by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jun 25, 2019 | Miscellaneous Business Topics
Oh, crap! Another performance review…
How many times have we heard–or uttered ourselves–this common lament? I’m guessing “lots” is a fairly accurate response.
The better answer, however, is “way too often.” The performance management process (of which some variation of an appraisal is essential) is the key to organizational improvement. To give that process the short shrift simply because someone has abused the effort sometime in your lifetime (maybe right now) is to say that, in effect, improving organizational performance is best accomplished by guesswork, hope, and good intentions. And by believing every supervisor who tells you, “Oh, yeah, I’m having regular performance feedback conversations with everyone who works for me.”
I was born at night, but not last night.
One of the scariest things I’ve read lately–in the long list of ill-advised approaches to leadership–is this talk of “getting rid of performance reviews.”
What a load of bunk.
We don’t need to, nor should we, get rid of them. In fact, it’s about time we doubled down and sharply increased the attention and use of this valuable process.
A puzzling part to me, is that most organizations attribute a poor performance review program or process to their Human Resources function. Another load of bunk. I’m not defending your HR department per se, but if your performance review efforts are anything less than successful, senior leadership–up to and including the chief executive–are squarely accountable.
A reminder… your HR shop is not an independent, self-employed entity, and if they haven’t heard you say differently, they are meeting your expectations.
Managing organizational performance is a leadership issue, not an HR function.
Some brief points to ponder:
- Why do them? Done correctly, performance reviews align individual efforts with organizational goals and objectives, provide a scorecard or barometer for performance (think pay, promotion, development, succession, training), and act as a solid vehicle in an employees’ developmental journey.
- Who leads this process? Senior leadership. It must–simply must–begin at the top. This top-down responsibility is as much a core responsibility as cost control and managing margins. Let’s be clear: If you, senior leader, don’t take this process seriously; if you don’t complete them timely; if you don’t enthusiastically support these efforts within your organizations, then their ineffectiveness is on your shoulders, no one else.
- Best practices include casting due dates in stone–no exceptions. The latter part of the review should spell out and discuss–in clear, unambiguous language–the expectations for the future review period. More is better than few. Use objective measurements whenever possible. Subjective analysis should be a severe exception, not a rule. If you really can’t measure it yourself, what makes you think an employee can?
Performance reviews are dead. Long live performance reviews. I’m fine with burying the old, HR-driven process that included so many cumbersome “extras,” provisos and “qualifications,” as long as we replace it with something that clearly defines expectations, provides measurements for those expectations, and follows up on the performance to those expectations.
Anything else is simply accountability avoidance. Let’s don’t do that, ok?
Be Brazen.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jun 15, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Outsourcing is a viable business option, and it’s here to stay. And it’s nothing new — we’ve been outsourcing some or all of the human resources functions for decades (think 401k admin, for example). Having said that, to what criteria do we manage these providers? More importantly, what criteria do we/should we use when selecting outsourcing partners?
Normally, outsourcing human resources — at any level — is a balanced combination of task management and results measurement. In other words, we typically outsource those high-volume, repeatable tasks, and measure a provider’s efficacy on the demonstrated success of accomplishing those tasks.
And, from my view, we need to keep 3 things in mind when selecting these outsourcing partners:
Task management. Are they capable of accomplishing the full range of tasks that we require, specifically as we require them done?
In other words, will they, can they, do it “our way,” or will our employees have to adapt to “their way,” out of provider convenience and consistency?
Results measurement. How will we measure the success of task accomplishment mentioned above? Again, will those measurements be a subset of what we already use and are accustomed to today, or will the measurements for success be those determined or offered solely by the new provider?
Best results, of course, come from integrating an outsourcer into OUR organization, including using established, valid measurements.
What else can they offer, that creates value in our world, that we may not have specifically been seeking? I have a large client who wanted to outsource virtually all task-driven efforts within benefits, compensation, and even some employee relations. The provider, however, demonstrated a method for outsourcing full-cycle recruitment that my client had never before considered. This value-added offering put that provider over the top.
In short, measure current and future outsourcers as you would any other business function: by a combination of the things they do measured against the results they deliver.
And hold their toes to the fire…
(I have no idea of the origins of that phrase…!)
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 28, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Should we use 360-degree evaluations to determine how well our managers are “managing?”
My answer will be brief, followed by some applicable humor (well, it’s funny to me…)
Management efficacy should be evaluated by measurement, not popularity. Don’t ask the question if the answers aren’t actionable. In other words, if the manager is kicking butt on all measurable fronts, what would you have him or her change if a survey came back with suggestions?
The right answer, of course, is nothing.
Having said that…
What would you like to hear them say?
Three friends of Thibodeaux’s from the local Cajun congregation were asked, “When you’re in your casket, and friends and congregation members are mourning over you, what would you like dem to say?
“Jacque said: “I would like dem to say I was a wonderful husband, a fine spiritual leader, and a great family man.
Ovide commented: “I would like dem to say I was a wonderful teacher and servant of God who made a huge difference in people’s lives.
“Then it was Boudreaux’s turn to said somethon: “I’d like dem to say, “Look at dat!!!!, he’s moving!”
Measure managers by results, not popularity or wishful thinking.
KB
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 28, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Uncategorized
Bullies. Jerks. Egomaniacs.
All have been used to describe domineering bosses. Leaders who are abusive, raise their voices, and intimidate. Personally, I call them something else.
Failures.
A leader who resorts to intimidation, brow-beating, threats and coercion is self-admitting the inability to successfully lead. I call it “business card leadership.” The sole source of this leader’s authority comes form a business card that says “you must obey me.”
Remove the business card, and these unsuccessful leaders couldn’t get a wolf to follow them while carrying raw meat.
Here’s a suggestion: “Be nice.”
For movie fans, remember the movie “Roadhouse” with Patrick Swayze? He’s a “cooler” (apparently some bigwig bouncer), and in one scene is giving other bouncers the rules. His commentary goes something like this:
All you have to do is follow three simple rules. One, never underestimate your opponent. Expect the unexpected. Two, take it outside. Never start anything inside the bar unless it’s absolutely necessary. And three, be nice.
He ends this conversation with the parting statement, “I want you to remember that it’s a job. It’s nothing personal.”
We could do well to internalize those three instructions above:
1. Expect the unexpected. “Stuff” happens. Remember that leading is only difficult “when it’s difficult.” When everything is running smoothly, all playing well with each other, everyone working at full competency, leading is easy. When something breaks down — and it will — it takes some skill.
2. Take it outside. Reprimand in private. Coach in private. never get emotional in a crowd. When you force defensiveness, career-altering emotions come into play. If you yell with others around, it’s apparent to others you are incapable of leading effectively. is that what you want?
3. Be nice. That’s right, be nice. At the end of the day, if someone simply refuses to be coached, comply with suggestions, etc., you can always fall back on “because I said so.” Don’t lead with that. Be nice. Calm voice. Phrase your demands as a question; reasonable (read :”keepers”) employees don’t really think a task question from their boss actually has a “no” potential response. It’s just courtesy. be nice.
And finally, remember this isn’t your life… it’s a job. It’s not a calling (for most of us), it’s employment. A way to make a living. A way to pay for the things we do when we AREN’T working. Think of it that way, and remember when you lose control, “your leadership is showing,’ and it’s not the best example to set.
…and be nice.
Cheers.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Mar 5, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Miscellaneous Business Topics
Do you want to win, or to change behavior?
This is a question I frequently ask clients when discussing how best to approach someone in a (usually) tough conversation or conflict. As leaders, if we want to “win” the discussion, we simply flash our business card, tell ’em “because I said so” and to get back their butts back to work. Immediately solves the issue at hand.
But what problems does the jerk-boss approach create in its wake? Does it fix enough to overcome the negativity of the process? Does it actually change behavior?
Yeah, no. It certainly doesn’t change behavior. At best, it creates mindless drones, waiting for another direct order to determine what they should do. At worst, it creates a disgruntled malcontent, sowing discord and malice among peers and blindly adhering to your rules, even if they damage the outcome. A behavior I call malicious compliance. You’ve seen it before — it’s when an employee does something they clearly know was wrong, and when asked ‘why,’ quickly responds “Because you told me to.”
We know these people. Bad news, hoss; we likely created them.
If you want to win, you can. Instructions above (jerk). If you want to change behavior, it’s as simple, just a bit more involved. Direct communications are always fine, just remember that if you want someone to change their behavior willingly, you’ll need to communicate in a manner they can accept and internalize. In all likelihood, yelling, screaming and saying “because I said so” are not “…a manner they can accept and internalize.”
Remember, it’s a clear sign of weakness if you must rely solely on your position to get things done. We can pay someone a whole lot less for those same results.
A good manager never has to remind others of his or her position; a good subordinate never has to ask.
Be Brazen.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jan 28, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
CNNMoney.com recently reported the results of a surprising survey: Year-to-date CEO departures are up almost 10% from 2005.
Up almost 10%. That’s a big increase.
Ford Motor Company, HP (God, what a mess!), Viacom… all these are high profile organziations with recent chief executive changes; the truth is, however, that many of the almost-1,000 CEOs that left their jobs this year were from companies much like yours. Not necessarily a newsworthy event to CNNMoney.com, but significant nonetheless.
Why are these CEOs leaving, I wonder? The CEO job is, purportedly, the pinnacle — the crowning achievement of a management professional. Why, then, the departures? Is it disappointment? Apathy? Lack of motivation? Excessive oversight?
Hard to say, since it’s likely all this and still more. The attention on the CEO’s office has never been greater; the penalty for failures, even short term ‘blips,’ can be painful. New SEC oversight for publicly-traded companies has supported short-term positions in leadership — an unintended consequence of recent legislation.
During a recent CEO search, most candidates are sizing up my opportunity much more closely than I’ve ever seen in the past. they want details on the predecessor’s successes and failures, reasons for leaving, and detailed background on Boards of Directors. All this is good, of course, as it increases the likelihood of a solid match. It also, however, points out that the CEO position is no longer this “holy grail” of an opportunity; people are evaluating it much more for personal fit and likelihood of success, regardless of short-term financial value.
Regardless, it’s an issue we must contend with. Short-term results begats short-term leadership… no way around that. Should our focus really be so close-in, or should we create, manage, and lead our organizations for the longer haul??
Can we do that with frequent changes at the CEO chair?
I don’t know for sure… but I doubt it.
