Comments

I'll point to an essay from Paul Graham:

"You weren't meant to have a boss"

http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html

Posted by Frank at March 21, 2008 12:17 PM

Great topic Madeleine and the only surprise I had with that research is the percentage of disillusioned workers in the UK is as low as 50%. The best thing leaders can do is set the direction, the example and the very wide parameters and then get the hell out of the way to let people get on with what we know they are more than capable of doing.

Most people are frustrated by meaningless management jargon and mistrustful processes that frustrate and restrict and over complicate work. The greatest management consultant was Lao Tsu nearly three thousand years ago. The first verse is the most important.

Go to the people

Live with them

Learn from them

Love them

Start with what they know

Build with what they have

But with the best leaders

When the work is done

The task accomplished

The people will say

”We have done this ourselves.”

Lao Tsu (700 BC)

Three years ago I was totally p****d off in my job and the only person who could change it was me. I was no longer an asset to the NHS and the NHS was certainly no longer good for me. Now I work for the hardest boss I’ve ever worked for – the guy in the mirror and it feels wonderful ….

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 21, 2008 12:46 PM

Most people do not need to read a survey to know what people feel about their work in any given workplace. There is a buzz or there isn't - it is either there when you walk into a workplace or it has gone missing in action.

Read Charlie Wilson's War to find out why red tape is a shackle only for those who need it.

Read the business pages in any paper today to find out why the context of your workplace is about to change. The good times are over for the time being - people will be forced to focus in tight on their work again.

What might people need going forward?

1) A work contract not a job description:

- a clear and present purpose..
- a common stretch goal (a BHAG - for more on his concept read Jim Collins)....
- a sense of belonging to a purpose-driven group (read the thoughts of the practical/theoretical workplace guru Pastor Rick Warren) that form and disband as required.....

2) A workplace built on TRUST not suspicion and envy:

- a workplace where my 90/10 rule applies, that is, 90% of information is freely available to everyone and 10% is kept classified or pass word locked....
- a place where innovation is an ACTION not a word , that is, people are free to prototype ideas, to test them, to launch and learn from them, etc...
- a place where someone with his or her feet up on the desk and who is staring out the window is deemed to be working because THINKING is as highly valued as getting to work on time....
- a place where respect is common currency, that is, people conduct their internal business within the acceptable codes of common decency....

3) A workplace based on inclusion not exclusion:

- a workplace where the sentient boundaries (read the classic work of Miller and Rice) fit the contract (see above) not those imposed by HR or the executive team, etc...
- teams are built to serve or to enhance the work (in line with the contract defined above) not simply to present a formal architecture for the latest management fad or fashion...

Richard.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at March 21, 2008 5:17 PM

Trevor and Richard...outstanding comments! I must admit that in reading the document I did find myself shaking my head a great deal, once or twice in agreement with the results, but mostly in disbelief. Disbelief at the BFO's ("Respondents want to make money and have fun") and that a company might actually have to hire another company to help them "explain their purpose", "energize and motivate their staff", and to help them "build reputations as great places to work". That's a leadership responsibility, at every level of the organization and there is much that can be one to show folks how their how and where their job fits into the "big picture" and how the company gives back to their communities.

You begin by creating a work environment...an organizational culture... that promotes trust, teamwork, and continuous performance improvement. This is achieved only by providing credible, involved, and engaged leaders/coaches. You can facilitate "worthwhile" communiy engagement by providing the time and opportunity to get involved within the local community ON COMPANY TIME AND DIME either supporting those causes your company partners with or helping those important to the team members who use their services such as public schools, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society. These types of projects are a great way to allow the frontline folks to get some leadership experience in planning and "executing" events and activities. As a last resort you might also be able to point out that idealism is truly a marvelous and meaningful thing but it doesn't pay that well. I have always been told that people don't leave their jobs, they leave their manager. There's a lot o truth to that statement.

Companies really don't think you can "outsource" energizing and motivating their staffs do they? Really?? You're serious???

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 22, 2008 12:07 AM

'people don't leave their jobs, they leave their manager'

Dave - you summed the whole thing up in 9 words - absolutely brilliant :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 22, 2008 7:29 AM

ideally, the workers should take charge of determining purpose in their work. This will make them happier.

However, expecting all individual workers to find purpose on their own is asking for too much.

If the leaders cant infuse a sense of worthwhileness amongst the employees, whats their purpose.

cheers

Posted by tayyab rashid at March 23, 2008 5:00 AM

I am surprised how many execs don't consider purpose. They can easily identify what they understand as their organization's purpose, "increase wealth for shareholders". As my future retirement depends on my stock investments, I am glad they see it that way. However, they don't seem to get that most employees don't really give a rip about the investors. Perhaps they should, but they don't. I like to ask people in the bowels of the organization about the historical performance of their stock. Most don't know. So the big job here is to help execs understand increasing returns is really a symptom of how well they engage the organization in a shared purpose. I often think of my days at GM when we realized wealth was being created by GMAC, not building and selling cars and trucks. I'll let the historical results on market share and revenue stand as evidence for how well that has worked out for them.

Posted by Mike Neiss at March 23, 2008 7:37 PM

Dave and Trevor - - While I find value in your comments, I would be leery about making such seemingly personal comments as "people don't leave their jobs, they leave their managers." This comment seems rather lame. It smacks of unaccountability.

Frontliners are NOT there for their managers and it is not the manager's responsiblity alone to add value to their jobs. I would say that the responsibility rest largely on the frontliner, given the room to work. They are there to fulfill their purpose through the work they do, even if the work is not considered to be their ultimate purpose. Funny thing, though, I have found my purpose in work that I would not have initially considered meaningful to my ultimate purpose. Fact is, I was fulfilling my ultimate purpose all along. All work is honorable if we engage ourselves in ways that are meaningful. The responsiblity is ours.

Frontlines are there to add value to the company's goals and objectives in word and deed, through both communication and innovation. (Attitude is also so very important.) In so doing, purpose is fulfilled. Leaders undoubtedly have responsiblitiy here but so does the frontliner. One of my greatest pet peeves is blame shifting. And since accountability has been your mantra on this site Dave, I'm sure there must be a misunderstanding on my part.

And Dave....does your final question imply that consultants have no value in assisting companies in motivating their staff?

Hey...all...check out my new Blog below. I hope we can have great discussions there too.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 9:29 AM

Agree 100% Judith - to me the Free Agent Nation is where it is at - be financially independent ASAP - then future career choices are easy & free wheeling like they should be - luckily I was there @ 25 years old.

Purpose is an inner game mainly - partner with a higher calling than a 'manager' (per your latest blog entry). Starbucks, Google, Amazon, Nordstrom, Nike - come to mind for fun & profitable places.

Posted by Mike at March 24, 2008 10:32 AM

Hi Judith – I always appreciate your feedback. Congratulations on your new Blog.

Please allow me to defend my ‘lame’ comment.

1 You are SOOOOOO… right that ‘the responsibility rests largely on the frontliner, given the room to work.’ – The reason I support so strongly Dave’s statement ‘front liners leave their manager not their job’ is precisely because (to coin Tom’s phrase of a few days ago) in the ‘real world’ too many front liners are NOT ‘given the room to work’ by over protective managers. Effective managers and leaders ALLOW front liners the autonomy they need – I’m lucky - I’ve had such bosses in my career.

2 I agree with you it is not ‘the managers responsibility alone to add value to front liners jobs.’ All that front liners need is the FREEDOM to do their job and not to be tied, frustrated and finally disillusioned by silly rules. In my experience front liners have just as much ‘purpose’ about their work as any manager – it is about the ‘person’ and not the position. Front liners don’t need to be patronised -they simply need to 'freed up' – or as you put it ‘given the room to work.’

3 I agree we have to find our own purpose – like you I found mine simply in doing my job.

4 ‘Blame shifting’ has never been and never will be my mantra – Like you I detest that whole concept. I know Dave will hate that idea too. It is not his style. I’m proud of everything I have done in my career and I have always known that I am the only person in control of my destiny. There is no point - and no justification - blaming anyone else – the buck stops with me. I welcome that and always have. Judith - that is why people like you, Dave and I happily publish our names on all our comments on this Blog for instance. We do not ‘blame shift’ – we make our point up front and put our name to it. That is professionalism; personal accountability and integrity not ‘blame shifting.’

5 As an example of the above both you and I know Judith there are unfortunately a few sad people who thrive on ‘blame shifting’ in hiding behind the unaccountability of aliases or ‘anonymous’ on Blogs and other settings on the Web. These individuals publish damaging and hurtful untrue personal statements about others which is cowardly; unprofessional; lacking integrity as well as illustrating immaturity. Thought I detest ‘blame shifting’ I detest even more that lack of backbone but that is another whole discussion.

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 24, 2008 12:07 PM

Trevor...thank you for your detailed response. I am not so eager to jump on anyone's bandwagon, brillantly expressed or not, unless I have thoroughly understood it. Hopefully, then, when I write others will understand my point too. The lame comment was not originally addressed to you as it was in response to another's comment. (By the way, this comment was not meant to be personal, but more directive to the assumption of frontliners in its implication.) With regards to your response, I assumed that you were lock and step with the commentator. You so wholeheartedly agreed with the comment in question without an explanation as to what in particular you were agreeing to. I understand throughly where you now stand. Thanks again.

Regarding those who publish their thoughts anonymously, I'm not hating on 'em. We are all at different places. We all need to find our courage in our own ways. Plus, it's our choice to publish anonymously or not. We all weight the benefit or loss of so doing; Just because some do not publish their names here do not mean that they necessarily lack backbone. And, it surely doesn't disavow or nullify their words. We do what we think is best for us at any partiuclar time in our lives. As you will attest, even though some write anonymously on this Blog, when addressed directly they often respond as if their names were published. I'm more interested in honest thoughts and responses more than any name...mine or yours...

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 3:05 PM

I may be a bit late in jumping in on this conversation, but wanted to add my 2 cents. Madeliene, you asked if it is the responsibility of the employee to find meaning in her work. I believe that it is a shared responsibility. I don't believe there is a person out there (manager or employee) who hasn't suffered from not being able to see the forest through the trees...caught in the day-to-day routine until purpose/meaning becomes lost. If we can agree that it is, in fact, a function of management to develop talent and that an employee is more engaged when she feels a sense of purpose, then what would it hurt for a manager to continuously remind her of why she is there, the value she adds and the contribution she is making. What would it hurt for a manager to ask her people what is important to them...what they care about and help them connect the dots. For example, a room attendant at a hotel creates a sanitary, safe, comfortable haven for guests to regenerate after a long day of travel and or work. Wow! If my manager told me that was my job, rather than just to clean rooms (make sure to "turn the room" in less than 30 minutes and don't steak the mirrors), I think I'd feel better about what I did for a living. I don't think companies can afford to leave it up to employees to find meaning in their work because the risk is too great that the results would be mediocre at best.

Does that mean the employee has no responsibility? Absolutely not. An employee has the responsiblity to seek meaning in her work and recognize opportunities that enable her to fulfill her purpose. Sometimes, however, it is just difficult to see meaning in the "task".

Regarding the comment "people leave their managers" - it has been sited in survey after survey that people don't quit their jobs, they quit their managers. People don't typically quit a perfectly good marketing, sales, programming job, unless they are unhappy with the environment in which they perform it. Who typically sets the tone of the workplace? Leadership.

Dave, to your question, can companies really "outsource" the job of energizing and motivating their staff? I work with leaders all the time who are just stuck and do not know how to get unstuck. (forest through the trees) As an outsider, I give them a new lens to look through. And, I don't motivate their staff for them, I help them see that it's possible and give them the tools/ideas to do it themselves. Everybody wins. That's my purpose and how I find meaning in my work.

P.S. Trevor, love the Lao Tsu quote!

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 3:25 PM

Hi Mike...thank you for your comments. They make a lot of sense. I must admit, however, to having a certain amount of envy. Though, I have, by in large, been my own "boss" for most of my adult life, I cannot boast to having such independent wealth. I can, however, boast to being able to "compete" with the very best of them. Bravo to you on a job well done! I have something to look forward to. This is always good. :-)

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 3:43 PM

Thanks Judith - my point about ‘lack of backbone’ refers to those very few people who use anonymity or alias to write untruths about others on the web. I assure you I have evidence of such comments being made about me - which I am happy to share with you - and that is why I feel so strongly about it. I agree with you totally that it is more than ok for people to write using any alias they wish if their comment is merely opinion and not personal against another person. My whole point (and I apologise for not making that clear first time round) is that it is just not acceptable - by any moral standard - when an untruth is written and published about another person using some cowardly alias. I am a very open and forgiving person but some behaviours are not acceptable. If my comment here offends anyone then I am sorry - but it is how I feel.

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 24, 2008 4:16 PM

I don't care what the surveys say. Employees should not allow their destiny to be put soley in the hands of some misguided or guided manager. (No disrespect inferred here.) Employees must find a way to succeed in their position or in another within the freedom to do so. But leaving because of a manager is lame! What is the employee's role in all of this? What is their purpose. Employees should be responsible to themselves by governing themselves and be responsible to their company by putting their best work forth every day.

The problem is that many employees have become lazy or were perhaps never trained at home or work about the value of self-reliance and personal integrity. Employees need to find their purpose and inspiration inwardly. Not only do employees have a responsiblity for their own work and following their purpose within the company, they also have a responsiblity to align with other employees, frontline managers, senior managers, and with the vision of the company.

Darci, I like your example of the hotel manager's motivational technique for her cleaning staff. I, in fact, ran a rather large mixed-use hotel and loved it! Among my favorite employees were those in housekeeping. (To this day they remain loyal to me and I to them.) As the GM, I took out time daily and did exactly what you suggested and what TP suggests: MBWA. I managed by walking around, though I had not read any of TP's book at that time. I assisted in changing the housekeeping staff's outlook on how they did their work daily. They responded with exemplary actions and I rewarded them accordingly. I too was awarded with homemade meals from various ethnic groups, cards, and little notes often left in my box. I did the same as I had done with housekeeping with every department and lead by example for managers. The results were great!

Although I considered myself as a great GM, affirmed by most employees and managers, there were those, who after some time, still had no regard for the customer, other staff, managers, or myself as the GM. I released them. If their actions and attitude remained the same consistently, this was what I could not tolerate.

All work matters. But it only matter in so much as we each indivdually take responsiblity for our own actions and attitudes. Yes, leadership has a very important role in setting the tone for the business environment. But as Margaret Mead said, "never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." Employees arise! And in so doing, arise in ways that honors leadership and puts your best forward.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 4:47 PM

Darci - I love that quote too - 2700 years ago WOW! - turns out this management theory stuff wasn't actually invented in modern business schools after all :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 24, 2008 4:52 PM

Trevor...what a good man you are. No apologies needed. I don'think anyone thought you were maligning them. I didn't at least. Your words matter to me.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 4:54 PM

Judith – Fascinating discussion that I am enjoying.

‘The problem is that many employees have become lazy or were perhaps never trained at home or work about the value of self-reliance and personal integrity’

I disagree with that generalisation.

Managers are ‘employees’ too and the example and the tone must be set by managers as leaders in my opinion. Of course employees have a responsibility to the company, to their follow employees, to managers and the vision. In my experience most of them do – that is in the few places where there is a shared vision as opposed to a 'vision' that is written in the boardroom!!!

I maintain the reason front line employees ‘walk away’ has little to do with a lack of inner purpose, lack of self reliance and certainly not a lack of personal integrity – it is because their manager is providing no leadership. Great front line employees deal with that quite easily – they just take charge in that ‘void of leadership’ from their manager - but some don’t do that for a variety of reasons, not least insecurity or lack of confidence. I don’t blame them for one nanosecond for walking away. An 'in touch' manager will know those people, what makes them tick, what turns them on and will move heaven and earth to get them to stay in the team until a parting of the ways become inevitable for whatever reason. Rest assured, the front liner realises that parting is inevitable way in advance of the manager.

In many years as a manager in healthcare I too did many hundreds of miles of 'walking around' listening to employees - before it was fashionable to be called MBWA. I always found that approximately 99.9% of the employees I worked ‘with’ (I never ‘managed’ them) were more than capable of doing the job and they had the right motivation. I never had to ‘release’ anyone – the employees who left the areas I managed left of their own accord. I think too many employees are ‘released’ without being given enough time or support – another failing of managers.

Managers are paid more than front liners because the job is – supposedly - harder. Employees are going to test you and push you and they will keep failing – sounds a bit like life actually. If managers can’t deal with that why are we paying them more money than frontliners anyway? Where is the added value in management? Who said a manager's job should be easy?

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 24, 2008 5:49 PM

Trevor...sometimes I am not sure if you conflate issues purposefully or if your strong all- inclusive idealogy prevails and your comments, though kind and generous, are so colored by your strong sense of fairness and inclusivity. I must admit that your comments sometimes slay me and make me asks myself questions that would otherwise be easily answerable--questions such as....why do we even have managers? Why not pay everyone the same salary? Why not have a flat pay scale? (After all, every employee is trying? Every employee is indeed valuable. But do they have the SAME value -- the engineer and housekeeper alike?)

Why do we have owners? (Should their dividends be equivalent to the salary of managers and employees? What do owners do? Who has the greatest risk here? Who has the greatest responsibility? Do managers, as overseers have the same focus as an employee?) Why can't employees do exactly what they want to do when they want to do it? Why do businesses have guidelines at all? Why do they even have protocols? (After all, all employees are leaders in their own right. Who needs governance? Employees know how to respond to others. They know what's required of them.)

Employees all went to the same school of ethics and have the same parents. They have all had brillant leaders from which to learn. They are all stimulated by the same stimuli.) Why don't we spoon feed employees? And while we're at it, show them an inordinate amount of daily attention? (This will make them feel loved and in turn they will work better and a manager will not be needed? But who's doing the fawning?) Why don't we lavish employees with overindulgence? Why don't we concentrate on their feeling daily? (Johnny, how are you feeling today? Any better than four weeks ago?)

If managers lead in this way everyday, nothing would get done and employees would not improve in their skill set, technical or emotional. MANAGERS ARE NOT BABYSITTERS! EMPLOYEES ARISE! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN LIFE -- YOUR OWN PURPOSE. AFTER ALL, IT'S ONE OF THE FEW THINGS,IF NOT THE ONLY THING, THAT'S EXCLUSIVELY YOURS! I would suspect owners and managers would love this. Maybe with this mind-set governance would not be necessary.

Your words still matter to me, Trevor. And I love the spirit of their essence.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 24, 2008 7:27 PM

What about the leaders who pay little attention to their employees, provide no direction, provide no feedback (unless of course it's negative), don't empower or allow their employees the freedom to try, fail, learn, try again and succeed. What recommendation do you have for the employees who work for those managers?

I suppose we tell them to ask for the direction they need, ask for feedback, ask for forgiveness instead of permission.

I'm in full support of employees stepping up and taking more responsibility for their career/their life, but I think it's a cop out. It's because we have failed to develop leaders who know how to develop talent, that we say "develop yourself". The fact that companies are concerned about the lack of bench strength of leadership talent is not a result of a completely incompetent workforce. Sounds to me like the pendulum has swung to the other side - how do we find that place where talent development truly is a shared responsibility?

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 10:27 PM

What about the leaders who pay little attention to their employees, provide no direction, provide no feedback (unless of course it's negative), don't empower or allow their employees the freedom to try, fail, learn, try again and succeed. What recommendation do you have for the employees who work for those managers?

I suppose we tell them to ask for the direction they need, ask for feedback, ask for forgiveness instead of permission.

I'm in full support of employees stepping up and taking more responsibility for their career/their life, but I think it's a cop out. It's because we have failed to develop leaders who know how to develop talent, that we say "develop yourself". The fact that companies are concerned about the lack of bench strength of leadership talent is not a result of a completely incompetent workforce. Sounds to me like the pendulum has swung to the other side - how do we find that place where talent development truly is a shared responsibility?

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 10:29 PM

What about the leaders who pay little attention to their employees, provide no direction, provide no feedback (unless of course it's negative), don't empower or allow their employees the freedom to try, fail, learn, try again and succeed. What recommendation do you have for the employees who work for those managers?

I suppose we tell them to ask for the direction they need, ask for feedback, ask for forgiveness instead of permission.

I'm in full support of employees stepping up and taking more responsibility for their career/their life, but I think it's a cop out. It's because we have failed to develop leaders who know how to develop talent, that we say "develop yourself". The fact that companies are concerned about the lack of bench strength of leadership talent is not a result of a completely incompetent workforce. Sounds to me like the pendulum has swung to the other side - how do we find that place where talent development truly is a shared responsibility?

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 10:29 PM

What about leaders who pay little attention to their employees, provide no direction, provide no feedback (unless of course it's negative), don't empower or allow employees the freedom to try, fail, learn, try again and succeed. What recommendation do you have for the employees who work for those managers?

I suppose we tell them to ask for the direction they need, ask for feedback, ask for forgiveness instead of permission.

I'm in full support of employees stepping up and taking more responsibility for their career/their life, but I think it's a cop out. It's because we have failed to develop leaders who know how to develop talent, that we say "develop yourself". The fact that companies are concerned about the lack of bench strength of leadership talent is not a result of a completely incompetent workforce. Sounds to me like the pendulum has swung to the other side - how do we find that place where talent development truly is a shared responsibility?

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 10:30 PM

ooops! Sorry about the duplication - technical difficulties (okay, more like user error) :(

Posted by Darci at March 24, 2008 10:31 PM

Judith...I am often guilty of making the assumption that we all see leadership the same way. Accountability is critical to building an effective team. Performance standards and measures must be defined, resources provided i.e. tools, time training to "enable" folks to achieve them and when standards aren't met, action is taken to correct the situation. The standards have to be enforced consistently to maintain credibility...any leaders most precious commodity. Accountability doesn't have to be punitive, but it must be appliped equitably and equally. So if the "lameless" of the statement was based the perception that folks weren't going to be held accountable, that would be on me.

As for the "people leave their managers" comment it was indeed a personal comment but based on my experience in my current job...Customer Service Call Center. One of the metrics used to assess my personal performance is employee churn which has averaged about 65 percent in our Center, a little higher than average in our industry. But as Darci points out...and thank you Darci...it is linked to the work environment the job is done iin. I have always said that was a leaders responsibility. One need only read the feedback we see in our exit interviews and that statement becomes a reality, particularly since as a leader,,,that's my customer talking. We see three recurring themes regarding our frontline managers. One, I can't find them. If they aren't on the floor, how can they coach and develop or provide escalation support...their most important responsibility? Two, when I find one I have train them. This takes time and "handle time" is a metric the rep gets beat up on. Besides, how can you coach and develop effectively if you can't perform the task themselves? Finally, why is it you can find the time to get me off the phone for discipline but never for coaching and development, career planning, team meetings, training? Couple this with inflexible attendance policies and pay that is less than competitive with the other call centers in the area, it's easy to see why they leave this work environment...company management if you will because management surely has the capacity to address and change these "irritants". Why they don't is a different topic but a lack of accountability higher in the organization is probably involved....where turnover is accepted as a cost of doing business and therefore is a metric that is not used to assess their performance/bonus.

Managers aren't babysitters to be sure but why do many insist on treating their frontline like children? This is the policy/process issue Trevor refers to. They don't want or need an inordinate amount of attention, but shouldn't a manager know your name? Acknowledge your contribution to the team periodically? They may not have all learned from brilliant leaders, some have had the advantage of having worked for some tremendous "bad examples", which is equally valuable. Your purpose is exclusively yours to be sure, but trying to "own it" in a work environemt that doesn't value it is Trevor so eloquently put it "raising your head above the parapet" ... and as Bud Fox in the movie Wall Street observed "there is no nobility in poverty anymore"

Darci...your observation "we have failed to develop leaders who know how to develop talent" (people)CAPTURES PERFECTLY the "real" issue in my and many other organizations....thank you. I think we find the place where talent development is a shared responsibility is in the way we as leaders interact with those we lead, regardless of the level of the organization we lead in. I can influence what happens above me and "control" what happens below me in my area of responsibility. Nothing influences those above me better than achieving great results...

As for my comment regarding "outsourcing" motivating and energizing the organization...it is a case of my not seeing the forrest through the trees. I never thought about the value a consultant in this capacity because I can't fathom the fact it would ever be needed. Even if I didn't know the answer personally, I would first look for it "internally"....heck, even though I do know it, I was ask the question to the folks in the company anyway. I don't recall who said the four most important words in any organization are "What Do You Think", but I have seen how powerful and productive they can be

Judith....congratulations on the blog! I will visit it frequently as I always enjoy and learn a great deal from your words and perspective.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 25, 2008 1:06 AM

Cop out? For whom? The managers? The talent? Both? I sincerely believe that leadership should and must play a role in the development of talent. My biggest point here: it is not the manager's responsibility alone. I would hope that talent would lead in this responsibility. Personally, I have ALWAYS, since an adolescent, sought after men and women, from various professions on my job our outside of it,. I have always also educated myself. I have rarely been turned down by coaches and mentors and I have always learned so much more than what was required. I think that when others see your desire to improve yourself and your desire to advance in spite of the failure of others (managers included), assistance will come. If not, keep going forward, even if this ultimately includes moving on.

I would literally sit at the feet of my mentors and coaches, listening more than talking, soaking everything in. Most of these I sought after and got! How mentally strong are you? How resilient are you? How humble? How maliable? Be proactive. Begin with yourself. What can you do? Do you know yourself? What are your weaknesses? What are your strenghts? How competent and effective are you? Who can best assist you reach the next level? Why not go after what you need?

What kind of assistance is available? What can you do to sure up your own weaknesses (and even advertise your strenghts?) Is not having the coaching and mentoring you feel you need on the job reason to leave your current position? Can you do your work effectively without it? How often do you need coaching and mentoring? Can someone in another area or at another company assist you? Can you take classes to improve your skill-set? There are always options! Do not wait for others to come to you, even when it is their job to do so. Be proactive! Act now!

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 1:08 AM

Dave...as usual you give much to consider. Thank you. Your litany of mismanagment is one of excessively poor leadership. Are you suggesting that leaders are, by in large ineffective and self-indulgent? Whose job is it to lead the leader? Train the manager? If talent isn't given the leadership necessary, what is the recourse? Does the talent have any responsiblity AT ALL?

Do stop in on my Blog for discussions. I too value your words.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 1:41 AM

Judith, your points on taking responsibility for your own career path and development are ones that I both agree with and most that I have practiced. Your comment "If not, keep going forward, even if this ultimately includes moving on." is all to often a choice that folks are forced to take...and the essense of the "they leave their "managers" reality...the environment that did not provide support or opportunity to advance. I never truly appreciated the significance of the "shared responsibility" need until I began in my current position. Many of the options you describe taking classes, getting help in another area of the company, are not options in the entry level, non-flexible and collectively bargined world of the call center where your options and opportunities are directly proportional to the number of calls in the queue. New folks need constant feedback to build confidence and tips and tricks on how to "manage" their stats. Your access to "other options" ends at the end of that headset cord because adherance to schedule is tracked and if you are supposed to be in queue...you best be there. We work in a call center where everyone has a common goal...to get to a job that get you off the phones. I promise you I am not exaggerating one bit. If you make it to the 12 month point, churn goes to less than 20%. So at the time when you should still be in a skill development mode, learning and perfecting the game, there is an excellent chance you will be working for a person who is not involved, engaged and proactive in giving you the tools and resources you need to learn, develop and progress. Throw in the "single parent" and a hundred or so other factors...it's a different world.

This is as close to the frontline as you can get because it's often the front door to many of our reps "first jobs" I believe Trevor and I tend to see things the same way because we never forgot what it was like to be on the frontline as we developed our leadership styles. He speaks a language I understand and know will get results and vice versa. The more my level of responsibility grows, the more I have to rely on my team mates....those I lead...as my partners. The concepts of effective leadership are simple. Applying them clearly isn't. Every one says "people are our most critical/important/strategic resource"...the way I lead simply shows my team I mean it!

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 25, 2008 2:37 AM

Judith, Darci and Dave – great exchanges – this is real fun!

Judith said - ‘Trevor...sometimes I am not sure if you conflate issues purposefully or if your strong all- inclusive idealogy prevails and your comments, though kind and generous, are so colored by your strong sense of fairness and inclusivity’

I’m sooooooo proud to be GUILTY as charged Judith.

I ALWAYS will and always have AIMED for all-inclusiveness and fairness – it’s the way my parents brought me up to be non-judgmental and never generalise. This has carried on in my life in my relationship with God. When I fail - as I often do - God forgives me and I try like hell to remember that when others fail or do not quite live up to expectations placed upon them by managers. People constantly surprise me – I just don’t believe stereotypes or pre-judgments :-)

Finally, the more I learn the more I realise I don’t know so thanks again to all three of you for considerably increasing my learning yet again through this fascinating dialogue.

It is wonderful to part of such a vibrant learning set where we can agree, disagree and move forward as friends and colleagues ….… Which actually brings me back to my answer to the point that Judith raises with me about my inclusively – GUILTY as charged your honour!! :- )

Best wishes to all at TP and all commenters - what a team!

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 25, 2008 7:01 AM

Bravo, Trevor, for your fortitude and graciousness in your stance. It is my desire that what we deem fair and inclusive is based firmly in the reality of what is truly needed and not in rose-colored uber ultra liberalism (sorry for the word) or idealism that does not, for example, ultimately assist employees but enables them to forever depend on others for their sense of self-worth, skills-enhancement, and advancement. While employees should be enabled to succeed, leaders should not become in the pejorative sense enablers.

I second your motion: "Best wishes to all at TP and all commentators - what a team!"

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 8:59 AM

Bravo, Trevor, for your fortitude and graciousness in your stance. It is my desire that what we deem fair and inclusive is based firmly in the reality of what is truly needed and not in rose-colored uber ultra liberalism (sorry for the word) or idealism that does not, for example, ultimately assist employees but enables them to forever depend on others for their sense of self-worth, skills-enhancement, and advancement. While employees should be enabled to succeed, leaders should not become in the pejorative sense enablers.

I second your motion: "Best wishes to all at TP and all commentators - what a team!"

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 8:59 AM

Dave...now we're talking about what "new folks" need, eh? New employees were not, in particular, the focus in the discussion here. Any manager with half of brain will know that when employees are new they need more assistance; they need hand holding. But honestly, I have always gone into even new positions looking for those who could assist me, whether they were other employees or managers. Also, I take exception here to the sense that all managers do not lead well. This generalization even in tone alone is inaccurate.

Quite a few years ago I actually worked in a call center. I think I was in college at the time or shortly thereafter. I had a few sessions of training with script in hand and the manager bracing us for rudeness. What I did immediately was to listen to those around me and found those who were doing execeptionally well. I would come in early and leave late. What did those who were successful do? What did they success afford them? (Not only did I want to do a good job, but I wanted the perks too!) How did they answer rudeness? What tone did they take throughout? Did they ever go off script? Did their numbers improve because of it? Did they fumble?

There are always options...always. Employees need only to find them. They must be proactive.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 9:34 AM

Thanks Judith – By the way please don’t apologise – I am delighted to be referred to in the same sentence as ‘rose-colored uber ultra liberalism’ – it reminds me I still have hope.

My experience of thousands of front line employees in my career is that all they need is permission to fail from their leaders. Some of course don’t need that permission – they will fight their corner without any help from people like me. That is what I meant earlier when I said we don’t need to patronise front liners – they can fight their own battles in the main. Those who need help and support should be given it as a right – that is the job of the manager – thought I prefer the term coach.

We ALL have talents to bring to the table – yes even that difficult person who always seems to be obstructive to change. He/She probably just needs to be loved.

I’m enjoying the debate. – Over to you :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 25, 2008 10:25 AM

Trevor....excuse me...but I wanna puke! This statement is just too much for me: "We all have talents to bring to the table - yes even that difficult person who always seems to be obstructive to change. He/She probably just needs to be loved." Yuck! Many simply need a kick in the rear...as in out the door!!!

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 12:03 PM

Good reply Judith - No problem with the puking. I still maintain however with a passion that sticks NEVER work as well as carrots unless we are talking gross negligence or misconduct. And even then it is rarely cut and dried. That has ALWAYS been my experience in life and in work. During my 'corporate career' I saw a minority of managers who got some sort of ego stroke by kicking people out the door and they were always the ones least in touch with employees and customers.

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 25, 2008 12:26 PM

There is a transference here, Trevor. It is not the ego of the manager that needs to be put in check, but rather the employee when he or she is obstinate. Who needs this? I understand the all too pervasive power of politics. But for those who are purposefully undermining a good initiative, whose input is nil, the boot is always in order.

A carrot does not work for many obstinate people. I do, however, thoroughly understand the importance of adjusting and working with difficult people and applying whenever necessary political maneuvers in order to accomplish the greater good.

This is all for me for now...I'm off!

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 12:59 PM

Got it, Trevor! I missed the "minority of managers" bit. I'm really off now or I'll miss my appointment.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 1:04 PM

Judith...the discussion was about what leaders could or should do to help folks find "purpose" in their work. It really doesn't matter what their role or tenure is in the company...turnover costs. Developing and retaining a "world class team" should be everyone's responsibility...which takes involved and engaged leadership at every level. My comments relative to manager performance were clearly linked to exit interviews...not a generalization or tone on my part. Those were the comments of those who "left their managers" (theirs or those in the company who make the policies) due to the many issues in the work environment. Your interpretation of my comments as "inaccurate" based on tone in no way changes the fact these are the operational realities that are faced everyday where I work. Are they difficult to believe, that's for you to decide. You can dismiss the reality that in my workplace that there are many "institutional" barriers to taking the initiative. In your experience in a call center, you spoke of many things that are common..."benchmarking top performing reps, working with others. This is exactly why we have team huddles...queue permitting. The effectiveness of these forums is leader driven. If your bosss isn't making you accountable, the effort put forth might be less than stellar, if any is put forth at all. Why do some of us do it differently...we're accountable to borrow Trevor's phrase to the man in the mirror and our team members. Your statement..."They are always options...always" is correct but with no where near the availability or accessibility that you might believe, based on the examples you list above. Come in early stay late...not an option...overtime has to be approved and even if you could you're logged into a phone taking calls....contractual issue. You are subject to discipline for using break/lunchtime to be at your desk "self studying"...process put in place after settling a DOL suit. But what I really don't understand is why many folks think that those who advocate for the frontline don't discipline folks or hold them accountable. Why I would be willing to tolerate anyone not meeting standards...to be unwilling or unable to boot up the behind of a person deliberately who might be acting the fool. Accountability doesn't have to be punitive or lead to discipline. Does it get to that point? Sometimes...but that's the difference real leaders make. Developing and retaining folks is everyone's responsibility. Some folks excel at it, some do well. some don't try.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 25, 2008 5:53 PM

Dave...I was not paid for my "overtime," as it was not on company time. It was on my time. And I was the great beneficiary. I repeat: there are always options. Employees need only to find them.

generic viagra online canadian pharmacy

The point is to create what you believe is possible and strategically act on it. The lack of availability and accessibility have rarely moved me. Many times it is as simple as believing a thing is possible and acting with wisdom and sincerity on your belief. The point remains; there are always options. Employees need only to find them.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 7:11 PM

Wonderful advice to be sure. A great idea in theory but the barriers and challenges in application on many "frontlines"...not just the one I work in...are far more real than many realize. Yours is a view is held by many of the folks in our organization. The folks who are in a posiion to drive change and accountability. Nothing changes mainly because they don't see that they have a problem. It's always the employee at fault. Their work ethic, attitude, if only we could get better people. It doesn't make sense to be sure but that doesn't make it any less real. As I've said before...it's just the place where theory and reality collide!

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 25, 2008 10:14 PM

Dave...this is how I have always lived my life. This is NOT theory alone. It is reality. It is activity. I do not know the "folks" in your office. But what I do know is that change is always possible and options always available.

You have completely misunderstood my point. It is not about getting "better people" but about having the people take a large role in achieving their purpose within the organization by aligning with other employees, managers and the goals and objectives of the company.

By the way, Dave, my hat is off to you for hangning in a place where your unhappiness is obvious. Have you been able to make any changes, any progress at all? And...please...please...please do tell me about the difficulties, about those above you who inhibit such progress. To that response I would ask, where have you not succeeded? Where can you improve? What are your options?

Shall I repeat the Margaret Mead quote again? Often times repitition helps me. So here it goes: "A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

All the very best, Dave, in your efforts. You seem like an upstanding gentleman with a great heart.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 25, 2008 11:09 PM

Well, this really did turn into a fantastic debate, didn't it? Thanks Judith for putting your 'boot' in to liven up the discussions, and to all the others who joined in.

I was much struck by the points that were raised in the excellent article to which Frank referred us. ("You weren't meant to have a boss" http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html)
The description of the difference between programmers in start up businesses and those in well established businesses sent a shiver up my spine. Many of today's employees - certainly in western business, at least - have become used to a standard of living that our parents would have been proud to achieve, and I worry that many of us are becoming complacent about that. Are we expecting too much to be spoon fed to us, without being willing to 'pay the price'?

Many of you on this blog will be familiar with TPC's Future Shape of the Winnerâ„¢model. Whilst there is clearly a massive leadership piece to FSW, the role of the employee is also paramount. To justify being described as Talent, we believe that the individual must be doing the very best work of which they are capable. With the best will in the world, how can the leader know what that is?

In the midst of the White Collar Revolution that is going on in today's world of work, all of us - leaders, colleagues, consultants, partners, suppliers - are being challenged to up our game, or else we will become irrelevant. That's why the lessons of Brand You are so important and why I believe we can't rely on being lucky enough to have a great leader if we are to achieve our fullest potential. As Judith so succinctly put it - there are always options.

Posted by Madeleine at March 26, 2008 10:17 AM

Congratulations. This post was chosen as one of the five best business blog posts for this week on my Midweek Look at the Business Blogs.

http://blog.threestarleadership.com/2008/03/26/32608-a-midweek-look-at-the-business-blogs.aspx

Posted by Wally Bock at March 26, 2008 3:21 PM

Thank you, Wally!

Posted by cathy mosca at March 26, 2008 5:12 PM

‘Many of today's employees - certainly in western business, at least - have become used to a standard of living that our parents would have been proud to achieve, and I worry that many of us are becoming complacent about that. Are we expecting too much to be spoon fed to us, without being willing to 'pay the price'?

Madeleine – thanks for your astute comments as ever.

Having worked for 35 years until 42 months ago in the third largest organisation in the world (NHS) and since then working independently for myself I think you are right we are expecting too much to be spoon fed to us. Self-employment and independence means the only ‘spoon’ one gets fed from is the one you earn. I say if I don’t work I don’t eat.

I could have carried on working for the remainder of my working life in the comfort blanket of the NHS. I could have picked up my salary each month until I was 65. I could have had a very generous pension lump sum at 65 and thereafter a great pension for the rest of my life.

That was the easy option and some would say (and did say) it was the ‘sensible’ option. But the reality is I had all but ‘died’ in the NHS. I had become stale and I was no longer an asset. I was no longer fulfilled although still passionate about changing healthcare and pushing for real change.

The ‘difficult’ option - according to many people - was to leave with no guarantee of income and uncertainty about the future.

When I look back now I don’t see a risk – it seemed the right thing to do in my heart and it worked out fabulously. I’ve not had one nanosecond of regret about leaving my alleged ‘comfort blanket.’ That blanket was not at all ‘comfortable’ actually. This is purely a mindset thing.

It feels much better to be free, alive, enthused, excited, passionate, loving every day and learning more than ever in my life rather than feeling like each day is a real effort to go to work. Actually in hindsight my risk was tiny compared to many people I see and respect for taking much greater risks in life.

Things like love, faith, contentment and career satisfaction are far more important than money, security and pensions and we all must make our decisions based on our own individual circumstances. There is not a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ answer to this.

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 26, 2008 6:17 PM

Madeleine -- Thank you for your wisdom in including us all (leaders, colleagues, consultants, partners, suppliers ) in the options category. This is so true. Thanks also for reminding us that in this global competitive economy, we cannot afford to rest on our laurels by any means; we must move forever forward yogether in achieving greater works, "achieving our full potential."

Togetherness is so important, for competition alone will not suffice in an increasingly global smaller world. Through technology our competititors have closely become our neighbors and in some cases our suppliers. Besides this, it is just good to accomplish things together. We need to get out of the state of me and more into we. This statement is not meant, in any way, to negate our capitalist system. Though, like all systems, re-alignment is necessary.

As you well know, Madeleine, I love the FSW model for its central talent focus. I love it that we can transcend our mundane state to one of talent by our efforts to succeed in fulfilling our purpose. (I had not thought of talent in this way.) This model actually assists in fulfilling purpose by developing talent in flux through its rotor and axes. This is beautiful indeed. Thank you. viagra cheap overnight

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 26, 2008 7:13 PM

Judith...quite the contrary I do "get" your point regarding taking the initiative in your own personal and professional development. Attitude and ambition are terrfic attributes indeed. Attitude must have opportunity, time and other tools to be developed to achieve the level of "talent" and these are not as readily accessible and available as many might believe. I also happen to enjoy my job...I am one of those small band of people...and we have made progress locally and a level or two up. Results have a way of changing minds. I get to use the leadership and management theories and tools that I preached as a consultant and apply them on the job. My description of my workplace is simply the way things are. I also spend a great deal of time training...getting paid to hang out and class clown with some terrific folks...you gotta love.

My take-away from this discussion is Darci's point that we don't know how to develop people which from my place on the frontline is 1000% on point. Initiative needs an environment to grow and reach it's potential and that's the role of leadership. It's not coincidental that all of the performance management models I have seen....Baldrige, FSW have a leadership component. The folks on the frontline...talent...have to be enabled with the time, tools, training, to meet performance expectations. When they fail...the responsibility rests with who?

As always Judith, thank you. Your perspective and words make me think and I always learn from them.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 26, 2008 8:19 PM

Dave...are these two terms, talent and the frontline, interchangeable to you? What, in fact, do they mean to you? What do you think of Madeleine's definition of talent above? In this regard, is everyone on the frontline talent?

With regards to your opening statements, I hate circles. So, I will leave most of what I have read there (though it may be just be my own understanding) to the wind. Perhaps, someone else will give a stab at them, having read all the comments above.

Thank you for your words, Dave. They matter. Your work so described above is valuable. I also guess it is possible to appear discontent and actually be content. Appearances can be deceiving indeed.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 26, 2008 8:37 PM

Talent and frontline are labels. We are talking about people. If I have done my job as a leader, then "the people" who work the frontline would earn your label of talent because they would be doing "the very best work of which they are capable". Their attitude, drive and initiative coupled with the work environment I create of trust, teamwork and continuous improvement is what enables "us" to excel...you have to have both. Madeline comment's "We can't rely on being lucky enough to have a great leader" leads me to ask the question why not? Shouldn't we all, reagrdless of label, be expected to to do the very best work of which we are capable? Be held responsible and accountable for our performance because leadership at every level has folks reporting to them....talent if you will?

Success requires both....if that "leadership" piece of the gyroscope isn't doing it's job, it's gonna wobble for sure, became unstable. Options available for those who don't work for a good leader perhaps,,,,not necessarily good ones however. Attitude and intiaive unsupported leads to turnover..

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 26, 2008 10:13 PM

Dave...what are you talking about? It is well understood that frontliners and talent are people. Who did you think they were? Or, better yet...who did you think I thought they were? What I was trying to get you to define was the construct so applied in order to move people to the next level.

Madeleine's point about defining employees as talent, for me, defines those who are forever in search of greater professional individual achievement on the job which assist in defining purpose. In this regard, there is inference that all employees are not necessarily, in the specific sense, talent in that they are not in search of betterment. This is NOT to say that these employees cannot at any time have a sense of pride and accomplishment in achieving their very best. (Perhaps, a leader's role is quite needed here, if employees buy in.) Without doubt, the right enviroment aids the process, but if this environment is not present, then what?

What we are all trying to work through (what we are trying to discover) is the evolution of ideas that hopefully affects change. Ideas are important. When enacted they lead to advancement. (There are, of course, other factors as well) Yes! We can say people, people, and more people. This we all understand. What language does best is to re-define, explore, and expound upon a given term, distinctly coloring and creating new openings, new understanding. From this, innovation, enlightenment, and self-awareness come.

Your seemingly fixation on indentifying labels (here and in other posts) does not broaden the discussion of labels at all, but rather narrows it. This is funny, you think? The reason this is so is because while we want to be simply understood, what we don't want are simpletons. Simpletons, by the way, do not necessarily describe uneducated people, people of a certain socio-economic class (yes, I said CLASS!), or people of a specific race.

What the term simpleton defines for me, however, are those who cannot or will not think critically. Those who blame their lack on others. Those who consistently without judgment, good sense and intelligence. Those who will not look beyond the pale, seeing nothing that is not apparent.

I also get a sense that your response is me- absorbed. Your understanding seems centrally based in yourself as a leader. While I appreciate you sense of accountability, you, my friend, will not be able to change anyone if they are not willing to be changed. So, employees have a large role to play in their own advancement.

I am not talking necessarily about my particular brand of anything, let alone a label. What I am talking about, however, is a broadening of ideas that would inspire people to act differently to fulfill their purpose.

How you arrived at labels from all of the comments above is baffling to me. It is not about applying a particular system of labels or any other system upon employees; it is rather about allowing employees to define themselves within a model that focuses on them which in turns produces results. This helps the define and enact their purpose. Your statement makes me think that perhaps your system structurally conforms people as opposed to people transforming systems.

Change is essentially the core of the FSW model. With talent as its structure, change is inevitable. Talent is the "I" in the midst of the storm. Instability exists. Chaos is encouraged. Change is inevitable; it is, in fact, greatly encouraged. What then becomes important is how the rotor to various axes.

How are you defining attitude? Please...please...please...do not say that this term is also a label.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 27, 2008 12:30 AM

Judith...exactly! You know they are people, I know they are people so the term talent accomplishes....?

As for the construct...in virtually every post I say the same. A work environment/culture that promotes trust,teamwork and continuous performance improvement. This is the mechanism that enables your " it is rather about allowing employees to define themselves within a model that focuses on them which in turns produces results". If I seem "absorbed" and my understanding centrally based on in my self as a leader...guilty. Enabling or allowing people to accomplish this doesn't happen by itself. It's my job. You observe it is about "allowing" employees to define themselves that focuses on them.,,,you say allow, I say create the environment that allows it....either way it gets "allowed"

I agree with your "While I appreciate you sense of accountability, you, my friend, will not be able to change anyone if they are not willing to be changed. So, employees have a large role to play in their own advancement." I agree but my value here is in removing those barriers and obstacles that might prevent them from wanting to change. Credibility and trust is the foundation for teamwork...the "we" that enables the "I" to excel, achieve, and fulfill their purpose. It's what gets the "buy-in". Continuous performance improvement is the change, the ideas, the chaos.

Madeline comment's "We can't rely on being lucky enough to have a great leader" and your "Without a doubt, the right enviroment aids the process, but if this environment is not present, then what? leads me to ask the question why not? What is leadership's role? What would stop them from being great leaders or incapable of cresting a work environment that build the culture essential for success, particularly when they have the authority and resources to do so? Why aren't they held to the same "To justify being described as Talent, we believe that the individual must be doing the very best work of which they are capable" standard that the "people" are?

My "fixation" with labels stems from the fact that for the past 15 years I have read a lot, researched a lot, taught a ton, faciltated thousands of meetings, and audited a ton of organizations and workcenters in the name of performance management systems. The terms or labels change, the visual "models" change, but the theories and concepts are essentially the same. Theories we got...it's execution we lack. The more things change....the more they stay the same.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 28, 2008 12:12 AM

Dave...OK...OK...OK...since leaders are people too, I guess we'll just have to include them (as those of us with options) among those are "held to the same standard as the 'people' are."

I loved your "continuous performance improvement is the change, the ideas the choas." The statement alone has movement and the beauty here is that it also fits so wonderfully into models such as the FSW where there is constant motion.
Hopefully, the motion is in the right direction. This reminds me of of growing up in Detroit in the late 70's where my uncle had taken over my grandfather's church of over 10,000 people, many of whom were young people.

My siblings, who are all older than me, were complaining to my uncle of not being able to do what the other kids were doing. They were going to clubs, hanging out late, and doing other things which we were simply NOT able to do. (There were 12 of us.) Our friends were out in the wind, having big fun, as we saw it. His response: "they may be moving, but in the wrong direction." My lesson: movement is neccessary, but its direction essential.

With models such as the FSW, there is a check and balance element within the various axes (ambition, architecture, brand, experience, execution, and performance), activated by the rotor (talent) which steadies the chaos until the next wave. There is leadership within talent. The movement, then, has purpose, peopled by talent (so described above) that works best in small huddles; it is not without direction.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 28, 2008 1:36 AM

Judith...your uncle, as is his niece, is very wise and profound to be sure!

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 28, 2008 9:49 PM herbal viagra

Dave...I thank you for your vote of confidence. I have learned so much simply being in the family in which I was raised.

We did not have a lot of material things, but we most certainly had loads of love, strict discipline, and the contributions of many others into our lives.

The contribution continues and I am grateful for such a platform as this in which to both share and receive. I have most certainly received through your words. Thank you, Dave.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 28, 2008 10:08 PM

GHT...Great Home Training is truly a marvelous thing and a commodity, given many of todays societal and socio-economic norms, in short supply. Love, discipline, and the contributions of many others into our lives...a prescription that would clearly cure much of what ails "us" today. I'm not sure it took the whole village to raise this child but it sure was terrific to benefit from it's collective guidance, wisdom and experience.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 28, 2008 11:26 PM

My mother was brillant in listening and discerning whether an untruth was spoken by an adult. (She could also generally tell by the look of surprise and dismay on my face.) But she NEVER took my side in front of adults.

In such situations, my mother would simply say, "Mrs. Smith, if it's like you say it is, Judith (invariably me because I ALWAYS had something to say) will be dealt with at home." This left the adult with her dignity in tack, even if there was some dishonesty on her part. What my mother didn't want was for me to think that it was OK to disrepect or go toe to toe with authority. She also left me feeling vindicated by not accusing me in front of the adult. I nearly always said precisely what happended, letting the chips fall where they may. My mother knew this about me.

Today, more than I would like to imagine, parents are taking the side of children right in front of the child, arguing with the other adult, even when it is obvious that the child is being untruthful. (I have seen this more than I'd like to admit. This is not pretty. I've taught school as a substitute and volunteer today at my local library whenever possible.) Children learn to disrespect authority and think it is Ok to be dishonest. In the long run, this often negatively affects performance and attitude, and an inordinate sense of what they expect from others on the job.

We must all participate in our own little or not so little way every day to contribute to the lives of others, especially young people Sometimes a simple sentence of appreciation or acknowledgement is all that's needed. I make it a habit of speaking to young people on the street and sincerely asking them how they are. It's amazing what small things can do. By the time they reach us in our various work enviroments, we will have indeed contributed to their success at work.

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 29, 2008 6:40 AM

Your Mother sounds like a very special and remarkable person indeed. I still get the three name blast from my Mother for the slightest breech in manners or basic courtesy. You are so correct about the impact the smallest display of interest or inquiry can make and one of the reasons I have always stayed active in working with schools in the classroom and with the staff and faculty. A co-worker and I are looking at starting "something" to work/advocate for single and working parent families. They is a group who are ever growing yet whose needs are often not addressed personally. professionally, or legislatively. I am angered, energized and depressed as we research and try to figure out how to get moving forward. As you point out, the "work" we do before they reach the work center will definitely influence their personal and professional lives and those of their children...

Posted by Dave Wheeler at March 29, 2008 10:50 PM

Thank you so much, Dave, for the work you do. It is so important, so very necessary. Keep the faith!

Posted by Judith Ellis at March 30, 2008 12:28 AM

There was a time that I had that problem. Now, it's long gone. The more I focus, the more I wish to do what I like to do. You can both have fun of what you do and execute the branding appropriately. The branding is though more affected by the enormous competition and openness that Internet+ offers everyone. So now competition is more democratic and more rampant too.

The more I do what I like, the more I refine my thinking/acting process in real-time. As I refine my gusto brought at work, regardless of approaches, methodologies, techniques, as long as I feel that I'm playing in the Toy-Field (although in actuality it's a rogue battlefield), I'm okay.

My increasing liking does not equate with not having to surmount--in some cases--the insurmountable. The world economy, therefore the fabrics of firms and organizations globally, is getting more sophisticated, but also more daring. Got to make your enjoyment more cultivated, so that you encounter challenge charming and carry on without a fail.

Never underestimate the challenges once you get to like your "craft." For one thing, not forgetting that now is more obvious that "everything is related to everything else"--managers, entrepreneurs, leaders must used connectedness, group-thinking online plus much more than just one discipline.

This TIME is not about just MBAs and Ph.D.s, in the current epoch it will require paying the highest for education/formation daily for the optimum knowledge. Teach to learn, teach to yourself.

Posted by Andres Agostini at April 10, 2008 4:21 PM