More Than Words

Rating people is tough when you've got to put it on paper.  It's one thing to talk about someone, especially when behind his/her back.  So-and-so stinks at such-and-such a task.  But if you're in charge of reviewing someone, those words matter as they translate onto a page.  Ask yourself about context as much as content.

When Lucy and Ethel go to work in that classic chocolate-making production episode, their rating was pretty poor.  They over-exaggerated their abilities, they could not keep up with the line, they ate product while working and they tried to cover up their errors.  They were fired on their first day.  

From a television rating perspective, this episode started Season 2 with a bang.  It capitalized off of the ground-breaking work of the first season and set the tone for television sitcoms for decades to come, to this day.  The ratings for their work was at the highest levels.

So how do you give thought around context in order to frame the content?  A relevant evaluative process is more likely to give credibility to the results in the eyes of the employee, even when those results are less than excellent. 

Tactical - What is the hands on level of engagement into the organization's health?  Look at how the employee puts his/her time and talents into the company.  And, then be able to point to the result of such tactics.  Is there an organizational influence?  And while business bottom-line is the easiest metric to use, it limits our view.  For example, a survey might reveal that most employees feel comfortable in the workplace.  Find out why.  It may be because the front desk receptionist greets everyone warmly and genuinely.  It might be that he/she acknowledges others specifically for achievements, birthdays, tough times, etc. That person contributes to organizational health, despite the lack of a straight line to net profits.  That person has a line.  Look harder.

Experiential - How has the employee involved himself/herself in the company?  What have they experienced, either voluntarily or involuntarily?  Consider both causes.  Just because someone volunteers to do something, doesn't mean it was good for anyone involved (and yes, you can fire someone from a volunteer role...).  Maybe there are new processes initiated by an employee's willingness to try.  As such, they've been added to a workflow or perhaps replaced a previous workflow.  But just as important, maybe an employee rallied his/her department to participate in a walk for a particular disease-fighting organization.  Those experiences should not be lost if they don't fit into a clean bucket for the company's review pattern.  Go back to considering what those experiences have done for the organization.

Emotional - Odd, right?  We have so many emotionally-stunted people working in our industries that it's important to think through this.  Listen, hugs and kisses aren't what's really meant by emotional (although, I have been a good receiver of that type of love for years...don't stop!).  Emotion is tied to communication, critical thinking and behavior.  Do they not matter in a consideration of performance?  There is a great deal of teasing regarding millennials and their lack of consistent approach. "There's a stop sign ahead, but if you don't feel that the stop sign applies to you, then do what you think you should do.  Don't stop if you don't feel you should.  It's okay."  That perspective is not exclusive to one generation.  I still talk to some 60 year-old business executives who haven't figured out emotional health and they struggle to connect well with staff.  That's not good for business.

Social - How has community been fostered by this employee?  So many companies talk about how they're a family.  That invokes an employee's context about family.  What if my family is a bunch of narcissistic, inconsiderate, selfish jerks? (This is just an example, it's not a reflection on anyone in my family so please, Mom, don't text me and send me angry-faced emojis).  The consideration should be about fostering supportive, interpersonal relationships for the movement of the organization and for the building up of others.  Look at how an employee engages with his/her teammates.  Speak to dynamism, collaboration and group ingenuity.  That takes risk for each employee willing to be engaged at that level and we should be mindful of that healthy impact.

Of course, I know, that you have a performance review form that has many more areas to consider. But maybe, those other areas should be considered in this expanded context.  Haven't you heard, "But you don't know" from employees defending themselves from a manager's perspective?  Sure you have.  So, why is it that we don't know?  Looking holistically as well as specifically takes time, I get it, but it's the best way to consider talent.

Quite frankly, we don't have an never-ending supply of ready-to-wear talent. This type of consideration will enhance how we can better setup our staff for success through skill development, knowledge management and attitude improvement while reducing our turnover.  

If your manager sat with you to review your performance and began to share a limited view of your impact, you would want to say, "But you don't know."  Think about your staff saying that to you and be ready to offer the fuller context in light of the above areas.  Let them know that you do know.

Love Yourself

Almira Gulch.  What a name.  It's fraught with constipation and furrowed eye brows.  And while it wasn't her idea to be named that, she found a way to fulfill the name's intent.  Wait?  You don't know who Almira Gulch is?  Really?  You might know her by her stage name - The Wicked Witch of the West.  In The Wizard of Oz, Almira is the black and white version of her technicolor green self.  And she delivers deliberate cruelty and fear across the spectrum of color.  And while Dorothy ultimately destroys her (she liquidated her, according to the Wizard), there is a scene prior to the trip to Oz that is symbolic of HR.

Auntie Em, the perennial calling card for home, is face to face with Almira Gulch.  Em has the perfect opportunity to tell Almira off.  Ms. Gulch has come to take away Toto (not Toto!), and it's crushing to the young Dorothy.  Em's maternal instinct kicks in and she's ready to take on this brash lizard of a woman.  And what does she say?  "Almira Gulch, just because you own half the county doesn't mean that you have the power to run the rest of us. For twenty-three years, I've been dying to tell you what I thought of you! And now... well, being a Christian woman, I can't say it!"  NO!

Why didn't she say it?  We're all there with her.  We want Em to haul off and deck her, honestly, and instead she leads us up to the finish line and then falls down just prior.  So frustrating.  We tend to do the same in HR.  

Think about terminations.  There are some that bring great joy to our hearts, admit it.  We're thrilled to see this slug of a human being exit our organization.  This person has been the bane of our existence for too long.  We've spent hours on this person and the situations created as a result.  And while there was hopefully some good that came through it all (management training, refinement of the discipline process), it is still a huge sigh of relief that he/she is gone.

Far be it from me to get my Philly on and ask you to just tell the person off on his/her way out (If you need that help, though, my mom is available for a reasonable cost...she's fantastic at it).  However, there is a truth to be shared.  In terminations, for example, it is helpful to the person for us to share what he/she can take from the experience in prep for the next role.  Frankly, we preach that formal reviews should contain nothing that hasn't already been shared with the employee.  So, sitting with the person on the way out to remind him/her of the progression shouldn't be new news.  What it is though is an honest recap of truth.

Haven't you hired someone and three months later think, "How did this person ever hold a job?"  And yet, they've worked for ten years' previous.  Likely, managers were just glad to see them go and didn't share much to help that person transition to the next role. 

And don't wait for a termination.  Give honest perspective throughout.  Are you afraid of being sued?  Seriously?  Anyone can sue any company for any reason.  Why fear what can happen no matter what?  I've watched companies get served lawsuits that are baseless and untrue, and yet still have to settle.  I don't think I am bitter in this, but rather, I take it as constructive freedom.

Please don't lose your basic HR communicative flow.  Frame your words, be thoughtful and encourage dialogue.  Ask perspective questions of the employee.  Be knowledgeable of the situation and prepared to discuss.  And tell the truth.

I would love to tell off a million people, give or take a thousand, but that's not ultimately for their benefit.  However, don't swing the pendulum too far the other way.  Don't live in fear and therefore not share enough.  Give people constructive feedback in an honest framework.  And if you need the release, go outside, behind the building and lose your mind.  And then come in, visit security, watch the video footage and crack yourself up.  You'll be back in the right frame of mind afterwards.

Trouble

Tuesday nights at 8:30, you would find me on the living room floor, eating a bowl of cereal, watching “Laverne & Shirley.”  That was my routine for years as a kid.  That show would crack me up.  These two women would find themselves in all sorts of situations, that were often caused by them.  The remainder of the show would be about how they would unravel the trouble.  The classic misunderstandings, assumptions, over-promising and poorly defined expectations filled most of the plotlines. 

Sound a bit like work?  Think of the trouble caused by misunderstanding, to start.  Often, I hear the following:

• I didn’t know that was what he was asking me to do
• Wait, you meant for me to do that this week?
• I think my boss is trying to make me look bad on purpose
• How can I be expected to do anything more? No one knows all of what I do

Lack of clarity around process, personnel and results often find themselves into our daily  “issue board.”  You know, that growing list of concerns or problems brought up by misunderstanding.  Think of the extra meetings you’ve had to bridge the gaps towards understanding.  Lots, right?

I recall one particular time where I calculated 15 hours of my 40-hour work week spent on meetings I had not planned on having in order to mediate the trouble that was brewing surrounding misunderstanding, unrealized expectations and a general lack of grace towards each other.  That was 37.5% of my work week.  Productive?  Maybe.  Could it have been avoided to begin with?  Much of it could have been.

I know that there is much to learn through situations like this.  The “a-ha” moments usually come when someone, who has worked himself/herself into a tizzy, finds out that the “facts” he/she thought were off and it causes a reconsideration of how information is gathered and processed.  It’s a beautiful thing to watch.  And yet, if you find yourself in multiple situations like that, doesn’t that show more of a systemic issue?

Trouble is a difficult culture to break through.  There are some companies that love it.  They thrive on unhealthy relationships, difficult processes and a sloppy organizational design.  That’s not a dramatic statement.  Considering the amount of books, articles and workshops on dealing with toxic co-workers, difficult bosses and a separatist board of directors, it’s very reasonable to see that many companies must swim in this description and many of us deal with this on a regular basis.

As leaders, we ought to be proactive to thwart trouble before it begins.  We can offer direction on process, wisdom in relational dealings and passion behind seeking resolution directly.  It’s not meant to be emotionless, but it’s often the case that a culture allowed to be too emotional can end up being crippled by those emotions and fall short of the mission.  We can encourage folks to move beyond such short-sightedness.  The feeling is not where the prize is found; it’s in reaching the goal.

Consider marriage.  The wedding itself is a fun day.  It’s a party!  There is much to love and feel good about; however, the marriage itself is the goal.  Emotions won’t be in the same sphere each day as compared to the wedding.  If the marriage is based on the desire to feel the way they did on the wedding day, the marriage is doomed.  And so it is with business.  Not every day is the first day of work; not every day is the first sale made; not every day is the holiday party.  In between are days where a lack of clarity, issues around process and general trouble can occur.  Taking a proactive stance to thwart such problems and to add value to the communicative process so that others can perform it without you is our job.

Open the dialogue, call others to a higher standard and bring issues out into the open with the purpose of educating, diffusing and moving on.  Trouble festers if left unattended.  Don’t let it happen.  You can make such an impact.  I mean, if Laverne and Shirley were able to do it in a 30-minute time slot, I have faith that you can get it done in a timely manner.  Sclemeel, schlemazel, hasenfeffer incorporated to all!

Don't Fear the Reaper

Go to @twitter and search for #leadership and plan on spending the next four days with no sleep reading what’s there.  Oh, and that won’t give you enough time to finish.  We are a leadership-sensitive business community.  Books, articles, chats, posts, etc. are aplenty regarding the need for, the stability desired in and the call for leadership.  It’s needed in business, at home, in our houses of worship, for our town little league programs, for our school boards and beyond.

The marketplace is ravenous for leadership-directed material.  I have been known to write about it.  I have been known to coach leaders on leadership.  I lead one of the premier HR consulting firms – Humareso.  I like leadership.

Sadly, however, over the past decade, I hear many complaining that our need for leadership is thwarted by a lack of desire for people to step into leadership.  Let me be clearer.  We’ve all experienced leaders who had no business being in positions of leadership.  They were cruel, cold, uninspiring, lacked vision or narcissistic.  Many couldn’t manage their way out of a paper bag let alone lead anyone anywhere (ok, so I have some strong feelings about bad leaders, I know).

Perhaps because of those bad leaders, we have many who could perform the role of leader who won’t do it.  They’ve seen the bloody battle that erupts around leaders.  They see the accolades, sure, but they see the bathroom wall writing, too.  It’s a reputation-killer in our society to be a leader.  Can we honestly blame people for not wanting to lead?

Or perhaps it’s Marvel’s fault.  We hold up high the myth of the super hero who can come in and lead effectively with character and right action.  Those movies are blockbusters, but do they set us up to think that all leadership should look like Captain America?  It’s a fantasy.  Could it be that our fascination with that genre impacts our willingness to jump into leadership?  Could be.

So what do businesses do?  They are so starved for leadership that money and willingness become tied together.  Begging someone to lead and paying that person handsomely is our charge to motivate.  I agree that our leadership should be compensated for the skill sets, aptitudes and knowledge they possess.  However, if we bypass those qualities in favor of willingness to hold a position, we belittle the intention of leadership.  Instead of influencers towards mission, we box bodies into short-term, high-paying figureheads.   That doesn’t seem too appealing. 

If someone has some of the qualities necessary to build upon for a leadership role, it’s our job to help coach them into the role, not scare them off.  Promoting people because you can is not a successful succession plan.  True leadership is of a different path.  Leadership is about influence, yes, but deeper than that, a leader inspires others to push and reach for their excellence individually and corporately.  A leader rallies people toward a challenge or lasting goal.

One of our passions is to ridicule and belittle our leadership.  We leave them little room to grow from their mistakes.  The title of leader does not and should not imply perfection.  No one fully arrives once given a role like that.  Regardless of your political persuasion, look at the way we’ve beaten up our last six presidents (and please, don’t send me any articles as to why Bush or Obama or Clinton are more awful than others).  I wouldn’t want any of my kids to be president, and that’s a sad statement.

If I were president, I would receive a barrage of criticism just like they did.  And while that’s on a grand scale, the smaller version is just as powerful in our workplaces.  It’s why we struggle to find people willing to step up.  And so our succession plans move from who is able to who is willing.  There is a vast difference between the two.

Some of you reading this know I am talking to you.  You know that you have the ability to lead, but won’t jump in.  You’ve seen how other leaders have been devoured by their own.  I know it’s not pretty.  Leadership, however, is a privilege that costs.  It’s not that you will become a leader and now be free from ridicule because you’ll have them read this blog.  That’s not what will work.

What will work is your relentless pursuit of excellence, your drive to encourage those you lead towards the mission and your creative exuberance towards the vision.  Some will not like to see this type of person leading them.  It’s too active, too forward thinking, too expectant.  I would say that’s too bad for them.  You are made from deeper and richer stuff.  Don’t fear leadership and what might come with taking it; rather, fear what a lack of leadership will do for a spirit such as yours. 

Freeze Frame

(by +Victorio Milian)

I've worked many jobs in my career. Some I've enjoyed, others I've hated. I'm fortunate at this stage of my life to be involved in a few professional ventures that I really enjoy.

Part of why I'm in a good place these days is that I've found a way to incorporate my creative talents into my work. For example, I've been writing for over five years for various blogs and other outlets. This has provided me with opportunities for my work to appear in magazines, to travel, as well as connect with other great professionals. My emerging interest in photography and graphic design is helping me with my clients and their respective needs. My hobbies and interests have a home in my places of work.

My creative activities also serve as a diary of sorts. It gives me an opportunity to reflect on my growth and development, both as a HR practitioner as well as a person.

I say all this because I recently read a NPR article entitled, 'Got A Hobby? Might Be A Smart Professional Move.' In it, the author, Maanvi Singh, discusses research which reveals that employees who have creative endeavors outside of work tend to perform better at work.

According to the researchers abstract:

We conducted two studies that examined the relationships between non-work creative activity, recovery experiences, and performance-related behaviours at work. Creative activity was positively associated with recovery experiences (i.e., mastery, control, and relaxation) and performance-related outcomes (i.e., job creativity and extra-role behaviours).

A word of caution--it was a study done on a small group of professionals. Also, more research needs to be done on the connection between a person's creative outlet and work performance. Therefore, I wouldn't point to it as definitive proof of a relationship.

For me, however, it does make sense. Particularly as a consultant, I'm more engaged with clients when I can bring my full array of talents to work, even if they're not needed or utilized. And I've learned plenty of things at work that I've applied at home. Also, having a creative outlet helps me to relieve stress and to regain balance.

How can employees figure out how to be more creative at work, so that they can be more satisfied? Here are a few suggestions:

• Look at yourself. Take stock of the things you like to do, particularly those activities that you may not be able to engage in during work hours. Perhaps you like art, or exercising. Whatever it is, take stock of those things.
• Look at your job. What type of organization do you work for? Specifically, what are the values and expectations within it? Understanding the type of environment you work within can help you identify whether or not there's an opportunity to explore incorporating creative activities at work. For example, I've worked in environments where my social media activities were encouraged. In others, it was a big no-no.
• Look at your supervisor. You will have no bigger advocate or obstacle than your immediate supervisor. And that goes for any organizational initiative you may want to implement or adjust.

Finding that professional/personal sweet spot is tough, whether you're a CEO or the janitor. When people are able to clearly articulate and exist within that sweet spot between the two, they (in my opinion) tend to do better at work.

Stir It Up

What can you learn from the Muppets?  Lots.  For those of us in a certain age group, we can recall those fantastic Muppet Show episodes with Julie Andrews, Paul Simon, Diana Ross and a host of other celebrities.  The Muppets would get these respected actors (and Mark Hamill), singers, performers, etc. to don a chicken costume or wrestle with a giant puppet all for the sake of a laugh.

In what ways do we become what we need to in order for the message we need to share to propagate?  I think about the tons of training I’ve done through the years and the ways in which I have had to grow the delivery and the content structure to meet the audiences in need of the knowledge.  Wow.  So many “performances.” 

Please know that I don’t use that word – performance – lightly or with frivolity.  I mean, performance.  The delivery of our information is as important as the information itself.  If we are unaware of the learning styles, the history of training in the company or the expectation of knowledge applied in the company, then we’re likely to see training fail.  That time will be little more than time off from the line for the average worker.

Ultimately, we know that this is not the desire of training.  The goal is usually wanting to expand upon some knowledge already in use and add to its functionality, or use it to build a bridge to another knowledge base.  So many times, I have watched the connection light bulbs go off.  These men and women, who have honed a craft, see the value in the information presented and desire to add it to the repertoire of duties they have.  It’s humbling.

And yet, I have also seen just the opposite.  I don’t always hit it out of the park.  I watch eyes that seem to say, “OK, how much longer do I have to sit here?”  Ugh.  That’s not such a great feeling.  Our duty as trainers is to give connectivity and relevance which comes from knowing your audience and the material well.  It then requires delivery in such a way as to hold attention, show appreciation and encourage participation.

Even in matters of compliance information, how much thought do we put into delivery?  With the Affordable Care Act, there is much to share, for example.  The material itself can be confusing or overwhelming, so consideration should be given as to how to deliver it.  For me, as I've shared with many on this topic, I have begun an information session by asking how the audience would have handled health insurance reform.  Obviously, you've got to keep a tight reign on conversation, but it has allowed the hearers to understand some parallels to the ACA.  Building blocks.  

Listen, constantly doing role play won’t work.  Always doing a video isn’t going to do it.  Arts and crafts at every training session is weird.  Think about variety.  Think about holding interest.  Think about the goal of the information.  Allow that to drive preparation for delivery.  Study the material to know it inside and out, yes, but also figure out what the best delivery method would be.

Think about how weird it might have been to sit in the creative arts and development office for a major television network and offer the Muppets as an adult solution to a primetime slot.  Crazy!  And yet, it worked because the delivery of material (the performance) was mindful of its audience.  We stepped outside of ourselves and entered this world.  That's what training should afford - setting the stage for dynamic engagement where effectual change occurs.

Problem

Healing.  It’s a gift.  In my life, I have experienced mercy and grace which has allowed healing to take place, mostly in myself and in relationship to others.  The ability to offer such a gift to others has no monetary price tag, but I know it comes at a cost.

When I have given a road for healing to others, it’s not always what I might want to do.  I defer to being bitter, angry, vindictive or self-righteous.  It’s my nature, and I don’t think I am alone in that.  I have a right to be hurt.  That person was callous, egotistical or just plain wrong.  And now, the relationship is damaged.  This damaged relationship is now impacting situations, workflow or other relationships.  The impact of this problem is tension, a rift or brokenness and it is far-reaching and, for businesses, costly.

As the week’s events between SHRM and HRCI have unfolded, I kept coming back to this idea of healing.  HR professionals know that we are often (if not always) called upon to mend relationship and change the course of brokenness in the workplace.  We converse with the injured parties; we bring our affirming communicative skills to bear on the situation; we coach the parties to seek resolution.  We recognize that there really can be someone in the wrong, but that does not have to be where the situation ends.  Now that error is seen, what are we doing to mend it?  We push for repair and then growth to learn how to deal with similar facts in the future.

SHRM and HRCI feel a little like Mom and Dad fighting.  This week, I have felt like the kid from the marriage watching, listening and being heart-broken.  I love both of my parents.  I have demonstrated allegiance to both sides and expressed love equally.  Just as in most divorce situations, Mom and Dad’s individual needs and wants have evolved for some time.  Both sides are looking back and trying to pinpoint when the complimentary paths diverged.  And regardless of fault or blame, they are now dealing with the gap that has widened between them and their expectations of each other.

The kids in a divorce situation want to help.  They want things to go back to how they were.  They want healing.  For us, as HR professionals, we must not choose sides but appreciate each side independently of the other.  It’s not our job to fix their relationship; these two sides consist of big girls and boys who can and should find their way to common ground for the sake of the professionals they serve.  Just as kids often cannot fix mom and dad’s relationship, we find ourselves heartsick observers. 

What we can choose to do is be a conduit for healing as opportunity strikes.  Share with each side how we feel.  Maintain the integrity of our roles as HR professionals.  Continue to be proud of the growth and accomplishments we’ve achieved that both sides have afforded, whether PHR/SPHR/GPHR certification or volunteer leadership positions in SHRM.  We have been cared for by both organizations.  Let’s return that care back to the two sides that are in need now.

Again, healing is a gift.  It’s not a wussy, feel good sentiment, but a willful decision with measurable results.  That kind of decision ought to be the type that we’re already used to making as HR professionals.  Listen up, Kids! There's a problem. Mom and Dad need us now. 

Papa Don't Preach

“Make it work.”  I love this phrase.  It brings to mind those hard-nosed, over-working small business owners who are keenly aware of the limited resources they have.  They have little time for holding hands and for coddling employees.  In essence, “You can’t do it? Then get out” is the attitude.

The major metropolitan areas on the East Cost of the US that I have engaged with throughout my career (Philadelphia, New York, primarily) are full of small business owners.  Many first generation citizens built their businesses on the 24/7 principle of work ethic with little concern for how much PTO they’ve accumulated or if there is an ergonomic chair for them to sit.  They busted their humps and created an atmosphere of hard work above all.

And while I love this (work ethic matters!), I have also gotten to watch these family-run small businesses push their children into roles that they have little giftedness in or desire to do.  The guilt of what a grandfather and father have done to build a company sits on the son/daughter who is primed to take over, despite the fact that the son’s/daughter's talents do not lean towards running this business.  These conversations are very difficult for a son/daughter to have with dad; there is so much of a personal nature behind it.  A father might preach the painful story of how the business began and the work it took to build it.  Guilt can easily set in.  Ideally, the father will understand and support his child's choice, but often I have seen a dismissal of such a desire and a fatherly push to take over the company.

Perhaps it’s from this traditional thought pattern that some management holds hostage employees who need to go.  Companies can find themselves in the unfortunate circumstance of desperately keeping employees because of their knowledge of systems, processes or product despite their lack of cooperation with other staff or overall lack of connectivity to the organization’s mission.  The employee has shown that he/she is disinterested and demotivated, but because he/she has been there for some time and knows everything, we have to just deal with it.

Managers have encouraged, yelled, cried with and threatened these employees.  And to the detriment of some companies, some of these employees have been promoted through the years and now serve in leadership-type roles (supervisors or managers).  Why are these flakes promoted?  How is it that the apparent reward of knowledge solely over the full package of long-term connection is quality enough to promote someone like this?  Companies find themselves stuck to do this.  Well, get un-stuck!

Our places of employment are not Guantanamo.  We are not holding prisoners, but employing people (I know, some employees think the former, but don’t you believe them!).  If someone is not the right fit, then plans need to be made to transition this person out.  Employment at will is still a valid policy in the US and is allowed to be used, as long as it does not conflict with other legislation and policy.  So, set up knowledge-sharing opportunities so that those who you do see a future with can learn from those who should go.  The words here are simple, but the action of them is tough.  Managers think about the chaos that might occur when so-and-so is fired.  If our employees are not prisoners, then why is management?  The work-relationship is not about that.

If your father said, “you have to work this company and that’s final,” there is more to work through emotionally and relationally rather than just professionally.  In our workplace, most of our relationships are not familial.  We’re not disappointing two or three generations.  Management has a job to do.  Finding and keeping talent that will move the company forward is part of our responsibility, just as moving out that talent that is destroying or, at the least, stagnating the mission.  And to be honest, we’re not doing any favors to that individual employee who doesn’t fit.  Let that person discover what he/she should connect to in a new organization.   It’s okay; we’re not their father.

Don't You Forget About Me

Comcast is pushing its new Streampix movie and television show catalog.  There are promos aplenty with much of it being TV commercials.  And its primary movie of choice to play in the background of the announcer's messaging is "The Breakfast Club."  This movie debuted in early 1985.  It's 2013 (barely).  A movie almost 29 years old is the primary movie of appeal for current streaming consumers?  Apparently.

This movie has been shown hundreds of times on TBS and the like.  It's sold thousands of VHS and DVD copies.  And it continues to sell.  So why?  For those of you familiar with my deep love for Molly Ringwald, I will leave that aside as a reason (hard for me to do).  Part of the appeal is the nostalgia of the 80's.  Those of us who hit their teens sometime during that decade find that this movie, perhaps more than any other, defines our generation.  The characters struggle with identity and their place in the world.  The peer pressure, the temptations of life, the masks needed to be worn, the inadequacy of self - all of these are themes, still relevant today.

It's brilliant, actually, that Comcast is using it.  The movie is a microcosm of life beyond the teenage years.  Many of us work in places where we have to mask ourselves and pretend that all is well when it very much is not.  And, to be clear, this is not necessarily an indictment on the workplace or company; it may be that your continued poor view of self haunts your everyday existence and causes you to maintain appearances using all of your energy.  Letting your guard down is not an option and perhaps there is no real outlet for it.

I am aware that counseling is available for the deeper issues; some companies have rather robust EAP's or even in-house professionals.  However, the reality is that most of us won't use those available services or seek outside help for what we would call "it's just how I am."  Going home after work and popping on "The Breakfast Club" while crying might be all the therapy needed.  I have experienced workplaces where the demand is great and the care for people is not.  I have also been at workplaces where the care for people is high, but the facade to be okay and participate with others is crushing.  Not everyone is the "kum ba yah" type to be okay with HR's latest and greatest team building program.  HR can encourage, albeit unintentionally, poor self-esteem (I can't do what these people can do), dishonesty (a lack of people being able to be genuine) or compartmentalization (I need to work a certain way and fit into a certain box).

Let's not be offended by this.  Let that go.  It's not about you.  It's about the companies we work for and the employees we serve.  So, ask yourself, what have I forgotten about people that I need to re-learn?  Take some time to consider your company to jar your memory.  Does peer pressure still exist at work?  Is it positive in that it's about performance and cultural health? Or is it about high school groupings all over again?  Who are the Cool Crowd and how do they keep the Dorks out?  How do people sit in the breakroom?  Look, this is just one stream of thought - there are MANY to consider.  But we ought to think about the Ally Sheedy's and Anthony Michael Hall's of our companies.  Where do they fit and are they fitting well?  Don't forget about them.

And yet, I would also submit that the Molly Ringwald's and Emilio Estevez's don't have it all together either. And sometimes, we in HR feed those roles and allow little room for them to say, "Enough!"  We build programs around the funny guys, rather than around significant content. so that we get a visceral response to affirm our own existence at work - close your mouth and don't pretend to be shocked.  I have seen this done numerous times and I am sure it will continue.  It's the same line of thinking around some who desire to be seen as "experts" or "thought leaders."  Posting and re-tweeting "smart" stuff doesn't really make you either an expert or a leader (ouch).

I am driven to always come back to the people we serve.  We have to consider all of them and how they fit together.  "The Breakfast Club" works well because we see the roles each one plays, the walls come down and true relationship emerges, but here's the reality - they went back to school on Monday and assuredly re-acclimated to their role.  They may hate it, but they do it.  Adults do it, too.  

Fitting in and finding your place means something to every person (don't even pretend it doesn't - even non-conformists hang out with other non-conformists).  Individual identity is precious and should be encouraged to be explored.  If you read biographies about some of the great business leaders, you'll see struggles dealt with in these areas for each and the way in which they were fostered through it.  We can consider this as we develop our programs and benefits, yes, but more so in our messaging and our recognition language.  

How do all of the pieces fit?  That's our job to study.  We are to create environments that will allow every person to be free to be the skillful, collaborative person we've hired.  That's what our companies pay for and that's what we need them to be.  And each person has a role.  Don't forget about any one of them.

Freaks Come Out at Night

Multiple shifts often mean multiple sub-cultures.  The way things are done during the day shift, for example, can vary (sometimes greatly) from how they are done during the night shift.  An us/them effect can take over and the disparity in attitude can cost an organization in lost productivity and higher payroll due to paying more for the extra time it takes to get things done.  

In one organization I got to be a part of some years ago, the day shift thought the night shift was a bunch of freaks.  They would spend part of their work day and break time discussing how dumb, crazy, stupid, bizarre and idiotic the night crew was.  Sounds productive and helpful to the culture, right?

Management has one choice in this type of situation - Get up.  Get out of your ergonomic chair and get on the floor.  Engage with the sales teams, line workers and administrative staff.  OK, how?

• Change the tone and type of conversation by being an example of healthy communication and encouragement towards goals.  Make the decision to not participate in smearing an entire team's or group's reputation.  If an employee thinks the night shift is filled with freaks, ask why?  Challenge the basis, not argumentatively, but directly. 
• Consistently be seen.  This effort cannot be a "one and done" deal.  It cannot be a once per month which happens to fall during the same time each month.  It cannot be done daily at the same time.  Mix it up.  Catch people outside of habit or comfort.  Allow them to be affected by your presence.  Your mere presence should give cause for employees to pause and think about what they are about to say to someone else.
• Don't allow comfort to get in the way.  You're going to have to do these things on all shifts.  Only engaging with the shift that is most convenient to your schedule will fall short.  Those workers on the shift you hardly come to see will know it.  It's not hard to amplify an us/them feeling when you're dealing with multiple shifts and teams.  The likely winners are usually the Monday through Friday day shift.  They are able to work with the bulk of senior management and administrators during the "normal week" schedule.  You cannot allow that to be the perspective; it will foster the feeling that any other shift is less than desirable.  Get up on a Saturday.  Go into work at 3AM for the overnight crew (just leave early from work the next day).  It's a little inconvenient but it's an appropriate message to those employees.

Simply, be present and persistent.  Set a tone that you would want others to follow.  Don't wait for someone else to start it (scary, I know).  You set the bar and start the momentum.  Don't look to the right or to the left for someone else to champion the cause.

The only freaks that ought to be named should be those who do not extend themselves for the betterment of the company.  What would it mean to your company if this were true?  The anomalies of the company are those who are not present fully and persistent in protecting culture.  Nothing scary about that!

Holding Out for a Hero

It is easy to look to someone else to fulfill our needs or desires.  Talk shows are full of people who've chosen a mate to be someone's "all in all" and, for whatever reason, it doesn't work out.  People tend to want to find that magic in someone that will rescue them from their current situation.  We do it with people, but we also do it with stuff.  We want that lottery win so bad.  We think that will rescue us from our current situation.  Then how is it that 70% of lottery winners are bankrupt?  We don't find our hero to be what we expect it to be.

For those of us old enough to remember School House Rock, there was a song called "My Hero, Zero."  The point of the lesson is that by itself a zero is nothing but put it behind a "1" and you've got "10," an increase numerically.  The Zero finds itself to be heroic in that it's nothingness turns into value when used in conjunction with another number.

As "People People," we get so many chances to bring zeroes to heroic levels.  I am not talking about budgets (I've tried that before and some accountant always catches my "accidental" additional zero at the end of the HR budget), but rather finding value in all of those who work with and for us.  The quietness of a worker should not be allowed to signify his/her minor contribution to the whole while the boisterous worker seems to get credit for things he/she had nothing to do with just because of loudness.  Cultivating those "zeroes" into heroes is part of our strategic responsibility.

A hero is one who is admired for performing great and/or brave acts and has fine qualities, according to Webster's Dictionary.  Aren't there some people in our workplaces that have those qualities and others simply do not know or notice, including the hero himself/herself?  Give consideration as to how to cultivate heroes.

1. Look for those who do exceptional work.  I'm not talking about the person who answers twenty calls a day whose job it is to answer phones; that is not a hero.  We cannot reward basic job responsibilities by calling that person a hero.  It has to be great or brave.  How about the worker who stays late to finish a project for three weeks without most people knowing?  How about the person who looks for ways to improve processes or technology for the good of the company even when it's not in his/her direct job description?
2. Listen to others tell stories.  Set the tone for this, though.  Someone coming to tell you that Joe is a great guy because Mike, who sits next to him, is tough to deal with and Joe doesn't complain about him.  Really?  I mean, I appreciate that, but Joe is no hero.  What about those of us who have relatives who are annoying to deal with?  Where's my hero trophy (just kidding, Family, there's no one annoying in our family besides me)?  Cultivate a forum for people to cheer others on by noticing the great or brave work someone is doing.  We should encourage our employees to notice great acts from great people.
3. Don't make this about gift cards.  I get that we want to reward people and I can appreciate the gesture, but the gesture can become the goal rather than things being done for true heroic reasons - rescue, encouragement, betterment, bravery, etc.  A $5 gift card to Starbucks is not equal to someone truly doing something marvelous.  And on this note, don't make each month a "have to" in finding someone.  Haven't you worked for those companies who have an Employee of the Month and wind up picking someone "who hasn't had it yet this year"?  Wow, that's stellar criteria.

Heroes are not those in front, per se, seeking the accolades.  We've got to look for them.  The humility coupled with the great or brave act is admirable and sets a tone for others.  The culture becomes attuned to the qualities in those being recognized.  It sets a pattern that we want repeated.

I am holding out for a hero in each of your companies.  You need one.  And lest I forget to say, you may actually be that hero for your company.  And if your company hasn't recognized it yet, keep doing what you're doing.  It's not for you to determine what management ought to do for you.  You just keep doing what you're doing because it's the right thing to do.  We are still allowed to do that; no federal or state law requires us to change that practice (yet)!

This Used to be My Playground

For 10 years, I have to admit, I have loved What Not to Wear.  I didn't really love Season 1, actually.  There was a different male host and the show was a little predictable.  But Season 2 turned the corner.  Men and women (okay, it's been all women for the last six seasons) with varying fashion dilemmas are nominated by friends and family for a makeover.  Seems classic, right?  In many ways, you would be correct.  So why with all of the other makeover shows that have come and gone, did #WNTW (oh yeah, I'm down with the hashtag) last for ten years?

In part, the hosts are hilarious.  Stacy and Clinton, bravo.  In part, too, it's because there is the understanding that the clothes don't make you feel something, but rather, who you are is highlighted by the clothes you wear.  Personality, professionalism and passion all pour through your outfit.  Silly?  What does it say to you when someone highly qualified shows up to an interview with ripped jeans and a graphic T?  Unless it's Urban Outfitters or a company in your mom's basement, you might be disappointed that this person did not think it worthwhile to dress accordingly.  Clothes do make the man (or woman, as it may be), but the tactic of #WNTW is to do so as an output of who the person is.

The hosts spend time talking to family and friends.  They ask the contributor what life has been like, where they want to go in the future personally, professionally, and how those around him/her can know those desires just by the contributor walking into the room.  It's not a clean shirt, trendy haircut and new lipstick kind of engagement.

We can do the same thing...not the wardrobe makeover part (I've seen what some of you wear and you're lucky there won't be an 11th year of What Not to Wear!), but a talent makeover.  Some of the issues for our long-term employees are that they've done work a certain way for years and it's tough to get them to try new ideas or new processes.  Perhaps they used to try and it didn't work out or the plans were too all over the place, so they don't "waste their time."  They have gotten used to playing on the same swing set and don't want to hear about the latest and greatest stuff.  It's very much like some of the contributors on the show.  They are still wearing clothes from the 80's and don't know why they can't get a date or that the dates they do get are psycho.  They're comfortable in what they know; "it's worked for me" is a common phrase.  

Let's show them how valuable their experience can be in light of new understandings of production, marketing and technology.  Let's get them into a new "outfit" not because we want to make them look hip, but because it will allow people to engage with them quicker and find out what they know.  Take the time to look at how things work in your place of employment.  Do the seasoned employees hang out with each other exclusively?  How will the younger ones feel okay to engage?  What about knowledge management?  What if some of those seasoned employees retire...where will that know-how go?

Assess the environment.  Not just the physical attributes, but the cultural attributes.  What is it the company values and how is that upheld?  Just like the contributor is encouraged to let his/her inner passions and interests shine through the deliberately chosen wardrobe, so too should our companies shine the mission and values through it's outer markings.  And that is largely seen in our employees.

We ought to be the experts at recognizing competencies in our people.  We should look for ways to accent and highlight those KSAs in ways that others in the organization will take notice and want to engage.  Think of it like dressing someone up for a date.  He/She may look good when they walk in the door and cause the date to be thrilled at the sight, but the conversation throughout the date will determine how likely this relationship is to continue.  So many companies have thrown thousands at image and surface tactics only to come right back to square one once the hoopla is over.  We know better than to fall for that (I hope).

The territory we're in charge of is our organization.  Allow talent to speak through our talent.  How can we facilitate the recognition of such talent?  How can we get our talent to go deeper and express more?  It's our primary job in human resources to manage talent fully (that's a lot of "talent" usage, isn't it?).  We don't get a $5000 gift card per employee to get it done, but we do get to use the resources at our disposal, which includes our smarts, to make it happen.

Woman's World

You might want to watch the video and listen to the song first.  Get the blood pumping.  A techno-dance beat with vocals from Cher might do the trick.  Can you believe that Cher, at 67, has the #3 album on iTunes?  She has had the power to reach audiences since the 1960's, and it doesn't seem to be slowing down!

I enjoy power.  Power to create, to teach, to inspire.  I am not a fan of the dictatorial or bullying type.  Having a voice to engage with a variety of people for a variety of causes because of the power to captivate, to educate and, yes, even to entertain is a gift.  To this end, power is about service.

HR professionals have, at times, become caught up in the desire/need to have a "seat at the table" (do you hear me retching at the overuse of that phrase?).  In doing so, our eyes become incredibly self-focused and we dwell on ways to show ourselves to be valuable and necessary.  We attend seminars that tell us how to get our executive teams to welcome us in with open arms; we listen to webinars geared towards personal advancement.  Now, understand that I am on-board with the truths in these things, but I would like to submit that the best leaders I've worked with have served their companies/peoples by example and lead the charge as a result.

Servant leadership seems to come easier for women.  It's not weakness to those who observe and understand.  Take Mother Teresa, for example.  She had the ear of many world leaders.  She created an entirely new religious order of nuns.  She spoke and wrote about the issues of poverty, healthcare and hunger to the world who wanted to hear what she had to say.  And she earned the right to be heard by caring for thousands of impoverished and diseased people.  

It's not to say that this is only something women can do.  As men, we're often not raised to serve others well.  We are taught to serve only in as much as you can be served by doing so.  And women are not exempt from this thinking either.  The workplace has forced this thinking upon both sexes and pushed the boundaries for self-centeredness and self-indulgence.  There is a need to return to an air of humility in service so that the cultures we seek to create are founded on lasting principles.

Talent to lead is a skill.  It's not all natural.  There are those with a natural inclination to lead, but refinement is necessary.  Service to others most often helps to refine with lasting results. 

Lasting results.  Now, there is a concept.  So much of what we hope to do is short term.  Hard work is needed for all efforts, but consistent approach sustains.  In this case, leadership that is focused upon those to be served keeps us honest, impassioned and humble.  We should want to get better in the ways we can be effective, not only by attending self-help workshops, but by practicing what we preach by serving those to whom we're delivering the message.  Mother Teresa didn't decide to do what she did because someone told her to be a great leader.  She did what she did because she was driven to serve.  The more she engaged with the people she was to serve, the more she wanted to get better at leading the charge for change.  She didn't "serve" for a while (you know, put her time in) and then move on to the speaking circuit, distancing herself from the passionate purpose.

We need to keep our heads in the game.  We are some of the most incredible professionals to walk the earth today.  We have an opportunity to be impactful and engaging, and thereby able to lead effectively.  And we can maintain and expand these truths by serving well those with whom we've been entrusted.

She Bop

Do you remember trying to fit in?  You might still be trying now!  Our school years most often represent the times where this was a reality.  We wanted so much to be liked, to be popular, to be wanted, to be so much more than we saw ourselves as.  We desired people to seek out our presence.

As we've aged (so hard to write that...), we still look to fit in.  Often, however, it may not be as much about being popular as it is being relevant.  We don't want to be our dads or moms of a generation ago.  We don't want to go "gently into that good night" and we shouldn't.  We should want to remain engaged and informed.  We should maintain a voice within our organizations that still speaks to the pulse of the markets, the competition, the corporate philosophy.

But I would be delinquent if I didn't mention priorities.  In our quest to be relevant, we sometimes lose our way in keeping the priorities of our organizations first.  Some of you are already shaking your heads in agreement (thanks!), but let's get some perspective on this, as it's not a new phenomenon.

We know that sex sells.  It has done so since time began.  Men and women have both used it to be desirous and to achieve goals.  Advertisers and marketing executives understand this and regularly use sex as relevant to the generation watching and listening.  The philosophy for some major organizations has shifted due to the use of sex to sell product.  GoDaddy has had some beautiful women in its advertising and this has been successful for them.  Oh, and by the way, they sell website domains and services...very sexy, hence the relevant advertising.

OK, in HR, we can't use sex (if you are, wow) to sell our relevance.  So, what do we use?  What is the latest and greatest product, series of lectures, technology?  The first component is to remember what the mission of the organization is.  All messaging should be tied to that, and if there are messages that don't fit, we should remove them, regardless of how "relevant" it is.  Secondly, relevance does not equal appealing.  These words have become overlapped in organizations.  Think about school for a moment.  There were days that school seemed boring, tough, annoying, overwhelming and stupid.  The appeal of school was not always there, but it's relevance remained.  Education is vital to the health and growth of people (we can argue about Algebra later).

And finally, the method of achieving relevance may not be popular. In fact, sometimes it may be polarizing. When Miley Cyrus performed at this year's VMAs, she delivered what she believed to be a relevant performance. She was talked about for days after the performance, clips were shown over and over again, celebrities were interviewed, etc. The response was divided - some loved it, some hated it. Is she relevant because we were talking about it or is she relevant because her messaging is consistent with the goals of her organization?

The dictionary defines relevance as "closely connected or appropriate to the matter at hand." What does the messaging we deliver in our companies say about our relevance? Are we "flash in the pan" messengers? Meaning, we deliver the latest and greatest, and as such, we have employees who pay little mind to it. They know that if they just wait a bit, the message will change again, so why commit? Better use of our time is to remain consistent in the ways in which we deliver product and services to our customers and to relay that consistent message to employees with enthusiasm and openness. Relevance can be enhanced by better connecting it to the matter at hand.

If we are Brother and typewriters are not what people want any more, then what are we doing to continue to deliver products and services in keeping with our mission of providing office solutions? Understand what's going on in the markets and maintain relevance through offerings. Simple to say, I know, but necessary to unpack with the executive team. Brother, for example, still employs 1100 workers in the US. They care to know how the company plans on remaining consistent in mission in light of changes in technology, usage and competition.

Sometimes our problem in HR is that we like the shiny new toys. New programs, new tactics, new videos are great, but if they don't contribute to the overall mission of the organization, then they are not relevant, regardless of how much fun they are. To be taken seriously as a true business partner, we have to be able to show how what we do, suggest and implement is driving our company to its mission and related goals. Some of you are doing great work in this vein and should keep sharing your great ideas. And for those of you not doing so, cheer up! Listen to "She Bop" (with which I have forever scarred you), re-energize and review the mission. Relevance takes thought...just like Algebra.