What Are You Willing To Stand For?

In my newsletter today I wrote about an incident that occurred with one of my consulting clients. The client wanted me to comply with their intention to unethically require a contractor to complete additional out of contract scope work or not be paid for the work they had already completed according to the contract terms. Since the contractor had already satisfied all the terms of the contract, I refused to withhold the contractor's payment. Because of my "blatant defiance" the client felt he had the right to speak to me in a highly escalated and demeaning tone. Finding this behavior and his unethical intentions to be unacceptable, I suggested that we part ways. He agreed.

What would you have done? Would the possible loss of income keep you working for someone who lacked integrity and respect for you? How would you justify working hard for someone who didn't value you? Do you feel allowing an employer or manager to speak to you in a demeaning manner is acceptable? If it happened once, and you did nothing, aren't you telling them it's okay? If you've allowed them to compromise your integrity, what will keep them from doing it again? At what point do you say, "No!"?

We must all have a line we will not cross. There must be a choice made as to how we want to operate in the world. If we want to be treated fairly and be respected, we must give the same to others. When we know what is right and true, we must stand up for it. It won't always be easy, but stand we must. It's not just about the respect that others have for us, it's about the respect we have for ourselves. I could not respect myself if I were blindly obedient and caused another harm as a result of being so.

Don't allow fear of losing your job or contract to compromise your principles. Stand up for what is right. You and the world will be better for it.

http://www.kennettereed.com/

Use the Recession, Gain an Advantage

Some time ago, I read the dip, by Seth Godin. Recently, during conversation, a friend suggested that I revisit the book. So, I picked up my copy and started reading parts of it again. I found much of it seemed new to me and far more relevant than it had before.

the dip is about knowing the difference between when to ride out the low points (the dip) and keep working toward your goal and when you're in what Godin calls a "Cul-e-Sac" (a place where you're stuck and no matter what you do, you can't improve your state). During a recession, many people begin to jump ship. Businesses begin to suffer from fewer sales, less production, fewer shipments, less foot traffic, etc. The affect is a hit to the bottom-line. Many businesses close up shop.

However, the dip is a time when businesses should get creative and look for opportunities. A time when leaders, managers, supervisors or business owners should take a deep breath and spend some time examining the ways in which they can create a more effective, focused, efficient, specialized business, department or team. Too often, we try to increase revenues by spreading ourselves and our teams too thin. We try to cover too much or too many markets.

If instead, we were to focus our energies on fewer tasks, products, customer segments or markets, the concerted effort and focus would have a greater impact. Therefore, it would more likely have a more beneficial result. It's the dispersed effort and the eventual quitting, that keeps us from being successful during a recession. Many successful businesses, unable or unwilling to push themselves through the dip, quit. Prior to the recession, those same businesses may have been close to realizing the level of success they were seeking.

Push yourself, your team or your business through the dip. Here are some ways to help you do that:

• First be sure you are in a dip and not a Cul-de-Sac. If there is no possible way to improve the situation, it's time to quit and move on. Quitting is not failure. Quitting allows you to redirect your resources (time, energy, money, ideas, people). Quit products, services or features. Don't quit markets, strategies or a niche.
• Look at your organization, department or team. How are you managing your resources (people, dollars, time, etc.)? To push through the dip, you'll need to examine your resources and be sure they aren't spread too thin or underutilized. Review your team and be sure you're effectively using their talents, skills and interests. There may be diamonds in the rough. Pluck them out, polish them and let them sparkle.
• Use the slow times to work on being better, faster, smarter, leaner or more specialized than your competitors.
• Market better. During a recession many organizations cut their marketing budgets. While they're cutting, you fill the marketing gaps their cuts have left behind. Your name will be seen more times and make more impressions than the competition.
• Since 80% of your revenue comes from 20% of the market. Determine who your 20% are and focus your resources on them.

Pushing through the dip makes you, your team and your organization stronger, wiser, quicker, resilient and confident you can do it again (if necessary).

Kennette Reed
http://www.kennettereed.com/

Managing Performance, Not Personalities

Yesterday, I conducted a training with participants from multiple companies. The training was the first part of a series of Leadership Academy classes. During the early part of the class, one of the participants expressed her confusion. The instruction was contradicting the directives her company's HR department had issued to all managers.

She went on to say, she'd just been instructed by HR to only evaluate people based on performance. All supervisors and managers had been told they should no longer deal with people on a personal level or try to build relationships. Supervisor and managers were to only speak with employees about their performance and keep conversations strictly about business. Individual differences were not to be considered and should not be part of the evaluation process.

Since this portion of the class was titled, Communicating With Employees, there was obviously some conflict between effective communications techniques and the instruction HR was giving. How do you effectively communicate with someone without taking the time to learn:

• Who they are
• What's important to them
• Their personal style

How can you motivate someone if you don't know:

• What their goals are
• Their work style
• What they value

This information can only be obtained through conversation, relationship building and over time. Building a better understanding of the individual and utilizing that information to support them is how supervisor and managers help others reach higher levels of performance.

Look at those who are considered to be the most successful leaders. They have been successful because of their ability to:

• Bring out the best in people
• Manage personalities to effectively meet departmental, organizational and personal goals

The only way to discover people's best is to learn who the individual truly is. You discover:

• What strengths do they bring?
• What are their goals / aspirations?
• How can their strenghts, skills and experiences best benefit both the organization, the department and the individual?

We bring all of who we are to our work. Those who manage must learn that the most challenging part of the job is the people piece. Learning to manage different personalities, styles and levels of understanding will provide the most frustration, reward and personal growth. If managers are not allowed to learn who we are and use that information to benefit both the organization and the individual, everyone will miss valuable learning and growth opportunities. If we strip away opportunities to develop a deeper understanding of the individual, we might as well have an office filled with robots.

How successful would any organization be if it were staffed with emotionless, computer programmed robots? Have you called tech support lately, and spoken with an off-shore representative who's trying to hide their accent, has changed their name to an American sounding name, obviously doesn't have a clue what your issue is or how to assist you and continues to provide scripted responses? How frustrating has that experience been? That's how successful an office would be, if it were devoid of personalities.

What do you think? Should personalities come into play? Is it possible to effectively manage without taking personalities into consideration?

Kennette Reed