Monday Motivating Moment
April 25, 2011
Your Weekly Attitude Booster
Decisions and Experience
Have you ever put off making a decision about even the smallest matter? Why is it so hard for us to make decisions at times? Is it because we are afraid of making the wrong decision?
A reporter once asked a bank president...
"Sir, what is the secret of your success?"
The banker replied... "Two words."
"And, sir, what are they?" the reporter asked.
"Right decisions," the banker answered.
"And how do you make the right decisions?"
"One word."
"And, sir, what is it?"
"Experience."
"And how do you get experience?"
"Two words."
"And, sir, what are they?"
"Wrong decisions," the banker answered.
The ability to move beyond the fear of making the wrong decision is key to living a full and successful life. As his Uncle Donald advised my husband years ago, "Do something, even if it's wrong!"
When faced with a tough decision, it is always helpful to ask, "What is the worst thing that could happen?" We may find that the worst thing that could happen is not as bad as that which could result from not making a decision.
Affirmation for the Week:
"I move forward with confidence in my decision making abilities. When any decision does not yield the desired effect, I rest comfortably in the knowledge that I can reassess my approach and make yet another decision. I am a powerful and successful decision maker."
Have a decisive week!
Mary Rau-Foster, E-mail Mary
Copyright 2011 by Mary Rau-Foster. All rights reserved.
However, if you find this information helpful, we grant you permission, and strongly encourage you, to print this page and put it on your bulletin board, or download an Adobe PDF file with a printable version. Thank you.
Sign up to receive your personal copy of the Monday Motivating Moment each week.
Read other Monday Motivating Moments
MY THOUGHTS
Did you learn from the things that you did right? Or did you learn more from the things that you did wrong? Most likely, your answer is the latter. Decision making is truly very experiential. There are theoretical steps and principles to guide us. But do you ever notice how decision making gets easier and easier after you've made a lot of wrong ones-and learned from them?
Monday, April 25, 2011
Saturday, April 23, 2011
DECIDING ON LEADERSHIP POSITIONS
DECIDING ON LEADERSHIP POSITIONS
from the article 'Are You A Great Leader? Does It Even Matter?'
By Mark Henricks | April 18, 2011
Consider these guidelines when it comes to promoting others into positions of leadership, and to exercising your own:
Promote people to managers only when you need managers. Don’t do it only to justify a pay raise.
On the other hand, if your best technicians need more pay, pay them more.
But never put them into leadership jobs that don’t make use of their best talents.
Especially if you’re in a small company, follow Palmgren’s advice and don’t keep leadership entirely to yourself. “Proprietors should enable their personnel to voice their concerns about the company matters, take initiative, and participate in solving the problems experienced in small companies,” Palmgren writes, “instead of retaining power to their own hands only.” It turns out that you can sometimes best lead others by letting them lead themselves.
Mark Henricks has reported on business, technology and other topics for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Entrepreneur, and other leading publications long enough to lay somewhat legitimate claim to being The Article Authority. Follow him on Twitter @bizmyths.
MY THOUGHTS
Which brings me to another question-is leadership for everyone? If you were not a 'born leader', can training and preparation make you a leader, even if you do not have the potential?
from the article 'Are You A Great Leader? Does It Even Matter?'
By Mark Henricks | April 18, 2011
Consider these guidelines when it comes to promoting others into positions of leadership, and to exercising your own:
Promote people to managers only when you need managers. Don’t do it only to justify a pay raise.
On the other hand, if your best technicians need more pay, pay them more.
But never put them into leadership jobs that don’t make use of their best talents.
Especially if you’re in a small company, follow Palmgren’s advice and don’t keep leadership entirely to yourself. “Proprietors should enable their personnel to voice their concerns about the company matters, take initiative, and participate in solving the problems experienced in small companies,” Palmgren writes, “instead of retaining power to their own hands only.” It turns out that you can sometimes best lead others by letting them lead themselves.
Mark Henricks has reported on business, technology and other topics for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Entrepreneur, and other leading publications long enough to lay somewhat legitimate claim to being The Article Authority. Follow him on Twitter @bizmyths.
MY THOUGHTS
Which brings me to another question-is leadership for everyone? If you were not a 'born leader', can training and preparation make you a leader, even if you do not have the potential?
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
ARE YOU TRAINING SUCKERS?
Are You Training People to Suck Up to You?
By Kelly Goldsmith and Marshall Goldsmith
http://www.bnet.com/blog/marshall-goldsmith/are-you-training-people-to-suck-up-to-you/145?tag=footer
Almost every company — and every leader — claims to want employees to honestly express their opinions. Almost everyone claims to hate “suck-ups” who just provide hollow praise to their bosses.
It’s a puzzling situation. If everyone hates suck-ups so much, why does so much sucking-up go on? The simple answer is that people tend to create an environment where others learn to suck up to them.
You’re probably thinking, “The Goldsmiths are making a good point. I see other leaders encouraging suck-ups all the time. Of course I find this to be disgusting!” It’s incredibly easy to see other leaders encouraging suck-ups. And it’s incredibly difficult to realize that you (without meaning to) may be doing the same thing.
In teaching classes, we’ve often ask leaders, “How many of you own a dog that you love?” Invariably these leaders smile, wave their hands in the air, and share the names of their ever-faithful mutts. Next we ask, “What family member gets the most unqualified positive recognition at home?” The possible answers are: A.) my husband, wife or partner; B.) my kids; or C.) my dog. More than 80 percent of the time the clear winner is … the dog!
We then ask these same leaders if they actually love their dogs more than the other members of their families. The invariably say no (although some appear to be lying). The next question is, “Then why is the dog the family member who gets the most unqualified positive recognition?” The answers always sound the same: “The dog never talks back!” “The dog never criticizes me!” “The dog is always happy to see me!” “The dog gives me unconditional love!”
In other words, the dog is a suck-up.
Here is a simple test that may help you avoid encouraging suck-ups in your own work environment. Rank-order your direct reports (or, if you don’t have direct reports, use co-workers) in three ways:
1.How much does this person like me? (You may not know the real answer, but it doesn’t matter. How much do you think this person likes you?)
2.What is this person’s contribution to our company and our customers?
3.How much positive personal recognition do I give to this person?
If you’re honest with yourself, in some cases you may find that your recognition is more highly correlated with No. 1 (liking) than No. 2 (contribution). You may be falling into a trap that you despise in others: creating an environment where people learn to suck up to you.
Think of your own experience in observing suck-ups. The ones that we all hate are obvious or embarrassing about it. These people’s problem is not that they suck up — it’s that they’re bad at it. Subtle suck-ups who don’t obviously look like they are sucking up do much better. They’re much more skilled in their tactics.
Challenge yourself as a leader or co-worker. Make sure that when you give recognition, you’re giving it for the right reason. Don’t assume that you’re too enlightened to fall into the “encouraging suck-ups” trap. Anyone can make this mistake.
What’s your experience in observing employees who suck-up and leaders who encourage this behavior?
MY THOUGHTS
It depends on why you and your staff (or co-worker) like each other. It's really no different from 'birds of the same feather'. If you're competent,an excellent producer, your staff probably likes you because he/she is competent and provides you with excellent support. So, you give personal recognition that's due. Most excellent performers do not suck-up. They don't need to. No need for worry.
But if you're an imbecile (sorry!)...well do your math.
By Kelly Goldsmith and Marshall Goldsmith
http://www.bnet.com/blog/marshall-goldsmith/are-you-training-people-to-suck-up-to-you/145?tag=footer
Almost every company — and every leader — claims to want employees to honestly express their opinions. Almost everyone claims to hate “suck-ups” who just provide hollow praise to their bosses.
It’s a puzzling situation. If everyone hates suck-ups so much, why does so much sucking-up go on? The simple answer is that people tend to create an environment where others learn to suck up to them.
You’re probably thinking, “The Goldsmiths are making a good point. I see other leaders encouraging suck-ups all the time. Of course I find this to be disgusting!” It’s incredibly easy to see other leaders encouraging suck-ups. And it’s incredibly difficult to realize that you (without meaning to) may be doing the same thing.
In teaching classes, we’ve often ask leaders, “How many of you own a dog that you love?” Invariably these leaders smile, wave their hands in the air, and share the names of their ever-faithful mutts. Next we ask, “What family member gets the most unqualified positive recognition at home?” The possible answers are: A.) my husband, wife or partner; B.) my kids; or C.) my dog. More than 80 percent of the time the clear winner is … the dog!
We then ask these same leaders if they actually love their dogs more than the other members of their families. The invariably say no (although some appear to be lying). The next question is, “Then why is the dog the family member who gets the most unqualified positive recognition?” The answers always sound the same: “The dog never talks back!” “The dog never criticizes me!” “The dog is always happy to see me!” “The dog gives me unconditional love!”
In other words, the dog is a suck-up.
Here is a simple test that may help you avoid encouraging suck-ups in your own work environment. Rank-order your direct reports (or, if you don’t have direct reports, use co-workers) in three ways:
1.How much does this person like me? (You may not know the real answer, but it doesn’t matter. How much do you think this person likes you?)
2.What is this person’s contribution to our company and our customers?
3.How much positive personal recognition do I give to this person?
If you’re honest with yourself, in some cases you may find that your recognition is more highly correlated with No. 1 (liking) than No. 2 (contribution). You may be falling into a trap that you despise in others: creating an environment where people learn to suck up to you.
Think of your own experience in observing suck-ups. The ones that we all hate are obvious or embarrassing about it. These people’s problem is not that they suck up — it’s that they’re bad at it. Subtle suck-ups who don’t obviously look like they are sucking up do much better. They’re much more skilled in their tactics.
Challenge yourself as a leader or co-worker. Make sure that when you give recognition, you’re giving it for the right reason. Don’t assume that you’re too enlightened to fall into the “encouraging suck-ups” trap. Anyone can make this mistake.
What’s your experience in observing employees who suck-up and leaders who encourage this behavior?
MY THOUGHTS
It depends on why you and your staff (or co-worker) like each other. It's really no different from 'birds of the same feather'. If you're competent,an excellent producer, your staff probably likes you because he/she is competent and provides you with excellent support. So, you give personal recognition that's due. Most excellent performers do not suck-up. They don't need to. No need for worry.
But if you're an imbecile (sorry!)...well do your math.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
FIRING A RELATIVE?
What If You Could Never Fire Another Employee?
By Margaret Heffernan | April 6, 2010
http://www.bnet.com/blog/business-strategy/what-if-you-could-never-fire-another-employee/154?tag=content;drawer-container
Until 2007, the oldest continuously operating business in the world was Kongo Gumi in Japan. A construction firm founded in 578 A.D., it began building Buddhist temples, and that’s what it was still doing when it was absorbed by Takamatsu. The last president was a member of the founding Kongo family, members of which still work as carpenters today. It shouldn’t surprise us that this is a family firm.
Two-thirds of all businesses are family owned: think Samsung, Fiat, Nieman-Marcus, Bacardi, Seagram and Ikea. We tend to think of family businesses as the stuff of soap opera — Dynasty, Dallas, even the Sopranos — and there’s no doubt that they are highly emotional. But that could be the secret of their success.
Why? Because the salient characteristic of family firms is that you can’t fire your family. The fight may be between siblings, between parents and kids — but they have to work it out. Neither party wants to walk away from a successful company that they own a big stake in, and it can be hard to avoid the family dinner where grievances leak out. Which means that the best of these firms become quite expert at resolving conflict.
Often these companies have one person — usually female — who is the chief diplomat and bridge mender. Some consultants even call this person the Chief Emotion Officer. She does all the interstitial work to repair hurt feelings and communicate detail, often fixing problems before they blow up. She’s in touch with the emotions inherent in every business, and her chief aim is to keep the peace.
I think there’s a great lesson here. As a CEO, it can be highly tempting to imagine that the solution to most problems is to fire one person and hire another. Sales director not delivering? Off with his head. Engineering team behind schedule? Find a new project manager. Employment conditions in the U.S. in particular give managers exceptional latitude in picking people up and throwing them out. Most managers love that because it means they don’t get stuck with their bad choices.
But I have to wonder how much better we’d all be at hiring if, like family firms, we couldn’t fire our failures. For all that we make our hiring practices lengthy and laborious, we still apply plenty of bias, instinct and wishful thinking — in part because we know we can get away with it. What if you couldn’t? What if you were stuck with that employee for life? How would that change your decisions? Here are five hiring practices we can learn from family firms:
1.Choose carefully at the start. Knowing this is a lifetime relationship, not a one-night stand should make you very thoughtful about your own biases.
2.When there are signs of failure, intervene early. Don’t let things fester, and don’t leave a struggling employee to fail.
3.Stop hoping they’ll be so unhappy that they quit. Your employee may meanwhile be hanging on in the hopes that you’ll pay them to leave. And that’s the worst of all possible worlds for everyone.
4.Ask whether the employee is in the right spot. Many companies hire great people but don’t put them in positions where they flourish.
5.Check that the problem doesn’t lie with the line manager. Employees often fail because they’re being mismanaged.
I’m not proud of the times I’ve had to fire employees. It’s a ghastly experience, and it ought to be. If the day ever comes that you don’t mind it, quit: you’ve lost the plot. But before you take this easy exit next time, imagine you’re running a family firm. You’ll see that errant employee for Sunday supper. How does that feel? Isn’t there an alternative to termination?
MY THOUGHTS
Firing is not a decision that is done at the first sign of incompetence or breach of discipline (unless it's serious and explicitly stated in the HR manual). Firing is a last resort. I've worked (or came across) family businesses. Those who opt not to fire family members (without doing anything about that son or daughter or cousin) are in deep s_ _t. It's clear from this article, that something has to be done. Or else, that cancer cell stays in the family business and eats the whole structure up.
I have a friend who was fired by his own dad. He was earth-shaken. But he got the message. And the rest of the employees did, too. The business has grown immensely. So has my friend. He's now running the business. His dad gave him the reins after seeing that he has learned his lesson and has become a better businessman. A much better man,actually.
By Margaret Heffernan | April 6, 2010
http://www.bnet.com/blog/business-strategy/what-if-you-could-never-fire-another-employee/154?tag=content;drawer-container
Until 2007, the oldest continuously operating business in the world was Kongo Gumi in Japan. A construction firm founded in 578 A.D., it began building Buddhist temples, and that’s what it was still doing when it was absorbed by Takamatsu. The last president was a member of the founding Kongo family, members of which still work as carpenters today. It shouldn’t surprise us that this is a family firm.
Two-thirds of all businesses are family owned: think Samsung, Fiat, Nieman-Marcus, Bacardi, Seagram and Ikea. We tend to think of family businesses as the stuff of soap opera — Dynasty, Dallas, even the Sopranos — and there’s no doubt that they are highly emotional. But that could be the secret of their success.
Why? Because the salient characteristic of family firms is that you can’t fire your family. The fight may be between siblings, between parents and kids — but they have to work it out. Neither party wants to walk away from a successful company that they own a big stake in, and it can be hard to avoid the family dinner where grievances leak out. Which means that the best of these firms become quite expert at resolving conflict.
Often these companies have one person — usually female — who is the chief diplomat and bridge mender. Some consultants even call this person the Chief Emotion Officer. She does all the interstitial work to repair hurt feelings and communicate detail, often fixing problems before they blow up. She’s in touch with the emotions inherent in every business, and her chief aim is to keep the peace.
I think there’s a great lesson here. As a CEO, it can be highly tempting to imagine that the solution to most problems is to fire one person and hire another. Sales director not delivering? Off with his head. Engineering team behind schedule? Find a new project manager. Employment conditions in the U.S. in particular give managers exceptional latitude in picking people up and throwing them out. Most managers love that because it means they don’t get stuck with their bad choices.
But I have to wonder how much better we’d all be at hiring if, like family firms, we couldn’t fire our failures. For all that we make our hiring practices lengthy and laborious, we still apply plenty of bias, instinct and wishful thinking — in part because we know we can get away with it. What if you couldn’t? What if you were stuck with that employee for life? How would that change your decisions? Here are five hiring practices we can learn from family firms:
1.Choose carefully at the start. Knowing this is a lifetime relationship, not a one-night stand should make you very thoughtful about your own biases.
2.When there are signs of failure, intervene early. Don’t let things fester, and don’t leave a struggling employee to fail.
3.Stop hoping they’ll be so unhappy that they quit. Your employee may meanwhile be hanging on in the hopes that you’ll pay them to leave. And that’s the worst of all possible worlds for everyone.
4.Ask whether the employee is in the right spot. Many companies hire great people but don’t put them in positions where they flourish.
5.Check that the problem doesn’t lie with the line manager. Employees often fail because they’re being mismanaged.
I’m not proud of the times I’ve had to fire employees. It’s a ghastly experience, and it ought to be. If the day ever comes that you don’t mind it, quit: you’ve lost the plot. But before you take this easy exit next time, imagine you’re running a family firm. You’ll see that errant employee for Sunday supper. How does that feel? Isn’t there an alternative to termination?
MY THOUGHTS
Firing is not a decision that is done at the first sign of incompetence or breach of discipline (unless it's serious and explicitly stated in the HR manual). Firing is a last resort. I've worked (or came across) family businesses. Those who opt not to fire family members (without doing anything about that son or daughter or cousin) are in deep s_ _t. It's clear from this article, that something has to be done. Or else, that cancer cell stays in the family business and eats the whole structure up.
I have a friend who was fired by his own dad. He was earth-shaken. But he got the message. And the rest of the employees did, too. The business has grown immensely. So has my friend. He's now running the business. His dad gave him the reins after seeing that he has learned his lesson and has become a better businessman. A much better man,actually.
Monday, April 11, 2011
DECISION-MAKING IN CRISIS
The Value in Crisis
Daily Inspiration
By John H. Sklare, Ed.D, Lifescript Personal Coach
Published September 01, 2010
I was watching a tennis match on TV, and the announcer was discussing the “mental” problem the tennis player was having lately. He commented that the player had to “work her way out of it mentally." The announcer also said that such problems can’t be practiced because "it doesn’t happen on the practice court. It only happens in matches like this.” There is an important lesson to be learned for those of you who find yourself in crisis today. Let me explain.
Crisis and turmoil provide a great opportunity for meaningful change. For example, take dieting: When life is good, it’s easy to make the right choices and avoid emotional eating. But the real test of healthy eating arises when you're faced with crisis. This is when you find out if you've really changed. If you haven't, you'll return to emotional eating as a coping mechanism. Just like the tennis player's mental issue during match play, improvement for you can only happen when you're in the heat of battle!
Here's the lesson: If you find yourself in a pickle, don’t just experience this situation; use it to move yourself closer to the person you want to be. Life’s firestorms are the perfect opportunity to change your life.
Wishing You Great Health,
Dr. John H. Sklare
MY THOUGHTS
If you think making decisions on a daily basis is hard, think of how you will decide in a crisis situation. Our decision-making style will most certainly be more defined when we are in a crisis. Some people will freeze-up, allowing others (maybe unknowingly to take the rein). Others will get an adrenalin rush allowing them to think on their feet.
The best decision makers are those who can adjust their styles - depending on the situation. You don't want to list and weigh the pros and cons when you're in a crisis. And you don't want to deal with everyday, normal problems as if a 9.0 earthquake just hit you.
www.innerdiet.com
Stressed? Angry? Not over your ex? Email your question to Dr. Sklare to get expert advice! Ask Dr. Sklare
Daily Inspiration
By John H. Sklare, Ed.D, Lifescript Personal Coach
Published September 01, 2010
I was watching a tennis match on TV, and the announcer was discussing the “mental” problem the tennis player was having lately. He commented that the player had to “work her way out of it mentally." The announcer also said that such problems can’t be practiced because "it doesn’t happen on the practice court. It only happens in matches like this.” There is an important lesson to be learned for those of you who find yourself in crisis today. Let me explain.
Crisis and turmoil provide a great opportunity for meaningful change. For example, take dieting: When life is good, it’s easy to make the right choices and avoid emotional eating. But the real test of healthy eating arises when you're faced with crisis. This is when you find out if you've really changed. If you haven't, you'll return to emotional eating as a coping mechanism. Just like the tennis player's mental issue during match play, improvement for you can only happen when you're in the heat of battle!
Here's the lesson: If you find yourself in a pickle, don’t just experience this situation; use it to move yourself closer to the person you want to be. Life’s firestorms are the perfect opportunity to change your life.
Wishing You Great Health,
Dr. John H. Sklare
MY THOUGHTS
If you think making decisions on a daily basis is hard, think of how you will decide in a crisis situation. Our decision-making style will most certainly be more defined when we are in a crisis. Some people will freeze-up, allowing others (maybe unknowingly to take the rein). Others will get an adrenalin rush allowing them to think on their feet.
The best decision makers are those who can adjust their styles - depending on the situation. You don't want to list and weigh the pros and cons when you're in a crisis. And you don't want to deal with everyday, normal problems as if a 9.0 earthquake just hit you.
www.innerdiet.com
Stressed? Angry? Not over your ex? Email your question to Dr. Sklare to get expert advice! Ask Dr. Sklare
WHY GOALS CAN'T BE ACHIEVED
Not Achieving Your Goals? 5 Common Mistakes
By Kelly Goldsmith and Marshall Goldsmith | March 8, 2011
http://www.bnet.com
If you’re like most professionals, you’re probably very skilled at setting goals–but not quite so adept at achieving them.
With the best of intentions, we make New Year’s resolutions, vowing to lose weight, exercise more, or get organized. And by February, our resolve usually evaporates, along with our goals, according to a poll by the time management firm Franklin Covey. The company polled more than 15,000 customers about their New Year’s resolutions and found 4 out of 5 eventually break them. About one in three didn’t even make it to the end of January.
At work, you’ve probably seen the same phenomenon. Companies establish all kinds of goals–from lofty missions statements to specific growth targets–then often fail to meet most of them.
Why? And what stands in the way of achieving goals? Here are five common mistakes:
1. You underestimate how hard it is to achieve the goal.
Those flabby abs? They can’t be turned into a sexy six pack in six days. Those diet books that promise full body make overs in 30 days? Not going to happen.
In reality, most meaningful goals take a lot of work to realize. If you don’t recognize from the out start that losing ten pounds, or increasing sales 10%, will take considerable time and effort, you will find it all too easy to give up once you get caught up in the day-to-day. You have to forecast the difficulties so that you are mentally prepared to meet the challenges when they inevitably arise.
2. You didn’t “own” your goal.
“I’m just doing this because my boss wants me to” is a goal that is destined for failure. If you’re just implementing a new sales strategy to please the new vice president, not because you believe in its necessity, you’re going to find it impossible to stay on course when you encounter obstacles–or just the daily interruptions.
We’re living in a perfect storm of distractions–email, cell phones, texting, IM, on demand media. It’s way too tempting to tell yourself, “I’m incredibly busy, I’ll get to this tomorrow.” In one survey, people admitted to wasting nearly two hours a day of an 8-hour work day on socializing or goofing off on the internet. Waiting for a “tomorrow” usually means never.
If you want to meet that 10% target, you need to be self-motivated and be committed to achieving it.
3. Your goal wasn’t clear, or measurable.
“Increasing customer satisfaction” is too general. You need to identify the specific, quantifiable goal (ie: improving customer retention by 5 percent), so that you can measure your progress on a regular basis. The on-going monitoring–seeing that retention inched up, or down–will reinforce your strategy and help you stay on track.
Yes, we know that there are people who argue that dieters should never get on a scale–that you can tell if you’re losing weight by how your clothes fit. But how many people actually lose weight that way? And is it really possible to keep focused on that difficult-to-achieve goal, without periodically checking in to see how you’re progressing?
4. You didn’t realize the rewards would be modest.
If you set a goal to increase sales 10%, and so far you’ve inched up sales 2%, you’re probably not going to see the confetti sprinkling down over your head. The sense of satisfaction may be limited. Progress frequently is incremental, and slower than we hope. The key is to remember that fact, so you keep plugging on.
5. You tried to do it alone.
There is a very good reason why so many diet plans encourage dieters to join to support groups. Most of us need a community of supporters who will cheer us on when the going gets tough–and, most importantly, hold us accountable. Just the sheer act of publicly acknowledging your goal can help make you accountable to achieve it.
It takes courage–and humility–to publicly admit that you need to do better. But once you do, having that band of supporters will help you stay disciplined to reach your goal.
How have you achieved a difficult goal? How did you do it?
MY THOUGHTS
Goals should push you enough to acommplish more than you think you can but should still be realistic. When you have millions of losses, trying to have a profit may not be reachable. I would go for cutting losses until it's small enough to aim for growth.
By Kelly Goldsmith and Marshall Goldsmith | March 8, 2011
http://www.bnet.com
If you’re like most professionals, you’re probably very skilled at setting goals–but not quite so adept at achieving them.
With the best of intentions, we make New Year’s resolutions, vowing to lose weight, exercise more, or get organized. And by February, our resolve usually evaporates, along with our goals, according to a poll by the time management firm Franklin Covey. The company polled more than 15,000 customers about their New Year’s resolutions and found 4 out of 5 eventually break them. About one in three didn’t even make it to the end of January.
At work, you’ve probably seen the same phenomenon. Companies establish all kinds of goals–from lofty missions statements to specific growth targets–then often fail to meet most of them.
Why? And what stands in the way of achieving goals? Here are five common mistakes:
1. You underestimate how hard it is to achieve the goal.
Those flabby abs? They can’t be turned into a sexy six pack in six days. Those diet books that promise full body make overs in 30 days? Not going to happen.
In reality, most meaningful goals take a lot of work to realize. If you don’t recognize from the out start that losing ten pounds, or increasing sales 10%, will take considerable time and effort, you will find it all too easy to give up once you get caught up in the day-to-day. You have to forecast the difficulties so that you are mentally prepared to meet the challenges when they inevitably arise.
2. You didn’t “own” your goal.
“I’m just doing this because my boss wants me to” is a goal that is destined for failure. If you’re just implementing a new sales strategy to please the new vice president, not because you believe in its necessity, you’re going to find it impossible to stay on course when you encounter obstacles–or just the daily interruptions.
We’re living in a perfect storm of distractions–email, cell phones, texting, IM, on demand media. It’s way too tempting to tell yourself, “I’m incredibly busy, I’ll get to this tomorrow.” In one survey, people admitted to wasting nearly two hours a day of an 8-hour work day on socializing or goofing off on the internet. Waiting for a “tomorrow” usually means never.
If you want to meet that 10% target, you need to be self-motivated and be committed to achieving it.
3. Your goal wasn’t clear, or measurable.
“Increasing customer satisfaction” is too general. You need to identify the specific, quantifiable goal (ie: improving customer retention by 5 percent), so that you can measure your progress on a regular basis. The on-going monitoring–seeing that retention inched up, or down–will reinforce your strategy and help you stay on track.
Yes, we know that there are people who argue that dieters should never get on a scale–that you can tell if you’re losing weight by how your clothes fit. But how many people actually lose weight that way? And is it really possible to keep focused on that difficult-to-achieve goal, without periodically checking in to see how you’re progressing?
4. You didn’t realize the rewards would be modest.
If you set a goal to increase sales 10%, and so far you’ve inched up sales 2%, you’re probably not going to see the confetti sprinkling down over your head. The sense of satisfaction may be limited. Progress frequently is incremental, and slower than we hope. The key is to remember that fact, so you keep plugging on.
5. You tried to do it alone.
There is a very good reason why so many diet plans encourage dieters to join to support groups. Most of us need a community of supporters who will cheer us on when the going gets tough–and, most importantly, hold us accountable. Just the sheer act of publicly acknowledging your goal can help make you accountable to achieve it.
It takes courage–and humility–to publicly admit that you need to do better. But once you do, having that band of supporters will help you stay disciplined to reach your goal.
How have you achieved a difficult goal? How did you do it?
MY THOUGHTS
Goals should push you enough to acommplish more than you think you can but should still be realistic. When you have millions of losses, trying to have a profit may not be reachable. I would go for cutting losses until it's small enough to aim for growth.
Friday, April 8, 2011
LEADER'S TIME
The One Priority Leaders Need to Spend Time On (But Don't)
By Sean Silverthorne | October 19, 2010
When Robert Pozen counsels CEOs on how to spend their time, he shares one piece of advice that they almost had never considered. We’ll get to that advice in a minute.
Pozen is an ideal person to provide counsel on this subject because, for much of his career, he has flown at high executive levels where time is at a premium. Now a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School, Pozen was chairman of MFS Investment Management, ran the Fidelity Management & Research Co., served as associate general counsel at the SEC, and held variety of appointments at high-powered law firms. In other words, his experience is worth considering when it comes to time management.
Top execs usually plan their time by figuring out the top priorities of the organization, then determining who is best equipped to implement them, Pozen tells HBR.org. Too often the answer is, “Me.” The answer might be right, but the question is the wrong one to ask.
“The question is not who’s best at performing high-priority functions, but which things can you and only you as the CEO get done? If you don’t ask yourself that question, your time allocations are bound to be wrong. Lots of CEOs who have been great number twos flounder as number one because they are implicitly asking the wrong question. That happens because they usually rose to CEO by being very good at getting things done themselves.”
In other words, delegate implementation to the next-best person, and spend your time doing only what the CEO can do. This could be meeting with high-level stakeholders, recruiting top talent, hearing concerns of key customers, or giving talks to important audiences.
“You really have to hold yourself back from taking on other functions or tasks even if you might excel at performing them,” cautions Pozen
This is great advice for many top executives, not just CEOs. Figure out the unique tasks or roles that only someone in your position in the organization can do, and farm out the less important things–even if you do them better than anyone else in the business.
You can read the entire interview with Pozen at What Not to Spend Your Time On, at HBR.org.
MY THOUGHTS
In other words, don't micro-manage. And give your people the chance to show that they deserve your trust.
By Sean Silverthorne | October 19, 2010
When Robert Pozen counsels CEOs on how to spend their time, he shares one piece of advice that they almost had never considered. We’ll get to that advice in a minute.
Pozen is an ideal person to provide counsel on this subject because, for much of his career, he has flown at high executive levels where time is at a premium. Now a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School, Pozen was chairman of MFS Investment Management, ran the Fidelity Management & Research Co., served as associate general counsel at the SEC, and held variety of appointments at high-powered law firms. In other words, his experience is worth considering when it comes to time management.
Top execs usually plan their time by figuring out the top priorities of the organization, then determining who is best equipped to implement them, Pozen tells HBR.org. Too often the answer is, “Me.” The answer might be right, but the question is the wrong one to ask.
“The question is not who’s best at performing high-priority functions, but which things can you and only you as the CEO get done? If you don’t ask yourself that question, your time allocations are bound to be wrong. Lots of CEOs who have been great number twos flounder as number one because they are implicitly asking the wrong question. That happens because they usually rose to CEO by being very good at getting things done themselves.”
In other words, delegate implementation to the next-best person, and spend your time doing only what the CEO can do. This could be meeting with high-level stakeholders, recruiting top talent, hearing concerns of key customers, or giving talks to important audiences.
“You really have to hold yourself back from taking on other functions or tasks even if you might excel at performing them,” cautions Pozen
This is great advice for many top executives, not just CEOs. Figure out the unique tasks or roles that only someone in your position in the organization can do, and farm out the less important things–even if you do them better than anyone else in the business.
You can read the entire interview with Pozen at What Not to Spend Your Time On, at HBR.org.
MY THOUGHTS
In other words, don't micro-manage. And give your people the chance to show that they deserve your trust.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
COMBAT WORKPALCE STRESS
March 18, 2011
Top 10 Strategies for Combating Employee Stress
http://safety.blr.com/workplace-safety-news/employee-health/employee-health/Top-10-Strategies-for-Combating-Employee-Stress/
Workplace stress is a bigger problem than it used to be, and employers have good reason to be more concerned about it than in the past, says Barry Hall, principal at Buck Consultants.
In a recent survey, 82% of participants reported that their company’s healthcare costs are significantly or moderately impacted by worker stress. In addition, respondents said they have seen a significant or moderate impact on absenteeism (79%) and on workplace safety (77%), according to the survey by Buck Consultants (www.buckconsultants.com).
Proactive Approach
Worker stress levels have increased within the past few years as a result of economy-related factors, such as layoffs, greater workloads, the need for some employees to work second jobs to make ends meet, and lower household incomes due to family members’ lost wages, Hall explains.
In response, many employers are taking steps to help their employees manage stress. In fact, Buck Consultants found that 66% of participants in its “Stress in the Workplace” survey have implemented four or more programs aimed at reducing stress, and 22% have at least eight programs in place.
According to the survey, the top 10 strategies being used by employers to address stress are:
An employee assistance program (78%)
Flexible work schedules (63%)
Work/life balance support programs (46%)
Leadership training on worker stress (45%)
Online healthy lifestyle programs (45%)
On-site fitness centers (43%)
Physical activity programs (38%)
Stress awareness campaigns (35%)
Financial management classes (30%)
Personal health/lifestyle management coaching (29%)
Significant ROI
Implementing stress management programs makes good business sense because the return on investment (ROI) is high. “It is a business issue for employers,” Hall says. “Employers increasingly realize they must address the rising tide of employee stress and not just to improve employees’ well-being,” says Hall. “Those who ignore stress will take a hit to their bottom line in higher costs and lower productivity.”
Employers that help employees manage stress tend to experience greater employee productivity, higher morale, lower absenteeism, reduced healthcare costs, lower turnover, fewer accidents, and lower workers’ compensation costs, reports Hall.
Acknowledge Stress
He says employers should not be “afraid” to acknowledge and address workplace stress. “I think there is still a lot of hesitancy to address it or to bring it up [with employees]. A lot of employers realize that they are a key contributor to it.”
Although there is no “magic” number of stress management programs to implement, Hall encourages employers to use as many effective programs as possible, because a program or resource “that works for one employee might not work for another.”
MY THOUGHTS
There's no doubt about it - workplace stress is a reality that needs to be addressed. I don't think this is something that should be left for the employee to manage. As the article suggests, employers have much to gain by investing on stress management programs. I just wish the programs are not the superficial attempts that scratches the surface. These programs should be part of a culture that enables and empowers employees to pick up on whatever the employer initiates.
Top 10 Strategies for Combating Employee Stress
http://safety.blr.com/workplace-safety-news/employee-health/employee-health/Top-10-Strategies-for-Combating-Employee-Stress/
Workplace stress is a bigger problem than it used to be, and employers have good reason to be more concerned about it than in the past, says Barry Hall, principal at Buck Consultants.
In a recent survey, 82% of participants reported that their company’s healthcare costs are significantly or moderately impacted by worker stress. In addition, respondents said they have seen a significant or moderate impact on absenteeism (79%) and on workplace safety (77%), according to the survey by Buck Consultants (www.buckconsultants.com).
Proactive Approach
Worker stress levels have increased within the past few years as a result of economy-related factors, such as layoffs, greater workloads, the need for some employees to work second jobs to make ends meet, and lower household incomes due to family members’ lost wages, Hall explains.
In response, many employers are taking steps to help their employees manage stress. In fact, Buck Consultants found that 66% of participants in its “Stress in the Workplace” survey have implemented four or more programs aimed at reducing stress, and 22% have at least eight programs in place.
According to the survey, the top 10 strategies being used by employers to address stress are:
An employee assistance program (78%)
Flexible work schedules (63%)
Work/life balance support programs (46%)
Leadership training on worker stress (45%)
Online healthy lifestyle programs (45%)
On-site fitness centers (43%)
Physical activity programs (38%)
Stress awareness campaigns (35%)
Financial management classes (30%)
Personal health/lifestyle management coaching (29%)
Significant ROI
Implementing stress management programs makes good business sense because the return on investment (ROI) is high. “It is a business issue for employers,” Hall says. “Employers increasingly realize they must address the rising tide of employee stress and not just to improve employees’ well-being,” says Hall. “Those who ignore stress will take a hit to their bottom line in higher costs and lower productivity.”
Employers that help employees manage stress tend to experience greater employee productivity, higher morale, lower absenteeism, reduced healthcare costs, lower turnover, fewer accidents, and lower workers’ compensation costs, reports Hall.
Acknowledge Stress
He says employers should not be “afraid” to acknowledge and address workplace stress. “I think there is still a lot of hesitancy to address it or to bring it up [with employees]. A lot of employers realize that they are a key contributor to it.”
Although there is no “magic” number of stress management programs to implement, Hall encourages employers to use as many effective programs as possible, because a program or resource “that works for one employee might not work for another.”
MY THOUGHTS
There's no doubt about it - workplace stress is a reality that needs to be addressed. I don't think this is something that should be left for the employee to manage. As the article suggests, employers have much to gain by investing on stress management programs. I just wish the programs are not the superficial attempts that scratches the surface. These programs should be part of a culture that enables and empowers employees to pick up on whatever the employer initiates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)