It is so incredibly unfortunate that often we put work and happiness at opposite ends of the scale.
Why is this so? There could be perfect legitimate reasons. Perhaps you do work for Cruella de Ville or the Marquis de Sade and work, through no doing of your own, is truly a living, eternal punishment. If such is the case - get out.
More often, however, we capitulate to this popular notion that work is not supposed to be fun. . .after all - it's work. I just don't agree. . . fun is not exclusive of work or vice versa. (Similarly I choose to eschew the popular "work/life balance" - it's not either work or life. . .work is part of life.) So, if we are supposed to be happy at work - whose responsibility is that?
Yours.
Not to be unsympathetic to whatever situation you may face. . .but seriously, you have a choice each and every day on how you are going to approach work. And trust me, life is so much better when you bring happiness to work.
So really, what we are talking about is an attitude adjustment augmented by some tactics that are just human goodness. Make it a point to greet people in the morning. . .with a smile. Efficiencies are not going to hell if you spend a couple of extra minutes talking about the family or the hobby. We can laugh at work situations. We don't need to treat every situation as if it's brain surgery. . .well, unless it IS brain surgery. . .and even then I'll bet you'll find brain surgeons with a sense of realism and a good sense of humor.
I've long held that attitude is everything. Usually I'm referring to that attitude of "I can do/learn anything." It also applies to the attitude we bring to work. . .don't you love it when others are happy at work? They love it when you are as well.
The title of this blog "Bring a Little Happiness to Work" is an error. Hell, bring it. . .bring A LOT of happiness to work today.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available for 2.99 at Amazon Kindle.
Friday, January 29, 2016
Friday, January 22, 2016
The Death of Over-Responsibility
Admittedly, I'm hesitant to write this for fear of creating an excuse. I'm a huge believer in responsibility and ownership at work. One of my favorite phrases is "You cannot change what you do not own." I think too many team members, through their own perception or fault of management, don't feel a sense of ownership.
That, however, is not what I'm writing about today. I'm writing about the sense of over-responsibility, which can be just as injurious as feeling no responsibility or ownership whatsoever.
I have witnessed individuals who, through acculturation or personal evolution, feel an overwhelming sense of responsibility. . . or over-responsibility Here are the burdens that this can create:
The individual is so over-indexed in responsibility that they believe that for something to be done right, they have to do themselves. The rest of the team, then, doesn't have much to do and they don't know what they can do that the individual hasn't already touched. The extreme sense of over-responsibility is then balanced out (if you will) by the rest of the team disabled from feeling any sense of ownership whatsoever.
Or, the sense of personal responsibility is so heavy that the professional rebels against anything that has to do with ownership. Consequently, the team itself is not responsible.
Third possible result. . .the over-responsibility is so weighty that the individual is loathe to make decisions for fear of making the wrong decisions. The individual, and the team, becomes catatonic.
They collectively worry a lot, but cannot activate.
Here's the thing. . . responsibility is like everything else, there are extremes at both ends. Feeling no responsibility is a bad thing. . .feeling responsible for everything is a bad thing. In the middle is the reality of the situation. Our work, our teams, our families, our lives call us to be responsible for our actions and the well-being for others; it does not require us to solve everything.
Within both our professional and personal lives there is a need for the reality of what we are called to own. . .and what truly should be someone else's ownership. The realization of that makes us, and those who surround us, happier and more productive.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
That, however, is not what I'm writing about today. I'm writing about the sense of over-responsibility, which can be just as injurious as feeling no responsibility or ownership whatsoever.
I have witnessed individuals who, through acculturation or personal evolution, feel an overwhelming sense of responsibility. . . or over-responsibility Here are the burdens that this can create:
The individual is so over-indexed in responsibility that they believe that for something to be done right, they have to do themselves. The rest of the team, then, doesn't have much to do and they don't know what they can do that the individual hasn't already touched. The extreme sense of over-responsibility is then balanced out (if you will) by the rest of the team disabled from feeling any sense of ownership whatsoever.
Or, the sense of personal responsibility is so heavy that the professional rebels against anything that has to do with ownership. Consequently, the team itself is not responsible.
Third possible result. . .the over-responsibility is so weighty that the individual is loathe to make decisions for fear of making the wrong decisions. The individual, and the team, becomes catatonic.
They collectively worry a lot, but cannot activate.
Here's the thing. . . responsibility is like everything else, there are extremes at both ends. Feeling no responsibility is a bad thing. . .feeling responsible for everything is a bad thing. In the middle is the reality of the situation. Our work, our teams, our families, our lives call us to be responsible for our actions and the well-being for others; it does not require us to solve everything.
Within both our professional and personal lives there is a need for the reality of what we are called to own. . .and what truly should be someone else's ownership. The realization of that makes us, and those who surround us, happier and more productive.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Friday, January 15, 2016
The Power Position
There are times when high school conclusions are actually borne out throughout subsequent adult experiences.
In high school, I decided to run as class rep in the student council versus president. Why? Okay, probably I had the sense that I wouldn't get enough votes to win the president's chair. . .but I also had the sense that as a rep I would have more power. The president's position was largely one of organizer and moderator. . .many of the ideas and measures that moved the student body forward were borne out of the rep population.
Consider that this is true in many businesses - the base of power is not in the top-most office, but often in the organizational tiers. Often those not in the top job have the opportunity to create a greater presence, a collaborative network and generate more ideas.
There are two important criteria to consider: how does the organization function and how does one create power?.
If the organization is very "paternal" and all ideas must originate with the very top leadership and everyone else is expected to just execute, this idea is null and void. If, however, the organization is more open, a team member can be very powerful within many different organizational tiers.
The opportunity to make this happen is comprised of these simple things:
Feel like you have ownership within the organization. "I can make this happen" is miles away from "I just come to work and do what they tell me to do."
Collaborate. Bounce ideas back and forth. Create conversations and generate ideas with others. This neatly ties in with. . .
Network. Get out of your silo. Create camaraderie. And in the end. . .
Generate great ideas that drive the business and make the team more accomplished. The end result is that you become one of the more powerful people within the organization.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle for e-readers, tablets and PCs.
In high school, I decided to run as class rep in the student council versus president. Why? Okay, probably I had the sense that I wouldn't get enough votes to win the president's chair. . .but I also had the sense that as a rep I would have more power. The president's position was largely one of organizer and moderator. . .many of the ideas and measures that moved the student body forward were borne out of the rep population.
Consider that this is true in many businesses - the base of power is not in the top-most office, but often in the organizational tiers. Often those not in the top job have the opportunity to create a greater presence, a collaborative network and generate more ideas.
There are two important criteria to consider: how does the organization function and how does one create power?.
If the organization is very "paternal" and all ideas must originate with the very top leadership and everyone else is expected to just execute, this idea is null and void. If, however, the organization is more open, a team member can be very powerful within many different organizational tiers.
The opportunity to make this happen is comprised of these simple things:
Feel like you have ownership within the organization. "I can make this happen" is miles away from "I just come to work and do what they tell me to do."
Collaborate. Bounce ideas back and forth. Create conversations and generate ideas with others. This neatly ties in with. . .
Network. Get out of your silo. Create camaraderie. And in the end. . .
Generate great ideas that drive the business and make the team more accomplished. The end result is that you become one of the more powerful people within the organization.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle for e-readers, tablets and PCs.
Friday, January 8, 2016
No, It's Not War. . .War is War
In speaking of the upcoming electoral process, Donald Trump said, "We view this as war."
Not a discourse on the future of the country. Not a competition of ideas and ideals. Not a presentation of strategies or political prowess. War.
War is a terrible thing and it is a very serious thing. To equate a national debate, or a workplace conflict, to war is indeed a grievous misuse of the word and concept.
As unfortunate as it may be that there may be a time and place for true war, that time or place is certainly not in a democracy in which we are supposed to be having civil debates. Nor is war appropriate for the workplace.
Individuals may take pride in their boasting and bearing of weapons; but certainly in the workplace it is not something that is positive. War is not about building; it is about tearing apart. War is not productive; it is destructive. War is costly. And as we have witnessed in our own history, even if one is on the "winning" side; there is a substantial price to be paid for years to come for that victory.
Nonetheless there are those who declare "war" when there isn't one. We should be highly suspect of these individuals - usually the motives are self-serving and not in the best interest of the whole.
So if you hear someone at your workplace say they are going to declare war on someone within the company, you may advise them that minimally, it is a error of semantics and grossly, it is an error of strategy. What we want in the workplace is positive production (and we should desire that for our national politics as well).
I once interviewed someone from a rival company who described their company culture as "running gun battles in the hallways."
That company no longer exists.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available for e-readers, PCs and tablets from Amazon Kindle.
Not a discourse on the future of the country. Not a competition of ideas and ideals. Not a presentation of strategies or political prowess. War.
War is a terrible thing and it is a very serious thing. To equate a national debate, or a workplace conflict, to war is indeed a grievous misuse of the word and concept.
As unfortunate as it may be that there may be a time and place for true war, that time or place is certainly not in a democracy in which we are supposed to be having civil debates. Nor is war appropriate for the workplace.
Individuals may take pride in their boasting and bearing of weapons; but certainly in the workplace it is not something that is positive. War is not about building; it is about tearing apart. War is not productive; it is destructive. War is costly. And as we have witnessed in our own history, even if one is on the "winning" side; there is a substantial price to be paid for years to come for that victory.
Nonetheless there are those who declare "war" when there isn't one. We should be highly suspect of these individuals - usually the motives are self-serving and not in the best interest of the whole.
So if you hear someone at your workplace say they are going to declare war on someone within the company, you may advise them that minimally, it is a error of semantics and grossly, it is an error of strategy. What we want in the workplace is positive production (and we should desire that for our national politics as well).
I once interviewed someone from a rival company who described their company culture as "running gun battles in the hallways."
That company no longer exists.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available for e-readers, PCs and tablets from Amazon Kindle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)