{"id":6795,"date":"2017-01-24T10:34:35","date_gmt":"2017-01-24T08:34:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/209.42.255.5\/~actionpoint\/?p=6795"},"modified":"2021-09-28T16:33:42","modified_gmt":"2021-09-28T13:33:42","slug":"a-neurobiological-approach-to-high-performance-management","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/actionpoint.gr\/el\/a-neurobiological-approach-to-high-performance-management\/","title":{"rendered":"A Neurobiological approach to High Performance Management"},"content":{"rendered":"by\u00a0Michael McIntosh|
<\/em>
There is no shortage or theories on how to manage and lead \u2013 every day we witness new insights from the famous, talented or deceased. But how might we enact good management on a daily, hands-on basis \u2013 and, just as importantly, why? It turns out there is genuine science to this question, and if we understand and apply some basic neurobiological principles, the gap\u00a0between mediocre and\u00a0high performance becomes bridgeable quite quickly.

1.Neurobiological Research<\/span> <\/strong>

Adrenaline<\/strong><\/p>
\"\"

A good place to start is with three naturally occurring chemicals that our brains produce instantly and one that takes a few moments more to generate but lasts a longer. The first two are\u2013 epinephrine (adrenaline) and norepinephrine (noradrenaline) work together to prepare and mobilise the body for action. Increasing blood flow, attention and concentration, they help to sharpen the mind, improving task focus while blocking out, at least to some extent, distractions such as sounds, pain, and fatigue and so on. In practice, they allow me to achieve a state of highly productive flow in my work while not hearing a single track on the CD that\u2019s playing in the background. They also give me the energy to finish a cycling or kayaking trip without much discomfort, whereas a short while later, when their effects subside, my body complains in the most vociferous terms about the harsh punishment it has just endured.<\/p>

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>

Dopamine<\/strong><\/p>

In a professional context these two hormones are important for motivating us to tackle challenging tasks, providing\u00a0the energy and focus to perform them to a high standard. Ideally, they are accompanied by dopamine, the chemical that makes us feel good by triggering our internal rewards systems, giving us a natural high, increasing positive feelings, optimism, camaraderie and sociability while reducing fear sensitivity and (some) inhibitions. Dopamine is a key ingredient in fostering our social drives and behaviours.<\/p>

If you have ever enjoyed the feeling of having achieved something difficult, whether related to a sporting or work achievement, that\u2019s dopamine doing its thing \u2013 and it can be\u00a0even better if you were a part of a close-knit team at the time. Our intrinsic desire for those addictive dopamine pleasure dumps means that, unless fear of failure or embarrassment is stronger, we continually seek new challenges and greater achievements, finding, despite the difficulties involved, them to be more stimulating than the uninspiring predictability of repeating the things we\u2019ve done many times before. Together, the focus and energy provided by epinephrine and norepinephrine allow us to perform at a higher level, and if we take a positive view to those challenges dopamine is likely to be present throughout as well \u2013 it\u2019s a naturally occurring behaviour-shaping system that lives within all of us.<\/p>

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>

Cortisol<\/strong><\/p>\"\"

To mess up this massively enjoyable party the fourth guest is cortisol \u2013 commonly known as the stress hormone. Cortisol responds to danger, just as epinephrine and norepinephrine do, but its role is to protect and repair us. Taking a little longer to take effect, it helps us to be more alert to potential sources of danger, reducing our optimism, appetite for risk and sociability. Amongst other things, cortisol also prepares parts of the circulatory system for repair after the physical exertion that used to be an appropriate response to most causes of fear and danger. In a modern context, the chronic exposure to cortisol that results\u00a0from sustained high levels of mental stress has been shown to be very damaging to physical and mental health, increasing illness in both frequency and severity, reducing quality and length of life. And whereas dopamine often lasts around 2 to 4 hours, cortisol can last up to 24 hours \u2013 or even longer when prolonged dwelling on negativity extends its influence.<\/p>2. Behavior Research<\/span> <\/strong>

Research shows that, possibly due to the power and longevity of the danger-sensitive cortisol in comparison to the pleasure-rewarding but short-lived effects of dopamine, employees need to feel they receive around 5 genuine compliments for every piece of negative feedback to create a balance where they feel fairly treated. To give you an idea of how commonly that ratio occurs, in exactly ZERO of the organisations I have been engaged by has this balance been achieved\u00a0prior<\/em>\u00a0to me working with them.

3. Management Practice<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

How does this inform management practice? The first thing is to understand that meaningful challenges provide motivation, energy and connection. This means that if managers want their teams to do \u201cmore\u201d or \u201cbetter\u201d, they had better feel challenged \u2013 preferably by something that connects with their own values and interests, furthers their own development and success and they see as worthwhile socially. As the neuroscience showed us, raising the bar on challenges also raises the bar on motivation and intrinsic reward \u2013 on the basis that employees feel empowered, competent, supported and sincerely appreciated for taking on that challenge and achieving those new goals. This is contrary to the view of some managers who hesitate to ask for \u201cmore\u201d for fear that team members will be displeased, or whose demands for \u201cmore\u201d are met with active or passive resistance. But in most cases this lack of employee task engagement is an artificial construct \u2013 most people want to do great things and feel great about what they achieve in a field that is of interest to them while feeling they are making a contribution to something worthwhile \u2013 it\u2019s why most people choose their jobs, careers and hobbies. It\u2019s also why every year a little over 1\/3 of all Australians perform volunteer work for no financial reward. (If those intrinsic connections appear to be absent from an employee\u2019s normal habits, it may be useful to view the employee within the workplace systemic context, rather than simplistically on his or her own.)<\/p>

It also suggests that managers need to be aware of how their own natural danger-aversion instincts are holding them, and their teams back, as evolution taught them to: A million years ago those who recognized danger and reacted fastest survived, and so in an environment where we were just another item on the menu our ancestors evolved to be sensitive to danger as their highest priority \u2013 a natural behavioral trait that remains today, often manifesting itself as fear or anxiety (fear of the future) despite the absence of such predatory threats. As a part of this sensitivity, we are very good at ignoring the normal, instead spotting the exceptional, with dangerous exceptions prioritized over pleasurable ones.<\/p>

In a work context, this means that conscientious managers are alert to problems, mistakes, conflict and anything else \u201cbad\u201d (or their potential), and react according to their own perceptions, biases and habits around dealing with that kind of threat. This is nothing for those in supervisory roles to be ashamed of, it\u2019s simply a lifetime of learning and a few million years of evolutionary instinct in practice \u2013 nothing could be more natural.<\/p>

Most managers, when not overly burdened with stressful concerns, also notice exceptionally good things, reacting with praise and sincere appreciation. But with the stronger influence of cortisol arising from the negatives, the overall impact is to create an environment where positives feel outnumbered and outweighed by negatives, commonly leaving employees feeling stressed about their work, unappreciated and, as a part of a prolonged pattern, disengaged.<\/p>

The fix, however, is amazingly simple. As a for-instance, let\u2019s assume that an employee has performed six tasks on a particular day. One of them was executed very well, one unacceptably poor and the other four of them unremarkably, ignore-ably, invisibly average. On the assumption that the four average performances were to a standard of proficiency that was perfectly acceptable, then surely the employee should not only be recognised for the single exceptional performance but, albeit to a lesser extent, all four of the \u201caverage\u201d outcomes as well. If we now add in the single poor performance, as long as the manager ensures that all six pieces of feedback are honest, sincere and consistent, and that the five good achievements aren\u2019t dismissed in time or appreciation on the way to an intense focus on only the poor outcome, an\u00a0ideal feedback ratio is automatically achieved.<\/p>

Example<\/strong><\/p>

This fairly common type of conversation:<\/p>