Oct. 16, 2017 "A 'ridiculously simple' way to manage people": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail:
Success in business comes down to managing people, according to Abbotsford, B.C., consultant Trevor Throness. Indeed, he boils it down to a crisp formula:
1. Find the best possible people for your team.
2. Tell them clearly what they need to do in order to win in their role.
3. Let them know how they're doing and coach them on a regular basis.
In his book The Power of People Skills, he calls the formula "ridiculously simple" but adds: "Have you ever worked for a company that followed these three rules?"
Probably not.
He can help with some tools to evaluate the people you lead and an approach for coaching them to success.
At the core is the notion of stars: Businesses that have "A" players in every key seat dramatically outperform others that don't. So you need to turn your key people – all of them – into stars, and he insists it can be done. "A weak culture tolerates chronic underperformance," he says in an interview.
"You need to develop people who are not 'A' players to be their best."
Start by assessing those team members, writing their names on paper and asking four questions to determine how effective they are:
If you could do it all over again, would you rehire her?
Evaluating your team can seem very subjective, but those questions make it more systematic and fair.
My opinion: These are really good questions. They will get the answers and you can see if he or she is a good worker or not.
My opinion: These are really good questions. They will get the answers and you can see if he or she is a good worker or not.
Recently, short of time, he had the leaders at a client company use just that first question about whether they would rehire various individuals and it was very revealing.
The question about stress is also vital: Your subordinates should reduce, not heighten, your stress.
The question about stress is also vital: Your subordinates should reduce, not heighten, your stress.
Don't take too long on these evaluations. Use your gut. It's not meant to be definitive for performance evaluation, but a preliminary to a coaching conversation with them.
As well, sit down and figure out what attitudes should be at the centre of your operation. This is simpler than it seems: Talk about people on your staff who are admirable, and why.
As you list those qualities, a pattern will emerge of what you value. Pick three attitudes to focus on. Don't rush out of that meeting, however, to pronounce the anointed behaviours, as if you were Moses coming down the mountain with tablets. He suggests writing them with pencil, and watching for six months to check you aren't missing something important.
As you list those qualities, a pattern will emerge of what you value. Pick three attitudes to focus on. Don't rush out of that meeting, however, to pronounce the anointed behaviours, as if you were Moses coming down the mountain with tablets. He suggests writing them with pencil, and watching for six months to check you aren't missing something important.
Another tool is a "Star Chart," a matrix in which you will again evaluate key players, this time on a scale of zero to 10 for effectiveness and having the right attitudes. That will sort your team into four groups:
- Stars, who are high on effectiveness and attitudes.
- Potential stars, who are high on attitudes but somewhat lacking on effectiveness.
- Wrong fits, who are poor on attitudes and performance.
- Productive but difficult people, who accomplish a lot but display the wrong attitudes.
That points to your coaching tasks for the next 12 to 18 months, in which you want to increase the number of stars on staff and help those who don't fit to find work elsewhere.
Don't shy away from that last part: He notes often people who are unsuccessful in one domain can be very successful elsewhere.
Don't shy away from that last part: He notes often people who are unsuccessful in one domain can be very successful elsewhere.
Reward and develop your current stars, so they will be even more effective. Coach your potential stars so they, too, can become stars, giving them support, clarifying expectations, and changing roles where needed.
Keep in mind that star players want to work with other stars, particularly their bosses, or will leave; so if you or other leaders don't fit the bill, action must be taken.
Keep in mind that star players want to work with other stars, particularly their bosses, or will leave; so if you or other leaders don't fit the bill, action must be taken.
Navigate the wrong fits, facing up to the situation. We all make hiring mistakes and that's probably what occurred with them.
"Don't let your fear or your pride prevent you from dealing with the situation. Take action, learn from what happened, and then get over it and move on," he writes.
"Don't let your fear or your pride prevent you from dealing with the situation. Take action, learn from what happened, and then get over it and move on," he writes.
Finally, deal with your productive but difficult people. This will likely be the toughest task, but, again, you have to face up to the situation.
Reprimand them so they know the score and then coach them if they are willing to change. If they won't, help them to exit with dignity.
Reprimand them so they know the score and then coach them if they are willing to change. If they won't, help them to exit with dignity.
"The biggest hurdle in business can be an unwillingness to address underperformance – we don't want to believe it or don't want to wade through what's needed to change things," he says in the interview.
So maybe it isn't all that simple. But it's crucial.
Nov. 6, 2017 "An inconvenient truth: Autocratic leadership is best": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail:
To be a successful leader, you need to be a naked autocrat. It also helps to jettison many of the shibboleths of traditional management, from stretch goals for all employees to engagement surveys.
That's not a radical view from an outsider. Rather, it comes from a consummate insider, Rajeev Peshawaria, who was chief learning officer of both Coca-Cola and Morgan Stanley before turning to executive coaching and consulting.
He starts with an inconvenient truth: We have idealized democratic and all-inclusive leadership far too much, when the need is for autocratic, top-down management.
Oddly, the vast majority of us agree: A survey he conducted found that 74 per cent of Canadians believe the best leaders use autocratic behaviours.
That's an important figure to consider, whether you are in your first job as a supervisor or in the executive suite, since collaboration and bottom-up leadership is supposed to be the rule.
The survey, of more than 16,000 people in 28 countries, had several questions. It included one naming famous leaders such as Steve Jobs, Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Singapore's first prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, along with a series of leadership behaviours they might have exemplified, evenly split between top-down and democratic.
The leaders' success was seen as emanating from their autocratic impulses. "Even Mandela and Gandhi were autocratic," he says in an interview.
But autocratic leaders are naked in the modern era. And their followers subscribe to notions of democracy and empowerment. So a balance is required, which he delineates in five keys to positive autocratic leadership:
Earn the right to use autocratic leadership: You need to develop a vision of a better future and positive values to get there that you embrace, even in the bad times.
Be autocratic about values and purpose while remaining humble, respectful and considerate with people: He calls this balancing act "The Naked Aristocratic Dance" and illustrates it in his book Open Source Leadership with a yin-yang symbol. He traces this back to his sample of leadership, notably Mandela, Gandhi and Lee Kuan Yew, who exemplified the dance.
Provide freedom within a framework: This idea flows from his work with Coke's CEO Neville Isdell, who realized that to be effective, he needed to end the centralized command and control approach.
He set out key values and told leaders in various countries they had maximum freedom within those. Mr. Peshawaria says that as companies become bigger and more bureaucratic, they need to expand the ability for people to move beyond the letter of the law to acting by the spirit of the law.
He set out key values and told leaders in various countries they had maximum freedom within those. Mr. Peshawaria says that as companies become bigger and more bureaucratic, they need to expand the ability for people to move beyond the letter of the law to acting by the spirit of the law.
Listen, learn and reflect continuously: Avoid tunnel vision. Things will always change and you need to adapt.
Forgive more often: Holding grudges and anger pulls you down. Blaming people for failure reduces innovation. When people take reasonable risks and don't succeed, forgive. As well, you need to change your approach to managing performance.
First, give up the notion each employee should be given stretch goals, nudging them to go "above and beyond." Pareto's 80/20 rule says 20 per cent of your team provide 80 per cent of your performance – so focus on stretching the folks with the top creativity and energy rather than everyone.
That doesn't mean giving up on the other 80 per cent, however, since they support your movers and shakers.
First, give up the notion each employee should be given stretch goals, nudging them to go "above and beyond." Pareto's 80/20 rule says 20 per cent of your team provide 80 per cent of your performance – so focus on stretching the folks with the top creativity and energy rather than everyone.
That doesn't mean giving up on the other 80 per cent, however, since they support your movers and shakers.
Second, discard the notion that managers motivate employees. His survey suggests it isn't true: Asked whether their manager motivates them or they are self-motivated, 69 per cent said themselves (73 per cent in Canada).
So managers need to find out what motivates each staff member and see how to align that with elements of the work – what can turn on the person's passion and what will turn it off.
Accept that not all will be equally motivated – or equally motivated this year. The father wanting to devote time to his baby or the woman taking an extension MBA program may need a couple of years of reduced, even minimum performance, before ramping up again.
That's fine, he believes, since it's the highly motivated 20 per cent that are critical (and these folks might join them in future). So talk to people about their intent to give, developing performance measures contouring to individual motivation – and, he adds, adopt an unlimited vacation policy to further extend this flexibility (your 20 per cent will still take too little vacation).
So managers need to find out what motivates each staff member and see how to align that with elements of the work – what can turn on the person's passion and what will turn it off.
Accept that not all will be equally motivated – or equally motivated this year. The father wanting to devote time to his baby or the woman taking an extension MBA program may need a couple of years of reduced, even minimum performance, before ramping up again.
That's fine, he believes, since it's the highly motivated 20 per cent that are critical (and these folks might join them in future). So talk to people about their intent to give, developing performance measures contouring to individual motivation – and, he adds, adopt an unlimited vacation policy to further extend this flexibility (your 20 per cent will still take too little vacation).
Finally, he urges you to ditch engagement surveys or at least modify them because they are deceiving you. Since the results average out all employees' responses, you aren't giving proper focus to your critical 20 per cent, who may have even been too busy to respond.
If you must conduct an engagement study, arrange it so you know what those critical few feel. It adds up to big changes in your leadership, as you transform into a Naked Autocrat operating in a world of freedom.
If you must conduct an engagement study, arrange it so you know what those critical few feel. It adds up to big changes in your leadership, as you transform into a Naked Autocrat operating in a world of freedom.
2 comments:
formerpolitician
2 hours ago
I couldn't disagree more.
Society's leaders need a vision; but it is rare that they have the knowledge necessary to have all the answers. I've seen over and over again how vigorous caucus discussion (and vigorous Parliamentary debate) can improve proposed legislation that is badly flawed. That's when our Parliamentary governmental system is at its best.
1 Reactions
HumbleGuy
10 minutes ago
The description can be improved. Decisive leadership better matches what is needed. Tough decisions are always hard to make without impacting others.
No comments:
Post a Comment