If you were asked what skills are in shortest supply in the workforce you would probably think first about computer and related skills.

While that is correct, some simple soft skills are just as difficult.

This year’s pair of April surveys confirmed that, as in previous years, employers are having trouble finding people with advanced computer and interpersonal skills, punctuality, and reliability.

Think about it.

Problems finding people who understand that they need to

• consistently show up at the agreed upon time; and
• always do what they say they will do.

Not exactly rocket science, but a substantial problem.

The first shows that 36% of businesses in the manufacturing sector that responded to the survey are having moderate difficulty finding workers who are punctual and reliable, while 11% report great difficulty in finding workers with those traits. In the services sector, it’s not as bad — 22% of respondents report moderate difficulty finding punctual, reliable workers, whereas only 3% report great difficulty.

The interpersonal skills are a far more significant concern.

In an age when face-to-face communications is giving way to texting, IMing and email, the ability to work in close proximity with people and not only get along, but bond to create high performing teams, is becoming more and more difficult.

Hard skills, from learning new programming languages or moving from technical work on a financial program to developing mobile apps are learnable, as are all hard skills.

Changing and redirecting the character traits that lead to being punctual and reliable or teaching interpersonal skills to a (probably) uninterested party are most often exercises in frustration.

These are the core reasons why attitude and aptitude are more important than current skills when hiring and a subject we’ll look at in more depth this week.

Image credit: Denise Krebs

It’s pretty obvious that ageism is alive and well in tech.

As is sexism, which you can see from the email a female CEO received from an engineer she tried to hire.

But far worse are these examples of what women in tech face, exemplified by the latest bit of app stupidity.

“Titstare is an app where you take photos of yourself staring at tits.” –David Boulton and Jethro Batts at the TechCrunch Disrupt hackathon

Not to mention those who defended it.

“It is not misogyny to tell a sexist joke, or to fail to take a woman seriously, or to enjoy boobies” –Pax Dickinson, co-founder and CTO, Glimpse Labs

Or the incredible level of ignorance and pure stupidity exemplified by White_N_Nerdy on Reddit.

“I’m honestly trying to understand why anyone says that females are ‘needed’ in the tech industry.” He continued: “The tech community works fine without females, just like any other mostly male industry. Feminists probably just want women making more money.”

Being old enough to remember, medicine, research and law were “mostly male” industries not that long ago—as were college and advanced degrees.

In the comments section of the article, many women say that prior to the Nineties women developers and engineers weren’t subject to nearly as much abusive harassment, which matches my memories from when I was a tech recruiter in the late Seventies through the Eighties.

What happened?

Please join me tomorrow for a look at what may be an epiphany of cause and effect for both ageism and sexism.

Flickr image credit: KAZ Vorpal

KG wrote a great post about ageism that started an interesting conversation regarding what needs to happen on both sides of the age line-in-the-sand for things to change.

But what people seem to forget is that, at the time, the Boomers were plenty disrupting and more demanding than their parents.

In fact, historically each generation has disrupted the status quo and demanded both more and different than its predecessor in one way or another.

Every generation has focused on various traits of the upcoming generation and deemed them the end of civilization—if not the world.

I’m sure our hunter ancestors looked with horror at their gatherer children and predicted starvation if the herds weren’t followed.

It’s a given that what’s currently happening always seems more difficult, and even brutal, than what happened in the past when viewed from a distance.

I have no problem when Gen Y demands and walks when those demands aren’t met for two reasons.

1. Most of their demands are of universal interest (ability to make a difference, respect, challenge, opportunity to grow, etc.) and will improve the workplace for all ages; and
2. walking is the privilege of the un’s—unmarried, unparenting, unmortaged, unencumbered.

One of the few constants is that we will always have a multigenerational workforce.

So everyone would do well to remember that eventually we all become our parents—maybe not in our own minds, but definitely in the minds of the newest generation agitating for change.

Flickr image credit: Eric Danley

What do Google, Facebook, Amazon and iPods have in common?

None can claim first-mover status, yet all are recognized winners.

First-mover position isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

In fact, it takes a very special mindset beyond what’s mentioned in the article if you are truly in first position.

Let me illustrate.

Way back in late 2009 I worked with an offshore client who had developed a location-based advertising  platform that provided ads, bought through a bidding system, targeted to users’ exact location, context and behavior in applications on mobile phones, portable navigation systems and internet sites.

They had fully developed software and filed for patents overseas and in the US.

Unfortunately, they were years ahead of the market and couldn’t get traction.

As a result of the frustration and the educational effort/cost needed to move the market they chose to pivot and move on to other ideas.

It was a logical choice at the time, although it doesn’t look like it in hind-sight.

First-mover status, especially in consumer tech, equals primary market educator—an effort that makes the actual product development feel like a piece of cake.

That ‘s why it is often second (or even third or fourth)-mover status where you find the big winners.

Flickr image credit: Tom Ray

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

I don’t think the list of 17 Traits That Distinguish The Best Startup CEOs were in priority order, but if they are I disagree and think the first two are out of order.

The list reads,

1. [Is] good at hiring AND firing.
2. Builds a culture, not just a company.

It should read,

1. Builds a culture, not just a company.
2. Good at hiring AND firing, but rarely needs to.

Founders who go into the game with a conscious sense of their own values, create a culture based on those values and make sure to communicate it rarely find it necessary to fire anyone.

In other words, they use their culture to filter their hiring and are tough enough to walk away from candidates with good skills who aren’t culturally compatible.

But how do you know? How can you evaluate culture compatibility in the short time you interview?

I explained how to do it way back in 1999 when the following was published by MSDN and have republished it here every few years; I think it’s time again.

Don’t Hire Turkeys!
Use Your Culture as an Attraction, Screening and Retention Tool to Turkey-Proof Your Company.

Companies don’t create people—people create companies.

All companies have a culture composed of its core values and beliefs, essentially corporate MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™) and that culture is why people join the company and why they leave if it changes.

Generally, people don’t like bureaucracy, politics, backstabbing, etc., but when business stress goes up, or business heats up, cultural focus is often overwhelmed by other priorities.

In startups, it’s easier to hire people who are culturally compatible, because the founders first hire all their friends, and then their friend’s friends.

After that, when new positions have to be filled the only people available are strangers.

So how do you hire strangers and not lose your culture?

Since your culture is a product of your people, hire only people with matching or synergistic attitudes. The trick is to have a turkey sieve that will automatically screen out most of the misfits and excite the candidates who do have the right values and attitudes.

Here is how you do it.

• Your sieve is an accurate description of your real culture.
• It must be hard copy (write it out), fully publicized (everyone needs to know, understand, believe and talk about it), and, most important of all, it must be real.
• Email it to every candidate before their interview and be sure that everyone talks about the culture during the interview and sells the company’s commitment to it.
• Everybody interviewing needs to listen carefully to what the candidate is saying and not saying; don’t expect a candidate to openly admit to behaviors that don’t fit the company MAP, since she may be unaware of them, may assume that your culture is more talk than walk or consider it something that won’t apply to her.
• Red flags must be followed up, not ignored because of skills or charm.
• Consider the various environments in which she’s worked; find out if she agreed with how things were done, and, more importantly, how she would have done them if she had been in control.
• Whether or not the candidate is a manager, you want to learn about her management MAP, approaches to managing, leadership and work function methods.
• Probing people to understand what their responses, conscious as well as intuitive, are to a variety of situations reveals how they will act, react, and contribute to your company’s culture and its success.

Finally, it is up to the hiring manager to shield the candidate from external decision pressures, e.g., friends already employed by the company, headhunters, etc.

Above all, it is necessary to give all candidates a face-saving way to withdraw their candidacy and say no to the opportunity. If they don’t have a graceful way of exiting the interview process they may pursue, receive, and accept an offer, even though they know deep down it is not a good decision.

A bad match will do major damage to the company, people’s morale and the candidate, so a “no” is actually a good thing.

Remember, the goal is to keep your company culture consistent, flexible and true to your core values as you grow.

From the time you start this process, you need to consciously identify what you have, decide what you want it to be, publicize it, and use it as a sieve to be sure that everyone who joins, fits.

Use your cultural sieve uniformly at all levels all the time. If someone sneaks through, which is bound to happen occasionally, admit the error quickly and give her the opportunity to change, but if she persists then she has to go.

For more help, download the CheatSheets in the right-hand frame and/or give me a call at 360.335.8054.

No charge:)

Image credit: HikingArtist

I’ve worked with hundreds of bosses and entrepreneurs over the years and there are two concepts I do my best to indoctrinate them with.

The first is a basic principle without which you can’t lead.

• Leadership outside-the-box starts inside your head.

The second is a corollary and acts as a guide anytime change is necessary.

• To change what they do, change how you think.

The point is that every boss in every organization at every level will lead/manage based on the way they think, what they think, how they think, and what they believe.

In other words, they will be guided by their MAP.

So if a boss wants her people to think/act/do things differently, then the way to accomplish that is for the boss to change first.

Flickr image credit: svilen001

 Cut through all the noise about how fast the world is changing, how to stay competitive, constant learning, retraining, etc. and one message comes through loud and clear.

Whatever the entity or organization he/she/it needs to know how to transform in order to stay relevant.

Transformation is a must whether you’re a bookstore or an author who believes there’s a need for them.

A men’s retailer, a woman’s or the mannequin supplier dealing with human non-uniformity.

Or a record store.

Not just relevant, but happy.

A person growing or a person doing a 180 pivot.

Whether entity or organization transformation is accomplished by changing MAP (mindset, attitude philosophy™).

But transformation itself starts by choosing to do it.

Flickr image credit: DaveHuth

Microsoft has done a lot of dumb things over the years and they haven’t stopped yet.

A recent ad campaign for Windows Azure implied it was “so easy, even an older woman can do it.”

This on top of an earlier tweet from @WindowsAzure.

“What do you do when your 68-year-old secretary needs Active Directory Multi-Factor Authentication? Ask Dear Azure.”

Social media wasn’t happy and Microsoft ended up apologizing for its “poor judgment.”***

However, Microsoft’s apology doesn’t cut much ice when viewed in light of the dynamics that drove/are driving the development of Windows 8.

According to a person who claims to be on the Windows 8 design team this is the thinking behind Metro.

It’s designed for your computer illiterate little sister, for grandpas who don’t know how to use that computer dofangle thingy, and for mom who just wants to look up apple pie recipes.

I have a low opinion of Win8 based on hearsay and the bad reviews I’ve read, but that’s beside the point.

Assuming what the programmer shared is even relatively accurate it shows that the ad was more business as usual than an error in judgment.

It reflects a corporate MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™) grounded in the C suite and begs the question of whether it will continue in a world sans Ballmer and Gates.

***In fairness, Geek Feminism says this gaff is common.

No phrase expresses the meme of female technical ineptitude more neatly than “So simple, even your [grand]mother could do it.” This is a very commonly encountered form of condescension.

Flickr image credit: Metassus

Over and over research has shown that money is no where near the top of what people want in their jobs.

Ask people what they want in a job, and meaningfulness looms large. For decades, Americans have ranked purpose as their top priority—above promotions, income, job security, and hours. (…) After more than 40 years of research, we know that people struggle to find meaning when they lack autonomy, variety, challenge, performance feedback, and the chance to work on a whole product or service from start to finish.

But even those aren’t enough to make it to the number one position.

First and foremost, what makes a job meaningful is doing something that has a “significant, lasting impact on other people.”

But what can you do if you work for a real-world pointy-haired boss and/or a company stuck in a Fifties mindset?

You need to take control, since changing jobs isn’t always an option.

How?

Try one or more of the following

1. Don’t buy into your boss’ or your company’s view of you.
2. Find what meaning you can in your work, even if it’s not the “change the world” kind or all that obvious.
3. Add more meaning outside of work—you are not your career.
4. Invest in a meaningful future by developing skills and/or contacts that will lead to the changes you desire.
5. Hang out with meaningful people—as defined by you, not those around you or society in general.

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

Be sure to click over to see the February 2014 Leadership Development Blog Carnival: What Great Leaders Do

Flickr image credit: Max Klingensmith

Media, including me, have termed Millennials the “entitled generation,” but, as with most things, there are two sides to the coin.

Over the last few years I’ve written about what I call “aMillennials” and I still think the term is apt.

As they age, the difference has become clearer.

Some Millennials still seem to think they are entitled to a job because they are there and promoted because they show up; in general, they feel they are owed something by the world at large.

aMillennials believe they should be hired because they can contribute, challenged to grow and that hard work will get them promoted.

They also have the silly idea that there is more to life than work.

 “There’s a huge gap across the generations in terms of how people look at the whole question of time and commitment and what that means,” said Stewart D. Friedman, director of the Wharton Work/Life Integration Project and the author of “Baby Bust: New Choices for Men and Women in Work and Family.”

They crave transparently, have little patience with corporate games and vote with their feet when stymied.

“People are just more disaffected now with that kind of lifestyle and want to have a greater sense of control,” Mr. Friedman said. “Where companies don’t provide that sense of meaning and purpose, their brand as employer is weakened. They’re not going to be able to compete for the best and the brightest.”

aMillenial-style entitlement is even invading the hallowed halls of Wall Street.

“The longstanding tradition of 100-hour work weeks, that’s not going to be easy to change, but I applaud these efforts,” Mr. Friedman said. “The young people, after two years in an analyst program at a bank on Wall Street, they’re burnt out, they’re saying ‘I don’t want to live like this.’”

Given the attitude, you can expect careers, from medicine to finance, that have historically included long hours, total immersion, high stress and total commitment to change and the changes will be wrenching.

What it means to business, both large and small, is a willingness to provide meaningful work as opposed to just a paycheck—no matter how fat.

Please join me Friday for a first person look at this change and another view on what’s driving it.

Flickr image credit: Jannes Pockele