Company Limits Bathroom Breaks To Six Minutes a Day

Yes, you heard right. Here’s the reference: Company Limits Bathroom Breaks To Six Minutes a Day

No doubt there was some employee shenanigans (think: excessive Facebooking and texting on mobile devices in the bathroom) that brought this on. And perhaps management did some things that contributed to this outcome as well.

But would the ‘Six Minute Rule’ have been invoked if management genuinely viewed their staff as professionals? Not likely!

Invariably, self-management practices go way up when management treats the staff as professionals. The staff’s ‘best-self’ gets proudly displayed. They’re motivated to do the right thing, and they’ll do it more often. Of course there’s always going to be a few knuckle-heads, but still…..

Who doesn’t want to work in an environment in which ‘professional’ is the organization’s aspiration. And who doesn’t want to work with colleagues who are professionals? Of course, the questions are rhetorical. An organization that centers its organization on professional ideals wouldn’t stoop to this.

Character: An Important Lesson From Peyton Manning

Yesterday’s Super Bowl was, arguably, anti-climatic—given all the pre-game hype.  Yet there’s a wonderful post-script to the game—the post-game reaction of Peyton Manning.

No doubt Manning was crushed (emotionally) after he and his team failed to match the skill and intensity of the Seahawks on football’s biggest stage.  Yet, he took the high road.

Manning has a well- deserved reputation of being a class act—win or lose. Yesterday was no exception.

Said another way, Manning is a real ‘pro’—defined primarily by how he conducts himself, not because of his skill on the football field. He’s a professional worth emulating.

Here’s an article that gives an insightful first-hand account of Peyton’s post-game activities.

How many mind-sets do you see in action?

Every Hand Went Up! —Part Two–From Grandpa’s Well Intended Faux Pas

NOTE: This post is Part Two (and a continuation) from ‘Grandpa’s Well Intended Faux Pas’ post on Jan 3rd.

_____________________

The Director asked the students, “how many of you would recommend the approach taken by Rob in the way he instructed your imaging course?” Every hand went up!

At the Southern California vocational school where Rob taught there was a gap in how prepared the students were to enter the working world.  Rob knew it, employers did too. Technically, the students  knew their stuff.  In other words, their skill-sets were fine.  The school had done a good job in training their students to be masters of an ever-increasing complicated technical universe.

Yet, increasingly employers realized the technical alone was insufficient. Purpose and values were  important. So was taking responsibility.  Like the employers, Rob believed that pouring in buckets of knowledge into student’s brain (as important as that was) was proving incomplete—after all, the school wasn’t preparing robots to enter the workforce.  The school, in effect, was preparing technicians to enter the workforce.  And traditionally that had been fine.

But today more was needed. Professionals were needed. Employers didn’t explicitly say so, but when you listened to their needs, professionals (the adjective, not the noun) is precisely what they were looking for.

Rob made the commitment to graduate professionals—not merely technicians. He did this on his own. He is to be commended. The implication? For students to meet the ‘professional’ standard they need both skill-sets and mind-sets.  Thus, he married the mind-sets from The Power of Professionalism with the well-established technical curriculum.  He upped the ante in a big way.

What did the students think?  They whole-heartedly recommended it.  Remember, every hand went up when the Director posed her question.

And if you’re wondering why the Director was asking that question, it was because the school’s owner was so impressed by the change in the students she asked the Director to look into expanding the approach to the rest of the school’s population of 1,000 students.  It’s an exciting prospect.

We promise to keep you updated as the story unfolds….

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.

 

 

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.

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.

Changing Your Tune

“Cheryl is the best project manager we have—her integrity is beyond reproach.”  “Suzanne is one of the finest people you’d ever want to work with—she’s simply a star.”
“Charlie was my best boss ever—fair-minded, respectful, insightful–he’s the real deal.”

The people expressing their admiration for these people based their views on years of personal experience working with them. But isn’t it funny how we’re prone to change our tune when things don’t quite go our way:

  • You change your tune about Cheryl after she reassigns you to a lower-profile project.
  • You change your tune about Suzanne after she respectfully, but vehemently, disagrees with you in front of the boss on a key strategic issue.
  • You change your tune about Charlie after he doesn’t hire you for a job you desperately sought.

If these people were good before, they should be good after. Your view shouldn’t change just because an isolated situation doesn’t go your way. Changing your tune in such circumstances makes you look petty…makes you look small…puts you fifty yards south of showing up as a professional would.

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.

Should I Say What I Know?

That’s a question that some of us constantly ask ourselves.

Most of us wouldn’t:

  • tell our friends how the new blockbuster movie ends.
  • speak up in a meeting on an arcane point if we believed doing so would derail the meeting.
  • share an innocent, but little-known, fact about a colleague that, when revealed, might be used against them.

Sometimes knowing when (and when not) to speak up is a matter of judgment. In other instances, it’s a matter of character. Either way, the fact that we’re asking ourselves the question as to whether to speak up or not is evidence that we should tread carefully.

I once had a manager who always ran in the right circles.  He hung out with the ‘big dogs’—the ‘A’ list crowd. He was always “in the know”.  And he couldn’t wait to demonstrate that he was “in the know”.  Initially, it was just awkward…the information he’d tell me about.  I initially suspected he was revealing information he shouldn’t.  After awhile it was obvious that was exactly what he was doing. It seemed he just couldn’t help himself—revealing confidences that is.

It’s really tempting to be ‘in the know’….tempting to say what we know. In most business cultures,  the more information we possess, the greater our standing in the eyes of others. For some being ‘in the know’ is a (self) validation of one’s own self-importance.  Being ‘in the know’ can be intoxicating, because with knowledge comes a form of power–perceived or otherwise.

It also means that someone has taken us into their confidence…they’ve extended trust. That’s the trouble…my manager was violating confidences.  He had broken the trust that had been extended to him.

When this happens it’s typical:

  • for people to share only the information that’s absolutely essential with the offender (especially if that person is higher up in the food chain than we are).
  • that the offender develops a reputation for having ‘loose lips’ …which translates to a blemish on their character – eventually undermining their own effectiveness.
  • for the offender to lose the respect of others – the polar opposite of the enhanced ‘standing’ they may have originally hoped for.

So when you’re tempted to say what you know…remember, discretion is the better part of valor.

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…