Michael N Bazigos, PhD
Organizational consultant & Columbia University AI professor / Ex-McKinsey, Accenture, IBM & PwC/ Partner / Patented AI Inventor
—————————————————————
I hold dual roles as Managing Partner of CultureShifts LLC and Professor of Organizational AI at Columbia University. I offer strategic services to help organizations: reap the benefits of their AI and other technology investments by focusing on the people side of the human + machine equation; lift their ability to perform and their workforce to thrive by evolving their culture; and putting people to their best and highest use through the interaction of assessment and role design.
Former roles include senior partner and global managing director of Organizational Analytics client service business, and Vice President at McKinsey & Co. Earlier leadership roles spanned industry and consulting at KPMG US, IBM, and PwC Consulting. Within this span, I lectured at the Teachers College, Columbia University graduate program in social-organizational psychology. As a former education dean, I founded Pace University’s Center for Urban Education.
Whether in internal or external leadership roles through my career, a passion for innovation, managing by the evidence, inspiring people and teams, embedding science into everything, and delivering quantifiable results have helped companies perform.
Phone: 16468234120
Address: New York, New York, United States
—————————————————————
I hold dual roles as Managing Partner of CultureShifts LLC and Professor of Organizational AI at Columbia University. I offer strategic services to help organizations: reap the benefits of their AI and other technology investments by focusing on the people side of the human + machine equation; lift their ability to perform and their workforce to thrive by evolving their culture; and putting people to their best and highest use through the interaction of assessment and role design.
Former roles include senior partner and global managing director of Organizational Analytics client service business, and Vice President at McKinsey & Co. Earlier leadership roles spanned industry and consulting at KPMG US, IBM, and PwC Consulting. Within this span, I lectured at the Teachers College, Columbia University graduate program in social-organizational psychology. As a former education dean, I founded Pace University’s Center for Urban Education.
Whether in internal or external leadership roles through my career, a passion for innovation, managing by the evidence, inspiring people and teams, embedding science into everything, and delivering quantifiable results have helped companies perform.
Phone: 16468234120
Address: New York, New York, United States
less
InterestsView All (11)
Uploads
Papers by Michael N Bazigos, PhD
Research models and organizational policies typically assume that overestimators lead homogeneously - and poorly. Few, if any, research designs attempt a line of sight from self-other rating congruence to actual performance outcomes exogenous to the leader.
This study established an exogenous performance variable, workgroup
empowerment, to test the linkage to rating congruence. The main hypothesis asserts that overestimators are heterogeneous: high performing ( empowering) leaders are commingled with low performing (non-empowering) leaders.
Because of the heterogeneity of this category and because of the greater number of possible routes to overestimation generally, greater variability in follower ratings was hypothesized. Healthy self-enhancement by high performers was proposed as one route to overestimation. Consequently, generalized self-enhancement was hypothesized to predict performance category for overestimators.
Cognitive processes are implicated. Healthy overestimation by better leaders was hypothesized to mask superior shared understanding with subordinates. An "executive premium" - the self-enhancing constant that high-performing leaders add to their scores - was proposed as an individual difference variable normally distributed among
overestimators.
The study used an upward feedback dataset of 309 leaders and 1,394 direct reports from many organizations and industries. Study participants were overwhelmingly US-based, male, middle-aged, and middle-to-senior in level.
Analyses supported the central tenet, that a subset of high-performing ( empowering) leaders indeed resides in the overestimation category. This subset was large enough to raise the group's overall performance above chance levels. Greater variability in follower ratings for the overestimation group was found, supporting the proposition that more routes and mechanisms are associated with this category. For high performers, overestimation masks a greater shared understanding with their followers than underestimation and agreement category leaders .
"Executive premium" distribution propositions were partially supported. Using generalized self-enhancement to predict performance resulted in a mixed outcome.
One sector that’s conspicuously weak in this respect is travel, transportation, and logistics (TTL), comprising everything from local and long-distance public transport businesses to leisure-travel operators and logistics service providers.
While each is unique, most depend on global physical networks and on large, distributed workforces. An analysis of McKinsey’s Organizational
Health Index (OHI) shows that, on average, businesses in this sector score no better or worse, overall, than those in others. But they fall down in promoting accountability among their employees.
Given the nature of their business, this vulnerability can have profound consequences for companies that get it wrong.
and leaders. Data from McKinsey’s Organizational Health Index,
encompassing a decade of survey results from 3 million employees at almost 1,300 organizations, offer insights into why this may be true.
growing competition from digital startups and technology companies that are setting new benchmarks for customer and workforce
experiences. At the same time, a new generation is entering the workforce, bringing with it new demands of the workplace and
new ways of thinking and collaborating.
From big data to the Internet of Things to intelligent automation, the pace of technology change, too, is accelerating. Disruptive technologies that automate mundane tasks and processes, or that augment human
expertise, creativity and skill with realtime information and new capabilities will completely change the shape of the FS
workforce over the next five to 10 years.
Our econometric value modelling estimates that 7-10 percent of tasks in the FS workforce could be automated by 2025, while 43-48 percent could be augmented with technology. The resulting cost savings
and productivity gains could deliver between $87 billion and $140 billion of cumulative value for the North American FS industry between 2018 and 2025.
rapid—and complex. Accenture Strategy research shows
any given transformation can unfold in over 26 trillion ways
financial and operational performance). We combined these into a model that prescribes a set of “baseline” behaviors that should always be evident, complemented by another set of behaviors (“situational behaviors”) that should be differentially emphasized depending on the level of organizational health. Both the content of the behavior and its relative emphasis are critical to either set. The current paper combines these into a model of organization-wide leadership and concludes with
action implications for organizations’ leadership development strategy.
Research models and organizational policies typically assume that overestimators lead homogeneously - and poorly. Few, if any, research designs attempt a line of sight from self-other rating congruence to actual performance outcomes exogenous to the leader.
This study established an exogenous performance variable, workgroup
empowerment, to test the linkage to rating congruence. The main hypothesis asserts that overestimators are heterogeneous: high performing ( empowering) leaders are commingled with low performing (non-empowering) leaders.
Because of the heterogeneity of this category and because of the greater number of possible routes to overestimation generally, greater variability in follower ratings was hypothesized. Healthy self-enhancement by high performers was proposed as one route to overestimation. Consequently, generalized self-enhancement was hypothesized to predict performance category for overestimators.
Cognitive processes are implicated. Healthy overestimation by better leaders was hypothesized to mask superior shared understanding with subordinates. An "executive premium" - the self-enhancing constant that high-performing leaders add to their scores - was proposed as an individual difference variable normally distributed among
overestimators.
The study used an upward feedback dataset of 309 leaders and 1,394 direct reports from many organizations and industries. Study participants were overwhelmingly US-based, male, middle-aged, and middle-to-senior in level.
Analyses supported the central tenet, that a subset of high-performing ( empowering) leaders indeed resides in the overestimation category. This subset was large enough to raise the group's overall performance above chance levels. Greater variability in follower ratings for the overestimation group was found, supporting the proposition that more routes and mechanisms are associated with this category. For high performers, overestimation masks a greater shared understanding with their followers than underestimation and agreement category leaders .
"Executive premium" distribution propositions were partially supported. Using generalized self-enhancement to predict performance resulted in a mixed outcome.
One sector that’s conspicuously weak in this respect is travel, transportation, and logistics (TTL), comprising everything from local and long-distance public transport businesses to leisure-travel operators and logistics service providers.
While each is unique, most depend on global physical networks and on large, distributed workforces. An analysis of McKinsey’s Organizational
Health Index (OHI) shows that, on average, businesses in this sector score no better or worse, overall, than those in others. But they fall down in promoting accountability among their employees.
Given the nature of their business, this vulnerability can have profound consequences for companies that get it wrong.
and leaders. Data from McKinsey’s Organizational Health Index,
encompassing a decade of survey results from 3 million employees at almost 1,300 organizations, offer insights into why this may be true.
growing competition from digital startups and technology companies that are setting new benchmarks for customer and workforce
experiences. At the same time, a new generation is entering the workforce, bringing with it new demands of the workplace and
new ways of thinking and collaborating.
From big data to the Internet of Things to intelligent automation, the pace of technology change, too, is accelerating. Disruptive technologies that automate mundane tasks and processes, or that augment human
expertise, creativity and skill with realtime information and new capabilities will completely change the shape of the FS
workforce over the next five to 10 years.
Our econometric value modelling estimates that 7-10 percent of tasks in the FS workforce could be automated by 2025, while 43-48 percent could be augmented with technology. The resulting cost savings
and productivity gains could deliver between $87 billion and $140 billion of cumulative value for the North American FS industry between 2018 and 2025.
rapid—and complex. Accenture Strategy research shows
any given transformation can unfold in over 26 trillion ways
financial and operational performance). We combined these into a model that prescribes a set of “baseline” behaviors that should always be evident, complemented by another set of behaviors (“situational behaviors”) that should be differentially emphasized depending on the level of organizational health. Both the content of the behavior and its relative emphasis are critical to either set. The current paper combines these into a model of organization-wide leadership and concludes with
action implications for organizations’ leadership development strategy.