Category Archives: Mentoring

Leaders Listen: A Process to Assist

Posted on by
Reply

Recently several clients have ask for a better way to assist their senior leaders gain a deeper understanding of the ideas, issues, and input from throughout all levels in their organizations. The conversations with them have centered on the need to help them with a process to involve others. Seemingly, there is an understanding that the need exists–so it has been more of a “how to” need.

In working with them, I’ve shared a process I used many times as a manager, mentor, and even now as a coach and advisor to leaders. At its core, it is a structured process to gather input. Yet, it’s more than that. It is a mindset in the leader that there is both a need and structured way to gather input.

In working with them, I have shared the process commonly referred to as “skip level meetings”.

An Overview of Managerial Skip Level Meetings

What is it?

Basically, it is when a higher-level manager meets with employees in-person to discuss organizational issues without the presence of their direct manager.

The purposes include:

  • gain information, perceptions, and ideas on the organization’s effectiveness through honest and unfiltered assessment from front-line employees
  • understand impressions and feelings about the organization, operations, and processes
  • allows employees to speak freely and confidentially

What are the pros and cons?

As with any managerial opportunity, there are potential gains as well as possible pitfalls.  These include:

Gains

  • creates stronger bond among employees and managers
  • opens communication channels
  • discover information of future value to the organization
  • gather insight into management operations and behaviors which can be areas for development

Pitfalls

  • be aware of hidden agendas, historical information, and previous ‘wounds’
  • caution not to give orders, even inadvertently
  • over-reaction to management feedback and the person delivering the message
  • managers do not understand the purpose and process

How do I do this?

Start off with a plan.  Think about when, how often, and why you will implement skip-level meetings.  Once ready, communicate it first to your managers.  Do so with clarity as to why and how–and listen to their input and concerns. 

Keep in mind the following tips for success:

Consider timing–when during the month, year, quarter will you receive feedback you can use?  This may mean avoiding times that are busier or where emotions are higher.  You want to strive for a ‘regular’ or ‘normal’ time.

Frequency–at a minimum, quarterly is often the optimal schedule.  However, if you are new or the organization is undergoing change you may want to do them monthly. 

Format–consider if you will do it as a group or with each individually.  Besides the obvious timing issues, consider confidentiality and participation.  While there is no correct or best format, you should think about implications.  Should you choose to do it as a group, ensure confidentiality.  When doing it individually, understand not all will be as forthcoming. You may even want to do a hybrid approach such as a group meeting following by individual meetings.  This can be especially helpful during times of change or as a new manager.   And these are always in-person.

Equitable treatment–simply put, include everyone.  Do it with everyone.  For a group setting, include the full team.  If doing individual sessions, be sure not to pick just a few since doing so will have people perceive you are biased.

As to process, consider a typical series of events:

  1. Decide on why, how and when you will implement skip-level meetings
  2. Communicate with your managers and gain their input and ideas
  3. Communicate the plan (why, how, when) to all employees directly from you
  4. Send along any questions or items for them to think about ahead of time, if needed
  5. Conduct the meeting(s)
  6. Communicate with full team (managers and employees) most common themes and any changes

And regardless of format–as a group or individually–build rapport as you begin.  Start with a simple question or even chat about something you have in common.

What could I ask?

Keep in mind the purpose is to solicit honest feedback, gain insight, and gather ideas.  Equally, keep in mind that you should organize the session so they talk more and you listen.  The following are suggested questions:

  • What do you like most about working here? 
  • What’s one thing that is working well for our organization? 
  • How do you hear about if you have done something well?   And from whom?
  • What do you like most about your job? 
  • What things would you change or improve about your job, department or at the organization? 
  • How does your manager recognize you for good performance or a job well done? 
  • What resources, information and support do you need to be more successful in your job? 
  • If you experience a problem or roadblock, where do you go for support and solutions? 
  • If you could change or implement 1 new idea, what would it be?
  • What is something you would like for your manager to know about you yet haven’t told them?
  • What would you like to know about me, our department, our strategy, etc?

In preparing questions and format, ensure the following:

  • Keep questions open–this encourages people to talk
  • Allow for 10 minutes for each question.  This guideline allows for not only time for them to think and respond initially to the question but for you to follow-up with clarification as needed.
  • Prioritize questions.  You’ll likely run out of time so want to ensure most important questions are first.
  • Vary questions as needed to timing of year.  If you’re entering the planning time of the year you may want more questions about new ideas and changes.
  • If you are doing the meeting with the team, consider ways for them to confidentially respond.  This could be using Post-it notes or perhaps having them submit them ahead of time (not via email but through another mechanism). 
  • Always conduct skip-level meetings in a closed, confidential space.  Use a conference room or office.
  • You should take notes.  And in follow-up, include general and common themes.  It’s important to follow-up and follow-through!

Can’t do everything? Well, that is a good opportunity for advocates, ambassadors, and growth

Posted on by
Reply

Lately I’ve worked with clients as they struggle to build their organizations.  Usually the conversation contains something like

“I can’t do it all and I need help with people to care and perform as well as I do”

“I need to find advocates for our organization who can get our message out”

“I need people who can present our story to others in a passionate and convincing way”

At the core, what the conversation is about is…inspiring others.

It’s also about creating advocates, partners, ambassadors for you, your organization, etc. which can carry your message within your organization and to others “outside”.

In discussions with them, I’ve mentioned 3 things to keep in mind:

  1. You can’t do everything
  2. No one will do it you way
  3. You have to inspire, train, and appreciate others

Usually, the first one is easy to discuss.  In fact, it’s the impetus.  They already know they can’t do everything.  Yet, what they don’t realize is that it’s not about “can’t” and really about “shouldn’t”.  In other words, they should look to others for help:

  • to develop and implement
  • to communicate with others
  • to improve upon the current situation

The shift to “should” involves helping them understand their role as leaders.  Leaders must focus on their role to lead.  Often, it’s not to focus on implementation.  Rather, they inspire others.  They set the vision.  They set the tone.

The second and third items are related.

Yes, by definition, no on will do it your way.  Early in my career, I was part of a Nortel/BNR program for new employees.  We were trained to do it the ‘right way’–what to say, when, and how.  I didn’t enjoy delivering the program (and nor did the majority of my colleagues).  Why?  Because it was not designed to be flexible to meet local needs.  Variation and customization was frowned up (I was downgraded on an annual evaluation simply for reversing the order of topics). 

But isn’t standardization good?  Shouldn’t people follow guidelines?  I often am asked this.

Well, yes.  But also you need to allow for people to use their brains and not just their hands, as one of my earliest managers taught me.

The implications are this:

Select, train, appreciate, and monitor.  All of these elements are important to success. 

Recently, I worked with a client on a new Ambassador Program for their organization.  This involves asking members to become advocates within their organization as well as within the community.  This exciting program has already inspired more participation and dedication not just with the Ambassadors but also within the organization.  In other words, people have become inspired to use their unique talents.

It’s the unique talent that is at the core of “no one will do it your way”.  As well, because of the training and materials each Ambassador received, they are equipped and inspired.

What has been already seen with this client, is a renewal of participation at all levels in the organization. 

It takes a strong leader to create the environment.  They must become comfortable (and skilled) with letting-go, inspiring others, and focusing on their role as leaders.

How many times are you going to slam your hand in the door?

Posted on by
Reply

Many years ago my VP asked me “So David, how many times are you going to slam your hand in your car door?”

He went on to add “Before you realize you’re causing your own pain!”

Pretty vivid, huh?!

It made such an impression on me that I’ve used this line repeatedly for the past 18 years since Wayne first said it to me.

See what he was saying is that I was causing the pain I was feeling on the job.  Others, while contributing to the pain, were actually not the cause.  I was.

How was this happening?

Simple.  I was doing nothing.  Yep, nothing.

The scenario was this:

I had empowered my team to come up with a new process for training customers on how and why we were changing our data collection process.  This was an important piece of a major process re-engineering. 

I thought I was a good manager–one who set directions and goals and then trusted the team to work on the details before implementation. 

Well, the team took the bull by the horns and sent invitations to our customers for an online training session.

Good empowerment, right?

Wrong.  In doing so, they had forgotten to include several important details.  On top of this, they scheduled the meeting in conflict with a sales meeting for all customers.  My VP was getting blasted by Sales VPs around the world.

Ouch.  Ouch indeed.

So how was I causing my own pain?  Well, because this wasn’t the first time I failed to appropriately oversee progress.  I had forgotten an important lesson–that when you ask your team for something don’t forget to follow-up.  Always communicate.  No, it doesn’t stifle them.  No, it’s not micro-management.  It’s appropriate management.

What I learned that day was that difference between hands-on and hands-off management.

Because I had taken a hands-off approach (thinking that I was empowering them and letting them creatively work on a project), I failed to understand that my role was to work alongside them.  Instead, I had abandoned them.

I had put my own hand in that door and slammed it.

Recently, I’ve seen this same phenomenon in two instances with clients.

In one, a CTO was frustrated with one of his engineer’s design for a new feature.  Yet, he was hesitant to provide initial feedback  for fear it would stifle creativity.  A few weeks into the design, the engineer had changed gears and was now working on a new project entirely.  Unfortunately this was now going to cost the company both a loss in time and money.  The CTO was furious and ready to fire the engineer.  Yet, I remarked that the engineer wasn’t the problem–the CTO was himself the problem.  Not only did he take a hands-off approach but he also knew the history of this engineer was to miss deadlines.

The CTO caused his own problem, not the engineer.

And I saw it again in working with a VP regarding employee issues–particularly in confronting problem employees.  Recently, he received strong feedback from colleagues that a particular employee was making some fairly costly mistakes.  These mistakes were so drastic that the company lost two customers over a period of six months.  And while not all could be attributed to the same employee, all could be linked to the VP’s inability to address the mistakes the employee was making.

During my discussion with the VP, he kept saying that he really thought that he needed to give people space to do their work.  He went on to insist that this was an isolated incident.  He felt that the feedback from his colleagues was not something he needed to address but, rather, isolated.

The VP caused his own problems, not the employee (and not his colleagues).

Both the CTO and the VP were slamming their own hands in their car door.  No one else was doing it.  This was self-inflicted.

I know, I did it many years ago.

So, how do you know when you’re slamming your hand?

If you’re making the choice to not intervene before a problem spirals, you could be the culprit.

If you’re not giving enough direction up-front on the vision, goals, and schedule, you may be the one slamming the door.

If you fail to give parameters and milestones, your fingerprints are on the door.

If you think they will figure it out on their own, you are the one causing the pain.

If you think doing nothing is an option, then learn to live with the pain.

 

© Copyright 2017, Dynamic Growth Strategies.  All rights reserved.

Busting Silos: Leading Organizations

Posted on by
Reply

Sometimes, things hit you in the face.

Sometimes, patterns are easy.

Sometimes, messages repeat but in new and different ways.

Thus has been the case for me over the summer.

In working with three clients the notion of ‘silos’ has emerged as the reason for poor teamwork, missing deadlines, and general dissatisfaction. Fingers have been pointed, heated words (verbally and in emails) have been tossed about, and goals have stagnated.

A few case studies are in order. The first couple demonstrate problem silos while the third shows what progress can happen when silos never get built.

The first such silo I observed was rather unusual. Often, when we think of silos in an organization it is because there has been a structure imposed by ‘someone above’ which hinders productivity and goal attainment. In this situation, the silos were being erected by individuals! How so?

Their behavior included creating onerous processes for simple tasks, retaining the ability to veto any input or decision from someone outside their function, and ultimately to shut down their function without input from everyone. Functional leaders were free to change dates, skip meetings, and cancel deliverable actions with virtually no input from anyone. Silos were created specifically to block progress.

The second example occurred in working individually with an executive of a start-up. One of his frustrations was the lack of cooperation among teams. His company is small with only 40 employees. Yet given the nature of new product design, the software and hardware teams were consistently working in silos. As we discussed his organization–and in particular, his expectations for the design teams–it became clear that he had set up the organization to be competitive. So over the summer, he worked on his ability to communicate the need for people to work together while keeping the integrity of their design. He recognized collaboration and instances of cross-functional success.

Well, just about a week ago he called and was quite stirred up. He was in the process of establishing a new customer support function to launch their product to the mass market. However, he was frustrated over the reaction of one of his managers. This particular manager was upset because he was being asked to start the new support function–hire, train, and design processes–but the organization would eventually not report to him. He admitted he wanted to avoid the discussion and would instead have the new team report to the manager. I quickly told him “ok, but this is an opportunity to build a cross-functional team without the silos you experienced a few months ago.”

Nothing was said at first. Then he said “you’re right”. He realized this was the best chance to build collaboration and to avoid silos and especially the mentality that comes with them. He went right to the manager and discussed how this was the perfect opportunity to shape the future. So far, no silo in sight.

The third example, the good one, was a request from a client I worked with about three years ago. It was in a start-up mode that eventually transferred to an existing agency for implementation. The start-up and transition had gone well. This time the request was to help with the next level in their strategy.

Their strategy.

You see, the email came jointly from the two organizations. While one of the executives is responsible for the program today, the request came from both leaders. What struck me immediately was that both leaders felt responsible for the next phase. Then, in my first few meetings with both of them it became clear and apparent that they felt a kinship in ensuring the future success. Neither pointed a finger, laid blame, tooted an individual horn, or felt the need to one-up the other. They were, have continued to be, and want to be in the future jointly responsible for the success.

So it occurs to me that silos are created–whether imposed by a senior manager or erected by functional departments–when the organization lacks:

  • clear goals–what is the outcome, how it relates to the overall organization, why it is important, clear (and simple) processes to support the collective goals, communicate clearly and often
  • accountability–who has prime responsibility and who needs to be consulted
  • collaboration–a core belief and behaviors that working together will reap success for the organization, build trust, and sustain growth

While this may sound like “teamwork 101” I think it goes deeper.

Take, for example, the first example where silos were created by functional groups and individuals in order to shield themselves from working with others and towards the goals. Silos had become in this case, bunkers and shields.

So, how can leaders avoid silos? Keep in mind clear goals, accountability, and collaboration. Work towards clear vision with the team, track progress together, and consistently reinforce the message that everyone must work together. As in the case of the second example, even when progress is made, you have to continually look out for silo creation. And as the leader, recognize and praise progress.

Lastly, keep in mind the core lesson of the third example. It’s a joint strategy. Start with this and silos will likely be avoided, as this client has been able to do so largely for the past three years.

As a leader, the challenge is to avoid building silos and that when you see someone erecting one, to bust it down quickly.

 

© Copyright 2016, Dynamic Growth Strategies.  All rights reserved.

‘Soft Skills’ Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

It’s quite common to hear ‘soft skills’ when people talk about managing people, leadership, conflicts, giving direction, listening, speaking…

But are they really ‘soft’? Let me tell a story I experienced over a dozen years ago while working with a client, Texas Instruments.

I was brought in to design and deliver a 5-month program for first-time managers. As you can imagine, it included things like leadership, performance management, DiSC®, teams, etc. It was interactive driven by case studies and group discussions. It was a half-day program each month for a group of 12-15 managers who went through the 5-months together.

Most significantly, it was introduced by the VP of the division (this was a production group in TI).

He attended the kickoff morning session and posed the following question:

“Let’s say that you return to your desk this afternoon and you’re immediately presented with 2 problems.

You only have time, however, to adequately solve 1 of the problems. You know that based on experience.

The first problem is that you have two employees who are arguing and fighting. Not coming to blows, but it is escalating. Words are being exchanged both aggressively and passive-aggressively.

The second problem is that the line has gone down because of the system failure.”

He then went on to ask:

“Which problem would you solve first?”

Invariably, everyone answered the second problem–the line is down. In all the sessions, this was the unanimous answer.

He then asked:

“Why did you choose that one?”

And they would say something like “it’s easier”, “we know how to solve it”, “it’s simpler”, “it has bigger implications for the company and customer”.

He then would say, especially to the responses about it being easier, knowing how to solve it, simpler:

“So it’s easy, ok. What’s the opposite of ‘easy’ or ‘simpler’?”

At this point, someone would say “hard”.

“Bingo”, he would exclaim. “Solving the technical problems is easy.”

“Solving the people problems are ‘hard'”, he would add. Heads would shake around the room in agreement.

And he would then add:

“So why do we say classes like this are ‘soft skills’ when by your own admission, they are harder? Why do we call issues dealing with people ‘soft’ when in fact they are ‘hard’?”

From that moment on, we never used the term ‘soft skills’ in the program. And working with this group was always rewarding–they really wanted to understand people, teams, and especially how they can successfully lead, manage, and coach.

I often use this story in working with clients. It’s an example I’ve found resonates with every client I have–from production and operations to sales and marketing to administration. I’ve found that it applies to my for-profit and my non-profit clients.

Soft skills are hard skills. Sometimes labeling them ‘soft’ implies fuzzy bunny, rainbows, and candy–, trivial, less important, secondary.

Rather, what makes them hard is that people are not machines. People have good days and bad days. People have emotions. Often as this example was debriefed in the program, that’s exactly what the participants said. They would also add that they had more confidence and ease in dealing with the system–they could count on it to react as expected.

So keep this in mind you use the term ‘soft skills’. For all these years, this has been an example which is both instructive and a useful reminder.

 

© Copyright 2016, Dynamic Growth Strategies.  All rights reserved.

The Phone That Stopped Traffic (and taught me an important lesson)

Posted on by
Reply

Yes, I’m back from vacating and it’s time to blog again!  From the feedback I got, the notion of “putting vacate back into vacation” resonated with many people. 

 

Over the past month, I’ve been reminded of a valuable lesson regarding priorities and appropriate behaviors.  What triggered this have been a series of conversations regarding the importance of appropriate attention to a customer or a colleague.

The story goes to 1999 when I was on a business trip to Austin.  On this trip, I was accompanied by Jim Underhill, Sales VP, who had also been assigned as my mentor.  We had a visit with a customer and now it was time for a nice dinner on Sixth Street at Dan McClusky’s.

We settled in and started debriefing the meeting.  We also talked about what was going on in the company, our teams, and our lives.

About 15 minutes into the dinner, I got a call on my cell phone.  Now mind you, this was 1999 and caller ID wasn’t even exist (this was the Motorola flip phone).

I took the call.  Answered it in a few minutes.  Hung up.  Sat the phone down.

Jim grabbed the phone and walked out of the restaurant.  He threw it into the middle of Sixth Street.  Quickly it was run over and smashed by a car.  I even heard wheels squealing.

I was stunned.  I was both embarrassed and mad.  I couldn’t believe what he had just done!

When he came back to the table, he said that it was a lesson.

It was a lesson to keep what is important at the moment.

He went on to say that it is vitally important in building a relationship, whether with a customer or colleague, to focus on the current conversation.  To shut out distractions.  To understand what was most important.

He then went further.  He said that a successful company and anyone in it has to remember that it is about people.  It’s not about the technology per se, it’s about what the technology can do with and for people.  In building a relationship it’s important to get to know the person–their behaviors, what’s important to them, and what’s going on with them.

By now I was a little less stunned and asked him a “what if” question.  I said that if that had been an emergency call (from family or a customer) would he have done the same thing.

No.

I pressed him to then tell me how he knew it wasn’t such a call–one that was more important than our dinner.  He simply said that if it had been such a call, I would have reacted differently.  I would have told him.  He went on to say that since he had spent 4 months getting to know me, he had learned about my behavior.  He had learned to read my behavior.

Obviously, this made me even more curious.  He went on to say that the only negative behavior he had observed was that I sometimes let self-importance trump what was really important.  Not priggish, he said, just sometimes too showy.  Cell phones at the time were a ‘perk’ or award for people in any company.  Not everyone got one–only those at a certain level in our company.

He then went a little deeper.  He said that remember that this company is 100 years old.  It has survived because of a lot of people and a lot of relationships.  You’re simply not that important.

Ok, now I was really feeling low.

He went on to talk about building relationships as a leader.  He mentioned several lessons that I attempt to keep even today:

  1. Know what is important at that time and place.  Pay full attention.
  2. Understand your purpose, which is much more vital to the relationship than your competence.
  3. Build relationships through deep interactions.  This includes building trust, respect, and the ability to appropriate disagree.
  4. You’re not important–the overall goal is what is important.

And then he ended with one last lesson–that of admitting a mistake and learning from it.

He said that tomorrow I was going to have to explain to my boss why my phone was broken.  His challenge was not to talk about what happened but to talk about what I learned.

Luckily, he was right.  My boss smiled when I told him the story and what I learned.  (But I had to pay for the replacement myself.)

 

© Copyright 2015, Dynamic Growth Strategies.  All rights reserved.