Failure isn’t really failure unless nothing is learned.

Learning from it means that you need to look at it differently.

Few individuals or companies enjoy dwelling on what they consider failures; most pick themselves up and move forward; the strongest dissect what went wrong.

They take the time to decompose the thoughts and actions that didn’t work and document them in a ‘lessons learned’ report.

Good so far.

But what happens to the report? Is it neatly filed with the project information or under another heading?

Investing effort in lessons learned reports only to file them makes it more likely that the errors will be repeated again in the future.

And that is frequently the case.

Instead, if the goal is to learn, then learn to LAUD IT.

Look at what went wrong, not what worked;

Analyze what was done;

Understand why it was done;

Determine how to fix/improve both thoughts and actions.

IT refers to using technology to share the information, making it easily available to everyone and searchable.

Try it. LAUD IT.

Image credit: Biology Big Brother on flickr

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

Years ago when I was a headhunter I recruited “John,” an inarticulate hardware engineer who wore his hair like Willie Nelson, had a beard streaked with gray, no-fashion clothes and was a bit vague about the world.

But John was brilliant and a genius in his work. He could look at a circuit design and know that it wouldn’t work, although he couldn’t always explain why.

The vp he worked for at the time ignored him, dismissed his opinion, built the circuits anyway and was shocked when they wouldn’t work.

All that changed when I stole him for a client whose focus was content, not looks or delivery.

“Jim” had no belief in intuition, but a deep belief in what he called ‘unconscious pattern recognition’, which, he said, was why John knew a bad design when he saw it.

John told me years later that Jim was the only person in his whole career who seemed to appreciate and value his skills.

According to Jim, in many ways John was a pain to manage, but his value to the product development effort more than off-set the irritation factor. He said that if managing people was easy managers wouldn’t be paid a premium.

And that brings us to the point I want to make.

I’m really tired of hearing managers constantly complaining about

• needing to hire ’self-starters’ so they can focus on building their leadership skills;
• the amount of time they spend settling team member disputes;
• how childish their people can be; and
• how the time spent hiring take them away from their ‘real’ work.

If you choose to become a manager you need to understand that

• no matter your level your people will always take precedence over everything else, because without people there is no company;
• people do become childish when thwarted or upset and that one reason that you make more money is that it costs more to hire a trained, adult baby-sitter than a teenager;
• few stars are born, rather they are the result of how they are managed; and
• if you don’t like the above three points you shouldn’t be a manager.

Management isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, so how do you know if you are/will be good at it?

Look in the mirror and answer this question:

Would you be happy and engaged if you reported to yourself?

Image credit: arte ram on sxc.hu

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

Yes, it’s another post about my favorite company. Why do I write so much about Zappos?

Because, according to CEO Tony Hsieh, “Our No. 1 priority is the company culture. Our whole belief is that if we get the culture right, then everything else, including the customer service, will fall into place.”

Zappos embodies everything I believe about culture being the bedrock of corporate success.

Whereas all I can do is talk/write about it, Zappos puts its money where my mouth is and proves it works by becoming a billion dollar business over the decade of its existence.

Not bad for a dot com startup that was given exactly one week’s worth of additional funds in which to turn itself around or be shut down.

But heaping more kudos on CEO Tony Hsieh isn’t the purpose of this post. Rather, I’d like your opinion of why cultures such as this are so rare.

Hsieh is a Gen Xer running a truly multi-generational company (I confirmed this by calling and chatting with a  customre support person, not HR or an official source, just a worker) that hires based on cultural fit and skills—they carry equal weight.

The focus on culture is one reason that Zappos doesn’t have the generational management problems besetting so many companies.

The Zappos culture is a long way from rocket science and Hsieh isn’t shy about explaining how to duplicate it, so you tell me.

Why don’t more companies do it?

Image credit: Robert Scoble on flickr

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

A few weeks ago Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said “The danger of that for the country is that there won’t automatically be an ability to restrain the excess that is typically associated with big majorities and single-party rule.”

OK, typical political rhetoric, but that isn’t what caught my eye.

What I found so amusing was the line about the dangers of “single party-rule.”

Amusing because when the Republicans owned the majorities in both the House and the Senate and there was a Republican President single-party rule was fine.

But it brings up an important point and one that can have a major effect on your company or team.

The point is consistency.

If, in fact, holding both the Presidency and Congressional majorities is de facto single-party rule then it doesn’t matter which party holds it, it’s still dangerous.

In business terms that means that if you condemn something your competition does or the way it acts and then do or act the same way you’re being inconsistent.

Likewise, if you laude something and don’t either follow suit or escalate it you’re being inconsistent.

People hate inconsistency, whether they’re your customers or employees.

And don’t kid yourself that they won’t notice, they will—people aren’t stupid.

You don’t have the advantage of ideology working for you in a business setting. Ideology works in politics, most people won’t notice the inconsistency in McConnell’s words, but even rabid Apple fans are quick to call Apple on anything that they think is inconsistent with the brand or the culture.

So think about your consistency and monitor your words and actions—better yet, build consistency into your MAP.

Image credit: Les Bessant on flickr

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

A company culture to lust after created in an industry not known for powerful cultures by a guy who never let go of his values from the sixties.

Meet George Zimmer founder, Chairman and CEO of Men’s Warehouse, a nearly $2 billion retailer with 17,000 employees and no intention of slowing down, who believes that that success is a function of his company’s culture.

“Customer loyalty is harder to measure. As we are in this recession, one way to measure this is that I believe when the recession ends, Men’s Wearhouse will have a higher market share than when the recession began. That will be because of our corporate culture, which will be the glue that holds the customer and the employee and the organization, the shareholder, holds it all together.”

Zimmer has infused the culture with trust and authenticity based on 3 principles

1. Listen carefully and wait at least one second after the other person’s last syllable before responding.
2. Elevate the other person’s respect – by focusing on the positive before something that needs to improve.
3. Always ask the subordinate how a problem might be solved.

The willingness to listen proved its value when a lower-level employee presented Zimmer with the idea that the company rent formal wear, now a significant revenue producer.

Beyond these three principles, the culture provides an environment in which employees aren’t afraid to mention problems or own up to a mistake and Zimmer constantly reinforces his desire for feedback and responds to each email.

“I tell people I like primary information, as opposed to information sifted by various levels of management, but I only get five a day on average.” (Many employees have little confidence in their writing skills.)

You hear a lot about trust and authenticity these days, but I’m willing to bet that George Zimmer didn’t think in those terms 30 years ago when he founded Men’s Wearhouse; no matter the words, he built something that followed his own moral compass.

“I consider anything to do with employees or the stores to be my priority. That’s one of the other things, I guess, when it comes back to trust and authenticity. That is my priority. I don’t say that, I don’t pay lip service to that. That is how I run this business and how I live my life. So, I think the people that work in our stores, know that.”

That’s what founders do.

Sadly, when their compass changes so does the culture—think Angelo Mozilo.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Be sure to check out the great links at the June 7th, 2009 edition of the Leadership Development Carnival, including lots of great management expertise—in case you think that ‘leader’ doesn’t apply to you.

(I’ve finally gotten my act together to participate, which means I’ll know when they’re happening and that means I’ll have the link to share with you:)

Image credit: Men’s Wearhouse

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, in Barrett’s Briefing, Pat Lynch, Ph.D., CEO of Business Alignment Strategies, said “employees’ perceptions of how their employer treats them on a daily basis” and Richard reminded us that how a remark is interpreted depends heavily upon the context you bring to it.

In other words, everything you hear, see or do is filtered through your MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™) and you’ll act on it according to your perceptions, whether they reflect the actual intent or not.

And we all know that what one person says and the other guy hears may have nothing to do with each other.

In a new article from the strategy practice at McKinsey discusses the need to change the public’s perception of business.

“Senior executives are acutely aware of how serious today’s reputational challenge is. Most recognize the perception that some companies in certain sectors (particularly financial services) have violated their social contract with consumers, shareholders, regulators, and taxpayers. They also know that this perception seems to have spilled over to business more broadly.”

But don’t hold your breath. In spite of all the talk executive pay is still going up, so, no matter how much spin, perceptions aren’t likely to change any time soon.

I’ve written in the past about the fragility of a company’s street rep, especially in the brave new internet world of instant, global, anonymous communication.

Perceptions are a constantly moving target that are distorted by a variety of circumstances—from as minor as feeling out of sorts to the global economic meltdown; as a result the communications that were understood today may not work tomorrow.

Whether company or individual you need to actively manage perceptions.

Experts constantly bandy such words as ‘authentic’, ‘honest’, ’sincere’ and similar terms in talking about how to change perceptions, when, in fact, there are only two things working together that actually accomplish perceptional change.

Those two things are actions and time.

If over time actions don’t back up whatever is said, then perceptions won’t change.

This is especially true regarding employee perceptions of company culture.

If a CEO wants to institute a cultural change then every manager at every level needs to support that cultural change or employee perceptions won’t change—but don’t expect it to happen overnight.

The greater the change the greater the cynicism as to how real and how sustainable it actually is, so don’t expect instant buy-in.

Communicate what you’re going to do and then do it consistently over and over forever—and watch perceptions change.

Image credit: Image Editor on flickr

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

“Is there a single devastating thing I may do unconsciously that messes my people up the most and, if so, what are the effects?”

I’ve heard variations of this question from many managers over the years.

The answer is yes, there sure is and if you aren’t doing it unconsciously then you’re one of the really bad guys and I can only hope that your turnover soars and your reputation spreads.

The action is inconsistency and the primary effect is fear. Secondary effects include intimidation and insecurity.

The end results in the business world are distrust, low productivity, less innovation, abysmal retention and, on a more personal level, poor reviews, fewer promotions and less opportunity.

It doesn’t matter that the inconsistency is unintentional, arbitrary or whimsical the results are the same.

It’s not knowing that really gets to people—even more than expected abuse.

Think about it. It’s one thing to have someone who constantly criticizes (unconstructively) or disparages you, because you can learn how to turn a deaf ear if, for some reason, you can’t get out of earshot. But when a zinger comes out of nowhere in what’s normally constructive, or at least neutral, feedback you’re caught unaware, thrown off balance and it really gets to you.

Actually, the more infrequent it is the worse it is when it does happen. And after it happens a few times people find themselves waiting for it, wondering when it’ll happen again and almost holding their breath to see if this is the time the other shoe will drop.

That fear grows exponentially once it takes root and distrust typically increases at the same rate.

Can you think of a worse scenario for people to labor under?

But when it’s unconscious, how do you know?

If you actually focus on the person with whom you’re talking, instead of checking your Blackberry or thinking about something else, you’ll see the zinger hit and you should be able to identify what it was. If you can’t, then ask! Acknowledge the reaction, state that you know it was something you said, but you’re not sure what. Be gentle if you expect the person to open up, but you stand a better chance if you ask immediately, while he’s still in shock.

But if you did it on purpose to enjoy the show and then get them to open up so you can twist the knife, I sincerely hope that all your teeth and hair fall out and Zeus’ thunderbolt strikes you where you stand and chars you into tiny little bits.

Image credit: tdnb on sxc.hu

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

I live in the great Pacific Northwest—the great, wet Pacific Northwest.

Our spring is late and what we’ve had has dribbled in a couple of days here and a couple there. Starting Friday we finally had three whole days of spring and I had a yard that needed major help.

The result of 30+ hours of hard labor is a vast improvement in the yard and I am totally whacked. So I chose a post from last year; I hope you enjoy it.

Corporate Culture I/O

Corporate culture has begotten a thriving industry that researches, dissects, writes, discusses, preaches, teaches, and studies it—all with the goal of helping people understand its effects and learn how to improve it.

It’s considered a soft science, a moving target, amorphous and difficult to pin down.

But I’ve always believed that corporate culture has much in common with a computer.

Yes, a computer, with its unyielding hardware and logical, literal software.

You see, in computing, the term I/O refers to input, whatever is received by the system, and output, that which results from the processing.

Programmers know that if you enter incorrect or bad data the results coming out of the computer won’t have much value, hence the term “garbage in/garbage out.”

And there you have it—the similarity between computers, corporate culture and most everything else in life.

What comes out is a function of what you put in.

Blindly accepting everything offered—whether from the guru du jour or religious texts—is sure to result in garbage out at some point.

Improving corporate culture requires critical thinking on your part. No one person, past, present or future, has all the answers. You need to evaluate the available information, take a bit from here and a bit from there, apply it to your situation and, like a computer, process it.

The resulting culture will differ from what you start with, because you’ve added the flavor of your own life experiences, knowledge and MAP to the mix and that’s good—different people, different culture.

A viable corporate culture is a living organism, growing and changing all the time and you’re contributing to that growth.

Do you contribute to your company’s culture?

Image credit: vivekchugh on sxc.hu

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

These are dangerous times for companies. Not only is the economy in the pits, but some employees are ‘getting even’ when they’re laid off or terminated.

“The fired technology director for LifeGift Organ Donation Center pleaded guilty in Houston federal court on Thursday to illegally accessing her employer’s computer and deleting files including organ donation database records.

After being terminated, Danielle Duann, 51, repeatedly gained access to the LifeGift network and intentionally caused damage that cost the nonprofit Texas organ procurement group more than $94,000, officials said. A charity spokeswoman said the files were retrieved and no lives were put in jeopardy.”

This kind of action isn’t new; software ‘bombs’ and bugs have been planted with the threat of activation and disgruntled employees have held company information hostage as bargaining chips. But obviously, as damaging as these are, there’s no comparison to the employee who returns with a gun and starts shooting.

Sometimes the action is obvious, but when it’s more subtle, as in hostage information, managers often find themselves giving ex-employees the benefit of the doubt.

During a discussion with a group of CEOs recently KG Charles-Harris said, “But while I used to give people the benefit of the doubt about their awareness of their inherent prejudices, I have learned that they are most often aware of the consequences, but don’t care.  If one is aware of negative consequences of one’s behavior, but don’t care about the effects on others, it must be akin to maliciousness…”

Although I don’t disagree with KG, there are two prime points on which I wanted the group to focus.

No matter how brilliant an interviewer you are or what additional resources you utilize there’s no guarantee that at some point you won’t find yourself in this situation. People aren’t open books and more importantly they often act out from stresses and slights—whether real or imagined—so it’s not worth beating yourself up unless you consciously ignored red flags during the interview process or reference check. If you did, then let it be a lesson learned and move on.

Preventatives, not paranoia, are a much more productive focus.

For example, there are dozens of free technology resources on the Net that people use every day with no thought for the ramifications of control.

Companies need simple policies, not bureaucratic nightmares, when setting up document and information sharing resources, such as whiteboards, Google docs, wikis, etc., with the goal being having whatever it is always in the company’s control.

This is critical because life happens in the form of jury duty, emergencies, accidents, etc., not just the rare vindictive employee, and your company needs to keep going.

I’m no expert in this area, so look for a guest post on preventatives soon.

Image credit: flattop341 on flickr

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content

What do you think of when someone mentions corporate culture?

What does corporate culture mean to you?

Here are some of the things that I think of when the subject of culture is discussed.

Conducive

Uplifting

Lasting

Teamwork

Us

Responsible

Enlightening

What do you think of?

Image credit: arte_ram on sxc.hu

Your comments-priceless

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

Sphere: Related Content