Have a conversation already!
One of the most powerful things a team leader can do is to engage in conversation with those she/he is privileged to work with. Unfortunately, the time for these conversations usually falls to the bottom of the priority list (which it shouldn't) in face of the pressing demands of the business. Equally unfortunate is that the annual review often is not productive in terms of getting team members to open up; it is shrouded in the anxiety of "what kind of rating am I going to get" and "how big of a raise will I receive."
All of which brought me to this: I schedule a time with each of my team members, without their supervisor, to just come into my office and talk. I explain to them that even though I take notes, this does not go into their HR file and is not a formal evaluation tool. This is their time to say what is on their mind. In advance, I provide them with the eight questions I want them to answer:
What is the mission of our company?
What is your role (your importance) in that mission?
How is the balance between your personal life and professional life?
Do you have the tools you need to do your job?
What do you want to do next, career-wise, within or outside of our company?
How can we enable you to do your job better/make your job more enjoyable?
What concerns may you have regarding your job?
If I knew what to ask you, what would I ask?
The first time you go through this - it may seem awkward, both to you and the team member. But as you do this with consistency (annually or semi-annually), both parties become more comfortable and relaxed. Also remember that this is a conversation; the individual's reply to one of the questions may lead both of you into a greater dialogue surrounding that specific subject - which is awesome!
I enter the process prepared to hear all sorts of both positive and negative feedback; I am also prepared to take immediate action (if appropriate) on what I hear. The latter validates the value of the team member and their contribution to their conversation.
More important than all of that, however, is that this conversation should open up an ongoing dialogue. If people have been reticent to approach you (which you really don't want), this literally opens the door to their input and the investment of one-to-one time acknowledges their ongoing contribution.
Some would say they can't afford the time to have such a conversation with their team members. Truth is, you can't afford not to.
Like it? Share it?
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Friday, September 29, 2017
Friday, September 22, 2017
Of Rocket Men and Dotards. . .
North Korea is in the testing phases of having the ability to launch nuclear missiles.
That should send a chill down your spine. At a time like this, the population of the world needs at least some reassurance that there is some gravity, some thought, some rational thinking that would help us avoid (minimally) a showdown or, worse yet (and may God forbid) an all out war.
Instead, we have the leaders of the United States and North Korea engaged in the very worst of Real Housewives type of behavior (actually, the Real Housewives would do it better - after four weeks they would at least meet face to face over a few stiff drinks and decide it was someone else's fault). Amidst all of the adjectives and word-mongering, Donald Trump has labeled Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man" and Kim Jong Un sent us scrambling to Google by labeling Donald Trump a "dotard."
For those of us concerned with the future of the world, its people and its prosperity - none of this is helpful. None of this contributes to a peaceful conclusion. And it is worrisome.
But, how often do we do the same thing in the workplace - whether with a competitor or with someone internally who we believe is a competitor (which, by the way, no one internally should be a competitor)? Instead of constructive dialogue or making a compromise or at least conducting ourselves with a modest amount of dignity. . .we lash out in the most elementary way possible. Does it destroy the fabric of what we are trying to create? Yes. Does it make the workforce feel positive? No.
Contrast the above name calling with what has happened in Germany. Angela Merkel will probably be re-elected Chancellor; this is a post she has had since 2005. From her name, the German people have developed a noun "merkeln." Loosely translated, it means steady and trustworthy and centered. Admittedly, this style is frustrating to some - but at the end of the day, most of the German population recognizes this down-to-earth style serves them well. They feel that they are well taken care of.
Further proof? The nickname the German people call Merkel is "mutti." In English, Mother.
Rocket Man? Dotard? Mother?
What would you rather the workforce called you?
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
That should send a chill down your spine. At a time like this, the population of the world needs at least some reassurance that there is some gravity, some thought, some rational thinking that would help us avoid (minimally) a showdown or, worse yet (and may God forbid) an all out war.
Instead, we have the leaders of the United States and North Korea engaged in the very worst of Real Housewives type of behavior (actually, the Real Housewives would do it better - after four weeks they would at least meet face to face over a few stiff drinks and decide it was someone else's fault). Amidst all of the adjectives and word-mongering, Donald Trump has labeled Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man" and Kim Jong Un sent us scrambling to Google by labeling Donald Trump a "dotard."
For those of us concerned with the future of the world, its people and its prosperity - none of this is helpful. None of this contributes to a peaceful conclusion. And it is worrisome.
But, how often do we do the same thing in the workplace - whether with a competitor or with someone internally who we believe is a competitor (which, by the way, no one internally should be a competitor)? Instead of constructive dialogue or making a compromise or at least conducting ourselves with a modest amount of dignity. . .we lash out in the most elementary way possible. Does it destroy the fabric of what we are trying to create? Yes. Does it make the workforce feel positive? No.
Contrast the above name calling with what has happened in Germany. Angela Merkel will probably be re-elected Chancellor; this is a post she has had since 2005. From her name, the German people have developed a noun "merkeln." Loosely translated, it means steady and trustworthy and centered. Admittedly, this style is frustrating to some - but at the end of the day, most of the German population recognizes this down-to-earth style serves them well. They feel that they are well taken care of.
Further proof? The nickname the German people call Merkel is "mutti." In English, Mother.
Rocket Man? Dotard? Mother?
What would you rather the workforce called you?
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Friday, September 15, 2017
Some New Thoughts on Time Management
Decades before I entered the workforce and decades after I exit the workforce, time management will be an issue. It seems that many of the seminars and the tons of books written on the subject are very tactical and prescriptive. Where is the thought innovation and the deeper strategy? Some ideas:
If you truly believe there will never be enough time, there certainly will never be.
Time doesn't run you, you run it.
Approaching time rigidly, with no flexibility. . .does not work.
Priorities are meant to be shifted. What seemed like a priority this morning may be less of one because of information you received this afternoon. Feel free to move things around. Your judgment around these issues is what makes time valuable. If priorities are absolutely rigid, work is approached from a dogmatic rather than pragmatic standpoint - and that is a waste of time.
The creation of enemies and the playing of internal "games" is a huge time waster. Everything about this moves you and the organization backward.
Silos and the lack of collaboration wastes time; these elements abuse human, communication and skill resources.
E-mail is often reviled as a time waster; it is not unless it is abused. E-mail, texting, messaging. . . are all very efficient ways of disseminating and collecting information quickly. If you are using e-mail in this manner - good for you! One of the popular "time management" techniques thrown around (and usually uttered with self-righteousness) is "I don't do e-mail until the end of the day." Think about this - how many people are wasting time waiting for your reply?
Which brings us to this: time management should not be approached as an insular topic. Think about how your time management decisions positively or negatively impact time usage for those you have the privilege of working with.
Hallway conversations with colleagues are not a waste of time - unless you are not learning anything or failing to establish a better working relationship with your peers. Even non-work related conversations ("What about those 'hawks?"), while often denigrated in time management seminars, are not a waste of time. By our very nature, we want and need to have those social interactions; they build rapport and they build knowledge.
Everyone should have a system that works to their style that supports them in managing their work.
It really comes down to this - the ability and willingness of the individual to use personal judgment in the appropriation of time. What really works for you?
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
If you truly believe there will never be enough time, there certainly will never be.
Time doesn't run you, you run it.
Approaching time rigidly, with no flexibility. . .does not work.
Priorities are meant to be shifted. What seemed like a priority this morning may be less of one because of information you received this afternoon. Feel free to move things around. Your judgment around these issues is what makes time valuable. If priorities are absolutely rigid, work is approached from a dogmatic rather than pragmatic standpoint - and that is a waste of time.
The creation of enemies and the playing of internal "games" is a huge time waster. Everything about this moves you and the organization backward.
Silos and the lack of collaboration wastes time; these elements abuse human, communication and skill resources.
E-mail is often reviled as a time waster; it is not unless it is abused. E-mail, texting, messaging. . . are all very efficient ways of disseminating and collecting information quickly. If you are using e-mail in this manner - good for you! One of the popular "time management" techniques thrown around (and usually uttered with self-righteousness) is "I don't do e-mail until the end of the day." Think about this - how many people are wasting time waiting for your reply?
Which brings us to this: time management should not be approached as an insular topic. Think about how your time management decisions positively or negatively impact time usage for those you have the privilege of working with.
Hallway conversations with colleagues are not a waste of time - unless you are not learning anything or failing to establish a better working relationship with your peers. Even non-work related conversations ("What about those 'hawks?"), while often denigrated in time management seminars, are not a waste of time. By our very nature, we want and need to have those social interactions; they build rapport and they build knowledge.
Everyone should have a system that works to their style that supports them in managing their work.
It really comes down to this - the ability and willingness of the individual to use personal judgment in the appropriation of time. What really works for you?
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Friday, September 8, 2017
Microsoft's Extraordinary Moral Stand
Often there is a lot of talk about corporations standing with their team members; sometimes followed by a lot of inaction. This past week, coming out of the shadow of the President's decision to rescind DACA, Microsoft, as well as many other corporate influencers, made strong commitments to their workforce.
On the Microsoft blog, Brad Smith, President and Chief Legal Officer of Microsoft wrote: "We are deeply disappointed by the administration's decision today to rescind protection under the program for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). As we said last week, we believe this is a big step back for our entire country."
There it is - the "putting our neck out" statement that has been all too uncommon among corporate cultures when issues this vital are on the national agenda. Beyond the words, however, came the commitment to a plan of action. In the blog, Smith urges congress to protect the Dreamers as a priority, even before it takes up the money issue of tax reform. "We say this even though Microsoft, like many other companies, cares greatly about modernizing the tax system and making it fairer and more competitive. But we need to put the humanitarian needs of these 800,000 people on the legislative calendar before a tax bill."
Microsoft outlines the compelling financial reason for this, but then goes on to make the ethical case. "As this debate moves forward, we need to remember that these 800,000 individuals came to our nation as children. They grew up in this country. They attended our local schools and count millions of American citizens as friends. They obey our laws, pay taxes here and have registered voluntarily with the federal government for DACA relief. They are loyal to this country and contribute their time and money to local churches, schools and community groups. The Dreamers are part of our nation's fabric. They belong here."
But is Microsoft prepared to put its money to support it's words? "For the 39 Dreamers that we know of who are our employees, our commitment is clear. If congress fails to act, our company will exercise its legal rights properly to help protect our employees. If the government seeks to deport any one of them, we will provide and pay for their legal counsel. We will also file an amicus brief and explore whether we can directly intervene in any such case. In short, if Dreamers who are our employees are in court, we will be by their side."
It's worth noting the ratio. 39 people - out of a workforce of tens of thousands. It would be very convenient to ignore such a small number; Microsoft is doing the opposite, they are making a major effort to support this group.
Microsoft is displaying the moral courage, leadership and ethics that is currently lacking in the administrative and legislative branches.
And it is inspiring.
By all means - share this!
On the Microsoft blog, Brad Smith, President and Chief Legal Officer of Microsoft wrote: "We are deeply disappointed by the administration's decision today to rescind protection under the program for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). As we said last week, we believe this is a big step back for our entire country."
There it is - the "putting our neck out" statement that has been all too uncommon among corporate cultures when issues this vital are on the national agenda. Beyond the words, however, came the commitment to a plan of action. In the blog, Smith urges congress to protect the Dreamers as a priority, even before it takes up the money issue of tax reform. "We say this even though Microsoft, like many other companies, cares greatly about modernizing the tax system and making it fairer and more competitive. But we need to put the humanitarian needs of these 800,000 people on the legislative calendar before a tax bill."
Microsoft outlines the compelling financial reason for this, but then goes on to make the ethical case. "As this debate moves forward, we need to remember that these 800,000 individuals came to our nation as children. They grew up in this country. They attended our local schools and count millions of American citizens as friends. They obey our laws, pay taxes here and have registered voluntarily with the federal government for DACA relief. They are loyal to this country and contribute their time and money to local churches, schools and community groups. The Dreamers are part of our nation's fabric. They belong here."
But is Microsoft prepared to put its money to support it's words? "For the 39 Dreamers that we know of who are our employees, our commitment is clear. If congress fails to act, our company will exercise its legal rights properly to help protect our employees. If the government seeks to deport any one of them, we will provide and pay for their legal counsel. We will also file an amicus brief and explore whether we can directly intervene in any such case. In short, if Dreamers who are our employees are in court, we will be by their side."
It's worth noting the ratio. 39 people - out of a workforce of tens of thousands. It would be very convenient to ignore such a small number; Microsoft is doing the opposite, they are making a major effort to support this group.
Microsoft is displaying the moral courage, leadership and ethics that is currently lacking in the administrative and legislative branches.
And it is inspiring.
By all means - share this!
Friday, September 1, 2017
Are You the Reason People Want to Come to Work?
It's that time of year when we honor the workforce. This means it is also the perfect time to re-state that work should be enjoyed. That's not to mean it's not hard work. . .or that it's not complicated. . .or that there won't be things that we hate - but that overall, work exhibits part of our purpose in life and that we enjoy that purpose.
Which brings us to this question of responsibility and ownership: are you the reason people want to come to work?
Each of us should own this responsibility. If we truly want work to be more enjoyable, then we ourselves, and the way we conduct business, must also be enjoyable. These, then, are the questions:
Are people happy to see you when they show up for work?
Do people feel that you are additive to the workplace?
In the way that you interact, do people feel better about themselves?
Do people feel that they can confide in you?
Do you genuinely have peoples' backs?
Do you exhibit both business smarts and emotional intelligence?
Is integrity a very important part of your work?
Knowing that you will sometimes have to do things that people don't like, do you generally conduct your business in such a way that people like you?
Do you honor diverse viewpoints? Are you collaborative?
Are you unselfish?
If you can answer these questions "yes," you are a reason why people want to come to work. If the majority of your workplace can answer these questions positively - you have a terrific team; you will retain and attract like talent.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Which brings us to this question of responsibility and ownership: are you the reason people want to come to work?
Each of us should own this responsibility. If we truly want work to be more enjoyable, then we ourselves, and the way we conduct business, must also be enjoyable. These, then, are the questions:
Are people happy to see you when they show up for work?
Do people feel that you are additive to the workplace?
In the way that you interact, do people feel better about themselves?
Do people feel that they can confide in you?
Do you genuinely have peoples' backs?
Do you exhibit both business smarts and emotional intelligence?
Is integrity a very important part of your work?
Knowing that you will sometimes have to do things that people don't like, do you generally conduct your business in such a way that people like you?
Do you honor diverse viewpoints? Are you collaborative?
Are you unselfish?
If you can answer these questions "yes," you are a reason why people want to come to work. If the majority of your workplace can answer these questions positively - you have a terrific team; you will retain and attract like talent.
Like it? Share it!
My book "Courageous Questions, Confident Leaders" is available on Amazon Kindle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)