|
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
“It’s time to stop talking about trust and start doing
something about it...” wrote
+Barbara Kimmel, Executive Director, Trust Across America as an introduction to
+Frank Sonnenberg's Managing with a Conscience: How to Improve Performance
Through Integrity, Trust, and Commitment (2nd edition). It's no wonder in
that Sonnenberg refers to the quality 100 times in his book. [ Don't mistake the following for a review,
however, I will highlight a few additional points Sonnenberg makes.]
"Trust" shows up on everything from US currency to
who knows how many corporate mission statements and untold number of
leadership-themed books, not to mention endless philosophical and moral relationship
treatises.
Willing to make an uneducated guess, it may be that 80-90%
of CEOs and business owners give lip-service to trust and may even believe in
their heart-of-hearts that they both trust their employees and can be trusted
themselves. If that appears to be hyperbole to you, forgive me.
This topic of trust, particularly as it relates to business
governance and leadership, is important enough to talk about often. As a TEC Chair, I work with a terrific bunch of business owners and CEOs and all
are challenged when it comes to trust. On the flip-side of what I stated
above, many owners and CEOs find themselves vulnerable because deep
down inside they may actually distrust some of their colleagues. We could go
round and round on that but for the leader who actually does trust his direct
reports and senior managers, that leader must make it absolutely clear that's
the case.
A real-life example that comes to mind is that of a CEO who,
for several months, was having misgivings about one of his senior managers. The
problem arose from the sense that this manager didn't seem to bring much "to
the table." The manager had been on board prior to this CEO's tenure and
as far as she was concerned, she was performing every bit as well as she had
always been. Neither knew what the other was thinking.
I listened to this through several meetings. Influenced by
what was being shared, the only normal thing to do was to ask, "Why?"
Why hadn't something been done about this? Why hasn't this been discussed
specifically with the manager? Why are you allowing this concern to affect the
team? Why don't you just get rid of this problem? Quit procrastinating!
Then one day, something very important occurred. A
vendor was visiting the company to discuss a significant matter that involved
this manager's department and was worthy of including our CEO. During the
course of the presentation and ensuing exchange, the manager noticed that our
CEO had little to add to the conversation.
Call it insecurity or whatever you'd like, but during the next
one-to-one meeting between them, the manager shared that she had grown very
uncomfortable during the meeting and suggested the CEO had chosen to remain
silent in an effort to allow her to just "hang out there;" play the
fool, so to speak.
Our CEO wasn't sure how to respond but was smart enough to
share the experience with his wife who brought up the issue of trust.
It became clear to our leader that a genuine conversation
with this manager needed to take place. Clarity of expectations and the
groundwork for trust had to be established. You see, he didn't question the
skill and the ability of the manger and actually trusted her expertise and judgment.
He had not bothered to communicate that but mistakenly assumed she knew it was so.
Soon thereafter another meeting was scheduled and the CEO
humbly requested an opportunity to set matters straight. With care and forethought,
he expressed that, indeed, he did trust this manager. His silence during the
vendor meeting was due to his sense that he just didn't have anything to add
and, in fact, he was a bit sheepish due to the reality that he hadn't spent
enough time educating himself on the subject. He apologized for that.
He also took the opportunity to 'reset' with the manager.
They discussed their mutual expectations of each other and both agreed to work
at improving their communications.
Sonnenberg wrote, " Employees
have the right to know that their employers have confidence in them and in
their abilities. People do not like being second-guessed or micromanaged. They
want to know that management trusts and respects them to do a responsible job.
This leads to superior employee performance. "
You guessed it. There was no need to replace this manager.
This is just one simple example. Our pursuit of high-performance leadership must include trust
and a forum that provides opportunity for the leader to teach, to coach, mentor
and express his or her confidence in the team chosen. The CEO must allow for
and demand the same of his direct reports and their direct reports all the way
downstream.
It may be easier said than done for many but let me share
one more piece of sage advice from Sonnenberg's book;
" Changing to a
more open and trusting environment requires letting go, unlearning many
management practices of the past. That is not easy and does not happen quickly.
It requires managers to leave behind many skills, sources of status and power,
and implicit assumptions about the workplace that were formulated during past
experiences."
Barbara Kimmel couldn't have been more right and if you, as
a leader, haven't given this some serious thought lately, revisit the subject.
Chances are, your performance and theirs', will greatly improve.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
Sonnenberg, Frank K. (2011-12-22). Managing with a
Conscience: How to Improve Performance Through Integrity, Trust, and Commitment
(2nd edition) (Kindle Locations 9-11). .
Kindle Edition.
Sonnenberg, Frank K. (2011-12-22). Managing with a
Conscience: How to Improve Performance Through Integrity, Trust, and Commitment
(2nd edition) (Kindle Locations 648-652).
. Kindle Edition.
It's an interesting day in the United States. Martin Luther
King Day is being commemorated across governmental institutions, finance and banking systems. Politically motivated
combatants are debating the real meaning of King's message.
Yesterday afternoon the CEO of the free world was
administered the oath of office during a quiet family and close-friends
ceremony in the White House. Today, maybe a million or so will gather along the
parade route and in the grand stands erected for the observance of the public inauguration
of Barack Obama in the nation's capitol.
At our home yesterday morning, for the first time in many
weeks, we tuned into the Sunday morning talk shows. In the past we even DVR'd
one or two and would watch them after returning home from Sunday services. Several
months ago we concluded there were just too many more important things to do...Green
Bay Packer games, autumn walks and bike rides, a round a golf, time with the
grandkids. Weary of the ongoing combative nature of everything political, we resolved
that whatever would rise to the level of importance could be read about later
in the day, or the next.
COMBATIVE, PERHAPS - QUESTIONABLE OUTCOMES
What struck me though, as I flipped between networks, was a
fascinating question posed by different moderators that went something like
this; "Given the tone of the
President's recent comments and speeches, will what appears to be a combative
determination, succeed in changing the course of Washington?"
Be reminded, that is not a quote. I'm simply paraphrasing
what I heard asked of the guest or panels these moderators were addressing. Heck,
I don't know if the 44th POTUS is combative.
All I know is that the Gallup organization released its latest poll today that
shows this country's CEO four-year approval rating at 49%, third worst since WW
II - just above Ford and Carter. Some
may argue that "approval" is not an indication associated with
successful leadership and we could go round and round on that topic. But, if a
Board of Directors or a lending institution's loan committee had anything to
say about that weak a showing, I'm afraid an executive search or a called loan
would result.
Then again, things could change. Historians may be a
position to record something that is quite different, quite better, four years
from now.
It seems fair to say that in today's world, politics and
business are worlds apart. Do we all agree on that or am I missing something?
Good, then lets' go with that.
NO LONGER JUST "SELF-HELP"
You are either reading this post of mine because you are a
leader determined to become a better leader or you are as I am, an experienced
leader, coach or consultant interested in how our community is working to
assist those we work with in their pursuit of becoming better at what they do.
Due to the fact that my childhood included a great deal of
team play and competition and that I had some terrific mentors like my grandpa,
my mom and some memorable coaches along the way, I am elated that "player
development" is fully embraced by the industry and its ultimate
beneficiaries, executives and business owners, along with their charges. We are
rapidly moving beyond "self-help" to helping others becoming better
at what we need them to do.
MORAL AUTHORITY TO
LEAD
This is a great time to be a leader and as great a time to
be in a position to work with leaders who are self-determined, life-long
learners. My experience of once owning hundreds of wonderful books but facing
the reality that I couldn't take all of them with me when we made the decision
to down-size and join the condominium 'circuit' is not a concern. Now I can
re-capture, re-stock and reunite with any of those older books and combine them
with all the current thoughtful stuff that's right here in an ethereal library.
For instance, the subject of "Emotional Intelligence" (EI) as a
leadership quality wasn't in the forefront of leadership attributes when I was
thrust into my first business leadership role. Servant Leadership, as a
leadership quality, though conceptually dating back to the late 70s, escaped
the notice of many of us who may have been in leadership positions. For me anyway,
"moral authority" wasn't yet on the radar screen, so to speak. All of
these subjects and great thinking are at my fingertips. I am grateful.
[We were young
entrepreneurs, brash and admittedly, (of course I should speak for myself only)
in the school of having "more guts than brains."]
Take the late Robert K. Greenleaf's "Servant
leadership: a journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness,"
first published in 1977, now in its 25th edition with collaborations with Larry
Spears, Peter Senge and Steven Covey in 2002. Greenleaf is said to have coined
the term, "Servant-leader" and passed away in 1990. In 1970 he published "The Servant as Leader," an
essay which launched the servant leadership movement in the United States.
Note the book's jacket description
of the March 1977 edition: "Servant Leadership helps leaders find their
true power and moral authority to lead.
It helps those served become healthier, wiser, freer, and more autonomous. This
book encourages collaboration, trust,
listening, and empowerment. It offers long-lasting change, not a temporary
fix and extends beyond business for leaders of all types of groups."
(Italics, mine)
When moral authority is exercised
accordingly, prosperity of every kind, follows.
LEADERSHIP MATTERS
Today's leaders have a tremendous
opportunity to learn how to become outstanding leaders not only by embracing
that which people like Greenleaf believed and taught but by paying close
attention to what great teachers are teaching and what the very best leaders
are doing to succeed.
Nothing I've ever read, not Sun
Tzu's "Art of War" and its various "For Mangers" editions or
any other purposeful lesson on leadership has suggested a combative approach to
management will succeed. I'm happy about that and I for one would not be
comfortable if the example being set by the CEO of the largest, perhaps unwieldy
organization in the world, would ever become lionized. Political will aside,
leadership matters and the more real leaders learn to lead, the less the
unknowing will be led.
Our mutual responsibility then is
to collectively move one another to better ground whether in our endeavors to
become better leaders, better teachers, mentors, friends, husbands, wives and
grandparents.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
What's Wrong With This Picture?
DISMISS GOVERNMENT and
LARGE CORPORATE MODELS
The compensation model I'm concerned about doesn't include
either the Federal Government or large Corporate models. Both are untenable,
inexcusable and unlikely to ever be changed. People that end up in government
cannot relate to entrepreneurs and vice versa. Bureaucrats rely heavily on the
success of the entrepreneur but have absolutely no concern or an interest in
what drives the entrepreneurial spirit that results in a small to mid-sized
business compensation model to begin with.
Large corporations are led by very smart, well educated
people. Publicly-held corporations tend to be governed by Boards of Directors
who create compensation models for those in the very top-tier as well as
generous remuneration 'stipends' for fellow board members. They may comply with corporate law and
government regulations but show a disdain for shareholders and more importantly,
the hard-working folks 'downstream.'
Those just part-way downstream within the large corporate
model may not be particularly fond of what they do for a living but have
resigned themselves to the task of gaming the system, navigating upstream through
a maze of challenging pay-grades structured by a sophisticated HR department.
Statistics indicate that in either of these large systems a
vast majority of the employed are not particularly happy or motivated to do
anything more than what is defined for them to do. With the stroke of the keys
in front of me then, I dismiss these for reasons that should be obvious. I have
little hope that either is going to change.
I am much more concerned about the compensation models that small
to medium-sized, privately-owned companies must create in order to retain
talent and in the end, sufficiently reward the entrepreneur who has taken the
risk to do so. This cannot happen if such an entrepreneur were to borrow from
the government or large corporate models
THE OWNERSHIP MODEL
Ownership brings with it a great many things, good, bad and
ugly. Genuine entrepreneurs have to keep going, get up after getting knocked
down, and start all over again, if necessary. They go off the rail, however, if
they begin to think that the company owes its success to them alone and the
compensation model gets all 'skewed up'...to the top of their org chart.
Don't get me wrong, it is my firm belief that entrepreneurs,
business owners and those who owners appoint as leaders should be compensated
handsomely for what they accomplish. The challenge of the day happens to go far
beyond that.
Let's assume the statistics we're aware of that suggest the
greater number of people working in these companies are feeling unappreciated,
without serious challenge and little accountability are undeniable. That means
a good number of people are restless, unhappy and unfulfilled.
The question to
ask of the person most dependent upon their productivity is;
"Do you know
who these people are?"
Every now and then employers are blind-sided when what they
believed was a happy, highly productive direct report or second-tier manager
leaves for greener pastures. What we've learned is that this happens for a
variety of reasons with money rarely being the predominant influence in the
decision.
Among several studies that have crossed my screen recently,
Laura Entis at INC.com cites one commissioned by Dale Carnegie ( @DaleCarnegie
) through MSW that reinforces the notion that compensation models call for more
emotional currency than leaders tend to think necessary. The study, as others
I've seen, reinforces the reality that 29% of employees are fully engaged, 26%
are disengaged and the big bunch in between are "putting in the minimal
amount of effort to achieve expected results."
The study goes on to indicate the real cost to business as a
result is $11 billion a year. Worse, in my estimation, is that with this in
mind, small to mid-size companies are no better off than the government or
large corporations when it comes to creating complete compensation packages. To
make matters worse, company leaders, in many cases, have no one to blame but
themselves.
COACHING TO SUSTAINED PROFITABILITY
It should be clear by now that small and mid-sized companies
have a distinct advantage over their government and large corporate competitors
when it comes to finding and retaining talent. What many leaders have so much
difficulty with though is coming to grips with how vital it is to develop their
coaching and leadership skills. I haven't met a business leader yet who
wouldn't rather work On the
business rather than In it.
That's easier said than done, especially for one who may
have started the business, has performed every function necessary and has
subconsciously overlooked the need to shift gears and simply learn to lead the
team they've assembled. Any who have, at one time or another, participated in
an effort that led to good results by a wise coach or leader knows what's it's
like to experience the compensation
of satisfaction.
As it turns out, the very best compensation models in force
today, yes, must be monetarily competitive, but to a far greater degree must be
associated with a working environment or culture wherein the leader leads. The
most successful organizations, with the most competitive compensation models,
are those that get it and do it. And, guess what? If you are the one in that
position and understand what this means, your employee engagement quotient will
soar. Your profits will be sustainable and as the word gets out, talent will
come knocking on your door rather than walking out through it.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
Leaders cannot afford to be distracted from their primary objectives
by world and national events. Lord knows there are plenty of them. It happened
to me over the past two weeks. With the main calendar holidays falling on a
Tuesday, many of us just felt out of sorts, so to speak.
TAKE YOUR PICK OR ADD TO THE LIST
Hurricane Sandy, an election, Sandy Hook Elementary School
the "Fiscal Cliff" and who cares to add to a long list of others led
us to yearend, perhaps a bit numb and well, distracted. At our place, we chose
to occupy our down and quiet time reading. Besides interacting with family and
close friends, We ignored the nightly news and Sunday talk shows - tired of it
all. We reengaged with the world to some degree on January 2.
Since then my conversations with business leaders planted
the theme of this post in mind. Leaders cannot afford to be distracted but that
doesn't mean they aren't concerned about all of the above. It won't surprise
you to know that to a person, they are very concerned about Leadership, theirs'
and that of the POTUS, to say nothing of the political morass that swirls
thickly around him.
MASTERING THE SKILLS - EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND MORE
Thinking about those leaders I have the privilege of working
with; they accept the serious responsibility of leading effectively and
diligently incorporating new things learned as societal norms and attitudes
shift. All, to one degree or another, possess an emotional intelligence, not
unlike that which is discussed in a fine work now dated by some years but
pertinent nonetheless , Primal Leadership (Daniel Goleman @DanielGolemanEI; Richard Boyatzis @RBoyatzis, Dr. Annie McKee @anniemckee; Harvard Press).
They realize that despite whatever regulations, executives
orders and government mandates that are imposed upon them, they still must hone
their strategic and tactical skills that lead them to become better leaders,
making better decisions with better results. With this in mind, as much as I
tried, I could not distance myself from wondering about these men and women and
how their determination to lead for the greater good would be compared to the tactics
of the Leader of the Free World.
HISTORICAL PRECENDENT - NOTHING LIKE IT
I won't dwell on this but it does confuse me because I go
back to Eisenhower's days and while admittedly I was much too young to fully
appreciate much of anything, from my age of reason on, I haven't observed
anything like what we all are watching today. I am thankful for the internet for
giving me access to literally thousands of bright, articulate thought-leaders.
In the old days, there was a reliable portfolio of great teachers, but today we
can learn from untold numbers of them and that's a good thing.
I'll let the historians chronicle the leadership attributes
of our current President but I also don't believe that any professionals I work
with would attempt to use or recommend that
his model as one for success in their worlds. http://www.franksonnenbergonline.com/blog/counterfeit-leadership/
CORPORATE v. POLITICAL LEADERSHIP
One of the four books I took on over the New Year's long
weekend was Managing With A Conscience, 2nd Edition; (Frank
Sonnenberg @FSonnenberg). Frank's one of
the folks I'm alluding to above and as you've likely noted, wrote a terrific
post to his blog entitled Counterfeit Leadership. When I first came
across some of Frank's thoughts, to be honest, I concluded that while well-intentioned,
he was perhaps a bit naive. Happily, I read on and began to follow Frank. In so
doing, I found that he believes not only in the goodness of humanity but is
convinced that leaders must and can lead with "goodness" intact. It
wasn't that I thought otherwise, it's just that I had not come across anyone
who put it out there in the same way. That's high praise when you consider the
many renowned authors that most of us have read.
While time management and priorities require discipline, it
is the leaders I speak of who take advantage of the speed and easy access with
which we gain the insight shared by so many that leaves us with little excuse
than to attempt to become the best leaders we can possibly be.
Leaders cannot afford to be distracted and must go on
leading regardless of how difficult and challenging a national or local government
may make it. Whether it's a 5-point this or a 10-point that, it is in the
thirst for knowledge and better ways of doing things that will be passed from
this group of leaders to the next and perhaps it is a foregone conclusion that
relying upon government of any kind will distract but will not destroy free
enterprising and life-long learning leaders altogether.
Jim Naleid
is a Serial Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
"Tell me it ain't so, Joe!"
 It was my privilege to sit next to the Superintendent of
Schools of a neighboring community at a luncheon recently. After we worked
through our introductions, I asked him what his greatest challenge or
frustration was at top-of-mind.
The keynote speaker at this particular event happened to be
Scott Walker, the Governor of Wisconsin. Given the governor's dismantling of
collective bargaining for public employees shortly after taking office, my
false presumption was that I'd hear something related to that.
Wrong. This is what the superintendent told me;
"People; if I could just get people to do what they're supposed to do, my
life would be better."
THE PROBLEM POOL
What about the demographics of that wayward group? Was it
the students, their parents? Nope. It was the personnel in the district that
topped the list. Naturally he wasn't referring to the whole and I surmised it
may have been his direct reports or at least those he had more occasion to be in
contact with. Without relaying the entire conversation that ensued, there was a
bigger picture, but I want to focus on the concern expressed by this leader
because you and I know that he's not the only one faced with this conundrum.
Diane Stafford, at the Kansas City Star, wrote a short but
interesting piece that appeared in our local rag's Sunday edition, entitled
"CEOs want nice, flexible workers."
That attracted my attention and as a matter of fact, I sent
Diane a note asking if there was more to her column than was published as it's
not uncommon for papers to trim, intentionally or otherwise, because a local
copywriter arbitrarily decides to. The piece was scanned and sent to Diane with
my question. She generously responded and assured me that the entire thing was
intact.
CEOs And MISGUIDED EXPECTATIONS
Stafford's report was based upon a panel discussion that
included four executives representing different industry sectors with the
audience being the KC chapter of the Society for Human Resource Management. The
panel was to address two questions posed by SHRM; 1.) What kind of employees
are employers looking for? , and 2.) How can human resource officials help?
Stafford summarized the responses to the first question;
three that I found more curious than the remaining four of seven. They were:
- "Key
People" who share their (the executives) philosophies about managing and
growing their operations.
- "Workers
who are willing to work" and show up every day.
- "Nice
people, because you can't train nice."
To round out the sought after attributes; Rainmakers,
Flexible, Bright and Team-oriented were the adjectives used to describe
prospective candidates.
The CEOs response to the second question suggested that the
CEOs believe that the HR departments should not only hire the right kind of
people but also provide training that 'increases the value of the people we
have.'" I suppose that is all well and good.
Before I get carried away here, let's assume this Q&A
session covered 30-45 minutes and due to time and space constrictions,
Stafford's mandate is what it is and in deference to the panel participants,
the responses were probably more involved.
Being that as it may, my interchange with the school
superintendent and corporate leaders I've worked with for the past decade leads
me to believe that in many instances, C-level executives frequently overlook
the necessity to clearly define their expectations, not only of the HR
department, but of themselves!
LACK OF DEFINITION
For convenience sake, let's pick on the four who sat on this
Kansas City panel.
My guess is that of the four, you may find one who has
clearly defined and committed to writing what he envisions his role at the top
of that organization to be. I'd also guess that you'd only find one out of four
that has personally committed to writing what he or she believes the
organization is and how it should be defined. The percentage doesn't change
much when you add that, in all likelihood, only one executive in four has
clearly defined the roles he expects his direct reports to fill. All of this,
more often than not, gets poured into a "HR bucket" just as the KC
panelists evidently did.
 Just about every C-level executive I've worked with has all
of the above in their heads. I don't know of any that mind-readers on their
teams. They then wonder why the people working with them, "just don't get
it." It's convenient to rest the blame with the HR folks but it's a
significant, and sometimes, fatal flaw in their own leadership that leads to
personnel shortcomings, lack of innovation and lackluster profitability when
they have failed to make it clear who They
are and what They expect of
themselves and others.
IT'S MANDATORY - COACH OR GO HOME
If you happen to be a CEO, Business Owner or C-level
executive and haven't committed to the reality that your greatest
responsibility is to define yourself, your organization, the roles of your
direct reports and then to be fully present as the one responsible for
developing the team you envision your company to be driven by, well, leaving it
up to someone else just won't cut it.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
Depending on your point of view, it'd be easier to knock the piled
up snow off a deck rail or lantern top than it is to clean up a real or
figurative list of things that have been put off since before the last snow storm. In these parts it
hadn't snowed for some 300 hundred days. That by historical standards is unusual
in itself.
Just days ago one was able to hike across a trail through the
nearby river valley marsh on a sunny, typical brisk December afternoon. With a
10-day forecast in mind, the sense was this may be the last such hike for the
season unless the forecasters were wrong.
When I opened the blinds to our rear deck this morning, it didn't
surprise me to see that the overnight snowfall left added weight to the hanging
lanterns and height to the deck rails. Perverse as it may be, one thought I had
was to get out there and liberate the lanterns and knock the snow off the
rails. The dilettante am I kept me from doing so.
However, it did occur to me that like a list of things that had
appeared to accumulate overnight, so is the hazard of awakening one morning to
realize that as many as 300-days worth of little things have remained undone.
"Procrastination
is the Thief of time" is attributed to a number of different
prominent literary figures over the centuries and American literary
critic and educator E.D.
Hirsch, Jr., who is best known for his Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to
Know (1987) believes it is one of 265 proverbs on his list of
proverbs that every American needs to know.
The big
difference between a newly dressed snowscape and a leader's lost list is
significant in this respect; the lanterns and rail have no need to be liberated
from the accumulation while a list of even a dozen things left unfinished by a
leader of others should be considered inexcusable.
THEY DON'T KNOW and IT DOESN"T MATTER
Admittedly, those that are being led may not have any idea of the
number of things that warrant inclusion on this list but one thing is for sure,
they know it when something that directly affects them should be but there is
no visible sign that leads them to believe it is or ever has been. That's a
bigger problem.
 Over the years exhaustive research has been done and all sorts of
remedies to cure one of procrastination or sheer laziness have been suggested.
Today, we can still use the rather archaic tools of pencil and paper, notepads
and such, or buy an elaborate Franklin© personal planner with calendars, color
cards and stuff and beyond that go high-tech with voice recognition software
and speak these reminders and "must-dos" into cyber-space. The issue
with all of the above comes back to the same old thing; What to do with them
then?
KNOCK IT OFF
Here's the deal; if you've allowed yourself to get away with
piling things up that you know darn well should have been dealt with 300 or 3
days ago, knock it off!
We could re-circulate a 10-point "Best" list of things a
leader can do to take care of business, the small and the great, but the truth
of the matter is we all know what's on that list and simply need to be reminded
that good and effective leaders manage to get bogged down too. Better leaders
simply keep the lists short (yes they make lists) while adding and subtracting
to them every new day.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with Better
Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
"Men
with clenched fists cannot shake hands." - Ghandi
A competitive young COO recently admitted to me that anger gets
the best of him now and then. Being a
bit older I had to think back on the people I've worked for or with that had
that same tendency. None came to mind.
Now either my experience is very unusual or my memory has conveniently
erased any semblance of a distinctly angry cohort, colleague or person to whom
I reported.
CLENCHED
FISTS
It should be a relatively easy thing to admit that we all succumb
to anger occasionally but acting out or "clenching a fist" in the
ring of supposed collaboration doesn't cut it. Mike Tyson, the infamous and
former heavy-weight champ shared an interesting observation and put it this
way; "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face."
Evidently, Mr. Tyson came face to face with one or more who lead with
"clenched fists."
The leader mentioned above will be meeting with me later this
month, and thus, anger is on my mind. Ghandi's quote noted here, excuse the
expression, struck me as did another I found nearby, "'Anger' is just one
letter short of danger."
Common sense and personal experience teach us that anger, in just
about any form, accomplishes little. So let's think about this.
LONG
STANDING ANGER
Westerners look at the turmoil in the Middle East and sense there
is a seething anger that spills out into the streets frequently and has done so
apparently for thousands of years. Don't you wonder how a 12-year kid develops
enough anger to pick up rocks and then passes that characteristic on to one
generation after another? Historians and social scientists study and surmise
but in the end it comes down to one thing, nobody is shaking hands and meaning
it.
Citizens all across Europe seem to be angry too. Some say it's
only a matter of time, perhaps less than we imagine, that more anger than has
already been displayed in this country will overflow into the streets as well.
Heck, it's already underway and recorded in the annals of recent history.
People are still hanging out in Wisconsin's capitol building, not happy about
one thing or another. The good news is while mobs trashed the capitol grounds
earlier this year, Molotov cocktails and rock throwing are not in the order of
the day.
ANGER
INTROSPECTION
Workplace violence is another thing and for the sake of not
allowing to go overboard on the subject, let's hope the isolated but frightful
instances that appear to be on an upward trend will not escalate to the point
of being commonplace or so frequent that we become sensitized, especially when
it comes to corporate responsibility and leadership with a much better purpose.
This discussion can't help but call for some introspection. When
was the last time anger got away from me? Was I really angry or deeply
disappointed. How did the display of anger appear to others? They say I wear my
feelings on my sleeve. If that's the case, did my personal assessment of my
behavior align with what others experienced?
 If asked, many of us would not be as candid as our COO. As he
talked about that issue and responded to some of my questions about it, we both
concluded that whether one of his direct reports screwed up or the company
missed a significant bid, allowing anger to foment at the top, no matter how
one might rationalize or justify it "is just one letter away from danger."
THE WORST OF TACTICAL WEAPONS
James Autry put it this way in his book, Love & Profit - The Art of Caring
Leadership ; "Anger as a weapon, frequently leads to humiliation, and
humiliation is the one thing no employee will ever forgive you." If prone
to anger, Autry further admonishes leaders that, "You cannot afford to do
something with such long-term negative impact. It will come back to haunt you
more than you'll ever believe."
The truth of the matter is that somewhere along the line, we've
all met with circumstances that resulted in anger being expressed toward us or
the converse also being true. Anger is not only a bad deal awaiting a transaction
but it may also be the weakest link in the chain of one's leadership
aspirations that result in handshakes meeting up with clenched fists.
If any of this applies to you personally, as it does me, we can be
reminded that open palms and calm hearts are precursors to sound, genuine handshakes and commitment.
Jim Naleid
is a Life-long Entrepreneur,
Change-Agent and Thought Leader, Managing Director of Naleid & Associates
and Regional TEC (“The Executive Committee”) Chair leading a
group of executives to become Better Leaders, Making Better Decisions with
Better Results. http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimnaleid
|
