Yes, this is about the male of our species. And it is about an article in the most recent Harvard Business Review magazine. And the findings in some recent research has indicated that size does matter and it seems to be inextricably linked to a company's financial performance.
But in this case of size mattering..it seems smaller is better!
The researchers measured the signatures of over 600 CEOs and a decade worth of annual reports. The larger the signature of a CEO of an organization, the worse the sales and sales growth was over a three to six year period compared to its industry peers. (read the article here).
It seems that a larger signature (as measured by drawing a box around the end points of the signature), points towards the individual having a narcissistic personality.
Now let's face it, all CEOs need to rate high on the self-esteem scale and should exude confidence. I think a wallflower CEO, would be equally if not more, damaging to a corporation. A CEO is the chief salesperson for a company, and it is his/her personality will often be the reason you would consider doing business with the firm. But it is not the flamboyance or grandiose gestures that create the bond, it is the trustworthiness of the CEO, which, at least for me, would translate into business.
I have met over my years in business many, many CEOs, some from extremely large global companies and others from mid-size and smaller concerns. Some certainly fell into the narcissistic realm, others psychopaths (you can read a previous blog of mine on that by clicking here), some that were OK, and only a few that were stellar.
The stellar group, were/are articulate, confident, trustworthy and understand that creating a positive business environment is not about the sell...it is about the ongoing relationship, the ups and downs and working with the client to continuously communicate, resolve issues, and create a bond that a few cent savings will not destroy. Because let's face it, a business relationship is not that different from a personal one -- first you date, then you "go steady," then you get engaged, and then you marry. Now that doesn't mean that you can't end up in divorce court, but it would take numerous infractions to get you there.
But let's get back to signatures. Now, I don't know how big is big, nor how small is small (you can see some examples in the article by clicking in the article on "Smaller Signatures, Better Results). As noted earlier, only men were studied. I bet a lot of you are now looking at your signature and wondering, am I or aren't I?
Further study here would be interesting. And I'm thinking that it could also be used as a screening technique in dating!
Maybe you should be going to your senior male executive and asking them to sign something and then pay attention to the size.
If their signature is quite large, just restrain yourself from saying "Whoa, you're big!" :)
