How often have you heard someone from a company say, “We hire slow and fire fast?”
I’ve heard this line so often that it sounds sort of a like a mantra or one of those wise sayings that are taken for granted but are generally wrong: “I invest for the long term,” or “There is no room for emotions in the work place,” or “The Red Sox will never win.”
This is not to say that it’s always wrong to “hire slow.” However, it’s important to understand the different ways that a company can hire slow. Some of them make more sense than others. What, fundamentally, does it mean to hire slow? For that matter, what does it mean to “fire fast?”
Read the rest at the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership
October 25th,2010
Published Articles | tags:
business planning,
communication,
confidence,
conflict,
culture,
fear,
hiring,
leadership,
management,
recruiting,
success |
Comments Off on Hire Slow And Fire… Slower?
October 14th,2010
Announcements | tags:
Amazon.com,
business,
communication,
confidence,
conflict,
culture,
goal setting,
innovation,
leadership,
management,
motivation,
organizational development,
team building |
Comments Off on Read the first chapter of my book (via Amazon Kindle for the Web)
My first jujitsu sensei liked to frequently remind us that if you wanted to go from San Francisco to LA, you didn’t go by way of Portland, Oregon. Naturally, the wise-guys in the class, which included me, would make cracks about the airline schedules. I don’t know if there actually were flights that went from San Francisco to LA via Portland, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest!
Of course, the point my sensei was trying to make was that a straight line is the shortest distance between two points. While this is certainly true in normal mathematics, fans of “A Wrinkle in Time,” might recall that a tesseract is the shortest distance between two points. While traveling via tesseract is purely science fiction, the fact remains that sometimes the direct route, that is, the straight line, is not the most rapid means of getting to your destination. Sometimes, you’re better off with a metaphorical tesseract. This is true in business and, as it happens, also in jujitsu (although that’s a separate topic). As a case in point, let’s look at the increasingly popular Results Oriented Work Environments (ROWE).
Read the rest at Corp! Magazine
I have a fondness for old time radio podcasts. Indeed, one of the big advantages of the iPod is that it created a whole slew of opportunities for those of us who want to listen to such things. One of my discoveries was a podcast of the Avengers radio show. Yes, there was one, although it didn’t really come from the Golden Age of radio, rather being adapted from the TV show. Nonetheless, listening to episodes of the Avengers pointed up four very important points:
1. Russian accents are only the second most villainous sounding accents. British accents are the most villainous, probably because they always sound like they have anti-social personality disorder.
2. British accents also sound heroic, at least when they aren’t the villains.
3. Old time commercials in a British accent sound like something out of Monty Python.
4. When word “helpless” is said immediately before “Emma Peel” you know someone is in for a very nasty surprise.
I’m not entirely sure what this means, although the first might reflect my image of Boris Badenov as the quintessential Russian villain. Since this year is the 50th anniversary of Rocky and Bullwinkle, perhaps Russian accented villains will make a comeback. I’ll leave that to James Bond (or Moose and Squirrel). What is more interesting is how well a 1960s cold-war espionage show holds up half a century later. Despite all our changes in technology and politics, and the much touted generational shift in the workplace, it should come as no big surprise that human nature hasn’t changed at all: people are still, basically, people, and John Steed and Emma Peel are just as suave and sophisticated today as they were fifty years ago. Despite all the noise about Boomers, Gen X, and Gen Y, there are also some things about the workplace that simply haven’t changed, although our perception and understanding of them might have.
In my book, “The 36-Hour Course in Organizational Development,” I discuss the twelve key elements of building a successful business. These elements are, in many ways, as timeless as John Steed and Mrs. Peel, if not always quite so sexy. They are, however, the key points that any entrepreneur needs to work with if you want to maximize your chances of creating a successful business.
Read the rest at Under30CEO
September 30th,2010
Published Articles | tags:
business planning,
culture,
fear,
goal setting,
innovation,
leadership,
management,
motivation,
organizational development,
team building |
Comments Off on Business Lessons From the Avengers (pt 1)
Once upon a time there was a company known as Robotic Chromosomes. Don’t bother Googling it; it’s no longer in business, and besides, that’s not the real name. Robotic Chromosomes had a way of hiring programmers that isn’t all that unfamiliar to folks in the software industry: logic puzzles. Like Microsoft, and various other companies, Robotic Chromosomes put every potential engineer
through a series of logic puzzles in order to determine if those engineers were qualified.
There is, in fact, no actual correlation between programming ability and the ability to solve logic puzzles.This did not stop the folks at Robotic Chromosomes, who were convinced of the validity of their methods and were not interested in allowing facts to get in the way.
Even within the logic puzzle method, though, there were some definite oddities and idiosyncrasies that distinguished Robotic
Chromosomes from other companies.
For several years, no one skilled in visual presentation or user interface development was ever good enough to solve
the logic puzzles, or at least they could never satisfy the solutions that the existing engineers believed were correct.
Read the rest at the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership
September 26th,2010
Published Articles | tags:
business,
business planning,
culture,
goal setting,
hiring,
innovation,
recruiting,
software |
Comments Off on The Taboo of the Bananas: Organizational Culture and Recruiting
For some reason, I’m having trouble getting out of my head the image of a game of Chutes and Ladders played with pictures of airplanes and flight attendants.
I was asked to comment recently on whether stress might have played a part in the story of Steven Slater, the JetBlue flight attendant who slid down the emergency chute, beer in hand. The beer part might not be a good addition to the kid’s game, even if mild alcohol consumption is supposed to reduce stress. Here’s what I wrote:
There is no question but that the current economic situation has increased the stress level for everyone. Unfortunately, one of the places where showing this is considered socially acceptable in on an airplane, where flight attendants are often not viewed as the professionals that they are. Furthermore, the struggle over overhead bin space seems to have only increased as more and more airlines charge to check bags; this, of course, increases the stress level of the passengers.
Why is this story getting such play? As Americans, we appreciate noble gestures: there is a huge difference between going postal with a gun and doing something dramatic to make a point. Slater’s actions hurt no one (which is not to say they were without risk; at the superficial level, though, it appeals on a very visceral level), which puts it into the second category. When we see someone act in such a dramatic fashion, we are reminded of our own stress and frustration at work, and admire someone who is willing to stand up to authority.
However, that doesn’t mean that Slater’s actions were a good long-term career move! It really depends on how JetBlue and other airlines might react. The standard, stodgy, reaction is to refuse to give him his job back. A more daring airline might choose to play up the adventure/daring angle of his actions and build a marketing campaign around it: “At XYZ Airlines you won’t need to do this!”
Of course, if you want to avoid situations like this, it’s important to pay attention to what’s going on in your company. Are employees excited about working there or just showing up because they have nowhere else to go? Is the CEO out in front of the employees demonstrating her excitement over the future of the company, or is he sitting in an office somewhere issuing vague directives? Do employees look for reasons to not come to work? What is the company doing to help manage stress: providing sufficient time off? Exercise facilities? Quiet space? Opportunities to have fun on the job?
At a very broad level, I’d also have to wonder how this fits with JetBlue’s image, or brand, as a fun airline? When you think about JetBlue’s advertisements, they try to present an image of flying, sorry, jetting, being a fun activity. In an odd sort of way, this incident can either reinforce that image or damage it, depending on how JetBlue handles things going forward. No, it’s not entirely rational: after all, when flying we want to get safely to our destination; at the same time, the idea of the trip being fun is appealing.
If this story fades out, then probably nothing happens to JetBlue’s image. But if the story hangs around, the focus can potentially make or break JetBlue’s brand: pressure cooker work environment or fun place to be. The answer will affect how travelers view the airline, and that influence, subtle though it may be, will affect whether or not people fly JetBlue.
August 15th,2010
Thoughts on business | tags:
business,
Chute,
culture,
JetBlue,
motivation,
stress |
Comments Off on Chutes and Ladders (Airplane edition)
(just in time for this article, I’ve even managed to get comments working properly (maximum spam blockage/minimal hassle) on my blog!)
While it is well known that rolling stones gather no moss, it appears that they are pretty rough on McChrystals. Recently, the news has been filled with headlines about General Stanley McChrystal and the story about him in Rolling Stone. Agree or disagree with how the situation was eventually resolved, it offers some important lessons for businesses.
While everyone has days when they aren’t happy with their boss, their job, their clients or just about anything else, what you say and how you say it makes a big difference. In General McChrystal’s case, perhaps the most striking elements of the article was not what he said, but what his staff said. Occasionally expressing frustration is normal. Open disrespect in the general’s staff is not, and says more about his opinions than anything he said. This attitude sets the tone for how the general and his staff will interact with others, people who, in a business environment, might be viewed as internal or external customers.
Read the rest at Corp! Magazine
August 5th,2010
Published Articles | tags:
business,
communication,
conflict,
culture,
leadership,
organizational development,
Stanley McChrystal,
team player,
teams |
Comments Off on As Above, So Below
“Destiny! Destiny! No escaping that for me!”
– Gene Wilder in “Young Frankenstein”
As fans of Mel Brook’s classic comedy Young Frankenstein know, Gene Wilder’s destiny as Dr. Frederick Frankenstein is to follow in his grandfather’s footsteps and create the monster. This being a comedy, things do work out somewhat better than they did in the original story. Destiny, it appears, can be changed with sufficient effort. Indeed, precisely because Frederick Frankenstein realizes that he’s following in Victor Frankenstein’s footsteps, he is able to turn things around at the last minute and bring about a happy ending.
In my consulting projects and in conducting leadership training with various groups, from college students through executives, I’ve frequently observed destiny in action. People play out the roles that they believe they are supposed to play out. Organizationally, we act as we’ve been taught to act in our various roles: CEOs are expected to behave in one way, managers another, engineers yet another. For example, in some companies it’s perfectly normal for engineers to show up to work in jeans and T-shirts, but totally inappropriate for a manager to do the same.
Read the rest at Corp! Magazine
After reading the recent articles in the NY Times about the Russian spy ring and listening to news reports on it, I’m left wondering just what the point was. It sounds mostly like an episode of Get Smart, complete with over the top recognition phrases and really bad brush passes (in one example, the spy holds out his backpack so that the passing Russian government official can place a bag into it).
Perhaps these 11 people misunderstood their instructions. Instead of being spies, maybe they were supposed to make pies.
The biggest question I’ve having with this story is just what the expected goals were. Why did someone decide on a long-term, expensive, potentially embarrassing operation? It seems odd that so much effort would be expended trying to obtain information that can be readily obtained through the news, Facebook, and Google.
No, I don’t think there’s some deeper, hidden plan here (were I writing an espionage serious game, I would, of course, have a different view… 🙂 ). Rather, I believe this is an amazing example of astoundingly poor planning. This is a project that seems to have been given the same level of critical thought and review as a plan that involves evacuating walruses from the Gulf of Mexico and not thinking about hurricanes.
In this case, I wonder if the Russians figured that they needed information about American life and at least knew they didn’t know much about it. Their assumptions, though, about how to get that information only serve to illustrate just how much they didn’t know about what they were investigating. It’s a wonderful example of how cultural beliefs and assumptions can get in the way of actually accomplishing your goals.
Sometimes the toughest part of learning something is figuring out just how much you don’t know. If the Russians had realized just how trivial this information was, they wouldn’t have needed to go to such lengths to get it. How often do businesses make the same mistakes? Sometimes the information isn’t that hard to get or the product isn’t that hard to build, but our assumptions based on a lack of knowledge cause us to make the whole thing much more difficult.
That can be extremely expensive. It can also lead to the Keystone Kspies.
Pardon me, I think my shoe is ringing.
July 1st,2010
Thoughts on business | tags:
culture,
goal setting,
problem solving |
Comments Off on Comrade, we meant pies
What is the most important factor in successfully recruiting top candidates? If you said things like salary, benefits, or the economy, you’d be wrong. It’s your organizational culture. I have a longer article in the upcoming Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership about the role of organizational culture in the hiring process. To give you a taste of it here … let me first say that when you start to throw around terms like “organizational culture” you may think that it’s academic, or that it’s abstract. It’s not.
Read the rest at ERE.Net