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.

Effective Leadership: Get Your Kicks on Route 66

My family just completed our annual vacation. This year we took an RV to Oklahoma to visit Laura's parents and then swung over to see the Grand Canyon on our way home. It was a great visit. I wanted to share at least one thought I had while driving home - and trust me, we did alot of driving!

If you've ever driven on I-40, which runs across the southwest US, you'll notice that much of its path parallels Route 66. In fact, every few miles you can exit I-40 and actually drive on "Historic Route 66". Perhaps it's because Route 66 has such an iconic presence in our culture or perhaps I was just spending too much time watching mile markers and cacti roll by, but I kept thinking about this old stretch of pavement. I thought about how times have changed since it was originally built. I thought about how the construction of I-40 forever changed Route 66 and the little towns that had sprung up beside it - many of those towns are now ghost towns. I thought about the men (there were probably a few women too) who built the old highway. In all of these instances I was really thinking about a legacy - I was thinking about what was left behind.

The hundreds or thousands of people that built Route 66 are, for the most part, dead and gone now. Yet there is something left behind - some of it good, some of it bad. There's the romantic aspect of Route 66 that recalls a different, maybe cooler and more care free time, that makes us sing songs and think of old TV shows or grainy home movies from the 50's and 60's. But there is also a legacy of lonely stretches of crumbling asphalt running past abandoned gas stations, hotels and restaurants - a street of broken dreams. I guess the true legacy of Route 66 is in the eye of the beholder.

As leaders, what will our legacy be? Will our life's work be left to crumble and decay after it's replaced by "Interstate 40". Or will we leave something behind that will be of true value for all that follow in our footsteps - something that won't be discarded when the next new thing comes along. Again, as so often is the case with leadership, it comes back to that stewardship question: did I leave people better than I found them?

Effective Leadership: The secret to happiness...

I had the opportunity to attend the ASTD national conference in Washington DC this past week. It was a great experience and I'll try to get a few posts up specific to what I learned. One recurring theme reminded me of a comedian I heard a few years back. His bit went something like this: "Hey, you want to know the secret to happiness? Lower your goals!" He may have meant it as a joke, but there's a nugget of truth in his statement; though I would rephrase it a bit. I wouldn't say to lower your goals but to have fewer goals.

One of the conference sessions I attended featured Ken Blanchard, author of "The One-Minute Manager", who applied this take on the Pareto principle: 20 percent of what a person does accounts for 80 percent of their success. Think about that. Most of our success comes down to just a few key behaviors! This concept lines up with the findings in an awesome book called "Influencer" which says the key to changing behavior is to identify the few "vital behaviors" instead of trying to change a laundry list of behaviors.

In managing the performance of our teams we will likely have much more success focusing on a few rather than many behaviors. It's no different on a personal level - we can't beat ourselves up over a litany of behaviors. Instead, we should focus on those vital behaviors that will have the most impact.

More to come....

Corporate Culture: The Victory Garden

I've started writing a blurb in Center Partners' monthly newsletter, "Off the Hook". Here's this month's column:

Have you ever planted a garden? Just a generation ago everybody had a garden but, unfortunately, it is becoming a lost art. Gardens are a lot of work! It’s not as simple as throwing some seeds in the dirt and hoping they’ll grow. To have a good, healthy garden you’ve got to have the right kind of soil. You’ve got to till the ground. You’ve got to clear rocks, sticks and other debris from your garden plot. You have to fertilize. You have to rake. You have to sow your seeds. You have to weed. You have to water. You have to keep critters (and in my case, kids) out of the garden. Are you getting my point? Good gardens don’t just happen. They require substantial planning and effective execution on the part of the gardener. And even with all the plowing, planting, raking, hoeing and watering, there’s no guarantee that you’ll have a good yield. No wonder gardening is becoming a lost art!

I think gardening is the perfect metaphor for building a healthy corporate culture. A great work environment doesn’t just happen on its own. Just like a garden, building a healthy, vibrant culture at work requires substantial planning and effective execution. It requires effort from every individual at every level of the organization, and we might not see the “fruits (or vegetables!) of our labors” immediately. But one thing is certain: every organization will have a culture. The question is will it be a culture that we have carefully planned, fed and nurtured? Or will it be whatever culture we allow to take root? Any gardener knows that growing a bumper crop of delicious veggies takes a lot of work but growing weeds takes zero effort on our part. It goes deeper than that though, because weeds will actually choke out the good, healthy plants that we want to grow. So the gardener’s job is not just to nurture the good plants but to pluck out the bad ones as well. It’s a constant fight - The never ending battle of man vs. weeds! (Start dramatic theme music here.)

The folks at the executive and director level of Center Partners are actively engaged in conversations about CP’s culture as we speak. You’ll be hearing and seeing more about this in the coming weeks and months. On a personal level, it has been very exciting to observe and participate in some of those conversations. I have been impressed with the insight, imagination and commitment of the people involved in the process. But everyone, not just the executives and directors, have key roles to play in CP’s culture. My kids get sick of me saying this, but we have a fairly common mantra/question in our home: “Am I being part of the problem or part of the solution?” Maybe, in keeping with the whole gardening theme, we could ask ourselves, “Am I nurturing a nice healthy garden or a scraggly weed patch?”

This past fall my family sat down for a dinner we made from things that came only from our garden. We had potatoes, tomatoes, carrots, cucumbers, raspberries and strawberries. Believe it or not, we felt a great sense of satisfaction knowing that we had “grown” all of those yummy fruits and veggies ourselves. Similarly, I think we can all feel proud of the culture we’ve grown and are growing here at Center Partners. We all have a stake in the kind of environment we have here at CP and it’s up to each of us to decide whether we want a Victory Garden or a weed patch. If we choose the Victory Garden then let’s all dig in and get our hands dirty!

Effective Leadership: "Sit right back and you'll hear a tale..."

I've always had a great affinity for Gilligan; I grew up watching reruns of Gilligan's Island every day after school; I can sing the theme song (both versions! If you're a true Gilligan afficienado you know what I'm talking about) word for word; I've even been told I have an uncanny resemblance to Gilligan himself - not sure if I should be proud of that or not. Believe it or not, I learned a few good lessons from "little buddy."

Remember the episode where Gilligan makes a set of wings? In one scene he has his wings on and is flapping madly and actually hovering about ten feet off the ground. He says "Skipper! Skipper! Look at me! I'm flying!." Skipper replies, "You can't fly! It's impossible! Get down from there!" So Gilligan dejectedly crashes to the ground. Gilligan was actually flying until Skipper "shot him down" with what he said.

Here's the moral to that little story: People have a tendancy to live up to their expectations. If you set the bar low - guess what - that's exactly what you get. If you set the bar high - that's exactly what you'll get. This is basically the same theme as my last post. We can "condition" people to perform (or not perform) by what we say (or don't say) to them.

Negative conditioning or negative messages have a way of becoming self-fulfilling prophecies. As an example, look at our current economic situation. For the past 18 months the media has been bombarding us with how bad the economy was. Even though the vast majority of Americans were still doing ok financially, the media (and some politicians') constant drum beat about the economy forced people to actually change their behavior - in a way that just caused more harm to the economy - they spent less money! Don't get me wrong, there are some major issues going on in our economy right now but if you believed what much of the media and politicos are saying we are on the verge of armageddon. The reality is the economy today is bad, but no where near as bad as it was even during the late 70's and early 80's. It goes to show if you say something often enough and loud enough people will begin to believe it and act the part.

Good leaders inspire. Good leaders play on the positive not the negative. Good leaders bring out the best in people - not the worst.

If the Skipper would've been on his game in that episode he would have encouraged Gilligan in his apparent successful attempts at flying. Who knows, maybe they could have flown off the island years sooner? Anything would've been better than the professor's coconut powered distress beacon!

Effective Leadership: Dogs, elephants and snow banks

The area in which I live was pummelled with snow over the past few weeks. Since December 18th we've recieved over 60 inches of snow! Needless to say, that's alot of snow. Most of us lucky homeowners have spent much of the last few days shoveling off our roofs in the hopes of avoiding a collapse. Well all of this roof clearing means nearly all the homes in my neighborhood are encircled by five-foot berms that, after daily thawing and nightly freezing, are now impenetrable, rock-hard mini mountains.

My dog Brandy, a shepherd/husky mix, has discovered that the chank link fence in our back yard which is about 4 1/2 feet tall without snow is now effectively about a foot high. She just scampers up the snow mound and hops right over the fence to freedom. Here's the funny part. Brandy would have never thought of jumping over the fence if the snow mounds had not provided her the opportunity. I've removed all the snow from the part of the fence where she's been escaping but guess what? she can still jump over the 4 1/2 foot fence! She could have been jumping over the fence for the past two years that we've had her but the thought never occurred to her. She WAS conditioned to stay within the confines of the yard. But now she sees that that measley little 4 1/2 foot fence need not keep her from exploring the big wide world! All thanks to the lousy snow!

This reminds me of a little story I've heard about training elephants. (I'm not positive it's true but it's a great analogy so stick with me.) When training baby elephants the trainers will cuff a large chain to the elephant's ankle. The other end of the chain is fastened to a large stake which is pounded deep into the ground. The chain and the stake are so strong that there is no way the baby elephant can escape. The little elephant learns very quickly just how far he can walk until the chain stops him. As the elephant grows he is conditioned to being staked. By the time the elephant is fully grown the trainer no longer has to use a big chain and stake. In fact he can use a flimsy rope barely nailed into the ground - anything to just remind the elephant that they are restrained. That elephant's brain is conditioned to believe he can't "escape" because he's staked - even if that stake is so flimsy he could pull it out with little effort.

Do we as leaders ever negatively "condition" our employees? We probably wouldn't do it intentionally, but I think we probably do it more than we realize. How might we be conditioning our reps? It might sound like this: "Oh, nobody's ever been able to achieve that! Maybe you'd better rethink your goals." Or maybe there are operational or process issues that condition our employees. I remember a former employer of mine would always have a "fire sale" at the end of every quarter. They were always short of hitting their quarterly sales figures so they would offer deep discounts. Both the reps and the customers were conditioned to expect big promos and discounts at the end of each quarter. Why should an agent try to hold top margin when he or she knows the company is going to slash prices at the end of the quarter? Whey should a customer cut a purchase order now when they know they can get a much better price by merely waiting until the end of the quarter?

Think about ways in which your organization might be negatively conditioning its employees and what you can do to help change that trend. Me? I'm going to go find my dog who is roaming the neighborhood at this very moment...

From the bookshelf....

Over the weekend I read Ayn Rand's Anthem. If you happen to be a fan of the rock group Rush you'll notice that drummer/lyricist Neil Peart "borrowed" from this book quite heavily for the band's concept album 2112. This is a great book and really makes you think about the concepts of individualism and collectivism. I'm sure there's a leadership lesson to be learned from Anthem also...but I'm too tired to think about it right now. Anyway, this is a great introduction to Rand's works. (I highly recommend the Rush album as well!)

The Ghosts of Leadership Past, Present and Future

In the Charles Dickens classic, A Christmas Carol, Ebeneezer Scrooge is visited by four spirits: One is his old business partner Jacob Marley. The other three are the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future. In keeping with that theme let's imagine a visit from the ghosts of Leadership past, present and future...

"Ooohhhhh! (That's what ghosts say!) I'm the ghost of Leadership Past and I wanted to show you how things used to be at your company. Remember when we first opened our doors? Remember the excitement we felt because we were a start up? Remember the great 'family' feel our organization had? Wow, we had some great ideas and a 'nothing can stop us' attitude. And isn't it funny how looking back we don't really think about the stupid mistakes we made - only how great everything was then compared to now? Remember that one great leader - she was awesome! Nothing like the leaders we have now. If only we could make our company like it was then."

"Bah! Humbug! That's all history. I'm the ghost of Leadership Future and I'm here to say the past doesn't matter. What's important is the future. We need to forget all of that history stuff because it's not going to help us be ready for upcoming challenges and opportunities. We need to be embracing new strategies, technologies and, yes I'll say it, leadership styles! If we're not constantly breaking new ground we're moving backwards. Let's make way for the next big thing!"

"Oh My! No wonder you guys are dead. I'm the ghost of Leadership Present and I've got to tell you you're both wrong ..... and right. The past is important. We need to build on the things we've done really well and leverage our legacy strengths - but we can't pine away for the past at the expense of the present or the future. Yes, some things may have been better back in the day, but be honest, some things were worse. And the future is very important - but not so important we sacrifice our core principles. We have to make sure we never lose site of those key values that made us who we are. I'm a bit partial but I think we need to stay grounded in the here and now - holding on to the things that got us here but keeping our eyes open to the future."

God Bless us everyone and Merry Christmas!

Effective Leadership: 20-60-20 - a win-win-win scenario

In our Coach Me 2 class we spend a little time discussing the 20/60/20 rule. This rule says that on a given team roughly 20 percent of our agents will be superstars, 20 percent will be strugglers and 60 percent will be average performers. So, with which group should the manager spend the most time?

The manager should dedicate the most time to the middle 60 - because that's the majority of his team. Unfortunately, however, many of the managers I've talked with say most of their time (and energy) is spent managing the bottom 20. Wouldn't it be great if there were a way to ensure that our top 20 and middle 60 got the same level of attention as our bottom 20? "But there just isn't time" you might say. Well today is your lucky day!

This is one of the most effective things a leader can do: use your top 20 to help you develop your bottom 20. This is a win-win-win scenario. The first winner is the top 20 agent. He or she feels appreciated and recognized when you say to them "You do a really good job at X. I would like for you to spend some time with (insert bottom 20 agent's name here) and show them some of the things that work well for you. Then report back to me and let me know how it went." Interestingly, one of the key workplace motivators for an employee is being entrusted with additional responsibilities. This scenario fits that bill quite nicely.

The second winner is the bottom 20 agent. They will benefit from getting some one-on-one "coaching" from a successful practioner, and them getting it from another face can't hurt either. And, let's be honest, if we have been in a management role for awhile we may not be as good in the trenches as our top 20 agents are; so tips and tricks coming from these folks might hold a bit more weight than those coming from us.

The third winner is the manager. Obviously, by leveraging our top twenty to work with our bottom 20 we've created much more time for ourselves to work with our middle 20. We could spend alot more space talking about all the cool things that come about from using the 20/60/20 rule but all we really need to know is that it works. Give it a try and see what happens.

Career Management: "Every girl's crazy 'bout a sharp dressed man!"

We recently had a young man complete six weeks of new hire training at our Couer D'Alene call center. Unlike his classmates who took full advantage of the company's rather casual dress code, this young man dressed in business attire throughout training. It wasn't until the newhire group graduated that the class realized this individual was a new agent just like them. They had all assumed he was their manager observing their performance in training - simply because of the way he was dressed!

ZZ Top reference aside, how we dress is quite important. I know we've grown up hearing things like "don't judge a book by it's cover" and "looks don't matter", but the reality is looks and dress do matter. People make judgements about us based on how we dress. The last thing we want is for our personal appearance or dress to be a distraction or detriment to how we are perceived in the organization.

In a career exploration class I facilitate we actually spend a lot of time talking about how to dress in the workplace. The adage about dressing for the job you want instead of the job you have makes total sense! And though it may seem superficial, one of the easiest things you can do to help yourself move up in an organization is to upscale your wardrobe.

President Obama: Excitedly Dissapointed...and proud of it!

This is my first post since the presidential election, so here are just a few thoughts: Is it possible to be dissapointed and proud at the same time? I did not vote for Barrack Obama. Politically speaking, I felt much more comfortable (though not excited) with John McCain so I voted for him. Am I dissapointed my guy lost? Sure. To be honest, I'm worried what an Obama administration (with a democrat controlled congress) might mean to the well being of our country over the next four years (taxes, defense, economy, etc...) But I can't help feeling excited by the historic nature of Obama's victory.

The fact that we've elected the first African-American president is a great thing. It says something about us as a nation. It says, as many of the African-American interviewees I've seen over the past week have said, that this truly is the land of opportunity for ALL . And in a strange way I actually feel that the conservative movement has been vindicated by Obama's election. For years many on the left have decried the US for being racist. Will they still consider our country racist? Probably, but their argument will hold even less water now. More whites than African Americans voted for Obama. That doesn't sound like a racist country to me. I was encouraged by the fact that, for the most part, race didn't have a whole lot to do with Obama's election. Obama ran a stronger campaign than McCain and he deserved to win. If his presidency gives hope and inspiration to a sector of our society who has otherwise felt dissinterested or disenfranchised, that's a good thing.

Even with it's flaws our democratic process works pretty darn well. I am proud that we've reached this milestone even though I voted against Obama. My vote against him was based on his positions - not the color of his skin. And in four years I will proudly vote against him again or for him based on his performance - not the color of his skin. And that's really the point: we are a much better nation if the election of Barack Obama means folks on both sides of the political spectrum have finally moved beyond race.

Corporate Culture: "All in the Family"

The family was the world's first "organization". Wise men and women down through the ages have discussed the vital role families play in society. Most societal ills can be traced back to the breakdown of the family unit. Debates rage about what defines marriage and family. Families are a big deal to everyone because there is so much at stake: A nation or society is only as strong as its familes.

Isn't it funny how as kids we would fight tooth and nail with our siblings. I can remember a few fights I had with my brothers - name calling, cruel insults, eye gouging, bloody noses, body slams - you name it. But if someone outside of the family were to threaten or bully me or one of my brothers the other two would be their to defend the other to the last breath. That's what families do. What is it about families that makes us so invested emotionally - both good emotions and bad emotions? Well, I don't understand all of the science but I think it's part of the grand plan. It's at home with our family that we first learn the lessons we'll need to be successful in life. And yet it seems we sometimes compartmentalize or differentiate our "family self" from our "professional self". Perhaps there are things we've learned from our families that we could apply to our organizations?

Isn't it great how your family loves you unconditionally? You can be the world's biggest bonehead and your family will still accept you. You can be in between prison terms and you'll still get invited over to your parents' home for Thanksgiving dinner. You can continually fued with siblings, possibly even coming to physical blows, but if someone else threatens a family member all of sudden you'll rush to their defense. Blood truly is thicker than water. Except in very rare occasions, a person's family will love and accept them no matter what. Familes don't give up on each other.

Our workplace organizations are different. First, we get to choose the people who will be in our organization. Second, if things aren't going well, we can always ask people to leave. We have all kinds of metrics we can use to determine a person's "worth" to the organization. If they aren't measuring up, we don't have to keep them around. And when we "let someone go" there's always a supply of new people waiting to take their place. Imagine if familes had "performance plans" like organizations have. "Sorry son, but we're just not seeing the type of performance we need from you so we're going to have to let you go." I'm sure my parents felt like having that talk with me once or twice!

At the risk of sounding very touchy-feely let me propose this little exercise: Imagine your team at work is "family". You didn't get to choose them, they're imperfect, and you can't get rid of them. Some of them have difficult personalities. Some of them are lazy. Some of them do embarrassing things in public. Some of them disagree with you and will tell you right to your face! Some of them belong to a different political party, church or bowling league than you do. If some of them are underperforming, too bad. You can't just replace them with a new family member. To put it another way - for better or for worse - you're stuck with them. If this were the case, what types of things would you do differently? How would your "performance management" change? Would you be more creative about finding a good fit for each of your employees? Would your focus be more long term than short term? Would you be more forgiving? Would you put yourself in their shoes a little more often? Spend a little time pondering this scenario.

In one of the CORE training classes I regularly facilitate I ask the question "what has made our company successful in the past?" In almost every class I'll have a tenured employee say that one of the keys to our company's past success was that our work environment was "like a family." What makes a work environment "like a family"? Do we feel accepted? Do we feel like folks we work with care about us? Do we feel like we are valued unconditionally?

Obviously we have a job to perform and business needs to be met. Businesses exist to drive profits and build stockholder wealth, but I think there can be a balance between bottom-line needs and the emotional needs of our people. People may choose to "give up" on themselves and, let's be honest, sometimes our organization may not be a good fit for everybody. If that's the case, that's okay. Hopefully, though, we as leaders will not be the FIRST one to "give up" on an individual. Here's where the "family" model really comes into play. Your family continues to accept you and root for you and even invite over to Thanksgiving dinner - even if you are "underperforming".

What can we do as leaders to keep the positive aspects of the family relationship alive in our workplace? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Model the Way

I'm in the middle of reading The Leadership Challenge by Kouzes and Posner. This is an excellent book I highly recommend. When I have more time I'll go into greater detail but I wanted to post very briefly on practice one of the five practices of exemplary leadership: Model the Way.

How often do "leaders" sabotage themselves because they don't practice what they preach? I'm reminded of the old adage "what you ARE screams so loud I can't here what you're SAYING". Sometimes we put the cart before the horse by worrying about the message more than the messenger (ourselves). Covey talks about the need to have our private victories (mastery of self) before public victories.

Kouzes and Posner sum it up perfectly. Effective leaders must model the very behavior they seek for their organization. And it's no coincidence that Model the Way is the first of the five practices. Effective leadership starts with the leader. If the leader has not internalized exemplary leadership practices himself or herself, he or she cannot expect exemplary "followership" from the organization. We'll talk more about this in an upcoming post.

Another non-political political post: The leadership styles of McCain and Obama

Here's an interesting read I came across at the LA Times. It compares the leadership styles of John McCain and Barack Obama.

Click here to view story: