Saint Manager the Martyr

This is one of the observations I've made  from a life in retail;    for some, there seems to be an unwritten rule that goes something like this. . . the more hours I work, the more exhausted I become, the more at wits end I am - is directly proportionate to the  amount of people who will come into the store the next day.   It is the tendency to drive a business through blood, sweat and tears, with a definite over-emphasis on the blood and tears part.   This is professional martyrdom

If I thought this was a phenomenon related only to retail, it wouldn't be worth mentioning.   Looking around, however, I find that the tendency toward martyrdom is not exclusive to any industry.

I am a believer in the power of hard work.   There is a difference between hard work and professional martyrdom.   The latter is the propensity to over-work, over-worry, over-compensate (and often, over-exaggerate one's own sacrifice) all in the name of driving the business and leading the workforce. It is entirely over-rated.

• First of all, strong business is driven by a positive combination of hard work, smart decisions and great teamwork - it is not driven by one person working until they fall nose-first into the dirt from exhaustion.
• Managers who are martyr-like may be doing it to demonstrate to the workforce exactly how hard they work - and they are unafraid to share every bloody detail of their professional devotion to their team.   While, yes, this may garner sympathy - that's pretty much all it gets.   It is not inspiring and it is not engaging.
• Managers who do the whole martyrdom thing are often more focused on their own exploits vs. the productivity and smart leadership of the entire group.
• Oh, and then there's this. . .throughout history most martyrs end up. . .well. . . dead.

It is tempting to play the martyr card.  It can generate pseudo appreciation and admiration.  It can boost our own egos.   It seemingly proves to ourselves that we have put it all out there for the sake of the business.

It is, however, an empty promise. In the end, it should not be the sacrifice of one that drives a business, but instead the energy of an integrated team.  Strong business and strong leadership is yes, hard-working - but it is also balanced and self-less in that it calls attention to the team vs. the exploits of the leader.

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders," available for e-readers, Apple products, tablets and PCs from Amazon Kindle.

Don't Stand Between the Clown and the Pie

As leaders, often we find ourselves in difficult positions, some of which are ultimately untenable.   For these times, my dad had this piece of advice:    step away from between the clown and the pie.

He was referring to a common circus skit.    Clowns would be having a pie fight and inevitably, some unsuspecting soul would wander into the line of fire and get hit by the pie that was intended for another recipient.   Translated. . .poor, unsuspecting soul took the brunt  of the silly attack that really did not involve him in the first place..   Had the individual accurately assessed the situation, and stepped away from the fray, he could have some himself a lot of grief.

As an option, this piece of advice has served me well in my career.    As leaders, we often get involved in many issues, some of which directly involve us, others which don't.   There are instances in which the best option is to just step away and let the fracas continue on to its own natural conclusion.

• Perhaps you have been placed in an untenable situation.   The goals that you have been tasked with simply cannot be attained given the situation.  The anxiety that this causes you, and the dysfunction that results in the workplace, may not be worth it and the best solution may be to just step away.
• Perhaps you have been inserted into the middle of an issue in which you have a strong point of view; your point of view, however, does not sync up with other key players.   As opposed to  banging your head against the wall, it may be the better part of valor to just step away.

Understand that by leaving the situation you are not admitting defeat.    In two of the most major decisions I have made in my life to step away; not only was I a happier professional, but in the end, the conclusion was what I would have prescribed anyway.   It was just that I needed to get out of the way for the "right" thing to happen in the long-term.

Most leaders are very persistent, and perhaps persistent to a fault.    Sometimes, it is really worth considering the very viable option of stepping away from between the clown and the pie and let the meringue fly where it may.

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders"  available for e-readers, Apple products, tablets and PCs on Amazon Kindle.

Snap Judgements

Some of the more egregious errors in judgement I've made were based on a quick, initial impression combined with intuition and past experience.     The interviewees with the great pedigrees and the verbal bedazzlement sometimes  turned out to be average performers.   The people who I thought were "only OK" turned out to be some of the more valuable team members.  The issue that I thought I recognized based on my experiences, was not at all what I thought it was.

Admittedly, there is often pressure in the workplace to make snap decisions.  Often we put pressure on ourselves to make decisions more quickly than is necessary or perhaps wise.

Here, then, are some of the lessons that I have learned.

Interview for attitude and aptitude, don't hire on intuition.  The entire interview process is fraught with difficulties, not the least of which is that the participants get a minimal amount of time together before making one of the more important decisions of their professional careers.  When I tried to make a gut judgement on an applicant, often I failed.   When I stepped back and evaluated the candidate from the two perspectives of  attitude and aptitude, I was much more successful.

Evaluate team members over the long-haul, not the short-sighted distance.  As a leader you have the great privilege of being able to work with people for a prolonged period of time (usually an advantage - if not - one of you has got to go).  Take advantage of this perspective and be open to learning the most you can about and from each team member over days, weeks and years.  Avoid making the mistake of quickly forming a concrete opinion about an individual that cannot be changed no matter what information is provided to you.  Be open, instead, to constant evaluation and (hopefully) appreciation of the art and skills each individual brings to the workplace.

Use different lenses to evaluate individuals.  Establish different criteria by which you look at each team member's talents.   Are they creative?   Are they analytical?    Are they organizers?   What positive role do they play on your team/what is their place in the world?  Too often we tend to evaluate team members from a point of narcissism, believing the more they are like us, the better we understand them and the better they are.  Not true.  While there does need to be common ground, often the more diverse team members are, they stronger their contributions to the team can be.

Take time with issues.    Because we are highly efficient individuals, often we can expedite issues quickly by making assumptions and judgements based on our past experiences.  I have learned it is often better to create a little space and time in which you can carefully consider an issue.  Some issues (do you want cream and sugar?) do not require such care, but many do.  Ask co-workers to think through an issue with you, so that you can arrive at the best possible decision.

While often we may perceive we are being judged by our ability to make quick decisions and turn on a dime; ultimately we are judged by our ability to make wise, strong business decisions.   Most of these, whether they regard people or issues, are not snap judgements.

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders," available on Amazon Kindle for e-readers, tablets, Macs and PCs.

The Errors in the Culture of Infallibility

Daniel Gross, writing for the The Daily Beast,  pointed it out. We are very eager adopters of a culture of infallibility. 

Mr. Gross's primary subject, Ron Johnson, the much-heralded arrival and now departed CEO of JCPenney, was popularly thought to be infallible.  As the head of Apple stores, Mr. Johnson built a heady success story of not only monumental sales, but also of a cultural shift in world retailing.  Many people thought the same magic could be brought to JCPenney;  they now appear to be wrong.

Similarly, as Mr. Gross points out, we mistakenly thought that the dotcom boom might never bust; or that the real estate market, pre-2008, would continue soaring.

We love a great success story.   We should also realize, however, that no being, no leader, no entity is infallible.

Leaders who portray themselves as infallible, or teams who believe their leaders are error free are in for a sorry surprise.  Yes, there are people who have the right answers for the right time.   There are leaders who are amazing at coaching and aligning their teams. We should not transcend that to mean, however, that they, or ourselves are surrounded with an aura of "I'm-always-right."

Ditto our regard for companies, organizations, systems, etc.   We may be amazed at a company's sales acceleration.  We may be dazzled at the efficiency of a system or the strong operating culture of an organization.  Simultaneously, however, we should be aware of potential downfalls or weaknesses or even other opportunities.

Neither should we expect team members to be perfect.   That's not to say we should not have standards; but we should expect high performing team members to be adventurous and entrepreneurial.   Team members cannot be those things, however, if they are operating without the net that allows them to make mistakes.

We like everything to be perfect - it's easier that way.  To be aware, however, that no one or no thing is perfect is in line with the reality of life.

• If we believe that something is perfect, or nearly so, then when the inevitable happens, and something goes wrong, we are sorely disappointed.  We then have to spend time and energy to recalibrate - because we had unrealistic expectations.  Moreover, the foundation we built upon infallibility has crumbled and we are disillusioned.  Had we been more realistic up front - we would have been wiser.
• If we position ourselves as infallible, we are setting the stage for certain failure.   It is almost the sit-com stereotype of the boss who cannot be wrong, but inevitably is served just desserts in terms of a spectacular pratfall.  It is better to admit up front that we will make mistakes, just as team members will make mistakes.

As opposed to engaging in the culture of infallibility, let's engage in the culture of looking at people and issues multi-dimensionally.   Let's acknowledge that what may be successful in one situation may not be successful in a different situation.   Let's explore the world of options as we seek the best possible answers for both our businesses and the teams with which we have the privilege of working.

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders," available for e-readers, IPad, IPhone, tablets and PCs from Amazon Kindle.

Who's Really Leading?

When does "team participation" evolve into lack of leadership?

Each member of the team should have mental ownership of the enterprise.   Their contributions should not only make the enterprise stronger, but they should also make the overall team a better working entity.  Soliciting team input and activating some or many of those ideas truly does create a better product or service.

There is also a point, I've noticed, at which time team input can devolve into a lack of leadership.   The team is not following the leader's instructions and bedlam ensues. Here are cautionary markers;

• If a leader is failing to lead and using team input as an excuse.   For example, "I've told them several times that we are going to start this project, but they consistently raise objections and refuse to activate."  There are always going to be objections, some legitimate and some are excuses.   The wise leader needs to differentiate between the two, use the former for constructive editing of a project and dismiss the latter.  
• If exceptions are becoming the rule.  For instance, if there is an edict that all team members wear parkas - it would be practical to exempt South Floridians from this particular rule.  But let's say that in another area of the country they don't want to do it because they just don't like the looks of parkas.  In another part of the country, they prefer to wear quilted jackets.  Now the leader is faced with exceptions mounting on exceptions and chaos reigns.
• If team members are telling each other, or you, how to work around whatever action you want taken.  For instance, "Well, I know she said she wants that. . .let's just wait until Friday when usually she's in a better mood."   If the leader's directives are being dismissed because people have figured out how to work around them, there's trouble.
• If leaders are frustrated that their directives are being ignored.  In other words, nothing is really changing or being accomplished.

The solutions lies with the leader, who must strike a fine balance between consistently engaging the team and being able to align the team to activate a common directive.   There are simple issues on which the leader says, "We are just going to do it this way."  There are more complicated projects in which team input is need.   Generally, that model looks like this.

1. Set the direction for the team
2. Ask the team for input
3. Carefully weigh all input
4. Work with the team to craft a common solution
5. Execute to that solution

If individuals on the team are not following leadership, it needs to be addressed, lest the leadership is wasted and other teams members become disenfranchised.

Strong leaderhip has the ability to do this:  confidently set goals and expectations, quietly listen to team input and move the entire team forward with the best possible solutions.

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" available for e-readers, PCs, IPads, IPhones and Macs from Amazon Kindle