 |
Archive for the ‘motivation’ Category
Monday, March 26th, 2012
Motivated people help drive the success of any great cause. While there are many factors that can affect our levels of motivation, the right stimulus or influence can increase our motivation and drive.
CMOE from time to time will share what we think are great motivational thoughts, ideas, images, or examples. The following are a series of motivational or influential quotes of recognized leaders and strategists. We hope these instill a sense of cause to your purpose today. We have provided links below that will allow you to share these motivational images.
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
FREE: add this image to your website!
Tags: leadership quotes, positive motivation, strategy quotes
Posted in leadership, motivation | No Comments »
Thursday, February 9th, 2012
 Previously, we briefly looked at several common theories on human motivation. This discussion will continue the discussion on motivation and focus primarily on a process that enables managers to not only understand motivation in the workplace, but also increase employee initiative, energy and excitement. From a simplified perspective, motivation can be viewed as a balance scale with motive on one side and action or behavior on the other. In order to move a two-pound behavior, a two-pound (or greater) motive is necessary. Behaviors, like motives, have different weights or difficulties; thus a light motive is unlikely to sufficiently move a heavy (difficult) behavior. And a heavy motivator can easily move a light (easy) behavior.
For example, the last time an employee was asked to clean and organize a dirty, dark and dingy storage area the employee’s reaction was, “Oh no, why me? Cleaning that storage room is the worst possible of all jobs I could get. Why don’t you pick on somebody else this time?”
Placing this situation on the balance scale, the employee’s perception of the behaviors required to clean the storage room weighed 10 pounds, and the motive and benefits supplied in the manager’s request weighed one pound. That’s why the employee’s reaction was, “Why me?”
Now, several months later, the same manager is about to ask the same employee to once again clean the messy storage room. There are four basic motives the manager could place on the motive side of the balance scale. They are: fear, incentive, guilt and self. Following are statements describing the first three motives.
Fear
“I’m sick and tired of your complaining. If you know what’s good for you, and you want to keep your job, then clean that room. And I don’t want to hear any more excuses. Just do it now!”
Incentive
“Hey, why don’t you clean the storage room this afternoon? If you’ll do it for me, I’ll bring you a Coke and a couple of donuts for your afternoon break. And don’t forget tomorrow is payday.”
Guilt
“I know you don’t like to clean the storage room, but it’s got to be done. And if you don’t clean it we won’t be able to sell anything that’s in there. Besides, my boss is really upset that it’s so messy and not organized. So if you don’t clean it today, I’ll be in big trouble tomorrow.”
These three motivators are typically imposed on someone, thus they are called extrinsic, meaning they originate from outside the person. The problem with extrinsic motivators is that their effect is short-lived. Any effect they might have works for only a few days, perhaps a week at most. Additionally, both fear and guilt are dirty motivators. After a dirty motivator has been used in an attempt to gain action, the relationship between the two parties can be damaged. Thus, even though a dirty motivator might seemingly accomplish its purpose in the short-term, in the long run the residual or collateral damage to the relationship may never be overcome,
If those disadvantages aren’t enough, there is another problem with extrinsic motivators. Whatever amount, quantity, or intensity of an extrinsic motivator is used to gain action today, that amount is likely not to be enough to repeat the same action tomorrow. In other words, if a manager bribes an employee with a cash incentive of X, it may take 2X to get a similar response in a successive attempt. In the case of the messy storeroom, if the manager had initially told the reluctant employee that there was a $25.00 cash bonus to clean the room, then on the second request it could take $50.00 to gain a similar amount of motivation. Likewise, if fear is used as the motivator today, then even more fear will be necessary tomorrow for a similar response. Continued use of extrinsic motivators requires an escalating proportion of motivation. This can obviously be incredibly damaging and/or expensive. (On a personal note, all child abuse has its origins in fear motivation. The process begins by using a little fear, moves on to substantial fear, and then when that finally doesn’t work, violence is the only way to gain action.)
Intrinsic
The fourth type of motivator that can be placed on the balance scale is intrinsic. It’s called intrinsic because the motivation is generated from within the person, rather than being imposed externally from outside. Unlike extrinsic motivators, intrinsic are long-term with the effects lasting weeks, months, years and in some cases even a lifetime. Additionally, intrinsic motivation is clean; there is no unwanted baggage as in extrinsic.
So what are these intrinsic motivators that have so much promise? Actually, almost anything that does not fit into the categories of fear, incentive or guilt is probably an intrinsic motivator. They are things like pride, respect, appreciation, challenge, making a difference in someone’s life, and achieving a goal. Although I’ve identified about eighty intrinsic motivators, there must be hundreds. Any positive influence that comes from within, lasts longer than a few weeks, and doesn’t leave emotional baggage is probably an intrinsic motivator.
Each person acquires through his or her experiences in life a set of intrinsic motivators unique to that person. The set of intrinsic motivators that energizes one person to action will not likely be exactly the same as those that motivate another person. Although I believe that there are some universal intrinsic motivators such as appreciation and respect, the thirty or forty specific items that motivate each person are different. It’s both nature and nurture that makes each person unique, even with respect to motivation.
Why I do what I do
People do not really understand themselves until they have compiled a specific written list of personal intrinsic motivators. This statement has caused more than one person in my workshops considerable consternation, but nonetheless it’s true. Then, after compiling the list, the items are then divided into three groups: heavy, medium and light motivators. By working through this process people are better able to come into contact with their authentic self. Far too many people live in either a fantasy or dream world that doesn’t bear a resemblance to reality. When a person is able to see what moves him or her to action, I believe that that person will then have a major understanding of whom he or she really is. Because then that person will grasp, “if I know what I know, why do I do what I do?
In the case of the messy storage room, the manager would be wise to apply one or two specific intrinsic motivators that are unique to the employee. It might be challenge, accomplishment, recognition, satisfaction, being in charge, or perhaps praise. By using these motivators the manager might find that the employee’s efforts to keep the room clean extend well beyond the immediate assignment.
Tags: employee motivation, employee motivators, motivating employees, motive for behavior
Posted in management, motivation | 1 Comment »
Wednesday, December 21st, 2011
 Many people believe that coaching is solely a management technique. While it is an effective means of achieving business results through others, peer coaching is often overlooked. Peer coaching requires many of the same coaching skills that managers utilize. However, coaching your peers requires a special sensitivity for each situation and a less direct approach. Unfortunately, when peers coach others, they tend to come across very in-direct and sometimes the other person misses the message entirely. In CMOE’s coaching Models, establishing impact is key to helping others see the full picture and gain new awareness or insight about the topic or situation. When a peer has effectively established impact with another, it is because they created what Dr. Steven J. Stowell calls “a felt need for action”.
I believe the best example of establishing impact with peers comes from the time-old nursery tale, The Little Red Hen. In this story, a hen discovers some grain of corn. She has a vision for turning this grain into loaf of bread, but recognizes all the work that must first take place. She asks her neighbors, the duck, the cat, and the pig for help all along the way. They declined helping her first with the planting of the corn, and then again when she cut the stalks, took the corn to the mill, and then finally when she baked the bread. When she asked, “who will help me eat this bread?” the duck, cat, and pig all jumped at the chance and said “I will.” Now the hen could have handled this situation in a variety of ways, but the power of her response is what has made this nursery tale so well-known for so long. The hen responded frankly: “Oh no, you won’t. I planted the seed, I cut the corn, I took it to the mill to be made into flour, and I made the bread, all by myself. I shall now eat the loaf all by myself.” This hen was effective at helping her lazy peers see the “big picture” by coaching them. She skillfully created an impact by sharing her perspective and observations with candor and honesty and making it easy for her peers to see the consequences of their behaviors.
Quick Tip
Remember, the overarching goal of peer coaching involves identifying and communicating to others how the combined efforts of team members can provide the most beneficial results. Keep the example of The Little Red Hen in mind and help take your team to the next level of performance.
Tags: Coaching with Impact, Coaching Your Peers, Peer Coaching
Posted in coaching skills, motivation | No Comments »
Monday, August 8th, 2011
I’ve heard a version of this question asked in various ways, “If they know what they know, why do they do what they do?” In spite of what people know; oftentimes they do what they want. Regardless of how they are trained or mentored, some people can do something right out of left field. In managing and leading people this can be frustrating at the least and maddening at the most. By contrast, other people just get the job done, with little attention or direction. Why the difference? Human motivation has been an enigma to researchers and others for decades. It’s interesting to note that opinions on motivation are referred to as “theories,” rather than facts. Stated simply, human motivation is the reason for an action. It’s the motive behind behavior. It’s what moves a person to action. It’s an explanation for what happened, or didn’t. There may not be another psychological topic where so many people have so many diverse opinions as human motivation. Nonetheless, there are some aspects of human motivation that we can analyze and understand. First, let’s review my six most favorite motivational “theories.”
Needs and Wants
We all have a variety of needs and wants. There is almost always a significant difference between what we need and what we want. Needs are things that are required for us to exist. Without certain basic needs, we would not survive. The most common examples are: air, food, water, and safety.
Wants, on the other hand, are things that we would like, but are not necessary to our survival. Without something that we want, we are still able to continue a reasonably normal existence. While many needs seem to be common and fairly consistent among people, wants can vary considerably from person to person. Motivational theories attempt to explain and even predict how people will respond to both needs and wants.
Abraham Maslow
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs categorizes the most basic human needs: (1) self-actualization, (2) esteem, (3) belonging, (4) safety, and (5) physiological. In his model; Maslow defines self-actualization as things like education, religion, hobbies; personal growth, advancement, and creativity. He sees esteem coming from approval, validation; or recognition from family, friends, or colleagues. To Maslow belonging is the relationships we experience with family, friends, team members, coworkers, supervisors, subordinates and customers. He says we need safety or freedom from violence and personal injury. He also includes in this category work safety, job security, and personal health. Maslow defines physiological needs as air, food, water, and sex. According to Maslow, lower needs take priority. Once they are fulfilled, the others can be activated. In other words there are some basic needs that take priority.
David C. McClelland
Psychologist David C. McClelland proposed his theory of acquired needs. He said that some human needs are acquired as a result of life experiences. Through experiences, he explained, some people acquire the need for achievement, such as accomplishing or completing something difficult. Other people develop a need for affiliation, such as forming close personal relationships with others. Yet even other people develop a need for power, such as controlling, commanding, or directing others.
Fred Herzberg
Another psychologist, Fred Herzberg, proposed the Two Factor Theory. According to Herzberg, two factors affect motivation, and they do it in different ways. The first are hygiene factors, which are things whose absence motivates, but whose presence has little perceived effect. They are things that when taken away, people become dissatisfied and act to get them back.
He called the second factor motivators, which are things that move people to action. The absence of these motivators does not necessarily cause dissatisfaction; the absence just fails to motivate. An example of these motivators would be pride, respect and appreciation. So hygiene factors determine dissatisfaction, and motivators determine satisfaction through action. The two scales are independent, meaning an item can be high or low on either scale.
Equity Theory:
Equity theory proposes that it is not the actual reward that motivates, but a person’s perception of the reward. Perception is based not only on the reward itself, but also as compared to the work or effort that went into getting it. In other words, a person’s motivation results from a ratio of reward verses effort. It’s interesting to note that equity theory is based on three assumptions:
1. Perceptions can include inaccurate data, disinformation, rumors and inferences.
2. Some people place a higher value on equity than others. So perceptions are likely to vary from one person to the next.
3. Some people can ignore short-term inequities as long as they think things will balance out in the long run. Stated another way, “the long-term juice is worth the short-term squeeze.”
Extrinsic and Intrinsic:
Extrinsic motivators are things that originate outside the person, such as those imposed by another person or event. By contrast, intrinsic motivators originate within the person, although they may have been partially influenced by an outside source. Fear is an extrinsic motivator because it is usually imposed by an outside source; while respect is an intrinsic motivator because it is a feeling generated from within the person. The primary difference between the two types is the source: extrinsic from the outside, and intrinsic from within. Although there are numerous intrinsic motivators, extrinsic motivators tend to fall into three general categories: fear, incentive, and guilt.
Beyond their source, extrinsic and intrinsic motivators are very different. Fear (extrinsic), for example, is overly used in our society today, but it is a dirty motivator (leaves emotional baggage) and lasts for only a few hours or days. By contrast, intrinsic motivators such as respect, challenge and making a difference are clean motivators (leave no emotional baggage) and can last weeks, months, years, and in some cases a lifetime.
Even though there are different opinions concerning human motivation, there are, indeed, several common threads among the various theories. It’s those commonalities that enable managers and executives to create a workplace environment wherein workers can maximize their performance through increased motivation.
 I’ve heard a version of this question asked in various ways, “If they know what they know, why do they do what they do?” In spite of what people know; oftentimes they do what they want. Regardless of how they are trained or mentored, some people can do something right out of left field. In managing and leading people this can be frustrating at the least and maddening at the most. By contrast, other people just get the job done, with little attention or direction. Why the difference? Human motivation has been an enigma to researchers and others for decades. It’s interesting to note that opinions on motivation are referred to as “theories,” rather than facts. Stated simply, human motivation is the reason for an action. It’s the motive behind behavior. It’s what moves a person to action. It’s an explanation for what happened, or didn’t. There may not be another psychological topic where so many people have so many diverse opinions as human motivation. Nonetheless, there are some aspects of human motivation that we can analyze and understand. First, let’s review my six most favorite motivational “theories.”
Needs and Wants
We all have a variety of needs and wants. There is almost always a significant difference between what we need and what we want. Needs are things that are required for us to exist. Without certain basic needs, we would not survive. The most common examples are: air, food, water, and safety.
Wants, on the other hand, are things that we would like, but are not necessary to our survival. Without something that we want, we are still able to continue a reasonably normal existence. While many needs seem to be common and fairly consistent among people, wants can vary considerably from person to person. Motivational theories attempt to explain and even predict how people will respond to both needs and wants.
Abraham Maslow
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs categorizes the most basic human needs: (1) self-actualization, (2) esteem, (3) belonging, (4) safety, and (5) physiological. In his model; Maslow defines self-actualization as things like education, religion, hobbies; personal growth, advancement, and creativity. He sees esteem coming from approval, validation; or recognition from family, friends, or colleagues. To Maslow belonging is the relationships we experience with family, friends, team members, coworkers, supervisors, subordinates and customers. He says we need safety or freedom from violence and personal injury. He also includes in this category work safety, job security, and personal health. Maslow defines physiological needs as air, food, water, and sex. According to Maslow, lower needs take priority. Once they are fulfilled, the others can be activated. In other words there are some basic needs that take priority.
David C. McClelland
Psychologist David C. McClelland proposed his theory of acquired needs. He said that some human needs are acquired as a result of life experiences. Through experiences, he explained, some people acquire the need for achievement, such as accomplishing or completing something difficult. Other people develop a need for affiliation, such as forming close personal relationships with others. Yet even other people develop a need for power, such as controlling, commanding, or directing others.
Fred Herzberg
Another psychologist, Fred Herzberg, proposed the Two Factor Theory. According to Herzberg, two factors affect motivation, and they do it in different ways. The first are hygiene factors, which are things whose absence motivates, but whose presence has little perceived effect. They are things that when taken away, people become dissatisfied and act to get them back.
He called the second factor motivators, which are things that move people to action. The absence of these motivators does not necessarily cause dissatisfaction; the absence just fails to motivate. An example of these motivators would be pride, respect and appreciation. So hygiene factors determine dissatisfaction, and motivators determine satisfaction through action. The two scales are independent, meaning an item can be high or low on either scale.
Equity Theory:
Equity theory proposes that it is not the actual reward that motivates, but a person’s perception of the reward. Perception is based not only on the reward itself, but also as compared to the work or effort that went into getting it. In other words, a person’s motivation results from a ratio of reward verses effort. It’s interesting to note that equity theory is based on three assumptions:
1. Perceptions can include inaccurate data, disinformation, rumors and inferences.
2. Some people place a higher value on equity than others. So perceptions are likely to vary from one person to the next.
3. Some people can ignore short-term inequities as long as they think things will balance out in the long run. Stated another way, “the long-term juice is worth the short-term squeeze.”
Extrinsic and Intrinsic:
Extrinsic motivators are things that originate outside the person, such as those imposed by another person or event. By contrast, intrinsic motivators originate within the person, although they may have been partially influenced by an outside source. Fear is an extrinsic motivator because it is usually imposed by an outside source; while respect is an intrinsic motivator because it is a feeling generated from within the person. The primary difference between the two types is the source: extrinsic from the outside, and intrinsic from within. Although there are numerous intrinsic motivators, extrinsic motivators tend to fall into three general categories: fear, incentive, and guilt.
Beyond their source, extrinsic and intrinsic motivators are very different. Fear (extrinsic), for example, is overly used in our society today, but it is a dirty motivator (leaves emotional baggage) and lasts for only a few hours or days. By contrast, intrinsic motivators such as respect, challenge and making a difference are clean motivators (leave no emotional baggage) and can last weeks, months, years, and in some cases a lifetime.
Even though there are different opinions concerning human motivation, there are, indeed, several common threads among the various theories. It’s those commonalities that enable managers and executives to create a workplace environment wherein workers can maximize their performance through increased motivation.
Tags: human behavior, motivation, motivation to increase performance
Posted in motivation | No Comments »
Thursday, July 14th, 2011
The term “employee engagement” is thrown around a lot in business circles, but what does it actually mean on a functional level? At its roots, “engagement” has to do with passion. Employee engagement, then, deals with helping employees to find or retain passion for the work that they do. Easy, right? Wrong. Every day, hordes of employees arrive to their respective places of business, but all that walks through the door is the body; both the mind and the spirit are far, far away.
For many of these employees, work is something that they do out of habit. They do it because they have to. They have bills to pay, groceries to buy, extra-curricular activities to support. Some of them had planned to retire, but were unable to do so when they saw their retirement funds dwindle in an unstable marketplace. With the latter priorities taking precedence, the question of whether employees actually like the work they do often falls to the bottom of their lists. It’s a question that they often feel is safer left unanswered, but truth is a slippery creature, and it’s stubborn. Whether they like it or not, the truth about an employee’s dissatisfaction will inevitably come out, and most often it will appear in subtle ways. Over a period of months, even years, a once-enthusiastic employee’s level of productivity will slowly drop off. Sometimes the shift in engagement is so slow that leaders are left wondering whether it had always been that way. Had they just not noticed until now? Did they simply make a bad hiring decision?
Although sometimes the answer is that there is a poor fit between the person and the job, more often, dwindling productivity is due, for one reason or another, to decreasing levels of engagement. These individuals go through the motions, but their minds are elsewhere. Why in the world is that person taking so long to slog through that one, measly task, you ask? Because that employee doesn’t care about the task he or she has been given.
This is not to say that leaders are entirely responsible for making sure that their employees are “happy.” To the contrary, happy employees who spend their time socializing and surfing the web can be just as unproductive as those who are disengaged from their work. What’s important for leaders to remember is that employees who are dissatisfied and those who are happy (but fail to do their work) have one big thing in common: both groups are bored. They lack motivation. They don’t see the value or purpose of the work they’ve been asked to do. Their assigned work is failing to hold their attention, so they’re finding other things to do to pass the time. For employers, this disinterest can mean huge losses—in terms of their time, their companies’ productivity and profit margin, and the hefty expense of training new staff to replace team members who are lost to attrition (either self-selected or imposed).
Almost no one gets to work exclusively on assignments they love all the time. With every job comes some drudgery, whether minor or pronounced. Maybe this grind comes in the form of having too much of a certain type of task to complete. Maybe project deadlines are too short and come with long hours and little recognition. Maybe the job is deadly repetitive or, conversely, maybe it comes with too many surprises. It is not up to leaders to try to provide the ideal work environment for every one of their employees all the time. That is an impossibility. But what leaders should strive to do is communicate openly with their employees, working with them to create the best possible environments for their individual interests. Employees need to have some control over the scope and responsibilities of their respective jobs, and they need to be supported and encouraged to pursue opportunities within the organization that speak to their passions and allow them to develop new or expand existing professional skills. Not only will this flexible style of leadership help the collective abilities of your workforce grow, you will also be more likely to retain previously high-performing employees whose interest in their current job responsibilities has diminished. “Employee engagement” may sound like touchy-feely management fluff, but by taking an active interest in whether your employees are genuinely satisfied and invigorated by their jobs, you can elevate the performance of both your workforce and your organization.
 The term “employee engagement” is thrown around a lot in business circles, but what does it actually mean on a functional level? At its roots, “engagement” has to do with passion. Employee engagement, then, deals with helping employees to find or retain passion for the work that they do. Easy, right? Wrong. Every day, hordes of employees arrive to their respective places of business, but all that walks through the door is the body; both the mind and the spirit are far, far away.
For many of these employees, work is something that they do out of habit. They do it because they have to. They have bills to pay, groceries to buy, extra-curricular activities to support. Some of them had planned to retire, but were unable to do so when they saw their retirement funds dwindle in an unstable marketplace. With the latter priorities taking precedence, the question of whether employees actually like the work they do often falls to the bottom of their lists. It’s a question that they often feel is safer left unanswered, but truth is a slippery creature, and it’s stubborn. Whether they like it or not, the truth about an employee’s dissatisfaction will inevitably come out, and most often it will appear in subtle ways. Over a period of months, even years, a once-enthusiastic employee’s level of productivity will slowly drop off. Sometimes the shift in engagement is so slow that leaders are left wondering whether it had always been that way. Had they just not noticed until now? Did they simply make a bad hiring decision?
Although sometimes the answer is that there is a poor fit between the person and the job, more often, dwindling productivity is due, for one reason or another, to decreasing levels of engagement. These individuals go through the motions, but their minds are elsewhere. Why in the world is that person taking so long to slog through that one, measly task, you ask? Because that employee doesn’t care about the task he or she has been given.
This is not to say that leaders are entirely responsible for making sure that their employees are “happy.” To the contrary, happy employees who spend their time socializing and surfing the web can be just as unproductive as those who are disengaged from their work. What’s important for leaders to remember is that employees who are dissatisfied and those who are happy (but fail to do their work) have one big thing in common: both groups are bored. They lack motivation. They don’t see the value or purpose of the work they’ve been asked to do. Their assigned work is failing to hold their attention, so they’re finding other things to do to pass the time. For employers, this disinterest can mean huge losses—in terms of their time, their companies’ productivity and profit margin, and the hefty expense of training new staff to replace team members who are lost to attrition (either self-selected or imposed).
Almost no one gets to work exclusively on assignments they love all the time. With every job comes some drudgery, whether minor or pronounced. Maybe this grind comes in the form of having too much of a certain type of task to complete. Maybe project deadlines are too short and come with long hours and little recognition. Maybe the job is deadly repetitive or, conversely, maybe it comes with too many surprises. It is not up to leaders to try to provide the ideal work environment for every one of their employees all the time. That is an impossibility. But what leaders should strive to do is communicate openly with their employees, working with them to create the best possible environments for their individual interests. Employees need to have some control over the scope and responsibilities of their respective jobs, and they need to be supported and encouraged to pursue opportunities within the organization that speak to their passions and allow them to develop new or expand existing professional skills. Not only will this flexible style of leadership help the collective abilities of your workforce grow, you will also be more likely to retain previously high-performing employees whose interest in their current job responsibilities has diminished. “Employee engagement” may sound like touchy-feely management fluff, but by taking an active interest in whether your employees are genuinely satisfied and invigorated by their jobs, you can elevate the performance of both your workforce and your organization.
Tags: employee engagement, employee engagement strategies, leadership style
Posted in Leadership Development, motivation, strategy | 1 Comment »
Monday, June 20th, 2011
Not only did I enjoy reading Finding the Zone, I found it to be very helpful in my own professional and personal development. The author, Gordon Lawrence, addresses a predicament many people face: a lack of enthusiasm and motivation to do the job they were hired to do. Lawrence suggests that the issue isn’t so much that these people are lazy, but that they aren’t doing the work that they enjoy or find compelling. Finding the Zone is about finding a niche for yourself or someone else that leads to enjoyment and passion for the task.
 Lawrence begins by explaining just what it is to be in the zone: “. . . when in the zone we are working at the fresh edge of our gifts and skills, and we are getting better. We are focused and not distracted. And we are absorbed in the process, not ourselves. We are challenged and energized as we proactively pursue our goal.”
Lawrence states that it is too difficult for many people to get to state of total absorption. In fact, he contends that some people may never experience the joy that comes with being in the zone. He explains that the zone is linked to investigative thinking and that our current environment and its conditions eliminate curiosity through “pat-answer teaching.” Pat-answer teaching simply means that children are too-often taught that there are only two ways to solving a problem, the right one or the wrong one. Lawrence believes that this style teaching stifles creative thinking in many people. He reaffirms the fact that everyone looks at a problem through his/her own lens; his or her traits, strengths, and/or personality.
He suggests that rather than asking employees to follow set processes, managers should allow their employees to investigate solutions that allow them to accomplish tasks using processes that come to them most naturally. This technique will promote the “zone” experience for them.
This book is easy to read and will leaders to gain better insight into their employees and their unique needs. But even more importantly, the book inspires the reader to consider his or her own situation and ask, “Is my job (hobby, etc.) taking me to the zone and if not, why? What will it take to find my zone?”
Tags: A Whole New Way To Maximize Mental Potential, book review, Business Book Reviews, Mental Potential
Posted in goals & goal setting, motivation | No Comments »
Wednesday, June 8th, 2011
I have always seemed to have a problem with setting goals for myself. Whenever I think about goal-setting I think I need to set a huge and extravagant goal for myself rather than setting a more-reasonable, smaller goal. I guess I think that if I am going to bother to set a goal at all, I need to make it worth my time. However, I’ve discovered that this type of mindset makes me feel defeated before I even get started. This, in turn, leads me to think that I will not be able to achieve these huge goals and gives me one more reason to be disappointed in myself. I tend to forget that small accomplishments also count. I’ve come to realize that regardless of whether a goal is a smaller, more-incremental type, or a larger, more-daunting one, they are all worth my time! Goal setting can be as simple or as complex as you want to make it, and every goal set and attained is worthwhile.
 I recently went on vacation, and just before I left I grabbed a book that I have been reading on and off for a few months. As I grabbed it, I said to myself, “I am going to finish this book while I’m on vacation.” I read a little of it on the plane, and a little more when I had some time in the hotel room, but when it came time to head home, I still had not finished it. But I read it on the plane home, and to my surprise I finished it. Goal accomplished! Even though it was a small goal, I accomplished it and it encouraged me to set another goal.
Through this experience, I found that it helped me to actually verbalize my goal if only to myself. I put it “out there,” if you will, making the goal more concrete which helped me attain my goal. Next, I may tackle the mess on my desk—now that’s daunting!
Tags: business goal setting, business goals, goal setting and planning, goals, setting goals, SMART Goals
Posted in goals & goal setting, motivation | No Comments »
Monday, May 23rd, 2011
For those of you readers who frequently watch the NBC sitcom, The Office, you likely enjoyed the last few episodes of the Spring 2011 season as I did! For those of you who are less familiar with this television show, it is based on an office made up of a hodgepodge of dysfunctional employees. There is a US and British based version. Their fearless leader, played by Steve Corell, recently left the company, and upper management is in dire straits to find someone to fill the manager position. The season finale featured many well-known comedians playing the roles of candidates to the Regional Manager position. Each interview with these candidates was more absurd than the last and it seemed like it would be nearly impossible to find the right person to be Regional Manager. Meanwhile, many of the fans of the show still wonder why the most likely person to be promoted to the position, Jim Halpert, isn’t prepared or motivated to be the office manager.
 Anyone who has the task of selecting and developing leaders from within the organization will agree with the idea that promoting from the inside to fill existing positions can at times be risky politically, but will often result in a better outcomes. However, it doesn’t just start when a leadership position becomes available. It is responsibility of leaders at every level to be preparing the next generation of leaders to come. The decisions and actions you make regarding talent identification and development will have a lasting impact on the business. In addition, your involvement in this critical task will help exceptional team members maximize their full potential and be fully engaged.
If you recognize that identifying and developing future talent within the organization is something you need to start doing, or simply do more of, here are a few questions to consider.
1. What are the leadership qualities, competencies, and characteristics required for success in a current or future position of leadership at your organization?
2. Who do you think has leadership potential that you would like to consider for development?
3. What specific technical, managerial, and leadership behaviors and indicators have you observed in this person that indicates leadership potential?
4. How does your management team and/or others involved feel about the leadership potential of this person? What strengths and weaknesses do they see in this person that you need to consider?
5. Do you know what this person’s career aspirations are? If so, what are they and will he/she be interested in development activities?
6. How committed will this be person to working on developmental assignments?
Using these questions as a guide, you will be more successful in identifying talent to drive the organization forward and prepared to being the development process.
Tags: leadership, Leadership Development, Leadership Training, talent development
Posted in Leadership Development, credibility, leadership, management, motivation, talent | No Comments »
Wednesday, May 4th, 2011
 Recently, an interview with Buck Showalter, Manager of the Baltimore Orioles baseball team was shown on the television. It caught my attention because the Orioles have had many losing seasons and there is renewed hope that Buck Showalter will be able to continue to turn things around for Baltimore. The last time the Orioles made it to the playoffs was in 1997. It was interesting that Buck doesn’t claim to be a “miracle worker.” He said he “respects challenges” that the organization faces and knows that he has to lead and “overhaul an entire culture of losing.” Many leaders are facing a similar situation because of the economic downturn and difficult challenges that have plagued many organizations. A lot of leaders may find themselves in a situation where they too need to overhauls the culture of a team or organization because of the downturn and impact on morale. Economic conditions have certainly taken a toll on my own organization and even with some positive signals it still seems that there is work to be done to reinvigorate people and get people recommitted to our vision and mission. To do this, it starts with consistent leadership. Buck said he’s just trying to get his young team members to think about the individual “piece they can contribute to the team everyday” that the team can “count on.” It is obvious that he believes in his players and what they can do. Buck Showatler’s leadership will certainly be in the forefront of my mind as I think of the challenges that we must respectfully face and finds ways to enroll my team members in positioning our organization for long terms sustained success.
Tags: Buck Showalter, losing culture, Orioles losing streak
Posted in leadership, mentoring, motivation, talent | 1 Comment »
Monday, January 31st, 2011
 “I hope business is slow today” is a constant theme that is present in many organizations. This theme is about individuals, employee, and managers who do not understand or fully realize the importance and value they provide the organization and work they do. These are the people that come into work today, do their job, and collect a pay check. These are the people that truly hope business is slow today through a misunderstood notation that being slow benefits them. Yet the irony of the situation is if business were slow every day, it is likely the organization who provides their paycheck would cease to exist.
If you pay attention to the world of work, you will observe that this them is quite prevalent. It is likely it exists among employees in your own organization (if you haven’t seen it already). It is likely present with your clients, the vendors who serve you, and even at your favorite lunch spot. You don’t have to look hard or far to find those people who truly hope that business is slow today.
Generally speaking, these people aren’t bad people, free loaders, or poor hires. The fact is many of them fail to see or have not been given the full picture of how they help the organization and why they matter. Leaders and managers must be on the look-out for people who hope business is slow, and make an effort to help motivate these individuals and help them understand how important they are to the organization. Couple this with frequent coaching (formal and informal) and a creating a culture of feedback, and you’ll soon find your employee are engage to have a productive day at work with a focus on the bottom line.
Tags: Coaching, corporate coaching, Employee Coaching, motivating employees, motivation, motivation in the workplace, motivation to increase performance
Posted in accountability, bottom line performance, bottom line results, motivation | No Comments »
|
 |
