This document provides an overview and agenda for the MRG Australia Summit 2020. It includes: 1) An introduction and welcome message for the summit. 2) An agenda that previews new MRG research on topics like Gen Z, shares how MRG's research is changing with new sharing platforms and questions, and how to apply research in coaching. 3) Summaries of presentations on research updates, balancing results and relationships, leader derailment types, motivating Gen Z, entrepreneurial leaders, compassionate leadership, and how MRG research is changing. 4) Information on how to use MRG research like best practices reports, industry studies, and role research in coaching and consulting practices.

1. Welcome
MRG Australia Summit 2020

2. Research In Practice
Maria Brown + Tricia Naddaff + Drew Rand

3. Agenda
A taste of new research
• Research updates
• A preview of what we know about Gen Z
How research is changing at MRG
• New ways of sharing our research
• New research questions
• What do you do with 30 years of data?
Using research in coaching and consulting
• Using and interpreting MRG research
• Practical advice for your practice

4. Page No 4
A Taste of New and Updated
Research
Research Updates
Gen Z

5. [Footer text to come] Page No 5
Results +
Relationships
A replication and update of MRG
research

6. Defining Results- and Relationships-Focus
Results-Focus
Production
Expects a lot, achiever, ambitious, tests limits, demanding, high aspirations, works hard, sets high goals, hard-
driving
Control
Does things on time, follows up, reminds people, persistent, tenacious, delivers on promises
Relationship-Focus
Empathy
Sympathetic, kind, generous, builds close bonds, genuine interest in others, cares about others’ wellbeing,
sensitive to others
Cooperation
Helpful, accommodating, team oriented, willing to compromise, seeks common ground

7. Balancing Results + Relationships
A study of 17,717 leaders in English-speaking countries
What percentage of leaders rank in the top 1/3 for both Relationships
and Results?
0.41%

8. Balancing Results + Relationships
A study of 17,717 leaders in English-speaking countries
What percentage of leaders rank in the top 1/2 for both Relationships
and Results?
3.37%

9. Balancing Results + Relationships
A study of 750 leaders in Spanish-speaking countries and 1,708
leaders in Asia
What percentage of leaders rank in the top 1/2 for both Relationships
and Results?
Spanish-speaking Asia
3.73% 3.69%

10. Balancing Results + Relationships
The difficulty of this balancing act is unaffected by region
Spanish-speaking AsiaEnglish-speaking
3.37% 3.73% 3.69%

11. Balancing Results + Relationships
Are there differences within English-speaking leaders?
Gen X Gen YBaby Boomers
2.9%
Men Women
2.9% 6.9%
6.9%2.2%

12. Why is it difficult for leaders to be both?
Neural See-Saw Social by Matthew Lieberman
• Self-Awareness
• Collaboration
• Communication
• Authenticity
• Trust
• ComplexThinkingAbilities
• LearningAgilityandSpeed
• BroadKnowledge

13. Maintaining focus on both results and relationships
consistently is universally difficult.
Some leadership demands have become too
complex for most individuals to master.
Is there any hope for balance?

14. How can we help leaders?
The frontal cortex monitors behavior, integrates information and shifts plans.
Well practiced tasks require less frontal cortex involvement.
If we can…
Identify and work on areas where practice can lead to
automation and reduce the need for frontal lobe involvement
Then we can…
Free up some of those frontal resources and be more efficient at
shifting the neural see-saw
And we can…
Teach models and methods of Shared Leadership

15. [Footer text to come] Page No 15
Derailers
Helping leaders at risk for
derailment

16. The study: finding derailing leader subtypes
The Derailers
15,811 leaders
40+ countries
Completed LEA 360TM 2015-2019
58% Male / 34% Female / 8% Not reported
The LEA 360TM is a multi-rater assessment
measuring 22 leadership behaviors and 31
leadership competencies
1,573 leaders
Bottom 10% in overall effectiveness
64% Male / 28% Female / 8% Not reported

17. Four Types of Derailing Leaders

18. High on:
Self
Feedback
Management focus
Dominant
Production
Low on:
Cooperation
Consensual
Empathy
Strategic
Restraint
Type 1:
My way or the highway
(24.3%)
Gender Actual Expected
Female 35% 28%
Male 57% 64%

19. High on:
Outgoing
Cooperation
Consensual
Deference to
authority
Empathy
Low on:
Management focus
Dominant
Type 2:
Happy Follower (28.6%)

20. High on:
Structuring
Deference to
authority
Type 3:
Stick to the Rules (27.3%)

21. High on:
Outgoing
Excitement
Self
Low on:
Strategic
Technical
Structuring
Communication
Control
Type 4:
Engaging Lightweight
(19.8%)
Gender Actual Expected
Female 24% 28%
Male 72% 64%

22. Questions?

23. [Footer text to come] Page No 23
Motivating Gen Z
Generational research preview

24. When motivation aligns with work,
employees are…
Happy Successful Intrinsically
Driven

25. Participants

26. What differs across young members of each
generational cohort?
Gen X
18-24 years old
Gen Y
18-24 years old
Gen Z
18-24 years old

27. Motivation Profiles by Generation

28. What distinguishes Gen Z from Gen Y?
Gen Z is more driven by:
Expressing
Relating to others in a direct,
spontaneous and emotionally
uninhibited fashion
Giving
Providing others with
support, affection and
empathy

29. What distinguishes Gen Z from Gen X?
Winning
Acting in a forceful,
aggressive and
directly competitive
manner
Excelling
Challenging oneself
and pushing for
higher levels of
achievement
Gen Z is
more driven by:
Gen Z is
less driven by:
Receiving
Getting support,
affection and
empathy from others

30. [Footer text to come] Page No 30
Entrepreneurial
Leaders
Understanding and Coaching

31. The Study
Founder of an
organization
or
President or
CEO of a
startup
Completed the
LEA Self
111 completed
the LEA 360™
North
American
norm

32. LEA Self Profile of Entrepreneurs

33. Entrepreneurs: Leadership Profile
Higher Emphasis on
Lower Emphasis on
70 70 80
35 30 25

34. LEA Self Entrepreneurs vs. Other Pres/CEOs
Higher vs. lower
is relative, not
absolute

35. Entrepreneurs vs. Other Presidents & CEOs
Entrepreneurs Place Higher Emphasis on
Entrepreneurs Place Lower Emphasis on

36. [Footer text to come] Page No 36
Compassionate
Leadership
NEW RESEARCH FINDINGS

37. Compassionate Leadership:
The Definition
Compassion is empathy in action.
Defining compassion in an organizational settings:
 Ability to develop people
 Ability to work with diverse people
 Demonstrates ethical leadership
Compassionate leadership was defined as scoring in
the top 50% on all three of these competencies.

38. Behaviors that characterize compassionate
leaders: Median score profiles by group

39. How do you coach empathetic leaders to
become compassionate leaders?
Coach leaders to avoid overusing outgoing
behaviors.
Coach leaders to be less reliant on organizational
norms and people in positions of authority
Key behaviors to reduce:
• Outgoing
• Authority

40. How do you coach empathetic leaders to
become compassionate leaders?
Coach leaders to be more open to changing conventions.
Coach leaders to take charge and seek to be influential;
consider the implications of their actions;
communicate clearly; maintain specialized
knowledge.
Key behaviors to increase:
• Innovative
• Management focus
• Strategic
• Communication
• Technical

41. How do you motivate empathetic leaders to
become compassionate leaders?
Motivate change by sharing the advantages of
compassionate leadership.
Compassionate leaders were rated higher than their less
compassionate counterparts on all but one leadership effectiveness
measure.
When empathetic leaders are also compassionate, they outperform
other empathetic leaders on most measures of cognitive, people and
business skills.

42. Questions?

43. Page No 43
How Research is Changing
at MRG
Best Practices Reports
Coaching Crib Sheets
Part R
Making the most of a 30-year database

44. Leadership Best Practices

45. Coaching Crib Sheets

46. New Research Items
LEA Observer Questionnaire
 Effectively leads organizational change
 Is effectively inclusive
 Shows resilience
 Demonstrates self-confidence
LEA Self Questionnaire
 I am authentic in my role
 I believe the almost anyone can acquire and develop skills
 I feel self-confident in my role

47. Is there a
relationship
between
Felt
Self-Confidence
& Conveyed
Self-Confidence?
No.
(r = .15)

48. New Research Items:
Behaviors that impact conveyed self-confidence

49. 30 years of research
Over 1.2 million participants
More than 120,000,000 data points
175+ Countries
Same assessment = Real comparisons
Answer research questions in light of global
trends and local events

50. Page No 50
Using MRG Research in
Coaching and Consulting

51. Coaching for Leadership Competencies

52. Using Industry Research for Strategic Directions

53. MRG Research in Your Practice:
Industry Studies
Creating
a Vision
Developing
Followership
Implementing
the Vision
Following
Through
Achieving
Results
Team
Playing
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Aerospace Industry (n=275) Aerospace Industry Top Performers (n=69) ORG (Combined Observer Scores) (n=19)

54. Using Role Research for Role Expectations
Strategic
Communication
Consensual
Management Focus
Technical
Self
Control
Best Leadership Practices for CFOs
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse

55. High Potential Leaders place more emphasis on:
High Potential Leaders place less emphasis on:
Behaviors that Distinguish High Potential Leaders

56. High Potential Leaders are less motivated by:
High Potential Leaders are more motivated by:
Motivation Patterns in High Potential Leaders

57. Preparing Leaders for Advancement

58. Women
Transparency/connection
•Excitement
•Feedback
•Communication
•Empathy
Leadership/Results
•Production
•Dominant
•Management Focus
Execution
•Control
•Structuring
Men
Thinking/Evaluating
•Strategic
•Traditional
•Innovative
•Self
Reserve
•Restraint
Receiving/Giving assistance
•Delegation
•Cooperation
Promoting/Convincing
•Persuasive
Themes in Leadership Differences

59. Median Euclidian Distances with US
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
CANADA
AUSTRALIA
NEW ZEALAND
UNITED KINGDOM
SINGAPORE
IRELAND
HONG KONG
BRAZIL
INDIA
BELGIUM
ITALY
MEXICO
SWITZERLAND
COLOMBIA
CHINA
FINLAND
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
SPAIN
PERU
SOUTH AFRICA
FRANCE
DENMARK
GERMANY
SWEDEN
NETHERLANDS
Leadership Differences with US
Understanding Country Differences

60. Understanding Country Differences
Germany compared to US norm group

61. Questions?

62. Let us help you
find the
research that
will enhance
your expertise
and assist you
in your work!
Thank you!
MRG.com

63. Closing Remarks