Comments

I really liked the posting. I've been wondering what my title in the company was since I do a little bit of everything. I realized that I don't need a regular common title to tell others what I do.
Thanks

Posted by Dahana at June 30, 2005 3:01 PM

Wonderful post. I have been in several organizations in my career where titles were everything. Unfortunately, I think in most cases all it did was stifle creativity and collaboration.

A few years ago my wife, who also happens to be CEO of our little design and marketing company, asked me what her title should be. My answer - "Creative Goddess" - is still there and has given her the latitude to be anything our clients want/need her to be. It also allows her to explore her own creativity. Almost everyone she meets loves it and wishes they could define what they do as expressively.

It's too bad most organizations prefer to box their employees in with titles instead of letting them explore their potential.

Posted by Andrew Hayden at June 30, 2005 3:07 PM

Nice post. I would not give up a big office, though.

We recently built a whole new company because I was trying to get my tech staff to create buzz and excitement. I kept hearing it was not their job. Now Buzzoodle makes it everyone's job.

Posted by Ron at June 30, 2005 3:08 PM

Great post. I'm in the process of driving mass transformation of my group of 60, and the change is rippling acros other teams that number in the hundreds. I'm popular with some, detested by others. Big fun!

I like Tom's idea of titles that describe what you are really about, not the standard corporate BS titles that have proliferated (and I work for a Fortune 50 company and have one of those titles). It will probably get changed to Pain in the Ass before long. One can hope... ;-)

Posted by Roy at June 30, 2005 5:16 PM

Business solutions architect, Enterprise architecture - that is my title believe our not for the US government IT staff I'm in at the national level. Once back in the private world, I may borrow Creative Genius from Andrew above - maybe Financial Genius - then I influence clients to become worth 10's of millions in a few scant years somehow ... Bankruptcy King should probably be avoided ... as well Mr. Bear Market ...

Posted by Sean at July 1, 2005 4:35 AM

I work for a fairly large multi-national that has all the usual titles as well as some that have developed over the years. But, everyone from the chairman of the board on down through the janitor is simply referred to by their first name. No reserved parking spots, either, or other trappings. I have no direct reports, but many people call me "boss," "chief," and even "hey you." I've been in this open environment for so long that anything else would feel restrictive and stifling, I'm sure.

Posted by Mike at July 1, 2005 6:10 AM

Interesting post

I don't think Job Titles are your problem. If people are "not my job" that is an culture, attitude and values problem. You are employing the wrong people not the wrong titles.

Fix the causes of the problems not the symptoms!

Posted by PaulH at July 1, 2005 6:12 AM

My chosen (and disputed by one) title is CLO. It stands for Chief Learning Officer and reflects my MP3: My Pleasure, Passion and Purpose. Life and work and my life's work is all about learning. Always learning. Learning and not being able to stop myself from turning others on to what I'm learning and who I'm learning from. And the ultimate and essential life-learning (for me and, I believe every other human being on and off this planet): To love and be loved. Now, how to put that in the business of business...?

Posted by John Fogg at July 1, 2005 6:31 AM

PaulH - interesting, bold and perhaps naive response.

It's systemic! Don't cultures evolve as a result of organizational infastructures, policies and procedures, reward and recognition programs, the physical environment, value systems, leadership styles, etc....? A title is just one small component that, in my opinion, can have a very big impact on how employees view themselves and are viewed by others. Organizations create the titles and divvy them out. Titles can either elevate ones perception of self or deteriorate it. In some instances titles create the culture. If you don't believe me, ask Starbuck's executives why they call their employees Baristas. You can call me a janitor or an "environmental safety agent" - it will change the way I view myself and my responsibilities. Certainly hiring the right talent is critical, but a passionate, creative, intelligent, hardworking individuals can be completely stiffled when the confines of their role become too restricted - it's not a cause, it's an effect.

Posted by Darci at July 1, 2005 9:44 AM

Well, PaulH's comment is maybe naive and maybe not.

It's not necessarily the case that you are what people think you are. On the one hand, others might see some talents or liabilities in you that you're blind too, so feedback is valuable. And a job title might describe you well. On the other hand, there's the "limiting" factor that says "you're only a HR person, you can't do marketing". This results in you needing to constantly prove your abilities in areas that you're passionate about doing, even if it means making the opportunities where none exist.

With me, it wasn't a matter of job titles. Because of the jobs I've had, I've needed to figure out how to fix bugs caused by everybody's favorite operating system, PMS Windblows. Because I've helped people fix their bugs (not my job, but I'll do it anyway), I got the reputation of being a "computer guy". It didn't matter how often I said I wasn't. I live 40 miles from San Jose, the center of the geek universe, and "computer guy" has a specific meaning here: someone who dives into the guts of a computer and loves doing it, such as a programmer, developer, or software engineer. I am not a computer guy, I wasn't trained to be one, and I have no desire at all to be one. Yet I was stuck with the unofficial job title of Computer Guy.

Then there was the time the office's technological wizard moved down south because her husband got a new job down there, and her job was given to me because the top managers thought I'd love doing it because I was a computer guy. Six weeks later, I moved myself to a different job.

Posted by the other Ron at July 1, 2005 10:18 AM

emmm, what the..? have i stumbled into some sort of parallel universe?... concentrating on physical space and job titles as the most important aspect of organisational transformation?... don't get me wrong space and titles do of course have importance but, in transformation terms, the changed/transfomed purpose/vision and agreed strategies to get there are much much more significant!... i mean, isnt that kind of obvious? (surely?)

concentrating on physical space and titles is a bit like fiddling with the colour of the box instead of dealing with its content (purpose) inside...

from a managemenet consultant whose focus is on, yes.... organisational transformation

Posted by chairman at July 1, 2005 10:33 AM

Thank you for the dialogue - I'm fascinated by the subject. And to your point, Ron, I thought of going down another path with this blog, which is "labels" (not necessarily tiles) and how when you get labeled, you get stereotyped and hence confined to what others perceive you to be. Your scenario proves the point that perception is reality (or at least became reality).

And, no, titles and physical space are not THE most important, but an element of...Vision and a clear, well communicated strategy is critical, but if not carried out by actions which support them, you will never become completely transformed. You get talk and no action. The small stuff matters.

Posted by Darci at July 1, 2005 10:58 AM

We have to be pretty shallow to judge people by their titles. I never do. If I respect someone it is not because of their title or their position, it is because of their character. What will become of our independence and self-reliance when we long to be someone to know - rather than someone worth knowing.

Posted by Cassandra Helm at July 1, 2005 12:19 PM

..."someone to know - rather than someone worth knowing...."???

In IT and finance circles clear titles are important: they aid in almost immediately knowing what functions someone has, like: CIO, software engineer, enterprise architect, internet architect, auditor, accountant, comptroller, CFO: saves time and money.

Posted by Sean at July 1, 2005 3:54 PM

Great. This applies to education too. One of the biggest barriers I face is my title of "teacher". Seeing me as the authority encourages my "students" to sit passively.

My biggest challenge, therefore, is to destroy this barrier and title. I find its particularly difficult to do in Asia, where people are trained to respect teachers.

But this is a necessary step if "my students" are ever to become autonomous learners. I must break their dependence on me (and other teachers) and nudge them towards initiative and independence.

I will know I have succeeded when they no longer need me. Ideally, my job could then be eliminated and Id move on to another project/place.

.......

Posted by AJ Hoge at July 3, 2005 2:31 AM

Dear all,

I agree with your views.. but perhaps there's a culture issue here as well that might need to be outlined.

I live in Europe, and in Europe people build organisations (for the most part) using people who are trained for a specific purpose and gain experience in that field alone. So, it becomes tough to market/brand oneself (is that a word?) as a generalist. A title on the other hand defines a specific quality/capability/need fulfilling function.

How do you guys see this? the need for titles and specificity in certain cultures, and organisational change in such cultures - doing away with titles, privileges , and other 'carrots'.

Arun

Posted by Arun Sadhashivan at July 3, 2005 3:58 AM

Naive? Moi? - Absolutely!

Best approach to life I think! Helps you to stop your thinking becoming too conventional. Ask plenty of questions (with the right attitude and values) and listen.

Yes job titles are a part of culture. But I have people on my team who far exceed their Job Title remit and some that don't - same title - different attitudes!

Arun is absolutely right about the culture in Europe (although different in different countries) Job Titles are often very important in the public domain (rather than internally). It's like qualifications - in some countries writing your degree after your name is essential in others it's a big turn off.

Posted by PaulH at July 3, 2005 4:38 AM

I'm bumping up against the "job title" issue personally right now. Job titles do not reflect the way you think and approach the world, but they do tend to "put" an identity on you when you accept one. As I try to move into a new area of life and design better ways to make people feel good, I am bombarded with questions of "What have you done in the past? Where is your portfolio?"

We have to ask the question, "Why do we do this? Why do we question others' ability and look for familiar ways to control loses? Why aren't we looking at each individuals identity, who they are versus what they've done? Why are we making people "functional?"

The fact is that people who understand that design is in the mind and that by surrounding yourself with engaging sensory stimulation you are engaged in the a neuro-emotional happiness equation, those are the humans who will succeed in life ... those are the ones who will feel alive, even when they admit and experience their fallibility.

You post is significant and we should all take another read, or pull over to the permanent "rest stop" of life.

Posted by Wendy at July 3, 2005 11:21 AM

wow...titles eh...well how's this...I am an educationalist in the field of visual communications, design, multimedia. My title as manager of the department is "Head Teacher". I've always felt uncomfortable with it because I have always felt that it doesn't truly reflect the nature of the work I do.

More recently [like this past week or so] I've come to realise that in the state-run organisation I work for, "teaching" has become a distant last on the list of duties required for this role. So I am thinking the title is misleading at best.

What's in front of teaching? Well it's a long list actually that includes amongst other stuff, accounting, mastering complex computer systems for the purpose of setting up records, entering data into said system, trying to figure out how to juggle the requirements of government funding bodies while implimenting commercially driven products, marketing within the constraints of a massive bureaucratic system, making sure everyone gets paid, managing professional development, developing assessment validation systems and procedures, recruiting new staff, recruiting new students, implimenting new configurations of training and curricula in terms of course structure - the list goes on and on. Teaching comes last to all this.

Adding to the tangible frustration [can you feel it yet?] are all the constraints of an educational system with all the rhetoric of innovation, but all the rigidity of bureaucratic structures that stop innovation.

I think my title should be Chief Chaos Facilitator :) Somewhat ironic given the nature of the hierachical, organisational culture which sees itself as flexible, open, service orientated and forward thinking.

Oh yeah...I do get to teach about 6 hours per week...

Posted by ian McArthur at July 4, 2005 12:12 AM

Wonderful comments Paul - I am with you 100% my friend and you are certainly not naive :-) - you are spot on as always!

This is about protectionism of status - it is as simple as that!

I worked in the National Health Service in the UK for 35 years until last year. I was a senior manager and suggested that everyone in our large office block of 40 people moved around at least once every six months to sit beside or opposite someone else from a different section - my view was that we need fresh perspective all the time and besides that we would get to know more about that persons job - more importantly - get to know them as a person.

Needless to say my idea was not well received by most colleagues. It was about as popular as Malcolm Glazer in Manchester.

Turned out I and a couple of other friends were the only one's to move around!

I also always had this dream that titles would just disappear and we would all just be called by our names.

I love the company mentioned years ago by someone - may have been Tom - that had its internal phone directory printed by Christian name in alphabetical order.

I think most people don't actually need to go into an office these days - most people can work from home - unless there is direct customer contact of course.

We are far too 'stuffy' about titles and our space at work - I advocate blowing the whole thing up.

And whilst on the subject - why not do away with old fashioned ideas about having to wear boring black suits and a tie if you work in an office?

Phew that feels better...

I do have a chapter on this whole thing in my book.

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 4, 2005 2:29 AM

Cathy - I don't think it's all about job titles, although these undoubtedly have an affect. The thing that hacks me off, because I think it's the main cause of the "not my job syndrome," is far-too-tightly-written Job Descriptions!

There may be some jobs where at 09:17 you have to do this and at 10:04 you have to do that. And there's a few bosses who want to know exactly where you are every minute of the day - but they're not often worth working for!

I think that if you present a new starter with an open and flexible JD, you're on the right track. Let the person see from the start that the job contains certain responsibilities and deliverables but that they've also got to contribute and evolve. In my experience, most people respond well to that. If they complain about it, go back and look at how effective your hiring procedures are!

Posted by Mark JF at July 4, 2005 5:07 AM

Job Descriptions should just have one sentence

"Do the job in as many hours as it takes in the way YOU think it can best be done"

I am only half joking :-)

In my experience JD's are often not worth the paper they are written on - they are usually a protectionism ploy for managers in my view.

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 4, 2005 6:06 AM

Trevor - I think your half a joke is actually the basis of a really good idea. How about a Job Description that says, "1) Talk to your customers and colleagues in order to figure out how to do the job as you think it can be best done, in as few hours as it takes. 2) Tomorrow, figure out how to either eliminate the job or pass it to someone to look at with his/her fresh eyes. 3) Then find another job that needs your fresh eyes and go to task 1."

How about working for a company that took that approach!

Posted by Mark JF at July 4, 2005 6:38 AM

Wonderful Mark - I will work for them!

How about you my friend and me starting up -'Hospitals R Us'!!!

:-)

Happy 4 July to all my American Friends

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 4, 2005 7:17 AM

Years ago, working for a small company that was growing incredibly quickly, my marketing team was asked to provide an organization chart.

I eschewed giving them one on paper; instead, we constructed a mobile with business cards hanging at various points. We were trying to make the point that we had to stay fluid and flexible, and that our organization would adapt to meet the needs required of it. (sigh)

We were asked to go back and provide a paper version of the traditional org chart; no one understood what we had given them.

Posted by Kevin Bertsch at July 8, 2005 2:52 PM