The Green Flash

The "green flash" is the way that they refer to the last second as the sunset fades into the Caribbean. As I happen to find myself in Grenada, and the bar at my accomodations is aptly nameed the Green Flash Lounge I thought this would be a good title for my post on a couple of points.

I got the opportunity to present two management and leadership programs down here for a group representing a cross section of leadership staff ranging from front line leaders to senior managers. It has been a very interesting experience on a number of levels including both cultural from an ethnocentric standpoint and from the challenges and issues facing their business.

The client is in some ways a monopoly- they have essentially no competition on the island. What speaks to their receptiveness and their vision is even under those circumstances they are very passionate about improving their level of performance both internally and externally. They are engaged.

It has been a personal growth opportunity for me- to explore and try to understand the nuances of both their corporate and personal cultures and convey concepts that are important to them without presenting our North American practices as "truths", but rather concepts to explore.

I have not found them to be at all naive nor awestruck. They challenge, but do so politely and constructively. They participate with a real desire to gain understanding and appreciation, but retain pride in what they have accomplished to date and what their plans are for the future.

Wherever this assignment takes me I have to tell you that I will leave here with much more than I brought with me. I hope I get invited back, I still have much to learn.....

When Will We Learn?

I have been following a number of interesting discussions on LinkedIn and other places about the issues surrounding employee recruiting, selection, and retention.

They range from the importance of the process to the idea that since we are in a recession and employees don't have anywhere to go we can focus on other more "important" business issues.

Interesting viewpoint. Studies show we are operating at 30% efficiency, employee job dissatisfaction is at an all time high, and to some it is a non-issue. I suspect they are not on the top 100 places to work list.

Another discussion I am following began to target some of what I believe to be the real issue- in many cases our hiring and selection processes are not well thought out and executed. They are ancillary rather than strategic.

That is the difference between truly high performing companies and those firmly "in the pack". The concepts of employee engagement and employment branding are coming into vogue. The idea that engagement and the resulting discretionary effort are built in to the foundation not added on later. A colleague shared with me "at Nike to work there you must be an athlete". They are clear about the JFHF3HCJD6FE culture and hire with it in mind. Other icons do the same.

If you are a senior executive how much time are you spending making sure that the people who are joining your organization or at least your team have the "right stuff", or like many organizations have you delegated this to your HR department? Here is a tip. Recruitment selection and retention of the best people is a management role, it doesn't "belong" to any one department. Top performing organizations have figured this out. It is a big part of why they are top performing organizations.

So if you are taking the time during this recession to focus on the "important" stuff and ignoring your people strategies it will be interesting to see how it works out for you.....

Enlightenment in the Vineyard

My wife and I had an opportunity to spend this last holiday weekend in one of our favorite locations, the foothills of the Sierras. The Calaveras County of Mark Twain fame also makes some awesome wines!

The region is quite small with limited production and focuses more on Spanish style wines like Temparnillo, Syrah, Grenache and "warmer" climate wines. It is reminiscent of our Rogue Valley located near the California border. Just as the Sierra appellation is overshadowed by Napa, most people associate Oregon with Pinot's. I can tell you some of the "warm weather" wines from the Umpqua region are fantastic.

In addition to getting to drink some great wine and enjoy some great company I had the chance to read an excellent book , Do You Matter and actually see some of the concepts in action.

Although the premise of the book is the criticality of design I saw significant parallels to my own perspectives on successful engagement strategy. The parallels for me included the systemic nature (both need to be included in all decisions) and the criticality of the internal in the process. We call internal customers employees.

The author said that the design is really creating a "portal" to the customer's experience with your product or service. I would submit that engagement is the same. If you think about the five levels of engagement I have discussed before, the highest level is that of pride of association. You have gone beyond a commodity to a shared experience. You have connected.

They point out that if your employees do not share this "connection" it will be reflected in their interactions with your customers. BlessingWhite and others share this perspective about engagement.
To put it in context; General Motors sells transportation, BMW or Porsche sell a lifestyle or experience. They are aspirational.

The reason I use the analogy of this wine experience is I saw several key elements represented in this particular community. The "tasting" experience is likely representative of Napa in the old days. You may have an opportunity to discuss the wine directly with the wine maker and/or owner. I recognize you can do that in Napa as well, but not for free or a tasting fee typically under $5!

One of the other things that is quite interesting is that several of the vineyards have tasting rooms located in close enough proximity to be entirely walkable. This allows you to enjoy the experience without worrying about driving or chartering transportation. There is excellent lodging and dining all in a contained area.

In the "better" wineries (MHO), the personalities of the people in the tasting room is also part of the experience. A kind of enthusiasm and ambiance is created. You are sharing an experience with others beyond just having wine.

When I developed my system of Compliance to Commitment I talked about the Human Resources Pyramid created by Roger Deprey-

• What is my job?
• How am I doing?
• Does anyone care?
• What do we do?
• How are we doing?
• How can I help?

The authors of Do You Matter ask:

• Who are you?
• What do you do?
• Why does it matter?

Is is just me or do you see some parallels there?

So the "enlightenment" part comes in the concept that whether you approach it from the "people" perspective or the design perspective the conclusion is the same. Successful organizations build relationships, they don't engage in transactions. It is built into their processes rather than "engineered" over.

I was somewhat saddened to hear that one of the likely first casualties of the GM debacle will be Saturn. I remember when Saturn was cult like on the level of Harley. It was a culture designed from the ground up with the internal and external customer in mind. Their human resources systems were studied and copied and their customer satisfaction was on a par with Lexus. As they became more successful GM "fixed" them and demonstrated that culture eats strategy every time. In this case the GM engineering/finance culture crushed what was once Saturn.

A friend who left a large oil company told me that engagement isn't new, they have "done it" at her old company. Well, I hate to be a buzz kill, but it must have been "engineered" rather than designed in because the employees in the "stores" didn't get the message. If they have been immersed in that model they must have missed a few of the classes. To them I am definitely a transaction.

So perhaps it was the wine, but I think this culture by design and engagement thing has potential. It goes to stakeholders not shareholders and relationships not transactions. I like it.

As a consultant, teacher, and leader I would like to share the idea of organizations who seek commitment rather than compliance. I don't aspire to own it, but I think the idea of being kind of a "portal" to take organizations to a new place intrigues me. What do you think?

Tipping Your Sacred Cows

I had a chance to do some reading from three different sources this week and all three in their own way examined some "sacred cows". Sacred Cows are those written or unwritten things that we just won't consider changing or even discuss changing.

One of my colleagues and mentors, Ty Warren of Savium, wrote a great book he titled White Hat Leadership. While it is a great book and I recommend you read it all, I especially liked Ty's discussion of two different personality and leadership styles: Explorers and Mappers. The concept of the explorer is pretty self explanatory. These are the idea people, the people who defy convention with charisma and the "big" ideas.

People like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would probably be described as explorers.

Mappers on the other hand are those individuals who follow the map or implement the direction. They are the stabilizers.

In my experience few people want to be a mapper. We have almost defined leadership and explorer to be the same. Ty and I disagree with that premise. Both of us, he in his book White Hat Leadership and I in mine Managing Whole People, talk about the concept of transition. By that we believe that particular leadership styles and competencies are not only valuable, but critical depending on where the organization is in its life cycle and operating environment. We also talk about how while we adore the concept of explorers most of our succession models are based on Mapping. Look at how many of our CEOs are drawn from finance or engineering. Those are mapping disciplines! I was a practicing HR executive for years. HR practitioners worship concepts like consistency like a sacred trust. Sounds like mapping to me!

I want to make two points here; first, I am not advocating that only explorers should lead. In fact to the contrary explorers become restless and impatient. In many cases their role should be transitional.

My second point may seem contrary. We are in one of the worst economic declines we have ever experienced. Doing what we have always done contributed to getting us here. Do we want to count on that to get us out? This may be the season for explorers.


My second reading came from some articles on BNET. The first one dealt with re engineering management. The authors suggested five ideas to consider:

• Management's work should serve a higher purpose. Oh my, management should actually look beyond the bottom line and market share! They go so far as to say it should concern itself with achieving socially significant goals. Could they be talking about health care, education, homelessness, and other related things?


• Reconstruct the philosophical foundation. These gentlemen suggest that executives broaden their parameters to include theories and models as diverse as theology, philosophy, anthropology and others- not just business concepts. My son shared with me some of the writings of John O'Neil, who works with executives and suggests that many of our corporate leaders have lost their balance and sense of fulfillment because they don't allow time for family, social responsibility, and related activities. They have lost their essence.


• Redefine leadership and its product. They suggest that rather than being heroic decision makers exclusively (can you say explorers), that leaders should be societal architects who foster and model collaboration, innovation, and participation.


• De structure the organization. In this context they talk about small, malleable units. Large centralized structures inhibit shared, efficient decision making.


• Empower the renegades. We need to empower the employees who are passionately committed to our values and mission. They describe it as emotional equity, I refer to it as commitment or engagement. Recent studies that I have talked about in my articles The Business Case for Compliance to Commitment and The Spillover Effect describe the economic and productivity benefits of instituting these practices far beyond their philosophical or intrinsic value.

My last reading debates the merits of yet another management "sacred cow", Best Practices. The author cautions us not to leap to the conclusion that practices and models used by large, big names firms are applicable for us "regular" guys. He even takes a poke at my profession; consulting, and how many big name firms make their living schlepping these models from client to client. His point is to be sure that model or practice works for you! He suggests you examine some basic concepts and constructs:

• Timing and market conditions. Is the environment the same as it was when the "best practice" was created? He uses the example of mass media advertising to create brand. With cable, the Internet, and social networking has mass advertising become spam?


• Different Rules. If you are a well established "brand" major deviation from that brand position can cause you to alienate your core market and not capture new share.


• Differentiation is key. Unless you are ubiquitous why would people choose you over a competitor? If all your "best practices" were invented by them unless you offer a significant cost or location advantage why should people buy from you.

His point and mine is not to learn from the best, it is don't just plug it in. It needs to be tuned to your culture. I tell clients a lot; I have a model, but the implementation of that model is different for each client. It is tailored to their culture and norms. I go so far as to reject clients because they are looking for a "plug in"!

I have focused my career on creating engaged environments. The good news is that organizations that develop, implement, and maintain engaged cultures outperform their peers in every segment across a broad variety of metrics. The bad news is that engagement is a culture and a system. It takes time and energy to create and commitment to maintain!

We are in a time and place where I think we may want must recognize that many of the conventional wisdoms, (sacred cows), are going to have to be re-examined. Maybe it is time for a big ole Texas style barbecue? I heard once that sacred cows make the best hamburgers! What do you think?