What Miley Cyrus Can Teach Us About Leadership

Yeah, I know. . .the title makes me laugh as well.

I admit I'm slightly hesitant to write this for fear of falling into the trap of the whole VMA Awards/Miley Cyrus/brou-ha-ha - because I'm capitulating to what I suspect was the end goal:   shock makes news.   I do feel the need, however, to point out we can learn from even the worst experiences. .  . flash floods, level five hurricanes, and yes, even from the Miley Cyrus . . .er, episode at the VMAs.

The comparatively low value of "shock."  If, as stated above, the entire purpose was to shock to make news it certainly accomplished its goal in spades.  It also alienated a large percentage of the population and even though the digital world lit up about Miley Cyrus - it was not positive.  In other words, it was a whole lot of short term flash and not much else.

I have seen both leaders and companies do the same thing    for the sake  of getting the attention of  their team or constituents. . .they seem to go off the rails in spectacular fashion.   While, like Miley, the end goal of getting attention may be met. . .so much alienation occurs in the process that one  has to ask if it was really worth it (it wasn't).

Change Your Brand, Don't Assassinate it.  Others have speculated that this was Miley's (or do I call her Ms. Cyrus?  Or what's-her-name with the fan finger?) attempt to change her personal brand from the "Disney girl" to that of a more mature performer. ("Mature?"  Hmmm. . .)  The challenge here is that there was little to no recognition of  the persona for whom she is widely recognized and liked -  consequently, there was little to no evolution that allows people to accept change.    In other words, she capitulated to the JCPenney theory of whiplash re-branding (which really has not worked out that well. . .for either party).  

People generally have a hard time coping with change.   Smart leaders, given the time and resources, evolve to it, thereby bringing a wider, more accepting audience to their enterprise.

If It's Worth Doing, It's Worth Doing Well.   I get it - this was, after all, the VMAs and outrageous behavior is the norm.  Here's the thing, though, it wasn't done well. (Seriously, it appeared as though they ran through two and a half rehearsals;  the choreography wouldn't have made the cut for a junior high cheer squad.)     Certainly throughout the history of the VMAs, Madonna, Lady Gaga and Katy Perry have all shocked us - but they've done it with mountains of creativity, energy and expertise that was sorely lacking on Sunday. 

Whether in marketing or leadership - if you're going to go "all out there" do it with a certain amount of energy and talent. . . so at least it seems intentional and becomes memorable.

Oh, and one last lesson to be learned. . .if ever you should be tempted. . .at an employee rally. . .a company picnic. . .God forbid, at a board meeting. . .

Don't twerk.

Ever.

Like it?   Share it!

And Now a Few Words About . . .E-Mail

True confession - I happen to love e-mail.   I  find it a comparatively fast and reliable way to communicate information.  I may not, however,  love abuses of what can be a relatively helpful technology.    Herewith, some common sense notions about e-mail etiquette in the workplace.


Do not conduct "war by e-mail." E-mail is fine for ironing out logistical differences;  philosophical differences require a conversation.     If you disagree with this point of view, come see me - don't e-mail me.

PLEASE DO NOT ANSWER WORK E-MAILS WITH AN EMOTICON:  And, yes, I fully realizing I'm e-mail "shouting," but really?   If you respond with an emoticon I have no idea what you mean.  Someone recently responded to me with an emoticon - I don't know if they were pleased with my idea or laughing at me.  Emoticons are fine for personal relationships and selected social media postings - but in the work environment they're moral ambivalence.  People will wonder about you for years.

Please. . . do not conduct "survivor" e-mail threads.  You know very well what I mean, the thread is so long that it finally becomes a test of will as to who can hang in there the longest and issue the last salvo.   If  the e-mail thread is longer than three responses - get out of your chair, or pick up the phone, and have a conversation already.

Please. . . be judicious in addressing your e-mail:    E-mail is great because you can communicate ideas to an audience who really needs to know.    It's not so great when it becomes the foremost tool of the insecure author who believes EVERYONE IN THE WORLD NEEDS TO/SHOULD WANT TO/MIGHT WANT TO KNOW. (Yes, I know, I was shouting again.  I'll stop.)


Similarly. . .Use  "Reply All" Sparingly.   The parallel of "Reply All" is standing up in the middle of cubicle land with a megaphone and belting out your message to everyone in a quarter mile radius.  "Reply All" means that everyone wants to see what you have to say. . .very rarely does everyone want to see what you have to say.  Specific people certainly do want to see what you want to say. . .address your reply to those privileged individuals.


Please, stop whining about your e-mail.    Yes, I know you have 174 e-mails in your in-box, but guess what, I probably have 183, 10 of which came from you!

Like it?  Share it!

Brent Frerichs is the author of "Courageous Questions, Conident Leaders" available for e-readers, PCs, tablets and Apple products on Amazon Kindle. http://www.amazon.com/Courageous-Questions-Confident-Leaders-ebook/dp/B0095KPA6A/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1374640668&sr=1-1&keywords=courageous+questions+confident+leaders

Enabling Great Leadership

Personal responsibility is key to the success of the leader.  There are times, however, that I have both experienced and witnessed, during which the leader is put in a position that  hinders or disables their leadership due to no fault of their own. .  . and often these are caused by the leader's boss.

Pretty much each of us reports to someone else . . .even CEOs report to a Board of Directors.   It is the responsibility of individuals who supervise leaders to assure that leaders have the tools and resources they need and are truly enabled to do the job they are supposed to do.   Really good bosses do this with a minimum of interference to the leader or their team.

These, then, are guidelines that people who supervise leaders should utilize:

Ensure that your leaders are aligned with the enterprise's goals and administrate those goals in an ethical and trustworthy method.    Continuous alignment with goals assures that the leader's team is always on track with a minimal amount of interference. Strong agreement with the guardrails of ethics eliminate miscues  that can cost the enterprise millions.

Don't publicly interfere with your leader's direction.     When your leader is working with their team, and you observe an opportunity for improvement, let your observation wait until you are in one-on-one conversation with your leader.      If you intercut into the conversation, you are undercutting. . .the result being that the leader's team won't know who to follow.

Don't assume, just because you are the leader's boss, that you know more about a situation or team member than they do.   They are closer to the team, they need to deal with the situation more frequently and ultimately it is their team's and their responsibility to deliver the results you prescribe.  The more you interfere, the less you can hold the leader responsible for results.

Don't hard drive an HR situation.   If you feel that a member of the leader's team isn't worthy, it is an observation you should make to the leader and a conversation should follow.   Do not force the leader into taking disciplinary action or terminate an employee.   Again, it is their team, they know it better than you and ultimately, it is their performance.   Rely on their judgment.

Don't give a member of the leader's team information that you haven't given to the leader.  It causes confusion and makes you look bad.

When it is time for bonuses, let the leader hand out the good news to the team members.  It is, after all, their team and they have invested energy and hours into making their team successful.

Like it?  Share it!

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

When "I" Am Important and When Not

One of the observations I've made of myself, and of others, is that often we get confused about when we really are important, and when we really aren't.   The dynamic often goes like this . . .that we become too involved in things in which we really shouldn't that we neglect to take care of the things, and the people, that really matter.  With that in mind, here's a quick primer on when "I" isn't such an important concept for leaders and when it is.

When the "I" Really Doesn't Matter. . .

I Don't Need to Do Everything Myself.  Whether out of a sense of "getting everything right" or "it's just easier to do it myself"  this is not a good idea.

I Don't Need to Insert Myself Into Every Situation.  Good leaders don't need to be everywhere;   they need to be where they are needed.

I Don't Need to Work Long Hours Just to Prove My Worth.  The natural workload provides more than enough challenge;  we don't need to add to it by incrementing our time at the office just because we think it will impress someone.

I Don't Need to be Right All of the Time.   Sometimes we spend so much energy and time trying to prove that we were right. . .that ultimately we are really, really wrong.

I Don't Need to be the Center of the Universe.   Your importance as a leader is not because you  need or want to be feel important.

So Instead of Wasting My Time on the Above. . .

I Need to Align the Team Around the Goals of the Enterprise.   This is core to every leader's work. . .time must be spent leading the charge to achieve the driving mission of the company.

I Need to be Present for My Team.   Team members who are involved in the work of the enterprise need guidance and answers at a moment's notice.   Leaders must be available to answer  questions ranging from the simplest to the most complex.

I Need to Listen.   One of the strongest ways to communicate a team member is valuable is to spend time listening. . .one of the best ways to be an invaluable asset to the enterprise is to listen to others.

I Need to Take Care of Myself.    Some of the stupidest things I've done I did when I thought I was too busy to take care of myself.   Good food, good rest, time with friends and family, as well as time spent in quiet thought are all strong investments not only in your own leadership, but in the success of the team.

Like it?   Share it!

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