Poking through 11+ years of posts I find information that’s as useful now as when it was written.

Golden Oldies is a collection of the most relevant and timeless posts during that time.

It’s said that money is the root of all evil, but there are plenty of evil people with no money and lots of wealthy people who do enormous good. I think it’s more accurate to say that greed is the root, since people will do anything to satisfy it. And often, what they do is perfectly legal — but legal doesn’t mean either ethical or moral.

Read other Golden Oldies here.

I’m no happier about the AIG and other bonuses paid to screwed up Wall Street banks, but I’m not sure why any of us are surprised.

“In the largest 25 corporate bankruptcies between 1999 and 2002, while hundreds of billions of dollars of investor wealth and over 100,000 jobs disappeared, the Financial Times found the “barons of bankruptcy” made off with $3.3 billion.”

Giant compensation packages, guaranteed bonuses and platinum parachutes are excused by Boards and executives as necessary to attract the “best and brightest,” but here’s what’s really going on.

The ‘names’ demand outsize compensation/stock options/guaranteed bonus/etc. in order to validate their ‘brand’.

Those responsible for hiring not only meet the demands, but even exceed them in an effort to attain or sustain the company’s reputation as a better home for ‘stars’ — the more stars you have the greater the bragging rights — mine’s bigger than yours in high school locker room talk.

Now let’s consider the folly of this attitude.

Those hiring often seek a name brand in the mistaken belief that the brand comes with a warranty that guarantees good results.

But no matter who you hire you’re actually paying for their past performance, which is always influenced by

• • circumstances—boss and company positioning in its market and industry
  • environment—culture and colleagues;

and let us not forget that minor factor

• • the economy.

The hiring mindset is that everything the brand accomplished was done in a total vacuum and dependent only on the brand’s own actions, therefore changing every single surrounding factor will have no impact on performance.

Put like that it sounds pretty stupid, doesn’t it.

This is one of the prime reasons that so many CEOs bring their ‘own team’ over when they move, as do managers all the way down the food chain—they know they didn’t do it alone.

CEOs aren’t like movie and rock stars whose very names draw consumers into spending money—nobody ever bought a product from GE because Jack Welch was CEO, nor do they carry Jobs iPods—so why pay them that way?

Moreover, assuming that performance occurring during an expansion is a valid yardstick for performance in general, let alone a downturn, is sheer idiocy.

You have only to remember the difficulties faced by people whose management skills were honed between 1991 and 2000, the longest expansion in our history. When the recession hit in March of 2001 they had no experience whatsoever of how to drive revenue or manage in a down economy.

That recession and the previous one in 1990 lasted only 8 months each. The longest recession we’ve had was 2 years, January-July 1980 and July 1981-November 1982, and that one had a 12 month break in it. This means there are a very small number of managers with any actual experience managing in anything even close to what’s happening now.

The current recession officially started in December 2007, so it’s already 15 months old and the end isn’t in sight.

What experience makes these folks the ‘best and brightest’ for today’s world?

Just why the hell are companies still guaranteeing oversized compensation and exorbitant exit packages when now is definitely the time to pay for future performance—no guarantees.

Image credit: flickr

A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read all If the Shoe Fits posts here.

Programmers in Silicon Valley are reeling.

What are they going to do?

No more clandestine recruiter calls from unicorn startups offering million dollar salaries, six figure sign-on bonuses, thousands of stock options and country club style perks.

And those graduating with CS degrees may find fewer startups bidding against each other for their services.

Not to mention layoffs. Layoff a programmer? Are you nuts?

Nope, that’s exactly what’s happening.

And, as an ex recruiter, all I can say is it’s about time.

Perhaps now candidate focus will return to the mission and the tech, instead of the dollars and bragging rights.

Because, in spite of the all the media coverage, there is a large number of programmers who don’t believe it will affect them — others, sure, but not them.

Of course, it’s hard when you’ve been the golden (mostly) boys and reality rears its ugly head.

But ask anyone in tech who has been around for awhile and they’ll tell you that change is constant and what goes up comes down — and eventually goes back up again.

Programmer jobs not excepted.

Image credit: HikingArtist

If your career or the time you’ve spent following business up and downs doesn’t predate 2006 then you may not think of Best Buy as a successful, cutting edge, highly innovative company with an exceptional culture.

I was reminded of Best Buy when I read that many managers still believe that time = productivity and contributions.

The managers viewed employees who were seen at the office during business hours as highly “dependable” and “reliable.” Employees who came in over the weekend or stayed late in the evening were seen as “committed” and “dedicated” to their work.

That attitude is so last century; in fact, it harks back to the industrial and even the agrarian age when presence was synonymous with productivity. After all, you couldn’t produce if you weren’t there.

The reason I thought of Best Buy is because it was the 2003 birthplace of ROWE.

ROWE means Results Only Workplace Environment and I’ve written about it previously (a lot), so rather than write the same stuff again here’s a link to my ROWE-related posts.

As to its success, in 2010 total revenues increased 11% and $4.4 billion of that was from female customers—not your typical big box tech shopper (at that time).

The extraordinary culture created by Brad Anderson that allowed for the bottom-up development of something as revolutionary as ROWE can not be overstated.

But it can be repeated.

Flickr image credit: Keith Laverack

You started with nothing more than an idea.

Your idea became a vision and your vision a business plan.

You built a great team and infused them with passion.

You found skilled advisors and investors who believed.

You built your product.

Your company launched it with panache.

The media loved it.

But sales were dismal.

No matter what you and your team did you couldn’t gain traction.

You laid off your team

You were left with one question: what did you do wrong?

The answer is ‘nothing’.

What went (or will) go wrong is clearly explained in this article by Henry Blodget. And be sure to read successful entrepreneur and VC Nick Hanauer’s commentary on taxing the rich and one more that explains why entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs do not create jobs—their customers do.

You did everything right, but no matter how great the product, food, heat and a roof overhead come first.

Disclaimer: I realize this post will come over as partisan and liberal to some of you and I sincerely hope you will share your disagreement in the name of healthy discussion.

Flickr image credit: Charles Kremenak

It’s Halloween 2011
when sugar highs will reach to heaven.
Extravagant costumes and parties galore,
even with an eviction notice on the front door.
Spending is up, forget the economy,
a billion for costumes and more for gastronomy.

Some costumes are sexy, some are just fun;
some are so scary you’ll just want to run.
But how ever you dress and whatever you do,
be sure it is fun and leaves a happier you!

This is not one of my better efforts; here is a sampling of previous and much better Halloween fare.

Halloween Success Story
There was a student named Delf
who had a high opinion of self
He truly believed that with nary a sigh,
he could start a company that would fly high.

He founded it on Halloween (more…)

Scary times require rhymes
It’s Halloween and things are scary—
the economy is really hairy;
your savings trashed, your mortgage iffy
and it can’t be fixed in a NY jiffy.

Today is the start of the holiday season, (more..)

A Halloween economy
Bats and witches and pumpkins, oh my,
bailouts and options and fat cats who sigh;
a Treasury Secretary deep in the fold
and stock that reeks like decades old mold.

For Halloween you want a costume that scares, (more…)

I hope you have a howling good time!

Flickr image credit: ^^RaviN^^

From the archives; see all mY generation posts here.

(or small ones)

Image credit: kittyz202 on flickr

I have 5 stories for you today about CEOs, two who don’t and four that do.

Pundits (consultants, academics, bloggers) are fond of lauding CEOs for their vision and skill at imparting it to their followers—Richard Fuld, Bob Nardelli, Jeff Skilling, Bernard Ebbers, Dennis Kowalski, the list is long—but after their meltdown you hear only from the Monday morning quarterback crowd.

But if you want to sort the true stars from the others, you need to take a long-term look—not Wall Street’s typical quarter or even a decade—at more than the stock price.

Moreover, you need to look at the down times; the times when the economy sucks, yet the CEO still finds ways to foster a great culture and stoke innovation—not just cut staff and threaten execs with termination if they don’t make their numbers.

For better or worse, it’s not in the vision or the leading, it’s the doing.

Our first story is should be a familiar name to all of you. Remember Sandy Weill? The man who drove the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 and whose deal making built CITI, the colossus that never really jelled. He was named “C.E.O. of the Year” in 2002 by Chief Executive Magazine, but that was then and this is now.

The travails of newspapers aren’t news anymore, but Frank Blethen, CEO the Seattle Times Co. has made matters much worse in the name of family.

Far on the other side are General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt and Procter & Gamble’s A.G. Lafley. The two are good friends and Fortune senior editor Geoff Colvin shares a rare joint interview with them.

In today’s cutthroat business world how many CEOs would lift a finger to save their competition? Ted Baseler, CEO of Chateau Ste. Michelle did exactly that when freezing temperatures wiped out the grape harvest in 2004. He didn’t just save his competition; he’s credited with saving the entire Washington state wine industry. Baseler is the quintessential big picture guy.

“We want Washington known. All of it. We’re not about to fight over whose bottle of wine gets sold. We’re competing with Napa, with France. We’re not competing with Washington wineries.”

My last offering is an interview with Pete Peterson, co-founder of Blackstone Group, looks back on s storied career and offers his insights as to what’s needed to “rebuild the American dream.” There’s a video (that refuses to embed) and a PDF of the interview (requires free registration). I think you’ll find it interesting.

Image credit:  pedroCarvalho on flickr

When you’ve coached or written a blog for years you can find yourself answering the same questions over and over, but that’s OK. I’d rather have you drop me a line or use the chat box in the right frame than search for something and become frustrated.

And that’s what happened last night about 10:30.

“Ken” pinged me and asked if I remembered a post that talked about compensation and used a stool as an analogy for the company. He said he’d read it a few years ago and wanted it as part of a presentation for his boss.

No Problem. I’ve used that analogy with clients for years and in posts three times. After I gave Ken the URL he said I should post it again.

I agreed, but added a bit to cover the current situation.

Success is like a 3-legged stool—

Customers / equity-holders / employees

If one leg becomes too long, the stool tips over!

Taking care of the first two is a given, whereas taking care of employees seems to be based on the labor market.

If the market is hot, people are showered with money and perks, as the market cools, so does employee care.

Yes, you can buy people and you can replace people, but it’s very expensive.

In the kind of tough economic times we’re going through people understand when there are no raises and even when their compensation is cut to avoid a layoff.

But if that treatment extends only to workers and lower management, while executive compensation and perks continue, you can count on a steady exodus as business improves.

When the market is tight and companies are throwing cash, stock and perks right and left it’s the wise manager who remembers that people who join for money/stock/perks will leave for more money/stock/perks.

If instead management chooses to

• do the right thing,
• treat people fairly,
• give them interesting work,
• enable their growth, and
• satisfy most of their intangible hot buttons

employees will be

• more productive,
• innovative,
• engaged,
• committed,
• caring,
• happier, and
• healthier.

What more can any boss/company ask?

Image credit: Steve Heath on flickr

See all mY generation posts here.