2018 is in the can, finished. Stick a fork in it, it’s done.
A new day has dawned. 2019 is here, we’re over a week into it already. Soon, we’ll be discussing how fast January flew by, then Q1.
Have you made plans? Personal goals are great. Business objectives are super. But do you have specific plans to “do” leadership better in 2019? No? Why not?
Many of us create detailed plans for the new year. We spreadsheet various categories like personal, family, business, spiritual, health, etc. But we need to add one: Leadership. What can you do differently this year to improve your leadership impact? “Get better at it” sounds great but is woefully unactionable. (more…)
Did you get the things accomplished that you set out to do at the beginning of the year? Most of them? Some of them? Any of them??
If so, great. If not, why not? Now–right now–is the best time to answer the following questions:
Regarding those things successful last year, what made them so? Was it because of me and my leadership, or in spite of? For those I lead, have I appropriately recognized their successes?
If we failed to accomplish some of our plans, goals, or objectives… why? Was it because we failed to do something we could have done, or were there really—really–circumstances beyond our control (honesty is important on this one)? For those I lead who performed less than satisfactorily, am I addressing that performance appropriately?
While you’re asking questions, how have you performed as a leader? Have you asked anyone… like those you lead? If not, now’s the perfect time. And I don’t mean just “hey, Jane, how am I doing as a leader?” Strangely enough, that might not actually elicit a meaningful response.
Consider a 360 survey if you haven’t had one, or haven’t had one recently. I’ve had lots of clients asking for them of late, so something good must be in the water.
Alternatively, you can DIY with something simple, like Start, Stop, Continue.
Sit down, one on one, with those you lead directly. Tell them you want—need–their feedback to improve, and to make their jobs better (and likely easier). Tell them you’ll be asking three questions, and you would like at least one input or response for each question. Then ask…
What should I Start doing that I’m not doing now?
What should I Stop doing that doesn’t seem to help you or others?
What should I Continue doing that you feel is positive?
Ask the questions, then shut up while they answer. No defensive drilling down, no “but what about…?” comments, nothing but “thank you for that input.”
If you’d like a simple worksheet for this, you can download by clicking on the image to the left.
And don’t forget to follow up with them in a few months to see how you’re doing with their inputs.
Speaking with a potential client, she asked about the process to “rebuild” their culture. The ensuing chat was interesting (I would call it “great!,” but the client hasn’t signed on yet…!)
First, culture isn’t actually “rebuilt.” It exists — in complete form — in every organization.
You may not LIKE the culture, may want to CHANGE the culture, but remember: It’s a change management effort, and has all the corresponding efforts and challenges of any organizational change process.
A specific culture can START anywhere within an organization, though it can only really be DRIVEN by the top. The top controls processes, most extrinsic motivations, environments, and sets values and acceptable behavior (the whole ‘lead by example’ thingy).
To change culture, all levers must be congruent… policies must match behaviors; values must be supported by procedures and accepted norms; compensation must match desired behaviors, actions, and results.
They’ve all got to work together, and when changing a culture (vs. maintaining), you really can’t afford even small inconsistencies.Without over-stressing my keyboarding skills, desired culture change will never take place via “programs,” off-sites, workshops or other isolated events.
It’s gotta be the whole enchilada. It must have complete support of the senior-most staff, and necessarily reinforced (in part) via performance management.
Investment in training is growing faster than any other human capital or HR-related expenditure. That’s according to Mercer, a ridiculously large consulting firm connected to Marsh.
Their recent survey showed that 51% of profitable firms (there’s a criteria for you) were planning on increasing their investment in Leadership and Career development in 2008. That’s more than for cash-incentives, base salary increases, and even health care.
If you’ve been waiting for leadership development to become really popular; to make the investment decision a near no-brainer, then now’s the time. In other words, everyone is doing it.
Besides just generally good for business, there’s other reasons to develop your managers and leaders:
1. You’re working with another small compensation increase for 2008 (see article on my website). You simply cannot afford to “buy” productivity and effectiveness. Alas, we must manage…
2. Better managers and leaders allow you to succeed in multiple areas of the business; more spending on training and less on base pay to attract, retain, and even engage a competent workforce.
3. Better management is a differentiator, higher pay is not.
4. Promotion and development opportunities are frequently cited as one of the top 3 reasons that high performers leave organizations.
So, your business will be better, key employees will stay longer, and base pay budgets don’t get blown out of whack — and we still can’t understand the significance of leadership development…?
I received the following question from an HR Director in the midwest:
Contingency Fees: What’s the value? It seems that the fee percentage in permanent placement ranges from sometimes less than 20% to 30%+ of the candidate’s first years salary.
So, what’s the diff??
Where’s the value change between the 20% firms and the 30% firms?
Though I do not conduct contingency searches today, I spent many years in the Director/VP desk wondering much the same thing…
The answer, however, isn’t mysterious.
The difference is frequently just timing. If a recruiter or firm’s current production is down, volume low, or revenue a bit off for the week/month/quarter, a firm may take closer to 20% for that particular search, instead of their customary 25-30%.
Perhaps they already have a couple of ringer candidates in the hopper, and they low-ball just to close a quick sale.
Maybe, they’re new at the business, and right now they just need to pay the bills (surely I don’t have to make all the obvious cautions here…).
Maybe, they’re just stupid. I doubt that, but let’s include all possible answers.
Now, having said that…Here’s the part that really gets me:
I spent a good many years in senior-most HR roles. A manager/company that will quibble over 5-10% on a $100K search for a valuable contributor to their organization, is so colossally short-sided and pound-foolish that it takes my breath away.
A hiring company’s bigger concern should not be whether the fee is 20%, 25%, or 30%; or whether the fee includes just base comp, base plus bonus, etc… The hiring company’s sole concern — SOLE concern — should be “Can this firm deliver one or more solid, successful candidates to fill my serious need?”
If not, then 15-20% is certainly no bargain; if yes, then we’re spending way too much time quibbling over a few thousand dollars.
The ensuing chat was interesting (I would call it “great!,” but the client hasn’t signed on yet…!)
To change culture, all levers must be congruent… policies must match behaviors; values must be supported by procedures and accepted norms; compensation must match desired behaviors, actions, and results.