Is your company fair? Is fairness part of your MAP? Are you fair to your people? How often have you heard (or said), “That’s not fair!”

People accept that life isn’t fair—more or less. Whereas you can’t walk away from life, but it’s relatively easy to walk away from a company or manager you perceive as unfair.

What do people expect within the business world in terms of fairness?

The obvious is that they don’t want to be shafted a la Enron. However, fairness refers to more than the obvious, most often to the company/manager doing what they said they would do, i.e., walking their talk.

Fairness is what people want and fairness is what most companies/managers promise—but frequently don’t provide. For example:

Fairness excludes politics

• Official – people will be promoted based on what they do
• De facto – people are promoted based on who they know

Fairness is egalitarian

• Official – everybody will fly economy class when traveling
• De facto – senior management flies first class

Fairness includes parity

• Official – similar skills are compensated similarly with any differences the result of merit
• De facto – compensation differences result from expediency, prejudice, or favoritism

Besides doing ‘the right thing’, why be fair? What’s in it for you?

Quite a lot, actually.

Fairness reduces turnover (and its associated costs), increases productivity, and fuels innovation, all of which makes you look good as a manager and gives your company a good street rep. Yes, companies have street reps, too, and those reputations have a major impact on the caliber of people applying; a rep that is positive for fairness makes it easier to higher great people.

All this means better reviews, increased compensation, a reputation that’s pure gold and a great night’s sleep.

What’s not to like? And all you have to do is do as you say you will.

Please join me Monday to learn why fairness is monkey business.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: RachelH on flickr

Last summer I coined a term to describe those who are chronologically, but not psychologically, Millennials; I called them aMillennials and there are more around then you might think.

Today I saw a great story about two aMillennials who showed their leadership by taking the initiative and convincing their university to provide comparable classes at a prison.

Four years ago, in fact, Wesleyan balked at a proposal to install such a program.

Two students, Russell Perkins and Molly Birnbaum, who had volunteered in prisons as students, revived the idea last year when they were seniors and figured out a way to finance it.

…a privately financed experiment in higher education that takes murderers and drug dealers and other inmates with histories of serious crime and gives them an opportunity to get an elite college education inside their high-security prison, the Cheshire Correctional Institution.

The professors involved say that the classes are just as tough as on campus.

These aren’t prisoners preparing for a return to society, in fact, some of them may never return. But that doesn’t mean they don’t want to learn—120 inmates applied 19 spots.

Skipping the debate as to whether this is a good program or not, the initiative shown is a large lesson for all those who spend their time reading and studying leadership instead of doing it.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: Rennett Stowe on flickr

Now take a look at modern business smarts

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: *Zephyrance – don’t wake me up. on flickr

Few things are constant, but management stupidity when it comes to retention is one of them.

Before Wall Street pulled the rug out of under the economy global demographics made the need to cherish workers at all levels obvious.

Estimates of the national shortage run as high as 14 million skilled workers by 2020, according to widely cited projections by the labor economists Anthony P. Carnevale and Donna M. Desrochers.

Then came the downturn and executive retention stupidity is once again running rampant.

Two-thirds of executives at large companies were most concerned about losing Gen Y employees, while less than half of them had similar concerns about losing Gen Xers. nearly two-thirds of executives at large companies were most concerned about losing Gen Y employees, while less than half of them had similar concerns about losing Gen Xers.

The assumption is often that Gen Yers are the least loyal and most mobile, says Robin Erickson, a manager with Deloitte’s human capital division.

However, a companion survey of employees found that only about 37 percent of Gen Xers said they planned to stay in their current jobs after the recession ends, compared with 44 percent of Gen Yers, 50 percent of baby boomers and 52 percent of senior citizen workers who said the same.

Everyone surveyed worried about job security. Gen X and Gen Y were most likely to complain about pay. But a ”lack of career progress,” was by far the biggest gripe from Gen Xers, with 40 percent giving that as a reason for their restlessness, compared with 30 percent of Gen Yers, 20 percent of baby boomers and 14 percent of senior workers.

Gen Yers, meanwhile, were more likely than the other generations to cite ”lack of challenges in the job” as a reason they would leave, while baby boomers more often chose ”poor employee treatment during the downturn” and a ”lack of trust in leadership.”

Let me spell this out.

The economy will turn around.

The Boomers may stay in the workforce for now, but they will retire.

Gen Y is being held back because of the economy and may never catch up, certainly not fast enough to run American enterprise when the Boomers retire.

That leaves Gen X, which is being ignored.

Stupid attitudes towards employees is nothing new for the folks running companies, but this one is really going to come back and bite not just them, but our country’s competitiveness.

One can only hope that the stupidity is global, so we’re not the only ones dealing with it.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit:  ZedBee|Zoë Power on flickr

I probably shouldn’t say this, but I do get tired of having managers ask, how to get workers to think/do/work “outside-the-box.”

For decades they’ve been exploring a plethora of business books, articles, seminars, coaching, consulting, discussions, etc., on the subject—some good, some not so good—and are still searching for how to lead their workers out of that dreaded box.

I hear, “How do we get the team to think differently?” “What incentives work best?” “How do we engage our people?”

What I don’t hear is “What do I need to change in me [to make it happen]?”

What annoys is the assumption that the solutions all involve changing the staff, environment, compensation and any other external item that might plausibly make a difference—except self.

If you want your people to think/do/work outside-the-box then you need to lead/manage outside-the-box and that usually means changing your MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™) before you can expect your people to change theirs.

This is rarely what leaders/managers want to hear.

I keep saying it, as do others, but many still don’t get it or just ignore it.

Today I’m saying it again loudly and very publicly:

You (there are no exceptions, none) manage/lead based on the way you think, what you think, how you think, and what you believe—in other words your MAP. No matter what you read, hear or talk, you will always walk your own MAP—that is your authenticity and you can never get away from it.

It’s not enough for you to know, you need to accept this as truth along with the knowledge that any changes are your choice and in your control.

That said, why not adopt RampUp Solutions taglines as your own.

To change what they do, change how you think.

Leadership: outside-the-box/inside your head.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: websuccessdiva on flickr

Social media; stories about it are everywhere, but I find the most interesting are about what companies are doing and how its being used.

Let’s start with Twitter. Everybody has heard of Twitter, even people who have no idea what it is talk about it—like my friend’s great-granny. But it’s their smarts in innovation that is most impressive—they outsource it.

Twitter’s smart enough, or lucky enough, to say, ‘Gee, let’s not try to compete with our users in designing this stuff, let’s outsource design to them.’ –Eric von Hippel, head of the innovation and entrepreneurship group at the Sloan School of Management at M.I.T.

If you run a business these days you’re probably using Facebook or thinking about it—I know I am. So I found this article in the NY Times of great interest, especially since it’s written for folks, not pros.

You need to be where your customers are and your prospective customers are, and with 300 million people on Facebook, and still growing, that’s increasingly where your audience is for a lot of products and services. –Clara Shih, author of “The Facebook Era” (Pearson Education, 2009).

Do you know the key ingredient that helps police nab the bad guys? Stupidity—theirs. It used to be that they flashed their loot around and bragged to their friends, not they flash their loot and brag on Facebook.

Maxi Sopo thought he had made an excellent decision when he ran away to Cancun to escape a Seattle fraud prosecution. He also thought it would be a great idea to add a former Justice Department official as a friend and gush about his exploits on Facebook.

I love it when stupid gets stupider.

Last is an item that falls in the smart or stupid category—you decide. It asks the question; at what point does a CEO’s Facebook sharing cross the boundary to TMI (too much information)?

Recently Chip Conley, CEO of Joie de Vivre, a $230 million company with more than 3,000 employees, got enmeshed in a bit of a 2009 corporate culture snafu. Conley’s not your average Harvard MBA pinstriped buttoned-down corporate chieftan. He’s an entrepreneur. He writes his own rules. So to him, it wasn’t so strange to post some pictures of himself at the Burning Man whatever-it-is in the dessert on his Facebook fan page. Or to tweet on Twitter about the demise of his 8 year long relationship.

When his employees got upset he wrote about it on BNET. Read both articles and share your thoughts in comments.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit:  nono farahshila on flickr

Most of you probably don’t remember, but a while ago I asked readers for help coming up with a new tag line. That was actually the second time I tried tapping my readership for help.

During the time I’ve been mulling your responses and advice (thanks Dave!) my blog was totally redesigned—no more road.

Today, for whatever reason, the tag has been boiling, instead of at a low simmer on the back burner, and what popped into my head was YOUR leadership breakthrough, which, while not terrible, didn’t really light fires, although it goes well with the new design.

I kept re-reading what you all said, especially Dave Crain’s advice, which I knew, but needed to hear again.

I think ultimately, you are the one that needs to come up with the tagline, if you want one. We can give you ideas, maybe even inspiration, but I think the “flash of inspiration” has to come from you. Only you have the passion and the insight uniquely individual to you.

I kept thinking about what I write (and rant) constantly, that leadership isn’t positional; anybody with initiative has the potential to be a ‘leader in the instance’—there when they see the need.

And that’s when it finally happened; I had an epiphany.

YOU + initiative = leadership

What do you think?

As to the winner, although all your input helped and he didn’t come up with the exact phrase, it was Dave’s words that drove me, so I’m declaring him the winner. I hope he enjoys The Three Laws Of Performance.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: hisks on sxc.hu

Raising kids is about teaching values, among other things, but kids learn by watching more than by listening. “Do as I say, not as I do” just doesn’t fly these days.

Cheating is not only a good example, it’s a global one.

Everyone knows that cheating is wrong, yet in US surveys 64% of high school students say they have cheated, while 84% of undergraduate business students and a whopping 56% of MBA students also admit to cheating. Not only is cheating prevalent, parental action often condones it.

Since many of these same parents are leaders in the workplace, the results of a McKinsey survey asking “which capabilities of organizations as a whole are most important for managing companies through the crisis” should come as no surprise.

Ability to shape employee interactions and foster a shared understanding of values.

Only 8% thought that important, which placed ‘shared values’ dead last on the list of nine.

What was first on the list? The item considered the most important?

Ability to ensure that leaders shape and inspire the actions of others to drive better performance.

Number two isn’t much of an improvement.

Capacity to articulate where the company is heading and how to get there, and to align people appropriately.

All the research I’ve seen claims that the best way to avoid ethical lapses is to have sustainable ethics embedded deep in the company’s culture.

And the comments of Rick Wartzman, director of the Drucker Institute at Claremont Graduate University, really resonate.

Perhaps the oddest aspect of the McKinsey findings is the suggestion that providing leadership is somehow separate from promoting values. In fact, the two are bound together—the double helix of any corporation’s DNA.

One would think that means the company’s leaders understand the value of values and would proactively work to foster and embed them.

But no, these leaders, likely the same one whose kids admit to cheating, believe that visions trump values.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: Warning Sign Generator

What would you write if you were allowed just 100 words to describe a future for our world knowing that your description would become reality?

I don’t mean sci-fi technology or sweeping physical changes, but changes to people’s MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™), universal changes that would improve life in any country and overall globally.

Here is mine.

We need to stop putting ideology ahead of success; stop avoiding accountability by citing those whose lead we follow; excusing our own unethical behavior on the basis that others do the same thing; believing that [whatever] is OK because our religion forgives us. We must take initiative and stop waiting for someone else to show us how, tell us why or lead our actions. We need to cherish our planet, all its plants and animals, and accept that there is only one race, human; everyone needs to clean up their own back yard, then help others—together we can win.

Write your hundred words in comments and you’ll be entered to win a copy of High Altitude Leadership: What the World’s Most Forbidding Peaks Teach Us About Success.

The winner will be chosen by Random.org. You can enter as many times as you want, as long as the entries are different. The contest runs to the end of November, so enter early and often.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: Noize Photography on flickr

What do you do when you are booted out of your business leadership position? Go into politics, of course.

Carly Fiorina, Hewlett-Packard’s ex (to the great relief of people both internal and external) CEO is the latest to throw her hat in the ring, touting her corporate problem-solving skills; problem-making is more accurate.

So what do you do when you are booted out of your political position (or your term expires)? Go on the speaking circuit.

I realize that I may offend some of my readers, but to learn that George W. Bush is being paid $100K to speak for 40 minutes ($2500 per minute!) on “How to master the art of effective leadership” makes me ill. (Hat tip to Grant Lawrence at OEN for the heads up. I found his thoughts on the subject well worth reading.)

The next item is a great interview with Drew Gilpin Faust, president of Harvard University, who, unlike her predecessor, recognizes that communication is the most critical action when leading an organization “with enormously distributed authority and many different sorts of constituencies, all of whom have a stake in that institution” and have no tolerance for any top-down management.

Authenticity is cited by many leadership gurus as absolutely necessary, but Professor Jim Heskett, my favorite Harvard voice, solicited reader responses to this question earlier this month, “Can the “masks of command” coexist with authentic leadership?” Beyond his summation be sure to scan through the comments for significant insights both pro and con.

Your comments—priceless http://www.mappingcompanysuccess.com/seize-your-leadership-day-

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

Image credit:  nono farahshila on flickr