Busy?

I’m behind.  Right now my “To Do” pile is substantially bigger than my “Done” pile. It’s not that we’re not getting things done. We’re doing good things, and we’re doing them well. We just happen to find more things to do faster than we can get them all done.

At a former client’s office I had two people use the analogy, “We move fast here – sometimes it’s like trying to change your shoes in the middle of the race.”  Interesting analogy isn’t it.  This company is in a deadline driven manufacturing business with lots of customers that expect timely delivery of quality product.  Clearly there is a need for managers to have a sense of urgency in the way they operate, but do they need to go so fast they don’t have time to change their shoes?

I’ve worked in some time-sensitive businesses.  Most recently it was magazine publishing where the material had to be at press by a set day each month, no questions asked.  Yet, the question was asked – a lot – and many times deadlines were pushed back.  When that happens, the people at the next step in the process have to rush their work, often making errors or simply having to work harder or faster than they should.  Usually little good comes from rushing.

What I observed was that while all magazines had the same monthly deadlines, some were chronically late with panic ensuing on a monthly basis, while others were consistently on time or even a bit early.  While one Editor was frantically trying to get his book put to bed, another was mid-way through the development of next month’s issue.

There were probably lots of reasons for this.  Maybe one Editor was more organized or had a more experienced staff.  Maybe one didn’t plan well or frequently had unforeseen problems.  But one thing I observed was that to varying degrees, those that were chronically scrambling liked it that way.  They were “I perform better under pressure” people.  They like the excitement of the scramble – the challenge of expediting – the thrill of sliding in under the wire.

So back to my client – I posed a question to the CEO asking if the attitude “we move fast here” was a source of organizational pride or frustration.  From his perspective was the “rush” nature of the business really because the company needed to meet many deadlines, or was it a somewhat “manufactured” value?  For an answer I got a contemplative look and “Hmmm, good question.”

I’ll contend that some organizations culturally like the excitement that comes from moving fast.  They like to react and see themselves as flexible and nimble.  While I’m all about a company being nimble and responsive to customer needs, I’m concerned that those who intentionally live in the fast lane might be putting undue stress on the organization.  Aren’t there parts of the business that would perform better if not always rushing?  Might we not get better “rush” performance if we didn’t have to do it all time?  Are we risking burning out good people because they never get to catch their breath?

There’s no right answer here.  Every organization has its unique issues, but it’s worth thinking about.  If your company is starting to get holes in the bottom of your shoes, maybe a little more planning and contemplative time might improve the overall performance.  Remember, it was the tortoise that won the race.

Do What You Say You’re Going To Do

This week I had the opportunity to meet with a group of new supervisors who were attending a course offering an overview of supervisory skills and responsibilities.  I was able to share with the group one of my preferred tips for new supervisors – do what you say you’re going to do.

Supervisors, both new and experienced, make promises all the time. They say things like:

• You’ll get a performance review every year.
• We’ll meet each week to check on your progress on that project.
• We’ll reevaluate your compensation next month.
• I’ll make sure you get more training on that.
• And on, and on and on.

Unfortunately, some supervisors don’t follow through on those pledges.  Although they have the best of intentions, they allow the day-to-day whirlwind of events to overwhelm them and they forget about their past promises.  Sometimes they do these things – but late. Sometimes they don’t do them at all.

Here’s the problem, when you make a promise to an employee and then don’t follow through on that promise, you lose credibility.  More than that, you begin to create a culture that does not focus on accountability. After all, if you don’t do what you say you’re going to do, how can you expect your employees to consistently do what they say they are going to do?

And it gets worse.  Imagine that you have an underperforming employee that you put on some form of improvement plan. Part of that plan is that you’ll meet with the employee every week and give them feedback on their progress.  But, you get busy and after a week or two, you stop having these meetings.  Then, four or five months later the employee’s performance deteriorates again.  You’re ready to fire the employee and pull out the performance plan to prove that you can. Clearly that plan shows what the employee was supposed to do, but it also shows how you were going to help them.   It’s a reasonable assumption that if you stopped giving the employee feedback, it must be because their performance was acceptable.  Trying to advance the position that the employee did not improve and that their termination is warranted by continued poor performance would have been a lot easier, if you had followed through with your pledge.

So, the tip is simple – do what you say what you are going to do – and if you can’t do it, don’t say it.  Everything works so much better that way.

Oh, Say Can You See …

Today is 9/11. As those who know me will attest, I’m not typically an overly emotional guy.  Nor am I an overtly political guy.  But today, at least for today, that’s changed a bit.  I’ve heard the National Anthem three times today. Early this morning I heard the Brooklyn Youth Chorus sing it as part of the 9/11 Memorial Ceremony in New York.  Later this morning I heard a replay of that same Chorus – again it was stunning. Finally, I heard American Idol David Cook sing the National Anthem in the Chiefs – Bills pregame.  It was an amazing performance.

Somehow, the National Anthem I heard today was different than the one I’ve known all of my life.  The words were the same and the tune was familiar, but it was different.  The whole story of the song seemed to leap out at me. A fierce battle that raged through the night, but come dawn, the stars and stripes still flew above the walls.  That struck me as such a testament to the last 10 years.  On 9/11 terrorists attempted to break the back of America. They tried to bring financial ruin and an unraveling of our society. Now, 10 years later, that star-spangled banner is still flying. I’m no Pollyanna – we have some serious challenges in our near future, but most of those are of our own making.  Other than the immediate loss of life, the terrorists did not harm American. Instead, we are more vigilant and better defended.

The other part of today’s ceremony that hit me was the firefighters and police officers. Those brave individuals who were running up the stairs of the World Trade Center while thousands of others were running down.  Because of their bravery, vastly more people were saved than were lost.  How blessed we are to live among people who are willing to make that kind of sacrifice so that others may live.

I also now work with several organizations that have a direct connection to the military and to veterans.  This 9/11 seems a little more personal knowing that there are so many who have served in the armed forces – most returning home, but too many dying in protection of the freedoms that I too often take for granted.  

9/11 is a day to remember – to remember the almost 3,000 people who lost their lives – but also to remember how fortunate we are to live in the United States, where we have freedoms the rest of the work envies and opportunities we have not even begun to imagine.

Tomorrow I may be back to my normal self, but for today, I’ll keep whistling the Star-Spangled Banner to  myself.  Let us never, ever, forget.

Too Good to Fire?

Now that the banking crisis is past us, we can forget that phrase “too big to fail”, right? Probably not – too big to fail is now part of our lexicon. In fact, here’s a spin on that idea that I see all that time – and I wish we could forget it too. Have you ever seen a situation where there is an employee who regularly leaves a trail of hate and discontent in his or her wake? This is an employee that regularly upsets coworkers. They are frequently the office bully. Tears are not uncommon sights in people they work with. But, even though these folks are hideous to their coworkers, the boss refuses to even confront them – much less fire them. Why!?!?

Too often the boss considers them “too good to fire”. The boss says, “While she may be a Tasmanian devil in the office, that woman could sell ice cubes to an Eskimo. Without her we won’t be able to make our third quarter numbers.” Or maybe it’s something like, “I know he’s hard on employees, but he’s the only one who knows what he does. If we fire him it will take 6-12 months to find a replacement and we can’t afford to have that position open for that long.”

Is anyone really that good? Undoubtedly there are times (although I’ve never seen one) that yes, that person is what the company needs this minute. But if that’s true, it is very, very, very, very rare. (Did I get enough very’s in there?) Yes, terminating that high performer could cause the organization some short term pain. Terminating them without first planning how you’re going to deal with their absence might be a really bad idea. But keeping them around, as a cancer on the organization will cause you long-term problems that far outweigh the short term benefits.

How many other good employees are disengaged, or actively leaving because of this person? How is your turnover being affected? While this person might be a good salesperson, are they really building the kind of relationships with clients that can be sustained? Are they the kind of relationships that fit your corporate values? Are your short term numbers really more important that the long term health and sanity of the rest of your team?

As a leader, in encourage you to seriously challenge anyone who pushes to keep a destructive employee just because their individual performance is good. Take a hard look at your corporate values, and the real cost of keeping that person around, and then make a decision for the long term, not just next quarter’s goals.

The Lifetime Employment Contract

All managers, sometime in their career, will have an employee whose job has outgrown them. Something has changed with the job – the business has grown, new technology has come along, the competition has increased, or something else.  Regardless of the reason, this employee who was formerly an acceptable employee is now struggling to meet the new expectations of the job.

What’s a manager to do?  The employee possibly has a several years of acceptable performance; he may be a popular and friendly person; but at the end of the day, he’s simply not doing the amount or quality of work you need done.  You could simply let him continue with what he does best and hire someone else to do the other work, but that’s not very cost effective unless you really have enough work for two people.  You could allow (encourage) him to transfer to another part of the organization where he would have a higher chance of being successful, but rarely do those things work out.

You don’t really want to fire this person. What you really need is a way to challenge him to learn and grow enough to perform the job successfully.  One way to accomplish this is the idea of a lifetime employment contact.  Imagine this conversation between you, and Bob, the struggling employee.

“Bob,” you start, “we have a problem that we need to talk about.  You’ve been a fine employee over the last 8 years and I appreciate your contributions to the organization.  But I’m concerned that the job is changing and is outgrowing you. I’d like to see you keep this job and be successful but I’m going to need you to do more.”

“Wow,” says Bob.  “I like this job, and I need a job.  I don’t want to get fired.  I guess if you’ll train me in what I need to do, I’ll do my best.”

“I appreciate that, Bob, but what I really need I’m not sure I can train.  What I need is someone who’s always looking for ways to make things better – someone who can innovate – someone who will challenge the status quo -someone who will lead, not just follow.

“Bob, you’re an at-will employee.  Do you understand what that means?

Bob looks concerned. “Sure – it means you can fire me any time you want.”

You smile. “Yes, that’s true.  It also means you can quit anytime you want.  We have an arrangement – you provide work and we pay you for it. If either of us wants to change that agreement, we can. But what if we were to offer you a contract for employment for life?  If we were willing to commit to you, what would you be willing to commit to in return?

Bob looks confused, so you continue. “Clearly, if you were to stay in this job for the rest of your career you’d expect things to change.  Between now and your retirement day we know there will be new technology, new regulations, new completion – things will change.  If we were to commit to you, we’d expect you to commit to keeping up.  You might need to go back to school or earn a certification. You might have to change your work habits – maybe put in more hours or do some reading and studying at home in the evenings.

“The reality is, Bob, that we already have that agreement.  Barring dramatic changes to the organization, I don’t see any reason that you can’t work here until you retire.  But, you can’t do that unless you are willing to commit to the organization – to invest in yourself and grow at the same speed that the organization is growing.  If you do that, you can be successful for a very long time. But, if you stop learning and stop pushing yourself, the job is going to pass you by.

“It’s your call, Bob.  If you want a lifetime contract we can make that happen, but you need to decide what you’re willing to commit to.”

Try this the next time you have a Bob on your staff and let me know what happens.

When is a Donation not a Donation?

It’s a balancing act.  Organizations want to be good corporate citizens and so they donate money, time and materials to worthy causes.  I strongly encourage this, and I encourage them to find ways to allow employees to help direct those donations to organizations the employees are involved in or who are close to their hearts and lives.  I’m also a strong believer that individuals should donate and give what they can to organizations they care about.  It is part of our responsibility as citizens to take care of those less fortunate or to support those organizations who are improving the lives and health of all of us. Americans are the most generous population in the world and we should continue and increase that whenever we can.

The challenge comes when you try to do both at the same time.  Many organizations participate in activities that bring “worthy causes” into the work place and give them a chance to directly solicit employees for donations. Now if you’re an HR person and concerned about maintaining a union-free environment, you know what challenges this presents, but often we do it anyway. The difficulty comes when employees feel corporate pressure to financially support the organization’s chosen charity.

Here’s a real story … a third party comes into the work place to make a presentation about their organization to your employees.  This is a well respected community organization who receives substantial corporate gifts annually.  After the presentation the speaker wants to play a “wheel of fortune” game.  Around the wheel are various items the charity needs – each with a value of $20. The “game” is that employees are asked to step up, “donate” $20 and spin the wheel to see how their donation will be spent.

It’s a clever game, and would probably work well before dinner at a fund-raising event, but is it appropriate for an office? How does an employee resist the peer pressure when other employees slap down one or more twenties to publicly show how much they support this charity.  What about when the boss looks at you with a raised eyebrow wondering why you haven’t “played the game” yet?

Here’s another … a normally “business professional” dress organization offers employees a chance to donate $5 per day to wear jeans one week.  In itself not a bad scheme, but then the manager steps up and says I will pay for four days for each employee and I expect you to pay for the fifth day.  Not, “if you choose to donate I’ll match you,” but  I EXPECT you to.  Now it’s not voluntary, it’s extortion.

As I said, I believe in charitable giving and encourage both organizations and individuals to do so as much as they can. I am perfectly okay with organizations encouraging donations and arranging for appropriate charities to educate employees about what that charity does and why they need financial support.  I’m even fine with organizations offering payroll deduction and other ways to facilitate taking money from employees to give to charities.  What I don’t like is any form of pressure or coercion.

I want people to give as much as they can afford to give – not as much as their manager thinks they should give.  I want them to give because they believe in the charity they are giving money to – not because they feel pressure from their peers or their boss to reach a corporate goal.  I never want someone to feel that their support (or lack of) will in any way influence their performance evaluation or career development.

As a leader – remember that charity begins at home. Help your employees to appreciate everything that they have – and everything they receive from the organization, but then let them make their own decisions about what they can afford to give away and who they give it to. 

A donation should be a gift, not a requirement.

It’s all about Priorities

I started a new job recently (more about that later) and am faced with decisions.  As those of you in HR know, it seems like there is always a lot to do, so the questions becomes what to do first?  I can priorities my tasks based on where the fires are, or I can look towards unmet needs – even though the organization might not recognize them as being needs.  I could focus on what will do the most to solidify my image and help impress my new boss that I was the right person for the job (aka try to make a big splash), or I can be a behind-the-scenes manager and quietly push my team in the right direction.

Overall, I’m in charge of HR and Payroll, so I wrote down a list of things I could choose to focus on.  Then I tried to prioritize them (but I haven’t tried very hard). Here is as far as I’ve gotten.

1. Pay people correctly
2. Administer their benefits correctly
3. Foster a culture of honesty and respect
4. Ensure legal compliance
5. Ensure that we pay people equitably (internally)
6. Foster a culture of “valued” work
7. Ensure that we have a competitive benefits program
8. Recognize good performance
9. Ensure that we address performance problems
10. Recognize and celebrate longevity
11. Develop a sound performance appraisal process
12. Build an efficient hiring process
13. Have friendly and effective supervisors
14. Ensure adequate Job skills training for all employees
15. Implement a comprehensive onboarding process
16. Attempt to pay people competitively (externally)
17. Reward good performance
18. Provide Management skills training to managers
19. Facilitate PC/Technical training to users
20. Ensure that we provide great paid time off benefits

The organization already does some of these things well, some need improvement, and some don’t happen at all. The first two seem like no-brainers while the rest of the list is subjective. If you think I’ve forgotten something – or if you’d shuffle the list differently – let me know.  I’d like some feedback.

In the meantime, what’s the lesson in this post?  In In Search of Excellence Tom Peters talks about how some people plan, and plan and plan and even plan to plan but never get anything done. He refers to this as Ready-Aim-Aim-Aim-Aim-Fire.  He proposes a different model of Ready-Fire-Aim-Repeat.  The idea is that you need to be doing something, and if it turns out to be the wrong thing, say you’re sorry and try again.  If you wait until you’ve addressed every contingency and made every plan, by the time you pull the trigger the situation has changed enough that you need to start over.

I like Tom’s model (for the most part), so this list is my “Ready” list. I suggest you lean toward action versus over planning, but action for action’s sake is often a waste of time.  Spend at least a few minutes surveying the landscape and identifying what you should be shooting at.  Then you can take your best shot and move forward.

Happy hunting.

Making Mistakes

We’re all human.  It happens. People make mistakes.  The question for you, as a leader, is when mistakes do happen, what are you going to do about it?  Over the years I’ve seen a wide range of responses – some good and some not so good.  Here are some examples and we’ll see where this takes us.

Diver A cuts in front of Driver B on the highway – no contact – no panicked swerving or braking.  Diver B can a) shrug and keep driving, b) express his dissatisfaction verbally or with a hand gesture, c) try to run Driver A off the road, or d) pull out an unlicensed handgun from under the seat and ensure that Driver A will never cut off anyone again.

An employee intends to send a funny but slightly inappropriate email to a coworker (first-offense – nothing graphic but definitely not work related) but accidentally sends the email to all employees. His manager could a) laugh about it, b) counsel the employee, c) fire the employee, or d) write a policy and implement strict regulations so that this can never happen again.

A payroll employee accidentally enters an incorrect wage rate for a senior manager, paying him one tenth of his proper payroll amount.  The Payroll manager could a) counsel the employee, b) transfer the employee, c) fire the employee, or d) write a policy and implement strict regulations so that this can never happen again.

I think you get my drift.  There are a range of responses that may be appropriate for any given mistake.  Given the circumstances the same mistake could prompt different appropriate responses.  In The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey talks about the idea of stimulus and response.  While we usually can’t control what happens to us, we can control how we respond to it.  If we take the time to insert a gap between stimulus and response, we can better ensure that we respond appropriately rather than reflexively or instinctually.

In business I’m amazed at how often the response to a mistake is to write a policy and implement strict regulations so that this can never ever happen again.  This response causes organizations to have long, complex and difficult to follow procedures.  It often causes duplication and redundancy so employees can CYA and not get caught for making that mistake, or any other.  These practices heap inefficiencies on the office.

So, what do you do?  First, breath – follow Covey’s advice and put a gap between the mistake and how you choose to respond.  Then, look at the risk.  What is the likelihood that the mistake could be repeated, and what is the “damage” that would be done if it is repeated?  If the likelihood and the damage are both high, then a new procedure and controls are warranted.  If either the likelihood or the damages are high, but the other is low, maybe just some retraining is in order.  If the both the likelihood and the damages are low, look to counseling to fix the problem.

One truism – people will make mistakes.  It’s your job, as a leader, to avoid over-reacting and instead look at the risks objectively and then respond in a thoughtful, professional manner.

Pets in the Office

We’ve never really been “pet” people.  Oh, we had a cat for a long time – 16+ years – but she was mostly an outside cat, very low maintenance.  Also, I have a Red Oscar (fish) that’s been with me for at least 10 years and he’s really big enough to eat (almost 12” from nose to tail) but again low maintenance.  Well, a few months back my son moved home from college and brought his Doberman Pincer “puppy”.  She’s now a full grown dog –and we’re now “dog people”.  Don’t get me wrong, she’s a sweet and well mannered dog and other than occasionally chewing up the wrong things she is nice to have around, but she’s not near as low maintenance as we’ve been used to.  Between feeding, walking, playing, and picking up after, having a pet around can be a time consuming option.  So, what about pets at the office?

Two ways to look at this.  First, I have a client that manufactures dog treats. Needless to say, the company is staffed with dog lovers and those in office are allowed to bring their dogs to work. While they are mostly well behaved, it is not uncommon to be met at the front door by 4-6 dogs all wanting to say hello and be petted.  They romp around the hallways and sleep under their owner’s desks.  Everyone has a drawer full of treats and none of these dogs is in any danger of starving to death.  There is the occasional barking fit when a stranger walks in or when one dog takes another’s favorite toy.  Dogs walk in and out of meetings – requiring the doors be opened and closed.

Is having dogs at the office really a good idea?  On par, at least for this company, the answer is clearly yes.  Sometimes they are a distraction or a nuisance, but generally they are friendly, companionable and relaxing.  Given a well drafted pet policy it’s feasible for many organizations to embrace four-legged pets at work.

But what about human pets?  You know, the boss’s favorites?  Is it okay for managers to have favorites?  Like so many things, the answer is “it depends.”  Regardless of your ideas on “fairness” all employees are not created equal.  Some are more responsible than others. Some work harder, or faster, and just do a better job.  Some can be counted on to have higher levels of emotional intelligence.  Some are just funnier – and more fun to be around. A good office team as some of each of these – diversity is a good thing.

When you need someone to handle a difficult customer or calm an emotional employee, having someone with high emotional intelligence is important.  But, when a detailed statistical analysis needs to be done, I’ll go with analytical ability over emotional intelligence.  And, when I need to plan the Summer Picnic, I’m going for the “fun” guy over the “smart” guy.  Is playing to employee’s strengths the same as playing favorites? 

If you wanted to plan the picnic but I asked Bob to do you, you might feel like I gave the fun job to my favorite ,where as I’d see it as utilizing my resources.  I need to be aware of how you feel (my emotional intelligence test) and be prepared to address the issue.   Real favoritism – treating employees differently for non-professional reasons – can kill the moral in an office and render a manager totally ineffective.  Favoritism can lead to charges of discrimination and harassment. 

Funny story – and only in California – a group of employees sued their employer claiming sexual harassment because the boss was showing favoritism by giving all the good assignments to the employee he was currently sleeping with. They won. 

Yes, it is okay to have pets in the office. Four legged ones pose a different set of challenges but can be much more rewarding.  (I do suggest indoor/outdoor carpet.)  But, having favorites based on something other than their ability to do the job is a really bad idea.

It’s as Simple as Talking and Listening

I’m a fan of books like Jules Verne’s “Around the World in 80 Days” and H. G. Well’s “The Time Machine.” These are great books, truly classics. If you’ve read them, you’ll remember how the gentleman of the day would meet at a club, have a leisurely lunch and then retire to library for brandy and conversation. They would apparently talk for hours about all the important subjects of the day. When was the last time you sat with a group of co-workers or friends and talked for hours about the important subjects of the day? When was the last time you did that for more than 10 minutes?

I’m afraid we are losing the art of dialog. Our “conversations” now are more likely to be texted, emailed or tweeted. Can you really have a conversation when you are limited to 140 characters? Email is a horrendous way to communicate most things, but is texting or Twitter any better? Why don’t we just talk to each other more?

And when we do talk, we don’t really dialogue. We have meetings. We solve problems. We try to get the conversations over as quickly as possible. Or, those who talk never listen. They simply rant about their views and what they think is right. “Talk” radio had exploded, but that’s not dialogue, its broadcast ranting. Go to Congress and listen to a “debate”. They aren’t debating anything. They are taking turns shouting their opinions and not listening to a word the other side says – except for how they can use it against them.

If you go to the Internet (the font of all knowledge) you’ll find hundreds of articles and books about dialogue and conversation. Unfortunately, you’ll find books – and not conversations. (Well, maybe on YouTube – I didn’t check there). So how do we get our voices back? I propose three steps.

First – you gotta wanna. This is a great line from “The Great Game of Business” by Jack Stack. The fundamental principle is sound, unless you want to make change, you won’t. If you agree with me that our world would be a better place if we’d simply engage in productive dialogues, then the first step is to start. Make it important. Schedule and protect time – not for meetings with agendas – just for discussion.

Second – you need to listen. As my mom used to say, “God gave you two ears and one mouth.” We need to listen twice as much as we talk. As Stephen Covey says “Seek first to understand and then be understood.” You can’t carry on a conversation if you don’t know what the other guy is saying. If you listen, without worrying about your response or discrediting the speaker, maybe you’ll learn something that could inform your opinion.

Third – talk, with respect and civility. Don’t speak as if you are the master of the universe, but instead as one small member of a very large pool of society. Be humble, but assertive. You have a voice. Hopefully you have well formed opinions. Don’t be afraid to speak up for them – not to win the argument – but to enrich the discussion and improve the dialogue.

We don’t have to have men’s clubs, libraries and brandy snifters to have a good conversation (but wouldn’t it be great if we could). We can bring back dialogue. We just have to sit down and talk about it.