When you evaluate a task or project to you see the whole or the hole?

Most people are adept at seeing the hole, i.e., what needs to be added in order to succeed. What’s missing can include scope, skills, resources, etc.

Unlike donuts, holes don’t enhance your projects. Being sure the hole is filled is important, but it’s also difficult to fill it if you don’t also see the whole.

The whole is the overview of how that particular project fits into the larger picture. Understanding that helps you to identify and address the entire hole, so you don’t end up having to go back and fix the part of the hole you missed or, worse, move on leaving an unnoticeable hole that turns into a sinkhole down the road.

Seeing the whole means taking time to understand not just your own position/area, but the functions of those around you and how they all interact, your company’s competitors and trends in your market.

More work? Yes.

A pain in the wazoo? Yes.

The benefits to you, your team and your company? Priceless.

Stock.xchang image credit: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/758343

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Leadership has become a catchword, a panacea, a supposed solution to whatever ails us as a nation and a world. It is what people get degrees in, strive to be and worry that they are failures if they aren’t recognizes as leaders.

There is a fantasy that positive leadership is an integral trait of positional leaders no matter how many times that has proved to be a false assumption.

Another assumption about positional leaders is their ability to see the big picture; also proven to be untrue. Here are two excellent examples of narrow, short-term thinking—one stupidity that just happened in a small biz and the other from a corporate titan 56 years ago.

The former is another stupidity from Subway, the company best know for $5 foot longs and a bullet-ridden foot. The most recent foot shot happened in Dartmouth, NS when a worker was fired for giving her own lunch to two fellow apartment dwellers after a fire left them homeless (she also offered them lodging in her own apartment which wasn’t damaged in the fire); Quiznos, being more publicity-wise, hired her.

The older stupidity was perpetrated by the original Bell Labs, one of the most prolific research organizations that ever existed, and is a story that has been repeated in one way or another by companies large and small ever since.

Executives recognized that many of those moving up the management ladder lacked the broad thinking skills that would enable them to function as leaders in the future, so they set out to provide an intense program to remedy the situation. The remedy succeeded beyond their expectations in that the attendees learned to thing for themselves and those thoughts didn’t dovetail with the slavish corporate mentality the executives desired the program was shut down, … executives came out of the program more confident and more intellectually engaged, they were also less interested in putting the company’s bottom line ahead of their commitments to their families and communities. (I hope you take a moment to read this fascinating story.)

It should be noted that authoritarian leaders, whether of companies or countries, have always known that education and strong positive values are anathema to their continued power.

How do you define leadership?

Join me tomorrow for a look at this question.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hikingartist/4192572927/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

What do you do when you want to improve your management skills?

Many people take a class, get another degree, and attend leadership school, all with the hope of finding management Tao. They crave a methodology, a set of actions they can do that assures management success.

But as the old adage says, it ain’t gonna happen.

Or to quote Bob Sutton, “I’ve come to conclude that all the technique and behavior coaching in the world won’t make a boss great if that boss doesn’t also have a certain mindset.”

So when you face new and challenging situations go ahead and

• access expert information, but don’t stop there.
• Discuss it with friends/colleagues,
• think about both what you read and what they said and
• watch the magic happen when you synthesize the input, tweaking it so it fits your MAP and the situation.

It is this process that makes it an approach you truly own.

Try the process with Sutton’s 12 Things Good Bosses Believe at the link above.

Management skills evolve, both personally and on a wider front, as they are shared with other managers, who also use the process, adding and subtracting based on their situation, experience and MAP.

Stop trying to use the whole cloth from just one source as seems to be happening more often these days.

Yes, the demands on your time are greater than ever, but there  is a crazy idea floating around that most, if not all, solutions are available on the Net if one searches long enough and, worse, that a better-than-50% fit can be used as is.

While this beats the “do first, think later” school of management, it’s not something that will win praise from your bosses or kudos from your team.

The way to become a great manager is to think, mull, accept, reject, evolve and even change your MAP as you digest and apply the information around you.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hikingartist/4192571173/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Almost every day I read at least one article or blog post to the effect that people should consciously start the day by deciding to lead, whether at the office, at home or in one of their varied activities.

And every time I clench my teeth and mutter to myself about the idiocy of the attitude.

Of course, it’s just my opinion, but here is why I think that way.

First, it is the court of public opinion that designates a person a leader, not the individual’s announcement that she is one, and the designation comes whether the leadership is lauded or lampooned.

In fact, talk of leadership is technically future or past tense—what should be done and what was done as opposed to what is being done in real-time.

Second is context. I have always found that discussions ignoring context seem nonsensical to me.

For example, the multiplicity of articles in the early 2000s that compared a company’s stock price and growth at that time to it’s high before the crash.

Even worse is the comparison of CEOs’ skill during that recession to their predecessors, or their own performance, during the expansion of the nineties.

Moreover, leaders are a product of their culture; drop them into a non-synergistic culture and watch them fail—often spectacularly and often taking the company down with them—think Bob Nardelli’s move from GE to Home Depot.

While culture is a company’s internal context, what is usually referred to as context is the external world situation and both affect leadership outcome.

So I have a suggestion for all those who jump out of bed promising themselves that today they will lead with no consideration of context.

Instead, try jumping out of bed each morning with the promise that you will show initiative within whatever context you face.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ingorrr/449613774/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Columnist Donald J. Myers, a retired U.S. Marine Corps colonel, bemoans the lack of integrity so prevalent today, in and out of the military.

The military goes to extreme lengths to develop integrity because, unlike the civilian world, a lack of integrity in the military costs lives — not just money.

I would argue that the excessive lack of integrity in the corporate world has also cost lives; the thousands whose lives were destroyed by Enron and the recent banking debacle, among others, cost lives and, although most are still walking, they are definitely wounded, some mortally.

The last couple of years media has been trumpeting the importance of leadership integrity and various surveys of global executives confirmed its importance.

But that was then and this is now.

Fast Company cites a new study by IBM—

For CEOs, creativity is now the most important leadership quality for success in business, outweighing even integrity and global thinking… The study is the largest known sample of one-on-one CEO interviews, with over 1,500 corporate heads and public sector leaders across 60 nations and 33 industries polled on what drives them in managing their companies in today’s world.

Here’s how the numbers broke down—

About 60% of CEOs polled cited creativity as the most important leadership quality, compared with 52% for integrity and 35% for global thinking.

(Yes, I realize that totals 147%, but it’s IBM…)

I have no argument with creativity, after all creativity gave us Avatar, iPods and Viagra, but it also gave us CDMs and CDOs.

This points up how important it is for leaders to practice integrity as they embrace creativity.

Image credit: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/963443

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Do you use stories automatically in discussions and conversations? I do and have for years.

Brain research has proven that stories get your point across better and it is remembered longer.

Many cognitive scientists believe stories are so accessible because they’re the way we make sense of the human world. … Stories grab our attention because there is nothing of more interest to us than the actions of other people.

While people are often the bane of managers, their growth, triumphs and ah-ha! moments, small and large, provide much of the joy found in performing a management role well and stories are one way to increase the joy.

Stories increase the joy because they boost management success; simple enough.

How do you know which story to tell?

By taking the time to know your audience and choosing a story that will resonate with them—even if you have to take a little creative license.

For example, if your audience is comprised of mostly twenty-somethings and the main character in your story is sixty-something they may focus on the age and dismiss the important part. So update the story with slight changes that makes it feel more relevant.

Of course, if their eyes glaze over during the telling you can be pretty sure you chose the wrong story. Rather than continue to the bitter end, break it off and come back to the subject from a different point and at a different time.

How do you know if the story worked?

The same way you know if any of your efforts work—watch the results.

Flickr photo credit to: Svadilfari on flickr

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Do you run a small or medium business (SMB)? If so, do you have a senior staff?

“Senior staff” doesn’t necessarily mean a bunch of vice presidents (for convenience I’m using that title), but it does mean the top people in your company who manage different functions (with or without staff). They are the people you rely on

• as a sounding board;
• for both tactical and strategic intelligence;
• to tell it like it is—even when you don’t want to hear it
• to see and understand the big picture;
• to lead the effort in employee acquisition, motivation, and retention;
• to support and strengthen the culture she envisioned;
• to not sabotage another group or start a turf war, and
• to help stamp out politics whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head.

And more, but you get the idea.

How to build your senior staff

The first item on your agenda is to determine what parts of your business/company beyond the standard finance, development, marketing, sales should report directly to you for peak performance. You don’t want a function that is absolutely critical to your success reporting through or responsible to someone else (agendas do get in the way).

It may be customer service (or whatever it’s called); it could be IT; if you are large enough to have someone handling HR it should definitely report directly to you.

Support functions, such as HR, are often left to report to someone else, which can prevent you from knowing what is really going on.

Where does one find talented VPs? Now and then you’ll be lucky enough to actually hire someone complete with all the bells and whistles that you want, but it’s more likely that you will find someone with the right potential.

Be aware that the main thing that separates good senior staff apart from other managers is a strong strategic ability, which means they see the entire team and understand how their department or area fits into the whole.

I’ve known many C-level executives who never grasp this, as well as director level and lower managers who get it.

All your staff needs a real understanding of business, including financials, and it’s your responsibility to make sure that they get whatever training and information is needed to do their job as a member of your senior staff.

Further, if you want the most powerful senior staff possible cross train them in each other’s functions and challenges.

Think of the phenomenal value of a finance person who understands the intricacies of manufacturing as more than a set of numbers; a head of product development who understands financials, customer service and inventory turns; an HR head who understands what actually happens in the different departments, etc.

Think of the power inherent in a senior staff that understands what it takes to turn an idea into a product and a product into revenue.

Think of what a difference it will make to your ability to do your own job, not to mention the overall success of your company.

Flickr photo credit to: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/909053

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday I quoted Colin Powell on this subject and it reminded me of this article. I don’t remember where it was originally used, but it dates back to the dot-bomb recession.

It’s “And” Not “Because”

Last week I attended a quasi-social business function and found myself in conversation with a very knowledgeable and polished executive. When I asked him what he did he said, “I’m not working, I’m looking for my next opportunity.” His answer floored me and I asked again. His initial reaction was to repeat himself, assuming that I hadn’t heard him (it was noisy), but my continued look of inquiry finally brought a second answer, “I’m a CFO.”

It’s sad enough that people choose to define themselves based upon how they earn a living, and very bad when, as in the conversation mentioned above, employment becomes the career validation without which the career ceases to exist. However it’s much worse when people take another step and subconsciously merge their identity with that of their company—I call it ego-merge.

I coined the term in the eighties to describe a state of mind that is not only unhealthy for individuals, but also damaging to the companies for which they work.

Ego-merge is the result of melding “me” and “my company” in the mind of the employee, whether worker or manager. It’s most obvious in tough times and most noticeable in conversation when people use “because” instead of “and,” thereby crediting the company or manager for their skills: “I’m great because my company/manager is great.” instead of, “I’m great and my company/manager is great.”

At first glance ego-merge might actually seem to be a positive for companies, but it’s not. When employees’ egos merge with their company’s, they often blame themselves for the company’s problems even when they have little power and may not have any line responsibility. Worse, it can be a major productivity sapper when times are tough—employees with ego-merge have a difficult time believing that they are good enough to help turn the company around, since in their minds their skills are good because of the company.

Ego-merge is often the by-product of the best companies/managers, where people are very involved, have high esprit de corps, and are passionate about their mission and success. It also happens with more Machiavellian managers who try and foster this attitude within their organization as a retention tool. Ego-merge does, in fact, encourage people to stay, but it also cripples them and reduces their long term value to the company.

It’s every company’s/manager’s responsibility to help their people grow and become stronger, not to subtly cripple them in the hopes that they won’t leave. Better, it’s in both the manager’s and the company’s best interest to become people-builders.

Why? Because reputation, both the manager’s and the company’s, is everything when hiring, and being known for your great G&S (grow and strengthen) policies will help you attract, develop and keep the best and brightest. Sure, you’ll lose them now and then when they’re ready for the next challenge and you can’t provide it, but the benefits resulting from their ultra-high productivity and creativeness during the time they’re with you will far outweigh the loss when they do leave.

How? Through some simple actions. G&S isn’t rocket science, nor does it have to be costly.

1. Treat everyone on your team and in your company with the same level of respect you want.
2. Listen to your people. Encourage and assist them as much as possible in developing the skills they need to take their next step—even when it makes your life a bit more difficult.
3. Always remind them that for all their successes, challenges, and failures it’s “and” not “because.”

But what if you’re a manager pushing G&S down while your own manager is either blind to it or the type who sees ego-merge as a plus? What can you do as just a worker with no control or leverage?

Awareness is the best protection against ego-merge. Recognize that it exists, understand what it is, know its symptoms and whether you’re prone to it, then monitor yourself, always remembering that the opposite of ego-merge is not arrogance.

1. Post a watch for the first symptom of ego-merge: when your glow of accomplishment for an exemplary project you did is quickly quenched by negative internal news or media coverage. The greater the offset the greater the ego-merge.
2. Listen to yourself. When describing a project (successful or not) or coup (large or small), listen to how you describe it and where and how you attribute its success or failure. Adjust accordingly.
3. Offset and reduce ego-merge in others by publicly giving full credit to those around you at all levels up and down for their contributions.

Flickr photo credit to: Svadilfari on flickr

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

“We simply assume that the way we see things is the way they really are or the way they should be. And our attitudes and behaviors grow out of these assumptions.” –Stephen Covey

Think about it.

You assume people will do the right thing when faced with choices.

You assume the visions presented by your leaders are honest, true and in your best interest.

You assume your religious leaders practice what they preach.

You further assume that they will protect you and yours when their own go off the rails.

You assume your spouse/partner/friend will like the movie/book/people that you like.

You assume your team will tackle work/projects in the same way you do.

But for any of these assumptions to be true, all the people involved would have to have exactly the same MAP and experience that you have—which is impossible.

And that is what you want to remember the next time you find yourself assuming.

Flickr photo credit to: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sjhughes/266394830/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content

Are you familiar with the old sayings, “don’t trouble trouble unless trouble troubles you” or “don’t go looking for trouble?”

More and more often I hear from and about managers at all levels who seem to be making this attitude central to their management approach.

Not just managers, but workers, too, have absorbed the message into their MAP.

They tell me that they are so overloaded, so busy, with so many fires to fight, that they can only deal with what is actually happening.

They claim there is no time for preventatives; no time to “nip [whatever] in the bud.”

I tell them that if they made time to stamp out the sparks now they wouldn’t be fighting so many fires next week/month/year.

What about you?

Are you a firefighter or Smokey the Bear?

Flickr photo credit to: http://www.flickr.com/photos/billmcdavid/3840647521/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Sphere: Related Content