"Lost" Opportunity

It is interesting to have the historic vote on health care in the background as I muse about this. Many opponents of the model being proposed by the Administration talk about the trillion dollars it will cost to fund the program. As a counterpoint I look at the following situation:

My readings and research tell me that we "lose" $5 trillion annually to the direct costs of employee turnover. Additional research indicates that we lose another $200 billion annually to "presenteeism"; the spending on health benefits related to stress, lost productivity due to employees dealing with personal issues at work, and the difference between contributions from employees operating at full versus marginal productivity. I saw research recently that said in addition to those costs we send over $100 billion annually on training and development in corporate America and yet less than 10% of those dollars result in meaningful and sustained change.

My math has never been my strength, but it would seem that the "lost" opportunity that these costs represent approaches five and a half trillion dollars in the U.S. economy annually. So if we addressed some of these we could pay for health care five times over and have money left over to address other critical issues like maybe education, homeless folks, and other similar societal issues. So what am I missing?

Our current economic system has retreated in a way to a kind of capitalistic feudalism. The industrial revolution was largely based on "dumbing down" tasks and activities to make them simpler and therefore more "efficient". The skills required to perform these tasks decreased and correspondingly so did the wages. Technology provide even further assistance, machines and "systems" can do what people used to do cheaper, faster, and many times more efficiently. In exchange for "compliance" we offered employees a certain degree of economic security. Then a world economy happened. Other economies began using "our" systems combined with their own enhancements and lower wages and we lost our competitive advantage. Our solution in many cases was outsourcing to these economies. At the root we forgot to include people in our "solutions", and now we are paying for it.

Research about engagement demonstrates that the U.S. economy is operating at about 30% of its potential efficiency. Before other economies gloat too much I would point out that this puts us in the top quartile.

Organizations that have a well developed engagement strategy enjoy significant advantages in productivity, profitability, and sustainability. Those terms sound pretty capitalistic to me.

Engagement is not measured exclusively by employee "satisfaction" or tenure. It is not a short term strategy or for the faint hearted. It also requires to examine and rebuild our relationships between: employer and employed, "vendor" and customer, and organization and community. We need to examine how we hire, how we train, how we reward, how we communicate, and most importantly how we relate to and value one another. The upside is that properly executed we can recapture some of those trillions and address compelling issues and not spend anymore money.

Is is just me or does that "value proposition" sound interesting? So I would ask again:

• If not now when?
• If not us then who?

Looking forward to your thoughts......

Lessons From Interesting Places

Some of you already know that I have found some of my greatest insights about engagement and working with people from some very interesting places. One of my favorites is the work of Monty Roberts, the original "horse whisperer". Monty's model of encouraging horses to "join up" with you rather than forcing them into a particular behavior was very seminal to me in creating my Compliance to Commitment(TM) model.

Today I was reading some tips from Cesar Millan, the "dog whisperer", and he offered some great insights that bear repeating.

• Live a balanced life. Milan comments that dogs do best when they have an opportunity to get exercise, have structure, and receive affection every day. I don't know about you, but that sounds remarkably like an environment of engagement to me.
• Trust your instincts. He points out that animals don't "speak" English. As a result they pay close attention to body language, energy levels and other non verbal cues for guidance. Sounds like pretty good advice to me.
• Be direct and consistent in your communications. This one is huge. How many times are we oblique or unclear or inconsistent in our communications? This causes confusion and frustration. I firmly believe that 99% of the people in the world show up every day wanting to do the right work and do it well. Poor communications, inconsistency or other human errors get in the way.
• Learn to be a great listener. Animals are great listeners. They never interrupt you and they never give you unwanted advice. They also never take ownership for your problem or allow you to shift responsibility for solving your issue, they just listen.
• Let go of baggage. Cesar mentions how in dog packs there are no grudges. Issues are resolved and you move on. Think about our organizational environments if we could follow that credo.
• Live with a purpose. Millan points out that when dogs don't have a purpose they can develop bad habits ranging from anxiety to aggression. Sound familiar? Our role as leaders and managers is to create clarity and purpose for our employees, to remove the ambiguity. Think about it. When employees understand the purpose of the organization and where their contributions fit in they spend little time being agitated or anxious. If they cannot buy into the purpose perhaps they are in the wrong "pack". The point remains however that the leader defines the purpose, it is not left to individual "pack" members to figure it out or to determine their role.
• Celebrate every day. For dogs and other animals each day is fresh and without comparison. For me this translates into looking at each project and assignment as a new opportunity to contribute. I tell young people that your career to a great extent is something you look back on. Don't be so concerned about your "career" that you forget or don't take the opportunity to enjoy each job or role you have a chance to participate in. I have had positions or assignments that I didn't enjoy as much as others, but I have tried to train myself to look forward not backward.

There is no "rocket science" or particular wisdom here, but 2009 looks like it will present most of us with some challenges as well as opportunities. We will choose how we react to them. I don't know about you, but I find some of Cesar's tips pretty valuable. My dogs don't seem nearly as anxious about 2009 as I am. Maybe they know something I don't......

Which Method Would You Choose?

A colleague of mine shared a great story with me that I thought would be worthwhile to share with others about the difference between compliance and commitment. The root of the word "manage" is apparently from an Italian word meaning to train a horse. Traditionally we have heard this refered to as "breaking" the horse or teaching it to submit to its master's will. You use a number of techniques to accomplish this:

• - saddling the horse and riding it until you wear it out and break its will
• -tying the saddled horse to a tree or post until it tires itself out
• -drowning the horse or similar techniques

A new process has emerged called gentling or "starting" the horse. This technique uses very different methodologies:

• - observing the horse carefully
• - familiarizing the horse gradually to the weight, smells,etc of the new experience
• -gaining the horses trust and willing agreement

Sometimes in a turbulent atmosphere we act like the first trainer. We see chaos and reluctance as rebellion and we seek to "break" the behavior. It may appear to be effective in the short term, but underneath is an attitude of fear and resentment.

I think that the first method is outdated and will not get you the results that you are looking for on a sustained basis. That's why Darby and I created New Paradigms. If you are interested in the "new" process, check out our case study at Compliance to Commitment.

MH