Ambition: Value The Folks In Your Organization Who Are Dissatisfied (In a Good Way)...

"You go out to eat, can't pay, y'all can't leave
There's dishes in the back, he gotta roll up his sleeves
But while y'all washin', watch him
He gon' make it to a Benz out of that Datsun
He got that ambition, baby look in his eyes
This week he's moppin' floors, next week it's the fries.."

--Golddigger, Kanye West

Ambition.  As much as many of us are uncomfortable saying it's a value/feeling/potential factor we want in our organization, ambition is needed in your company in order to get good stuff done.

Here's the golden nuggett last year from Paul Hebert over at Fistful of Talent:

"Mad Men Season 5 started this past week.

Full disclosure, before this past week’s episode, I’ve watched a total of 6 minutes of Mad Men.  But the hype was too much for me to bear, so I DVR’d it and sat and watched it the other night.  It’s awright.

But… I liked it a lot more when I heard this line…

“Dissatisfaction is a symptom of ambition. It’s the coal that fuels the fire.”

The more I thought about it, the more I liked it and the more I figured there was a lesson in it.

And here’s the lesson IMHO:

If you work too hard to make every employee happy and satisfied, you create a group of people who never want anything to change."

Interesting and true in my eyes.  If everyone's satisfied with how things are going, who pushes the envelope and tries to change things for the good at your company?

Backstory: A few years back, I was doing a classic "section 2" in performance management for the company I was with.  As part of that exercise, we were trying to change the traditional company values we were rating people on (hard to do and pretty ineffective) to "potential factors", which are more like "DNA" strands you want to evaluate all your people on.  The things you value most across all employees, regardless of role.  

As part of that exercise, we did broad brainstorming as a leadership team - coming up with 37 potential factors to whittle down to the 5 or 6 we would eventually go live with.  The ones you would expect were there - innovative, driven, etc.

2 members of the leadership team came up with - and were adamant about including - ambition in that list.

You would have thought that they did something unmentionable to the American flag.

As it turns out, the rest of the team couldn't get past the fact that ambition comes with some negative baggage - sometimes people act in self-serving ways, a zero-sum game mentality can be rewarded, etc. No matter how the 2 leadership team members came back to the positives associated with ambition, the others couldn't get over the negative attributes associated with its use as a potential factor.

But ambition is real and gets results, just like Mad Men and Paul outline above.  

It takes a gutsy company to include ambition in a performance system.  But, whether you put it on paper or not, you're likely rewarding ambition behind the scences in your company.

Are Motivational Posters in the Workplace Dead? If So, What's Next?

I'll admit it.  I never liked the fluffy motivational posters that people like Successories put out. You know the ones - big title like "Potential" with a picture of an iceberg with a subtitle that says, "the greatest things you're capable of are unseen by others."  Or some %$#$ like that.  I'm probably not the best one to write those things.

Because I'm jaded.  

As I travel around, I see fewer and fewer of the "up with people" motivational posters.  I think they've run their course for the most part, where even the optimists get limited pump from seeing the iceberg.

Which begs a question - if Successories are dead, what's next?  What's next is you writing you own catchy slogan. Something with your personality, decidedly un-"successories" like and hopefully with a little humor mixed in.

You know - write a slogan like regular people talk.  Something that could hit a t-shirt at your company that real people can related to and maybe rally around a little bit. Need examples?  I've one for you from the world of sports that should get your corporate creativity flowing...

Let's look at Ray Lewis (controversial linebacker for the Super Bowl Champion Ravens).  He's "Pissed Off for Greatness":

Why is he pissed off for greatness?  Because he's tired of you being OK with being mediocre.  You're better than that, my friend, you just need to get a little pissed off.  Here's video of Ray explaining his performance philosophy (email subscribers click through for video), watch the whole thing (2 minutes):

Oh my.  It's a call for discretionary effort, but rather than saying those words or talking about boring words like engagement, he's wrapping it up in the mantra "pissed off for greatness". Which is pure play t-shirt and coffee mug fodder that the cynics can rally around.  

We all need the same things from our people.  Think differently about how you market that need to cut through the clutter, and you win big.

THE GREAT REMOTE WORKER DEBATE: The Only Two Things That Matter...

Yesterday, I posted on an internal memo at Yahoo sent to company employees about a new rule rolled out last week by CEO Marissa Mayer, which requires that Yahoo employees who work remotely relocate to company facilities.

Reaction on the web goes one of two ways:

1. You dummies don't understand that if you don't allow me to work from home, I actually work less once you factor in commute time, crappy meeting time, office politics time.  You should let me work from home.

2. Yahoo nailed it.  Too many slackers working from home don't give enough, aren't availalbe to collaborate, etc.  There's no replacement for being together.

Both reactions have truth in them.  Which means there are really only two things that matter when it comes to the debate of remote workers as it relates to the HR practice:

1.  You should be trying to find ways to make your location specific, "in the office" workers more productive.  Do they have protected time where they can really get away from meetings, people, etc to drive value?   We should be finding ways to bring the best elements of remote work to the office.

2.  You should be trying to make your remote workers more available in all ways to be part of teams, to collaborate and set the expectation that's a part of the role.  You should be thinking video in this regard - nothing holds a remote worker more accountable that being available for video calls.  Much harder to be disengaged if that's the case.

Seems like these two angles are what we should be focusing on related to the remote worker debate.  Best of one world transferred to the other.  Cats and Dogs living together.

What did I miss? 

SKILLS FOR MANAGERS: Knowing When to Switch It Up...

Short post today.  All in all, I've got a pretty good life.  Great family, interesting work, etc.

My biggest disappointment and challenge that appears from time to time?  Waiting too long to change the game on something that's clearly not working.

When something is not working in any area of your life, you should ask yourself the following questions:

1. If I wait to change this, is there any reasonable probability it's going to get better?

2. If the answer to #1 is no, what the #$# am I waiting on?

The disease of waiting to change or take action is everywhere, and it's impacting the managers you support daily.  Excuses for not taking action if the answer to #1 include the following:

1. We need to give it/them time.

2. I'm afraid of hurting someone's feelings

3. It's too hard to get everyone on the same page.

4. I've got a lot invested in the current solution.

When you really stop and thinking about it, the most dynamic leaders in any organization are the people who can accurately assess if there's any probability of stale results getting better, then take action like a Ninja on five Red Bulls to change it up.

It's on my mind in a big way.  So much so the post today over at our new blog at Kinetix (aptly named Tremendous Upside) is a quote:

"If you're scared, buy a dog"

Kill something that needs to be killed or pivot today. It might just be what it takes to get you interested in your work again.  For some of you, that's the biggest win you'll have this year.

DOWNLOAD: 5 Keys to Better Goal Setting in Performance Management...

It's January and a lot of you probably are still trying to get started making sure everyone has goals that tie into how you do performance management at your company.  That's normal - January slips by quickly, doesn't it?

But you're looking at the goal setting tip sheet you want to send out to managers - you know the one - with SMART goals and a bunch of other things that are true but seem like cliches at this point because everyone has heard them so many times, right?

Never fear - I'm hear to help you with the latest whitepaper I did over at my company (Kinetix - check us out if you didn't know) entitled, "REMOVE THE SUSPECTS: 5 Keys to Better Goal Setting in Performance Management".  You should download it, because here's what I'm slinging your way:

1. Real words to replace tired buzzwords like “goals” and “goal setting”, that will actually resonate with your team and set you up to clearly define what’s most important in their role. We call them “the five most important things”. 

2. A roadmap to help you create goals that are conversational in nature and position you to become a career coach for your “A” players and help weed out your suspect “C” players. There's a clear path to talking about the difference between good and great performance and what's in it for the employee that sets your managers up to be coaches.  I'll give you what I would do if I were you.

3. A simple one-page worksheet that allows you to set goals for your employees in a way that doesn’t feel like another big process for the corporate database in the sky.  Give me a shout if you need more detail than what's included in the whitepaper.

If you want to read more, go get the whitepaper here (registration required).  Not a sales pitch, just interesting reading and a great way to help your managers out.  I wrote it, so if you like what you get here, you'll like the whitepaper...

If you find registration for content personally appalling, I don't even know who you are anymore.... Just kidding, just email me or hit me in the comments if you're hiding from the authorities and are naturally suspicious, and I'll send you the PDF...

Coffee’s for closers. Download “Remove The Suspects”, because that cup of Joe just looks better in the hands of an “A” player. 

MORE VACATION POLICIES TO HATE: One Week Off Every Quarter...

I'm on record as having a game plan for helping your company become a Great Place to Work.  See that Kinetix whitepaper here.

It's a PR game you have to play and the first part is easy if you have the means (Ferris Bueller reference for those of you who track these things) - you have to buy attention.  Write a check.

One of the easy ways to buy attention that stacks up towards a GPTW award is to give more vacation time then reasonable companies are inclined to provide.  That leads to big vacation packages, the no set vacation package (take it when you want it!) and all the other flavors that you've seen toward the GPTW goal, wished you could give, then gradually grew to hate because you work at a standard place that can't buy GPTW attention (or decides not to).

But one vacation policy recently caught my eye - a week off ever quarter in addition to the company's standard vacation policies at a startup called Quirky.  Notes from the CEO of Quirky:

"We’ve found that our cadence as a business is very centered around 90 day sprints. Retail seems to have 4 major seasons, our best products seem to be baked in 90 day time frames, the longest we can lock in tactical plans without completely guessing as to what products we will be talking about/investing in is quarterly.

Pressure slowly builds throughout these 90 day periods, culminating in an extremely stressful and magically productive final 2-3 weeks of a calendar quarter. It’s been this way for 3 years.

Historically, we’ve jumped right back into it. But beginning in 2013, the first week of every new calendar quarter will be lights out.

We are going to shut down the entire machine for 4 weeks next year. Instead of running for 52, it will run for 48.

This is a full, mandatory shutdown of all internal activities. Lights out. Deep breath.

Time for us to explore other creative interests. Relax without worrying about what we’re missing. Time for us to get our head back into the game. For some of us, time for us to clean our apartments, see the dentist, and buy a new pair of kicks."

I know. You hate it. "I got your kicks right here" is what you are saying. I hate these guys and gals too. For being small. For being edgy. Most of all for doing sh#t that puts pressure on everybody else.

But here's the thing.  This one actually makes sense. They're doing the smart business thing for their type of business.  

Software development shops run in what are known as sprints. The product team decides what's going into the next release, and the development team literally "sprints" across a defined period to get the roadmap features built. In shops like these, it's more than a 40-50 hour week to get it done - for the entire sprint period.

Shutting down at the end of the clearly defined sprint period is actually pretty smart and innovative.

So why I'd love to scream, "GIMMICK" from the top of my building like so many other countless vacation policies that are chasing the Great Place to Work designation, I can't on this one.

Shutting down once a quarter actually makes sense for a software development shop.

I highly recommend it if you have the means. (FBR)

PEOPLE ECONOMICS: Regression to the Mean

I've got a theory I've written about here before - EVERY MANAGER and INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTOR HAS A SHELF LIFE AT A COMPANY.

What's a shelf life?  Shelf life means that you come into a new opportunity with lots of fresh ideas, and you're engaged and ready to kick some ass.  And you do that.  Just as importantly, the people around you - the receptors of all that wisdom - view you as at least somewhat fresh and innovative.

Like the Eagles once said, you're the new kid in town.

Until you're not.  I think every manager has a period of about 2-3 years in the company, then they either need to get a different team in the same company, change companies or do what is hardest - reinvent themselves and the personal value proposition they bring to the company and their teams.  

I call it shelf life.  Others might call it regression to the mean, and smart people realize it impacts companies as well indviduals. Here's some notes on how a VC thinks regression to the mean is the biggest threat to Facebook:

"What's the biggest threat to Facebook?  Some things leap to mind: Google, Twitter, the shift to mobile, government regulators.  But a top Facebook executive says those aren't the real problem.

Instead, it's reversion to the mean, according to Chamath Palihapitiya, who's now a venture capitalist at the Social + Capital Partnership. Reversion to the mean, or regression to the mean, is a concept from statistics. It basically says that exceptional performance can't last forever."

Here's how that works according to CP:

"When companies work, the biggest thing that happens is you revert to the mean. The mean is every crappy company out there. And we all work at crappy companies. We've all done it. We all look at our boss and think, "This guy's an idiot. How does he have this job? This company is so stupid. I hate my job. Is it time to leave yet?"

We've all been in that position.

And so the real question that I was asking myself at Facebook was, "What happens and how do companies end up in this situation?" And my realization was every company gets there eventually. But that last word is the most important.

And the challenge of a senior executive team is to prevent that regression to the mean. And culture is the only thing that does that."

Regression to the mean for companies and shelf life for managers.  It's going to happen eventually.  Your job is to prevent the regression from happening as long as possible.  When you think about it, preventing good talent from that regression is probably the most important thing a HR pro can do, right?

CAREER ADVICE: Never Let Your Boss Tell You How Other People Feel About You Without Forcing These 2 Questions...

Dateline: Somewhere in Corporate America.

The Scene: A C-Level is telling the HR pro who reports to him what another C-level thinks about her performance (hint - it's not glowing).

The Mistake: The HR Pro in question thinks that since the C-Level reporting the feedback is supportive of her (it's the other guy with the problem, right?), she doesn't have to challenge him in this situation.  She thinks his reporting the feedback is a nice heads-up.

But wait.  It's more complex than that.  Even if C-level in question is nice and has a tone that says he doesn't agree with the other executive, there's two important questions that HR pro needs to ask the C-level manager in question:

1.  Do you agree with him?  (ask it even if you know the answer, because it's the next question that matters)

2.  If you don't agree with him, do you tell him that?  (moment of truth, not enough managers get aggressive when good performers who report to them are getting marginalized and they have the moment of truth where they can say something)

Some of you are reading this and thinking, what's the big deal?  People talk *#*# every day in corporate America.  Why should that HR pro box in his/her manager in that fashion?

Simple - because if you're a good performer and you allow others to chip away, especially with a passive executive as your manager, sooner or later the spin being put out there on the street can become the conventional wisdom.  You can't be a spectator and allow others to perpetrate the fraud.   

You've got to challenge your manager to stand up when you're not in the room to defend yourself.  Note - this only applies if you're a high performer.  

Don't worry about respecting your manager.  Challenge them to have your back.  Don't let a narrative be formed on you if you can do something about it.  

If you're not assertive for yourself, why would your manager feel the need to do it for you?

Ask the Capitalist: Can I Have the Managers Use 360 Results For Performance Ratings?

Dear HR Capitalist:

I’d love a post where you weighed in on the value of 360 feedback with the following parameters (my preferred approach).  I am running into people who want managers to be able to view results and consider them during performance review time.  My position is that employees will not seek out feedback from key stakeholders who perceive a need for improvement if he/she thinks the manager will see the feedback. 

My preferred process:

•       Employee chooses raters, not manager.

•       Only employee and 360 process facilitator see the actual detailed results report

•       Employee must provide a summary and action plan to her boss (and staff)

•       Separate from annual performance review process –development focus only, ensures a “safe” process

•       Report results not used in determining rating or salary increase

•       Action plan however can be used to formulate the PPRD development objective

Just curious on your thoughts from any angle on this topic – general effectiveness/value, separating the process from annual perf review etc.

Debbie from LA

-------------------------------------

Hey Debbie - 

I think your thoughts regarding the danger of using feedback collected during a 360 process to drive performance ratings are on the money.  The bottom line, which you know, is this: If the 360 process drives performance ratings, etc., it can quickly turn into a cloak and dagger type process where everyone knows what is at stake, which can make a couple of things happen:

--People can come out with the daggers and hurt people they don't like personally, or

--People will avoid giving real feedback to those with developmental opportunities that they like personally because they don't want to hurt them.

Either way, by using 360 data in performance reviews, the process is DOA in my eyes.  Same goes for using it for input into salary increases.

Couple of other notes on your preferred approach... I'd be careful of letting the employee alone pick who gets the opportunity to provide feedback.  My sense is that they'll avoid individuals that they think will be harsh to them and thus the data won't be as informative as it otherwise could be.  I'd prefer an approach that allows the manager, who should have an eye towards who relies on the employee for things in the organization, to have input and be able to make some calls with the employee on who the survey goes to.

One thing I'm on the fence about is the ability of the manager to see the report on the employee.  The risk you run is even if you tell the manager they can't use that data on a performance review, they'll still be influenced by it.  That's too bad, because if you're going to expect your manager to act as a coach, the data and reactions from others is a great tool.  Maybe they'll get that from the summary from the employee, maybe they won't.

Final thoughts - simplify that sucker.  Don't do 30 items.  Question the need for ratings at all.  Get simple feedback the team member can learn from.  Check out this book for more thoughts on simplifying many, many things in your talent platform.  I'd buy the book if you don't already have it.

Good luck with the process!

KD

DOWNLOAD: The HR Rubik's Cube (How to Revamp Performance Management at Your Company)

I've been doing a lot of work lately related to performance management, specifically how to get away from forms, rating scales and all the other administrivia that drives your clients crazy and makes them think you're more of a paper pusher than you really are as an HR Pro.

I know you're more strategic than people think you are.  That's why I did a whitepaper over at Kinetix called "The HR Rubik's Cube: Plot Your Talent Using the 9-Box Grid".  It's basically a starter's kit to being thinking about performance management with a very strategic end in mind, the type of tool that makes people go "hmm... I never thought of it that way" rather than "damn! Do I have to fill out this form again?".   Go get the paper and it will give you a nice intro to the following:

1. The Holy Grail of Performance Management (aka the Performance vs. Potential Grid), which allows you to look at talent in a multi-dimensional way, ignoring rating scales, metrics and other features that get in the way of measuring true performance at your company. 

2. Four Ways the Performance vs. Potential Grid Makes You a More Strategic HR Pro when it comes to re-engineering the Performance Management Process at your organization. 

3. How to Create a Performance Management System that Delivers the Performance vs. Potential Grid, measuring what really matters (performance) and adding items we call potential factors. 

If you want to read more, go get the whitepaper here (registration required).  Not a sales pitch, just interesting reading and a great way to help yourself out.  I wrote it, so if you like what you get here, you'll like the whitepaper...

If you find registration for content personally appalling, I don't even know who you are anymore.... Just kidding, just email me or hit me in the comments if you're hiding from the authorities and are naturally suspicious, and I'll send you the PDF...