Can't Stop the Feeling

Standing firm in an opinion is admirable.  Standing firm in an opinion is foolishness.  Which is right?  I’ve had managers defend their stance to me in various contexts and situations.  And there are times I’ve agreed with them and there are times I’ve not.  There are times I’ve had to ask them what they were thinking (a question I have regretted asking upon occasion because they’ve told me).

Whose perspective gets to win out and why? Is it just based upon how we’re feeling? If so, that has to stop.  

Often, the person with the most power gets to win.  The executive, the c-suite, the board of directors...one of them can pull ahead in the winning viewpoint rather easily.  The trick might just be to work with this level in understanding the winning perspective as well as influencing it. 

Remember that freshman year of Psych 101?  One of the many classic truths taught was that people want to be heard and validated.  Our need to belong and to contribute runs deep.  When people, especially when they sit on the decision-making team, don’t feel that they can do or be these things, they leave, attack or, perhaps the worst, die inside.  We can influence someone who is ready to settle for one of these options.

Perhaps it might be a worthy exercise to provide some case studies to the executive team, leaving out the resolution, in order to foster discussion between them.  Why wait until there is a real situation to find out which opinion will win?  And from here, understand and influence such an opinion, where appropriate. 

If someone has the opportunity to share his/her perspective and to be heard in a safe environment, then the defenses are lowered.  A time for conversation and for consideration is easier to foster.  It’s here that those details which are illegal or morally questionable can be vetted thoroughly by those decision-makers.  It’s here that previous experiences can be shared to offer clarity around a particular perspective.  It’s here that the cause of the organization can be upheld stronger so that the decisions made are broader in context.

The natural question that arises here is, “Who decides who is right?”  Well, that’s where the forum matters so much.  Our ability to foster dialogue is crucial; however, if we cannot do this in an environment where the sharing of thoughts can happen, it will not produce the desired results.  Our impact is based upon the results that come from such a time.  With the end in mind, it behooves us to ensure that the environment is healthy for dialogue.  Remember, just being able to express a view and for it to be heard clearly is a large part of the battle. 

But, it must be understood, that there may be a divide between positions.  There will have to be an ultimate decision made.  Respect for the next steps of those individuals on the opposing side should be offered.  If someone feels so strongly about an opinion that he/she needs to leave the organization, then that’s okay.  You’ve established an environment for that person to share the different view, as well as to be heard.  Being heard is not the same as full agreement.  We help cultivate maturity through situations like this.

This is not wishful thinking, by the way.  I’ve sat in board meetings where perspectives and opinions were being shared.  People were being heard, but these people were also the hearers of others’ expressed opposite viewpoints.  It’s not about making everyone think the same.  Group think has lots of issues to contend with, too.  This is about readying your team to act when it needs to.  This is about ensuring a path towards an appropriate response in situations.  This is about allowing each other to find out where the edges have to be smoothed out or where they need to be left sharp.

In Mommie Dearest, Faye Dunaway portrays Joan Crawford.  It’s an ugly look into the movie star’s life and her influence on her children.  There is one ancillary scene towards the end of Joan’s life where her husband, Al Steele, has died and left her with his seat on the board for Pepsi Cola.  She attends the first meeting afterwards only to be patronized by the remaining all-male board and “kindly” offered to be excused.  It was the first time a woman had been on the board.  The men did not know how to respond and had not worked through it ahead of time.  They were made to feel ridiculous and she offered a solid perspective on it that they could not dispute, but only to welcome her onto the board.

And while there are laws today which would prevent what Joan Crawford went through, there are still plenty of perspectives out there.  Someone has to listen to them, to understand them, to challenge them, even if it’s just to be prepared with a response as to why it’s the way it is.  Oh, and “because I said so” is not a thoughtful response or position.  Just in case that’s what your plan was.

Creep

The challenge of negativity isn’t new.  We fight it everyday.  When we are faced with it, what is our normal response?  Walk away?  Join in?  Yikes.

Kit, the pitcher in A League of Their Own, is negative throughout most of the movie.  Manufacturing sympathy for her is tough.  She is a whiner.  She brings down those around her.  She is frustrated with the sister who seems to have everything.  She is obnoxious to her teammates.  She is negative about her life and wants to bring others down around her.

Think about how critical the pitcher is to the team.  What does it do to the team to have someone like this at the mound?  How many of these people work with or for us?  And while you might want to fight this person, just as happens in one scene of the movie, work policy is likely to prohibit you from doing so. 

Confrontation is appropriate.  You do not need to allow this person to monopolize your time or to jeopardize the flow of the rest of the team due to such negativity.  It is not okay.

Make the business case first.  Log the hours given in support of this negative person, to try to move him/her beyond the perceived issues.  Log the hours given in support of correction of the frustrated team communication.  Log the hours given in conversation with other team members who struggle to work with that negative person.  Those hours have a cost, with very little ROI. 

Often the pattern for a manager is to have all of these conversations, but the functional team dynamic remains the same.  The cycle of engagement is not impacted and the status quo returns a day after addressing the issue.  Management does little usually to course-correct the department.  The symptom gets address – frustration, lack of communication, hurt feelings – but the cause – the negativity of a person – is left because we don’t know what to do.

Sit with Mr./Ms. Negative and share the logged hours.  Show him/her how much time has been spent because of him/her.  Let the time be a factual example that the behavior has caused.  You’re not saying the classic, “I spend so much time dealing with your stuff.”  That’s too general and will likely cause the negative employee to be remorseful for a moment but with no lasting repercussion.  When management is specific to the time, a line can be drawn in the sand to say enough.

A manager should further make the business case regarding lack of productivity.  In all of the hours spent by the manager in dealing with the situations caused by the negativity, rest assured it’s about the same for the team members involved.  They are not on task because of having to address the related issues of the negativity.  And every member of the team is valuable.  It should be very easy to show the negative employee that the team is not here to deal with these issues; it’s not part of their job description.  The cost of lost productivity is real and can be shared as an amount based upon time, hourly rate, cost of goods, and other operational & production costs.  

Giving the negative person truth and fact is the most respectful way to engage.  It will allow the conversation to move away from feeling, which is the default position, and rest purely on fact.  Management must engage on a level that moves the negative person out of his/her own perspective and into one that includes the company’s purpose.  Often, the negative individual sees his/her role as unappreciated at the company.  By sharing factual information, the negative person is offered a different (and more correct) view of how the company sees him/her.  When confronted with such information, management can be deliberate about the path of engagement moving forward.

Management will need to follow through on this.  If we’re serious that the waste of time is enough, then we must act upon that.  No more resources of time, team members and operational productivity will be wasted on such negativity.  Everything isn’t terrible, everything isn’t against you and everything isn’t about you.  Clearly act on this.

And while management may feel that the negative person is too tough to handle, a better view is to think about the team members that aren’t receiving such attention despite the great work being done.  The squeaky wheel getting the grease isn’t a long-term strategy for success.  Affirm the right behaviors more than the wrong; look at the time you’re spending on the wrong and make corrections.

Keep in mind, too, that this negative person can follow the path that Kit did.  She got traded.  Don’t wait too long to trade your Kit.

Can't Take My Eyes Off of You

Tenacious resolve.  Boy, it can be annoying.  Once or twice a week, I am on a train.  When I hop a train to New York City, I find a person or two with this tenacity around seating.  These people would sooner cut you than have you sit next to them.  They put their briefcase or purse on the seat next to them.  Fearful people walk by the open seat for fear of reprisal from the presumed bold person who would dare hold the seat with baggage.  I have watched a passenger stand by the seat, look down at the purse, look over at the owner seated next to it (who never looks up, to the right or to the left), and then walk on.  Where is the resolve? 

For those who’ve traveled with me, you could attest to the fact that I am of the type to board the train, pick up the baggage on the open seat, hand it over to the owner and sit happily for the remainder of the ride.  Only once did I have the baggage owner say something to me.  I did not look up, to the left or to the right.  I consoled myself with the thought of throwing momma from the train (probably the only positive context I can offer from that movie).  I exude resolve in that kind of circumstance.

This trait is not found in all people naturally.  It is, however, something that can be learned.  Tenacity is grown from a response to a core belief.  In the previous example, fairness is violated.  If fairness or justice or a sense of right and wrong matter to you, that can be built upon to develop tenacity around defending such a position or offering active engagement to its display.  It’s a manifestation of your belief system.

Think about your goals for this year.  It’s halfway through the year.  Do you still believe in them?  Take some time to measure where you’ve gotten with them and what’s needed to accomplish these goals.  But also, assess the tenacity with which you’ve approached the path towards those goals.  Do you fight for them?  Is your resolve deep around them?

Goals are important.  For as much as they’ve been over-complicated in creation, the point of them remains strong.  Goals serve as a beacon.  They are to drive the daily strain.  They allow for mile-markers of celebration on the path towards them.  They are the driving force of an organization.  If you don’t know where you want to go, then where are we going?

Being strong in our resolve towards these goals takes an unapologetic position.  Unapologetic is not the same as mean.  Be tenacious in protecting those goals, even if there is an alteration that has to happen to them.  Updating goals based upon new information is healthy.  If the new information is that you’re tired or it’s too hard, that is not healthy.  Goals should be designed to stretch you.  Easy to say, yes, but the point is to work hard to get this challenging objective. 

If you want to increase sales by 50%, calls will have to be made, networking will be expanded, pitching product and services will have to increase 100%, etc.  All of this takes great effort.  If you are not committed to the goal, then tenacity around it won’t develop.  Come back to goal creation.  Where do you want to get to and why?  Answer that clearly and create objectives to get there.

For those who are privileged to lead a team, work with each individual to develop strong resolve around the goals set.  Help them to know how to get to where they’d like to be.  Avoid the common issue of goals being set to paper, and then little else.  You have a great chance to enhance and develop skill sets for your team.  And then the celebration around accomplishment is even sweeter when it’s a collaborative effort of support and encouragement.

Fight more for the goals you’ve set.  Don’t cower.  Stand up and move towards accomplishment of those goals.  Remain laser-focused.  If someone has put a piece of luggage in your seat, move it.  You paid for your ticket.  You were up early to get the train.  You have a goal to get to the destination ahead.  See?  Think about goal-pursuit in simpler ways; it will help to foster tenacity.  And once you have the resolve behind the goals, watch out world!

Escapade

Starting over sounds like fun.  Remember when Billy Madison got to do all 12 years of school over again?  He challenged his father to let him redo each grade from 1^st to 12^th for two weeks per grade.  The goal was for Billy to show that he can work hard on his own, and therefore, be qualified to take over the family business.  And as a gibberish-speaking, Nintendo-playing, flaming bag of doggie poo lighting, raging drunk, that was going to be quite a feat.

Now perhaps you work for such a company owner.  Maybe, like Billy, your leader beat the odds and somehow ended up in the leader seat, despite having to wear loafer or Velcro shoes only due to an inability to tie a shoelace.  Maybe you’re wishing for your own do-over, or least the quickest escape. 

We both know that repairing the mistakes of others is an uphill climb.  It’s exhausting and it’s deflating to the soul.  Better would be to have a prevention plan in place and work from proactivity.  But this is for another blog….

What stands out from this is a positional consideration.  It’s very true that being at the ready with a dust pan and brush stinks, but consider using different tools and a different context.

If you’ve been positioned as a janitor, despite being hired for what you thought was a different role, act like you’re working in the position you were hired for.  Stop taking on only a cleaning role, but more, stop letting others think that is your role.  You can’t always quit your job and just start over somewhere else.  It’s not that easy.  Enact subtle changes now to re-position yourself into the role you were hired for originally.

What if, instead of loathing the company owner described above, you chose to be a partner?  Put yourself on his/her schedule for breakfast or lunch.  Ask about his/her hopes for the company.  Ask how he/she hopes to get that done.  Ask how he/she sees the organization needing to change or bend to make that happen.  Put down the broom and pick up a pen (or iPad).  Have a couple of meals together to unpack these questions and the ones they’ll lead to.  Take notes.  You’ll see the small ways you can insert your expertise and ideas into the conversation.  You can begin to change the view of your role in that leader’s eyes.

Come back to mission and vision.  Plan, in your second to fourth meal time, to bring up what you understand the mission to be.  How does your manager see it?  Are there connections to the expressed hopes for the organization?  You’re now moving into an analytical posture with your leadership.  That’s an attractive position because it opens the door wider for analysis of the organization.

Look at the team around you, too.  Where are strengths being used?  Where are they lacking?  And is the right person doing the right thing?  You already know that your role has mutated unhealthily, so don’t be surprised that others are suffering in the same way.  Put down the dust pan and pick up a conductor’s baton.  Pull them out of it and put them in places to showcase the hirable skills originally displayed.  And if there are tasks that need to be done, get them done, but be smart about assigning them.  Look to see where those tasks make the most sense.  Remember, you can then speak to your manager about this thoughtfulness and restructuring in the context of the conversations you’ve been having with him/her.

That alignment is a display of giftedness meant for your role.  Granted, clean-up is important, especially when you first get to a company.  However, don’t stay in that posture.  Just because you can clean up doesn’t mean you should always do it.  And if there is that much going on, something is broken and you can fix it.

A stumble along this new path may occur.  You might find that the last week has put you back into clean-up mode only.  It’s okay.  You’re re-training yourself as well as others.  A step back is not uncommon.  Just make a course correction.

You can start over right where you are.  Make weeks into escapades rather than preparation to escape!  You don’t need to go back to first grade to prove you have something valuable to offer.  But, if you start seeing giant penguins running around the office, the pressure has definitely gotten to you.  Time to use some PTO.

Are We Ourselves?

Assertive versus Aggressive.  Confidence versus Conceit.  As a leader, we might display one over the other.  There was a guy I knew in high school who parlayed confidence into conceit on a regular basis.  He annoyed the crap out of me, but I found myself swimming in his lane to fight back.  I had become that rude jerk.  I was merely trying to be an assertive alpha male (my skinny frame didn't make it so easy to do....stupid track team), but it didn't translate that way to others.

While an assertive person channels and promotes good communication, the slide into aggression parlays that into interruption and talking over people.  It's a subtle slide.  There are characteristics that start healthy enough but then become twisted and contorted by a shifting foundation.

Is there something more lurking just a little deeper?  A lack of self-esteem may be at play.  It's not to say you don't have any self-esteem, but rather it's development might be askew.  Dr. Michael Miller, former editor in chief of the Harvard Mental Health Letter, says, “It’s more likely that self-esteem will come as a result of accurate self-understanding, appreciation of one’s genuine skills, and the satisfaction of helping others.”  As managers, is this our stance?

Observations for years show me how much management often find their identity in the work they do.  This becomes the basis for self-worth and self-esteem.  And this is a simple recipe for disaster.  When we base our esteem upon shifting sand, such as a particular organization, the work being done or even the people we work with, the foundation is based upon change.  People leave, we leave, the work changes and organizations are sold, merged, restructured or altered.  If we live for the company, we will be disappointed.

Our audience, however, might be receiving management poorly based upon the dilemma of assertive/aggressive or confidence/conceit.  Again, if it's a matter of self-esteem, your staff can easily identify the difference.  When a manager is over-the-top or a micro-manager, the talk among employees will start rather quickly.  It sets a tone for response that's based upon someone's individual needs (in this case, the manager) rather than the good of the whole.  Staff begin to look for ways to avoid the wrath of a manager or even seeing the manager at all.  These goals supersede the goals of the department in the work to be done.

Such a backwards setup.  We short-circuit the efforts towards our department's goals by the way in which we struggle to handle ourselves and the workload, for instance.  Help is an okay option.  It's not a sign of weakness, despite the possibility that your employer may think so.  And while I know your job is important to you (your finances, for example!), it cannot be that you should become less of the person you are or are meant to be.  Simple to say, right?  But what does it profit you to be aggressive, struggling with self-esteem or self-worth and not meet the goals you've set for work?  Right the ship.  Take the time necessary to unravel what's been going on.

Typically, managing the esteem of a manager is not on a job description, yet we see it happen.  Don't be the manager putting employees in this situation.  Get grounded outside of the work.  Then, when work needs to be done, it is a matter of how to best do it, apart from it fulfilling some esteem needs.  And while I am far from a self-help guru, I do know enough that there is truth that a person must discover for himself/herself that is separate from work, from a person or from status.  Take the time to examine yourself and find out what's true about you.

In human resources, we can find ourselves giving so much to others, which is a part of our job, that we tax our own foundation.  We must be sure to connect inwardly.

Pushing the envelope is worth it.  Don't fear being assertive.  It does matter in driving the goals of your department.  However, it is meant to be done with a specific goal in mind for the organization, not for your esteem.  If work defines you, take a small step back and look at the bigger picture.  Your role needs you to be as with it as possible.  You are the one in the role for a reason.  Get back to you.