I’m frequently accused about being badly out-of-date with current terms, let alone trendy ones, but I find myself using them even when they make me uncomfortable. That’s the case with “talent,” a term I’ve used, although it makes me squirm. This post from Wally Bock does a great job of explaining why. (I never really thought it through.) Thanks, Wally!

I’m sick of “talent.” I’m sick of wars for talent, and talent pipelines, and talent acquisition. I’m sick of talent anywhere it’s used as a substitute for people. People are not talent. People have talent. People are more than talent.

There’s no such thing as disembodied talent. Every bit of talent comes wrapped up in flesh and blood people.

People Are More Than Talent

People aren’t just talent. They bring you their hopes and fears. They bring their experience, expertise, and passions. Sure, their talent is important, but so are other things.

Their work ethic is important. The other people on your team want to work with someone who pulls their own weight. If you’ve got a slacker, even a talented one, you’ve got a problem.

Social skills matter. Nobody wants to work with or for a jerk. If you’ve got a talented person who can’t get along with other people, you’ve got a problem.

The situation matters. Context is critical. Talent is specific. If you’ve got a talented person in the wrong job, you have a problem.

Let’s quit talking about talent as if it’s some disembodied thing that we can bottle or store or (gag) develop. Instead, let’s think of talent as one of the many parts of those complex and wonderful people we work with.

Image credit: Three Star Leadership

I am a former Marine, I served five years and learned a lot while in. Marines tend to have some quirks and one of those quirks is the idea of motivation.

If a Marine is said to be motivated it means they are professional, diligent and an all around squared away Marine. To not be motivated basically means you are a poor performer or worse.

One takeaway from this experience was that the idea of motivation was skewed for me for a while.

In the civilian world I have never once heard one person call another motivated. However I have heard people say that someone is disciplined or that they have a strong work ethic. And maybe that’s what the Marines meant, discipline and motivation were really one and the same.

So that takes me back to my question. Is it better to be disciplined or motivated?

Getting up early for a run typically sucks; I don’t know many that want to leave the comfort of their warm bed to go for a run or to the gym. What gets them up? Rarely motivation, it’s usually discipline.

Working toward a task at work can be tedious. Discipline will get you to the finish line, while motivation can be that spark that gets an idea flowing.

Perhaps it’s motivation that tells you to get up early and discipline carries you through.

I’ll be honest. I lack discipline. It’s a constant struggle for me and something I strive to achieve. Since it’s an area of opportunity I tend to dwell on it.

It has slowly become apparent to me that motivation and discipline are not mutually exclusive. They are compatible.

So, as you go through your day tomorrow consider what is driving you?

Is it motivation or discipline or all of the above?

Image credit: Pati Morris

Short post today, because the links are more important than anything I can say.

These days too many people brag about working excessive hours and too many managers rate their people based on their willingness to work those hours.

As Labor Day approaches, and a single day of rest from all the hours we Americans spend on the job is upon us, people can’t seem to stop talking about the crazy hours they work.
One of the most-read articles on the Wall Street Journal’s web site last week was a piece about how 4 a.m. — a time so ungodly there’s even a TED Talk about how surreal it is — has become the most productive hour for go-getters.

That’s in spite of research that excessive hours quell innovation and creativity, reduce productivity, increase errors and can cause serious health problems.

Yet research, time and time again, shows the problems with overwork — on people’s health, on turnover, on absenteeism, on productivity. Studies have shown that after about 50 hours a week, productivity actually decreases, and it plummets after 55 hours, leaving no detectable difference between those who work 56 hours and those who work 70 — or 130, as Mayer suggested may be needed for successful startups.

Many years ago a smart senior manager, who became a serial entrepreneur, commented that the need for 50+ hour weeks was a sign of bad management.

I can already hear the arguments, because I’ve been hearing them for years (decades, actually).

So here’s proof from someone who’s not an academic or researcher who doesn’t understand, because they don’t work in the real world.

Jeff Bezos.

Last Wednesday, Amazon announced it was preparing to launch a pilot program in which a few dozen employees would log only 30 hours each week. In return they would receive 75% of their normal salary and retain full benefits.  (…) By offering employees more flexibility, Amazon sends the message that life outside the workplace matters. The new policy also indicates that the world’s second-largest retailer is acknowledging the limits of human cognition, whether or not that was the Amazon’s intent.

That’s it. Now read the links.

Image credit: Martin Cathrae/Flickr

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

Whether you admire Arianna Huffington, founder of The Huffington Post, or not, you can’t argue with her success.

But it came at a cost, “…seven years ago I collapsed from exhaustion, burnout and sleep deprivation. I broke my cheekbone on the way down and got four stitches on my right eye.”

That incident lead Huffington to add a third metric to success’ standard two metrics of money and power.

…the third metric, which includes our well-being, our wisdom, our capacity to wonder and bring joy into our lives, and our capacity to give. Without these four pillars, life is really reduced to our to-do list.

Too many in the startup community do treat their lives as a to-do list, from starting a company through marriage and kids, with sub to-do lists for each.

They lose sight of the simple; seeing life as a series of competitive challenges.

Which I find hilarious, since that attitude harks back to the much maligned Boomers, whose mantra was “life is a challenge to be overcome.”

Granted, there are many challenges that indeed need to be added to our to-do list until overcome, but there are many others that, although noticed, may be passed by, with nary a ripple in our well-being.

Destroying yourself for the sake of a vision benefits no one—not your team, nor your investors, nor your family/friends and least of all yourself.

Image credit: HikingArtist

A few weeks ago I read an article in Business Week about corporations using security surveillance to check on people taking sick days. It was a list of high profile absences that I wanted to share with you and that gave me the idea for Oddball Facts as an occasional alternative to Quotable Quotes.

Of course, sometimes employees are at work when they aren’t; in other words, the body is present, but the mind is absent, which can have dire results.

Jack Phillips and Harold Bride, radio operators, Titanic: The duo were tasked with handling radio messages for the ship’s 2,220-plus passengers. Unfortunately, they didn’t heed significant iceberg warnings.

Typically, inexcusable absences focus on line workers who call in sick when they aren’t; most people assume that it’s more prevalent in lower levels and mostly on unimportant days, but that isn’t always the case.

There’s a commercial running these days for a cold remedy that features quarterback Drew Brees; the take away is that some people can’t miss a day’s work. But consider another sports figure that didn’t see it that way.

Manny Ramirez, MLB superstar: Playing for the Red Sox in 2003, he was out sick during a series against the Yankees. Though not sick enough to stop him from socializing with the Pinstripes’ Enrique Wilson at the Boston Ritz-Carlton bar.

Remember Nero, who fiddled while Rome burned? He didn’t have anything on this CEO.

Jimmy Cayne, former CEO, Bear Stearns: The Bridge Grand Master famously departed for a tournament as his firm—and its nearly $400 billion in assets—flirted with bankruptcy and sent Wall Street into chaos.

Many companies allow employees to work from home, even management on occasion, but how long would Wall Street tolerate the president of a troubled company who worked a third of the time from home, let alone a vacation home? Not long, you say? It didn’t seem to bother them when it was the President of the United States.

George W. Bush, former President, brush-clearing enthusiast: During two terms, Bush spent 487 days at Camp David and 490 at his Crawford ranch. One-third of his Presidency was thus spent “working from home.”

Flickr image credit: D Sharon Pruitt

Post from Leadership Turn Image credit: snackx

Monday TWR Lighting CEO Ken Meador shared information and insights on what works in his company and doing business in general; Tuesday I wrote that satisfying most people’s top four desires was more important than money if you want your people to stay.

Considering the 11 year average tenure, TWR seems to have nailed the retention issue, but I wondered about salaries and the demographic challenge the company faces to grow, so I asked Ken.

Me: Are your salaries comparable to the area? Higher? Lower?

Ken: Geographically we are marginally comparable, market/competitor wise we are a bit lower. Houston is still a tight job market with plenty of jobs and limited amount of educated (legal) talent from which to draw. Those employees who make up the heart and soul of the TWR Lighting stay because they “feel” a part of, rather than apart from the company.

Me: Do have profit sharing?

Ken: No. We have a company wide bonus pool based on performance metrics, revenue, SG&A & EBITDA. Also, 11 key people in the company have been rewarded as shareholders.

me: I ask because I’ve always believed that people don’t stay for money and I think you prove that, but thought I’d better check:)

Ken: We find that those who leave for “tha money” are typically at the lower end of our employee spectrum or Gen Ys.

Me: What’s the median age of your workers?

Ken: 41

Me: What are you doing about hiring and keeping Gen Y workers?

Ken: At the moment, little. They have a different point of view regarding “work ethic”, team participation and adaptation to our culture, which by most counts TWR is progressive in comparison to others. A “take it or leave me alone” attitude surfaced after a period of time.

Me: Your comment that it was your Gen Y workers who left for money seems to be a real world contradiction of what they claim—that they’re more interested in culture and responsible management, etc. than money.

Ken: Yeah , I’ve read the same things and what companies are doing to “accommodate” to the whims of the Gen Yers. Talk about a “tipping point”, paranoia in business, even big business, that geeks will inherit the business by techno-proxy has altered business models, changed HR hiring practices and has created a whole new industry in the “kid-glove” handling of these mercenary newbie’s. The Gen Yers are only interested in responsible management as long as it doesn’t interfere with their personal culture. Down deep they want the money just as much as any generation before them.

Me: What do you think is their real attitude?

Ken: See the answer to the question above. Suffice it to say we are a small player in the Gen Y arena, basically techie CAD types. Even using our interview processes (never said we were perfect) we were prone to give the benefit of the doubt that once they were immersed in our culture, they would adapt. However, our experience has been that they have less than essential people & communication skills (preferring instead great texting acronyms), strictly 8-5ers which doesn’t fit well with a 24/7/365 model and carried an unreal expectation of their “worth” to the business.

Me: Based on your employee longevity you must be facing the problem of replacing retiring workers. How do you plan to retain all their knowledge and pass it on to newer/younger workers?

Ken: Tribal knowledge transfer is probably the most critical aspect of transitioning employees. To date, we accomplish the transfer of knowledge by continuous cross-training in the most critical areas of product manufacturing and assembly, materials logistics and inventory control and sales. Supplemental to this is the participation by so many in the hiring processes, involvement and feedback in the lean manufacturing processes and cross-functional involvements in project prioritization and execution.

Ken says he will respond to your comments and questions himself.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL