I’ve written several times referencing Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers and it’s come up in numerous conversations I’ve had.

Each time I hear that Gladwell’s premise is flawed and that if a person is determined enough they will succeed blah, blah, blah.

They claim this holds true whatever the location, including gang-ridden inner cities or third world countries; work hard enough and you will overcome.

My typical response to their rhetoric is “bullshit.”

A few days ago TechCrunch published The Chilling Story of Genius in a Land of Chronic Unemployment; a comparison between Ibrahim Boakye and Max Levchin.

It is elegant proof of what Gladwell says, as well as a warning call to the stupidity of wasting our world’s human resources.

On a much smaller scale managers waste their human resources every day through “positional deafness,” i.e., only soliciting and/or hearing thoughts, ideas and suggestions from those at X level or higher.

I’ve never understood why managers expect workers who were consistently ignored and shut down to suddenly start contributing because they receive a promotion.

• Nobody suddenly develops a brain as a result of being promoted.

• If they were good enough to promote then they should have been good enough to listen to in their previous positions.

• If they can’t contribute in the position for which they were hired, why hire them at all?

• Even new grads hired for their potential need to be heard; they are like eggs and like eggs they must be cared for if they are to hatch.

Managers afflicted by positional deafness often experience high turnover and lament the lack of loyalty, especially in “more junior workers.”

But the term ‘junior’ is very subjective; for some managers it refers to those with just a couple of years of experience, for others it’s a level within the company and for still others it’s relative, with the baseline how long it took them to finally be heard.

It’s easy to know if you suffer from positional deafness, just consider the sources of your input over the last quarter and what you did with it.

Better yet, ask the people you trust to tell you the truth, not just what you want to hear.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3740791077/

Office politics has many definitions, but one characteristic remains constant—your ‘voice’ is positional. In other words, your ability to be heard is based on your position in the pecking order. Ideas below X level are ignored, between X and Y are acknowledged, Y to Z are heard and sometimes implemented.

But to have a full voice you either need to be part of the C suite or a “star” (stars below the Y level are scarce as hen’s teeth). Some argue that star systems are merit-based, but that argument falls flat if only those at a certain level are heard.

Few people like office politics and its presence has always been responsible for a large percentage of turnover.

One way to substantially reduce office politics in your organization by making sure that everyone has a voice.

Even in highly political corporations individual managers can improve their team’s performance and retention by making sure ideas receive a fair hearing no matter who thinks of them.

It’s easier when you are a first line manager, because you have only yourself to blame if a pecking order establishes itself in your group. If it does happen have a candid talk with the mirror and decide what’s important to you and what you want your ‘management brand’ to be known for.

As you move up, with one or more layers of management below you, it becomes more difficult because you are working to propagate an attitude that may not be wholly shared by those who report to you.

Your success depends partly on how consistent your own actions are and partly on what procedures you create to reinforce the desired behavior.

One of the most successful approaches is to tie bonus compensation to measurable results for soliciting suggestions from all levels and let VSI do the rest.

Of course, as with health, it is better route to prevent office politics than it is to cure it once it gets a toe-hold.

Simply put, that means not hiring managers at any level whose past behavior reflects the wrong attitude. You have two methods to accomplishing this. Obviously, it is something to discuss when doing reference checks.

But more importantly, if you make it clear during interviews that part of the candidate’s compensation depends upon it. It’s amazing how quickly a candidate will withdraw when her pay depends on a behavior with which she doesn’t agree.

Image credit: Svadilfari on flickr

Successful communications go a long way to sustaining successful relationships.

Relationships are a function of human interaction and whether they are short or long you need to communicate.

When those involved are peers, as in a marriage, good communication is a responsibility of both.

But when one person is subordinate to the other, such as parent and child, it is up to the parent to make sure that whatever is being communicated is understood.

Human interactions in companies are also relationships and follow the same rules.

If you are a manager how do you make sure you are heard?

It’s pretty simple as long as you remember to do it every time, no exceptions.

Did you know that all people have a mental model through which they hear?

That means their understanding of the words you use may have little-to-nothing to do with what you meant when you said them.

It’s a grave tactical error to assume anything else

There are 3 actions you must do to assure that you are heard correctly.

1. Start by carefully explaining your model and your assumptions when giving direction;
2. give your people clear, complete information on the subject. This includes what you want done, project outlines, deadlines, everything—you do not want them to have to keep coming back and asking for more—getting information should not be like pulling teeth; and then
3. check by having them explain it back to you; it’s the only way to be sure that they have actually heard and understood your information, rather than their version of it;
4. do it today, do it tomorrow, do it all the time.

It may feel awkward at first, but eventually it will become second nature.

The more these actions are needed the greater the likelihood of them being perceived as nuisance, but not doing them is a career-killer.

Your payback will come in rising productivity, more motivated people, and lower turnover—all positively affecting your personal bottom line.

Image credit: Torley on flickr

The other day I was asked, “When do you lead/manage rationally vs. emotionally?”

First, let’s define the terms so there’s no confusion in how they’re being used.

Rationally refers to communicating and appealing to those who are more cerebral, while emotionally means focusing more on feelings—kind of a left brain/right brain—not that one type is cold and the other overwrought.

People hear in different ways and it’s the responsibility of a speaker to communicate so that all can hear.

Over the years, I’ve been told many times by people in managerial roles that having to constantly alter how they present information is hard work and they believe that it’s up to the listener to understand what they’re saying.

As you might guess, I have little tolerance for this kind of thinking, especially when it persists after significant educational efforts. What these people never seem to get is that if “they” can’t hear you “they” certainly won’t do what you want.

It’s not just a choice of rational vs. emotional, it’s understanding your audience and then speaking appropriately.

For instance, if you’re presenting plans for a new building to investors, business, the community and the media you might be inclined to concentrate on relative costs and ROI, since you want to win over the money crowd, but that doesn’t mean you should ignore the esthetics and ambiance.

First, you need to think about the different viewpoints and craft your presentation to include both types of information, even when it’s stuff about which you don’t care, because that way you have it all at your fingertips.

During the presentation a money person suggests that construction costs could be lower by using smaller windows and lower ceilings, but you know that won’t fly with the community and business interests, since they’re concerned more with how the building will look and feel.

If you’ve done your homework, you can show that higher ceilings and larger windows have been proven to increase worker productivity and the improved ambiance means higher rents.

Each group will focus on the information addressing their primary interest with the rest being relegated to backup position, but the important thing is that each heard something positive that directly addressed their concerns.

Doing this is a habit you can cultivate and the fastest way to do so is to make yourself hyper aware of anything that that brings the thought “who cares,” since that’s the information/viewpoint you’re most likely to skip.

None of this is rocket science. It only requires self-awareness that’s backed by a passion to be heard. It’s also not a guarantee that people will agree, but they will hear you and that’s where you need to start.

Image credit: roland

Today’s post is what is called “short and sweet.” I could have written far more, but I felt that the real message would be lost in the excess verbiage.

“I didn’t know…” is America’s favorite excuse, although it won’t hold up in a court of law; ignorantia legis neminem excusat (ignorance of the law excuses no one) dates back to Roman times.

The operative word is ‘know’, because, unfortunately, there’s a lot of latitude in what one chooses to know.

People don’t know anything that

• disagrees with their ideology or world-view;
• is presented by the opposition or those with whom they disagree;
• conflicts with their personal goals/agenda; or is
• inconvenient or annoying.

If you want to live or love successfully then you need to choose to know; it’s your responsibility to not just listen, but also to hear past all four barriers.

Image credit: Andrew Bossi on Wikipedia Commons

Looking for a great place to work? Great Place to Work® Institute and the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) just released their Best Small (50-250 employees) & Medium Companies (251-999 employees) to Work for in America. (The website also gives the results for the last four years.)

So, what makes an official “great place to work?”

“At the heart of our definition of a great place to work – a place where employees “trust the people they work for, have pride in what they do, and enjoy the people they work with” – is the idea that a great workplace is measured by the quality of the three, interconnected relationships that exist there:

• The relationship between employees and management.
• The relationship between employees and their jobs/company.
• The relationship between employees and other employees.”

And read what employees say about their companies.

What would your employees say?

Image credit: Eddie~S

Yesterday I described the manager you love to hate, so it’s only fair to offer up the flip side of that coin today.

What’s a major difference between the manager you like and the one you rave about?

What sets one above the other?

Rave-generating managers don’t just listen; they truly hear what you say.

More importantly, they have no problem saying

• I don’t know.
• Tell me more.
• Educate me.
• Please explain.
• Let’s discuss it.
• What do you think?

And especially

• I was wrong.

Which kind of manager do you have?

Which kind of manager are you?