Many managers I’ve known see themselves as coaches building winning teams and often base their management style on coaches they’ve known or who are known to win—not always a good thing.

Now there is yet another coach who is anything but a role model.

But more far more deplorable than Rutgers’ Mike Rice’s actions are outside lawyer John P. Lacey’s comments about the abuse and the message they send.

On Friday, the university also released a 50-page report that John P. Lacey, an outside lawyer, prepared last year in response to the abuse allegations. It made clear that Rutgers officials were aware that Mr. Rice’s outbursts “were not isolated” and that he had a fierce temper, used homophobic and misogynistic slurs, kicked his players and threw basketballs at them.

But it described Mr. Rice as “passionate, energetic and demanding” and concluded that his behavior constituted “permissible training.” It found that he aimed to “cause them to play better during the team’s basketball games.”

His methods, “while sometimes unorthodox, politically incorrect, or very aggressive, were within the bounds of proper conduct and training methods,” the report said.

Since when are adults kicking kids and throwing things at them “within the bounds of proper conduct?”

It’s bad enough that abuse happens, but far worse when the very people charged with evaluating it give it a stamp of approval.

More proof, if anybody needed it, that winning is everything and anything done to increase the odds of winning is OK.

So thought the banking managers whose actions brought down the global economy.

So believe all those, students, as well as adults, who cheat to get ahead.

Anything goes, just don’t get caught.

And if you do, blame it on your passionate desire to win.

YouTube credit: Ron Goldstein

Do you tend to confuse consequences with punishment?

Worse, do you confuse them with regards to your people?

The former is a part of a strong, healthy culture, while the latter is a major factor in an abusive one.

• Consequences are the result of an action; they may be good, bad or depend on your point of view.

In other words, cause and effect—doing A results in B.

• The consequence of studying hard is a good grade on the test.
• The consequence of writing a check with insufficient funds in your account is having it bounce.
• The consequence of not immediately responding to an email may be neutral for you, but not for your company.

Even if you don’t like the idea of consequences there’s no way to stop them. Everything you do, say, even think has at least one effect—if not more.

Startups, obviously, are hot beds of cause and effect—both little and large and often with a domino effect.

You land a spot at Vator Splash to introduce your new product, but you’re caught in a massive traffic jam, aren’t available to do the demo and a junior developer ends up talking with your most interested potential investor.

Consequences.

Nobody fault; you can’t even claim responsibility. Stuff happens.

There was no way to predict the accident that created the traffic jam.

Everybody knows that actions have consequences and you’ll lose credibility if you ignore them or claim there are none.

Just remember, consequences have nothing to do with punishment.

Flickr image credit: Oran Viriyincy

Yesterday we considered the dangers inherent when employees start thinking of themselves as an extension of the company/manager, as in ““I’m great because my company/manager is great.” instead of, “I’m great and my company/manager is great.””

Today we’ll look at why building people, as opposed to making them dependent, is a smart move and three prime things to help you do it.

People building is imperative, 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 and actions will help you attract, develop and keep the best and brightest.

You’ll still lose some 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.

G&S isn’t rocket science, nor does it have to be costly.

Here are three basic rules to encourage G&S and discourage ego-merge.

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.”

Any manager can implement these and other strategies on her own, whether the company supports G&S or not.

However, it’s to a company’s advantage to fight ego-merge and advocate G&S through its policies, then support it by hiring managers who believe in the power of G&S.

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?

But what can you do to avoid ego-merge as 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.

Here’s what you do.

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 image credit: vetlesk

How many times, especially these days, at a networking function have you asked someone what they do and gotten the reply, “I’m not working, I’m looking for my next opportunity.”

OK, a lot of people are looking, but that doesn’t answer the question.

Ask again and you might get the same answer, but if your face still has a look of inquiry written on it you’ll get a second answer, “I’m a [whatever].”

It’s sad when people choose to define themselves based upon how they earn a living; worse when, as in the example above, employment becomes the career validation without which the career ceases to exist.

Bad as those are, the worst is 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 what happens when “me” and “my company” meld together 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” when talking about accomplishments, 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.

No matter how great their work environment, feeling responsible is a major productivity sapper when times are tough—employees with ego-merge have a difficult time believing that

• it’s not their fault;
• their manager doesn’t blame them;
• they are good enough to help turn the company around,

because in their minds their skills and talent are good because of their manager/company.

Ego-merge affects the best companies/managers, where people are very involved, have high esprit de corps and are passionate about their mission and success.

But it also happens with more Machiavellian managers who intentionally foster the attitude within their organization as a retention tool.

Ego-merge does, in fact, encourage people to stay, but it also cripples them, ruins their creativity, saps their initiative and reduces their long term value to the company.

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

In fact, it’s in the best interest of both the manager and the company to become people-builders.

Join me tomorrow for a look at how to recognize and avoid ego-merge, as well as why people-building pays off.

Flickr image credit: Seth Anderson

In 2007 I wrote Stop abusing the L word!, and it is still one of my all-time favorite posts.

Five years later we’re still abusing the L word and the E word is getting the same treatment.

The E word is entrepreneur, but you knew that.

When I was young kids sold lemonade or mowed lawns wanted to earn spending money; it didn’t mean we were destined to start companies.

The E word, like the L word, used to be a label applied by other people after the fact to describe someone who founded a business that grew large—think HP and Intel.

Also, the label is more modern, even when applied retrospectively; Ben Franklin and Henry Ford weren’t lauded as entrepreneurs in contemporaneous writings, but always are now.

Nor do I class self-use of the E word as obnoxious in the same way that self-use of the L word is—I once saw a resume where ‘leader’ was used in both the ‘Position Desired’ and experience descriptions, “supervisor and leader,” “director and leader” (seriously, that’s what was written)—but it is a bit pretentious to introduce yourself that way, especially at a startup networking event (heard that, too.)

We all know that overused words lose their meaning, so lets lighten up on the E word; it gets a heavy enough workout from the media.

Image credit: Warning Sign Generator

Last fall I wrote that the prevalence of bullying, especially in the workplace, was giving rise to an anti bullying industry and I’ve seen nothing to change my mind about that.

I recently learned that my post was taken by at lease one person to mean that I didn’t believe workplace bullying was real and I want to state categorically that it is very real and way too prevalent.

I’ve seen abusive managers and cultures in action up close all my working life, especially since I returned to headhunting in the late Seventies.

Whether you call it abuse or bullying, it’s out of the closet and getting more and more media attention, which is good.

I learned about the misinterpretation last week when I received a call from a senior manager I’ll call “Lisa.”

Lisa was looking for expert witnesses because an employee has gone to HR with claims that he is being bullied.

I immediately told her that I don’t believe I would qualify as an expert, but offered to listen to the story. (I was very curious.)

Long story short, Lisa explained that her job was very difficult because the department she had recently taken over had a number of very stupid people who insisted on doing things differently from the way she knew they should be done.

She had found the only way to make them listen was to scream and constantly point out what they were doing wrong.

However, one of them was so wimpy he had filed a complaint with HR and the investigation was impeding her work, hence her desire to find experts on her side.

I asked what made her think I would side with her and she mentioned the article.

I then explained in words of one syllable that she had completely misunderstood what I wrote, that her she was bullying her people and that actions such as screaming and public belittling were not only abusive, but created a toxic culture for everybody.

As you might guess, her reaction to what I said was less than positive.

Fickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Gilbert Fiorentino may not be a household name, but millions of online shoppers recognize the name Tiger Direct.

In a nod to the corporate excess and bad culture, as represented by John Thain and disgraced CEO Dennis Kozlowski, we now have Fiorentino.

The truly shocking part of this story is found in the comment section; the stories from employees whose descriptions of their work environment will raise your hackles even as they make you cringe.

Dell sued TigerDirect for trademark infringement for “repeated and blatant” violations regarding the resale of its computers and in 2008 the Florida Attorney General’s office sued for failing to pay advertised rebates to consumers.

But this isn’t just another CEO running amok.

Fiorentino may have founded Tiger Direct and be CEO of CompUSA (bought out of bankruptcy), but Systemax owns the whole shebang.

And it is Systemax that turned a blind eye for all those years as Fiorentino created and maintained a culture of intimidation and abuse of both employees and vendors for more than a decade.

“He was making a lot of money for the company and I think people looked the other way for a long time. … If he wanted it, he took it, for whatever reason,” –William “Cully” Waggoner, a former employee who was fired in 2009 after five years with the company, but won a court settlement challenging the action. A blind eye until a worm turned and made that fateful whistleblower call.

Now Systemax claims it wants to change its corporate culture.

A memo last week to employees talked about embracing changes like a more “open management style” and elimination of competitive postings of hours worked by each employee. “The prior management regime was not the reason for the Company’s success – you were.” –Systemax Executive Committee

This is the same executive committee that was blind all those years.

If you believe them I have a great buy on a gorgeous orange bridge that would look terrific on your front lawn.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/salim/402620871/

“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

Image credit: emdot

I frequently have people ask me for an example of a really bad corporate culture, especially after I write a post about a good one as I did yesterday. Sure, I know a number of them, but when it’s insider knowledge it’s dangerous to share, even if it’s scrubbed.

So I looked around the Net and found this great example on Eric Peterson’s blog that he made up, “It was a bit facetious on my part.”

Not hardly! Eric may think he made it up—he even has a disclaimer—but I know the CEO he was channeling. Reading that interview was one of the eeriest things that’s happened in a long time, since I lived it and it was practically verbatim.

It happened back when I was a headhunter and the CEO wanted to hire me to staff a new division. He was explaining his company’s management approach in response to my question about work environment and turnover.

He wanted me to understand that it didn’t really matter what kind of people I sent, they would break them to fit their needs. He thought it was so funny—I thought he was so sick.

I refused the assignment, but didn’t forget the company. In the course of the next few years I removed more than 100 people, some went to my clients, but many I just gave away, coached, helped. And turned on every other recruiter I knew to that happy hunting ground.

It wasn’t about money, it was a humanitarian effort—you can’t just walk away when you see people being abused.

And that’s what it was, abuse. Abuse is rife these days and we all owe it to ourselves to step in and do what we can when we see it.

In business it can be the entire corporate culture or just a rogue manager, but it’s never something to turn your back on or put up with—no matter the name, abuse is just plain wrong.

Have you rescued yourself or a friend lately?