Over the years we have had the privilege of working with many organizations in Talent Management Strategy with particular emphasis on Employee Selection and Employee Retention.
We have found that the culture of the organization sets the tone for performance excellence or protectionism.
Every organization has politics of some type. I don't care who you are. There's good and bad politics of course. The "good politics" promote performance excellence and personal accountability.
The "bad politics" are associated with a pervasive "flavor" of accepted non-performance by the team. A particularly nasty form of "bad politics" are described by "The who matters more than the what."
This is a particular management style associated with low performing managers who can't get the respect of the team without playing favorites and parceling out information on an "as needed basis."
Following are five signs that a low performing manager is destroying potential in your organization.
- "The Who Matters More Than the What" Syndrome – Ineffective managers typically have their favorite (low performance) employees who mirror that manager's poor performance record. Doing the job well isn't a "performance metric" with low performing managers. Instead – currying favor of the low performing manager by enabling them and feeding their ego becomes the goal by the low performing employee. The low performer, subordinate employees maintain their "favored status" through "favors" of various types for the low performing manager. The biggest "favor" offered to the lousy manager by the low performing employee is the acceptance of that manager's mediocrity. It turns into a circle of "protectionism" of sorts. The lousy manager may give the lower performer preferred tasks that make both the low performer and the lousy manager look good. The reality is they aren't fooling high performers who may decide to seek employment elsewhere before they themselves succumb to the low performance game.
- The "Stupid Factor" Syndrome – Information isn't shared but disseminated on an as-needed, "need-to-know" basis. We can either share our knowledge and lose all power or we can share it and go get more knowledge and have the power. Tim Sanders best describes this thought process in his outstanding book "Love Is The Killer App". Knowledge is power when it is disseminated quickly and efficiently. Low performing managers don't disseminate knowledge but instead harbor and squander it in order to make themselves feel important. How can you tell if this is an issue? If the same questions must time and time again be answered by a particular manager, the real problem is a lack of systems or a low performing manager who is trying to make themselves important by injecting themselves into every decision – thereby making employees depend on them and enhancing their "importance".
- The "Trivial Issue Factor" Syndrome – Simple, trivial issues must be handled by management. This is particularly troublesome. If employees aren't "smart enough" to handle repetitive issues via a policy or just plain intelligence, it's a sign of lousy management practices or a low performing employee. Either "problem" is unacceptable. Low performing managers want control over every issue – even when the decision-making process could be handled by a policy statement. After all – low performing managers derive their power in handling everything down to the minutest detail.
- The "Greener Pasture" Syndrome – Your high performers leave for "greener pastures".
Think about it strategically… Assuming you have benchmarked the job and know what is needed in terms of Behaviors, Values, and Personal Attributes, and you match the right talent (person) to the job, then what could be the real problem? Poor management. Lousy managers and high performers are like oil and water. The lousy manager doesn't want a subordinate that performs at a higher level than they and a high performer quickly "smells" a manager's incompetence. If you have a high performer with the requisite experience and it seems that they are leaving for "greener pastures" – chances are they are really leaving a lousy manager.
- Lack of Personal Accountability Syndrome. This is a huge problem. In many organizations there is very little Personal Accountability. This problem always represents a lack of Personal Accountability at the managerial level. What does a lack of Personal Accountability look like? Low performer managers blame performance on subordinates who can't do their job. The reality is… The "buck" stops with the manager. It is the manager who must ensure that the right people are in the right seats on the "bus". It is the manager who must ensure that every employee team member knows what is expected from them to do the job well. It is the manager who must ensure that every team member is maximizing possibility by doing the job well. It is the manager who acts as a role model of mediocrity or excellence for the team members to emulate. The lack of Personal Accountability is a serious disease that must be eradicated from every organization. This problem begins with the low performer manager.
Your organizational culture is critically important. It's up to you… Decide what you want it to be.
- Decide.
- Set the vision.
- Monitor your managers and ensure that they are living the brand of your organization – ensure that they are living the mission, vision, and guiding values.
- Expect results.
Mediocrity or Performance Excellence. It's your choice – it's always up to you.
It's a tight labor market. Everyone seems to be looking for talent.
Occasionally a newer client will say, "We just need to get someone in."
Why would they be a newer client? Because they aren't aware of just how serious we are about hiring the right employee for the position.
Our response is always... "You need to hire the right employee for the job. Don't destroy possibility by hiring the wrong person and paying for it later."
The decision to keep the position open until filled with the best candidate possible while meeting a minimum threshold is the most strategic.
Not hiring is better than hiring the wrong person for the job.
Why shouldn't you hire someone to just "fill in" until you can hire the right employee?
It's actually quite simple. The wrong talent will create the following problems...
Employee Morale - If you hire a person who can't do the job well, there will be performance "gaps". Your high performers will notice the mediocrity immediately due to performance issues. The result will be high-performer employees who believe they are being held to a different standard. Eventually your existing high performers will feel that their pay should be better. After all - they do their jobs well. Most organizations "toe the line" saying, "We can't go against our pay scale."
What happens next is all too predictable. The high performers leave for "greener pastures".
Employee Turnover - Assuming you don't give the pay increase to your high performers, they will consider employment elsewhere. They will be hired by higher performing organizations. Where will they go? They will seek employment at places like Southwest Airlines where personal accountability is critically important and a vital part of their Mission, Vision, and Values.
Customer Goodwill - The wrong hire will destroy Customer Goodwill. The wrong hire won't take care of your customers the way you will.
Operational Costs... The wrong hire will drive up your operational costs. The most "telling" way that they do so is their productivity is reduced compared to high performers. Another operational cost would be the cost of employee selection.
The wrong person in the wrong job can wreak tremendous havoc in your organization. Your best employee selection strategy is hiring the right employee for the job the first time. Fit the best person to the Job Benchmark.
You simply cannot afford to hire anything less than the best talent for the job. If you are ready to dramatically improve your the quality of the talent you hire in your organization and improve your bottom line, give us a call, we can help.
Remember - not hiring is better than hiring the wrong person for the job!
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
Chris Young helps organizations Maximize Possibility through talent management, cultural transformation, and strategic intervention. Bring Chris in today!
1-866-988-RAIN
Employee coaching is the rage these days. It seems like everyone has a coach. It also seems like everyone is a coach.
There are standards in coaching - but they aren't universal yet like in counseling and psychiatry.
Coaches have a lot to offer - when they are effective. Most aren't effective.
A "coach" has the potential of wielding a great amount of power. While a coach is not a therapist, psychiatrist, nor a psychologist - they potentially have the power to dramatically influence the lives of those they touch. This power resides via the fact that the coach is often perceived as the "guru" - meaning the client may have blind faith in their coach's coaching abilities and may actually be led astray.
What is our view of the problem?
There's a lot of what I call "warm and fuzzy" employee coaching. What is it?
"Warm and fuzzy" coaching is coaching based on "soft data". An example of soft data may be interpreted as the emotional responses or viewpoints of the person being coached. A hard data example would be the results of a Behaviors, Values, and Personal Attributes assessment.
Hey... Feelings are good. But we need to know the source of those emotions. How is this person looking at their "world"? Without this "view" - no amount of employee coaching will ever be effective.
Key thought... What if the person being coached doesn't have a very good "radar" system? What if the coaching client's distorted view of the problem is the the problem. There is a strong potential that the the "medicine" being applied or suggested by the coach may be incorrect as a direct result. The result of this ineffective "treatment" will be diminished employee performance improvement.
In other words - the employee coaching will be a waste of time and money.
An example... Let's say my boss says I need coaching and one of my biggest challenges is time management. My Behavioral Style lends itself to very poor time management. The reality is I won't be able to truly manage my time. You could threaten my life and no matter how hard I try I won't be able to make any meaningful change. My awareness of my poor time management skills is probably the best "change" I can do. All the business coaching in the world truly won't help me.
What should I do instead? Have someone else manage my time. Or perhaps work in a job where there are adequate time management systems that force me to manage my time. Yet most coaches won't tell you that. Most will say, "Let's put these skills into place." Or worse yet... "Read my book on time management..." It won't help. You can't change core Behavioral Styles.
Manage your strengths - outsource your weaknesses.
The real problem... Very few business coaches have a true sense of what drives the Behaviors, Values, and Personal Attributes of the employees they are coaching. Some may use a Behavior Profile Instrument such as DISC or Myers Briggs. This is a good start, but not nearly deep enough.
When coaches fail to understand the real issues, coaches don't get results. The problems and challenges never go away because the real issues aren't addressed.
What can you do? Are you considering the hiring of your own coach?
- Ask them if they use psychometric instruments?
- Are they certified?
- Do they use them properly?
Employee Coaching Madness... We see ineffective coaches take on cases they shouldn't. So many coaches are starving to death and will do just about anything to work. The fact is, it is unethical to coach the uncoachable. Case in point... We get a lot of call requests to help "Ed". The real problem is Ed just can't do his job. Most coaches will try all sorts of things to help Ed do his job better. The first thing we do is have Ed complete a series of Personality Profile Instruments and then compare his results to the needs of the job (job benchmark). Then we determine if we can really help.
When we decide we can't help Ed we are often told by the company that we need to do something anyways. The company spent a lot of money hiring him and they don't want to acknowledge they made a mistake. What do they want? They want The Miracle Maker Group to come in and help coach Ed to success. The reality is - if Ed doesn't fit the job - no amount of coaching will help.
And there lies the rub... I know of few business coaches that can "see" the relationship between have the core abilities via Behaviors, Values, and Personal Attributes and the needs of the job (job benchmark).
Meaning what?
Most employee coaching will result in minimal to zero bottom-line business results.
Our perspective is simply this... If you don't measure the Behaviors, Values, and Personal Attributes of the team member and compare them to the needs of the job - no coaching plan will be effective. It's really that simple. Without a strong series of Personality Profile Instruments in the hands of a competent coach to show the source of the real issues - no lasting change will result.
If you or your team is in need of performance coaching. Do not settle for anything but the very best. Give us a call today and we'll discuss the real coaching needs and determine how to truly improve performance in your organization.
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
Chris Young helps organizations Maximize Possibility through talent management, cultural transformation, and strategic intervention. Bring Chris in today!
1-866-988-RAIN
On May 6, 1954, the Roger Bannister did what no man could possibly do previously.
Bannister became the first man to break the 4 minute mile in 3 minutes and 59.4 seconds in England on a windy day.
Prior to that day, it was commonly accepted that no man could break the 4 minute mile barrier. It was believed that the 4 minute mile was physically impossible. And it was commonly accepted. It was a fact.
The reality was... The four minute mile was a psychological barrier more than anything else!
Power Thought… The power of your mind is incredible. Your “limiting beliefs” or “mental barriers” are profoundly more powerful than physical.
What are you thinking about?
Forbes at the time called the breaking of the 4 minute mile by Bannister one of the greatest athletic achievements.
Bannister wasn’t alone in his new paradigm. Once it became mentally feasible, others would join him…
· Within 56 days, John Landy broke Bannister’s record in 3 minutes and 57.9 seconds in Finland.
· By 1957, 16 other runners had also broken the 4 minute mile.
Change your thinking to change your results.
What mindsets do you have that are getting in your way?
· “Today’s not my day?”
· “Some people are luckier than I?”
· “I can’t work with…”
· “Mondays aren’t good for me…”
What is your “Four Minute Mile Barrier”?
Opportunity! Probe the limiting beliefs, mental barriers (like the 4 minute mile), or negative attitudes that you are keeping in your mind…
· Write them down.
· Change the “I can’t” to “I will”.
· Remove the negative thinking.
· Decide to break through your mental barriers.
The choice is yours.
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
Chris Young helps organizations Maximize Possibility through talent management, cultural transformation, and strategic intervention. Bring Chris in today!
1-866-988-RAIN
Everything has a “brand”.
Ferrari. What is it?
It’s red, fast, and exclusive. I almost forgot… Expensive.
Everyone has a brand. Your Personal Brand is a direct reflection of the thoughts you think.
What is your Personal Brand?
· Talented and energetic?
· Positive-minded?
· Passionate?
· Angry?
· Bitter?
· Energy-robbing?
· Whiny?
Is your brand what you want it to be? Remember... You don't get to decide. Those around you decide what your "brand" means.
We have the privilege of working with the some of the most gifted talent out there. Of course… We help our clients hire the right employees and then inspire and coach them to the highest levels of human performance. We are a bit biased…
While talent is important. Attitude is even more critical. One’s attitude can take the best talent and destroy possibility – both within ourselves as well as in others.
The best talent in the world with a lousy attitude is not going to be the best talent.
The best attitude with average talent beats pure talent alone.
Carefully consider… Are you Maximizing Possibility or destroying it?
What is your story? Are you actively managing your attitude to get what you really want? Are you putting your best foot forward? Or are you letting things bother you and impact your day that you shouldn’t be?
Think about the one person at work that drags you down.
· How would you describe them?
· What do you like about them?
· What don’t you like about them?
· What are some of the things you are doing that they are?
· Are you doing some of the very things they are that are driving others crazy and destroying energy?
If you asked other people to name the one person who drags them down - would it be you?
How can you shape your attitude? The “way” is to decide.
Decide that you can change your attitude.
Decide to leave a legacy.
Decide that you won’t let the little things bother you.
Decide that no matter what happens, you will rise above the challenges you face.
Decide that you don’t know the entire story and the “story” you do know is interpreted through your “eyes”.
Decide that your life is your “story” and you write the pages – no one else has that power.
Decide that you will make the best out of everything that happens in your day.
Decide that no one else is responsible for how your day goes.
Decide that you make your own luck.
Decide to be a role model for others.
Decide to sit in the “front row of your life” - contribute.
Decide that what you think matters.
Decide that what you do matters.
Decide that the words you use have more meaning than you give them – choose them carefully.
Decide that average is never “good enough”.
Decide that your life will be an exclamation point rather than a “period”.
Decide that the “buck stops with you” – Personal Accountability.
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
Chris Young helps organizations Maximize Possibility through talent management, cultural transformation, and strategic intervention. Bring Chris in today!
Chris Young helps organizations Maximize Possibility through talent management, cultural transformation, and strategic intervention. Bring Chris in today!
1-866-988-RAIN
In the first installment of this article series we shared a source of interpersonal conflict that is most prevalent – core behavioral/communication differences that aren’t understood.
Another often-overlooked source of employee conflict is what we call “Job-Me Conflict”.
Job-Me Conflict is exactly what it sounds like – conflict between the employee and the job.
Unfortunately, Job-Me Conflict is a hidden cause of employee conflict that occurs when and organization fails to use personality assessments and job benchmarking in it employee selection process. This is often the source of a host of problems leading to lost employee productivity, poor employee morale, and damaged Customer Relationships.
It makes intuitive sense doesn’t it? If you don’t like your job – your frustrations will likely “spill over” into your interpersonal relationships at work and at home. You have been there before… In the wrong job. Remember what it felt like? Recall the dread? Do you recall the feeling you felt when you quit?
For some in a poor job fit situation – they move out of the situation quickly. For others – the pay and benefits package are so important and the lack of intestinal fortitude on the part of the poor job fit team member coupled with low supervisory accountability enables the problem to continue until retirement.
The real problem, however, is that Job-Me Conflict is rarely identified as a source of employee conflict. Instead – we see many organizations going through Conflict Resolution Training – only to have the problem recur within days or weeks.
We have a saying at The Rainmaker Group. “Job-Me conflict always leads to ‘You-Me’ Conflict.”
The life cycle of this problem is actually pretty straight forward.
Stage One – The wrong person for the job is hired – thus beginning the process.
After the “honeymoon” period is over the wrong person for the job slowly realizes they don’t like the job. They don’t realize that the job isn’t a fit – they usually pin the blame on someone else or past life problems. Ever heard of the “boiling frog principle”?
· Throw a frog into a boiling pot of water and they will jump out immediately.
· Place a frog in a pot of room temperature water, turn the heat on, and the frog will slowly boil – not jumping out – and subsequently dying.
The wrong person hired begins to feel discomfort. The initial discomfort is typically quite subtle and therefore difficult to place the origin (boiling frog). This discomfort comes from the continuous stress of changing their core behaviors at work to do the job. After all – who they are at home behaviorally (Natural) is different from who they are at work (Adapted). The initial “can do” attitude is replaced by either task avoidance/incompletion and/or rising resentment toward the job, the supervisor, and team members who do the job well.
Perhaps you have never experienced the emotional stress of this “problem”. One of the best ways to describe what happens emotionally to the poor job fit team member is to think about a family get together. If you come from a large, extended family like I do – Christmas is a welcome holiday, but a bit scary. Why? The larger the family – the more diverse the behavioral patterns – meaning there are a lot more people I can’t stand there that I can’t get away from. Where does this discomfort come from? At the end of the day I am emotionally tired because I have spent a lot of the day “flexing my behaviors” – in other words – keeping my mouth shut. This isn’t natural for me! This is potentially how the poor job fit team member feels – EVERY DAY! Imagine.
Stage Two – The supervisor begins to hold the poor job fit team member accountable for performance. As is typically the case – the poor job fit team member begins to think their supervisor is picking on them and communicates their views to other team members. At this point the poor job fit team member is about to let the world know how unfair life/supervisor/job/childhood/neighbors/children/rude drivers/etc is.
Stage Three – The “infection” is spreading. The poor job fit team member’s complaints are falling on two general “sets of ears”.
· One general set of ears are attached to the team members who fit the job and perform well. These high performers also realize the short-comings of the poor job fit team member and wish that this person would do their job or leave. Perhaps they are fond of the supervisor that is being complained about. Nevertheless they feel that the poor job fit team member isn’t one of them and they ostracize them to some extent. This leads to even more interpersonal employee conflict.
· The other general set of ears are attached to fellow poor job fit team members who agree that life is in fact unfair and that the supervisor not only is the source of the problem for their colleague but also their own.
Stage Four – The supervisor either brings us in at this point or they wait until a 360 assessment is conducted that suggest that the supervisor is the "problem". Why is that? Their supervisory skills are lacking and some people feel they are unfair.
I’m not saying the supervisor isn’t at fault in any way. The supervisor typically contributes to the problem in some manner (another blog post!).
How can you deal with this type of conflict?
If you really want to get to the root of the employee conflict issue you must consider using a personality profile to understand where the issues may be coming from. But when you call us – don’t name names. We will tell you who is most likely to be contributing to this problem. The “source(s)” of the employee conflict will be a combination of interpersonal behavioral differences (See Part I of this series) and/or poor job fit.
How can you avoid Job-Me Conflict in your organization in the future?
There are two things you can do to dramatically reduce the drama of employee conflict.
1. Hire effectively in the first place. Match the Behaviors, Values, and Attribute needs of the job to the job benchmark. When you match the needs of the job to the talents of the employee – you dramatically reduce the potential for Job-Me Conflict and therefore reduce employee turnover.
2. Educate your team members. Help your team members to become more self aware of their Behaviors and Values and that of their fellow team members.
Until you understand the source of employee conflict in your organization, no “medicine” will work for you. Proper diagnosis of the “source” of employee conflict is critical to helping ensure that it is completely resolved.
Bring in The Rainmaker Group to help you understand the source of the conflict and apply the right mix of learning, awareness, and behavioral flexing to make the problem go away.
Now Go Maximize Possibility!
Miss a part of our five part series on interpersonal conflict? Click the links below to read any articles you may have missed!
It's Friday!
Over the week, I was refreshing my "studies" research and came across this powerful study regarding employee productivity. It's worth thinking about... What are your employees up to?
WASHINGTON, DC—The groundbreaking research found that by simply sitting down and doing work, employees can dramatically increase their output of goods and services.
Does your company culture encourage effective work in the workplace?
Do you really know your talent?
Do you have a succession plan in the event a team member becomes ill or leaves your team?
Pick a management leadership position in your organization. If you lost the person doing that job - what would you do?
These three questions are powerful. Average organizations aren't aware of their talent capacity. As a direct result, most organizations miss the opportunity to put that talent to good use.
A recent case-in-point. We have been working with this particular client for the past 20 months. This client is in the retail business offering products in the thousands of dollars range. It's highly specialized. To work there - you have to LOVE the product or you aren't going to be very effective. Their clientelle can tell immediately if you are a "poser" trying to act like you know the product. Their business model is seasonal. Therefore... They have seasonal employment - some people stay year-round.
You may see the real problem. The "talent pool" for this organization is extremely shallow. There aren't many passionate people out there with the necessary background to work well in this industry.
Recently, they were seeking a sales manager for one of their stores and their internal talent pool wasn't looking very promising. We highly recommended profiling every team member in the organization to identify potential succession candidates. To save resources, they hadn't profiled everyone.
What About Bob?
I was scheduled to talk with a particular general manager and when I called his store, one of their long-term sales team members from another location answered the phone. Let's say this person's name was "Bob". I had interacted with Bob several times. I thought I had the wrong store and then it hit me. Bob is passionate about the product and had even led a Customer Experience initiative for the entire organization. We didn't have this person's personality profile and he could be a good fit for the sales manager role.
How did it "hit" me? The signs were there...
- He believes passionately in the product.
- He (in many ways) was the "obvious choice" for a manager role.
- He is a year-round employee - making the seasonal "cut".
I suggested to the owner of the organization that we profile "Bob" saying, "If Bob doesn't fit - I won't charge you."
Long story short... Bob fit in just about every sales manager selection benchmark element for the role. Why did we miss some of the potential obvious signs that he wanted to be a sales manager?
His "Individualistic" Value wasn't particularly high. In other words - Bob wasn't walking around saying, "I want to be sales manager." Yet just about every other element of his personality profile fit very well.
What else kept Bob off the "radar"? Bob didn't have previous sales manager experience. It is now obvious that Bob could do the job relatively well with guidance and training.
Message... What you don't know about your team members will cost you. In this case, this organization had a sales manager candidate that had been over-looked for some time. While this person doesn't have sales manager experience, he could have been "groomed" for the role over the period of a couple of years. It makes me wonder how many people are out there ready to be "tapped" into a particular career path. They just need that "spark".
In order to truly know the talent capacity of your team, you must use an effective personality profile instrument and compare the results to job benchmark for each respective management role.
To not know the talent capacity of your team means you are losing the opportunity to Maximize Possibility in your organization. Begin the incredibly strategic process of employee succession planning today.
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
Does your organization have a reputation of hiring carefully?
Is it easy to get on your "bus"?
What does it say if you hire two out of three candidates and there's only one or two interviews in your employee selection approach?
It says, "It's easy to get on your team."
Key thought - "How do people behave if they believe it is easy to get on your team?"
Southwest Airlines really has employee selection strategy figured out. They set expectations through their reputation. "Don't apply if you aren't good enough."
It takes five interviews and most candidates don't make it through. If you are hired by Southwest Airlines , you are one of the few and have a right to be proud.
In fact Southwest Airlines is known to "interview" potential team members before they ever arrive for their official interview. This is done with the help of ticketing agents and flight crews who can report information about a candidate's attitude, how well they would likely fit into the Southwest culture, as well as how the candidate treated others during the flight to the candidate's hiring managers.
Southwest's hiring philosphy is to "Hire for attitude and train for skill." The reason for this is that Southwest realizes that most people can be taugh just about anything given the right learning environment, but attitudes rarely change.
The results of this approach? Southwest airlines has an enchanting culture that is hard to find in organizations of its size and is consistently recognized as one of the best companies to work for in the United States.
What can you do differently in your employee selection process? Start by asking yourself....
What are the ramifications of a stringent employee selection system?
What are the ramifications of having the reputation of hiring the best?
The benefits are many....
- When you hire only the best talent for the job, you receive the benefits of that employee selection strategy. - Productivity is maximized. - Your reputation speaks for itself. Candidates who are unable to measure up need not apply.
- Attitude. To believe that you are part of something bigger than you - to have pride in being chosen - sets an attitude of purpose. An "attitude of purpose" sets the stage for high performance.
- Reduced employee turnover costs associated with poor employee selection.
Now go Maximize Possibility!
Other blog posts you may be interested in:
