Archive for October, 2007

Oh Sweet Self-Command

Tuesday, October 23rd, 2007

One of the most difficult things a manager will ever undertake to understand is how to motivate people. The field of industrial psychology has entire subfields dedicated to this topic, as do the fields of education and of course, general psychology. Motivation is an important concept, and it’s worthy of a lot of study.

But sometimes the problem of motivation is simple, and all the organizational psychologists in the world can’t resolve it.

I was speaking with a colleague the other day, and she has been struggling for some time with an unsatisfactory assistant. She was getting some grief from a co-worker for not doing enough training, and for being intimidating. Truthfully, this person probably isn’t the best trainer in the world, and she’s a bit of a dynamo, so I suspect she’s intimidating as well. But I had been at the receiving end of that assistant’s poor performance quite a few times, and I had to take exception to what her co-worker was saying.

“You really think this is a training issue?” I asked.

“Well it must be,” he said, “or otherwise she would be doing her tasks more effectively. She’s not stupid, that’s for sure.”

I asked the colleague (let’s call her Mary, because this is getting confusing), I asked Mary what the tasks were that the assistant was failing in. All of the things she was botching up had to do with detail management. I probed a little deeper to be sure this was correct.

“Does your assistant know all of the steps to do her tasks?” I asked.

“Yes, she does.” Mary replied.

“How do you know she knows all of the steps?” I asked again (the co-worker was squirming at this point, no doubt from boredom – this kind of detail is for lower levels than we).

“Because sometimes she does all of the steps, and when she forgets steps, she doesn’t always forget the same ones. That’s how I know,” an exasperated Mary replied.

And that makes Mary right – the problem isn’t training. It’s discipline. And discipline is a motivation problem that can’t be trained.

Am I saying that someone with a discipline problem can’t change? Absolutely not! I could name numerous wonderful examples of former employees who have made remarkable turnarounds related to personal discipline. But did I train them? No! Because it can’t be trained. Discipline can only be chosen.

In each of those examples I was very direct with the individual. I said something like, “the problem is not lack of ability, or lack of knowledge. It’s a lack of discipline. And discipline is something you have to choose for yourself, and you have to practice it constantly. Without it, not only will you fail in this job, but you will fail in any job. Furthermore, discipline doesn’t take time to grow on you. It starts from the moment you choose it. So I need to see a difference in discipline. On Monday.”

Does that sound harsh? I guess that depends on who you are. I’ve said that to some folks who never got around to succeeding. And I said it to those aforementioned wonderful examples, each of whom took it as a personal challenge to master.

I could write numerous blogs on how damaging it is to fail to train or to provide substandard training. But there is a problem on the other end of the spectrum, and that’s the problem of blaming poor discipline on training. If someone is performing poorly, there are a few quick questions to ask that will get you to the heart of the problem – which is where one finds solutions.

  1. Are there others performing the job in a satisfactory manner? If yes, how did they get trained, and was the training different for the poor performer?
  2. Does the poor performer consistently do the same things incorrectly (indicative of a training issue), or does he commit acts of random poor performance (indicative of a discipline issue)?
  3. Has this person been told specifically what they are doing wrong (if not, shame on you, do not pass GO, do not collect $200)? And if they have, are they still making the same mistake(s)?
  4. Has this person ever improved in this area, and then lost their performance improvements?

If the poor performer was trained in a similar manner to others, makes random mistakes, has been told specifically what they were doing wrong, and has improved and then slipped again, you don’t have a training issue. You have a motivation issue. And it’s discipline.

Since discipline can’t be trained, try saying something similar to what I said. Give them until Monday. And if they don’t improve, get them out of your organization at the soonest possible moment. People that lack discipline are fairly democratic about it, and there isn’t another area of your organization that needs that problem more than you do.

Be sure to watch for situations where someone’s skills aren’t a good match for the job, but that will likely present itself as an employee who is consistently struggling with a few specific things (not random acts of ineptitude). And watch for employees who were once great and are now making mistakes. This could be a sign of being overwhelmed, of boredom, of depression, or an indicator that they are considering leaving.

Get really good at figuring out when you have an employee with discipline issues, because they will pull you and the rest of your team down. Train them well, be specific with feedback, and if random errors continue to occur, tell them clearly, kindly, in-no-uncertain-terms one time that they need to fix it.

The other issues of motivation are far more complex, and many of them form the basis for all that is exciting about leadership. Once you get the discipline problems out of your way, motivation is a very fun and challenging area to spend some energy on.

P.S. – If you are committed to discipline, but you’re so overwhelmed that you’re still not keeping it together, I highly recommend a book called “The Other 90%” by Robert Cooper. Everyone I’ve recommended it to has reported getting great value out of it.

(c) 2007, Andrea M. Hill

Posted in Lucre, The Couch | No Comments »

Could This Be My Karma?

Monday, October 22nd, 2007

We all have stuff we need to work on, and mine’s paying attention. Really paying attention when people are talking to me is kind of hard. My mind tries to dart off in a million directions, which makes me impatient with whatever is happening right now. And if it’s a conversation I really don’t want to have, then it’s just that much harder. I can’t tell you how much feedback I’ve gotten in my personal relationship about being present. And it’s fair feedback, because I’m not.

I have this horrible habit of typing while people are talking to me. I’m a fast typist (110 WPM with accuracy), and I’ve been typing since high school, so if someone comes in and starts talking to me I can look up at them, listen to them (OK, with half a brain, not a whole brain), and keep typing whatever it was I was typing at the time of their arrival. My previous assistant actually told me it made her sick to her stomach when I did it. That’s when I knew I had to stop.

Have you tried to be present, really present, all the time? It’s very difficult. I’m in my 40s, not hyper (at least externally), and reasonably socially skilled. Yet when I started trying to be present all the time, it nearly did me in. In fact, it was so reminiscent of my college-day failures at meditation that I nearly threw in the towel. I was acting more present, but I’m not sure I was being any more present. A while ago I stumbled on some CDs by a woman named Pema Chodron, and I finally got a glimpse into what it was I was trying to accomplish.

I studied comparative religions quite seriously when in college, but never before had I properly abstracted the reasons to meditate and the fundamental reasoning behind Buddhism (though I always considered myself a follower of Eastern philosophy — go figure). All of a sudden, in 3 CDs, it became unbelievably clear to me. The whole condition of life is learning to be present right now. And the reason for most of the unsatisfactory conditions of our lives is that we don’t learn to experience the present just for what it is.

When we feel sadness, we want to get rid of it. When we feel anger, we want to get over it. When we feel frightened, we want to get past it. And when we feel impatient, we want to get on with it. But what’s wrong with just feeling sad, or angry, or frightened, or impatient for a bit? The things we do to NOT feel those feelings is what causes so much of our discomfort in life! Feel angry about someone breaking up with us? All we can do is feel worse and worse as we try to figure out ways to get even with them. Feel sad because we’ve lost a good friend? All we can do is feel worse and worse as we feel worthless and guilty over things we should have done better, and then drink ourselves to the point of headache because we don’t want to feel that bad any longer.

The condition of life is one of sometime discomfort, and that the thing we need to do is learn to experience the discomfort, instead of trying to mask it or reject it. If we just let ourselves feel the discomfort and accept it for what it is, we don’t feel compelled to layer on more failures by doing artificial things to mask the discomfort. That way, we learn what needs to be learned from the situation without making additional mistakes. That, by the way, is the original purpose of meditation. If we learn to simply empty our minds of all the “content,” we can learn to be present in the given moment.

So, what does this have to do with work? Just this. There are so many situations we don’t want to deal with at work. An aggravating subordinate, a negative co-worker, an unreasonable boss — above all, relationships define our work experience. But if we’re present — truly present — in each moment, we just accept each interaction for what it is. Sound too zen for you? Well consider this — you have to have those interactions anyway! If you go into them truly accepting them for whatever they are — whether they’re going to be irritating or fine — chances are the interaction will go OK. It’s when we go in resisting, wishing we didn’t have to have them, that things tend to be bad. Either they go bad immediately between you and the other person, or they go bad for hours afterward in your head. Either way, they mess up your day.

So I’m trying to be more present. At home, at work, wherever. It’s scoring me a few extra points at home. And I imagine the people I work with appreciate it too.

(c) 2007. Andrea M. Hill

Tags: , ,
Posted in Sublime | No Comments »

Molecular Transformation Begins at Home

Thursday, October 11th, 2007

If you’ve ever eaten lemon meringue pie (it helps if you enjoyed it, but it’s not essential), the following thought should make some sense to you. It’s even better if you’ve made lemon meringue pie, but I think I can get the non-pie-bakers past the lack of experience.

Over the years, colleagues and I have discussed at great length what is necessary, in terms of critical mass, to effect genuine cultural buy-in. Sometimes the person who initiates the conversation is somebody who wants to make a difference in their company, but suspects their individual commitment is insufficient. Sometimes a new executive wants to create greater cohesion, and is daunted by the task of bringing his or her staff around. I have known the particular joy of working with an entire management team who was committed to one another and to cultural buy-in. But even with an entire management team on board, cultural buy-in is tough to gain.

This article isn’t about the countless issues that get in the way of cultural buy-in, though the list is long: mavericks who eschew committing to the group, senior management who will talk the talk but can’t walk it, dysfunctional players who get satisfaction from disrupting emerging cohesion, and an assemblage of individuals who for a variety of reasons related to intellect, interest, or initiative simply don’t get it. That list will always exist, and focus on eradication of the barriers to cultural buy-in will not lead to success.

No, the only successful approach is to focus on core change, similar to the molecular change that occurs in baking. When you make the filling for a lemon meringue pie, you start with sugar, flour, lemon juice, water, and egg yolks. When you mix these ingredients together they start out pasty, but then they become watery. The first time you make lemon meringue you wonder how you’ll ever achieve that tart filling the consistency of thick jam. As you stand over the stove, stirring assiduously, the heat becomes annoying and you become convinced that you have forgotten an important ingredient – the “gelling” one, whatever that is. Then it happens. Molecular transformation. The hot thin liquid changes – and rapidly – into the translucent gel you have been despairing of achieving.

If you don’t stir it with enough enthusiasm, it burns before it transforms. If you don’t take it off the heat at precisely the right moment, it won’t have that velvety mouth feel. And if you let it cool in the pan instead of putting it into the crust and topping it immediately with meringue, the meringue (yet another molecular transformation waiting to happen) will become watery and weak. All these possible catastrophes without a single substitution of ingredient.

Cultural buy-in is sort of like that. Ingredients are important – if you don’t have the right ingredients you can’t achieve the desired chemical interaction (in baking, that is). Quantities are important too. There is magic in finding the right mix of personalities and talents.  Quantity is important for another reason as well. If you have a business with 20 people, nearly all 20 need to be bought in, because one or two people represent such a significant percentage of the whole – very different mathematics from the business with 500 people, or 1,000, or 45,000.

But what really matters is how the ingredients come together. Whether you are a member of a team, the head of a team, a manager of a department, or the leader of a division, what you try to do is create molecular transformation with a core group. The more willing participants you have, the merrier. But even if you just start with a few people, if you can achieve cohesion, visible purpose and enthusiasm among them, others will be drawn to that energy.

What each organization needs is a nucleus of committed folks. Committed to the company vision, company culture, and one another. That nucleus will attract others to it over time. Not everyone will buy in, but if the center holds, not everyone has to. Is the right percentage 10%? 15%? 35%? It depends on the company and on the dynamism of the group of people who embrace the culture.

Too many people become so overwhelmed at the notion of creating cultural cohesion throughout an entire organization that they never get past thinking about it. Think much smaller. Think much closer to yourself. Molecular transformation begins at home.

(c) 2007, Andrea M. Hill

Posted in Lucre | No Comments »

How Do You Get to Carnegie Hall?

Thursday, October 4th, 2007

Having a successful business isn’t just about doing more of what we do well, or doing what we do well even better – it’s about finding out what we should be doing. Now I know there are a bunch of brilliant geniuses out there who can pull this information out of their um, ear, but most of us need to figure out what we should be doing by listening to our customers.

There are some common objections to doing this, and I’ve been assured they have merit. The most common among them is the customers don’t know what they want until we show it to them. Another is customers aren’t nearly as aware of what the technology can do as we are, so we need to show them what’s possible. Assuming you can ignore the sheer condescension of these positions for a moment, just what is it about not listening to customers that we think might be viable?

While I acknowledge that there have been a handful of inventions in history that have transformed consumer behavior, these events are few, fortuitous, and far in-between. The majority of successful innovations have been due to heightened awareness of consumer preferences and desires, and an ability to skillfully meet real emerging needs faster and more effectively than anyone else.

The best thing about meeting customer expectations is that you don’t necessarily have to have more capital, more employees, or better (heck, any) consultants to excel at it! What you do have to be is more aware, and this requires discipline and patience. Here are a few things you can do to stay on top of customer needs and therefore, on top of your competition. The only requirement is that you learn to keep a notebook and pen in easy reach at all times.

1. Keep a list of every time a customer asks for a product or service you don’t offer, or says ‘it would be so nice if you could provide such-and-such’, or mentions something they like about a competitive offering.

2. Every time you are exposed to an innovative service or particularly interesting offer, jot it down. Take a moment to evaluate whether or not there is a comparable opportunity for your own business. If you come up with something, write that down too.

3. Shop a competitor or spend time observing customer behavior. If you’re a retailer, you can probably do this at the mall. But if you’re in another line of business it may be more difficult. Consider subscribing to internet forums that discuss your industry – you may be surprised to discover how candid forum participants are about their business partners. Look for unmet needs and opportunities.

4. Review your notebook constantly, mining it for insights. Something that was completely uninspiring yesterday may be brimming with possibilities today. Develop lists of potential needs – and don’t restrict yourself to what seems rational, simple, or affordable. Consider the usual to the unusual, the obvious to the obscure. Of course you will come up with some ideas that you can’t afford or which are entirely impractical. But you’ll have the ideas! And occasionally, a great idea is so great that you can figure out a way to fund it and have it pay for itself.

5. Once a week (yes, this often – what is more important as a business person than figuring out what you should be doing?) sit down and develop a list of things you could do to meet potential customer needs. Sometimes this process will be very fun and you won’t want to stop, and other times you will have a hard time coming up with ideas. Your goal is not to come up with a brilliant new business innovation once a week. Your goal is to become so skilled at observing your customers and imagining what they might want from you that you come up with a great idea once or twice a year.

Once-great businesses die every day, and at the heart of each business failure is the failure to figure out what they should have been doing. Sales decline? Then they weren’t selling what they should have been selling, or at the price they should have been selling for. Margin decline? Then they weren’t maintaining the differentiation and competitive advantage they should have been to justify maintaining higher prices. Loss of market share? Then they weren’t doing the work they should have been doing to understand what customers wanted, when they wanted it, at the price they were willing to pay for it.

I suspect the primary reason businesses don’t figure out what they should be doing is that they get caught up in the minutia of daily management. We might refer to this as the crime of complacency. The other reason businesses don’t figure out what they should be doing is that they think they already know and do not have to find out from the customer perspective. Let’s refer to this as the crime of hubris. Neither alternative is as satisfying as hitting a business home run. So put that little notebook and pen in your pocket, and prepare to start paying attention.

(c), 2007, Andrea M. Hill

Posted in Lucre | No Comments »

Simple, But Not Easy

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007

In preparation to sell our house, our real estate agent made us thin out our bookshelves. This was no small feat. We have 20’ ceilings in our living room, with built-in book shelves that require a ladder to reach the top. After packing up only half the books we had nearly 40 boxes to take to storage. The problem was that I packed based on size, not based on which books I would want while waiting for our house to sell. But honestly, how does one know which books one will need until one needs them?

I have been kvetching incessantly about the missing books and I had a particularly frustrating moment today when I wanted my leadership books to reference pursuant to writing a magazine article on leadership that is due tomorrow.

My better (more practical, less flappable) half suggested that perhaps I was on a toot about nothing. I was told to go upstairs and write what I know, and that rifling through books is my favorite mode of procrastination (which is correct).

So I sat in front of the computer and thought about the good leaders I’ve known, and the ones who couldn’t lead anyone out of a paper bag. I thought of times I have been pleased with my own leadership and times when I knew I’d blown it. And I realized that though being a good leader is hard work, the components are simply common-sense.

A good leader is a student. Of what? Of whatever matters. They are students of their followers, they actively seek teachers, they demonstrate urgency about building expertise. They recognize the importance of being tested, and of submitting to the process of learning. They are not dilettantes – their pursuit of knowledge is serious, persistent, and motivated.

A good leader has mastery. They know their subject matter inside and out, and they never let that knowledge become stale or dated. When they are ready to let their competency slide, they switch fields or retire.

A good leader works harder than everyone else. They respect that the role is a responsibility, not a right, and they work hard to earn it every day.

Leadership requires an individual to be confronted with diverse and numerous challenges simultaneously. Therefore, a good leader must live by a clear value system in order to be consistent.

A good leader is consistent.

A good leader never tries to pretend they are not the leader. The only two reasons I can think of that people do this are gutlessness or a misguided notion that it’s egotistical to acknowledge their leadership, and neither reason is particularly flattering.

A good leader is direct, and is more concerned with being effective than with being popular. The best leaders I have ever had have been unflinching in their criticism of me and extremely demanding of my performance. I have been lucky to have those people in my life. A good leader respects their followers by challenging them tirelessly.

Jim Collins defines a Level 5 Leader as someone who is humble. I agree with his description of humility, and I’ve also seen strangely distorted interpretations of it. This humility has to do with knowing there is always something new to learn, and that it can be learned from anyone. This humility has to do with recognizing that anyone can make a mistake, and that the leader is in the best position of all to make more and bigger mistakes, because they make more and bigger decisions. This humility has to do with being able to acknowledge and learn from mistakes, which requires being vulnerable. But good grief – this humility is not about being free of ego! It takes a lot of ego to take a position of significant responsibility. Having a huge amount of self confidence is necessary to being a good leader, and self confidence and humility are not mutually exclusive. If your ego is healthy enough, you can channel it away from self-interest and into the needs of the organization. A weak ego will spend all its time protecting its flanks out of fear and self-doubt. So a good leader has a strong and healthy ego and focuses their energy on doing what is good for the organization – not their own self-interest.

A good leader understands that it is their responsibility to make decisions, and they make them – despite the risk, despite the fact that nobody else really wants to make the decisions but will happily criticize them in hind-sight.

A good leader has the ability to put people at ease, establish confidence, and inspire motivation. Is this charisma? Sometimes, but not always. Very low-key people can achieve this, and very high profile people can miss the mark. This type of inspiration is not personality dependent, but it is people-centric. Good leaders really dig people in general, and their people in specific.

Good leaders are good teachers. They are not only voracious about learning, they are also ardent about sharing what they know and developing others. Why? Well what the hell – why not?

Finally, a good leader is human. They know it, they don’t pretend to be otherwise, and they also know that a certain percentage of their peers and followers won’t permit it. So they strive to live up to unrealistic expectations every day, and are healthy enough to be kind to themselves regardless.

A leader can be good – can be great – without demonstrating all of these qualities every day. But they are distinguished by the fact that when they fail, they relentlessly pick themselves up, brush themselves off, and resolve to do better.

There are a lot of people out there in positions of leadership who neither demonstrate these characteristics nor the resolve to master them. It would be better if we would recognize them for what they are. They are authorities. An authority can be handed their title and the deference that goes with it. A leader only gets the title – and the commensurate respect – by working for it.

Every. Single. Day.

(c) 2007, Andrea M. Hill

Posted in Lucre | No Comments »