Leadership Blind Spots

The second is what they call "situational blindness," which are factors that obscure your ability to see what's occurring, and you have to wait for events to unfold. So both of those, while important, are not blind spots. Blind spots – the way I think about them – are things that you can recognize if you look for them.

Rachel Salaman: You work with business leaders.

Robert Bruce Shaw: I do.

Rachel Salaman: Helping them to sometimes recognize their blind spots, how does that go? Is there much blindness about blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: You find it's mixed. There's some cases where leaders are curious and they want the feedback, and often those are leaders that will hire an executive coach like myself to provide input.

Some of it depends though on the nature of the blind spot, so if it's more connected to their self-concept it becomes more difficult sometimes to broach that and to address it with them. So, for example, if a leader thinks of him or herself as strategic and it turns out their blind spot is they're not very good strategically, and you have to raise that, and that can become a difficult conversation.

Rachel Salaman: What are some of the most common blind spots that you've come across with leaders?

Robert Bruce Shaw: Well, there's a chapter in the book where I talk about 20 of them, and that list is not meant to be exhaustive, but it gives you a flavor. One that's fairly typical is when leaders assume that others think the same way they do and they assume that they have the same thinking process, decision process – even the same values – and it turns out they don't, but nevertheless they assume that's the case, and it results in bad decisions in terms of either staffing or in terms of the recommendations they take from those individuals. So that's one that I find very often in leaders.

Another case would be the capabilities on a leader's team, and what I often find is that leaders inflate the capabilities of the people on their team and they think that they're better than they are because they often don't have a perspective on other teams or what superior performance looks like in a particular area.

So it's different in the stereotype of a leader, which is then very hard on their teams. I find the opposite – they actually believe their teams are better than they are.

In the way the book is organized I talk about four different levels of blind spots: one about yourself and how you view your own impact, one around your team, the third around your organization, and then the fourth around your markets, and in each of those there are typical blind spots that you find.

Rachel Salaman: You also talk about the causes of blind spots. Can you talk us through a couple of those now?

Robert Bruce Shaw: If you divide it broadly there are two major drivers. One is psychological, and within that you find that people, when they have a great deal cognitively they're dealing with, they have a tendency to exclude some information – it's cognitive overload.

And the other piece of the psychological blind spots is more emotional, so there are things that you just don't want to see because they conflict with how you view yourself or how you've invested either your time or your resources and so on.

So there's a psychological component and there's also an organizational component, and in that case you find that information is tilted as it goes up the hierarchy. You find that people, when they're dealing with figures of authority, often will not tell the complete truth, so you get both psychological and organizational factors that contribute to blind spots.

Rachel Salaman: And how preventable are they?

Preventable is an interesting word, because you can say you can't prevent them, but you can recognize them and manage them. So one thing I emphasize in the book is don't look at blind spots as a problem to be fixed, but as something you have to manage on an ongoing basis.

Rachel Salaman: And you say in your book that blind spots are actually linked to strengths, which is an interesting idea – that an overpowering strength usually has an associated blind spot. Could you explain that with an example?

Robert Bruce Shaw: If you look at people's reccurring blind spots, very often they're connected with their strengths. An example would be an entrepreneur who is passionate about his or her business, but doesn't see the threats that exist around that business and even the resources needed to make the business successful. So what you find in entrepreneurs – the blind spot is they don't understand the vulnerabilities they have because they're passionate about the business and growing that concern which obviously you need to be as an effective entrepreneur, but there's a downside to it.

And so part of what I examine is how do you understand the blind spots relative to their connection to your strengths, and then how do you deal with that on an ongoing basis?

Rachel Salaman: So how difficult is it for leaders to identify their own blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: You find variability on that. For example, I often conduct 360 assessments, and one of the things that are striking is how self-aware some people are versus others are not. So there's a wide range of capability in terms of people's ability to look at themselves in situations.

You can do some things though that enable you, which the book talks about, and practices and processes that you can put in place that enable you to identify the blind spots more effectively. For example, one of the things I recommend is take a look at your mistakes and look for patterns in your mistakes over time, and very often what you will find is that not all mistakes are related but those that are similar, if you peel back the onion a bit – what you will find is there's a blind spot driving those and that's a practice or a process you can use to seek to identify your own blind spots, and there's a number of others in the book, but that's one example of what you can do.

Rachel Salaman: And in your experience, you say in the book that knowing that you have a particular blind spot doesn't mean it will disappear. So is there anything good about them?

Robert Bruce Shaw: In some cases I think they can help with self-confidence because part of what blind spots do is they protect you from things that may be threatening or increase the level of self-doubt that you have. And in the book I describe a number of leaders whose achievements speak for themselves but they had significant blind spots, so part of the way I think about it is it's balancing your self-awareness with the confidence and even audacity you need to be an effective leader. So the blind spots can be effective but they always pose a threat, and part of what you want to do is have mechanisms around you that prevent the big mistakes from occurring as a result of those blind spots.

So the net of it is I went into the book thinking differently that I would treat blind spots as problems to be solved – they're always negative – but after writing the book I came out with a different view, which is it's more nuanced and complicated than many people think.

Rachel Salaman: What can you do if you want to make a blind spot that you've identified that you have – you want to turn that into something positive?

Robert Bruce Shaw: Well, the most important thing is to recognize it's there and then have either people around you or processes that prevent it from becoming a mistake or a failure, and what I find is that either people don't recognize them or when they recognize them, they don't take them seriously enough, and consequently make mistakes that can derail their careers – that can hurt their organizations.

So the key really is knowing that it exists and then what are you going to do to prevent that from causing problems for you or your organization as you move forward.

Rachel Salaman: Now, you make the point that blind spots mediate between the poles of self-confidence and self-doubt, and you've touched upon that already. Could you talk about that a little bit more?

Robert Bruce Shaw: There are a number of authors, and in my own practice with leaders, I find that that balance is one of the keys to understanding how leaders operate. And what you typically find is organizations reward self-confidence, even hubris, and leaders who move forward typically have a great deal of self-confidence, so their threat is they don't recognize their blind spots – they've moved forward in a way that they don't see the vulnerabilities and they make significant mistakes.

And the case that I use in the book is J.C. Penney with Ron Johnson recently, and in many ways a phenomenal leader but he had blind spots around his markets, pushed forward, and personally paid the consequences as well with J.C. Penney.

The other extreme though is if you're too self-aware – and this sounds contradictory to many people who write about leadership – it introduces self-doubt in some cases, because you don't have the confidence to move forward when you have incomplete data or you may have gaps in your own capabilities.

So the way I think about blind spots is it mediates between those two. If you don't have any awareness of your blind spots you're at risk; if you have too much awareness the risk is you don't have the confidence you need to move forward.

And there are some classic cases, and I go back to entrepreneurs where they had significant blind spots but pushed forward regardless of those and became phenomenally successful. Later in their careers – and Steve Jobs is an example of that – it also caused some problems, so it's complicated and not all positive or negative but that learning how to balance those two is one of the keys.

Rachel Salaman: And your book is full of really useful and interesting case studies. You mentioned two well-known business leaders there – let's talk a bit more about Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple Computers. What are some of the lessons we can learn from him when it comes to leadership blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: He's one of the cases I profile in the book, and one of the things that intrigued me is I looked through the literature – I didn't work with him personally but there's quite a bit written about him – and early in his career his team would describe him as having a reality distortion field. He was so capable of distorting things to meet whatever his objective was, so the iron will and the visionary, and some of them, when they first started working with him on the Macintosh team, initially couldn't believe it and they'd go, "We can't believe this is the way he operates."

And in many respects that was part of him being visionary – it was having some of these blind spots around himself, around the markets – but it also got him into trouble, which I profile in the book around his board. And eventually – I won't go into all the details – but he was fired by his board, which he couldn't believe could happen, and John Sculley ended up being CEO, and Jobs was out of the company for 15 years before he came back in his second act at Apple.

So he's a case of both the strengths and the limitations of visionary leaders in terms of their blind spots and how they need to recognize those and over time manage them more effectively.

Rachel Salaman: You mentioned earlier J.C. Penney and Johnson. Can you talk us through, for the people who don't know what happened there?

Robert Bruce Shaw: Well J.C. Penney is a large retailer in the United States that had run into trouble with the competition from stores like Walmart and online retailers such as Amazon, and Johnson was brought in from Apple to turn it around. And he came in with the vision that he was completely going to change the business model, moving away from a low-cost provider to more niche markets with branded products, and what he did was he didn't hesitate to make the change. He made it very quickly, lost a significant percentage of his customers, and ended up losing billions of dollars for the company. He lasted 17 months and then was fired by the board, and I use him as an example of blind spots around his market, in that what he attempted to do with J.C. Penney was somewhat similar to what had been done at Apple in terms of carving out niches and branding products and the like, but his market was very different.

The profile in the book was somebody who was incredibly successful previously, had applied those lessons, but didn't understand the differences in his new situation, and for consequences for himself and for the company as a result.

Rachel Salaman: Now, a central theme of your book which has become clear in our conversation is that leaders get into trouble when they don't know what they don't know – ignorance of ignorance in the words of the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead. And in your book you present the blind spot matrix, which illustrates this and helps us understand it a bit more. Can you explain that?

Robert Bruce Shaw: The way I thought about blind spots is we have strengths that we recognize – what I describe as known strengths – and in many cases people leverage those to full effect whatever they might be, and that's fairly obvious.

And you also on the other side of that have known weaknesses: things that you know you're not very good at. So I describe known weaknesses and known strengths: both of those you can adapt to and either leverage or address as needed.

Below the line, if you will, there are two other areas. One is unknown strengths, which sounds counterintuitive, but in some cases people have strengths that they're not fully cognizant of and don't fully leverage. And then in the blind spot quadrant is unknown weaknesses or threats, and I describe a typology to help people understand known versus unknown strengths versus weaknesses.

And the thing you have to be careful of are the unknown weaknesses or threats, and that's part of what the book describes as how do you surface those and make sure that even if they remain weaknesses, you're cognizant of them and then can adapt to them appropriately.

Rachel Salaman: One of the chapters in your book is called ‘Seek Out That Which Disconfirms What You Believe'. Why and how should we do that?

Robert Bruce Shaw: What you often find with leaders is they become advocates for their ideas, so once they've settled on a plan of action – and Johnson at J.C. Penney we talked about earlier as an example of that – you convince others that that's the appropriate path forward, or you eliminate them in terms of their influence within an organization because they don't agree with what you are proposing.

And one of the things I argue is that's a dangerous path to go down, and what you want to do is look for disconfirming ideas as you develop your plan of action and your hypotheses. And there's an interesting quote I use in the book with Charles Darwin, which says that once he came across an idea that was contrary to his own he would write it down within 30 minutes because his brain would operate in a way that it would soon be out of mind.

And what I recommend to leaders is that they take an approach where they are more testing a hypothesis initially – a point you have to take action, don't misunderstand my point – but most leaders do that too quickly, and so the book describes ways that you can go in and look for ideas that are contrary to your own, either in one to one interactions, in group settings, in terms of the data you look at in order to test the validity of your ideas and decrease the likelihood that you're operating with blind spots around what's occurring.

You're listening to Expert Interview from Mind Tools.

Robert Bruce Shaw: You mentioned earlier that there's a lot of nuance in this topic, and in the book you talk about levels or degrees of blindness in your blind spots. How important is it for us to recognize how blind we are in an area once we've identified a blind spot?

Robert Bruce Shaw: This was another learning for me in that my assumption was that blind spots would be binary: either you see something or you don't. But I use the analogy in the book of actually how we think of our blindness on a visual level and there are degrees of blindness, and in part of the blind spot phenomena is you can be completely blindsided by something and you don't see it. It occurs and it causes problems for you and your organization, but there are other cases where you see it but you don't truly understand the nature of it and what's required to act upon it. So it's not as if you don't understand it's a threat or you don't understand it's a weakness, but you underestimate its potential impact or what's required to address it fully.

And in many cases that's what you find with blind spots, it's a partial awareness where people don't respond. And I give an analogy in the book of people years ago with smoke, and for years people didn't know that smoking caused cancer, which I would describe as an unrecognized threat, but then some people who smoke understand that it has health complications but nonetheless go ahead and continue to smoke and they rationalize it – "It's not going to affect me and I know people who are 90 who smoke" or whatever it might be. And then there's even a third category where people will continue to smoke who basically don't change and they don't fully address what they're doing to themselves.

So leadership I see the same way – where there are levels of blindness that you find in leaders and part of it is you want to explore those areas where it's recognized but not fully acted on.

Rachel Salaman: So if I see a blind spot in myself, is it helpful for me to work out how blind I am?

Robert Bruce Shaw: And also the fact that it can reoccur, in your earlier point, because there are some cases where you recognize it and then going back to my recommendation to look at your mistakes, it's surprising how some of the same blind spots will surface in slightly different forms over time. But the genesis of those mistakes are similar, so what you want to understand is, you may understand that at a cognitive level but then continue to make the mistake.

And I'll give you an example of that. We talked earlier about one of the common blind spots, that leaders think that others are like themselves, and one leader I worked with would make staffing mistakes and she would put people in positions of power who either had lacked the decision-making capabilities or even in some cases the values that she wanted, and part of it she was seeing herself in them, and she did it more than once – it was something that she continued to do and then she would explain it with some more specific factors – but the underlying cause was she had a tendency to extrapolate from her own beliefs and her own capabilities to others. So once she understood that she became much better at staffing, because she would have other people to provide input around her for example, which is "Am I seeing this person accurately? Is there something that I'm not looking at candidly at what the capabilities are?" And then became much better over time, but it took a number of staffing mistakes before she came to that point.

Rachel Salaman: I suppose once a blind spot like that has been recognized, just having other people's input on those kinds of decisions is halfway to solving the problem.

Robert Bruce Shaw: What I've found with the best leaders is they have advisory counsels of various types and there may be some people who provide general advice, so you find in some cases with CEOs or very senior leaders, they have someone close to them on their teams who provide advice to them on a whole variety of areas.

You can also ask for advice in specific areas, so for example, around strategy, and maybe people who are very good at saying you're not seeing this the way you need to see it. So one of the things you find with the most savvy leaders is they have advisors who can help them in those areas, and it doesn't mean they're always right.

And one of the things I argue in the book is there's previous literature that talked about others having more insight into ourselves than we do. I don't necessarily believe that, but I do think you need people who can provide a point of view and something for you to consider, and then ultimately it's your decision as a leader on whether you act on it or not.

Rachel Salaman: So as much as anything it's about being open minded and humble?

Robert Bruce Shaw: Hubris is one of the factors you find that gets people into trouble, but the thing I would argue is that we often think of leaders as being self-centered – and you can pick up the newspaper any day and find examples of that – but organizations have a piece in this as well, and as I said earlier they reward hubris. We want our leaders to be decisive, confident, sure of the path forward, and those individuals, and not always the case, but they are typically promoted. And those people who are in some cases more reflective, they have more doubts, they're often not and I'm not saying it's always the case, but organizations have to be able to look at leaders too, and be more realistic about what's required, and then when they put people in place who have some of these traits – particularly if there's an arrogance or a hubris – making sure there are other people who will challenge them.

Rachel Salaman: So how can leaders reach what you call in the book an "optimal margin of illusion" in regard to their blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: That was one of my favorite concepts in examining this area, which is there's research literature in the psychological area that says the most effective people are slightly more positive than they should be, but not to the point of being delusional. So this term – the optimal margin of illusion – is you need some illusion to be effective (back to my example earlier of entrepreneurs or successful leaders) but at the same time you have to make sure it doesn't get to the point where it's unchecked or results in fatal mistakes.

So part of the answer to your earlier point is having people around you who are a sounding board and will challenge you, and the other part is you put in place practices that make sure you're not going beyond what's optimal to the point of being delusional or existing with blind spots. And I give a number of examples of how to do that, but one of the significant ideas in the book is not so much that we change how we operate and how we think, but it's the situations we put ourselves and the checks and balances we put around ourselves.

So, let me give you an example of leaders who don't do this. Often leaders come in and they surround themselves with people who think like they do – what I call correlative blind spots: they think so much like you that you have similar blind spots and consequently you make mistakes.

What you want to do is have people who think differently than you do, not to the point where you can't work with them or you don't respect them, but you don't want people who have the same blind spots that you have. That's an example of a mechanism you put into place to prevent yourself from making big mistakes and making sure that that marginal illusion is optimal and not excessive.

Rachel Salaman: So far we've mainly focused on the blind spots of individuals, although you have mentioned that in the book you also talk about teams, organizations and markets. What are some of your ideas around blind spots and teams?

Robert Bruce Shaw: So, if you take, for example, you have an executive team where everybody has grown up in the same industry, and they are very comfortable working with each other; they understand how each other thinks; they make decisions in a similar way; the problem is they see the market in a similar way, so collectively they have a blind spot about how the market is evolving or what I often find is how they view competitors.

That's an example where the team has a collective blind spot, and the leader's role in part is to be able to challenge that, but if the leader is not careful, because you're comfortable working with people who think like you do and have similar backgrounds, it becomes self-reinforcing and there's numerous examples of leadership teams that found themselves in trouble because they couldn't think differently about their markets or even about their organizations, and some of the root cause was there's not enough diversity within the team or even the ability to challenge each other.

You mentioned earlier in terms of people being willing to challenge a different point of view or challenge the status quo, and often in executive teams you don't find enough of that.

Rachel Salaman: So just knowing that these kinds of threats exist might be enough for a leader to actually look at his or her team differently and start recognizing where some of these blind spots exist?

Robert Bruce Shaw: The thing that worries me as a consultant when I work with executive teams is when there is a degree of similarity and a lack of conflict, which suggests to me that they're seeing things in a way that is so similar, and sometimes it can be right – and don't misread my point – if they happen to be right in their collective views, obviously it's easier to execute strategies and push the organization forward, but the risk is they collectively view the markets incorrectly or view the organizations incorrectly and then they run into problems. So what I like to see in executive teams is a willingness to have heated debates – and I call them productive fights – about the serious issues, not about superficial things but around strategies and around the marketplace and around competitors, so then you decrease the likelihood of having those blind spots at the group level.

The same holds true for organizations, which is organizational cultures can embody those, and part of a leader's role is they'll look at that and say we're not seeing things realistically and then what do we do as a result of that.

Rachel Salaman: What are some of your other ideas around organizational blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: Well, the book focuses primarily on leaders, but I do look at the context, and one of the things that I suggest in the book is that each leader has to look at the feedback that he or she is getting, and look at how much they need to change versus how much in the organization. And in some cases, it's more about the organization than it is about the leader, and that's a process where sometimes an outsider such as myself or someone inside that the leader has confidence in, can help decipher which of that the leader owns versus which of that the organization owns.

An example I give in the book: let's say you're a female executive and you're fairly aggressive, you could get feedback that you need to tone it down, that you're alienating people. Well, it may say more about how they view female executives than anything about your behavior, but you still may want to change the behavior given the culture you're in, but it's not as if you're doing anything wrong, it's more about them. So each leader for each situation will look at which piece of this do I own, which piece of it is in the organization, and then how do I want to modify my behavior? And you may decide I'm not going to modify it and that's entirely the leader's prerogative, and one of the things I argue is you can't assume that others see things accurately, but you want to understand what they see, and that gives you enough information to make an informed decision.

Rachel Salaman: You've mentioned a few times the importance and the benefits of having outsiders or members of your team observe and comment on blind spots, and in the book you dedicate I think it's a whole chapter on building an advisory network. How could someone go about doing that in an effective way?

Robert Bruce Shaw: There are a couple of ways that I recommend. One is I think generally there is someone that you're working with who understands you well, whose point of view you respect, and if it's someone you don't then they're not going to be particularly effective in influencing you, and they are willing to challenge you. And if you say there's no one – and many people will say there are individuals that do that – but as I work with the organizations often there's not.

So the first question is if you don't have that individual then you need to identify someone to play that role for you. Now often people will go to their spouses. The problem with spouses is twofold: one is they often don't see the business or organization in its totality, and consequently they give a point of view but it doesn't have as much data to be especially helpful.

The second thing is that in some cases spouses can be defensive, and they will protect the individual more than being candid – not always the case, and I'm not opposed to people using their spouses in that role – but it's not the role that I'm recommending in general for the business.

The second thing you can do is identify target areas that are particularly important. So, for example, technology in most firms now is critical: is there someone who advises you on how you're viewing technology? It's not just technical always but how you view the role of technology, so you can target certain areas that you want an advisor to be supportive.

It could be someone inside the organization or someone outside, but the key is they're willing to challenge you in areas where you need it, and at the same time they're supportive, but that's what you want to have in place in order to address the blind spots that you might have.

Rachel Salaman: I was interested to see in the book you include a discussion on curiosity in leaders. Could you share some of your points now and tell us how that relates to blind spots?

Robert Bruce Shaw: I mentioned earlier that self-awareness varies considerably, and one of the factors you find in that is people who are self-aware are typically curious.

So if you bring up a blind spot, rather than being defensive, which most of us are, particularly if it's an area that's important to us, the best leaders I find want to know more. They may not agree with it but then why would you think that is the question they'll ask or give me an example of that or tell me more. Now at the end of the conversation they may say "Thank you, I'm not going to act on that but I appreciate the input."

Leaders who lack curiosity have no interest in that discussion, so one of the things you find is curiosity is one of the keys to being able to look at your blind spots, and it cuts through the defensiveness. And what I often find is back to the earlier question you asked, many people when you point out a blind spot will tell you why that's not the case. I can give you three examples of when I didn't do that, or here's an illustration where I didn't support your point of view, and they basically rationalize their own behavior versus someone saying tell me more – give me examples.

So that's one of the keys, and back to my organizational perspective on this, is often organizations don't reward curiosity in leaders as much as they need to. Even though they talk about innovation, if you think about leaders, the decisiveness is often the key and confidence – it's not curiosity. So when I work with leaders, one of the things I look for early on in my engagement with them is how curious are they?

And you can look at that a number of ways but particularly about themselves and their own impact. One of the things I'll just add as an aside is, in people who have read the book and leaders that I've worked with, one of the questions I'm getting repeatedly is, "Well then tell me more about the blind spots that you see." And they are very direct about it: they want to know exactly what the blind spots are, and using that language. And part of it I find with leaders, they want to understand how they're perceived, not across the board but in many cases, so I think part of the advantage of the book is it gives them a language system to talk about this, and also, which I don't say as much about, is how they look at their own teams. So the blind spots may be in team members or even to your earlier point the team in total.

Rachel Salaman: Your book is full of solid practical advice for leaders who want to be more aware of their blind spots, I think that's clear by now. What are your three top tips for people who may want to start this process today?

Robert Bruce Shaw: I'll give you a couple. The first one I would say is find someone who knows you very well and whose opinions you trust and just ask the basic question: do you see me as having any blind spots? And you may have to explain, but most people understand the concept of blind spots, but you can define it in terms of weaknesses and threats that I don't recognize, and then just listen.

And if they identify one or two, and you may be unfortunate to have more than that, but let's assume you have that, then you want to look for examples. So if the person says you have a blind spot in this area – so, for example a person might say you don't understand that you are demotivating people through your behavior because you don't recognize achievement, and you're very harsh when things aren't working out well and there's not an appropriate balance, but I don't think you see that.

Now remember as I said earlier a blind spot is not just a weakness, it's an unrecognized weakness, although if the individual that you trust gives you some feedback then you want to ask for examples of it – so, "Tell me when I did that," – and that helps you understand the nature of it much better.

The other thing you can do around that particular point is if there's particular areas where you maybe have more blind spots, find someone who is an expert in that area. So, for example, you may have blind spots around talent. Go to your HR leader or go to someone that you work with who you think has a good eye for talent and say to them, "Do I have blind spots around how I view talent?"

It's not just a general question but a specific question, and you determine which areas you want to probe.

The second tip I would say in terms of understanding goes back to my earlier point. Spend some time thinking about the mistakes you made over the last 10 years. I talk about in the book that I often go out on treks into the wilderness and you have no distractions, and I have time to think about my own mistakes.

And not that you have to go out there and do a week-long trek, but just think of the mistakes you've made and then see if there are patterns in the mistakes. If there are patterns then you say, "What's the underlying cause?" And then tie it back to what may be a blind spot of yours.

And what the outcome for me when I've done this both with myself and with my clients is you realize something very powerful has caused some of the mistakes but you didn't recognize it, and looking back over your past experience, and of the mistakes you identified, not all of them may connect, but if they do connect it's a very powerful exercise to understand what's a potential liability as you move forward. As we said earlier, they often will reappear even when you recognize them, so to have that insight can be very helpful.

Rachel Salaman: Robert Bruce Shaw was talking to me in London. The name of Robert's book again is "Leadership Blindspots: How Successful Leaders Identify and Overcome the Weaknesses That Matter."

I'll be back in a few weeks with another Expert Interview. Until then goodbye.