How We Tamed The Great Depression

167

Gordon Dryden

When I was born, in 1931, the “Great Depression” gripped the world. Where we lived, in the Catlins sawmilling district of South Otago, not one home had electric light. Tap water trickled from a corrugated-iron tank. We bathed once a week in an out-house copper tub. Our sole outside long-drop toilet teetered over a sawmill creek. We had no movies, no television, no night clubs. My family never owned a car. But the village of Tahakopa—at the end of the now-defunct Catlins railway line—did have a small free library, tucked into tiny church hall next to the blacksmith’s shop. In an isolated nation of 1.5 million people, almost 80,000 men were soon to be unemployed.  Exports dropped by 40 per cent. A conservative government seemed powerless to act. The United States was even worse off. At the height of the depression, one worker in four was unemployed. Not until the outbreak of the 1939-45 world war did it fall below 20 per cent. Yet by 1938 New Zealanders out of work had dropped to 14,000. By the start of the war: to almost zero Unemployment did not exist here for the next 30 years. Even by 1978 fewer than 1 per cent were out of work. For much of those intervening years New Zealanders enjoyed one of the three or four highest living standards in the world. Our annual productivity increases were consistently in the top three. We might have tolerated the world’s worst liquor licensing laws and most boring restaurants. But we did so many things right: the only county to turn a one-crop economy—in our case, grasslands farming—into a global success story. Our lumber pioneers created the world’s biggest man-made forest, planted on barren pumice land. That set the base for the booming pulp and paper industry, whose productivity increase topped the world in the 1950s. Our farm-scientists pioneered new breeds of sheep, to produce great meat and wool. New farm milking sheds and bulk tanker collection of milk from farm to co-operative processing companies doubled the productivity of our dairy farms. The world’s first automated milkpowder processing stoked the explosion of other dairy exports. Scientists at Ruakura and Massey research institutes poured out innovations. Aerial top-dressing—spreading fertiliser from New Zealand-made planes—turned mountainous tussock country into giant productive sheep farms. We became world leaders in the production of clean, cheap hydro-electric power, as dams were first built along the Waikato River and later in the South Island. And behind it all, from the mid-1930s, when the recovery began, lay the combined massive state house-building—from all-New Zealand materials—and highwayconstruction programs. State housing alone sparked the growth of protected manufacturing industries— from Fisher and Paykel’s whiteware to the all-wool tufted carpet. The late thirties, forties, fifties and sixties were magic years of hope and modest confidence. Along with Sweden, Norway and Denmark, New Zealand successfully led the world out of the great depression—what others achieved by wartime mobilisation. We even seemed to take it for granted that our All Blacks were generally the best—and that, in one blistering era in the sixties, four athletes living within a mile of coach Arthur Lydiard’s home in Mt Albert could own either every world middle-distance running record or their Olympic gold medals. Now—as the world cowers from the second biggest financial collapse in history— amazingly all the things that 1930s utopians dreamed about are now possible. But can we do it again—and in the same way? The answer, I suggest, is two-fold: yes we can—with the same spirit of innovation and early adoption (as we were among the first to fully adopt refrigerated shipping and containerisation). But: no—we cannot do it in the same way, in a world that is dramatically different. Seven new catalysts are now converging to change virtually everything: just as the disrupting technologies of the printing press, steam power, electricity, the massproduced automobile, television and the silicon chip have transformed previous eras. Those seven keys to unlock the future are simple but revolutionary. And they give small societies, like New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore, as much opportunity to prosper as the innovative ecology of Silicon Valley: KEY 1: It’s global. Virtually everyone on earth now has the opportunity to plug into a digital global market. Tiny Singapore, with the same population as New Zealand but crowded into an area the size of Lake Taupo, and with few natural resources, has attracted over 3000 international companies to set up there. KEY 2: It’s personal. Even nine years ago, half the people on earth had never placed a phonecall. Only 12 per cent owned mobile phones. Now almost 3.5 billion have them. By the end of 2009: 4 billion. In Finland, the former Nokia gumboot and lumber company is the world’s biggest producer of the new mobile phone-cameramultimedia “computer in your pocket”. Better still, everyone has a talent to succeed at something—and now has the chance to sell that talent to niche markets around the world. KEY 3: It’s interactive. Only a few years ago I was battling with New Zealand’s sole state television channel for the right to run a second one. Now well over 100 million people, in many countries, create their own multi-channel global TV network every day: on YouTube—a concept that did not exist five years ago. Now, in a typical month, YouTube notches up 5.6 billion separate “video-views”. KEY 4: It’s instant. Eleven years ago, Google didn’t exist. Now it can scan billions of websites in half a second and provide instant answers to 300 million inquiries a day, and instant access to maps and email. For around $1 to $2 a year, Atomic Learning can provide each student in any school with access to 30,000 video tutorials, on all the world’s most important computer software. KEY 5: It’s often free or almost free. Over 300 million subscribers now make free international phone calls every day, and view each other as they speak through Skype on each other’s computer screens. Google provides all its information free—but sells its associated sponsored messages, often as low as 5 cents a click. China has slashed laptop computer prices by up to 90 per cent selling them without an operating system and letting buyers download a free “open source” system from the Web. KEY 6: It’s easily shared. Wikipedia is now by far the world’s biggest encyclopedia, with well over 10 million articles in English alone, compared with Britannica’s 80,000. Yet all Wikipedia articles are contributed by passionate specialists on their own subject—and extended by others, free. KEY 7: It’s co-creative. If we can dream it, we can do it—together with millions around the world. And this is probably the most important of all, especially in a small country where co-operative enterprise and “No. 8 fencing wire” innovation has always been a treasured trait. Wikipedia, Google, YouTube, MySpace, Flickr, Facebook and other online co-creative social communities are only the beginning. Each has created an interactive global platform to unleash the talents of millions. And each is based on all seven catalysts for change. Now that’s a real challenge. Even greater than the thirties! Gordon Dryden <a title="blocked::http://www.thelearningweb.net/" href="http://www.thelearningweb.net/">http://www.thelearningweb.net/</a> Gordon Dryden is the Auckland-based co-author of UNLIMITED, the new learning revolution and the seven keys to unlock it

2010-03-07T00:00:00Z

256 how_we_tamed_the_great_depression

When I was born, in 1931, the “Great Depression” gripped the world. Where we lived, in the Catlins sawmilling district of South Otago, not one home had electric light. Tap water trickled from a corrugated-iron tank. We bathed once a week in an out-house copper tub. Our sole outside long-drop toilet teetered over a sawmill creek. We had no movies, no television, no night clubs. My family never owned a car. But the village of Tahakopa—at the end of the now-defunct Catlins railway line—did have a small free library, tucked into tiny church hall next to the blacksmith’s shop. How We Tamed The Great Depression

2010-03-07T21:33:54Z

166

Robert Clay

If you’re in business you need to understand the nature of the people born between the early 1980’s and the mid 1990’s, who now make up approximately 20 per cent of the workforce and are vital to our economic future. The fascinating article on Generation Y that follows was written by <a title="blocked::http://www.humanassets.co.uk/" href="http://www.humanassets.co.uk/" target="_blank">Dr Charles Woodruffe</a> of business psychology consultancy Human Assets Ltd. It appeared in the July 2009 edition of the always excellent <a title="blocked::http://trainingjournal.com/" href="http://trainingjournal.com/" target="_blank">Training Journal</a>, and is reproduced here in full with the kind permission of the publisher. The article explains so well the nature of Generation Y. It will not only be of interest if you work with or employ Generation Y people, but its insights are also interesting from a marketing perspective, when deciding how to target and reach this important part of the population. I hope you enjoy it and find it as useful as I did. Generation Y — Charles Woodruffe asks why Y? In the run-up to the recession, there was a plethora of articles and conferences claiming to unlock the perplexing nature of Generation Y. They are the pipeline of new talent available for employers but their values, needs – indeed, demands – were seen as different to those of their forebears. Employers were trying hard to understand them in order to attract and retain them. They were presented with a stereotype of very demanding, ‘want it all now’ young people who were difficult to recruit but easy to lose. Generation Whine was rather cruelly applied as an alternative epithet. The Generation Y stereotype has a logical basis in the way in which members of that generation were parented. In talking about Generation Y, we are talking about people brought up by active parents. Although, somewhat irritatingly, every writer seems to date the generation differently, Generation Y is broadly the group of people born in the early 1980s and runs through to those still in secondary school. Their parents are broadly from the group known as the Baby Boomers – those born between the end of World War Two and the mid 1960s. The key feature of Generation Y’s upbringing is that their Baby Boomer parents have been heavily involved in it. We are talking about the huggy parents who ferry their children from event to event, do their homework for them, help them with their applications and, most importantly, have given them a high sense of self- worth Nor has the active parenting ended. The Americans have conjured the marvellous term ‘helicopter parents’ to describe the ongoing vigilance of the parents of Generation Y. This vigilance extends to a willingness to take issue with HR managers who do not recruit their progeny! So where has all this left the children? Supposedly, members of Generation Y are marked out by their self-belief. They have had a history of positive feedback, understanding and parents answering their every need. They have little track record of frustration and having to wait. They have tended to be able to obtain what they want when they want it – be it a lift to a party or the latest Game Boy/Xbox etc. And the members of Generation Y that you are seeking to recruit and train will, almost by definition, have had a history of academic success. As if having doting parents was not enough, members of Generation Y came to the labour market – until last autumn – at a time of plenty. But autumn 2008 might, of course, be where the story ends. In summer 2009, we need to take stock. Firstly, we were only ever talking about a caricature. Secondly, we need to decide whether the caricature still applies and matters. The Caricature If you follow Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, with basic survival and security needs at the bottom and self-actualisation at the top, the parenting and background economy were said to have resulted in Generation Y being able to move directly to address higher-order needs. By the caricature, they are self-actualisers. In the workplace, they are painted as a high- maintenance generation, marked out by: <ul type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">High Ambition </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Sense of entitlement </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Outspoken – they show a high willingness to challenge managers and are undeterred by traditional hierarchy, giving off an air of over-confidence </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Inability to take criticism </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Wanting work-life balance and flexibility. One survey suggests that 85 per cent want to spend 30–70 per cent of their time working from home </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Wanting attentive management from supervisors and regular appreciative feedback. Generation Y is also said to: </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Struggle with processing failure and criticism </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Unable to internalise lessons </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Have difficulty with unclear guidelines or minimal management – yet not want to be told what to do </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Be ready to resign if their jobs are not fulfilling and fun, with decent holidays and the opportunity for career breaks and time off for charity work. </li> </ul> At the same time, Generation Y offers several positives, including: <ul type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">A complete at-oneness with IT – they have been brought up with it </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Team-working skills </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Self-belief to achieve </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">A high level of drive. Seemingly in contradiction with the emphasis of Generation Y on work-life balance, people comment on their willingness to work after hours and at weekends to get a job done. </li> </ul> That was the caricature of Generation Y up to the recession – a time when Generation Y did not fear unemployment, having every belief in its ability to secure alternative employment. What is the status of the caricature now? Firstly, like all caricatures, it would be foolish to apply it without thought or inspection to everyone born in the decade and a half from the early 1980s. Secondly, there is probably a germ of truth in it that it would be equally foolish for managers to deny. On one hand, the caricature is an exaggeration and shorthand for a particular type of person. On the other hand, it recognises changes that have taken place in people’s expectations at work that have spread beyond people born in those specific years. Dealing first with the characteristics of the Y generation, you should clearly not think that everyone born within their timeslot will embody all their characteristics – good or bad. Their stereotypical behaviour was generally an unrealistic and irritating way for people to approach employers (I recall hearing of a person in their mid twenties throwing a strop because their bonus was merely half a million pounds); nowadays it is just plain ludicrous. Of course, there will be some who, recession or not, continue to live out the caricature to its extreme. It seems to me that you do not have to adapt to their shortcomings, which – taken to an extreme – might stop them being seen as talent in the first place. Instead, your selection systems need to pick out the ones who will adapt to work life in your organisation. However, and returning to the germ of truth in the caricature, there has to be some mutual adaptation. You will choose members of Generation Y who were difficult to recruit but easy to lose seem the most productive people or the best investments. They will choose you if you have recognised that the centre of gravity of what you offer people has changed. This change has also spread outside the confines of Generation Y, just as Facebook and iPods are not the monopoly of a particular generation. It is a change from which it will be hard to turn away, even in a recession, though, of course, people might well have retraced their steps down Maslow’s hierarchy. Everyone might be concerned with job security, but that does not mean they will be positively engaged if their other needs are ignored. So how do you engage people who have become used to the new generation of employment? Essentially, you have to get alongside their needs and values and make sure you address their priorities (Woodruffe, 1999). For several years, I have used a needs triangle to try to summarise what people nowadays are looking for in work (see below). This is not perfect science but it does offer a way of ordering people’s needs. The particular Generation Y spin to this is shown in green. The entire triangle must be considered if organisations are to attract and retain talented people – if they are to be employers of choice. What is more, people must be treated as individuals. For example, some people want to sacrifice pay for more holidays in their package; for others, it is the other way round. Taking the three components of the triangle in turn, there are several specific factors to consider for each of them. <a title="blocked::http://marketingwizdom.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Gen-Y-Needs-Triangle1.jpg" href="http://marketingwizdom.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Gen-Y-Needs-Triangle1.jpg"><img id="Picture_x0020_1" title="blocked::http://marketingwizdom.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Gen-Y-Needs-Triangle1.jpg" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CAB0A1.DB9615F0" border="0" alt="Gen Y Needs Triangle" width="499" height="205" /></a> 1. The Package Generation Y – particularly males – are said to be quite focused on their salary. This has been put down to their student debt burden and the need for a good salary to join the property ladder. However, although the package is a vital component of being an employer of choice, few people flock to an otherwise bad employer purely because it pays well. Generally, the package is the least sure way of retaining people for it is the inducement that is most easily matched by another employer. 2. Employability We do not go to work just to earn today’s money, but tomorrow’s also. People are concerned with an income stream rather than just immediate money. There are four major factors that affect employability: <ul type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Being developed People nowadays demand development. They recognise that the future is uncertain and that even a committed employer cannot guarantee a job. They want to be ready with a passport to alternative employment. Organisations must give a high priority to people’s development in order to attract and retain them. Development must cover professional and managerial/ leadersip skills. The most powerful development comes from providing people with new experiences, particularly experiences that challenge them. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Involvement with prestige projects Ambitious people, notably today’s Generation Y graduates, like visibility. They relish the opportunity to tackle prestigious projects, particularly those that will give them exposure to people with power within the organisation. Assuming their contribution is a positive one, such exposure enhances employability. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Career advancement Drive and motivation is part of what makes people talented. Advancement feeds their goal of securing and maintaining an income stream. Part of being an employer of choice comes from letting good people get ahead quickly. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Being part of a prestigious organisation There is an advantage to the employee in working for a prestigious organisation that is at the leading edge of its sector. It has a currency on the job market that will generate future income. The importance of this factor is clear from organisations’ thirst to be among the list of Top 100 employers (eg The Times Top 100 Graduate Employers). </li> </ul> 3. Job Satisfaction If people go out to work to generate the income for a style of life, they also want to be happy while doing so. Six components of job satisfaction can be separated: <ul type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Achievement To be an employer of choice, you want your staff to be telling their friends about the tremendous achievements they have notched up, not how they are bored out of their brains and under-utilised. Generation Y puts great store by using its strengths. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Respect and recognition People are less tolerant than in the past of status distinctions and barriers. They want to be trusted with information and to have their hard work noticed. Members of Generation Y are also said to be intolerant of status barriers: they expect to be able to email senior people and might well extend this to those at the top of their employing organisations. Raising managers’ skill levels is vital to being an employer of choice. Indeed, they need to lead rather than manage. Generation Y is also described as in particular need of regular feedback, having grown used to regular testing at school and university. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Autonomy People enjoy a sense of autonomy and of being trusted to get on and deliver. They can be frustrated if they do not feel a sense of ownership over their projects or if they lack real responsibility. It was partly satisfying this sense of autonomy that made ‘dot coms’ so attractive. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Balance between work and private life Generation Y is said to be particularly intolerant of a lack of integration between work and private life. It is not so much a sense of balance as a blurring of the two that matters. Members expect to come to work and be logged into Facebook or MSN at the same time as doing their work. At university, they are used to mixing work (study) and their private life and would see it as restrictive to have boundaries at work. They are the ‘permanently connected’ generation. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Congruent values People want to work in an organisation with values that are congruent with their own. By definition, values are something on which we differ. However, at any period of time there is a dominant value system with which employers would be better off being congruent than discordant. For example, nowadays, organisations strive to parade their CSR credentials and this must be for their staff to witness as much as their customers. But it is vital that this is authentic: Generation Y is vigilant to a lack of integrity. Generation Y is also said to be particularly vigilant to identity and intolerant of working towards something that does not reflect its own sense of identity. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">A sense of fun in a good working environment Many people prefer to work in an informal and fun atmosphere. Organisations have sought to meet this in all sorts of ways, such as by having trendy office environments, ‘dress-down’ days and team-building events of various sorts. A lack of teamwork/cooperation was cited as a turnover driver by 19 per cent of leavers in a survey by TalentDrain. </li> </ul> Individual Focus Perhaps more important than any of the above needs is the requirement to treat people as individuals. In response, organisations are doing their best to customise what is provided to employees, ensuring as far as possible that each person’s particular needs are met. But they’ll leave anyway However, the image of Generation Y is that you can meet its members’ needs as much as you like but they’ll leave anyway to build their CVs. They do not have staying with their first employer as their game plan, so what is the point of bothering with them? There are two responses to this. Firstly, will they all leave? The answer, surely, is of course not, especially in the current economic circumstances. If you can offer them the chance to build their employability, some will stay, some will go with the possibility of coming back and some will be lost forever. Secondly, the ability to build employability is, in truth, probably greater for large organisations than others. Certainly, small firms would be naïve to think they can readily take on graduates who will stay to lead their organisation in the future. It is simply not in the Generation Y blueprint. Quite realistically, they will see that they need to move around and build their CVs. On the other hand, large multinationals can offer a series of employments akin to moving between organisations. This is fortunate because opting out of employing Generation Y is only realistic for smaller organisations. Large volume recruiters like retailers, the civil service, law firms and accountants have to keep topping up their talent pipeline. Other organisations could consider leaving their recruitment of future leaders until people have matured into the ways of work. That is not to say that they should boycott Generation Y: it is just that the relationship is likely to be an affair rather than a marriage. Conclusions Generation Y makes up approximately 20 per cent of the workforce and is vital to our economic future. Some of them will behave in line with their caricature. In a recession, one hopes for their sake, many will not. However, it is also the case that what people expect from work has evolved and this evolution extends beyond Generation Y. The task of employers is to separate the employable from the unemployable but also to adapt to the changing demands of each generation in just the same way that they adapt to the changing expectations of their customers. Finally, a survey last year by the CIPD and Penna came out with findings that run counter to the Generation Y stereotype. It found that Generation Y members were less concerned about CSR than Baby Boomers and also “far less likely to rapidly change jobs than was thought” (Allen 2008). Maybe another Generation Y quality is the ability to pick up on, and adapt rapidly to, changing economic circumstances. References <ol type="1"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Allen, A. (2008, September 18). Redefining the rules of the generation game. People Management, 12-13 </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">CIPD and Penna and (2008, September) Gen up: How the four generations work. CIPD website <a title="blocked::http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/25DA52DE-F120-4579-AFE3-564C8801425D/0/genuphowfourgenerationswork.pdf" href="http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/25DA52DE-F120-4579-AFE3-564C8801425D/0/genuphowfourgenerationswork.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.cipd.co.uk</a> </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Woodruffe, Charles (1999). Winning the talent war: A strategic approach to attracting, developing and retaining the best people. Chichester: John Wiley. </li> </ol> Charles Woodruffe has written another article on talent management, this time focusing on Generation Z – which he describes as “the silent generation” due to their preference for interacting with technology rather than other people, which you can read on the Training Journal website. Go to <a title="blocked::http://www.trainingjournal.com/generationz.pdf" href="http://www.trainingjournal.com/generationz.pdf" target="_blank">www.trainingjournal.com</a> to read his predictions for this new generation, born since 2002 and due to enter the workforce in around ten to 15 years’ time. Dr Charles Woodruffe is MD of business psychology consultancy Human Assets Ltd. He can be contacted on +44 (0)20 7434 2122 or via <a title="blocked::http://www.humanassets.co.uk/" href="http://www.humanassets.co.uk/" target="_blank">www.humanassets.co.uk</a> Brought to you by Robert Clay - <a title="blocked::http://marketingwizdom.com/" href="http://marketingwizdom.com/">Visit Website</a>

2010-03-07T00:00:00Z

Understanding Generation Y 255 gen_y_–_love_them_or_hate_them_they_are_now_20per_cent_of_the_workforce!

If you’re in business you need to understand the nature of the people born between the early 1980’s and the mid 1990’s, who now make up approximately 20 per cent of the workforce and are vital to our economic future. The fascinating article on Generation Y that follows was written by Dr Charles Woodruffe of business psychology consultancy Human Assets Ltd. It appeared in the July 2009 edition of the always excellent Training Journal, and is reproduced here in full with the kind permission of the publisher. Gen Y – Love Them or Hate Them They Are Now 20% of The Workforce!

2010-03-07T21:38:32Z

Ann Andrews CSP

Why do we treat our people this way? And yet, if only senior management realised, that if they treated their staff with any kind of care and humanity, their bottom line could grow exponentially. But first they have to treat their staff as humans. People need a break every now and again.   I once asked the general manager of a computer company what growth he was aiming for over the next 12 months – his reply – 3-5%. When I asked if he would like 30% growth, he almost fell off his chair. His reply was distinctly patronising – ‘Ann, in case you hadn’t noticed, computer companies don’t get that kind of growth any more.’ My reply – ‘that’s not what I asked you – I asked you if you would like 30%?’ I went on to explain, that if we aimed for 30% and only achieved 15%, wasn’t that infinitely better than aiming for 3-5% and getting it? However, I also explained that he wouldn’t get 30% by constantly tightening the screws and demanding more and more and more from his staff. I have spent 15 years working with organisations, encouraging managers and employees to leave behind work methods I believe are leftover from the Industrial Revolution. I show managers how to delegate 30% of their day to employees so they (the managers) can work ON the business not IN it, and I show employees the necessity of starting to think and act like an owner not a dependant.  To think every single day, ‘How can I do my job better today than I did it yesterday?’ An organisation will not get this kind of loyalty if they treat their people like machines. Even machines need oiling occasionally.  I believe everyone within an organisation is a stakeholder, not just the shareholders. In fact I believe if an organisation actually gave their employees a small parcel of shares, they would be amazed at the loyalty and involvement and results they would get from their staff. It is a cliché I know, but in this world of look-alike products and services, the ONLY competitive advantage any organisation has is the people it employs. Their loyalty, passion, energy, initiative, drive,creativity and willingness to go the extra mile when times are tough, could be the difference between survival and extinction. Business planning is done the way it has always been done - a group of senior managers (mostly with a financial background) putting their heads together to create a dry and uninspiring business plan – yes a business needs a business plan, but wouldn’t it be more exciting if they: <ol> <li>Didn't just focus on the short to medium term?</li> <li>Involved their staff in looking at where THEY wanted the company to be in 2 years, 5 years and 10 years?</li> <li>Asked for ideas and input from every single member of the organisation, including cleaning staff?</li> <li>Had regular focus groups of staff to discuss what competitors were doing and what ideas came from that which could be used or adapted?</li> <li>Held regular customer forums to involve them in ideas for the future</li> <li>Involved suppliers occasionally to see what ideas they were working on in teir business that could have a lfow on effect into yours?</li> </ol> One of the most powerful business books any manager or owner can read is Maverick by Ricardo Semlar. By setting up totally self-managed teams, Semlar (Maverick) improved productivity in his organisation from $10,200 per employee to $96,000 per employee over a period of 13 years. When he first floated the concept of employees not only managing themselves, but also making day-to-day business decisions, he was ridiculed. Yet he had the last laugh, because by empowering his people and giving them a share in the profits (and the losses), he watched his bottom line double/treble and quadruple.  Ricardo Semlar now shows up for work 2/3 times a year, the rest of his time is spent playing golf, speaking to large organisations for a huge fee, and writing books and articles about his business. He also has a waiting list of people who want to work for his company. Do you? Was it easy? No. Did they have set-backs along the way? Of course they did. But he never lost sight of the fact, that working in a hierarchical fashion, where he made all the decisions and everyone else just followed orders, required him to be physically present every day of the week, and that is not how he wanted to live his life. Ah..I hear you say – but he was the owner of the company. If I as a manager only came to work three or four times a year, I would be fired. Of course you would, I am not suggesting that as a manager you only show up three or four times a year – what I am suggesting, is that you look at the concept that Semlar used – handing over as much decision making to the front line as he possibly could. You can do that. So where do you start? You start by making the decision to get out of hierarchy.  As managers, what would you rather be doing instead of managing people?  Wouldn’t you rather spend one day a week doing more productive things? Do you really enjoy watching other people work (or not work as the case may be)? As a manager, once you have decided what you would rather be doing, think about what you are prepared to give up in order to have that day a week. Usually managers will profess to hating running meetings, or scheduling rosters, or stock-taking, or dealing with performance issues. Employees can run meetings, and schedule rosters, and do stock-take and deal with performance issues. Employees can do anything, if they are trained in the task, coached while they are learning and then trusted to get on and do it. The interesting thing is that if we turned our organisations on their head and seriously involved employees, we may actually need less managers. And possibly that is the reason we keep doing what we have always done and getting our 3-5% growth! Perhaps managers keep coming up with things for their staff to do to justify THEIR positions. It doesn’t have to be that way. A manager has four tasks to complete: <ol> <li>To increase profits and productivity</li> <li>To decrease costs</li> <li>To grow people</li> <li>To do themselves out of a job every 3-5 years.</li> </ol> So maybe bottom line thinking is actually a form of self-preservation for senior management and an easy way of NOT having to deal with staff in any way other than giving out more and more orders and causing more and more change. Whether it is needed or not. Food for thought.

2010-03-03T11:00:00Z

If you treat your staff with care your bottom line will increase 254 there_is_more_to_a_business_than_just_the_bottom_line_

I have just been working with an international bank and their staff are absolutely overwhelmed by the never-ending, on-going changes that keep coming down from on high. They are quite literally, exhausted! Sickness is rife, attendance is becoming a challenge and morale is low. There Is More To a Business Than Just The Bottom Line

2010-03-03T21:30:35Z

Andrew O'Keeffe

How was I to know that one of my team had been abused as a child and that I needed to be more sensitive in interacting with him? The point is that I wasn’t to know. You often can’t know the pack of cards you are dealt as a manager.   Managers face a challenge unique in human history. Only over the last two centuries have we spent our workdays managing people who are not our family. Over the long course of human history, the natural condition is that we spent our days with our immediate family. Everyone’s history, personality and life experiences were both known to the family and were the responsibility of the family. That was life. But since the Industrial Revolution 250 years ago (and even more recently outside of Western societies) we get to work with people with a range of experiences, good and bad, that shape their identities and leads to the mix of personalities in our teams. We then by chance get to work together, and a manager needs to integrate the variability of personalities and experiences.   At another level, managing at the individual level is critical because humans have a sense of “self”. Only one other animal demonstrates this same sense of self. Animal Studies Leif Cocks is a senior primate keeper at Perth Zoo in Australia and President of the Australian Orangutan Project. He was the first person to share with me how scientists study for “self”. First, the animal being studied, say a monkey, gorilla or chimpanzee, is provided with a mirror and left to become familiar with the object. The animal is then lightly sedated and the scientist paints a blue spot on the animal’s forehead. The animal comes back to consciousness and happens upon the mirror. In looking in the mirror, it is only the chimpanzee that is curious about the blue spot and uses a finger on its other hand to try to wipe off the blue spot.   In other words, the chimpanzee appears to know that it’s them in the mirror and that “a blue spot has appeared on my forehead”. No other animal currently studied shows this behaviour. A monkey might scream and drop the mirror. Friends with dogs tell me a dog barks at the stranger dog in the mirror. No other animal sees “self” and it’s only from a sense of our self that we see, acknowledge and understand other selves. (The head of primates at Milwaukee Zoo in the US, Jan Rafert tells me that bonobos will soon be studied using the mirror experiment. Bonobos are as evolutionary advanced as their chimpanzee cousins and one suspects will also see themselves in the mirror). Implications for Leaders As leaders, or as HR professionals guiding leaders, the key implication is that we are not so much managing teams as we are leading individuals. As a manager on one of our leadership programs recently said, “Of course! In my team of seven I need to manage each event in perhaps seven different ways in order to effectively relate to my seven staff.”   Here are some tips for leading at the individual level.   Tip 1 – Base Camp   There can be no relationship without knowing the person, which means knowing the person’s identity. The test is that the person knows that you know them. As a leader, how well do you know the people in your team of direct reports? Do you know the following information about each person:   <ul style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="disc"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their personal family situation (partners, children, parents, siblings)? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Where they were born and where they spent their formative years? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">The key life experiences that shaped their sense of self? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their personal achievements they are most proud of? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their interests outside of work? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their key work achievements over their working life? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their key skills that they most like to apply? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Their motivation as to what they most want to achieve through work? </li> </ul> Without knowing the answers to these questions you can not possibly know the person. Only through knowing a person can we have a connection and the moral authority to lead.     Tip 2 – Individual Catch-Ups   The single most important leadership action a manager can take to connect with individuals is to schedule regular meetings with direct reports. These meetings should be for one hour and be held at least fortnightly. The meetings provide a platform for respecting and connecting with individuals.   One of the managers I have worked for who held regular and effective catch ups was an executive at IBM called Tony Bowra. As you walked into Tony’s office for your catchup, Tony swung around in his chair and reached into his filing cabinet and pulled out your file – a simple manila folder. He had scratchy notes from your last meeting and slips of paper with “memory jogger” ideas that had crossed his mind since last time. Having an hour with Tony was productive and energising. He sought for ways in which he might help you, we bounced ideas around to progress a task and he checked in with progress on activities so that you knew that he was interested.   Over the years I have found that sometimes the reason causing managers to resist the idea of a regular catchup with their people is that they are unsure what to cover in the meeting. Here are some suggestions: <ul> <li>Progress of tasks since last meeting</li> <li>Identifying and removing any roadblocks</li> <li>Discussing ideas of new tasks and initiatives to respond to emerging problems/opportunities</li> <li>Sharing any development/feedback observations</li> <li>Checking in to see if the person needs any support or assistance from you</li> <li>Action points for next meeting.</li> </ul> Because we are dealing with individuals, a manager quickly finds that each person uses the meeting differently. One person might be tasked focused. Another might value the time for conceptual discussions. Another might talk more about personal topics.   If as a manager you start this initiative, you might be surprised by the responses you trigger when you ask towards the end of the meeting, “Is there anything else you wanted to cover today?”   Tip 3 – Birthdays   Sometimes it’s the simple things that work. Beginning in 1999 I had the good fortune of working with a colleague called Cathy Wilks. Cathy taught me a great lesson about individual connection. When we first started working together she said, “I don’t need a lot from my manager. Just don’t forget my birthday!” So simple, yet significant – birthdays are personal, like an individual fingerprint. They are a great opportunity for a manager to recognise the identity of the individual. After that lesson, I never again delegated the action of birthday recognition. I retained the action to acknowledge each person’s birthday and to broadcast their birthday announcement and good wishes to other team members.     Tip 4 – Senior Executives   What about senior executives connecting with front-line staff? It might surprise you that front-line staff often classify senior executives according to the scale of those executives who “say hello” and those who “don’t even say hello”. Senior executives who say hello are in effect acknowledging and respecting the people as individuals “in the mirror”. Those who do not are ignoring the identity of the person and consequently, in the minds of the individuals, are refused the authority to lead.   A second-level manager of a manufacturing facility once told me that before he started at a new plant he learned the names of all 80 staff in the factory. He said that, “Then on the first day I just needed to match faces to names and to learn something about each person.” He added that he couldn’t imagine how he could connect, lead or influence the 80 people without knowing each individual.

2010-03-01T11:00:00Z

Managing People 253 the_greatest_management_challenge_of_all_

One time a few years ago one I inadvertently upset one of my team. We were in a team meeting, progressing through the agenda. Dan (not his real name) started on his subject. He was joking around a bit and I asked him to stick to the subject. In the normal course of things my comment would not have upset anyone. But I could see that Dan was hurt by my comment. Of course I was concerned and immediately after the meeting I went to his office. I apologised for the obvious hurt I had caused. He shut the door. Graciously, he said that he sometimes overreacts to things. He confided that he had been abused as a child and “so things that might be little to some people trigger hurt in me.” The Greatest Management Challenge of All

2010-03-02T00:55:01Z

Hannah Samuel

Research shows more than 40 percent of New Zealanders don't have reading, writing, speaking and listening skills necessary to understand many written documents used in workplaces. Yet, many of us continue to use words that confuse when we write and speak, losing both goodwill, and possible business, in the process. You might feel comfortable using the words 'pro' and ‘anti' instead of ‘for' and ‘against', but are you sure the person you're communicating with is as familiar and comfortable with them as you? Or how about 'bi-annual'? If you mean 'twice a year' why not say that? Making someone feel belittled or confused does nothing to enhance your reputation. In fact, it may well earn you a reputation for being superior, arrogant and a show-off. Using obfuscatory (confusing) words our customers and supporters don't immediatelyunderstand isn't impressive - it's dumb. So how can you enhance your reputation as a communicator and keep people 'with you' and tuned-in, rather than turned off and tuned-out? • Focus on them, not you. Set out with the intention of making the reader or listener feel good about interacting with you. Put them at ease and help them openup to create a genuine two-way communication process that works for them. • Be specific and direct. Speak and write clearly. Avoid using long sentences and unusual words. People are more likely to 'stay with you', and enjoy the interaction, if you communicate using words and phrases they are familiar with, and easily understand. • Be friendly and natural. Many of us write much more formally than we speak, and yet our written words are simply spoken words captured on paper or electronically. Write how you speak and you may be surprised at how natural it becomes. • Avoid jargon, technical and unusual words as much as possible. Industry specific words have their place, but for most day-to-day communication, plain and simple is almost always best. • Never assume. Check understanding on an ongoing basis. If you think the person may be confused, or not following you, use a different, more easily understandable word or phrase as quickly as possible. Confuse and you'll lose. Communicate in a way that builds rapport and makes people feel good about the interaction and your reputation for being a gifted communicator will be assured.

2010-02-22T11:00:00Z

Using words that confuse when we write and speak, losing both goodwill, and possible business, in the process 252 do_words_you_use_confuse

If you've ever been irritated, or frustrated, by someone using words and phrases that make things harder to understand, rather than easier, you're not alone. Do Words You Use Confuse?

2010-02-22T22:37:38Z

Ann Andrews CSP

Because there isn’t much career development for our employees in the flattened hierarchy. So learning as much as they can every day, is the very best way to advance and climb what is left of the corporate ladder. Sadly most employees tell me that their managers don’t trust them to make decisions or to be involved in creative ideas for the bottom line. Yet when I chat to managers and ask them what their greatest stresses are, they will tell me that it is having to spend every hour of every working day, telling employees what to do, when to do it, and even HOW to do it. And so the word ‘but’ keeps everyone stuck in that ever decreasing and depressing parent/child cycle.  And yet it doesn’t have to be that way. Management ‘buts’ are traditionally: ‘Ah yes, but you can’t trust employees – they say they know how to make good decisions, but when left to their own devices, who knows what chaos they will create that I will then be left to clean up and take the rap for.’ From supervisors and team leaders: ‘Ah yes but, if I hand over more decision making to my people, what would I do all day?’ From employees: ‘Ah yes, management ask us to make decisions, but when we do it is invariably the wrong decision from their perspective, so we just don’t bother any longer. Let them make the decisions, even though we know their decisions aren’t all that great either.’ What a shame we all think this way – such a waste of everyone’s time and talent. When working with self-managed teams in a manufacturing environment many years ago, I realized that when people use the word but, they are actually voicing a fear, and after a while I worked out that the only way to overcome a fear was to find a W.I.I.F.M. – a what-is-in-this-for-me? For managers, I believe they need to be spending more of their time working ON the business, rather than worrying and stressing about all the day-to-day crises which cause them to be working IN the business. And yet I know, that most managers don’t know how to stop working this way – it is almost the-way-things-are in the workplace. So I have a three part exercise I use to get managers to realize how much time they waste every day in fire-fighting, every single day. I ask them: 1.  What are the four or five tasks you do that you wish you didn’t have to do, which, if you had        someone else to do them for you, would free you to be doing more important things? <ol style="margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify;" type="1"> </ol> And they almost always tell me – admin, or dealing with petty complaints, or compiling reports that no-one reads or chasing up after other people to make sure they have done the job correctly. I then ask them: 2.  If you were recruiting someone to do those tasks, what would the hourly rate for such a person be? And they nearly always tell me - $10 - $15 per hour. <ol style="margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify;" type="1"> </ol> And finally, I ask them: 3.  How long would it take you to teach someone else, how to do that task for you? <ol style="margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify;" type="1"> </ol> And very rarely, do they ever tell me anything more than – 2 hours, 4 hours or even at the extreme, one day. So what stops managers handing over these fairly trivial tasks to other people? Usually the reaction – it’s quicker to do it myself. Yes it probably is – but as long as a manager does these minor tasks themselves, they will never get out of fire-fighting and crisis managing. THE WIIFM FOR HANDING TASKS OVER TO OTHER PEOPLE Remember, I said that a ‘but’ is a fear and the only way to overcome a fear is to find a WIIFM. When I ask managers what would they would prefer to be doing rather than chasing their tail? They invariably say – visiting clients or sourcing better suppliers or investigating a better computer system.  Which is the best use of a manager’s time – dealing with petty admin or talking to clients? A no brainer really. So if you are a manager and you know you spend too much time fighting fires, then try this really simple exercise. Be surprised, be amazed and be freed up TOMORROW.    The steps are: <ol style="margin-top: 0cm; text-align: justify;" type="1"> <li style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;">Decide what you would like to hand over?</li> <li style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;">Who is the best person to pick up that task?</li> <li style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;">How long would it take you to teach them? </li> <li style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;">When can you both get started in handing over?</li> </ol> Be there as a coach and mentor until the person feels comfortable in doing the task – and then move on to the NEXT task and so on.

2010-02-21T11:00:00Z

How to get out of fighting fires and crisis management 251 ah_yes_but_

Over the course of my 20+ years working in the corporate world as a personnel manager and human resources manager, I became passionate about teaching employees how to be self-managing; to think ahead with regard to their skill-set and career prospects. Ah Yes But

2010-02-24T22:53:09Z

Guest Writer

Top performers may not have obvious development needs and in identifying those needs, you can sometimes feel like you're being nitpicky or over-demanding. In addition, top performers may not be used to hearing constructive feedback and may rankle at the slightest hint that they're not perfect. However, giving your stars good feedback is essential to keeping them engaged, focused, and motivated. Luckily, feedback discussions do not need to be unpleasant, especially with top performers. Instead of dreading your next review session with your star, think of it as an exciting opportunity to celebrate success and discuss what's next. What the Experts Say      Don't be tempted to bend the feedback rules for top performers. No matter who is receiving the feedback, it is essential to follow <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/hmu/2009/04/feedback-that-works.html" target="_blank">good feedback practice</a>. Do your homework; gather data and details to support your feedback. Always describe behaviors, not traits. Don't dwell on the past; instead focus on what the employee can change in the future. Be sure to check for understanding and agree on clear next steps and a fair way to measure progress. That said, feedback for your top performers does require special care. Don't assume your star is perfect. Jean-François Manzoni, Professor of Leadership and Organizational Development at <a href="http://www.imd.ch/" target="_blank">IMD International</a> and co-author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Set-Up-Fail-Syndrome-Managers-People/dp/0875849490" target="_blank">The Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome: How Good Managers Cause Great People to Fail</a> points out, "Everyone has some room for improvement, in this job or the next, within our current set of capabilities or a broader set that will likely come in handy in the future." You do your star a disservice if you fail to help her figure out how she can continue to grow. When conducting your research remember that results don't always speak for themselves. High performers often have great results; yet it's important to understand how they achieve those results, and often at what cost. Unfortunately, top performers often get results by forgoing other things, such as caring for their people, building alliances with others, or maintaining a healthy work/life balance. In addition, a top performer's strengths may often be her weaknesses. Think carefully about the behaviors that have enabled your star to succeed - they may be the same behaviors holding her back (see Case Study #1 below). To make the most of your feedback session, focus the discussion on three levels: the star's current performance, her next performance frontier, and her future goals and aspirations. At the beginning of the session, set up the conversation by explaining you will be covering those three levels. Jamie Harris, Senior Consultant and Board Member at <a href="http://www.interactionassociates.com/" target="_blank">Interaction Associates</a> and author of Harvard Business School Press's Pocket Mentor book <a href="http://hbr.org/product/giving-feedback-pocket-mentor-series/an/13272-PDF-ENG" target="_blank">Giving Feedback</a> says, "This is always a good thing to do, but especially important for a high stakes conversation." Once you've agreed with your top performer on the agenda, start by talking about her current performance. Express Gratitude for Current Performance Many managers make the mistake of assuming that their top performers already know how well they are doing. Always start your feedback session by specifically stating what your star has accomplished. Show gratitude for her contributions and successes. As Manzoni says, "Advice is more likely to be welcome if it builds on comments acknowledging and celebrating this year's performance and is clearly positioned at helping the subordinate continue to develop beyond the current role and capability set." Constructive feedback is more easily received if it is preceded by genuine appreciation for hard work. Given how valuable your star is to you and your organization, you can't express enough how much you value her. Now, What's the Next Performance Frontier? Top performers are likely committed to self-improvement - that's one of the ways they became top performers. As her manager, it's your responsibility to help her determine how to keep improving. Tap into that commitment and engage your high performer in a discussion about how she might achieve the next level of performance, whether it is a new sales target or a promotion. This part of the discussion should include recognition of what might be standing in her way and how she can overcome those obstacles. This doesn't need to be a negative conversation, however. Manzoni had a particularly good manager who adeptly helped him think about what was next and how he could get there. As Manzoni says, "I never felt criticized. Instead, I walked into his office six feet tall, and I came out of it nine feet tall." Identify Future Goals and Aspirations Once you and your star have agreed on where she is headed, ask about her motivation and values. To prompt her, ask questions such as: "What do you want to be known for?" or "What matters most to you?" This will give her a chance to reflect on her career path and how this current role and her next performance frontier fit in. It will give your high performer what Harris describes as a "window into greater awareness about what enables her to succeed in the current situation and what she want to achieve next." It will also allow you to figure out how you can align her motivations with those of the company. Harris says, "Some people perform well in any context but people will almost always perform well when their own excellence is aligned with that of the organization." Before you wrap up a feedback session with a high performer, always solicit feedback on how you are doing as a manager. Ask questions such as "How can I continue to support your high performance?" or "What can we do as an organization to keep getting better and supporting your great work?" This is important because, as Harris says, it "shows that you're their ally in achieving what they want to achieve." Harris says, "This also helps cement their connection to the organization." Frequency is Key In giving feedback to your stars, frequency is crucial. Harris warns that you shouldn't be tempted to leave your high performers alone. He says, "The higher the performer, the more frequently you should be providing feedback." Don't wait for review time. You and your company depend on retaining top performers. Therefore, it is a wise investment of your time and energy to support and develop them.     Principles to Remember: Do: <ul type="disc"> <li>Give both positive and constructive feedback to high performers regularly.</li> <li>Identify development areas, even if there are only a few.</li> <li>Focus on the future and ask about motivations and goals.</li> </ul> Don't: <ul type="disc"> <li>Presume a star has reached the limits of her performance.</li> <li>Leave your top performers alone.</li> <li>Assume your stars know how appreciated they are.</li> </ul> Case Study #1: When His Strength is also His Weakness Drew Margolin, the former CFO at Medley Advisors, was fortunate to work with a stellar Director named Simon. Simon was by all measures a top performer in the company. He was efficient and no-nonsense and kept focused on his work, not on the day-to-day drama and gossip that often happens in a small company. However, because he didn't get involved in company politics, he often came off as "unapproachable." In his mid-year review, Drew told him that while his ability to stay above the company drama was a real strength, the fact that others thought of Simon as unapproachable was not okay. He provided an example: Simon often skipped out on the Friday lunches offered by the company, social events that were considered an integral part of the "company spirit." Drew told Simon that he would be more successful in his job if he could find ways to build relationships and trust with others. Drew explained that he didn't particularly enjoy the social events either but understood he had to attend and socialize as part of his job. At first Simon nodded and agreed he would be more participative. He vowed to not have lunch at his desk on Fridays. However, the next Monday, he showed up at Drew's office upset. He had thought about it and didn't understand how a skill could be both a strength and a weakness and wanted Drew to decide which it truly was. Drew said, "I took this as a good sign because it meant he had considered changing and what it would mean for him." It took Simon a few discussions with Drew to fully understand the importance of what Drew asked and the double-sided nature of his ability to stay uninvolved. Eventually, Simon started to attend more of the events, somewhat begrudgingly, but his participation allowed him to create better relationships across the company. Simon was later promoted twice, and when Drew left the company, he even took on some of the former CFO's responsibilities. Case Study #2: Reframing Feedback in the Context of Long-term Goals Gretchen Anderson, the Director of Business Development at the search firm <a href="http://www.on-ramps.com/" target="_blank">On-Ramps</a>, has worked with many young, ambitious professionals throughout her career. As a manager at the management consulting firm Katzenbach Partners, Gretchen managed a particularly ambitious consultant named Melissa. Melissa was an extremely hard working associate - so hard working that Gretchen and others at the firm were concerned she would burn out. Her reviews were comprised mostly of positive feedback about her performance. However, Gretchen felt she needed to address the pace of Melissa's work, "I didn't want her to be another burn out story." Upon hearing the feedback, Melissa was extremely emotional and didn't understand why Gretchen would thank her for her hard work and then tell her to stop working so hard. She felt she should be the judge of when she was working too much. In every one of Melissa's feedback sessions this issue became a source of intense emotion for Melissa and conflict with Gretchen. Melissa regularly asked for follow-up sessions to keep discussing the issue and grilling Gretchen about the fairness of the feedback. After a half dozen conversations, Gretchen decided she needed to find a way to reframe the issue so Melissa could understand what was at stake. Instead of starting the sessions focused on current performance, Gretchen began by asking Melissa about her long-term career goals. Gretchen said, "I knew I couldn't change her nature but I could focus on helping her change her behavior as long as I could get her in the right frame of mind first." Melissa said she wanted to be promoted to manager as soon as possible. With that goal as the backdrop, Gretchen was able to explain more clearly to Melissa the consequences of her work pace: as a manager, Melissa needed to set an example for her associates. Also, if she was constantly working at capacity, how would she handle a last minute request from a client? Melissa needed to figure out how to build more spaces into her schedule so that when she became a manager, she'd be able to serve her clients well and treat her associates fairly. Melissa's drive to work hard was not going to go away, so instead of battling that, Gretchen gave her a reason she could relate to to modify her behavior.

2010-02-09T00:00:00Z

Giving Feedback 244 giving_feedback_to_high_performers_

(Harvard Business Review 3.12.2009) Giving feedback, particularly constructive feedback, is often a stressful task. As counterintuitive as it may seem, giving feedback to a top performer can be even tougher. Giving Feedback To High Performers

2010-02-09T20:12:25Z

Guest Writer

These are no absentee owners. The Toyoda family built Toyota Motor (TM <a title="blocked::http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=TM&amp;source=story_quote_link" href="http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=TM&amp;source=story_quote_link"><http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=TM&amp;source=story_quote_link></a> ) into the largest auto company in the world and the leader of its third generation, Akio Toyoda, is president. His father, Dr. Shoichiro Toyoda, who turns 85 on February 17th, is the company's honorary chairman and, according to associates, he remains deeply involved in the company's operations. So with this rich history behind them, who did Toyota send out this week to answer questions about the accelerator recall? An American sales executive named Jim Lentz. Now Lentz is one of the smartest and most capable executives in the auto industry, but he isn't even Toyota's number one executive in the U.S. Nor is he an engineer, which makes him less then perfectly qualified to answer technical questions about how an automobile starts and stops. But what's really worse is that he is not a member of the Toyoda family. Akio Toyoda has strongly held views about the importance of quality and reliability in Toyota's history, and the role of his family in the company's success. But neither he nor his father has confronted the recall problem head on in public. The younger Toyoda has even gotten the nickname "no-show Akio." It is frankly surprising and hard to explain. In a good year, North America provides the bulk of the profits for Toyota and is a major contributor behind Toyota's enormous market capitalization. But now, at a time of its biggest crisis, when the flow of those profits is threatened, Toyota has allowed America to fend for itself. One senses a deep debate going on inside the company. On one side is the American operation arguing for Japan to get significantly involved in the recall in a way that the public can see. But America has always had a difficult time making its opinions heard on the other side of the Pacific. That difficulty has been exacerbated because of the retirement at year's end of a senior California-based public relations operative. Back in Japan, executives are struggling to come up with an answer to public doubts about Toyota cars and trucks. But they are traditionally slow to act and their sense of how to communicate with American audiences is not well-developed. Keep in mind that Toyota is a company run by engineers who like definitive answers to even the most complex problems. They are uncomfortable with softer subjects -- especially in different cultures -- that aren't easily understood through a root-cause analysis. It is likely that Japan is all too mindful of the drubbing that Ford CEO Jac Nasser took a decade ago when he become the automaker's spokesman in the Explorer rollover crisis. Nasser became something of a laughingstock because of his thick Australian accent, and there were predictable references to Crocodile Dundee. Most Toyota executives speak excellent English, though they often prefer to have interpreters translate for them. They are doubtless concerned about the impact of their accents on Toyota's image. Still, they would likely win points for sincerity and conviction were they to speak for themselves when appearing before the American public. Prolonged media appearances in times of crisis by top executives may not be not the Japanese way. But it is the American way and, increasingly, the global way. Toyota has struggled for years to shed its conservative habits and to become more of a global company. But the slow progress it had been making in this direction has been reversed by its handling of the current crisis. There is a Japanese expression: genchi genbutso, meaning "go see for yourself." It is an integral part of the renowned Toyota Production System. For any problem to be solved, it has to be inspected first at the place where it has occurred. It is time for the Toyoda family and their associates to go and be seen at a place where Toyota cars are designed and built so they can face the public, explain what has gone wrong and lay out how it plans to fix them. Such a simple act will go a long way toward defusing the current crisis -- and enabling Toyota to keep growing as a global company. <img id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image001.gif@01CAA8D3.0D56D240" border="0" alt="" /><a title="blocked::http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/04/autos/toyota.fortune/#TOP" href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/04/autos/toyota.fortune/#TOP"><http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/04/autos/toyota.fortune/#TOP></a>

2010-02-09T00:00:00Z

Japan's owners fail to show. Amercian executive made to face the music 245 toyota's_no-show_leadership

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The last time anyone looked, Toyota was a Japanese company controlled by a Japanese family. But during the entire accelerator recall crisis -- now complicated by brake problems with the Prius -- they have been all but invisible. Toyota's No-Show Leadership

2010-02-09T02:29:20Z

Gihan Perera

<h3>1. Report on current affairs and news</h3> One of the easiest and most obvious options: Simply link to an on-line news story, and add a paragraph or two of your commentary to it. <h3>2. Summarise the latest research</h3> Take some in-depth research from your area of expertise, and summarise it in a form that's relevant and meaningful to your market. <h3>3. Share stories from your life</h3> Speakers are always finding ways to work in anecdotes from their life into their presentations. There's no reason you can't do the same thing with your blog. <h3>4. Rant!</h3> Express an opinion! You don't have to be rude and obnoxious, but your blog is the place where your personality comes through. So be direct, forthright and don't sit on the fence. <h3>5. Review a book you've read</h3> If you've read a good book recently, write a brief book review on your blog. Again, your purpose is to help your blog readers, so they can decide whether or not to read the book themselves. <h3>6. Promote a product or service</h3> If you regularly publish high-value content, your blog readers won't mind the occasional promotional blog post. In fact, they almost expect it. If you can tie in the promotional stuff to some content (for example, a high-content blog post that ends with a link to the product), so much the better. <h3>7. Announce something new</h3> Use your blog to make announcements - whether they are new products, new services, new staff joining your team, success stories from a client, and so on. <h3>8. Refer to other experts in the field</h3> Everything you write doesn't have to be original content. In fact, it's quite common for bloggers to refer to other Web site - and in particular, to other bloggers. It's a great way to provide value to your readers, and also encourages other Web sites to link back to you. <h3>9. Copy other people's material</h3> In some cases, you can even use other people's material directly, without having to link to it. Of course, this only applies if you have explicit permission to do so! <h3>10. Profile a client or customer</h3> Use your blog to write a profile, case study or success story about a client or customer. You could even ask them to answer, say, three questions, and post this as an interview on your blog. <h3>11. Share a positive testimonial</h3> When clients say nice things about you, get their permission to use that as a testimonial, and then post it to your blog. Again, as long as you don't do this all the time, your blog readers won't mind this occasional self-promotion. <h3>12. Record an audio clip</h3> Some people find it easier to record audio than to write. I don't - I find it much easier to write than to record. But I know some people who think nothing of pulling out a voice recorder, iPod or iPhone and recording a brief audio clip, which they can then publish to their blog. It doesn't have to be CD quality, either - as long as it's not scratchy or difficult to understand. <h3>13. Record a video clip</h3> The next step is video, and again I know some people who find it a breeze to record a video clip of themselves, with a short, sharp message they can then publish to their blog. <h3>14. Insert a YouTube video</h3> You don't even have to record the video clip yourself. YouTube, Vimeo, Viddler and other video-sharing sites make it easy for you to embed their video clips into your blog. <h3>15. Recommend a Web site</h3> Find a Web site you like, that your readers might find useful as well? Write a brief review of it on your blog, along with a link to the site. <h3>16. Answer a frequently asked question</h3> I bet your e-mail program's "Sent Mail" folder has some gems of information you've shared with somebody, in answer to a question they asked you. Why limit this to just one person? Many of these answers you write could easily apply to lots of people, with a bit of editing to hide confidential details and put it in context. This is great source material for blog posts. In fact, every week I go through my Sent Mail folder looking for just such material. <h3>17. Jot down a half-formed idea</h3> Blog posts don't have to be long, structured articles - as you would do for a newsletter, magazine or even an article on your Web site. It's OK to just jot down a few notes, as long as they make sense. <h3>18. Publish your podcast posts</h3> You might have a podcast that people subscribe to, so they receive your episodes automatically. To reach even more people, publish each episode on your blog as well, so that non-subscribers (to the podcast) can stumble across it. <h3>19. Share a PowerPoint presentation</h3> Create a message as a PowerPoint presentation, and then use SlideShare.net to publish it to the Internet. You can then embed this into a blog post, just as you would do with a YouTube video. <h3>20. Announce a coming event</h3> Use your blog to announce your coming events. You probably promote them everywhere else as well - such as your Web site, your e-mail newsletter, your Twitter feed, etc. - so why not post them on your blog as well. Whew - that's just for starters!  There are may other things you could blog about, but these 20 should give you enough for starters!

2010-02-09T00:00:00Z

Blogging is important to reach on-line communities 246 why_aren't_you_blogging_yet

Blogging is really, really important now, because your blog can be embedded easily into other places, such as on-line communities, Facebook pages, and even iPhone apps. So if you're not blogging yet, I hope this article convinces you that it's easy to do. Why Aren't You Blogging Yet?

2010-02-09T02:34:09Z

Ann Andrews CSP

Sadly, for the person being bullied, the results can be absolutely devastating. At worst the target will eventually leave to work  somewhere less unpleasant; at best they will stay; grit their teeth and get more and more miserable, and less and less productive. It is estimated that workplace bullying affects 1:4 people (source - Workplaces Against Violence) (<a href="http://www.wave.org.nz" target="_blank">www.wave.org.nz</a>) Because bullying is such an emotional topic, in this article I want to cover: <ul type="disc"> <li>What bullying (in the workplace) is - a definition</li> <li>The difference between harassment and bullying - and there is a difference</li> <li>Tips and tools if you suspect you are being bullied</li> <li>Tips and tools for an organization to identify and deal with bullying</li> <li>Some stats</li> <li>The costs of bullying</li> <li>Further information </li> </ul> WHAT BULLYING (In the workplace) IS: Bullying is the abuse of position and/or power. It is about actions that are deliberate, debilitating and repeated. The target will be bullied until they either leave the organization or is totally subjugated. And then the bully will hunt out their next target. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HARASSMENT AND BULLYING: <ul type="disc"> <li>Harassment is usually linked to gender, colour, race, disability and/or prejudice of some kind.</li> <li>The person being harassed knows immediately that they are being harassed</li> <li>Harassment is obvious - these people want an audience; they are looking for approval. </li> <li>Harassment is about bravado, machismo (or whatever the female equivalent of machismo  is). It is about looking good in front of their mates (or co-workers)</li> <li>People who use these tactics often lack self-discipline; they are almost always insecure and are very likely to have personal inadequacies</li> <li>Bullying, however, is usually directed at one person who is selected because they are bright, popular, competent and vulnerable. </li> <li>Bullying is about envy and jealousy</li> <li> The person being bullied may not realize they are being bullied for quite some time</li> <li>Bullying is mostly done in private so that others don't see, and so that there are no witnesses</li> <li>Bullies are inadequate in all areas of interpersonal skills and lack discipline in their own behavioural skills </li> </ul> NB - Some people are both harassers and bullies. TIPS AND TOOLS IF YOU SUSPECT YOU ARE BEING BULLIED     Rule No 1 Never, ever confront a bully. Not in private and absolutely never in public. They have been playing their game for a long time; they are skilled at it and all confronting them will achieve, is to actually make your situation worse. They may give the impression that they have listened, and in public they will make sure everyone around sees that they think you are wonderful and talented and capable, but in private your life will be hell. Tip No 1                        Try never to be alone with them - not always possible I know Tip No 2                        Keep notes - find a quiet place after an incident and jot down the key points of what just happened - what was said, what was threatened and what you said and did in response. This will also help you to calm your nerves. Tip No 3                        Let someone know what is happening. Do be very careful who you choose to confide in  - telling the wrong person can risk them letting the bully know you are making complaints, and then Rule No 1 comes back into play again with even greater force Tip No 4 Start planning your exit - whether that is to another department or to another organization, it really doesn't matter - the longer you stay the more stressed you will become and the worse the effects will be on your health and your self-esteem. Remember that bullies do not give up. Once they have selected you as a target, they will continue bullying you until you leave or are totally subjugated.   Tip No 5 And this is a really important tip. Know that this isn't YOUR problem. You are not to blame in any way. It is their problem and the problem of the organization for not recognizing what is happening. Because if the person has been with the organization a long time, you can pretty much guarantee that you will not be the first person they have done this to, and the organization has actually chosen to turn a blind eye and not deal with the situation. Tip No 6                        Sadly laying a complaint about bullying is often one person's word against another, and if the ‘other' person is in a management position, the manager seems to be believed more than the employee. TIPS AND TOOLS FOR AN ORGANISATION TO IDENTIFY AND DEAL WITH BULLYING Tip No 1                        Understand what bullying is and the harm it can do to your people; your organization and your reputation (people talk) Tip No 2                        Don't confuse strong management with bullying - there is a whole world of difference Tip No 3                        Make sure you have a bullying policy in place and make sure that the policy is communicated regular and enforced if necessary Tip No 4                        Make sure your managers and team leaders are trained in identifying and dealing with bullies Tip No 5                        Watch for the signs that a bully is at work - they are actually very obvious. The signs are showing up in any department where there is: <ul class="unIndentedList"> <li> High absenteeism</li> <li> High sickness rates</li> <li> High turnover</li> <li> High litigation costs</li> </ul> SOME INTERESTING STATS  (source <a href="http://www.bullyonline.org/">www.bullyonline.org</a>) <ul type="disc"> <li>66% of organizations have no bullying protocols </li> <li>23% of bullies work alone</li> <li>77% coerce others to bully alongside them</li> <li>Only about 4% of bullies are ever punished</li> </ul> Bullyonline also cites instances where, if the bully suspects the target is on to them, the bully will get in first and complain of being bullied by the target to deflect the heat from themselves! Watch the pattern, because it will be repeated. According to stats which appeared in The Australian Weekend Herald (7/7/07) : <ul type="disc"> <li>74% of Australians claim to have been bullied in the workplace</li> <li>77% said bullies were more likely to get ahead at work</li> <li>54% said there was a boys' club</li> <li>71% of those being bullied dreaded going to work</li> <li>46% said being bullied had made them physically ill</li> <li>67% said they worked with someone they would sack if given the chance</li> <li>Women are more likely to be bullied than men.</li> <li>79% of women say they have been bullied v 69% of men</li> <li>Less than 1% take legal action</li> <li>Approx 20% of people who bully are teachers, lecturers and school admin staff</li> <li>12% are health care professionals</li> <li>10% are from the social services and caring occupations (including care of the elderly)</li> <li>6-8% are from voluntary and non-profit sector</li> <li>65% of enquiries bullyonline receives are from the public sector</li> <li>30% from the private</li> <li>90% of cases involve a manager bullying a subordinate</li> <li>8% peer-to-peer</li> <li>2% subordinates bullying their manager</li> </ul> And HER BUSINESS Magazine Jan/Feb 2006 suggests that: <ul type="disc"> <li>58% of bullies are women</li> <li>Female bullies target another woman 87% of the time</li> <li>Male bullies choose women targets 71% of the time</li> </ul> THE ENORMOUS COSTS - In a recent British court case, a bank worker was awarded NZ$2.2m for being bullied at work. (<a href="http://finsec.wordpress.com" target="_blank">http://finsec.wordpress.com</a>) An Australian technician at British Aerospace won A$342,989 damages for a major depressive illness contracted while working for years under a supervisor who was often drunk, asleep and just plain incompetent. A probation officer in NZ was awarded NZ$1m damages for injury to health caused by work overload which his employer did nothing to reduce And a US survey of 9000 federal employees indicated a cost of US$180m in lost work time and productivity through bullying.  (Her Business Jan/Feb 2006) Victoria, Australia has paid out A$34 million in compensation to almost 1,000 teachers and principles for stress and injury to health caused by excessive workloads, abuse, lack of support and having to deal with difficult students. What a lot of bullies also fail to realize, is that what they are doing is actually against the law. In New Zealand, intimidation (and if bullying someone isn't intimidation, I don't know what is) attracts a maximum penalty of 3 months in prison or a fine up to $2000, whereas assault (and pushing and shoving constitutes assault), the maximum penalty for that is 6 months imprisonment or a fine up to $4000. Employers in S.Australia can be fined up to $100,000 for failing to adequately manager bullying behaviour. FURTHER INFORMATION <a href="http://www.bullyonline.org" target="_blank">www.bullyonline.org</a> <a href="http://www.workplacebullying.com" target="_blank">www.workplacebullying.com</a> <a href="http://www.bullybusters.org" target="_blank">www.bullybusters.org</a> And to download an example of a bullying policy for your workplace go to <a href="http://www.freedomtocare.org/page155.htm" target="_blank">http://www.freedomtocare.org/page155.htm</a> <a href="http://www.org.nz%20" target="_blank">http://www.org.nz%20</a> (also has a free helpline)

2010-02-09T00:00:00Z

250 bullies_at_work

Bullying isn’t new, it has been around for as long as there have been humans on earth. Bullying is about power and control – pure and simple. Bullies At Work

2010-02-09T23:04:12Z