When I started RampUp Solutions way back in 1999 and talked/preached/ranted) about the importance of culture I was often met with a bored expression or an eye roll.

Back then culture was an ethereal concept compounded of smoke and mirrors and propagated by consultants whose main purpose was to generate business.

That attitude has radically changed over the last decade…

“…Our final advantage is the hard-to-duplicate culture that permeates Berkshire. And in businesses, culture counts.” —Warren Buffett

“Culture has become the defining issue that will distinguish the most successful businesses from the rest of the pack.” —Ginny Rometty, SVP, Group Executive, Sales, Marketing, and Strategy, IBM

“…he [Jeffrey Katzenberg, the CEO, DreamWorks Animation] didn’t always know how important it is to make employees happy in their jobs. … Had Katzenberg known earlier how critical it is to build a best company to work for, he told me, he might have been more successful than he is.”

Tony Hsieh, Jeff Immelt, numerous academics, assorted pundits, gurus and coaches, not to mention all forms of media, are focused on culture.

With all the talk and solid examples of the bottom line value of good culture why do so many companies, large and small, provide an employee experience that can only be described as ‘lousy’?

Because companies don’t provide culture, managers do.

Managers, from CEO to team leader, create/enable whatever culture exists below them.

But they have little-to-no effect on the shape of the culture above them, unless that culture permits the influence, as illustrated by the creation of Best Buy’s ROWE.

It’s not that managers don’t get it, but understanding something and doing it is not the same thing.

Understanding is grounded in intellect.

Doing is grounded in MAP.

And MAP is a personal choice over which companies have no control.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Most people are familiar with the Golden Rule—do unto others as you would have them do unto you—but there should be a corollary—do unto to yourself as you do unto others.

It’s called self-compassion, as opposed to self-indulgent.

People who find it easy to be supportive and understanding to others, it turns out, often score surprisingly low on self-compassion tests, berating themselves for perceived failures… People who score high on tests of self-compassion have less depression and anxiety, and tend to be happier and more optimistic.

Compassion: a feeling of deep sympathy

Indulgent: benignly lenient or permissive

It seems that some people don’t apply compassion to themselves in fear of it morphing into indulgence.

Does this describe you or someone you know?

If yes, what can you do?

My own observations tell me that self-indulgent people rarely show compassion, so the fear doesn’t make much sense.

I found the article especially interesting, because I’m often guilty of beating myself up and I could use more self-compassion. I do fine on the big things, but the small stuff not so much.

I believe that self-compassion is part of MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™), so what I needed to do was change mine and being me I wanted a simple and as easy as possible way to do it—and I think found it.

How? By thinking of myself in third person—not ‘me’, but ‘she’.

I had a great chance to try the approach out yesterday.

I was moving something, knocked over a favorite plant and more than half broke off.

My immediate reaction was to tear into myself, but I stopped and instead thought what I would say to a guest who did the same thing—which would have been along the lines of “not a big deal; don’t worry about it; it will grow back.”

So that is what I said to me.

And you know what?

It worked.

Now I just need to do it every time and make it a habit.

Why not give it a try? You’ll be surprised at the difference it makes.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sweetonveg/5179031393/

See all mY generation posts here.

(Classes start March 21 after hangovers are gone. –Ed.)

The world of William Somerset Maugham saw extraordinary changes between 1874 and 1965. Perhaps that’s why the first quote is applicable to technology he could never have imagined, while people, of course, haven’t really changed.

If Maugham were alive today would he tweet, blog or text? If so, I’m sure he would follow his own advice, “It is unsafe to take your reader for more of a fool than he is.”

He also offers up the best take on politics and religion that I’ve heard, “The most useful thing about a principle is that it can always be sacrificed to expediency.”

Maugham’s people insights are also as viable today as they were when he said them.

His belief that “people ask for criticism, but they only want praise” resonates these days as it never has before, but it’s his advice on the subject that is worth absorbing, “It is salutary to train oneself to be no more affected by censure than by praise.”

Managers who hire with the target of being the dumbest person in the room know the truth of this thought, “Only a mediocre person is always at his best.”

Hiring to be the smartest means hiring weak and opens you to a common problem that Maugham describes pithily, “Like all weak men he laid an exaggerated stress on not changing one’s mind.”

That mindset has prevailed since time immemorial proving the truth of Maugham’s opinion, “Men have an extraordinarily erroneous opinion of their position in nature; and the error is ineradicable.”

You can avoid joining this majority by learning a simple truth earlier than Maugham did, “It wasn’t until late in life that I discovered how easy it is to say “I don’t know.””

The other benefit to learning to say “I don’t know” is found in this final quote, “You can do anything in this world if you are prepared to take the consequences.”

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

I have an eclectic selection for you today, with no unifying theme, but I have faith that you are all savvy enough to deal with it.

First is a different twist on a familiar subject. The idea that failure can be a good thing isn’t new, but Professor Baba Shiv, professor of marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business, has a new twist that is valuable to companies and individuals alike. He identified two mindsets, one fearful of making mistakes and the other fearful of losing out on opportunities, and describes how to shift from the first to the second.

A fascinating article in The Atlantic looks at new research on the concerns of the really, really rich. Seems as if the worry about the same things as most of us—“their sense of isolation, their worries about work and love, and most of all, their fears for their children”—relatively speaking, of course.

Normally, no one wants to see anybody made obsolete by a computer, but does ‘normally’ include lawyers? Because that is what’s happening, at least when it comes to stuff like discovery.

Finally, I’ll leave you with some addictive fun. You probably saw or read about Watson, IBM’s most advanced artificial intelligence computer that won Jeopardy. Now, thanks to the New York Times, you have the chance to challenge a computer. One caveat, it’s addictive.

Enjoy!

Image credit:  MykReeve on flickr

How often do you encounter ID ten T errors?

Do you think ID ten T errors are technology or human based?

How accurate is your identification of ID ten T errors?

How often is your analysis influenced by your own preexisting ideas or MAP?

How do you deal with ID ten T errors?

Do you ever produce ID ten T errors? (I do.)

How do you deal with your own ID ten T errors?

Image credit: Street Sign Generator.com

Media has long focused on youth in all its myriad forms.

Another leading focus is that small segment of any group that acts out, whether positively, think entrepreneurs, or negatively, think criminals.

Media melded these two consuming subjects together in its stories on young entrepreneurs.

If you didn’t know better you might end up believing that most startups were hatched by a kid working out of her dorm room or a guy in his parents’ basement when the reality is that the great majority of entrepreneurs have that touch of gray.

Research by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) shows that entrepreneurs over the age of 35 accounted for 80 percent of “total entrepreneurial activity” in 2009…

80-20. That’s a whopping difference.

Not counting recession-driven entrepreneurialism here is an over-simplified answer to the complex question of why. Obviously both statements are generalizations—there are plenty of people in both groups that don’t fit the mold.

Young people are a tightly conforming group, tending to go where the majority goes and do as they do, wanting to “fit in” and needing approval.

That seems to change after a decade or more in the trenches, with a wealth experience, a greater understanding of themselves as individuals and less need of external approval.

“I think I’ve grown more fearless as I’ve gotten older. I just feel like, what is there to lose? Do you know what I mean? You take a chance—the world still turns. Taking chances and doing things that scare you only make you stronger.” — Alan Cumming

Cumming’s words really resonate in the entrepreneurial world.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/geoliv/4644708452/

Image credit: WikiMedia Commons

I received an interesting email today.

Hi Miki, I’m a candidate for a senior position at [company]. I fully believe my success is dependent on a good cultural fit and that means, among other things, bosses I respect and who respect me, good communications, etc.

Everything was going fine until I googled the CEO and there was a link to her Facebook page. It showed a picture of her in a bikini with her arms around a couple of attractive young guys. Although I won’t be reporting to her I am concerned about the culture that she presides over and her leadership ability.

I’d appreciate knowing what you think.

“Jim”

What made it even more interesting is that the writer is a guy.

The email included a link to the Facebook page and the lady’s pose with the very young guys came over as extremely friendly.

There was a time when situations like this were classed as private, unless you were a movie star, but those days are in the distant past.

Young people are constantly warned about posting inappropriate images and content that recruiters might see, but it is assumed that adults know better.

So what’s going on?

At the least, this CEO showed extremely poor judgment publishing the image, especially on a public page. Further, age doesn’t excuse her because she is definitely old enough to be classed as an adult.

The bottom line in this instance was that Jim decided to pass on the opportunity. He felt the same discomfort and concern that many managers voice when they find comparable pictures of candidates online.

Jim didn’t care what the CEO did on her own time, but he recognized that he didn’t respect her and felt he couldn’t trust her.

What would you do?

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

There has been much written about implementing change in an organization. I’ve written several articles on change focusing on the need to change yourself before you can expect those around you to change and I stand by those. (Two of them are here and here.)

And as you know I often link to articles and offer my take on them. The trouble with that is that many of my time-pressed readers read what I wrote and promise themselves that they will read the link later, but never do. They either forget or the reminder gets buried under a never-ending avalanche of new stuff to read.

I think today’s link is important, so I’m not going to comment or offer a few quotes.

Since this post is only 188 words, you’ll have time to click and read That’s the Way We (Used to) Do Things Around Here: With a little knowledge of neuroscience, reframing behavior can be the essence of organizational change.

You also might want to consider signing up for strategy+business; you may not always agree with them, I don’t, but I believe you will find them useful.

stock.xchng image credit: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/880737