I am sure both the Giants and the Cowboys spent many days, even weeks, preparing for the game. They may not have known the playoff implications that would be involved, but being the last game of the regular season, they knew it would be an important game.

Preparation
What do you think went into preparing for the game? I would imagine, both teams watched a lot of film of the opposing team to try to gather some intelligence about their offensive and defensive plays and line-ups. Both teams practiced plays over and over and over until they neared perfection. They prepared for all kinds of positive and negative scenarios that could arise during the game. In short, I am sure we can all agree that both the Giants and Cowboys started the game with an in-depth strategy for how to win.

Be Adaptable
What happens when Eli Manning, quarterback for the Giants, gets the play call from the offensive coach, relays the play to the team in the huddle, comes up to the line to hike the ball and sees that the Cowboys are set, defending the play perfectly? Does he go ahead and run the play because that is the strategy and the play that was called in? Sometimes he will, but many times he calls an audible. For those who don’t know, an audible is when the quarterback changes the play just before hiking the ball. You will see Eli Manning many times pointing to the defense and screaming numbers and words to his team mates. In many cases, these numbers and words are keys to a new play. He does this because the defense is prepared to stop the play that was called. He knows that now is the time to call an audible.

The Take Away
In executing a business or personal strategy, sometimes it is necessary to be like Eli, identifying when it’s time to be flexible and adaptable and call an audible. We can never be 100% sure of the obstacles, challenges, and opportunities that will come our way, but you cannot discount the importance of the preparation. Just like the Giants and Cowboys spent time preparing for the game looking at different scenarios the opposing team may throw at them, we can look at scenarios that may occur as we are on our journey of winning our own game. The more we can define those scenarios and be willing to call an audible when they occur, the better chance we’ll have of succeeding.

Faith in Himself
Tim Tebow has a strong conviction in himself and is not concerned with all of the things that people are saying he can’t do. He is humble and even though the spotlight is on him, he gives credit to everyone on the team. In the press conference after the Chicago Bears game, in which the Broncos pulled out a come from behind win, Tim said, “I just want to thank Coach Fox and the coaches for giving me the opportunity and believing in me for the entire game and for the defense for keeping us in it and our receivers and our offensive line, who at the end of the game made me look a lot better than I really am.” He has integrity and the team knows that he is going to work hard at every practice and give his best effort on game day. Overall, Tim Tebow is a courageous leader. He works hard at improving the things that are within his control and is able to ignore aspects that are out of his control. He is willing to act for the good of the organization in spite of the risks, dangers, or fears of failure. He believes in himself and this thinking inspires his teammates to believe in him as well.

Unique People Skills
Tim Tebow genuinely cares for other people. He is willing to invest time in relationships and is respectful of people’s differences. He is a good communicator that shares and receives feedback in constructive ways. He was able to capture each individual team member’s talent by recognizing their value and rewarding their contributions. By utilizing his people skills, Tim Tebow developed the unique talents of the team. He provided support that encouraged continuous improvement and motivated teammates to give a 100% effort, every day, all season long.

Ability to Execute
Tim Tebow was able to unite and drive his teammates to achieve a common goal. He clearly described and clarified the team’s mission, vision, and strategy. His ability to help people understand their role on the team has helped break down the barrier of individual statistics and accomplishment focus. Tim Tebow created a culture change within the Denver Bronco locker room. He ushered a new way of thinking that revolved around the good of the team. His words and actions always supported team unity. In a post-game interview, he said, “I don’t think it’s ‘Tebow Time’; I just think it’s ‘Bronco Time,’ and the team steps up as a team. We play for one another and continue to trust one another, and I think that makes all the difference in the world.” Even though he had the team aligned and on the same page, he was able to remain accountable when something went wrong. He took responsibility for his mistakes and took the necessary actions to develop areas of the game that he was weak in.

The Denver Broncos 2011 NFL season will not be soon forgotten. By changing their leader 5 games into the season, they went from losers to winners. Tim Tebow was able to foster a change in the team. Analysts from around the country pointed out that his football skill set was not good enough to lead his team to continued victories. Yet, week after week he led the Broncos to come from behind wins. Connie Diekens, a subject matter expert on leadership communication and influence, recently put out her Top Ten Influencers of 2011 list and Tim Tebow is ranked #1. Diekens said, “His unwavering faith and never-say-never resolve have captivated the nation.” Tim Tebow’s strong leadership skills, more than compensated for his underdeveloped football skills. His ability to gain trust, encourage effort and align team goals created a high performance culture that led the Denver Broncos from a losing season, straight to the NFL Playoffs.

The Research

After Dr. Sashkin and I explored the meaning of perceived fairness in the workplace, we tested whether fairness in management made any actual difference in the retail industry. We identified 20 retail stores (all part of a large chain), ten each in two different regions of the United States.  We selected ten stores (five in each region) because of their exceptionally high employee sickness/accident compensation costs (compared with the company average) and ten of the stores because of their unusually low costs.  We then looked more closely at the ten high-cost and the ten low-cost in order to identify two sets of five that were roughly matched in terms of size, sales volume, urban or rural location, and workforce composition.  These ten stores, five high on our bottom-line cost measure and five low, then became the test sample.

All ten store managers filled out a questionnaire base on the ten dimensions in reference to themselves and their own practices.  About 60 percent of the department managers completed the questionnaire about themselves and also the employee version, describing their store managers.  Hourly employees were asked to complete the questionnaire in reference to their department managers.  The proportion of hourly employees mailing back questionnaires averaged twenty-five percent.

Does Fairness Make a Difference?

First we compared of self-reports of the five high-cost store managers with the self-reports of the five low-cost managers.  There were no differences whatsoever.  All of the store managers saw their own behavior in a positive light.  Next we examine the self-reports from the department managers.  Again, the outcome was exactly the same. All managers in the ten stores viewed themselves favorably.

When, however, we compared the way high-cost managers and low-cost managers viewed their store managers, the results were more interesting.  Scores in low-cost stores were better on all their ten dimensions of fairness.  In summary, there were differences on all ten scales favoring the low-cost stores, and on five of the ten dimensions those differences were statistically significant and sizable.

For example, the average score on the Integrity dimension for the low-cost store managers (as rated by the department managers) was 18.0: for high-cost store managers, the average score was 13.4, a difference of almost five scale points.  Scores on each scale ranged from a low of 5 points to a high of 25 points-for a possible difference of 20 points.  Thus a five-point average difference would have represented a difference of 25 percent.

When we examined the responses of the hourly employees in the high-cost and low-cost stores, the difference became truly dramatic.  There were differences on every one of the ten dimensions, all favoring the low-cost stores.  Five of the differences had high levels of statistical significance, and four of these were so high as to be expected by chance in less than a thousand cases. Clearly, hourly employees at the low-cost stores viewed the fairness climate in a dramatically different way than did their counterparts at the high-cost stores.

The hourly employees considered certain “soft” issues most in their interpretation of what is fair in the workplace. The scores were most dramatic in Trust, Truthfulness, Integrity, and Justice.  Hard-nosed managers often view these warm-fuzzy things as optional or unnecessary managerial attributes.  In reality, as the research indicates, the soft attributes have high economic relevant to organizational effectiveness and profit.

The data are strikingly clear, and every manager ought to pay close attention to what it indicates.  In the retail industry specifically, as noted by the research quoted, and in other industries most likely, fairness while managing others does indeed make a critical difference in organizational performance.  Old style, hard-nosed managers who ignore the importance of “soft” attributes such as Trust, Consistency, Truthfulness, Integrity, Communicating, Expectations, Equity, sharing Influenced, Justice, Respect, and Following Procedures will suffer for high costs associated with employee sickness and accidents.  With the staggering cost of doing business today, no manager can afford to ignore what was learned from the research

I was recently in the classroom of my son (7 years old) and noticed the poem written below at the front of the class.  As a parent and professional familiar with the qualities of great leaders, I was excited to see this being instilled into his character.

It Can Be Done
The man who misses all the fun
Is he who says, “It can’t be done.”
In solemn pride he stands aloof
And greets each venture with reproof.

Had he the power he’d efface
The history of the human race.
We’d have no radio or motor cars
No streets lit by electric stars.

No telegraph nor telephone
We’d linger in the age of stone.
The world would sleep if things were run
By men who say, “It can’t be done.”

-William J. Bennett

This poem caught my attention because I am constantly helping my children to become great leaders and learn the skills necessary to be successful in their own lives.  While there are many qualities of leadership, the conviction to enjoy the journey and press forward is a great quality to develop and poses.

Being a leader who is able to drive organization success requires personal traits or characteristics that are not necessarily intuitive. Successful leadership demands a set of skills that appears to be less know or obvious, but nonetheless is critically important to both personal and organizational success. Mere knowledge of what actually drives success doesn’t by itself guarantee success, but it can point a person in the correct direction. Success comes from consistent execution of the personal trait of characteristic. Perhaps that is the “execution” that we should be discussing, not the execution of the company’s business plan.

According to the same research study, the top six leadership traits that are most likely to drive both personal and organizational failure are

1. Not building effective relationships.
2. Not demonstrating self control.
3. Not having functional expertise.
4. Not being able to manage complex systems and processes.
5. Having poor communication skills.
6. Not being able to execute the plan.

Now that you have seen the two lists, note what is included and where items appear on the lists. Do a comparison of what drives success and what drives failure. What similarities do you notice? Do you see, for example, that the most important thing a leaders can do to help drive success, and hopefully prevent failure (because it appears as the number one item on both lists), is to build and sustain effective interpersonal relationships with others? Do you notice that the lists are different? The traits that drive success are not necessarily the same traits that contribute to failure. This knowledge can provide an enterprising or aspiring leader with a list of things to do to maximize future success, and others things to eliminate from personal habits.

I find research intriguing; perhaps that is the psychologist in me. Some people prefer to ignore research, perhaps because they are suspicious of the manner in which the data were collected, or conclusion drawn by the researchers. The truth is that research can provide us with information that we otherwise would know. If we consider the information objectively, see how it applies to our life and what we do, and try to incorporate the relevant parts into how we behave, we can become more effective than we otherwise be. Give how you behave, as a leader, some thought.

Before discussing the two lists of traits, permit me to illustrate my point with an experience I had a few years ago. While consulting at a company I was asked to observe the CEO of the organization make a presentation to his executive staff of about a dozen persons. After a few preliminaries, the CEO asked, “What is the most important thing we need to do as leaders of this company?” A few of the executives mentioned things like, “Drive more profit,” “Control expenses,” “Get more sales,” and “Pay attention to gross margins.” The CEO nodded his agreement to the suggestions, but then said, “All of these things are good, and we certainly need to pay attention to them, but I think these is something else more important that this company desperately needs us as leaders to do.”

When none of the executives seemed able to read the CEOs mind, he walked to a whiteboard and wrote, “The most important thing we need to do is EXECUTE!” Then he turned back to the group and added, “Without us paying strict attention to how we and our employees execute the company business plan, we can’t possible succeed, and might well fail in the marketplace.”

In this CEOs mind the most important leadership trait for him and his executives at that time was the proper execution of the company’s business plan. Would you agree? Is execution the most important leadership trait? I have heard a number of leaders say almost the dame think in a variety of industries. In fact, there are companies today that have “execution” as their number one corporate priority. Execution is a common topic at trade conventions, industry meetings, company meetings, and in the boardroom. If execution were widely believed to be so important, it would certainly show up as the number one item in a list of what drives leadership success and failure. Right? Or are there other leadership traits more important than doing the right things in the first place? Could it be that doing the right things as a leader outweighs doing things right?

In last month’s article I listed the most important leadership traits as expressed by actual leaders in organizations. These leaders were discussing the most important traits to consider when selecting a leader. In my informal survey conducted in many organizations over several years it is interesting to note that “execution” doesn’t show up in the top six traits. In fact, “execution” doesn’t appear in the top twenty-five traits. I must admit that my informal survey is potentially flawed for a variety of reasons, but it does provide an interesting perspective on what Leaders value as important leadership traits when selecting a leader.

The top six mentioned leadership traits in my informal survey are:

1. Experience.
2. Leadership skills.
3. Being visionary.
4. Decision making.
5. Team player.
6. Technical skills.

By comparison, according to an extensive research study over many years and including hundreds of organizations and literally thousands of leaders, the top six leadership traits that are most likely to drive both personal and organization success are

1. Building effective relationships.
2. Being able to manage complex systems and processes.
3. Being able to communicate effectively.
4. Being in control of yourself.
5. Execution and results.
6. Having functional expertise.

You can conduct your own research by asking ten (or more) of you associates, friends, or leaders in your organization, what they consider to be the most important trait or characteristic a leader must have to be successful. See if you come up with results similar to mine, or if any of your leaders come close the top six from the research study, I think you will be surprised with what you learn.

See the list of qualities that are most likely to drive personal & business failure in Qualities of Effective Leaders, Part 2

Each of us has a bucket located in our heart and whenever we receive any type of feedback it goes in our bucket.  I’ve taught the metaphor of the feedback bucket to thousands of people around the country.  Perhaps because it’s so simple, or because of the catchy name, but for whatever reason, it helps people grasp the importance of the feedback with give and receive in our interactions with others.  Picture your feedback bucket and imagine all types of feedback you receive each day going into your bucket. The problem is that we have holes in our buckets, which cause the feedback to leak out over time.  If there are a lot of holes, or if some are large, the feedback leaks out quickly.  If a person’s bucket doesn’t have many holes, or if they are just pinpricks, the feedback leaks out slowly.  Remember, we all have a bucket and every bucket has some holes in it.

Who put the holes in your bucket?  The answer is complex, but stated simply they came from both internal and external sources.  You probably drilled a few yourself through careless actions and others came from parents, family, friends, associates, and your present and former bosses. Because our lives constantly change, the holes in our feedback buckets are in a state of flux. Holes come, and holes go, but some are always there.

How does an employee behave when his or her feedback bucket is empty?  How would that same employee behave if his or her bucket had a few deposits of feedback?  The response I get to these questions from retail managers is surprisingly consistent.  And I’ll bet you probably know some of the answers. But before we get to that, first keep in mind that people suffer great pain when their bucket is empty.  Feedback deprivation is one of the most psychologically painful experiences a person can have.  In fact, mentally healthy people will go to extraordinary measures to ensure that their bucket doesn’t run dry.

Consider that people don’t consciously know when their bucket is empty.  It’s something we can’t recognize because most of us don’t understand it.  It is a feeling or an emotion; and being able to pinpoint emotions is difficult for most people.

Even if a person knew that his or her “bucket gauge” was on empty, it’s highly unlikely that the person would ask for feedback from others–especially men, because it would show weakness.  If women are the better communicators, like some people say, and if they are more intuitive, again like some experts say, then maybe women would be better suited to know when their bucket was empty, and maybe they might be more able to ask for help.

So how can you know if one of your employee’s feedback bucket is running low?  Typically, a problem with inadequate feedback will show up in one or more of six ways.

1. A person’s work performance (quantity and quality of work) is quite often directly related to the amount of feedback in his or her bucket.  It doesn’t mean that a person will stop working when their bucket’s empty, but sustained performance over time requires at least some feedback in the bucket.  So if you see an employee’s performance beginning to erode try stepping up your feedback to that person.

2. The ability to get along peaceably with co¬workers and even work effectively as a team is also directly related to how much feedback those people recently received.  Workers are less likely to demonstrate patience, cooperation, understanding or tolerance when their feedback buckets are empty, or even near empty.  So when you want a group of employees to become a team of employees, be sure that your feedback to them is frequent and positive.

3. Employees with empty buckets are prone to be followers, rather than take the initiative to be leaders.  Followers wait for things to happen, while leaders take the initiative and make things happen.  That’s because followers don’t feel as though it’s their job.  Decision–making is an integral part of demonstrating initiative.  Why make the effort to take a risk and make a decision if it’s not your job in the first place?  So if you see employees lacking in initiative, step up your feedback.

4. People suffering from feedback deprivation commonly engage in destructive communication and people whose buckets are fairly full frequently engage in constructive communication.  The simple cause of complaining, griping and back-biting, especially in the break room, may be nothing more than a number of employees who have been ignored too long and their buckets are running on empty.  So when you become aware of destructive communication, step up your feedback.

5. Each day most of us make a decision to either get up and go to work, or roll over and go back to sleep.  Part of that decision is centered on how much feedback we have received recently.  A fair portion of time and attendance issues, such as being late or absent, could he prevented if managers invested more time in giving appropriate feedback to employees.

6. A few years ago a group of Outback restaurants implemented a program to reduce turnover among part¬-time employees.  Each member of management was required to do three things each day to every part-time employee.  They were to look the employee in the eye, use his or her first name, and ask a question about how their day was going.  So to a part-time employee who was a student and worked the evening shift the comment might be, “Ann, how was your day at school?”  Sounds simple, doesn’t it? But within six months Outback had slashed part-time employee turnover in those restaurants by a whopping 50 percent! How important is feedback? Ask those employees.

So what can you do as a manager to make deposits in employees’ buckets and to even plug up a few holes? There are four easy, but important strategies you might consider.

1. The quantity of feedback you give someone is important, but the quality is even more important.  An idle comment may be welcome, but a question about how your midterm exam went yesterday could be a huge deposit.  How much do you really know about your employees?  Do you know how they spend their spare time?  Do you know their hobbies? Are you concerned about them as an important part of your team?  Take a few minutes and find out.  And then fill a bucket!

2. Employees who receive appropriate and timely praise and recognition for their contributions to the company feel better about themselves.  Feelings of being valuable and a contributor to the company can plug a few holes.  Many books have been written about how to recognize employees, but the regrettable truth is that few managers consistently use the principle of praise and recognition appropriately.  Look for both individual and group achievement and then make a fuss, and do it where a number of people can hear.

3. The third tactic to plug holes and make feedback deposits is to celebrate achievements.  Too often managers believe that results are to be expected.  It’s why we give you a paycheck, so we don’t need to celebrate individual successes.  However, if you don’t pay attention to individual and group achievements, you’ll never know who crosses the finish line.  Work at knowing who is achieving and then celebrate those achievements with your employees.

4. The extent to which any employee embraces changes to operating procedures or organizational structure is directly related to how much feedback that employee has been given regarding why the changes are necessary.  Remember, feedback is a two way street.  It doesn’t just flow from the manager to the employee.  It needs to flow from the employee to the manager too.  When employees are asked for their feedback regarding potential changes, they are much more likely to embrace the change after it is implemented.  Ensure that feedback flows in both directions.

In this article we’ve looked at the feedback bucket.  I like the metaphor because its uniqueness is so memorable to my students.  Take a serious look at your employees this month and determine which buckets are running too low.  Then, make some major deposits in those buckets.  Use the techniques in this article.  You’ll like the results.

The decisions and actions you are making regarding talent identification and development will have lasting impact on your organization. A leader today needs to be a pro-active people builder and actively work on identifying and nurturing high-potential team members. By raising the leadership bar, leadership will become a competitive advantage for your organization. Here are a few key things you can do to get the process started in your part of the organization:

• Make seeking out and fostering the development of existing talent a priority. Find time in your schedule to do it.
• Use a development process that can serve as a guide and help sustain your efforts.
• Conduct regular development planning discussions with team members and future leadership talent.
• Use communication tools and regular coaching conversations to follow-up and fuel development efforts.
• Support employee development plans and efforts by providing resources for and removing barriers to their success.
• Demonstrate your personal commitment to their development by engaging in development initiatives and building your own development plan.
• Create a development culture where people strive to maximize individual performance.

If you are able to contribute to developing the next generation of leaders in some of these ways, it may just become the greatest leadership legacy you can leave to your organization.

The reason I have chosen to discuss these two people is that I come across similar situations fairly regularly where people have everything it ought to take in order to be successful. But for some reason they make a decision to commit “career suicide.” I have every reason to believe that within a year both of these managers could be reading the want ads looking for a new position wondering what went wrong with their last job. They will wonder this in spite of the fact that for over six months I met with, coached, counseled, prodded and even warned them that behavior change was needed immediately. But for the reasons I would like to discuss, these people have decided, “good enough is good enough.” As Larry Hodges, the former President of Mrs. Field’s Cookies, has said, “Good enough is not good enough.”

The reason I selected these people and this topic is that in both of these cases termination does not need to happen. With a little effort and behavior change both of these people could have long and productive careers in their companies. But unfortunately, that may not happen: I think we can learn from their mistakes not only for ourselves, but also for those people who report to us.

Jack Welch, the former Chairman of General Electric Company, once said, “Face reality as it is, not as you think it is, or as you wish it was. Face it head-on as it really is.” That advice is clearly what both of these people need to do, because in both cases they have constructed their perception of reality as they “wish it was,” not, “as it really is.”

First, let me update you on the situation with the store manager. Although his district manager has several complaints, his primary complaint is that the manager is indecisive and procrastinates. This is even true on time-sensitive problems where immediate action is critical. Nonetheless, when given a directive, this store manager nods his head as if he hears what is being said, seems to understand what needs to be done, and even has the ability to do what is needed. However, in too many cases he either can’t make a decision, or waits too long before beginning. Have you ever seen someone like this? These behaviors can drive people crazy!

Procrastination is a complex psychological behavior that affects everyone to some degree or another. With some people it can be a minor problem; with others it can be a source of considerable stress and anxiety. Procrastination is only remotely related to time management, (procrastinators often know exactly what they should do, even if they don’t it), which is why very detailed action plans usually don’t help.

As in the case with the store manager, the procrastinator is often amazingly optimistic about his or her ability to complete a task on a tight deadline. It’s common to hear expressions of reassurance that everything is on schedule. For example, he or she may estimate that a project will take two days to complete. That sounds like a lot of time, so the person delays getting started because there appears to be an abundance of time available.

At some point, the person crosses a point in time where he or she suddenly realizes, “Oh no! I’m not in control. This isn’t working.” And as a result, waits even longer because being out of control is so uncomfortable. Even though it may appear that procrastinators are lazy, actually, one of the most common root causes is a fear of being out of control.

There is no simple solution to procrastination. Improvement takes not only a personal commitment followed by discipline, but it also requires the person realize that the best way to maintain control of situations is through preparation and on-time performance. This isn’t easy, but it can be done.

The second manager has a much different problem. After considerable discussion, she finally admitted to me, “I am a sarcastic person.” Then she quickly added, “But I’m only sarcastic in order to get people to do what I need them to do.” She believes that sarcasm is a valuable motivator and is appropriate in the workplace.

The problem with sarcasm is that it is so potentially dangerous that practically nothing else can destroy a relationship faster. People have long memories and most people don’t soon forget when they are the victim of sarcasm. So this manager has systematically damaged almost every peer relationship she has in her company. In an assessment I conducted asking her peers to rate her effectiveness in interpersonal communications; almost every person gave her the lowest possible rating. Most of them apparently, had been the victim of her sarcasm.

Research indicates that the quickest way to improve organizational effectiveness is to improve interpersonal relationships. And conversely, the quickest way to fail is to erode interpersonal relationships.

This manager’s second problem is arrogance. In the business world arrogance tends to be associated with a person in a position of power. Without organizational power, arrogance can appear misguided or even humorous. When a manager is in a position of power, he or she can be the victim of an over inflated perception of self that results in demonstrated arrogance. That seems to be the problem with this manager. She actually believes that she is indispensable in the organization and couldn’t be reassigned or terminated under any circumstance. She has created in her mind such a false sense of reality that she is unable or unwilling to accept the advice of others, even her boss.

So what’s going to happen to these two managers? Time will tell, but unless they begin to face reality as it is, very fast, they may be on the outside looking in, rather than on the inside watching their careers blossom. These are sad stories that, unfortunately, are repeated all too often.

How many times have you heard someone say, “That’s not fair!”  Kids say it to parents to describe the size of their dessert.  Workers say it to describe their perception of the treatment they receive from a manager or company.  Indeed, fairness seems to be a universal feeling that people have regarding how they are treated by others.

People tend to see fairness from four perspectives.  The first is the outcome of events, relating usually to rewards or sanctions.  The second is equity–the fairness of what happened to one-person vis-à-vis as compared to what happened to another person.  The third category focuses on appropriateness.  Some people think a situation is unfair because they believe the circumstance or, especially, the roles taken by certain people were inappropriate.  And the fourth category deals with morals, ethics, or the failure to adhere to a code of behavior defining what is believed to be “right.”

The Oxford English Dictionary defines fairness as the extent to which conditions are just, equitable, and impartial. Yet, in psychology, equity theory is not the same as justice, and there are quite a variety of theories and approaches to justice and fairness.  In addition, the entire issue of defining employee responsibility and establishing employee accountability also must be considered.

From research I conducted with Dr.  Marshall Sashkin in the1980s, we learned that the understanding people have of fairness in business actually includes ten dimensions.

1. Trust:  The confidence employees feel toward management; the degree to which employees believe management will do what it says.

2. Consistency:  The regularity, continuity, or predictability of management’s actions, such that employees are not surprised by unexpected management actions.

3. Truthfulness:  Fidelity and sincerity show though management’s actions that have demonstrated the validity of management’s statements.

4. Integrity:  Adherence of management actions to values, ethics, or an ethical code.

5. Expectations:  Provision of clear statements by management as to what task activities are desired of employees and what consequences will result.

6. Equity:  Demonstration though management’s actions that all employees are treated alike in terms of rewards and sanctions received for similar behaviors and results.

7. Influence:  Management’s provision to employees of authority that is equal to employees’ responsibility, such that employees feel ownership of their actions and achievements.

8. Justice: Adherence to a set of standards that is perceived as appropriate and is administered with impartiality.

9. Respect:  Expression by management–through its actions–of concern, consideration, and regard for employees.

10. Procedures:  Following in every case a publicly stated set of rules for making fair decisions, with all concerned parties taking an active role in applying those rules.

Do your employees complain of unfairness? Finally, where would you place your organization in these ten dimensions?