Posted: April 7, 2020 | Categories: Leadership, Team Building

A few weeks ago I was meeting with the owner of a manufacturing company.  Before I could even ask, she asked me if I would like to have a tour of her plant.  I could tell she was eager to show off.  I knew they had the most updated equipment and state-of-the-art technology, but I soon found out that wasn’t what she wanted to show off:  She wanted me to meet her people.  As we passed each work station, Kim introduced me to the heads of each section.  She talked about their talent and had something special to say about each one.  Tell me: What level of trust do you think she has with her team?  You are right! A bunch.

In three separate studies conducted by the training team of Patterson, Grenny, and Maxfield, it was discovered that the “single best predictor of satisfaction with supervision is freqeuncy of interaction.  And if your actions are infrequent and only about problems, you’re really doomed.  Others only hear your position:  They never see you as a person.”

When we show a genuine interest and listen well, we connect at a personal level.  Once this happens, every subsequent discussion in problem solving, re-direction, and accountability becomes much easier, and we can have more direct conversations without creating resentment.  Leaders care!

Posted: January 9, 2020 | Categories: Team Building

Years ago a colleague and I were facilitating a session in management training.  We were working on accountability, and my partner made a statement to the class that I have never forgotten:

“It’s like being a good parent:  If we are too strict and allow no latitude, we often find that the child can be rebellious and resentful.  If, on the other hand, we are too lax, and have no rules, we end up raising a child that no one wants to be around”

So how do we find a happy medium?  Assuming we have clearly defined roles and expectations, we will eventually come to a point where we have to re-direct a team member who has strayed from the standard.  How rigid should we be?  It can depend on the situation, the severity of the error, and many times the temperament and track record of the person we are addressing.

Just recently, a manager I know had to fire an office assistant.  He and his partner had hired Sue.  His partner, Jim, was like a drill sergeant, and one day Sue came in one minute late.  He approached her about it, and she became very defensive.  From that point on, things were not the same.  Sue’s work began to suffer, and the on-time conversation seemed to mark the beginning of the decline.  Should Jim have spoken up?  How did he approach her?  Should he have let it go?  I wish I could give you a “silver-bullet” answer.  Instead, I will leave you with another favorite quote from an old mentor of mine from many years back:

“Better to let a little wrong live than a lot of love die”

Posted: December 3, 2019 | Categories: Leadership, Management, Team Building

You may have noticed a couple of pervasive buzz words going around in the business world today:  Synergy and/or collaboration.  It means teams getting out of their silos, putting all their heads together, and solving problems.  The first and most important step is defining the problem.  By defining a problem, it means that you have simply stated the situation in a factual, non-blameful way.

As simple as this sounds, I find that people struggle with this step.  Too often in problem-solving team members start out with blame or just a symptom of the problem.

Several years ago, I was teaching a management class, Ralph was one of the class participants, and he decided to apply this fundamental with his team.  He asked for a statement of the problem, and he heard comments like, “Sam didn’t do the quality check in time”, or “the belts were not changed in time and the machine broke down”.  Ralph stopped them right there by saying, “That’s not the problem”.  He stuck with it, and they finally came up with a simple statement they could all agree on:  “The problem is we had a late delivery to a key customer”.  Now we are cooking!  Instead of getting into blame and finger-pointing, we can work through the next three steps of the problem solving process.

2.  What are the causes of the problem?

3.  What are the possible solutions?

4.  What is the best possible solution?

The team agreed on the best solution, laid out their action steps, and were well on their way to making the changes to improve delivery time.  Ralph said that had he not insisted they define the problem, they would have gone round and round.  Remember, if you have a problem to solve, begin by defining it.  Consider the old maxim, “A problem defined is a problem half solved”

Posted: November 12, 2019 | Categories: Leadership, Management, Team Building

A good leader cares about his team.  Who would want to work for someone who didn’t care?

I have a good friend who is a caring leader and a successful businessman.  I was talking with Jim a couple months ago, and he talked about a challenge he accepted a month before while attending a trade convention.  The challenge was this:

“Imagine that someone contacted you, and wanted to buy your business.  They made you an offer that was hard to refuse.  You quickly realized that you could retire early if you accepted this offer.  It was in cash, and you accepted.

After about a year, you received a call from the same person, and things weren’t going well.  They were desperate, and wanted you to know if you would be willing to buy the business back for 10 cents on the dollar.  You were twitching to get back to work, and you took the offer.  Here is the question:  Now that you own the business again, who would you hire back?  Is there anyone you would not hire back?  If so, why is this person still working for you?”

It was a day of reckoning for Jim.  He did have a manager that he would not hire back in that scenario.  He knew what he had to do.  He let him go.  The person who has since replaced the dismissed manager is doing very well, and the business is doing much better.  Jim, like many I know, said the same thing after he let a sub-performer go:  “I wished I had done it sooner”.  If he had, it would have saved him a lot of grief and money.

Here is the message:  If someone is consistently under-performing, and he or she has been given ample opportunity to improve, it is usually wise to part company.  It can actually turn out to be a “win-win” rather than a “lose-lose”

Posted: September 23, 2019 | Categories: Leadership, Team Building

Last week the Wall Street Journal featured an article by Joanne Lublin entitled, “To get ahead, rivals get along.”  In the column Ms. Lublin pointed out that 73% of the heads of S&P 500 companies who were selected last year came from within, compared with 69% in 2017.  Along with this rise, candidates with exceptional people skills are most desirable.  “Employers now prefer to elevate highly collaborative executives.”  Here is an example of just how important this quality can be:

Two years ago I was working with a company that had two internal candidates named Jim and Bob.  They were applying for the same position.  They like, trusted, and respected each other, and were willing to be a good sport about it if they weren’t selected.  After one was selected, these two continued to work together and keep their relationship solid.  Two years later, the candidate who was passed by was offered a management position at another location.  It was just what he wanted.  He has since excelled at the position, and has now been given another promotion.  Jim and Bob both have a position in the company at a corporate level, and their ability to work together is exceptional.  As the classic rule of synergy goes, Jim and Bob together are greater than the sum of the two.

If you are playing in sports, you play to beat the other team.  That only makes sense.  When it comes to competing with people on your own team, try competing against yourself.  Like Bethoven and Shakespeare, strive to compete against yourself and your own record.  Your team will be a combination of strengths.