Today is for all of you top dogs (TD) who tweet, all of you who think twitter should be called fritter and those who wonder when (or whether) Twitter is going to make money.

Let’s start with TDs who tweet or if you’re into politics check out this directory of Congressional tweeters.

For those who don’t see the point, read what Diane Hessan, CEO of Communispace has to say about how her own conversion to Twitter.

Finally, in spite of all the passionate people sending out millions of tweets, where’s the money? An interesting discussion from the faculty at Wharton focuses on the possibilities of a profitable Twitter; but one reader’s comment says a lot about people’s attitude, “SNS are all about sharing, creating, connecting and learning in a digital environment – it’s not about making cash.”

A common attitude, but one that begs the question, if it’s not about the cash why should anyone invest? Companies such as Twitter and Facebook don’t start and scale for nothing and users certainly are unlikely to step up to pay.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: nono farahshila on flickr

Just one link for you today.

It’s a new site dedicated to the premise that not all CEOs are bad guys.

So grab yourself some coffee, or a beer if it’s that time, and take a look at what some of the thousands of good CEOs are doing to have fun and/or give back.

I hope you have a great time at Not All CEOs Are Jerks.

Image: MykReeve on credit: flickr

“The real character of the person can be known by what he does when nobody is watching. … Feudal culture is one where there is one set of rules for the king and another set of rules for the rest of the people. … What we are seeing is not the failure of entrepreneurship. It is the greed, ego and vanity of some super managers of some large corporations. That is not the essence of capitalism. Capitalism is all about creating an environment where individuals can leverage their innovation and their entrepreneurial abilities to create better and better opportunities.” –N.R. Narayana Murthy, Founder, Chairman and chief mentor, Infosys Technologies (Hindustan Times 4/19/09).

Satyam has shown that greed is a human condition, not just the province of the decadent West, reserved for various ‘leaders’ in developing countries or politicians in general.

Murthy’s thought that the real person surfaces when no one is watching are akin to the age old wisdom of Plato when he said, “In vino veritas” (In wine is truth).

And I think that in these two comments you find the real truth about anyone who aspires to positional or as-it-happens leadership.

Leadership isn’t about influence or vision; it’s not about how many follow you or heap kudos on your efforts. It isn’t even about honesty and authenticity—the leaders on Wall Street were both in their pursuit of profits.

It’s about what happens between you, yourself and your MAP at three o’clock in the morning when you’ve had too much to drink (real or metaphorical) and no one is looking.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: skalas2 on flickr

Although there’s often a substantial lag between hiring and productivity there’s a lot you can do to reduce it.

Yesterday we discussed what to do between acceptance and start to solidify your hires, integrate them into the team and familiarize them with the company’s market and products.

That effort doesn’t end the day they report to work.

During the first couple of days take time to go over the information you’ve already shared (see previous post) and get some feel of where the knowledge gaps that will slow productivity. Be sure to make this a positive experience—it shouldn’t feel like finals week.

To have the most productive employees, you must build a partnership. Your people must believe that you’ll treat them fairly and help them to grow to reach their true potential—and you must do exactly that.

People respond to this treatment by going the extra yard, working the extra hours, becoming, if they aren’t already, and real 10 percenters.

Offer plenty of feedback, waiting for the annual review is grossly unfair, as is giving feedback only when something is wrong. Honest and authentic feedback don’t mean abusive or destructive. Offering recognition of what the person does well and being candid about areas that need improvement are two hallmarks of a good review.

This holds true for all your people, candid feedback throughout the year means no surprises during the annual review.

Stay with the buddy system you established at acceptance, having access to someone who knows the ropes and culture is invaluable to those new to the company and the team.

Be sensitive to any actions or behaviors that are causing a problem, or have that potential and address them immediately. It’s far easier to “nip it in the bud” on a friendly, informal basis than to let it escalate into a major situation.

You’ve invested a lot of time and money in acquiring every one of your employees and building a world-class team, group, department, or company. It’s just plain stupid to ignore, even for one day, anything that will damage those efforts. Early intervention is key to avoiding human-based problems and that’s your real job as a manager.

Always remember that when it comes time for your own review you are who you hire and nothing you do as an individual will offset a low-productivity team or high turnover.

Image credit: djayo on sxc.hu

It’s great when VSI (vested self-interest) drives positive happenings anywhere, but when it happens in kid-focused media it’s definitely cause for cheering.

And so it has to the MTV—channel folks love to hate.

“After years of celebrating wealth, celebrity and the vapid excesses of youth, MTV is trying to gloss its escapist entertainment with a veneer of positive social messages.”

According to Stephen Friedman, MTV’s general manager, for Gen X “the humor was more cynical, the idea of community seemed earnest and not cool. It’s the opposite now.”

I don’t care that it’s driven by the bottom line, it’s also a recognition that the youth market is changing. And if MTV thinks that the Millennials have a different attitude they probably do—hopefully one strong enough to outweigh its entitled mindset and need for constant praise.

Viacom, MTV’s corporate parent, even has a new deal with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to make shows more supportive of education, which is truly amazing.

Jumping to the older part of that generation, the current economic downturn is taking many newly minted MBAs in new directions.

Historically, graduates from the top business schools headed for Wall Street. Now it seems that many didn’t really want that path.

“There was a real herd mentality to get into investment banking, noting that prestige, peer pressure and parents often channeled students to Wall Street. But because of the crisis, “there was suddenly permission to pursue something you were interested in that your parents three years ago would have said absolutely no to.” –Jessica Levy, Wharton senior.

“Some students now acknowledge that they were pursuing investment banking jobs largely to placate parents who, having invested nearly $200,000 in their children’s educations, were eager for them to earn top dollar — and some prestige too.”

I find it interesting that the supposed cream of the talent pool, highly (and expensively) educated, our future leaders with supposedly outstanding independent/critical thinking skills succumbed not out of personal desire, but from outside pressures. Nope, they didn’t really want to work on Wall Street with its gargantuan salaries and over-the-top, masters of the universe mentality. Who woulda thunk it.

All sarcasm aside, I do hope that this is a bit more of the silver lining the banking meltdown. It’s not that Wall Street is always bad, but that there are many ways and places to contribute.

“It’s always been about the brass ring and it’s always been about the brand recognition, and for a lot of students that meant jobs at Goldman Sachs,” Emanuel Sturman, director of career services at Dartmouth College. “It’s premature to say the bloom is off the rose totally, but I think students are starting to look at a wider array of brass rings.”

And who knows, maybe working in other industries will enable them to contribute to the common good in ways more meaningful than just writing a check.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: Idea-Listic on flickr

Guy Kawasaki said, “Don’t assume you’re done [after you’ve hired someone].”

No kidding. After 30 years it still never ceases to amaze me that managers bust their butts spending time and money finding the right person, craft the offer, close the candidate and then go merrily on their way assuming that the person will show up at the appointed time—even if that time is two or more weeks in the future.

A lot can happen in two weeks.

When they do show up these managers do little-to-nothing to integrate them into the team, culture or work—other than to assign projects with a sink-or-swim attitude.

These managers complain when new hires don’t ‘hit the ground running fast enough’ and are totally perplexed when they either burn up or burn out and leave.

What motivates mangers to act like this? Sometimes ignorance, but mostly just not thinking.

Remember that

• People aren’t water faucets. They don’t turn off emotions and feelings in the morning when they leave for work. They’re present in all their chaotic, sloppy splendor—but rarely admitted or discussed. Many of these emotions and insecurities will surface during traumatic times. According to the shrinks, changing jobs, even voluntarily getting out of a terrible situation, is one of the three greatest traumas that people face. (The other two are relocation and divorce, because unlike death people can play the ‘what if’ game forever.)
• Resigning isn’t easy; it’s not comfortable and people don’t like doing it. And the longer they’ve worked for the manager/company the harder it is, especially when nothing is really wrong.
• Even in this economy, counteroffers still happen although they’re counterproductive. They hurt the company, the group and the individual. The ones that work are the exception to the rule—probably less than 5%. As far back as 1983, the WSJ National Employment Weekly was printing articles warning about the dangers of accepting counteroffers; nothing’s changed; if anything it’s gotten more so.

Once your candidate has accepted, take an assumptive approach when talking about anything in the future. Use phrases such as: When you’re here, After you start, etc.

Then lock in your hire with these seven simple acts (simple once you think of them).

1. Call her after her resignation to make sure things went smoothly.
2. Assign a buddy from the team who can supply help and information on a proactive basis.
3. Give her information to read to familiarize herself with your market, company and its products.
4. Discuss the first project and give her information to take home.
5. Besides you and her buddy, have various members of the interviewing team call her occasionally to tell her how much they’re looking forward to working with her.
6. Solicit her opinion; ask for her suggestions.
7. Don’t overwhelm her, but make her feel that she’s already a valued member of the team.

Be sure to come back tomorrow and learn what to do after they start work.

Image credit: acerin on sxc.hu

One way out…

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: Martin Bravenboer on flickr

When would you evacuate?

Image credit: dierken on flickr

Many economic pundits are predicting the end of this economic meltdown (see previous post). Chalk those predictions up to the optimism of springtime and the need to fill a news cycle.

While rates of decline for various economic indicators may be decreasing, the excesses that created this meltdown will take years to work through. The ham-handed responses by government and many businesses will only delay the eventual recovery. This is only a break in the winter weather.

But even as the economic meltdown is only now approaching its nadir, a few new businesses may find this to be a fertile time to set up shop.

Consider the single greatest expense and challenge of most new businesses – finding and attracting talented workers, trained and immediately available for interesting work.

Currently the US economy provides 155 million jobs. This meltdown has reduced employment through five distinct mechanisms shown in the table below:

Given that the measured statistics are usually undercounts and that these unemployment/underemployment numbers will grow in the next 12 months, likely over 32 million workers (over 20%) in the US will have talents and time available to participate in another business.

For many companies, payroll costs represent over 65% of total expenses. For new ventures, personnel costs can be much larger, up to 90% of expenses. In this environment, many workers are searching for work.

New ventures traditionally offer below-market compensation for their workers. However, they offer other significant benefits.

Typically, new ventures offer broader scope in each job, better growth opportunities, ability to make large, direct, measurable contributions to the organization, and the enthusiasm of working in a small, close-knit team. Some new ventures offer profit participation or stock options. For unemployed or underemployed workers, these benefits can be significant, even when the cash compensation is low.

Technology and the recession have dramatically reduced other business operating costs. The cost of computers, phone systems, and tele-conferencing have dropped. Office space is cheaper, and home-based employees can cut that cost even further. Travel, where necessary, is cheaper than any time in the past ten years.

Even without easy availability of capital for start-ups, this recession may offer fertile ground for new ventures and with the added benefit of retaining far more of the equity.

Few companies would consider doing a major project using individual contributors instead of teams.

Hiring is a major project, one that has substantial long-term impact on the group, department, and company.

So, why are teams used in every part of business today—except staffing? Why is it assumed that the various parts of staffing are a function only of managers and HR?

Sadly, some managers are not comfortable involving their people. The reasons range from control issues (involvement in staffing is very empowering) to fear (the manager feels insecure) to disinterest (staffing has a low priority).

But in today’s fast-paced work environment, it’s hard for managers to block out several consecutive minutes, let alone the hours, needed to read resumes, let alone source any candidates, screen, etc.

Speaking as an ex-headhunter, I’m here to say that the mechanics of recruiting aren’t rocket science; they may not be intuitive, but anybody can learn them, especially in these days of LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter.

More importantly, when it comes to recruiting, there is no manager, no HR person, certainly no headhunter who is as impressive to an outsider as employees excited about their company.

Candidates really respond positively to being recruited by a peer! A peer who likes her company so much she is willing to put time into the staffing process? A manager to whom hiring is not about control but rather about empowerment? Who sees hiring as a chance to shine, not a necessary evil? Who not only understands the desire to make a difference but actually gives people extra opportunities to do so?

Wow! That’s the kind of manager most good candidates want to work for! Nobody can sell the company or the group or the project or the manager with the same intensity and passion as the company’s own people!

More bodies ease the work load, as well as supplying creative ideas and fresh energy to the staffing effort. Further, teams

• empower and give people a feeling of ownership;
• engage people in the present and future of their group and the company;
• teach critical managerial skills;
• spreads the workload; and
• helps minimize new employee friction.

With the exception of technical interviewing anybody in your company can be on the team, whether they are from that department or not. Sure, it takes a well written job req, but almost everybody in your company knows as much technically as most headhunters—and they certainly know more about the company. Best of all, they really care!

None of what I’ve written hinges on the economy; the time to teach people new skills is not, not when you have multiple openings and are under pressure to fill them.

Think of it as an investment—one with an amazing ROI.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: ZedBee|Zoë Power on flickr