Latest news with #executive
Entrepreneur
a day ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Why Your Workplace Superpower is Also Your Most Deadly Blind Spot
This story appears in the July 2025 issue of Entrepreneur. Subscribe » For successful people, there's nothing more confusing than failing when you gave it your best. You leaned on your tried-and-true personality traits — the ones everyone agrees are your "superstrengths" — and yet, things fell apart. Fortunately, when this happens, there's a fairly common diagnosis: You have encountered a blind spot. As a clinical psychologist turned business coach, I've spent years honing my intuition to recognize when previously successful leaders, executives, or entrepreneurs were getting in their own way, and to come up with tailored solutions to help them. What I've learned is that we are not as self-aware as we believe. We tend to feel as if most of our traits, instincts, and feelings are like everyone else's — except for where we see ourselves as exceptional or gifted, in ways that we imagine can only serve as a positive. And when I began as a coach and started to hear people talk about the strengths and weaknesses of the people they work with, I took their answers at face value. If an executive was praised for their confidence, I'd make a note of it, and look for other areas that might need to be worked on instead. After all, strengths are good, I reasoned. It's the weaknesses that we need to worry about. Related: Why Failure Is Crucial in Finding Your True Purpose But after a little while, I started to notice a surprising pattern. Often, if an executive was praised for his confidence, that same reviewer might also mention his arrogance. The friendly extrovert would have trouble leaving people alone to do their work. The same individual would be described as both persistent and stubborn — and the more persistent she seemed to be in some people's eyes, the more stubborn she seemed in the eyes of others. The visionary would have trouble with execution. The understanding boss was quick to agree with everyone, leaving no one quite sure where they stood. The calm, unflappable CEO never signaled when he was upset, causing people to guess what bothered him. The curious, out-of-the-box thinker seemed to get easily distracted by something shiny and new. My realization: Strengths are not unqualified positives. Instead, our challenges often emerge from investing too heavily in our strengths — the "superstrengths" become supernovas, and tip into qualities that frustrate people around us and get in the way of our success. My attention to detail might feel to others like micromanagement; an orientation toward action can look a lot like a lack of strategic thinking; conscientiousness becomes perfectionism; critical judgment becomes a lack of interpersonal sensitivity. And because these strengths are often the qualities we are most proud of — the things we like best in ourselves and have heard positive feedback about over the course of our lives — the idea that they can become our biggest weaknesses is a serious blind spot. I call it a "trait blind spot." Most of us simply won't be able to see when it happens. Related: How to Overcome Past Struggles and Turn Them Into Your Superpowers Esther was a great example of this. She was the CEO of a small pharmaceutical company, and had taken over from its scientist founders. The board loved Esther; she had an incredible reputation as a conscientious and careful leader, and she seemed like the natural choice to steer their company through an IPO and beyond. But nine months after Esther was hired, the board chairman called me with concern. "Growth has been surprisingly slow," he told me. "We brought in this new sales guy. And it's helping, a little. But the sales guy keeps telling me we need a new CEO. We like Esther and want to make it work. Can you figure out what the problem is?" I reached out to Esther to set up a meeting. She asked if I could connect her with a few references — perfectly appropriate and reasonably commonplace. Two weeks passed before I followed up. Esther said she still hadn't had a chance to reach out to one of the references. Another three weeks passed, and I figured this was never going to happen. Until, to my surprise, she reached out and said we were good to get started. Two weeks later, Esther and I met at the international terminal in the San Francisco Airport — the only place and time that worked for both of us. It was not an ideal location for a substantive meeting, but I was able to explain my process — interviews, testing, a report, a plan. She seemed amenable, and I found her to be pleasant and polite. No red flags. Except the pace of the follow-up remained glacial. Esther gave me limited access to her team, making the process slower than normal. She also kept putting off her testing. When I had gotten about three-quarters of the way through the process — now a full three months after I had initially reached out to her — the board chairman called me and asked for a progress report. "Do you think she can get better?" he asked. "I hope so — but I'm not sure. I have to admit, I haven't even begun coaching her yet." "You've got to be kidding." I paused for a beat. "I'm sure Esther is coachable, I just — " He cut me off. "I think you've given me what I was looking for," the chairman said. "We're going to let Esther go. She's great, but just isn't a fit for a startup. We have to move fast, and, like you've seen, she can't." This was a perfect illustration of how a superstrength can also become a deadly blind spot. Esther prided herself on being cautious and deliberate, which were useful traits in her old role. But her new role required something else. By being cautious and deliberate now, Esther was failing. She couldn't see the problem, because it had never been a problem for her before. With awareness and a plan, she could have fixed this. But she ran out the clock, and her extreme traits cost her the career opportunity she'd been so excited to earn. Related: How to Find Your Blind Spots When You Don't Know What You're Looking For Because there are a seemingly unlimited number of traits we might possess, it takes some focus to figure out which ones are most likely to lead to blind spots. I'm sure many of you have taken personality tests — Myers-Briggs, Enneagram, and others. While these tests are fun and yield findings that are interesting to explore, the Big Five traits (see table below) are a particular set of traits that have been developed and refined by research psychologists over the past 70 years. The big five traits Extroversion: When someone finds energy in the company of others (introversion — comfort being alone — is on the other side of the spectrum) Openness to experience: Curiosity and an eagerness to do and learn new things (as opposed to someone who thrives on routine) Accommodation: Agreeableness and trust (while people low in this trait are comfortable with disagreement and in environments where they may have to play politics or manipulate others) Conscientiousness: Discipline in the pursuit of goals (with relaxed spontaneity and a willingness to multitask at the other extreme) Neuroticism: Anxiety and irritability (as contrasted with an even mood and generally sunny disposition) Numerous teams of investigators, using robust statistical methods, have agreed that these five traits show remarkable stability throughout our lifespans and across cultures and contexts, and are orthogonal to each other, or statistically independent. This makes them a good place to start in any discussion about traits — and trait blind spots. Psychologists believe that a bell curve exists for each of these traits. Many of us are somewhere in the middle — somewhat extroverted, not too extroverted — but some of us fall on the extremes, and that is where we run the risk of falling victim to a blind spot on the opposite side. What do I mean by that? You think your superstrength will always be the right approach, even when it isn't. If you are very extroverted, you will be at a loss when being introverted would be the optimal trait for a particular situation. If you are extremely open to new experiences, you won't adapt to a situation where what's needed is deep focus on one domain. A client named Mila, for instance, had experienced an exceptional rise at one of the most successful B2B companies in the world. She was known in the industry as a rock star: super smart, incredibly driven, and a key leader with a legendary ability to focus and quickly devise elegant technological solutions. Expectations were high when she jumped to a prominent startup and found herself elevated to CEO after an unexpected resignation. The marketing team was delighted to get Mila's name out in the world even further, wanting to book her as a keynote speaker at conferences around the globe. The technologists couldn't wait to see one of their own shining in a broader, more public-facing role. The sales team was thrilled to have her in the top spot at the company, because they knew her name would mean something to customers, and bringing her in to help close deals would give them a competitive advantage. That is not how things played out. Mila was aware when she took the job that she was quite high in conscientiousness — she was, like Esther, slow and deliberate at times. She liked to spend time holed up in her office working through problems, and her previous role made it possible for her to do that. But unlike Esther, she knew that wouldn't work as a CEO. She was pragmatic and had a strong bias to action, so she forced herself to act more quickly, to rely on her team, and to make big decisions on perhaps less data than she might have hoped for. Related: The One 'Superpower' Trait These 6 Top Leaders Always Look For When Hiring Still, the role of CEO has few day-to-day requirements, and is shaped by the person who occupies it. There were more decisions to make than in her previous role, and even with her conscious effort to speed up, she still found herself wanting more time alone to focus, recharge, and think. She was friendly and charismatic when forced to interact, but left to her own devices, tried her best to keep her schedule free of what she saw as social distractions. She told her team, "There's lots of work to do, and I need the time to do it." There was no one to force Mila to add things to her schedule that she would rather avoid. So as much as possible, she sidestepped what made her uncomfortable. Salespeople had to ask her again and again to come to a closing to answer a client's questions, or even just to say hello and lend some of her star power to the transaction. The marketing team got her to agree to just one keynote when they wanted to book her for a dozen. One-on-one, Mila was warm and caring, but she did not take advantage of opportunities to rally the team in big ways, to give inspiring speeches, or to stand in front of them as their fearless leader. She became almost an invisible presence. Her internal leaders were frustrated that they had to spend time convincing Mila to do the things that they thought she should have naturally been seeking out and genuinely excited to pursue. When I was brought in and interviewed her team, they were baffled. "Why do we have to beg our CEO to be the face of the company?" they asked. One of her senior leaders even confided in me, "It's like Mila only wants to do the hard work. Getting interviewed is fun! Giving speeches is fun! People would love her. And she wants to look at spreadsheets all day?" This was, as it turned out, an easy one. What Mila and her team didn't realize was that she was an introvert in a job that required the behavior of an extrovert. The simple reality was that for Mila to leave her comfort zone — to meet with clients, lead company meetings, talk to the media — was exceptionally challenging. She coped with the stress of extroverted activities not just by avoiding as many as she could, but also by convincing herself that these tasks were extraneous, and that simply focusing on strategy and execution would be enough. She was blind to the reality that her innate introversion was holding her back as the company shifted from product development to commercialization, when a CEO needs to be external-facing. Traits are hard to change, and I don't intend to argue otherwise. Any attempt to change them is likely to end in frustration and failure. We are, for better or worse, who we are. Rather than fighting our instincts, it is almost always more productive to become aware of our traits and then manage around them or find a role where we can thrive not just despite who we are but because of our unique gifts and abilities. Mila was never going to be the life of the party — but if she wanted to be a successful CEO, she needed to become aware of her blind spot, then adapt. To some degree, she needed to push herself out of her comfort zone. But she could also compensate by building a team around her that could own at least some of the tasks she didn't want. I advised her to hire a "chief of communications and inspiration" to own some elements of the role that she didn't feel comfortable with, and we worked on ways to strategically harness her limited tolerance for meetings by using her in only the most important sales closings. While Mila was uncomfortable being on stage in front of large groups, I could see that her genuineness, warmth, and industry credentials made her quite charismatic in small group situations. I encouraged her to schedule monthly sessions — "Friday breakfasts with Mila" — and invite four employees at a time from different parts of the company to join her for a meal. She used these meetings effectively to connect with employees as individuals, inspire them about her vision for the company, and show them how much she appreciated their contributions. She also worked with sales and marketing to help them shape her identity to the world as a brilliant, compassionate, introverted leader. This allowed her to stay in her comfort zone as much as possible while adjusting the world's (and the company's) expectations of who she was and how she might behave. Finally, she leaned on her extroverted CFO to take a more central role during board meetings in order to relieve her of "performing" for the board, letting her focus instead on building the one-on-one relationships. Through understanding and accepting her blind spot, Mila was able to make changes that felt like a relief — and with help, she blossomed as a CEO and found success. Her introversion was something to address, not a fatal character flaw. Rather than trying to convince others that certain parts of the job weren't important, she needed the self-awareness to know what she could and couldn't do, and strategies to overcome any problems. Related: How to Turn Blind Spots From Your Enemy Into Your Most Important Asset As you read Mila's story, you might have wondered how she got that role in the first place. Isn't it obvious, you might ask, that an extrovert would be a better leader than an introvert? As Mila's company moved from developing its product to commercializing it, the answer was yes. But I wouldn't make the case that this — or any trait — is universally valuable in every situation. I have seen CEO roles where deep thinking matters most, and the nature of the business doesn't require the kind of robust presence that Mila's team wanted from her. There may be leadership traits that prove useful in many cases, but even more important is the fit: Which traits are useful in a particular context? Over time, I've found it interesting to discover that trait blind spots do tend to surface for entrepreneurs more than corporate leaders. The collection of traits needed to build is very different from the set of qualities required to lead. Successful leaders in established companies are often described as "well-rounded." They have filled several different roles, and those with significant trait blind spots end up getting weeded out on the move up the hierarchy. You simply don't become CEO if you don't have the right mix of traits or can't learn how to adapt to your own particular set. To the extent there are weaknesses, they are not blind spots; they are known and managed around. Entrepreneurs, on the other hand, succeed because they are exceptional at something — maybe vision, maybe resilience, or maybe none of the leadership traits at all — and this exceptionalism is so strong that people are willing to overlook their other challenges. Think about the stereotypical brilliant founder with no people skills, where employees accept that he's difficult and leave him alone to do his magic. People fear pointing out the issue because of the possibility of an adverse reaction, denial, or defensiveness. Some entrepreneurs, when confronted with evidence of their gaps, may argue that people are exaggerating. But there is a ceiling to growth when someone has an unaddressed blind spot standing in their way. Once the demands of the job shift to encompass far more than just product development and rapid growth — once the founders must become managers of people — they're exposed as fundamentally flawed CEOs. They are "spiky, odd-shaped polygons," as I like to put it, and don't fit as leaders in a more established enterprise. If you are struggling, one of your first questions should be whether you are missing a particular trait. But the very next question should be whether one or more of your inherent traits are hindering you rather than helping you achieve results. If you want to identify your blind spots, here's where to start. Related: What Is Your Entrepreneurial Superpower? The first step is awareness. You need to understand who you are, and what core traits define you. Personality tests, like one to measure where you stand on the Big Five traits, do not provide the whole picture, but they can be a useful place to begin. Looking at your results, do a gut check. In which categories are you at one extreme or the other, and how does that play out in your life? If any of these traits were overused, how might that negatively impact you? Everything can be taken to an extreme, and that's what we need to catch. By looking at the Big Five and how they play out in leadership, it is easy to see how being at either extreme for any of the traits can be harmful. When it comes to neuroticism, if you are too reactive, you will be unlikely to maintain your equilibrium through the endless pressure and the ups and downs of business. You may be too unpredictable to your colleagues and subordinates. Being too calm, on the other hand, has the potential to make you appear as if you are unaffected by difficulties, and others may doubt that you are taking problems seriously enough. What about openness to experiences? If you are too imaginative, it becomes toxic to productivity. But if you are too conventional and cautious, you can't move at the required speed. Pure extroverts may lack the internal focus to put in the solitary efforts that are sometimes required on the road to success, while introverts may not be able to handle the social and interpersonal demands of any career that involves interaction with others. Being too agreeable can affect potential business gains, while being too critical can harm needed relationships. Being too high on conscientiousness may lead to discomfort with risk and ambiguity, while being too carefree can lead to mistakes. Ask yourself the top adjectives others use to describe you, and then reflect on what happens if you modify them with the word "too" — are you too smart, too energetic, too selfless? These are probably things you like about yourself, but that's what makes them even more dangerous. If you are proud of these facets of yourself, you are less likely to try to extinguish them or control them. Who wants to act less smart, for example, or less careful? You may not be able to see all of this yourself — and in fact, you probably can't. Ask others to help. How do they perceive you when it comes to the Big Five and other leadership traits? How would they describe you, and, if asked directly, what do they say you are too much of? Do you have a trait blind spot — either an overused strength or a critical gap — that needs addressing? Related: Your Business Won't Grow Until You Tackle These 3 Leadership Blind Spots After awareness, the next step is action. Once you've identified your traits, you need to examine whether they match your current context. Within an organization, you know the landscape better than a coach like me ever could. Are your traits bumping up against expectations in ways that are holding you back? Where are you consistently finding yourself struggling, and does it come back to an area where you are "too much" of something, or where a different trait is needed? You might ask yourself to think about the people succeeding in your organization or your profession, and whether they embody different traits than you. Do the truly persistent individuals around you seem to be getting things done in a way that you're having trouble with? Does that mean persistence is a helpful trait here, and is that something you might be willing to grow within yourself, or might it mean you are in the wrong role? Are there mechanisms you can put in place to guard against over-relying on certain aspects of yourself? If, for example, you have too much of an ownership mindset, can you force delegation and outsourcing so that you mitigate your inclination to do everything yourself? Remember, there are no universals; different traits are useful in different roles. Your default responses may be perfect, or they may need some adjustment. For Esther, whose caution caused her to lose her job, there could have been a three-step action plan to address the problem: 1. Recognize that your superstrength (in this case, caution) is a blind spot in your current context. 2. Ask yourself: Can you shift? Do you even want to shift? 3. Find a solution. Coming forward with honesty about Esther's strengths and limitations could have prompted a discussion between her and the board about how to move forward productively. Perhaps she could have convinced the board that the company didn't need to move as quickly as they believed, and that her more deliberative style was a benefit in an industry prone to missteps. Perhaps she could have brought in a "number two" to own some of the decision-making that depended most on speed and yet still have given herself the space to focus on the company's larger strategy. Related: 6 Traits to Look For in Your Next Boss There wasn't necessarily a right or wrong answer, just the opening for a discussion that could happen only once Esther recognized her blind spot. No matter what trait you are trying to manage, when you are no longer blind to your blind spot, solutions come into focus. Reprinted by permission of Harvard Business Review Press. Excerpted from Blindspotting: How to See What's Holding You Back as a Leader by Martin Dubin. Copyright © 2025 Martin Dubin. All rights reserved.
The Standard
a day ago
- Automotive
- The Standard
BYD partners with Inter Milan, will launch limited edition car in Nerazzurri colors
From left to right : Giorgio Ricci, Chief Revenue Officer of FC Internazionale Milano; Stella Li, Executive Vice President of BYD; Giuseppe Marotta, President and CEO of FC Internazionale Milano. BYD
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
CN Announces Janet Drysdale as Interim Chief Commercial Officer
Veteran CN executive to step into key commercial role MONTREAL, July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- CN (TSX: CNR) (NYSE: CNI) announced today that Janet Drysdale will assume the role of Chief Commercial Officer on an interim basis, effective immediately. Janet is stepping into the role following the departure of Remi G. Lalonde. Janet spent the first decade of her nearly 30-year career at CN in a variety of roles in Sales and Marketing. She is a seasoned and versatile leader with significant cross-functional experience having held executive positions at CN in Investor Relations, Finance, Corporate/Business Development, Sustainability, and most recently as Chief Stakeholder Relations Officer. "I am very pleased that Janet will be leading our commercial team during this critical time. Janet's depth of experience in sales and marketing, steady hand, and drive for results will provide strong leadership for the commercial team. I look forward to working closely with her as we accelerate the execution of our growth agenda,' said Tracy Robinson, President and Chief Executive Officer at CN. "I thank Remi for his contributions to CN." The Chief Commercial Officer role is a critical executive position overseeing CN's strong and experienced team responsible for sales and marketing. The appointment of a permanent Chief Commercial Officer is a priority. Biographical Notes Janet is an independent director of Rumo S.A., Brazil's largest freight railway. She is Chair of the Board of the Railway Association of Canada, and she sits on the Board of the Canadian American Business Council. Ms. Drysdale holds an Honours Bachelor of Science degree from Queen's University and an MBA from McGill University. Ms. Drydale also holds the Global Competent Boards Designation (GCB.D). About CNCN powers the economy by safely transporting more than 300 million tons of natural resources, manufactured products, and finished goods throughout North America every year for its customers. With its nearly 20,000-mile rail network and related transportation services, CN connects Canada's Eastern and Western coasts with the U.S. Midwest and the U.S. Gulf Coast, contributing to sustainable trade and the prosperity of the communities in which it operates since 1919. Jonathan Abecassis Stacy Alderson Director, Public Affairs and Assistant Vice-President Media Relations Investor Relations (438) 455-3692 (514) 399-0052 media@
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
CN Announces Janet Drysdale as Interim Chief Commercial Officer
Veteran CN executive to step into key commercial role MONTREAL, July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- CN (TSX: CNR) (NYSE: CNI) announced today that Janet Drysdale will assume the role of Chief Commercial Officer on an interim basis, effective immediately. Janet is stepping into the role following the departure of Remi G. Lalonde. Janet spent the first decade of her nearly 30-year career at CN in a variety of roles in Sales and Marketing. She is a seasoned and versatile leader with significant cross-functional experience having held executive positions at CN in Investor Relations, Finance, Corporate/Business Development, Sustainability, and most recently as Chief Stakeholder Relations Officer. "I am very pleased that Janet will be leading our commercial team during this critical time. Janet's depth of experience in sales and marketing, steady hand, and drive for results will provide strong leadership for the commercial team. I look forward to working closely with her as we accelerate the execution of our growth agenda,' said Tracy Robinson, President and Chief Executive Officer at CN. "I thank Remi for his contributions to CN." The Chief Commercial Officer role is a critical executive position overseeing CN's strong and experienced team responsible for sales and marketing. The appointment of a permanent Chief Commercial Officer is a priority. Biographical Notes Janet is an independent director of Rumo S.A., Brazil's largest freight railway. She is Chair of the Board of the Railway Association of Canada, and she sits on the Board of the Canadian American Business Council. Ms. Drysdale holds an Honours Bachelor of Science degree from Queen's University and an MBA from McGill University. Ms. Drydale also holds the Global Competent Boards Designation (GCB.D). About CNCN powers the economy by safely transporting more than 300 million tons of natural resources, manufactured products, and finished goods throughout North America every year for its customers. With its nearly 20,000-mile rail network and related transportation services, CN connects Canada's Eastern and Western coasts with the U.S. Midwest and the U.S. Gulf Coast, contributing to sustainable trade and the prosperity of the communities in which it operates since 1919. Jonathan Abecassis Stacy Alderson Director, Public Affairs and Assistant Vice-President Media Relations Investor Relations (438) 455-3692 (514) 399-0052 media@ in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
NFL Players Association executive JC Tretter is resigning amid union overhaul
WASHINGTON (AP) — NFLPA chief strategy officer JC Tretter is resigning from his position, three days after Lloyd Howell stepped down as executive director of the players' union. Tretter told CBS Sports on Sunday that he doesn't want to be considered for the NFLPA's interim executive director position and denied he played any role in undermining Howell's position. 'Over the last couple days, it has gotten very, very hard for my family. And that's something I can't deal with,' Tretter told CBS Sports on Sunday. 'So, the short bullet points are: I have no interest in being (executive director). I have no interest in being considered. I've let the executive committee know that. I'm also going to leave the NFLPA in the coming days because I don't have anything left to give the organization.' The 34-year-old Tretter, who played center for eight seasons with Green Bay and Cleveland through 2021, was the player president from 2020 to 2024. He served in his new role since October 2024. Howell resigned Thursday after two years because his leadership had become a distraction. Howell has come under scrutiny since ESPN reported he has maintained a part-time consulting job with the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm that holds league approval to seek minority ownership in NFL franchises. That followed the revelation that the NFLPA and the league had a confidentiality agreement to keep quiet an arbitrator's ruling about possible collusion by owners over quarterback salaries. The latest issue was an ESPN report Thursday that revealed two player representatives who voted for Howell were not aware that he was sued in 2011 for sexual discrimination and retaliation while he was a senior executive at Booz Allen. In 2023, a year after the NFLPA sued the owners for collusion, the NFL sued the union after Tretter suggested in an interview that running backs who were unhappy with their contracts could fake injuries, which would be a violation of the collective bargaining agreement. The grievance also was decided this year and was not shared publicly. Tretter told CBS Sports he didn't have access to the collusion grievance and wasn't involved in the confidentiality agreements. Tretter was the NFLPA's player president in 2023 when Howell was elected as the union's executive director following a vote that changed the union's constitution and made the search and election process more confidential. 'I'm not resigning because what I've been accused of is true,' Tretter said. 'I'm not resigning in disgrace. I'm resigning because this has gone too far for me and my family, and I've sucked it up for six weeks. And I felt like I've been kind of left in the wind taking shots for the best of the organization. ... And in the end, what's the organization done for me? Like, nothing.' ___ AP NFL: The Associated Press
