Higher Ground

Making an informed decision seems like a good plan.  I think most companies would look favorably on employees that decide to do that.  It seems like a mature, thoughtful response.

In school, I was involved in a pretty good food fight in the cafeteria.  Mashed potatoes were thrown onto the walls in our attempts to create art.  The school did not think it the best use of the food, especially when it moved from walls to people.  It was one of the rare times I was brought to the principal’s office (I was usually not caught for the stuff I did, not because I was angelic).  Because I had my own skin to protect (from my dad!), I found a way to present information that not only removed any malevolent thought of me, but actually made me sound like a good guy operating in the fallen humanity of school.  Brilliant? Yes.  True? Ummmmmmmmmmmmm.

What if the information is flawed? 

It’s probably due to a few possibilities.  One – perhaps there is a gap in the way information is gathered.  Maybe there are some steps that have been bypassed due to ignorance.  In our efforts to be efficient, we can forego communication steps and not look back.  Maybe we didn't know the process or all of the people involved.  We can easily assume some “facts” and fill in the blanks ourselves.  It’s not what we would like to do, I know, but the pressure of getting things done cause us to create shortcuts.

Have you ever been in a meeting where you offer a perspective as an absolute, only to find out that most of the room knows pivotal details?  And now you look like an absolute idiot?  Yeah, it’s never happened to me…I feel badly for you people (an obvious lie if you’ve ever been in a room with me!).

Secondly, the informed decision may be colored by self-esteem issues.  Crazy as it may seem, but there might be among those with whom we work a person or two who are devastated when they are not the founts of information.  To that end, they might offer bits and pieces of information so as to try to coax out the rest.  When bits and pieces fly around like that, it leaves open inference and flawed interpretation.  The decisions made would be based upon granules rather than rocks of truth.

And then there’s political positioning.  I have been in organizations where communication is used based upon maligned purposes.  There can be treachery and back-stabbing in an organization with information sharing an easy road to travel.  I may only share what I want others to know, with a longer term plan in place to paint someone in a bad light, to make myself seem more important or to inflate the view of the department I lead.  Shocking, I know, but it happens.

For those of us in an HR capacity, we have to be a bit more eyes wide open about information.  It is a necessity for us to do our homework.  Cultural and relational impact is likely to occur from some of the decisions to be made based on certain information.  We can serve in an unbiased manner and gather all of the facts.  If we were to slip into some of the posturing or sloppiness addressed above, we compromise our role as a strategic partner to the overall health of the business.

Over the past few months, I have conversed with some business owners whose experience with HR people has them characterized as “mealy-mouthed” or “chatty Cathys.”  What a sad perspective.  Is it really likely that our informed decisions will be seen as informed decisions when the impression we give falls into those categories?   It’s not about our skin.  It’s about our commitment to the senior leadership team to deliver truth that will encourage growth and health for the organizations we serve.

Really, what’s the worst that would have happened if I just admitted to flinging a spoonful of mashed potatoes?  Detention, cleaning it up, some Philly-Italian-style parenting?  You gotta have something to go to therapy with, right?

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. 

Video Killed the Radio Star

When I was a kid, my mom used to laugh at me because I basically had the TV Guide memorized about 10 minutes after we got it.  I would know what shows were coming on which day, which shows were new and which were repeats, and even which celebrity guest stars would be on Match Game.  To be fair, there were a lot less channels than there are now.  And further, I didn’t have much to do apparently, so memorizing the TV Guide was easily done.

I loved TV.  I guess I still do, though I watch much, much less than I did as a kid.  And I could not tell you the last time I held a TV Guide in my hands.  So much has changed in that medium.  I wish I knew then what I know now about how it would evolve.  It would have been great to be at the forefront of the development.

Our brands need the same care.  What are our brands?  I think there are a few to pay attention to:

1 – Our companies – The brand identification for our organizations matters.  What does the public perceive about your company?  What is the messaging?  What is it they think of first when they hear your company name?  Those answers are a matter of our brand.  Do you know those answers?  How do you know them?  In other words, how were they communicated to you?  Companies spend millions on marketing their brand, but can still miss the fact that the messaging is misaligned from the actual company.

Branding is not marketing.  Branding is about the utilization of the brand; it’s about the prep work done ahead of the marketing to the public.  Sometimes, companies think that a snappy logo is the brand identification.  The logo is really more about marketing than branding (See Phoenix Cavalier’s thoughts at http://biznik.com/articles/branding-is-not-marketing).

2 – Our roles – There is perspective held by those around us of our jobs.  A role may be seen as tactical or strategic.  The position we have now may not be what we want for our future, but because the role is seen as one type of position, it can translate to what others might think of what you can do.  If the role you’re in is not strategic, but you want that opportunity, then re-branding it is as strategic is necessary. 

Think about the positions in your company that have been changed or discontinued.  How did they become irrelevant?  Is there danger of that for your role?  I worked for a company that saw a particular role as irrelevant and therefore discontinued it.  About three months later, there was so much not being done that the short-sightedness was glaring.  One VP commented, “I had no idea how much that role actually meant to the function of the department.”  The brand of the role was not clear.  A brand is simply the message of a product, service, or, in this case, a position.  Again, what’s the message of your position to the company?

3 – Our competencies – If a role is to go away, are you going to be swept away with the position?   Can the company see the difference?  Your skills, knowledge, aptitudes and abilities have a message.  Step back for a minute and see if you can read what they are saying to those around you.  If you’re feeling particularly brave, ask someone if they could give you 3 skills that he/she sees you demonstrating on a regular basis.  Vulnerable, yes, but it could be quite eye-opening. 

When the makers of the TV Guide magazine product imagined their brand, they could only see it as a publication distributed on a weekly basis.  As time went on, it provided interviews with TV stars.  And once the necessity for a weekly magazine became less relevant, TV Guide moved to creating a TV channel with entertainment news, syndicated shows, reality-based programming and showbiz interviews.  The core brand evolved to a fuller spectrum of TV entertainment. 

Check your brands.  What’s the message?  Oh yeah, by the way, if it’s to be a good-looking, Italian, HR pro with a dynamic consultancy and a killer blog who is trying to influence the business community with strategic development encouragement, I’m sorry to say that’s already taken.  Back off and pick another.

Talk Talk

I looked at a bottle of lotion today.  I use it often but I read the label today.  It said "20% more than 10 oz. bottle."  I looked at the weight of the bottle and showed 12 oz.  That is 20% more than 10 oz.  No false advertising here, but is it really advertisement worthy?  The bottle doesn't say anything more than this.  The sentence is running across the top of the bottle.  There is no mention of a value - paying for 10 oz. but getting 12 oz.  There is no mention of taking on the standard size lotion bottle.  Nothing but the statement.

My dad used to describe some people as "liking to hear themselves talk."  There wasn't much substance to what someone was saying, but they sure had lots to say.  The only way it made sense for that person to talk so much was that he/she liked the sound of his/her voice.  As weak of a reason as that may be, it just may be the best explanation.

Substance is needed in our conversations.  Too much fluff can fill our dialogues.  We talk about inane things that don't matter and don't help us.  As leaders, do we know what we're saying and why we're saying it?  Is it simply being said because you feel as though something has to be said?  That usually isn't a great reason.  In fact, it might be counter-productive because, first, it might water down anything of substance you do have to share in the future and, second, it might cause you to say more about something than you ought.  The value of communication is a demonstrated leadership quality.  Your team will get what you think about verbal communication when they hear and see what you're doing with it.

The words themselves are not stupid, but rather, not thought through well.  Take for instance a recent political  election commercial.  The woman running for office says that if elected, she would take medicare money from the US government for the state as opposed to the current official who is not.  She makes this point and then says, "and that's the kind of leader I will be."  I scratch my head.  Is taking government medicare money a sign of leadership?  That's the correlation?  Hmmmm.  I'm not convinced.  Sounds like fluff to me.

Simply, as leaders in our companies, we have to be thoughtful about our words.  What is it we really want to communicate?  Focus on that.  Make cohesive dialogue.  Share one point and connect it to the next in a sensible way.  Help others follow your progression.

1. Know what you want to communicate
2. Think through how you want to communicate
3. Clearly share the communication

I know it's simple, but the amount of rhetoric and jargon we slip into can make our necessary communication with our team ineffective and off-putting.  Take the time you need to gather your thoughts and share what you really want to share.  I would really like to hear that communication!

Out of Touch

Positional devaluation is an epidemic.  Perhaps you don’t know what that is.  After all, it is not the lead story on the evening news nor the headline in your favorite newspaper.  For some, it might seem ridiculous and petty, but I assure you, it is not.

Look at the way roles within your company are viewed.  Aren’t some seen as more valuable than others?  I understand that the COO or CFO is an important role and might have a different level of value to the organization, but does that mean that other roles are not valuable?  Too often, we sell new candidates on the stepping stone view of the role they’ve applied for.  We apologize for the role, in essence.  We see the role as less than what someone should settle for.

What kind of message is that?  Do you expect someone to just take the job because you do a Jedi mind trick? (“This isn’t the job you’re looking for. The job offered will do fine.  Move along.”)  With such a poor setup, it’s unlikely that a candidate would accept, and if they do, be assured that it’s just to collect a paycheck while the new employee interviews for other jobs.  Sad and not encouraging, I know, but truthful.

Devaluing a position is a cultural nightmare.  Take, for example, employees who used to do a job such as what I've described.  They feel comfortable to give the “oh, you are the new guy doing this? Ha, good luck!” speech.  I understand the teasing and sometimes it just might showcase the familial spirit of the company.  However, what isn’t okay is to allow the mocking to be a staple of the workday.  Devaluing the job being done is to devalue the person doing the job.

Listen.  For those of who you really know me, you know that I have sensitive moments.  I offer sympathy; I empathize with others.  The devaluing of a job is NOT a sensitivity-thing.  My perspective is not about primarily caring for feelings (although, I am not against that either), but rather it’s about protecting the culture of the company and the “every job is important” attitude.  It cannot just be a cute phrase, but belief in action.

My first on-the-books job was with Friendly’s.  I was a dishwasher.  Not a glamorous job.  I was thrown all kinds of crap and no one said anything to me.  I lasted six weeks.  It wasn’t because I was too good for the job, but because I was alone and made to feel unimportant.  I looked at my job as being less than everyone else’s.  I didn’t like that feeling, but the message was clear.  But think about running that restaurant without clean pots, pans, dishes or glassware.  That job is vital regardless of glamor.  It would be out of touch with business necessity for a company to think otherwise.

So, simply, review those overlooked roles in your organization.  Speak into them.  Now look at those jobs that are devalued intentionally through commentary and jokes.  Fix it.  It’s messaging that must be addressed. 

There is nothing wrong with washing dishes for a living.  There is nothing wrong with packing and shipping boxes for a living.  There is nothing wrong with cutting lawns for a living.  There is nothing wrong with waiting tables for 30 years.  Nothing at all.