Have You Washed Your Hands?

Hospital acquired infections can prove a serious danger to unsuspecting patients—especially those already vulnerable due to illness and such.  Inadequate hygiene practice on the part of doctors and nurses is often the culprit.  Simply put…that can mean forgetting to wash one’s hands before coming in contact with a patient.  Proper hygiene practice is more than merely the washing of one’s hands, but it’s certainly a big (and obvious) part of it.

Kaiser Permanente ( a well-known health care provider in my area) tackled this problem head-on…even if it meant taking on some sacred cows.  I learned this first-hand while aiding my 83 year old mother during her pre-surgery orientation at the hospital.  The nurse explained what was expected of my mother (i.e. no fluids after midnight, no wearing of any jewelry, etc).

Most of the instructions were predictable, but there was one big surprise at the end.  “Now there’s one last thing you must do any time any of the nurses or doctors are about to treat you.”  “What’s that?” my mother asked.  The nurse smiled, “Ask them if they have washed their hands.”  My mom wasn’t sure if the nurse was serious.  ”You’re kidding, right?” my mom asked.  The nurse absolutely was serious.  Turns out, every patient gets the same request about asking the staff if they have washed their hands.

My mother was unaccustomed to asking her care givers (doctors especially) such questions—largely for fear of offending them.  Certainly, she wasn’t bashful about asking more technically-oriented questions.  But the ‘hand-washing’ thing threw her for a loop.  At first she thought it demeaning to ask a specialist who has a gazillion years invested in training the same question she used to ask me as a little kid before we’d sit down for dinner.  These aren’t children, she argued.  She concluded that the question was too basic, too fundamental to really have any real impact.  Plus, the last thing you want as a patient is to have your care-giver get ticked-off at you.

But later, in a moment of bashful curiosity, mom (in her own round-about way) asked the ‘hand-washing’ question of her surgeon.  He wasn’t offended in the least.  In fact, he thanked her for asking.  That was all it took, mom began to ask the ‘hand-washing’ question all the time—at times shamelessly.    It seemed she even took some small measure of delight in it.

The sacred cow (the inquisition of a doctor by a lay person questioning the doctor’s commitment and discipline) had been put out to pasture.   Hooray for Kaiser— and other like-minded health care providers—- who have accomplished this marvelous breakthrough.  Their culture is now healthier…more capable of delivering  even greater health care results…far less likely to unintentionally infect a patient….all consistent with mind-set #1 which is all about having a bias for results.

Each organization has their own sacred cows that retard the health of their organization’s culture.  As Kaiser demonstrated, sacred cows can be overcome with commitment and perseverance.

In your organization, what sacred cows would you like to put out to pasture?

When Unique Knowledge Trumps The ‘Wisdom’ Of Crowds

Our Nov 3rd post—Ask The Right Person The Right Question—pointed out that for us to be confident in the answers to our questions,  it’s imperative that the person(s) be ‘in a position to know’.  Perhaps that seems obvious, but too often questions are asked of people that aren’t really informed on the subject in question.   This is especially true when it comes to surveys.

Consider the sample survey we use to assess the strength of the mind-sets within an organization.  A seven point scale is assigned to each of the seven mind-sets—seven is great and one is terrible.  An organization may score consistently high (6.3) in mind-set #1 (professionals have a bias for results) across the entire enterprise.  Mind-set #2 (Professionals realize (and act like) they’re a part of something bigger than themselves) may also score well (5.4).

The score of 6.3 for mind-set #1 seems like a natural in light of the organization achieving 110% of its annual revenue goal—the organization’s most important objective for the year.  Across all departments, no department scored mind-set #1 lower than 6.0—showing great consistency across all departments.

Mind-set #2 is another story.  Every department scored mind-set #2 at least a six—except for one.  The CFO’s office collectively scored mind-set two a 3.1.  It was the scores from the CFO’s office that brought the overall score for mind-set two down to 5.4.  Was there unique knowledge contained within the CFO’s office that prompted the 3.1?  Turns out, there was!

In light of the great revenue year, the company was sitting on a pile of cash. Instead of paying down the company’s extensive debt, the organization’s leaders (by way of a contentious 60%/40% vote) elected to take generous bonuses instead.  This ultimately proved problematic as creditors later came with saber’s rattling.

Those in the CFO’s office had unique knowledge.  In turn, they scored mind-set #2 poorly—deservedly so.  Had the rest of the enterprise known the same, no doubt, they too would have scored mind-set #2 poorly.  What initially looked like a pretty good score for mind-set #2 turned out to be a false-positive.  This was caused by the lack of good information…people were simply ill-informed.

Sometimes what looks like a survey aberration is really an important by-product of unique knowledge.  It would have been a mistake to become confident about the survey results associated with mind-set #2 from the raw numbers alone.   Confidence should stem from informed choices….and reinforces the point that people aren’t necessarily ‘in the know’ as much as we assume.

 

‘Professional’–A Super Identity

Mitch Wasden— chief executive officer at Ochsner Medical Center in Baton Rouge, Louisiana—recently posted an interesting article on the Harvard Business Review Blog Network about ‘Identity’. Those of you familiar with The Power of Professionalism know that one’s ‘professional’ identity is at core of my new book. ‘Professional’ , as I point out in my follow-up comment to Mitch’s article on the HBR site, is really a ‘super identity’. It’s unique. Check out Mitch’s article–along with my comment. I’ve also re-printed my comment below:

_____________________

“Identity, indeed, is at the root of so many of one’s decisions and subsequent actions.  And Mitch is right that identities can work at cross purposes.  It’s my view there’s one identity In the workplace that trumps all others—that of being a professional.  It’s like a super identity.   It’s  powerful because it truly identifies who you are — not what you do.  This helps minimize the cross-purpose problem.”

“After all, isn’t that what an identity is supposed to do….give us a clear picture of who we are…as opposed to what we do ( being an ‘expert’, being an accountant, etc).  Too often our identities are centered on what our vocation or expertise is (what we do).  Do those Identities drive our decisions and actions? Absolutely!  But…

…it’s my view it’s more important to be a professional who happens to be an expert….more important to be a professional who happens to write code…be a nurse…or be a CEO for that matter. The reason is simple….it’s because of how the professional thinks…the professional holds certain mind-sets.”

“For instance, a professional realizes they’re part of something bigger than themselves–and they act like it.  So take the expert in the meeting in which he’s challenged. Sure his ego is going to take a hit….but which identity would you prefer the individual to hold in that situation…”I’m an expert” or “I’m a professional who happens to be an expert”?  Which identity would contribute to a more constructive outcome–for the individual expert as well as the group collectively?  Which identity would help avoid a contentious confrontation?  Which identity would best aid a constructive conversation?  Which identity is going to help the ‘expert’ bring out his ‘best self’ in that situation?”

“I’ve found that it’s the latter —“I’m a professional who happens to be an expert”. The professional knows by default (because of being part of ‘something bigger’) that “I’m a team member”—and (generally) they act accordingly.  This is why one’s ‘professional’ identity trumps other, arguably more tactical, ones.”

NOTE: I’ve identified seven mind-sets held by trusted professionals…the one above, plus six others. .

“Unfortunately, too often we’ve forgotten what it really means to be a professional. Consistent with that, I’ve also found that few hold ‘professional’ as a core part of their identity.  That’s unfortunate, but it’s something I’m working on.”

Bill Wiersma, Author– The Power of Professionalism (2011)

Getting Out Of Your Own Way

Mind-set #1 is about having a bias for results. Get results and you’ll be trusted.  Simple.  Naturally,    people say they hold this mind-set…after all, that’s what they feel others expect them to say.  But saying you’re committed and demonstrating it are two different things.  It’s when one’s buttons get pushed, when one’s comfort zone gets invaded that you really find out whether the commitment is real or faux.  Turning up the heat acts as the ultimate stress test…as you’ll soon out if you’re committed to really delivering results or not.

What happens when:

***the entrepreneur with a great new idea seriously questions whether they are the right person to bring the idea to fruition.

***the senior officer in the Fortune 500 realizes she’s about to hire someone smarter and perhaps more capable than she is.

***the managing partner who willingly steps aside to aid the ensuing merger with another firm.

Sometimes getting out of our own way is the very best thing we can do in bringing forth the best possible results.  It may require that we put our ego aside or lose control to a third party.  It may result in being relegated to the shadows, instead of the spotlight.  It may mean taking a short term financial hit.  It may just break our heart.  Know in the end it’s always few who take this less-traveled road.  They may not like it, but they do it anyway.  After all, it’s who they are—namely professionals.

It Gets Worse–Legalized Insider Trading Revealed In 60 Minutes Story

After writing The Power of Professionalism there are (literally) hundreds of illustrative stories about distrust that I could share with readers if I chose to.  Almost always I chose not to share them—largely because people have become desensitized.  There’s too many and, cumulatively, they become too painful. People know there’s a big problem with distrust–there’s no sense piling on.

That said, a recent story is worthy of sharing–because it exposes (essentially ) legalized political insider trading in Washington. We have 60 Minutes story– Congress Trading Stock Insider Information to thank.

If you have had any doubts about why Congress is the second least trusted entity behind Wall Street, this vignette should convince you why the public holds Congress in such contempt.  This story, once again, demonstrates why we need professionals who happen to be politicians–not professional politicians!

Debra…Big-Time Difference-Maker

Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown of Slidell, Louisiana shares this instructive experience.

“Years ago while in a previous position, I traveled a lot and would leave my home around 6:00 AM.  There was a fast food restaurant between my home and the exit on the interstate where I would stop for a cup of coffee.  It wasn’t a big sale—less than a dollar.  This fast food restaurant was—believe it or not—special.”

“Normally, I would stop at the microphone at the menu sign and wait for the expected raspy, non-engaged voice asking me if I wanted the latest value meal.  That wasn’t the case at this place. Instead I heard the most pleasant voice say, “Good morning, this is Debra, how may I help you?” “

“Seriously?  Someone at a fast food restaurant who actually wanted to help me…and wasn’t interested in pushing their latest meal deal?   I was impressed.  Yet, it got even better.”

“As I sat at the window waiting for my cup of coffee, Debra appeared.  She had my coffee.  I gave her a $5.00 bill.  Her attention to detail and professionalism blew me away.  She placed her hand beneath my outstretched hand, placed the bills in the palm of my hand first and then added the changed on top of the bills which allowed me to close my hand without the possibility of dropping the change all over the parking lot.  Now I was even more impressed.”

“Then she handed me the cup of coffee and asked if I wanted cream and sugar for the coffee.”

“”Thank you for stopping by, have a very nice day.”  I told her thank you and to also have a nice day and left for my trip and left her a tip.  Tipping a fast food employee is unheard of, but I was thrilled to do it….as that brief exchange with Debra set an amazing tone for the rest of my day.”

“Every time I left on a trip I made a point to stop at THAT restaurant.  Every time the experience with Debra was the same.  It got to the point I stopped not for the coffee but rather to hear Debra’s voice and her good wishes.  I wrote a note to management and complimented them AND Debra on how she conducted herself and how professional she was.”

“Now for the rest of the story.  This experience was over 20 years ago–and I still tell that story to this day. It was about two weeks after I wrote the thank you note that I stopped by as usual for coffee.    When I pulled up to the window, this time was different.  Debra took my hand but not to put change in it.  She said, “I know it was you who wrote the note to my manager.  Because of the note, I got a raise and wanted to thank you.”

As Jim noted, he ended up going to that restaurant because of Debra.  She made the kind of difference that resulted in drawing people back to her (and the restaurant) over and over.  Imagine how many others like Jim she influenced.

Whether Debra ‘showed up’ as a professional because of her upbringing or because of the restaurant’s management—we’ll never know.  We do know that Debra’s capabilities were recognized by management and she was ultimately promoted.  Unfortunately for Jim the promotion meant that she no longer worked the window.  The service, Jim later observed, was never the same.

Debra was exceptional.  She stood out. She showed up as a professional would—yes, even at a fast food joint.  So impressed, Jim wrote a thank you note.  Nobody does that.

Every organization seeking competitive advantage should be scouring the countryside high and low, day and night for more Debra’s.  Now would be a good time to start.

 

 

Enjoy Retirement Tony

Earlier today, Tony La Russa announced his retirement–this after winning the World Series last week in dramatic fashion. He’s going out on top. I’m thrilled for him.

La Russa, who wrote the Foreword for The Power of Professionalism, had a brilliant career and undoubtedly will be a first ballot entrant into baseball’s Hall of Fame.

Cardinals star pitcher Chris Carpenter said of Tony, “I’m not sure there are a lot of people that can match the preparation, the dedication and the ability to put it all together.”

Carpenter is ‘spot on’.  In recruiting big name contributors (such as Tony) for The Power of Professionalism I had one singular criteria–that the individual had to emulate what I was writing about in the book. Tony does….he’s such a pro.

La Russa leaves a lasting legacy. Managers will forever model not only what he did but how he did it. Baseball was lucky to have him.

Enjoy your retirement Tony.

 

 

How Mind-Set Three Aids Fledgling Entrepreneurs In Venture Funding

I recently attended a chapter meeting of the Keiretsu Forum.  The Keiretsu Forum provides a medium for young, high-potential companies needing venture funding to meet potential investors.  The companies need the funding to sustain their current operations or, more typically, take their business to the next level.  Obtaining that  funding is critical!  For some, the lack of additional venture funding can mean languishing in mediocrity or worse.

The investors can be a tough bunch…and well they should.  Many of these enterprises must overcome long odds to succeed.  Investors need to be both thoughtful and  prudent. They routinely scrutinize balance sheets, market strategies, and the like. But often their greatest scrutiny is of the entrepreneur’s themselves.  It’s, arguably, the most important factor to get right.

Investors love “coachable entrepreneurs”. Why? Because entrepreneurs who can’t learn ‘on the fly’ will likely fail.  And investors–who typically were once successful entrepreneurs themselves—often become the source of deep insights for the fledgling entrepreneur-leader. Often the investors are the entrepreneur’s best source of advice.

Know-it-all entrepreneurs usually have a short business life-span. The fast and furious start-up experience has too many moving parts –each of which requires specialized expertise–for people not to ask for advice.

On the other hand, entrepreneurs who are constantly asking questions (because they realize there’s so much they don’t know) have a much better shot at flourishing. These are people who have a mind-set that suggests that ‘things get better when they get better’  (mind-set #3).  They plan, execute, evaluate and learn….then repeat the process until they get it right.

When an investor comes to the conclusion that the entrepreneur is uncoachable…it usually signals the beginning of the end.  It doesn’t matter how smart or creative the person is. Without the ‘coachable’ trait the entrepreneur is unlikely to get funded.The investor, who is all-too-aware of how difficult the uncoachable entrepreneur can be,   opts out.  He keeps his financial powder dry, patiently awaiting the next potential deal.

This attribute of personal leadership (being uncoachable) often makes or breaks people very quickly in the entrepreneurial world. Investors simply won’t put up with it.  In the ‘corporate world’ it’s another story.  Uncoachable people in mainstream corporate environments ‘flame out’ much later–at least comparatively.  There’s lots of reasons why…but it doesn’t change the ‘drag’ the person typically has on the organization. Imagine if the corporate ‘uncoachables’ were forced to justify their funding each year by a rough-and-tumble investor.  Boy, how things would change!

Professionals: Not What, But How

In our August 30, 2011 post we illustrated why it’s a bad idea to think an organization should automatically be considered ‘professional’ because it produces technically sophisticated products developed by really smart people. A recent article in Fortune couldn’t have been more timely or effective in complimenting that earlier post. The story–based at the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer–is outstanding.  It’s one of the best business articles I’ve read in a really long time. Here’s the link: http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/28/pfizer-jeff-kindler-shakeup/

There is perhaps no greater threat to an organization than dysfunction in the top team. And when that top team leads the world’s largest drug company, the potential consequences are huge. ’Inside Pfizer’s palace coup’ is the title of the article. Trust me–it’s aptly titled. In terms of bad behavior, these people had nothing on Machiavelli. Revenge, betrayal, power-grabs…it’s all there. If this story would have taken place in the military, it would have been described as ‘behavior unbecoming’.

Pfizer’s historical performance has largely been impressive….they make technically sophisticated stuff….they have exceptionally bright people. Yet ‘professional’ is a term that most reasonable people would find hard to use in describing Pfizer’s top team after reading this article. And, of course, the whole organization takes a big ‘hit’ because of that. It’s simply unavoidable. Remember—most people define an organization as ‘professional’ not by what the organization delivers but by how they go about their business. Pfizer’s experience should always be a reminder of that.

When Sacrifice Isn’t

A wide receiver throws a great block, springing his running back teammate around the corner for a 15 yard gain. The announcer in the booth (a former wide receiver himself) sings the wide-out’s praises–finally paying him the ultimate compliment by commending him for how he ‘sacrificed himself’.

Huh?  Last time I checked football was a team sport.  Suggesting that the wide receiver (a ‘skill’ player) was ‘sacrificing himself’ by performing a skill with less prestige (blocking)…or by suggesting that he did it begrudgingly (because he dislikes it)…or by suggesting it’s especially admirable because it’s out of his comfort zone is myopic. It’s a team sport. People are expected to do what’s required to achieve the desired result. He’s not sacrificing himself, he’s attempting to help his team win!

I’ve noticed that managers are sometimes like the announcer…they think that when one of their ‘skill players’ performs a ‘lesser skill’ (something ‘beneath them’) they consider the ‘skill player’ to be making a sacrifice. Regretfully, these managers haven’t caught the vision of mind-set #2 – being a part of something bigger than yourself.

Consider:

  • the busy rainmaker at the law firm who takes their precious time and shares their considerable influence to open an important door for a colleague.
  • the mechanical foreman who takes 20 minutes out their day to provide encouragement and technical advice to a second-year apprentice who has run into a particularly vexing problem.
  • the theme park GM who– one day a month–works ‘the front lines’.
  • the Marketing VP who willingly gives up 5% of their departmental budget to R&D as a result of an unexpected new research breakthrough.

Neither the rainmaker, the foreman, the GM, nor the VP, consider themselves to be ‘sacrificing’. They, like the wide-receiver, realize they’re a part of something bigger than themselves. They’re a part of a team – they do what is required for the team to succeed.

People on winning teams constantly do things that may be out of the norm or that stretches them but they are rarely seen as a ‘sacrifice’. It’s just not how they see things.