Last December a post entitled Top Ten Reasons Why Large Companies Fail To Keep Their Best appeared in Talent Forbes and about a month later another contributor boiled the 10 reasons down to one (with 2 parts),

1) Create an organization where those who manage others are hired for their ability to manage well, supported to get even better at managing, and held accountable and rewarded for doing so.

2) Then be clear about what you’re trying to accomplish as an organization – not only in terms of financial goals, but in a more three-dimensional way. What’s your purpose; what do you aspire to bring to the world? What kind of a culture do you want to create in order to do that?  What will the organization look, feel and sound like if you’re embodying that mission and culture?  How will you measure success?  And then, once you’ve clarified your hoped-for future, consistently focus on keeping that vision top of mind and working together to achieve it.

Yesterday’s Ducks in a Row focus was Greg Smith and his resignation from Goldman Sachs. Greg resigned because he felt the culture had deteriorated to the point that he could no longer ethically tell candidates that it’s a great place to work—Goldman’s focus is squarely on maximizing their own profit and clients be damned. (The story is all over traditional and social media.)

At the end of his resignation Greg says,

Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.

The bold is mine and that thought fits the “if you learn nothing else…” admonishment.

But I will go a step further—

You can’t attract great clients without great talent, so even if you make money in the short-term you will die in the long-term—bereft of both talent and clients.

Great culture attracts great talent; great talent attracts great clients; great clients spend great money—over and over and over.

Flickr image credit: Samuel Mann

“The stakes are high. You’re dealing with volatility. There are often secrets. … You often feel confused, at odds with a least one of your people, out of control.”

Do you ever feel this way when dealing with team members who are at odds?

It’s actually a quote by Richard Simon, editor of The Psychotherapy Networker (article in the NY Times), addressing the extremely high stress of being a couples therapist. (I did change ‘patient’ to ‘people’)

The parallels between couples therapy and managing are amazing—and frightening.

Frightening because too often these days people are making guns their solution of choice, so ignoring stuff may not be the best option.

Even managers with fantastic teams working in great companies with excellent cultures often feel stressed when dealing with the daily squabbles of normal human beings.

Downgrade any of those components and the stress goes up accordingly.

When dealing with the situation and resulting stress you need to recognize is that it’s not unique to you or your organization; it’s normal.

The first thing to do is make sure that you aren’t the source, but if your MAP is contributing to the problem apply whatever corrections are necessary to change that.

The second thing is to recognize that you have little choice but to act as a therapist on occasion, take time to learn a few of the tools and add them to your management skillset.

Because as much as your team and company will benefit from that knowledge, there is no question that you will benefit more.

Flickr image credit: cliff1066™

I dream; you dream; everybody dreams—without dreams there would be no reason to get out of bed in the morning, let alone do anything else.

Robert Kennedy summed up the human attitude towards dreams when he said, “There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why… I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?”

Why not, indeed?

Walt Disney tells us, “All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them.”

And Jesse Owens elaborated on that when he said, “We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort.”

But if you find yourself dreaming more than doing Baltasar Gracian’s advice should help, “Dreams will get you nowhere, a good kick in the pants will take you a long way.”

Entrepreneurs are dreamers big-time and entrepreneurism is truly a global force; Jack Kerouac understood not only the universal appeal of dreams, but also its universal effect, “All human beings are also dream beings. Dreaming ties all mankind together.”

Entrepreneurs looking to hire would do well to remember the words of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and make them their mantra, Dream no small dreams for they have no power to move the hearts of men.”

When times are darkest and your dream seems unlikely to reach fruition you will find the words of Christopher Reeve inspiring, “So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable.”

Are you ever too old to dream? John Barrymore has a great answer to that, “A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams.”

Finally, you can do a lot worse than let the words of Malcolm Forbes be the driving force in your world, “When you cease to dream you cease to live.”

Image credit: Melody Campbell

It’s always surprising how often different sources address the same problems offering similar solutions, but in such different ways that at first glance you wouldn’t notice.

Within days of each other, both Fortune/CNN and BNET offered up good information on employee motivation. Fortune/CNN article was science-based, while BNET was experience-based, with a leavening of humor.

They both said essentially the same thing with one exception, which I’ll get to in a minute.

Motivating employees means providing real purpose in their work; it requires challenging them and encouraging them to learn and grow; and it requires clear communications, including well-defined plans, roles and responsibilities.

Pretty standard stuff.

Now for the exception; the science offered up a new twist that just might help your implementation.

Removing obstacles is not the flip side of providing purpose, challenge and clear communications.

In other words, this is not one of those times that removing the negative means the positive will automatically rush in to fill the void or vice versa, that having the positives will overcome the negatives.

In this case you need to address the two as totally separate subjects.

First, remove any obvious negatives.

Next, start implementing the positives.

Third, be on the lookout for new obstacles.

Fourth, and most important, be sure that you on the side of the angels and not one of the obstacles.

Flickr image credit: zedbee

I found this great list of dumb boss quotes and thought I’d share my favorites along with my editorializing. You can check out the rest of the list here. There’s an old saying that people don’t quit companies, they quit managers and today’s quotes will tell you why.

First up is the manager who exemplifies the Peter Principle, “I’ve noticed that our ‘cost of goods sold’ rise whenever we experience greater sales. What can we do to reverse this trend?”

Then there is the obviously caring manager known for his leadership skills, “I’m getting a new company car new week. Please call the dealer and ask him to delay the delivery until after Wednesday’s layoffs. I want to appear sensitive.”

Many times what managers tell candidates in an interview isn’t exactly the way things work on the job, “I’m sorry if I ever gave you the impression your input would have any effect on my final decision.”

Other managers don’t bother to pretend, “I threw your suggestion away. Only managers can make suggestions.”

Some managers give are known for putting their people in no-win situations, “If you are on schedule, then your plan was not aggressive enough. If you are behind schedule, you must be goofing off.”

There are many managers who really don’t have a clue when it comes to motivation, “Don’t worry, give it a try. You have nothing to fear but failure, demotion and termination.”

Just in case you think that these are all fiction, the following were added by readers.

From Sophia: “You are not here to think, you are here to do.”

From dliney: Manager: “We’re going to promote you- you’ll be like a faculty member.”
Staff: “Then there will be a raise”
Manager: “Uh-no.”

From cwbailey64: “Frankly, I know I hired you, but you have to admit… you have no talent.”

Anonymous: Everyone who disagrees with me signify by saying “I resign.”

I hope enjoyed these as much as I did and will take a minute and add your own to the collection.

Image credit: HikingArtist.com

Tony Hsieh Has been beating the drum that happy employees provide the best customer experience and help assure success and sharing his wisdom on how to do it.

The other question I keep getting asked is how do you do it when you

• aren’t the CEO or even a senior manager;
• don’t have the budget for great perks; or
• aren’t the touchy-feely rah-rah type (direct quote).

The short answer is in five words, you take time to care.

Why should you care?

The how is nicely summed up in this article about new research from Harvard Business School.

Gallup estimates the cost of America’s disengagement crisis at a staggering $300 billion in lost productivity annually.

$300 billion is a number that should get anyone’s attention.

The engagement issue is relatively simple and definitely cheap to solve.

The problem is that, as usual, employees and managers aren’t on the same page.

The research shows that for employees “the single most important [event] — by far — is simply making progress in meaningful work.”
Managers are another story.

“When we asked 669 managers from companies around the world to rank five employee motivators in terms of importance, they ranked “supporting progress” dead last. Fully 95 percent of these managers failed to recognize that progress in meaningful work is the primary motivator, well ahead of traditional incentives like raises and bonuses.”

What constitutes supporting progress isn’t rocket science, either.

• Autonomy, meaning no micromanagement;
• sufficient resources, meaning valid scheduling and enough of whatever to get the job done without having to beg or being left to fail without them; and
• learning from problems, meaning understanding the why and how, not just the what.

If you find any of the three difficult to provide you need to look in the mirror.

The problem isn’t about having time to support progress; the problem is that your MAP doesn’t support the concept.

Flickr image credit: ZedBee | Zoë Power

Back in the late Seventies/early Eighties women who chose to stay home, as opposed to working, were, demeaned, called “traitors to the cause” and looked down on for their choice.

Which was stupid.

Today, people who don’t start their own companies or choose to work for established corporations are similarly treated.

Which is just as stupid.

Not everybody should be an entrepreneur; not everybody should work in a startup; and those choices do not reflect negatively on the quality of a person’s skills or attitude.

Choosing to work for an established company or large corporation does not lower people’s intrinsic value; nor does it mean they are dumb, lazy, unmotivated or uncreative.

Some see large company experience as a training ground, while for others there is pride in being part of something large and ongoing and they enjoy the camaraderie.

Some are looking for stability, although that is mostly gone, and some don’t really care as long as they can pay their bills—their job (paycheck) is not their career; that energy is focused on a passion that just doesn’t pay.

Even some entrepreneur’s think traditional jobs can be a better fit.

Just as thousands of intelligent, educated, driven, passionate, creative women chose to stay home and raise their kids, thousands of intelligent, educated, driven, passionate creative people choose to work for large companies.

As I said Tuesday, it’s about fit and “fit” isn’t a reason to judge.

We are all different; you need to find what floats your boat and do it—not do what others say should float it.

Stock.xchng image credit: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1221230

There is much talk about the need for “cultural fit” when hiring and rightly so, since being in the wrong culture is equivalent to a fish out of water.

But does fitting require total acceptance? Does it mean agreeing 100% with every value and the way each is implemented?

It’s not nitpicking; bad hires are only one outcome of a bad fit between candidates and corporate culture; bad cultural fits are also the culprit in most screwed up M&A.

Actually, there are many similarities between hiring one person and acquiring/merging two companies—no matter how complementary the skills, technology and experience, cultural incompatibility typically leads to disaster.

While culture may not seem obvious when acquiring or hiring, due diligence and good interviewing is eminently capable of identifying and exploring it.

The problem is that managers often ignore cultural differences, because they believe they that their culture is ‘right’ and those joining will change—much like the people who marry “in spite of [x],” believing that s/he will change because s/he loves me.

Consider Amazon and Zappos vs. Microsoft and Skype and then think about the candidates you “hired anyway.”

The problem is often not a matter of right or wrong, but of different—the things that float your boat don’t float mine or, worse, sink it.

And 98% of the time you should have seen it coming.

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

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/

John Greathouse is a VC at Rincon Venture Partners and he offers up some great advice about celebrating successes, both large and small.

I pretty much agree with all his ideas.

What I don’t agree with is that they are primarily for use in what he calls AdVentures (internet startups) and not in Big Dumb Companies (BDCs), which, he says, use newsletters.

While BDCs may indeed use newsletters, although due to expense I’m pretty sure they are mostly digital now, you don’t have to be a net startup to implement tweaked versions of Greathouse’s ideas in your organization—you just need people.

First, let’s restate the acronym and make it SSMLDC for Startup, Small, Medium, Large Dumb Company (yes, there are startup DCs), the key word is dumb, so we’ll call them DCs for short.

Some DCs don’t value their people (which make them happy hunting grounds for recruiters), while others just don’t show it.

But the real problem is one of individual managers, since they have the option of appreciating and caring whether those above them do or not.

No one says you have to manage like your boss or her boss or the company’s big boss.

I have seen many managers who are anything from a few degrees to 180 off from their company’s stated and/or de facto approach.

The good ones leave DCs for good companies and the bad ones leave for DCs.

If your goal is to be a great manager in any environment take the ideas that Greatehouse describes and tweak them to fit your group—whether you’re a VP or a team leader

After all, just because you work for a dumb jerk (DJ) doesn’t mean you have to be one.

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