Credibly Connect

You Get What You Reward

2009-11-24T13:26:00.004-06:00

"You get what you reward." That is universal truth, or about as close as you can get to it. Yet, corporate America continues to reward the wrong behaviors and then acts surprised when the desired results aren't achieved.

Examples: Most companies say they want quality, yet reward quantity. They say they want great customer service, yet how many do you know who poll customers and actually pay bonuses based on their observations? Not many.

Here's a good example of how it should be done, how there is a clear goal -- reduced costs of health care based on improved employee health and a reward carefully calculated to achieve that goal . . .

Whole Foods Market, the largest U.S. natural-goods grocer, is providing added employee discounts to employees who lose weight and measurably improve their health.

Employees will receive discounts of 20 percent, rising to 30 percent, based on blood pressure, cholesterol levels, body-mass index and whether they smoke or not.

"We're making an investment and we expect a return," CEO Mackey said, referring to potential savings in health care costs. (Whole Foods spent $150 million on self-insured health coverage last year.)

The offer reflects Mackey's published opinion that most health problems are "self-inflicted" and can be prevented through proper diet, exercise and similar lifestyle changes. Cost savings are achieved by "less government control and more individual empowerment." (For whatever it is worth, I wholeheartedly agree.)

Mackey angered some Whole Foods customers in August when he wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed column that people "have no intrinsic right to health care." It is a service, just like food, clothing and shelter, "best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges." The resulting outcry included calls for a boycott and his ouster.

That's too bad, because he is right.

Do such programs work? Well, this new health reward initiative goes into effect in January so the jury is still out. But other such programs inside Whole Foods have apparently worked well. Whole Foods shares have tripled this year.

Study: Communication Drives Performance

2009-11-22T16:33:00.003-06:00

A new study has shown conclusively that top-down transparent communication, a/k/a "straight talk," drives employee performance. This is a lesson we've long preached in the Credible Connections program based on anecdotal evidence.

Now, there's more . . .

"Courage, innovation and discipline help drive company performance especially in tough economic times. Effective internal communications can keep employees engaged in the business and help companies retain key talent, provide consistent value to customers, and deliver superior financial performance to shareholders."

According to Watson Wyatt's newest communication survey for 2009/2010, companies that are effective communicators "have the courage to talk about what employees want to hear," "redefine the employment deal based on changing business conditions," and have "the discipline to plan effectively and measure their progress effectively."

Does this really matter? Yes. The study shows that companies that communicate effectively had a 47% higher return to shareholders over a five-year period (mid-2004 to mid-2009).

The link between communication and these three levers of performance — courage, innovation, and discipline — is a welcome one. These are themes that I have written about, taught and coached for years. Here is how you can utilize them in the workplace.

Courage. Watson Wyatt defines it as "telling it like it is." This is especially true when it comes to delivering straight talk. Shielding employees from bad news is akin to treating them like children; it says they are not "grown up" enough to handle tough stuff. So why do companies do it? One reason is because they feel employees will lose heart and then underperform. The Watson Wyatt study shows just the opposite. Tell people what they need to know and they will reward you with solid performance.

Innovation. The status quo is not working so companies must do things differently. While Watson Wyatt sets up innovation as something that will be done in the future, that is too late. Innovation must begin now, in fact it should never have stopped. Innovation is not something reserved for product development; it is really applied creativity. Given this definition, employees should be encouraged to rethink processes, streamline job tasks, implement productivity measures, and continue to think creatively.

Discipline. Troubled times call for accountability. Companies need, as Watson Wyatt points out, to set direction and take stock of how well they are doing. All too often plans are not communicated effectively and employees are given direction without context. They know what to do but not why. The why is important if you want to stimulate engagement, that is, gain share of mind and heart. The same applies to measurements. Bad news rolls down hill, but what about good news? When things are going well, too often managers neglect to inform employees. A firm communication plan, supported by updates on intranets, wikis, and even blogs, not to mention, email, can help let employees know how the company is performing.

Effective communication is not the sole solution to troubled times, but it may be the most effective way to ensure alignment. Listening plays a critical role too. It is well and good to disseminate information, but if you fail to listen to its echo, that is, how people feel about it as well as understand it, alignment may be doomed.

Integrating courage, innovation, and discipline into your messages may help your enterprise survive tough times, and give you a step up in good times too.

By John Baldoni (for HarvardBusiness.org)

Morale Numbers: Figures Don't Lie, But Liars Do Figure

2009-11-19T10:08:00.006-06:00

There are numbers and there are numbers . . .

A quarter of U.S. employers say morale among workers at their companies is low, according to a recent CareerBuilder survey.

Two out of five employees responded they had trouble staying motivated and do not feel loyal to their employer.

Why? Stress. Two of five workers employees say stress levels were high; half said their workload was increased.

Reality?

Morale is much lower than published, much like unemployment is much higher than published. A high percentage of employees will claim undying loyalty and motivation on a survey in part because they don't trust their employers to not "peek" into the survey, find the traitors, and deal with them. Other employees hope against hope the axe doesn't fall on them next and perhaps professing loyalty and motivation provides the penitence they are seeking from no one in particular.

This recession has crushed morale at most employers. And employers don't see it because most don't really care. They care about productivity and employees who are afraid of losing their jobs work hard.

Until . . .

Until there is light at the end of the tunnel, things get better, and when that happens most employees don't forget their fears, the sleepless nights and who was responsible.

The real tab will be presented to most employers after the recession ends and hiring begins.

The relatively few employers that have credibly connected with their employees by doing great jobs communicating and exhibiting care, compassion and concern objectively will be rewarded. Those who haven't will face the music in the form of decreased productivity, increased turnover, and union organizing efforts, just to name a few of the creative ways employees will respond. That will in turn result in a collective whine from employers who don't understand why employees don't just don't appreciate them anymore.

And the beat goes on . . .

Credible Connections - Summarized

2009-10-27T18:00:00.003-05:00

The philosophy of Credible Connections is the philosophy of Charles Schulz put into action in the workplace.

The following is the philosophy of Charles Schulz, the creator of the 'Peanuts' comic strip.

Follow along . . .

You don't have to actually answer the questions. Just ponder on them. Just read the this straight through, and you'll get the point.

1. Name the five wealthiest people in the world.

2. Name the last five Heisman trophy winners.

3. Name the last five winners of the Miss America pageant.

4. Name ten people who have won the Nobel or Pulitzer Prize.

5. Name the last half dozen Academy Award winners for best actor and actress...

6. Name the last decade's worth of World Series winners.

How did you do?

The point is that none of us remember the headliners of yesterday. These are no second-rate achievers. They are the best in their fields. But the applause dies. Awards tarnish. Achievements are forgotten. Accolades and certificates are buried with their owners.

Here's another quiz. See how you do on this one:

1. List three teachers or professors who aided your journey through
school.

2. Name three friends who have helped you through a difficult time.

3. Name five people who have taught you something worthwhile.

4. Think of a few people who have made you feel appreciated and special.

5. Think of five people you enjoy spending time with.

Easier?

The lesson:

The people who make a difference in your life are not the ones with the most credentials.. the most money... or the most awards. They simply are the ones who care the most.

In the workplace, that person should be your boss and, if you're a boss, that's who you should be to those who look to you not only for leadership, but for care, compassion and concern.

Simple as that.

Credible Connections, the system, is about putting that simple, yet profound, philosophy into daily practice.

Will Drugs Really Solve Our Problems?

2009-10-08T16:53:00.004-05:00

I sure hope so because most Americans take a lot of drugs -- "uppers, downers, screamers, and laughers," as Hunter S. Thompson once described our love affair with pharmaceuticals.

A recent revelation of the top 50 most prescribed drugs in America -- which represent 10 percent of the nation's annual health care costs -- reveal that we're looking for the "happy pill," or at least the pill that will take our pain away.

The number one most prescribed drug?

Hydrocodone -- a powerful opiate pain-killer often marketed as "Vicodin" that is highly addictive.

Number 9 is Alprazolam, the generic name for Xanax, also addictive and given for anxiety and depression.

At 15 we have Sertraline, another depression medication, along with Lexapro at 19.

At 20, there is oxycodone, another highly addictive pain killer.

Rounding out the Top 50 are another 7 medications for depression and anxiety.

Which makes the collective blood pressure of the country not surprising. In the Top 50, there are 10 medications for hypertension.

The problem? While the meds may be making us healthier, or at least let us live with whatever it is we have, they are surely not making us happier.

Indeed, in the most recent World Happiness Survey, the United States ranks 16th, which may overstate the case since 81% of all Americans believe we're headed in the wrong direction.

For sure, we're one of the most scared populations. Scared of what? Mostly of losing our money which may be why we take so many drugs that don't work which leads to . . . well, more drugs.

It would be nice to see a health plan introduced on either side of the aisle that dealt with the causes of disease rather than simply delivering expensive ways to live with them.

Health Care: What Happened to The Part About "Personal Accountability?

2009-10-05T15:38:00.003-05:00

Part of the campaigns of both candidates for President last year focused on "personal accountability."

Now, with relentless bailouts of financial institutions, car companies, and a "stimulus" that is supposed to make everything better, I am left wondering what happened to the "personal responsibility" part.

This is obvious across the spectrum, but perhaps nowhere more in your face than the various health plans being promoted on both sides of the aisle.

Bottom line of all plans: Extend health care to everyone. Ignore pre-existing conditions -- even if they are self-inflicted. In insurance terms, it is the prohibition of underwriting risk. In plain English, it means those who take care of themselves will be paying for those who have and continue to abuse themselves with food, alcohol and tobacco, just to name three.

But let's take one, the most common one in our society -- obesity.

Under these circumstances, being overweight or obese is not just a personal issue that affects one's health but is also a public health issue that impacts other people in society, especially those who are paying the bills.

A recent study in the journal Health Services Research reveals that the extra Medicare cost associated with overweight elderly people will cost hundreds of billions of dollars across the entire current Medicare population.

The article's findings show that treating the health needs of an overweight or obese elderly person will cost Medicare 6 to 17 percent more over a lifetime than treating an elderly person with a healthy weight. The same will surely be true of younger people.

The authors of the study used a measure of weight that takes into account a person's height, known as the body mass index and looked at total costs from Medicare alone for individuals covered from age 65 until death. The extra demands made of the healthcare system by overweight and obese elderly amounts to Medicare's spending on average an extra $15,000 on overweight elderly individuals and an extra $26,000 on obese individuals.

"Our research provides valuable information for why the public and health policy makers need to pay attention to the financial burden of health care for overweight Americans besides it's being just a health issue," Professor Zhou Yang at Emory University concluded. "More aggressive public health campaigns or early behavioral or policy intervention to stop the obesity epidemic could be cost-effective as well as otherwise beneficial for society."

And that is probably true. But I don't believe this is primarily an educational problem. Rather, I believe most people know they are killing themselves when they overeat, drink, and smoke. I just believe they don't care and figure the health care system will take care of the problem when the time comes.

This health care debate is a monument to what an absence of personal responsibility looks like in the real world and the cost will be staggering. After all, one's medical condition and their lifestyle won't count when calculating premiums so why not skip the gym and have a drink, hey?

America Is Looking At the Wrong "Model" for Health Care

2009-07-28T12:01:00.008-05:00

It is beginning to appear that President Obama's health care plan may end up as dead as President Clinton's a decade ago.

The reason? It is modeled on Canada and England and other nations where health care is handled like fire protection -- provided by the government to all and paid for by some.

The issue in most American's minds is not who is going to pay for it. Indeed, Obama's plan is for the rich to pay for health care and that suits the poor and middle class just fine.

The problem for most Americans is what they will get for their money (or someone else's money).

The real issue is "quality" of health care, which is a code word for "what I want, when I want it."

Indeed, the drug companies openly encourage Americans to self-prescribe by telling your doctor what you need, which is what you saw on TV last night, and if he won't give it to you, find one who will.

Many Americans are just not comfortable thinking that the very best might not be available to them when they need it, i.e., on our death beds it seems everyone wants another day or week or month no matter what the cost. "Hell, I'll be dead," they think to themselves. "Who cares who pays for it?" Right?

Right.

Therein lies the problem with the socialized medical systems around the world. You take what you get and you get it when it is available which may not be today. And, they're not going to spend a million dollars who you can live another six months with some form of dreaded cancer. Nope. You're gone.

It would, indeed, be ashame for most Americans if we couldn't have immediate gratification when it comes to getting the purple, green, or yellow pill, or surgery on Friday, especially when we're told it will make us feel better.

That's why Canada's medical system isn't going to sell in the U.S., no matter how popular Obama may be. It's good, but it is not the very best.

Which brings me to my point . . . we're looking at the wrong model.

We should be looking south, not north. We should be looking at Mexico's health care system, which doesn't even pretend to be egalitarian, but rather recognizes that the poor get one standard of care and the rich get another.

In Mexico, the poor and the middle class (the latter of which are also known as the "poor" by U.S. standards) can buy into the State plan. It is run by the government. The doctors are hired and paid by the government. They are government employees. The hospitals are owned and run by the government. And if you get sick or injured you can go to one of these doctors or hospitals free of charge, 24/7, no questions asked.

You may wait for care. You may not get state of the art care. But you will get State care which is (most of the time) good enough. What you're not going to get is the best doctors spending unlimited money to prolong your life. You're not going to get a private room. You may even have to wait in the hall for a room. What you're going to get in the State plan you're going to be thankful for because you got it cheap. Indeed, our maid and gardener are part of the State plan here and it cost us a grand total of $200 a year for each of them and about $150 a year for each of their spouses and children. We know if they get sick or hurt they will be treated.

Which bring us to us -- people like you and me. People who can and choose to afford more.

The fact is I wouldn't be caught dead (or probably would be caught dead) if I had to go to one of the State hospitals in Mexico. I saw a friend almost die in one of those places, called her Mother in Australia and asked her whether she wanted to see her daughter alive again and, if so, to get her transferred to the private system. She did and her daughter is alive and as mean as ever.

Kelly and I are part of this "private" health care system in Mexico. The premiums for the private insurance cost about 10 times the premiums for the State system and the care is about 100 times better. I recently had arthroscopic surgery at a beautiful, bright, modern hospital in Queretaro, Mexico. My room looked very much a Ritz Carlton suite, including a separate room for Kelly that adjoined mine. The doctor was a highly-trained gastroenterologist who specialized in, you got it, arthroscopic surgery of the abdominal area. I checked in at 8 a.m., was welcomed by the "concierge," taken to my room, IV'd, and had surgery promptly at 9 a.m. As I was wheeled into the high tech surgical suite, I counted no fewer than 4 doctors and a half a dozen other nurses and technicians. I was in recovery by 9 a.m. and back in my room by noon. The nursing care was nothing less than spectacular -- almost too attentive. I went home the following afternoon. Having "private" insurance, I thought, would really pay dividends.

I was wrong.

My deductible was $5,000 U.S. and it seems the tab -- tax, title, license, hospital, doctors, anesthesiologist, drugs, tests, everything totaled $2700. One has to wonder why the same surgery in the U.S. was quoted to me at $20,000 (which is another part of the problem that remains to be solved.)

But even though I didn't need the private insurance this time, I'm still happy to pay my premium -- one that is about 30% of what I'd be paying for the same coverage in the U.S.

The point? There are two medical systems Mexico. Everyone gets care but everyone doesn't get the same level of care. The same thing happens in the U.S. everyday but we want to deny it and it is our denial that costs money -- a lot of money. By pretending to have one system that cares for all at the same level, we pay for what amounts to an expensive facade. The fact is Steven Jobs got better care than either you or I would have gotten when he had his liver transplant. Why? Because he is worth a billion dollars and can pay for the best of the best of the best and did.

Harsh? Maybe. But it is true and it is consistent with American history -- those who pay more, get more.

So, here's the proposal:

Set up a State system in the U.S. Hire doctors, build hospitals (or buy a few) and put the entire staff on the State payroll and offer health care up cheap to anyone who wants it.

(Note: This is not what Obama has proposed. He wants to keep the facade of everyone getting everything when they want it. Everyone gets the Cadillac. That won't work. The State system I propose would provide good, not great, medical care. It would be on a budget like every government program and it would have to live within that budget. If it mean waiting for surgery, then that is what it would mean.)

The rest, those who could afford it and are willing to pay for it, could buy the "BMW health plan." Top quality. Top service. Nothing overlooked. First class.

The cost of the private plan would be high (very high) but worth it for those who wanted the best and are willing to pay for it. The two systems would live side by side but be totally separate.

Yes, I know. This proposal flies in the face of our egalitarian beliefs but unlike the current proposal it is consistent with our history, it will work, and most of all -- it will sell.

Government To Assume Role In Setting Executive Compensation

2009-06-10T11:24:00.003-05:00

Last week in a blog on this website I observed that executive compensation would be the government's stalking horse -- the example of corporate excess that will justify everything from government's micro-regulation to the takeover of entire industries, and even to making of ultimate determinations of who succeeds and who fails.

It is a sad day for the free market in America and ironically it was not the free market that resulted in the corporate compensation obscenities that is the poster child to justify invasive regulation of corporate America. Rather, it was the substitution of the good old boy network for the free market and the absence of transparency that bastardized market setting mechanisms for executive compensation that results in the news that follows, from today's Bloomberg:

The Obama administration will seek new powers for the Securities and Exchange Commission to force firms to let shareholders vote on executive pay and make directors who set compensation more independent, an administration official said.

Today’s proposal, subject to congressional approval, would cover all public companies. President Barack Obama has long supported giving shareholders nonbinding votes on bonuses, salaries and severance packages. The administration also will name a “special master” to monitor compensation plans for firms receiving exceptional assistance in the financial rescue.

The changes are aimed at reducing systemic risks and quelling a political uproar over bonuses paid to executives whose companies were bailed out by the government. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has repeatedly blamed pay standards tied to short-term profits for contributing to the worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

“It clearly is going to force companies to be more transparent with their disclosure” on compensation, said Irv Becker, national practice leader for Philadelphia-based Hay Group’s executive compensation practice. If the measure is implemented, it likely will take several years before shareholders begin to confront management, he predicted.

“It’ll kind of be novel the first year, maybe the first two, and then likely be a little bit more serious in future years,” said Becker, a former head of compensation and benefits at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

The Culprit In The Socialization of America

2009-06-04T13:37:00.005-05:00

Several years ago I gave a speech to an industry association. In it I posited that the absence of serious, independent corporate governance had resulted in inflated executive compensation and that one day corporate America would pay a severe price for not policing itself.

The speech was not well-received.

Under the heading of "I told you so," we now see the price that has been exacted due to companies existing for the benefit of their officers and upper management rather than for their shareholders. Had boards of directors done their job and paid based on performance and paid based on market, executives would make far less than they do today and would not have made themselves such obvious targets for the class war that has begun in America. Moreover, we would not face the socialization of industry that exists today.

We would not be allowing the government to take control of entire industries and interfere with impugnity the market process of determining compensation at the executive level. Had the market, not the good old boy network, determined executive comepensation all along, just as companies determine the compensation of low-level employees, those who wish to empower government to destroy the free market system would not have the executive compensation banner to raise as evidence that the market doesn't work.

Of course, the problem was never the market. The market was never allowed to work when it came to executive compensation. Regretably, just as my argument years ago did not resonate, neither will this argument if only because the General Public wants to punish corporate America for its excesses, even if it means putting a bullet in the back of the free market.

Corporate America has a lot of work to do to regain a modicum of credibility. They can begin by appointing truly independent boards of directors who hold executive management to high standards, pay based on results delivered, and pay the least, not the most, they can justify in base compensation to garner the talent they need to succeed.

Hysteria Trumps Facts (Again)

2009-05-02T11:46:00.007-05:00

If you listen to the government, swine flu is going to doom us all. Traveling out of the country is out of the question. And Mexico, well, Mexico is surely a death sentence. Friends and family have postponed trips, and the tourism industry in Mexico has been decimated, even in light of the facts which are as follows:

FACT: As of April 28, 2009, there have only been 26 laboratory confirmed cases of swine flu in the entire country of Mexico. There have been 64 laboratory confirmed cases in the U.S.

FACT: A total of 0 of those cases occurred in San Miguel de Allende (where we live).

FACT: Although the media is reporting that "152 people have died" in Mexico, these deaths have not been confirmed cases of swine flu and indeed many of them have been confirmed as plain old influenza which, by the way, can be deadly.

FACT: U.S. President Barack Obama began a speech this week imploring Americans not to be alarmed and reminding the globe that both the U.S. and Mexico have sophisticated and well-coordinated systems in place to control and mediate the spread of any disease. Then in an about face suggests that no one travel to Mexico except on an "as needed" basis. Mexico followed suit and has essentially shut down its entire economy.

FACT: 36,000 Americans die each year from the ordinary, regular and common seasonal flu. So although it is expected that the General Public will be alarmed by any contagious disease, particularly one that is transmitted from human-to-human, even the World Health Organization (WHO) has NOT recommended a travel alert, stating "WHO advises no restriction of regular travel or closure of borders." See the WHO's website at: www.who.int/csr/don/2009_04_27/en/index.html.

FACT: Swine flu is just one of many types of influenza, or flu, that originated in pigs. This strain has been transmitted to humans and from human-to-human. That's why the media jumped on it; the occurrence of a flu of this type is out of the ordinary. Indeed, this is at least the third time swine flu has made its way around the world since the 1970's.

FACT: This swine flu is very similar to ordinary seasonal flu in that it appears to respond to antiviral treatment and transmission can be prevented with a few simple, common sense steps. If we wash our hands regularly or use alcohol-based hand cleaners, cover our mouths when we cough (which is also polite), and wipe down surfaces we may touch with an alcohol-based cleaner, we should be fine. (Note: These are ordinary safety precautions, effective even to prevent catching the common cold.)

FACT: Swine flu is safer than your car. In the U.S. alone there are well over 100 deaths every single day caused by automobile related accidents. With swine flu, the odds are far less and chances for recovery are far greater. If you are thinking about not traveling due to swine flu, then you should probably refrain from driving, too, since it is far too dangerous.

Swine flu is just the latest hysteria that has resulted in irrational behavior by the masses. Before swine flu there was Y2K (that was going to shut down all computers in the world and leave us in the dark), mad cow disease (that would surely end the world in a hydrophobic fit, and even the 2007 Peruvian meteorite (that was to be the first of many that would destroy the earth), and the list goes on and on.

Today I am going to walk into beautiful downtown San Miguel de Allende this clear day, dry and about 75 degrees, sit down in my favorite coffee shop and read from one of the many books I have going in my Kindle with nary a thought of swine flu, which doesn't make me braver than most, just better informed.

In life, including our roles as employees and professionals, we would all be happier, less tense, clearer thinking, and more valuable to be counterintuitive rather than following the herd.

Better Employee Relations: A Sure Thing

2009-03-16T13:21:00.004-05:00

I have preached (and will continue to preach) employee involvement in community and charity as a way for employers to credibly connect with their employees. Indeed, in tough times it is the best way to illustrate that our individual difficulties pale in comparison to many others -- to help put our lives into context.

One client involved their employees in a battered women's shelter -- donated a thousand dollars and had a group of employees buy what the shelter needed and delivered it. It began as a single opportunity to serve and ended as an "adoption" of the charity by an employer and its employees. The dynamic of giving together has brought this employer and its employees closer together.

Recently, employees from the Wal-Mart Distribution Center in Steubenville, Ohio, walked into the YWCA for a day of painting and minor cleanup work, but they soon knew they had found an adoption. In an old building, the YWCA didn't have the funds available for the remodeling work so the local Wal-Mart and its employees essentially adopted the organization and the building. The volunteers put in nearly 400 hours while Wal-Mart donated $5,000 to the effort.

Do you want better employee relations? If you are ready to do more than talk about it, or lament the economy and what it has done to relationships inside your workplace, do something.

This is a good place to begin.

New Blog/New Program: Employee Free Choice Act: Winning Even When You're The Designated Loser

2009-02-11T13:53:00.006-06:00

President-elect Obama and leaders of both Houses of Congress have made the Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”) a legislative priority in 2009. Obama co-sponsored the legislation, also known as "card check," in the Senate, and he promised to make passage of it a top priority during his administration.

EFCA would effectively eliminate secret ballot elections in union organizing attempts and require businesses to recognize unions based solely on authorization cards signed by employees. Under EFCA if a union is able to convince, cajole, pressure or threaten a majority of your non-supervisory employees at any of your U.S. facilities to sign union authorization cards, your company will be required to recognize that union as the sole bargaining representative of your employees. You will be required to bargain in good faith to an agreement with the union, and if an agreement cannot be reached with that union on wages, hours, and working conditions within one hundred and twenty (120) days, the government will impose an agreement on you -- that is the government will decide what your employees will earn, the benefits they will receive, and under what, if any, circumstances you can administer policies, discipline and discharge.

I will be speaking and training employers how to avoid the implications of this law or any other that is enacted that makes it easier for unions to organize employees. A description of this new half-day program can be found at: http://www.crediblyconnect.com/Employee-Free-Choice-Act.html

To the end of preparing employers, I will be speaking in San Diego, Los Angeles and Palm Springs later this month and in San Juan, Puerto Rico, in June, and to a variety of industry associations over the next several months. Review the website and if there is anything I can do to prepare your management team, please contact me at jimkarger@mac.com

I have also started a new blog dedicated solely to the proposition of keeping employers up to date on what may be the most damaging labor legislation in the last 50 years. If you want to be added to the recipient list, e-mail me.

President Moves Closer to Organized Labor - We Need to Move Closer to Our Employees

2009-01-30T15:37:00.005-06:00

Below are some remarks made today by President Obama at a signing ceremony for certain Labor Executive Orders . . .

“I also believe that we have to reverse many of the policies towards organized labor that we've seen these last eight years, policies with which I've sharply disagreed. I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem, to me it's part of the solution. (Applause.) We need to level the playing field for workers and the unions that represent their interests, because we know that you cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement. We know that strong, vibrant, growing unions can exist side by side with strong, vibrant and growing businesses. This isn't a either/or proposition between the interests of workers and the interests of shareholders. That's the old argument. The new argument is that the American economy is not and has never been a zero-sum game. When workers are prospering, they buy products that make businesses prosper. We can be competitive and lean and mean and still create a situation where workers are thriving in this country.

"So I'm going to be signing three executive orders designed to ensure that federal contracts serve taxpayers efficiently and effectively. One of these orders is going to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to reimburse federal contractors who spend money trying to influence the formation of unions. We will also require that federal contractors inform their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Federal labor laws encourage collective bargaining, and employees should know their rights to avoid disruption of federal contracts.”

This is unfortunate for American business and American employees and preliminary to the real goal of organized labor for the last 30 years -- to eliminate the secret ballot election which provides employees an opportunity to express an informed choice after hearing both sides, not just the side of organized labor. Under EFCA (the misnamed "Employee Free Choice Act," employers would have to recognize a union if that union was able to get 50% +1 of their employees to sign union cards. In many cases employers don't even know its happening until well more than 50% are signed up.

What is ironic is that organized labor, who wants their own bailout in the form of EFCA, won 61% of the secret ballot elections they petitioned for last year and for the last two years in a row the percentage of workers who are represented has gone up, not down.

I will be speaking on EFCA and how employers can retain their rights to express themselves and employees keep the right to a secret ballot in trainings I will be providing for individual employers and industry associations. I will begin this effort in February and it will extend at least the ultimate outcome on the EFCA legislation. If your company has an interest in how to avoid this damaging legislation and its effects, contact me at: 214-432-5701.

The Big Three Will Survive . . . But Probably Not Here

2009-01-20T15:59:00.005-06:00

In the event you are wondering whether the Big 3 automakers will ever build another assembly plant in the United States, the simple answer is "NO," and here is the reason why:

http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm?id=1189

The good news? At least one of the three should get up off their death bed and compete successfully in the global marketplace.

SAMM Featured In L.A. Times - A Lesson To Be Learned

2009-01-16T09:11:00.008-06:00

Save A Mexican Mutt (SAMM), the non-profit rescue my wife and her partner founded six years ago, took from the streets and adopted out more than 150 dogs in 2008. It is a labor of love and the organization's work was recognized earlier this year in Fortune magazine.

Yesterday, SAMM was featured in the Los Angeles Times. Here's the link:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/01/mexico-dogs.html

The hard work of Kelly and her volunteers on behalf of the animals reminds me of a lesson some, but not all, employers have learned: Involve your employees in charitable, giving work.

A few years ago I was involved a union counter-organizational effort in San Diego, California. The employees of the company, with the aid and assistance of management, had learned to never be satisfied, to complain about everything. No foul was left uncalled. Indeed, every little event became a major issue proving what they already believed, that they were abused, mistreated, and unappreciated. It was one of the more miserable workplaces I've seen in some time.

Rather than try and convince these employees and their managers that life really wasn't so bad, I decided to show them just how bad life can be. And so I called a few local charities to see who needed help and who might provide the lesson these employees and their managers needed.

I came upon a battered women's shelter in need of food and clothing. The company came up with a thousand dollars but rather than just give it away, we involved the employees and their supervisors in shopping for the merchandise and delivering to the shelter. Once there they had little choice but to hear some of the stories from women who had been beaten, whose greatest fear was that the person who was supposed to love them the most would come home and physically abuse them.

There was not a dry eye in the house and, in short order, the complaining stopped -- on both sides of the aisle. They recognized and were embarrassed about their complaints, if only because like most of us, they had nothing of import to complain about. We are the fortunate, the blessed, the lucky.

In these tough economic times, it may be difficult to do your employees many favors bought with dollars, but here is one favor you can do for them -- find a worthwhile charity that needs help, not just money but help and involve your employees in the effort. The lessons will be worth more than most can understand -- until they have seen it.

P.S. In San Diego, I'm told the employees still go to the women's shelter after several years, still help, and that all is well.

We wish you well in 2009.

There's 7.2 and then there are the Real Numbers

2009-01-11T13:50:00.006-06:00

The U.S. Department of Labor reports that 7.2% of all Americans who want to work are unemployed. That's the highest unemployment rate in 16 years, not surprising after employers shed a shocking 524,000 jobs in December, capping a yearly loss of 2.6 million as the deepening recession claims more victims.

I was thinking about the numbers this afternoon when, like most Sunday afternoons, I took the SUV to be washed. For 50 pesos in San Miguel de Allende, less than $4 U.S. dollars, Juan and his workers will wash it by hand, top to bottom, inside and out. Today I waited for my car and talked to a couple of Juan's helpers as they worked. Tiring of my street-level Spanish, one of the workers drying my car spoke to me in English. Not just English, but the real thing -- no accent.

"Where did you learn your English?" I asked.

"In Tampa, Florida," he replied. "I lived there from the time I was three until last year -- 23 years. Then I returned here," he said gesturing to the vehicle and then the city below. "Not exactly my choice of work, but I take what I can get."

I nodded but said nothing.

"I have a high school diploma," he offered proudly, "and a year of college. But there's no work up there."

"Nothing?" I asked.

"Oh, I might be able to get a job in a car wash," he laughed sardonically, "but here I can live on a car washer's pay. There, no way," he lamented.

"So, why San Miguel?"

"Juan is a relative," he replied. "He hired me. He knows I have a child back in Tampa I need to support. Kind of ironic, isn't it? We used to cross into the United States to get work so we could support our families here. Now I come to Mexico to support my child there."

He shook is head and went back to work. In a few minutes he walked over and said, "Your car is ready." And then he came closer and whispered. "I want you to know something," he said. "If you have work -- any work -- any work at all -- I need work. I really need work."

As I drove home, I stopped thinking about the numbers and thought of the people I know back home who are out of work -- other lawyers, HR professionals, and first line managers to CEO's. But it dawned on me that I know more people like Carlos -- people qualified to do more than they have an opportunity to do, good people, hard working people, people who are not technically "unemployed," and so do not show up in any of the government's numbers, but who suffer nonetheless.

It is hard to know the answer but I do know the question, "What went wrong with the world's largest economy where millions today cannot find a job and many millions more waste their talents and education?"

Happy New Year . . . But Not So Fast

2009-01-05T13:32:00.003-06:00

The most significant, game-changing piece of labor legislation will get quick attention from the new Congress and President and for many the result will determine must how "happy" your New Year will be. American organized labor is looking for their own "bailout" and this may be it if you're not ready.

President-elect Obama and leaders of both Houses of Congress have made the Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”) a legislative priority in 2009. Obama co-sponsored the legislation, also known as "card check," in the Senate, and he promised to make passage of it a top priority during his administration.

EFCA would eliminate secret ballot elections in union organizing attempts and require businesses to recognize unions based solely on authorization cards signed by employees. Under EFCA if a union is able to convince, cajole, pressure or threaten a majority of your non-supervisory employees at any of your U.S. facilities to sign union authorization cards, your company will be required to recognize that union as the sole bargaining representative of your employees. You will be required to bargain in good faith to an agreement with the union, and if an agreement cannot be reached with that union on wages, hours, and working conditions within one hundred and twenty (120) days, the government will impose an agreement on you -- that is the government will decide what your employees will earn, the benefits they will receive, and under what, if any, circumstances you can administer policies, discipline and discharge.

On a personal note, I can say without reservation that EFCA is the most damaging piece of labor legislation I have seen in my 32 years of labor relations practice. In each of the 120+ counter-organizational campaigns I have handled, the employees decided in the privacy of a voting booth after hearing both sides of the issue against union representation, even though most of those same employees signed union cards. Signed union authorization cards are frequently the result of peer or union pressure and do not accurately reflect employee sentiment. Under EFCA unless an employer has advance notice that cards are being circulated among the work force, it will have no opportunity to communicate its views regarding why a union is not in the employees' best interest. Eliminating the election process and the time it provides for both sides to be heard will result in thousands of unwary employers being organized soon after the passage of EFCA. Indeed, the Service Employees International Union estimates that the ease of unionizing under EFCA will allow it to organize one million workers a year, as opposed to the 100,000 workers it currently organizes annually.

While there remains the possibility that EFCA will not be passed, most critical observers believe EFCA will become law in some form – a law that will make it far easier for unions to win the right to represent your employees. The result? An environment of “us” versus “them,” one that often ignores market forces in the setting of wages, hours and working conditions. Indeed, you need only turn on the television and watch the Big Three automakers begging for government money, yet not addressing their most significant disadvantage: a high-priced union workforce that cannot compete with the nonunion U.S.-based foreign-owned plants of Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. And, it is not just the wage and benefit disparities that exist between union and non-union workplaces that make union shops uncompetitive, but also the paradigm instilled by organized labor into the employees they represent – that management is the enemy – hardly a foundation that supports engaged, competitive employees necessary to compete in today’s global marketplace.

Beginning January, 2009, I along with several of my colleagues will be offering a program on EFCA to a limited number of employers, focusing on what you should be doing to avoid its passage, what employers and managers should be doing to prevent union organization in an era of emboldened unions, how to deal with EFCA as it becomes a topic of discussion in every workplace, and how and when to involve your employees in the effort not only to keep your company non-union but to insure your employees’ democratic right to vote on issues that will affect your business and their lives.

The one-day program, “Preparing for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)” will include the following components:

· Executive update on legislative developments

· Evaluation of specific personnel policies and practices that exist in your organization that result in a successful union organization attempt

· Train your managers and supervisors on how to maintain your non-union status regardless of the law, including essential elements of my “Doing The Right Thing” and “Credible Connections” programs that have served employers effectively over many years in their efforts to remain non-union. Included in the training is education on important National Labor Relations Board rules, warning signs of union organization, as well as training on the specifics of EFCA and why the legislation is not in the best interest of employers, managers, or employees.

And, for employers desiring more intensive evaluation and preparation, I will also offer these services as time permits:

· Development of specific responses to union organizing strategies

· Training your trainers (making your HR department capable of taking union-free management training to first-line supervisors)

· Training employees and new hires on the dangers of EFCA, authorization cards, and how to deal with coercion, misrepresentation, and harassment by union organizers and pro-union employees

· Preparation of a campaign in the event card-signing strikes your workplace

· Development of a rapid response team in the event of an organizational attempt by a union

In 2008 I handled five union organizing campaigns, and had to turn away several others because of a lack of time. I anticipate 2009 will likewise be filled with union organizational attempts, especially against those employers who are not ready for EFCA. I urge you to prepare for EFCA before, not after, its passage. If you have questions, would like more information, or would like to book a date or dates for training, please contact me at 214-432-5701 or via e-mail at jimkarger@mac.com.

I wish you the very best in 2009 and look forward to staying in touch.

Frail Grasp on the Big Picture?

2008-12-25T10:15:00.006-06:00

Christmas morning . . .

Friends will arrive this afternoon at two for a late lunch.

Before then we will take the dogs for a long hike -- it makes them a bit more mellow in the afternoons. They will beg for food from our guests, get their fill, and then curl up on the floor while we chat.

But I sense the topic this year will be different -- not the newest IPhone or GPS or whatever toys were selected as "the ones to have" this year. Rather, the topic will be the economy.

Bush, of course, ended up bailing out the auto industry for a few months with a ticket price of $17 billion. With all the other bailouts, various wars and conflicts, and other seemingly indiscriminate spending, some economists estimate we the taxpayers will be left with a $2 trillion deficit by the time Obama enters office.

Everyone hog seems to be at the trough these days -- even hedge funds for the rich have gained access to $200 billion in federal aid. There's not a capitalist to be found in America these days. When the going got tough, the capitalists put their hands out like beggars in Zegna suits.

What the total tab will be of government nationalizing the banking and auto industries, which seems only the beginning, remains to be seen, but my guess is that it won't be pretty. That will be our Christmas discussion this year, along with various options on how best to deal with the fallout, for our clients and individually. Some of us attending today learned about making money in the short side of the market in 2008, highly effective but there seems something inherently sad and ironic about betting against the very market upon which we all depend.

Of course, as I am sure more than one will observe, "We're not betting against the market. The market bet against itself when it went to the government." I happen to agree with that sentiment, which either means I have a frail grasp on the big picture or simply recognize that the big picture has changed.

As we await our guests, whatever your topic of discussion today, in the end remember that it is just moonshine. The real thing, that which is important, is our opportunity to be with friends and family. They, not our brokers and bankers, will be by our sides in the tough times, and you will be there for them. Of course, no one has to say it because we know it in our heads, but mostly in our hearts.

Best to everyone for a wonderful Christmas and 2009.

No Deal, Soon No Job, Ho Home, No Hope

2008-12-11T23:30:00.003-06:00

I've been on the road all day, since six this morning. I listened to CNBC at different points during the day and besides listening to Jamie Diamond, CEO of JP Morgan Chase tell us how he didn't really need the $25 billion the government foisted upon his bank, he said he took it to be a good citizen, but no, he couldn't tell us how it was spent or if it was spent at all, mostly because he didn't know. It was just more money in a big pile of money. "Fungible" was what he called it -- just like wheat or oil. Once you mix it together you can't tell what was yours or his. Now it is all just his. Congress is made up of slow learners but from the TARP experience they learned that you never give, loan or otherwise dispose of money without knowing how it is going to be spent and how you're going to get paid back.

Which brings us to the auto bailout which I have watched with interest over the last several weeks. It was pitiful, truly pathetic by any standard. The Big Three represented by Moe, Larry and Curly dressed in Zegna suits could never answer the hard questions, or many of the easy ones, either. "What would do with this money if we gave it to you?" "How will you change your business in order to make the money make a difference?" "How can you compete with your union employees making $75 an hour (with benefits) compared to Honda, Nissan, and Toyota whose employees earn $41 an hour (with benefits)?" "Why can't you go through the Chapter 11 bankruptcy process like other broken companies, reject the contracts that aren't working for you, rid yourselves of the legacy liabilities, lay off half your workforce, and come back lean and ready to compete?"

"Uhhh . . . "

Nope, no answers, at least none that made any sense to those who speak and understand English. What's left of the free market was finally defended, much too late, but the theater was spectacular.

A few minutes ago, at 10:20 p.m. CST Harry Reid announced that the compromise plan to provide emergency finding to the U.S. auto industry was dead. The major sticking point? The unwillingness of the United Auto Workers union to accept reductions in employee compensation as part of the deal, abide by equivalent work rules and give up a benefit no other employee in America enjoys (except perhaps a few CEO's) -- 95% of their pay if they are put on the street in a layoff.

Now it is over, and absent some Hail Mary pass in the final moments, General Motors and Chrysler will file for bankruptcy and soon. Ford won't be far behind. And then the Big Three (who by market cap aren't really very big anymore) will need to make a decision -- reject the collective bargaining agreements with the UAW, take long and bitter strikes, and then negotiate new agreements competitive with the wages and benefits of their foreign competitors who have found a way to make a buck making cars in America, or convert to Chapter 7 -- a total and complete liquidation sale where you can buy a lathe or a nice office chair for pennies on the dollar.

Either way, hundreds of thousands of autoworkers will be put on the street and what they will find will not resemble their $75 an hour positions screwing on nuts and bolts. No, what they will find are $9 an hour jobs flipping burgers or making beds at cheap motels on the outskirts of what is left of the cities they once lived in. And there is a part of me that says, "It's about time."

But, it is not really their fault. They just took what they were offered by fat, dumb and happy companies that once had a monopoly on the car market in America. GM, Ford and Chrysler figured they could pay anything as long as they paid the same thing. They could have stood up to the UAW years ago, taken a deep, long and bitter strike, then downsized and learned to compete. Now, they get to the same thing except with billions of dollars in debt and formidable competitors like Toyota, Honda and Nissan. My bet is that none of the three will survive, at least not for long.

Hundreds of thousands of other workers who serviced the auto industry in one way or the other will lose their jobs, too. Big businesses will fail. Small businesses will fail. Unemployment, already at a 26-year high, will skyrocket and the mortgage default rate, already disturbing, will help Jamie Diamond at JP Morgan Chase find a use for that $25 billion he "didn't really need" but only took because the government had him over a barrel.

Between now and then comes tomorrow. We will all wake up in a new world, a tougher world, all because of a single human flaw -- greed. Indeed, as I close this out the Dow futures are already down $350 at 10:56 p.m. on this cool night in a La Quinta motel on the outskirts of San Antonio, Texas. My window is open and the electricity in the air is palpable. Two railroad workers are standing outside by their truck, drinking beer and smoking cigarettes, and both wonder openly "how much longer we'll last."

A good question indeed.

One Blind Girl - A Lesson for Many Blind Managers

2008-11-20T13:11:00.004-06:00

Board rooms are not nice places to be these days. The meltdown of the credit market, stock market, and the markets for goods and services has left many in fear -- employers and employees alike. And, when we are fearful, we have a tendency to stop talking to each other, to withdraw, which ironically only causes others to assume the worst case, that something is being hidden, that the Armageddon scenario is upon us.

So, talk. No one expects, or even appreciates, life shot through rose colored glasses, especially not at this point in time. What they expect and deserve is the truth -- all of it. What's more they need guidance. They need to be mentored, to put things into perspective. No, it is not enjoyable to see one's retirement account decimated by 50%. And, it is difficult to go to work each day and stay focused, not worrying about whether and how long one's job will last.

But, in the biggest picture these are small issues and the caring, compassionate and concerned employer will be straight and will remind employees that Spring will follow Winter as it always does.

You may have seen this story before but it is a beautiful metaphor about what is important and what is not, about the importance of truth and of giving, lessons that are always timely, but perhaps never more than now.

There was a blind girl who hated herself because she was blind. She hated everyone, except her loving boyfriend. He was always there for her. She told her boyfriend, 'If I could only see the world, I will marry you.'

One day, someone donated a pair of eyes to her. When the bandages came off, she was able to see everything, including her boyfriend.

He asked her,'Now that you can see the world, will you marry me?' The girl looked at her boyfriend and saw that he was blind. The sight of his closed eyelids shocked her. She hadn't expected that. The thought of looking at them the rest of her life led her to refuse to marry him.

Her boyfriend left in tears and days later wrote a note to her saying: 'Take good care of your eyes, my dear, for before they were yours, they were mine.'

The truest expression of love and the cruelest expression of ungratefulness.

This is how the human brain often works when our status changes. Only a very few remember what life was like before, and who was always by their side in the most painful situations.

Life is a gift.

Today before you say an unkind word - Think of someone who can't speak.

Before you complain about the taste of your food - Think of someone who has nothing to eat.

Before you complain about your husband or wife - Think of someone who's crying out for a companion.

Today before you complain about life - Think of someone who was taken too early.

Before whining about the distance you drive - Think of someone who walks the same distance with their feet.

And when you are tired and complain about your job - Think of the unemployed, the disabled, and those who wish they had your job.

And when depressing thoughts seem to get you down - put a smile on your face and think: You're alive and still around.

For employers, a quandary: speak of economic troubles or wait?

2008-11-17T17:10:00.009-06:00

Some excellent advice to all employers suffering in the current economic crisis
. . . keep your employees apprised. -jim

Drivers for DHL Express recently learned they would be losing their jobs next year, but many of them didn't learn it from their employer. They heard the news while dropping off packages in the Boston area.

"You know how a lot of our members found out what's happening?" asked Sean O'Brien, president of Local 25 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters in Charlestown, which represents DHL drivers. "They found out from their customers. The company told customers they were terminating their accounts."

At a time when the financial outlook has darkened for businesses large and small, employees are anxious to know what the intensifying economic downturn will mean for their companies and their jobs. But in many cases, they are hearing only silence.

Fifty-four percent of American workers said they've heard nothing from their employers about the economy and how it is affecting business, and 71 percent said they want to hear more from the top in this moment of uncertainty, according to a national survey conducted last month by the global public relations firm Weber Shandwick. The vast majority, 70 percent, think the deteriorating environment will weaken their companies in the coming year.

Many workers say they would prefer candor from their bosses, even if the outlook is bleak, so they can prepare for tough times.

"Workers have a sense that things are in bad shape, but the companies aren't talking about it," said Warren Pepicelli, manager of the New England joint council board for the labor union Unite Here, which represents textile and hotel workers across the region. "I don't see much of an effort by employers to communicate with their workers about the broad economy and the effect it has on individual shops."

But for employers, an economic meltdown presents a quandary. While they'd like to be reassuring, they are reluctant to send out hopeful messages that might have to be retracted in the event things take a turn. On the other hand, they don't want to scare workers with bad news unless they're sure it's true.

"If you don't know what kind of cost-cutting might be taken, you don't want to alarm people unnecessarily," said Bob Eubank, executive director of the Northeast Human Resources Association in Waltham. "When you have the facts, you should communicate them. When it's speculation, you might be doing more harm than good."

Eubank said many executives in the region and around the nation are currently rebudgeting and tearing up their business forecasts in light of worsening economic conditions. "The difficulty is that the data is still coming in," he said. "Even if they know they have to cut back, they might not wish to reveal it right away because of the impact on people and the organizational disruption. It's a fine line they have to walk."

Some companies are opening up. Managers at General Electric Aircraft Engines hold annual December briefings with labor officials at GE's plant in Lynn, in which they offer their assessment of business prospects for the coming year. In most cases, though, the companies that give advance notice when jobs are going to be cut or shifted out of state are required to do so by labor contracts or state laws. The companies that aren't compelled to give warnings typically don't, workers and union leaders complain.

Publicly traded companies are legally obligated to make any disclosure that could have a "material" effect on their share price to all stockholders at the same time, and thus aren't able to give employees advance notice, said Michele Nadeem, vice president of corporate affairs at DHL Express in Plantation, Fla.

DHL said it will be closing more than 300 shipping and receiving stations around the United States, scrapping its domestic business, and eliminating 9,500 jobs nationwide, including hundreds in Massachusetts. The company disclosed the plan on Monday, "about 10 minutes" after it was approved by the supervisory board of its corporate parent, Deutsche Post World Net in Bonn, said Nadeem.

"We could not communicate it until then because it was material," Nadeem said. "The company was forthright about this."

Some executives have stepped up communications as the economy has soured, though they tend to be from companies that remain financially solid. One is Iron Mountain Inc., the Boston data protection and storage services company, where chief executive Bob Brennan this fall sought to calm the fears of employees, known as "Mountaineers," through a newsletter, videotaped question-and-answer sessions, and a personal memo to workers around the globe.

"Iron Mountain is a very strong company in good times and bad," Brennan wrote in his memo last month. "I realize the economy and the markets are in bad shape and that those conditions hurt you and those around you in many different ways. I'm sorry you're going through that and want you to realize that conditions will improve with time." The memo ended with an exhortation to "Enjoy your weekend."

In an interview, Brennan said it's important for leaders to increase the frequency of communications in distressed times.

"I'd rather come out and tell them, 'I don't know what to say,' than to go in a hole," Brennan maintained. "You have to acknowledge employees' concerns. There's a lot of bad news out there, and we all know it can be contagious. From the lowest-paid workers to the highest, everyone's been hurt, and it's very important to be empathetic."

Bob Weiler, chief executive at Phase Forward Inc., a Waltham firm that helps drug companies manage data for clinical trials, similarly e-mailed employees last month. He tried to put the sagging economy in context, stressing that the credit crisis is squeezing financial institutions more than Phase Forward's customers. "Fortunately, we sell to the pharmaceutical industry, which is cash rich and not dependent on credit to continue its mission of bringing drugs to market," he wrote.

Executives can't talk about their company's performance or anything else these days without acknowledging the financial market turmoil and the economic uncertainty, said Russ Campanello, the Phase Forward senior vice president for human resources.

"My experience is most employees appreciate honesty and transparency," Campanello said. He recalled that, at a Halloween party shortly after Weiler sent his e-mail, "it was remarkable how many employees and employees' spouses stopped Bob and me and talked about how relieved they were to hear a message like that."

By Robert Weisman, The Globe

Captain Connie - The Meaning of Meaningful Work

2008-10-14T19:55:00.006-05:00

Friends,

This is a link to the story of "Captain Connie," someone I have known for 25 years, a wonderful woman who represents best the gift of "meaningful work," or better said, how to make work meaningful. Read the story here:

www.hoteladolphus.com/Captain_Connie_Story.aspx?utm_source=Adolphus&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=F%20and%20B%20Newsletter&utm_content=October%202008

I began working for The Adolphus in 1980 -- even before Captain Connie came on the scene and I remember her when. The meaning of relationships in the big picture came over a period of years and perhaps relationships developed with some of my earliest clients are still the most vivid.

Her story can and should motivate us all to make every workplace a better place.

Best,

Jim

P.S. The French Room at The Adolphus in Dallas, Texas has and will forever be my favorite restaurant in the world. Don't miss it!

An Update from the Long Lost . . .

2008-09-25T22:16:00.004-05:00

Yes, I know. I have been a poor correspondent for which I apologize. Here are a few updates, personal and professional . . .

- The San Miguel Leadership Institute (SMLI) continues to enjoy positive attention in the press. The Institute was recently written up by CNN Latin America. If you haven't seen the SMLI website, please turn your browser to www.sanmiguelleadershipinstitute.com

- Dave Riveness, co-founder of SMLI and author of The Secret Life of a Corporate Jester produces a monthly e-mail newsletter that contains thought-provoking material for managers and leaders - internal inquiries that help us see past our blind spots. I have asked him to send you the current issue of The Corporate Jester.

- While in St. Louis working last week, I had the opportunity to spend a little time with my daughters, Katy and Kandi. While riding in Kandi's car I couldn't help noticing three bags neatly stacked on the back seat floorboard. Curiosity led me to open one of them and in it I found an interesting collection of seemingly unrelated items -- a self-heating can of soup, chips, candy, toothbrush, toothpaste, a comb, soap, can opener, bottled water, and a few other items that led me to ask her jokingly, "Are you planning on running away from home, hon?" She smiled and then told me the story behind the bags. "Dad, there are a lot of homeless people in St. Louis and I pass one or more nearly everyday on my way to work. It breaks my heart. These people have nothing. Many are suffering. I want to help but I don't want to give them money because I a fear some will use it buy drugs or otherwise waste it. So, I make up these bags and when I see someone who is down and out, I stop and give it to them." A great idea to be sure and one which we all might use since homelessness is, regrettably, everywhere.

- Sunday finds me headed to Belgium where I begin a corporate training tour that, between now and mid-December, will take me to Europe, Asia, and South America. I will be on e-mail and returning my calls. Let's stay in touch . . .

Leash-Pulling In the Workplace: How The Great Manager Changes Behavior

2008-09-06T18:04:00.007-05:00

A good friend and colleague, Dave Riveness, sent along this website today: www.ted.com/index.php/talks/ian_dunbar_on_dog_friendly_dog_training.html

It is a talk by one of the world's premier dog trainers. Speaking at a 2007 conference, Ian Dunbar asks us to see the world through the eyes of our dogs. By knowing our pets' perspective, we can build their love and trust.

It's a message that resonates well beyond the animal world. Indeed, as I think about training managers and employees, we seem to make the same mistakes most of us do with our animals. Most managers have learned from experience to highlight their employees' mistakes as a way to prevent future errors. In some cases, it takes the form of mean-spirited criticism. In other cases, the employee is simply ignored or left out in order to inflict enough pain to insure that whatever went wrong doesn't go wrong again.

As with dogs, this method of managing sounds somehow right, or at least common, but it simply doesn't work.

Let's consider for a moment what Ian's recommendations are to teach your dog to follow you off-leash and, as we do so, consider how these suggestions apply in the all-human world of work where we want to teach our employees to follow us and be good leaders stewards of those for whom we have accepted responsibility.

- Your dog's desire to follow and remain close is the necessary foundation for walking politely on-leash.

In human terms, it means the employee must want to follow you. Yelling, belittling, ignoring, and the panoply of negative behaviors we see in the workplace only insure that employees do not want to follow, do not want to stay, and will leave at the first opportunity.

- You need to stimulate and strengthen your dog's gravitational attraction towards you by moving away enticingly and heartily praising your dog all the time he follows.

How does this translate? Perhaps it means that just as you give your dog plenty of lead, you do the same with your employees. Don't drag them -- but move away -- see what they can do, and when they do the right thing, praise them liberally.

Proceed with a happy heart and a sunny disposition: talk to your dog, tell him stories, whistle, walk with a jaunty step, or even skip and sing.

This translates into managers and supervisors who are, by nature, happy people. I have yet to find a good leader of people who is angry most of the time. Rather, they assign work the meaning it deserves, but no more. They accept mistakes as being the natural order of things, the way we all learn, and they pass down the culture they wish to inculcate in their workplaces through anecdotes, through stories. Their employees like to be around them.

Do not accommodate your dog's improvisations; you are the leader, not the dog. Whenever your dog attempts to lead you, accentuate his "mistake" by doing the opposite. Stretch the psychic bungee cord: if your dog forges ahead, slow down or smartly turn around; if your dog lags behind, speed up; if your dog goes right, turn left; and if your dog goes left, turn right.

In human terms, the good manager, while pleasant, doesn't forget that he or she is the leader. While they provide plenty of lead to their employees, they are not led by them. They do not ignore poor performance. Instead, they lead by example, by demonstrating excellence. They are slow to anger, quick to praise, and always alert for opportunities to lead by example.

And, yes, we all understand that our employees are not animals. But, we are all beings who seek approval, validation, care, compassion, and concern. And so as it works with your beloved pet so it will work with your charges in the workplace.

Review the video above. I will be interested in your comments which you can add at the bottom of this post. And, you may also want to check out Dave's website: http://www.corporatejester.com . It's all about seeing our blind spots as managers. Dave and I will be working together on several programs into 2009: http://www.sanmiguelleadershipinstitute.com/

Lots to learn and so I will leash up Max, my German Shepherd, and slowly, happily, teach him to follow rather than try and rip my left arm off as we make our daily walk into town.

Fortune Magazine Features SAMM and SMLI This Week - Don't Miss It!

2008-06-14T16:40:00.002-05:00

An animal-loving reporter at Fortune magazine caught wind of our charity, Save A Mexican Mutt, and sent a photographer to San Miguel de Allende last month. The article appears in Fortune on the newsstands Monday, June 16.

You can see the online version of the Fortune article here: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0806/gallery.Fortune40_after_work.fortune/3.html

If you are interested in learning more about the plight of homeless animals, are interested in providing a dog in need a forever home, or in credibly connecting with your employees by involving them in an experience in helping the helpless, see http://www.saveamexicanmutt.org . Volunteers for care, transport, foster, and donation are all needed and appreciated.

Also receiving mention in Fortune is the San Miguel Leadership Institute (SMLI), an educational organization founded by Dave Riveness and Jim Karger that creates unique learning environments for the exploration of intriguing and timely topics by organizational leaders. Forums are held in San Miguel de Allende and at corporate sites all over the world, with each program exploring topics such as employee engagement, emotional intelligence, and spiritual capitalism, all within a structure designed to drive interaction, discovery and application. Learn more about what is going on at: http://www.sanmiguelleadershipinstitute.com

Much positive is happening even in these difficult economic times faced by most in corporate America. Indeed, it is the tough times that present our most valuable learning opportunities.

Companies that prosper will be those open to new ways of thinking, new ways of doing -- those that don't pinch pennies to survive, but who are destined to thrive through their fundamental understanding that investing in their employees, securing their engagement, and showing them a path to personal and professional satisfaction is the only way to long-term success.