There clearly are several significant workplace trends looming in front of us that we would do well to recognize. I’ve mentioned many of them here in this blog. Additionally, other authors, consultants, and practitioners have also done a good job of trying to predict the future.
As with all pseudo-science, however, some of it is pure bunk.
For instance:
Baby-boomer retirement, and its purported “sucking sound” on available talent, is quite possibly much ado about nothing. Let’s look at it logically: The definition of a baby-boomer is someone born between 1947 and 1963 – spanning almost 2 decades. Couple that with the current trend of later retirement, and you have a group of people born over a 20-year timeframe, retiring individually 55-75 years later at various ages. At best, it’s a non-event; at worst, it’s generational in nature, and very specific to population demographics — for instance, it’s clearly more prevalent in the midwest than in either coast, or in the top 10 most populated metroplitan areas.
Organizations are realizing that generational issues are not materializing as expected. No big surprise, really. We’ve been dealing with diverse workforces for a hundred years, including race, gender, and age — “generational” differences aren’t any more significant, and merely require purposeful thought to overcome. Workers do not have to view society, the world, and the workplace equally to be productive. Frankly, I believe we’ll see more of employees just “coming to work to work,” and less senseless attention on those things that don’t directly effect their ability to be productive.
So, when futurists write columns and books, and read the tea leaves to determine where we’re headed, use your noodle and some common sense before blindly drinking the Kool-aid.
A big trend that does needs attention – there is clearly a growing dearth of leadership talent available. This isn’t as much a function of baby-boomers leaving as it is our desire for new, fresh leadership at a time when the leadership “bench strength” is at its weakest. Many hyper-performing employees don’t necessarily view management as a logical progression from their current assignment, and we haven’t done a good job of painting a favorable picture of becoming a leader (think SOX requirements, jail terms, bad publicity for poor performance, etc.). Further, many of those extended-career boomers don’t necessarily want to work that “extension” as a high-stress leader. We better start growing managers and leaders – and fast!
In short, many real trends, contrary to those consistently broadcast like chicken little’s falling sky, are as much a “movement” in the workplace as they are trends.
This question is a regular in executive circles… are leaders “made” or “born?” Do we have to find that person who by birthright is destined for leadership greatness, or can we cultivate, foster, and nurture someone with currently-unrealized potential to be that leader?
First I would ask, does it really matter? Is this just another stupid consultant-academic exercise, or are we looking for excuses for those performing like crap? Makes you scratch your head, eh?
Combat Leadership
Leadership is necessary in combat, but doesn’t hold its definition there; it may do so for current and/or former members of the military (of which I’m proudly included), but not necessarily the rest of the world. I’ve known many combat leaders who could only purportedly “lead” while in combat. They were ineffective without a crisis. Combat needs leaders; we don’t require combat, though, to have leaders. Long-term organizational leaders don’t have the “luxury” of crisis to be effective. Staving off crises to begin with–that’s leadership.
Critical Leadership
To use simple criticality as the overarching criteria, then trauma surgeons would be more of a leader than a high-performing CEO, merely because of job function. I don’t agree with that thinking, either. Again, crisis management — maintaining a calm, authoritative head under pressure — is an incredibly valuable skill. But it’s not the core foundation for effective leadership.
Leaders are made, not born. It’s easier, of course, to start with someone who has a known propensity (assessments or demonstrated performance) to “learn to lead.” It’s not, however, a necessity. If we take the time and effort, and are willing to marshal the appropriate resources, we can make the leaders of tomorrow from within our existing organization.
Additionally, leadership is entirely situational, which drives people to say things like “She has no potential to become a leader.” They actually mean “Given what I know about leadership from my experiences, this person doesn’t fit that description.” They could easily become an incredible leader elsewhere, as many have proven out in other organziations. the converse is also true: Given again that leadership is largely situational, a successful leader in one organization
may or may not be completely successful in another. Change the dynamics, change the opportunities for success.
I also believe that management and leadership are inextricably linked, so I don’t spend huge amounts of time trying to split hairs on the definitions. That, of course, is a posting in and of itself, so I’ll save the details for later.
Christmas is almost here! With that comes the end-of-year reflections on our development goals we set for this year and reconsider those planned for the coming year. I’d like to make your search for new development targets easy this year and do what a good coach normally wouldn’t: tell you what to do. (more…)
I mentioned earlier that leaders must lead from the front. I observed something last week that reminds me that they must also lead “from the ground.”
No matter who we are, what title we have, how many people are working for us, or how much money we make… we can never forget that we lead others, and that those others are the ones who are on the ground — the front lines — of our organizations. Making money.
You may be able to manage from your office on the 32nd floor, or the front corner of your plant, or from A-space, downtown offices detached from the real operations. You can manage from there, but you cannot lead from there.
To lead, you’ve got to come down the elevator, go to the back of the plant, or hop on an airplane and head to “where the action is,” on the ground.
An example: I was in Dallas last week on business. While there, I stayed at a Marriott Suites close to Love Field. At the time of my visit, there was also a national sales force meeting there (I’ll let the company remain nameless… for now). On the 12th (top) floor, this hotel had a “concierge” lounge; you know, the ones with a small bar, free food, quiet atmosphere to end a day.
Only it wasn’t quiet today. The management — only the senior management — of this sales force was staying on the top floor where they had concierge access. And they were a bit rowdy, to say the least. That’s neither here nor there, as my stay was going to be brief regardless. Afterwards, I went downstairs to the lobby lounge to wait for a client of mine… we were going to go have dinner.
So, here I am in the lobby lounge, twiddling my thumbs and people-watching. It’s strangely crowded for a Thursday night. The group nearest me is almost a dozen strong, mostly men, and they quite obviously were part of this same sales organization I mentioned above. Only these guys were ground-level troops, not uppity-ups like the ones in the concierge lounge. These guys were the ones who just woke up every day, went to work, and made that company money. Lots of money.
And they were not happy. They were railing on about the VP and Manager who, apparently, were otherwise too occupied to go to dinner with them. Like me, they obviously knew where they were. One of these sales guys had a neat idea: seems his buddy back home (same company) had recently been recruited by a competitor, and that recruiting executive, coincidentally, was in Dallas. Why don’t we, he said, call this guy and see if we can get together for a drink?? All but 2 of the guys agreed, so he made the call.
The competitor executive, probably reeling in surprise at his incredibly good fortune, agreed to meet the guys — at a fairly upscale steakhouse to buy them dinner. To heck with a couple of drinks, this guy was going in for the kill.
All but the 2 dissenting voters went to dinner.
My client showed up shortly thereafter, so I had to leave, or I might have stayed in that lobby bar until those guys came back, just hoping to pick up on some more of that conversation.
The folks staying on the 12th floor were so self-absorbed that they forgot to lead. They didn’t realize that leaders do so from in front and on the ground — managers can manage from a distance (though even with managers, I’d argue about their effectiveness in doing so).
Did they lose their entire sales force? Unlikely. These things are always easier to discuss than to pull off successfully (that’s experience talking). Regardless, those sales guys now had a great contact — on a personal, first-name basis — at a competitor. And they were interested enough to spend their free time while at a company-sponsored sales event.
Pretty bold.
And damned foolish on the part of those managers in that 12th floor lounge.
We lead; as such, we are essential for successful, growing organziations, to be sure. But never, ever, forget who actually makes the money on a daily basis. It’s them, those contributors on the ground, fighting the fight each and every day, and we must stay focused on caring for, providing for, and recognizing their worth to our organziations.
Far too many organizations spend too much of their time and money trying to figure out why their employees are leaving. Maybe the question they should be asking themselves is “why would they want to stay?”
Turnover costs are a fact of life, and some are harder to quantify than others – like losing a great employee that was really starting to make a difference in the business. I think the best way to start reducing turnover is to look at some of the causes. (more…)
Finding and keeping talented employees is at or near the top of nearly every senior leadership survey I’ve seen lately. Seems like the time should be right for the talent management gurus to show off their stuff and make a bundle. Throw a bunch of money at it and see what that gets you.
Guess what, leaders? Your talent doesn’t want to be managed any more than you do.
They want you to put your leadership pants and skirts on and create a work environment where they’re motivated and challenged to do exceptional work.
