Is It Really Just About Strengths?

Have you ever noticed people making excuses for poor performance or ugly behavior by invoking the "It's just who I am" defense?

Research (and common sense) show that focusing on peoples' strengths can have a positive affect on engagement and results.

But any approach or new , misunderstood, can actually cause negative side-affects.

 Have you seen any of these?

- Using  "strengths" research as an excuse for managers to avoid uncomfortable performance discussions with employees. ("Everyone knows that James is difficult to work with and shirks his responsibilities. No one wants to work with him and clients complain about him...but he's a really good analyst. Let's not rock the boat.")

- Hiding behind strengths as an excuse for bad behavior. For example, "I'm sorry that I snapped at you and called you a bumbling idiot. I have a short fuse. That's just how I am. Sensitivity is not my strength. You'll just have to accept that."

- Dumping mundane tasks (like paperwork, administration) on others because "it's not my strength." (For example, "Anne, you're so good at making the office coffee, cleaning out the pot and using the fax machine. Would you mind? I'm not good at that kind of stuff.") All jobs require doing some things we don't like, or aren't particularly good at...and most companies can't afford to give all of their employees an assistant to dump work on. Sometimes we just have to suck it up and do something, even though it's not our strength.

 All of that said, I'm still a huge believer in understanding one's strengths. I just get alarmed when I see a good concept spin out of control and become destructive.

What's Happening With The Strengths/Weaknesses Thing?

There are probably a number of reasons why, but I think there is a phenomenon that gets played out--at least in American business circles--whenever the latest and greatest thing hits the scene. And it's this:

What is actually a Principle is adopted as a Rule.

Instead of really taking time to understand all that lies underneath a principle, people run with the catch phrase and treat it as "the way." A book title becomes a buzzword that is then tossed around in meetings. It becomes problematic when the word doesn't have a shared meaning among the users. And that happens a lot. So it is with Strengths.

It's a lot easier to say "It's all about Strengths" than it is to live a life identifying and acknowledging our strengths; figuring out where we need to become at least adequate in some of our weaknesses; and respecting the people around us enough to behave unselfishly even when we "feel" like doing our own thing our own way.

When managers avoid uncomfortable performance discussions, they are showing disrespect for their employee. How can the person improve without hearing the truth, exploring ways to change, and growing as a result?

When we hide behind Strengths as an excuse for bad behavior, we're really saying "I don't respect you enough to bother to honor you with good behavior."

And when mundane tasks are dumped on someone else because "I'm not good at it," then I better ask myself just how I'm using my position power. Is one of my less attractive "strengths" the inclination to take advantage of others' weakness?

What I find ironic as I write this is: we're talking about Strength, yet the insidious culprit is Laziness.

What to do?

1. Take time to learn the "why?" behind the "what." When you can explain a concept accurately using everyday language, you've got it. If you or colleagues around you are still discussing things using buzzwords, stop and ask for an explanation of the meaning. That discussion could lead to shared meaning and deeper understanding.

2. When you hear a "performance excuse" disguised as a reason, follow up by asking: "What are you going to do about that? It's impacting other people and that's not acceptable." It's amazing how we'll make changes once we are called on our behavior and not allowed to explain it away.

3.  Make really bad coffee and jam the fax machine.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Managers Guide Passion

Talking about "passion", especially in the workplace, can create passionate debate.

No one is against the idea of being passionate about one's work. But Managing Leadership's Jim Stroup has this thought:

Passion for work is generated by the value of that work - not by a mindless "passion" gene or character trait. As a result, the responsibility for generating passion should be placed back where it belongs - on managers, or even on directors and owners, not employees.

Managing Passion Creates Engaged People

Although passion may be an individual  experience, in the workplace it's the manager who is the perpetrator of passion.

Matching the right tasks with the right people breeds the kind of productive experience that offer satisfaction as a result of accomplishment. That kind of matching means that managers have to know their people well enough to know what their individual talents are--then use them accordingly. This does at least four things (you may want to add more):

1. It offers the opportunity for the company to benefit from the strengths that it supposedly hired.

2. It shows the employees that their talents are, indeed, recognized, and that they (the employees) aren't just "human" resources.

3. It shows the employees that their managers know "who they are and what they are all about."

4. It offers a genuine chance at a reality of "excellence" rather than "excellence" as a buzzword.

Maybe we should start referring to this as "managing passion": understanding the best of what people bring to the job and  managing  more deliberately  to help people become productive in satisfying ways.

Note: Look, there are tasks that all of us have to do, regardless of the work we've chosen. We not only aren't passionate about them, we don't like them. It's part of life and being an adult. Managers aren't there to "make people happy." Happiness is a personal choice. But managers get paid to produce excellent results. They can't achieve that goal without bringing about excellence in their people. And I don't think I've ever heard anyone express disappointment at the opportunity to excel.

Management Engagement

That's what has to happen to make all of this a reality: management engagement. Employee engagement implies that there are vast numbers of workers malingering on the job--and we have to "get them engaged."

I would suggest that there are vast numbers of managers who don't know their people well enough to orchestrate work in ways that lift people's desire to engage. There are too many mismatches going on out there.

It ends up being, in great part, a relational issue.

Managing is not an easy job to do well. But it's impossible if a manager doesn't take the time to build relationships that allow insight into individuals' strengths and desires when they show up for work.

The employment agreement is a contract: We, the organization, need to accomplish this; and we're hiring you, the employee (regardless of level), because you bring this to the organization

The manager's job is to orchestrate all of the "this".

I like the idea of Managing Passion.

Photo source: roberts-playground

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Leadership, Happiness, and Satisfaction

Every so often I check the statistics here to discover what search engine queries bring people to All Things Workplace. I figured that the keywords were going to be mostly "leadership" or "management".

Wrong.

"Job Satisfaction"..."Happiness at Work"..."Where Can I Find the Best Job?"..."Strengths and Weaknesses"..."How Can I Find A Job Where the Boss Listens to Me?"...those are the themes. Career issues--sometimes disguised as communications--turned up on a second page of searches.

(Click on image to enlarge)

Make no mistake. People are searching for how to feel good at work. We want to do well...and we want to feel good in the process.

But these are leadership and management issues. What people are saying is: "We want to be in a place where the "orchestration of work" allows us to contribute our talent. There are times when we need direction and times when we need to improvise our own riffs."

Think about two variables

There's a relationship between how much people enjoy their jobs and how well they perform. That's not a mystery. But there is a dynamic you need to know about in order to manage yourself and others:

1. Some people have to feel good about their job and their workplace before they can get busy and perform at their max.

2. Others have to have to first achieve super results in order to feel good about their jobs.

It's a "Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?" phenomenon. I picked up on this during a stretch where I was diagnosing "performance issues" for a client.

My conclusion: Managers hadn't caught onto the validity of the two approaches to performance. Naturally, the "feel good first" people were perceived as weenie-like non-performers. However, they actually had a huge commitment to doing well. They just needed something else to help them be able to get there.

What was it? They wanted the managers to understand who they were and what made them tick. That went along way to having the "right feeling" about the job.

The second category of people wanted a scorecard. They weren't about to "feel" good until they checked off their tasks and accomplishments.

Target yourself and your people

1. Which approach most naturally fits you? Figure out what that means to the way you work and the way your work is managed. Then talk with your manager about your desire to excel and how you might use this natural preference to make that happen.

2. Managers: The next time you're in a meeting (or one-on-one), have an informal conversation about the two approaches. Let people talk about what comes first for them. You'll learn a lot about how to manage each person; and they'll get more of what they need in order to hit the top of the job satisfaction/high performance curve.

Punchline: First, know yourself and your own preference. Only then will you have a solid point of reference for understanding the distinctions of the people around you.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Managers Build Talent

You may already have the right people to enable your company to "win"--however you define the word.

We recently designed a leadership 'program' to develop the top talent in a global company. The model created used the executive management committee as coaches for the learning activities. First we coached the coaches on how to coach; then we turned them loose. It's been the most effective learning in nearly 30 years of leadership development and design.

 What's happening that works?

• The top leadership learns a lot about their own abilities.

• They learn about their people while developing closer relationships with them.

• The high potential participants receive coaching and company insight from the leaders who know it best.

• The participants also "step up" their game. How often do you see the top leadership in a company totally dedicate two full days to the talent beneath them?

You Can Do It, Too

Managers are the natural lighting rods for developing talent. Coaching isn't another job--it is their job.

Companies are always looking for ways to develop people economically but effectively. Every research study on the planet shows that employees are most influenced--pro or con--by their immediate boss. That's exactly why managers at every level have the ability to make the most difference when it comes to grooming people for the future.

The mission: Give them the capability.

Three things managers can start now:

Diagnose: Focus on identifying the very best talent in others.

Encounter:  Seek the truth then speak the truth, wherever that path will lead.

Build: Participate in the performance growth or your people.

When managers coach, we get "two personal bests" for the price of one.

Note: Even (smart) stars find a coach somewhere: Check out John Bishop's nice story at Leadership Is A Verb.

Whoa! Just as I was hitting the "publish" button an email came through from Fistful of Talent naming All Things Workplace in the Top 25 Talent Blogs again this year. Given their criteria and primo staff I'm truly honored. And if you are a seeker of talent info, be sure to subscribe to their feed.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

How Wisdom, Discernment, and Integrity Matter

Building leaders is on almost every organization's agenda.

Hiring good people can be a costly process.

Losing employees--regardless of cause--can be equally expensive.

Wisdom, Discernment, and Integrity in Business created a lot of buzz, especially on Twitter.

And whether the long-time, ongoing issues are How One Bad Apple Can Create a Toxic Team, Crazy Co-workers , Bad Bosses, or the rule of No Assholes, people in the workplace are apparently driving other people in the workplace crazy.

What's Happening In Organizations?

Corporations have HR professionals, behavioral interview training, search firms that screen and test, assessment centers, assessment tests. . .

I believe that what is missing--and what needs to be purposefully added to the organization effectiveness equation--are Wisdom and Discernment applied with Integrity.

The vast majority of screening/hiring/promoting practices focus on education, experience, and task-related performance.

But take a hard look at the reasons for dismissal and lack of promotability (not a real word according to the spellchecker!). I've seldom seen well-screened people leave a company because of their technical incompetence. The issue is almost always one of "fit." "How" the individual operates is, in some way, inconsistent with what the organization really thinks is best for itself. (And vice-versa).

Do any of these reasons for separation sound familiar to you?

• He's not a team player
• We need people who can work without a lot of supervision
• We need people who can take supervision
• She doesn't provide enough direction for her people
• She provides too much direction for her people
• He doesn't think about options and possibilities when making decisions
• This company doesn't value my creative thinking
  
• This company doesn't value the fact that I always follow the rules
  

(Please feel free to click on Comments and add your favorites. If I get enough, I'll post a Top__List).

How Can We Change This To Make A Difference?

When we're hiring and promoting, wouldn't it be worthwhile to know who we're getting--not just what we're getting?

It seems to me that we need to understand at least two things in order to make that happen:

1. What "kind of people" do we want? (What values do we hold that need to be evident in our people)?

2. What does it take to develop and use wisdom and discernment needed in business?

What Kind of People Do We Want?

This seems to be the part that is overlooked. Sure, interviewers might say "I liked her" or "He seemed serious enough about the business." Deep down inside, don't we really need to figure out some general characteristics that will help the individual and the work team hit it off over the long run? If it's the kind of job that has management responsibility or potential, then what kind of characteristics do we want to see in our leaders? I know we want them to be able to reach their goals. But what kind of people do we want them to be while they are doing that?

When the issue of "best fit" arises, it becomes foolish to ignore the reality that "how" we are is, in part, the manifestation of "who" we are. To hire and promote based on intellectual/behavior criteria ignores the social and relational nature of organizations. An entire generation of managers, interviewers, and job candidates have been sold on the idea that "past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior." It sounds good. It sells well because it is "scientific." One can create behavioral questions or assessment scenarios that can surface and confirm whether or not a person has, or is able to, perform specific functions. That kind of validation is certainly important. But will that person be able to perform those things well in your organization, given your unique mix of relational expectations, communication patterns, systems, and management?

What if we decided to be intentional about the use of wisdom, discernment, and integrity in the process?

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Wisdom, Discernment, Integrity and Business

"A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches."
--King Solomon, Proverbs 22:1

How often do you hear the terms wisdom, discernment, and integrity used during the business day?

And just what are organizations looking for when they are hiring or promoting?

We hear words like intelligent, problem-solver, action-oriented, results-driven, and good decision-making ability.

But what good are any of those if they aren't carried out with wisdom, discernment, and integrity?

It's possible to be action-oriented and still take a lot of wrong actions.

Does intelligence guarantee sound leadership?  History reveals that many leaders with intelligence that was clearly "above average" have oppressed their people, ruined their economies, and even committed genocide.

What Are We Dealing With Here?

First, some slightly paraphrased definitions from Merriam-Webster Online.

Wisdom: ability to discern inner qualities and relationships : (insight) c : good sense : (judgment).

Discernment: the power to distinguish and select what is true or appropriate or excellent; the quality of being able to grasp and comprehend what is obscure.

Integrity: firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : (incorruptibility); the quality or state of being complete or undivided : (completeness).

Why Do They Make a Difference?

Let's start with integrity. It's probably the easiest to deal with and something that we do talk about on the job, at least when it is violated.

Integrity makes a difference because it's an outward indication of our internal character. If we say we have a set of "corporate" values and then live by them--even if it means sacrificing extra revenue--then we are known as having integrity. When we live up to our word, we have integrity. Most of all, integrity is what allows a person or a company to be trusted.

When you possess wisdom, you are able to make judgments that go beneath the surface issue or decision being presented. My observation and experience show that those possessing wisdom have actually learned from their previous experiences and mistakes; have confronted their own part in them; and now are able to see more clearly what is happening within other people and other situations. Maturity--not age alone--is necessary for wisdom.

Discernment is probably the least-used word in business. It implies a well-honed wisdom that allows one to accurately "read between the lines" when dealing with people and situations and see what is true. You and I know lots of people who say "I know how to 'read' people. However, I don't really know lots of people who discern the truth very well at all.

What Happens in The Absence of Those Three ?

When we hire and promote based upon education, experience, and behavioral traits, we're still working on the surface. To get "keepers" we need to dig one level deeper.

At a business luncheon meeting a few years ago our well-educated, high-level executive speaker spent his entire block of time talking about his accomplishments, what he was going to achieve in the coming year, and the plan to get there. When he asked for questions, the guy next to me said something gutsy. He said:

"I'm sorry. Who you are spoke so loudly that I wasn't able to hear what you had to say."

My neighbor had discerned the self-centered character of the presenter. The speaker had not discerned the values, maturity and character of his audience. As a result, his accomplishments couldn't overcome the low regard in which his peers began to hold him as a result of his bravado. It was a defining moment that impacted his career mobility.

When we're hiring and promoting, wouldn't it be worthwhile to know who we're getting--not just what we're getting?

It seems to me that we need to understand at least three things in order to make that happen:

1. What "kind of people" do we want? (What values do we hold that need to be evident in our people)?

2. What does it take to develop the wisdom and discernment needed in business?

3. How are you acquiring your wisdom in a way that leads to discernment and integrity?

How much value does your organization openly place on these?

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

When You Delegate, You're Still In It Together

One of the joys experienced by a new manager is having an array of people to call on to "get it done."

One of the challenges experienced by a new manager is having an array of people to call on to "get it done."

I can't think of a role that's more challenging than managing, at any level. One of the traps, though, is a mistaken sense of what delegation is all about.

What Successful Managers Do

1.Help people perform.

That means you have to spend time focusing on the people who do the task, not just the task.

Who needs help? How much? How much is too much? How often do you need to follow up to see how things are going? When you follow up, what do you really need to do to be helpful? (It may be to get out of the way, explain how to do something in detail, or something in between).

2. Invest in people, not use them.

We agonize over how to invest our earnings so that we reap personal financial growth.

When we delegate are we asking, "How can I invest in this person during this task in order to benefit all of us over the long run?"

Or is the question "What can this person do for me?"

Each question leads to very different outcomes. One is personal and organizational growth. The other is a sense of using and being used.

3. Be alongside, in front of, or close behind--but never absent.

No one--no one--is successful alone. However, it's really easy and unbelievably common to fail by thinking we can do it alone.

So the best managers I know live out a model that clearly shares responsibility. They provide direction and support; their people ask questions easily as a result of the "we're in this together" atmosphere.

What's up in your management/delegating life?

_________________________________________________

How about Static Leadership?. Find out more from Jim Stroup.

What happens when new leadership and cultures clash? Wally Bock dissects the clash at Home Depot with simplicity and clarity.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Performance Tip: Recognize The Talent You've Got

When I check the keyword searches that land people here, a lot of them have to do with "find my strengths" or "how do I manage talented people?"

People at work appear invested in clarifying their own strengths and understanding the inherent talent in others. If that's so, I was wondering why there is so much angst about retention. It seems that people would be committed for the long term if their strengths and talents are being valued.

The Managerial Equivalent of "Your Lips Say 'Yes' But There's 'No-No' In Your Eyes"

There is at least one reason why some people--including managers-- are shopping their resumes. It has to do with the distinction between advocating development and then doing the opposite.

Here's a real life example:

Luke (not his real name) is an operations manager at one of my client companies. He's experienced and has been in the manufacturing industry for 20+ years. He is the most well-read client ever. Whenever I see him, he waxes poetically about the wonderful "new" managerial ideas he's picked up from the most recent leadership books he's read.

One of those ideas had to do with recognizing someone's small successes and following through with verbal encouragement or even a small reward (lunch, movie tickets, a $25 gift certificate. . .) Better yet, acknowledge the person's fete during a regular departmental meeting. He also talked about the importance of those ideas during a meeting with his supervisors.

But he wouldn't do any of those.

I asked him why not.

His reply "I'm not going to spend time rewarding or telling someone how good they are if the company is already paying them a salary. They are supposed to do good work."

He doesn't have the same approach with his kids. I've seen him. He acknowledges them when they've succeeded at something. Anything. And he does it spontaneously.

What the heck happens in life(?) between:

and

.

Every day we're all trying to learn or do something new. Let's be honest: part of our day is spent being a kid again when it comes to struggling with a new problem that needs a solution. And we could use a few encouraging words of recognition when we demonstrate a talent that helps the organization.

("Gee, that felt good. I think I'll do it again!)

What would a well-known, successful business person say about the importance of encouragement?

"My best friend is the one who brings out the best in me."
~ Henry Ford

What Do Our Brains Say About Encouragement?

According to the ATW resident neuro-gurette, Dr. Ellen Weber, brainpower is lost to common critiques. In this instance, the absence of acknowledgment can easily turn into the perception of a "critique." For those who can't seem to get their hearts in gear, maybe a look at how serotonin builds better businesses will offer an intellectual bridge to encouraging action.

What's going on at your workplace when it comes to recognizing and acknowledging people's strengths and talents?
_________________________________

Click on your preferred subscription area at the top of the sidebar on the right. You'll always get the newest post!

Photo attribution to:
www.mingara.com.au      
www.corporateclowning.nl

 

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Non Verbals Across Cultures: Start Teaching It

It's easy to misunderstand someone from a culture different than your own--especially when it comes to non-verbals. 

Despite this, there's not much intentional training on nonverbal behavior in global corporations. Perhaps there should be. I recall my initiation into this special "world" as a new  management trainer in Saudi Arabia in 1979. Since then, the whole idea of cross-cultural teams and travel has become the norm. I'm not so sure that the same is true with purposeful understanding. Here's my Day One experience; perhaps you've had a similar one:

Real Life

Our support staff was made up entirely of Indian, Bangladeshi, Pakistani, and Thai folks. When addressing the group about an administrative problem, the silent responses ranged from a head shake (Indian) to downward stares (Pakistani and Bangladeshi) to a bright smile from our Thai guy. I took this to mean lack of concern or a misunderstanding--perhaps I wasn't speaking clearly. I finally left the discussion puzzled by what appeared to be a collective lack of concern.

By the end of the day the situation was, without fanfare, totally resolved. Huh?

It was only later that another native English-speaking manager with considerably more experience sat me down and gave me a million-dollar lesson in cultural non-verbals. He shared that the Thai smile signaled an apology; the Indian head-shake wasn't a "No" (a U.S non-verbal) but in fact a "Yes, I understand." The other two fellows were from cultures that didn't value constant eye contact while being engaged--but they were listening carefully and clearly engaged.

Teaching and Learning, Explicit or Implicit?

So: is non-verbal behavior something that can accurately be picked up by informal exposure to other people or does it need to be specifically taught?

A study by  Damnet & Borland (2007) (don't seem to be able to access this any longer) suggests it may be better to teach nonverbal behavior explicitly.

This study examined Thai university students learning English as a foreign language.

One group saw videos of native English speakers along with being taught the meaning of the words. While they were not explicitly taught the nonverbal communication, they were implicitly exposed to it.

A second group was purposefully taught about nonverbal communication in addition to learning the grammar and vocabulary. It was this second group that showed the best understanding of nonverbal communication.

In Organizations, It Matters

It can be tough enough during meetings and normal interactions to interpret the nonverbal cues from our own culture . Add the global nature of doing business and one would have to ask: Wouldn't it make sense to simply put this out there as a training program? It could be a lot of fun as well as highly educational in a way that would reduce unnecessary misunderstandings.

Add your own examples to the comments. It would be a big help to readers everywhere.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

5 Powerful Ways for Managers to Open Discussions

Just imagine how disappointed you’d be after setting up a meeting or performance discussion, only to lose your listener(s) with an opening that didn't create momentum. Anticipation of a good meeting--followed by a weak opening-- is like inviting someone for a hot air balloon ride only to find the helium tank is empty.

Here are  5 openers  that will capture your listeners' imaginations and pull them deeper into the heart of your issue.

1. Ask a Question

Opening with a question is a rhetorical device. It creates curiosity and starts the listener thinking. Thinking means active engagement with your topic, and that’s just what both of you want.

2. Share a Quote or Maybe an Anecdote

Anecdotes are brief stories that can make people laugh or quickly establish the main point at hand. A  related quote from a professional authority or well-known person can magnetically hold attention in those opening seconds.

3. Involve the Mind’s Eye

A mental image in the listener's mind is one of the most powerful things you can create, so engaging the imagination is a powerful opening technique. Use words like “imagine,” “picture this,” “do you remember when,” etc.

4. Note a Shocking Statistic

I love starting off with a fascinating fact. Why?  People enjoy fascinating data if it is unique, startling, shocking, or counter-intuitive. Be sure it is directly relevant to your point as well.

5. Use a Metaphor, Analogy, or Simile

These are some of the most powerful devices available when it comes to telling a story in a single sentence. It's a great way to capture attention and also sparks the mental imagery that allows people to tell a story to themselves.

Whether you are sitting down one-on-one or kicking off a meeting, one or more of these will create the kind of engagement that will make you "listenable" and draw others into the discussion.

Wouldn't it be great to become known as the person people want to be with, regardless of the topic?

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Recognize the Seven Universal Emotions

This is useful to everyone, especially in a career world that is so overwhelmingly global.

You'll find "experts" on body language and rants about the meaning of this gesture or that one. Much of this is true, with one huge caveat: you have to be patient and carefully synthesize the totality of the gestures and mannerisms in order to develop some degree of accuracy.

If you are making a presentation, running a meeting, or in a management discussion, it may be more helpful to know what emotions are universal. This gives you a better chance at narrowing the possibilities of what kinds of responses you are really seeing. So, here goes.

The Seven "Universal" Emotions

These are common throughout all people and cultures:

• anger     

• contempt

• disgust

• fear

• happiness

• sadness

• surprise

Here's where it gets tricky:

There are 10,000 different facial expressions. About 3000 of these facial expressions are relevant to emotion and most people use only 50-60 in normal conversation. Those 50-60 do relate to the seven universal emotions.

These expressions can be "macro" expressions which last 1-3 seconds or even longer. An example would be a smile. The question: "Is the smile real or fake?" If fake, what does that mean? (Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar; people simply want to be polite).

We also make micro expressions that give up our more hidden feelings. These are like reflexes, because it's very difficult to stop them from happening since they are part of our brain's hard-wiring. That's why we get a "feeling" when we watch small discrepancies between someone's words and their expression.

These expressions last only 1/25th of a second. (That is faster than an eye-blink). Most people can't pick up micro expressions consciously. When viewed on film and played as slower speeds, these expressions look just like macro expressions. Many homicide detectives do this. If you don't happen to be looking for a serial killer, it's still a great way to watch what signals you give off when you are speaking or running a meeting.

How to Use This

The seven universal emotions are the ones that are most important to you. You want to know whether someone is angry, happy, etc., with your interaction. Memorize the list (or carry a cheat sheet) and increase your awareness of these.

Do: When you think you have enough visual information to believe that the person--or people--are, say, "surprised", don't make the assumption that you are correct. Instead, matter-of-factly state your observation: "You know, I'm watching the response to this slide and am getting the sense that maybe you are a bit surprised. Is that so?" This will lead to affirmation or will yield other responses that will help you--and them--stay or get on track. 

Don't: Try to be magically clever and tell them  you know how they feel. The last time you did that with your spouse or significant other, how'd that work for you?

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Top Ten Things You Don't Want To Say

Researchers at Oxford University have compiled what they are calling the "Top Ten Most Irritating Phrases."

The researchers who compiled the list monitor the use of phrases in a database called the Oxford University Corpus, which comprises books, papers, magazines, broadcast, the internet and other sources.
The database signals new words and phrases and can also tell them which expressions are disappearing. It also shows how words are being misused.

If you are reading this while in a meeting, get your paper and pencil ready for the tally. If you are about to speak, here are ten for your mental eraser:

The top ten most irritating phrases

1 - At the end of the day

2 - Fairly unique

3 - I personally

4 - At this moment in time

5 - With all due respect

6 - Absolutely

7 - It's a nightmare

8 - Shouldn't of (it is “shouldn’t have”)

9 - 24/7

10 - It's not rocket science

Confession: I was in the midst of a potential problem analysis some years ago with part of the planet Mars design team in Princeton. They were planning the entire exploration project. In a moment of frustration I actually uttered the words, "Hey, this isn't rocket science." They suggested that I might be better suited for exploring the New Jersey Turnpike.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Employees or Contractors: Who Gets The Most Feedback?

I don't know for sure. But you probably do.

Performance Speaks For Itself. . .  drew  comments that raised the debate about this question.

Becky Robinson is a freelancer who writes about leadership for Mountain State University. She feels that freelancers and consultants  "have to continually prove their worth to keep clients and work"--so it's important to be able to solicit performance feedback from clients.

That's certainly true. But management authority, consultant, and writer Wally Bock says: "As for freelancers needing it more, it seems to me they need this kind of support less. Most freelancers are paid by the project and there's usually feedback on each one. Folks on the payroll tend to slip into the background."

If that's the case, then "contractors" get more information about their performance--and how to improve it--than employees.

Can that be?

Performance improvement is directly linked to the timeliness, frequency, and quality of feedback. If Wally's observation reflects reality in the workplace, then "outside" people are the recipients of better performance management than those on the payroll.

It would be helpful to know what's really happening out there. If you are an employee or a freelancer/coach/consultant, what's your experience? The answers could be quite fascinating--and revealing. Weigh in with a comment below.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Performance Speaks for Itself, But Not At Work

OK, so the posts here usually come out early in the morning. But last night was later than usual. My daughter treated me to an early Father's Day gift and took me to opening night of the Eric Clapton/Steve Winwood tour. (When these guys first started making music 45 years ago, our nights began at the hour this one ended).

I don't usually try to stretch a pop culture event into an object lesson. This is not stretch, so here goes:

In Real Life, Performance Speaks for Itself

Clapton and Winwood walked onstage with the band, did their first song, and Clapton said, simply, "Thanks for coming out." Except for a one-line, "This is for Hubert", an acknowledgment of long-time Blues pioneer Hubert Sumlin's presence in the audience, the duo played non-stop for another two hours and 15 minutes. Multiple standing ovations throughout--no chatter, only performance--for two hours and 15 minutes with no break.

Pure performance. Acknowledgment through instant feedback. And reviews that will "promote" the tour.

In Organizational Life You Have to Speak for Your Performance

Wouldn't you think that a drop-dead project or presentation would promote your career--and make you a "promoted" employee?

No.

Employees at all levels beg for recognition. Managers get paid to manage (which includes develop and grow) their employees. But for some reason, many of the same managers who value performance don't acknowledging it. The result: Their stars look for another stage where their managerial audience will pay attention to the show.

Here's the reality: you have to promote your career and your performance. It's organizationally astute to keep a list of your specific contributions and remind your manager periodically of your aspirations and accomplishments. There are at least a few of reasons for this:

1. Some managers just don't pay attention. They aren't evil-- they have a blind spot. Give them a set of lenses that will help them see 20/20.

2. Some managers do pay attention and then get caught up in the demands of their manager. They forget and simply need a reminder. Remind them.

3. Regardless of what the recruiting brochure or sales pitch was, you are still responsible for managing your career.

It's part of your life--and you are responsible for that.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Change and Generational Differences

Is it more difficult to make changes after the age of 30?

The answer is "yes" according to some new research.

The Scientific American Mind ran an interesting article on why change is hard and suggest that most of us experience reduced "openness" after our twenties.  The article is currently available for review here

Here is a quote:

"Once a family and career are in place, novelty may no longer be as welcome. New experiences may bring innovation and awakening but also chaos and insecurity. And so most people dream of novelty but hold fast to the familiar. Over time we become creatures of habit: enjoying the same dishes when we eat out, vacationing in favorite spots and falling into daily routines."

I'm not sure this is a revelation but I do think it's well-stated and to the point. We all gravitate toward anchors of stability in life-- people and places with whom we feel secure. The research implies that through our twenties we're sort of roaming and looking for experiences. What we're also doing is taking in those experiences and making sense out of life...which then moves us toward a chosen "lifestyle" and  increased stability.

What this also implies is that, like all preceding generations, Gen Z will no doubt look at Gen Y as "the traditionalists".

What Does This Mean for the Workplace?

Read the italics carefully. Although we become creatures of habit the research says that "novelty may no longer be as welcome" and that most people still "dream of novelty."

That's why we need to spend time with, and listen to, the newest generation in the workplace. They are the ones who will ignite the dreams and bring the novelty into our lives and businesses. Instead of saying, "We can't do that here" replace it with, "How would you do that?"

Then sit back and listen.



The article by Nikolas Westerhoff was published in the December 2008 edition of Scientific American Mind.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Is it more difficult to make changes after the age of 30?

The answer is "yes" according to some new research.

The Scientific American Mind ran an interesting article on why change is hard and suggest that most of us experience reduced "openness" after our twenties.  The article is currently available for review here

Here is a quote:

"Once a family and career are in place, novelty may no longer be as welcome. New experiences may bring innovation and awakening but also chaos and insecurity. And so most people dream of novelty but hold fast to the familiar. Over time we become creatures of habit: enjoying the same dishes when we eat out, vacationing in favorite spots and falling into daily routines."

I'm not sure this is a revelation but I do think it's well-stated and to the point. We all gravitate toward anchors of stability in life-- people and places with whom we feel secure. The research implies that through our twenties we're sort of roaming and looking for experiences. What we're also doing is taking in those experiences and making sense out of life...which then moves us toward a chosen "lifestyle" and  increased stability.

What this also implies is that, like all preceding generations, Gen Z will no doubt look at Gen Y as "the traditionalists".

What Does This Mean for the Workplace?

Read the italics carefully. Although we become creatures of habit the research says that "novelty may no longer be as welcome" and that most people still "dream of novelty."

That's why we need to spend time with, and listen to, the newest generation in the workplace. They are the ones who will ignite the dreams and bring the novelty into our lives and businesses. Instead of saying, "We can't do that here" replace it with, "How would you do that?"

Then sit back and listen.



The article by Nikolas Westerhoff was published in the December 2008 edition of Scientific American Mind.

Want Better Meetings? Introduce Each Speaker

Business meetings are supposed to produce good information, understanding and decisions.

Way too often (maybe most of the time?) they turn into marathons that are a series of individual "stand up/sit down" presentations where one speaker simply melts into the next. The result is low energy and some unnecessary confusion on the part of participants. Why should I listen to Sarah talk about this? Sometimes it's even, "Who the heck is Sarah?"

You and I need a change in energy and pace to capture our attention and hold our interest. So I'm going to offer managers and meeting leaders an easy way to improve meetings everywhere:

Introduce Each Presenter

Why is this important?

Sure, you may know Ralph from Accounting or Rita the Sales Manager. But do you always know exactly why they are speaking today, what they've done recently, or something captivatingly unique about them? To simply toss a speaker into the mix and push the button for the next slide makes every "speaker" the same. This forces them (if they are aware) to work harder at re-capturing the group.

Set Them Up for Success

Introductions set the mood for the presenter. The group has a chance to absorb some information that will set up the segment. Most importantly: It establishes  the credibility of the speaker. There is a psychological boost that comes from someone else--especially the boss--endorsing the presenter. What better way to show recognition for specific activity than in a meeting with "the team" or others from the company?

Here's what to include. Any one or all may be useful, depending upon the familiarity of the group with the next presenter.

1. Establish their expertise on the topic.

Tell what they've been working on, how that relates to their work and educational history, and one thing that you value about their efforts.

2. Capture  attention.

I once had to introduce a guy totally well-known to the group. His specialty? IT. But I also knew that his hobby was wine-making and he had literally cultivated a first-class vineyard on his property. So the intro slide was a photo of him (supplied by his wife) tending to the vines on the weekend. It completely shifted the dynamics. Then it was possible to quickly move into #3.

3. Make it relevant to the topic at hand

"Bill has spent the past 3 months at our site in Finland studying the pilot program for added manufacturing efficiency. He has those results for us today and I think you'll be intrigued by them."

Managers and meeting leaders: Think "Expertise, Attention, and Relevancy." Then do the intro for each. The presenters and the audience will appreciate it and you'll shift the energy in a way that will improve the quality of your sessions.

What tips do you have from your own meeting experiences? Inquiring minds want to know!

_______________________________

Meeting Bonus: In case your meeting leads to problem-solving, Art Petty offers 8 Suggestions To Improve Your Team's Problem-Solving Skills.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Build a Culture of "Thanks"

I've been hearing more and more (you no-doubt have, too) about retaining good employees at all levels. Sure, there is plenty of downsizing. But organizations still want to hold onto the best. It costs a lot to find, hire, and get a new person up to speed.

Here are some thought-provoking statistics from an article I recalled some time ago from the UK's Management-Issues:

"Research by UK performance improvement consultants Maritz has found that almost one in five of us (19 per cent) have never been thanked for our efforts at work while more than a third only hear those two little words once or twice a year.

Perhaps not-entirely coincidentally, that's about the same proportion as another recent survey found have no loyalty towards the organisation they work for and couldn't care less about their job.

Yet at the other end of the spectrum, around a third of us do receive regular recognition and are thanked several times a week, something that (as more than eight out of 10 of those surveyed acknowledged) has a positive impact on their desire to remain with their employer."

"Thank You" & the "War for Talent"

Check out the screen shot of my " war for talent"  Google search. 504,000 results.  Books, articles,  training programs, software systems, and academic research. Conferences are being held to ponder the meaning of talent acquisition and retention.

 

Let's assume that the statistics noted in the article are a true reflection of the norm. The third who receive thanks regularly feel positive about their employer and are inclined to remain at the firm.

Easy action: Executives need to start thanking their managers regularly. Then they need to tell them to start thanking their people. Maybe we could get uppity and call it "Building a Culture of Thanks." Clearly, it would be more effective and less costly than conferences and software.

And it would make our mothers proud.

___________________________________

Note: My online friend and leadership guy Ed Brenegar takes this so seriously that he has a place where you can click and experience the transformational power of gratitude: Say Thanks Every Day. 

And you can help by...contributing to Norwegian friend and manager Frode Heiman's recognition survey at Never Mind The Manager.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

How Do You Spot an Emerging Leader?

You've seen this happen:

1. Totally random people are placed in a group.

2. They are given a task.

3. Lo and behold, a leader will emerge.

At work it may result in the acquisition of an Ocean Liner factory in Nebraska; if it's Aunt Ethel and your family, you end up eating at the Amish Country Buffet instead of Casa del Gnocchi.

What is it that prompts people to grant a person leader status?

 Research and Emerging Leadership

A study published in Personality and Social Psychology suggests that leaders emerge through a combination of:

a. Their own outspoken behavior, and

b. how that outspoken behavior is perceived by the others.

Anderson and Kilduff (2009)  looked at how dominant individuals in a group were perceived by others in the group. Perceived competence is important because it's difficult to become a leader if everyone in the group thinks that person is a jerk regardless of how dominant (s)he is.

Here's the punchline: Anderson and Kilduff's research shows a big gap between the actual competence of leaders vs. how they are perceived by the others.

In the second of two studies the researchers had participants compete with another group on a series of math problems. The groups were videotaped. Then, member behavior was closely examined. Dominant participants were inclined to offer more suggestions to the group. The result? These people were perceived by the group and the observers  as the most competent.

Here is some very practical food for thought: The "leader's"  behavior encouraged others to see that person as competent even though their suggestions to the group were no better and sometimes worse than others. So the truth of the matter is that the leaders didn't always contribute the best but their voices were usually heard first and most often.

What to Take Away

Leaders emerge through processes that are somewhat more subtle than we realize. Rather than dominating others in the traditional sense of the word, emerging leaders show their "competence" by adding greater amounts of verbal contributions to discussions. Others assume that the greater contribution means the group will more likely succeed under that person's leadership.

The next time you are part of an unstructured group, be vigilant. (Or, if you want to be the leader, be talkative!).

Note: This is about emerging leadership in random or unstructured groups. It's very real and worth being aware of.

Tip: If you hear a loud, consistent voice that is taking you in a certain direction, start adding structure by asking, "What is our real goal and what criteria do we all have?" Then take time for everyone to weigh in. The same leader may remain, but you'll know the reason why and your decison will be deliberate and purposeful.

In organizations, most groups of people don't start on random terms that produce an emergent leader. But it's useful to understand more about informal, everyday groups that can impact many other aspects of our lives, from community groups to politics.
________________________________________________

Bonus: If you want to know just how crazy "intentional" leadership development can get, then check out Dan McCarthy's "Another Too Dumb To Be True Leadership Development Program." (Maybe yelling louder and longer isn't so bad after all!)

All Things Workplace is honored to be named in the Top 10 Blogs for Advancing Your Career. Sincere thanks to über-coach Marty Nemko and Blogs.com.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Help and How to Ask For It

We all need help: managers delegate (it's really about help), team members collaborate, and it would be great if our kids would take the trash out for us.

Yet asking for help seems to be unbelievably difficult for many. To some it's embarrassing; others see it as a sign of weakness; and there are those who fear the sense of rejection that comes from "no".

If you think about it you'll realize that most people are willing to help most of the time. After all, aren't you?

A Helping Hand

Research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  shows that we vastly underestimate just how willing others are to lend a hand.

In a series of studies Francis Flynn and Vanessa Lake of Columbia University tested people's estimates of how likely others were to help. They recruited people to ask others to fill out questionnaires, borrow cell phones and even escort them to the gym.

The result: people underestimated how likely others were to help them by as much as 100%.

So, what's going on?

It's embarrassing to say "'no"

We find it difficult to understand what others think and feel because we are kind of stuck inside ourselves. We may not like to think of ourselves as egocentric, but we all are to varying degrees.

The researchers say it's more than that. We also underestimate just how much social pressure there is on other people to say "yes". In effect, when you ask someone to help you it's a lot more awkward for them to say "no" than you might imagine.

Two Practical Tips For You

1. When you want help, just ask. People are much more likely to help than you think (especially if the request is relatively small). Most people gain pleasure in helping others who have a need.

2. Make it easy for people to say "no". Here's the flip side: most of us don't realize just how hard it is to say "no" to a request for help. People feel more pressure to say "yes" than we realize. If what you are asking for really may be a burden, think of ways to make it easier for the person to say "no".

Note: In the workplace, goals and deadlines may not be negotiable. If you are a manager you need to look at what you are delegating, the totality of activities an employee has to do, and set priorities. It's popular to parrot, "Do more with less."  In this case, the "less" is time. Can your employee or team achieve the standard of performance by doing more with less time? Get clear about what's most important.

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.

Leader Development at Mountain State

"The real key to leadership is for leaders to know when to lead and when to follow."

--Dr. Charles Polk, President, Mountain State University

Last week's Are You Really Developing Leaders? highlights the critical ingredient of action and doing in leadership development as stated clearly by current, high-performing managers.

That grabbed the attention of Becky Robinson who writes Mountain State University's Leader Talk, the official blog of their School of Leadership and Professional Development. We began discussing real leader development and the University's quest to continually link the classroom with real life. Two things made me want to go further with this:

1. Becky's enthusiasm and investment in the success of the program.

2. My commitment to working with universities and their students to help build faculty and student leadership and prepare students for organizational life.

A Glimpse into Real-Life Leadership Education

Becky shares this:

 As president of a statewide professional organization and a business owner, Robin Holstein was a leader long before she entered the Coonskin Armory in Charleston, WV to begin her Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership from Mountain State University. With more than twenty years of work and life experience between her high school graduation and her first day of class, Robin knew that completing her degree would be challenging. Still, the intensity of the eighteen month program surprised her.

 

Robin joined a blended cohort of Air Guardsmen, and graduated as the only woman and only civilian. This cohort has been important resource to her. After completing assignments and reading outside the classroom, the cohort met to discuss a designated topic, guided by a faculty member/facilitator. Each week, their discussion sparked a dynamic interchange between the course material and real life. On topics ranging from leadership principles to human resources, the group used personal examples to relate their opinions and ideas.

 

One benefit of the cohort experience, Robin shared, is that it mirrors a real life boardroom experience.  She had to learn to work with a diverse group of people, to relate to their ideas and opinions. Emotions flared when people polarized on topics at times. At each classroom  she practiced negotiation and persuasion and learned to communicate well.

 

When the organization she led faced declining membership and scarce budgetary resources, Robin turned to her cohort for encouragement. She had a plan, but wanted support. She initiated a merger with an organization from a nearby state. As a result, the members of her organization have new opportunities for networking and training.

  

Robin's experience is a great example of what is happening in Mountain State's leadership programs. At each of our campuses and online, students in cohort groups join together to learn leadership skills in an interactive way that prepares them to make a difference in their organizations.

 

Since I started writing LeaderTalk, I've been captured by the vision of our faculty, the enthusiasm of our students, and the potential of the future.

 

Mountain State has been teaching leadership for several years, under the School of Business and Technology. About three years ago, Bill White, the founding Dean of the School of Leadership and Professional Development, realized his goal to establish a separate school to focus on leadership development and leadership studies. The school has seen incredible growth, and he is forging ahead toward other goals:

• to see leadership recognized as a discrete academic discipline
• to create a premier center for leadership learning
• to establish consistent outcomes for leadership learning across the country.

 

We are excited about the development of our new doctoral program. In October, the first set of students will begin this three year program. Though the first set of students will study in seat at our main campus in Beckley, West Virginia, a second group will begin the program in February 2010 in a hybrid program that will include a combination of in seat study and four days per year of study in residence. Both groups will be working toward a Doctor of Executive Leadership degree.

 

The doctorate joins our Master of Science in Strategic Leadership and our Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership offerings. All three degrees are designed around a three fold purpose. We are developing stewards of the discipline of leadership who will

• conserve leadership knowledge
• generate new knowledge about leadership
• and transfer leadership knowledge to others.

 

All three degrees are intensely practical and are built around a cohort format that encourages students to immediately apply their learning to real life situations.
_______________________________________

Steve's note: In my own telephone discussion with Dr. Polk, he said something that cuts through the long running pop-psych, re-hashed "leadership" advice and offered this:

"To understand leadership you have to take time to observe your own behavior in different situations. There's no understanding 'others' until you get an accurate picture of how your own behavior impacts theirs. That's what we want to be sure happens in our programs."

Like this article? Subscribe to my RSS feed.