Message Board for Discussion with Francie Dalton

Welcome!

Francie — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:19:57 GMT

This forum is provided for attendees of Motivating the Unmotivated to post questions or comments and to allow interaction with fellow participants. I'll check in periodically to respond to your questions. Remember: all of us can learn from the experiences of others, so please be sure to let me know how you have applied the material in your workplace. Click "Post a Comment or Question" at the top of the page to ask your question. Click "Reply" at the top or bottom of the page when responding to others.

Forum: Conflict and Movitvating the Unmotivated

Evidence Based Performance Measures

Francie — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:35:35 GMT

Evidence Based Performance Measures

Proof of Performance of Absence Thereof: that's what you get with well defined performance measures. Properly constructed, performance measures describe targeted outcomes in both quantitative and qualitative terms, permitting fair and objective assessment of performance as an organization moves from its Current State to Desired State. As a result, rather than speaking of what "seems to be so" or how one "feels about" the performance of a department, colleague or vendor, performance measures provide objective, evidence-based measures of performance.

Establishing valid performance measures sure isn't easy. But the investment pays tremendous dividends. Individuals can prove their value to organizations; managers can justify rewarding/trimming staff; performance reviews can be more factual and less emotional; and organizations can clarify the value they deliver to employees, customers and shareholders.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Poisonous Passivity

Francie — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:50:45 GMT

After Janet, a senior executive, had grumbled bitterly and at length about the inaccessibility and coldness of her CEO toward staff, business consultant Laura asked Janet if she had ever presented the boss with options for how he might better manage his image. For example, Laura inquired, had Janet developed a staff rotation matrix for monthly breakfasts/lunches with him; monthly or quarterly meetings with each department; etc. No, said Janet; I would never suggest such a thing to him.

So, asked Laura, youre observing that he has an image/ behavior issue, you acknowledge that you and others are aggravated by it, you know of steps he could take to improve, and yet youve not communicated these to him. Why is that?

Well! Janet huffed. He knows what hes like. He knows how he comes off. If he cared, he wouldnt behave that way. Im certainly not going to discuss his behavior with him!

Do you know for sure that he is aware of how he is perceived? asked Laura.

Silence.

Without confronting him about his current behavior, could you offer suggestions on how he might engage with staff? Laura asked; Or might you suggest a cultural survey to capture persuasive data?

I dont have the authority, said Janet, to make suggestions.

You have to have authority to make suggestions? Laura asked, incredulous.

Around here you do! Janet replied. Have you ever made a suggestion to him before? Laura asked.

Yes. I suggested 3 ideas for our holiday party and he rejected all of
them responded Janet. I see, said Laura. So youre thinking that because he didnt accept those particular suggestions, he wont accept any suggestions on anything?

Well...yeah! replied Janet. And even if thats not so, its not my job to manage his image.

Youve expressed frustration several times that youre not
included in strategic planning, and that your role doesnt get the esteem shown to other high level professionals observed Laura. Is it possible that such esteem only to those who step up and demonstrate a willingness to do the hard things?

Yeah OK, said Janet. Look - I have to hang up now.

Embedded in this brief conversation are no less than 5 aspects of poisonous passivity that can derail individual success, subvert group effectiveness, and exacerbate undesirable turnover.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Five Negative Fantasies for Justifying Inaction

Francie — Thur, 30 Oct 2008 02:33:23 GMT

Ever make a suggestion and encounter only negative responses? Ever caught yourself responding to the ideas of others (or even to your own ideas!) with the same "impossibility" thinking?

Whether from weariness, fear, or the lure of complacency, we're all sometimes guilty of not taking initiative when it's appropriate to do so. Here are the 5 negative fantasies or myths we use to try to justify inaction, along with suggestions for out-thinking and overcoming each.

1) Nothing is Wrong: Preferring not to look under the covers, this one is usually heard when some form of assessment is suggested. If measuring customer satisfaction is suggested, the response is: "But our customers must be happy because they aren't complaining"; if an employee survey is suggested, the response is "But our employees must be happy because turnover is low". In response to suggestions that 360-degree leadership assessments be done, you'll hear: "But our quality of management must be good because what needs to get done is getting done"; or "We must be doing well because profits are up, dividends are being paid, etc." The fundamental premise here is that there is no apparent reason to assess, so why assess?

To discredit this myth, begin with the observation that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence! We can't manage what we don't know, and no one is in a position of omnipotence. Just like preventive medicine costs less than medical treatment, it is better to be proactive than reactive. We must ferret out risk; identify vulnerabilities while they can still be prevented. The alternative is post-impact damage control.

Realize that if nothing is wrong, then that's all the more reason to assess!

Being able to provide employees shareholders customers with documented evidence of just how great everything is will be a great PR move.

Learn the second negative fantasy and solutions next week.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Succeeding a Legend

Francie — Thur, 11 Sep 2008 16:26:29 GMT

I will be featuring content from an article of mine recently published in Assocations Now in upcomming blogs. Look for material from CEO interviews, advice for the successor, board members and much more. ASAE and the Center for Assocation Leadership also published my book Versatility: Optimizing Interactions When 7 Workplace Behaviors are at Their Worst in August 2008.

Its hard enough to be a new CEO, but its significantly harder when the former CEO was both long-tenured and beloved. How can you succeed when youre constantly measured against such a demanding standard?

"Following a long-time CEO will require a certain generosity of spirit," says Kerry C. Stackpole, CAE, interim executive director for the National Association of Hispanic Publications. "The already difficult role of CEO is exacerbated when emotions are involved. Intellectually, the parties may articulate a willingness to move on, but hearts can remain entangled in the past." When the departing leader is beloved and the long-time legacy is positive, succession poses even greater risks.

So stop for a moment and take a deep breath. The statistics arent favorable for those who follow great predecessors. Clarify your thinking about what youre taking on. Although substantive and useful works have been published about leadership transitionsThe First 90 Days by Michael Watkins and Making a Leadership Change by Thomas North Gilmore primary among themnone deals specifically with the unique set of challenges attendant to succeeding a legend.

In the coming weeks I will present a synthesis of interviews with eight CEOs who followed legacy leaders. They provide priceless advice for the three parties whose behaviors and processes will determine the success of such transitions: candidates assessing such an opportunity, board members responsible for stewarding a successful transition from a legacy CEO, and legacy leaders passing the baton.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Metrics Based Management

Francie — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:58:09 GMT

Buy Versatility Now!

So...how is your organization managed? Based on the whim of senior management? Based on the most recent complaint by a board member? Based on a gut feel or on outdated traditions?

What if there were a way to manage the structural, behavioral and procedural components of your organization that could both improve business outcomes and ease their achievement?

There IS such a way. Its called Metrics Based Management and its a way of managing based on measures that have been customized to the documented needs of your organization.

I. WHATS WRONG WITH TRADITIONAL METHODS OF ASSESSMENT?

Lets begin with a definition of the term assessment. Within the context of organizational management, we assess, evaluate or appraise, so that we can judge;

so that we can form an opinion. Making assessments enables us to define whats so

at the moment. Traditionally, managers use two methods for making these assessments: observation and communication, both of which are frequently inadequate and misleading. Worse still, the degree to which these methods permit fictions to masquerade as facts is likely to remain perpetually invisible to management.

The result? Managers dont know what they dont know.

Consider the following:

Observation: Imagine you have two subordinates, Dick and Jane. In walking down the hall, you observe Dick leaning back in his chair with his feet up on his desk, hands behind his head, staring out the window. You shake your head in disgust, labeling Dick a goldbricker. Youd dismiss him immediately if you could, but instead make a mental note to see HR about taking action. Continuing down the hall a bit further, you observe Jane. Shes on the phone, switching back and forth between two calls, typing into her laptop, covering the phone receiver to give instructions to her assistant, taking notes, and filing, all at the same time. Your chest swells with pride. You cant help but smile. Youd clone her immediately if you could. Jane gives new meaning to the word multi-tasking, setting an example you wish everyone would follow.

Lets be clear here. Theres no debating what you saw. Its an absolute fact that Dick

was relaxing and Jane was multi-tasking. No argument there.

What you cant know, however, based on your direct observations, is that Dick just closed the biggest deal of his career, and is taking a few moments to savor it, while Jane, having

missed 6 deadlines in a row, is trying frantically not to miss another.

So much for observation as a valid method of assessment.

Communciation: This time, imagine your two subordinates are Joe and Sally. Lets say youve assigned them a task on which they must work together, and that the task will take

several weeks. About 10 days have passed when you see Joe in the lobby. In an effort to make casual conversation, you inquire about the progress of the project. Joe hesitates in responding to your question just long enough to give you pause. Ummmm...its going fine, boss. Itll be just fine he says, with a brave smile on his face. Suspicious now, you

ask Joe if theres a problem. Much too quickly, he replies that Everything is fine - just fine. Not to worry. Everything is going to be all right. Something in his tone is

unconvincing, and shortly thereafter, you set a meeting with him. As he settles into the chair in your office, you once again ask whether there are any problems with the project.

Once again, Joe hesitates just a fraction of a moment too long. You ask the next logical question: Is Sally pulling her fair share of the weight? I didnt say she wasnt! he replies hotly. Look Joe you continue; something is clearly awry. Lets call Sally in and see if we can get it worked out. As you move to the phone to call Sally in, Joe begs you not to intervene, saying that, for the sake of his future working relationship with Sally, hed rather handle things on his own. He assures you that hell come to you if he isnt successful.

Because Joe resisted your probing, and because he rallied to the defense of his co-worker, you dont doubt him for a moment. So, you come away from that conversation thinking the world of Joe, and being apprehensive about Sally.

But take a moment and realize what actually occurred during this conversation. Joe never actually said that Sally wasnt pulling her weight. You merely inferred as much from Joes artful intimations. Were you played? Could Joe have had his own agenda??

So much for communication as an adequate method of assessment.

Just as the assessments made in these stories were flawed because they were based on mere observation and/or communication, so too is decision-making flawed when it is based on these traditional methods of assessment. Compounding this already two-tiered problem is the fact that when managers make these flawed assessments, theyre unaware of their error, so theres no motivation to change the method of assessment.

If managers cant trust what they see, and cant trust what theyre told, how are they to

manage effectively? What tools can they use to assess fairly and accurately?

Forum: Francie's Blog

Congratulations to our contest winner!

Francie — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:34:18 GMT

Congratulations TNiemann! You are our contest winner! Your $50 American Express Gift Card will arrive tomorrow.

Forum: General Discussion

Inspirational Leaders: Motivating the Unmotivated

Francie — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:16:19 GMT

If you're frustrated in your efforts to elicit the best from each of your subordinates, chances are it's not that they can't be motivated, but that the wrong methods are being used to motivate them.

The secret is to package what you want from each individual in a way that makes them want to deliver for you. There are 7 classic work styles, each of which is motivated differently: Commanders, who need control; Drifters, who need flexibility; Attackers who need respect; Pleasers who need to be liked; Performers, who need recognition; Avoiders who need security; and Analyticals, who need certainty. Now here's how to use this knowledge to better motivate your staff.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Share your stories: Challenges in the workplace

Francie — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:26:31 GMT

Please share the toughest workplace challenge that you are currently facing.

Forum: General Discussion

Questions?

Francie — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:19:58 GMT

Please post your questions regarding my article "Harness the Power and Utility of 360 Degree Feedback" here.

Forum: Harness the Power and Utility of 360 Degree Feedback

Share your advice.

Francie — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:16:50 GMT

Please share your advice for the optimal use of 360s.

Forum: Harness the Power and Utility of 360 Degree Feedback

Overcoming Obstacles

Francie — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:14:44 GMT

How did you overcome obstacles to the use of the 360s in your organization?

Forum: Harness the Power and Utility of 360 Degree Feedback

Obstacles

Francie — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:12:53 GMT

What obstacles are you facing to the concept of using 360s in your organization?

Forum: Harness the Power and Utility of 360 Degree Feedback

Errors in Delegation

Francie — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 02:46:50 GMT

Ever wonder why its so tough to get desired outcomes from those highly paid, well educated, poised and polished senior executives of yours? Is it that they keep turning in work products that arent ready for prime time? Or is it that their stellar work outcomes are delivered at the cost of tremendous collegial discord? Are they truly short-staffed and overwhelmed, or are they just unwilling to acknowledge that it's time to prune incompetence from their staff? Whatever the dimensions of suboptimal performance in your organization, chances are at least one of the causal factors is the way you (and they) delegate.

Poor delegation can easily be categorized as either Inadequate or Disabling. Within these two categories are no less that 12 classic and discrete errors in delegation. This article describes each, and provides easy-to-implement tips for how to avoid or correct them.

INADEQUATE DELEGATION is so because it lacks a qualitative and/or a quantitative dimension. Usually unintentional, inadequate delegation is characterized by sloppy processes, visible in hindsight, that result in rework after rework. Use the tips provided below to avoid inadequate delegation.

1. Failing to Identify Higher Purpose Served: Caught up in the rush of doing business, its easy to delegate on the run, without articulating how the assignment enables the organization to achieve its strategic initiatives. There are 3 important benefits to taking the extra minute or two required to articulate the linkage between assignments and their higher purpose: 1) It increases the perceived importance of the assignment, thereby 2) increasing emotional commitment to stellar execution; and , 3) it equips the recipient of the delegated task with tools to motivate the performance of and increase the morale of his/her staff. The technique to easily isolate and identify the higher purpose of an assignment is to ask yourself why the assignment is needed, what other outcome its accomplishment enables, and why that other outcome is needed. Include this information when making the assignment.

Forum: Francie's Blog

Message Board for Discussion with Francie Dalton

Recommended Reading

Welcome!

Evidence Based Performance Measures

Poisonous Passivity

Five Negative Fantasies for Justifying Inaction

Succeeding a Legend

Metrics Based Management

Congratulations to our contest winner!

Inspirational Leaders: Motivating the Unmotivated

Share your stories: Challenges in the workplace

Questions?

Share your advice.

Overcoming Obstacles

Obstacles

Errors in Delegation