Loose Threads

Resisting the urge to pull on a loose thread can be tough for some of us. Lest you think today’s post is about fabric, it isn’t. Loose threads are interpersonal teases.

They occur in meetings when someone:

  • makes an innocent error on an inconsequential fact
  • pauses for a moment to gather their train-of-thought
  • says something provocative in a well-intended attempt to challenge people’s thinking

What do you do when this occurs? Pull on the thread or leave well-enough alone? Some pull on the thread—interrupting the speaker, asking an inappropriate question, filling a void in the meeting with our own ‘stuff’, or taking the conversation in an unhelpful direction. We tell ourselves we’re being helpful…

…but closer to the truth is we’ve been unable to resist having the last word or getting in our two cents. In other words, it’s about us—often a not-so-veiled attempt to show how smart or important we are.

In meetings this can be death—especially for the inexperienced or ineffective leader/presenter. How many times have we all seen meetings completely unravel because one or more attendees couldn’t resist the urge to pull on a loose thread or two? This is not only frustrating, but expensive too.

Professionals resist the urge to pull on loose threads, largely because they:

  • quickly turn from one into eight (people pile on)
  • knock the leader/speaker off their train-of-thought
  • are a catalyst in derailing a meeting’s momentum
  • are a sign of disrespect

Professionals aspire to master their emotions—especially when it comes to pulling on loose threads.

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.

Lost Book…Lost Cause?

I’ve observed that many who received an Advanced Readers Copy of The Power of Professionalism have made a lot of notes and posted a ton of tape-flags in their books. In other words, they took the book to heart—something that every author secretly wishes for. One gentleman said in his Amazon review that he’d never loan his book out—simply because it was too valuable.

Fast forward to an e-mail I received last week from a colleague-friend, Mike Kelly.Continue reading

Silicon Valley Leader’s TPOP Megaphone

Readers:

I’m sharing an e-mail that was sent to me from a senior leader in the Silicon Valley that I thought you’d appreciate. This senior leader is communicating with his people – through the lens of the seven mind-sets in The Power of Professionalism (TPOP).

The leader is a very successful start-up guy…a real peach of a guy. He’s the top guy in his company.

He’s familiar with my work–having previously read The Big AHA!

He agreed I could share his e-mail as long I extracted the company’s name – which I have. I have substituted in its place the fictitious name Walnutians. Continue reading

Mind-Sets Trump Skill-Sets – New Evidence, If You Needed Any

In the Power of Professionalism we advocate that skill-sets, as important as they are, were less important than one’s mind-set in the discharge of a professional’s responsibilities.  Employers overwhelmingly agree. According to Harvard lecturer Dr. Paul Stoltz, 98% of employers would pick the prospective candidate with the ideal mind-set (and lacking the desired skill-sets) over the person with the ideal skill-sets (and lacking the desired mind-set). The same principle applied to employee retention.  When deciding who to retain—someone with ideal mind-sets or someone with ideal skill-sets— 90 plus percent of employers would retain the employee with ideal mind-set. These results were based on a recently released five year study with thousands of top employers from all over the world.

This shouldn’t be surprising. Think of the important initiatives your organization has attempted:  the implementation of new (and critical) operating processes, the all-important new product launch, the execution of a critical strategy, the delicate integration necessitated by a merger or acquisition. Think of the difficulties, the exasperation involved—sometimes even to the point of the initiative failing. Chances are the difficulties weren’t a skill-set problem. More likely, the difficulties were a mind-set problem.  Is it any wonder employers are so attracted to those with desirable mind-sets?