“Whatever we measure is really our mission“

In other words, you might say that you are committed to being a cheerful parent who makes his/her children feel appreciated and safe in the world. And yet your measurement of how well things are going at your house is all about noise levels (keeping them low) or how high the kids marks are at school compared to your brother’s kids.

Alternatively, you might be a manager or religious leader who quotes your mission statement about “bringing out the full potential in people”. And yet your measurement systems are all about the number of new clients or attenders your staff/congregation brought in this month.

What you are measuring in actual terms will determine the actions you take, the actions you applaud and those you denegrate, the investment of your time and money and emotional energy. You may just be pouring those last three investments into something that doesn’t ultimately make you or others happy/successful…

So. What’s the mission you actually aspire to (rather than the one you default to)? How could you change your measurement systems and indicators to focus the organisation’s attention and efforts toward that mission?

Here are my takes on useful managment behaviours:

1. When you train, don’t assume they’ve learned. Be clear on how you’ll know they’ve learned it and assess them carefully.
2. Learn to train and communicate in a variety of ways; that way if they don’t get the first time round, they may get it by the 3rd.
3. Listen at least as much as you speak
4. Recognise your biases and be prepared to step aside from them often (no matter how valid they are), especially when you’re listening
5. Hear the aspirations of your staff and find ways for them to reach for their goals, ways in which both their goals and yours meet
6.  Acknowledge the struggles of your staff and empathise with them
7. Don’t rescue staff from their struggles, teach them what to do and expect them to do it

If you were finishing this list, what would you add?

At about 230 pages, Managing with Aloha is one of the “easier” reads you’ll come across in regards to management. This is largely due to Rosa’s fluid style and knack for story-telling. If you’re like me, you would rather read 10 pages of “this is how the principle worked with real people in the real world” than 20 pages of statistical analysis and abstract reasoning that “proves” the principle.

Rosa has outlined the traditional and positive values of Hawaiian culture and found unique ways to live them in  managerial and business settings. This results in  employees becoming activated, taking ownership, enjoying high morale and raising productivity through their own development.

Now if you just heard “Hawaiian culture” and thought “it won’t translate to mine”, think again: everything I read is transferable.

As I wrap this up, I want to make clear that Rosa did not ask me to review her book, nor am I receiving any “kickback” for this post. This is entirely my idea and choice.

Managing with Aloha can be found by clicking here.

I’ve come to disagree.

Bill’s problem was not too much enthusiasm; that was his strength (or one of them). His problem was the weakness(es) that undermined the good his optimism and energy accomplished. His good work was undone by poor communication.

If only Bill had checked in with his managers and workmates consistently whenever he had a bright idea - if only he’d sold them on it, caught them up in a vision of what was possible - he’d not have rushed ahead so often only to find others putting a stop to his plans (and unravelling his hard work).

Sometimes we’re told to rein in some strength that we have because it’s causing some kind of perceived problem. The truth is (as with Bill) that our strength is not the problem;  in reality there’s simply some lack of skill or personal quality that undermines it.

For instance, you might be a great networker: you love meeting new people, chatting about your product or service with great enthusiam. You’re demonstrative, with a terrific memory for people’s details (which you use to follow them up as leads).

Several people are starting to tell you that you’re coming on too strong and overpowering people, turning them off. What do you do? Do you put a lid on your natural personality and aptitudes? No! You find out what’s missing in your skillset and work on that instead! You develop better listening skills, channeling your exuberance into making each person you meet the focal subject of early conversations. You stop behaviour that makes people feel like “leads”. 

Guess what happens? They love you! Your natural liveliness coupled with the new way you give others your attention leaves very positive impressions with people. Your sales coincidentally go up (as do the numbers at your parties!)

Another example? You’re task-focussed and very good at getting things done. Your work-team, your wife and your friends have been telling you for years to “lighten up”, to be more personable, to spend more time with your kids. 

Should you stop being “task-focussed”? No! That’s your personality and a valuable trait in many areas of life. But maybe it’d help if you occasionally made people the task.

I’m sure that sounds cold and unemotive to many people; but for you it may be a lifeline. Devoting your accomplishment-mindset to creating memorable days out for the kids, planning a round of coffees with people you manage where you plan to find out one new thing about them every month, taking a project management approach to making your next anniversary celebration the best ever - ideas like this may be ways you can improve the quality of your relationships by using the very strength that seems to stand in the way.

Don’t downplay your strengths – find new ways to support them.

For more of the story, go to the authors of this concept: Marcus Buckingham & Donald O Clifton in the book Now, Discover Your Strengths. I couldn’t recommend it highly enough…

Let’s face it Boss/Manager/Leader, your time is valuable … and so is that of your staff.

Before you go dragging busy people into another team meeting, ask yourself these questions:

• Is there actually a more effective delivery system for the information I want to pass on?
• Is there too much talk and not enough action in my department or office? How’s another meeting going to drive more action?
• Am I imposing an artificial “unity” on them when I could more productively feed their natural abilities and natural relational tendencies?
• What’s more likely to foster my team’s ownership of the business’s goals? A ra-ra motivational meeting? Or consistent demonstration of where the employee’s goals are met by reaching the organisation’s goals?
• Is this the best use of MY time?

You’re not alone and business commentators have been singing the praises of decentralising and debureaucratising workplaces for a couple of decades now. I love this recent post by Kevan Hall - and the picture at Slow Leadership expresses what most of us are thinking when we sit down to yet another staff meeting!

 As a design nut and hobbyist systems thinker, I really liked the post that starts below. It was very thought-provoking. Hope it helps… (Pete)

• Quick;
• Cheap;
• Innovative;
• Good.

You can choose any two of the four, but whichever two you choose rule out the other two. It goes like this:
If you choose to provide a product or service that is both innovative and good, it will neither be quick nor cheap to produce. Innovation and quality take time: time to produce and refine the initial idea, time to make sure that all the bugs are ironed out before it goes on sale (famous software companies and auto makers take note!), and time to introduce and market it correctly. In addition, the people working on it need to come to work feeling in good shape, mentally and physically, or they cannot be as creative as you need them to be. Trying to rush things through, or cutting corners, will destroy the quality aspect. Being niggardly with resources will force people back onto old ideas, so there will be no creativity.
For more, click here.

It starts: “Project managers are caught in a seeming paradox: They need to create and maintain good working relationships so that they can get work done through others. At the same time, they need to constantly perform course corrections on others’ performance. In other words, they need to criticize…”

Want more? Go to criticism .

My wife Janine was making a great point the other day. In management herself, she was describing how – as a manager – it’s easy to make the demand that other workers comply with your own pet hates. In other words, those pet hates of the manager begin to take the form of regulations in the workplace.

She used an example of the lunchroom (or tea area). Whereas it annoys her that people put dishes and cutlery in the sink, no one else seems concerned by it. So, is it worth diverting time and energy into coercing people into rinsing the dish and placing it in the orderly pile on the drainer – especially at the risk of spreading the irritation she feels to other workers? This would make a mountain out of a molehill. (The dishes can be washed once a day on a roster - dirty stuff left in the sink for a few hours  really doesn’t impede the efficiency and effectiveness of the office).

How often at work have you seen pet hates or even personal opinions become either law or a bone of contention? They’re called pet for a reason. When they’re looked after, they only make the one who owns them feel better – everyone else gets annoyed at best. They waste time, money and effort that could be better spent elsewhere and they create relational frustration.

I don’t expect my whole street to look after my pet dog. I also don’t give her free rein to run around the neighbourhood. She has her place, at my house, where the kids fuss over her, where she can run and chase birds in the backyard to her heart’s content, where she can have her niche in the order of things.

So that thing at work that bugs you – is it a best practise standard as yet unreached … or is it just your own pet hate?

That wonderful phrase struck a chord with me. Don’t we all need some forum where we can “purge” ourselves of our gripes, disappointments, worries – and those things that are like stones in our shoes?

Last year, Monster Inc (a leading global careers and personnel agency) published a study designed to aid companies in maintaining both high productivity and high retention rates among their staff. See Retention Report . In it, they made the following comment:

“Having a realtime and continuous practise to monitor employee sentiment regarding their jobs is becoming a necessity in a workplace expected to become more competitive”

This flies in the face of two standard practises of workplaces: to maintain a code of silence (keep your thoughts and feelings completely to yourself); or to air your frustrations somewhere where the boss can’t hear you and the problems can’t be dealt with. Unfortunately these practises are often the natural effect of a culture created (maybe unintentionally) by management.

I was so excited to hear a manager speaking the way this team leader did. To allow and encourage staff to air it and talk it through – with some process attached and with a mechanism in place to follow-through on the issues – is forward thinking, empowering, courageous. It’s already helping this man’s team perform with higher morale energy and creativity.

Worth pondering, huh?