 |
Archive for the ‘leadership’ Category
Monday, January 9th, 2012
 It has been my experience that few people understand the qualities that make a person an effective leader. And it has been my experience that few people also understand which leadership behaviors drive organization and personal failure. Inasmuch as the traits that drive leadership success of failure seem to be misunderstood by so many, let’s consider the top six traits or characteristics that drive leadership failure. Perhaps the knowledge and understanding of success and failure traits might help with your personal success.
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:
- Experience.
- Leadership skills.
- Being visionary.
- Decision making.
- Team player.
- 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
- Building effective relationships.
- Being able to manage complex systems and processes.
- Being able to communicate effectively.
- Being in control of yourself.
- Execution and results.
- 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
Tags: Drive leadership failure, Leadership concepts, leadership traits, Leading discussions
Posted in Leadership Development, character, leadership | No Comments »
Monday, December 19th, 2011
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. Look for a
 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.
Tags: coaching feedback, corrective feedback, employee feedback, feedback, positive reinforcement
Posted in feedback, leadership, management | No Comments »
Friday, December 2nd, 2011
 The recent passing of the extraordinarily visionary Steve Jobs has left many of us recognizing the importance of developing the next generation of leaders. Some have speculated that this unfortunate loss may leave Apple struggling, especially if leaders who can carry on the innovative thinking of their predecessor don’t emerge. It will be interesting to watch things unfold over the next few years at Apple. But given recent economic instability, and for many organizations the need to get lean and tactical, I think it is likely that for many organizations, development of the next generation of leaders has not been a top priority. While Apple’s situation is on our minds and in the news, I think it is a good time to revisit some of the things current leaders can do to prepare the next generation of leaders.
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.
Tags: Apple, Steve Jobs
Posted in Leadership Development, leadership | No Comments »
Monday, November 21st, 2011
Earlier, I described two people whom I have coached in the past year. Both of these individuals have responsible jobs with excellent compensation. The first is a store manager of a large supermarket, and the second is a manager in a large multi-national manufacturing company. They both have the education, experience and opportunity to be successful in their careers. In fact, both of these people have the ability to move up in their respective organizations. The problem is that both of them are about to be terminated due to their failure to perform up to expectations.
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.
Tags: business coaching, confessions, ife business coaching, personal commitment, professional business coaching
Posted in coaching skills, communication, leadership, mentoring | No Comments »
Monday, October 17th, 2011
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?
 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?
Tags: business ethics, fairness definitions, Fairness in business
Posted in leadership | 1 Comment »
Thursday, September 15th, 2011
Curiosity and being observant about your organizations health can quickly expose its strengths or weaknesses. When CMOE consults and works with organizations, individuals often pose the question, “How does our organization stack up against others?” The question is genuine and is often stated as a hopeful plea of verification. People working at all levels in an organization want to know how their team, department, or entire organization stacks up against others. Managers who ask this question are either
- Enlightened individuals who are focused on continuous improvement.
or
- Perspective leaders who see their organizations exhibiting symptoms of sickness, similar to personal health issue. They can tell that something isn’t quite right and the organization needs a checkup to make sure it’s nothing too serious.
 Perspective leaders who see their organizations exhibiting symptoms of sickness, similar to personal health issue. They can tell that something isn’t quite right and the organization needs a checkup to make sure it’s nothing too serious.
Knowing the health of your organization, team, or department is critical to your staying competitive in the modern marketplace. An understanding of what your organization does well and what could be getting in the way of your success will help you make a plan for becoming a world-class organization.
Through its continuous research and development, CMOE has pinpointed 15 vital signs that indicate the overall health of your organization. These are also the vitals that indicate when there is a problem. When looking at these signs, we focus on the following core areas:
Results: Has the organization clearly defined outcomes it wants to achieve and the metrics to measure people’s progress? Does it have a history of delivering superior results for its customers, owners, and stakeholders?
Processes: Does the organization operate like a well-oiled machine? Does the organizations work flow efficiently? Does it have processes and standards that are clearly defined, and team members who consistently follow and support effective work practices?
People: Does the organization have the right people with the right skills, behaviors, and expertise, making them capable of delivering on established expectations?
Investment: Does the organization have access to the necessary financial resources? Is the organization willing to invest in the organization so its mission and future strategies can be fulfilled?
Periodically watch your vital signs by creating a checklist that allows you to verify your organizations health on an ongoing basis. Make sure that this list is meaningful to you. If you don’t know where to start, you may want to download CMOE’s resource guide, How Does Your Organization Stack Up? This 15 point inspection is a good starting point for you to assess your organizations current health and will provide you with some ideas about what a very healthy – and a less healthy – organization looks like.
Tags: 15 point inspections, business checklists, Business Health, Business Inspection, Continued Business Improvment, Health of a Business
Posted in leadership | No Comments »
Tuesday, August 30th, 2011
In an earlier discussion, we learned how supportive, feedback can reinforce a behavior you want repeated. In other words, one purpose of supportive feedback is to create behavior repetition. In some situations supportive feedback can actually correct behaviors as well, For example, a manager in one of my workshops had complained that the board of health could condemn his two teenage sons’ bedrooms. So I asked him to try an experiment by watching for any improvement in either boy’s bedroom whether it was intentional or not. When he noticed an improvement, no matter how small, he was to make a fuss with supportive feedback and then observe what happened. He agreed to the experiment and returned a month later with an interesting story.
“First, of all,” he said, “there was a little improvement in the 17 year-old’s bedroom, even though I gave several supportive comments. However, when I found some improvement in my 14 year-old’s bedroom and then made a fuss with supportive feedback, his reaction was totally opposite.”
The manager explained that after dinner one evening he mentioned to his younger son that his bedroom looked cleaner than it had the day before. Within a few minutes the boy was filling a large garbage bag with trash. Then the next evening the younger boy asked his mother if he could borrow some glass cleaner because he wanted to clean the windows in his bedroom.
Can you believe that? The boy wanted to clean the windows!
That manager then made an interesting comment. He said, “You know, I was getting converted to this way of thinking, but when I heard about the glass cleaner, 1 became a committed convert”
“Committed convert” or not, a batting average of .500 isn’t had!
So if using feedback appropriately can solve so many problems, why don’t more managers use it? There are several reasons, but the four most common are 1) managers may not believe that people need or deserve feedback; 2) managers may not have the skills necessary to deliver appropriate feedback; 3) managers may believe they don’t have enough time to deliver appropriate feedback; and, 4) the business world traditionally revolves around the profit and loss statement, not around “being nice to people” by giving appropriate feedback.
One of the most effective ways of eliminating ineffective behaviors from employees is to fill their feedback buckets. When your supportive feedback fills someone’s bucket, and makes them feel good inside, there is a much better chance that that person will act effectively and cause fewer problems in the future. A little investment of your time today will likely bring fewer problems tomorrow. And that, impacts directly to the bottom line of the profit and loss statement!
There are three common methods managers have used in an attempt to change employee behavior. The methods are telling, selling and threatening. The problem is that these commonly used methods are only marginally effective. And if they work at all, it’s only until you turn your hack. Then the person oftentimes goes right back to the same old behavior. If you doubt that, consider your reaction to being told what to do. Isn’t your first reaction to being told what, when, or how one of recoiling or standing firm against the request? And then, how do you feel about being sold on something? It makes most of us feel inferior or unqualified in some manner. Our natural defensive instincts typically kick in when someone tries to sell us something.
What’s your reaction to being threatened by being told that if you don’t change something immediately there will be a dire consequence? Now, if you believe that what you’ve done is serious, you might accept a line being drawn in the sand. But, what if you don’t ‘believe your behavior deserves a threat? How effective and long lasting is a threat then?
At this point experienced managers point out that some employees are primarily money driven and are only likely to respond, or change their behavior, when a line is drawn in the sand. To this I respond, remember, changing behavior is almost always a process, not a single event. Sometimes it can even be a very slow process. And sometimes it won’t work, despite our best efforts and intentions. But our obligation as managers is to use the best techniques we can.
It’s important to understand how feedback works for most people so that you can know when to use supportive feedback or corrective feedback. The following chart can help clarify the difference.
The reason why we need to support or correct behaviors is that behaviors drive performance, and performance drives results. When changing employee behavior, it’s very important that the employee clearly understand the connection between what you are asking him/her to do and the impact the change will have on organizational results. Without that connection, the employee is likely to get lost in the process. The process works like this. Positive behaviors tend to drive positive performance, which tends to drive positive results, which deserves supportive feedback, or the positive behavior may not be repeated. Negative behaviors tend to drive negative performance, which tend to drive negative results, which deserves corrective feedback. If supportive feedback doesn’t work, then move on to corrective feedback. If corrective feedback doesn’t work, then move on to drawing a line in the sand with an appropriate level of discipline.
In Part Two of this discussion on corrective feedback we’ll learn a practical method of transferring ownership of both the problem and its solution to the employee. By transferring problem/solution ownership to the employee, you will have a much better chance of a long lasting solution without the collateral damage that can happen when you use the traditional methods of telling, selling or threatening. In the mean time, try using supportive feedback as a tool to correct behavior; how about at home in a child’s messy bedroom?
In an earlier discussion, we learned how supportive, feedback can reinforce a behavior you want repeated. In other words, one purpose of supportive feedback is to create behavior repetition. In some situations sup
portive feedback can actually correct behaviors as well, For example, a manager in one of my workshops had complained that the board of health could condemn his two teenage sons’ bedrooms. So I asked him to try an experiment by watching for any improvement in either boy’s bedroom whether it was intentional or not. When he noticed an improvement, no matter how sm
all, he was to make a fuss with supportive feedback and then observe what happened. He agreed to the experiment and returned a month later with an interesting story.
“First, of all,” he said, “there was a little improvement in the 17 year-old’s bedroom, even though I gave several supportive comments. However, when I found some improvement in my 14 year-old’s bedroom and then made a fuss with supportive feedback, his reaction was totally opposite.”
The manager explained that after dinner one evening he mentioned to his younger son that his bedroom looked cleaner than it had the day before. Within a few minutes the boy was filling a large garbage bag with trash. Then the next evening the younger boy asked his mother if he could borrow some glass cleaner because he wanted to clean the windows in his bedroom. Can you believe that? The boy wanted to clean the windows!
That manager then made an interesting comment. He said, “You know, I was getting converted to this way of thinking, but when I heard about the glass cleaner, 1 became a committed convert”
“Committed convert” or not, a batting average of .500 isn’t bad!
So if using feedback appropriately can solve so many problems, why don’t more managers use it? There are several reasons, but the four most common are 1) managers may not believe that people need or deserve feedback; 2) managers may not have the skills necessary to deliver appropriate feedback; 3) managers may believe they don’t have enough time to deliver appropriate feedback; and, 4) the business world traditionally revolves around the profit and loss statement, not around “being nice to people” by giving appropriate feedback.
One of the most effective ways of eliminating ineffective behaviors from employees is to fill their feedback buckets. When your supportive feedback fills someone’s bucket, and makes them feel good inside, there is a much better chance that that person will act effectively and cause fewer problems in the future. A little investment of your time today will likely bring fewer problems tomorrow. And that, impacts directly to the bottom line of the profit and loss statement!
There are three common methods managers have used in an attempt to change employee behavior. The methods are telling, selling and threatening. The problem is that these commonly used methods are only marginally effective. And if they work at all, it’s only until you turn your hack. Then the person oftentimes goes right back to the same old behavior. If you doubt that, consider your reaction to being told what to do. Isn’t your first reaction to being told what, when, or how one of recoiling or standing firm against the request? And then, how do you feel about being sold on something? It makes most of us feel inferior or unqualified in some manner. Our natural defensive instincts typically kick in when someone tries to sell us something.
What’s your reaction to being threatened by being told that if you don’t change something immediately there will be a dire consequence? Now, if you believe that what you’ve done is serious, you might accept a line being drawn in the sand. But, what if you don’t ‘believe your behavior deserves a threat? How effective and long lasting is a threat then?
At this point experienced managers point out that some employees are primarily money driven and are only likely to respond, or change their behavior, when a line is drawn in the sand. To this I respond, remember, changing behavior is almost always a process, not a single event. Sometimes it can even be a very slow process. And sometimes it won’t work, despite our best efforts and intentions. But our obligation as managers is to use the best techniques we can.
It’s important to understand how feedback works for most people so that you can know when to use supportive feedback or corrective feedback.
The reason why we need to support or correct behaviors is that behaviors drive performance, and performance drives results. When changing employee behavior, it’s very important that the employee clearly understand the connection between what you are asking him/her to do and the impact the change will have on organizational results. Without that connection, the employee is likely to get lost in the process. The process works like this. Positive behaviors tend to drive positive performance, which tends to drive positive results, which deserves supportive feedback, or the positive behavior may not be repeated. Negative behaviors tend to drive negative performance, which tend to drive negative results, which deserves corrective feedback. If supportive feedback doesn’t work, then move on to corrective feedback. If corrective feedback doesn’t work, then move on to drawing a line in the sand with an appropriate level of discipline.
In Part Two of this discussion on corrective feedback we’ll learn a practical method of transferring ownership of both the problem and its solution to the employee. By transferring problem/solution ownership to the employee, you will have a much better chance of a long lasting solution without the collateral damage that can happen when you use the traditional methods of telling, selling or threatening. In the mean time, try using supportive feedback as a tool to correct behavior; how about at home in a child’s messy bedroom?
Tags: changing behavior in the workplace, changing behavior patterns, corrective feedback, corrective feedback example
Posted in leadership | No Comments »
Monday, August 1st, 2011
In organizations, families, and indeed even our Western society, one of the reasons for failure is the inability by leadership to establish and enforce accountability. Accountability in leadership is a topic that is not frequently discussed and as a result often the cause of problems relating to compliance to procedures, following work rules, treating customers with respect, achieving results, and getting along with co-workers. Accountability is at the heart of empowering people to perform well, demonstrating initiative, and acting responsibly. When a climate of accountability exists, things work smoothly; and when it is absent procedures fail and policies are ignored.
Let me describe parental leadership first. I read a newspaper report about a father who had an emotional outburst and caused a scene in a school board meeting regarding the suspension of his son from school. His eleven-year-old son had threatened the life of another student on the playground. Following district policy, the principal had suspended the boy for three days saying, “In light of tragedies that have happened in schools around the country, we take all threats such as this very seriously. The policy requires a three-day suspension.”
The irate father emotionally pleads his case to the school board saying, “He’s a good boy and even though this is the second time this year he’s been suspended he doesn’t deserve punishment this harsh. Three days is just too much, because it’s embarrassing for him and our entire family.”
The father apparently was saying that because the suspension would be embarrassing that the punishment ought to be reduced. In other words, the consequence of the son’s behavior is trumped by the father’s desire to evade embarrassment. That is interesting in light of the father’s emotional outburst in a public school board meeting.
Now let me describe organizational leadership. A manager complained, “My employees just don’t take me seriously. She said, “Even though I tell them over and over, some employees won’t even call in to say they are sick. They just don’t show up.”
I asked what she did when an employee didn’t take the time to call in sick. She replied, “I just find somebody else to work the shift and then when they do show up I tell them to be sure to call me next time.”
I asked, “So how is this technique working?”
She said, “It’s not! That’s the problem; I can’t find good people these days.”
The situations with the irate parent and the ineffective manager are related in the absence of the leader establishing and enforcing individual accountability. When people do not feel that they are held accountable for their behavior, they often lower their performance to the lowest possible level acceptable to the leader. In other words, leader behavior regarding the establishment of accountability does a lot to determine a person’s highest level of performance. That’s what the eleven-year-old boy did on the playground. He had gotten away with inappropriate behavior before (certainly at home and possibly at school) and believed he could do it again. His previous inappropriate behaviors resulted in no undesirable consequences for him. That’s similar to what the employees were doing to the manager. They had not been held accountable when they didn’t call in sick before, so they had no belief that it was a necessary requirement to maintain job security. The manager’s failure to hold her employees accountable created an overly permissive climate where the employees could dictate their own policies and procedures.
At the foundation of establishing accountability is the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence. When people do not believe that their behavior will result in a consequence, they are free to choose any behavior that feels good at the moment. When people believe that their positive behaviors will result in positive feedback or even rewards, and their inappropriate behaviors will result in corrective feedback, coaching, or even discipline, they will raise their performance to the standard expected by the leader. The leader sets the standard through his or her application of feedback, coaching and discipline.
I don’t know all of the details about the parent and his son, the schoolyard bully, but it is a safe bet that the son had not been held accountable for his behaviors in the past. The reason he threatened another classmate’s life is because he didn’t believe that his behavior would have any undesirable consequences. He thought he could get away with it. And, the reason why the manager’s employees didn’t call in sick, and didn’t even apologize for not doing so was because they also thought they could get away with it. The two examples are related because in each case the leader failed to establish personal accountability by practicing the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence.
Effective leaders believe in and practice the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence. When an employee performs well and/or adheres to organizational rules, an effective manager will notice and provide the employee with appropriate feedback to reinforce the good performance. Likewise, when an employee does not perform well and/or does not follow the rules, an effective manager will notice and provide the employee with corrective feedback, or coaching to change the performance. Exactly the same thing is true when raising children. Behavior Must Equal Consequence, both positive and negative, must be a guiding principle to raise responsible children who as a consequence act responsibly.
Personal accountability is a climate that is created when a leader consistently practices Behavior Must Equal Consequence. The word “consistently” often bothers managers, because they think it means “every time.” Clearly, a manager cannot provide supportive or corrective feedback every time an employee does something. That obviously is not possible. But a manager can do what is necessary to become more aware of an employee’s performance and then provide appropriate feedback as often as is practical. Simply, if employees feel and act as though they are accountable, then the leader is practicing consistent feedback. If employees do not feel and act accountable, then the leader is not consistent with his or her feedback.
Consistency not only involves the frequency of feedback in that it must be frequent enough to create a climate of accountability, but it also includes the appropriateness of the feedback. In the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence, good performance must result is supportive feedback, and poor performance must result in corrective feedback. If a manager, due to stress, anger, lack of understanding, failure to take time, or habit gives negative feedback for good performance, positive feedback for poor performance, or no feedback for any performance, then the employees will sense a lack of consistency and conclude that they are not accountable for their actions. Thus they are free to act any way they want.
So the secret to creating a climate of accountability is to become more aware of performance levels, take the time to give the correct type of feedback or coaching, give feedback as often as practical, and do so as consistently as conditions permit. Done over time with the proper administration of rewards when deserved and discipline or sanctions  when appropriate, a manager can create a climate of accountability and become more effective. In organizations, families, and indeed even our Western society, one of the reasons for failure is the inability by leadership to establish and enforce accountability. Accountability in leadership is a topic that is not frequently discussed and as a result often the cause of problems relating to compliance to procedures, following work rules, treating customers with respect, achieving results, and getting along with co-workers. Accountability is at the heart of empowering people to perform well, demonstrating initiative, and acting responsibly. When a climate of accountability exists, things work smoothly; and when it is absent procedures fail and policies are ignored.
Let me describe parental leadership first. I read a newspaper report about a father who had an emotional outburst and caused a scene in a school board meeting regarding the suspension of his son from school. His eleven-year-old son had threatened the life of another student on the playground. Following district policy, the principal had suspended the boy for three days saying, “In light of tragedies that have happened in schools around the country, we take all threats such as this very seriously. The policy requires a three-day suspension.”
The irate father emotionally pleads his case to the school board saying, “He’s a good boy and even though this is the second time this year he’s been suspended he doesn’t deserve punishment this harsh. Three days is just too much, because it’s embarrassing for him and our entire family.”
The father apparently was saying that because the suspension would be embarrassing that the punishment ought to be reduced. In other words, the consequence of the son’s behavior is trumped by the father’s desire to evade embarrassment. That is interesting in light of the father’s emotional outburst in a public school board meeting.
Now let me describe organizational leadership. A manager complained, “My employees just don’t take me seriously. She said, “Even though I tell them over and over, some employees won’t even call in to say they are sick. They just don’t show up.”
I asked what she did when an employee didn’t take the time to call in sick. She replied, “I just find somebody else to work the shift and then when they do show up I tell them to be sure to call me next time.”
I asked, “So how is this technique working?”
She said, “It’s not! That’s the problem; I can’t find good people these days.”
The situations with the irate parent and the ineffective manager are related in the absence of the leader establishing and enforcing individual accountability. When people do not feel that they are held accountable for their behavior, they often lower their performance to the lowest possible level acceptable to the leader. In other words, leader behavior regarding the establishment of accountability does a lot to determine a person’s highest level of performance. That’s what the eleven-year-old boy did on the playground. He had gotten away with inappropriate behavior before (certainly at home and possibly at school) and believed he could do it again. His previous inappropriate behaviors resulted in no undesirable consequences for him. That’s similar to what the employees were doing to the manager. They had not been held accountable when they didn’t call in sick before, so they had no belief that it was a necessary requirement to maintain job security. The manager’s failure to hold her employees accountable created an overly permissive climate where the employees could dictate their own policies and procedures.
At the foundation of establishing accountability is the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence. When people do not believe that their behavior will result in a consequence, they are free to choose any behavior that feels good at the moment. When people believe that their positive behaviors will result in positive feedback or even rewards, and their inappropriate behaviors will result in corrective feedback, coaching, or even discipline, they will raise their performance to the standard expected by the leader. The leader sets the standard through his or her application of feedback, coaching and discipline.
I don’t know all of the details about the parent and his son, the schoolyard bully, but it is a safe bet that the son had not been held accountable for his behaviors in the past. The reason he threatened another classmate’s life is because he didn’t believe that his behavior would have any undesirable consequences. He thought he could get away with it. And, the reason why the manager’s employees didn’t call in sick, and didn’t even apologize for not doing so was because they also thought they could get away with it. The two examples are related because in each case the leader failed to establish personal accountability by practicing the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence.
Effective leaders believe in and practice the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence. When an employee performs well and/or adheres to organizational rules, an effective manager will notice and provide the employee with appropriate feedback to reinforce the good performance. Likewise, when an employee does not perform well and/or does not follow the rules, an effective manager will notice and provide the employee with corrective feedback, or coaching to change the performance. Exactly the same thing is true when raising children. Behavior Must Equal Consequence, both positive and negative, must be a guiding principle to raise responsible children who as a consequence act responsibly.
Personal accountability is a climate that is created when a leader consistently practices Behavior Must Equal Consequence. The word “consistently” often bothers managers, because they think it means “every time.” Clearly, a manager cannot provide supportive or corrective feedback every time an employee does something. That obviously is not possible. But a manager can do what is necessary to become more aware of an employee’s performance and then provide appropriate feedback as often as is practical. Simply, if employees feel and act as though they are accountable, then the leader is practicing consistent feedback. If employees do not feel and act accountable, then the leader is not consistent with his or her feedback.
Consistency not only involves the frequency of feedback in that it must be frequent enough to create a climate of accountability, but it also includes the appropriateness of the feedback. In the principle of Behavior Must Equal Consequence, good performance must result is supportive feedback, and poor performance must result in corrective feedback. If a manager, due to stress, anger, lack of understanding, failure to take time, or habit gives negative feedback for good performance, positive feedback for poor performance, or no feedback for any performance, then the employees will sense a lack of consistency and conclude that they are not accountable for their actions. Thus they are free to act any way they want.
So the secret to creating a climate of accountability is to become more aware of performance levels, take the time to give the correct type of feedback or coaching, give feedback as often as practical, and do so as consistently as conditions permit. Done over time with the proper administration of rewards when deserved and discipline or sanctions when appropriate, a manager can create a climate of accountability and become more effective.
Tags: effective leadership strategies, leadership, Leadership Development, leadership skills, qualities of leadership, Strategic leadership development
Posted in Leadership Development, leadership | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 19th, 2011
CMOE is announcing our $500 Visualizing Leadership scholarship. This is an opportunity to for high school (grade 9-12), college, or graduate student receive some financial aid for the upcoming school year. This scholarship will be offered to the student who creates the most visually compelling infographic that helps convey a concept or idea around Leadership, Teamwork, Strategy, or Coaching. The winning infographic will have the opportunity to be used in our workshops, training programs, or our consulting services.
Not only is this a great opportunity to receive financial help for education, we also believe this is a great opportunity to help and strengthen student skills, as well as help shape strong leadership skills for the future. It will give students an opportunity to explore industry concepts that may be of interest to them, as well as explore other topics that are vital in the workplace.
John Quincy Adams said, “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” This scholarship will allow these students this opportunity, as well as allowing them to become leaders through helping others.
Each entry will be judged and given a score based on its relevance to the following 4 categories:
-Creativity
-Relevance to our industry
-Professionalism
-Image quality
CMOE is excited to display the winning infographic and its author on our blog on or before September 15, 2011. To view all criteria and deadlines please visit www.cmoe.com/scholarship.htm for more information.
 CMOE is announcing our $500 Visualizing Leadership scholarship. This is an opportunity to for high school (grade 9-12), college, or graduate student receive som
e financial aid for the upcoming school year. This scholarship will be offered to the student who creates the
most visually compelling infographic that helps convey a concept or idea around Leadership, Teamwork, Strategy, or Coaching. The winning infographic will have the opportunity to be used in our workshops, training programs, or our consulting services.
Not only is this a great opportunity to receive financial help for education, we also believe this is a great opportunity to help and strengthen student skills, as well as help shape strong leadership skills for the future. It will give students an opportunity to explore industry concepts that may be of interest to them, as well as explore other topics that are vital in the workplace.
John Quincy Adams said, “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” This scholarship will allow these students this opportunity, as well as allowing them to become leaders through helping others.
Each entry will be judged and given a score based on its relevance to the following 4 categories:
-Creativity
-Relevance to our industry
-Professionalism
-Image quality
CMOE is excited to display the winning infographic and its author on our blog on or before September 15, 2011. To view all criteria and deadlines please visit www.cmoe.com/scholarship.htm for more information.
Tags: blog scholarship, business scholarship, easy college money, money for college, scholarship
Posted in Leadership Development, leadership | No Comments »
Monday, July 18th, 2011
I’ve noticed something strange in the last five years or so: people seem to have forgotten how to think, and nowhere is that troubling fact more obvious than in the workforce. This lack is not limited to common sense. It is not limited to emotional intelligence. It seems that the sheer capacity to question, to wonder, and to contribute something new to our collective human consciousness has been almost entirely snuffed out by self-satisfied complacency and attention spans so short they would make you average four-year-old blush. There may be some other reasons, too.
Admittedly, questioning authority (and the status quo) isn’t always easy, and it isn’t always safe. Depending on the reigning style of management at a given organization, sometimes offering an opinion too loudly or promoting an alternative too forcefully or rocking the boat too vigorously can be a quick way to enter the ranks of the unemployed. We need to be careful about how we broach certain subjects. Battle cries for new world orders clearly need to be tempered with some tact. But the thing that no one needs is another lemming following its brainless predecessors off a cliff.
As a species, we have been given the gift of reason, the capacity to think for ourselves. Yet, too often, we default to the opinions of “experts”; we bow to the expertise of our “superiors”; we get swept away by the torrent of groupthink just because it’s there. We have gotten comfortable and become lazy; we are content to let others do the thinking for us. We have forgotten how to think critically, failing to question the decisions being made all around us with neither our input nor our consent. We have been trained to get along by going along. The newest generation of employees has not been rewarded for being innovative. They have been downsized, outsourced, and laid off. This is partially their fault and partially not. They try to go unnoticed so that they can keep their jobs. For many, it’s purely a case of self-preservation. Keeping their heads down has made them invisible, entirely unremarkable, and kept them under the radar. The unfortunate fallout is that it has also made them drones. What a waste.
Some of the most influential people in our history have also been the most cantankerous. Galileo Galilei, widely known as the father of modern science, refused to let go of the notion that the earth is not, in fact, the center of the universe. For that, he was tried by the Inquisition and found guilty of heresy. He spent the remainder of his life under house arrest because he refused to denounce what he held to be right and true, despite popular pressure. Where was that defiant spirit when Enron was busy cooking its books and stealing billions of dollars from its shareholders? Enron didn’t employ stupid people. For all intents and purposes, it wasn’t that they lacked ethics or character, either. What was missing was the ability to question authority, and the courage to draw a line in the sand.
 I’ve noticed something strange in the last five years or so: people seem to have forgotten how to think, and nowhere is that troubling fact more obvious than in the workforce. This lack is not limited to common sense. It is not limited to emotional intelligence. It seems that the sheer capacity to question, to wonder, and to contribute something new to our collective human consciousness has been almost entirely snuffed out by self-satisfied complacency and attention spans so short they would make you average four-year-old blush. There may be some other reasons, too.
Admittedly, questioning authority (and the status quo) isn’t always easy, and it isn’t always safe. Depending on the reigning style of management at a given organization, sometimes offering an opinion too loudly or promoting an alternative too forcefully or rocking the boat too vigorously can be a quick way to enter the ranks of the unemployed. We need to be careful about how we broach certain subjects. Battle cries for new world orders clearly need to be tempered with some tact. But the thing that no one needs is another lemming following its brainless predecessors off a cliff.
As a species, we have been given the gift of reason, the capacity to think for ourselves. Yet, too often, we default to the opinions of “experts”; we bow to the expertise of our “superiors”; we get swept away by the torrent of groupthink just because it’s there. We have gotten comfortable and become lazy; we are content to let others do the thinking for us. We have forgotten how to think critically, failing to question the decisions being made all around us with neither our input nor our consent. We have been trained to get along by going along. The newest generation of employees has not been rewarded for being innovative. They have been downsized, outsourced, and laid off. This is partially their fault and partially not. They try to go unnoticed so that they can keep their jobs. For many, it’s purely a case of self-preservation. Keeping their heads down has made them invisible, entirely unremarkable, and kept them under the radar. The unfortunate fallout is that it has also made them drones. What a waste.
Some of the most influential people in our history have also been the most cantankerous. Galileo Galilei, widely known as the father of modern science, refused to let go of the notion that the earth is not, in fact, the center of the universe. For that, he was tried by the Inquisition and found guilty of heresy. He spent the remainder of his life under house arrest because he refused to denounce what he held to be right and true, despite popular pressure. Where was that defiant spirit when Enron was busy cooking its books and stealing billions of dollars from its shareholders? Enron didn’t employ stupid people. For all intents and purposes, it wasn’t that they lacked ethics or character, either. What was missing was the ability to question authority, and the courage to draw a line in the sand.
Tags: business thinking, group think, group think mentality, Strategic Thinking
Posted in leadership | No Comments »
|
 |
