I have distinct memories of my class portraits. I didn’t like brushing my hair, and all of my photos between the 2nd and 4th grades betrayed me with a subtle little lump just above and behind my left ear. In 1st grade I got chickenpox, and had recovered sufficiently enough to return to school – just before the lady from Timeless Images showed up with her tripod and green rug. Some people struggle with remembering when they got the chickenpox, but I only have to consult my 1st grade class portrait. There was the year I got glasses (4th grade), the year I had stitches in my chin (5th), and the year I was first allowed to wear mascara (6th). An entire personal history translated with clarity through my awkward class photos.

In the Newsweek article a Legacy Photographer named Kelly Price said, “People want their kids to look perfect rather than teach them to appreciate their flaws.” She goes on to say that she fears if she asked for her 12-year-old daughter’s photo to be retouched, she would be sending a message of insufficiency to that child. The article quotes a psychoanalyst named Susie Orbach as saying “The rise in airbrushing is a byproduct of a culture consumed with the idea that the body is perfectible.”

When my now 23-year-old daughter first realized she had buck teeth – the kind of sudden awareness that can crush a 10-year-old – I was able to show her pictures of me at the same age and with the same buck teeth. Then I showed her my class portrait from 8th grade – the one with the braces and the headgear. That – and a promise that head gear was rarely employed any longer – comforted her. I’m sure it didn’t hurt that she also saw the massive pimple just over my right eye in that same 8th grade photo – a reassurance that one day she, too, would enjoy pimple-free skin again.

I am disconcerted. I’m not sure if it’s the matter of being a part of a society that is “consumed with the idea that the body is perfectible,” or if my concern is related to the idea of what a perfect body should be. We live in a culture that idolizes the 15-year-old female form – no hips, and an ability to show 6″ of flesh below the navel without disclosing the presence of pubic hair. When I was a teenager it was socially risky to be larger than a size 7. Our children are under far greater pressure today, not only to be a much smaller size, but also to be self-conscious at a much younger age.

Our role as parents is to help our children see beauty in all its forms and to recognize their own inherent beauty – inclusive of any temporary or permanent perceived flaws. When we cave in to society’s superficial notions of what makes an attractive person we relinquish our ability to be authentic. A terrible sacrifice.

Many parents would assert that they ask for airbrushing in an attempt to protect their children from discomfort and dissatisfaction. But is this truly a service to them? Sparing our children the experience of discomfort only delays the time when they must confront it head on. Such delay can rob them of the skills necessary to face their frailties with humor or to muster the courage and strength to recover from a disappointment.

I remember scheduling my Senior Portrait. I was acutely conscious of how expensive it would be, and I asked my mom why the photos cost so much. Her reply was that, unlike my class portraits in years past, the senior photo would be taken in a studio with special lighting and photo retouching services. Not having any prior experience of that type of photography, I questioned the value of spending so much money. Her response? “Oh honey, won’t it be fun to have just one photo that makes you look like someone in a magazine ad? Something you’ll always hold on to because it’s your last class photo?”

It was. And I did. But in all the years since, I have gotten much more value out of those years of class photos that showed me precisely as I was.

(c) 2008. Andrea M. Hill

Stressors are different from person to person, and each stressor affects people differently. So there are lots of reasons people are feeling harassed at work, including too much work as a result of too much downsizing, untalented or egotistical managers, and negative co-workers. When I’m talking with someone and they bring up job stress I always ask what’s stressing them out. And though the list of grievances is fairly diverse, there is one aspect of work that causes more stress than any other, and that’s role ambiguity. If companies want to reduce stress the most important thing they could do is to ensure there is clarity regarding who is supposed to do what, how, and when.

Too many companies put a job description together (half the time they just pulled them from a manual somewhere), slap it into a binder, and never look at it again. Because nobody looks at the job description, nobody knows what training is necessary to be successful at the job. This is true for all jobs. So there’s a manager or supervisor who isn’t quite sure what their role is, and they hire employees who aren’t sure what their roles are. Neither of them receive the training they need, and neither of them really know whether or not they are being successful.

When does the employee or manager get feedback? When they fail to meet expectations (just what WERE those expectations anyway?) or get on someone’s nerves. Result? Stressed out people.

Every role should have a job description that serves as the primary information document for the employee about what he or she is expected to do. That means someone has to pay attention to the document, making sure it is always up to date and relevant. This is NOT HRs job! This is each manager’s job, and it should be done in collaboration with the employees who are IN the job, to make sure it accurately reflects what they do and what they need to be doing.

There should be specific training for each job description. The training can be classroom training, reading a specific book or article, or chapter in a book, it can be OJT. But what they are supposed to learn and how and from whom should be clear.

Each new employee should be given clear expectations from their very first day. At the last company I was with we conducted new employee reviews at the 30, 60, and 90-day thresholds. Each new employee was given the review document that would be used for his or her reviews on the first day of their new job. This allowed them to see what would be expected, and it took a tremendous amount of stress off the table.

Every employee should spend time on their first day with their supervisor or manager, talking about role expectations and how they are to get the help they need to be successful. If a system like the 30/60/90-day review process is to be used, the scoring approach should be clearly discussed and understood on that first day. It might seem to someone who has not used a process like this that it would be intimidating. In fact, when it’s done well, it’s incredibly liberating. No guesswork is necessary to find out how they will be successful.

I think the best way to make sure job descriptions are being reviewed and kept up-to-date is once a year at the employees’ annual review. They should be a scheduled part of the discussion, and both employees and supervisors/managers should have meaningful input regarding whether or not the document is accurate or needs to be updated. Of course, it should be possible to update a job description at any time, but at least if it’s on a schedule you can be confident that attention will be paid once a year.

If more companies would pay attention to role clarity and preparation for role success, a lot of workplace stress would disappear. And the results of less-stressed-out employees with clear understanding of what they are supposed to be doing would drop straight to the bottom line.

(c) 2007, Andrea M. Hill

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