Thankfulness is not trite. It can be portrayed as such, but in actuality, it is quite a bit more. Being face to face with someone who wants to express his/her gratitude to you is humbling, heartfelt and, well, special. When those in my lifetime have sat me down to express a sentiment of thankfulness or if I have received a note to say as such, I am always taken aback. It reminds me that my life means much more to many more than I realize. It's so very easy to be swallowed by duty and responsibility. I have a family, a job, a church...I define myself by function. And yet, what matters most is not those roles but the way in which those roles impact the relationships connected - the people who value the work I do, the involvement in my church programs or the love in action for my family. I define my life by what I do. Gratitude shakes me back to what my life should really be about - relationships.
The story of my life has been marked by incredible difficulty and incredible pain, but those things do not define me. If it does, it takes my eyes off of the incredible beauty and incredible blessing in my life. So many people, so much love, so much to appreciate. Each one of us has a decision to make each day - am I going to be a benefit or a distraction to those around me? I can control my behavior...I am not a victim. I can rise above the pettiness around me, if there is any. I can choose to be a beacon of positivity in my work culture. I can be grateful for where I am. Gratitude is powerful. I am amazed constantly at the impact of being thankful. I don't know why I am amazed. I have seen it happen plenty. But I forget so easily. During this week where it's easy and convenient to be thankful, let's think about ways that we can be more grateful all year. I know that I can raise high the banner for what it will do to the workplace or to the family, but I think it's more than that. When a habit of gratitude is lived, a life is really lived. The story of my life needs to be about being thankful. This isn't about self-help. It's not about being a great leader. It's not about being a good employee. It's about you. All of those things mentioned will happen when you're grounded. And gratitude is grounding.
Performance reviews always make me smile. All of the preparation put into it by
managers and supervisors is overwhelming.
The stress level is high. The
loathing of the review by the preparer sets in deeply. Resentment over spending a weekend or two to get
them done overflows into a negative reaction concerning other components of the
job. And let’s not forget the anxiety of
the recipient of the review. They hope
for a good appraisal so that the raise they expect/deserve happens.
Isn’t it a great cycle?
Every year, six months or maybe even quarterly, a manager and a subordinate
sit together to review that subordinate’s performance. The process can be draining. I was just asked to review a particular company’s
performance review plan. The actual review
was six pages to complete (Yikes!). One
manager has 20 employees that report to him.
Wow! No wonder his response is to
hate these reviews. They take an
incredible amount of time.
And what about those reviews, especially if they are annual,
that connect directly to compensation.
If you hit a 3.4 average, you get a 3% raise, but if you hit a 3.3
average, you only get a 1.5% raise. How
many managers have to alter scores so that the employee gets the raise? Is that a real review of performance or just
documentation to file so that a raise can be given?
Part of the basis of philosophy on performance reviews has
to be considered. Why are they being
done? To justify a raise? To merely say
they are being done? Why? If the reason is to actually honestly review
the performance of the employee, then we’ve got it right.
So many managers struggle to be honest about
performance. They know that a certain
employee will flip his/her lid and make things really difficult moving
forward. Really? That’s a reason to curtail a review? It sounds like this person should be
encouraged out of the organization. I
mean, who’s in charge? If performance
standards are not being met and the recipient is belligerent about it, then I
don’t see why we’d waste time coaching someone who does not feel he/she needs
it. Move on.
The review is not only a time to tell someone what’s wrong,
but also what’s been really good. It’s
more than okay to tell them something good.
Be honest about it, though. Don’t
make up stuff. And don’t try to compare
an innocuous “good” thing to a really bad performance reality. For instance:
“Jim, thanks so much for being
great during the holiday food drive. You
brought in more canned goods than anyone else.
Fantastic. But you know, the
financial analysis work you’re doing seems to be missing a few components each
time and it has not improved. We’ve
talked about this before and I am not seeing much improvement.”
Are we really going to compare the holiday food drive
participation (non-work essential) to a core job function (directly work
essential)? The employees we speak with
are not stupid (I know, there are exceptions) and can see that there isn’t much
good you have to share if the best you can come up with is that he brought more
cans of creamed corn in than anyone else.
Let’s think critically on our part and provide dignity on the part of
the employee. If the best we got is
creamed corn, then shouldn’t we try to move this person out of the organization
or at least to a different area where his skills would better align?
Reviews are to be just that – reviews. There should not be anything discussed in the
formality of the sit-down that someone hasn’t heard previously. Using the example above, the supervisor
reminds Jim that they had discussed his missteps with financial analysis before
– perfect. Now, the review provides an
opportunity to right the ship, if it’s not already happened. Develop a plan and a range of results
expected with the employee. Use the
sit-down to establish parameters.
The busyness of the daily workload can be prohibitive to
formal objectives, but the review provides a dedicated time to develop those
goals and objectives. The employee
should have a voice in the development of those goals, so use part of that time
to do so. It takes some of the pressure
off of the manager if he/she can get participation in success.
I know that in one blog article, we can’t solve the world’s
problems with performance reviews, but we can start. Think through what you and your company are
doing. Is it working? If not, what has to change? Are you seeking help, if needed, to
restructure? If it’s working, why? Keep those core truths close and make
decisions that support them. If it ain’t
broke, don’t fix it.
The first performance review I received had all 5’s on it
and one 3. The three was for employee
communications – how I spoke to other employees. Two things, even in my early 20’s, struck me
with this. One, I knew I wasn’t a 5 in
everything. No way. And the second, for me to get a 3 in one area
that had never been spoken about to me previously, must mean that I really
stink at it. I was dejected that this
was a reality that no one shared with me. I would have addressed it in
myself. I was a little bitter towards
the manager. I was unhappy with this
bomb (in my estimation) being dropped.
Oh, and by the way, I got my raise.
Effective? Hmmmmmm…
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!
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.
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?
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.
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)!
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.
