Leadership Articles

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Change Management Articles, Human Resources Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Teaching The Old Dog – That’s Not Going To Work…Really

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

The definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. Although there is a ton of evidence to the contrary, training being developed today still follows a broken methodology.

Is this insane, or what???  

In a recent project with a client, I was asked to develop training on a new safety system and protocol that was going to be rolled out to all 15,000 or so employees across the world. This new “initiative” was designed to solve an issue regarding incidents that occurred around staircases in their manufacturing facilities. The objective of this training was to reduce those incidents by at least 50%. This outcome would save the company money.
 
And a side benefit is that it would allow people to work more safely and probably enjoy work more.
 
The solution that was developed prior to my arrival was a three-day intensive course on safety focusing on this specific incident. This was followed up by two computer-based training courses and a subsequent test.
 
To my client surprise, the solution didn’t work. As a matter fact those same safety incidents actually went up.
 
Although shocking to my client, it was evident to me that this was another case of the best intention falling far short of the objective.
 
SO WHY DID THIS FAIL?
 
There are really three main reasons that this training was insufficient and was actually the wrong solution to solve this problem.
 
1. The training did not involve action. Three days of classroom training and subsequent computer-based training may be effective in some cases, but for this instance, it probably was the worst solution that they could have created. Correcting issues regarding activity requires activity in the training.

2. The training was too long. There is no reason that training like this should have lasted anymore than 90 minutes. If it was necessary to have a longer training regarding safety, it probably should have been broken up into smaller bite-size chunks. Let’s face it; our attention spans are minuscule nowadays. Some statistics say that it is anywhere from 5 to 7 minutes. Therefore having a training that is three-day long about one subject encourages the participants to not pay attention and only desire to be out of the class as soon as possible.

3. Training probably was the wrong solution to begin with. Training is a great solution to teach someone a new skill or introduce them to a new behavior. Generally speaking for reducing incidents regarding safety training doesn’t help to solve the problem it only highlights that there is one.
 
WHAT DID WORK?
 
The solution we suggested was counterintuitive coming from someone brought in to analyze training.
 
Here is what we did:
 
• We talked to the people that had either witnessed and or “participated” in one of the incidents
• Created warning signs and placed rubber mats around the area where the incidents began to occur
• Created “talking points” for supervisors, line managers, and all other leaders to discuss the safety incidents and to highlight the new precautions
• Created a 5 min. activity showing the incident and allowing discussion about how to avoid it as part of monthly plant meetings
 
What Was the Result?
 
In one month, the safety incidents were reduced by 50%. Within 60 days the safety issue was almost nonexistent. Of course, there were rare times that it did happen. On further conversation, the client and their work team decided to make the activity we created for the plant meetings a part of all new employee training.
 
Training is a powerful tool. It is important to have opportunities to develop employees utilizing training and often times it is a crate tool to introduce new concepts, skills, or things that employees are going to need to do in a new way.
 
However, training is not a catchall solution for every incident. Therefore, it’s important to make sure to look at the issue and determine what is the simplest, straightforward and high-impact method to correct the situation.
 
Where have you seen training being used incorrectly? What might you have done to solve this problem?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Human Resources Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

The Fallacy Of Culture Change

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

Why is there all this vim and vigor around culture change lately?

Maybe, it’s because we’ve realized how powerful culture really is.

There is not one day that goes by without a blog or article “making the case for” or “giving the 3 steps to” changing the culture.

The fallacy of culture change is there is no quick fix or rapid method to change a culture (short of breaking up the organization or something drastic like that). It takes time, effort, and a bit of history to create culture. It doesn’t change easily.
 
WHAT IS ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ANYWAY?
Culture is what manifests our actions, informs our approaches, and determines who will be recognized and rewarded.

Organizational culture reflects the values, beliefs, and norms that characterize an organization as a whole. – Author J.D. Sherman
 
WHAT DO YOU DO IF YOU THINK YOUR CULTURE IS “BROKEN” OR IS INSUFFICIENT TO DRIVE FUTURE SUCCESS?

Before embarking on an initiative like this, there are a few questions that MUST be addressed:

1. Does your culture really need to be changed?

In the spirit of “first do no harm” it is important to really examine your current corporate culture. In many cases, the basis or foundation of any organization that is successful or was successful are core values like

• Integrity,
• Tenacity,
• Innovation,
• Service
• Loyalty
• and many other admirable attributes.

It is seldom that an organization has core beliefs like dishonesty, murder, and thievery. Uncover the fundamental cultural beliefs prior to taking on ANY initiative to change the culture. Those beliefs can be leveraged or rekindled for future growth rather than attempting to replace them
 
2. What is the difference or dissonance between where you want the organization to go and your current culture?

Examine the gap between that stated culture (answer to question 1) and the desired end state or strategy. Once that gap is determined there are many different ways to bridge that gap and enable fulfillment of strategy.
 
3. What is the resistance that the culture will give you toward implementing a strategy?

There many examples of organizations that did things in the name of strategy that were counter to their culture (think Kodak, Circuit City, Eastern Airlines).  The actions resulted not only in a strategy not being fulfilled but the organization being negatively impacted- lower profit, decreased productivity, dramatically lower market share, etc.

It is critical that organizations understand that the rush to “change the culture” will only increase resistance against that very activity.

Creating a campaign to change the culture will only result in resistance to changing it. – Curt Coffman

BRIDGING THE GAP

Understanding the history and fundamentals of the culture are key to beginning to bridge the gap between strategy and culture. By building that bridge, a culture can be leveraged to drive the fulfillment of a strategy that will gain profit and market share.

What are some examples of culture change that you’ve seen fail? What companies have you seen that do well change their culture effectively?  What did they do?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Learned Helplessness: Kill The Messenger Management

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

WHY IS TELLING THE TRUTH SO HARD?  WHAT IS IT ABOUT HONESTLY REPORTING RESULTS OF A SURVEY OR PROJECT THAT MAKES ORGANIZATIONS WANT TO RUN FOR THE HILLS?  

Softening bad news has become an art form. It even has a word to explain it spinning.    Smart dedicated people purposely alter (spin) how they communicate data to make bad survey results – Employee Engagement, Customer Satisfaction, Exit Interview, etc. – seem positive or at least “not that bad”.

Being unable to honestly relate results and subsequent trends is a symptom of Organizational Learned Helplessness (OLH).

Learned Helplessness occurs when people in an organization believe there is nothing they can do to make a difference.   Performance spirals downward.   Communication and respect for others decreases and people fall back on primitive self-protection behaviors.
 
LET’S KILL THE MESSENGER.

Taking frustration the sharing bad news is a common trait in many organizations.   It is prime symptom of Organizational Learned Helplessness because somewhere in the organization’s history telling the truth became a bad idea.  This time honored tradition is called Kill the Messenger Management.

Unfamiliar with this form of management?  Here is a simple description:

A leader belittling or reprimanding a junior person (anyone that reports to them) because they deliver results or news that is not favorable.  The junior person is not in control of the results (they are not the thought police or enforcers of any kind) and therefore are simply reporting.

We have all seen it. It is not to say that you should be unkind or demeaning in delivering results.  Even (and especially if) they are bad.  But, killing the messenger does nothing but tell people that the truth is only good when it’s favorable.

THE SPIN CYCLE
Over time, organizations that suffer from Learned Helplessness almost never let data, results or news go out without “spinning it” or softening it or whatever colloquialism is used to say “change it to make it sound better”.  Therein, leaders never really hear the real unfettered truth. This is one of the big reasons that consultants are brought in to uncover why things are really going awry (if they are).

SETTING THE TRUTH FREE
It is not easy to tell the truth, but in the long run dealing with bad news or results head on enables the organization to learn and recover quickly.  Sometimes, it even makes them more effective. The process will take some work, as most positive things do (think diet and exercise). Here’s a simple truth baring process:

Making it easier/better to tell the truth:

1. Build the Ark – There is a tendency to be afraid to tell bad news because bad news makes people feel bad when there is nothing that can do about it.  It can leave the person(s) receiving the message feel as if there is no hope.  That makes them either angry or depressed. The best way to avoid this is to couple the bad news with a solution or method to deal with the bad news.  This takes a little extra work.  But it’s important that bad news isn’t just left out there without something that can be done about it.

2. Prepare leaders  – Let senior leaders know that the news/results are not good.  It’s never a good idea to blind-side leaders with bad news.  So make sure they are aware of it, potential rationale for why it is bad and what could be done about it.

3. Let everyone know the “real” results QUICKLY – One of the worst things that can be done with bad news is to hide it or “shape it to not sound so bad”.  It’s important that accountability for the results at every level is discussed.  Don’t point the finger at mysterious forces out of the organization’s control  – “The economy” or “Outsourcing”.  Of course those things will have influence, but they are not the only (or sometimes even the primary) reasons for the bad news/results.

4. Take action – This is the most critical part of the process. Inaction is a contributing factor to on going Organizational Learned Helplessness and why employees don’t trust “management”.  When an issue is uncovered, action must be taken.  Organizational inertia has a tendency to stifle action that may disrupt the status quo.  However, if nothing is done to impact bad news or results, people see ongoing failure as a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Then the next time bad news/results are found they don’t believe anything will be done about it and so its better not to admit them at all…sound familiar?  Taking action doesn’t have to be bold or splashy, but it must be done.
◦ Wonder why employees don’t think engagement matters? Look at the lack of action from previous results
◦ Wonder why employees don’t believe that the consultants were really brought in to make the organization more effective? Look at the lower earnings that were released or the layoffs that occurred after the last consultants were brought in

If there is not a commitment to follow though with action, talking about the bad news is not worth it.  If there is not commitment to taking action on results, conducting an employee engagement survey is counterproductive.

5.  Follow up – don’t just leave the news/results lingering in employees memories. Follow up with news of the action taken.  Then ask for more input, conduct another survey, etc.
 
The truth is a vital light to shine on real issues within the organization.  It is so important to tell the truth.  Because no matter how much we try to hide it, the truth always comes out (think Enron). Dealing with issues/problems head-on makes the organization more credible and builds employee trust of leaders.  Not telling the truth will continue the shaping, double speak and distrust found in many organizations.
 
Have you seen instances of “kill the messenger management”? What are you doing to help encourage more openness about results?  Please let me know.

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Facilitation Articles, Human Resources Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Learned Helplessness: Let’s Have A Conversation – Me Talk You Listen

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

Do you know the serial interrupter? That person who uses the 80-20 rule of conversation. They speak 80% and you speak 20% of the time (if that).

What happened to the art of communication?

Used to be a conversation looked like this:

• You talk, I listen
• I talk, you listen

But it seems like now conversation looks like this:

• You talk, I listen
• I talk, you interrupt
• You talk some more
• End conversation

My wife and I have noticed that regardless of the setting, people are getting worse and worse at having good two-way discussions. Not only is it frustrating, but it undermines the success of teams and organizations.

There are many new theories that say conversation is one of the most critical parts of leadership, teamwork, and collaboration.

• Leadership is a conversation – June Harvard Business Review
• Conversation is the path to a high performing team – Wharton School of Business e-newsletter
• Conversation is critical to high powered organizations and groups– 
 
So how did conversation go from dialogue but monologue?

• People forgot how to talk to each other:
The usage of Twitter, Facebook, e-mail and texting require less and less actual conversation with other people.

• People are so busy they forget that conversation is two way between you AND the person your are speaking with:

We are working more hours, over the weekend, and even through vacations. There is so much work to do that people don’t feel like they have the time for dialogue. They just need to get things done.

• There is much less room for alternative opinions or even dissent:

With the onslaught of 24 hour news channels, blogs dedicated to a particular point of view and all of the other segregation of ideas there is very limited interest in hearing views that are not our own. We have lost the ability to listen to someone who has a different opinion and actually hear what they are saying.

How do you ensure that this very important part of ensuring organizations work and making relationships in life viable does not turn into a bother or a bore?

• We need to talk to each other:

This may sound counterintuitive with the previous statement that we have so much to do. But, we need to spend more time actually talking to each other sharing ideas and even disagree.

• We (this includes me especially) need to stop and listen much much more:

It is imperative that when we have the opportunity to speak with someone else that we spend 80% of the time listening to what they have to say. Allowing them to have full complete thoughts. Concentrating on one that person has to say. This way you can learn about them, learn about their point of view, and most importantly learn something new about yourself.

• Actively look for people that don’t agree with you to speak with:

In order to get better at the give-and-take of conversation, one of the best things that someone can do is to seek out conversations with people that have a polar opposite point of view. It could be something that is a controversial subject like politics or it could be something that is less confrontational such as differing musical preferences. The objective, is that no matter how upset you get at that person’s opinion, you must listen to them while they are speaking and not interrupt or think of your comeback to what they are saying. You must listen all the way through and only when they are finished can you respond. At the end of the conversation you let them know  one thing that you’ve learned from that persons point of view or perspective. You’ll be surprised at what you learn!

Conversation drives innovation and increases the likelihood of a successful project, team or organization.  It is vital that this does not become a lost art.  If nothing else, that would make talking very boring.

Do you think that people have gotten worse at having conversations? What are some things that you do to encourage conversation? Please let me know!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Corporate Titles – The New Art Of Crazy

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

Over the course the past few years, organizational titles have gotten stranger and even more meaningless. Why does a title mean so much? Why is it so important for corporations to give inflated titles to positions that don’t really require it?
It is as if we believe that by giving someone a heightened title, it will encourage them to act in a different way.
 
For some people that may work well, however for the majority of employees, a title that is not relevant or realistic to the work that they do can seem silly at best and insulting at worst.

It can actually work to undermine or demean employees.
 
Titles that have come up recently:
• Chief First Impression Officer = Receptionist
• Deputy Creative Director = Assistant Creative Director = Creative Directors second-in-command
• Hair engineer = Stylist = someone who cuts and styles hair for a living
 
There is nothing wrong with new titles or even inflated titles; the problem is that titles don’t make a job or work environments any better, just like changing the name of poop won’t make it smell any different.

Research shows that the most critical things for employees are that their work is challenging, the work environment is good, and their managers are great. If the focus for companies is to creating a productive, profitable, and great place to work then, for the most part, titles are very secondary.
 
If we are spending too much time trying to come up with nifty titles instead of making the workplace great, then energy is being wasted.
 
Employees see right through the attempt to “cover up the smell.” Companies that focus on creating productive profitable and highly engaged organizations will likely succeed regardless of the titles they give their employees.

Companies that focus on gimmicks, like flashy titles that don’t put the hard work into making a great place to work, will fail no matter what they call people.
 
Would you think about all the crazy titles that are out there? What are some of the most interesting titles that you have seen lately?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Facilitation Articles, Human Resources Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Leadership Follies – Training Is Not A Cure All

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

FOR MANY YEARS CONSULTANTS AND EXPERTS HAVE TRIED TO CONVINCE LEADERS THAT TRAINING CAN IMPACT PERFORMANCE. IT SEEMS LIKE THE PROBLEM IS NO LONGER THAT THEY DON’T BELIEVE THAT TRAINING IS IMPORTANT, BUT THAT NOW THOSE SAME LEADERS THING THAT TRAINING IS THE “CURE-ALL” OR “SILVER-BULLET.”

“What has made people think that training people will magically make them more effective, efficient and overall higher performing?”  

Well, we told them it would.  But, we did too good of a job. We have too many people thinking that “training is a cure-all” for all leadership sins.

TRAINING FEELS LIKE THE RIGHT THING

Problem:
My team is not performing up to expectations…

Solution:
Well, train them to perform better!

Problem:
My team is suffering from low morale…

Solution:

Well, train them… Of course!

Uhm… Really??? Do you actually think that ‘training is the cure-all?

Leaders and organizations are so concerned about making quick changes and hitting quarterly numbers that they are always looking for the fastest way to make employees “better.”

Training feels like the right thing. And in some cases it can be, But this is the case only if it used properly. Remember that it is an arrow in the quiver that is needed to solve organizational issues and not just the the bow and arrow.

About $5.6 billion to $16.8 billion is wasted annually on ineffective training programs. ~Cary Cherniss, Rutgers University

According to improvement consultant Jim Clemmer, most organizations use their training investments about as strategically as they deploy their office supplies spending.

In the end, the impact on customer satisfaction, cost containment, or quality improvement is just as useless.

USING TRAINING WISELY

Training is an excellent way to help people increase their skill or learn about a big change. It is not a method to change behavior, And it is certainly not effective without set up and follow up.

A great way to think about using training is this:
• Develop an overall plan to alter organizational performance, introduce effective processes, and show how training will fit in.
• Make sure that people understand why they are being trained.
• Create the training course so that they have a tangible outcome or things they can use right away.
• Discuss the training with the group or individual very soon after the training.
• Set new expectations for performance once the training is completed.
• Allow time for the training to take.
• Communicate with people as if the training has worked.

“Training as a stand alone tool is like trying lose weight with exercise alone.”

It’s a lot of work and only gets you 20 to 30 percent of the solution desired. In order train in the most effective way, your training needs to be part of a larger plan designed for a particular outcome. It is a great tool to support change or introduce new concepts.

The key is that training needs to be put into context of the larger effort.

SIMPLE RULES

Just remember these three simple rules if you want to succeed:
1. You can train skill; You cannot train will.
2. Training is a great tool, but not the only tool for change
3. Training is not magic and will NOT solve every problem. You can’t train away the blues.

Organizations that use training as the panacea will quickly see that people will not take to the training and in turn, resent it.

So, do you have a strategy for the training systems that you use? Does your training plan fit into a larger organizational strategy? Are you making sure that the training that you pay for is being used effectively? Are you paying enough attention to the ROI of your training budget? I’d love to hear your thoughts!

**********
This blog also appears on the Linked2Leadership Blog.  Please visit them!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Human Resources Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Hey Boy, Where’s Your Lanyard?

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

During a recent project, I ran into an issue that worried me. Not because of the issue itself, but rather for what it represents. A really big deal was made about wearing the security badge ID’s on a lanyard and not on our belts.

The Lanyard Decree

After the “lanyard decree,” lanyards were distributed throughout our company and a memo was sent out saying that all employees, contractors, and vendors must wear lanyards. Although the lanyards were passed out, we started to notice that, for the most part, not many people are wearing the lanyards.  Especially senior leaders…

I was later told the chronology of what led us to our lanyards:
• Someone saw my team without lanyards
• They went to their boss to complain about us not wearing lanyards
• Boss told them to go back to work
• They found an obscure policy stating that all people within the building had to wear lanyards
• Went back to boss and pointed out our violation
• Boss said, even though not a good use of time, go ahead and point it out
• She wrote a memo to the person(s) we reported
• Presto – lanyards…

So after about 10 minutes of calculating, I came up with the following:
• Total time  to “resolve this issue” = 2 weeks
• Total hours spent on project = 70 hours (30 just for the person finding the rule about lanyards)
• Total money spent on issue = $15,000 (70 hours at average of about $214/hour, very conservative rate for all levels involved)
• Total return back to shareholders = (-$15,000) – that’s negative boys and girls…
• Positive impact on organization = None
• Value to organization = None
• Impact on advancement of project = None

Simply Maintaining the Same 

This is a serious phenomenon that occurs when a successful company forgets, or never really understands, what makes it successful.  While becoming successful, they turn their efforts to building infrastructure to support their success.

At some point, the company’s energy goes from becoming successful to maintaining its success; through gaining market share, building new products, etc. – to becoming more efficient, effective, better leaders, etc. All of which are powerful and can make the company more productive, but not as a stand alone.

“How many other “initiatives” are there like the lanyard one?”

At what point does an organization begin to make this kind of work okay?  Never you say?  Really?  Again, using the data from the same unscientific survey, many organizations have these types of “junkets.”

There are some groups within organizations that even encourage them!

The Cycle

Organizations have a tendency, once successful, to focus inwards as much or more than they do outwards.  The cycle, which has not been tested but has been researched, has four major phases:

Inception

This is the spark that sets the eventual company in motion.  This is generally prior to even thinking of creating an organization, it is the incubation or hatching of an idea or product that sells.

Becoming Successful

The organization is generally smaller and nimble. It has developed a great idea or product. Through things such as hard work and word of mouth. The organization begins to find a level of success that enables it to grow.  The organization is focused on selling its service, product, and the customer.

Although this is not the time of “exceptional customer experience,” the organization is laser focused on making sure that each and every customer is taken care of.  There is not focus on infrastructure, but the beginnings of “back office” support begins to take shape.

Growing Market Share

• Once a company has reached a sustainable level of success, the focus shifts from becoming successful to increasing the reach of the organization.  Oftentimes that involves growing the number of customers that are reached and driving up the share of the market they occupy. In this phase this a focus on building the organizational infrastructure to support that growth and specialization of tasks or roles.  Sales focuses on bringing in clients, marketing focuses on spreading “the word” about the organization, customer service focuses on taking care of customer needs, etc.
• Somewhere in this part of the cycle, the focus turns from growing the market share, to internal initiatives. It goes from outward to inward.
• Although there are parts of the organization that still look to the customer, it is all under the veil of “what’s good for the company”.  There is growing process, bureaucracy, etc. There are a large number of employees whose roles are to manage or work within some internal function.  It is generally as many or more than or the employees that are customer facing (either for service or sales). For example: Credit Card Company – only 15% of their employees have any contact with customers, over 75% of those employees are paid $12/hour or less
• For profit educational organization – 65% of employees have no contact with current or potential students. It is not hard to imagine that if the majority of employees have little or no contact with customers, they would not understand (or care) what the impact of their actions might be.  How could they foresee the impact to the bottom line? Experiencing competition.
Changes In the Market Landscape
• With the burgeoning bureaucracy, organizations are often taken back by quick shifts in the marketplace due to changing regulations or competition.  Even when the shift is acknowledged or discussed, there is little understanding of how to adequately deal with it because the focus has been off the market and shifted to the internal workings of the organization. This is certainly natural and understandable, but detrimental.
• Too often as the organization is growing it distances itself from how it started to become successful.  Of course that is not always the case, but there are many instances where it seems as if “they are making money in spite of themselves.”
• As the market shift takes place, the organization is not prepared to meet it.  Mostly because it does not understand what really made it successful in the first place and the long denial that takes place during the decline. There is, justifiably, a focus on self-preservation.  The reaction can be to “double down” on methods or efforts that do not reap any benefits.

What Is the Best Way to Avoid “Coasting to the Cliff?”

Always stay on top of why people do business with you. Don’t be fooled by assuming that people do business with your organization for any other reason than the real one.

Key the focus of your organization outward – Make sure there is a clear “live of sight” from each employee to the customer no matter their role.

You must develop employees, make process efficient, and drive profit. It all must be at the service of gaining and retaining customers. Understand that the market is changing all the time. No company is safe from the ever-changing marketplace.

“Organizations that succeed transform.”

As stated so eloquently in the latest issue of Harvard Business Review, companies must understand what is at their core, but be able to transform as the market changes.

Just as steam turns to water and water to ice, companies must understand what “brought them to the dance” and pivot on that to regularly anticipate the changing customer and marketplace.

If you think about it like a company, your prized position in the marketplace with customers erodes.

Are you focusing on what really gains and retains customers?  Do you know if your team or organization is headed for the cliff? Are you allowing team members to hang your company’s future on the necks of an albatross with a lanyard? I would love to hear your thoughts!

********************
This blog also appears on the Linked2Leadership Blog.  Please visit them!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Human Resources Articles, Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Leadership Follies – Teenage Mind In The Heart Of Leaders

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

Have you noticed that business, politics, entertainment, and the average person have created a culture of abdication and finger-pointing? Do you find yourself or businesses and people around you practicing this adolescent behavior? 

I certainly have!

And a recent letter that a friend showed me from their soon-to-be-adult child cemented this belief for me.
 
CHILDISH BEHAVIORS
The resounding undertones were:

  • I didn’t make mistakes.
  • Every bad thing I did was a learning experience.
  • My actions weren’t bad, your interpretation of them was.

 
Everywhere we look, there are examples of this.

“I did this because of them!” Or ”my actions were their fault.”

This unbecoming attitude is shown up with Herman Cain, John Edwards, Jeff Skilling, and Bernie Madoff.

Some valuable questions:

  • At what point do we/you/us/me take full responsibility and face the full consequences of our actions?
  • How can we actually learn if we don’t acknowledge there are mistakes?
  • When did we decide that making mistakes, failing and telling the truth were bad ideas and practices?

 
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

“Just trying to be nice…”

Positive Psychology, Organization Development, and other bodies of knowledge have developed whole sets of vocabulary to alter the world of work.

The intentions were to shift language, when appropriate, to move from blame and ridicule to support and learning.

It seems like we have taken things too far though:

  • Words are ‘smithed’ and sculpted outside of their original or real intent
  • Messages are softened so as not to offend or create conflict
  • Rhetoric is toned-down so as not to ruffle any feathers

All of this is done in an effort to make things easier to hear. But perhaps, I think we have taken this too far.

We are perpetuating an adolescent mindset that shuns or avoids the best that the maturing process brings and we are creating insufficient sophomoric future leaders.
 
TRUTH AND CONSEQUENCES 

How They Shape You

There are two truths about mistakes:

1. They happen to all of us because we are human.
2. They shape us and how we approach life.

HERE’S A STORY TO “DRIVE” THE POINT HOME…

When I was a teenager, I took my father’s brand new Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham out for a “joyride”.  I was convinced that my parents were not going to let me drive legally, so I would “show them.” Keep in mind, I was a teenager and my brain was not fully formed.

I crashed the car into…another car. Let’s just say my father was not pleased. I not only had to pay for the damages to his car, but all the other damages I caused. I had to apologize in public.
 
I was angry, hurt, and most of all remorseful.
 
My parents did not sugar coat my mistake. Yes, I said mistake. I screwed up! They were very clear that they were upset with what I had done, not with me as their son.

I faced the full financial consequences of my actions, and I was not allowed to get my license until I had fulfilled my punishment.  That whole experience taught me a lesson about life and my responsibility.  It shaped me.
 
NO ACCEPTANCE OF MISTAKE, NO WIN

If a person does not accept their mistakes, then the person wronged can not move on from it, or forgive them. After making a mistake, the person will not be able to look at what they did and learn from it.

This will ultimately waste time in fabricating mitigations to the mistake and circumstances around it. It causes more stress than it relieves.
 
Saying a mistake is a “learning experience,” without acknowledging error, abdicates your responsibility in actions taken.  
 
TIME TO LEARN
The more we sugarcoat a mistake, or try to act like we “don’t make mistakes,” the less likely we are to really change, learn, and grow.

“Learning experiences can come from mistakes, but they can not replace them.”

A learning experience is what you do in class or how you overcome a bad habit.  It is the outcome.  If you interrupt people on a regular basis, that is a fault or mistake.

Your learning experience can be the time you interrupted your wife and she called you out on it.  Once you acknowledge you made a mistake to interrupt her, you are able to learn from it.

Saying you did not make a mistake does not allow you to really learn from it.  It also works to undermine the relationship.
 
FAILING SPECTACULARLY?
It is vital that leaders understand that failure is not only an option, but inevitable.
 
The magic is not when you fail, but what you do about it.
 
There is a simple pattern that most great leaders follow:
1. Make a mistake. Generally speaking, this is the easy part.
2. Quickly admit that a mistake has been made.
3. Acknowledge the mistake and what was learned from it.
4. Implement learning publicly or transparently.
5. Repeat
 
HOW TO FAIL
Here is a great recent example of this from Amazon after they failed miserably and were blistered in the press:

“This is an apology for the way we previously handled illegally sold copies of 1984 and other novels on Kindle.

Our “solution” to the problem was stupid, thoughtless, and painfully out of line with our principles. It is wholly self-inflicted, and we deserve the criticism we’ve received.

We will use the scar tissue from this painful mistake to help make better decisions going forward, ones that match our mission. 


With deep apology to our customers,

Jeff Bezos 
Founder & CEO 
Amazon.com”

 
TRYING NOT TO FAIL
There are countless examples of leaders that try to do damage control, “mitigate,” and pass the blame on to anyone but themselves or their company.

Here is the path they typically follow:
1. A mistake is made.
2. The mistake is covered up or shrouded somehow.
3. Mistake is made public by a government agency or the process, but blame is deflected by the organization to users, consumers, etc.
4. A non-apology apology is made, but little action is taken.
5. No one acknowledges mistakes or someone that really doesn’t have authority is blamed.
6. Repeat.

Outstanding recent examples of this “failula” (failing formula):

  • Toyota blaming drivers for the brake problems in some of their cars.
  • BP and their vendors not acknowledging blame during the Gulf Oil Spill.
  • Netflix trying to launch a new brand and raise prices at the same time.

All of these showcase that it’s better all the way around to say, “I made a mistake,” “This is what I will do to make sure it doesn’t happen again,” and “Let’s fix what’s broken.”

If we want to survive as an intellectual society, we have to teach the next generation how to accept mistakes and recover from them. Not how to avoid them and push the blame.

Do you find yourself accepting your mistakes and learning from them? Or do you tend to push the blame on others? What areas in your life can you improve on learning from your mistakes, and becoming a better leader by doing do? And how can you help the “teenage” adults around you grow a little more mature this year? I’d love to hear your thoughts!                        

This blog also appears on the Linked2Leadership Blog.  Please visit them!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Facilitation Articles, Leadership Articles Permalink

Leadership Follies – Moving Furniture In A Burning House

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

Do you ever wonder if people running out of a burning house are thinking about rearranging the furniture? Would you think them crazy if they did?

And yet this is what we do so often in business. We run around doing things that don’t matter and really don’t make much sense…

We are often ignoring the real issues of leadership and process, and spend our precious time just looking at rearranging boxes on an organization chart.Reorganizing the staff can sometimes be just a blind stalling tactic that let’s us feel like we are doing something important. 

FIRE?  WHAT FIRE

Organizations have historically used reorganizations to solve real performance problems that really don’t have anything to do with structure.

For example, here are some real problems that a reorganization can help fix:

  • Ineffective leadership
  • Lack of accountability
  • Lack of, or poor, project/program prioritization
  • Poor internal or external communication
  • Few real measures to understand effectiveness of service (internal and external)
  • No cohesive/holistic approach to outsourcing or using vendors

As a by-product of many mergers and rapid growth, many organizational structures are unruly, but not untenable.
With competition nipping or gnawing at their heels, fundamental changes are usually in order and not just moving people from one side of the organizational chart to the other.
 
WHAT IS REARRANGING?
Reorganization is defined as:

re·or·gan·i·za·tion  (r-ôrg-n-zshn)n.
1. The act or process of organizing again or differently.
2. A thorough alteration of the structure of a business corporation.

Or quotes found from folks I know:

  • “Or perhaps you mean the kind of corporate lunacy that induces people who are far removed from operational reality to decide that they need to ‘shake things up‘ in the organization to ‘spur productivity‘ and ‘improve bottom-line results‘, without having a clue as to the true cost of their decision.”
  • “Layoffs“
  • “Reorganization is a ‘friendly term’ management uses to make significant structural/organizational/position changes more palatable when people are about to get ‘moved around.’”

Suffice it to say, most people do not think random reorganizations work well or at all.
 
PUTTING THE FIRE OUT FIRST 
The most important thing is to deal with what is really broken.

  • If leadership is not effective, help the leaders gain skills to become better leaders or find new ones.
  • If people aren’t being held accountable, set up processes to do so.
  • If project prioritization is an issue, make sure to create a forum to have all the key stakeholders discuss and agree upon project priorities and resources.

Essentially, deal with the real problem head on.

Don’t be naive; reorganizations are necessary, but are not the answer to all organizational issues.
 
REARRANGING THE FURNITURE WILL NOTPUT OUT THE FIRE
There are times that restructuring does cause increases in positive outcomes. However, more often than not they fail.

Although there are thousands of reasons why, they mostly boil down to three themes:

1. Employee and Leader Resistance
Employees and affected leaders often believe the reorganization is a result ofinability to make tough decisions or other non-business related rationale.

People hate change.

Change actually causes a reaction in the prefrontal cortex that has people resist change initially.  Outside of a very few occasions, everyone resists change regardless if it is good or bad.

If it’s determined to be necessary, make sure that the rationale for the reorganization is steeped in facts that point to improved performance.  Although people may still grumble, it is hard to argue with facts.

2. Timing is Horrible

Lenny Bruce said:
“Timing is everything.”  

Nothing could be more true when it comes to reorganizations. It is important to undertake a reorganization only during a slower time in the business cycle.

If that is not possible, it should not be in the midst of other big changes or at peak times.

If FedEx were to restructure, doing it between Thanksgiving and Christmas in America would not be a good time.

3. The Scope and Impact of the reorganization is not realistic or fully thought through

Doing these two things will set you up for failure:
1. Trying to turn a team around in very short time frame.
2. Adding a large amount of responsibility to a team that does not have the capacity.

Change does not have to happen all at once. It should not be thought of as a “once in a lifetime” opportunity.

Trying to get everything into one reorganization too quickly is like trying to jam 40 kilos of potatoes into a 10 kilo sack: something will break.
 
If the furniture really does need to be moved, then Move It.

Be clear about the issues that cause the lower productivity, efficiency, etc.   It is imperative that the real issues causing reduced productivity, profit, etc. are being addressed.

As a result of taking some actions to “put out the fire” a reorganization can be a natural outcome.  Make sure that the new structure works to address these issues.

Moving boxes on an organization chart will not solve deep-seated issues of performance and productivity.  It is vital to take time in determining what the true issues are.

MAKING THE REORGANIZATION SUCCESSFUL

1. Plan or the “Dip In the Delta”
Change will impact performance, but you can make that a positive.  That is why it is undertaken in the first place. The magic is knowing how to mitigate the dip in productivity and turn that quickly into a positive.  This takes planning and thought.

Make sure you are actively working on how to utilize the change to solve organizational and productivity problems 

2. Get Buy-In from Leaders, Employees, and Other Key Stakeholders
Make sure that the people impacted by the change not only buy in, but are “pulling for it” before it happens.

3. Make Sure the Process and Metrics Are In Place
There is nothing worse than not being able to accurately tell if the reorganization is really making a difference. Make sure there are agreed upon metrics to measure organizational performance to showcase wins and point out where more needs to be done.

Hone internal processes to ensure that performance gains can be realized.

Make sure that internal communication, project prioritization, and other key processes are known, used, and enforced to maximize the impact of the reorganization.

4. Take Care of Employees and Leaders After the Reorganization.

Reorganizations and change initiatives in general fail if focus is taken off the change once it’s implemented or goes live.

This is a huge mistake.

The most important work and most critical time to focus is right after the reorganization takes place.

Leaders need training and support, employees need to know where to find answers and express concerns, and customers need to continue to be served and find resolution to problems when they arise

5. There Must Be a Willingness to Take On More Change, Just Not too Quickly

Nothing is ever perfect the first time.

It’s okay to tweak structure and process once it’s been in place for a little while if its not working. In fact, if you don’t people will learn to get around things to get what they need.

If a change is not working, admit it, but only if there is proof that it’s not working. Once time has been given to make the change work and it is proven to be unsuccessful, change it again.
 
REMEMBER: PUT OUT THE FIRE FIRST, AND THEN REDECORATE
Reorganizations can be a powerful tool to support organizational change.  They can be a tool in increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization.  But it is imperative that the real underlying issues of low performance are taken care of first.

Without that, no matter how well the sofa looks against the wall, the house will still burn down.

*************
 
This blog also appears on the Linked2Leadership Blog.  Please visit them!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

25 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Leadership Follies – Lipstick On A Pig Does Not Make It Sexy

Sticky Post By On August 25, 2015

CHANGES IN ORGANIZATIONS  AND MANAGERS ARE OFTEN ESSENTIAL IN ORDER FOR YOUR BUSINESS TO GROW AND THRIVE.

Let’s just be very clear about something.

If there is a need to make big changes in how an organization is performing and being managed, there are three things that will not make a difference.

1. Giving people new titles.
2. Making personnel changes without process changes.
3. Moving failed leaders into new positions.

The last one is surprisingly common in organizations.  Somehow it seems that if a leader is not performing well in their current role, moving them to another part of the organization will fix that.

That is like saying if I put lipstick on a pig, it will be sexy.  No, no it won’t.  It will just be a pig with lipstick.

WHY CAN’T LIPSTICK ON A PIG BE SEXY?

The misguided belief that a long term failing leader can be moved into another role and can magically perform effectively or exceptionally is another example of Organizational Learned Helplessness, based on a theory discovered by Martin Seligman.

“People who see themselves in situations where they have no control are reported to have higher stress levels and lower productivity.”- Martin Seligman

One of the biggest factors in this malaise is the organization’s inability to change the situation, even if it is in their power to do so.  Many organizations are made up of teams that have grown and matured together.

They have long histories, sometimes spanning decades.  For the most part that is excellent.  However, when a member of that long standing team fails to perform over time there is a tendency to excuse this as “just the way they are”.

There are circumstances when it is even defended.  What if that failing person is a leader?  Should excuses for non or under performance be acceptable because “that’s just the way they are”?

HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT TO CHANGE?

When an organization is failing there is a simple process to follow:

ASSESS WHY IT IS FAILING

  • Interview customers, employees, leaders, vendors, etc.
  • Look at competitors and how they are performing.
  • Determine the “line of sight” for each department and team in the organization.

Line of sight is the direct impact that an employee, team, or department makes; not the end customer.  Each and every person and group in the organization should be able to articulate how what they do either gains or retains customers.

Fix the things that are not working based on the assessment.

REPLACE FAILING LEADERS

  • Leaders that have under-performing groups or are failing due to their lack of ability should be replaced.
  • If it is possible, promote a high potential candidate from within who has shown promise.

If there is not anyone in that position, do two things:

1. Hire someone capable of succeeding as a leader from the outside.
2. Have that new leader mentor two or three high potential employees to replace her when she wins the lottery and decided not to come back to work on Monday.

GET RID OF TEAMS THAT ARE NOT POSITIVELY IMPACTING THE CUSTOMER

  • Move the employees from those teams to areas that have shown their “line of sight” and are high priority to the business

Do not be naive – this change is hard and its fruits will not bear right away.

There are stages of change that organizations must go through to come out successfully.  Whether you follow William Bridges philosophy, Kotter’s or any of the other excellent models, the changes will take effort, require work and difficult choices.

The issue of leadership is clear:

If a leader has a history of not performing, they should be removed from leadership. Nothing says, “we’re serious about this change” more than the removal of a leader everyone knows is not performing.

No matter how much lipstick a pig wears, it’s still a pig.

Don’t fall into the Organizational Learned Helplessness trap.  Changing roles will not make a person or group more effective, being more effective will.

**********
This blog also appears on the Linked2Leadership Blog.  Please visit them!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

FIND A SOLUTION

Cube 2.14 will increase your organizational effectiveness. We specialize in developing innovative, practical solutions to create productive workplaces that exceed goals.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Anil@Cube214.com
  • (847) 212-0701
  • www.cube214.com

CONTACT US

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Your Website (required)

Subject (required)

Your Message (required)