Tag

Relationships Archives - Page 37 of 52 - How to be Awesome at Your Job

321: Making Meetings Meaningful with Mamie Kanfer Stewart

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Mamie Stewart says: "It's really everybody's responsibility to have an effective meeting."

Mamie Stewart shares her expertise in planning (and declining!) meetings, substitutes to the traditional meetings, and making meetings more beneficial and productive for everyone.

You’ll Learn:

  1. How to decline a meeting so well, that they may just thank you for doing so
  2. Ideal alternatives to meetings
  3. Best practices for achieving your expected outcome in meetings

About Mamie

Mamie Kanfer Stewart is the author of Momentum: Creating Effective, Engaging, and Enjoyable Meetings. Her company, Meeteor, helps teams and organizations build healthy meeting culture. As a coach, speaker, writer, and trainer, Mamie has helped thousands of people improve their meetings and how they collaborate. Mamie has been featured in Forbes, Inc, and Fast Company. She is a regular contributor on The Price of Business and is the host of The Modern Manager podcast.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Mamie Stewart Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Mamie, thanks so much for joining us here on the How To Be Awesome At Your Job podcast.

Mamie Stewart

Thank you so much for having me, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I want to hear first and foremost about, you do piano sing-alongs on a regular basis. What is the story here?

Mamie Stewart

Yeah, I love piano sing-alongs. I grew up playing piano, and I kind of played on and off, but in total probably about 13 years of lessons. But I never quite got into classical music, and even jazz wasn’t quite the thing for me, although I studied both for many years. And then about 10 years ago we were on a family business trip and we were in a bar, and one of our customers was playing the piano and everyone was singing along. And I was just watching the scene – I was in my mid 20s at the time – and I was like, “I want to be that person at the piano. I want to create this environment for other people. That looks like so much fun.”
So, I went home from that trip and I started playing again, and I play using guitar chords. So I use lyrics with guitar chords and I can figure out the melody in my right hand – I took enough lessons that the piano’s a really intuitive instrument for me. And now I basically only play pop songs and the whole family gets together. And we do it for parties, we’ll do it just hanging around the house with my kids and my cousins and my nieces and nephews. And we just went on another family business trip a couple of weeks ago and we did it on the business trip. And it was really fun watching my dad, because he was so proud of me. And it was really fun to be there with all of our customers again and I was actually that person at the piano, making the music happen.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, that’s great. It just sounds so wholesome, in terms of family fun, as opposed to everyone’s on their iPad, zoning out in their own little worlds.

Mamie Stewart

Yeah, it’s really incredible when people come together like that. And I used to hate the piano because it felt like such as solo instrument to me. It’s always tucked in the corner and you can’t take it with you and sit around a bonfire. And so for a long time I didn’t like it as the instrument that I was good at. And I really wanted to learn guitar, which I since have, but actually play a lot more piano than guitar, because the power of the piano to bring people together to sing like that is just amazing. And it’s so fun when everybody’s crowded around and leaning over my shoulder and screaming out what songs they want next. It’s a lot of fun, and fun for all ages.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, it sounds like an effective meeting, if I may. How’s that for a segway?

Mamie Stewart

Nice.

Pete Mockaitis

So you’ve got a company Meeteor – clever name, like meteor with two Es before the first E. So, what’s it all about?

Mamie Stewart

So, Meeteor is all about meetings, obviously. And we used to be a technology company, and now we are more of a training and coaching and consulting company. So, we focus primarily on helping organizations and teams build effective meeting practices. And we do that by offering trainings and courses and workshops, and through coaching. So we work with a lot of teams to help them think about their collaboration practices from a broader perspective, of which meetings is one of them. But then really thinking about, what are the kinds of meetings that you’re having and how do you implement those effective meeting practices?

Pete Mockaitis

Excellent, thank you. Okay, so I want to touch on that point right there. You said you were a technology company and so you were doing software. Now you’re not. So maybe we could just quickly hit that point. What’s your take on the pros, cons, limitations of, and what’s available when it comes to meeting apps?

Mamie Stewart

So, I love technology. I’m not a technologist, I don’t know how to code. I tried it once and it was not for me. But I really believe in the power of technology to help us do our best work. And when it comes to meetings, when you have to plan an agenda, and you need to take notes, and you want that information to be available in lots of different places to all the different stakeholders that need to be informed of meetings’ outcomes, technology is wonderful. So, it can simplify and streamline your process, do wonderful things.
And there are quite a few good meeting apps that exist right now. So, a couple of them, if people are interested – BeNote is a great one, Instant Agenda, Lucid Meetings, Wisembly Jam. There’s a whole bunch out there and they’re all different. They all have a unique kind of perspective. Some of them feel a bit more corporate, some of them feel a little bit more cool and hip, some of them have more structure where they help you build an agenda using the different buckets that you need to think through, some of them are more free-flow. So they’re kind of all over the place, but it’s really about what you need to integrate with your own technology and what you need as a meeting planner or participant to get the most out of your meetings.

Pete Mockaitis

Right. I was just imagining – and this maybe exists, so you tell me – that it would be interesting in a meeting… Because I’ve been there – it’s just like, “This particular content is not at all relevant to me in any way, shape or form.” And so in a way it’s as though this segment of the meeting I could just not be at. And so I thought it would be interesting if there was maybe a live slider on an app that you could just move from 0% to 100%, like, “This is relevant and I’m into this” versus, “Not at all.” And so I guess you’d need to maybe have that in a dedicated device or something, not full of other distractions, which would cause its own set of problems. But tell me, Mamie, does that exist?

Mamie Stewart

Not that I know of, although I’m wondering if the reason it doesn’t exist is because everybody would always be on, “This isn’t relevant for me.”

Pete Mockaitis

Well, but I think that’s valuable information, especially if you’re taking seriously the cost of your meetings and saying, “Oh, okay. Duly noted. Let’s have fewer people in these meetings.” So yeah, I guess they don’t want to hear the hard truth: “I’m a boring presenter and / or I have convened a meeting that is wasting everybody’s time.”

Mamie Stewart

Yeah, and unfortunately that’s often how we see it – it’s never my meeting that’s the terrible one; it’s the meeting I have to go to that’s so bad. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis

There we go. Look in the mirror.

Mamie Stewart

Exactly. It’s the reason we work with teams, because it’s really everybody’s responsibility to have an effective meeting. So if you go to a meeting that you shouldn’t be at, that’s on you too. It’s not just, “Oh well, I was invited to a meeting. I have to show up.” And if you’re planning a meeting, you’ve got to be on it too. You’ve got to be thinking a lot about who are the right people. And there are many practices. I know this isn’t rocket science, but there are clear steps you can walk through to figure out, is a meeting the right next step, and who should be there?

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, now your book Momentum covers a number of these principles. Maybe first and foremost we’ll set a little bit of the “Why” or the stage, in terms of, to what extent are poor meetings just terribly destructive and sabotaging companies’ and organizations’ efficiencies? My hunch is, the answer’s “A lot”, but if you could maybe contextualize that and see, is it just a little bit a lot, or a lot a lot a lot?

Mamie Stewart

Well, the problems with meetings are quite vast and really varied. So, they are costing people their energy, right? Everybody has been to a meeting and you walk out of it and you’re feeling so drained and frustrated. It was a waste of time. You have so many other things to do, now you’re going to have to work late. That is a real cost on people, and it’s a cost for the company.
And we can’t always quantify that but I’d say it’s a cost in lost productivity, and it’s definitely a cost in engagement, which companies are thinking a lot about: “How do we increase employee engagement?” And the number of engagement right now is very low. It’s something in the 20% or 30% of employees who report being engaged at work. And when you’re going to 5, 10, 20, 30 meetings a week, that has a big impact on how you feel about the company and the work that you’re doing. So that’s one form.
Another form is around the finances. So if you’re thinking about it from the value that you’re paying your people to be there – if you have a 5-person meeting and each person is being paid $50 an hour – that’s a $250 meeting. And most of us don’t think about meetings that way, but every hour you spend, it’s not just one hour. It’s actually five man hours if there are five people. And that can trickle down to the bottom line and it can be quantified in finance. And there are some online tools – if you just search “cost of meetings”, you’ll find different calculators to help you figure out how much are meetings actually costing you financially.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. And I guess owning my own business I think about every hour of myself in this way. And so, if I’m in a terrible meeting, I try to be a nice guy, but I feel it – it’s like, “You are stealing money from me right now.” [laugh] In terms of, there are so many value-creating things I could be doing in these minutes, other than this. And so, I don’t know, I’ve yet to just exit, abort mission, like ejector seat, “I’m out of here.” But maybe that’s the right answer. So tell us a little bit of that, when it comes to, you say there are a number of tools when it comes to determining who should be at the meeting and should you be at the meeting. To begin with maybe, is the meeting even the appropriate choice for what we’re trying to accomplish here?

Mamie Stewart

Alright, so we’ll start at the beginning. So, if you’re planning a meeting, the first thing you want to do is figure out the desired outcome for that meeting. And we call it “desired outcome” because it really is the outcome or the result that the meeting is going to achieve, not the activity the meeting is going to be doing. So we often think about meetings by asking ourselves the question, “Why are we having this meeting?” And it’s kind of natural to answer, “To discuss, to brainstorm, to consider, to problem-solve.”
And those are all wonderful things to do in the meeting, but they’re not outcomes. So at the end of the meeting, if you ask yourself, “Did we achieve our brainstorm? Did we achieve some problem-solving? – yeah, you could say that we had a great discussion and yeah, we dug in and we thought about solutions and we problem-solved, but that doesn’t tell you if it was a productive meeting. It doesn’t actually tell you what the meeting achieved, and whether or not that helped move work forward. So, we focus on a desired outcome and we ask the question, “At the end of this meeting, what will you have achieved? What will be there?”
It’ll be something like a list of potential ideas for further investigation, or a decision that’s made and agreed upon, or a plan for the next three months with clear metrics for success, or alignment on this complicated information that we need to have a shared agreement on how to move forward. It can be written in millions of different ways, depending on what the meeting needs to accomplish, but you’re focusing on that outcome.

Pete Mockaitis

I think my least favorite outcome that I’ve heard for a meeting is, “To just kind of see where we’re at.” And I suppose maybe there’s a kernel of something that’s workable into a valid outcome there, in terms of, like you said – we truly do need to have an understanding of who is doing what and where it stands, in order to come up with, I guess, the true outcome would be, the plan going forward, or an elimination of redundant efforts, would be the success for that meeting.

Mamie Stewart

Yes, and that does happen on occasion. We say meetings that are about sharing information usually aren’t meant to be meetings. So there are lots of different ways and alternatives to meetings, so we can talk about those for a minute. You can send an email if it’s just, “Here’s some information you all need to know. Here’s an email that explains it.”
If you need people’s input on something but you don’t actually need them to interact together, you can write up a memo or have a shared document of some sort, put it online and ask for people to give input. And they can leave comments and edits and ask questions, but they can do it on their own time and you don’t have to bring them together in a room to do that.
You can also use chatting tools or other different forums, and even an alternative to a group meeting is lots of small one-on-one meetings. So, instead of me bringing five people together and taking an hour for the six of us to meet, I could go around and have a one-on-one with each of those people and spend 10 minutes with five people. I’m still spending 50 minutes of my time, but they’re only dedicating 10 minutes to me.
So I’ve saved them 50 minutes, because I went one-on-one, because I didn’t really need them all to be in the room together. I just needed to get their input on something. And it was maybe too complicated to send in a document, or maybe it’s too important and I really want to make sure that they understand what it is I’m sending and I want to talk to them face-to-face. So there are lots of ways to communicate besides meetings.

Pete Mockaitis

So I love that – those many alternatives to meetings. Another one I’m thinking about is just a survey, in terms of, “I need your input.” Maybe you’re commenting on the document or maybe you’re just filling out a survey with SurveyMonkey or Google Forms or Typeform, which I think is so cool. These are handy ways to collect that.
But what really blew my mind there is that one-on-one approach. Not only mathematically is that saving huge cost, in terms of everyone together versus one at a time, but it’s also in many circumstances likely to improve the input that you’re collecting, because people are not sort of censoring themselves like, “Uh-oh, I don’t want to offend these other four people in the room by stepping on their toes or making them think that I thought that their work was lame or that I’m questioning their judgement or their smarts”, or whatever. So you could not only save time, but even get superior input and build better relationships all in one fell swoop by having multiple one-on-one meetings versus the longer group meeting. That’s huge.

Mamie Stewart

Absolutely. Many times it’s even easier to schedule, because finding an hour for everyone to overlap can be really hard, but finding 10 minutes with each person, especially if you’re using a tool like Mixmax or Calendly or a couple of other scheduling tools, where you just send them your link and they grab 10 or 15 minutes on your calendar – it is so much easier to get those 10 or 15 minutes with people individually than trying to find an hour where you all overlap.

Pete Mockaitis

I love it. So then, we talked about when a meeting is appropriate and the alternatives to the meeting to achieve those aims. I’d love to get your take, if we’re on the receiving end of a meeting request and you’re having a heck of a time seeing how that is helpful for you to be there, or even it’s maybe slightly helpful but kind of way down low on your priority list, compared to the other, much more compelling things for adding value for the organization or achieving the key goals, etcetera. How do you do that dance in which you are declining a meeting, particularly if it comes from someone with higher power or authority or title in the organization? It seems like it may not be the right answer to say, “Nah, I’m out.” [laugh]

Mamie Stewart

I wish we could do that, but no, most of us can’t do that. There are there a bunch of different ways you can approach it. So first is, if you don’t know what the meeting is about and what the meeting is meant to achieve or why you were asked to be there, you should absolutely ask.
And it is totally okay to say, “I would really like to make sure that I’m prepared for this meeting. I’m not 100% sure what I can do to be ready, or what value, or why you’ve asked me to attend, or what perspective you want me to bring. I really want to be ready for this meeting. Can you tell me what the meeting is going to achieve, so that I can make sure I have all the information ahead of time or anything else I need to be prepared for?” So basically making yourself look like a wonderful employees who’s saying, “I want to make sure that this is a good use of your time as the meeting leader. What can I do to prepare? Can you give me more information about this meeting?” So that’s one approach.
On the same token you can also offer, “This is my understanding of what this meeting is about. Am I understanding this correctly?” So, “It’s my understanding that this meeting is going to be planning for the next quarter and making some decisions about budget allocation. Is that correct? And if yes, is there anything I need to be doing to prepare for that?” So if you want to offer something up, you can say, “Here’s an idea of what this meeting might be about. Is that correct?” So that’s one way.
If you’re not comfortable going directly to the meeting leader for any reason, especially if it’s not your boss – if it’s maybe from a different department or another colleague and you just don’t feel like they’re going to be receptive to that – if you can go to your manager… And again, even if it is the manager’s meeting, you can still go to them with this perspective, which is, “I was invited to this meeting and I have these other priorities that I know are really important to the team or the organization. Can you help me prioritize here? I’m not sure what is most important. Do you really need me to be in this meeting or do you think that this meeting is important, or can you talk to the meeting leader because I’m really trying to balance all these things and I don’t want to drop any balls?”
So again, now you’re asking for help from your manager, but you’re saying, “I want to do this all. It’s not that I’m trying to get out of work; it’s that I want to keep the quality of work high. I want to make sure that my priorities are aligned with the team of the organization’s priorities as well.”

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, that’s great. You say, “Hey, what’s the goal? How can we be prepared? What can I do to be in great shape for this?”

Mamie Stewart

I have yet to have anyone come back and tell me that it didn’t work. I think most of the experiences I’ve had is hearing from people saying, “Once I came and I asked and I said, ‘What is this meeting all about?’, most managers who are calling meetings, or most meeting leaders actually know what they want to accomplish.
It’s already in their head; it’s why they called the meeting. It’s just that they didn’t communicate it. So it’s not that they are being thoughtless and like, “Oh, let’s just have a meeting for the sake of it.” They have something in their head they want to do. They just haven’t explained it or put it in writing or told anybody else. So, they’re most likely going to come back and say, “This meeting we’re going to talk about this customer and our strategy for how to handle them.” And then you can have another conversation.
If you realize if you’re thinking, “I don’t know that I need to be in this conversation”, that’s a different conversation, because you can say, “Now I know what this meeting is about and I’m not 100% sure that you need me for this meeting. I have a lot on my plate. Is there something I can provide ahead of time, any information I can share ahead of time about this client?”, or whatever the meeting’s about. And you can also let them know, “If I don’t attend, I am aligned with whatever outcomes you guys decide on and I accept any tasks that you allocate to me.” Now you have to be willing to go with that if you’re going to say it, but you’re basically trying to get out of the meeting by saying, “I’m willing to go with the group and I’m willing to take on responsibility for whatever decisions are made.”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, that’s a nice one. I like it. Okay, so then I’m wondering about large meetings, in terms of the whole department or the whole company or the whole team, in terms of, I think some folks have some bad habits when it comes to enjoying having everybody around when it may not particularly be value-added. Sometimes I think there’s some sort of emotional, familial dimensions to the game. What are your thoughts on those?

Mamie Stewart

There’s definitely a thing about inviting lots of people to meetings as a way to build relationships, and I’ve seen this multiple times. A lot of teams use their standing weekly meeting or their all-department or all-hands meetings as ways to build relationships and connection with each other and with the company, rather than for whatever said purpose they’re actually trying to achieve. They’ll say, “This is our weekly meeting. We’re going to go over what everybody’s up to” or, “We’re going to report out the numbers.” But really they’re only doing that because they’re subconsciously trying to create a sense of connection between people or between the organization.
And there are wonderful ways to make connection that don’t involve bringing a bunch of people together to sit through really boring report outs. So, I’ve talked to a number of different team who’ve tackled this in different ways. Some of them have started after-work get-togethers, some of them will go on a one-day team building retreat and just have fun, some will do lunch and learns.
I love this one story about a company – they started a book club that was an opt-in. So you didn’t have to read the book, but if you wanted to, you could. But anybody would show up for one lunch every month, and whoever had read however much, and then they just talked about it. And it was a chance for them to talk about something that wasn’t work-related, and get to know people in a different way. And they chose all kinds of books – fiction books, business books, books on the future of work – all kinds of cool stuff. And sometimes only one person had read it and sometimes they all did. But it didn’t matter because it wasn’t about the book; it was just about getting together and enjoying lunch and being humans.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s great. It’s to provide superior alternatives that meet that objective all the better, in a more fun, energizing sort of a way. I dig it. Okay, so enough about getting out of meetings. Let’s say when a meeting is occurring – what are the key steps after you’ve identified the outcome you’re after, to really have some best practices and productive meetings flowing?

Mamie Stewart

Alright, so you’ve identified the desired outcome, and now you want to think about the structure of the meeting and who needs to be there. So, for the structure of the meeting, there are a lot of different flows. What activities are you going to do? How much time do you need to allocate? Are you going to break people into small groups or is it always going to be one big discussion? Are you going to have any pre-material for people to consume so that when they come in they’re ready to jump into the content and you don’t have to spend the first 20 minutes getting them up to speed?
So there’s a whole bunch of things you can do around structuring an agenda that will help you make sure that the meeting achieves the desired outcome. But again, if you don’t know the outcome, you can’t really design an agenda to achieve it. So you’ve got to start with that outcome.
And then in terms of the people, it’s the same thing. If you know what you’re trying to achieve, you can think through, who needs to be in this meeting to get to that outcome? And I’ve heard from multiple people that they’ll have a wonderful conversation and they’ll get to the end of the meeting, and then they realize that the key decision-maker isn’t there. And so then they have to have another meeting with the key decision-maker, in which the key decision-maker asks all the same questions and wants to go through all the same options that the group already discussed. So they basically have to have a repeat of that meeting.
And it’s really unfortunate, because if the meeting leader had been really thoughtful about who needs to be in this meeting to get to that outcome… If you know that the outcome is a decision and not a recommendation, then you want to make sure that you’ve invited the right people. And sometimes you do invite them and they decline – then you need to reschedule. If that key decision-maker says, “I can’t make it to this meeting”, because usually they’re upper management and their schedules change and they get busy – don’t have the meeting without them. It’s okay to have a meeting without some people, and there are other people who are critical who need to be there.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. I’m thinking back to someone I know who mentioned in his career he had a rule for his meetings attendance, which was that he always insisted that there be a clear outcome and a decision-maker present, and he would walk out of meetings if those two criteria were not met, which is bold. But point well taken, that if that’s your objective, it is impossible to achieve some objectives without certain people there. So yeah, don’t go there if you don’t have the key people in the room.

Mamie Stewart

Yeah. And I’ve actually seen people walk out of meetings before because they’ve realized it’s not a good use of their time. And In some cultures that really will not fly, and in other cultures it’s totally acceptable. Even if it’s never been done before, you have to know the vibe of your people, you have to know the culture of your company and the style of your team. But I’ve seen people say, “This discussion’s really interesting, but I’m realizing it’s not actually very relevant to my work. So if this is the only topic we’re going to cover for the remainder of the meeting, I’d actually just like to get back to my other work, because I don’t really think you need me.”
And teams will be like, “Okay, that sounds fine.” And sometimes they’ll say, “Actually no, there’s another topic. Maybe we should flip the order and talk about that one now, because you need to be here.” And I’ve actually done that in meetings where I’ve looked at the agenda and I’ve said, “The thing they really need me for isn’t till the end of the meeting. So is it okay if I show up halfway through instead of starting at the beginning and sitting through the first half of the agenda that they don’t need me for?”

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good, absolutely. Well, I’d love to get your take then, when you’re in the heat of the meeting, what are some pro tips for keeping that conversation moving toward the outcome that you’re trying to hit?

Mamie Stewart

This has got to be one of the hardest things, is being in a meeting and watching it go off tracks and feeling like there’s nothing I can do about it. We actually just wrote an article about this on our media blog, so you can check it out there. But there are a couple of approaches, and I want to reiterate – this isn’t easy stuff. I was actually just in a meeting with about 20 people; I was not leading it.
And I was watching this debate unfold and it was really souring the energy of the room and it was painful to watch. And I was sending vibes to this one person being like, “Please stop talking. Please stop hammering on this. We really need to move on.” And afterwards I was like, “Oh my gosh, I was totally that person who saw this meeting crashing and I didn’t do anything.” And this is my business; I should be the first one to jump in.
So I want to reiterate – this is not easy stuff, but there are things you can do. So, some of the things that we recommend – and coaches have to coach themselves too – so some of the things I recommend are, one, asking a question. So questions open up thinking in a way that statements don’t. So if you’re interrupting and saying, “It seems like this conversation has gone off track” – you’re kind of asserting a judgment in a way that other people might respond with like, “Stop interrupting us; we’re having a conversation here.”
But if instead you ask a question, like, “I’m listening to what you’re all saying and I’m trying to connect how this train of thought is going to help us achieve our outcome. So I’m not suggesting we stop; I’m just trying to understand the connection.” Now you’re actually asking people to respond and say, “Oh, how is this helping us achieve our outcome? Oh, maybe it’s not. Maybe we could table this for later.” So you can use questions to guide a conversation.
Another approach is to just suggest that it gets taken off the table right away. So this is what I wish I would have done. I wish I would have said in that meeting, “This is a really important conversation that we’re having right now. I don’t think it’s the most important conversation for this whole group to be having. I’m wondering if we could have a subgroup tackle this topic after the meeting ends, or maybe next week when we can find time to get together. But I feel like we have a bunch of people in this room that this conversation isn’t relevant for.”
And that’s also what happens, is when conversations go off track, it’s maybe a few people who are interested in the topic and you start getting into the weeds, but it’s actually not relevant for the whole group, or it’s not going to help you get to that outcome. And that conversation doesn’t need to stop; it just doesn’t need to happen right then. It needs to be taken offline for a different meeting or a different conversation.

Pete Mockaitis

Lovely, thank you. Well, now, any thoughts when it comes to doing the capturing of the notes and the actions and the follow-up activities?

Mamie Stewart

Oh yes. So nobody loves taking notes. At least I haven’t met anybody who says they love taking notes. It’s not a fun job, it often can feel very administrative, but taking good notes in a meeting is a really wonderful skill. And you can develop this skill by practicing. But it’s hard to get engage and take notes and maybe help facilitate and keep things on track, so it can be a lot one person to do. So, if you’re not in that boat of, “I want to learn to take good notes and it’s going to be a thing that I do all the time, is take meeting notes”, another approach that we recommend for teams is to take notes as a team.
So during the course of the meeting, everybody is responsible for writing down key information. If you hear a decision that’s made, write it down. If you hear a next step that’s called out, write it down. If you hear a big idea or important information or something that’s relevant for you, write it down. And at the end of the meeting, you reserve the last five minutes to do a wrap-up. And one person pulls up some sort of digital document – could be an email, could be a meeting tool that you’re using, could be a Google Doc. It doesn’t really matter; we just suggest that it be digital so it can be shared easily. And you type up the notes together.
So you do a little round robin and you say, “Okay, who captured a decision?” Or ask the group, “What decisions did we make today?” And people will call it out, and one person types it up. And you build the notes together so that at the end of that five minutes, at the end of the meeting, you have now notes that everybody’s agreed upon, because they all sat there and built them together.
And it’s instantly shareable, so even people who weren’t in the meeting can be informed of the meeting’s outcomes. So if you were that person who opted out of the meeting because you didn’t feel like it was important for you to be there, but you actually do need to know what came out of the meeting – if there was a decision made that affects your work – it can be instantly shared.

Pete Mockaitis

I dig it, thank you. Well, tell me, Mamie – any other key things you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Mamie Stewart

Just that meetings can be really fun. Meetings have such a bad rap and it’s not their fault. Meetings are really a wonderful way to come together and be with your peers and your people and build culture and move work forward. And it does take some effort, it does take some thinking, but that’s why I wrote the book and that’s why my business exists, because we can help people do it. It’s not rocket science. It takes a little bit of knowledge, a little bit of skill, and mostly a lot of effort, a willingness to say, “I’m going to do something about this. I’m not going to let meetings get in my way anymore. I’m not going to let them be this big distraction. They’re not a necessary evil of business”, and putting forth the effort to say, “I’m going to change this.”

Pete Mockaitis

Excellent, thank you. Alright, now could you share with us a favorite quote, something that you find inspiring?

Mamie Stewart

Yeah, so I have a piece of artwork that hangs in my office by a fantastic artist, Shannon Finnegan. And it’s double-sided. And one side says, “Change is impossible”, and the other side says, “Change is inevitable.” And I love it. As soon as I saw it in the gallery I was like, “I have to have that”, because I find that that is kind of the constant state of being of feeling like, “Oh my gosh, changing people’s behavior, trying to impact how people work, all of those things – it just feels impossible sometimes.”
Our habits and our behaviors are so ingrained to who we are and how we think that it’s impossible to change. And yet, we’re always changing. We’re never really static people; we’re constantly learning and growing and evolving. And so this dynamic tension that exists within change is just something I love and think about a lot.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, thank you. And how about a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Mamie Stewart

So I’ve been thinking a lot about this when you sent that question, and I kind of came to two conclusions because I listen to a lot of audio books and I read a lot. And I love the Center for Creative Leadership – they do a lot of different research, but I just love their work. And it’s not a particular study, but the research that’s been done on the impact of sleep on productivity and how important it is to get healthy sleep, and the diminishing returns that come from working long hours.
As an entrepreneur I started in the mindset of, “You have to work crazy hours and do everything you can to make this business succeed, and you need to drive your employees to get the most out of them.” And that just wasn’t me, and it didn’t really work for me. And when I started reading some of the research about the importance of sleep and work / life balance and all these things, like, “Yeah, that makes a lot more sense. I don’t want to work 15 hours a day. I have two little kids and a husband who I love and I want to be with. And I’m not going to do that.” And if I’m not doing it, I’m definitely not making my employees do it.

Pete Mockaitis

Alright. And how about a favorite book?

Mamie Stewart

For managers I love the book Radical Candor. I’m sure you’ve heard this one before.

Pete Mockaitis

We had Kim on the show.

Mamie Stewart

Yeah, and she’s wonderful. It’s just a great book. I really love it. And for non-work-related stuff, I love the book Zero: The History of a Dangerous Idea. It’s about the concept “zero” and the history of this idea within mathematics and in life, that there could be nothingness. And there was a time where in math there wasn’t a concept of zero because you couldn’t have zero. Zero was not a tangible thing that you could have. You could have one, but you couldn’t have zero. And once zero became part of the world, it opened up math in a phenomenal way. It allowed for negative numbers and imaginary numbers and all kinds of cool stuff that we didn’t always have before that.

Pete Mockaitis

Thank you. And how about a favorite tool?

Mamie Stewart

Well, I already said that I love technology, and I love apps. So a couple of my favorites are Mixmax – I use it for my email and I use it for scheduling, and just it’s a great tool. And I have an app on my phone called Forest, which allows me to grow a tree to keep me from using my phone. Now at work I almost never use it because I don’t get distracted by my phone at work, but when I’m at home with my kids, it’s this horrible thing that I do because it’s like, “I’m so bored playing dolls, I think I’m just going to get my phone up.”
So, my kids now know and they will tell me, “Mommy, let’s play. Can you grow a tree?” And I’ll open up my phone and I will set a timer for the tree to grow in 30 minutes. And basically every time I open up my phone, it asks me if I want to kill my tree, and I say, “No, I don’t want to kill my tree. I want to play with my kids.” And so I will put my phone back down. So, it’s a great tool to keep you from being distracted by your phone.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh wow. And how about a favorite habit?

Mamie Stewart

I love habits. So, one of my favorites is to make a checklist of what you want to get done every day. So, sitting down every morning, and whether you have a to-do list that you’re pulling from or it’s just all kept in your brain – however you keep yourself organized – being really intentional, just like with a meeting, know what is it that you want to achieve in that day, and make a little checklist for yourself. It helps you stay focused, and that sense of satisfaction when you check everything off feels really good. And if you didn’t get to everything, you could even do a little mini reflection. So, I’ll often look and say, “Where did I get distracted?” or, “How did I either underestimate or overestimate how much time something was going to take?”

Pete Mockaitis

And tell me, is there a particular number of things you have on this to-do list? Some people say, “The five most important things, the three most important things, the two most important things”, or “No more than two hours’ worth.” How do you gauge that?

Mamie Stewart

I’m not a fan of arbitrary rules. The same thing happens with meetings – people say, “I like the ‘two pizza rule’. You should never have more than X number of people” or, “Meetings should never be more than 20 minutes”, or whatever. I don’t know, I don’t subscribe to those things. I feel like arbitrary rules maybe are general rules of thumb that can help, but they don’t actually get to the underlying problem.
And so, if you’re being really intentional, it’s not about how many things are on your to-do list; it’s about what you have the capacity to do that day. So when I look at my calendar and I see I only have an hour of time today where I’m not in scheduled meetings – what am I going to do in that one hour? What’s the biggest priority?
And it might only be one thing – it might be writing the outline for my next episode of The Modern Manager, or it might be working on the proposal for the client that I’m courting. If I have six hours available in a day, it’s a totally different list. So it really just depends, and each activity takes a different amount of time. So you have to be thoughtful. I don’t think it’s helpful to just say, “I’m going to pick three things to do”, because that might not be enough and it might be too many.

Pete Mockaitis

Got it. And Mamie, tell me – is there a particular thing that when you’re sharing your wisdom, really seems to connect and resonate and get folks nodding and re-tweeting and quoting yourself back to you?

Mamie Stewart

Well, we talked about it a lot today, which was the desired outcome. That is definitely the number one thing that I talk about, it’s the number one thing I suggest people do. So, if you’re only going to do one thing after listening to this podcast, look at your calendar and for any meetings that you’re planning, write a desired outcome, or for any meetings that you’re attending, ask yourself, “What do I think the desired outcome is of this meeting?” And if you’re not clear, go ask someone about it.

Pete Mockaitis

And Mamie, tell me – if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Mamie Stewart

So you can find all my information on my website, which is MamieKS.com. So you can get my email there, you can find information on my book, you can find my Facebook and Twitter accounts, all that good stuff.

Pete Mockaitis

Alright. And do you have a final parting challenge or call to action for folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Mamie Stewart

Yeah. So, definitely do that desired outcome thing I just talked about. And secondly – it’s kind of broad, but take ownership of your meetings. Whether you’re planning them or attending them, you have the responsibility and you have the capability to make them productive. So, stop looking at meetings as this necessary evil, as this horrible thing that’s going to waste your time, and start looking at them as an opportunity to get work done.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, I love it. Mamie, thank you so much for taking this time and sharing the goods. I wish you and Momentum and Meeteor all the success in the world!

Mamie Stewart

Thank you so much. It’s been a pleasure.

315: Leading with Speed with Alan Willett

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Alan Willett says: "Go beyond mad good skills."

Alan Willett shows how to lead with speed by measuring and tracking yourself, working smarter rather than longer, and having purpose. All the things that are need to stay competitive.

You’ll Learn:

  1. How to work faster and smarter rather than longer
  2. Approaches to accelerate the decision making progress
  3. Why and how to let people “add an egg”

About Alan

Alan Willett is of the rare species who is an expert international consultant, speaker, and author. He has worked with companies ranging from 1 person to some of the giants such as Microsoft and NASA. Alan says that his passion is helping people and organizations transform their friction points into profit points. Alan defines a friction point as “the space where the business needs and the implementation reality collides.” There is always heat generated! Alan is the expert who transforms organizational friction points to produce positive results for the business and the people.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Alan Willett Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Alan welcome back to the How to Be Awesome At Your Job podcast.

Alan Willett
It’s awesome to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m really looking forward to digging into some of your latest thinking. It was way back in episode 114 that we had you. It seems like you’ve had a few new thoughts since then.

Alan Willett
Indeed I have. What episode are we up to now?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh boy, we are past 300, which is wild.

Alan Willett
Wow. Congratulations Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Thank you. Yes, it’s been a fun ride. People are into it. Yours was one of the favorites. It seems sensible to come on back.

Alan Willett
Really, it’s great to be back. It’s a lot of fun before. I look forward to fun today.

Pete Mockaitis
First, I need to hear, speaking of fun, you have a Guinness World Record to your name. Tell us all about this.

Alan Willett
Okay. Well, yes I do. I did end up in the Guinness Book of World Records. It was called that back then.

Pete Mockaitis
Is it different now?

Alan Willett
Yes, now called the Guinness Book of Records.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, okay.

Alan Willett
Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
I didn’t know that.

Alan Willett
Yeah, it’s a recent change I believe.

But yes, so I remember back when I was at Rochester Institute of Technology. In my sophomore year two weeks before Thanksgiving break, two weeks before finals, our cross country coach came to us and said, “Hey, I have a great idea. For RIP’s 150th anniversary let’s run across the county.” Being 19 and young and vigorous, I said “Sure, let’s do that.”

Two weeks later I finished my last final after my last all-nighters getting ready for finals we drove non-stop to California, dipped our feet in the Pacific Ocean, turned around and started running all the way back to the Atlantic Ocean.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. The record then is the distance or you were the first or what’s-?

Alan Willett
Good question. Well, our goal was to beat the Pony Express, which I’m told we did which is very cool. We also beat another team that had set a record previously of 20 days. We did it in 14 days.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh boy.

Alan Willett
14 days 4 hours and 8 minutes.

Pete Mockaitis
Well that is quite – does it stand to this day or did someone have to get up on that record and shatter it themselves?

Alan Willett
Oh somebody – actually subsequent RIT, Rochester Institute of Technology, team did it I think for RIT’s 170th anniversary. They beat us. Shame on them.

Pete Mockaitis
Everyone wants to surpass the previous generation.

Alan Willett
Yes, ….

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Let’s recap for folks who didn’t catch it the last time, you’ve got your company is called Oxseeker, Inc. What’s the company about and where did the name come from?

Alan Willett
Well, that name came from – two things. One is when I looked for names five years ago, six years ago, all the ones I thought were great were already taken, so I went back to an old standby which I coined the word oxseeker back in the ‘80s.

Zen poetry has ox has a symbol of enlightenment. I always thought seeking enlightenment was a cool concept, so I used that word to really now mean seeking excellence because what I really have been doing with my work all along is trying to make organizations constantly better, constantly seeking a higher level of excellence. That word really just sort of captured what I was about.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s so interesting. I did not know that the ox had that association prior to chatting with you.

The first thing that comes to my mind when I think of an ox in the context of intellectual stuff is I think Thomas Aquinas, his nickname when he was doing his studies was called like the ox because I guess he was just really big and didn’t say much and they kind of made fun of him, like he was dumb, dumb ox.

Then one of the teachers scolded his pupils the legend has it, like, “When this ox bellows, the whole world shall hear.”

Alan Willett
Ah, oh, I like this story as well. That’s good.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, add some layers to it. That’s good.

Tell us your latest fascination has been the need to lead with speed. I added the ‘need’ myself. I had to triple the rhymes there.

Alan Willett
Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
Why is it so important to you right now?

Alan Willett
Well, I realized a lot of my whole work has been about that. For example, my previous book, which we talked about before, Leading the Unleadable, was really about how to unwrap the gifts of those magnificent people who sometimes cross the red line, like the mavericks, cynics and divas because those people can really propel an organization forward at great speeds.

If you just fire them, you lose that fire. If you let them run rampant, they destroy the organization, so you’ve really got to manage them well.

As I keep going into organizations, I keep hearing about the increased need for speed. This almost feels cliché because around the 1990s seems like things were picking up. Now they’re really picking up speed.

To stay competitive, you’ve got to constantly be learning, constantly upping your game, constantly providing better value to your customers or to your organization and you’re just working more. Regardless, you’ve got to be there. To me it’s even more than speed, it’s acceleration.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, so you’re saying just because in the nature of competition and globalization and sort of technology and these forces that we hear a lot about, is that kind of what’s behind it to put the extra necessity these days?

Alan Willett
Yes, absolutely. There’s a second part too which is I have seen too many people just burn out, really creative, smart, fun people that couldn’t take the pace.

What I’ve really been trying to help a lot of people do and organizations do is not just survive, but thrive, to learn to love how to handle this pace and how to handle this pace in a sustainable way so that they get plenty of rest, have plenty of fun but are still setting the beat, setting the pace that is right for today’s competition.

Pete Mockaitis
Then that sounds like a little bit of a tension there in terms of being speedy and also not burning out, so what are some of the pro tips to accomplish both?

Alan Willett
Ah, well, here first let’s talk about that balance. If I may go technical for a minute, do you know I was also a software engineer for a while? I actually wrote software.

Pete Mockaitis
I do. The software people love you because you sort of speak both the languages that connect with the software developers and those who love and manage them.

Alan Willett
One of the things – here let me put a couple things together here with this story. This is about the balance and learning from this.

Some of the things that I mean by leading by speed for example is one, we really want to hit speed to value. It’s not about just furious activity signifying nothing, the sound and the fury. It’s about speed to value. You’ve got to have a purpose, a place to go, something that you want to provide.

In the next part I want to note is that you want a speed dashboard. In other words, like a car has lots of different odometers, speedometer, is it overheating or not, all those kind of warning lights. That’s what you need too. Meaningful, useful set of data that answers the question, “Am I going faster?”

One of the things I did as a software engineer when I was writing code is I learned some techniques to really track my own data so I had that useful data. One of the things I did was tracked how fast I was going, how many objects per hour I was producing of good quality code. The other one I was tracking was how much rework I was doing, how many defects.

I stayed up late one night until like 4 in the morning to finish a program. It sounds like a good idea, right?

Pete Mockaitis
Pros and cons I’d say.

Alan Willett
Well, I thought I put in this extra 10 hours, I’ll be farther ahead.

Here’s what happened. When I tested the program the next day, it was full of errors. I repeated this exercise a few more times just because I was a scientist, curious. I found out when I worked extra hours late at night, my defect injection rate went sky high. I made way more mistakes.

Those defects took me longer to correct than had I went to bed and came up the next day and just wrote a couple of hours of code the next morning when I was well rested. Really, working harder actually made me dumber. Working longer made me stupider.

One of the really things I really kind of worked with organizations and people is not about the long hours, it’s about really smart hours. It’s about making sure you have this major set of data so you actually know you’re going faster and know how to go faster. You have the data to improve.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s intriguing. I’ve read some studies along those lines with regard to a number of different environments and industries.

I think it was similar. It was video game development. They talked about when they have rush mode or whatever the term they use in the industry, like when they work real hard because they’ve got to make sure to deliver the thing on time as the deadline is coming in. They saw a similar pattern across. It’s not just you, but it’s many folks who are doing intricate knowledge work.

When you push hard and sleep less, sometimes your – it’s really quite disheartening to put all that effort in and discover you would have been better off having enjoyed some sleep and rejuvenation and being sane and actually getting a better result on the other side.

Alan Willett
Absolutely. Now there’s exceptions to this, I’ve got to note. But really when you’re doing that type of work, the intricate things where little mistakes cost you a lot of time, be well rested. That simple.

But let’s scale it up. Overall what I’m talking about when I talk about the sustainable speed of leadership, it’s really looking at this as a more of a marathon than a sprint or a series of sprints. It’s really looking at yourself and saying how do I continuously improve and I stick to it for the long term.

I’m planning – I grew up on a farm. We don’t retire on farms. We just keep working. I’m in this for the long term. I want to keep continuously improving and I don’t want to get burned out, tired out while I’m doing it. What’s my engine for improvement? To stay relevant, to stay competitive. How do I keep that balance?

One of the things I’m working on in the book I’m working on is called the four-dimensional balance, which is really about four key concepts: the center of speed, how to keep your eye on the true prize, owning the speed of the game clock, and four-dimensional balance.

Those are some of the big concepts I’m playing with of how to really keep people focused on how to achieve this intricate balance as you put it.

Pete Mockaitis
Now so how does one keep the eyes on the true prize and what are some of the distraction prizes that tend to lead us astray?

Alan Willett
Oh, that’s easy. For example – great question though. Your eye on the true prize. First, true prize for me is a lot of things, like just simply doing good in the world, making sure that you’re really truly providing value to your customers. Some of the false indicators can be, “I need to make a profit for this quarter,” “I need to have double digit growth.”

I know actually some CEOs for example that really focused on this double digit growth. They focused on it so hard that they started to fire people that weren’t achieving it. Later that CEO was convicted for keeping two sets of books. I actually believe he didn’t actually know that people were keeping two sets of books but the only way to stay employed was to have double digit growth, so they gave it to him.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. That’s kind of pushing it so hard that you’re cheating and then in a way it’s kind of like, well it’s so intriguing in terms of the details, that juicy, scandalous situation. But I guess it’s my understanding that people really do feel a great sense of temptation toward cheating when it’s kind of absolute, the only way this must be or it’s just … everywhere.

Alan Willett
Right. I forget the exact quote, but one of the quotes I really like is something that was along these lines. “Chase wealth and it will flee from you. Chase wisdom and wealth will follow.”

Pete Mockaitis
Sounds so wise. Chasing wisdom.

Alan Willett
I believe it is. Back to the true prize. It’s really, really being focused on what you really want to achieve for yourself in your organization.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. When it comes to dashboards, can you give us some examples of all the more precisely great metrics or things to track versus suboptimal things to track? You mentioned quarterly profits can lead one astray. What are some superior things to track?

Alan Willett
Here, let’s talk about an individual for a minute because I know your audience is mostly individuals. Then we can talk about the larger one.

Let’s look at individuals and just say you’re doing knowledge work like many of us have to do these days. Well, a couple of things I try to track is how much value we provide for the effort we’re putting in. Now that’s a really tricky thing to do, but it’s worthwhile doing.

Like you noted in software development, some of the things people use is function points or they can even use lines of code per hour, things like that. Those can be tricky but what you really want is a good proxy for value that makes sense.

Another thing you can measure actually is how much cost equality it takes to get something out the door.

Quick definition of that. Basically you do two weeks of development and eight weeks of testing before you can free it. You have 20% cost equality. If you have eight weeks of development and two weeks of testing and it works great and your customers love it. You have a 20% cost equality.

Productivity is inversely proportional. The better your cost of quality, the better your productivity. That’s a couple things personally one can track to really keep an eye on the prize. Does that make sense?

Pete Mockaitis
Yes.

Alan Willett
Absolutely. For a business, what you really want to be tracking to me I believe is customer loyalty for example. Are you keeping the customers that you want, the ones that you truly prize? Are you growing in the right direction, bringing on the customers you also want and really want to grow in that space?

I don’t think it’s about how big you grow, but I think it’s about having enough and being able to sustain that growth in a way that’s good for your organization.

I know an organization that I work with that was very happy being at 50 people in the organization and sustaining that. When they grew up to 350 people, which the leader at the time said he never wanted to do, they ended up blowing up. He got distracted from his true mission to go after something bigger.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. That’s helpful. Thank you. You mentioned you had four – is it four part would you call it? Four part balance?

Alan Willett
Four-dimensional balance.

Pete Mockaitis
Four-dimensional balance. Can we unpack these components?

Alan Willett
Sure, I can give you another example. Owning the speed of the game clock. I love that when – I like sports. You watch some of the greatest athletes. In my day it was Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, folks like that. Today it’s LeBron James, Steven Stephen Curry for the National Basketball Association.

But you watch these people, the best, they seem to be playing on a different pace than everybody else. I don’t mean faster. It seems like everybody else is kind of has frenetic energy around them and they’re just walking down the court and hit the right person at the right time. They just seem to be playing in a slower pace than everybody else with more results. Does that make sense?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah.

Alan Willett
Another one – there’s a lot of elements to that, how you can own the speed of the clock as a leader. Part of that is the center of speed.

One of my favorite Superbowl stories is where Joe Montana, San Francisco, they’re down by a few points with a few minutes – just a minute left on the clock or something like that. He’s in the huddle and he says to the whole – his team, he says, “Hey, isn’t that John Candy on the third row there?” Everybody looks up and says, “Yeah, yeah, I think it is.”

Joe was so cool, calmed everybody else down and then just calmly threw a touchdown pass to win the game. To me a lot of the center of speed is really this inner calm that everything will work out.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that. Now inner calm can be easier said than done. What are some of your perspectives for arriving at such a place?

Alan Willett
Learning that failure is seldom fatal and that you can learn a lot from it. If you’re not afraid of failure, you’re not afraid of winning either. Does that make sense?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah.

Alan Willett
That’s one of the things I think really people have to overcome. I go on a whole rant about our school system, but I believe our school system sort of embeds fear in people, fear of getting a bad grade, fear of getting something wrong, things like that. Really what we have to learn or unlearn in some ways is to overcome FUD.

Pete Mockaitis
FUD?

Alan Willett
Fear, uncertainty and doubt. One of the questions I’ve often been asked is what slows leaders down. There’s a lot of things that can slow leaders down, but the number one thing is FUD, fear, uncertainty and doubt. That’s what makes people for example, set up a committee to bring … to answer a question that should have been obvious.

Pete Mockaitis
The fear of I am scared to look really dumb and get this very wrong and have my sort of name and reputation attached to it, therefore I will go about sort of dispersing responsibility by assembling this committee and in the process of having the committee you’ve got all those extra people and decision steps and meetings that kind of slow it down.

Alan Willett
Right. There’s time and places for doing things like that. But too often that’s just a delaying tactic to avoid making a decision. Fear causes people to delay decisions until it’s obvious what the decision should have been.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I want to talk about decisions there when it comes to decision making rules or approaches or what are some great ways to accelerate decision making. One is I guess being courageous and not convening a committee when it’s not necessary. What are some of your other approaches?

Alan Willett
I would say there are three critical things to accelerating your decision making process. Number one, and these are, by the way, before you start the decision processes what you should be doing. Be clear about who’s going to make the decision, how the decision is going to be made, and what risk level is acceptable. I’ll unpack that a little bit more if that’s okay.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah.

Alan Willett
There’s actually basically three – four decision making styles. Leaders that are really clear about this at the start do far superior.

They can say this, “I’m going to make the decision. I’m not taking any input. I just want you to know that.” It’s clear. Or, “I’m making the decision. I would like everybody’s – I would like these people’s input to make sure that I have all the data I need, but I’m going to make the call.”

By the way, if there’s a crisis in the cockpit in an airplane, that’s the number one decision making style. You don’t have time for consensus. Somebody’s got to decide, but collecting input greatly improves the effectiveness of pilots.

Number three is we are going to decide together. We’re not going to do this unless we have consensus. We’re all holding hands and leaping together.

Number four is you can delegate and you can say, “It’s up to you. Here’s your budget. Here’s your timeline. You make the decision. Here’s my input.” If you’re clear about those things at the start, you’re really going to accelerate the decision making process.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I think where things really get fuzzy and so annoying and unpleasant is when it’s very unclear in terms of the decision making process. Like, “Okay, we all know this thing needs to get done.” It’s a proposal or a product or an initiative or something. “We all know this thing needs to get done. We kind of know the players sort of who are involved,” but then beyond that it gets a little fuzzy.

I chuckle sometimes because I’ve heard listeners ask for clarification associated with decision making and the answer they get in terms of who has a decision is, “Well collaborate,” which is really a non-answer.

Alan Willett
It is a non-answer. I’ll give you a situation even worse than that, where the leader implies however vaguely that it’s up to the group to decide. Then the leader themselves makes the decision without any input.

Oh, that slows an organization down for weeks or longer because the level of anger is worse than if they said, “Hey, my decision. I’ll take input maybe, but I’m going to make the decision,” so much clearer, so much better, no anger.

Pete Mockaitis
This reminds me. I had a situation where I was trying to help out with a committee that just sort of planned some of our fun in terms of, “Hey, a few times a year we’re all going to get together. We’re going to have some camaraderie, some team building, some good times, so here are the activities.”

I thought, “Okay, this sounds like an interesting project.” I talked to some people and gathered a bunch of ideas, like, “Hey, what do you think would be fun for everyone to do.” We come up with all these ideas. “Okay, perfect. Now we’ll do a survey and see what everyone’s thinking.”

I recall one of the options was sailing. I was like, “That sounds really cool. I haven’t done much sailing and that might be really interesting. Heck, we’ve got some budget. Let’s live it up.” Then I presented it to sort of the senior person in charge of the committee who really did make it kind of seem like, “Oh yeah, you know what? Just see what everyone wants to do and yeah it’s just fun so go do it.”

He just – I said, “Hey, looks like the results are pretty strong on the survey for sailing.” It was intriguing because he didn’t admit to it but he kept saying, “You know what? I have a hypothesis that if you segment the data in this way, we’ll discover that in fact sailing is not the optimal choice.”

It was like, if you were committed to this activity why did you kind of say that we were going to do it this other way? It is like and what do you have against sailing is what I really wanted to know. It just didn’t seem honest.

Alan Willett
No, absolutely. That’s really problems come. By the way, if that leader really wanted to do that activity but wanted people to really be committed to that activity just say this, “Hey, this is the activity we’re doing. I want the group to figure out how to get people really involved, how to make this activity really sing, how to make it better.”

Absolutely leave people room to add an egg to that cake, but you can point the direction and say what cake we’re going to bake.

Pete Mockaitis
That is a nice metaphor there ‘add an egg to that cake.’ Is that the legend? Was it Sara Lee or one of those companies that they had the cake mix and they could have had it all encompassing but they wanted to make people feel like they had a part in the cake making process so they said, “And you add an egg,” so it’s like, “Oh, I did this.”

Alan Willett
Actually the legend is this. It’s true actually. That they were selling a cake mix without adding an egg. This is at a time when people made cakes from scratch. It wasn’t selling at all. As soon as they had people add two eggs, which changed the taste not a bit, people started to buy the cake mix like crazy because people really need room to add an egg.

I really believe that in my consulting work as well. I have learned over and over again that when leaders hand you something that’s done, they do not get the same level of involvement or quality when they leave enough room for people to add their own creative juices to it. When they do that, it gets better and people are more committed ….

Pete Mockaitis
What’s really cool about that notion of adding an egg is it’s really not all or nothing. You have a whole continuum of things from you figure out the activity to this is the activity but you figure out the food before or after or the snacks during or the refreshments or how we’re going to promote it.

There’s any number of ways that folks can have some decision making authority and involvement in doing that. It’s kind of fun that you get to kind of choose hey, how much is mine versus how much is others and what are kind of the ground rules.

Alan Willett
Absolutely. Going back to what I said, your question, “How do we improve the speed of decision making?” Let’s also say how do we improve the impact and results of decision making.

This is where leaders can constantly learn. They have to learn which of these styles to learn when because sometimes you may have a group of people that you really want to own the outcome and to be committed to it for the long term.

Perhaps this group of people, they need to go plant the wheat, grind the wheat, and all the steps to make this cake. If that’s the case, you should send the people to do this. Have them make it from scratch. Again, you point the direction, you say, “I want a cake,” but you let them figure out how to make it.

Pete Mockaitis
It’s funny. I’m imagining from sort of like a corporate speak perspective. Another way that there can be a misalignment there is either you’re using jargon like, “I need you to craft a baked solution that will be a culinary delight.” In a way there are many baked items that could fit under that purview but if a person really has in mind a cake, they should probably say a cake just so that that’s what you get is a cake.

Alan Willett
Absolutely. That’s where I say really to me leading with speed is really about constantly learning how to have the best impact not just for yourself but for your whole organization. It’s learning, if you will, the best language to present these things, the best style to get people on board, and what style is appropriate when.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m curious if we are talking about individuals in a workplace and this person wants to see some more speed right away, what would be some of your prescriptive tips and tactics for right here right now do these things and you should see a speed boost happening promptly?

Alan Willett
Okay. The quick answer of course is to listen to Pete’s Being Awesome At Your Job or reading my books. That’s fun to say. Actually that is true.

But my real answer is I encourage people not to look for immediate speed pumps because to me it comes back to what I said before. This really isn’t a marathon. The running metaphor kind of breaks down because you can’t constantly accelerate when you’re running. You hit these limits very quickly.

But from a leadership perspective, a self-leadership perspective, I really believe what people should focus on is creating their own, if you will, leadership acceleration engine. That is how do you constantly improve, not necessarily every day, but can you improve 1% a day.

Alan Weiss, one of my mentors, said if you improve 1% a day, you’re twice as good in 70 days. Just think if you keep that going, you can hit light speed leadership.

I think of leaders that had such great impact without any political power or position. Gandhi, for example, Martin Luther King, these are leaders that really had a dramatic impact without being paid for it, without being given a title. They’re able to constantly improve, constantly learn, and constantly improve the impact of their leadership force.

What I really encourage people to do is figure out what is the best methods for them to learn how to learn how to accelerate their ability to learn.

Pete Mockaitis
Lovely, thank you. Well, Alan, tell me anything else you want to make sure to cover before we hear some of your favorite things?

Alan Willett
There’s one big thing I wanted to mention, which is this. This is one of the new things I’ve been working on, which is we’ve coined the word ‘embrace friction’ at embracefriction.com. Let me explain what I mean by that. Have you heard a lot about the frictionless workplace? Things like that?

Pete Mockaitis
I know about your take with friction points and collisions, but I’m not quite sure I know precisely what you’re referencing here.

Alan Willett
I’ve seen a lot in books and podcasts etcetera talking about how to reduce friction at work or how to make the frictionless workplace. I think that’s rather silly because friction is natural in nature. Without friction you’d skid off the road. There’d be like an icy road, you’re in the ditch. Friction, you need it.

What I’m finding is too many organizations are actually trying to manage friction away, trying to get rid of the conflicts.

What I really believe is one of the biggest boons for speed we can have as leaders and people in organizations is figure out ways to embrace friction, to take those points where the heat is really hot and it’s like destructive and be able to transform those destructive friction points, the heat of those into the heat of innovation. How can you take those boring ideas and make a better idea out of them.

That’s one of the big things I’m working on now. I just want to encourage people to think about is when you hit those hot points, how can you change them? How can you change the way people are talking about it, engaging in it to put it to a higher level of better value.

Pete Mockaitis
Thank you. Now can you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Alan Willett
One of my favorites comes back to Winston Churchill, “Do not do your best, do what is necessary.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right, thank you. How about a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Alan Willett
One of my favorite experiments that I encourage people to do is help people. Just see what happens. By the way, you should follow the Red Cross rule: don’t help people that don’t want to be helped. But do help people. Do good in the world and you’ll be surprised about how much good karma it does for you and others.

Pete Mockaitis
Thank you. How about a favorite book?

Alan Willett
One of the books I have really been liking lately is called The Essence of Value by Mario Pricken.

Pete Mockaitis
What’s that all about?

Alan Willett
By the way, I believe you can only get it in hardcopy. It’s fairly big, sturdy book. It’s because it’s well-designed. It’s really about why do people pay extraordinary money for some pieces and objects. How do you actually determine what is valuable of a thing, a service, etcetera? I find it fascinating on a number of levels, both historically and for running my own business.

Pete Mockaitis
Excellent. Thank you. How about a favorite tool?

Alan Willett
My iPad with my Apple pencil has been delightful lately. It has showed me new ways to take notes and to really do art.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. How about a favorite habit?

Alan Willett
One of my favorite habits now is when I go on long trips with one of my kids we listen to audio books and that’s just been a delightful way to connect.

Pete Mockaitis
Tell me, is there a particular nugget that you share when you’re teaching some of this stuff that really seems to connect and resonate and get folks nodding their heads and taking notes and retweeting?

Alan Willett
Oh that’s good. Absolutely. Go beyond mad good skills. It’s great to have good skills, but one of the things that we really work on is that good skills is nothing without other element, like the ability to make other people better, the ability to give feedback to other people that makes a positive difference and have them say thank you and you don’t get shot in the process. Mad good skills are great technically otherwise, but having a whole picture is dramatically cool and it takes you to the next level.

Pete Mockaitis
Lovely, thank you. If folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Alan Willett
You can go to AlanWillett.com.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Alan Willett
Absolutely. Learn to own the game clock, which is if you’re feeling panicked and stressed, learn how to look up in the stands and say, “Hey, isn’t that John Candy?”

Pete Mockaitis
Awesome. Thank you. Well, Alan, this has been fun once again. I wish you lots of luck as you’re continuing to illuminate and expand upon these ideas and just keep on doing the great things you’re doing.

Alan Willett
All right. Thanks Pete. A pleasure to be here.

312: Leadership’s Tough Questions with Vince Molinaro

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Vince Molinaro says: "Once you're in a leadership role, that's got to be your main thing."

Vince Molinaro diagnoses recurring problems in leaders today, the mindset of a great leader, and what it really takes to deliver accountable and  transformative leadership.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The four key terms of the leadership contract
  2. Why having tough conversations is so important
  3. Steps to being an accountable leader who gets the best out of people

About Vince

Vince Molinaro experienced a defining moment early in his career when he saw a respected colleague and mentor succumb to a cancer she believed was the byproduct of a stressful, toxic work environment. As a result, Vince vowed to teach business leaders how to build successful organizations by increasing the accountability of their leaders. He’s a leadership adviser, speaker and an author of The Leadership Contract(Wiley), a New York Times and USA Today bestseller now in its third edition, and The Leadership Contract Field Guide, published in January 2018.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Vince Molinaro Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Vince, thanks so much for joining us here on the How to Be Awesome At Your Job podcast.

Vince Molinaro
Thanks so much, Pete. It’s a pleasure to be here. Thanks for inviting me.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh yes, I’m looking forward to getting into your wisdom here, but first I have to hear the back story of you playing at the accordion as a child. Why this instrument?

Vince Molinaro
I didn’t have much choice. I wanted to play the guitar and the drums but that got kind of ruled out. My parents were Italian immigrants, so the accordion is what most kids like me learned early on in their lives. That’s what I started with. Lasted about seven years of lessons every Saturday morning. That’s part of who I am. It’s part of my heritage as well.

Pete Mockaitis
The accordion, the first thing that comes to mind when I imagine an accordion is Steve Urkel. I believe he also was an accordion maestro. Was he not?

Vince Molinaro
I believe he was. I believe he was. It had at that time, certainly when I was growing up, a little bit of that geeky brand. Now actually I find that certainly among some Millennials, it’s a pretty hip instrument to play.

Pete Mockaitis
Excellent. You sound super hip in terms of your content that you’re sharing. I’ll give it to you. Tell me, did you have any tremendous accordion performances or highlights of your accordion career?

Vince Molinaro
You know what? My problem was that I very quickly learned to play by ear. I would listen to music and I could kind of figure out how to play it on the accordion. Instead of practicing all the music that I was told to learn, I would spend all my time at the time figuring out how to play The Eagles and Supertramp on the accordion.

That took over my interest. I was a pretty mediocre accordion player. There aren’t many memorable experiences as a performer.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m wondering, do you think you’d be capable of playing the accordion today or is it long gone?

Vince Molinaro
I could play at a very rudimentary level. I did when my kids were younger and they were – we gave them piano lessons. I did take some piano lessons. There is that musicality inside me that I still maintain a little bit.

I think if anything the benefit is it really introduced early on a love of music, a good ear for music and the discipline that it takes to practice something every day consistently though I didn’t practice what I was supposed to practice, I did spend a little bit of time on that instrument every day.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s great. I also want to hear about you’ve got a great title, the global managing director of leadership transformation for Lee Hecht Harrison. Can you tell us what is that role and this organization?

Vince Molinaro
The organization is a part of The Adecco Group, which is a global Fortune 500 company. LHH is one of the world’s leading talent and career development firms. We operate in 65 countries. We’re the world’s largest provider of career transition and outplacement services.

When companies are needing to reduce staff, we’re able to come in and provide really valuable services that help people through the transition, help them kind of find new work, better jobs faster.

Then we also have our talent and leadership side where we work with companies helping them develop their leaders so they can be effective in dealing with all the change and transformation that’s happening in many sectors around the world.

I’ve got sort of a small consulting unit and we’re responsible for driving the thought leadership for the company and helping really senior leaders think about how they need to kind of help their leaders get to the next level so their companies can be successful.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s excellent. You put some of these concepts into your book, The Leadership Contract, which is now in the third edition. Is that right?

Vince Molinaro
That’s correct. It’s just come out in its third edition as well as a field guide companion book that allows the leader to kind of apply all of the ideas in their own leadership role.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s great. What’s sort of the main idea or thesis behind The Leadership Contract?

Vince Molinaro
It really started – I spent my career in the whole leadership industry. I’ve done it through consulting with hundreds of organizations over the years. I’ve done a ton of research and writing as well as I’ve held a lot of senior level roles myself and built businesses and whatnot.

In the last little while, we kept hearing a real problem by a lot of our customers, which was we’re investing more than ever in leadership development, but we’re not seeing it translate into stronger leadership. We’re trying to understand what’s kind of behind that.

I spent a lot of time reflecting on the industry, what I saw my clients doing. It came down to this idea of I think what’s missing is leaders not understanding that when they take on a leadership role, they’ve actually signed up for something quite important. But a lot of times that is not made clear or transparent.

It’s largely because we have a history of kind of promoting strong technical performers into leadership roles. We throw them into those roles, don’t give them a lot of support, don’t give them a lot of guidance of understanding what it means to be a leader. They try their best, but they’re never really performing as effectively as they can.

That’s where this idea of a contract in that I believe it’s kind of human nature for us to hold anybody we deem to be a leader to a higher standard of behavior. We expect more from people in leadership roles than I think we should. To me that implies a contract. When you take on a leadership role at any level in your career, you’ve actually signed up for something important.

I think that idea is not necessarily new. I think it’s always been there, but today the role is so demanding that we have to understand there’s a leadership contract and then the terms that go along with that contract. That’s essentially the big idea of the book.

Pete Mockaitis
Intriguing. What are some of the key terms of the contract?

As you talked about contracts I’m thinking – I recently became a landlord. We’ve got leases. It’s so funny with tenants. You discover maybe every few months, there’s another thing to put in the lease. We didn’t think of it last time. Not to put that in the sink. I guess we’ve got to spell that out. What are some of the key terms that show up in this contract?

Vince Molinaro
Well, there’s really four when I try to really distill it down to how to help individuals in leadership roles really think about their role. It’s really about the mindset of the leader.

The first term is that it’s a decision. You have to make it. What that means is you’ve got to really think about yourself and define yourself as a leader.

I have found in my work and my team has as well in developing thousands and thousands of leaders worldwide that you find that I can kind of take on a leadership role. Let’s say I’m an engineer and I’m a great engineer. They kind of have a split mind. They still think of themselves as engineers and the leadership part of their job like their part time job.

They kind of all get to that leadership stuff Tuesday afternoon where I’ve got a window between 2 and 2:30. What I’m saying is, “No, no, the decision is you’ve got to define yourself as a leader.” Yeah, you might be an engineer or an analyst or an accountant by training, there’s nothing wrong with that. But once you’re in a leadership role, that’s got to be your main thing. You’ve got to define yourself in that way.

If you know yourself well enough, you kind of say, “You know what? It’s not for me,” then that’s a very noble decision. I think we need more people to be honest with themselves in acknowledging when leadership isn’t their thing. That’s the first one.

The second one says that okay, once you decide then you’ve got to understand that it comes with responsibility and obligation. You have an obligation to shareholders, your customers, your employees, the communities in which you do business. The fundamental obligation is to leave your company in better shape than you found it.

You look around the world today. You see leaders involved in scandals or corruption or other bad behavior and you kind of go, “Well, they’ve clearly missed this point somewhere along their career as a leader.” Obligation is the second one.

The third one that often surprises leaders is I’d say leadership really is hard work. You’ve got to get tough. You’ve got to have the resilience and resolve to tackle some of the challenging things you’re going to face.

A lot of it always has to do around people, managing poor performers, giving candid feedback, making tough calls that might make you unpopular with your team but are critically important for your business.

Sometimes people come in with a fallacy of, “Well, now I’m the manager. I can just kind of put my feet up on my desk and everyone else does the work.” It’s like, no, no, no, you’ve got a lot of work to do as a leader and some of it is pretty tough. If you don’t do it, you actually – and if you avoid it, you don’t appreciate how much you weaken yourself and weaken your team.

Then the last one is really the new motto of leadership that’s emerging in companies is that leadership as a community. It’s about leaders working together in a very unified way, where in the past it was a very centralized, key decision makers at the top. They dispensed the order. The rest of us did our jobs.

Today we’re working in more networked models. It’s cross-functional work. We’ve got global matrix structures. You’ve really got to be thinking about all the leaders and the relationships they have with one another and how effective they are at working together.

There’s a leadership contract and the four terms that I think are really helpful to think about our role as leaders today.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, I’m right with you there. I want to sort of talk through each of these a little bit. With the first point in terms of deciding that you’re a leader. I guess as a youth I went to many leadership conferences. It was sort of beat into my head that everyone is a leader. We’re all leaders.

Maybe could you contrast that a little bit in terms of the difference between we all exercise to a degree leadership and influence and self-management, and all that stuff, versus what you mean by the decision to be primarily a leader.

Vince Molinaro
Yeah, I kind of probably would phrase that a little differently. I would say we all have the potential, leadership potential within us. Then I think you’ve got to make the decision to fully commit to say I’m going to be truly accountable and work really hard to be as great a leader as I possibly can.

I don’t subscribe to the sense of there’s a few of us that have been blessed with these special traits of a leadership and the rest of us don’t have them.

Like you, I do believe everyone has the potential to be a leader, but I think that potential has to be honed and in order for it to be honed, you’ve got to be pretty deliberate at the decision you’re making and make that really firm commitment to yourself to be really deliberate as a leader. That’s kind of my perspective on that one.

Pete Mockaitis
Could you paint a picture for us with regard to the cost or the commitment or the time investment that is really necessary to lead effectively.

Vince Molinaro
I’m not sure if it’s as much about a time commitment as much as really how you think about yourself. If you think about yourself as a leader, then you realize that in many ways there are different expectations of you, to know that you’re always on.

A good example is someone I write about the story in the book. He was a team member, this was in a technology company, … team. Then he got promoted to be the leader of the team.

Now all of the sudden, he found that the nature of his relationships changed, that he couldn’t behave in the way he did when he was a team member, where they would go out for dinner and for drinks and party and have fun. He realized, “No, no, now I’m the leader. I need to behave differently.”

It doesn’t mean that I bring a sense of authority to the relationship. The expectations are different. There was an example of how he realized he needed to step up in different ways in order to lead that team. He still had strong relationships. He just wasn’t one of the guys and the gals as much.

That’s sort of that it’s kind of more how you show up, what you pay attention to, what you’re being deliberate about and obviously that commitment to develop yourself, to be open to feedback and to invest in your own development. I think those become fundamental.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood there. When it comes to the leadership is hard work phase, could you share a couple of examples of the hard work that is often dodged and how to engage in it all the more effectively?

Vince Molinaro
Yeah, the two we hear a lot about is not being aggressive enough in managing a poor performer and not having the confidence to give candid feedback to someone on your team. If you take, let’s just focus on one of them.

If you take the classic story of the chronic poor performer. I’ve played this out wherever I’ve traveled globally. It tends to follow a same story or arc.

You’ve got a poor performer on a team. Everybody knows who the poor performer is. When employees and team members are off having lunch or a coffee, there’s a lot of gripping about the poor performer. “Why can’t she or why can’t he get his act together? We’re all having to kind of put in extra effort in order to cover that person,” and on and on and on.

As the weeks and months go by and you as the manager or the leader do nothing, the conversation shifts from the poor performer to who? To you. Now the gripping is about why aren’t you doing anything to help this person. Either give them training, either move them to another role or maybe they need to be exited from the company.

Finally you get the courage and you decide that maybe yeah, this person needs to leave the organization. You finally do it. The first thought that comes to your mind – into your head every time you do it is why did I wait so long.

That’s been a universal finding every single time I talk to a leader about this. It doesn’t matter whether they’re a CEO or a supervisor, a team lead. If we knew that, if we know why are we waiting so long, then why do we wait so long? We don’t appreciate there’s a price you pay as the weeks and months go by not addressing an issue like this.

That’s only one of many issues you’ve got to deal with. What I talk about in the book is the hard rule of leadership, but as leaders, when we avoid some of these legitimately challenging hard work, we don’t appreciate how we weaken ourselves, weaken our teams, and actually weaken out company.

But if you have the courage to address them in a more timely manner, you actually strengthen yourself, strengthen your team, and strengthen your company.

This one gets a lot of attention from leaders. They all kind of admit, “Yeah, I’ve got a bunch of relationships I’m avoiding,” I mean, “A couple of conversations that I’m avoiding. I’ve got some strained relationships that I’m not doing anything about because I just can’t get myself to approach that person.” We don’t appreciate day-to-day how it weakens us and weakens our performance.

Pete Mockaitis
To the answer to that then, you mentioned courage in terms of executing that. Any pro tips for pulling that off?

Vince Molinaro
Well, in the field guide I kind of talk about really learning how to have tough conversations. I call them tough conversations because number one they are legitimately tough. They’re tough on the person. They’re tough on you. We don’t necessarily like having those conversations, but we need to.

A lot of times people kind of confuse being tough with being rough, which is not at all what I subscribe to. You can be tough, you can hold someone accountable, you can kind of put their feet to the fire, without being abusive, demeaning, or a bully.

What I say is the place to begin is to think about how much you care about that person first. Because if you think about how much you care about that person, you realize then you have an obligation to give them the feedback. Maybe it’s something in their blind spot. They’re unaware of something they’re doing that’s undermining their performance.

I see so many times a person’s career gets curtailed because everybody knows a secret about them but no one’s ever had the courage to sit down and say, “Hey, you know how you do this? This is not working out.”

What I find is that the more you do this, the better you get at it, the more practice you have, the confidence increases and then people just know that you’re a person they can count on to give them the straight goods.

I find a lot of times in my work with CEOs one of the things they value is “You’re going to give me the straight goods. I’ve got no one around me that has the courage to tell me like it is. I need to know how it is.” That’s I think the real opportunity.

What our global research has found is one of the lowest areas in companies is peer-to-peer feedback. You’ve got leaders who are hesitant – so if you and I are peers in different departments or divisions and we’re not getting along, we kind of avoid each other, but we don’t have the courage to kind of sit down and hash these things out.

I think that’s going to be the future of leadership – otherwise we just waste a lot of time and things drag out longer than they need to. I think it just begins with having that confidence and courage and knowing how to have a tough conversation, but it begins with actually caring about the person and their wellbeing and their outcome, their final outcomes.

Pete Mockaitis
I hear you. Then on the flip side of that I think that there are a lot of leaders who claim they want to hear the real truth, but their actions and demeanor, words in response don’t really mirror or reflect what they claim to want. Do you have any pro tips on how you can actually be encouraging and receptive to the real stuff, the truth that may be unpleasant to hear?

Vince Molinaro
I think you’ve got to be active in soliciting it, number one.

Number two I think a lot of scenario leaders often fail to appreciate how much people just naturally will tell you what you think you want to hear as opposed to telling you what you need to hear. You’ve got to kind of call that out and say, “Okay, are you telling me what you think I need to hear or are you sugar coating this or are you only giving me the positive side to the story?”

Jim Collins in Good to Great really talked about our ability to accept the brutal facts. I think that’s where it begins. If you can kind of set the tone that it’s okay to accept – to talk about the brutal facts, to not kill the messenger, then you will see people come to you.

Now, on the flip side, when you are that person speaking truth to power or having to raise a contentious issue with a senior leader, what I’ve learned that helps is if you don’t come across as you’re whining or complaining or blaming, because that’s what tends to get the backs up.

If you come at it with a place of maturity, you’ve done your homework, you’ve got the data, you’re being factual, that show kind of how you care about the company, then that also helps the message be easier to take as well.

I think it’s kind of a dual thing there. The leader has to set the right tone, has to challenge people to not make sure they’re telling them what they want to hear, not punishing people for doing that. Then on the flip side we need to learn how to kind of deliver some of those tough messages in a way that they’re going to hear it without reacting to someone who’s whining and complaining.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. In addition to delivering the tough messages, what are some of the best practices in terms of regular and daily communication to be inspiring and motivating and getting the best performance from people?

Vince Molinaro
It’s interesting. We did a global study on leadership accountability. We looked at – one of the things we found was that leadership accountability was a critical issue in over the 2,000 respondents we had globally. 72%, three out of the four companies, said it’s a critical issue, but there’s only a 31% satisfaction with the degree of accountability being demonstrated by leaders globally.

We found that pattern, it doesn’t matter whether we collected the data in North America, South America, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Europe, it was the same pattern. It was quite stunning actually. I was not expecting that.

But one of the things we also found is that there was a difference, a connection between strong leadership accountability and company performance, where industry leading companies just surpassed the rest of the companies on a number of areas.

One in particular that was interesting is we asked the respondents, “Think about the leaders in your company that are truly accountable. What is it that they do differently every day?”

The first one is that they hold everyone to high standards of performance. They set the bar really high. I would say that’s one of the things you need to do.

Number two is they’re genuinely excited about the company and its future. To your point around the inspiration, that’s where inspiration comes from. If I show up as a leader and I’m dragging my heels every day, you can imagine what impact that has on the engagement me, of my team, and my employers. But if I’m truly and genuinely excited and enthused, that’s a huge motivator.

The third thing they do is they actually have the tough conversations, so people know exactly where you stand and there is that clarity. You may not like the conversation from time to time, but they always know you’re going to have their back and not withhold anything that could be getting in the way.

The fourth thing is they’re very good at communicating the strategy so that everyone has real clarity about what it is they need to do and how it contributes.

The last thing is that they’re always kind of looking to the future, anticipating trends.

The first four are really about how you communicate, how you inspire. Set high standards. Jeff Bezos Amazon just with most recent letters to his shareholders, talk a lot about how they set really, really high standards and how when you set high standards, they are inspiring to people because people want to excel, people want to do great.

To do that, you’ve got to set the bar high. That’s the starting point. Then you kind of show your enthusiasm. Then you bring strategic clarity. Then you have the courage to have the tough conversations when you need to. We can kind of define behaviorally what really accountable leadership looks like day-to-day and the impact it has on people.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I guess I’d like to hear maybe a specific example or a case study where I could just get a crystal clear picture associated with “Ah, that leader is being very accountable,” versus “Ah, that leader is being very not accountable.”

Vince Molinaro
Well, you know if you think about what’s been happening in the world and you think about – I’ve traveled – in the last two years I’ve traveled to 60 cities around the world. It seems like wherever I was landing there was a significant leadership story unfolding, mostly on the political side.

On March of 2016 I land in São Paulo, Brazil. I happened to land on the day when millions of Brazilians are taking to the street to protest their corruption in government and corruption among senior executives. There I was that whole week there to talk about leadership. That’s all anyone wanted to talk about.

But you get to see the negative impact that has on people when the most senior leaders are not being held accountable.

You can kind of see it in corporate performance. The good examples, probably the example that is a good one right now is what Starbucks has done this week with the training. They shut down the store to provide that important training they needed to kind of get a core cultural issue.

That was a very strong message from the CEO to say, “We have a problem. We’re going to fix that problem. We’re going to address it in a pretty dramatic way.” What company does that? What company shuts down its doors to address an issue that need to be addressed?

That’s an example of that accountability. They didn’t deflect it. They didn’t deny it. They didn’t diminish that. They addressed it head on. That’s the kind of example to me that we need more of.

What you generally find is a lot of leaders as they take on new roles in companies, they come in and they always see a gap in accountability. That’s the biggest challenge that I find that they’re struggling to put in place is how do you kind of create that sense of accountability.

Then you see examples of companies that haven’t fared well where leaders get defensive. They make mistakes, but they won’t admit them. You can kind of go on and on and see those examples play out.

But that’s generally what it looks like whether it’s at the C-suite right down to a front line. It’s people not owning their role, not owning when they’ve made mistakes, not apologizing, and doing nothing to rectify the situation.

Pete Mockaitis
You say accountability. It’s really about the ownership in terms of this is my responsibility and I will do what is necessary to ensure that it is made right.

Vince Molinaro
Yeah. That sense of ownership is really important. A lot of my clients say, “We want to build an ‘own it’ culture. We want people to feel like, they feel like the company is theirs.” Because if you feel that, then you bring that sense of ownership every day. You bring that sense of urgency. You just are kind of operating at a higher level as a leader.

Pete Mockaitis
Mm-hm. Do you have any quick pointers in terms of just immediate do’s and don’ts in order to be more of this transformational, and inspiring, and accountable leader like tomorrow, “Do this and stop doing that?”

Vince Molinaro
Well, I think right off the bat is if we kind of think about applying the four terms that we talked about earlier.

The first thing is you need to do – I’ve got a weekly blog that I call the Gut Check for Leaders. It’s always framed in the form of a question to inspire reflection.

I would think about really sitting down and saying, “Have I really made the decision to kind of think of myself and define myself as a leader. Am I all in and fully committed in my role as a leader?” Because you can’t do anything until that foundational question is answered.

Sometimes we let ourselves slip into a state of mediocrity or we don’t pay attention to it or we get so consumed by the day-to-day workload and challenges that we don’t pause and reflect. I would take a few minutes to think about that.

Then I would say, “Okay, if I’m all in, then what am I really here to do? What’s the purpose of my role? What are my key obligations? Who am I obligated to? What’s the value that I’m trying to create for customers, for my employees, for shareholders? How am I leaving my company in better shape than I found it?” Those are two pretty big questions that I think are foundational.

The other opportunity related to hard work is what one thing that you know you’ve been avoiding, and we all have our list of those things that we’re avoiding, they’ll come top of mind pretty quickly. Make some advancement on improving that. Stop avoiding it. Stop delaying.

Find a way to make progress because if you make progress, even in a small way, you are making things better. You are advancing things. You’re not going to be stopped. You’re not going to be spinning your wheels. That I think is critical.

What is it that you’re avoiding? Is it feedback I need to give someone? Is it a tough conversation you need to have with a peer or colleague?

Then the last one around community is research that shows in organizations today, the amount of collaboration that we’re doing has increased like 67%. Now we are more dependent on others for our own success.

There was a time when say 20 years ago when organizations were more hierarchical. I could be fairly independent as long as me and my team did our job in our own little silo, we were okay. Now you’re so dependent on one another.

I would sit down and think, how strong are my relationships with the people that matter most to my success. Where are my relationships strong? Great, maintain them. Where are the relationships strained and how can I repair them?

Those are the four things. You’ve got to decide are you all in, be clear on what you’re obligated to, start being more deliberate and tackling the hard work and strengthen the relationships that you need to be successful.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. Tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Vince Molinaro
I think we covered everything. Probably the part that I would mention is I think it’s really important in today’s, in this period we’re in now with the disruption that’s happening in a lot of industries, with the advent of artificial intelligence, and the whole move of machine learning and robotics, it’s unclear what the future of work is really going to look like.

But I think what I’ve come to really know and understand for sure is that an organization desperately needs leaders and need leaders at all levels to really step up and be strong.

If you are that one person that maybe you’ve never thought of yourself in that way, but you feel you’ve got that potential in you and if you really want to start stepping up, you’ve got a huge opportunity to add tremendous value to your organization and to your success.

Leadership roles are difficult, but when you can build a great team, when you can drive strong, collective performance, I feel there’s nothing better and more rewarding in one’s career than that opportunity to be a leader. It’s a time when we need strong leadership and we need more people to step up and be accountable and help our companies be successful.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. Now can you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Vince Molinaro
A favorite quote is my current favorite quote. I got it a couple of weeks ago from Tim Ferriss, I think it’s his Friday 5 Bullet email blast that comes out. It was a quote that he’s been mulling called the Hanlon’s Razor. It says something to the effect of ‘never kind of interpret malice, when stupidity is a much better explanation.’

Why I like that is I find many times in organizations, particularly in large, complex organizations, stuff doesn’t always work out. In fact, it feels like more things don’t work out than do work out.

I spend a lot of time talking to leaders who are really frustrated by things that don’t work out. They get really angry like, “Why can’t marketing get its act together,” or, “What the hell is going on with sales?” “Those folks in R&D don’t have a clue what’s going on.”

We kind of attribute malice, bad intention, where sometimes I think people are just overworked. They’re not always making the best decisions, maybe because they don’t have all the information. I find it’s an interesting way of reframing those things that cause a lot of stress and frustration. That quote is kind of resonating with me the last few weeks.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, it does me as well. I think about that in large part in relation to the media when it comes to stories just being incomplete or seeming like the word choice is full of bias in terms of “Well, we know how you feel about this issue,” is that I think that I think this journalist really just has too much on their plate in terms of budgets and workload and what’s going on.

I particularly think about when the story is about a document like a Supreme Court decision or papal encyclical, it’s sort of like none of you have just read the whole document, which seems like sort of the thing to do when you’re reporting a story on that and it’s all completely contained in one volume.

It’s like you could read all of that and then you can report on it and then you have the complete picture of what’s inside it. But it seems like they never do. I don’t think … work in the mix.

Vince Molinaro
Yeah. That kind of helps, right? It sort of helps because you could be sitting on what were they thinking. I think that is an important part of people’s realities today.

I think what it also means for leaders, and I’ve been thinking about this as well, is this ability to sort through what’s real and what’s hype because there’s just so much coming at us. I just want to be clear on what’s going on sometimes. It’s hard to do.

It’s hard work because there’s a lot of information, some of it conflicting, some of it biased. Then if you kind of assume there’s mal-intent, but then that just adds an emotional component ….

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, thank you. How about a favorite study or experiment or a bit of research?

Vince Molinaro
That’s a great one. I kind of stay on top of a lot of the science that’s going on. I don’t think anything specific that I would cite. I think what’s interesting is I am starting to see a pattern in some of the research in a number of areas where what we’ve long believed or long held to be true is being upended a little bit.

It’s early days in my conclusion, so I don’t want to be too definitive just yet, but I think it’s a kind of an interesting time where a lot of these things that we always took for granted are being changed. That I think creates new opportunities to think broadly about our future and what’s possible. That’s kind of how I would answer that right now.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. How about a favorite book?

Vince Molinaro
I’ve always had an interest in kind of Greek and Roman thinking and drama, so I’m all into the books on kind of the stoic way and how it plays out in leadership. There’s a lot of those books out now that are really meaningful to me.

That’s great in many ways. There’s a number of those. Ryan Holiday does some great work there. It just brings kind of an interesting perspective to life, which is in many ways really practical and in some ways also pessimistic, which I find interesting. It’s just a way of helping you reframe and be effective in a world where there’s so much complexity and change.

Pete Mockaitis
Thank you. How about a favorite tool?

Vince Molinaro
Well, I do the cooking in the house. I would say that the knives I use to prep and make meals, those are my favorite tools, particularly when they’re nice and sharp and you can do some great prepping. I would say those are my favorite tools because they help me cook the meals for my family.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Vince Molinaro
It would have to be the discipline of exercise and making sure I do that every day and keeping myself as fit as I can. I think that right now in terms of where I’m at is really important to me.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Is there a particular nugget you share that really seems to connect, resonate, get Kindle book highlighted, retweeted, heads nodding when you share it from the stage?

Vince Molinaro
The one I think I stumbled on is something about ‘when it comes to leadership, good intentions are not enough.’ I find that one always captures people’s imagination.

I think it’s because I think that we have a lot of people in leadership roles who are well intended but don’t appreciate what it really takes to excel and be successful, so good intentions are not enough when it comes to leadership. You really need to roll up your sleeves and commit to the role.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. If folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Vince Molinaro
Certainly, LinkedIn is the platform I primarily use to share my blogs and whatnot, so they can find me there. Or at www.TheLeadershipContract.com. They can find out about the books, the blog and other work that I do.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Do you have a parting call to action or challenge to folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Vince Molinaro
Well I think being awesome at one’s job really takes that sense of commitment. I think it’s echoing what I said before. Companies need people to step up and be leaders at all levels. Like we discussed earlier, we all have that potential inside of us. It’s not a magical quality that only a few people have been blessed with. I think if people really want to be awesome at work, the way to do it is to step up and lead.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Vince, thanks so much for taking this time and sharing the wisdom. I wish you tons of luck and success with The Leadership Contract next edition and the field guide and all you’re up to.

Vince Molinaro
Thank you so much. I really do appreciate it and this was fun, some great questions. Thank you.

303: Inspiring Teams through Purpose with Fred Kofman

By | Podcasts | 2 Comments

 

 

Fred Kofman says: "The way to integrate a team is not by payments, not by rewards and punishments, but inspiring them."

Fred Kofman shares how to unlock the power of purpose to strengthen your team and drive better performance.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The first hurdle to working in a group
  2. How to find the inspiration in your work
  3. How to solve the problem of disinformation

About Fred

Fred Kofman is a Leadership Advisor at Google and former vice president of executive development and leadership philosopher at LinkedIn, where he worked with the top CEO’s and executives around the world. Born in Argentina, Kofman came to the United States as a graduate student, where he earned his PhD in advanced economic theory at U.C. Berkeley. He taught management accounting and finance at MIT for six years before forming his own consulting company, Axialent, and teaching leadership workshops for corporations such as General Motors, Chrysler, Shell, Microsoft, and Citibank. At its height, his company had 150 people and created and taught programs to more than 15,000 executives. Sheryl Sandberg writes about him in her book Lean In, claiming Kofman “will transform the way you live and work.”

 

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Fred Kofman Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Frank, thanks so much for joining us here on the How to be Awesome at Your Job podcast.

Fred Kofman
My pleasure, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m so curious to hear, so you had a nice run there as the Vice President of Executive Development at LinkedIn. You just recently made a switch. What are you up to now and what’s the story?

Fred Kofman
Well, I’m now an advisor for Leadership Development at Google. Well, the story is I would say a transition, but along the same line.

I’d been with LinkedIn for five years. They are – I feel that they are all my brothers and sisters. It was an amazing opportunity that Jeff, the CEO, gave me to work with all of them. But after five years I think I worked with almost every executive in the company, so my mission was fulfilled.

I had shared what I can do and what I can help people learn and I felt that the value of my contribution was going to start diminishing quickly because it would be mostly repeats or tweaks, whereas there were a lot of other organizations that could use that and I wanted to offer my gift more broadly.

I agreed with the people in LinkedIn that I would be out in the market and combine the work I did with them with some work I would do for other companies. Then when I went out, some people from Google asked me if I could consider doing a more extended engagement with them, a project that would be more absorbing.

I thought it was a fantastic opportunity, so I just accepted and I’m here. I’m beginning this project of Leadership Development or advising them in the area of leadership development.

Pete Mockaitis
Very cool. I’ve been enjoying digging into your book a little bit, The Meaning Revolution. Could you give us how do you conceptualize it in terms of what’s the big idea behind the book and why is it important now?

Fred Kofman
There’s a fundamental problem that every person that is trying to work with a team has to solve. It starts with a couple, just two people or a family, a small team and is the same problem that an organization with hundreds of thousands of people will have.

That’s to try to combine or integrate the need to have each person be accountable, to do what they’re supposed to and also the need to have each person cooperate for the achievement of the common goal.
This seems obvious. You want a group of people that work together. Every company wants the same thing. We want people to work together and each person doing what they’re supposed to do.

But there’s a hidden problem with this. There’s some incompatibility between these two imperatives. That is that if you evaluate people based on their what’s called OKRs or KPIs, which are the key results or key performance indicators, people are going to focus on their own individual jobs.

Pete Mockaitis
Indeed.

Fred Kofman
And they won’t really collaborate with others and they will even build silos to make sure other people don’t prevent them from doing what they need to do.

Today we live in an illusion where people think they are getting paid or that they’re hired to do what they call their jobs, but they’re all wrong. Every person is wrong when they say, “My job is accounting,” or “My job is sales,” or “My job is engineering.” I think everybody’s job is to help the company succeed, just like every player’s job is to help the team win.

But a defensive player will think that his or her job is to stop goals and the offensive player will say my job is to score. That’s not wrong, but it’s not true either. The job is to help the team win.

You normally do your job as a defensive player by stopping the other team from scoring, but in some instances, under some conditions, it would be better for the team if you left your position and you went forward and tried to score. For example, if you’re losing one – zero with five minutes to go.

It’s a typical strategy that teams will send the defensive players to the offense to try to tie the game. But if a person thinks, “Oh, no, no, my job is just to defend,” they will not want to go forward.

The same thing happens in a company. If you feel that your job is to reduce costs, you are going to be less interested in satisfying the customer because it could be expensive to satisfy the customer, even though the best thing for the company to achieve its mission would be to pay attention to the customer.

Or if you’re in customer retention – I tell this story in the book about somebody that was trying to sign off on Comcast and saying, “I don’t want your service.” It went viral because that was a crazy conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
Right.

Fred Kofman
It lasted like ten minutes with the customer service

Pete Mockaitis
Cancel the account. Yeah, I remember that.

Fred Kofman
Exactly. That costed Comcast tens of millions of dollars in brand loss – in brand, I would say, distraction.

This was a stupid tradeoff that a person made because they think or they have a performance indicator that is how many people cancel the service during your time, when you’re on the phone.

The less people that cancel their service, the better your performance, so of course you’re going to try to convince everybody not to and you will even try anything to the point that you’re going to upset the customers and then create a brand disaster for Comcast.

Pete Mockaitis
Right. Then that’s making a lot of sense in terms of your job is broader than your job description, whether it’s to prevent customers from leaving or what not. Then at the same time, given that there are perhaps thousands of things that an organization needs to do in order to succeed and you’ve got to have some degree of division of labor and responsibility.

How do you think about that appropriate balance between folks sort of executing on their key performance indicators versus doing whatever is necessary to help the organization win?

Fred Kofman
Yeah. That is what the book is about. I’ll give you a hint; it’s not a balance. It’s a relationship of subordination. The primary goal is to achieve the mission. That is the super-ordinating imperative. That’s why you’re here.

If you’re a soccer team, you’re there to win the game. You’re not there to say, “Well, how do we balance winning the game with having more shots or having less goals scored against.” It really doesn’t matter. It’s better to win seven – six than to lose one – zero. You say, “They only scored one goal against us,” yeah, but you lost. It’s not really balance; it’s a subordination.

But it’s very difficult to try to incentivize this subordination because the moment you tell people, “We’re all here to win,” and you can’t observe what people do directly or even if you observe, know if people are doing the right thing or not, because many times it requires judgment or discretion.

When you give people a collective incentive and you say, “We all win together or we all lose together,” you become vulnerable to predators and parasites, people that will come and prey upon the system because they are –

For example, if you pay an average sales commission, like the whole everybody sells and then you pool the money and you pay every salesperson the same, well, all the people that are below average would love your company and they will come and work for you and all the people that are above average are going to leave because they are going to be brought down by the average.

In a sense, average pay drives the best ones away, if I can do a little verse, and makes the worst ones stay. That’s a very unfortunate result in economics that if you want to encourage individual excellence, you have to evaluate people by their own individual performance. But if you evaluate people through their individual performance, you’re discouraging them from contributing to the team objective.

That is in mathematical terms an insolvable dilemma. If you just take self-interested agents and you try to create an organization, you can’t. It just doesn’t work. There’s no clever incentive system that will solve this problem.

The book is about understanding why that’s the case, but then seeing how do you manage this problem better. What can you do?

Very, I would say, surprisingly for me in an ironic sense, the solution of the most material, the hardest problem is soft. I would say the solution to the economic problem is really spiritual because the way you have to integrate a team is not by payments, not by rewards and punishments, but by inspiring them. That’s where leadership or what I call transcendent leadership comes into play.

You have to give people the opportunity to participate in a project that they feel passionate about. They’re not doing it just because you pay them, but they’re doing it because it makes sense, because it fulfills a deep longing they have in their lives. It is done in a way that is ethical and makes them proud. It also gives them the chance to connect with other people who they just crave to be in community with.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, that sounds like a great place to be. Could you maybe help us go from a bit of a point A to point B sort of given what is currently the case in many workplaces? What are some of the very first steps to bring it into that spiritually robust, purpose-filled great place?

Fred Kofman
Yeah. Okay, let’s just say that some of your listeners are entrepreneurs or leaders in existing companies. The first step is to find the deeper meaning of what the company does.

Let’s imagine that I’m a doctor and I go home and I have a seven-year-old daughter that asks me, “Daddy, what do you do?” I say, “I make money.” Well, that’s not very inspiring. She goes, “Oh, well, good.” If she asks me why is that important, “Oh, because I can buy nice things for you.” She’d understand that and that’s okay. We have a nice house or we can eat tasty food and so on. But it’s not very uplifting.

If I dig deeper, what do I do “Well, I cure the sick,” or “I use medicine to make people well, to help them reestablish their health.” But if I go deeper, it’s like, “Well, when people are at risk and they have illnesses or they feel terrible or they are hurt, I help them first survive, and then come back to health,” and so on and so forth.

If I describe that as my job, as my profession, well, I feel uplifted. I feel happy and my daughter will be happy too. She will be proud to tell other kids at school what her daddy does.

I know it sounds a little perhaps simplistic, but if you are running an organization in the market, the people that are buying your product or service are finding some way in which that product or service makes their lives better. It makes them sufficiently better that they are willing to part with their hard-earned cash to acquire your product or service.

Don’t focus, as Peter Drucker, said, don’t focus on the drill because people don’t really want drills. Focus on the hole. What people want is holes. That’s why they buy drills, to make them. The question would be what is the human need, the human aspiration that your product or service is helping people to address and take care of.

You need to know that and you need to feel that in your bones, like deep inside that you’re super proud of what you do. If you’re not proud, like if you’re not on fire, you’re not going to be able to light up the people that you want to inspire. You need to feel it inside and then be able to communicate and invite people who join you in that project.

Don’t invite people to work and say “Okay, come and put your effort and I’m going to pay you.” Of course, that’s the economic deal, but the economic deal will only get you average performance.

Pete Mockaitis
This is really reminding me, Fred, of a fun chat I had. I think I was freshly hired at Bain & Company. I was chatting my fellow consultants in between some training stuff. Somehow it just sort of came up, it was like, “Hey do we do good as strategy consultants?” For me, it was kind of like, the answer was of course or else why would you have ever taken this job.

Then I went on I guess what was a rant associated with, “Well, what we do is we make companies more valuable which is extremely important because folks who are saving for retirement or for college education need for the stocks in their portfolio to appreciate and we help make that possible so that their dreams can come true.

Non-profits and foundations within their endowments have their investments placed in a basket of equities that individually we are helping make. And the leverage of us doing it is so huge in terms of being 23 years old and not having a lot of experience yet and trusted to tackle things that are going to liberate millions and billions of dollars of economic value that …”

So I went on this whole rant and the others were kind of like, “Whoa, I just thought this would be a good place so I could get into Harvard Business School or something.” I was surprised. I guess for me, I call it naïve or what, but I would just sort of assume, “But, of course, you would only choose a job that had deep purpose for you or else you would have chosen a different job.”

But different people, I quickly learned, operate from different starting points in their career decision making.

Fred Kofman
Absolutely. Yet, if you allow me, Pete, to challenge you a little bit.

Pete Mockaitis
Please.

Fred Kofman
I think you missed the most important part of your job when you described the benefits. I agree with every one you listed, but for me at the top of the list, not for me, economically, at the top of the list, the reason why these companies are going to become more valuable is because they will serve their customers.

The real value in the economy is not the mission of giving jobs to people or money to the investors. The real value in an economy, the one that propels humanity forward, is the competition to give value to the customers. That’s what good consultants help companies do. That’s what the mission of every company needs to be.

If not, we become a bureaucracy. But, “Oh look, we’re doing so much good because we’re hiring all these families.” Okay, that’s like 1% of the good you are doing. Don’t forget the 99% because the real good you’re doing is that people are buying your product because they find it useful in their lives.

You have no idea how much value you’re adding because as I say, if I use an Apple computer, it would cost me maybe 1,000 dollars to buy, but I would have been willing to pay 5,000 dollars. Even if Apple makes a profit of 2 or 300 hundred dollars, I made a surplus value or a consumer profit of 4,000.

Now, nobody knows that because there’s no place where I say I’m willing to pay 5,000. That’s something only I know how much value this computer is going to give me or how much would I be willing to pay for it.

I find it a little problematic today when people talk about social enterprises or “We’re doing good,” or we hire whatever people you’re hiring and say, “Well, so many families eat because of us.” Yes, that’s true, but that’s so small compared to the wealth that you’re creating in terms of life richness, not necessarily measured by money.

But we at Google today is the Input/Output conference for developers and just looking at all the developments in artificial intelligence and the assistant and all that, there’s thousands of people here that are just day and night thinking non-stop, “How can we make people’s lives better?”

There was a clip of a lady that had a difficult handicap. I’m guessing something similar to what Steven Hawking’s had. The kind of life that she was able to live because of the products that were created, it’s infinite. There’s no money in the world that would pay for that or she would not be willing to pay to access the level of quality of life that she’s able to achieve through some of these new technologies.

I want to be very emphatic. I emphasize this in the book, particularly in the last part, that there’s no system that we know that creates social cooperation and the growth and development of humanity like a market system, where everybody opts in because they think they’re getting a good deal or opts out otherwise.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that. It does connect and resonate and it’s easy to get kind of lost in the weeds a bit. As we discussed this, it kind of reminds me of the book, The Goal, in a manufacturing context in thinking about you had all these performance indicators about manufacturing, but it’s really just about making an efficient product such that it can be sold profitably and then that is enriching the individual end-user who are engaging it.

I’d love it, Fred, if you could tackle, maybe just bring to life a little bit some industries that might be kind of tricky in terms of finding that fulfillment and purpose. I guess some of them could just be controversial in terms of weapons or – well, I could name all kinds of controversial issues, like weapons, tobacco, alcohol, certain insurance drugs, insurance products, hedge funds.

Could you give us a few examples of how “No, no, if you’re working here is actually awesome in this way.” Or maybe you say, “Yeah, maybe work somewhere else.” What do you think about some of the trickier ones?

Fred Kofman
Well, let’s with weapons. What would be the need that a person buying a weapon can satisfy?

Let’s just say an honorable need. I’m not talking about a criminal buying a gun to murder people or to rob them. I’m talking about good people because if you’re going to be inspired, you have to believe that your mission is conducive to some higher good. If you can’t come up with anything, then you shouldn’t work in that industry.

I’ve never worked with gun manufacturers, but I’ve heard the arguments, so I’m sure you have heard them too. What would be the argument for a noble goal that weapons could pursue?

Pete Mockaitis
It’s interesting, when I said weapons, I was originally thinking of tanks and jets and nukes for nations. But I guess on the personal-

Fred Kofman
Okay, that works too. That works. What would be the reason to – let’s just say you’re working for McDonnell Douglas and you’re a leader and you want to inspire some young people to come work there.

Pete Mockaitis
I would suppose you would say, “We are keeping our servicemen and women safer with these offerings. We can rest easier in our homes, in our nation, knowing that we can resist the threat of a foreign power who would seek to kill and enslave us and we don’t have to worry about that much on a day-by-day basis because we have brave people equipped with these useful tools.”

Fred Kofman
I would work for you.

Pete Mockaitis
All right.

Fred Kofman
That’s inspiring. Again, I’m not claiming that this is true and that there are no weapons manufacturers that are evil. There are weapon manufacturers that work for the other guys too and they create the possibility of aggression or dominance or all these horrible things.

But at best, it’s possible to work for a certain kind of military-grade weapon manufacturer or even a gun manufacturer and say, “Yeah, it’s about protection. It’s about maintaining the quality of life, of sleeping well because I am aware that any thug can come and abuse you.” That’s inspiring.

Again, it’s not the weapon, but what is it that the weapon allows a human being to do that will allow this person to take care  of important human concerns in an ethical way, meaning without aggressing or without hurting other people in a violent manner.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, thank you. Now that that is well-established in terms of your view or purpose in terms of how folks are enriched by the existence of your product and service.

If you zoom into sort of the day-in/day-out of work life, how can we stay connected to that and let the meaning really serve to be energizing and empowering day after day. I’d particularly like to hear that from a vantage point of maybe not an executive or a founder, but perhaps a manager who only has a few direct reports.

Fred Kofman
Yeah, well, let’s start at the bottom, not even a manager with individual contributor. There’s a great story that I found and I use it in the book that refers to President Kennedy’s visit to NASA. I think it was 1962.

He went to NASA and was touring the facility and there was a custodian that was mopping the floors. Just being gracious, the President stopped and said hello and asked him, “So what’s your job here?” He said, “I’m helping to put a man on the moon, Mr. President.”

That is culture. That is a culture that clarifies every day what are we here to do. He was certainly mopping the floors, but that’s not the way he felt about it. Just like it’s different to put brick over brick than to build a cathedral. If you keep the cathedral or the man on the moon in mind, then everything you do takes a different meaning.

This is true, there’s lots of studies. I quote several of them in my book about hospitals for example, and you’ll see the custodians in the hospitals finding a lot of meaning in helping people regain their health and cleaning their rooms and even chatting with them and bringing some joy on the nurses too.

You say, “Oh, some of these are menial tasks. They have to change the sheets.” Yeah, but in the process of changing the sheets, they’re making contact with another human being. They are participating in their life. They are giving them hope when they feel down, when they’re distressed.

It’s profoundly meaningful. It’s almost like a saintly thing to do. You’re going and touching with love and compassion people who are suffering. That’s an amazing opportunity that you only get if you work in a hospital.

I know we may consider some of these things like, “Oh, it doesn’t really matter. You’re just washing clothes in a hospital or making rooms in a hotel.” You say, “Those things are just worthless, meaningless tasks,” but the truth is there are people who do find a lot of meaning in that, but it’s not about the task. It’s always about the goal, the human concern that is being taken care of through the task.

If you’re a manager, then your job is first to remember that and second to remind other people in your team what are you really doing, maintain this awareness day in and day out and everything we do is for that. Everything we do is to fulfill our mission, the service that we’re proud to provide to the community or humanity in general.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. I’m with you there. Then you also mentioned a few problems that crop up within the organization in terms of things being disorganized with disinformation or disillusion. Do you have a couple actionable steps you recommend for hitting these pieces?

Fred Kofman
Yes. You may have a clear mission and everybody could be aligned to the mission, but different people see different parts of the organization and have different opinions about what would be the best way to accomplish the mission. I call this touching the elephant.

There’s a great story of a king bringing five blind men and putting them next to an elephant and telling them to describe the shape of the elephant. They start arguing. One of them says, “The elephant is like a column,” touching the leg. The other one says, “Oh no, it’s like a wall,” touching the side. The other one said, “No, no, it’s like a snake,” touching the trunk and so on and so forth.

The king at the end says to them, “Well, you’re all right and you’re all wrong. You’re all right because the part you are touching is really like you describe, but you’re all wrong because you are … extrapolating the part you touch and using it to elicit or to infer what’s the shape of the elephant as a whole.”

Many times in organizations we do that. People are close to some part of the organization and they think that the whole organization is an extrapolation of the part they perceive. The ones that see the organization are so far away, it would be like seeing the elephant from a mile away, that you can see the whole thing, but you don’t have any granularity and you don’t have the details that are required to make intelligent decisions.

I call this disinformation. Different people have different information and nobody knows the whole picture with the level of granularity that’s required to make intelligent decisions. How do you solve this?

Well, if people are aligned on the mission and they know how to share information in a non-arrogant way, I call it humility, then they can come together and each person can say what they see, and what they infer, and what they experience in their immediate environment.

Then the other people can integrate that and create the pool of common information out of which they can make an intelligent decision together, what would be the best way to proceed to accomplish our mission. But that requires kind of gathering the intelligence of everybody and creating this collective consciousness, this group awareness that encompasses the information that everybody’s bringing.

That is surprisingly difficult to do. After I wrote the book I was having some interactions with General Stanley McChrystal who wrote the book Team of Teams. It’s surprising how in the military and particularly having to fight guerrilla warfare that is very decentralized, they were dealing with exactly the same problem in spades.

One of the biggest managerial revolutions that McChrystal triggered in the US military was the creation of the Special Operations Command, the Joint Special Operations Command as a learning adaptive network, as a group of people who were operating in a decentralized manner, but were creating this shared consciousness to have all their resources available to make intelligent decisions to win the war, not win each particular battle, but to achieve the mission.

Pete Mockaitis
Very nice. Thank you. Well, tell me, Fred, anything else you really want to make sure to cover before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Fred Kofman
I’d say that one of the consequences of this revolution from money to meaning is that you can’t do it as an addition to your personality. You can’t say, “Well, I’m who I am and then I’m going to do this.” The inspiration to use meaning as a galvanizing force, that inspiration requires you to be in a certain form, not just to do things. But who you are really creates the drive for people to follow you.

You have to earn your moral authority from your life. You can’t use formal authority to do this or monetary authority or economic power. You are trying to elicit the internal commitment from people so that they give you what you have no way to extract.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s a nice turn of phrase. ‘They give what you have no way to extract.’ Thank you. Now could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Fred Kofman
Well, this is a quote from Mother Theresa that says, “Not everybody can do great things, but everybody can do small things with great love.” I find that very inspiring that this being a moral hero is not about having super powers; it’s about doing day-to-day things with great integrity, with great care, with great compassion. But it’s something I’d like to … in my life.

Pete Mockaitis
How about a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Fred Kofman
Well, I’ll tell you a shocking study if it’s favorite, but it’s the fact that the level of engagement worldwide is about 12 – 13%, so meaning almost 90% of the people hate their jobs. That’s incredible that so much suffering is happening because we don’t know how to work together and in way that uplifts human beings.

Pete Mockaitis
Right. How about a favorite book?

Fred Kofman
I’d say from Ludwig von Mises, Human Action. It’s not an easy book to read, but it’s a treatise in economics that changed my life.

Pete Mockaitis
Interesting. How about a favorite tool, something that helps you be more awesome at your job?

Fred Kofman
Gmail. Google search and Gmail. I think they’re incredible service opportunities. They’re so well designed.

Pete Mockaitis
How about a favorite habit, a personal practice of yours?

Fred Kofman
I won’t turn on my phone until I finish meditating, doing my yoga exercises, and going to the gym.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. How about a particular nugget, a piece that you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks and has them quoting it back to you?

Fred Kofman
The distinction between a victim of circumstance or being a player and responding to whatever life gives you.

Pete Mockaitis
If folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Fred Kofman
The best way would be to look at my profile on LinkedIn. I put hundreds of short videos and papers there. They’re publically available. There’s also a website called Conscious.LinkedIn.com. There’s also the book on Amazon or my previous book, Conscious Business.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, perfect. Is there a final call to action or challenge that you’d issue to folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Fred Kofman
Yeah, find something that inspires you then live in that space. Don’t waste your life doing something that doesn’t have that juice.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Fred, thank you so much for taking the time to share this wisdom and expertise. It’s powerful stuff and I just wish you tons of luck and all the meaning that you’re bringing to folks.

Fred Kofman
Thank you, Pete. It was a pleasure talking to you.

302: Curing the Under-Management Epidemic with Bruce Tulgan

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Bruce Tulgan says: "Delegation is not like putting your kid up for adoption. Delegation is like hiring a babysitter."

Bruce Tulgan makes the case for why it’s good to be the boss and the massive business costs of under-management. He also reveals the true definition of micromanagement and empowerment.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why and how to avoid ‘managing on autopilot’
  2. The central importance of regular one-on-one meetings
  3. How to use the ‘Manager’s Landscape’ tool

About Bruce

Bruce Tulgan is internationally recognized as the leading expert on young people in the workplace and one of the leading experts on leadership and management. Bruce is a best-selling author, an adviser to business leaders all over the world, and a sought-after keynote speaker and management trainer.

Bruce has spent decades working with tens of thousands of leaders and managers in hundreds of organizations ranging from Aetna to Wal-Mart to the U.S. Army.

Bruce has received Toastmasters International’s most prestigious honor, the Golden Gavel. He’s written numerous books and his writing has also appeared in dozens of magazines and newspapers such as the Harvard Business Review, BusinessWeek, HR Magazine, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and USA Today.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Items mentioned in the show:

Bruce Tulgan Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Bruce, thanks so much for joining us here on the How To Be Awesome At Your Job podcast.

Bruce Tulgan
Thanks so much for including me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, first I want to hear all about… You have a 6th degree black belt in Uechi-ryu, if I said that right.

Bruce Tulgan
Yup.

Pete Mockaitis
A karate style. And I’m so intrigued by this on a couple of dimensions. First of all, the degrees. More degrees is harder and takes longer, right?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah. I’ve been studying karate for 44 years, since I was 7 years old. And in our style 6th degree is a master. And so I had to go to Okinawa to be promoted to that level, but I’ve studied since I was a little boy. And in fact, my lifelong teacher since I was a young child – he now has come here to live with us. So, next door to my home is my office and my dojo, and my lifelong teacher lives with us now.

Pete Mockaitis
That is really cool, that’s really cool. And so, I’m intrigued then, with Uechi-ryu, is that distinctive from other karate styles, and in what way?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, all karate comes from Okinawa, which was the Ruykyu Kingdom and was annexed by Japan in 1879. And it’s kind of a nexus of Japanese and Chinese influence in Okinawa. But our style is a very hard style; it’s half hard, half soft, is what it comes from originally. And it’s based on conditioning the body and practicing kata, which are prearranged series of techniques, and fighting. And that’s true of all classical karate practice. So our style is a very effective style; it’s upright and it mixes the movements of the tiger, the dragon, and the crane. And it’s a lifelong passion of mine.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool, that’s cool. And so, is there any overlap between your interest in… I’m going to try to pronounce it the way you pronounced it – karate. Did I say that right? I always say “karate”. I feel so American.

Bruce Tulgan
American say “karate”. But “kara” means “empty” or “Chinese”; it means both things. And “te” means “hand”, and “do” means “way”. So “karate-do” means “the way of the Chinese hand” or “the way of the empty hand”.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, I’m with you. Well, so, is there some overlap there from that, I guess, mindset or way, and your company RainmakerThinking?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, karate influences everything in my life, because I’ve been doing it since I was 7 years old. So, it’s an art of the mind and the body and the spirit, and certainly it influences everything I do. I mean I’ve learned from karate that the fundamentals are the most important, no matter what you’re doing. The fundamentals are what it’s all about. I’ve learned that simple doesn’t necessarily mean easy, but simple is often what you need and simple can be pretty darn hard. And I’ve learned that practice, practice, practice is the way you get good at anything. And I think half hard, half soft, which is what our style comes from – those principles work in everything. It’s yin-yang. It’s also much of what we teach in our management seminars, is accountability and flexibility go hand-in-hand. So that’s kind of a nice analog to hard and soft – accountability and flexibility.

Pete Mockaitis
And so your company has done a number of interesting studies long term, over many years. Not quite as many years as you’ve been doing karate, but since the ‘90s, right?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, we started doing this research in 1993. I was a young, unhappy lawyer at the time, and I began interviewing young people, people my age, about their experiences in the workplace. And those first interviews turned into my first book, which was Managing Generation X, which finally came out in 1995. And we’ve been continuing the research ever since. So now more than a half a million people have participated in our longitudinal interviews, and from 400 different organizations. And tens of thousands of those interviews lasted 10 years or longer. So we’ve been tracking these issues – generational change in the workplace, human capital management, and leadership and management best practices – we’ve been tracking these issues since 1993.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’d love it if you could share sort of a key insight that has high applicability from some of these studies.

Bruce Tulgan
Well, our generational shift research is where we’re tracking generational change in the workplace. And of course demographers have been talking about this great generational shift that’s going to happen for a long time. Now it’s actually happening. The age bubble on one end of the spectrum is growing, as the Baby Boomers continue to age, every single day in North America alone 8,000 to 10,000 Baby Boomers turn 65, and they’re filling up the age bubble on one end of the spectrum.

On the other end of the spectrum, the fastest growing segment of the workforce is made up of those born 1990 and later. By 2020 those born 1990 and later will be 28% of the workforce, and by 2020 the Baby Boomers will be well under 20% of the workforce. So this has implications for staffing strategy, attraction, selection, onboarding, up to speed training, performance management, rewards, incentives, retention, knowledge transfer, succession planning, leadership development. All of these issues are affected by the shift in the demographics.

And of course it’s not just numbers that are changing, but also the mindset of the workforce is changing. Everyone’s talking about the Millennials, especially the second wave Millennials – the youngest, least experienced people in the workplace – those born 1990 and later, and what our research shows is that they are like the canaries in the coal mine. The young emerging workforce, they think short-term and transactional, they want to know, “What do you want from me today, tomorrow and this week? What do you have to offer me today, tomorrow and this week?” They do not want everything on a silver platter – that’s a lie, or a misunderstanding. They don’t want to be humored at work – that’s nonsense. They want to be taken seriously and they want to know, “What do I need to do every day to earn the rewards and flexibility that I need?” And so, I think that’s where we’re all headed. What we learned from our generational shift research is as the numbers shift, we’re all headed in that same direction. People of all ages… We’re all Millennials now.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, when you say “the canary in the coal mine”, I get that metaphor suggests a warning of danger and changes that need to be made. Can you expand upon that a little bit?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah. Any organization that’s still trying to recruit people by, “Hey, welcome to the family. Pay your dues, climb the ladder, and in the long run the system will take care of you.” So, “We expect you to make lots of short-term sacrifices in exchange for vague promises about long-term rewards that may or may not vest in the deep, distant future” – that’s from the workplace of the past. That doesn’t work anymore.

Pete Mockaitis
It’s so funny, as you describe that, I was immediately like, “No, no way, don’t believe you”, because downsizing, layoffs, it happens all the time. And I don’t know where it got baked into me, but I remember even in college I thought I cannot depend on any employer long-term for anything, therefore I’m going to assemble an unbeatable, indispensable set of skills that make me valuable anywhere and everywhere. And that’s one of the main reasons I chose to start a career in strategy consulting. And so, it seems like I’m not the only one who figured that out; this is pretty widespread, that these vague promises of future rewards ain’t cutting it for folks.

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, look. So that’s a big part of it, and I think that employers, they know on one level that job security is dead, that people have to take responsibility for their own success, but then they can’t figure out how to drive performance and retain the best people. A lot of organizations are having a hard time figuring that out, and the reason is because even though everything’s changing, they’re still operating on the same assumptions. So, organizations need to adapt. They need to realize that in a highly uncertain environment people are going to think short-term and transactional.

That doesn’t mean you can’t retain people for the long term, but it does mean you’re going to have to do that in a much more granular, high maintenance way. And so I think when people point to the youngest, least experienced people – the second wave Millennials – and talk about, “They’re so high maintenance”, I think that’s true. But I think people of all ages are becoming more high maintenance, because if you can’t trust the system to take care of you in the long term, you look to your immediate boss to take care of you in the short term, and that’s high maintenance.

And so it’s not that people are not willing to do a lot of grunt work very well, very fast, all day long. They just want to know, “Okay, how are you going to make the quid pro quo explicit every step of the way? How do I score enough points around here today, tomorrow, this week, this month, this year, to earn more of what I need and want to take care of myself and my family?”

And as you say, career security no longer lies in an organization chart, but it lies in the marketable skills you’re able to build up in yourself, your ability to add value, your ability to collect proof of your ability to add value, the relationships you build with decision-makers who know you can add value. That’s where career security lies nowadays, I think more and more. And we see this in greatest relief among the youngest people, because they’ve never known it any other way. So older, more experienced people maybe are having to adapt to this free agent mindset, but the youngest, least experienced people have never known it any other way.

Pete Mockaitis
You’ve got to be like Liam Neeson, with a particular set of skills.

Bruce Tulgan
[laugh] Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Whether you’re going to take down a bunch of kidnappers or have career security. So, I’m right with you there. And so, I got turned on to your work through Chris Deferio on the show earlier, and he was raving about your book It’s Okay to Be the Boss. And I too became quite intrigued as I dug into it a little bit. And so, could you share a little bit with us there, what’s the main idea behind this book and why do you think it’s really just connecting with folks and striking a chord here?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah. Well, that book, It’s Okay to Be the Boss, comes out of another line of our research – our research on leadership and management best practices, and the experiences that leaders and managers are having every day. And we’ve been tracking “under-management” is what we call it – it’s the opposite of micromanagement. We’ve been tracking what we call the “under-management epidemic” that so many leaders, managers and supervisors in the real world, they’re just not doing enough leading, managing and supervising.

And there are a lot of reasons for that, but when leaders are not highly engaged with their direct reports in today’s environment, things go wrong. And so the book It’s Okay to Be the Boss, what I tried to do was share the research we’ve been doing on under-management. What is under-management? What is the state of practice when it comes to most leaders and managers? What does it look like? What’s going right, what’s going wrong? And when leaders and managers are not leading and managing in a sufficiently engaged way, why is that? Why is it that leaders have such a hard time on the front lines, spending time in high-structure, high-substance dialogues, guiding, directing, supporting and coaching people? Why is it that managers have a hard time doing that? What’s going wrong? What are the costs? And then, what are the most effective managers doing differently? And that’s what the book is about.

It’s eight steps back to the fundamentals of leadership, it’s get in the habit of managing people every day; take it one person at a time; learn to talk like a teacher or a coach; make accountability a process, not a slogan; spell out expectations every step of the way; track performance every step of the way; solve small problems before they turn into big problems; and reward people extra when they go the extra mile.

That’s the basic thrust of the book, and I think it’s hitting a chord because I think a lot of leaders and managers feel like it’s getting harder and harder and harder to manage people, and they start looking out in the world of management experts and leadership books. And a lot of those leadership books and management books are telling them a lot of formulas that don’t really work. And my book has the virtue of, it’s not the flavor of the month; it’s just the old fashioned basics.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So then let’s talk a little bit about this under-management crisis that’s there. So, can you paint a little bit of a picture in terms of what does that look, sound and feel like in practice, in terms of the state of management, leadership, supervision, and employees that is all too common and problematic right now?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, I think what most leaders and manager feel like they don’t have enough time to provide high structure, high substance, coaching-style guidance, direction, support every day. They feel like they don’t have enough time. And if you really talk with managers as we do every day, what they’ll tell you is, “Oh, I talk to my people every day”, but what that looks like almost always is they touch base: “How’s everything going? is everything on track? Any problems I should know about?”

And then the problem is those questions tell you nothing. And they interrupt each other all day long. So, when something pops into somebody’s head, they text their manager, they email their manager, they go look for their manager, they call the manager. When something pops into the manager’s head, they go look for the person or they text them or they email them or they call them. We call that “management by interruption”. The problem is nobody’s at their best when they’re interrupted. And then we see each other on email, we see each other in meetings.

And if you take those four elements – touching base, interrupting, email and meetings – that is what makes managers think they’re managing, because they’re spending a lot of time communicating. It’s just that it’s not very effective communication. It’s not time effective and it’s not effective in terms of getting into the details. So what happens is managers feel like they’re managing, and we call that “managing on autopilot” – touching base, interrupting, email, monitoring, and meetings.

And what happens is, problems hide below the radar, and then every so often a problem blows up and everyone jumps into firefighting mode. And then it’s roll up your sleeves, all hands on deck, and boy, is that time-consuming. It’s a whole lot harder to put out a fire and salvage the wreckage than it is to prevent a fire. So this is what we call the “vicious cycle of under-management” and it’s why so many leaders say, “Well, I’m already talking to my people”, but what they’re not doing is creating a structured dialogue where they spell out expectations, where they make sure people know exactly what’s expected of them, what are you doing, how are you doing it, what steps are you going to follow, show me your plan, they track performance in writing, and troubleshoot, problem-solve, resource-plan, hold people accountable, and provide recognition when people go the extra mile.

That’s what’s not happening in nine out of 10 management relationships. Nine out of 10 managers are not providing a regular structured dialogue, where they make expectations clear, track performance, problem-solve, troubleshoot, resource-plan, and hold people accountable and provide recognition and reward when people go the extra mile. Nine out of 10 management relationships that’s not happening, and that’s what we call “under-management”.

And there are eight business costs – problems occur that never had to occur, problems get out of control that could have been solved easily, resources are squandered, people go in the wrong direction for days, weeks or months without realizing it, low performers hide out and collect paychecks, mediocre performers mistake themselves for high performers, high performers get frustrated and think about leaving, and managers end up doing tasks, responsibilities and projects that should have been delegated to someone else, or sometimes were delegated to someone else; they just come back to the manager. So this is what under-management looks like.

Pete Mockaitis
Alright.

Bruce Tulgan
And it’s the elephant in the room in most workplaces. It’s a problem that hides in plain sight.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, that is quite a picture, thank you. And it’s spooky, and it resonates, and it’s real. And so, well, I guess I’m wondering then, it sounds like you are asserting that if you spent some time upfront engaging in these structured dialogues and having less of the interruption stuff, you would in fact come out ahead, in terms of time turning into great output.

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, that’s exactly right. So, it’s not that managers don’t spend a lot of time managing already, they just don’t put their management time in the right place, and they don’t use it in a sufficiently effective way. So one way to think about it is think about all the time that people spend firefighting. Remember Smokey the Bear?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah.

Bruce Tulgan
Smokey the Bear used to say, “It’s a whole lot easier to prevent a forest fire than it is to put one out.” And Smokey was one smart bear. And so in many ways, the discipline we teach is managing upfront in advance before anything goes right, wrong, or average. It’s fire prevention. Or if you like Stephen Covey, it’s quadrant to management, it’s putting leadership and management upfront, and making it easier for people to go in the right direction in the first place, so you don’t have to spend a whole bunch of time solving problems that never should have happened.

Pete Mockaitis
So the “important but not urgent” quadrant there.

Bruce Tulgan
Exactly. In many ways, good management is like taking a walk every day and eating your vegetables. It’s simple but it requires discipline and focus, and you’ve got to build those habits.

Pete Mockaitis
So, when you talk about having a structured dialogue, what does that look like in practice? What are some rituals, the equivalent of the taking the walks and eating the vegetables that should just be happening and be sort of like one-on-ones, schedule that recurring times, or how does that look like in practice?

Bruce Tulgan
Yes, so it’s team meetings, but only for what team meetings are good for. And then one-on-one is where all the action is. And the reason for structure… So, look, maybe it’s the same time – Tuesdays at 10:00, maybe it’s everyday at 10:00. Or maybe your schedule’s a moving target so you can’t do it at the same time every day or every week, so that at the end of each conversation, you schedule the next one. But the key is to have structure.

And the reason for structure is so that you, as a leader, know you’re going to have this conversation. And me, as an employee who relies on my leader, as your direct report, I know it’s going to happen too, so that I can prepare and you can prepare. The key to structure is instead of interrupting each other, we keep a running list because we know we’re going to have that meeting. Now, of course, we should be able to talk informally in between one-on-ones. And if the building’s on fire, then we better interrupt each other. But so often we interrupt each other – nobody’s at their best when they’re being interrupted – so often we interrupt each other when we really don’t need to, the building is not on fire.

And it works so much better if you keep a running list, and then before each one-on-one, you prepare. Some leaders and managers, what they do is they have their direct report send them a one-page document before the one-on-one, maybe the day before, with what are your burning issues, maybe status updates on ongoing tasks and responsibilities and projects, burning issues, resource needs, questions, and other matters. And then the key is by preparing, you’re going to make that dialogue so much more effective because you’re preparing. The structure leads to the substance.

And when it comes to the substance and structure, everybody’s different. The dialogue you need to have with one employee may be very different from the dialogue you need to have with another. That’s why one-on-one is where all the action is. Some people, you need to go over their to-do list with them every day. Some people, that would be ridiculous. Some people are self-starting high performers. The reason you meet with them is to make sure that you’re helping them clear obstacles out of their way, or get them the resources they need, or help them navigate interdependency, or maybe you’re trying to get ideas from them because they’re so good.

The conversation you develop with one person will be very different from the conversation you start developing with another person. And so the structure is key, but it might be every day for one person, every other day for another person, every other week for another person. And likewise, the substance will be different depending on what you need from that person, and depending on what that person needs from you.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot, and as one who really doesn’t do well with interruptions. Not that I start screaming or anything, but it’s so true. It’s like, “Where was I?” All that time, reconnecting to what I was doing before the interruption, that really does add up. And so I’m curious then, there’s this time saving occurring with those eight business costs avoided. And so what kind of time investment are we talking about here in terms of daily, or weekly, or one hour, half an hour? What are the rough ranges that you’re seeing?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, it depends on how many direct reports you have. Look, the reality is there are some managers who have unwieldy spans of control. If you have 30 people reporting to you directly with no chain of command, best of luck. Now you’re still better off to have one-on-ones and maybe have a 20-minute one-on-one with each person. That means you could get to three in a day, and that means you get to 15 in a week, that means you could get to all 30 in two weeks. And that still would be better than the random unstructured loosey-goosey ad hoc touching base interrupting and firefighting that most managers are addicted to.

So, look, I say start with an hour a day. If you think you don’t have time to manage people, set aside an hour a day. If you really think you don’t have time, like, “No way,” then set aside 90 minutes a day, because it’s high leverage time. The less time you have, the more important it is to set aside time for guiding, directing, supporting and coaching upfront, in advance while you still have a chance to prevent problems from happening.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good, that’s good. Alright, so then I’m intrigued by the title of your book itself, It’s Okay to Be the Boss. I think some would say, “But of course it’s okay to be the boss. Who thinks it’s not okay to be the boss?” What specifically are you challenging there?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, so many people, they don’t want to be in charge, or they feel like they don’t know how. A lot of people want the status, and the authority, and the prestige, and the rewards. They want the business card, but they don’t want the burdens of being in charge of other people. They don’t want the actual day-to-day work that comes from guiding, directing, and supporting and coaching people. So maybe they want the paycheck, maybe they want the business card, but in fact they resist the interpersonal difficulties that sometimes come with having authority over someone else.

If you have authority in relation to someone else’s career and livelihood, that’s powerful. And I’d say, do not take that power lightly. That is a lot of responsibility and it’s not to be taken lightly. On the other hand, you have to own your responsibility. You’re someone else’s boss. They go home at night after work, and sit at the dinner table and talk about their boss – they’re talking about you. So it’s okay to be the boss, but you’d better be good at it.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so I’d like to get your take then – in the realm of what you’re describing, being a little bit more hands-on and planful in these exchanges, what’s the right way to think about the empowerment versus micromanaging elements? It sounds like it’s quite easy to go too far in one direction or another. How do you think about navigating those waters?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, my view is that micromanagement is a big red herring. Micromanagement is the shield people use when they want to be left alone. “You’re micromanaging me.” “Nope, I’m just managing you. Good news we’re also going to pay you. If this were an amusement park, there’d be a line outside the door and somebody would be selling tickets.” And by the way, micromanagement is also the excuse a lot of managers use when they don’t want to do their job of managing. “Oh, I wouldn’t want to be a micromanager.”

But micromanagement is really quite rare. Real micromanagement is too much direction and feedback for this person with this task at this time. How are you going to know how much direction and feedback this person needs with this task at this time if you’re not in regular dialogue? So the way to calibrate is precisely to get in there and start talking about the work with this person until you are engaged in a regular ongoing structured dialogue with every person about his or her tasks, responsibilities and projects. Then how do you know how much direction and feedback this person needs?

And it’s a moving target. Maybe I’ve been doing X, Y and Z projects for a long time, so I know how to do those, I don’t need as much direction on that stuff. But what if I have a brand new responsibility? Well, then I’m going to need a lot more guidance and direction on the new responsibility for a while until I get up to speed on it.

So, I think there’s a lot of false empowerment thinking out there. The way to empower people is to leave them alone. What’s empowering about that? False empowerment is sink or swim, reinvent the wheel, figure it out, do it however you think it should be done, even though it’s probably not up to you. There’s nothing empowering about that. Real empowerment is about setting people up for success. Real empowerment is about making sure people know exactly what’s expected of them, giving them the resources they need, spelling it out, breaking it down so that people know exactly how to succeed.

That’s real empowerment. Real empowerment takes hard work on the part of the manager. And so what I tell leaders is, real empowerment is not so sexy. It’s the boring art of delegation, is real empowerment. It’s spelling out an area of responsibility for someone else, making clear all the guidelines and parameters, establishing good timelines, and following up at regular intervals. That’s how you properly delegate.

Some people think that delegation is giving away responsibility. Delegation is about giving away limited execution authority. So delegation is not like putting your kid up for adoption. Delegation is like hiring a babysitter.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. That’s a nice metaphor, thank you. I have a baby at home, our first, at the moment. So I’m right with you on that. And so then, I’m curious, you mentioned that we can do this. You can avoid folks kind of hiding out and collecting a paycheck, the stowaways. And so I’m imagining that this would be tremendously effective at surfacing very quickly, “Well, you’re really kind of not doing anything. I’m talking to you every week, and I’ve looked at what it is you’re working on and it ain’t much, and it hasn’t been much week after week. And I’m trying to ask you to do some extra things, you’re not doing those things.” I’m wondering that once you start engaging folks in this way, I think that many workplaces will surface many such people in that boat. Any pro tips for handling that once you’re in the thick of it?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, what I always tell managers is… When they ask me, “How long should I tolerate a low performer?”, what I always say to managers is, if you’re not providing regular high structure, high substance guidance, direction, support and coaching, then you don’t even know if you have a low performer working for you. Because if you think you have a low performer and you’re not managing, then the first question you should be asking is, “Is it you or is it me?” Because a lot of problems in the workplace can be avoided or solved relatively easily when managers start practicing the fundamentals.

But if you’re practicing the fundamentals of leadership, if you’re every day, every other day, once a week, spelling out expectations, following up, following up, following up, breaking it down, spelling it out, breaking it down some more – if you’re doing everything you can to set me up for success and to give me the support I need, and when you come back to me say, “Did you do it?” and every time it’s, “Nope, I didn’t do it.” “Well, okay, let’s talk twice a day.” You come back in four hours, “Did you do it?” “Nope.” “Okay, here’s a checklist for the checklist for the checklist.” You come back the next day, “Did you do it?” “Nope.” Well, how long does it take to figure out that I’m really not doing the job?

So managers often say to me, “Oh, the hardest thing is giving negative feedback. Oh, the hardest thing is letting somebody know when they haven’t done as good a job as they think they have.” Well, if you’re bending over backwards and jumping through hoops to help me succeed, all of a sudden, if I’m not doing it, I’m the one who’s uncomfortable, not you.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s true.

Bruce Tulgan
All of a sudden, when you come tell me, “Hey, you’re not doing it,” it’s not going to be a surprise to me. We’ve been having these conversations every day. It’s becoming increasingly clear to both of us that gee, I’m just not doing the job.

Pete Mockaitis
Alright. And then any choice words that you encourage managers to deliver under such circumstances?

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, that if you’ve been documenting this. As long as you’re documenting that you’re spelling out expectations and you come back, document that my performance is not meeting those expectations, then yeah, the choice words I recommend at that point are, “Hey, we’ve got a problem. And it’s not me, it’s you.” [laugh]

Pete Mockaitis
[laugh] I’m wondering if we should use the same intonation. [laugh]

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, it’s like when employees come to the manager and say, “Oh, you’re picking on me and you’re favoring Mr. Red.” And what most managers want to say is, “I’m so glad you noticed. The reason I favor Mr. Red is he comes in early, he stays late, he bends over backwards and jumps through hoops. He dots his i’s, he crosses his t’s. The reason I favor Red is he does more work than you.” And if you’re meeting with people and spelling out expectations and tracking performance in writing, it becomes much easier to be authentic and hold people accountable in a meaningful way.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m right with you there. And then I think you mentioned that this has so many implications for so many different parts of the organization, I’m thinking about just performance reviews. And we had a lawyer on the show previously – I believe it was Eliot Wagonheim – who mentioned that performance reviews in court cases for wrongful termination are never brought up by the employer saying, “As you can see, judge and / or jury, there’s a long history of underperformance.” But they are always brought up by the defense, like, “Time and time again, the performance reviews said, ‘Met expectations’.” And I think that is just a super clear, official, institutionalized way that you see this with regard to, is this management really happening on a meaningful basis, or is it not at all.

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, I think you’re absolutely right. We call that “false fairness”, “false nice guy syndrome”, and “avoidance of conflict”. And what happens is that if you’re not managing people every day, every other day, once a week, guiding, directing, supporting and coaching them, tracking performance in writing, then what happens is the review period comes up and everyone’s got to kind of figure it out. And often people are making reference to work that they’ve never seen directly, or they weren’t supervising directly, or something that was 10 months ago, or people think it’s politics or who you like.

And a lot of times what happens is because of all of these complications, managers do not give real granular feedback, but rather everyone gets a “Meets expectations”. And so it means the paper trail is not helpful, it’s not accurate, it’s not driving performance, and it’s a sledgehammer that has no real management impact. If anything, it has a negative impact.

So, one of the beauties of guiding, directing and supporting people on a more granular basis and providing more structured feedback on an ongoing basis is then when you do get to those performance reviews, it’s much easier to create them, it’s much easier to differentiate between high performers and low performers and people in the middle, and there are a lot fewer surprises. And it’s much easier to align rewards with performance.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s great. I’m thinking about, I’ve shared… I’ve looked at some people’s reviews before when they’ve opened up to me a little bit. And I guess I’ve had a privileged formative years in work with consulting, because I would see someone’s review and it was so sparse, it was like, “This is barely a page, and you get this annually?” Well, I got a four-page review, it’s single spaced, full of specific instances of my work every three months, at the end of every project in consulting.

And I actually looked forward to the review period because it was like, “Oh, I am learning stuff now. And this is enriching for me and part of value proposition of having taken this job.” And it’s just a shame how so often it’s just a joke. And it does, as you mentioned, cause problems in terms of, I guess, credibility, authority, trust – all that stuff being undermined because the words are often hollow in these documents.

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, I think that’s absolutely right. And by the way, high performers like to keep score, high performers like to get reviews, high performers want to be evaluated, because they know they’re going the extra mile all the time, they want to get recognition and reward for it. The only people who want to be managed by false empowerment and false fairness, the only people want to be left alone and treated like everyone else are low performers who are hiding out.

So, this sort of hands-off management and false fairness approach caters to low performers. High performers want a manager who knows who they are, knows what they’re doing, is in a position to help them do more better faster, get unnecessary problems out of their way, get rid of low performers who are in their way, and help them get recognition and rewards so they can earn more for themselves and their families.

Pete Mockaitis
Perfect. Bruce, tell me – anything else you really want to make sure to highlight before we shift gears and talk about a few of your favorite things?

Bruce Tulgan
[laugh] No, I think you’ve been very thorough.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh shucks, thank you. Put that in my review, Bruce.

Bruce Tulgan
Yeah, there you go.

Pete Mockaitis
Document it. Then can you start us off with a favorite quote, something that inspires you?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, gee, where shall I begin? I guess the title of one of my favorite books, What Got You Here Won’t Get You There by Marshall Goldsmith, that’s one of my favorite quotes.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. And how about a favorite study?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, we’re always doing research. So we’re releasing a new white paper in a couple of weeks called Winning the Talent Wars, so I guess that’s my current favorite study.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Any choice insights that you can speak to in a sense or two?

Bruce Tulgan
Yes, the supply and demand curve is totally out of whack. There’s much greater demand for skilled talent, especially in the STEM fields than there is supply, and that’s going to be true for the foreseeable future. And employers who don’t become more nimble in their employment practices and their management practices are going to find themselves engaged in frustrating bidding wars for talent. So you either are going to commit yourself to a bidding war, or you’re going to do the hard work of building a winning culture.

Pete Mockaitis
Well said, thank you. And how about a favorite book?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, gee, probably my favorite book of all time is The Last Lecture, and that’s just an amazing book. Siddhartha is one of my favorite books. Jonathan Livingston Seagull is one of my favorite books. There’s a few.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good, thank you. And how about a favorite tool?

Bruce Tulgan
A favorite tool? Well, I guess in my own life, probably the tool I use the most are reading glasses and my iPhone. But I think in the management world, the tool that I recommend the most is what we call the “manager’s landscape”. And at the top of the page, you create a horizontal axis with six questions: Who, Why, What, How, Where, and When.

And then in the Who column, you list all of your direct reports and make a few notes about them – A player, B player, C player, that sort of thing. In the Why column, for each person you say, “Here’s why I’m managing this person. Here’s my goal with this person. Here’s what I’m trying to help this person get better at.” In the What column, you put what’s your message for this person right now, or what are your questions for this person right now. In the How column, it’s a trial-and-error thing, but it’s how do you talk to this person. Some people, you ask question; some people, you give orders; some people, it’s a combination of both. And then Where and When – where and when are you going to have these conversations, and how often of course? So that’s what we call the “manager’s landscape”. So that’s a very powerful tool that we recommend.

Pete Mockaitis
Very nice. And how about a favorite habit?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, I think fitness is at the core for me. Take a walk every day and eat your vegetables. But I think in general, human beings are creatures of habit. And the only question is, do you have good habits or bad habits? That’s where you have to make choices. Human beings are creatures of habit. Habits feel good. And the problem is that bad habits feel just as good as good habits. The good news is that if you take the time and discipline to develop good habits, they feel just as good as bad habits, and they make you stronger.

Pete Mockaitis
And tell me, is there a particular nugget, an articulation of your message that really seems to connect and resonate with folks?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, I guess, “The fundamentals are all you need.” “Own your responsibility, own your authority.” “It’s okay to be the boss, be good at it.”

Pete Mockaitis
And Bruce, if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, our website is RainmakerThinking.com, and there’s a whole bunch of free resources at RainmakerThinking.com. Or you can always follow me on Twitter @BruceTulgan, or LinkedIn, or the normal channels.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or a call to action you’d issue to folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Bruce Tulgan
Well, the first person you have to manage every day is yourself. And that means you’ve got to be honest with yourself about your work habits, you’ve got to be honest with yourself about your personal habits, you’ve got to take care of yourself outside of work so that you bring your best to work. You’ve got to get good at being on time or a little bit early, take notes, use checklists, stay focused. The first person you have to manage every day is yourself, and then the second person you have to manage every day is everybody else.

Pete Mockaitis
Got it. Well, Bruce, thank you. This has been fun, it’s been eye-opening, it’s been intriguing. Please keep doing your good work. And just thanks for taking this time!

Bruce Tulgan
Likewise. Geez, I’m honored to be on your podcast, and thank you so much. Thanks for making it so easy.