Somebody's got to be in charge.

--Quote from random assertive people everywhere

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

My good friend Tim Sackett had a post earlier this week on The Cancer of Speaking Up.  Go check out that post, because I immediately had flashbacks to grad school where we worked in teams on business cases.  A big part of those business cases was creating position papers and presentations as work product.  Because it's grad school, it's the educational sector and because we were all equals on that team, we had some hiccups.

The primary hiccup is this: We sat around the laptop, creating slides and papers on the fly.  

Imagine 5 people huddled around a laptop, all with an equal voice.  The problem wasn't so much that everyone had ideas, it was that differing personalities valued different things as part of the process.  That meant that at times we got derailed by little details that we didn't have time to debate.

Yep - you guessed it!  The high details person wanted to talk about comma placement (which is opinion-based, you high detail freaks!) and conjunctions. 

Which made me want to address that person in the following way the next day - "What's up, freak?"

We were editing grammar in real time rather than dealing with big ideas and doing the grammar/punctuation scrub later on.

The biggest lie the devil ever told us is that everyone should have an equal voice.  Feedback and idea generation is great, but there comes a tipping point when you have to get shit done.  At that point, someone has to be in charge.

Our goal as leaders should be to involve people enough to be inclusive, but have a process where we don't get paralyzed by the very average ideas or focus points of others.

If you need help with involving everyone but protecting yourself vs the time it takes to deal with bad ideas, I've got three things for you:

1--Never create work product with people huddled around a laptop or looking at a screen.  Put someone in charge to create the first round, then send it out for feedback.  I'm still amazed how many teams are create work product in the aforementioned way.

2--If you have a need to do idea generation/brainstorming but want to run the session in an efficient way, see these tools I've written about in the past as a part of Change Agile.

3--If you're goal setting with a team member and you want them to give you ideas on what their goals should be, use this 3-step process I've done videos on in the past.

Remember - the concept of every voice matters is a good one.  But don't let that participation prevent you from getting things done.

I'm not a big gimmick/team-building exercise guy.  I find most team-building stuff to be a little forced, although I will say that I always dread it and emerge from it with some type of positive.  The positive I get is usually empathy towards a team member that I didn't necessarily like or feel close to.

I ran across a team building/unity exercise yesterday and wanted to share.  It's from the the 1998 Chicago Bulls, who had won 5 titles and where getting ready to start the playoffs for what everyone was sure would be their final run.

Their season was full of distraction, arguments and distrust.  Here what Phil Jackson, the legendary coach, did to quiet the noise and circle the wagons one last time.   More from Bill Simmons at The Ringer:

Jackson gathered players, coaches and trainers for a special meeting before the 1998 playoffs, asking everyone to write a message about what that final season meant to them. A poem, a sentence, a song, whatever. It had to be 50 words or fewer. Everyone obliged. They went around the room reading their messages, even Jordan, and when they finished, Jackson burned them in a coffee can. All the chaos and dissension burned away with it. They banded together for eight weeks and prevailed again, for a lot of reasons, but mainly because they employed the greatest player ever.

Before you kill me - I get it - this exercise doesn't work for most of the team building needs you have.

But I like this one a lot for teams who are getting ready to have to come together for a big challenge, teams that maybe could be fired if the next month or two doesn't go well, and especially if those teams are generally bitchy towards each other.

50 words or less.  Maybe you frame it as what your job means to you.  Who knows what comes out of these people's heads, right?  Could be stupid stuff, or it could be fascinating.

One thing's for sure - no one is going to try and look stupid if they have the floor and they've had some time to think about it.

What I love about this exercise is that it gets you into the head of your teammate.  Maybe it's someone you don't like very much.  What happens when they try and have a serious moment is what I mentioned before - empathy from others.

Ahhhh.  That's who you are.  Got it.  With empathy and understanding comes a couple of other things.  Patience.  A little bit of trust.

Can you use this exercise today?  Probably not. Should you be looking for ways to make your team more empathetic to each other?  Absolutely.

The Bulls won their 6th title in 1998, primary because they had Michael Jordan.

But a little bit of that title belongs to Jackson, who kept the lid on long enough to make the last title run with Jordan.

Don't forgot to burn the paper your people bring in.

With all the talk of automation and AI changing the nature of jobs in the future, one question we should all be asking (especially those of us with kids) is "what degrees, education and skills are going to have the most impact in the future?"

Mark Cuban has an opinion - he thinks some of the degrees we're most focused on now are going to fade in importance and liberal arts - yes, liberal arts - is going to make a comeback.  Here's an excerpt of what he said in a recent interview via Business Insider:

I personally think there's going to be a greater demand in 10 years for liberal arts majors than there were for programming majors and maybe even engineering, because when the data is all being spit out for you, options are being spit out for you, you need a different perspective in order to have a different view of the data. And so having someone who is more of a freer thinker.

Cuban's forecast of the skills needed to succeed in the future echoes that of computer science and higher education experts who believe people with "soft skills," like adaptability and communication, will have the advantage in an automated workforce.

Cuban highlighted English, philosophy, and foreign language majors as just some of the majors that will do well in the future job market.

"The nature of jobs is changing," Cuban said.

If you've followed the breaking news out of Cuban's Dallas Mavericks organization, you can insert witty joke on the most important training for future professional workers <here>.  Regardless of Cuban's recent troubles, his thoughts on the future of the workplace is interesting.

Cuban's thoughts made me think more about the Bain "Expert Generalist" model.  Here's a taste of that model:

Orit Gadiesh, the Bain & Co. chairman who coined the term, describes expert-generalism as “the ability and curiosity to master and collect expertise in many different disciplines.”

Research shows EG’s have:

• A better ability to adapt to change
• More accurate assumptions of the future
• More insightful ideas
• A deeper connection to those with different perspectives

Hmm, sounds like the world could use a few more EG’s.

More from LongNow.org:

From his perspective as a psychology researcher, Philip Tetlock watched political advisors on the left and the right make bizarre rationalizations about their wrong predictions at the time of the rise of Gorbachev in the 1980s and the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union. (Liberals were sure that Reagan was a dangerous idiot; conservatives were sure that the USSR was permanent.) The whole exercise struck Tetlock as what used to be called an “outcome-irrelevant learning structure.” No feedback, no correction.

Tetlock’s summary: “Partisans across the opinion spectrum are vulnerable to occasional bouts of ideologically induced insanity.” He determined to figure out a way to keep score on expert political forecasts, even though it is a notoriously subjective domain (compared to, say, medical advice), and “there are no control groups in history.”

So Tetlock took advantage of getting tenure to start a long-term research project now 18 years old to examine in detail the outcomes of expert political forecasts about international affairs. He studied the aggregate accuracy of 284 experts making 28,000 forecasts, looking for pattern in their comparative success rates. Most of the findings were negative— conservatives did no better or worse than liberals; optimists did no better or worse than pessimists. Only one pattern emerged consistently.

“How you think matters more than what you think.”

It’s a matter of judgement style, first expressed by the ancient Greek warrior poet Archilochus: “The fox knows many things; the hedgehog one great thing.” The idea was later expanded by essayist Isaiah Berlin. In Tetlock’s interpretation, Hedgehogs have one grand theory (Marxist, Libertarian, whatever) which they are happy to extend into many domains, relishing its parsimony, and expressing their views with great confidence. Foxes, on the other hand are skeptical about grand theories, diffident in their forecasts, and ready to adjust their ideas based on actual events.

I've always been a fan of the HR Generalist - the HR professional (manager, director and VP level) that is responsible for all of the areas of HR.  A lot of the research today is telling us that the need for deep specialization is going to fade in a world of automation and that the generalist - regardless of profession - is going to be on the rise.

The real question is - are you willing to bet your kid's future and have him/her get a liberal arts degree?

Wow.  I don't know about that.  I just don't know.

That's a loaded/trick question. 

You probably reacted to that by thinking, "we have nothing if we don't have trust".  To me, I'm not sure - I think it depends on your definition of trust.

Do you think trust is integrity at all times and ethics? How to you measure that? Is trust doing things like you expect them to be done? Do people have to check in with you if they're going to do something that would cause you not to trust them? Have you trained them on what that is?

Of course you haven't. And the definition of trust is different for all of us.

That's why I think I would pick high talent over high trust if given the choice for an organization. Talent gets things done and if an organization has a high talent level, odds are that organization will outperform it's peer group.

An organization full of people you can trust might be a high performing organization - or it might be lame from a performance perspective. Odds are, organizations full of people you can trust will fall along the bell curve.  

Of course, the two factors - talent and trust - aren't mutually exclusive.  You can have both.

The problem is that for all the issues with measurement of performance, we are still much more capable of measuring performance in an individual than we are of measuring how much we can trust that same person.  And our definitions of trust will differ dramatically person by person, which creates unbelievable variability within a single organization.

You don't know you have a problem with trust - until it's gone.  We should always pick talent over intangibles we have trouble measuring.

If you can tell me how you accurately measure trust, I'll change that stance.

With all the talk about Amazons's 2nd Headquarters campaign and where that project will land, it seems appropriate to examine the economic impact of the less lofty Amazon distribution center.  These smaller projects from Amazon are often highly contested, with counties and cities fighting to offer the best incentive package to land the included jobs as part of an economic development initiative.

A new study of publicly available data by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute has found that when Amazon opens a new warehouse, the county where it is located does not see an increase in employment during the following two-year period. Warehouse jobs do increase by about 30%, but the county's overall employment stays steady.  More detail below:

Amazon has opened fulfillment centers in 25 states, often courting state or local tax incentives to build them. The study suggests that these localities are not getting a return on that investment, one of the study's authors, Ben Zipperer

In fact, the study found that if anything, employment actually decreases two years after Amazon opens a fulfillment center in a county, though not to a statistically significant degree.

EPI used data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that included warehousing employment figures in 1,161 counties around the US. That includes 54 Amazon warehouses in 34 counties, accounting for about 75% of all Amazon fulfillment centers.

The study also found that average warehouse wages, based on total wages, do not increase when Amazon opens a warehouse in a county. That could be because Amazon hires a mix of part-time or hourly and salaried employees, keeping overall wages down. A separate study released in January found that 700 Amazon employees in Ohio — about 10% of Amazon's workforce in the state — drew benefits from foot stamps.

As you would expect, Amazon disputed the findings of the EPI study in a statement:

In addition to the 200,000 Amazon employees in the US, we know from 2016 data, which is more current than the EPI data, Amazon's investments led to the creation of 200,000 additional non-Amazon jobs, ranging from construction jobs to healthcare industry positions. In fact, over the last five years, counties that have received Amazon investment have seen the unemployment rate drop by 4.8 percentage points on average, and in some areas, the rate has been lower than the state average.

The study, Amazon said, focused on a "misleading" section of time (2001 to 2015) that included both the recession and a time when Amazon was not building warehouses at the clip it is now.

Is anyone really surprised that counties and cities may overpay for an Amazon Distribution Center project?  You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.  Fail to secure the project and be positioned as the county commissioner who never brought a name project to your county.  Overpay, and wait for it - no one with the exception of the academics - really evaluates whether the project paid off or not.

Amazon continues to win.  Government officials in charge of economic development and job growth, take heed...

Happy President's Day, suckers.

Who's actually off on President's Day?  More people than you might think.  Check out this graph of the percentage of US offices closed on various holidays (email subscribers, click through if you don't see the graph below):

Let's talk about that graph.  The big item in play in my eyes is Martin Luther King Jr. Day.  Strategically, your company needs to recognize MLK Jr. Day as an official holiday.  Some of you won't like that. Others will, and the rest will be neutral.

But strategically, you need to recognize MLK day.  But you don't want to add another holiday - I get it.  The process to get there is pretty simple - look at your official holidays and see what you can revoke as a holiday to make room for MLK.

Let's look back at a post I did on MLK day:

Next, you could look at your existing holidays.  I rank order them like this:

Untouchable - Christmas (birth of Jesus), 4th of July (birth of our country), Memorial Day (remembering those who served and gave their lives)

Less meaningful but still untouchable - Christmas Eve (wow - try it - I wish you luck) New Year's Day (just try and take that one), Thanksgiving (our right to remember Omish-like founders and eat large amounts of food), Labor Day (celebrating workers - try that one)

One you could trade out, but there would be hell to pay - Day after Thanksgiving (expected if you've already given it - hello entitlement!!)

Trade this one or one like it out for MLK in 2019 - President's Day, Columbus Day, etc.  (Let's face it, the presidents are on money, and damn, Columbus didn't even really discover America, right?)

If you want to give MLK as a holiday but want to stay even related to paid time off, this is your playbook.  1) Trade out President's Day or Columbus Day if have it.  2) If you have floating holidays or generalized PTO, reduce by one day and designate MLK as official in exchange. 3) Go get Friday after Thanksgiving or (winces) Christmas Eve to trade for MLK.

The clear target in holiday day revoking is President's Day.  If you recognize it but not MLK day, do the paperwork and announce you're switching it up.  President's Day is gone and MLK day is in.  Both are Mondays. Anyone who complains has a lot of time on their hands.

Presidents appear on money - it's OK to revoke a holiday that involves no activity or focus when people are off.  No one will miss it.

Celebrate this President's Day if you're off by doing something that's overdue.  Recognize MLK and put President's Day on the back-burner.

My top 5 presidents of all time, BTW:

5.  JFK - Icon. Who knows what would have happened had he lived?

4.  George W. Bush - Going to be criticized by many, but 9/11 is a waterfall event.  He led when he was needed. My take is what he did was a lot harder than anyone wants to give him credit for. Also, he seemed like a normal guy in many ways.

2. (tie) Obama - Furthest away from my politics, but a leader nonetheless.  I think the fact that he got into the job, found out how difficult it is being the leader of the free world (hello situation room and drone strike approvals) and was able to maintain his grace and composure was beyond reproach.

2. (tie) Reagan - Tear down this wall, m***** ******s.  Evil Empire goes down under his watch.  Advantage: US, but also the world in general.  Leadership with a capital "L".

1. Lincoln - There's only one Lincoln, baby. Read Team of Rivals to understand just how amazing Lincoln's time was and how far ahead of his time he was.  Plus he was a tall, angular dude.  I feel like I could throw it in to him in the post and get a bucket if I needed it.  If I throw it to Obama, the lefty is just going to shoot it.  

Also Receiving Votes: Washington, Teddy R, FDR.

Happy President's Day, fellow capitalists.  Hit me with your top 5 in the comments.

Business slang - it's everywhere.  Sometimes you need an interpreter, someone to tell you not to drink the tap water, etc.  I'm here to help, at least on the talent side.  Let's start with the business slang term "Battlefield Promotion":

Formal definition of Battlefield Promotion - An advancement in rank within the military that occurs generally while deployed in combat, often after an injury or death of another soldier in battle.

Business definition of Battlefield Promotion - An advancement in rank in the business world that generally occurs when an incumbent leaves, and the company in question makes a quick decision to promote from within so they don't miss a beat in operations.

What people really mean in the business world when they use the term "Battlefield Promotion" to describe the situations of the newly promoted - They're not sure whether the person just promoted has the chops to do the job, and they're pretty sure that if the company opened up the search to outside candidates, there's no way the person just promoted would get the job.  Use of the phrase in the business world underscores this skepticism, with the following usage:

"John just left ACME.  Looks like Jen is going to get a Battlefield Promotion".

"Ann just got a Battlefield Promotion over at IBM Global.  Hope she can get it done, it's going to be tough"

Listen closely, and you can hear the codewords around you.  If you hear the term "Battlefield Promotion", it's code for "I'm not sure this person is up to that job."

Which is not to say the person doesn't get it done.  They often do, it's just a term that illustrates the back biting nature of the human condition.

Reflections from a past Ash Wednesday:

The year is 2002.  A young HR Capitalist is running a field region of HR for a Fortune 500.  He's attending national HR meetings in St. Louis (shout out to Nelly - maybe NSFW or NSF-HR, but it's St. Louis-themed for sure).  The meeting includes 10 Director/VPs of HR - the best HR team I've ever been a part of.

The second day of our meetings landed on Ash Wednesday.  A VP of HR who lived in St Louis grabbed a lunchtime Ash Wednesday service.  She came back with the ashes on her forehead.

Enter Southern Baptist HR leader.  SBHRL doesn't miss a beat.  Right before the afternoon got started, she proceeds to walk up to our Catholic HR leader and breaks it down as follows:

SBHRL:  Hey Ann - You've got a little smudge on your forehead (motions to poorly designed cross of ash remains).... 

Ann - It's Ash Wednesday.

SBHRL: Got it.  Just thought you would want to know.

Not everybody's going to get it when you wear the warpaint of your choice.  Great opportunity to educate and evangelize, though.

Wars have been started for less.

BTW - you've got a little smudge right there.  Seriously.

Not going to lie - I'm underwater with work today.  Enjoy this blast from the past and be sure to read the comments...

I'm on a little bit of a Dave Grohl kick - as evidenced by this post I did with a money quote from Grohl that really nails how people become world-class at anything (get your first instruments, start practicing your craft and suck, but keep coming back because you're having fun, etc.)

Grohl is basically a proponent of the 10,000 hour rule.  With that in mind, I've got a question for you today:

"What Was the First Day of the Rest of Your Professional Life?"

Not following me?  Check out the following clip from Grohl at SXSW where he did a keynote (thanks to multiple readers who sent me the link to this) - I've set it to the point where he talks about the first day of the rest of his life.  Click here to listen to the story - it involves a punk rock relative and a trip to Chicago.  I start it at 14:05, listen to at least 16:40 to hear the reference.

The first day of the rest of your life.  What does that mean?  It means what was the inflexion point in your life where you found purpose and challenge that would define who you are for the rest of your life?

What was the first day of the rest of my professional life?  I think there are two:

1.  I was a sophomore in high school and took a roadtrip with some juniors and seniors from our small town to the University of Missouri to play basketball for a weekend - pickup, ragtag hoops in the on-campus rec center.  Figured out I could hang at a young age, and that cemented a work ethic that would allow me to chase hoops in a way that resulted in playing college baskeball on full scholarship, but more importantly gave me the abilty to chase things I really believe in with a singular, dogged focus.  Almost OC in some ways. It's served me well as a transferable skill, but that's the first time I found it - after that day.

2. I was living in St. Louis as a 29-year old and trying to get back to the Southeast and in networking with some BellSouth Executives they said the following: "Kris, we don't have anything we can put you in within Marketing, but we've got this HR Manager spot.  You used to be a college basketball coach, right?  Why don't you try that?"

DING.  It was the first day of the rest of my professional life.  I have to say the ride has been fun, and I can't imagine myself doing anything else.

What was the first day of the rest of the your professional life?  Hit me in the comments (or in email as many do) and tell me when it all changed for you.

I've been working on a new training program for managers of people at Kinetix - on Change Management.  It's part of the BOSS Training series.

Change Management is a pretty hard topic on which to keep managers engaged.  So instead of making it incredibly theoretical, we're taking a page from the software development industry and talking about Change Agile - bringing Agile principles to your change efforts.

What does that mean? Well, the first thing it means is that you don't get to tell people what to do related to the change that needs to occur.  Change Agile is about managers engaging their teams on a team vision, project or perhaps just something that's broken - bringing their teams into the idea process to unlock the innovative powers of a team.  After an idea is selected, agile suggests that you have to run tests that are as small as possible to make sure the idea you selected actually works before layering too much complexity into your solution.

Here's a free exercise from the training. This one's from a tour of traditional change management theories including Kotter, The Rogers Adoption Curve, the ADKAR model and the Satir model. Mix all those theories together and you can start to make great assumptions about why some people pick up on the change being presented quickly, as well as why others are happy to stay in the shadows. 

You can run the exercise below referencing a technology change at your company (which almost everyone has had, right?) or use change that is very specific to your company - your products, services, etc.

Feel free to use this one - and let us know if you want to talk about what we do with the BOSS training series for managers.