Hey CEOs, This Isn’t Rocket Science

Written by Kimberly

Are you tired of hearing about all of the ways you can make your company a “win-win”?  Yea, I know the jargon gets old.  But the goal shouldn’t.

As much as I don’t like jargon, business leaders can achieve a win-win in their organizations.  It’s not difficult but does require effort and accountability from the rest of management.  A splash of empathy always helps too.

CEOs need to shift their focus from their customers to their employees.  I’m not crazy and I get that it’s the customers and ongoing business development that keeps the lights on.  What’s hard to see (and I’m sorry to say that I’ve seen it first hand) is when companies put a higher priority on customers and numbers than they do on their employees.

It’s not a difficult concept.  When employees are happy, customers will be happy.  When customers are happy, the bottom line will take care of itself.  On the flip side, do you think employees will go overboard for a customer when they don’t feel they’re being treated fairly?  Think they’ll burn that midnight oil for you at crunch time?

Leaders and CEOs have a lot on their plates.  When it comes to how to treat people right, maybe this seems like an overwhelming undertaking.  I understand that too.  But it doesn’t need to be complicated. 

Good leadership MUST start from the top so that it can trickle down to the rest of management.  This is not negotiable.  The responsibility of providing good leadership shouldn’t fall on HR’s shoulders because HR doesn’t run the company — the CEO does.  HR should be coaching and promoting good leadership styles but at the end of the day, it has to start at the top.  So now that we have that clear, here are a few basics:

• Listen to new ideas.  You never know who will come up with the next “big” one.
• Provide good feedback.  People want to know how they’re doing.  It is a big deal.  Don’t take it for granted.
• Celebrate the little victories publicly.  It’s free and goes a long way.  Trust me.
• Be sure that folks are learning from mistakes.  If they’re not, take action.
• Don’t get hung up on surveys.  Leave your office and visit the trenches.  You won’t melt if you mingle with the underlings, I promise.
• Communicate and communicate more!  People feel valued when they know what’s going on in the organization.

Get out of the board room, ditch your ego and apply that basic psychology and some common sense to your leadership style.  Be sure the entire management team is doing the same.  Rinse and repeat.

In an environment that needs change, it will be slow but you will see a positive difference.

10 Years In Your Current Role? You’re Stale!!

10 years in your current role, your stagnant.  Your resume probably reads like a job description.

When recruiters and hiring managers stop being human, they’ll stop having biases.  Biases are all over the place, legal and illegal — we just don’t know about them.

My biases are centered on wanting to see candidates who have gotten bored in their roles and made the choice to move on.  Not because they were laid off and had to move on.  I’m looking for the folks who are hungry to do more — striving to be that rock-star with an organization.  (I broke my own rule there — I hate the word “rock-star.”  Sorry ’bout that.)

Now if you’ve spent 10 years with the same organization but have progressed within the company and held different roles — that’s good to see!  Please read carefully:

When you don’t step out of your comfort zone, you don’t grow. Period, end of story.

When you get too comfy in a job, that’s all it is — a job.  You show up for work every day, do what’s expected of you, don’t make waves and your bills get paid.  It’s all good.

Or is it?

It just shows that you can do what many Americans are already doing every day.  But as a prospective hiring manager I’ll take the liberty of stealing Ms. Jackson’s lyrics and ask you, “What have you done for me lately?“   Or what have you done for your current organization that you can bring to mine?  Can you show what your accomplishments are?  If you can, you’re on track. 

You’re only as good as your last gig and the accomplishments under your belt within that gig.

Am I condoning job hopping?  No.  And my definition of job hopping might be different from yours.  I view job hopping as folks who change jobs within a one-year period.  I think people who change jobs every 2 to 3 years is a good sign.

Here’s why different job experiences are good for you:

• You’re exposed to different working styles and personalities of several managers and co-workers.   
  This comes in handy when navigating the waters of corporate politics — which you will encounter at some point.

• It’s good for your self-esteem and will keep you sharp within your industry. 
  When you bring your awesome talent to a new organization, you bring fresh eyes and new ideas.  They’ll appreciate that and you’ll feel valued because you’ll be valued.

• Varied workplace environments give you the best education — experience. 
  You can be in the same occupation and industry but it doesn’t mean that every company does the same thing in the same way.  They don’t.  Learning new ways of doing your work and being more productive is always something you can build on with a new organization.  Staying at one place too long puts you in a silo and you risk being viewed as not being flexible or easily adaptable to change.  It’s no secret in business that the only thing that stays the same is CHANGE.

• You can decide what types of companies you like to work in.
  Do you like big corporate organizations or do you prefer smaller companies?  Being exposed to several organizations that have different protocols will allow you to continue learning.  And while some employees never catch a glimpse of their company’s CEO, others can mosey on in to their CEO’s office and chat about the weekend.  You decide which one fits you best.

• This goes for CEOs too. 
  Just because you’re the head honcho doesn’t mean you don’t get stale.  You do.  You can ride on the coattails of a successful project for only so long before you’ll be looked upon to come up with the company’s next big thing.  My personal bias is that CEOs should be flushed out every 5 to 7 years just for the perspective of bringing fresh eyes to the table.

So, get out and do something different and grow. 

The Four Functions of Management

For any kind of organization to run smoothly in achieving their set goals and objectives they need to implement management concepts. To plan for it, there are four basic management concepts that allow any organization to handle planned, tactical and set decisions. What are those plans? The answer lies here.

Any organization, whether new or old, whether small or big need to run smoothly and achieve the goals and objectives which it has set forth. For this they had developed and implemented their own management concepts. There are basically four management concepts that allow any organization to handle the tactical, planned and set decisions. The four basic functions of the management are just to have a controlled plan over the preventive measure.

The four functions of management are:

The base function is to: Plan

It is the foundation area of management. It is the base upon which the all the areas of management should be built. Planning requires administration to assess; where the company is presently set, and where it would be in the upcoming. From there an appropriate course of action is determined and implemented to attain the company’s goals and objectives

Planning is unending course of action. There may be sudden strategies where companies have to face. Sometimes they are uncontrollable. You can say that they are external factors that constantly affect a company both optimistically and pessimistically. Depending on the conditions, a company may have to alter its course of action in accomplishing certain goals. This kind of preparation, arrangement is known as strategic planning. In strategic planning, management analyzes inside and outside factors that may affect the company and so objectives and goals. Here they should have a study of strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats. For management to do this efficiently, it has to be very practical and ample.

The subsequent function is to: Organize

The second function of the management is getting prepared, getting organized. Management must organize all its resources well before in hand to put into practice the course of action to decide that has been planned in the base function. Through this process, management will now determine the inside directorial configuration; establish and maintain relationships, and also assign required resources.

While determining the inside directorial configuration, management ought to look at the different divisions or departments. They also see to the harmonization of staff, and try to find out the best way to handle the important tasks and expenditure of information within the company. Management determines the division of work according to its need. It also has to decide for suitable departments to hand over authority and responsibilities.

The third function is to: Direct

Directing is the third function of the management. Working under this function helps the management to control and supervise the actions of the staff. This helps them to assist the staff in achieving the company’s goals and also accomplishing their personal or career goals which can be powered by motivation, communication, department dynamics, and department leadership.

Employees those which are highly provoked generally surpass in their job performance and also play important role in achieving the company’s goal. And here lies the reason why managers focus on motivating their employees. They come about with prize and incentive programs based on job performance and geared in the direction of the employees requirements.

It is very important to maintain a productive working environment, building positive interpersonal relationships, and problem solving. And this can be done only with Effective communication. Understanding the communication process and working on area that need improvement, help managers to become more effective communicators. The finest technique of finding the areas that requires improvement is to ask themselves and others at regular intervals, how well they are doing. This leads to better relationship and helps the managers for better directing plans.

The final function is to: Control

Control, the last of four functions of management, includes establishing performance standards which are of course based on the company’s objectives. It also involves evaluating and reporting of actual job performance. When these points are studied by the management then it is necessary to compare both the things. This study on comparision of both decides further corrective and preventive actions.

In an effort of solving performance problems, management should higher standards. They should straightforwardly speak to the employee or department having problem. On the contrary, if there are inadequate resources or disallow other external factors standards from being attained, management had to lower their standards as per requirement. The controlling processes as in comparison with other three, is unending process or say continuous process. With this management can make out any probable problems. It helps them in taking necessary preventive measures against the consequences. Management can also recognize any further developing problems that need corrective actions.

Effective and efficient management leads to success, the success where it attains the objectives and goals of the organizations. Of course for achieving the ultimate goal and aim management need to work creatively in problem solving in all the four functions. Management not only has to see the needs of accomplishing the goals but also has to look in to the process that their way is feasible for the company.

How does your company fair against these four areas management?

Unleveling the Playing Field

I read a great feature article in Fortune magazine this month about Marc Andreesen, the co-founder of Netscape and the social network Ning. I have to say it was inspirational in three(3) ways:

1. it motivated me to dig deeper into the innovation idea bank and move forward with the latest technology to use it as a starting point for the next generation;
2. that creative thinking is the lifeblood of business and entrepreneurship;
3. there are people like him that motivate people like me.

So with that in mind as a mid-level HR executive, a senior level executive or someone just starting out you need to unlevel the playing field so YOU stand out as a leader and innovative/creative thinker to solve business problems. Certainly as HR continue to be represented at the table and those that are just getting invited you need to really stand out and inspire and move those around you. How do you do that you say for those not yet there or in a company that views HR as an administrative function here are some important ways:

• you need negotiation and influencing skills that are strategy based;
• you need to take the lead on innovation and develop practices that drive growth - KNOW THE BUSINESS INSIDE AND OUT;
• have strong business acumen and a keen eye for identifying high-potential leaders before someone tells you;
• deliver value daily to your internal and external constituencies as well as building extraordinary personal leadership qualities that resonate throughout the life cycle of your business;
• develop frameworks for global exportation and strategies from a product and supply chain prospective;
• get involved with your investor relations program - evaluating it with a ad-hoc team;
• and finally, conventional is passe so exploit technology and social networking to manage talent, HR, and the business with intricate involvement with your CEO.

I hope that you will look at these thoughts and grow from them. If you agree, drop me an email, text, Twitter, or Linkedin message . Oh, BTW my former CEO & Executive HR were just like Marc. Thanks Greg, Iain, and Mike.

The Hidden Upside Of Downsizing

People are getting fired. Profits will never be the same. It's 1929 all over again. The guy on the corner tells you, "It's a recession. Times are tough."

So why is Stephen Covey , the best-selling author of 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, feeling all upbeat? Because he believes that a positive cultural shift is occurring as we speak, and that firms that empower their employees are about to blossom (see my previous post dated 7/1/08, 5/28/08, and 5/23/08).

"We've never had such opportunity as we do today," he says. "People can create. They can adapt. They can make sacrifices. This is a really an opportunity for creative businesses to gain competitive advantage."

Covey has built a publishing and consulting empire teaching people how to be the masters of their own destinies. While the emphasis these days tends to be on all the pain the financial crisis is causing, he's much more interested in the change it is permitting. Agonizing about having to lay off workers or worrying that your own job may be on the block doesn't fly with him. "People are too much a product of their conditions, and not of their decisions," he says.

When profits dwindle, many organizations make the mistake of letting people know as little as possible, he says. "I find that people are very capable and resourceful when they're not in the dark. Open the books, show them what's happening. If you get them involved with the problem, they'll be a part of the solution. They may come up with ways to cut costs other than cutting people."

To get employees to trust management when mass firings are more common than rainstorms, leaders need to be open, authentic and real, Covey says. "If there is no real trust and genuine integrity, then it just becomes a kind of fake program of fake democracy, which will worsen it. People will say, 'We were manipulated again.' "

What are your comments?

HR Work Is No Longer HR’s Work - From an HR Strategy Perspective

I attended a dinner function in the last week with a couple of colleagues. During the evening we got onto discussing my favorite subject .... HR strategy, and were having a debate about the usefulness of HR departments. The chap I was chatting to was in a typical mid-management line function and was complaining about the lack of HR support he was receiving and how much “HR work” he was doing.

I immediately said to him that this was a good thing, which took him by surprise. I continued to put my argument forward that it is not HR’s role to be managing his staff, and that the concept of HR being the department that deals with “People matters” is old and not contributing to organisational growth.

His counter argument was that he is there to make sure his business unit achieves its output goals and all this other HR mambo-jumbo is wasting his time. I did concede that if HR is dumping a lot onto him that is not value adding then he may have a point and should push back on doing stuff that fails to help him achieve his outputs. But, achieving his goals involves people, and he could not abdicate this role to HR or anyone else. Management of a business includes effective management of people. I asked him about his HR department in some more detail and how they had got to this point.

There are a number of interesting take aways from this discussion that took place:

1. this is not a unique situation and its been an ongoing debate for many years. What it does tell me is that the role of HR in that organisation in not understood or positioned properly. Even though HR is trying to do the right thing by getting line management to take accountability for their staff in a holistic manner, they are fighting an uphill battle and will continue to do so until the executive reposition the HR department correctly.
2. the HR department does not realise the long term damage they are creating when they execute an approach without the proper backing and strategy. It backfires like we have seen with this line manager. His view of the HR department is not positive and he sees them working against him. Correcting this is now going to be a bigger problem than before.
3. this does highlight a major concern with the level of strategy knowledge within HR departments. HR folk tend to be good at designing and executing activities inside the “HR space”, but can do with some support in executing programmes into the larger strategic realm. It points typically to the lack of business understanding and how to position HR strategically.
4. the forth point is about line managers themselves - I personally think that most of the push back to managing all aspects of their staff is related to fear and uncomfortableness with dealing with difficult people situations. This highlights the need to select management correctly, and not just appointing the good salesman into the sales manager role. Not all people are good and dealing with people matters, but it must be a requirementfor management and supervisory positions, and training and development in this space is a necessity.
5. finally it is also senior managers responsibility to measure people correctly to achieve particular behavior changes. If this line manager is rated on how he achieves his output goals, then that’s what will drive his behavior, however, if he is also measured on how he effectively manages people and gets the best out of them then that will drive another set of behaviours - but its all part of a well thought out HR strategy.
   
   Some of you may be thinking whether there is a need at all for an HR department if line management become super proficient in managing people. The answer is not as simple as a Yes/No, but I do think that you can get rid of the HR department as we know it today. Concepts such as HR shared services and other components that are administrative and transactional in nature can be owned by an inclusive services division. But HR strategy and expertise groups would still need to exist, but could be intertwined into the organisation in other ways than a separate department. Sounds like a good topic for a later discussion.
   
   Tell me your thoughts.

Sweat the Small Stuff

When it comes to company culture and having a reputation that attracts and retains quality people, the small stuff is the important stuff. If the boss adds a little to the expense account, maybe the CFO adds a little to the balance sheet. If the person in the cube next to you treats a vendor poorly, then maybe that vendor adds a little extra to the invoice next time - or tells 100 people not to do business with you. In November, CBS on line had an article entitled "Bad Behavior Contagious, Study Finds" - highlighting some of the research on this phenomena. For me and others I am sure, steeped in social psychology and the impact of the social norms - it's a no-brainer. But most folks blow off the effects of small behaviors.

Keeping your eye on the small stuff is probably the single biggest thing a company can do to influence culture.

Appalling Business Decisions

Over the past 2 months I have had calls from friends in business who have been either laid-off or downsized because of the economy. In one particular case I was appalled to hear that one of my very close colleagues was let go who ran a very successful business with excellent margins and top line growth. Are you surprised to hear that in the current economic environment? Well believe it I mean top and bottom line growth year over year with margins increasing each year as well.

This person ran the business which was a business unit of a larger corporation. She was smart, brought in excellent people and had the respect of the organization. Her leadership skills were exceptional and it permeated throughout the organization. Well, suffice it to say that the parent company was looking to take out additional overhead to shore up its' margins and she was hit.

So here is my dilemma, this person was 1,000 miles away from the parent company, it's business was different in most regards, and was a stand alone environment except for infrastructure and IT development support. How could the management of the parent company come to a decision like that unless it has no regard for business economics and how to effectively manage people. I am appalled at this decision and would love to read the sales and profit statements in 2009-2010 to see the full affect of this stupid decision.

What are your opinions on this subject and have you seen similar decisions made in your company that make little or no business sense.