Honor the local politics as your life’s blood—regardless of attendant frustration!
Get the community’s women heavily involved. (See immediately below.)
(Probably not many of you are working for NGOs or other agencies delivering aid. But roughly 100 percent of us are in the full-time business of … GTD/Getting Things Done. Simply put, Easterly’s book is perhaps the best tract I’ve read on the topic of implementation–getting things done. There is a ridiculously small library of books on implementation per se—which is a scandal. I am quite certain that you would benefit from The White Man’s Burden.)
WOMEN ARE … THE BALL GAME
Another lesson, of particular importance, from The White Man’s Burden:
For projects involving children or health or education or community development or sustainable small-business growth (the overwhelming majority of projects) … women … are by far the most reliable and most central and most indirectly powerful local players in even the most chauvinist settings—their characteristic process of “implementation by indirection” means “life or death” to sustainable project success; moreover, the expanding concentric circles of women’s traditional networking processes provide by far the best path for “scaling up”/expanding a program. (Men can by and large not comprehend what is taking place.) Among other things, this networking indirection–largely invisible process will seemingly “take forever” by most men’s “just tell ‘em what to do” S.O.P.—and then, from out of the blue, following an eternity of rambling-discussions-on-top-of-rambling-discussions, you will wake up one fine morning and discover that the thing is done, that everything has fallen in place “overnight,” and that ownership is nearly universal—while the men’s “direct”-bullying approach typically leads to conflict that becomes more and more entrenched with the passage of time. Concomitant imperative: Most of your (as an outsider) staff should be women; alas, most likely not visibly “in charge.”
Talent
92. Hiring: Do You Approach It with Unabashed Fanaticism?
In Who: The A Method for Hiring, Geoff Smart and Randy Street say, “In short, hiring is the most important aspect of business—and yet remains woefully misunderstood.”
I agree wholeheartedly with both halves of the assertion:
“Most important.”
“Woefully misunderstood.”
Google’s Director of Leadership and Development Paul Russell adds, “Development can help great people become even better—but if I had a dollar to spend, I’d spend … 70 cents … getting the right person in the door.”
We are concerned with hiring, no doubt of it. But … do we treat it … strategically … as the “most important aspect of business”— four-person auto body shop or Siemens? My constant refrain concerning such topics: Are we … “professional students of” … hiring?? As I see it (again!): Effective hiring = Effective offshore motorboat racing = A craft, a profession with a body of knowledge to be mastered. (If you read Who, you will doubtless be challenged by the meticulous hiring rituals recommended by Smart and Street; at the least, they are worthy of the closest examination.)
93. Promotion: Are You Building a “Two Per Year” Legacy?
I once talked to leadership guru Warren Bennis, to whom I dedicated this book, about promotions to relatively senior ranks. The conversation went like this:
Suppose you hold one of your organization’s top jobs for five years. Suppose, and this is typically about right, that you have two key promotion decisions per year. Then it stands to reason that just 10 decisions in five years determine (not “contribute to,” but, in effect, “determine”) your legacy!
For example, a U.S. Air Force four-star general I got to know had a strong point of view about where his service should be going. He did not occupy the #1 slot in the USAF, but he doubtless made as much or more of a long-term difference than did the #1. In short, he carefully selected and developed a tiny handful of generals who shared his philosophy; then, before they were scheduled to rotate, he carefully slotted them into key jobs throughout the Air Force. Hence, “his boys” became the next generation of policymakers—the tactic was remarkably effective.
Once more, I’m hardly accusing you of being a slacker. I have … zero … doubt about the seriousness with which you attend promotion decisions. But once more I am asking: Do you give the promotion decision, if you are, say, BigCo CEO, exactly the same attention you give a major acquisition? That’s the level of importance in terms of impact—hence, it’s a pretty decent yardstick of “attention deserved.” Most of us, obviously, are not “CEO of BigCo,” but the idea is precisely the same in any boss selection process.
Promotion decision?
Fanaticism rules!
94. Development: Are You Finding and Cultivating First-Rate (“Godlike”) First-Line Supervisors?
Success in the marketplace is a great thing!
Top-quality products you can be proud of are great things!
Integrity and transparency are great things!
But none of the three turns out to be the principal determinant of worker satisfaction. That honor goes, hands down, to … whether or not the employee gets along with his or her first-line supervisor!
(NB: This is not a hypothesis. The research data, from the likes of Gallup’s Marcus Buckingham in First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently, are clear. The employee’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction with her first-line supervisor is the Clear & Unequivocal … #1 factor … in her state of mind about her job, and hence her performance—as checkout clerk or MIT-trained research chemist.)
So?
(1) Are you, Big Boss, a … f-o-r-m-a-l student of frontline supervisor behavioral excellence?* (*Yes, again, damn it, this sort of thing can be formally studied.)
(2) Do you spend … gobs and gobs (and then more and more gobs and gobs) of time … selecting the first-line supervisors?
(3) Do you have the … best training program in the industry (or some subset thereof) … for first-line supervisors?
(4) Do you Formally & Rigorously … mentor … first-line supervisors?
(5) Are you willing, pain notwithstanding, to … leave a first-line supervisor slot open … until you can fill the slot with somebody spectacular? (And are you willing to use some word like … “spectacular” … in judging applicants for the job?)
(Is it possible that promotion decisions for first-line supervisors are more important than promotion decisions for VP slots?) (Hint: Yes.)
I am, once more, absolutely … not … suggesting that you aren’t serious about first-line supervisor selection, care, and feeding.
I absolutely … am … suggesting, in pretty much no uncertain terms, that you probably don’t take it as seriously as you might if you saw it as precisely what it is … a first-order … strategic … decision.
Strategic!
I am suggesting that you assess your full cadre of first-line supervisors more or less posthaste—and start down the path to … Matchless Supervisory Excellence … by creating the best imaginable first-line supervisory training program ASAP and assigning each frontline supervisor a senior mentor.
ASAP = Now.
(NB: First-line supervisors selection-training-development is … more important in very small businesses … than in larger ones.)
THE “TALENT” TRIO
The last three items (#92, #93, #94) constitute HR’s “Big Three”–the true “Talent Trio”:
1. Hiring = Most important business decisions.
2. Two promotion decisions per year = Legacy.
3. First-line supervisors = Keystone to employee morale and satisfaction and productivity.
Followed in each instance by my “Big Two” queries:
1. Are you an avid student of the three issues/opportunities?
2. Do you spend an appropriate (that is, “insane”) amount of time on these three issues-opportunities-strategic watersheds?
How about, to stretch a litt
le further:
Hiring + Two promotions/year + First-line supervisor development = De facto business strategy + Personal leadership effectiveness.
Hmmm.
95. People Who Lead People: You = Your Development Track Record.
In New Delhi in the spring of 2009, I had a senior general officer in the Indian Army in the front row of the meeting room. I don’t recall the details, but evaluating senior officers for promotion came up. I ventured, boldly, that there “was … ONE … issue [in the promotion evaluation] that stood head and shoulders above the rest.”
Namely: What this candidate’s track record is—in exacting detail—in developing people. Though hardly locked in concrete, I posited that “the ONE question” might go something like this:
“In the last year [three years, say, duration of the current assignment], name the three people whose growth you’ve most contributed to. Please explain in some significant detail where each was at the beginning of the year, where he or she is today, and where each is heading in the next 12 and 24 and 60 months. Please explain in some detail your development strategy in each case. Please tell me your biggest development disappointment this past year—looking back, could you or would you have done anything differently? Please tell me about your greatest development triumph—and disaster—in the last 10 years. What are the ‘three big things’ you’ve learned about ‘people development’ along the way?”
As I see it, it’s more or less not the boss’s role, for instance, to make strategy. It’s the boss’s role to develop the best strategists. And so on. And that notion in turn is the by-product of my abiding view that … Job #1 … of the organization is to develop the people within, to live up to the assertion of RE/MAX founder Dave Liniger:
“We are a life success company.”
Finally, as I see it, this in some form applies to pretty much every promotion. And it even has a bearing on evaluating a nonmanager on, say, a three-month project. That rather junior person will, for example, in several instances doubtless be responsible for accomplishing a “mere” milestone—and to do so, and do so well, she must engage her team members, and engage them in a way that they go away with some experiential learnings that contribute a bit to their growth over a three-month (nontrivial!) period; hence, she, too, will have plunged headfirst into the “people-development business.”
To reiterate: The promotion decision should be dominated by the candidates’ detailed track record at people development—considered one person at a time. (The candidates’ assertions should be carefully checked with the people the candidates claim to have developed and with the candidates’ subordinates in general.)
Reprise:
Right Now!
As in …
Now!
Stop what you’re doing!
Please list.
Right now!
The five people!
Whose development you have contributed to!
Directly!
Measurably!
And Profoundly!
In the last 24 months!
Are.
You.
Happy.
With the list?
Happy with yourself?
As a “People Developer”?
If “Yes” …
Great!
Congrats!
If “No” …
What.
Precisely.
Do you plan to do about it?
Starting Monday?
No.
Starting this afternoon.
People
96. It’s All (ALL!) About … the Quality of the Workforce.
I really hate the following phrase: “the only thing you need to know.” Hence, I want to talk to you about … the only thing you need to know.
The formulation that follows came from a speech I gave in Shanghai in the spring of 2009. I was part of a program that included renowned consultants, economists, etc. I began by saying, “In the next few hours you will hear many prescriptions for dealing with today’s shaky times—and preparing for China’s future. Many of those prescriptions will involve the role of the government in manipulating economic levers, the sorts of help that big firms and SMEs will need, etc. I will doubtless find many, probably most, of the suggestions on the money—figuratively and literally.”
I meant every word of it.
But then I added that my role was to simplify—to boldly, and perhaps foolhardily, assert that, regardless of economic levers pulled, there was in fact only … One Thing That Really Mattered … in the long run to the health of the enterprise—and, indeed, the economy as a whole.
Namely:
The quality and character of the workforce. (And, concomitantly, the unstinting “24/7” devotion of enterprise leaders to developing each and every member of that workforce.)
I added that “there is only one ‘winning formula.’”
People who are 100 percent, everybody, no exceptions, receptionist to EVP R&D:
Committed!
Engaged!
Growing!
Learning!
Fearless (unfailingly encouraged to try new things)!
Respected!
Trusted!
Appreciated!
Independent-minded!
Team-focused!
Focused themselves, even when fresh caught, on supporting and enabling the growth of others!* (*Huge point! Supporting and enabling others’ journey to Growth and Excellence is a Day #1 part of the job of everyone. Period.)
Passionate about their mates and their customers!
Informed!
Open (fanatic about sharing)! Caring!
Committed to Excellence in everything they do!
And that, in turn, I added, demands 100 percent … “servant leaders” (to shamelessly steal from Robert Greenleaf) … who are 100 percent devoted … as Priority #1 & Job #1 … to developing people, in good times or bad—100 percent of people—who are:
Committed!
Engaged!
Growing!
Learning!
Fearless (unfailingly encouraged to try new things)!
Respected!
Trusted!
Appreciated!
Independent-minded!
Team-focused!
Focused themselves, even when fresh caught, on supporting and enabling the growth of others!
Passionate about their work, their mates, and their customers!
Informed!
Open (fanatic about sharing)! Caring!
Committed to Excellence in everything they do!
I explained that, in my opinion:
This applies throughout the world—in America and Brazil and Lithuania and Estonia and Korea. And in China, as it pursues a future obviously more and more dependent on incorporating intellectual capital and creativity into its enterprise portfolio (already China bridles at being assigned a role as “the world’s workshop”).
This applies to 100 percent of people in the workforce. As with a football team or symphony orchestra … there are no “bit players.”
This applies in every industry and for every price-point strategy therein. In Brazil, Magazine Luiza, the country’s Walmart, is invariably at or near the top of the “Best Companies to Work For” list, just as Wegmans, the regional grocer, and the Container Store are at the head of the pack, peers of Google and Amgen, on the American “Best” list.
This applies to companies of all sizes—from microscopic to humongous.
This applies in good times—and especially in bad times. Engaged workers and an unwavering Commitment to EXCELLENCE from those workers will not make problems in the market evaporate, but such people, nonetheless, represent the best chance of weathering the storm and coming out stronger on the back end.
Strategy is important.
Systems are important.
Financing is important.
But this is … The Only Thing You Need to Know.
Totally Committed People Surging Toward Unimaginable P
ersonal Enterprise Growth Opportunities Win!
I’d bet my life on it.
(I guess I have.)
NO PIE IN MY SKY!
So I made a list of desirable workforce attributes.
So what?
Isn’t the whole idea “pie in the sky”—idealism run amok?
Perhaps it is.
And, yes, it’s an imposing list of desirable traits.
But …
What’s the alternative to aiming in this direction?
Economic levers effectively manipulated are important.
(Witness the last two years.) Capital expenditures are important. (No doubt of it.)
But it is the “human capital” that matters in the end.
And the human capital development … per se … which must be our abiding preoccupation.
Our obsession.
And often it is not our preoccupation or obsession.
We spend our time on developing clever strategies. We spend our time manipulating the numbers.
And the human-capital basics get short shrift.
Consider:
As the recession heated up in the United States, one of our major consumer-electronics retailers closed its hundreds and hundreds of doors. That would be Circuit City. Meanwhile, its principal competitor soared. That would be Best Buy.
When the recession loomed, Circuit City had raced to cut costs. It got rid of most of its best salespeople—they had the highest commissions, and hence added immeasurably to the cost side of the short-term business equation.
Best Buy, years ago, had acquired a little company called “The Geek Squad.” These were the consumer-electronics SWAT teams that helped customers sort out problems setting up or maintaining their purchases. The service represented by the charged-up Geek Squad eventually became Best Buy’s signature of great distinction—Mark of Excellence per me.
The Little Big Things Page 21