This Place Is A Joke

One of the helpful by-products of people reading The Power of Professionalism is raising their hopes and expectations for their own organization in becoming more professional. They raise the bar, I don’t. But when things fall short, don’t be surprised when people express disappointment—or worse.

Case in point: the title of this blog comes from the subject line of an e-mail someone recently sent me. Here’s a partial list of some of things people have shared with me — experiences that they not only find unprofessional, but truly disturbing.

A.   A supervisor asked one of their employees to upload the supervisor’s resume to a competitor’s website for potential employment purposes.

B.    A busy-body assistant spills the beans on someone’s salary—which is higher than most other employees. Worse yet, the employee was new to the organization. So right out of the gate the new employee is ostracized– creating animosity across the entire organization.

C.   The organization’s value of meritocracy is compromised when a vice president promotes his best friend—someone whose performance (let alone capabilities) were hardly worthy of promotion. The promotion is viewed as a blatant act of cronyism on the part of the vice president.

You, no doubt, have your own examples. Let’s face it, no organization is perfect. Yet most people (top performers especially) expect their organization to strive in adhering to professional ideals.

It isn’t criminal for people NOT to take pride in their organization. But feeling your organization is a joke is sad…really sad. Each of the individuals who shared their experiences with me was (at some level) was thinking of leaving. These are precisely the types of people that organizations can least afford to lose. And even if they don’t leave, their disgust leaves a wake of cynicism in its place.

It’s a price that few organizations can afford….no joke!

Next week, the other side of the story…

An Abundance of Professionals ≠ A Professional Organization

To what degree does ‘professional’ describe your organization?

That’s a question that I frequently ask of senior leaders. Naturally, they’ll bend into a pretzel to answer in the affirmative.  After all, the answer reflects on them—for better or worse.

Most of the senior leaders justify their affirmative responses by the nature of the service or product that the organization provides (or attempts to provide).  In other words, the senior leader considers their organization ‘professional’ because, at the end of the day, it delivers an innovative technology or sage business counsel.  You know, these are organizations with big-brain scientists, highly-trained marketers, time-tested engineers, etc as a core part of their staff. Some are considered experts. In other words, the senior leaders justify their affirmative answer because of what the organization ultimately produces (e.g. a serum, sophisticated advice, a bridge).  It’s true that specialized expertise was required to produce each—specifically technical expertise.

But what’s not so obvious was that the serum was late to market (beaten out by a competitor who was first to market by six months). This development ultimately undermined the serum’s competitive advantage in the marketplace. The bridge was 30% over budget and took twice as many internal resources as once thought. Heads rolled as a result of the cost over-runs and client dissatisfaction.

Let’s look at it from the trenches.  If people inside the organization…

  • Don’t know what the organization’s priorities are (e.g. ever-changing or unclear priorities)
  • Can’t count on internal resource commitments to be honored (e.g. downward pressure on budgets become commonplace…decision surrounding budgets become capricious)
  • Have lost confidence in the organization’s ability to meet production deadlines (e.g.  the unwillingness of management to stick with commitments is often the culprit here)
  • Have become accustomed to whimsical decision-making on management’s part (e.g. “Just hold tight.  Wait five minutes, things will change.” )
  • Don’t know what’s going on in the greater organization (e.g. inadequate or ineffective communication)
  • Don’t understand what business they’re in (e.g. yes, this really happens!)
  • Haven’t fully bought-in to the current initiatives advanced by management (e.g.  the case for why these initiatives warrant special attention and support has been ineffective by management.)
  • Realize that customers/clients are being disadvantaged (e.g. the bill gets maximized, client value doesn’t.)
  • Don’t see their management defending the organization’s professional ideals (e.g. explicit or implicit)
  • Don’t feel connected to their colleagues (e.g. they may as well be strangers in the night)

…few will say that the word ‘professional’ describes their organization…even if their organization delivers sophisticated products or services…even if they employ ‘big-brained’ people who have advanced training….even if their individual specialists exude superior technical proficiency.

This may seem counter-intuitive and even painful to hear. But consider David Maister’s experience. David, now retired, was once the world’s leading authority on the management of professional services firms.  He observed, “I rarely meet individual professionals who believe their firm, as an institution, is built on such [professional] principles.”

Most people define an organization (white collar or not) as ‘professional’ not by what the organization delivers (technical stuff developed by really smart people) but by how they go about their business. This is outlined in great detail in Chapter Two of The Power of Professionalism. And make no mistake, how they go about their business is a by-product of their mind-sets.

In the end it’s about confidence and trust. So when I hear senior leaders say, especially in the face of great chasms of trust, that the word ‘professional’ describes their organization I realize we’ve still got a ways to go.

Professional or Classy?

How do you describe someone who…

  • keeps quiet about a rare indiscretion that, if revealed, would have tarnished someone’s otherwise stellar (and deserved) reputation
  • resists the temptation to tell someone they were wrong (when they clearly were).  Instead, they offer a different point-of-view–one that lets the person down softly.
  • jumps in and deflects attention away from a colleague who has unexpectedly embarrassed themselves in front of 80 ‘A’ list attendees during a workshop at your industry’s annual conference

Which description fits—professional or classy?  Not surprisingly, it’s usually both.

Real Artists Ship

Today’s post was inspired by a colleague friend of mine–Sally Helgesen–a gifted author and management consultant.

Sally was reminiscing that her favorite Steve Jobs quote was “ Real Artists Ship”.   I can’t help but relate this quote to Mind-Set #1–Professionals Have A Bias For Results.

By ‘ship’, Jobs means produce…get your stuff to market….get people to try your stuff, weigh-in on it…all the while taking a risk.  Of course, your stuff may well be a product, but also could be a service–doesn’t matter.

Big ideas are fine…partially-designed  products on a drawing board may temporarily inspire…but until you ‘ship’, it’s all theory.  Results begin with ‘shipping’.

Do it and you’ll show the world why you matter–just as Jobs did!

Hiring Professionals

During a recent Soundview webinar that was highlighting The Power of Professionalism, I was asked by a caller “what are some questions one might ask during the new hire process that might reveal someone’s level of professionalism?”  I indicated I’d respond in greater detail in a subsequent blog.  Here goes….

Certainly the question is a good one…and is an important piece of the puzzle in determining whether you’re dealing with someone who would ‘show up’ as a professional would.

When people think ‘professionalism’, they often equate it almost exclusively with character or by how the individual deals with other people. Fair enough…as that’s where so many people fall short on the ‘professionalism test’.  But don’t forget that both competence (does the person know what they’re doing?) and judgment (can the person separate the essential from the trivial?) are critical too.  Chapter four (page 73) in The Power of Professionalism outlines this in great detail.

Also keep in mind your (and others) experience with the candidate during the pre-employment process will naturally tell you a lot about how professional the candidate is.  Did they keep their commitments?  Were they on time? Were they forthcoming to questions they were asked? How personable were they? How respectful to others?  How did they treat people who couldn’t do anything for them?  Were their mind-sets consistent with the organization’s culture?  Were their mind-sets something that might improve the organization’s culture?

Questions for the candidate during the formal interview process that help reveal how they handle disagreements (or interpersonal conflict) are often revealing.  Consider asking questions like:

“Tell me about a time in which you had a disagreement with your boss. How did you handle it?  Specifically, what did you do?”

“Tell me about the person that raised your blood pressure the most in your last organization.  Why did that person raise your blood pressure so? Specifically, what did you do to work effectively with that person?”

“Amongst your own personal values…which ones, when violated, ‘tick you off’ the most?”

”What attributes do you bring to the table that will help make us be an even more professional organization?  How have you demonstrated those attributes in the past? Be specific.”

“What’s worse: to be considered unprofessional or be considered incompetent?  Why?”

These are just a few possible examples.  Lastly, you can consider asking the candidate to rate themselves on a scale of 1 (low) to ten (high) on each of the seven mind-sets.  Before the candidate actually rates themselves, let them know that you’ll be asking their references (preferably their prior bosses) the exact same question.  In other words, you’ll be asking the candidate’s references to rate the candidate on each of the seven mind-sets as well.  You’ll want to see 8’s, 9’s and 10’s come from this process.  Consider 7’s neutral….anything less is bad news. (NOTE: this numeric assessment process is based on the cutting-edge work of Geoff Smart and Randy Street, authors of Who:The  A Method For Hiring. Smart and Street use this same numeric process for assessing the candidate’s capabilities, strengths and weaknesses–not for their level of professionalism, per se.)

Remember, any of us can be fooled by a candidate.  After all, the candidate is going to tend to tell us what they think we want to hear.  That’s why doing reference checks is so important.  It’s just a great reality check….and part of one’s process in the due diligence of hiring someone.  Don’t hire without doing reference checks.

Point being:  don’t base the decision on a new hire exclusively on the results from the interview with the candidate. It’s a data point…hopefully, one of several.  You’ll find more professionals that way.

Naiveté or Professionalism

Professionals know that things get better, when they get better (Mind-Set #3). That means the professional is constantly learning and improving…then learning and improving some more. The process  never stops. That mind-set, in part, is what makes them a professional.

Seth Godin, one of the world’s most respected marketers and the world’s most popular bloggers, recently wrote about this very thing.  Here’s a link to his post:  http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2011/07/naive-or-professional.html Seth, who received an Advanced Readers Copy of The Power of Professionalism, spoke passionately about how ‘professionals’ were making such a big difference in Kenyan farming practices. When Seth says ‘professionals’ he doesn’t mean a hired gun (think: professor) from a prestigious ag school that comes in to save the day.  He means that the real farmer—you know, the overall clad guy who works the fields from sun up to sun down.

Seth’s biggest take-away? It wasn’t about teaching the farmer the technical stuff.  Rather, it was about the importance of helping cultivate the farmers identity as a professional before teaching the technical stuff. He concluded that a lot of things naturally fall into place once you’re dealing with professionals.

This is precisely what we advocated in The Power of Professionalism. As Seth points out, it isn’t always  easy to help someone become a professional . Yet it is essential for changing the mind-set of (what Seth calls) the naïve—someone who fails to take responsibility and fails to learn.

This is an important lesson for managers and leaders to remember. Before the change initiative, before the new product development, before the reorganization, before the technical stuff…cultivating professionalism in your people will make a challenging process naturally go much better.

The Deepest Deficit: Trust…

It’s scary how many articles on trust are emerging these days.  It’s certainly a sign of the times.

Most of the articles I see on trust have a distinct North American slant.  Today, however, I ran across one such article that had a distinctly European flavor.  It proved worthy of sharing.

Here’s the link:  http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/07/the_deepest_deficit_trust.html

As Goffee and Jones point out,  the trust deficit is not merely a North American phenomena.  Those of you who have read The Power of Professionalism shouldn’t find that surprising.  Just goes to show…misery loves company.

Youth Is Served – The Finest Professionals Can Offer

The Julian Krinsky Group is a prestigious sports and educational entity that serves more than 4,000 young people each year through leading-edge summer programs.  Based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, the Group serves families from all over the world.  Their standards are high—really high! Their aim is to deliver the very finest, most innovative, learning experiences possible.

The staff is young—typically those in their early 20’s. Delivering such high quality programs through a young staff is no easy task. Tina Krinsky, Chief Visionary Officer of the Group, found the mind-set material “the perfect inspiration for my dozen different orientation speeches that I give to over 400 staff from all over the world.”

Of course, Tina wanted to instill within the staff the standards of excellence that was expected of them.  But more importantly, she told the staff that she considered each and every one of them a professional—- certainly a contrarian notion when one considers their young age. Yet she noted, “we deliver the finest, most professional, learning experiences for young people in the world. Only you as professionals can ensure that happens. I have every confidence you will do exactly that.” They do.

Tina sees in those young staffers what they can’t immediately see in themselves. By the end of each  summer, staffers grow just as much as their young students do. They grow—not because they are trying to do something—but because they are attempting to be something.