Is Your "About" Page Real, or Just Real Phoney?

About pages - they're everywhere these days.  Whether you have a bio on your company's site, you own your own business and have to tell people who you are, or simply have a bio via twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn, you've got choices to make regarding how you position yourself.

Are you an expert, a working (wo)man, or something in between?  Remember - if you leave bio tools blank, you're still making a choice - you're telling the world that you're afraid to take a stand.  If I see that as someone who hires a lot, that's OK, I just think you're a nice compliant sort- but I probably have zero expectation that you're going to come in and WOW me if you're not brave enough to position yourself via something as static and available as an "about" page on LinkedIn.  Job history only on LinkedIn?  Cool.  I'll be back when I need a safe choice.

Why is the "About" page on my mind?  Because Jason Seiden brutally hacked some poor unsuspecting company that clearly didn't get it.  More from JasonSeiden.com:

"What happens when personal branding goes too far? When it leaves others (aka “me”) with the impression that you think you’re MORE THAN AWESOME; YOU’RE A PIVOTAL PLAYER ON THE MOST PHENOMENAL, BESTEST, MOST PERFECTEST TEAM EVER CONCEIVED IN SOMEONE’S WHOLE BRAIN.

EVER. That’s how I felt when I read Brill Street’s About Us page—I got that, “Yep, they’re the best… just ask them!” feeling inside.

And there’s their wunderkind Talent Manager, who makes me want to hang it all up and go fetal in the corner. Armed with a Bachelor’s in cognitive science, she “thoroughly understands the mind” and “has become an expert in the areas of Talent Acquisition, Career Coaching and Organizational Development.” Wow. If there’s one thing I’ve learned after 6 years of studying management at the world’s foremost business institutions, nearly 2 decades in and around entrepreneurs, executives, managers, recruiters, coaches, and OD professionals, and hours upon hours reading papers by guys like this and meeting guys like that, it’s that I could never master all three of those areas in my entire lifetime, even if I tried."

When I first read Jason's post, I have to admit, I thought it was a little mean.  Then it grew on me, and I learned from what he shared and basically decided you have three choices when it comes to an "About" page and how you position yourself:

1. Go with the Brill Street approach.  Say you're the expert even if you're not or at the risk of seeming plastic to the world around you.  LOTS of companies and people doing this.

2. Tell the world who you are.  Tell the world who you are not.  Be confident in the fact that by not trying to be all things to all people, you'll be more attractive to the people who are really looking for what you have to offer.  This is similar to the Seth Godin "tribes" approach, and it's clearly the authentic way to go.

3. Be scared.  You think the Brill Street approach sucks, but you just don't have the moxie required to tell the world who you are/aren't. 

I've got news for you.  #2 is the only way to go.  It builds trust and authenticity, but it requires you to tell the world what you think sucks.  Take a stand.  People like it and the people who don't won't be nearly as active in being critical as you think they will be.  I reworked my LinkedIn bio and came up with this:

"Who am I? That's an easy question - I'm a VP of HR type who has led HR practices in Fortune 500s and venture capital-held startups. I work for a living, and believe if you aren't an active recruiter/talent agent as an HR pro (regardless of title or position), you're overhead. I cringe when peer HR types act like administration is job #1 and allow it to dominate their professional identities. I cringe again if they make no attempt to be an active recruiter.

BOOM! If you like that description, you'll like me. It's that simple.

I'm also among the most transparent HR pros you can find, and here's why. I care so much about the art of HR that I've started two blogs (www.hrcapitalist.com and www.fistfuloftalent.com) with the goal of building a community I could learn from. I've been putting my thoughts down every business day for 3 years.

That means what you see is what you get. I can't hide, and if I ever pulled the blogs down, Google would probably haunt me forever anyway."

Let me know what you think, because there's no such thing as a perfect "About" page.  There's only Brill Street pages and blank pages.

Want to Define Your Talent DNA? Don't Waste the Values Section Included in Your Performance Review...

I've been thinking a lot about performance management lately.  Of special note is the fact that I'm thinking of ways - real ways, not lip service - that the performance management process can be used to reinforce and/or build culture at our company.

The main thought I've had?  In order to make the true cultural play, when it comes to your performance management system, you've invariably got to make some of your current team members uncomfortable and possibly even make them think that they don't belong at your company.

Stay with me on this one and we'll discuss after the jump.  More from KI's Byron Abramowitz over at the HR Technologist:

"Every company has a specific DNA which defines who they are and what makes them successful.  For Oracle, their DNA is wired in such a way that their M&A process includes acquiring anything that they feel is a threat to them in the market, and their sales organization aggressively seeks to win every deal.  For Apple, their genetic makeup is wired around simplicity in design, allowing form to follow function, and creating an such a strong aura around their products that they can command premium pricing for what is typically a commodity (computer, cellphone, etc). 

In the HR Technology space, SuccessFactors has a specific DNA as well.  They have experienced a fair degree of success in developing their platform organically and building their staff around the hiring philosophy of "No A-holes".   What this means is two things; SuccessFactors isn't likely to hire someone from Oracle (see above), and they haven't built out their capabilities through acquisition of other vendors like some of their competition.  As a result of these decisions they have built a successful company full of nice people, and have a technology platform which is largely built upon a single set of standards, has a consistent look and feel throughout the suite, and tightly integrates from one process to another. 

So, let's take Byron's examples (although there are plenty of people out there who would claim that SuccessFactors doesn't practice what they preach when it comes to the "No A-hole Rule") and think about culture.  How can an Oracle employee take a glance at what is most valued at SuccessFactors and see if they fit and vice versa? 

Corporate Values? I doubt it.  Most of the Values and Mission statements are so far removed from daily activity that they've ceased to become useful as gauges on how work is actually done in a company.

My preference?  If a company truly wants to drive culture, they ought to put what they really value on the old "Company X Values" section of the Performance Review.  You know where to find that, right?  It's usually the section 2 of a mature performance review process that comes right after the position specific goals and objectives.  The Goals and Objectives section of the review is position or individual specific, but the Values are usually the same for all talent at the company, rated for each employee as items that are consistently expected out of every position in the company.

Unfortunately, it's usually soft things that are included in the Values section.  For example, consider the competency "Integrity" that's often included in this section of the review.  How can someone exceed your expectations regarding Integrity? 

Right - they can't.  You only know Integrity is a factor when it's not there.  That's why it doesn't belong in the values section of a review. It's impossible to rate or distinguish if someone has more of it than their peers.

Instead, work on your culture by forcing meaningful dialog on items that your company really thinks separate the stars from the ditchdiggers.  I recently worked an exercise with a company peer of mine and had the peer list the 5 things that successful people at our company have that are critical to individual success.  One of the ones he listed was "Ambition".

Ambition as a corporate value.  Think about that for a second.  Many will disagree, many will squawk.  It feels mean.  BUT - if that's what is valued at your company, don't you owe it to your OD and performance efforts to be truthful with your employees?

Work on your culture by being honest regarding the values you promote in your performance review process.  Larry Ellison would be proud.

The Concept of "Good Enough" and Your Talent Strategy: Who's the Customer?

I love the smell of wavering in the morning.  You know the type of wavering I'm talking about - the type of hiring manager wavering that wonders aloud if the candidate is "too qualified" and "too upwardly mobile" to plug into a spot in question at your company.  The argument goes a little something like this: "Let's don't overshoot our needs with this position, because I don't want to be filling this job again in 11 months because we've promoted this gal on to the next position."

Good grief, Charlie Brown.  I'm usually a proponent of getting the maddest set of skills you can for any position, but before I go off on a rant, let's explore the point of the hiring manager in question.  Rather than focus on their perspective of the hiring manager, however, I'm going to explore the business case for not over-hiring.  I've never seen a better pitch (related to the topic, not a direct connection) for not over-hiring than this article at Wired, which explores the business concept of "good enough":

"The Flip's (Flip Mino, small pocket video camera, which is how we tape FOTv) success stunned the industry, but it shouldn't have. It's just the latest triumph of what might be called Good Enough tech. Cheap, fast, simple tools are suddenly everywhere. We get our breaking news from blogs, we make spotty long-distance calls on Skype, we watch video on small computer screens rather than TVs, and more and more of us are carrying around dinky, low-power netbook computers that are just good enough to meet our surfing and emailing needs. The low end has never been riding higher.

So what happened? Well, in short, technology happened. The world has sped up, become more connected and a whole lot busier. As a result, what consumers want from the products and services they buy is fundamentally changing. We now favor flexibility over high fidelity, convenience over features, quick and dirty over slow and polished. Having it here and now is more important than having it perfect. These changes run so deep and wide, they're actually altering what we mean when we describe a product as "high-quality."  And it's happening everywhere. As more sectors connect to the digital world, from medicine to the military, they too are seeing the rise of Good Enough tools like the Flip. Suddenly what seemed perfect is anything but, and products that appear mediocre at first glance are often the perfect fit.

To some, it looks like the crapification of everything. But it's really an improvement. And businesses need to get used to it, because the Good Enough revolution has only just begun."

If you haven't seen this article, you need to go read it now.  The idea of "good enough" should make you ponder the tools you use and the time you spend working on certain things.  And yes, the concept of "good enough" applies to people as well.  Do you really need the MBA on your support desk?  Shouldn't we rightfully be worried that they're going to run at the first job offer that better matches their five year plan of world domination with their MBA?

Of course you should worry about that.  It's enough to make you trade the MBA that you can afford for the safe bet on your support desk - the normal grad with a bachelors, or maybe the sharp kid from the community college, both of whom can do the job.

But to truly get your head around the concept of over-hiring, you have to first determine who the customer is in this situation.  Is it:

A. The hiring manager - you're trying to fill the position and he's your customer.  He wants good enough and nothing more.

B. The customers of your business - what type of service are they going to get from each candidate?

C. The company - who is reliant on the overall talent pool to innovate, get smarter and nimbly move people around to meet the needs of the business.

"Good enough" is the answer if you believe the customer is "A".  Don't over-hire and the hiring manager in question is happy and calm.  However, if you believe the customer is a combination of all three, including your company, the definition of good enough changes. RADICALLY.  Suddenly, good enough means that the candidate not only has the ability to do the job in question and keep customers happy, but he/she needs to be promotable at least one, if not two, rungs up the ladder once they get a bit of experience under their belt.

Which is why hiring managers need infuencers around them.  That's you, right?

It's also why in the realm of "good enough", your company doesn't need a Flip Ultra when it comes to talent in entry-level spots, it needs the Flip Mino HD.  Still convenient, but higher quality.

How to Make Sure Your Boss Doesn't Switch to Tap Water

Franklin Covey has a consulting product on Execution. One of the key concepts is the "whirlwind".

The whirlwind is all the email, phone calls, minor emergencies and more that happen to you in the course of a normal workday.  You get sucked into the whirlwind. Like mowing your grass, you have a sense of self-satisfaction when you take the email box to zero.  But there's a dirty little secret/downside to allowing your day to be solely driven by email and the other elements of the whirlwind.

The nasty fact? When you deal with the whirlwind only, you don't add value. You start looking very similar to a commodity as an HR Pro.  What type of commodity?  How about water? Lots of choices for that.  Some like to pay for the label, but in a cost pinch, what do most people do? They go with the water that's the lowest cost (tap water, anyone?)

And so it goes when you're an HR Pro. The whirlwind is there to suck you in. Allow it to run your professional life, and no value-added project on your plate gets completed. What's that? You HAD to deal with the whirlwind?  I know you did, but when you allow it to rob you of all your project/value add focus, you lose.  No one else does - you lose.  In a pinch, whatever your career level, your company is going to look at what gets done out of your operation, and if the value added isn't there, there's a possibility they're going to make a choice to downgrade.

To tap water. 

When you ONLY deal with the whirlwind and don't create product out of your HR shop, the downgrade is always a possibility.

Carve out at least an hour every day the rest of the week to chase a project that's going to make the people you serve go "wow". Then keep doing that.  Keep the whirlwind at bay and protect the time you have to create product.

It's the only way to ensure your boss doesn't start drinking straight from the tap.

Picking Winners: Your Job Is To Shake the Employment Brand Up...

Dateline: Tuesday

Location: A Conference Room at my company

Topic: 1-on-1 with member of People Team, subtopic is final selection of pictures for use in some specific employment branding materials.

So, here's the breakdown.  We're doing a cool little piece of recruiting collateral for use in campus recruiting entitled "how not to get hired", and a few weeks ago we brainstormed some copy as follows:

"Call your Mom for last minute advice from our lobby"

"Be a close talker"

"Steal sodas from our fridge.  Call 10 cans "one for the road"

"Sneeze on hiring manager."

"Look for fist pound instead of handshake at first interview"

The idea is that the copy would be overlayed in a comic-type theme on one side of the card, with three ideas featured and accompanied by a photo to be brushed to make it look like an illustration.

Obviously, we're trying to have fun and do some things that fit the culture.  Of course, I couldn't leave it alone, and I went there with the following brainstorm idea: "Pick a winner when you think no one's watching.  But we were".  The picture to accompany it?  A giant nose-pick, of course.

Sophomoric to be sure, but as I asked for feedback on the idea from my friends on twitter, a bigger question came into play.  Isn't it our job to push the employment brand and prevent it from being boring?

Now, I realize a bigger question is in play with the picture to the right - is it appropriate? But, as the feedback flowed from the machine I like to call "the twitter", it became obvious that the world is divided into three camps regarding the use of this type of image to your brand:

1. It's never appropriate

2. It might be appropriate if it somehow fits the vibe at your company

3. Duuuude - go for it, that's just plain funny.

By the time you read this, I've likely blinked and opted for a safer route.  That's probably too bad.  After all, if Seinfeld can run an entire episode around the event, how damaging can it really be?

And more importantly, are the people who say that's never appropriate good fits for who we are?  Maybe they are, maybe they aren't.  All I know is that if you're not on the edge and risking the viability of your brand from time to time, you're likely not doing enough to develop the brand.

And that makes you a face in the crowd.

How To Destroy a Lifetime of Trust as an HR Pro in a Single Day...

I got a call today.  Former HR Director who had worked for me at a past Fortune 500.  Top line talent, smart and proactive.  The dream direct report when you're a VP of HR.

But here's the deal. It didn't work out. She blew up 2 years of trust and high potential tags in one day with one action. What action could an HR pro take to throw it all away in one day, you ask?

Simple - she leveraged salary information she had due to her access to the entire HRMS to complain that she wasn't earning enough as compared to other functional leads in the unit she supported. To be specific, her feelings got hurt that she wasn't making as much as the Director of Engineering or the Director of Customer Service.  Took the complaint straight to the field VP she supported and told her she had to fix it if she wanted to keep her.

Guess who the field VP called?  That's right, the dotted line known as KD.  When I get a call like that, It feels like a mushroom cloud rising up over the eastern horizon.

Why?  Because that high potential HR Director didn't claim that she wasn't making enough relative to her HR peers in the company or HR peers in the marketplace.  She wanted to earn as much as her peers in other departments.  But the market said that wasn't warranted and still does to a large degree.

The moral of the story?  With great access (the whole HRMS, employee records, payroll registers, etc) comes great responsibility.  If you're in a HR leadership position, you've got more access to this kind of stuff than anyone.  Because of that access, you've got to act like an adult.  You're closer to a FBI/Secret Service/CIA agent in that regard.  You know things. Things that would jolt other people.  You're expected to lock it down and keep it all confidential.

The quickest way to blow trust when you have that much access?  Leverage your access to information (the HRMS salary data) to make an emotional play (pay me like the people in other departments) to attempt to pimp someone to pay you more.  Unfortunately, I've seen it multiple times in my career.

I'll say it again - with great access comes great responsibility.  You know things others don't.  That means you have to be more mature than those you serve.

Passion for Your Job: There's an App for That...

When you get inside a company that really wants to hire the best and has no interest in average talent, a common phrase comes up whenever you discuss the merits of a candidate for any role:

"Are they passionate about what they do?"

It's an interesting area to explore, because with this type of company or hiring manager, simply being able to do the job well isn't enough.  Instead, the focus on passion turns to what the candidate in question does to expand their knowledge, skills and abilities in their area of expertise - on their own time..

Is that fair?  Not to the clockwatcher, but let's face it - you're probably doing them a favor if you want passion and care enough about it to probe during the interview.  After all, if passion is part of what you need, if you don't screen for it during the process you'll have a bad fit, and that likely leads to a relationship erosion over time.  Better to ask for it now.

What questions can you ask related to passion?  Here are three I like:

--How do you stay up to date in your field outside of work? (looking for a real thirst for cutting edge material without regard to the time that it takes..)

--How have you used what you learn outside of work to get better at what you do for a living? (always nice to see someone put the "book learning" to work in their job to stand out from the crowd)

--Tell me the biggest project you've chased and delivered on related to your career as a <fill in the blank> outside of work? (looking not only for the candidate seeking knowledge outside of work, but projects that show an entrepreneurial streak).

Case in point - one of our software engineers just got the green light from Apple for an iPhone app he calls "Get Here".  You should buy it.  It represents passion.  He didn't have to do that.  His curiosity got the best of him, and he chased it a bunch while other people were watching bad television at night.

Is there any doubt that the ability to innovate in your company is directly linked to the passion your talent has for their areas of expertise?

PS - if you interview with me, don't even try to fake me out on passion.  Like style, I know it when I see it..

A Simple Way to Show an Online Portfolio For a Resume... Or Be a Complete Smart***

That's right, today I've got a simple way to show an online portfolio for a resume... or be a complete smart***

Either way, you know I'm good...

I ran across the following site - Let Me Google That For You.  Never had seen this until I got a LinkedIn request from RPO pro Rob Jannone, who includes it in his LinkedIn profile as a portfolio of his work.  I did one as a portfolio of my work, the tiny url appears below:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=kris+dunn

Clearly this site came into play to make people, who ask you for information they could clearly look up themselves, feel foolish.  Sometimes you need a tool to make those people feel like morons.  Mission accomplished here.

But if you're looking for a tool that can show a portfolio of your work and you've done a good job over the last couple of years related to owning the SEO for your name, this tool does the trick as well. Simple yet elegant, the mouse moves, types in your name and presto!  Your own online portfolio... As long as you own the first page for your name.  If you don't own the first page for your name and plan on being a candidate anytime soon, it's a good idea to start becoming active in online activities that can help you raise your profile.  That's a good idea at any time, and this tool and the portfolio possibilities just reinforces that need for all of us from a career standpoint.

WARNING: It's going to be hard to ever use this tool if your last name is Palin, Kaczynski, Federline or Jessica Lee. 

Warning on Culture: The Cynics Are Out With Their Knives...

Trying to build a great culture at your company?  Think culture can give you a competitive advantage?  You're right.  But there's something you should know about the process of trying to build a great culture.

The cynics are around every corner, and they don't like what you are doing.  They'd rather blade you than look at you.  They think you're a cheerleader, and it pisses them off.

It's a necessary conversation to have, and it's on my mind because of a thoughtful piece by Chief Culture Officer Grant McCraken (you should check out his blog) over at the Harvard Business Review:

"Visitors touring the Zappos headquarters in Las Vegas are greeted noisily. Staffers blow horns and ring cowbells to bid them welcome.

This sort of thing puts my teeth on edge. Call me a grinch. Call me a humorless, life-hating, stick in the mud, but commandeering personal emotions in the interest of forced conviviality seems to me wrong. I believe emotions are mostly a private matter and should not be controlled by the corporation.

Comedians have long made fun of the airline staff member who wishes everyone farewell with real feeling, in very quick succession. Can sincerity be serial, we wonder?

Our culture cares increasingly about authenticity. Indeed, thanks to the work of Joseph Pine and James Gilmore, authenticity has become a watchword in the world of marketing. In this new cultural convention, being really excited all the time is patently inauthentic, not least because we know that peak moments of emotion are by their nature occasional. So when we ask our staff to roll out the bonhomie, some employees now believe they are being asked to be inauthentic."

Those are deep thoughts that would resonate with any cynic of culture-building (and there are many) and fair in some circumstances. But as a team member who just joined a company (DAXKO) who cares about culture, the devil is in the details for me.  We (DAXKO) don't do the cheer-leading described above, but still the cynics, mostly internal, are there and the thought process goes something like this:

--Why are we spending so much time on culture?  We need to be focused on results!

--Stop promoting the culture.  Life is tough here (we're asked to work hard) and the promotion doesn't match the reality.

And that's in a company with no Zappo's-like culture/cheerleading.  So, how do you look to build culture AND build authenticity at the same time?.  How do you silence the critics who say you're a cheerleader?  The answer is pretty simple for me.

Make your culture operational in nature.  Figure out what you want your Talent DNA to be so it matches your culture, and then be unyielding in your drive to hire only those who have the DNA chromosome your're looking for, and be willing to fire those who lose that DNA once they're in the door or faked you out in the interview process. 

Put your money where your mouth is by defining who fits, then hire and fire accordingly.  My guess is that the cynicism goes waaaay down if you're willing to do that.

UPDATE: Grant McCracken will be the guest on this Thursday's HR Happy Hour show with my friend Steve Boese (Click here for details).  You should check it out...

Kick'em When They're Up, Kick'em When They're Down - Questions to Assess Strategic Thinking

Words to live by:  It's not "show friends", it's "show business". 

Just because someone looks great in the suit/biz casual/Metallica t-shirt, knows their area of expertise, and communicates like a talk show host doesn't mean they're ready to lead.  No, to really lead, someone's got to be strategic.  Not strategic in that they know all the buzzwords - that type of strategic makes me drowsy and bored.  I mean strategic in the fact that they can link their actions and the activities around them to real results.  They understand the cause and effect of micro-details to the success of a firm like yours and know the questions to ask to get at what's real, and also know the levers to pull to get strategic results.

Which means you need some real questions to ask leadership candidates related to their ability to be what I call "operationally strategic".  Questions that show they can leverage their expertise to get results, and subsequently be 10 times as valuable as the other candidates who can't.

What questions can you ask to determine whether a leadership candidate is operationally strategic in their area of expertise?  Luckily, Harry Joiner, the Marketing Headhunter has a great list.  Below are my 4 favorites from a recent post from Harry, click through the link to see the rest:

• Very specifically, who is your customer?  Describe them for me in as much detail as you can.  Vague answers and short answers are a BIG problem.  I am looking for longer answers that demonstrate a strong affinity with the target market.  The candidate should sound like they LOVE their customers!  Do they hang out with them in person and online??  That's a major PLUS.
  
• What factors distinguish winners from losers in your category?  Only two words matter: Marketing and Innovation.  Many people overlook the fact that all companies are in the emotional bond business.  If your candidate starts rambling on about price, quality, speed, etc -- then you've gotta wonder if he really empathizes with the customer.  That's a marketing issue.  Next, consider innovation:  Imagine you had asked a fax machine manufacturer this question ten years ago.  Would price, quality, and speed have mattered at all?  You get the point.  Disruption happens.
  
• How can you increase barriers to existing competitors and potential new entrants? Warren Buffett calls these barriers a "moat around one's business."  Again, the best answers will have something to do with marketing and innovation.  BONUS POINTS awarded for candidates who seem to have a process for these things.  Get them to step you through it.
  
• If you left your company today, how would you compete against it?  I freaking love this question because most e-commerce candidates simply think in terms of just doing more, better, faster, and cheaper.  I've got news for them: Someone's always going to do things better, faster, and cheaper.  How can you do things more intimately with your customer??  In the words of Marshall Field, "People return to the place where they have proactively been made to feel special."

Great questions to get at the heart of someone's strategic mind.  Many leadership candidates don't have a strategic mind beyond buzzwords, so do yourself a favor once you ask these questions.  SHUT UP.  Don't bail them out.  Make them talk for at least 2-3 minutes before you follow-up or redirect to grind for more details.

The quicker you talk when evaluating someone's strategic mind, the less you get.  Shut up and let the candidate determine whether they go deeper than buzzwords.  It's not show friends, it's show business...

Hell Hath No Fury Like Someone Scorned In the Digital Age...

Blogs. Twitter. Facebook.

Ever wonder why we don't see more people, who think they have been wronged by someone, set up a micro-site/micro-account to tell the world about that person's transgressions?

It doesn't happen often, but every once in awhile when it does, I'm always surprised we don't see more of it.  Need proof of the potential?  Just ask Oracle President Charles Phillips.  Brace yourself, because this one has some sting:

"Over the course of several days this week, a series of mysterious billboards popped up in New York and other cities showing romantic photographs of the co-president of Oracle with a woman.

On one of the billboards that appeared in New York on Times Square, the words “Charles & YaVaughnie” were posted along with “You are my soul mate forever!” The note was signed “cep,” referring apparently to Charles E. Phillips Jr., the Oracle co-president.

Last night, Mr. Phillips offered something of an explanation: he was having an affair, which he said had since ended. The woman in the photographs is not his wife, Karen, but his former mistress, YaVaughnie Wilkins, and he acknowledged a long-term relationship with her.

The billboards are apparently an attempt by Ms. Wilkins to embarrass Mr. Phillips. Ms. Wilkins could not immediately be reached for comment last night."

Billboards in Times Square cost 10's of thousands of dollars, so I get this avenue's not available to the accounting clerk who got termed for performance reasons but feels your controller is too loose and free with the expense account.  Still, billboards wouldn't do that individual much good anyway.  You know what would?  A microblog that is set up via Blogger or Typepad that either features that person telling the world why they think they were wronged or simply dishes dirt in an unrelated way.  The digital tools are actually better than a billboard in that the links to the site end up going viral and the media isn't a "one and done" proposal - instead they can be updated whenever the scorned has a new thought to share.

Need proof on the value of media in this area?  Ask former CEO Chuck Jett, who is stil getting hammered by a hate blog.

So authoring tools are available to anyone, and people feel like they got jobbed every day.  Why don't we see more of these types of acts via blogs, Twitter and Facebook?

I suspect it's because most of us have to work, and setting up a blog to strike back at someone or a company tends to be the equivalent of career Harikiri.  After all, if I'm looking to hire you and your rant blog at a former employer comes up in the Google search, what's to say you wouldn't do the same thing to me?

That, my friends, is the great equalizer...

Stuff the Capitalist (aka KD) Likes - Rage Against the Machine....

Who am I?  Who cares?  Good questions.  It's my site so I'm going to tap into Fridays once in awhile by telling you more about who I am - via a "Stuff I Like" series.  Nothing too serious, just exploring the micro-niche that resides at the base of all of our lives.  Potshots encouraged in the comments.

"The movie ran through me
The glamour subdue me
The tabloid untie me
I'm empty please fill me
Mister anchor assure me
That Baghdad is burning
Your voice it is so soothing"

It's true.  If you see a White Sequoia rolling down Rodeo

Lakeshore Drive in Birmingham and hear a big booming bass, it's probably not Josh Groban.  It's Rage Against the Machine.

And, it's me driving.  Strange beats for a white guy VP of HR who lives in a county that votes 90% Republican?

Why's it strange?  For starters, I can't post the lyrics I'd like to share because they focus on:

-how "the man" (my words, not theirs) keeps us down (they say it a little stronger)..

-a general distaste/hatred for law enforcement (oops, my wife's a career prosecutor)..

-the need for revolution and an overwhelming respect for socialist icons (I have a tshirt on my wall that reads "Capitalist")...

But I digress.. The reason I love Rage is because regardless of the lyrics, the riffs are golden and the lyrics tell you to get off your *$$ and challenge the status quo.  You don't like something?  Things are feeling lame?  Mommy didn't love you?

Stop whining and do something about it.  Call it for what it is - something that sucks - then do something about it.  Don't be a victim. Here's a thought - start outworking someone to create something that makes it better.

And if you start a revolution and happened to get capped.. Well, that's just the cost of doing business.  There's always someone with a PistolGrip Pump on their lap at all times.

But at least you weren't a victim.  Testify.

(note - one of the most underrated CDs of all time is the RATM CD of covers, where they feature remakes of Eric B and Rakim's "Microphone Fiend" and Bob Dylan's "Maggie's Farm")

"I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.
No, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more
Well, I wake up in the morning
Fold my hands and pray for rain.
I got a head full of ideas
That are drivin' me insane
It's a shame
the way she makes me
scrub the floor"

Word.  How can good not come out of RATM covering that? Happy Friday.

More than Jack Welch: Should We Fire Everyone Who's Doing an "Adequate" Job?

Up and out.  Fire the bottom 10%.  You know the drill: the Jack Welch rules...

Now Henry Blodget is back asking a similar question at the Business Insider, a Wall Street digital publication:

"Should we strive to find only "A" players and quickly release any "B" players to make room for more potential "A" players?)

Netflix does this. 

Importantly, Netflix believes in paying "top of market" for all of its A players.  In other words, it pays them as much or more than any of its competitors would pay them.  To its credit, Netflix also tries to pay its A players top dollar BEFORE they get an offer to leave.  So Netflix is using both carrots and sticks: If you can earn and keep your place as an "A" player, you'll be handsomely rewarded for it.  If you can't, then you'll be free to work somewhere else.

So, should we sack everyone who is just doing an "adequate" job?

I find Netflix's logic very persuasive (especially the part about being a team, not a family), but I do have some lingering doubts.  On the one hand, I absolutely want us to build the strongest team we can--one composed entirely of "A" players.  I want to reward the A players by making them feel appreciated and rewarded, and I don't want to demoralize them by having them feel like they're carrying the "B" players' dead weight. (We don't employ "C" players for long).

On the other hand, unless this policy is spelled out clearly ahead of time (which it certainly could be) it seems harsh to inform a dependable if uninspiring B player that they're doing an "adequate" job--and, therefore, that they're done.  We therefore try--probably for longer than we should--to help the "B" players become "A" players.  Unfortunately, as companies like GE and Goldman Sachs have long known, it doesn't always work. (GE and Goldman fire 5% of the workforce every year, just to keep strengthening themselves)."

It's sexy to think you can achieve what Henry is outlining, but let's think about this for a second.  The much discussed GE policy of firing the bottom 10% is the BOTTOM 10%.  What Blodget is describing, and what many of the Netflix presentations allude to, is that we shouldn't tolerate "meeting" expectations.  That means a WHOLE bunch more employees than the GE policy of the bottom 10%.

Of course, it all depends on your Bill Clinton-like "definition" of meeting expectations (I did not have... never mind).  And a bunch of other factors you can find people talking about by clicking through to read the comments of Blodget's post and looking at this discussion over at the HR Technology Conference LinkedIn group.

You want to fire your adequate performers because they're not stars?  Random thoughts:

--Your best people are the stars, and those below their performance level are "adequate".  How's that compare vs. what you'll find in the marketplace of candidates?

--Your job is to migrate adequate performers to star status.  How ya doing on that?  How are your front line managers doing on that?

Whoops.  Maybe you're not ready to fire the solid - but not star - performers after all.

It's tough when a theory that's cool doesn't transfer to what you can use.  I wish the real world would just stop hassling me.

Recognition on Small Scale: It's Not About Rewards, It's About Team Chemistry...

One of the things that I'm interested in and probably a little jaded about is the topic of recognition.  You see, I've never needed praise to be motivated, so I naturally am a little cynical when it comes to the topic of recognition.  That's not a great fit for a VP of HR, but hey - we all have strengths and weaknesses.

My natural disposition of not needing a lot of recognition makes me especially skeptical of formally celebrating small things that happen daily in an organization.  After all, the feeling goes, if we celebrate EVERYTHING, how can we truly distinguish between the little things and what REALLY matters.  Then I saw the video below at my friend Steve Boese's HR Technology Blog. 

Watch the video below and then let's talk.  REALLY watch this basketball player (Andrew Bogut of the Milwaukee Bucks) after he makes a free throw:

For those of you that don't know the culture of basketball, it's now common and customary for teammates to come up after a free throw and give the shooter a high/low five before he shoots his second shot.  Being the old school guy I am, I've from time to time moaned that the guys on TV don't need to celebrate everything.

This video puts me in my place.  The small encouragement for a teammate isn't recognition at all.  It's team chemistry.  I'm wrong to have felt the way I did.

Let's look at what Bogut did.  His team (the Bucks) are in the dramatic minority in that the two teammates on the side of the lane did not come up to encourage him after the first shot.  I'm guessing Bogut is used to this, because instead of staying on the line, he comes forward and is either trying to give himself encouragement or is mocking the fact that his teammates won't give him encouragement that has become customary at the college and pro level.  Get with the program, he seems to be saying. Either way, it's bad.

Is there any doubt after viewing that the Bucks are in decline as a team?  If they refuse this level of chemistry, what happens when teamwork and chemistry is really required?

Small recognitions in the day-to-day workplace.  It's not always about recognition, sometimes it's about encouragement and chemistry.  Don't be jaded (like me) and kid yourself that it doesn't matter.

Using the Trailer Park Industry for Your Next Company Video Spoof...

Every year, we do a "Kickoff" meeting at DAXKO to get the year started.  Mixture of several things, including talking about the strategic thing, breakouts, entertainment, and yes...

...parodies.  Often of the video kind.

This year's target?  Trailer parks. Sweet.

If you spend time watching videos on YouTube, chances are you've come across some from Rhett & Link.  They're the guys who did the hilarious Taco Bell drive-thru folk song, the Facebook Song, and dozens of others, which together have generated well over 25 million views. 

Their latest target was Cullman Liquidation, a mobile home company in Cullman, Alabama.  For them, Rhett & Link have made a commercial which is billed as "painfully honest and epic."  Take a look at the local spot that went viral through YouTube (email subscribers click through for video).  I love it:

With that in mind, when the DAXKO swat team was looking for a parody target, our own Jere Chandler targeted the...um...Cullman retailer.  As luck would have it, someone at DAXKO knew one of the players at the Cullman Trailer Company, which explains her guest appearance in the resulting parody.

Sweet stuff.  Take a look below.  Or don't.  I don't care.