by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 28, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Kevin Berchelmann
I have a better idea… Let’s not.
Personally, I think “benchmarking,” much like its sister phrase, “best practices,” means “waste of time.” Time better spent analyzing and improving your internal processes.
Benchmarking is supposed to mean looking inside other organizations, and comparing their results, methodology and metrics of a practice or process with your own. Supposedly, this has some meaning to us, and we can use that to adjust and improve our own processes and practices.
Therein lies the problem — our processes and practices, not theirs. We cannot simply reach into another organization — similar in scope or not — and extricate several of their unique processes to overlay on our organization. Taken so out of context, we may actually do much more harm than good.
One size doesn’t fit all, what works for you may not for me, templates are useless… pick a phrase, they all apply. Studying another’s process to determine if there are pieces of it that you can use, within your own, well-defined structure and practice, may indeed have some value. Benchmarking entire processes, practices, and methodologies does not.
Sure, compare all you like. But take the results of that comparison and ask why there is a variance. There are so many variables within organziations — people, structure, geographic, cultural, you name it… a firm can have “better” metrics than you, but not necessarily execute that particular process nearly as well.
Don’t benchmark… analyze and improve.
But, that’s just me…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 10, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Human Resources, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Human Resources needs to get past this, “Do it for one, must do it for all” mentality. It’s just not true, and a lousy way to help a business succeed.
I regularly tell people this about precedents: “Yes, I’ll likely do the same thing, given the exact same circumstances, in the future.”
For example, if I allow an extra week of protected FMLA for a stellar employee in production with 6 years with the company, I may very well agree to do that same thing for the next “stellar employee in production with 6 years with the company.” Change a single parameter and the precedent doesn’t exist.
But even that isn’t the right answer, since decisions need to be made based on current business needs. I’m not trying to create a social system at work whereby all receive identical treatment. They won’t. I’ll do those things necessary, including making nondiscriminatory employment-related decisions, as the business needs dictate.
There’s all this talk about HR’s “seat at the table.” Want to get “kicked off the table” in a hurry? Adopt the inflexible, “Do for one, do for all” mindset. It has no place in business, in my opinion.
Cheers,
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 10, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
In this and 3 subsequent blog entries, I’m expanding on the “5 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” I outlined in a recent article.
The second law focuses on open communications; too often, usually in the misplaced interest of correctness or conflict-avoidance, we tap-dance around topics, subjects, and even direction. We assume — often incorrectly — that someone “knows what we mean,” though we didn’t come out and say it.
Law #2. If you want something specific done, say so specifically, using clear, plain language. Employees, generally, have some difficulty doing their basic jobs; adding “mind-reading” to their description is just plain unfair.
No hints, implications, or innuendos. Say what you want, and use English! Directness counts.
I was recently doing some coaching with a client executive who was lamenting the poor “listening skills” of his Operations VP. Seems he had told the VP that one of his director-level staffers was not fully competent, and that the VP should “do something about that person.”
3 days later, that VP fired that director. My client executive was shocked — he told me, “I told him to do something with her, you know, like coach, train, or develop. Maybe even warn her of her performance.” He said, “I didn’t tell him to fire her…”
The VP, of course, simply said, “The boss said ‘do something with her, so I did.”
“Problem fixed.”
Not really… I don’t need to tell those of you reading this the difficulty in replacing an experienced mid-level manager in a specific industry. Especially without even making an effort to change her performance or behavior in some way.
Of course, the senior executive felt his comments were sufficient… obviously, they were not. English would have prevented this misunderstanding… simply telling the VP that he should “improve her performance or behavior” would have been sufficient; perhaps even simply asking the VP what he’s done to work with the director would have jogged a reasonable conversation.
Instead, a miscommunication — caused solely by incomplete/indirect language — has created yet another “situation” at the company.
As if we didn’t already have enough to do, we go out creating challenges to deal with.
So, like the doctor when the patient says, “Doc, it hurts when I do ‘this,’ and the Doc says simply, “Stop doing that.”
Stop doing that.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Apr 24, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Miscellaneous Business Topics
— It’s not just the words…
WARNING: Colorful metaphors, including PG-13 language follows. Don’t read if easily offended since, generally, I try so very hard to never offend…!
So, I’ve got this client… (as my friends know, most of my really good stories start this way). Anyway…
I’m working with their leadership teams (multiple levels), and during a recent mid-manager session, one of the participants commented that it was great to have a “common language” for all the managers.
This, of course, is music to my consulting ears, so I ask him to elaborate.
He said well, we can discuss things now like “empowering employees,” “resolving conflict,” and “active listening,” and the term means something to us, as opposed to (in the past) not really being able to verbalize these concepts.
Now, I’m really jazzed, so I ask for specific examples. In retrospect, this could have been an error in judgment on my part… live and learn.
So, this participant then says, “Well, everyone now understands what we’re talking about — what we’re doing — even when getting “chewed out.” He says, “It’s not an “ass-ripping” anymore, it’s “feedback.”
“It’s not an ass-ripping any more, it’s feedback.” You gotta admit, that’s 
funny. I could hardly catch my breath I was laughing so hard.
After normal conversation resumed, however, it became clear that what he had said, though funny, was actually quite accurate. And it isn’t just a play on words.
Taken out of context, with no management or leadership process in place for continued communications and real feedback, an “ass-ripping” is just that. Used in the productive context of regular and frequent communications and clearly defined expectations, within a defined performance management process, it really is, now, “feedback.”
I learned a valuable lesson that day (well, TWO lessons if you count “don’t ask stupid questions like that” as a lesson): Words matter, because that’s how we frame situations within our environment. It’s not a simple play on words if the new frame of reference is different than the old.
This “common language” thing can really make sense.
How about in your organization?? Are you still “ass-ripping” or are you “providing feedback?”
Think about that.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Mar 28, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
As leaders, we need data and information to make sound decisions. Without them, we are but knee-jerk reactionaries, our direction and focus more resembling a weather vane in the wind than the rock-solid vision necessary for leading others.
So, as we start this new year, let’s decide now that we’ll do everything within our power to have access to that information. For instance: Do you blow up (real or perceived) when your staff brings you really bad news? Shooting the messenger is the pinnacle of foolish; the bad news continues, you simply don’t get it anymore.
The truth is, we should embrace those delivering us bad news. Even if they caused it. we can deal with the performance and behavior later, but right now, the best thing we can hope for is knowledge.
So, what do we say to our folks to prompt such open and forthright discussions? Well, realize first that your words don’t mean squat if your actions portray something else, but here are some suggestions:
1. Tell your staff to always be honest and frank with you, particularly when one-on-one. Having to “ask the right question” to get to an answer is no way to run a railroad. Or a manufacturer. Or a construction company.
2. Make sure they don’t color bad news positively. Present it “naked,” so to speak. As I frequently tell clients, “I’m just going to say this, and probably poorly. Please allow me to clean it up afterward.” You do the same. Unvarnished, bare truth first, pretty, glossy, covers later.
3. They need to know that you want ALL relevant information — good and bad. It’s not “horn-tootin’” to let you know of things that happened as planned; it’s simply informing your boss of relevant status. Both are important.
4. Tell them you want both sides of any story with known conflict. We can’t be interested in a one-sided flow of information; the hallmark of a good senior manager is the ability to see and discuss both sides, even if they personally favor one.
5. Make sure they realize that, if they know the answer, they should say so. Equally, if they don’t know the answer, they shouldn’t wrap it in so much BS that it appears they do.
These are merely suggestions. It’s a new year; time to correct some old “wrongs,” establish some new “rights.” One of those rights should be positive, accurate communications between you and your staffs.
As a friend of mine is so fond pf saying… “This ain’t rocket surgery.”
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Feb 11, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
Human Resources is not a day care. As such, conflict resolution should only be a part of our accountabilities as it relates to making the business successful.
In other words, we aren’t resolving conflict merely to create some kumbaya-looking harmonious state; we resolve conflict so employees will work better and be more productive.
Sometimes, the right answer can be taken from a day care playbook: Shut up, sit down, and color. Quit touching her. Don’t make me stop this car. The list goes on.
They all mean the same thing — “Drop the petty stuff and get back to work.”
I know that sounds heartless, but we are actually paying these folks, right? I don’t think saying, “Hey, I paid you last week — do your job and quit starting trouble” is terribly out of line. In fact, we should probably say it more often.
Yes, there are times when conflict resolution skills come in handy; times when more finesse and delicate handling is called for. But let’s be real — that’s not the norm. Too frequently, HR gets involved in regular, interpersonal dynamics that have little to do with business productivity or success, and everything to do with one employee’s general dislike of another.
Stay focused on what matters. Don’t hesitate to say, “Shut up, sit down, and color.”
If that doesn’t work, put them in time-out…
