenger.”  When I went to meet with KR and his management team last week, I was greeted by KR holding a copy of our article in Harvard Business Review.  He pointed to the sidebar called “Are you an Accidental Diminisher?”and said, “I fit the profile:  visionary, creative, talker.  I think I might be an Accidental Diminisher.”  He politely hijacked the agenda for the Multipliers seminar I was conducting for his management team and said, “I’d like to ask my team what I am doing that is accidentally diminishing.”  I was intrigued and agreed.  We proceeded to have a healthy, productive conversation about some subtle ways that leaders can diminish others.  KR, a text-book Multiplier, walked away with clear ideas for how he could be a stronger Multiplier and to his already innovative organization.

The Truth of the Matter. Many of us are well-intended leaders who are following popular management practice.   Is it possible that, despite good intentions, you’ve been accidentally diminishing the people on your team?   In our research, we were surprised to discover how few Diminishers understood the restrictive impact they were having on others.  Most had moved into management having been praised for their personal, and often intellectual, merit, and had assumed their role as boss was to have the best ideas.  Others, had once had the mind of a Multiplier, but had been working among Diminishers for so long, they had gone native.  Accidental or not, the impact on your team is the same – you might be getting only ½ of the true brainpower of your team.

Here are three of the signs that you might be an Accidental Diminisher:

1. You’re a visionary – You are a big thinker and lay out a compelling vision of the future that you evangelize to those around you. You think you’re following popular leadership practice, but you may not be leaving enough space for others to think through the challenges for themselves and generate intellectual muscle to make a vision a reality.
2. You’ve got the gift of gab – You’re passionate and articulate and can consume a lot of space in a meeting.  You may think your passion is infectious, but more likely it is stifling the thinking of others.
3. You’re a creative, idea person – You’re a fountain of innovation, continually spouting new ideas for your team to play with.  You may think you’re sparking creativity, but you are quite possibly causing organizational whiplash as people around you scurry to keep up with each new idea.

You can start by taking an assessment on www.multipliersquiz.com to see where your “good” management practices might actually be diminishing.

This week’s Multiplier practice: Follow KR’s lead and ask some people around you:  What am I doing the might be accidentally diminishing? Using the “accidental” word will allow people to more easily tell you the truth and teach you what you need to know.

Even Brown’s toughest critics would accept that he is an intelligent man. Shai Agassi, of Better Place fame, wrote after watching him speak at the World Economic Forum, “the man is the most cerebral leader I have ever seen.” http://shaiagassi.typepad.com/the_long_tailpipe/page/2/. Praise indeed coming from someone as smart as Shai. It is a matter of record that Brown was studying History at Edinburgh University at age 16 and that he went on to get his PhD from the same university. Like the fate of talented, driven people before him, he was “promoted” for his brilliance and aptitude. He is an intelligent, ambitious man by all measures. But a better question for a Prime Minister might be “What effect does he have on the intelligence in the people around him?” There, Brown has struggled. Consider a few examples:

The Tyrant vs The Liberator. Tom Bower’s biography, Gordon Brown, Prime Minister offers detailed insight into someone described as “psychologically flawed”; a chaotic figure, prone to sudden and terrible rages. “Repeatedly he lost his temper, screaming obscenities at those he damned as dishonorable or incompetent,” writes Bower.

Decision-Maker vs. The Debate Maker. Brown has a gravity pull towards making decisions unilaterally or with a small group of inner advisors. Caroline Flint felt so underutilized that when she resigned she described being no more than “window dressing.” She wrote, “You have a two-tier government. Your inner circle and then the remainder of cabinet… In my current role, you advised that I would attend cabinet when Europe was on the agenda. I have only been invited once since October and not to a single political cabinet – not even the one held a few weeks before the European elections…I am not willing to attend cabinet in a peripheral capacity any longer.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/05/caroline-flint-resignation-letter

Micromanager vs. The Investor. Bower describes Brown as a control freak as chancellor, determined to micro-manage not just the economy but the entire sweep of British domestic policy, even contractually binding government departments to do the Treasury’s bidding or else face a cut in their budgets.

Core Assumptions. Then came the moment just days ago, in the midst of the General Election where Brown was caught on a microphone calling Gillian Duffy “a bigoted sort of a woman” after just having told her to her face that she had a nice family. His disdain for her opinions revealed an amazing contempt for the views of ordinary people. There was no curiosity in his voice. Just accusation, judgment and blame of his handlers. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/28/gordon-brown-bigoted-woman

When I think of Brown over the last three years I am reminded of something Bono wrote in Time magazine: “It has been said that after meeting with the great British Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone, you left feeling he was the smartest person in the world, but after meeting with his rival Benjamin Disraeli, you left thinking you were the smartest person.” By all accounts Gordon Brown falls into the Gladstone category.

I have often thought that the job of Prime Minister is now so complicated that it is impossible for a person—however intelligent—to be successful at it. It is no longer just how intelligent they are themselves that matters, but how well they can access the intelligence of the people around them.

This week’s Multiplier practice: Ask yourself how your intelligence—your ideas, knowledge, ability to solve problems and figure things out—could be stifling the intelligence in the people around you.

This week’s inquiry: Which is most important: a leader’s intelligence or how well a leader draws out the intelligence in the people they lead?

CK Prahalad:  The Genius and the Genius Maker. There are great thinkers and there are great teachers, and they are different.  Great thinkers are smart.  Great teachers make others smart.  The genius of CK Prahalad was that he was both.

CK was the kind of teacher who didn’t do all the thinking for you.   He made you think.  His infectious curiosity made you want to know more, to question, and to find out why.  He never made empty claims.  He gave you data so you could think for yourself.  He used his extraordinary intellect to unearth and challenge the entrenched logic that kept organizations stuck.  And, he gave permission for others to challenge as well.  He asked questions that caused people to pause and think.  My personal favorite was one he said often after sharing an insight.  He would pause and say, “Is it not so?”  It always made me think a bit harder.

Smart Around CK. I had the incredible honor to work along side CK for several years at Oracle, while he taught and guided our executive team as we retooled our strategic intent.  It had been many years since I was a student at business school, but I became CK’s “student.”  I listened intently to his lectures, watched and studied him interact with Oracle’s executive team, and I benefited from priceless 1-on-1 tutoring in strategy, leadership, and the power of collective intelligence.  And, all the while, I sprinted to keep up with him as he positioned me in critical roles that challenged, stretched, and grew my capabilities.

Years later I was visiting CK and his wife Gayatri at their home.  Gayatri pulled me aside and whispered, “CK would never tell you this himself, so I will.  CK told me that you might be the smartest student he has had.”  It was one of those compliments that can fuel a person for a while – for me, probably a decade or two.   But still, when Gayatri said this, I laughed inside thinking, “Surely CK has had a thousand students at Harvard and Michigan who are a lot smarter than me.”  But then it hit me.  I was smart around CK.  When I worked with CK, I was brilliant.  He made me think deeply.  He made me question things and challenge assumptions.  His intelligence provoked me.

I left the Prahalad home that day thinking about what Gayatri had shared with me.  I wondered why I was so smart around CK.  Gayatri gave me a gift that was more valuable than a personal compliment.  She helped me see that some people make us smarter.  I began to wonder, “why are we smart and capable around some people but not around others.”  It is the question that germinated the book Multipliers.

CK Prahalad:  Multiplier and Mentor. Not only did CK’s observation spark this work, he guided our research and thinking.  When I first shared the idea for the book with him, he encouraged me telling me that the idea was important, relevant and a source of competitive advantage.  He then outlined many of the core assumptions of Multipliers, as if he had been thinking about the subject all his life.  When Greg and I anxiously reviewed our research with him, he responded with, “Your research is solid.  It is time to publish.”  His confidence in us gave us courage.  And, his generous support never faded.

Multiplier Practice: CK astutely observed, “The real leadership skill of the next decade isn’t what you know.  It is how well you can access what other people know.”  As a leader, spend less time telling everyone what you know.  Instead, ask questions to uncover the knowledge in the people around you.

We say goodbye to one of the great management thinkers of our time, and I say goodbye to a much-loved mentor.  The world will miss the mind of CK Prahalad.

Is it not so?

Liz Wiseman

For Diminishers, the numbers ranged between 20-50%. I recall seeing people’s frustration, and even embarrassment, as they told us how little they were allowed to give to their work. This was a sharp contrast to the ebullient pride people displayed when they told us how much they were able to give to the Multipliers ,where the numbers typically fell between 70-100%. When we compared the two sets of data, we were amazed to find that Multipliers got 1.97 times more than the Diminishers. That represents an almost two fold increase or a 2X effect!

Why is this? When people work for Multipliers, they hold nothing back. They offer their very best thinking, creativity and ideas. They give more than their jobs require and volunteer their discretionary effort, energy and they hold themselves to the highest possible standards. They give 100% of their ability, and then some as they stretch and grow their capability further. In essence, Multipliers have figured out how to get so much from their people that they effectively double their workforce for free.

Diminishers are costly. Meanwhile, in the office around the corner, Diminisher managers are racking up a sizable bill for their companies. Because they only get about 50% of the capability of their people on average, they need twice the resource pool just to get the same job done as their Multiplier counterparts. It is as if half of their workforce doesn’t show up to work each day. The bodies may be occupying the cubicles, but only about half of the brainpower is there. While, many Diminishers look successful on the surface, they come at an extraordinary high cost to their companies.

How much are you getting from your team? What would your staff members say if I asked the same question to them…about you? Would they say that you are getting 100% — everything that they had to give? Or, would they say that they have ideas and capabilities that are underutilized, or perhaps even unwelcomed. If you are like most managers, you are probably not getting 100% of the brainpower of your team. And, at a time when organizations have scaled back, you are expected to do more with fewer resources. Instead of trying to do more with less, try getting more by using more. Multiplier leadership is a key that unlocks the intelligence that is trapped inside organizations.

What could you get done if you could double the brainpower of your workforce? What problems could you solve? What opportunities would you successfully tackle? Just imagine what you could accomplish if you could harness all the energy and intelligence around you.

This week’s Multiplier practice: Begin by asking your staff members one simple question: How can I make better use of your capabilities? Then listen.

This week’s inquiry: In your experience, why do Multipliers get so much more from their people?

Tell us what you think!

Liz Wiseman

Maybe you’ve worked for the know-it-all variety – the visionary who is so focused on selling his vision to the organization that he doesn’t leave any space for others to think for themselves and generate the intellectual muscle needed to make a vision a reality.  Or, perhaps you work with a creative, idea type who, week after week, suggests new targets and campaigns for your team—forcing you to scurry to keep up with her thinking rather than contributing your own ideas.  Or, maybe you work for the tyrant who creates an environment of anxiety and likes to keep his organization on edge.  He thinks this pressure will spark innovation, but instead it shuts down thinking and leaves people only offering safe, predictable ideas.  These leaders—we call them “Diminishers”—underutilize people and leave creativity and talent on the table.

At the other extreme are leaders who, as capable as they are, care less about flaunting their own IQs and more about fostering a culture of intelligence in their organizations. Under the leadership of these “Multipliers,” employees don’t just feel smarter; they become smarter.  When these leaders walk into a room, light bulbs go off over people’s heads; ideas flow and problems get solved. These are the leaders who inspire employees to stretch themselves to deliver results that surpass expectations.  You know what it feels like to work for one of these leaders – they stretch you and command your best work.  You probably grow more in a year of working for this leader than in five years working for someone else.  Working for them can be exhausting, but it is exhilarating!

One high-tech executive we interviewed (in researching our book “Multipliers”) recalls working for two such types of leaders.  Both worked in the same company and in the same role.  One had the Midas touch of a Multiplier and the other had the chilling effect of a Diminisher.

One was George Schneer who was the kind of manager who ran profitable businesses that grew under his leadership.   Our colleague shared, “I was a rock star around George. I felt like a smart SOB – everyone felt like that.  He got 100% from me – it was exhilarating.”  George grew people’s intelligence by engaging it.  In a typical meeting, George only spoke about 10% of the time.  He would “crisp up” a statement of a problem and then turn his team lose on it to find an answer.  He rarely told people want to do.  Instead, he used his energy to find opportunities in the market.  He would then frame them and step back and watch his team find innovative solutions.   People who worked for George said they felt like geniuses when they were around him.

The other leader was a brilliant scientist who did all the thinking for his group.  In a typical meeting, he did most of the talking.  When problems came up, he would almost always have an answer himself.  He used his energy selling his ideas to his team.  This manager hired really intelligent people, but, once they realized they weren’t allowed to think, they would eventually quit.  Or worse, they would quit on the inside but stay in the job until they could find a way out.  One of his direct reports recalled, “He really only got about 50% of what I had to offer.  I would never work for him again.”

Some leaders find their strength in their own genius and can stifle others and dilute the organization’s crucial intelligence and capability.  Other leaders are genius makers.  They used their intelligence to amplify the intelligence and capability of those around them.  Everyone around them gets smarter and more capable.  We call these leaders Multipliers.

This blog is dedicated to these types of leaders – the Multipliers.  Each week, we’ll share the insights we gained in the two years we spent studying both Multipliers and Diminishers across 35 companies on four continents while writing our book, “Multipliers:  How the Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter” (Harper Business, June 15).

We’ll show you what these Multipliers do, how they see the world, and the incredible results they achieve through others.  You’ll see why they don’t just get a little bit more from people, they get vastly more. We’ll share their stories and outline the big ideas, but we’ll also provide practical starting points for leading like Multipliers.  You will have a chance to weigh in on the questions we pose each week, and we will all learn from the pool of knowledge that forms.

So, join us on this exploration.  Subscribe here.  Invite your friends and colleagues to join in too.  And offer your insights into this week’s inquiry:  Why are we smart and capable around some leaders and stagnate around others?  We want to hear what you think, so jump in.

Liz Wiseman & Greg McKeown