When Customer Service Makes You Disappear

So I sat down quietly on Tuesday morning to do the next installment of the Career series. The phone rang.

Right now, it's Sunday morning at 12:34 a.m. Eastern Time and the first chance I've had to open up the software to get back in touch with our community here at All Things Workplace

What happened?

Well, it's been what you might call a consultant's dream/nightmare. Suddenly, it was important to take action immediately on projects ranging from 360 feedback to talent management to designing a new process for a global system. In the midst of that, a call came in from what turned out to be a new client.

The result: Four consecutive 15-hour days in different locations interspersed with a 4 a.m. teleconference to accommodate global participants followed by a surprise visit from out-of-town friends and then a dinner to celebrate another couple's wedding anniversary.

Hey, it's all good. But I got very, very antsy the longer I felt out-of-touch with the daily interaction at All Things Workplace.

The relationships here are every bit as genuine and real as those in the brick-and-mortar world and I really missed the daily contact and learning. If you commented and wondered what happened, I was working (contrary to much popular belief about consultants:-)

Before the phone rings again I'm headed toward the comment boxes to pick up where we left off, then add the next Career post (along with some things I think I learned from the various engagements this week).

Thanks for continuing to weigh in. . .it's good to be back.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

The Intersection That's Uniquely You

When it comes to a career that has meaning, you are really looking for something that captures that which is uniquely you.

Work satisfaction rests on a foundation that joins together the best of who you are with the best of what you can accomplish. Outstanding accountants, teachers, lawyers, welders, and musicians somewhere made a choice that turned into a "best fit" career.

You want to do the same thing. That's why it's important to know the elements that go into a meaningful career.

This is where it's easy to get confused. There are three elements that come together to create an effective career decision. There are coaches, counselors, and helpers who, because of training, education, and personal preference, may lean toward over-emphasizing just one. Each is valid but is only 1/3 of the total picture:

Values: That which you hold dear and represent personal priorities in your life.

Interests: Subject matter that holds your attention and keeps you engaged.

Talents: Those innate gifts and learned skills that allow to perform at peak levels under the right circumstances.

Here is a graphic that I developed for corporate clients who are transitioning inside--or outside--of their organization. I use the same graphic for individual clients. It offers a mental model to think about these three areas in ways that lead to the intersection of "uniquely you."

I hope you find it useful as well.

If you are a manager, use this as a discussion starter when engaged in professional development plans.

For parents: Begin watching your youngsters using these as a lens to through which to view their activities and decisions. As they move into their teen years, ask them how they see themselves in each area and where they see things coming together. Bonus outcome from helping them focus: Four years of tuition is a lot cheaper than six!

Here's to a career that is uniquely you.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Career Transition? Start at The Right Place

"People who've been fired or laid off, or are really flat about their current situation, are coming from a "world of work" mindset. They're still immersed in the sensations and day-to-day reality of their last/current job when they find their way to a coach. By using talents as the primary access, it really honors what's present and right in front of them."

   --Lisa Gates, Career Coach/Leadership Muse

Lisa is so right about this that it prompted a little continuation of What Should I Be Doing With My Life?

The Myth of the Cumulative Career

Whether you are someone making a transition--or a coach/HR person/friend who is trying to be helpful--realize that the natural tendency when making a career change is to build on where you've been.

It's natural because the most comfortable and socially acceptable way for us to live is in a linear fashion. We're taught to think and build upon what came before; that's the way you "get ahead."

This may, in fact, serve you well if you started out with the right career fit. But  you are making a change! It's a signal to start thinking about yourself, your life, and your career differently.

If it's helpful to find some catch-phrases to go with this, here they are:

1. If you are simply building on your existing career, then you are on a Transactional career path. In other words, more education, experiences, and opportunities in your current professional discipline will get you where you want to go. You exchange time and effort for more of what you're getting now.

2. If you seek to change your work life, then the change is Transformational. You are on a quest to morph into the new you (which is actually the real you). Linear thinking based solely upon past experience will make you hear voices that say, "You're earning a good living. You should be grateful (and you really should). Why change?"

Why? Because you know you have to. You are getting burned out, worn down, and disengaged as a result of your present condition. If the issue really isn't your work environment (which it could be), then you are right: the issue is you and your future satisfaction.

Here is a visual reminder as you begin to move ahead:

Up Next: The place where career elements intersect.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

What Should I Be Doing With My Life?

During my management and consulting career I’ve watched two things impact a person’s sense of “What should I be doing with my life?”

1. A job change initiated by an employer.This is usually a reorganization or layoff that causes people to evaluate what else might be a good fit within the existing company or what to focus on in the midst of a sudden job search.

2. A personal crisis: “What I’m doing at work isn’t satisfying. There must be more to my life than this!”

Both situations offer an opportunity to find more happiness, satisfaction, and contentment.

If you look around, you’ll find different approaches to career development. Some focus on one’s interests, others talk about skills; you’ll see tools that ask you to clarify your values (what’s really important to you); and finally there is, at last, a valid movement that addresses talents and giftedness.

Much of the work I do is with corporations and individuals involved in 1 and/or 2 above. Both involve having control over meaningful changes in one’s life.

Fortunately there are companies out there that offer support in the event of the first situation. (Unfortunately, there are many that do not, with the result being a lot of wasted talent that could have been used in ways never imagined).

What I think I’ve learned is this: there are 3 key areas to focus on when you seek more congruency in your working life.

I've used elements of this little slide show in past months here and hope that it will add some clarity and thought to how you view your career. If you are a manager, think about how you might use this to see people’s potential a bit differently than you might be doing now.

Here’s the video link for Using Your Talents.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Wow! "Fistful of Talent" Says We've Got Juice!

The Talent Management Blog Power Rankings honored All Things Workplace with a #3 in the top Talent/Recruiting/HR/Human Capital Blogs.

This is  genuinely humbling for a number of reasons:

1. Every one of the blogs is on my daily reading list and represents a unique point of view.

2. The panel who voted excluded their own blogs, each of which is a personal powerhouse.

3. It was a total surprise. I didn't know they were up to this.

4. I was in the midst of working on a Talent Management design for a client company when the news showed up in an email.

If you don't yet subscribe to FOT, one click will get you access to folks who are active in their respective disciplines and offer up worthwhile information every day. Kris Dunn spent a huge amount of time getting FOT off the ground and it was a winner coming out of the gate.

Speaking of winners: check out deserving First Place dude Jim "Wow" Stroud as he responds to the news:

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Thinking About Talent: Yours and Theirs

It's easy to get bogged down trying to define what kinds of skills you want to develop for yourself or your people.

We have so much information available in the way of competency list, talents, and behavioral descriptions that the task can become overwhelming and sometime convoluted. This is especially true when you're making decisions about these in a group.

I put together the graphic below for a client. It reflects the major headings of talents and skills at increasing levels of development, and is a synthesis of my experiences over the years. One could say it is more art than science.

However, I've found that it offers a simple and accurate structure that will prompt you to think about the right categories of competencies at the right organizational levels. The trick: identify  the 5-8 genuinely important items related to each that represent high performance. Giving yourself or someone else more than that is unreasonable and can be discouraging.

Remember: we're not expecting people to walk on water--we want great swimmers.

Let me know if this proves helpful.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Here's an "Aha!" About Talent Management

Anyone involved in getting a full-blown Talent Management process in place knows that it can be quite a process in itself.

Whenever I see something appear to be moving more slowly than it has to, it's fairly certain that something simple is being overlooked.

I was just listening to an executive team talking about their impending Talent Management initiative in anticipation of a presentation that was to be delivered to them on the topic.  Here are some snippets of the informal chat:

• "It's good that we're finally going to do succession planning in earnest."
• "That's right. Our Board is nervous about what would happen in the case of a sudden death or serious illness."
• "I need to know who my up-and-coming people are."
• "We'll be able to look at a chart and see 'who's who' when it's time for an important move. "

Hmm. Other Folks Are Thinking. . .

Shortly before that, I was with line managers and HR people who were talking about the same initiative. Heres' what you would have heard:

• "I think this is supposed to make it easier for me to have development discussions with my people."
• "What software program are we going to use to track training and developmental assignments?"
• "This is good. We're going to have more workshops and seminars."
• "What are we going to include that will help with retention?"
• "Does this mean that we'll have a defined career path?"

Didn't We Just Talk About This?

Yesterday's post on the importance of self-interest comes into play here. Not selfish self-interest but the fact that when something new is introduced, we tend to define it from our personal perspective. That perspective emerges from a hope that something we need is going to be fulfilled.

The multiple conversations revealed an Aha!. While everyone across the organization was pretty excited about "Talent Management" as a way of life, they didn't have a simple, common understanding of what it meant. The top level folks were thinking, "Succession Planning." Everyone else had a variety of notions, depending upon one's role, needs, and hopes.

Sooo. . .trying to practice what I preach about Aha!. . .I put together a quick graphic for the person doing the executive presentation. The idea was to simplify what Talent Management is about while acknowledging the validity and distinction of Succession Planning as a part of it. The simplicity is also there to force the need to talk about the underlying elements and arrive at a common understanding:

If any of you are in the early stages of program development--or bumping into what appear to be honest misunderstandings--I hope that this may prove helpful.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

There Certainly Is an "I" in Teamwork

Regular readers know that I'm a pretty positive and mellow dude. This is, in fact, true.

Except when I hear stupid stuff that gets repeated so often and thoughtlessly that it becomes faux "management wisdom." When repeated by people with position power it can take entire groups of employees down the wrong path.

One such example: "There is no 'I' in "teamwork."

The underlying message here is that teamwork is all about subverting one's self to the overarching mission of the team, thus negating the "self" as an entity to be dealt with.

Big mistake.

Humans are all about self-interest. If you are a manager who wants a group of people to work together on anything, you better find the special something that touches the members involved. That means talking with each person individually to find out what they need--(or want to avoid)--as part of the team effort.

A Real-Life Example

It's late on Sunday night and I'm laying out a presentation for an executive team who is going to have to support and implement a global talent management process. They already believe in the process and want to see it happen.

But they have to make it happen. That means satisfying each person's felt need: more information about career development, minimal administrative hassle, streamlined activities that minimize task time, equal access to talent from other divisions, lack of interference with other business priorities. . . all of these are in play. Unless each person's driving need is satisfied, the program won't get off the ground in a meaningful way no matter how much the team is for it.

There is a huge "I' in teamwork and it's this: If "I" am managing the team, then "I" have to help each of "you" get what you need in order to be able to participate wholeheartedly.

It's not selfish to look after your self-interest. It's human. At work, it can mean the difference between focused high performance or diluted activity.

Managers who pay attention to the "I" in teamwork will serve their people, their teams, and their organizations well.

Bonus example: Check out Chris Bailey's The Art of Managing Self-Interest.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

"Aha!" Signals A Beginning

How many times have you studied, thought, worked, conversed, or meditated in order to reach an "Aha!" moment?

It seems to me that we have a tendency to treat "Ahas!" as if they are a result.  Yet when you look at them carefully, they signal a beginning; a sign that there may be a new path to pursue, something new to learn, or a situation to re-visit in a different way.

Some Aha! Questions to Ponder

1. When was your last "Aha!"?

2. Did it lead somewhere?

3. If  so, where?

4. If not, why not?

5. Is it time to re-visit it to see what you might have missed?

(Almost) Everything I Know About "Ahas" I Learned From Fourth-Graders

When I got out of the Army, I went back to college to complete the last few requirements for my degree.  I also went back to being a working--and paid--musician.  Life was good. Except for the next "Aha!."

You see, at that time in the history of the universe, there was a strange, quaint phenomenon known as dating.("Dating" was a very common ancient ritual that involved asking a young woman to go out with you alone to a movie, or a restaurant, or an event. The idea was that if you could get to know each other better, you might want to continue and develop an even deeper relationship. If this sounds strange and you want to learn more about it, go to a garage sale, buy a 45 RPM record (they look like oversized CD's with a big hole in the center), and listen to the lyrics. Hint: you will notice that the lyrics rhyme. Oh, and you'll need to buy a 45 RPM record player,too.)

Sorry.

Back to the related "Aha!" which was known as:

"Come in and meet my father"

Me with mandatory strong handshake: "Hello, Mr. ____, nice to meet you. "

Father: "Hello, young man (fathers do not utter the actual name of the perceived weasel-disguised-as-a person. Now that I am the father of a daughter, I understand the dynamic. But I can't reveal it, otherwise I would betray the other fathers-of-daughters-about-to-be-dated-by-the-weasel).

"Tell me, young man, what do you do for a living?" (This is a man-question to determine the extent of your slackerness).

Me: (proudly): Mr. _____, I'm a professional musician and I play at ______and ________.

Father: (Silence)

Father again: (Continued silence, furrowed brow, followed by look of disdain).

Father, turning to wife while walking out of the room: "Ethel, tell him to have her home by midnight."

Aha!

I learned that:

a. "I am a musician" was not a good thing to say, no matter how much money I made.

b. I would have to do something that appeared to erase my perceived weaselness and make me respectable.

Aha!

I will be a teacher.

So I did a little stint at a Junior High School.

Aha! Working with 13 and 14 year-olds clearly wasn't going to do it for me. I concluded, rather hastily, that every existing 13 and 14 year-old should be universally housed in their own country or state--say, North Dakota--until they are 20.

Obviously, High School would work out better for me.

Aha! I apparently had a very short memory and forgot that, between the ages of 15-18, Homer and Hemingway were completely overshadowed by Heaving Hormones. That leaves:

Elementary School. Yes, but what grade?

Third graders still had "accidents."

Fifth graders were reaching puberty.

And if I were to be somehow elected President, they would soon be sent to North Dakota anyway.

Aha! Fourth grade.

. . .and Here Are The 5 Things I Learned About Business from Fourth Graders

The kids--and all of us at work-- show up each day hoping that we'll have an Aha! experience. That it will lead to something new, engaging, and satisfying. As a teacher, it was my responsibility to attempt to create the conditions for that in the context of what was to be learned. So I had to do five things:

1. Be crystal clear about the learning goal.

If I wasn't clear, the day didn't go well. Minds and bodies gravitated toward something that did seem clear. The world--even the world of fourth graders--abhors a vacuum.

2. Show them the connection between what they would learn and how it works in life.

If they couldn't see how "it" was real, eyes glazed over.

3. Understand each of the kids and how they learn.

Hands-on doers, Readers, Questioners, 10-year-old Cynics. They were all represented.

4. Create an experience that would allow #3 to be satisfied.

I always thought that this was the toughest part. How do you achieve the learning goal in the designated amount of time with so many different kinds of learners?

5. Manage the experience and follow up with each of the kids.

Once I put the activity in motion, I had to touch base with each of the students, check out how they were doing, tell them how they were doing, and then formally evaluate how they did.

Applied Management That Creates "Aha!"?

1. Managing starts with clarity. The time a manager spends getting clear about what needs to be done will pay off in focused effort from increased understanding.

2. The Manager is the Mediator of Meaning. Clarity is the first part of  the issue. The other part is taking the time to show exactly how "what" you are proposing to do is directly connected to the success of over-arching goals.

3. Managers Understand How People Learn and Work. Intellectually, we all acknowledge that people learn differently and work differently. Really successful managers take time to pinpoint what those styles are and genuinely acknowledge their inherent value.

4. Managing Means Knowing How to Orchestrate the Experience. When to have a meeting or not have a meeting; who needs one-on-one attention? What isn't negotiable and what will work best with a full discussion? Is the objective really achievable--at the level of quality desired--in the originally designated timetable? Managers, go ahead and add your favorites to this list.

5. Managers Lead from Every Proximity. You'll spot a good manager out in front of the group; alongside of a direct report who is struggling; or standing in the back of the room listening to a discussion and only joining in when re-direction or a fact is needed. And everyone knows how they're doing in relation to what's expected.

I hope this has sparked an "Aha" for you. If it did, by all means weigh in in the comment box below.

Graphic Source: A Perfect World www.aperfectworld.org

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Why Marathon Meetings Don't Work And How To Change Them

"If we've got them in town we'll work 'til the sun goes down."

That's not a verse from Old Man River. It's a real quote from the manager of a global organization. He figures that if he's paying for travel, hotel, and meals to bring people from four continents together then, darn it, it ought to be "cost effective."

Cost effective in this case means meeting from Monday through Thursday or Friday from 7 am until 7 pm with lunch delivered. Then, dinner at an (albeit) nice restaurant where the business discussion can continue.

The purpose of these meetings: To make decisions impacting the success of the business.

Draining the  Function at Your Neuro Junction

Allow me to turn this over to the research mavens at Scientific American for a moment. Any emphases are mine:

"The human mind is a remarkable device. Nevertheless, it is not without limits. Recently, a growing body of research has focused on a particular mental limitation, which has to do with our ability to use a mental trait known as executive function. When you focus on a specific task for an extended period of time or choose to eat a salad instead of a piece of cake, you are flexing your executive function muscles. Both thought processes require conscious effort-you have to resist the temptation to let your mind wander or to indulge in the sweet dessert. It turns out, however, that use of executive function—a talent we all rely on throughout the day—draws upon a single resource of limited capacity in the brain. When this resource is exhausted by one activity, our mental capacity may be severely hindered in another, seemingly unrelated activity. (See here and here.)"

We're Not Leaving Until Everything Is Resolved!

This battle cry is probably well-known to business types worldwide. You've heard it, I've heard it and yes, I even remember saying it more than once.

There's nothing wrong with resolution; it's the pathway to reducing tension and moving on in a healthier way, regardless of the type of issue. Here's the catch:

The research (and common sense) shows that decisions are adversely affected by fatigue. And, the act of trying to stay focused is an energy-burner with self-defeating results. Let's keep this simple:

Tired people make bad decisions.

Forcing tired people to keep making decisions in order to feel good about your Return on Travel Investment (ROTI) is the business equivalent of taking a gun and intentionally shooting yourself in the foot. You may enjoy the momentary sense of power but the results wont' feel very good.

5 Things That Can Make a Difference

1. Give people all of the information to be discussed prior to the meeting, with enough time to digest it.

2. Tell them what decisions will be made using that data.

3. Keep your meeting to the length of a normal work day with frequent breaks and time to go outside for a little fresh air.

4. If it's a week-long meeting, schedule an afternoon of leisure time. Most of the meaningful decisions I've seen made in companies actually take place while people are engaged in casual conversation and building relationships.

5. Leave enough time at the end of the meeting to evaluate the meeting. Not 5 minutes; more like 20 minutes of "How did we do and what do we want to tweak for our next meeting?"

Finally--and this is a biggie: If you have finished what you set out to do and it's Thursday morning of a meeting that was supposed to end on Friday, declare victory and stop. How many times have you seen meetings go to their appointed end time because someone allowed the end time to govern the activity?

Flights don't leave for another 24 hours?

If you have a room full of mature people, ask, "What's the best way to use our remaining time?"

It will be the week that people people rave about for years to come.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Communication, Leadership and Clarity of Pupose

Chrissy Scivicque at Office Arrow took time to interview me recently.

The relaxed phone conversation resulted in:

Steve Roesler on Communication, Leadership, and Clarity.

 
Office Arrrow fills a need for useful information geared to executive assistants and other office professionals. If you are a manager and want an easy, helpufl tool to boost the effectiveness of your assistant(s), steer them toward the free sign-up to begin a new path to professional development.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Great CEOs Never Micro-Manage(?)

Management Issues just ran a provocative headline: Great CEOs never micro-manage

When I see the word  "never," it raises a flag. I seldom recall "never" being very helpful unless the issue is related to piloting an airplane, skydiving, or Quality Control at a nuclear power plant.

Here is the heart of the research:

A study by recruitment firm Personnel Decisions International has come up a range of key attributes and characteristics that, it argued, distinguishes successful chief executives from other managers.

High energy levels, a desire to be in charge and an ability to cut through complex issues to what is really important were three of the most important attributes that set apart those destined to be CEOs from other executives, it found.

Conversely, those who exhibited traits of being passive-aggressive or micro-management were less likely to make it to CEO level.

The research analysed data from more than 9,000 senior executives and first-level leaders and compared it with nearly 150 CEOs in order to find out how the CEOs were different from other leaders and what characteristics made them successful.

Great CEOs , Managers, Surgeons, Parents...All Do What The Situation Demands

Professional experience and observation show that the desirable qualities mentioned are, in fact, pretty desirable. They would be desirable in anyone asked to lead an activity.

But being effective doesn't mean exercising a boilerplate set of characteristics in all circumstances. So it is with the degree of management that one exercises, regardless of title--including CEO.

Let's say you've just been anointed CEO of a global steel company. You discover quickly that the internal systems aren't in place to reduce costs enough to be competitive. Then, you are amazed to find that part of the issue stems from managers not tracking costs regularly. Finally, you figure out that they don't know much about efficient manufacturing systems or key indicators of cost effectiveness.

What do you do...tell them to get better and leave them alone until they get better?

Hardly.

You work closely to identify better systems; teach them what you know about key indicators; and follow up in great detail until the measurements are correct and self-monitoring becomes a regular behavior.

As a parent, you may have a super-responsible teenager. When it comes time to get that coveted driver's license, you probably won't hand over the car keys and say, "Give me a shout if you have any problems. I don't want to micro-manage you."

You can't leave people alone to do what they don't know how to do.

Remember: just because someone is experienced at a given role, situational changes will demand your frequent attention and close management until the person gains new skill, confidence, and effectiveness. Once that happens, back off and enjoy the fruits of your brief--but appropriate--"micro-management."

Thought for today: Trade the notion of "never" for the principle of "situational." Instead of memorizing all of the attributes ever exhibited by successful leaders, learn how to live a life of situational diagnosis followed by accurate response.

Life is about doing the right thing at the right time.  If the right thing is brief micro-management, it will be considered wise by all concerned.

photo source: picasaweb.google.com/. (and a Happy 4th birthday to Aarav!)

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

When Bosses Get Good Scores

"The persistent, spirited craving we have for connection, meaning, relevance, peace -- can't really be abandoned because from 8-to-5 we have a job, can it? More and more and more we see people bringing their humanity to work, and finding ways to specify what's really important. Less is more. Seems to me the only time more is more is when it's more of less." (my italics)   

                --Lisa Gates comment on Goals, Clarity, and Less

Headlines often highlight the negative, or questionable, in order to grab our attention. It works.

We're so used to it that when I see one that puts a smile on my face, it actually has more impact.

Here are statistics that say things aren't quite as dismal as most headline writers would like us to think:

More than half--58%--of U.S. workers have confidence in their company's leadership. A full 66% say that they would recommend their firm to their friends who are seeking a job.

Those figures come from a survey conducted by NetReflector, a company that offers tools for gathering customer and employee feedback. The survey included 9,351 people in 10 different countries. I'm not sure of the exact amount from the U.S. survey population.

What does this mean?

We're always seeing headlines or journal articles about difficulty in recruiting and retaining talent. If these stats are true, then companies would seem to have a lot going for them. Additionally, the NetReflector folks point out that high employee satisfaction usually equates with high customer satisfaction. Not bad.

Is there a hidden challenge in there?

I think so. I did a post about what job seekers want. The top 3 items were interesting, challenging work; rewards and recognition for accomplishments; and a chance for quick career growth and advancement.

The NetReflector survey asked "what could bosses do better?" The highest percentage of responses stated "use my skills and abilities better." And just under half (49%) felt that what they did actually contributed to the company's mission.

If we can assume that this is an accurate representation, then supervisors and managers can probably boost their effectiveness even more by focusing on two things:

1. Creating assignments that offer some stretch goals and professional growth.

2. Intentionally talking about how the work unit's efforts tie into the company's overall mission.

I'm thinking that if managers can focus on just a couple of meaningful things at a time--instead of being faced with multiple programmatic fads--they can make a difference.

What do you think?

 

         

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Workplace Vision, Impalas, and A Leap of Faith

I want people to succeed. Period.

So when I see a friend or client doing something that seems self-defeating I usually offer a thought or two,  even if unsolicited.

Why?

Because I figure if someone says they want to achieve something, they mean it.

I've learned that I'm sometimes wrong.

Many people only want to do what it takes to achieve something if it requires as little personal change as possible.

Vision and Impalas

Impalas are wonderful to watch. I had a chance to do just that during an extended speaking tour across South Africa. These beautiful animals grow to a maximum height of only 38" but can leap 10 feet in the air and 36 feet horizontally.

What does this have to do with leadership, change, and vision?

Impalas will not jump if they don't know what is on the other side of an obstruction. They want to see everything before making a leap. This obviously reduces risk and helps their safety. But they may never get to see what was "on the other side." (Being Impalas, they may not care:-)

Vision and People

People do care about what they can't see.

If your organization is making some changes, you want to know what the "new" thing is ultimately going to be and "how" life  will be better--or different-- than now. That's why we ascribe leadership qualities to those who paint a picture of what may be possible, where we are going, why, and how. No one expects all of the answers. What we look for is enough clarity to give us enough confidence to make a leap of faith.

Your organization (and you) are probably in a cost-reduction mode right now. Every one of my clients is feeling a pinch. But you can't build a business for the long term just by "cutting"' expenses; you cut in order to gain short-term control.

Back to the introduction. . .

Most often, clients and friends do ask how I see things unfolding in their businesses. One case led me to comment on the need for delivering a clear vision of what the possibilities will be after some mandatory belt-tightening. Otherwise, I offered that people would begin to lose hope in the future and start looking elsewhere for work.

The response? Silence. The reason: "Not my style."

This is a place filled with fleet-footed impalas. Since they don't know what's on the other side, my hunch is that their resumes will make the leap first. At the first sign of something hopeful, the Impalas will follow.

What are you or your organization doing to paint a clear picture of the future?

Thought for today: Give your impalas a visual sense of the future so they feel safe making the leap.

Note to leaders: If you aren't willing to make some personal changes yourself, don't be surprised when others aren't willing, either.

Bonus note: I've met people in very senior positions who still get nervous when they know they should share news that may not be happy-making to everyone. They know it's the right thing to do, it's their job to do it, and people need it. But it still creates some anxiety.

Rhett Laubach at Authenticity Rules did a piece on The Five Misconceptions of Speaking. These can be applied to any situation where someone has angst about the information and the audience--vision included.

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Age of Conversation 2 Update

We live in an online world where content leads to conversations that continually re-shape the content.

There is probably more interactive learning online than in many classrooms. If this is so, it makes sense to gather a group of involved "conversationalists" and do something to heighten awareness.

Age of Conversation 2: Why Don't They Get It? is scheduled to be published shortly. Proceeds will again go to the kids helped worldwide by Variety Children's Charity.

I'm honored to be a contributor. This is a group of marketing, business, design, and thought leaders whose sites will add some daily spark to your RSS reader:

Adrian Ho, Aki Spicer, Alex Henault, Amy Jussel, Andrew Odom, Andy Nulman, Andy Sernovitz, Andy Whitlock, Angela Maiers, Ann Handley, Anna Farmery, Armando Alves, Arun Rajagopal, Asi Sharabi, Becky Carroll, Becky McCray, Bernie Scheffler, Bill Gammell, Bob LeDrew, Brad Shorr, Brandon Murphy, Branislav Peric, Brent Dixon, Brett Macfarlane, Brian Reich, C.C. Chapman, Cam Beck, Casper Willer, Cathleen Rittereiser, Cathryn Hrudicka, Cedric Giorgi, Charles Sipe, Chris Kieff, Chris Cree, Chris Wilson, Christina Kerley (CK), C.B. Whittemore, Chris Brown, Connie Bensen, Connie Reece, Corentin Monot, Craig Wilson, Daniel Honigman, Dan Schawbel, Dan Sitter, Daria Radota Rasmussen, Darren Herman, Dave Davison, David Armano, David Berkowitz, David Koopmans, David Meerman Scott, David Petherick, David Reich, David Weinfeld, David Zinger, Deanna Gernert, Deborah Brown, Dennis Price, Derrick Kwa, Dino Demopoulos, Doug Haslam, Doug Meacham, Doug Mitchell, Douglas Hanna, Douglas Karr, Drew McLellan, Duane Brown, Dustin Jacobsen, Dylan Viner, Ed Brenegar, Ed Cotton, Efrain Mendicuti, Ellen Weber, Eric Peterson, Eric Nehrlich, Ernie Mosteller, Faris Yakob, Fernanda Romano, Francis Anderson, Gareth Kay, Gary Cohen, Gaurav Mishra, Gavin Heaton, Geert Desager, George Jenkins, G.L. Hoffman, Gianandrea Facchini, Gordon Whitehead, Greg Verdino, Gretel Going & Kathryn Fleming, Hillel Cooperman, Hugh Weber, J. Erik Potter, James Gordon-Macintosh, Jamey Shiels, Jasmin Tragas, Jason Oke, Jay Ehret, Jeanne Dininni, Jeff De Cagna, Jeff Gwynne & Todd Cabral, Jeff Noble, Jeff Wallace, Jennifer Warwick, Jenny Meade, Jeremy Fuksa, Jeremy Heilpern, Jeroen Verkroost, Jessica Hagy, Joanna Young, Joe Pulizzi, John Herrington, John Moore, John Rosen, John Todor, Jon Burg, Jon Swanson, Jonathan Trenn, Jordan Behan, Julie Fleischer, Justin Foster, Karl Turley, Kate Trgovac, Katie Chatfield, Katie Konrath, Kenny Lauer, Keri Willenborg, Kevin Jessop, Kristin Gorski, Lewis Green, Lois Kelly, Lori Magno, Louise Manning, Luc Debaisieux, Mario Vellandi, Mark Blair, Mark Earls, Mark Goren, Mark Hancock, Mark Lewis, Mark McGuinness, Matt Dickman, Matt J. McDonald, Matt Moore, Michael Karnjanaprakorn, Michelle Lamar, Mike Arauz, Mike McAllen, Mike Sansone, Mitch Joel, Neil Perkin, Nettie Hartsock, Nick Rice, Oleksandr Skorokhod, Ozgur Alaz, Paul Chaney, Paul Hebert, Paul Isakson, Paul McEnany, Paul Tedesco, Paul Williams, Pet Campbell, Pete Deutschman, Peter Corbett, Phil Gerbyshak, Phil Lewis, Phil Soden, Piet Wulleman, Rachel Steiner, Sreeraj Menon, Reginald Adkins, Richard Huntington, Rishi Desai, Robert Hruzek, Roberta Rosenberg, Robyn McMaster, Roger von Oech, Rohit Bhargava, Ron Shevlin, Ryan Barrett, Ryan Karpeles, Ryan Rasmussen, Sam Huleatt, Sandy Renshaw, Scott Goodson, Scott Monty, Scott Townsend, Scott White, Sean Howard, Sean Scott, Seni Thomas, Seth Gaffney, Shama Hyder, Sheila Scarborough, Sheryl Steadman, Simon Payn, Sonia Simone, Spike Jones, Stanley Johnson, Stephen Collins, Stephen Landau, Stephen Smith, Steve Bannister, Steve Hardy, Steve Portigal, Steve Roesler, Steven Verbruggen, Steve Woodruff, Sue Edworthy, Susan Bird, Susan Gunelius, Susan Heywood, Tammy Lenski, Terrell Meek, Thomas Clifford, Thomas Knoll, Tim Brunelle, Tim Connor, Tim Jackson, Tim Mannveille, Tim Tyler, Timothy Johnson, Tinu Abayomi-Paul, Toby Bloomberg, Todd Andrlik, Troy Rutter, Troy Worman, Uwe Hook, Valeria Maltoni, Vandana Ahuja, Vanessa DiMauro, Veronique Rabuteau, Wayne Buckhanan, William Azaroff, Yves Van Landeghem

Preview of Book Cover designed by David Armano

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

"Confused" or "Conflicted" About Decisions?

You and I go to meetings where the decision-making can seem unbelievably confusing.

And how about those decisions where we just can't seem to arrive at a peaceful conclusion?

After giving it some thought and observation, I think I've got a way to look at this that I hope will be helpful.

Confused or Conflicted?

The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines the two this way:

Confused: being disordered or mixed up. 

The result is not being able to think at your usual speed.

Conflicted: (a feeling of) mental struggle resulting from incompatible or opposing needs, drives, wishes, or external or internal demands.

The result is inaction, over-reaction, or both.

Yes, both are possible. We can react strongly to the conversation around the decision, but still not be able to make the decision.

Note: Each of these phenomena apply to individual as well as group decisions. Those self-conversations in our heads can get every bit as frustrating as the ones across the table!

What To Do?

1.Stop and diagnose.

(Please remember Steve's rule for everything: "Prognosis Without Diagnosis is Malpractice").

2. If the issue is Confusion, ask:

    a. Are we clear on the goal of the decision?

    b. Do we have the right information, and all of it--or as much as possible?

    c. Do we have the information organized in an understandable way?

    d. Does everyone involved have the same understanding of the goal and the information?

    e. Do we have a structured process for making our decision?

When you are clear that all of the above have been satisfied, then you're probably dealing with Conflicted-ness. (My spell checker is definitely conflicted trying to deal with that one).

3. If the issue is being Conflicted, then you'll probably experience silence or overt argument. You're  seeing the result of deeper issues--perhaps even at the personal values level--that need to be resolved. Whether silence or argument:

    a. Talk straight immediately. Say, "We've got a good understanding and a good process. But there's something else stopping us.What's really getting in the way?

    b. Don't speak again until someone offers a comment. After the first person responds, don't evaluate the remark. Thank them. Allow for everyone to respond without evaluation.

Principle: Until the real issue is named out loud, it will silently undermine the decision process. Once it's named and acknowledged, it is neutralized. When it comes out into the light of day, it can be seen clearly for what it is and discussed accurately. This is the most difficult thing for groups (and individuals) to deal with. Why? There's always the fear that "my issue" will be discounted, misunderstood, or seen as a blockage to "good teamwork."

Yet the person who offers the first bit of truth is the one who leads the group to a more satisfying decision.

    c. After 'b', you will know exactly how to proceed because the substantive issues will be out there in clear view. You'll see both an increase in both energy and collaboration.

Note: Organizations are usually pretty good at organizing. And even those of us with a more casual approach to life still have our own method of organizing it.

If you are really stuck on a decision, go with "Conflicted." In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and say that more often than not, we aren't confused. We usually know the right thing or best thing to do. It's facing up to our conflicting wants and needs that get in the way. "Having it all," whether in a business meeting or personal life, is a decision criterion that can only lead to internal conflict.

Thought for Today: Clear priorities offer the soundest foundation to decision making.

Related bonus: Check out  what Dr. Ellen Weber offered a while back in "What Do Peers Say About Your Smarts"  . The questions about self-development are really the kind of clarifying questions that can lead to better decision making.

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Technical Difficulties

For the past 14 hours or so, posts from All Things Workplace have not been publishing. I am working with the Typepad people to find out what's going on.

Update: Thanks to Laura at Typepad, we have found the source of the problem.

Oooh.. according to Laura, the cause is: me.

Time for an HTML refresher..

Steve

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

What About Intellect Without Wisdom?

A good question from a reader who took time to email about her concern.

It seems that she's surrounded at work by many purported to be "the best and the brightest."

The observation: The brightest aren't necessarily the best.

Her conclusion and frustration come from daily experiences where "smart" people aren't making sound, thoughtful decisions. To her, this doesn't reflect what one would expect from high IQ's and advanced degrees. She's puzzled about a lack of consistent relationship between intelligence and wisdom.

You've seen the same thing, I'm sure. So what's really happening here?

There is a distinct difference between knowledge and knowing how to apply it properly in a given situation. My online colleague Jim Stroup often writes about the importance of situational assessment and adapting to changes at a given moment.

As I watch people succeed or struggle in businesses each day, a picture emerges.

When making decisions and judgments, wise managers have a keen sense of their own weaknesses before exercising their strengths. They value discernment, taking into consideration the situation and the people involved.This causes them to pause and reflect on the totality of things before acting.

My reader is seeing just the opposite: people whose actions are not governed by discernment but by a sense of "self" as the center of things. This often leads them to ignore the totality of people and information and rely only on what resides in their own minds. Whatever level of information that may be, it is one-dimensional and inconsistent with the totality of the situation.

Finally: wise people seem to consciously value wisdom over pure intellect. Instead of pursuit of knowledge as a commodity, they pursue wisdom as a lifestyle.

Watch what people pursue. It will tell you much about what to expect from them.

"Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. 
Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad."

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

With Thanks: Best of Leadership Blogs 2008

What a treat!

All Things Workplace has been recognized by voters as the Best of Leadershp Blogs for 2008.

I'm "in transit" right now but wanted to say 'thanks' to all who participated and will add to the post later.

A thank you as well to Kevin Eikenberry and his staff who worked hard to manage the details.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Leadership: When "No" Is More Imortant Than "Yes"

Busy-ness, Priorities, and "No"

I'm in the middle of a diagnostic where the key issue is that "we can't get things done because everything is important."

There are stated priorities. These can shift more than once during the course of a single day because of a customer or managerial demand. The result?

People scrambling to move resources from one initiative to another in a situation with limited resources:

1. If something is on the priority list--regardless of its rank--it is always in play. If someone yells loud enough for #10, #2 will get nudged aside.

2. Everyone is energetic and committed to "doing it all." But trying to do it all leads to doing nothing well or methodically.

What Needs To Happen?

People need to know what not to do.

In this case, effective leadership is a firm negative. Items need to be physically removed from the "important"  list with the directive, "No, don't do that."

Anything remotely resembling interest in a low priority item by the leader will be interpreted as permission to continue doing that which is self-defeating.

"Yes" will encourage diverse input, good ideas, and enthusiasm.

"No" is the way effective leaders give direction when there are competing demands.

Note: Because of the competing demands of this week's project, I decided not to respond to comments until tonight. Looking forward to returning to the conversation.

photo source: latimesblogs.latimes.com/

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.