Check out my latest article in Bellwether magazine (pages 8-9). There’s some great examples from two CEO’s as to how they reinforce professional values in their organizations.
Honoring An Amazing Men’s Room Attendant
I love hearing of stories about people in non-tradition jobs or situations that really put an exclamation point on what it means to be a professional. Lorenzo Robinson, a men’s room attendant at the posh 21 restaurant in Manhattan, is one such person.
To most, his work wasn’t glamorous. In fact, some might consider his work demeaning. Not Lorenzo. He glorified his work. Those he served loved him.
Lorenzo’s story reinforces that it isn’t what we do but how we do it that determines whether we are a professional or not. There should be no doubt, Lorenzo was a professional.
Lorenzo Robinson passed away prematurely in late October. Even though we never met, I’m honored to share his inspiring story. Here’s a nice article from the New York Times about him.
Is So-and-So A Leader?
Invariably the person asking this question either disagrees with or dislikes the individual in question. The inquisitor shares their point-of-view largely to discredit or disparage the person in question.
From my point-of-view, leaders abound—although they’re not always going to be people that you agree with or necessarily like. Check out my earlier post as to why.
Minimizing Politics In Your Company
The topic of organizational politics is always a hot one. I’m sharing a terrific article by Ben Horowitz which speaks to approaches that, when followed, will minimize organizational politics.
This particular article—now over three years old—is definitely centered around the executive suite, but the principles can be applied outside the executive suite as well.
Ben’s blog is one my favorites. The quality of his writing—and the thinking that drives it—is just terrific. Enjoy.
When Recruiting Don’t Under-Estimate The Impact of Professional Values
The principles from The Power of Professionalism, of course, can be applied in a myriad of ways. Jennifer (Jenn) Schoenhofer, President and CEO of Atlanta-based Axis Teknologies, had a really interesting one.
She was recently hiring for a position that would be a part of her executive team. Obviously, this is an especially important position. And if you knew Jenn you wouldn’t find it surprising she has adopted the ‘we only hire professionals’ philosophy.
She uses that philosophy and makes it integral during the interview process. Jenn is clear with each candidate….“Professional values are our north arrow here. They’re integrated into every facet of how we go about our business.” She especially loves this aspect of the interview –and she reports the candidates respond to it really well too.
Jenn carefully selected her preferred candidate and extends an offer. The candidate accepts. You know what’s coming….the candidate’s company counters–financially sweetening the pot. Then the candidate reneges on their acceptance to Jenn’s offer. Jenn re-counters, but not with money. She meets with the candidate again and re-emphasizes (of all things) just how Axis’s professional values will enhance the quality of the candidates work life AND how it will drive the company’s success in the future.
Shortly after that the candidate resigned from their company and joined Axis. Jenn is thrilled and so is the candidate.
This particular candidate left a well-known, well-established leader in the telecom industry. They left a prestigious job for something that they felt had even greater appeal. Jenn tells me that a significant factor in the candidates decision to leave was Axis’s commitment to professionalism (and all that goes with that). In fact, she indicated that virtually every candidate she interviewed for that particular job found great appeal in the emphasis Axis was putting on professional values.
The war for talent is real so don’t overlook recruitment as yet another (in a long list) of ways that professionalism makes your organization more competitive.
Thanks to Jenn in her willingness to share…
The Ultimate Paradox
As Captain Frank Ramsay declared in the 1995 film Crimson Tide,”we are here to protect democracy, not practice it”. As Ramsay (played by Gene Hackman) points out, the military defends the country and the rights of its citizens without being afforded many of those same rights. How honorable is that?
Thanks to each and every one of the nation’s veterans.
I Really Can’t Put My Finger On It
I recently received an email from a colleague friend who owns and operates a very successful executive search firm. She’s quite familiar with The Power of Professionalism. At the very end of her note she added the following PS:
“I was comparing two people yesterday. I said to myself, ‘Person A is highly professional. It’s not that Person B is unprofessional, but Person A is notably highly professional.’ I really couldn’t put my finger on some detail or example that brought me to this conclusion. Odd.”
Isn’t that the truth? Often times it’s our intuition that whispers to us how professional someone is. And more-often-than-not the assessment this woman was making is an unconscious process for most of us.
There’s just something about how the person conducts themselves—which often translates to a lot of little, yet terribly important, things. Taken in aggregate, it reveals a tapestry that could only have been created by a professional.
In organizational settings (particularly) we’re prone to compare—it’s the nature of the beast. We compare because we must. Who do we hire—candidate A or B? Which service provider—A or B–gets the new maintenance contract?
Differentiating oneself is tough. Yet, I’ve learned that professionalism can be a big differentiator. For trusted professionals the key is to get others to notice—even if the person really can’t put their finger on the ‘why’.
When Identities Compete
Some of our toughest (and often best) decisions are by-products of competing identities we hold. For example, a politician courageously acts in the best interests of the nation—rather than acting in the best interests of their political party.
What competing identities, you ask, were in ‘play’ for the politician? Namely, being an American versus being a Republican. (NOTE: The example of being a Republican is for illustrative purposes only. The politician could have just as well have been a Democrat). In this particular instance, the politician felt the ‘tug’ of being an American outweighed being a Republican (their revered political party). Thus, the politician was willing to take an unpopular stand—unpopular, at least, from members of their own party.
Recall Stanford Professor James March’s research on decision-making wherein he theorized that our choices are strongly influenced by one of two factors: 1) the consequences one is subject to–what one gets versus what it costs OR 2) an especially important aspect of one’s identity. The former is quite calculated, the latter is quite intuitive.
Yet, decisions aren’t always rendered exclusively by a comparison between March’s two factors. Sometimes the decision is rendered as a result of a comparison within only one of March’s factors. In the politician’s case, the defining struggle became one of identity. Which identity (being an American versus being a Republican) was more important? In the end, the politician made a value judgment in putting the country first, their political party second.
It’s not unusual for one’s most difficult and consequential decisions to be influenced by an especially important identity they hold. That shouldn’t be surprising—given the inseparable correlation between identity and one’s personal values. And it also shouldn’t be surprising that an identity-based decision is one that, while difficult, is often one that the individual is especially proud of. After all, it frequently reveals their very ‘best-self’.
Seven Signs An ‘Expert’ Is Slipping
1) they tend to be impatient with ‘mere mortals’
2) they tend to reinforce what they already believe or trust they know
3) they get overly defensive when others challenge them
4) their listening skills have tended to atrophy
5) new ideas are often seen as a threat or source of discomfort for them
6) frequently they tend to hang around with people of similar stature
7) they have become over-reliant on the approach that enabled them to become an expert in the first place
If these signs are prevalent, it portends an expert in decline.
The Ultimate Paradox— When A Leader Voluntarily Steps Down
President George Washington started a precedent, Pope Benedict XVI broke one—both stepped down. Both did so on their own volition—neither was pushed (think: fired).
Relinquishing one’s responsibilities at the height of one’s power goes against the grain of human nature. In fact, many may believe that stepping down is a sign of weakness in a leader. That’s not always the case.
I chose to believe that Washington and Pope Benedict did so for the greater good of the entities they led—Washington for the United States; Pope Benedict for the Catholic Church.
In Washington’s case he believed that over time the country would be best served by having a number of people serve as the country’s leader—rather than one person serve indefinitely (as a King would in a monarchy). Washington was revered; he could have served far beyond his initial two terms. Yet he chose not to.
In Pope Benedict’s case the Catholic Church currently faces many substantive issues. To effectively deal with those issues, the church’s leader must be both focused and energetic. It’s no secret that Pope Benedict’s health has deteriorated—largely due to his elevated age (85) —at the time of his resignation. Today Emeritus Pope Benedict turns 86 with some reporting that he is suffering repeated falls and is nearly blind in one eye. His energy is reportedly waning. Is it any wonder he chose to step down?
Did these two leaders shirk their responsibilities in stepping down? Not from my perspective! Rather, they did what they felt was in the best interests of the entity they had been entrusted with. Both were willing to withstand the inevitable second-guessing and criticism that came with their decision. Isn’t that what we’d expect from someone who realized that “it wasn’t all about them”—consistent with mind-set two?