Consistency

Leaders need to be consistent in thought and direction. This is different from the concept of minimizing dissonance. Leaders need to set an organizational objective that enables the team to implement strategies and develop the tactics to achieve the objective.

I was once part of a team which had a pretty well defined objective. The strategy though was not so well defined and the tactics shifted weekly. As a result, the team under performed. It went through the motions of establishing itself, but the leader of the team kept changing the strategic direction which kept the team members from achieving their potential. It seemed that every time the leader went to a conference, class, or seminar--everything had to change. I agree things had to change but one strategic direction was never adopted for long enough to give the team a chance to develop the tactics necessary to make the strategy successful and then to achieve the objective.

Leaders are driven people. They are inherently successful and want to be successful. I know I like to be on the cutting edge of my profession. But the downside is that if, as leaders, the direction of the organization or our leadership style is constantly changing, the team cannot adapt and learn how to be successful. Worse, if the objective or strategy is constantly changing, the organization cannot succeed.

So what is consistency? Does that mean we can never change or alter our organizational course? No, of course not. Leaders need to carefully consider that every change comes at a cost. At a minimum the cost is lost momentum as the organization shifts to another objective. Organizations undergoing change become inward looking--focusing on internal mechanisms and operations. Successful organizations remain outwardly focused--keenly aware of the changing external environment and the competition. Successful teams adapt to the changing environment because their strategy already incorporates the ability to change to meet external stresses. A major reorganization and redefinition of the strategic goals should not be necessary every time a new external obstacle/threat appears.

Some leaders work well with organizational chaos, but for the most part long-term chaos is not healthy for people or organizations. Boundaries need to be set, goals determined and the approached fairly well planned. In military speak--the objective is identified, the strategy defined, and the tactics to implement the strategy are developed in response to the external forces which impede progress towards meeting the objective.

I attend leadership conferences and seminars to improve my skills and tool set. It is critical that leaders continue to improve their skills. The danger is that, based upon attendance at a conference or seminar, the leader will return and "change everything." While the leader may see a need to do this, the incorporation of change needs to be carefully considered and orchestrated. It must be communicated and if the change can be incorporated within the existing structure--so much the better. People expect product improvement and organizational improvement--these at least should be values that the organization is built upon. So small changes and incorporation of new procedures and ideas should be the norm. But if, as in the case of some leaders, the desire to change everything occurs after attendance at every seminar or class--then the problem is much larger and is probably related to feelings of inadequacy or inferiority that the leader has regarding the task or the organization or the situation.

Consistency is the ability to, when all of the chaos is happening, keep the organization's focus on the objective. Use the existing strategies to adapt and succeed. Consistency allows a leader to incorporate improvements and enhancements within the existing framework and not have it appear as a shift of focus from the existing objectives and strategies. The leader who lacks consistency is always chasing the next fad or invention and clearly is behind. The consistent leader is ahead of the fad and can rapidly incorporate ideas without giving the team a sense of emergency or panic.

E is 3

Ethan is Three and having multiple parties to enjoy the achievement. Party One with his friends was yesterday at Chuck E Cheese. There were 12 or 13 of his closest in age friends there to celebrate the moment. It was grand, noisy, fun, and generally high energy. Chuck E Cheese made a personal appearance in the mayhem and was impressive.

The gang was there and it was a very enjoyable time. For my own part, I had forgotten how high energy these affairs can be. But all of the parents of the other children stayed and so there was a lot of good adult conversation as well. Chuck E Cheese provides a reasonably safe environment for kids to play and enjoy these types of affairs in. I was impressed with the security system for matching children to parents. It was good to see that they are concerned about the safety of children--after all, their business is all about catering to the young part of life.

A definite good time was had by all and especially Pop-pop!

Sol De Chile - Cabernet Sauvignon 2003 (Estate Bottled)

Well, we tried two bottles of this wine to be sure, but despite the following tasting notes from the wine maker:

Our Cabernet Sauvignon has a rich and concentrated ruby-violet color. It has aromas typical of its variety and added hints of chocolate and coffee. Its tannins are mature and firm.

My experience was much different. The wine seemed very immature. I was overwhelmed by the tannins and never found either the coffee or the chocolate. The nose was very hard but it did linger.

Not being a fan of this wine I cannot recommend it for anything even though it seems to be a reasonably priced wine.

Recommendation: Must miss. Not suitable for use as even a gift to someone you do not like.

Moon Sand Evening

Until last night--I did not have a clue what Moon Sand was. I guess i was just uninitiated--but Ethan was there to help educate Pop-pop about the virtues of Moon Sand.

So there I was, celebrating the first warm evening of 2008, in my shorts, my best Aloha shirt and sandals sitting in the middle of the driveway getting educated about Moon Sand by a very talkative and excited three-year old. And having a great time doing it. The conversation was interesting as we rolled the big wheeled trucks through the sand and made castings of the trucks and one person. We were joined by the neighbors who further educated me on the uses and versatility of Moon Sand. Of course, a lot of it was left in the driveway--but we had fun.

Respect for People Helps Improve Balance

A very difficult subject is respect.

Leaders want to be respected and their people want to be respected as well.

It is very easy to become so focused upon the mission that people become tools to achieve a goal and are therefore devalued as the most important part of the team. I use a simple memory device to describe the difference between a leader and a manager. Leaders lead people and managers manage things. When leaders lose focus of this little idea, they are in trouble of losing the team.

People are not tools. People are not objects. People are people. They each come equipped with wonderful talents and capabilities. Leaders must resist the tendency to devalue people and talk about them in terms of resources or billets or positions. There are faces and families attached to those impersonal concepts.

Leaders need to deal with people differently. Leaders must recognize that when the team is working late, there are family events being changed or missed. When business trips happen, there are many other people who are being affected. This stresses the people and may impact optimal performance. It may contribute to burn out.

It isn't all about the job--hopefully, we a working to live and not living to work. In my own adult life, I have made the decision to accept a salary cut to take a new job because the net quality of life improvement outweighed the value of the additional income. People are making these kinds of decisions everyday. Sometimes they are too afraid of the unknown to make a change, but then their stress over feeling not in control of their lives will negatively impact the team and others around them.

What are some examples that in certain circumstances could be construed as lack of respect for the people part of the team equation?

- Calling a mandatory meeting for 4:30 PM which will definitely go until after 6PM (and most people are off by 5PM).

- Emailing a team member a task overnight and expecting it in place for an 11 AM function--hoping they check their personal email before they come to work.

- In volunteer organizations, not understanding that some people are working 45-50 hours or more per week at their main job and then devoting then next best part of themselves to the volunteer organization.

- Constant short notice meetings without published agendas so the team members can prepare in advance and make the meeting productive

- Line of sight tasking.

- Believing that the reward for good work is less punishment.

- Sending someone on a trip when you know there are important personal events planned.

A wise person once told me--when you leave the organization you are in, who is really going to remember you after five years. You have your family with you your whole life and five years after you leave that company, if you are mindful of them, you will still have your family.

Good leaders understand that their workers or volunteers are trying to achieve balance in their lives. I remember The Karate Kid movies in which the wise sage taught Daniel-san about balance and lives being in or out of balance. Leaders need to help those around them achieve balance. Look for the warning signs that the lives of your people are out of balance: divorces, stress, illnesses, short fuses in discussions.

Respect those around you. Sure, there are going to be those times when everyone needs to pull together to achieve a goal, but it should not be an "every minute of every day and then some" environment. Be sensitive to the families and friends behind your people and to the drivers in their lives. Then, when the team really needs it--they'll be there and be happy about pulling together to achieve something really important.

Recognition--the Force Multiplier

Leaders are responsible for ensuring the members of their teams feel as if the contributions they make are important. To do this leaders need to both acknowledge contributions and recognize the value of the contributions.

Not every contribution needs to be recognized, but it is too easy to fall into the trap of recognizing no contributions at all--or even worse--calling out only the not so good contributions. This is demoralizing. After a while the team begins to wonder if anyone cares about what they are doing.



It is easy to fall into the trap of forgetting that people appreciate knowing that what they are doing is moving the mission forward--in whatever endeavor is being attempted: work, sports, music--leaders have an obligation to encourage. One of the best ways to encourage and reinforce good behaviors is to recognize--when it happens, good stuff. Don't wait until weeks later. Do it on the spot if you can. Catch people in the act of doing good!



We all generally have a real good grasp on reality and know when bad stuff happens. What we don't really understand sometimes is what is the good stuff? What do we need to emulate? That's the job of the leader--to recognize the good stuff and let everyone else now what it looks like so they can recognize it too.



How to recognize? A public comment that that was good is a great way to start. It can be done on the spot and in front of peers. Certificates are good. Awards are nice--especially money or time off.



Develop a culture that recognizes and encourages. Amazing things will happen as people push themselves a little bit more--without even realizing it, because they know their efforts are appreciated. And then the team, work unit, or whatever will be capable of doing more than it believed it could.

Dissonance--When Words and Actions Don't Agree

Have you ever run across someone whose words and actions don't agree? And they don't even realize it? Let me give you an example:

The weekly staff meeting is scheduled to start at 1 PM on Wednesdays. But every week the leader isn't ready to start until 1:10 PM. After a few weeks people stop arriving at 1 PM and start arriving at 1:10 PM. But what does the leader do? Gets upset that people are arriving late? But are they really late? So what time does the 1 PM staff meeting begin?

A similar situation is when the leader indicates that subordinates should be open and honest and say and relate what's on their minds. But what inevitably happens when something bad is brought up or a different (notice I didn't write opposing) point of view is presented? The slam dunk as I call it. Or even worse, the cold shoulder where it is made clear that input from that person is unwelcome.

This stuff is easy to do. I've done it to others and had it done to me. It is dissonance because I am no longer consistent. What I think I want is not what I am showing my team that I want. I get unhappy with the team because they're not doing what I think I want and the team gets frustrated with me because I say one thing, but do something else and hold them accountable for an inconsistent expectation. It causes a lot of problems when this happens and the good leader needs to be constantly aware of these situations.

Seven steps to reduce dissonance

1. Make the decision to change.

2. Realize that your own actions have caused the situation. Do not blame it on circumstances. Accept responsibility for the dissonance and work aggressively to overcome it.

3. Look for scheduling situations which contribute to the problem--like closely planned successive meetings or events. Ask yourself--Why do meetings have to begin on the hour or half hour? If there is a scheduling problem which does not allow getting from one meeting or event to another until quarter past, change the scheduled time to quarter past! And then stick to it

4. Do what you say and say what you mean.

5. Start on time, regardless of who is present. After a very short time, people will adjust to the punctuality just as they did the lateness.

6. When bad news or dissenting views are being presented--don't say anything negative. Say thank you--and mean it. Realize that you need to hear good and bad news and you will never hear the bad if you continue to shoot the messenger. Take the information away for processing later. Ensure you understand the context.

7. Ask a trusted team member if there are things you are doing which cause frustration on the team related to dissonance.

Dissonance is dysfunctional to teams and prevents teams and organizations from achieving their full potential. Be aware of how your words and actions contribute to dissonance and notice how people respond to it. If they can, people will often vote with their feet--and leave the dissonant leader for one more consistent.

Keep Going O's

Another day another come from behind to tie followed by a late inning win! I am believing in these O's. The Baltimore Sun said today that this was the best start in 10 years! I say--enjoy it and keep cheering. I would love to see Oriole Park at Camden Yards rocking again with over 40,000 fans attending a game other than the Yankees or Red Sox.

I am getting to the point where i don't wnat to miss any of the action because--these guys are exciting! Who knows, maybe the O's will be looking to get talent for a pennant run in July rather than renting talent out (like they did Trachsel, last year). This is the American League East and anything can happen.

See you at the yard!

Trust and Teams

Are there trust issues on your team?

How do you know? When there seem to be more and more secrets--things that everyone can't know--there are trust issues. When the words: "Don't tell ___ about ____" are being used, then there are definite trust issues. At this point the team is in trouble.

To develop the closeness which helps teams overcome rough times, secrets need to be minimized. If there is something out there which affects the team--then everyone on the team needs to be aware of it. Look at it another way--if there is an issue and members it is being kept from some members of the team, then the team is not able to fully use all of its resources to overcome the issue. It is like playing a baseball game with only seven players instead of nine. The team is handicapped even before the first pitch.

So the question the leader has to ask is: "Why do I not trust my team with this information?" or "Why do I only trust certain members of the team?" The savvy leader recognizes that there are no real secrets on close teams anyway. The whole idea of secrets and trust may be related to concern about control of the team. But in the end, the trust issues not handled properly will fracture a team and render it ineffective.

How does a leader handle proprietary secrets that senior leadership indicates may not be shared? Don't let the team know you have a secret. Someone else has determined that your team is not trustworthy. The leader's job is to convince that leadership that the team is indeed trustworthy and failing that, do not indicate to the team that there are trust issues with higher leadership. It is really demoralizing for someone to say: "I know what's up and I can't tell you." Coming from the background I do, I fully believe the best approach is to deny knowledge at all of the larger situation for the benefit of the team. Good leaders will protect their team.

But what if someone violates the leader's trust? Look, it's going to happen anyway sometime. The benefits of what I like to call "transparency" far outweigh the potential losses caused by occasional trust violations. We are dealing with people--and people make mistakes and interpret situations very differently. Why give people a reason to believe you are not being honest with them? Both in the good and the bad information. Expect people to be adults and even when getting bad news, set the expectation that bad news will be dealt with in a mature and encouraging manner.

Leaders need to look at themselves. How do they handle honest communication. Killing the messenger of bad news, although I do like the scene from the movie 300, doesn't change the news and generally does not encourage the openness and transparency necessary for effective teams. Leaders need to be able to hear the bad news, too. And to keep openness alive on a team they need to be able to hear bad news from their team.

Trust the members of your team--with the good and the bad. Allow and enable them to participate in decisions and situations which affect members of the team. Do not play the "I've gotta secret" game. Grow the team into one that pulls together when times are tough and plays together when they can and you will have created a team that will rise to levels even the leaders did not imagine possible.

Oriole's Baseball - April 2008

Wow--I'm excited! What a great baseball weekend. This time last year the O's were 1-4--today they are 4-1 and alone atop the AL East!! I have to get excited about it because we need everything that we can to cheer about after ten consecutive losing seasons. And even a glimmer of hope is worth excitement.

The team has demonstrated they can come back. They have been behind in every game they played this year and won 4. Coming from behind to over come 2 or more run deficits on at least four occasions!

I went to the Saturday night game where they came from behind twice to win. It was cold--but the play of the gritty O's kept us at the game believing that something good was going to happen! AND IT DID! 6-4 and the O's win. I watched yesterday's game and saw the O's stick with it until the end--last out. AND WIN!

I do like the continually changing scoreboard and I feel that after this homestand they may actually get the bugs worked out. The team at least returned the pitch-type and speed to the smaller stadium scoreboards. And they even figured out how to still show the pitcher pitch count.

One more small product improvement though--the message of who is warming up in the bullpen should not be placed inside the player's stats on the lower board. Take down the defensive alignment on the upper board to show that message.

Let's go O's