Don’t Care What You Call It, Just Choose it & Do it!

by Triangle Performance Staff | Oct 15, 2014 | Miscellaneous Business Topics

Political leaders (I uses those two words together with great caution) claim that “the buck stops here” and “they are ultimately accountable.” Corporate chiefs claim they are “ultimately responsible.” So which is it and what do they mean?

I’ve spent the better part of the last two weeks scouring the internet for some definitive distinction between the two words–accountable & responsible–and how to use them correctly. Through reading volumes of contradictory articles and papers (written by people who, given the confidence of their opinions must be much smarter than I am), I have reached a profound conclusion–people should use the word they are most comfortable with, and regardless of the one they choose, do something other than just say it!

A prime “non-political” example of what I am saying came during the recent NFL flap involving Ray Rice, when Commissioner Roger Goodell stepped up to the microphone and proclaimed, “Unfortunately, over the past several weeks, we have seen all too much of the NFL doing wrong, that starts with me.” “I got it wrong in the handling of the Ray Rice matter, and I’m sorry for that, but now I will get it right.” He went on to say what he was going to do. I’m glad he’s working on getting it right, but he still got it wrong.

In the end, he will or won’t “get it right,” but I take issue with people (political or otherwise) who take “responsibility” only after being forced to do so. This, in my humble opinion, is a perfect example of the problem as I see it; too many people find those words easy to say but don’t give them the meaning or weight they deserve.

So what does “accountability” really mean?

First and foremost, I believe it means that you accept personal responsibility for what’s expected of you. When things don’t go as planned, don’t blame others or an external environment. Own up to the outcomes regardless of whether or not your actions specifically caused the problem. Demonstrating accountability is acknowledgment that there are things you could have done (even if you don’t know what they are), or still can do to change the outcome, and commitment to doing them.

When we fail to take ownership, we yield control (victim status), and being a victim is the exact opposite of being a leader. Victims blame, point fingers, deflect attention and make excuses. Leaders focus on what they should have done, can do or should do, and take action by seizing the initiative to influence the right outcomes.

I had a client a while back that wanted help shifting the mindset of their field management team to one that was more “accountability” oriented. To do that, I started with a very simple graphic (which by the way is one of my favorite coaching tools) and explained that good leaders take ownership of and focus on what they can control and refuse to waste energy and time on the things that they can’t.

Prior to the session I asked all of the managers to identify one or two barriers to meeting the business objectives. The range of answers I received was as varied as the people that provided them, but with rare exception they pointed to things other than themselves as the barriers. Not what I expected, but it actually played perfectly into my meme. I’ll speak to some of the types of barriers related to difficulty in hiring to make my point. I heard all kinds of reasons for their difficulties–poor candidate pools in their markets, poor service from their third party advertising firm (low applicant flow), even poor screening by their pre-hire assessment system.

When I mapped out their responses in the appropriate circle (based on their paradigm), the consistent theme was that they were victims of circumstances beyond their control. After I brought that to their attention, I asked, “So what part of that situation do you own?” The initial looks I received were interesting, and as they processed the question and their answers, I saw light bulbs starting to go on. Finally one of the managers raised her hand and said, “I can’t control the labor pool in my immediate market, but I can look in other markets.” Then another raised his hand and said, “I can’t do my own job advertising but I can work with our third-party vendor and give them feedback with regard to the low applicant flow.” The managers were beginning to “get it.”

Demonstrating ownership/accountability/responsibility is about focusing on what you can control or what you can influence, not succumbing to victim status by living in the “no control” circle.

Let’s circle back to Goodell for a moment and dissect the situation to see how well he owned the situation. Goodell missed a huge opportunity, in my opinion, by stepping out in defense against calls for his resignation–rather than immediately admitting his (not the NFL’s) mistake. The opportunity he missed was in giving his words weight and meaning. Had Goodell (you can substitute any name) immediately said what he said and then added, “I am taking ownership of this, and if I can’t resolve it, I’ll step down” then and only then he would have been taking responsibility and demonstrating true accountability and ownership.

The same goes for any leader. We have to get past the lip service we give to the topic of “accountability” and demonstrate it by pointing at ourselves and taking action – not making excuses and remaining the victim.

One example that stands out in history is James Burke, Chairman of the Board for Johnson & Johnson during the Tylenol tampering disaster that occurred back in 1982. Burke’s ownership of something that was outside of his control (for the moment) was a life lesson for leaders. He immediately went to the media and took ownership (buck stops here): this is what we are doing and what we are going to do–and then he went and did it. When they discovered the root cause of the problem, they didn’t find it by looking for blame, they found it by looking for how their actions allowed it to occur and took action accordingly.

The impact of those actions were huge. The costs was pulling over 31 million bottles off the shelves in stores everywhere and offering free replacement to any customer that requested it; on top of that came a Tylenol re-launch (well over $100 million in direct costs). The benefits were what mattered, and they were tenfold (or more) the costs, as Johnson & Johnson’s stock price initially dropped (based on the ensuing panic) but fully recovered within two months. I offer that example, not just because it is a great one for demonstrating real ownership (proper circle management), but also its impact. People have much more confidence in those that take and demonstrate accountability than in those that abdicate it. Had Burke not taken ownership and instead blamed the person that did it, or minimized the risk to anyone outside of Chicago, consumer confidence likely would have worked against the brand and, subsequently, the share price and shareholder value.

Burke shows that accountable leaders do four very distinct things when taking responsibility:

We all probably remember far more examples of organizational managers not taking ownership than we do those who took real accountability. Far fewer people become infamous for falling on their sword than for spearing others. It’s a fairly simple idea, but because it takes a special person to do it, it’s not always easy.

So which circle are you living in?

Leadership, Conflict and Moving Forward

by Triangle Performance Staff | Aug 8, 2014 | Miscellaneous Business Topics

Conflict Happens. Or, at least it should. All too often we come across organizations that are dysfunctional not because of conflict, but because everyone is afraid of it. Let me start by saying that if that sounds like your organization, stop NOT fighting, arguing, disagreeing and instead, understand that you are likely running from the solution you seek, or the next product iteration that will shoot you out in front of your closest competitor. Conflict as uncomfortable as it is, is where we make our best decisions and get our best collaboration.

If you claim that you are leading your organization, then know that being a leader is not about IF you will deal conflict but HOW. In fact, few other skills (managing conflict) will shape a person’s career as distinctly as the ability to deal with conflict.

There are literally thousands of books, articles, theories, etc. that are devoted to dealing with conflict. I want to start by making sure you know that your first job as a leader is to make sure that there is conflict, the healthy kind!

At its most basic level, conflict goes hand-in-hand with leadership because leadership often involves challenging people to do what they don’t want to do or see what they simply don’t want to see. Achieving results typically involves moving people out of their comfort zones, making tough decisions that others, might not agree with, and taking actions that create real strife within the organization. Leadership is knowing and helping others see that conflict in those situations is to be embraced rather than avoided and then helping guide them in how to do exactly that.

So how exactly do you embrace and use conflict for successful outcomes? It’s actually pretty simple, but again, not necessarily easy…

Now you heard me use the word collaboration several times in my note so far, I want to go on record right now and say that collaboration in my mind is NOT what most think it is. Collaboration is not easy, it’s also not an amateur sport. For many, the word collaboration conjures up thoughts of people in a room full of smiles and speaking nicely to each other as they all work to the “ultimate” outcome. While I am sure that might happen somewhere, it is not something I have witnessed personally. Collaboration can be gut wrenchingly uncomfortable, it requires work and energy, and most of all, time. The outcomes however are usually worth all that goes into the process. Remember, however, that how you choose to engage in conflict is a choice. Not every situation requires collaboration, but all are guaranteed to provide at least some level of discomfort.

Leaders are responsible for generating real results, both in the short and long-term. That charge requires being comfortable being uncomfortable because the two are often at odds with each other. It is in that discomfort that a leader can shine as they lead others through seemingly impossible decisions that can bring out the worst in us all.

So how comfortable are you with being uncomfortable? Do you run or avoid dealing with the conflict on your team? Do you allow conflict to stall your team or even your decisions? If so, then pull up your big boy or girl britches and get comfortable being uncomfortable then watch the successes happen.

It’s a Conversation, Not an Event!

by Triangle Performance Staff | Jul 1, 2014 | Miscellaneous Business Topics

Consultants, trainers, human resource managers and the like have harped on giving feedback and coaching employees for as long as I can remember, but the fact that they still harp on it (plus my own personal experience) tells me that the message for some reason rarely takes a complete hold. I am quite sure there are tons of theories as to why, but, in my opinion, the reason is not that the message is not heard, instead it is because it is the wrong message.

We all know the importance of giving feedback because intrinsically we know the personal value of getting it (or at least some of us do). The value proposition for getting feedback is not only to know how well we are doing, but also to tell us what we need to start doing, keep doing, or stop doing. Most “how to” books and training programs do a decent job of articulating the value proposition, but few make it personal which is where we get the real understanding. We best understand the value proposition when we consider the concept of feedback in terms of us receiving it. Close your eyes and imagine working for someone who hires you, points you to your office, and says “get to work.” They never says another word outside of a periodic “you screwed up” or an annual review that gives you no information and a three percent raise. Some people might consider that situation a blessing but, for most, the lack of feedback creates an internal disruption that either drives us to worry and work harder while getting more frustrated or work less until we receive more information. Everyone needs feedback of some kind. Some jobs offer external feedback (objective scorecards, etc.), some individuals are able to come up with their own systems, but regardless of what a job offers or an individual is able to come up with on their own, manager feedback is still essential.

There are a significant number of resources available to help you learn techniques for giving good feedback, but few, if any, address “how” to give feedback in terms of fitting it in an already packed calendar. So let’s start with that notion in mind. Let’s start by changing how we view feedback. In most of our worlds, giving feedback is treated as an “event.” Something for which we must carve out separate and distinct time and then make sure we have all of our documentation, etc. so to “follow the process.” Stop and think for a moment about the purpose of feedback, it’s either to help someone to change something or to make sure they repeat something (good work). The process that we get hung up with and that leads us to this “event” mindset is one which is meant to force change – “either change or get out.” While feedback is definitely involved in that process, we can often avoid the conflict rich feedback process generally associated with trying to force change through progressive discipline processes if we choose to look at feedback differently much earlier in the employment relationship.

Does that make sense? If so, then you’re probably asking “if not an event, then what?”

The “Then What”

Feedback is about a conversation! Think about how many times a day you interact with your employees. Email, phone calls, drop by visits (even the little ones), or even bumping into them in the hallway. Most of us encounter our employees with some amount of regularity during the week. The “then what” is to make the most out of what you are already doing, not doing more. Feedback does not always have to be formal, scheduled, structured, or planned. Ongoing feedback can be something as simple as a “great job on getting that new client” or “let’s watch our attention to detail, little errors can sometimes add up.” Either of those lines can be given at the beginning or end of any conversation. Simply consider them as slight course corrections caused by providing a little more wind in an already expanded sail. What’s interesting is that the “then what” occurs even if we don’t include it in our regular interactions. In the absence of feedback (data), employees fill in the gap by trying to read your non-verbal cues, mood, lack of communication, etc. While sometimes they are correct, in most cases, they are not and that is what causes employee discomfort and ambiguity. So the next time you send your employee a quick email to check on a project’s status, add a line to thank them for their effort – that is feedback. Then the next time you have a one-on-one (an event) you can give them even more information and tell them why you thanked them.

Receiving Feedback

Another integral step in giving good feedback is in learning to receive feedback. Too much focus is given to direct feedback in terms of coaching and counseling so let me start by saying when I talk about “receiving feedback” I am NOT talking solely about direct feedback in those terms. We get feedback all of the time. It comes to us in what we sometimes see as obvious messaging and then often times in messaging that we completely miss or ignore. Either way, there are keys to remember when receiving any kind of feedback:

• Don’t take it personally
• Accept it, work to understand it – don’t judge it
• Be thankful

If we assume all feedback is well intentioned and we do each of those three things, the outcomes we’ll see in both our own actions and other’s perceptions. Even if the feedback is ill-intentioned, doing those three things will still promote positive change!

The more important aspect to talk about, however, is where we get our feedback. We can ask for direct feedback and sometimes get it, but getting good dire feedback from our employees can often times be difficult. With that in mind we have to look for our feedback in other places. The first place to look is in the results that we generate through others. While employees have to own their results, we have to honestly assess if we have any ownership that should be shared. Secondly, we get feedback in the non-verbal cues our employees demonstrate. It is up to us to be attentive. That is not to say that we simply need to watch body language. Though that is important, the more important aspects of non-verbal cues are in a person’s paralanguage – the rate of speech, inflection used, confidence demonstrated, etc. These cues are all around us and if we demonstrate good attentiveness we can capture the feedback and adjust accordingly while still in stride. The key for receiving any feedback, direct or indirect, is that we have to want it.

Conclusion

Once we understand what feedback is and its true purpose, we can make significant changes in our work environment and subsequently in the results we generate. The point we should remember with regard to giving feedback is that we give it regardless of our intent so we have to maintain a heightened level of awareness. Similarly, if we want feedback we need only pay attention as it is there for us to see and hear. In either case, we have to remember that – like our employees – we have many ways to give and receive feedback. Good leaders learn to use them all.

So which ones are you working on today?

Teamwork – It’s not kumbaya, it’s WORK!

by Triangle Performance Staff | Jun 10, 2014 | Miscellaneous Business Topics

Since I was a kid, it seems that the holy grail of working with others has always been the elusive “team” work. Thousands upon thousands of books have been written on the topic. Many of those books provide magical theories or models for developing teams and subsequently team work. Having read many of those books I can say that most offer great ideas and very logical models that help us understand the certain aspects of successful teams. Few however address what I believe to be the root of effective teams. While I can’t and won’t say that any other author is incorrect in their premise or approach, I can and will say that the reality of successful teams is much simpler than most would have you believe. I suggest however that you not confuse simple with easy because for most of us, teamwork goes against our basic nature and it simply ain’t easy.

While by no means rocket science, if we dig into each of those four we might find some nuggets to work with.

Let me go on record before we go any farther and say that great teams almost always have great leaders. The leader sets the tone, establishes the expectations and provides the example for others to follow. So if anyone tries to tell you that good teams don’t need a leader, they are misinformed or worse yet, have deluded themselves into believing what is a near impossibility. While some teams may not have a defacto leader, all will have a leader or by definition it would not be a team. Without a leader, these four attributes are, in most cases, not possible.

So let’s break these attributes down.

• A Shared Goal – while most would say this goes without saying, few actually demonstrate that belief beyond words. I don’t want to confuse things, but I use the word “shared” on purpose. Many teams have “common” goals which means everyone has the same individual goal, but establishing a “shared” goal means establishing a finish line that can only be crossed by all or by none. Each member of a senior executive team controls levers that can impact organizational goals in a positive or negative way. A shared goal requires those levers be pulled in concert, not isolation, for individual benefit or achievement.

  Setting a shared goal seems to make sense, so why then do so many fail to set one? The answer goes back to what I said at the outset, it requires work. It takes real effort by the leader and open collaboration of the team members. Unfortunately, collaboration tends to be much like having a shared goal, everyone talks about it but few actually practice it.

• Selflessness / Ego less Behaviors – to successfully collaborate, both parties have to demonstrate a certain level of selflessness which is why setting that shared goal can be so difficult. Even after a team establishes the shared goal, the selflessness requirement continues on. I mentioned above that each member of a team typically has levers that they control which can impact the shared goal. As a team member we have to remember that it’s not about me, it’s not about what it costs me versus another, it is about the team and the team’s goal. In that same vein, the team members have to leave their egos outside the team. That does not mean that they give up their ego, it means they keep it in check and grasp the fact that no one on the team is any more or any less important than anyone else on the team. In a sense, they have to see the team as a jigsaw puzzle that is incomplete without the proper pieces.
• Familiarity – this attribute is the one that tends to get the most attention by organizations when they talk about “building teams.” While important, familiarity is something that occurs naturally in the teaming process. Using simple techniques to better understand each other, how we think, our tendencies, etc. is a great practice, but focusing solely on this attribute only leads us to our kumbaya ideal. Familiarity is about knowing teammates and accepting them as they are and having them accept you in the same manner. Familiarity also allows for team members to not judge other team members. Familiarity leads to understanding and to knowing when things are personal and when they are not.
• Individual Competence – this goes without saying, however, I unfortunately run into numerous cases where competence is overlooked. The rea son being that leaders misunderstand or err in how they define the word. Competence relates to far more than someone’s ability to generate results from within their professional domain. Competence in this sense relates to the person’s ability to generate results working with, around and thru others and being good at it.

To draw in an example that I think most can relate to I offer you what many other coaches would offer, a sports team story. Normally I hate it when consultants or others in the business world start talking about team sports and teamwork. I hate it because people tend to get too wrapped up in the motivational aspect of the stories, the Cinderella teams, etc., or in stories of teams that conquered all odds. While there is value in those stories, I think too many focus on the wrong aspect. So to avoid doing what I disdain I am not going to use an inspirational sports story. Instead I am going to use an instructional situation!

In the April 2011 edition of Fast Co., Chuck Salter penned one of the most descriptive articles on what it takes to be a successful team that I have ever come across. He used the Miami Heat to teach the world about real teamwork. The Heat have been a dominant force since that year, not because they had the most talent – there are plenty of teams in the NBA that are loaded with talent. No, they are dominant for the same reason that the Spurs and several others are perennial power houses and consistently return to the playoffs, because they play as a team.

Salter’s article speaks to three buddies (Wade, James and Bosh) that all entered the league in 2003, each becoming “the” dominant force and leader for his respective team. Each possesses incredible talent and the ability to lead his teammates. When they came together they did so with a shared goal already in mind – a championship. To come together, however, they each had to make sacrifices in terms of money, scoring opportunities and leading. Each player also had to check his ego within the confines of the team and give what was needed for the team to succeed; which meant giving the ball to others and trusting in their skills. Each player knew the other players intimately (familiarity) and each worked to be the best he could be and to helped his teammates to be their best as well (competence). That team has prospered and continues to prosper today because they get better at teamwork each season.

There will always be detractors to my example that prefer to talk about talent and structure (rules, models & gimmicks) as means to the end. Those detractors may be able to get short-term results from such an approach, however, I don’t know many successful organizations that turnover their senior staff every year (like a lot of basketball teams do)! The best teams historically (not flash in the pan winners), in sports and in business, all share those four attributes. So if it is a team that you want, lose the kumbaya thinking – step up and be the leader that establishes what it will take to be part of your team and then practice what you preach.