Colin Cowherd vs Freddie Coleman: Who Would You Rather Work For?

I’ve been spending a lot of time lately listening to the local ESPN Radio affiliate - which is odd because I’m not an avid sports fan. However, I do consider myself fairly well versed in talk radio. I spent ten years in radio and worked in a number of different formats, including news/talk. So, I find myself listening to talk radio through both my “radio filter” and “leadership filter”.

Two hosts in particular have jumped out at me for the examples they provide for both good and bad leadership behaviors. The hosts in question are Colin Cowherd and Freddie Coleman. My critiques of these guys have nothing to do with their sports knowledge - they are both super smart and have dazzling command of their subject matter. And, in their defense, I’m basing my critiques only on what I hear on the radio. In “real life” both of these gentlemen may be completely different than their on-air personas. But on the air one host models many classic “good boss” behaviors while the other models many “bad boss” behaviors. Now, Let’s go to the whiteboard to break it down….

Colin Cowherd: I am regularly amazed at how dismissive and derisive he is to his callers. Maybe that’s part of his schtick - but it doesn’t come across as “entertaining” as it does with other talk-show hosts - it just comes off as Cowherd being a jerk. He comes off as very arrogant and condescending. I had a boss like that once. This guy was very smart - probably a genuine genius - but was his own worst enemy. His direct reports found him so arrogant and abrasive that they avoided talking to him. He talked a good game about having an “open door policy”, “empowering his employees”, yada yada yada - but he was ultimately just unpleasant to work for. Because he was so dismissive and even demeaning at times his people were mostly focused on just keeping him off their backs not on moving the organization forward- which was a shame really, because this guy was very bright and talented. Again, he was his own worst enemy.

Freddie Coleman: Freddie is like the anti-Cowherd. He has a way of making even the “dumb callers” feel like they made a contribution. He is polite and expresses appreciation and I have never heard him insult a caller or tell him to “go back to flipping burgers”. His show in general seems geared toward actually seeking out his audience’s opinions rather than using them as a springboard to launch into a diatribe or put-down. Like Cowherd, Coleman has an encyclopedic knowledge about sports - but he never comes across as the arrogant “know-it-all” that Cowherd does. I’ve had bosses like Coleman too. They are the ones that encourage input and value an exchange of ideas - even those ideas that might contradict their own.

As I stated at the beginning, I’m basing these observations only on what I hear on a radio show. These guys may or may not be anything like the way they sound, but I try to find “learning moments” all around me - even on sports talk radio! These are two guys at the top of their game professionally, but in terms of leadership styles which one would you rather work for? Put me on team Freddie!

Effective Leadership: Elevating The Coaching Discussion

Obviously, a big part of our job as leaders within an organization is to manage performance. But limiting our one-on-one discussions to just metrics is a big mistake. We should seek to have "bigger" discussions with our employees - not just interrogate them about their numbers for the week.

Here's a simple tip: Begin to ask your employees more reflective questions. "What's your five-year plan?" or "What do your really enjoy doing?" or "What would your dream job be?". The question is not so important, but the practice is. Drawing you employees out will help you as a leader to know them better and to target areas of development that will address not only those skills needed for their immediate job performance but for their long-term career development as well. And think about this: if I'm an employee with a boss who is genuinely concerned about my long-term development - not just about my current "numbers" - I am much more likely to be loyal to him/her and the company.

Effective Training: Learning To Shut Up!

One of the hardest things for trainers to learn to do is to SHUT UP! Let's be honest, what draws many of us to a training role is the opportunity to be in the spotlight. Most of us trainers are comfortable (maybe even happy) in front of a group. We might even like the little ego stroke we get from "pontificating" on subjects and being viewed as "experts" within the organization. But sometimes, our own egos can get in the way of learning.

A colleague of mine gave me this advice several years ago in regards to delivering training. I'm not saying I'm the best at following this advice but it's a great counsel all the same. He says if you have a choice between a lecture and an activity, ALWAYS go with the activity. But wait, if I'm using activities all the time I won't be able to share my wit and wisdom with the class! I won't be able to be in the spotlight! My friends response to that would be, after a deadpan expression, "....and your point is?"

Effective Leadership: Are you a "Steve Jobs" or "Bobby Knight" Leader?

David Aaker at the Harvard Business Review has an excellent post, "Steve Jobs and the Bobby Knight School of Leadership". It raises a few interesting questions? Would their management styles be tolerated if they weren't so successful? Would their management styles be effective with Gen Y'ers and Millenials? Could they have been even more successful if they had learned to scale back their negative behaviors?

Corporate Culture: 10 Warning Signs of a Toxic Boss at the Interview

Here's some information on how to determine a bad potential boss:

10 Warning Signs of a Toxic Boss at the Interview

Effective Leadership: Maximize Employee Performance by Leveraging Discretionary Effort

Here's a few thoughts on discretionary effort:
Maximize Employee Performance by Leveraging Discretionary Effort

Effective Leadership: Coach to behaviors not metrics

The call center business is very metrics driven. We operate in an environment where everything is measured - hold time, handle time, conversion rates, dropped calls - you name it, we measure it. In fact, I'm pretty sure there's even an Avaya report that will show you the number of times the toilets flush in the employee restrooms. Well maybe I'm exaggerating just a bit but it's not hard to understand how we can sometimes fall in to the trap of managing to metrics instead managing to behaviors.

It is not uncommon at all to walk past a coaching discussion and hear something like this: " Well, your AHT (average handle time) is 540 seconds. Get that down to 480 by next week." Unfortunately, this supervisor thinks he's "helping" his agent be saying this. The reality is this is not helpful at all. If the agent knew how to reduce their AHT to 480 seconds don't you think they'd already be doing that?

A much better approach is to arm the agent with the specific BEHAVIORS that will help them accomplish the goal. Instead of saying "get your handle time down", the effective coach would give the agent specific action items that will result in a lower handle time, for example: follow the required call flow or ask this specific question at a specific time, etc. And this doesn't apply to only AHT discussions. This applies to any aspect of managing performance.

I am not saying that metrics or numbers are not important. On the contrary, in the call center industry, particularly in the call center outsourcing industry, meeting metrics is how we make our money. But their is a huge danger in holding agents accountable to metrics instead of behaviors and here's why: Agents do not control metrics. BUT agents do have complete control over their behaviors. If the right behaviors are happening the metrics will take care of themselves.

An agent feels empowered when he or she leaves the coaching discussion with specific, observable and measurable behaviors to put in to practice vs. feeling demoralized after getting beat up over their "numbers". And here's something to keep in mind: If agents are doing all the "right things" and still not hitting the metrics than we have probably showed them the wrong "right things". Make sure you focus on the "critical few" behaviors that will have the biggest impact on performance.

Remember, managing performance is about changing behavior. It's as simple as that. And you will never change behavior by focusing on a number. You have to focus on the right behaviors and hold your team members accountable to those behaviors.