Crypto-Effectology - Finding hidden effectiveness

dreamers, managers, and leaders

Fri, 24 Dec 2010 07:44:58 -0500

When discussing leadership, you often hear the term vision, or dreams bandied about. "They have the vision", "They have a dream", and especially "They are such a visionary!". We all have dreams. You can argue that we all have a vision or visions (even without the use of hallucinogenic drugs). That makes us dreamers. What makes a leader is the ability to bring people along for the ride, to get them involved, to inspire them to want to "buy in" to your dream.

We often conflate the terms leader and manager. This is unfortunate, because it confuses the ability to organize a group that has little or no choice to be where they are (as long as they want to be part of a particular organization), and the ability to inspire a group so that they want to be an active participant in your group for reasons other than power, prestige, or money. When you have a manager who is truly also a leader, you have an amazingly powerful combination.

We seem to have a shortage of these kind of leaders these days, people with powerful dreams (besides becoming rich on the Internet), that can not only inspire others to join them, but organize and guide them. A lofty goal to shoot for.

The most valuable gifts

Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:14:51 -0500

The Christmas season would not be complete with out some discussion about gifts. I am a huge believer in the concept of giving without any expectation of return, and Christmas, no matter what faith you follow (if any), seems to truly bring out the best in people in that regard. Yet, I sometimes reflect on how a sense of obligation to deliver bigger and better presents, or at least something tangible seems to grow with each year and we miss out on or fail to appreciate two of the most precious gifts we have to give to each other; gifts that are suitable for any time of the year and carry value far greater than any material gift: friendship and time.

Friendship is something that can only be given by choice, you cannot demand or coerce it. It can be given on a purely personal level, but I believe it can also be given on a business level as well. How many of you have customers that you enjoy having lunch with or actually look forward to speaking with on the phone? The warmth one feels when spending time or talking with someone you feel is a friend, no matter the intensity of the relationship, is something we should all treasure.

We can be forced to give our time unwillingly, and thus time is perhaps an even greater gift when given freely. We can always acquire more "things" - money, possessions, but we are only granted so much time, and once it passes, it is gone forever. So to willingly give it shows a respect that can transcend friendship. It shows a belief that we are worthwhile to the person spending their time with us.

So as the new year approaches, think about time and friendship. Consider not only who you will choose to give these amazing gifts to, but how you can show real appreciation to those who share these gifts with you.

Changing the rules of the game

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 23:43:38 -0500

At James Malinchak's speakers bootcamp this past week, he held a contest for Marketer of the Year among his coaching program members. Each contestant was given 12 minutes to tell us, the audience - who doubled as judges, how they had applied certain things they had learned as a coaching member to excel in marketing the past year. All of the contestants had impressive stories, and equally impressive bottom lines.

One of the contestants did not spend a huge amount of time describing what techniques she had learned and how she had applied them though. Rather she concentrated on talking about her sister who was having some hard times, and how, by winning the contest, she could help her sister by giving her a much needed vacation in Vegas.

Would you care to guess who won?

This was a fantastic example of "changing the rules of the game". Rather than compete with the others based on the exact criteria of the contest, she worked the heartstrings of the audience, and walked away with the prize. Comparing her results to the others might have been a vulnerability for her. Rather than soldiering ahead and hoping for the best, she took a strength: her feelings for her sister and a heartwarming story (which even the coldest among us enjoy), changed the rules of the game and avoided competing head-on with the others in straight numerical or measurable results. Brilliant!

pretending to be big

Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:22:34 -0500

There are a slew of products out there designed to make your one man operation seem like a big professional operation. Off-site phone systems that allow you to have multiple extensions and professional sounding voice-mail messages, and maybe even official sounding menu picks, virtual offices where a receptionist actually answers the phone with your company name (and the 20 others she is handling).

Which leads me to two questions:
1. If the point is trying to convince potential clients that you are a bigger company, is it a good idea to start out a relationship with a lie?
2. Do these products actually help you provide better service?

Actually it is one question: What are your trying to accomplish? Having an office where you can meet with a client comfortably may very well enhance your service. Trying to make someone believe you are bigger than you are almost definitely does not.

I like being direct. I am who I am, and I am who you are going to get if you retain me. No window dressing, maybe just some technological aids to make sure you are satisfied with your interaction with me.

Three keys to service

Tue, 19 Oct 2010 07:07:00 -0400

To provide really great service, you need three things:
1. Leadership - someone has to steer the ship!
2. Team Building - you cannot do it alone!
3. Systems - make it repeatable!

easy step towards better customer service

Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:57:01 -0400

Alan Weiss recently made an excellent suggestion for a cheap and easy way to immediately improve a company's customer service: Start addressing all of your customers by name. He added start by addressing them as Mr., Ms., Dr., etc. until you have been given permission to address them otherwise.

Allow me to add that the key part of that is the second part: addressing them as Mr., Ms., etc. FIRST. By addressing people you don't know with some respect, you gain permission to continue the relationship.

This is different than networking, where everyone you are introduced to is most likely comfortable with, and expect, being called by their first name. The one word difference here is "expect". I do not expect to be addressed by my first name by a clerk or a server I have never met before in my life, and am probably not thinking about starting a business relationship with. However, if they make the effort to discover my name (looking at my credit card, or maybe a simple, "How can I help you Mr?..."), and start by being respectful, I will quickly get comfortable and appreciate that this business "knows me".

Not treating your customers like objects or numbers ("ahh, sale #5 today!") is always a good thing, but you need to do it right. Be respectful, they are interesting in doing business with you, not being your best friend.

delighting does not require perfection

Sun, 19 Sep 2010 12:17:55 -0400

My favorite buzzword in business is "delight". Several authors have used this word to describe the ultimate goal of business: to delight your customers. A delightful experience though is not necessarily one where everything is perfect. Perfection is supposedly a goal we should strive for. We develop processes like Six Sigma to ensure that we reduce our error rate to essentially zero. While I can see where this may seem to be a laudable goal, it actually can affect our ability to ship, and if we don't ship than we certainly aren't going to have any delighted customers. So how do we resolve this conundrum?

If you use a computer at all, you probably feel that perfection has never existed in that field. The issue for programmers and systems analysis people is that there are an infinite number of environments and interactions that a system is exposed to, and you can't infinitely test if you are going to ship. Yet it is possible to delight customers given what would seem to be an impossible situation.

The answer lies in setting the expectations of the customer and the interactions made along the way to them reaching their final goal (in the programmer/analysts case using your system to add and obtain information of some type). If expectations are set impossibly high, and/or it is a struggle to get help or report issues, and then wait days, weeks, or months to get resolution, then no, the customer most likely will not be delighted. However, if expectations are set that there will of course be some tweaks that need to be made, and when issues are reported they are promptly addressed (even if the solution is not always what the customer was expecting or hoping for!), then the customers needs will indeed will be met, and if the process to get there was as promised, they will often be delighted.

Go ahead and look for ways to have zero defects. You may even come close (depending on your industry or your job - this stuff applies to workers too). But the real gold lays in helping your customer (who could be your boss!) reach their goals in utilizing your product or service. That is where delight can be generated.

the leader who serves

Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:37:54 -0400

The word "leader" typically creates an image in our mind's eye of someone in charge. They lead the way to... something (victory? profit? A better life?). They are out front, commanding, giving out orders, ensuring things are moving. It is a stirring image. It is also a destructive stereotype. Destructive because it leads those of us who are placed into leadership positions to believe that those who are following us are there to serve us and to make our goal their common goal. But each one of us has goals and dreams, and who is to say that one goal or dream is any more important than another?

I avoid the term "servant leader" because "servant" carries such a negative connotation. The term is irrelevant. The concept, the leader providing service to those who follow them is the important thing. A "true" leader, for lack of a better term, provides service in innumerable ways. It could be removing obstacles that stand in the way of someone doing their job when it would be just as easy to tell them to work extra hard or overtime. Perhaps it is mentoring someone who has a burning desire to excel at what they are doing.

The leader who serves inspires loyalty instead of fear, finds their work easier, and realizes their goals more quickly.

a service attitude

Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:38:06 -0400

Think about the last time you went out to a restaurant for dinner. After the waiter or waitress took your order did you gather up the menus so they would not have to reach all over the table? When they stopped by to refill your drink did you position the glass to make their access to it easier?

How about when you were entering or leaving a building. Did you hold the door open for the person leaving or coming in (even if they weren't the opposite sex)?

This isn't about being "nice", or polite, or making someone's day (as I mentioned in a previous post). This is about an attitude. An attitude of service to those around you. To try and help out in little ways that cost you pretty much nothing.

Consider the attitude that forces the waitstaff to stretch over the table to reach the menus or the drink glasses. The attitude that forces someone else to make that extra effort to pull open a door.

Now consider that attitude coming out in how you react to your customers, your boss, your co-workers. Which attitude would you rather be on the receiving end of?

why won't they listen?

Thu, 2 Sep 2010 09:58:13 -0400

Here are some interesting statistics from some recent studies:
only 41% of employees believe their managers listen to the ideas they present to them.
37% (more than a third) felt their company's management was inaccessible to them.
a majority 60% felt their company's suggestion program was ineffective.

But here's the interesting part. According to one research firm, each employee suggestion was worth approximately $6,000 to a company in cost savings, etc.

So why does it sound like hardly anybody is listening?

One reason (and the one close to half of the people participating in the studies mentioned above would probably believe) is that employee suggestion boxes are just there for show. A sop to keep the employees quiet.

The big reason - at least what I would hope - is like so many other well intentioned projects, many (and perhaps most) employee suggestion programs do not have systems in place to handle the incoming suggestions. Is there a central place to accumulate them? Is there staff assigned to review, filter and pass on the most "promising" suggestions?

Hanging out a box for people to put pieces of paper in isn't a system - it is a recipe for further employee frustration and disengagement.

If you want input, then make it possible to listen.

it goes both ways

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:22:13 -0400

We all want the people in service positions (clerks, waiters, etc.) to smile, be polite, show respect, man, the list just goes on and on.

You want a harried, stressed out service person to brighten up and actually pay some attention to you? Try giving them what you are hoping to get from them (no not whatever you are buying!). Smile, and say good morning, if they make a mistake smile again and tell them "that's OK, happens to all of us." When they tell you to have a good day, respond in kind: "and you as well!"

The Golden Rule applies to customers the same as it does to vendors.

effectable

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:18:13 -0400

Scott Ginsberg (the name-tag guy) is coming out with a new book "-able". As with a lot of his stuff, Scott has highlighted something that should be obvious to most of us, but sometimes lies hidden: by applying yourself in the ways you are most "able" you can make things happen... in fact you will greatly increase the probability of those things happening.

So let me add my own "able" word to that lexicon: "effectable".

If you are effectable, you are actually "able" in two ways:
1. You regularly effect positive change (i.e., make things happen; setting things up for others to be effective) both in yourself and in the world around you.
2. You are effective. Of course I mean effective in my definition of the word: "doing the right things, the right way for you". Using your strengths and finding ways around your vulnerabilities.

The two are intertwined. If you are effective, you will be getting things done that need to be done to advance your goals. Even better you will be doing them in ways that strengthen and energize you rather than weakening and draining you. You also set an example for others around you, creating an environment that allows for positive change and for them to be effective and deliver outstanding results whatever the endeavor. This is the stuff that drives successful individuals and successful teams.

Don't just stop at being effective, be effectable, make things happen for yourself and for everyone around you.

You can find Scott's book on Amazon by clicking here.

You can learn more about the book and Scott's philosophy by clicking here to go to his blog

the simple things

Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:35:06 -0400

I stopped in at a local restaurant the other day to double check with a manager about some stuff I had arranged with them. It was late in the afternoon, and the restaurant wasn't that busy, in fact a group of wait-staff was clustered around a service counter talking to one another. I stood at the hostess station figuring I would be in and out fairly quickly. Five minutes later, I was still standing at the hostess station, waiting. The wait-staff occasionally glanced my way without any sign of acknowledgment or greeting, and who knows where a hostess might have been. Finally someone approached with some menus, and luckily it was the manager I had come to see.

Now here is the amazing part. The manager and I sat down to discuss things, and while we were sitting, a line formed at the hostess station, and they were ignored just as I was! Finally, the manager pointed this out to some of the staff and someone wandered over and got the customers to tables.

Why would something like this happen? Is it simply that the staff just does not care? Admittedly this was not a fancy restaurant, and some might consider working there as no big deal and so what if I get fired, but I would like to think it was more a lack of procedure and process. Does the restaurant have a written policy that customers will be greeted within a certain amount of time? What if the hostess station is empty? Is there a written procedure about who should cover the station if the host or hostess is away? Are there designated wait staff that can double as host or hostesses? Maybe these procedures exist, but weren't being followed because it was "slow".

What would it cost this restaurant to put these kind of processes in place (or enforce them even in slow times)? Nothing. How might it affect a customer's perception of the business? (Do I really need to answer that?) I often hear the excuse that customer service which delights is great for other companies, but it costs too much for "us" to provide extra service. Really? A little bit of time is too much to invest?

charcoal vs. propane

Sun, 4 Jul 2010 10:58:54 -0400

With summer in full swing, the smell of cookouts pervades the air. When I was a kid, we had block parties on the fourth of July. We would gather in one neighbor's yard, the dads would bring their Webers, and after some unintentional flame throwing utilizing lighter fluid (egged on by the kids), the charcoal would catch and the burgers and dogs were on their way. Today, you are far more likely to find propane grills cooking the burgers and dogs, but you can still find some old die hards lighting up charcoal, and claiming that food just tastes better done over hot coals vs. propane flame.

I admit to using propane. To me the fun in the picnic is being with family and friends, laughing, playing, and just generally having a good time, so I cook the way that is easiest and most enjoyable for me. And that is the point. The objective of the cook-out is not really to prepare the food a certain way, the objective is to enjoy the time together, to take a break from work, and any of the other cares we have.

There lies effectiveness! Getting to the goal in ways that we were are most comfortable with. When we who are grilling get to sit down with friends and family and enjoy the company, after we cook the way we like and are most comfortable with - be it coals or propane. When we enjoy the trip, the destination is even more satisfying.

yes, but...

Sat, 3 Jul 2010 18:01:10 -0400

It is an oldie but a goody. "Yes, but...". It is such a wonderful phrase, because it lets you agree with the problem, and then bring up what sounds like a perfectly sensible objection and probably intractable problem: "Yes improving our service will attract customers, but what about the cost to hire the new people to give that service?"

Noticeably missing from the "but" are suggestions to address the problem. "Yes, but" is a simple way to politely tell someone with an idea to shut up and sit down, or worse, a way for you to shoot down your own ideas.

Next time you hear anyone (or yourself), say "Yes, but..." offer an idea about how to solve the "but" problem. If that encounters a "Yes, but..." then offer a solution to that one. Start a discussion, get people (or again, yourself) thinking, and more importantly, moving in a different direction The status-quo is easy, but it is static. Growth is not achieved by standing still.

when a passion becomes a chore

Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:46:13 -0400

The high humidity here in Pittsburgh over the last week or so has taught me something extremely valuable.

I am an avid walker. On a good day I can do several walks totaling close to 6 miles, and on a bad day I do close to 4 miles. In my younger days I was an avid runner, but a series of physical mishaps, advancing middle age, and wretched work schedules took me away from it.

Walking became a passion, and my walks have become an integral part of my schedule, simply put, a habit, and a most enjoyable one at that. The ease with which my body adapted to longer and longer walks reignited my old passion for running; if I could walk almost 4 miles, why not run (or at least jog) a few of those? I started integrating some running into my daily walks. At first everything seemed fine, then my competitive spirit (I'm never satisfied with where I am today) kicked in and I kept trying to increase the running mileage, and speed.

I found myself almost dreading my daily walk/run, and looking for excuses to take a break: "my legs hurt, don't want to overdo it, etc., etc." What was once a joyous passion that launched my day had become a chore.

Then the humidity really kicked in. I started out on a walk/jog, and quickly felt like I was breathing water. I simply could not get enough oxygen. After a few days of this, I started feeling like giving up. The other morning I got up and said "Screw it, I'm just going to walk again today - no run." It felt wonderful! That simple walk gave the energy boost I was used to, cleared my mind - it reminded me why my walks had become such a passion. The next day I tried to incorporate some running, and to my surprise, it was effortless. Now I gauge how my body feels (and the weather!) and decide whether to mix running and walking or just walk. Magically, I am back to looking forward to my morning constitutional.

How often do we allow a simple pleasure or a passion to become a chore because we feel we have to outdo ourselves? We don't always have to be the best, or even compete with ourselves to constantly set a new personal best. Sometimes we just need to enjoy what we do however we do it. Are there passions in your life you have lost because you turned them into chores?

just wow

Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:11:46 -0400

Sometimes something makes you just sit up and say "wow, I cannot believe I am reading this". This article in the Wall Street Journal came to my attention the other day and it fits that description nicely.

The gist of the article is that some employers are requiring that applicants for a job already be employed somewhere. The reasons given in the article seem to make sense on the surface, and if the objective is simply to fill a position with a body that "should" be able to do the job, I suppose hobbling hiring practices this way will work. However, if the objective of hiring is to bring in the best talent, who fits in with the company, and brings needed strengths to a position, I cannot think of a more useless tactic.

Just because someone has a job does not mean they are the best person for that job. There are a multitude of really toxic reasons they may still be employed (e.g., office politics). Just because someone is currently unemployed does not mean they lost their job because of poor performance. Their company could have gone under, they might have had less seniority when the budget cuts hit. Even if they lost their prior job due to "poor performance" doesn't mean they were truly a poor performer. They may have had a lousy manager. The job could have been structured poorly. They could have been a victim of politics.

Whatever excuse is given for limiting the pool of applicants, the question remains: Is the objective to get the person who will best fit in with the team, and will bring the appropriate strengths to the job? If the answer is yes, then acknowledge there is going to be a ton of resume sorting.

The article referenced here is now a year old, but I suspect the practice discussed has actually gotten more prevalent in the past year.

white paint

Sat, 29 May 2010 22:43:28 -0400

Even if you work to pull out and expose hidden or "useless" talents, they can still end up being like white paint: out there, visible, but they don't really generate any excitement. However, if you add a little of this tint and a little of that, you create vibrant colors that make people sit up and take notice. Of course you can go back to that base, that white paint, try some different tints and come up with whole new color combinations.

Too often we see utilizing our talents in some set way - an established, safe way. If our talents aren't up to the level expected (think professional sports - you really have to have some serious talent to make it), we push them off to the side. But what if you looked for an alternative way to use that talent - a different tint or color - the possibilities become endless. White as a color is safe, but it is boring. Start thinking in colors!

will you risk it?

Sun, 23 May 2010 20:40:19 -0400

I recently read an interesting piece by my friend (and very funny person) Trina Hess. The subject was creativity as a leadership competency to move companies forward in these rather interesting times (Trina concentrates on the humorous aspect of creativity, click here to read the whole post).

I happen to agree with everything she wrote (I am a huge fan of the use of humor in business and life), so I started thinking, why don't we see more of this kind of change? Why don't we see the agents of change carrying the day throughout American business? Fear.

While a large number of CEOs and business owners give lip service to the concept of creativity and the disruption that new ideas cause, the reality is that change and disruption are terrifying; the status quo is much more comfortable (even if ultimately fatal to the business). Thus, publicly the concept of change and disruption is encouraged, but as policy within the company? Not so much.

This is important to know if you are going to start to bring your strengths and talents to bear fully at work, because it means you will be bringing change, and there is a good chance that it won't be welcome (at least at first). Is it worth it? Almost certainly. Is it a risk? A huge one.

courage is not optional

Mon, 10 May 2010 17:42:37 -0400

When considering concentrating on strengths, developing talents, and avoiding vulnerabilities, there is one "talent" or "strength" that must be unearthed and brought to bear on the things you are doing: courage.

Not the type of courage we usually associate with the word, like selflessly running into a burning building to save a puppy (although if you have that in you, that is pretty cool!). Rather, the simple courage to simultaneously admit that you have vulnerabilities that cannot be "fixed", and declare that you truly have strengths and talents that can be applied in powerful ways to your day-to-day activities (no false modesty here!). The simple courage to actually do something with those strengths, to jump in with both feet without someone telling you what to do. The courage to change course if you realize that you have been coasting unhappily on a talent that you never really loved.

That courage, that talent, is there in all of us. Bring it out, let it help you to make the most of your strengths and talents. Thinking about strengths and talents isn't enough, you've got to act. Find the courage, it is worth the work.

the simplest of talents

Sun, 9 May 2010 20:48:56 -0400

One thing I get a lot in response to my "there is no such thing as a useless talent" rant is "No, you don't understand, I have a truly useless talent..." and they describe a talent that at first glance does sound trivial or silly. Talents like tying a cherry stem into a knot with your tongue, amateur juggling, knowing a couple of card tricks, may very well sound useless at first glance.

Yet these kinds of simple - for lack of a better word, talents can be used to overcome one of the biggest obstacles in networking: breaking the ice. "How did you do that?" "That is so cool!" Phrases like that invite response, they open a path for conversation, they can jump start the beginnings of a relationship.

Breaking the ice is only one example of a way a "useless" talent can actually become a key part of your life. I emphasize this aspect of effectiveness because so many of us underestimate our own pool of talents. We only see our obvious strengths (worse, sometimes a perceived lack of same), and write off those trivial little talents we have had since we were kids, or even developed relatively recently as a hobby or an avocation.

I still firmly believe that you need to concentrate on developing strengths, but don't let those simple talents go to waste. Think about how they can fit in with your strengths as part of an overall strategy. Feel free to share some "useless" talents in comments, let's see if we can put them to work with your strengths.

desperately seeking talents

Fri, 7 May 2010 10:05:04 -0400

Every one of us possesses some variety of talents. Sometimes they are obvious: we all know a salesperson who just seems to connect with their prospects, puts them at ease, and closes the sale effortlessly. Sometimes they are not so obvious. It is with these "hidden" talents where some of the greatest potential lies.

Sometimes a hidden talent is in plain sight. We just don't feel it is worth anything. It is a useless talent. The truth of the matter is that there is no such thing as a useless talent, you simply haven't found the right use for it yet.

It is easy to inventory your obvious strengths once you know the three criteria to evaluate them against. What is more difficult is to inventory your talents, identify which are already strengths (even if you are not utilizing a strength regularly, it is still a strength), and then further identify talents that might not yet be strengths, but could be developed.

Spend time finding those hidden talents. Where possible, work on developing them into strengths. You may be surprised where they lead you.

talents vs. strengths

Thu, 6 May 2010 13:12:31 -0400

"You have a gift for that." Most of us have been told some variation of this phrase. "That" of course can be anything: from something "normal" like a sport, to the ridiculous like playing PacMan with your toes (seriously, my friend David Holzer can count that among his many talents.) But, is it a strength?

For me to count something as a strength it must meet three criteria:
1. You need to be good at it.
2. You need to be good at it consistently.
3. You need to love it.

If one of your talents fails any one of those three tests, relying on it as a strength will cost you at some point. You may fail at a very inopportune time, or you will go through life doing something you really don't enjoy simply because you happen to do it well.

The truly positive side to this is that many of us have a lot of undeveloped or at least underdeveloped talents. The questions you need to ask yourself are:
1. What talents do I possess that I currently do not include among my strengths?
2. What would it take to develop these talents?
3. How can I apply them?

Number one and two are probably pretty easy; number three is the tricky one. More on that soon.

A committee of one

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:37:00 -0400

When I was a kid, my father had an interesting way of assigning certain kinds of work. He would take you aside, smile, and say "I need something done, you will be a committee of one, of which you shall be chairman." These were the most dreaded tasks, because when he said that, he meant you were on your own; you had to figure out how to get it done, and you alone were responsible for getting it done.

Not everyone claims to desire leadership positions. Not everyone wants to be "in charge". Unfortunately, the fact is we can't escape having to take on leadership, if only sometimes for ourselves.

All of the attributes we look for in leaders we can look for in ourselves. All of the ways a leader can work around their vulnerabilities, we can adapt for ourselves. We don't need to inspire a group, but we do need to inspire ourselves.

A leaderless group gets little done. Why should an individual be any different?

full time leader, part time manager

Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:37:36 -0400

It isn't about being in charge all the time. Sometimes leading is all about providing the spark to get things going, then letting the managers take over again.

Late one summer, I found myself in some undeveloped part of Kentucky with a bunch of friends. Our youth group had left a rather comfortable campground to finish up the week "roughing" it. As often happens in life, a comedy of errors ensued and the main part of the group found itself alone with the sun approaching the horizon, and the group organizers and adult chaperones off trying to build a bridge of some sort. Everyone was milling around trying to figure out what to do and starting to get a little worried that we would not have a camp. At this point someone approached me and said "do something."

I'll never know why he approached me in particular (I don't remember standing in a particularly heroic pose or anything), but since he had asked, I obliged. I called the group together (about 40 kids), and explained the situation: it was going to be dark soon, we needed places cleaned up so we could lay down sleeping bags, and of course we needed a fire. I found four people who knew had to build a fire from scratch and set them to it; they grabbed some volunteers to collect firewood. Everyone else began staking out spots to sleep and cleaning them out. For the next hour or so, I resolved arguments over proper fire starting technique and appropriate places to lay down a sleeping bag.

By the time the organizers had returned with the adults, we had a nice fire pit blazing and a clean camp site surrounding the fire. I happily returned control over to the "managers" and went back to being just another camper.

Are you afraid to lead because you see yourself getting stuck in the nitty-gritty details? Look for those opportunities that allow you to be the spark, the one who gets things started, get it to a point where others can step in and run with it, then let go. You can be a full time leader and a part time manager.

an important lesson

Thu, 22 Apr 2010 05:51:00 -0400

Much as we would like to believe that our experience, knowledge, or just plain amazing ability ensures that our judgment is flawless, we all make mistakes. I remember one that I made very vividly, and the lesson that I learned from it.

One of the departments I oversaw as an executive for an Internet company was Customer Service. The manager of the group was highly competent and extremely outspoken (my favorite kind of person to work with!). We were recruiting for a new service representative, and I was involved in the interview process. One candidate came through that was experienced, competent, but a little reserved. I felt I saw a little of myself in them. In a review of candidates the manager rejected that particular candidate. Up until then, I had only acted as a sounding board for the manager, asking questions to ensure that the decisions made had considered as many variables as possible. In this case I overruled the manager, saying that I felt this candidate had enormous potential, and would be a great asset to the team. We argued over the hire for a bit, but since I was "the boss" I prevailed.

The person "I" hired lasted three months. They did poorly in the training, and after a couple of months they missed work without notifying the manager. We tried to make things work, but we were forced to terminate them.

The mistake I feel I made may not be the one you think though. Yes, I let my judgment be clouded by feeling a connection with this person because of a trait I felt we shared, and maybe I should have been/be more of a hard-nose, but being a hard-nose is not my nature (perhaps it is a vulnerability?) and I suspect the same type of thing would happen again. No, the mistake I made was overruling someone who I had entrusted with the job of running the day-to-day operations of the Customer Service department, for a personal reason. Someone who had earned my trust, someone who was willing to question my judgment. I made it personal. I forgot my own rules about leadership and management; I became an obstacle.

The manager happily accepted my apology and of course teased me mercilessly about it for quite some time. I deserved it.

you can't fake it

Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:32:35 -0400

I have a love/hate relationship with motivational posters. I love the often amazing photography. I usually love the sentiment they express. I hate that so often they espouse values and ideals that are not expressed anywhere in the environment.

I know that everyone is told to have an inspiring mission statement, and that hanging those motivational posters around will "inspire" your people. Unfortunately, unless your actions match your words, you won't motivate much of anybody. A company I worked for a while back had a very eloquent mission statement. It talked about the commitment to the employees, etc., etc. Shortly after a new marketing director started, she stalked into the president's office and informed him that the mission statement was bunk. When he asked why she thought that, she held up the page of the employee manual that reviewed benefits and time off policies in her left hand, the mission statement in her right, and explained: "Because what is on this, does not reflect what is on this," nodding first to her left hand then her right.

If you think the workplace will be brightened up by some attractive artwork, go for it. But leave the motivational words off, unless you are serious about really implementing them.

when leaders pitch in

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:32:59 -0400

We like to think of leaders as being above the day to day work on their project or goal. They do the "vision thing". Perhaps. Occasionally though there may be a situation where another set of hands might not only be welcome, but required.

Back when I was an IT Director, I ran into such a situation. My project was building a computer room from scratch. I won't go into all of the technical details, but it was a large undertaking. The "go live" weekend arrived, and my team started putting everything together. There was a lot of highly technical work going on, configuring computers and network devices, but there was one decidedly low tech piece of work that also needed to be done: running miles of cable underneath the floor to all of the various pieces of equipment. Who could be spared to get down on their hands and knees and run cable? Me. Actually, me and my boss, the Chief Information Officer.

I had hired some of the best computer and networking engineers I could find, people with a far higher skill level than mine. Taking one of those highly skilled professionals away from the technical work could very well have meant failure. So the two leaders, my boss and I, got down on our hands and knees and ran cable all night long. Monday morning we went live.

Leaders determine the right things to do, but they may be called upon to decide who is the best to do something (often described as managing). Sometimes the "leader" is the best person to do the lowest job. A real leader accepts that and jumps in without hesitation.

good to great

Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:10:09 -0400

I am always intrigued when someone giving a leadership presentation asks the inevitable question: What makes a great leader?

If there are thirty people in the room, forty answers get shouted out. "Empathy!", "Great Motivator!", "Listens!" Of course all of these answers are correct. A combination of a lot of these attributes can make a good leader. But what makes a great leader?

How about this:

Having the vision to see the right things to do, and the wisdom to allow others to help you get them done.

The key word is "allow". You can't force, you can't order (well, you can, but the end result is rarely satisfactory). The great leader surrounds themselves with people who want to help reach a goal, and then turns them loose to get it done. Simple? Yes. Easy? Hardly.

doing the right things

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:33:56 -0400

"Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things."
- Peter F. Drucker

All too often we are concerned about doing things right. We agonize over whether we did our job the way our boss wanted us to. Where we are the ones doling out the assignments we fret whether the people we have given those assignments are doing them the "right" way.

So rarely do we ask ourselves "is this the right thing to do?" We do the accepted. We do the conventional. We do it well; we manage.

What would happen if you questioned the thing you were doing instead of the way you were doing it? What if you thought, "maybe this isn't what I want to do, this isn't right for me". What if you acted on that thought? You could fail. Then again, you might discover a path that you could pursue joyfully and where you excel.

Leadership isn't just about working with others, it starts with you. Develop the leader within: do the right things for you.

Lead, follow, and get out of the way

Tue, 6 Apr 2010 10:15:23 -0400

Lead, follow or get out of the way. A simplistic "bumper sticker" directive: here are three choices, select one, because we are moving on! However, if you change the "or" to an "and", you have an effective leadership paradigm that will yield amazing results.

What if, instead of choices, we consider them ways to get things done? What if a leader leads AND follows AND gets out of the way? Let's break it down:

Lead, inspire, have the vision, determine the direction to go. We all have the potential to lead, we all have dreams, it is getting people to follow that is the sticky part. I firmly believe most people would want to follow someone who does the next two things.

Follow the ideas and suggestions others give you. Investigate alternatives that are different (even if, or especially if, radically different) from the ones you are comfortable with or commonly turn to. Someone who is not in front of the parade can still generate ideas and guidance for the one who is. Listen to the ideas of others and investigate or follow paths they suggest.

Get out of the way of the group you lead. They are there to realize the dream, to reach the goal, let them reach for what you have shown is possible. Once you show them the path, the direction to go, ensure there are as few obstacles as possible, step aside, and let the people who you have brought together specifically because they have the skills to reach the goal do their thing.

Lead, follow, and get out of the way. One small change to a phrase, one huge difference in getting things done.

building the road, and maybe some towns along the way

Sun, 4 Apr 2010 23:45:16 -0400

One of the things I harp on when setting goals, is how critical the third key to effectiveness (build the road one step a time - i.e., determining what the steps to attain that goal are) is. When I talk about the concept of building the road one step at a time, my main concern is that unless you determine the steps along the way, you cannot tell where along the path you will need a strength you possess or where one of your vulnerabilities can trip you up. Knowing or having an idea of the way allows you to plan accordingly.

Seth Godin introduces an interesting twist to the concept. In his post "One in a million" Seth brings up that if you dream REALLY big (e.g., becoming first violin for the Boston Philharmonic) your odds of achieving that goal are actually pretty small - say, one in a million. However, if the steps along the path prepare you for other outcomes or take you down other interesting paths, achieving the goal or not becomes a lot less important.

So determining the steps of the path first not only allows you to plow through where you know you will be using a strength and adjust accordingly when the path will exercise a vulnerability, but you can also set the steps up to enhance your current status (if nothing else), and/or create a multitude of paths that you can follow if the "one in a million" shot starts to look more like the million than the one.

Read Seth's whole post, I think you will see the wisdom in what he says, and how the opportunities you can create can result in a huge bonus when breaking down your goals and dreams into manageable steps (The third key to effectiveness - building the road one step at a time).

when a strength becomes a vulnerability

Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:31:04 -0400

I was talking with a good friend the other day and she was telling me about a problem she had with her sales process. My friend is an excellent salesperson in large part because her greatest strength is an ability to connect with people. For as long as I have known her I have been impressed with the way that she seems to mesh with people she meets almost immediately. She develops a strong rapport and high level of trust very quickly (which is justified - her interest and concern for people is quite real and heartfelt).

The problem comes with some of the after sale follow ups. My friend has been doing on-site visits, and the time involved can be considerable (with only a small part being relevant to business), which then cuts into sales time, which makes her uncomfortable, so she procrastinates on doing the follow ups . The very thing that makes her a great salesperson is now causing her anxiety - her strength has become a vulnerability.

What to do? Change the rules of the game. Instead of on-site visits, do follow-up via phone calls. My friend has excellent phone skills, her pleasantness and warmth come through the phone very well. The benefit to her is she can schedule these calls apart from sales time, which eliminates her anxiety and procrastination, which also gets rid of the delay her clients were experiencing with follow-up. Obviously she will test this over a period of time to ensure it is working as well as her on-site visits, and take corrective action as needed.

A simple change in how the game was played resulted in an alternative that should work out to everyone's benefit, continuing to leverage a strength rather than "fixing" a weakness. A great example of how it is done!

you can't delegate that

Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:06:35 -0400

Delegating is one of the more obvious ways to work around a vulnerability; assuming that you believe it can be delegated in the first place. Let's take networking as an example. Since networking is all about developing relationships it would not seem to be a good candidate for delegation. Unless you break it down into its component parts.

The first step in networking is actually introducing yourself to a particular person. If you are particularly shy, that vulnerability can make "breaking the ice" a difficult task. Most books I have read on the subject concentrate on "fixing" your shyness. What if we approach it from another direction? Why not have someone you know introduce you to a few people? Delegate the difficult ice-breaking to a friend who is familiar with the person you are trying to engage, or someone who does not share your shyness vulnerability. The only downside is that it limits the number of people you might meet at a particular event (your friend is probably going to wander away at some point and do their own networking), but meeting a few people is still better than meeting none.

You can delegate far more than you think if you take a minute to break down tasks that seem to defy delegation into smaller parts. What else can you think of that defies delegation?

relax

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:40:00 -0400

Using the principals I espouse, I usually get a lot done in a typical day. I walk/jog between 3.75 and 6 miles, visit anywhere from one to three or four clients, work on my book (more on that another time), write blog entries, help my wife cook dinner and clean up after, follow up on off-site work for clients... the list goes on, but it is starting to get boring.

Occasionally, I have a day like today. I relax. I do my walk, I do a few things around the house, but for the most part I do not do anything "important". Maybe I watch a movie with my wife, maybe I read a bit, it doesn't matter. Days like this help me stop and smell the roses, they remind me that there are a whole lot of things to enjoy in life and not all of them involve money or work.

Most importantly, I recharge, I unwind. I get ready to pick up my full schedule again.

Part of being effective is knowing when to stop, catch your breath, and take a look around you. You don't need to be going 24X7, there simply can't be so much in your life so unbelievably important that you can't take a little break and enjoy the sunshine, the smile of your significant other, the laughter of children, or the wag of a dog's tail. Give yourself permission to relax and enjoy!

incremental victories

Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:23:00 -0400

Wars are won through a series of battles that advance your side toward an ultimate goal. Your life proceeds similarly (hopefully without bloodshed). Your vulnerabilities will be with you your entire life and unless you spend your days locked in a room, you will face a never ending series of challenges that engage those vulnerabilities during that life.

The key is to see those those challenges as you would a war - to be fought in small battles. Sounds obvious but I see so few people doing it. They see the challenges before them and become overwhelmed. Take apart a problem. Break it into small pieces. Then see whether you can change the rules of the game, ignore it, or delegate it. Finish one battle, move on to the next.

Sorry for the testosterone loaded war metaphor, but it was either sports or war, and I hate sports metaphors even more than war ones.

in praise of doing nothing

Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:05:55 -0400

One way to work around a vulnerability is to simply avoid or eliminate tasks and jobs that engage them.

Obviously, you can't just avoid or eliminate everything that you don't like, can't do well, or aren't comfortable with, but, it is truly amazing how many things are done both in business, and life in general, simply because they have always been done. A process becomes ingrained, and accepted as part of the status quo.

Are there things in your life that really aren't that important to you, but you were told throughout your life the criticality or importance of these things, or that if you don't do them you would somehow be incomplete or a bad person? Maybe you just convinced yourself that these things, whatever they might be, were important (a simple way to denigrate yourself perhaps?).

Admittedly, there is a fine line between deciding something isn't important and using that as an excuse to not pursue something you truly desire (one is realism, the other an excuse or sour grapes). However, if you can keep that line clear, you will find yourself a lot happier and more effective.

Can you think of something that plagues you but really and truly isn't that important? Care to share?

the perfect excuse

Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:04:22 -0400

While listening to someone arguing with a fitness coach about losing weight, the phrase "I love myself the way I am" made my ears perk up. From the point of view of "positive thinking", this is a potent argument against taking action on your vulnerabilities. Who can argue with "I am what I am and I accept that"? I have said that having vulnerabilities (and in some cases of weight problems the inability to say no to the wrong kind of foods could be considered a vulnerability) does not mean you are broken, so shouldn't I agree whole-heartedly with that use of "positive thinking"?

Uhh, no.

Putting positive spin on a vulnerability is just another way of throwing your hands up in the air and giving up. Of course now instead of beating yourself up and feeling guilty, you can actually feel virtuous that you see yourself in such a positive light (and this applies to many, many things besides weight - that was just the topic that got this started).

Don't fall into that trap. No you aren't broken, but if a vulnerability is preventing you from achieving something you desire, or interfering in your life somehow (and if it isn't, well, there is a discussion about that coming up), you need to look at the ways you can work around it. Think of unique ways to change the rules of the game, or look for assistance (i.e. delegate). Don't surrender or give up, and don't rationalize a vulnerability with "positive thinking".

letting them choose the way

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:39:31 -0500

I would like to but...
I couldn't do that...
It probably wouldn't work anyway...

These are the kinds of phrases we use to limit ourselves. The underlying theme in all of these types of self-limiting statements is that we can't do something or make something happen because of a weakness we have.

A variation on the self-limiting statements above, but worse in its own way (and one that had trapped me for years), is: "I'll just do this because that's what I'm good at." Whether "this" energizes us or not. Whether "this" makes us jump out of bed in the morning or not. Whether "this" actually engages our strengths or not.

We let our vulnerabilities choose our way for us.

Look at some of the ideals you have abandoned, projects you never started, or are still thinking wistfully about. Now consider what was the vulnerability you had that kept you from it. How could you work around that vulnerability? Now pick one and go do it. Feel free to share in comments.

change the rules of the game

Tue, 9 Mar 2010 18:02:43 -0500

Imagine if in a game of chess you could declare in the middle of the game that pawns could move side to side one space as well as move forward one space. It would certainly make the game more interesting, and if you had set things up at that stage of the game to take advantage of the pawns being able to move that way, you would have the upper hand against your opponent.

Of course games don't work that way, but why not life? Why do have to follow an exact process or flow to get something done? If what we do differently is not immoral, illegal, or dangerous what difference does it make? What is wrong with saying "I don't care if this is the way it is always done, I'm doing it my way!"?

When confronted with a task/project/process that impacts one of your vulnerabilities, instead of sighing and putting forth a best faith effort that you know will fall short - but at least you'll get it over with, change the rules of the game. Consider how can you change the task to fit one of your strengths or talents.

In the comments I would love to hear how you might have done this (maybe even without thinking) in your life (work, personal, it doesn't matter). Give it some thought. If you share in the comments, I will bet you will start thinking about some other obstacles that you can overcome the same way.

playing in pen

Sat, 6 Mar 2010 22:49:42 -0500

I love solving Sudoku puzzles. I always write on them in pen. One might think that I solve Sudoku puzzles in pen so that I can show how confident I am in each step I take to solve the puzzle. One might also think I do it to ensure that I think each move through since it is often difficult to trace back where the mistake was made and just erase those steps. One would be right.

There is one more reason I work on Sudoku puzzles in pen though. When I do make a mistake that I can't recover from, I can just crumple up the puzzle and throw it away. I am reminded that sometimes I fail, but like with most of what we do in life that failure is inconsequential in the overall scheme of things. There are billions more puzzles to solve, and the failure to solve one correctly neither diminishes my desire nor my ability to solve others; I simply did not solve that particular one. It helps me keep the failures along my journey in perspective.

working on a vulnerability

Thu, 4 Mar 2010 11:06:35 -0500

The issue with concentrating on and working to "correct" a vulnerability is that you spend time (and possibly money) that will have little or no useful return. If you are not "wired" for a certain task or you simply despise doing it, no amount of training or positive thoughts about it are going to make a noticeable difference. The time you spend making a marginal improvement could have been spent making large strides in honing and developing your strengths and talents.

So is there a time you should actually work on a vulnerability? I can only think of one. If you get pleasure from the activity/task/whatever then consider it a hobby or an avocation that you pursue when you have the time. Take those Ballroom Dancing lessons if you've got the time and the money (and if you have been concentrating on your strengths to achieve your goals and dreams you may very well have it). Who cares if you'll never be on "Dancing with the Stars"?

Just don't let it interfere with the real passions and work you have in front of you.

what is wrong with a little vulnerability?

Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:21:31 -0500

All of us will admit to some vulnerabilities or weaknesses. Some we are happy to ignore; few of us are concerned we do not possess the talent to be movie stars, but if they concern our work or personal life in the slightest we obsess over them. So we spend money and more importantly, time, taking courses, going to seminars, or reading books desperately trying to "fix" what is perceived to be broken. For some reason, we believe we need to be Superman (or woman). We forget of course that even Superman had a vulnerability (and it was a doozy!)

The real problem lies not with your vulnerability, but with the perception of how important it is, and the belief that it indicates something needs to be fixed within you. The reality is that there are some vulnerabilities you cannot eliminate, no matter how hard you try. Nothing is broken, nothing requires fixing, they are what they are, they are part of what makes you, you.

Accept your vulnerabilities and find ways (and people!) to compensate for them. You'll find it more rewarding, and far more enjoyable.

can anyone help?

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:26:35 -0500

If you aren't going to be a lone wolf, then you need a pack to run with. So will any old pack do? The short answer is NO. The full answer is a little more involved. First, let me drop the wolf metaphor; unlike wolves we humans can belong to or at least associate with multiple groups. However, we have limited time and resources so it is impossible to give a large amount of attention to a wide variety of groups.

We belong to a number of networks or groups by default: school classmates or former classmates, office mates (if you work in an office), family, neighbors. Members of some of these networks can be invaluable in helping you cope with some of the more common changes that occur on a day to day basis (just as an example, when my car needed to be serviced over a weekend recently my wife's family lent us one of their cars so we wouldn't be grounded).

It is the out of the ordinary change that can often go outside of the expertise or experience of our immediate (and most comfortable) networks. The solution, so we are told, is to expand our network... do the "networking" thing. Unfortunately, much of networking is "shotgun" style: point, blast, hope the spray hits something.

Choose your networking efforts based on the challenges or changes you are trying to address. Remember that the most effective networking requires developing relationships, and we have limited bandwidth for those relationships. Look at the organization sponsoring a networking event. Who are they aiming at? If it is a "business networking" group you can bet the attendees are mostly concerned about finding referrals and leads. A lot of service groups attract an extremely diverse crowd. Check around your existing networks to see if anyone has any experience with a group.

This approach may sound cold, impersonal, and analytical, but networking is a tool. If you want to survive change, then you need to use the tools around you effectively. Not everyone can help you with the changes you are trying to make or deal with. Find the ones who can, and work hard to develop strong relationships with them. And the others? Well, you can always add them in with the rest of your 1,500 friends on Facebook; who knows maybe they will become part of your inner circle at a later date for a different set of reasons.

celebrate every success

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:19:50 -0500

Virtually everything you do can be broken down into small component parts or steps. Some are linear: do step 1, then do step 2, and finally do step 3. Some are non-linear: do this (call it step 1), then do something else (maybe it is the third or fourth step or piece of the process described). The order or process is not what matters. It is the doing. The challenge is to continue "the doing" in the face of failures and frustrations, or maybe just a task that overall seems insurmountable (there are how many steps to this!?).

One simple thing you can do to motivate yourself is to celebrate every success. If you are trying to lose weight and you lose a pound, pump your fist, get a high five! Celebrate the loss of that silly pound (just don't eat a Dairy Queen Sundae to celebrate! There are limits after all). It doesn't matter how small or large the success is, the fact of the matter is it is a success - it is progress.

Is this contradicting what I have said about "positive thinking"? No. I don't want you to imagine a success and celebrate it, have a success and celebrate it. There is an old adage: "Success breeds success." You can't breed more successes unless you recognize something as a success in the first place.

Now if you'll excuse me, I am going to go celebrate writing another blog entry!

brightsided

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 06:11:00 -0500

If you haven't read "Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America" by Barbara Ehrenreich, I suggest you check it out at your local library or at least browse through it at a Barnes & Noble or Borders near you. I admit the title is a little off-putting, but what she has to say is largely spot on, and a lot of it strikes a chord with me.

In fact, I had this post started a bit ago, but it wasn't until my friend Mel DePaoli sent me this link:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=kool-aid-psychology

that what I was thinking clicked. Go read the whole thing, but here is one of the money quotes:

"Isn�t positive thinking better than negative thinking? All other things being equal, sure, but the alternative to being either an optimist or a pessimist is to be a realist. "

To be a realist is to see the situation for what it is (good, bad, or indifferent), understand your limitations (your vulnerabilities or weaknesses) as well as your strengths, and to arrive at a plan of action to move ahead. Your feelings are whatever they are (positive or negative), it is your actions that determine what will happen.

the lone wolf starves to death

Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:01:43 -0500

In our society we grow up being fed the concept of the "lone wolf": the lonely entrepreneur who builds a business from nothing to some ungodly size slaving away by himself (or herself); persevering against the odds, or the manager who takes on a failing department or division and single-handedly pulls it back from the abyss.

This concept is a myth. No one makes it alone in this world. In fact this myth is quite dangerous, because it leads us to believe that seeking help is a sign of weakness that other wolves in the pack will take advantage of. The truth of the matter is that in a society rocked with change the way this one is, the lone wolf will quickly find themselves in a world of hurt as their strengths that served them so well in a certain situation utterly fail them when the situation changes.

Surround yourself with allies. Seek out those with different strengths and talents, and nurture those relationships. Help them develop so that they can return the favor. You do not need to face change alone. In fact, you can't.

dealing with failure

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:52:03 -0500

If you act in the face of change and not just feel, you will fail along the way. This is inevitable. There may be some small sliver of the population that populates that extreme end of the "luck" bell curve where everything goes right, but most of us live in the vast center where things go right and things go wrong with annoyingly equal frequency. Failure is a natural consequence of trying things. It is neither bad nor good. It simply is.

Most of us have been taught to fear failure. Rather than fearing failure, I suggest you accept its presence and consider looking to minimize the effects of it. When you start to act take reasonable steps. If you decided to do a parachute jump, you wouldn't strap on a chute and head up in the first plane! Well, I hope you wouldn't. More likely, you would contact someone who has done jumps before and is either an instructor or can refer you to one. They would start you on a series of lessons on packing the chute, landing, etc. After extensive practice and learning you might go up and do a tandem jump to get the feel of it. All of these "baby" steps minimize the effect of a failure. If you land wrong when you jump from 3 feet, you might have sore ankles or legs for a day, but that is better than a couple of broken legs or worse. You still might "fail" but the consequences are far less dire.

feeling vs. acting

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:11:43 -0500

Stephen Covey, in "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People", makes the point that as human beings we cannot control our feelings - they are what they are. However, we have absolute control over our actions. In a world that is changing as fast as ours is today, it is not unreasonable to expect that we could go through an entire spectrum of feelings in a single day. From anger to love, elation to abject depression. So how should you react? What actions should you take? The key is not so much what actions you take, but how you decide on your choice of actions.

Lets take a common change these days: loss of a job. Having been in that situation in the past I know there are a plethora of feelings most of us go through. Anger, hurt, confusion, and the big one: uncertainty. In a well meant but mistaken attempt to get you to turn off your emotions, some employers might tell you that this could be the best thing that ever happened to you, a new beginning. They might be right, but so what? Why shouldn't you feel those emotions? Maybe you loved that job, maybe you were just hanging on in a bad economy. Even if this turns out to be the best thing that ever happened to you, or a new beginning, it is doubtful this new beginning will be staring you in the face, so why should you try and turn off those feelings?

What you cannot do is allow those feelings to determine your next actions. Don't engage in wishful thinking ("maybe they'll hire me back when the economy turns around"). Wishing is a useless action based on emotion only. Actions need to be based on the situation around you and the tools you have to take advantage of that situation (e.g., your talents and strengths). Your feelings may still be churning, but that's OK, accept it.

Dealing with major change is a lot easier when you allow yourself to have whatever feelings want to bubble up inside, but act on facts and analysis.

everything I know about handling change...

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:47:01 -0500

I learned from computer programmers.

If there is one group of people who understand the power (and terror) of change, it is people in the tech world. Few other industries see the kind of massive upheaval that the technology industry sees on a regular basis. A decade is like a millenium in this world. The death of Moore's law (commonly defined as the power of microprocessors will double every 18 months) has been forecast many times, and yet it still goes on.

How do people in this industry continue on without their heads exploding?

As with most things in life, there is no single overriding answer, no clear reason. However, one reason tends to poke out more often than not. The ability to see patterns.

Programmers tend to understand that there are standard patterns that most computer languages follow. Once you know those patterns, it is "simply" a matter of understanding the syntax that allows a language to follow those patterns (and syntax is simply another pattern!). Since a large number of the best programmers are strong when it comes to pattern recognition, it doesn't take them long to see the needed patterns and learn a new language or adapt to the new patterns of an operating environment (like the World Wide Web).

Hopefully any programmers or other tech types reading this will forgive what may sound like an oversimplification of a difficult craft, but it is that simple (mind you, that doesn't make it easy!). In the tech world, the best bring one of their most potent strengths - pattern recognition - to bear on change that occurs at break-neck speed.

It all comes back to identifying your strengths and finding ways to apply them in a new situation.

almost like doing nothing

Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:29:50 -0500

Ever feel like you are treading water? You manage to keep at the edge of the changes that surround you, but you never quite feel like you are on top of things. What happened? You got comfortable.

You react to change, but only enough to reach a basic comfort level. You never dig down to look at what other talents and strengths you might have to face your new reality. You do your tried and true; you make a few incremental tweaks. The bad news is that at some point change may overwhelm your tried and true; the changes we are experiencing in our society today come faster and seem more drastic than ones in our not too distant past.

Now is the time to get uncomfortable. Look for something that could be a game changer, do a complete inventory of your talents and strengths, and really look hard to see how you could leverage them to pursue that new something.

Then go do it.

a choice in change

Thu, 4 Feb 2010 09:49:06 -0500

Tom of the Tao Center (http://thedaocenter.com) responded to my last post regarding change with a line that just resonated with me so much, I felt it needed to be repeated and expanded on (just a bit!):

"change happens... growth is optional"

When confronted with change, the only wrong thing to do is nothing. Every change in our life gives us an opportunity to grow - intellectually, spiritually, maybe physically. There is nothing wrong with feeling anger, despair, or confusion in response to some changes; you cannot control how you feel. We do control our actions and choices. In reaction to change, we must make a decision to not only feel, but act with self-examination, review of our changed conditions, and actions to move forward in the new reality. Yes, growth is optional. The consequence of not taking that option is stagnation.

Who will save you?

Wed, 3 Feb 2010 06:09:00 -0500

One of my favorite blogs is Seth Godin's. His blog is generally aimed at marketers but how he approaches that topic resonates so nicely with my theme of effectiveness, that the point of a large number of his posts relate nicely to some of my thoughts. And so it is with one of his latest:
Who will save us?

Read the whole post, but one of the lines that really struck me was:

"We need to get past this idea of saving, because the status quo is leaving the building, and quickly. Not just in print of course, but in your industry too."

The status quo never stays long anymore. To stay effective we cannot waste time trying to hold onto what is obviously leaving, or bemoan its departure. Rather we must embrace change (even if we don't like it!), look for appropriate talents and find ways to apply them to the new situation. It works better, and is a whole lot less frustrating.

what happened to networking?

Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:28:16 -0500

I have been avoiding going to networking meetings lately. Not because I have been busy (although I have), not because I think networking is useless, and not because I hate people. I have been avoiding networking meetings because like most self-advancement/improvement techniques that become popular, Networking has lost its way.

Every salesperson is told that networking is the way to sales nirvana; a source for an infinite number of leads and referrals. Every job seeker is told that networking is the one sure way to find the job of their dreams. Networking meetings are now just everyone checking everyone else out, each person trying to figure out if they can get something out of the others. The operative phrase is �we don�t want to just get to know you, we want to get to know your rolodex.� Which is just another way of saying �I don�t care about you, I only care about who you can introduce me to.�

Effective networking is a process of developing strong and deep relationships. It begins with truly being interested in the people you meet, working to understand who they are and what they do. Learning what their dreams and goals are, and striving to find ways to help them (sometimes that is nothing more than sitting and listening attentively). Sorry, feigning interest doesn�t cut it; they will figure you out. Offering quid pro quo (i.e., the classic �I�ll get you referrals if you get me some�) may work here and there, but usually ends up one sided (and not always in your favor!), and peters out over time.

Friends will introduce you to their other friends. Friends will talk you up at a party or a business meeting. Friends will lend you an ear when you need it. Friends and friendships can last a lifetime.

The process is slow, and there will be dead-ends, but take it from someone who has received some fantastic referrals and support of incalculable value, the return far exceeds the investment.

It can't be that simple!

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 21:31:35 -0400

When confronted with a simple solution to a problem, many of us react with: "It can't be that simple!" Why? We are trained to believe that complexity adds authenticity or somehow validates what we are doing. Another concept is that without added layers of complexity, whatever our solution is supposed to handle won't fully cover all of the permutations of the problem. So we add complexity until we feel comfortable.

What if we let "it" be "that simple"? Remember, simple does not imply easy; but complex almost always greatly increases the difficulty of a task. So, if we kept it simple, than we will almost certainly decrease the level of difficulty; maybe not make it easy, but...

It can be that simple!

one less cost

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:31:30 -0400

Today, data is virtually free. The Internet has made sure of that. Yes, occasionally you will pay for access to a specialized database, but for the most part, the data you seek can be found online somewhere if you look hard enough.

Unfortunately, there is a huge difference between data and information. Data is just "stuff", lists, pictures, random facts and opinions. Information is created from data but it requires thought and purpose. Information is synthesized from data.

If you want information you pay for it. Either you pay someone to create it for you (books and courses come to mind), or you pay in time and energy to do it yourself. On the bright side, that cost is typically far lower than data acquisition costs.

One of the huge barriers to entry in business was the high cost to acquire the data (market sizes, demographic concentrations, interest in a class of product) needed to create the information that intelligent decisions could be based on - if you couldn't afford it you flew blind. The Internet leveled that barrier. If you are in business (or thinking of starting one), don't fly blind - there just is not an excuse anymore.

required sacrifice

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:53:20 -0400

You must sacrifice to get what you truly want! How many times have you heard that? The concept of giving up something to get something else or delaying gratification is strong in this culture. At the risk of playing semantic games I would argue that while the need to give up some things to get others is often valid, the word sacrifice has such negative connotations that most people tend to shy away from doing the things that could take them to a new level or gain whatever it is they truly want.

The process of getting what you want is actually a series of decisions that set priorities and assign values. Is this goal or objective truly what you want? If it is, then trade-offs you are required to make to reach it are not sacrifices - those things that you must "sacrifice" are simply of lower value to you than your goal.

Look at where you want to go, and what is in your way. If you need to create a tighter budget are the things you are giving up all that important to you? If not, then why mourn them? These are positive decisions and should be celebrated not considered sacrifice. Lighten up! Negative thoughts breed more negative thoughts.

goals: the right way and the wrong way to reach them

Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:36:43 -0400

Goals are wonderful things. They give you direction, they give you a target. However there is a key factor often overlooked when we set out to attain our goals: Focus.

Too often we focus on the goal itself: "Our goal is to increase sales 20% this fiscal year!" The obvious question: "How are we going to do that?" The wrong obvious answer: "By focusing on our sales effort and working harder everyone will boost their sales!" Uhh, right. The result is burned out sales people (or whatever department the goal is aimed at) just doing more of whatever they do, hoping that will boost sales or productivity by whatever imaginary figure someone came up with.

The right obvious answer actually is: "By looking at what we did in the past and what is possible now, executing those things and letting the goal take care of itself." If you want to achieve a goal, you need to put the goal itself aside and concentrate on doing the things that will take you to that goal.

Simplistic statements like "work harder" will not get you to a goal. Posting progress to a goal will not get you to the a goal. Doing the things needed to get to that goal will. Measuring those things for effectiveness and changing course as needed will. Posting the things that are working, and push them will.

Stop focusing on the goal, and start focusing on the steps to that goal. It will make a huge difference in reaching it.

fear as a motivator

Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:47:40 -0400

I posted to a LinkedIn discussion a bit ago about whether "fear" is a valid motivator in business. Some of the people responding defined fear as an internal motivator: you fear failure so you drive yourself to perform at a higher level. I interpreted the question differently. I felt the poster was asking if management could use fear as a motivator (one of his examples was the "fear of losing one's job" - since management is the one gives that impression I went off of that).

I am amazed we would still have this discussion! Fear is destructive. Several posters responded that it can work in the short term (you may make a quarterly goal, etc.) but long term it won't work. I heartily disagree. Making a quarterly goal is not "working". You have no idea what might have been done to make that goal out of fear - corners cut, quality reduced, morale decimated.

Another poster responded that "strict" leaders are not leaders, they are bullies. Hear! Hear!

Leaders/managers inspire, encourage, and support. A climate of fear has no place in an organization.

we know what is best

Wed, 8 Jul 2009 07:39:00 -0400

Remember when your parents would stop you from doing something fun (but probably dangerous) and when you protested they would say "Sorry honey, but we know what is best for you." Admittedly they probably did (thinking back to some of my adventures, I know they did!), and they most likely truly did have your best interests in mind.

Fast forward to adulthood. Amazingly this game still plays out with business owners, managers, and politicians, but I think with a lot less of our best interests in mind. While the phrase "we know what is best for you" may not be used directly, the actions and responses of people "in power" (at least with some power over you) cry it out loud and clear.

The problem is that in most cases I do not think it is because they have some deeper knowledge or truth. They simply want to do what they want, and they do not want to have to debate it, and this is a nice condescending way to shut you up (of course we suspected our parents of doing the same thing, but I think we are a little more justifiably suspicious in this case).

Debate of ideas is healthy; shutting down someone else simply because their opinion is inconvenient to you, or may force you to explain your position, is destructive. If you have kids, you probably do know what is best for them and feel free to tell them that. However, with the rest of the world, take the time to listen to what others around you are saying. It may not always be comfortable, but a true exchange and debate of ideas is unbelievably powerful.

the illusion of control

Tue, 7 Jul 2009 16:38:27 -0400

As a society we have an obsession about control. "Take control of your life!", "Teachers need to control their classrooms!", control this, control that.

Control is an illusion. How can you control someone who has free will, or random events that are blind to your machinations? What you can do is manage. Management is not about making something happen, but rather guiding yourself and others towards your objectives, and adjusting for what comes along. Knowing that something may go over schedule and having a contingency plan is far better than over exerting yourself (or others) in a mad frenzy to "beat the clock".

When you let go of the fantasy of control and start to manage, amazing things start to happen. Suddenly it doesn't matter how something gets done as long as it does (and amazingly - it does). Changes in your schedule merely require changing directions and doing something else for a time rather than huge monkey wrenches in your carefully laid plans.

I am not talking about letting events take you where they may, but rather adapting to the circumstances around you (events and people) and continuing to move forward toward your objectives.

leadership on demand

Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:06:48 -0400

Sometimes a leader can appear out of nowhere, solve a problem, and then fade back into the background.

One year when I was a teenager, a summer camp I attended went to an undeveloped campsite in Kentucky for the last weekend of the "experience". I use the word campsite loosely, and undeveloped literally. We arrived very late in the afternoon, and the group had to separate. The adults and the leaders of the group had to attend to something with the cars and the rest of us were left at a clearing under a rock overhang.

As evening started to approach the leaders and the adults were not back yet, and people started getting uneasy. Nothing was prepared, it was going to get dark soon, and we had been given no direction. For no apparent reason, someone walked up to me and said "Do something!". So I did.

I called the group together (about 25 teenagers) and started things moving. "Who knows how to build a fire?" Three kids raised their hands. "OK, we need volunteers to go collect firewood." Three more kids started off to look for wood. "The rest of you, pick out a place to sleep and lay out your sleeping bags."

Things continued on like this for about an hour or two; people asking where they should put their stuff, the firestarters getting a fire circle built and a nice fire going. By the time the adults and the leaders had come back, everybody was pretty well settled, and I sat down and started talking to friends. I spent the rest of the weekend enjoying roughing it.

Leadership is a state of mind. It does not require a title, and it does not require special training. Sometimes a situation just requires someone to step in for a bit, lead everyone out of the wilderness, and then step back. You do not always have to be the one out front; but occasionally a little leadership on demand is just what is needed.

does anyone remember laughter?

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:29:58 -0400

I ran across a statistic this past weekend: The average child laughs 113 times a day, the average adult laughs 11 times a day. I have heard an even greater number for children, but no matter whether it is 100 or 400 the fact is as we grow older we don't laugh nearly enough.

Some years ago, I was responsible for a team supporting a line of software products. The company had just been acquired and even though the workload was increasing, top management imposed a hiring freeze. It was a very stressful time.

One morning I came into a staff meeting with the department. Everyone looked very somber and serious. When I turned around from closing the conference room door I was greeted with a most unusual sight. My staff had all made paper mustaches and beards, stuck them on popsicle sticks, and were holding them up to their faces; kind of a "we are all Matt now" moment. Two things about this little joke. First, they were pretty good facsimiles of my beard and mustache, second, the department was mostly women; I burst into laughter. I actually laughed so hard I slid down the door and sat there gasping for breath. The department joined in, and we all had a really, really good laugh for about 5 or 10 minutes. Eventually we got back to business, but the tension and pressure that had been in the room at the beginning was gone.

Few situations are so desperate that we cannot find some humor in them. Few presentations are so serious that we cannot inject some fun into them. All of us, at one time or another, have found ourselves in situations that are so utterly absurd we should be rolling on the floor laughing at the ridiculousness of it all instead of fretting and cursing our bad luck.

You may not be able to laugh yourself out of issues, but it can clear your mind and put you on a path to find a creative solution. Give it a shot; try and remember laughter!

doing what needs to be done

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:20:05 -0400

I started walking recently, and the effects have been amazing. I've lost a little weight, gained energy and just overall feel better. (I also sleep like a log!) This post is not about the general benefits of exercise though. My point in mentioning my new found walking habit is to illustrate how easy it is to ignore the things that need to be done in favor of things we feel must be done.

I have wanted to start exercising again for a while. It just seemed there was always something that had to be done first, followed by something else important, and suddenly it was the end of the day and exercise would just have to wait. Recently I made exercise a priority. I reorganized my schedule so that I could go on a walk daily. Not only did the world not fall apart, but I found that I was getting more done!

I had known how my body and mind reacted to exercise - I had made it an important part of my day years ago when I was an IT Director, but for some reason in the last few years I just kept finding things that were supposedly critical and just could not wait.

For me, exercise is one of those things that needs to be done. It is, to use Stephen Covey's terms, Important but not Urgent. Look at your day. Are you doing the things that need to be done, or just the things that you think must done?

vulnerabilities matter

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:57:24 -0400

My son Alexander (Witching Hour Productions) provided me with a perfect example of how not being cognizant of your vulnerabilities can affect your efforts.

Alex was writing an article on using magic (sleight of hand and illusion, not supernatural) to help children develop better eye to hand coordination, greater confidence, and other positive attributes. He went to Google to search for research studies regarding the subject and came back with nothing.

I did a quick couple of searches and immediately found an intriguing study on the subject done in 2008 (they found it made a big difference - who knew?).

Why would I, an "old-timer" (yes, I was working on computers long before the Internet), be able to use Google better than someone who has grown up with it? Simple. One of my strengths is understanding data and how it can be organized, and so how it can be searched. Alex is not wired that way (at least not to the extent I am).

Now that Alex sees this as a vulnerability, he will not waste time doing searches for information - he will go to sources that can do it more effectively; saving him time, and getting him better data.

the perpetual 95% + 5% problem

Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:31:06 -0400

My friend and coach Lisa Spahr has a great blog post up "Open to a Life Coaching Moment: Good Old Customer Service- or NOT - a Case Study". It is a great story, and I highly suggest you read the whole thing, but for the purposes of this post, here is the money quote: "My readers are intelligent enough to know these individuals shouldn�t be in their current positions without serious consultation with a manager."

My question is Would their manager even care? This goes to the heart of the issue of good customer service - actually it goes to the heart of running an effective (and thus profitable!) business. If the management either does not believe in promoting an excellent customer experience, or does not communicate their belief in it then why should we expect that the employees will take it upon themselves? It would be nice if employees took the initiative (and some do) but the reality is most workers take their cues from their managers to determine acceptable behavior.

I agree with one of Lisa's earlier points in the post about excellent customer service: "... I think its DEAD in most places today." and I think that the problem is management. I have seen little or no indication in a large number of organizations that providing an excellent customer experience is policy, or if it is, that the management actively works with their people to help them deliver it.

I've said this before, but I think it occasionally bears repeating: 95% of all business problems are management problems... and the other 5%? Well, they are management problems too.

Excellent customer service does not need to add costs to doing business. It starts with management deciding it is important, then designing policies that guide, encourage, and reward employees to provide it, and lastly doing everything in their power as managers to ensure that employees can and do provide an excellent customer experience.

vulnerability or excuse?

Wed, 3 Jun 2009 20:52:55 -0400

Tom Menditto (The Tao Center) teaches Tai Chi. Tai Chi is only one aspect of Tom's approach to wellness, but it is the one that is relevant to the point of this post.

Most of us have at least heard of Tai Chi and have a vague simplistic idea that it is a series of moves and poses that require a lot of concentration which carry significant stress relieving and strength benefits. Tom tells me there is a lot more to it than that, but I that would be a whole post (if not a book!) by itself. What intrigued me was a story Tom told me during a meeting we had recently.

Tom was running a booth at a chinese festival when an elderly couple approached and engaged him in a discussion about Tai Chi. After a bit, the couple told Tom that it was all very interesting, but they "were too old" for Tai Chi. He tried to politely correct them; that thousands of elderly people practiced Tai Chi, and that it was actually extremely beneficial for older folk. They stuck to their guns though, insisting that they "were too old" and finally wandered away.

Age can be a vulnerability in some cases. Engaging in contact sports like football, lacrosse, or hockey is simply not a good idea after a certain age. However, as Tom pointed out to the couple, thousands of older people practice Tai Chi and rather than putting themselves at risk, enjoy many benefits.

That couple used their age as an excuse. Why? I cannot know what was going through their minds, but often it is the fear of failure that is the culprit. We fear failure. We fear looking foolish or dumb.

As you look inward to identify your vulnerabilities (so you can find ways to work around them), ask yourself: is this truly a vulnerability or am I just making an excuse so I will not even have to try?

games team builders play

Mon, 1 Jun 2009 06:35:07 -0400

I joined a discussion thread on LinkedIn the other day. The discussion was centered around whether team building games (e.g., one person stands in front of another and falls back, assuming the other will catch them) were effective.

Do I really need to say what side I was on? There were some great insights in the discussion, but I was amazed at how many team building consultants jumped in defending these exercises. I think sometimes we forget that a team is a means to an end. When you start concentrating on the team itself instead of the task the team is assigned, then catching each other and going on retreats together become replacements for critical evaluation of the problem the team is trying to solve and seeing how each team member can contribute.

While I am totally against just looking at a team as a group of production units (the other extreme), touchy-feely, getting in touch with your inner team member, and other such stuff (for lack of a better word), is not an option. Nothing beats dissecting the problem and bringing each team member's strengths to bear where they will do the most good.

when disaster strikes

Thu, 28 May 2009 14:57:46 -0400

This past weekend I saw the most interesting example of teamwork in the face of disaster.

I was working in my yard, and I moved a shovelful of what looked like some loose dirt. Suddenly there were thousands of black ants running around the dirt I had just disturbed - I had taken the top off an anthill.

Within maybe 15 minutes, most of the ants were gone; digging new tunnels and recovering what they could from the wreck I had made. A small cadre of ants remained out, moving sticks, pieces of leaf and dirt, and small rocks; rebuilding the hill.

While few of us (I hope!) will ever experience the trauma of having the physical top of our house or business ripped off, are you prepared for a more "mundane" disaster? What if the market suddenly changes? Your largest customer dumps you? Can your team mobilize and regroup to face the new challenges? Will they?

Not only must you have a disaster recovery plan, but your team must be there for you as well. The ants do it out of instinct and for what is essentially their family. Have you instilled similar feelings in your team, or are they just units of production? Are they just there for the job?

can your network respond?

Wed, 27 May 2009 08:32:00 -0400

Expanding on the previous post. The third attribute of an effective personal network - The ability to respond to your requests actually exists in the network, is affected by three key factors:

1. How common the request is to the network. The more common a request, the higher the probability someone in the network can handle it, or can pass it on to someone in their network.
2. The willingness of the members of the network to pass on requests to their networks. If every request stops at the first contact point, chances increase that the request will go unfulfilled.
3. The broadness of your network, and the networks of your network members.

If you have recently changed directions in your personal or professional life, the requests that you have and may receive can change as well. Requests can become odd, or not fit the network (this can be a symptom that the third factor is not there). Are you assuming that requests are passed on to your members' networks? Maybe you should ask. A broad network does not necessarily mean a huge network. It does mean diverse though. Cultivate relationships with people outside your circle.

Just as computer networks need constant maintenance, your personal network needs care as well.

effective personal networks

Tue, 26 May 2009 08:12:37 -0400

For your network (friends, business associates, etc.) to be effective it must possess three key attributes:

1. Requests for service or information are responded to promptly if someone can answer the need.
2. If someone cannot respond to a request for service or information they pass the request on to others in their network.
3. The ability to respond to your requests actually exists in the network.

Most of us would say our networks handle attribute one pretty well. I suspect that attribute number two is not as common (we may fool ourselves into thinking it is though). The third attribute is the most critical and the hardest one to identify.

If you want networking to work for you (and for the members of your network!) start thinking about the requests you have and receive, look at your network in relation to them, and ask yourself if your network possesses the three key attributes in relation to those requests.

silver bullets

Wed, 20 May 2009 06:52:52 -0400

If, like me, you are a fan of old monster movies - especially werewolf lore, you know that as long as you have a silver bullet, you are golden.

Besides movies, I am a voracious consumer of books. I will take three or four books from the library and read them all, typically reading parts from all of them at different times of the day in different rooms of the house. Most of these books are concerned with success, leadership, and service in business. Each of them purports to provide a foolproof system to success in whatever the subject of the book happens to be; they promise a silver bullet.

Interestingly, a lot of the people I know who also read these books do not follow the suggestions or systems in them for long before being distracted by the next big thing.

This is a shame.

It is a shame because each one of these books usually contains some valuable information, and if parts of the systems, processes, or changes to your life they are expounding fit your talents, then you can do some amazing things. Unfortunately, we want that silver bullet. We want that one solution that will change everything. So we throw out some good stuff that we could have merged with other good stuff, and instead jump both feet into the next system that we will throw away in a few weeks.

Next time you pick up a book like that remember that you are probably different from the person who wrote it: different personality, talents, life situations. Take what fits, mix it in with what you already know, be ready to change if it makes sense. You will be pleasantly surprised.

one size does not fit all

Mon, 18 May 2009 06:54:48 -0400

Of all the ways you can make the job of management easier, the one way that does not work is to "treat everyone the same". While this may sound like a wonderful idea, in reality it is destructive.

The power of a team of people lies in each of their unique talents. You cannot effectively utilize those talents if you act like one person is exactly the same as the next with exactly the same needs. Is treating people as individuals tougher? Of course. However, if you do, you will find other parts of your job become easier.

employee rankings

Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:20:42 -0400

I was directed to an interesting blog post here via a recent post by Seth Godin.

What interested me was not the concept that it is harder to hire good people in a downturn (it is always hard to hire good people - just because hiring is a difficult process; often done wrong!), although that was intriguing in itself. No, what truly interested me was what seemed to be the blind acceptance of the employee ranking concept. (A players - the ones you absolutely want or need to keep; B players - the ones you think you can advance to be A players; and C players - your first choice to lay-off if the time comes.)

I have two issues with that concept:
1. It requires acceptance that management has designed the best procedures to get things done.
2. It ignores the fact that someone who is a C player within the current framework of processes and procedures could very well be an A player in a different framework.

In a previous post, I argued that current processes should be reviewed and changed to fit new circumstances on a regular basis. What better time to evaluate the processes than in a downturn? The way things are being done should be reviewed first, and possibly changed. Then, evaluate personnel. Some of the A players may no longer fit, and some of the C players may suddenly look a whole lot better.

the foundation

Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:43:00 -0400

Management (from the CEO or owner of the company down to a supervisor) is truly the hardest job in a company. Great managers can make amazing things happen in a company. What makes a great manager? Ask 10 people who have seen a great manager in action that question and you will get 20 answers; and a good number of them would probably be right!

There is no single attribute to a great manager, but there is one attitude to start with that will lay a strong foundation that you can build a world class team on: believe in your people and in their strengths.

If you are a manager, I challenge you to examine your attitude towards your direct reports or employees. Do you truly believe that they want to do the best job possible? Do you believe they possess strengths that can be leveraged to maximize their contribution as well as their belief in themselves? If you do, then strengthen your foundation and apply those beliefs into actions. The results will astound you!

simple and easy

Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:43:10 -0400

We often seem to believe if something is hard (not easy), it cannot be simple. Computer programming is a prime example of this.

Computer languages tend to be quite simple. The list of commands you have available to you is often just a few pages long. Compare that to a modern english dictionary! Also, the number of ways you can put together those commands is relatively limited. What is hard is translating a process (like generating an invoice) into that computer language. That is where the work comes in.

In a similar vein, management of people is actually quite simple. We have a list of things that need to get done in a certain time frame with certain resources available and a group or groups of people to do it with. Simple! What is hard is motivating these groups - teams - to get the job done.

Books like the "One Minute Manager" are often scoffed at for being overly simplistic. Actually though, a lot of those types of books or concepts (like working to strengths!) are right: It is that simple. However, it is not easy!

The choice is yours: Work hard on creating processes that are simple to grasp and organize. Or, take the easy route -- which actually becomes working very hard on complicated processes that create unneeded work for you and your people.

infinite loops

Thu, 26 Mar 2009 11:15:16 -0400

In computer programming there is something known as an "infinite loop." This occurs when the programmer accidentally or unknowingly sets a condition that will never be met to stop running a particular section of programming code. Since the condition is never met, the section of code keeps running until you physically interrupt it.

Is there an "infinite loop" in your life?
- Do you keep hoping that your boss will suddenly recognize your accomplishments (after 5 years!) and promote you?
- Are you amazed that turnover in your company is still high?
- Perhaps you keep advertising in the same place and no one ever calls?

There is a difference between quitting before you reach a goal and realizing that you might be going in circles and will never reach that goal. If you can recognize that you are in an "infinite loop," interrupt it! Try something else. Let me know what you find.

the 6 most dangerous words in business

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 05:57:00 -0400

"That's how we've always done it."

These are the 6 most dangerous words in business. In a world where the only thing that does not change is the fact that EVERYTHING changes, thinking that something you have done in the past will work today is a recipe for disaster. It does not matter whether you are successful today, whether you are struggling, or if you are just worried. Everything in your business should be reviewed and considered or reconsidered on a regular basis.

Do not fear change! If you cannot embrace it, then at least accept the reality of it -- and take action.

FUD

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 06:03:00 -0400

"Right now, anyone who misses work could end up without a job." That quote was from an article in my Sunday newspaper a few weeks ago. The quote was from an Administrative Assistant who had gotten a call that her daughter had a fever and needed to be picked up from school. "But this time, Ms. Rodriquez insisted her daughter go back to class." Wow. Sounds like that is one dedicated and motivated employee!

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. If that is the best a company can do to motivate and inspire employees, then we are in for a long and nasty recession. Here's the problem: when FUD is used as a "motivator" (intentionally or not) that employee will bring that FUD home and transfer it to whether they should buy product XYZ or not. As the sales of product XYZ go down, the company who makes XYZ gets nervous and starts instilling FUD into their employees so they work "harder". And so it goes...

Is the recession real? Absolutely. Will some companies be forced to layoff staff? Unfortunately, yes. However, using that FUD to motivate employees is a simply horrible idea.

What would be far better is to try and make valuable employees feel valuable. Don't lie or give false assurances that they will never be laid off. However, let them know you appreciate them -- and work with them on personal and professional issues. They must be valuable; if they were dead wood, why are they still with the company?

Why not AIM for Appreciation, Inspiration, Motivation?

your super powers

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:02:44 -0400

Seth Godin hit another home run with his blog entry What's your super power?

Now, if you are going to introduce yourself by telling someone your super power(s), you need to have identified it (or them!) first. This is where finding your strengths comes into play! Once you have identified your strengths and found the proper place to apply them, you can design your introduction.

When I am asked "so what do you do?", I usually reply:

"I help individuals uncover their hidden talents and strengths -- and help discover ways to apply them in their personal and professional lives."

The person I am speaking with does not need to know what the underlying strengths are that give me these "super powers," only that I have them. Now we have something to discuss!

renaissance

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:29:27 -0400

I believe business is on the verge of a renaissance. A renaissance where people are recognized as the vital aspect of a business that they are -- rather than just another unit of production.

This may be hard to swallow watching the huge number of layoffs and the collapse of the financial industry; but I don't mean those dinosaurs. Trapped in the old paradigm, even the ones that are left will not make the change. Or as a last resort, they will have to be dragged, kicking and screaming into the future.

I am talking about new business. A business that one may start in order to take advantage of a new technological advance or a hole left by the death of the dinosaurs. The ones that start these businesses have an amazing opportunity: to utilize people effectively by allowing them to work to their strengths, by structuring the work to leverage the people, not structuring the people to leverage the work.

Pass the popcorn, this could be interesting.

the spark

Sat, 14 Feb 2009 22:19:04 -0500

An organization be it a business, a club, a community service organization needs a spark. A person who energizes everyone in a department. A person who jump-starts a stalled project. A person who makes everyone else sit up and listen in a meeting.

They might not be the most liked, but they are typically respected. They might not be the recognized leader of the group, but the leader ignores them at their peril.

Are you the spark of your group/organization? If not, can you identify someone who is or who could be? If it is not you, cultivate and nurture the one (or several) you can identify. Without a spark, motivating and advancing a group is truly an uphill slog.

the "best people"

Mon, 2 Feb 2009 05:34:00 -0500

John Thain, former CEO of Merrill Lynch was interviewed recently where he was justifying bonuses that he paid out just before the the crap hit the fan. His explanation boiled down to that you had to reward your "best" people or you would lose them. What was the determining factor in deciding these people who received these bonuses were Merrill's best people? Were they they ones that were keeping the solvent parts of Merrill running amid crisis? How did you know they were the ones - what actions could you point to? Or was it just that they had a fancy title and that meant they had to be the best, why else would we have hired them?

The point is your best people are not always the ones that are supposedly running something for you. Sometimes they are the clerk in some cubicle somewhere that makes sure schedules are being set up, and client orders are being fulfilled. Sometimes the ones running something are doing a lousy job, but the people underneath them are somehow holding everything together.

I find it disturbing that the assumption is immediately that the "best" people are the executives, when all too often they are the worst.

How can anyone be a politician?

Fri, 30 Jan 2009 05:38:00 -0500

I watch politics in spurts. I have been watching lately only because the decisions being made may very well determine how quickly this economy recovers. Notice I say how quickly and not if. One thing I have observed in the history of this country and its economy is that it always survives. It always recovers. That may change someday, but I do not think that day has arrived (and the discussion about why I think this way is for another time - and that day may never arrive either).

But I digress. What has intrigued me about the political scene in the last few weeks is the give and take and compromise that politics requires has been in full view. I wonder if any politician is free to (or maybe even capable of) put forth policy ideas that they feel will work, and what they think is right, without larding it up or dumbing it down with everyone else's interests?

How can anyone be effective in an environment like that? How can anyone enjoy working in an environment like that?

Doing it my way

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:29:27 -0500

I have been posting sporadically for the last several weeks. Couple of reasons: I've been sick, and just the hassles of a busy schedule. At least those are the reasons I tell myself.

I had developed a rhythm to posting that worked very well for me. When that got disrupted, I thought "hey, no problem, blogging is supposed to be spontaneous, I'll just post when the spirit moves me like they say blogging is supposed to be". The problem is, that isn't the way I work, it isn't the way my thought processes flow.

The result was exactly what I should have expected: sporadic posts, thoughts forgotten because I wasn't near my computer when they came to me.

My point? I am a big believer in systems. But, those systems need to be your own, they need to be fitted to the way you work, the way you think. When you try and do what you are "supposed to do", it falls apart. To be truly effective you have to do it your way.

status quo

Fri, 23 Jan 2009 04:21:00 -0500

I have been watching the debate on both sides as our new President starts to introduce his plans/ideas for this country. I won't debate here the merits or demerits of anything President Obama is presenting. Rather what intrigues me is the reaction on the part of critics. The language varies, but the basic premise can be summed up In a phrase: "That's not the way it has been done!"

The status quo is the single greatest enemy to progress. If you always do things the way they have been done, you get run over by the innovators. It may take time (the larger the organization, generally the more time it takes for change to ripple through) but it will happen. Not a matter of IF, just a matter of WHEN.

The desire to control things, to determine the outcome seems to come naturally, but the reality is sometimes you just have to plan the best you can, then jump.

Revealing a weakness

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:44:00 -0500

One of the interesting things I have observed in general about managers is their inability or unwillingness to admit weakness. Part of this is our culture. Our leaders are supposed to be infallible, which is why we descend on our "heroes" in sports, politics, and entertainment with such force when they slip. "They let us down!" Managers fear that if they show weakness their subordinates will descend on them as well and try to exploit it.

What a shame. While I do not recommend standing up in a staff meeting, rending your shirt while screaming "I am lousy at this!" (this being whatever task is being discussed at the time), recognizing where you are weak and involving the people who are strong in that area, actually reinforces their view of you as a leader, and (for those of you who are of a paranoid bent) can short circuit any attempt to exploit your weakness.

Always digging a well

Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:43:37 -0500

Harvey McKay says about networking you should "dig your well before your thirsty". Now that we are in a downturn, those that dug their wells are reaping some of those benefits. Those that did not are struggling and racing around trying to find some way to survive, and making time for digging a well just seems a waste - there are more immediate concerns and the benefits just seem too far away.

Perhaps. Or perhaps NOW is the time that you should make sure to carve out a slice of your day/week/month to dig your well. NOW is the time to fit into your busy schedule some effort to help someone else. Will you see an immediate benefit to this? Maybe not. But, there is another old saying that applies nicely here: "A friend in need is a friend indeed."

Stand out now, and when things start looking good again (and they will!), you will be remembered over others.

Why do things need to be complex?

Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:14:00 -0500

I still run into people who take exception to "The One-Minute Manager", and the other assorted books in that genre that try and simplify management, service, or whatever down to some basic concepts.

"No, it is not that simple! Management (or whatever) is far more nuanced, there are thousands or millions of components to this that need to be considered!"

Only if you are worried about control. The more complex a system or a process, the more control the person(s) in charge have. Only they know the secrets to making everything work! Only they can communicate the needed directions to the right people at the right time to avert disaster.

In dealing with human beings in particular (and I sometimes think with computers as well), control is a fallacy. Oh sure, you can fire someone, or reassign them, but that is not control - in the case of firing them, you have actually removed them from your sphere of influence. How is that control?

The point is, management can be that simple - get the right people in place, and get everything out of their way so they can perform. Is that easy? No, but do not confuse simplicity with ease. Management is still hard work, and "The One-Minute Manager" and its cousins do not try and make the case that it is not. Only that it does not need to be complex.

A little mutiny can be a good thing

Wed, 7 Jan 2009 05:49:00 -0500

If you are a manager at any level, do you allow your people to challenge and argue with you? Too often we get to a level within an organization that we start to think entitles us to "respect" and devotion of those below us. Or in the case of the business owner, we just think we deserve that respect if for no other reason than "I sign the checks".

If someone wants to bring something up, they should write a polite memo, outlining their concerns and their proposed solutions. Maybe.

Or maybe, if they are burning with an idea or concept, or are worked up about some policy they see as a roadblock to getting their work done, they should storm into your office, bang their fist on the desk, and give you that piece of their mind.

I have had managers that worked for me do that. The result is refreshing. Instead of some soulless, passionless memo or email (I am unfortunately old enough to remember memos), I saw the fire, I saw what ignited this person. I saw the possibilities. After the initial outburst, I also got facts. I got a volunteer to explore a new concept. Most important, I got a partner instead of a subordinate. I got someone who knew they could speak their mind, and who knew if their idea was rejected it was not personal, and that they should keep coming with new ones, and they too would be considered.

No, you do not want to have regular screaming matches in the hallways (you should never react with a negative outburst), or noontime duels with pistols at ten paces. What you do want are people that know you will listen, that you will react to and consider things in a consistent manner, and that you know they are human, and that sometimes blowing off some steam can be a good thing.

The Million (or Billion) Dollar Man

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:32:00 -0500

Do CEOs actually deserve the huge salaries we hear about? Maybe, but it depends on a key factor/standard that USED to be applied, but does not seem to be anymore.

Risk.

As an example, whether you like him or not, Bill Gates deserves every penny he has made (and the quite a few he gave away). Gates took the chances with Microsoft from the very beginning. He put his reputation, his skill on the line and made the company what it is today. There was no golden parachute waiting for him in those first few years.

Today's big company CEOs assume no risk. They come in with massive compensation packages and If they are let go, they fall back on severance packages that are more than most of us will see in a lifetime. There is no incentive for CEOs of larger companies to do anything other than the status quo. How can they lose? If the company takes off - it was due to their strong leadership. If the company fails, even if they take the blame, they walk away financially set.

The ones who truly deserve compensation and recognition are the managers at any level that break the rules and innovate. They challenge and truly take chances (given their severance package - if any - won't compare to the CEO's).

If you own your business or took over a failing one and rebuilt it - reward yourself. But do not forget the people who continue to make things happen for you. All businesses need to the managers who "just keep things running", but they should be truly rewarding the ones who are out there trying new things - failing sometimes, but often succeeding, and helping your business grow.

The Crab Barrel

Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:11:00 -0500

There is an interesting effect that has been noticed at the Maryland shore. If you open a barrel of live crabs, they will start to try and climb out. Makes sense, but then what happens is if one starts to gain on the others, they will concentrate on pulling the leader back down.

You will find the same effect in business and in life in general. As one person starts to gain in power or knowledge, others will try and find ways to pull them down - to take them down a peg.

For 2009, make it your goal to ignore the others pulling you down. The words are common: "That isn't the way we do things here.", "That won't work.", "Well that is just plain stupid." Don't let the ones who are too afraid to take the bold steps drag you down. The ones who don't believe in applying your strengths in unusual ways. Make this year the one you escape from the barrel.

Happy New Year

Thu, 1 Jan 2009 09:28:04 -0500

There is an amazing opportunity this year. The news is filled with economic gloom and doom. These are the times to bust out of the box, and work on being effective. The standard ways of doing things in business will not work in this environment. Look to being different. Look to cutting out the business as usual, and take some chances. But do it based on your strengths and your talents, not what everyone else is saying what to do, or what "you think" is the right thing.

Here is to an intriguing 2009!

christmas service

Thu, 25 Dec 2008 08:57:54 -0500

My wife and I have been very busy this year, and so we found ourselves out at the mall the day before Christmas Eve doing some last minute shopping for our mostly adult children (when do you really become an "adult"?).

Luckily for us we share our children's rather "interesting" and eclectic tastes - so we knew exactly where to go: Hot Topic. I have been to Hot Topic before and generally the service has been cool at best, and truly indifferent at worst. When you are under the gun this is not the type of service that encourages a festive holiday feeling, but their selection of off-beat stuff was our best bet so...

To our great surprise we were warmly greeted by several clerks when we came in, and after a minute of looking around with a slightly concerned look on our faces (we weren't finding what we wanted), a young lady with the middle part of her hair spiked up and dyed a light green, came up and asked us if she could be of assistance. We told her what one of our sons was interested in and she immediately guided us over to that section of the store.

What happened next actually surprised me. She stayed with us, volunteered to go in the back to check if we could not find the size t-shirt we needed, and then shock of shock, she actually started asking us questions about our other two kids to see where she might direct us for them as well. She even picked out a stocking stuffer for one of my sons that was one of the last two (she was buying the other one for herself). She stayed with us for a good 20 minutes, talking, and holding merchandise for us we weren't sure about.

Her name tag said "Rex" which we were relieved to find out was a just a nickname (she is a fanatic about Tyrannosaurus Rex).

Thanks to Rex we were able to get everything we were hoping to find, and Hot Topic made a few sales they probably wouldn't have gotten if she had not been so helpful.

If you have a Rex working for you (be they a retail clerk, front-line customer service, or just someone that occasionally deals with customers) make sure they are appreciated for what they do. Rex made my wife's and my holiday cheerier, and ensured that I will give Hot Topic other chances for my business in the future.

The best teams

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 08:36:20 -0500

Being a "team player" frequently means "do not make waves". Teams that are made up of classic "team players" are a waste. They may make some manager happy - they're doing their "job", keeping the status-quo, but it is highly unlikely that manager's team will do anything meaningful for the company.

A real team player is one who is constantly questioning, one who is constantly looking at the other members of the team to see how they might be utlilized in different ways, playing off their strengths. They work within the team pushing; looking at and bringing up alternatives, but their overriding concern is the success of the team.

If you are leading a team, you may think you want a bunch of people who will follow you blindly (although you may not put it quite so bluntly - but that is what it is), but what you REALLY want is a bunch of people with strong opinions and wild ideas. Your job is to make sure that they pull together, and that none of the members disrupts the team as a whole.

You do not want a bunch of robots, you want individuals. More specifically, you want individuals who care about the success of whatever the team is about. Look for people that care passionately about the success of a team. Get their opinions, their thoughts, their ideas. Make sure that you or the group as a whole considers them. If they are rejected, explain why.

If you can build a team like that, you will go farther, and do far more, far quicker, than the docile group down the hall who need to be led to each task and never question or challenge.

Wasted time, wasted motion

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:27:00 -0500

As the US economy moves deeper into recession, a rallying cry from the past will rise again: "Do MORE with LESS!" I have a better idea: "Do LESS with THE SAME or LESS (if you insist)!"

How many things do we do in business that are just busy work, or we did to answer some immediate need and then became a part of the corporate culture? I suspect far more then we expect. If you are shorthanded or forced to reduce headcount, rather than requiring who is left to cover those jobs as well, see if that work can be eliminated or forstalled.

When things are good it is easy to over-hire or do things that sound good at the time but do not contribute significantly to the bottom line just because we can. When things start to head south a bit instead of looking hard at some of these things we just make the survivors handle them.

This is truly where a stats fiend (see previous post) can be invaluable. With masses of data, it is easier to isolate what is making a difference and what is not. Be brutal with yourself and not your people, find the things that are truly not needed right now and free your people up to do the important stuff. After a time, you probably will find you didn't really need it anyway.

Measure, measure, measure

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 06:02:00 -0500

Revisiting a blog entry by one of my favorites: Seth Godin - Three New Jobs - I want to focus on one of them: the Stats Fiend. You should be measuring almost everything in a business, actually I would say start looking at your life too!

Like all things though, there can be too much of a good thing, and if emphasis is placed on the wrong stats, you can go traipsing down a very lonely and useless path. One glaring example that came to mind recently was a lot of customer service organizations obsession with a wonderful metric: "average time on a call". In the appropriate situation, this metric can lead you down a path of discovery about aspects of your product or service that need attention. By looking at the relationship between time spent on calls and the reason the customer called in, you may find reps need additional training, or that your product or service is broken in some serious way. Unfortunately, all too often the metric is used to punish reps who try and help customers. Reps are rewarded for "getting the customer off the phone" so they can handle more calls per hour meaning less reps need to be hired, costs go down and all is right with the world! Uhh, no.

There is a huge difference between data and information. Collect all of the data you can, but look carefully at the information you synthesize from it.

You are what you think you are - kinda

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 05:46:00 -0500

There is a philosophy floating out there where the basic concept is whatever you think you are, you become it (I am probably oversimplifying a bit but bear with me). If you say you cannot do something, or that you are "bad" at it, then voila! that is the behavior that results. If you believe that you can do it, then your behavior adjusts accordingly. Besides the obvious issues some might have with this when it comes to physical activities (no amount of positive thinking could make me a world class body builder say - my genetics are wrong), I think this concept has some merit if you add one little tweak to it.

I speak to groups about strengths and weaknesses and one of the things I emphasize is finding ways to avoid getting stuck with the things that weaken you, things you are not good at. You may not be physically able (see bodybuilding mention above - and if you know me stop laughing), or you may not be wired that way (can we all be accountants if we put our minds to it?). My philosophy would seem to contradict the above philosophy... except:

What if you choose to improve at something you had previously decided was a weakness by applying one of your strengths to it in some out-of-the-box way? You do not need to do something the way "everybody else does it" (shameless plug: feel free to check out my rant on "Best Practices" over at The Contrarian CIO ). If doing it differently meets your needs and exercises a strength instead of a weakness you are way ahead of the game.

Think about an activity you avoid because "I just don't do that well" and look for a solution using one or more of your strengths (and especially forget what everyone else tells you is the "right" way to do it). You might be surprised.

Fear of failure

Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:52:00 -0500

A close cousin to the fear of change is the fear of failure - or maybe it is the son or daughter? At any rate, fear of failure is another innovation stifler and effectiveness killer.

Why do we fear failure? We fear losing the respect, the friendship, the love, etc. of those around us. Of course in the business world we fear that we will lose our jobs and worse, that no one else will employ us or help start anew.

Failure is nothing more than a learning process - if you let it be that. Each failure teaches you things that you might have done wrong, assumptions that you made that might have been wrong. A failure does not reflect on your value as a person, it is how you react to that failure that reflects your value. There is a breed of person known as a serial entrepreneur: they start companies, and either they fail or they succeed. If they succeed, the entrepreneur usually ends up selling it, and moving on to the next idea. If it fails, they look at it, learn some lessons and move on to the next idea. Some of these people get funded pretty much every time they start a business.

Don't let the inevitable failures in life stop you. Pick yourself up - dust yourself off - and start again.

Fear of Change

Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:03:00 -0500

The Pittsburgh, PA metro region has some of the highest mass transit rates in the country. Getting on a bus here starts at $2.00. With costs escalating service is being cut and rates will probably increase. Some months back, there was what I guess would be considered an opinion piece in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette about a European model of transit. The philosophy was to run small buses (probably closer to vans) through neighborhoods, then these "feeders" would drop those people off at main bus routes where the larger buses would run in very tight well defined routes. Unfortunately I do not have a link (if I find it I will update this post) because the piece was well thought out and very sensible. So why wouldn't our Port Authority try it? Depending on who you asked, some answers would be: intransigent unions, incompetent management, the cost, etc.

The answer that underlies any explanation of course is: fear of change. The unions fear anything that would change the status-quo - how does this affect their members, what would the parameters be to negotiate under this new system. Management fears the same: if we change, how do we deal with the new issues that are sure to crop up?

This fear of change stalls innovation and destroys effectiveness. Change is something to be embraced and celebrated, not feared and rejected. Most of you have probably never heard of Digital Equipment Corporation. In the late '80s they were the number two computer manufacturer behind IBM (number two!). When PCs started to proliferate, their CEO scoffed at them (he also scoffed at UNIX, calling it "snake oil"). The result: Digital missed the boat on the PC revolution, was eventually bought by Compaq, and disappeared from the business landscape.

Do you constantly look for ways to change your business for the better or adapt to an ever changing landscape? Or do you stick with "the proven old ways" which believe me, at some point, will land your business in the dustbin.

Success Breeds Success

Mon, 8 Dec 2008 06:06:00 -0500

This past weekend, I got my bank to fix a mistake they had made. The mistake was not obvious and it took a bit of conversation to convince the customer service representative I was talking to that I was right, but with perseverance I was able to get her to see the light, and have her convince her supervisor as well. That success lifted my spirits to a point where I sat down and finished up a client project that had been dogging me, and start on some new blog entries.

We all have days where things just do not seem to be going the way we want. On those days, find something - anything - that you can take on, knock down, and claim success. Then go back to some of those thorny issues. I will bet you find them a whole lot easier to address.

How NOT to win against the big guys

Wed, 3 Dec 2008 07:24:07 -0500

One of the arguments against the Big Box stores (Walmart, Target, etc.) is they destroy local businesses. One of the counter arguments is that the local stores need to find new ways to survive in this brave new world. I am not coming to come down on either side of this argument today, but let me tell you a cautionary tale for local business.

One of my cars has a slow leak in a tire. The small garage I usually take the car to is about 25 minutes from my house, and there are no coffee shops or cafes around there to wait at - way too time consuming for such a simple repair. The closest Big Box store is Costco - they won't work on tires they did not sell. So, I decided to try the local tire store which is a 10 minute walk from my house. Sounds great huh?

I get to the place around 10:00 am. The neon "OPEN" sign is not lit, and it is hard to tell if the lights are on in the office. I take a chance and yay, the door is unlocked. There are six people in front of me, no one is at the desk. I stand in front of the desk and wait. Several minutes later someone who looks like they work there walks in, goes behind the desk, does a couple of things and then walks out from behind the desk toward the door. No acknowledgment of my presence. Before he can reach the door, a delivery guy walks in. They talk for a second, and they both walk out the front door.

The person who looks like he works there returns, and heads for the door leading into the service area. He grabs a pair of gloves and as he slips them on, one of the people in front of me asks him how things are going. He grunts something and walks into the service area. It has now been around 10 minutes and no one has said a word to me. Disgusted, I walk out. As I am leaving, a couple pulls up and walks into the office. A few seconds later they come out and get back into their car.

Two customers gone. I won't speak for the other guy, but I will not be back. Now, perhaps they were short staffed that day. Maybe they were overloaded with work (yay!). Would it have hurt to put a sign up on the desk letting me know that and they would REALLY appreciate my patience? Would it have killed the guy to say, "Good morning, sorry for the wait, we are really jammed up, someone will be with you in a second, please grab a cup of coffee while we try and get our stuff together?"

My choice now is to probably go to Pep Boys (they are 20 minutes from my house, but there is a strip mall nearby where I can get a cup of coffee and work while I wait). There, someone will acknowledge me in probably less than a minute, get me written up and on my way to wait for probably two hours just to fix a leak in a tire - but, it will get done.

Do I really need to explain the moral of this story?

Happy Black Friday!

Fri, 28 Nov 2008 05:18:00 -0500

As I am writing this, I have no idea how this, one of the heaviest shopping days of the year, where some retailers make the bulk of their money, will turn out.

I do know - even if sales are down, that there will still be mobs of surly shoppers descending upon shops everywhere, and a lot of them will not be in the best of moods (it is one of the reasons I stay home and let my Thanksgiving dinner settle - no sale is worth the hassle to me).

If you are a manager of a retail business, watch out for your employees today - they are going to take a lot of abuse, and if you help them through it, you will get something back as the season progresses. Also, watch for your superstars today. The ones who seem to thrive on the challenge of keeping up with the rush. The ones who never lose their smile, when those all about are losing theirs (apologies to Kipling). These are the ones that you want to consider keeping on if you hire seasonally. These are the ones that can help your business through the coming predicted downturn. Try not to let them go.

Raving Fans

Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:29:00 -0500

If you have read the book "Raving Fans" you may have thought to yourself - "Yeah that sounds cool, but who could really afford to do things like that?" Depending on your industry you may not be able to afford not doing some of the exceptional services described in the book.

You may believe that your service is so unique or complex that your customers have no choice but to seek you out. Unfortunately for you, even something as complex as computer services is now considered a commodity (because of increased competition), or worse, the value to some companies is not perceived as sufficient to justify the cost.

I would argue that providing an experience that "delights" your customer is more of a necessity now than ever. If you are considering cutting costs as the clouds gathering about the economy seem to be getting darker, consider cuts that might inconvenience you vs. your customers. If everything points to cutting service, then look for different ways to provide service.

While I still do personal on-site visits, I am looking to conserve my time (and my client's!) by offering phone conferencing and on-line meetings using software like Go-To Meeting.

Consider how you might be able to add more value to an existing product or service. If it helps you keep a couple more clients, and maybe even gain some in bad times it will be well worth the effort.

Why wouldn't you want someone like this?

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:40:10 -0500

This post from Seth Godin is perfect.

The You Show

It is aimed at the interviewee, but I think interviewers should take notice.
Here are the money quotes:

"One approach is to be reactive, to sit where you're supposed to sit, have your resume appear just so, wear what you're supposed to wear and answer each and every question in the safe and secure way.

The other approach is to put on a show. To be in charge, to lead.
...
Some bosses don't want to hire people who have a vision, a personality and a shtick. That's okay. You don't want to work for them anyway."

Read the whole post. An effective employee is always one who can think for themselves, who knows how to do their job and lets you do what you should do as their manager: get yourself and everything that might be an obstacle the heck out of their way. They do not make your job harder, they make it easier. If you feel threatened by such people, maybe you are the one in the wrong job. I wish more managers understood this concept.

The little person on your shoulder

Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:08:00 -0500

They have no name, no face. A lot of us are familiar with them though: whenever we are on a roll or about to break new ground - step out of our box, try something new, exercise a new found talent/strength - they appear on our shoulder whispering in our ear "You're not that good! You can't do that! Who do you think you are kidding?"

Whenever they appear, you need to brush them off your shoulder and keep moving. They are self-doubt, concern; they can stop ideas and dreams in their tracks.

The reality is if you have been truthful with yourself about a strength, you are that good. Are you the best? Who cares? If this is a true talent/strength it means you are probably better at it than a lot of people. Very rarely do you need to be the best (and even Tiger Woods loses here and there), you just need to be doing your best.

Do what you love

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:53:00 -0500

You may have heard that you should do what you love and success (or something) will follow.

I have an issue with this. What if you actually suck at what you love? Worse, what if you are the only one that cares about what you love? I suspect that no amount of love for that thing will bring you success then (heartbreak maybe, bankruptcy very possibly).

What that really should say is: If you love doing something, are good at it, and there is a market - do it. Otherwise, make it a hobby.

But I have to work on my weaknesses!

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:08:00 -0500

I gave a presentation a bit back to a group of sales people. The focus of the presentation was to concentrate on your strengths and look for ways to apply them to your sales career. Where you were weak, I suggested they look for ways to avoid that part of the job or to find some way to get assistance.

In one of the comments I got back the writer insisted that I was wrong, that he needed to work on his weaknesses as well as his strengths. Some people seem to believe they can truly do anything if they just put their minds to it.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. I have a tin ear, and my wife who is quite musical tells me that I have a range of three notes - and those are off key. If I "put my mind to it" and went to a voice coach, I am sure I could probably increase my range to four or five notes (OK, lets be optimistic and say eight), and probably be on key for about five of the eight.

I do not think that would put me in line for lead singer of any popular rock bands, or a position in the Pittsburgh Opera. So why would I waste my time and money? I am perfectly happy singing along with the radio when I am out driving (when no one else is in the car and I can have the windows rolled up), and that is pretty much the end of it.

Reality is that none of us are great at everything. We can go much farther in our lives and our careers if we understand that and work to our strengths. Give a little attention to our weaknesses (enough so we do not get fired for example), but concentrate our efforts on where we are gifted. Look for out of the box ways to apply those talents to the job at hand. You will be happier and your boss will be too.

Service - Doing it right

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:07:00 -0500

My wife and I recently bought some groceries at the local Giant Eagle (one of the supermarket chains in Pittsburgh). When we got home we realized we were missing a couple of items. We double checked the car and realized that we must have left a bag at the self-checkout.

We drove back (it is only a few miles so I figured the gas was worth less than the groceries), but there was no sign of the bag at any of the self-checkouts. We figured that either someone had found them and thought this was their lucky day (if they liked mashed potatoes) or the staff had put the products back.

We briefly discussed what to do next, and had just decided to write it off and buy the stuff again when a clerk who had been standing near us asked us what had happened. We explained - feeling like idiots - and told the clerk what had been left behind. To our amazement the clerk remembered putting the stuff back, directed us over to the customer service line, and had us wait while she went back to the shelves and retrieved what we had left behind.

What astounded us even more was when she noticed that the line at customer service was a bit long, she pulled a manager aside, explained the situation and asked if we really needed to have our stuff reviewed. The manager asked if we had the receipt (which we did), looked in the bag, and said "no problem".

A couple of things here. First - the clerk did not have to go out of her way to retrieve our groceries. She could have told us to wait in line, have our receipt verified and then let us get our stuff that we carelessly left there. Second - she really did not even have to ask us what the problem is - in this "service" economy I rarely see employees get in trouble for not asking if they can help someone. Last - besides her taking a manager aside (how often would an employee have the guts to interrupt a manager?!), the manager did not have to just let us go - they would have been well within company policy to make us wait and verify everything and sign some kind of release form at the customer service counter. But, she did, and he did not.

That is an example of service done right!

Intriguing Idea

Sun, 9 Nov 2008 22:25:42 -0500

I try and follow Seth Godin's blog on a regular basis. This post from Saturday caught my eye in particular though:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/11/three-new-jobs.html.

While the concepts would be foreign to a large number of business owners, these three jobs could be some of the most effective positions in a company (certainly anyone doing a lot of online work). Effective does not have to be unusual, but sometimes it sure helps!

Great concept Seth!

Service - Doing it wrong

Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:21:45 -0500

My business networking group meets weekly in a hotel. We have a contract with that hotel. We guarantee them we will be there every week - we pay them, and they even have a no cancellation clause. In return, they agree to have a room available to us, with tables set up the way we request, and coffee (critical for me).

The other week we showed up for our weekly meeting only to find that the room was not set up, in fact it was set up for a different meeting. We asked the clerk about it. Her response was that she was the night clerk and the person responsible for that kind of stuff was not there and she was not sure if they were going to be in that day. She did check and there was another meeting room that was not reserved so we grabbed that. Unfortunately the room was not set up the way we wanted it, and there were too few tables to organize it properly. We inquired about stealing a table or two from another room, and were handed the same line about she was the night clerk, yada, yada.

Meanwhile, several of our membership inquired about getting coffee. The service staff was a little more helpful, and shortly coffee was available. We had our meeting, but the atmosphere was a little more harried and it was not as enjoyable as usual.

I do not blame the clerk. She had been given no direction and probably no leeway in how to handle customers renting meeting rooms. She was most likely worried if she helped us pilfer a table or two she could lose her job. I blame the management. While I do not know the specific policies in place at the time, I can guess that management was far more interested in "control" then they were pleasing their customers. This kind of "service" is way too common, and I expect to see more of this style in the near future due to "the economy", since it is seems to be a universal to restrict service to customers even more to "cut costs" when the economy tanks. Time and time again experience shows that cutting service results in a downward spiral.

What a shame.

Networking as Farming

Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:30:33 -0500

Dr. Ivan Misner, the founder of BNI®, and who most people consider "the father of modern networking" often says that networking is like farming rather than hunting.

When you hunt, you fail if you do not bring something back every time you go out. When you farm, you spread seeds knowing some will grow, some will not. but over time you will collect a nice harvest.

I was thinking about this metaphor the other day, and there are some things there that I think some people who are exploring networking or referral marketing miss; things that could make networking far more effective for them.

There are several phases to farming.

The first is to select and prepare the land for the particular seed you want to plant. You need to test it. Is it too acidic for this type of plant? Does the plot get enough sun, what is the drainage like? Too often when we network we do not consider whether the people we are networking with (the land) network with people in our market. We meet with them and immediately start asking for referrals rather than getting to know how they work with people, what social groups they belong to, and most importantly, asking how we can help them. We do not investigate or prepare the land.

The next phase of farming is to plant the seed in a way that is suited to the way this particular plant will grow. How far apart do the plants need to be? Have you ever been to a networking event where you see someone collecting business cards (hopefully politely), then they go back and put all of those cards into their mailing list database and start sending out newsletters etc.? Maybe your business needs a lot of seeding - you require a high transaction rate. Maybe (like me) your crops need a lot of room. Fewer plants, but I can concentrate on helping them get large. My goal when I go to a networking event now is to find a few key people, and see how I can go about developing a mutually beneficial business relationship with them.

After the seeds have been planted they need tending. They need to be watered and fertilized on a regular basis, weeds removed around them. Here is where a lot of networkers fail. They meet someone who is of interest, plant the seed, then wonder 6 months later why they never got a referral from that person. Your contacts need to be tended to. They need to hear from you, they may even need your help with something.

When the crops have matured comes the harvest. Some people are pushy - they try and harvest too soon. This can destroy the plant (the relationship) that you have worked so hard to develop. On the other hand, you cannot let the fruit wither on the vine. You need to pick it (it generally will not throw itself into your basket - even if you have a great relationship with that person). Sometimes that means getting up into the tree and looking around. I never said this would be really easy!

One last word: too much of anything can be a bad thing. If you are trying to reach huge numbers of people with newletters etc., make sure you have their permission to send them stuff. There is a word for unwanted email etc.: SPAM and it is not good. If you have the smaller more tightly knit networks, keep in touch, but remember these people typically have work they need to get done too!

Farming is a system, and yes I am a system guy (shameless plug: check out The Contrarian CIO, my technical blog!). I am a fan of Dr. Misner's work, and his organization (and yes I am a member). Check out BNI® - in Western PA go to http://www.bni-westernpa.com

As high as your elbows

Fri, 31 Oct 2008 06:38:00 -0400

When I was in High School, I was on the springboard diving team. A bunch of divers from across the city would regularly go to an indoor pool run by the city where there was a great diving board and a coach who had just missed going to the Olympics (he placed 4th in the trials).

One piece of advice he would constantly give us was to watch where our elbows where when we started a dive: "You will go as high as you lift your elbows." It was hard to lift your arms up high once you left the board. You got scared and tried to get your arms in position as quickly as you could. You found out real quick what happened when you panicked and dropped your elbows at the start of your dive. Water is really hard when you land on your back from about six feet in the air.

When we are motivating people, or motivating ourselves, how high are your elbows? Do you set a goal way above your head and reach for it, or do you panic and drop your elbows thinking this is as high as you go?

Poisonous atmosphere

Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:06:00 -0400

If we were placed into an atmosphere of methane, we would die from what for us is a poisonous atmosphere. Common sense tells us it would be pretty stupid to ask out people to work in a room filled with poisonous gas. "Hey! Just hold your breath and step out every couple of minutes to get a fresh breath!"

Yet we expect people to function and be effective in an atmosphere of distrust. One where they are constantly looking over their shoulder. One where they are never sure which way they are going to be asked to go, and it does not matter anyway because often there is no right way to go.

Then we are shocked that we have turnover - "It is so hard to find good help these days!"

Not only is an atmosphere where intelligent trust is the norm effective - the opposite: no trust, "you have to earn it!" is poisonous.

What kind of environment do you provide?

I've added something new!

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:53:32 -0400

If you know me (or have looked at my web site - mjtomsho.com) you know that I have been both a manager, and a technical type. If you have been following this blog, or even if you have just joined me and have reviewed some of the older entries, you know that my passion is to find the effective way to do things. I have struggled for a while with how to integrate the concepts of effective management and technology.

Well, my struggle is over. Starting today, I am breaking the two apart. Crypto-effectology is alive and well and will continue to be applied to management philosophy on this blog, and applied to technology on a separate blog: The Contrarian CIO. I hope you will join me on both as I continue to indulge in explaining to anyone who will listen (well, read) why it is really all about effectiveness - not productivity, not efficiency. Doing the right things using your strengths and talents vs. established ways or even "best practices".

Does confrontation have to be a bad thing?

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:43:06 -0400

Depends. It really is a matter of degree. Some would consider just spelling out what we want to be confrontation. "What if they don't agree?" "What if they say they won't do it?" If you have problems at this level, either you have hired or are working with some really bad people, or you have set the bar so low that they don't take you seriously as a manager or a co-worker on a project.

Confrontation in what I think of as the classical sense is caused by either a misunderstanding of expectations, or one party (usually the one making the assignment) changed the rules for whatever reason (often because they didn't like "the way" something was being done - it wasn't the way they would have done it).

If you find yourself changing the rules, you need to look at yourself and figure out why someone coming up with a different way to do something scares you so much. This behavior will definitely lead to really bad business relationships and you will have a really tough time retaining good people (or getting people to help you).

If there are misunderstandings, it can be a little more complicated. You may know the job you are delegating or sharing so well that you skip steps in your explanation. If this is the case, learn to ask the person to review with you the steps before they go off and do it. If they stumble, it may be because you skipped something. Never assume that someone knows as much as you. Never let them assume they know as much as you.

When someone has a clear view of the task at hand and makes a mistake, you will generally find they will take the blame, and the confrontation can become a help session instead of screaming accusations.

An effective system

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:23:00 -0400

An effective system is one that gets the job done. This past weekend we bought a Wii Fit. This "game" for the Nintendo Wii, is designed to help you create and follow a regular exercise program.

Yes, the graphics are hokey, the encouraging comments a bit trite, but overall I would say Nintendo has done a fantastic job. The exercises are actually challenging and fun, the system responds well to input (the board you stand on for most exercises and the Wii controller are fantastic engineering).

Several members of my family have started on it (yes me too), and the initial indications are that we will stick with it (Gee an exercise program that people stay with... I would call than an effective one).

As I go through the program, I will be talking more about the interface and why I think this system will be effective. Some of the more technical aspects may be going on a new blog I am launching shortly: "The Contrarian CIO" watch for links to it!

Best buddies?

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 07:03:00 -0400

It can be easy to misconstrue giving trust as offering friendship. After all, trust is the core of a friendship. From that point it could be easy to assume that if you trust your people, then you are becoming their friends, and that is not a good thing (or at least we have been told that - I am still considering that).

The fact is trust, friendship, and the manager/employee relationship can all be considered separately. The kind of trust that a manager needs to give to their people is not the same kind of trust you might give to a friend. You do not need to give out personal information, or get involved in their personal lives. You may need this information to make an informed decision, but you can ask for it when it is appropriate rather than making a regular part of the work relationship.

Did I go out with my people in the past? Yep! A couple of times. I shied away from it most times I was asked - not because I was afraid they would think I was their buddy, but rather I wanted to allow their direct supervisor to develop the relationship she wanted with them.

In general, I would say that being "a trusted friend" to your people is not the best idea in the world. However, letting them know they can trust you in the world of work (even if you do not go out drinking with them) will pay huge dividends down the road.

Boss vs employee bunk

Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:27:49 -0400

A lot is written and spoken about the supposedly adversarial relationship between boss and employee.

An adversarial relationship forms for a couple of reasons. The biggest is lack of trust. If the manager/boss does not trust the employee to do what is right and/or the employee does not trust the boss to do right by them, they end up warily circling each other, looking for a weakness or an opportunity to get a hit in.

So, how about if you hire people, give them some trust to start and watch what happens? If you are consistent with this, employees will start to police their own ranks (why would they want someone to ruin a good thing?). This does not mean do not check up on people, but instead of checking to see if they are doing something bad, how about offering to help in some way? You may end up removing an obstacle, and you can find out what is going on at the same time.

Careful though! If your offer to help is not sincere, or your trust is not, people will see through you in an instant.

The tyranny of low expectations

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 06:03:00 -0400

A post from a few days ago mentioned how I thought my experience at a fast food place might have been better if they had just finished up with "that completes your order". My wife mentioned that those words were sometimes uttered at that particular place: when a manager was working the window.

Hmm. So the managers were trained and expected to say that, but the regular employees were not? That would mean either that aspect of the system was considered inconsequential, or the employees did know about it, but the managers did not enforce it. Or, some combination of the two. Examining the second option, why would the managers not enforce such a simple rule? Possibly because they did not feel it was worth the confrontation.

Since so little is expected of the workers at a fast food place, compromises are made in the system. Is it any wonder that you get treated like a non-entity at drive-thrus and stores and supermarkets? If little is expected of the employees then why on earth should they try and go beyond the most minimal effort in their jobs?

They say

Wed, 15 Oct 2008 07:06:00 -0400

In the heat of this presidential election you see a lot of news reports that start with:
"many people say..."
"but some think..."

Who the heck are these people? They seem to be all over the place. In business and on the job:
"I heard..."
"I read..."
"experts say..."

The funny thing is that those phrases usually preface someone telling you that something cannot be done. We use some vague hogwash that "we heard" or "we read" or "I've been told" to avoid doing something different. To justify looking at the people we work with as units of production instead of the individuals that they are.

The guy that started FedEx originally submitted the business plan as a paper in a class. He received a "D".

Look past what others are saying - maybe something really is impossible, but on the other hand...

The simple things

Mon, 13 Oct 2008 04:56:35 -0400

I went through the drive through of a local fast food place the other day to pick up some stuff for my kids. They took my order efficiently enough, gave me the cost, and I drove up to the window to pay and pick it up. Here is the breakdown of the process that followed:

The young lady behind the window repeated the cost (good). I handed her my credit card which she swiped and handed back to me (OK, but no "thank you"). Since we had more than one drink, the person filling my order asked if we needed a drink carrier (Excellent!). Last, I was handed two bags without a word and everyone at the window turned away to work on the next order (Very Bad).

This would have been a pretty good experience except for that last step - I was confused as to whether the order was complete - my wife looked through the bags and confirmed that it was. However, I held up the line for almost a minute while I waited for them to confirm there was nothing else and then until my wife had verified the order.

It is the simple things that can make a difference. I was not even expecting a thank you, but four words: "That completes your order" would have assured me I could move on. Why is it so hard for businesses to document a simple 4 step process and show their employees how to follow it?

The root of the thing

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:03:00 -0400

The word effectiveness contains the root "effect". The literal meaning of this is to make things happen. It is so easy to let things "affect" us. They push on us or we adapt them as part of our persona (an "affectation"). In business and in life are you going to be the person "making" things happen or the person things are happening "to"?

Good for the Goose, good for the Gander?

Wed, 8 Oct 2008 06:18:00 -0400

If everyone that came into a job had exactly the same talents and applied them exactly the same way, then every process and procedure you design for those talents would be perfect for every person you brought in. I would offer up that trying to find clones of a specific person might conceivably be possible, but would be extremely time consuming and just downright disheartening.

An example of a position I have seen this goose and gander metaphor play out is sales. Often the sales manager got to where they are because they were a really good salesperson. The issue as to whether this is really a smart move will have to be the subject of another post. For this post, what seems to generally follow is since the sales manager was very successful with his or her style of selling, they assume that their methodology is - if not the only - certainly the best, and they push their people toward being just like them.

This is a fallacy. There are always multiple ways to get a job done. What the sales manager should actually be doing is looking at some of the fundamental aspects of their sales process (length of cycle, type of customer they typically deal with, average sales size, etc) and then looking at their people to see if they have talents that can be applied to these aspects.

Effective Management - The Trust Factor

Mon, 6 Oct 2008 07:34:00 -0400

One of the primary attributes of an effective manager is the willingness and ability to give intelligent trust to their people.

In an earlier post I talked about how you have to start with trust somewhere - you can't say "I will trust you when you earn it." If someone starts out with zero trust how can they earn any? They would not be able to do anything that would earn your trust since they have none to work with.

What an effective manager does is evaluate the employee and the situation (what is the sensitivity of the job - what is the worst that could happen if something goes wrong) and then makes a decision to allocate a certain amount of trust to that person.

Here's the catch: the employee needs to know how much trust you are giving them, and they have to be willing to accept it. If they feel you are not giving them enough trust, then they will not work to earn more - unless - you sit down and explain to them why you are giving them this particular level of trust. If they still do not accept it, then something is fishy - either you are giving an incredibly small amount of trust; maybe less than the situation warrants, or you did not explain it thoroughly enough, or the employee is truly untrustworthy (or has some kind of attitude).

The bottom line is that you have to start somewhere and you have to trust your instincts about people, and the data you have about them. Real management is not easy - sorry!

Effectiveness and Efficiency and Productivity, Oh My!

Fri, 3 Oct 2008 06:07:00 -0400

Aren't effectiveness and efficiency and productivity the same thing?

I get this a lot. The answer is very simple: NO.

I can do a task as efficiently as humanly possible. However if the task is not focused on reaching an appropriate goal (personal, business, whatever) then simply, it is not effective.

I can find ways to be incredibly productive (fit a lot of effort in a short amount of time). If the result does not bring me closer to the goal... it is not effective.

It really is that simple.

Job Descriptions

Wed, 1 Oct 2008 07:18:00 -0400

How are most job descriptions written? Often (especially at low and mid levels), we give a title to the job and then list out the responsibilities that "we all know" make up that job title. Oh and just to cover the bases, we add "and other responsibilities as determined by the supervisor/management".

These things are wonderful! Now, we can determine an appropriate pay scale (since all "X" are paid in this range in our industry), and we know what to evaluate the employee on, and - bonus! - we have a checklist to go through to hire.

Standardization in a manufacturing process allows the company to create its product more efficiently and hopefully more effectively. Standardization in positions stifles effectiveness.

Standardized job descriptions ignore the goals of the company, the department, and the individual. They tie the hands of the managers to bring in a truly excellent person who may not fit a couple of those bullet points.

Are your job descriptions defined to help the company meet its goals or are they designed for the convenience of the management? Will the people you hire bring new ideas and new concepts, or will they fit a mold that may or may not be effective in helping reach those goals?

Work Vs. Effort - redux

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 06:28:00 -0400

I've touched on this before, but I think it is a critical enough concept, and has enough facets to it, that it bears revisiting.

More often than we want to believe, we confuse work and effort.

Work is the set of activities designed to achieve a goal. If the goal is to release a new product, the work is designing the product, lining up the raw materials or the components, putting together the production process, then marketing and sales. If the goal is to clean up the yard after the winter, the work is pulling out the dead plants, picking up debris, checking the lawn mower, and mowing the lawn. These examples are simplistic but you get the point.

Effort is the amount of energy we expend performing activities.

If the effort expended is not aimed specifically at the components of the work, it is not effective, and can even be destructive. This may seem obvious, but how many times have you sat down at the end of the day and said: "Whoa! I worked all day and I got NOTHING done!" You expended effort on things that did not advance you toward your goals (e.g., You read a bunch of emails and responded to them. Checked out some web sites for whatever).

Remember Pareto's Law (often known as the 80/20 rule): 20% of the effort achieves 80% of the results. How much of your efforts are aimed at your goals?

People belong here

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:38:00 -0400

While maybe automation is best for some of the repetitive and unimaginative tasks still being done by people (the previous post mentions the cooking of fast food in particular), there is a world of work out there that people do belong in. It depends on how it is done, and what is most effective for the business.

Lets look at that fast food place. If you had folks whose talents centered around being sociable, why would you not want them out there taking orders? Yes, there are times when just punching a couple of buttons and getting some food is more convenient, but there is something to be said for the social interaction. When I go to a restaurant, it is partly for the food, but partly for the service. I tip based on how the waiter or waitress treated me and responded to my needs. Would I save a couple of bucks if I didn't have to deal with a person? Yes, but the experience would be different and I wouldn't go there for the same reasons.

Effectiveness. That word is always there. What is your market? What is the most effective way of dealing with them? What do they want? When I eat fast food (a lot less now than when I was young), I want the consistency of food that automation can bring, but I still enjoy ordering from a person who can smile at me, make sure they got the order right, and make me feel like the restaurant actually cares that I chose them over the burger joint down the street.

Passion for automation

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:38:00 -0400

McDonalds was not the first, and over time, it may be shown they were not the best, but they were and are a leader in the concept of systemization of the processes that make up a company. This systemization concept has allowed the franchise market to explode. By reducing a job to the most simple steps, the people doing the job become interchangeable. No one needs to be a chef to turn a hamburger patty at exactly the right time when it has been shaped to the exact thickness, and is cooked on a grill set to the exact heat, to ensure that it is cooked to the proper temperature and degree of doneness.

Long term, the logical conclusion is to completely automate processes like that - eliminate human workers all together. I am not altogether comfortable with this, but at the same time, I see the economic reasons, and frankly, most of those jobs strike me as soulless, boring things that sap any sense of fun or enjoyment out of the people doing them. How can one work to their strengths and talents if there is nothing that can be applied to the job?

That said, I believe there are a lot more jobs out there that business is busy trying to automate that should have the human factor. More on that in a few days.

Is greed effective?

Mon, 22 Sep 2008 07:16:40 -0400

Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch. Six months ago, most of us would look at the executives of these companies and say: "Man, they must be really smart. They must really know what they are doing. They've got this effective thing down. Look at the money coming in!" Now? Not so much.

Greed of course was the overriding reason these companies went down. Greed at the top, and yes, greed at the middle and at the bottom (well, at least at the sales level - I doubt admin assistants, etc., got to share in the wealth all that much). Nothing much is going to change in companies that size - the profit drive is so great and is so ingrained into the people that take over, that I don't think anyone who thinks differently can get into a position of change.

Greed is not effective. Greed distorts one's worldview. Few of us will ever get to either run or create a company the size of the financial behemoths that recently have been laid low. But, in our own lives, in our own business - the restaurant that reduces portions or uses cheaper ingredients; the retail shop that looks for new ways to get more for less from their employees. We can always justify that "our costs have risen", "You just can't hire good people anymore", but in the end, if it is about getting a few more bucks in our pockets...

Greed is not effective.

the carpenter gene

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:47:20 -0400

The other day, I was interviewing a remodeling business owner with Melanie DePaoli for our upcoming book and at one point he commented that he firmly "believed" that there is a "carpenter gene" and that you either have it or you don't. Either you can work in wood, or not. From my own experience, I have to agree with him. I can't cut a straight line to save my life. Miter joints baffle me.

This goes to my point about working to strengths. When I need carpentry work done, I hire a carpenter. If I do it, the job will take 10 times as long (if not more!) and it will be done badly. I think most people would agree this is the correct thing to do, and yet in so many businesses we are expected to wear many hats, some of which we simply do not have "the gene" for, and then our job is critiqued partially on those things we have no skill for, and we are expected to improve on those things! Crazy.

It only takes 3 to create something great

Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:29:37 -0400

When I look back on the history of technology, it seems that small teams have almost always been the ones to truly create something great. Edison invented tons of things by himself or with little assistance. Novell Networks (I'm dating myself here - Novell was one of the first true PC networks, it was amazing at the time) was created by a team of three. The Netscape browser was written by a single software engineer.

Once the one or two or three become a major corporation though... most of the people I deal with probably don't know about Novell Networks. Is there a Netscape browser anymore or has it been handed back to its open source roots - Mozilla and Firefox. Microsoft, although still riding high, receives huge amounts of criticism for the quality of its massive team efforts (hundreds of developers) on Internet Explorer and Vista.

Brilliance and creativity tend to get lost in huge teams. It is tough to truly exercise your strengths when you are constantly told you need to be a "team player" and do your small part, even if your strengths could be applied holistically to the project, or worse, the part you are assigned to does not play to your strengths.

My Way or the Highway

Sat, 7 Jun 2008 16:58:38 -0400

How many times have you heard that phrase? Maybe at work, or even helping someone at home or in the neighborhood. Maybe you've used it with a spouse or a child. When someone uses that phrase I think it signals an insecurity they have. They want it done their way or no way at all, because your way may be better.

To my dismay, I've seen the phrase used in knowledge type industries, consulting, programming, etc., where there are truly an almost infinite number of ways to accomplish a task, and most of them are probably identical in terms of cost and time.

The phrase is especially pernicious when dealing with someone who is trying to reach personal goals. Each of us have our strengths and talents and the way we need to approach things may differ depending on those strengths.

If you are in a management position, think about this the next time you get ready to land hard on someone who isn't doing something "your way". Encouraging them, and backing them up so if their idea fails it doesn't adversely affect whatever you are working on, will pay far greater dividends in the long run than showing them "the highway".

Making a Plan

Tue, 27 May 2008 15:11:37 -0400

OK, you got a goal, now you want to make it happen. So now what? You need a plan. Goals may be dreams with deadlines attached, but if you don't have a plan, the only thing that will change is the deadline. How you devise that plan, that path, is the trick.

If you think of a plan to meet a goal like a trip or a journey, you might consider how Mapquest, or Google Maps gives you a path. It starts at your house (or wherever you put in as a starting point), and then moves outward toward your destination. Makes sense. If you are going to start moving forward, the knowing your next step is a fine way to go.

But think about how you would actually layout a path if you didn't have Mapquest, or Google Maps. Yes, there was a time when we had to figure this out ourselves! The way I would do it is to start at the end and work my way back. I could make adjustments for where I might know about traffic, or construction. If I wanted to take some side trips along the way, I could jump to other parts of the map.

Stephen Covey and Michael Gerber both advise you to start with the end in mind. You'll discover it to be far easier (after you get used to it) then stumbling blindly along.

What are goals?

Fri, 23 May 2008 08:00:00 -0400

One definition that I have heard for goals is they are dreams with deadlines attached. That definition while poetic, lacks clarity. I have struggled with goals for a while, and I believe part of my problem is the ethereal definitions given to them. I write my goals down, and now what? Well I am dreaming about this, now I have a deadline... and?

I have started to think of goals as destinations. You are at point A, and you want to be at point B. Looking at it as a destination you can now start to lay out a path - a plan - to reach that destination. Next, some ways to devise that plan.

The cart before the horse

Wed, 21 May 2008 20:57:49 -0400

I was meeting with a client the other day discussing how to streamline some of their order entry processes. An interesting point in the meeting, was when they jumped to how they could utilize the software they already had in-house to help with the process. I smiled and brought the meeting back to outlining the current process so that we had a good idea how things were being done, what the problems were, and bottlenecks that were occurring.

Looking at the software as a solution before properly outlining the task and the current process. This type of cart-before-the-horse thinking is why so many attempts at systemizing fail, and why business people so often get angry with their IT staff (or consultants). A computer, or the software running on it, is just like a hammer or a screwdriver - it is a tool. A tool that requires some thought regarding its application and someone behind it to work properly. Would you use a hammer to drive a screw?

A view of the future of outsourcing

Wed, 14 May 2008 13:37:18 -0400

There was a blurb in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette this past weekend. A recognized expert in outsourcing was saying (I am paraphrasing) that the best place to outsource was where the talent was, not where it was cheapest.

Ahh, if only that was reality, or at least if a majority of companies believed it. I firmly believe that outsourcing in certain circumstances makes an enormous amount of sense. If you need a particular skill set for a limited time, it can be tough to hire someone knowing that you might not be able to keep them busy after a couple of months. I've seen people that argue that to outsource might cost you three or four times the hourly rate of someone you have in house, but if the person is only there for a month... (for those of you who don't like to do math, you would have to hire someone for only 4 months (train them, pay benefits, have a place for them to work... and if they couldn't do the job after all?)

The problem comes when companies look at this as a way to save money by not paying local workers the prevailing wage for that job, and think that by having it done overseas (offshoring) the drastically reduced labor rate + long distance charges is worth it.

Funny thing is, I've seen companies' reputation take a beating that far exceeds the temporary benefit to the bottom line.

Empowerment could be just providing the right system

Sat, 10 May 2008 19:07:29 -0400

There was a column in a recent issue of the Pittsburgh Business Times that caught my eye. Hal Becker wrote about "empowering" front line employees to take care of customer service issues. He described an experience at a hotel where his reservation had been messed up. He finally had to ask for the manager to get it resolved. His view was that these types of problems should be within the power of the front line employees (the clerks, etc) to resolve.

I agree, but lets take that a step further. If you had a documented system on how to handle a customer from the time they enter the business to the time they leave, and have a list of possible solutions to common problems, AND an escalation procedure if the employee isn't sure what applies, then you solve the problem three ways:

1. You don't stress out a good employee who is afraid that they went too far or not far enough to please a customer.

2. You ensure that your customers are given the service they felt they are paying for.

3. You (the business owner or manager) are satisfied that how a problem is resolved will be within the bounds that you are comfortable with.

It is a WIN - WIN - WIN!

Telephone Scripts

Fri, 9 May 2008 09:34:34 -0400

Lots of companies utilize scripts as a way to systemize telephone interactions. Scripts are supposed to ensure that during a telephone contact needed information is collected and communicated all with a professional tone.

A well scripted conversation might go like this:

"Good Morning, Thank you for calling XYZ Company, our job is to make your job easier, this is John, how can I help you?"
"Yes, I'm calling about a problem with your ABC Unit."
"I'll be happy to help you with that problem sir, may I ask who I am speaking to?"
"Tom Jones of ABC Company"
"Thank you Tom, may I have the serial number of the unit..."

The only problem I have with scripts is some people believe it all has to be verbatim. In the example above, lets look at the response when the person calling in gives their name. I know that referring to someone by their first name in a support/sales situation is conventional wisdom, but not everyone is comfortable with referring to a stranger by their first name. If one of your people isn't, why would you stress them out? I have never encountered anyone that got mad at me for being respectful (yes, I tend to start out with Mr. or Ms. when speaking with someone new).

A little flexibility to make your people comfortable goes a long way to reducing stress without compromising professionalism or information gathering.

More on this in the future.

Getting people on the bus

Mon, 5 May 2008 07:59:00 -0400

In "Good to Great" Jim Collins makes a point about getting the right people on the bus, figuring out where the bus is going to go, and then getting these people to help get the bus there.

This confused me for a while, since it would seem to violate the concept of goal setting - if you don't know the target, how can you hire people to help you hit it?

I'm starting to think that the answer lies in an old saying: "there is more than one way to skin a cat" (why on earth anyone would want to do such a thing is beyond me, but I didn't make the expression up, I'm just repeating it). Think of it as being at point A and you want to get to point B. If you get the "right" people on board first, it makes it a whole lot easier to figure out what path you should take to get there.

Lets face it, is there ever just one way to solve a problem or make a business grow and flourish? The key is knowing where you want to end up, getting people that you can work with on board, and then chart a course based on their strengths. Too often we chart the course and then expect everyone to pitch in and get us there - even if the course we have chosen was the most difficult given the resources at hand.

Know your destination - but don't start planning the exact way to get there until you have the right people on board, and you know their strengths. A little more nerve-wracking at first, but a lot easier going once the journey starts.

Lessons from Captain Bligh

Sun, 4 May 2008 08:38:23 -0400

I was at a Toastmasters conference this past Saturday, and one of the presentations was on the lessons we could learn about leadership from Captain Bligh. Yes, that Captain Bligh of infamous "Mutiny on the Bounty" fame.

It turns out that Bligh was actually a fairly nice guy who had some fairly radical and ahead of their time ideas about leading a crew of sailors in the late 1700s.

Unfortunately, Bligh did a few things that pretty well messed things up and resulted in the mutiny. The major things that I took from the presentation were:

1. Consistency - if you start off a certain way that is working - keep doing it. When the ship reached Tahiti, Bligh stopped doing the standard military drills that had kept his crew sharp during the voyage. This resulted in a massive breakdown of discipline which started the crew down the path to mutiny.

2. If you screw up, take the responsibility and fix it - get back on the path you were on or find a new more workable path. Once the ship left Tahiti and headed back for Britian, the crew (possibly understandably) began to resent having to be back on the ship, and doing the drills that they had not been doing for the last few months. Instead of rallying the troops so to speak, Bligh castigated and criticized them - including officers and those in front of their men! Bligh had screwed up - he had let discipline get lax - and instead of taking the responsibility for it, he took it out on the men for acting like... well like people who had just had a 3 month vacation in Tahiti.

While most of us don't need to worry about being put out to sea in an small open boat, we can see disastrous effects in our businesses or departments we run if we, like Bligh don't act consistently and work to take responsibility and corrective action when we make a mistake. Our jobs, our company(!), could be at stake, certainly the trust and cooperation we have worked to build up with our people.

Thanks to Gary Mull, International Director for Toastmasters International for a fantastic presentation.

Documentation - the missing link

Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:26:46 -0400

I'm not talking about the user manuals you get or download when you buy software, or even the instruction manuals you get when you buy a product ( or included with your product). I am talking about documenting the processes and procedures used in your company.

NOT an employee manual. Procedure manuals to show how to do anything and everything in the joint. How much time could be saved if there were directions on how to do everything in your company? Think about how much time you spend showing a new person how to do a job. Now think how nice it would be to cut that time significantly.

Do I really mean everything? Maybe.

A few years back I was at a client site. I enjoyed being at this client site because they had a great coffee service (not Starbucks, but still good). I had just grabbed the last cup and since my mother had taught me to be polite, I decided to make a fresh pot. I got everything together, poured the water into the brewer and pushed the brew button. What I didn't know was the coffee machine was hooked up to a cold water supply line. No matter how you slice it, two pots of water does not fit in a single pot. So one pot's worth ended up on the floor. My mother had also taught me to clean up my own messes, so I spent 20 unbillable minutes looking for a mop and cleaning up.

How much you document may depend on the resources you have available. But consider how much time could be wasted by new employees trying to figure out what "everyone" knows about the coffee machine, or the copier or the fax machine.

Leadership/Dictatorship/Anarchy

Tue, 29 Apr 2008 06:29:00 -0400

How does a leader lead? Is it by standing over everyone and cracking the whip (after all we are all just lazy bums)? Or could it be by letting everyone do whatever they see fit - "See? We are empowering our employees!" Or maybe it is somewhere in between.

The boss who cracks that whip, and continually blames their employees for all that is wrong in the business is not a leader. Their business may work, but they have created a heck of job for themselves.The boss that is afraid to direct their employees, preferring to let them do as they please is not a leader either. The employees might love them, but the business will eventually suffer, and they will complain as bitterly as the employees who work for the dictator.

Leadership is not dictatorship, but it isn't anarchy either. A group needs a leader. It needs someone who will listen to everyone, take what they say into consideration, and then make their decision. MOST importantly, they take responsibility for it. The two keys here are taking into consideration the resources you have available (the employees and the tools they have to do the work) and taking responsibility for your decisions and actions. If things don't work out, perhaps you didn't give the right directions, or explain the concept properly. Or maybe you just had a bad idea. It happens to the best of us.

Organic Process

Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:28:10 -0400

When you design a process, a procedure, a system, whatever you want to call it, one thing you should expect is that it will be out of date and at least partly useless within a short time. How short of time will depend on the job itself, and whether the process involves technology. If it involves technology, don't expect a long life for your process/system.

The temptation is to put something in place and declare "this is it!" Avoid this temptation. Review processes on a regular basis, I would say no less than once a year. Don't be afraid to make changes or to scrap the whole thing and start over. You'll actually save time.

One word of warning. Making small patches is not the same as making an integrated change. Slapping a patch on or allowing for an exception will only grow the problem - soon you will have what programmers call "spaghetti code": a twisting, turning, mess of special changes here, exceptions there. When it is time to change, review the whole process and see how the change can be integrated in. If it can't be, then you may need to redo the process.

He's Baaaack

Sun, 20 Apr 2008 06:28:00 -0400

OK,

It has been close to a year since I last put up a blog entry. So why am I here now, new location, new title, new just about everything?

Over the last year I did some serious thinking about what it is I do, what I would like to do, and how I should be getting that word out. Contemplation is a wonderful thing, it brings clear thought, clarity, etc., but nothing beats action for actually getting something done. So I am done contemplating. I know what it is that I am trying to get out to the world, and here is one place I am going to start, or maybe it is re-start.

I picked out some of my old blog posts because I felt they were still relevant, or at least interesting. Feel free to browse through them again (They are being posted with past dates so as not to interfere with newer posts). But I hope you will join me as I explore the concept of "crypto-effectology" - finding hidden effectiveness.

Work vs Effort

Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:41:00 -0400

This article from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette was referred to me by David L Holzer, a good friend and insurance advisor with an interesting view of the world:
Work Zone: A bottomless well of vacation time

The gist of the article is that Netflix has no vacation or sick leave policy, and how this kind of "non-conventional" policy is taking hold here and there. Their policy is, if you got your work done and you want to knock off for a few days, do it.

From my point of view, here are the money quotes:

"The worst thing is for a manager to come in and tell me: 'Let's give Susie a huge raise because she's always in the office.' What do I care? I want managers to come to me and say: 'Let's give a really big raise to Sally because she's getting a lot done' -- not because she's chained to her desk." - Netflix Chief Executive Reed Hastings

"We're a grown-up company, with over 12,000 employees, and you have to have some semblance of process and procedure." - unidentified Yahoo spokeswoman

Notice the difference? Reed Hastings @ Netflix is more interested in getting WORK done. Yahoo is more interested in the processes and procedures. If you have the processes to get the work done than what difference does it make if you have 12 or 12,000 employees? The point is still to get the work done! A "grown-up company" - What in the world is that?

Here lies the crux of the problem with a lot of managers. They confuse work with effort. Work is the result of effort. We pay people for work or results. If we as managers give someone assignments that they can complete with 1,960 hours of effort then why should they have to hang around the office for the other 120 hours (3 work weeks) in that year?

The Customer is Always Right Part 2

Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:45:00 -0400

The Customer is Always Right.

In my last post, I talked about how this little statement is often made and then ignored by companies. In fact, it is ignored or twisted so often, it becomes meaningless.

Let me introduce a piece of heresy here. It is a statement that I picked up along the way, unfortunately losing the source somewhere in the fog of time. Wherever I picked it up from, it was the first thing I drilled into customer service reps that came into my departments:

The Customer is NOT always right. However, it is your job to make sure they feel they are.

My reps knew that there were certain policies that we could not get around. However, that didn't mean we couldn't work with a client to see if we could come up with something that made the customer feel good, and at the same time didn't violate whatever policy the customer had run afoul of.

Sometimes it was something as simple as staying on the phone and letting them vent. More often it wasn't a policy issue at all. It was making sure the customer didn't feel stupid when they realized if they had just read the manual, they wouldn't have run into the problem in the first place. At one software company, we actually had a code to record such incidents: RTFM (Read The Freaking Manual).

Now before you rage at me that using the code insulted the customer, understand two things:
1. That we often reported back to development that there was a high incident of those codes for a particular feature, and we would work with them to try and rework that section of the system so that it was easier to use. (this process will perhaps be covered in another post)
2. The reduction in stress among the Customer Service Reps was marked. The goal of the team became thinking of ways to work with the customer to get a Win-Win, instead of stressing that management would capriciously decide that the reps answer insulted the customer or insulted the company.

The perfect answer of course is to have no policies that would contradict what a customer may ever call about, or software/hardware that works flawlessly everytime, for everyone, no matter what is done with it. I won't be holding my breath for either of those to happen anytime soon.

The Customer is Always Right Part 1

Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:40:00 -0400

The customer is always right.

This is considered a truism in the Customer Service world. However, the fact of the matter is very few companies actually believe the customer is always right; they throw it out there to show "they care". In point of fact, I would say most of the companies I have dealt with in my life don't believe the customer is ever right. How many times have you heard: "I understand what you are saying sir, but I can't help you." That is a very nice way of saying "you're right, but too bad."

So what they are really saying is "The customer is always right, but that doesn't mean that we have to help them." While I would hardly expect any company to use that as their motto, if you are going to create policies that make a mockery out of the statement, then why use it?

Earning Trust

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:37:00 -0400

This post was written before I had gotten my hands on Stephen M R Covey's book "The Speed of Trust." Great book, and I think I got some of what Stephen was talking about here:

How many times have you heard: "You have to earn trust"? I believe this bit of conventional wisdom has been ingrained into me since I was a child (you can probably relate to that). I also believe that this bit of conventional wisdom has held me back in more endeavours than I can count.

What this bit of wisdom should say is: "You have to earn more trust." If you start with the premise that someone starts out in your relationship with no trust, then how can they possibly develop any? If you don't trust them to some degree then what can they do to earn some? How hard is it to tell a new employee or co-worker that you are going to trust them with some things up-front, and allow them to earn more trust as time goes on?

How much trust you give will depend on the circumstances - how much you have to lose if they violate your trust - but there is almost always some level of trust that can be given at first. The reality is that you are doing this anyway to some degree. The really big difference is how it is presented. Telling someone they have to earn your trust is a negative. It will take you a long while to develop a strong relationship with someone if you tell them up-front that they are not trustworthy (at least you perceive them that way). On the other hand, telling someone you are granting them a level of trust up-front is a positive. If the person is truly someone deserving of your trust, they will work extra hard to earn more, knowing that you have stuck your neck out (to some degree) in the beginning.

Starting a relationship on a positive note. Wow, what a concept!

Rules for Hiring - Part 2

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:35:00 -0400

Rule #2 of Hiring:

Always hire someone better than you at the job you are hiring for.

Sounds obvious right? However, too many times people are hired that are not as competent at their job as the manager (especially in the Tech world where the line between managing the work and doing it is often blurred - another mistake, but more on that later.) I believe the usual reason for this is fear. The manager believes if their group or department is staffed with extremely competent people, that the manager's boss will decide they (the manager) is no longer needed, or in the case where the owner makes the decision, they are afraid the new hire will outshine them.

The manager in the first case is driven by the fear of being made obsolete or useless. They miss the point that a manager is typically judged by the quality of their people's work, not their ability to rescue every project from the hands of their incompetent staff. If you hire only the best people to do the work, and remove the obstacles in their way, you should be recognized as the leader that you are.

However, if you find yourself in the kind of position where the bosses up the chain (and if there are a lot of those, you are already in the wrong company) share your fear, get out! What you are in for is a lot of frustration and an ulcer as your worry consumes you. Think about it. If you do shine because of your people, your boss (and possibly several bosses up the line as well as other managers in other departments) will either take credit for your work, or more likely, try to sabotage you. If you want to shine, but play the game and hire mediocrity, you will be frustrated as your department constantly looks to you to help out (which will feel nice the first 10 times but around time 100 is just plain infuriating.)

The second case is actually more ego than anything else. To those people I say: "Wake Up! You own the company! What the heck are you worried about?"

Rules for Hiring - Part 1

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:34:00 -0400

Rule #1 of Hiring:

Hire for chemistry first, skills second.

I have known and worked with several brilliant people in my time. Several of them however, never clicked in the organization and their contributions were minimal. Why? Because even though their resumes and demonstrable skills were impressive, they did not have any chemistry with the people they worked with.

Chemistry doesn't necessarily mean you want this person to be your best friend, or even that you want to hang out together. It means that your work ethic, your view of the job at hand, and the way you look at how to solve problems generally agree.

Skills can always be trained or enhanced. Having someone share your philosophy - about work in general and the specific work - is something that they will more typically come into the job with. Training attitude is much harder, and will take valuable time that person could have been producing value for the company.

The 15 Minute Solution

Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:31:00 -0400

When I was a kid, my dad had this horrible ritual each Saturday in the spring and summer:
Yard Work

Yard Work entailed cutting grass, trimming hedges, cleaning up garbage thrown by passing cars and pedestrians, and anything else my dad could dream up.

To try and lighten the load, dad would always unload this nugget of wisdom on me:
"If you do 15 minutes of yard work everyday, then you won't have near as much to do come Saturday."

I never listened, I had too much to do during the week, playing ball with friends, bike riding, I could always find an excuse not to do 15 minutes of yard work. Then, come Saturday, I would howl about being trapped for the morning and often part of the afternoon doing things I could have done during the week.

We can easily apply this to taking over an existing organization.

The temptation is to jump in and prove that you know better than everyone else. Start barking out orders, making changes, and whip the group into shape. After all isn't that your job? Well, no. Your job is to get obstacles out of the way. To do that sometimes you need to push. To push, we need to convince people this is in their own best interests. You need to develop trust and rapport so that they will listen to you when you try to communicate (not TELL) why something is in a group's best interest.

You need to observe first. See what is going on. Try and understand why things have evolved the way they have. Then start making small improvements and changes. Don't threaten people with wholesale change, ease them into it. Do the 15 minute changes, which over time will become part of the culture. Save the big push for later, when you have a base to work from, when you have the support of the group. Some of the smallest changes can reap big changes in process and attitude.

Don't spend a week or a month planning a set of changes or new processes, and then dump it in your staff's lap at a Friday morning staff meeting and expect it to be implemented in the next 4 hours. Make the easy changes first, and make them gradual. You'll find you have less to do come that Friday morning staff meeting.

As I get older, my parents get smarter

Tue, 8 Apr 2008 20:29:00 -0400

The title of this post touches on the difference between knowledge and wisdom.

Anyone can gain knowledge. There are colleges to attend, universities to get advanced degrees from, and more books, videos, and internet sites about everything you wanted to know about than you could ever review.

Ahh but wisdom is a little trickier. Wisdom tells you how to apply the knowledge that you have.

Wisdom comes from two places: your own experience, and the experience of those around you. How easy it is to dismiss those with experience when you are young, and overflowing with the latest knowledge. How easy it is to ignore those who have been there before you, especially in technology where "everyone knows" the latest knowledge is the best.

If only it was that simple. Read a book: be an expert. Unfortunately, the knowledge you can gain from reading a case study, or someone's opinion/system (even mine!) may not totally apply (or apply at all) in your particular management situation. This is where wisdom- the power of experience - comes into play; wisdom allows you to judge how much of your knowledge is applicable, and how to apply it.

But what about new knowledge? New techniques, new data? This is where the truly wise shine! Those who are truly wise do not rely just on their experience, but act like sponges when it comes to new knowledge, and adapt their thinking based on their experience and the new knowledge (including the experience of others).

So can only the old and experienced be wise? Of course not! The key for those who are younger and less experienced is to listen to the more experienced, and include that combination of knowledge and experience in their own thought processes.

You would be surprised how smart your parents really were!

Don't Push Me

Mon, 7 Apr 2008 20:28:00 -0400

A little while back I was facilitating a leadership breakout session. I started the session out with a simple exercise:

I had the group split into two and face each other. They then put their hands up in front of them and gently put their hands against their partner's. At that point I told the group facing me to push. The results were predictable: the group that was being pushed, pushed back. This is human nature - we do not want to be pushed around - we don't want to lose control of ourselves or our situation.

One of the challenges of leadership / management is getting people to do things that they might not want to do, but are important. We need to push.

After everyone had sat down, the next question was: "what if the person pushing you had told you that a piano was falling and they needed to get you out of the way so you wouldn't get hurt (or killed!)?" The unanimous answer was "push all you want."

This is the key. People will allow themselves to be pushed or directed if they see there is some benefit to them. Too often management simply gives orders without explanation. The response is push back. It might be in the form of grumbling, complaints among employee groups, or even outright mutiny. All bad.

Take two minutes to explain what you are doing, or better yet, find a way to relate it to how it might benefit the people doing it. You'll find the pushing goes a lot easier.

KISS

Sun, 6 Apr 2008 19:00:00 -0400

I have always believed in the KISS principal: Keep It Simple Stupid! with the Stupid always being applied to whomever was designing or creating the thing that needed to be kept simple.

However, today I heard a new definition of KISS:
Keep It Short and Simple

Brilliant! That can apply to virtually everything you do: Instructions to an employee (think 1 minute manager), written documentation for a computer program, or a process designed to handle a particular business task.

Tip of the Hat to Melanie DePaoli of Omicle, and thanks for a wonderful new insight!