Wednesday, August 31, 2011

7 Habits Of Highly Ineffective Managers | Fast Company

BY Mindflash
Mon Aug 29, 2011

Excerpts:

Here's how to kick the most common workplace ruts that are dragging down your management style. Hang this poster in the break room at your own risk.

7 Habits Of Highly Ineffective Managers:

1. Continually breaking your Word.
2. Chastising your employees publicily.
3. Getting all up in their business.
4. Withholding positive feedback.
5. Being all-knowing all the time.
6. Speaking before listening.
7. Being afraid of discipline.

Access Content Source And Other Great Stuff: http://www.fastcompany.com/1776957/7-habits-of-a-highly-ineffective-manager

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Didn't Get That Promotion? - Amy Gallo - Best Practices - Harvard Business Review

HBR Blog Network
Straightforward, actionable advice for novice managers, seasoned leaders, and people at all levels in between.
Best Practices


FEATURED PRODUCTS
Overloaded Circuits: Why Smart People Underperform
by Edward Hallowell $6.95 Buy it now »
Manage Your Energy, Not Your Time
by Catherine McCarthy, Tony Schwartz $6.95 Buy it now »
Getting passed over for a promotion can be disheartening and even humiliating. Whether you thought you deserved the job or were promised it, no one likes hearing that they didn't meet the mark. The reality is that it happens all the time, perhaps more so in a tough economy when companies hesitate to give out promotions or raises. The good news is that it's possible to survive the experience with both your reputation and ego intact, and to become a better employee because of it.


What the Experts Say
If you're told you aren't going to advance, you can't let the disappointment stunt your performance or your career. Instead, you need to act. "Things will only be better in the future if we do something about it," says Christopher Peterson, a professor of psychology at University of Michigan and a pioneer in the field of positive psychology. In fact, failing to get a promotion can be a great opportunity to learn as long as you keep it in perspective. "It's possible to reframe these setbacks as disappointment rather than devastation," says Ben Dattner, author of The Blame Game and founder of Dattner Consulting. Here are five ways to not only endure the situation, but to make the most of it.


Wait
"The first thing is to not act impulsively, emotionally or reflexively," says Dattner, who is also the co-author of the HBR article, "Can You Handle Failure?" Don't compound the issue by acting petulant or entitled. "It's not always possible to make things better, but it is always possible to make things worse," adds Dattner. Instead, let yourself feel the emotions that come up, the whole range of them. You are likely to feel disappointment and anger but you may also feel some relief. Do this long enough to cool down but don't wallow in the feelings. "Getting angry and depressed will not get you another promotion," says Peterson.


Gather others' perspectives
Peterson suggests that once you've had a chance to calm down, find out why it happened. If possible, talk with the decision maker. Just listen and don't get defensive. "There are always reasons, even if they aren't justified," says Dattner. Take this as an opportunity to learn about yourself and your place in the company. Peterson cautions that you may not get a straight answer from the person in charge. If that's the case, "seek out a trusted and knowledgeable person you can get advice from," says Peterson. You may even want to get an outside perspective from a headhunter in your industry as to whether you have the right skills and experience for the job. "What we think we deserve is different from what others think we deserve," says Dattner.


Act instead of complain
The squeaky wheel may get the grease in many organizations but it won't serve you to complain or make accusations at your boss or HR. "You don't want to squander good will," says Dattner. You may only make them defensive and angry, and further justify their decision not to promote you. Of course, you don't need to hide your emotions either. "There's nothing wrong with saying, 'I'm really disappointed. I wanted this to happen'," says Peterson. But also be sure to enlist their help. Try saying something like, "How can we work together to make sure I get promoted in the future?" And then take action on their advice. If you were passed up because you lack substantive expertise, look for ways to get the expertise through training or a lateral job move. If you are thought of as slow to act or overly controlling, work on changing that perception.


Perhaps most importantly, be empathetic and graceful to the person who did win the promotion. "The worst thing you can do is tear down the person who got the job," says Dattner.


Reframe the experience
Dattner suggests that rather than thinking of the experience as horrible, frame it as an opportunity to learn and grow. "People often look back on setbacks in their careers and see them as great moments," he says. Keep it in perspective and try to see it from a different angle. Perhaps there were good reasons you didn't get the job and you now have the impetus to work on improving your skills and gathering new experiences. Maybe you were complacent and this is an incentive to start focusing more.


Ask yourself what you really wanted from the promotion. Some people get overly fixated on advancing because they want to prove themselves. If you get passed over, ask yourself whether you really wanted it. Or, were you spared something? Would the job have required more hours or entailed more stress? If you conclude that you indeed did want it, ask yourself what about the promotion you most coveted: the respect, the title, the money. There may be other ways to get those things without the promotion.


Keep your network active
After a setback like this, your first instinct may be look for another job. Sending out resumes may be in order if you were promised the promotion or if you didn't get for reasons you positively can't change. Though the reasons are rarely that straightforward, "you can be open to other opportunities," says Dattner. He suggests you keep your network open and active so the next opportunity — either inside or outside your organization — can find you.


Principles to Remember


Do:


  • Find out why you didn't get the promotion and take action on that feedback
  • Look to others to help you evaluate what you need to do to get a promotion next time around
  • Continue to network so you know of new opportunities


Don't:


  • Act right away — wait until you've had time to cool off before you do anything
  • Badmouth the person who got the job or those involved in making the decision
  • Make the situation into a devastating experience — recognize it for what it is: a disappointment



Case Study #1: From non-promotable to top 10%
Nick Simon* switched careers in his late 20s and entered a two-year management rotation program at a telecom company. The expectation was that at the end of two years, the program participants would be promoted to the next level. But when the two years were up, all of Nick's peers advanced — and he didn't. When he found out, his boss, Laura*, gave him feedback and several examples of why he didn't make the grade. Nick disagreed with what he heard. But, instead of getting defensive, he told her he was disappointed and asked if they could talk about it further once he had time to process it.


Nick then went to a few senior colleagues to ask for their advice. They told him the feedback may feel off to him, but the perception of his performance mattered. He needed to change the way he was seen. He spoke with Laura again and asked for her blessing to talk to her boss — the head of the department (as Nick said, "This is not the time to go over your boss's head.") "I spoke to senior managers to let them know that although I found the feedback confusing, I accepted it and asked for their support, specifically to pull me aside if they saw me acting in ways that were not helpful," he says.


Despite how bad it felt, he knew he wasn't ready to leave the organization. It was too early in his new career to make a productive move. "Although it was perceived as humiliating by others, I was able to compartmentalize it, and decided to learn what I could from the experience and move on," he says. Six months later he applied for an international role that involved a promotion and he got it. He thrived in this new job. "I went from non-promotable to the top 10% can't-lose list in a year's timeframe," he said. Looking back, Nick sees the experience as worthwhile. "I actually don't regret it, because it helped me better understand how to navigate the political landscape, to really trust myself and not allow others' opinions to influence my own sense of self-worth," he says.


*Not his real name


Case Study #2: Taking action after disappointment
Lisa Su* has worked at a Boston-based technology company for six years. She came in as a manager and was quickly promoted to senior manager within her first year. She expected to keep moving up at that same pace. However, many of her colleagues warned her that the next level — director — was harder to reach because the title came with many more benefits and responsibilities.


To get this promotion, Lisa had to be nominated by her boss. Applications then go to a committee, which makes a recommendation to the CEO who makes the final decision. Lisa was twice nominated for the director position. The first time, she was not surprised to learn she didn't get it. A lot of people don't make it the first time around. The feedback from the committee was that she was a high performer but the economy made it difficult for them to grant many promotions. The second time she was passed over she was more disappointed. She saw that many of her peers were promoted, including someone who had come into the organization after her. This time she got the feedback that her role wasn't "director-worthy." This was difficult feedback because she wasn't sure how she could change it. "That's been the most frustrating thing. There's nothing specifically I can do," she says.


She turned to a friend and colleague for advice. He told her that the company's leadership wanted directors that contribute to the bottom line. He encouraged her to find ways to map her work directly to the company's financial goals. Lisa recently moved to another role under a different manager who has a reputation for helping people get promoted. He's worked with her to increase the visibility of her work, get her credit for her ideas, and to articulate how they contribute to the company's goals.


Lisa also keeps her network working for her. After the second denial, she put one feeler out and several interviews, and eventually job offers, came of it. But Lisa would rather stay with her current employer. "I really like my job. I just don't like the fact that I didn't get the promotion," she says. Lisa is hopeful that she will be nominated again this December.


*Not her real name



Thursday, August 25, 2011

Why You May Be Blind to a Good Idea (and What to Do About It) - Cathy N. Davidson - Harvard Business Review

HBR Blog Network



Several years ago I attended a lecture on attention blindness, the basic feature of the human brain that means when we concentrate intensely on one task, we miss almost everything else happening around us. Since we can't see what we can't see, the speaker showed us a video designed to catch us in the act. Six people pass basketballs back and forth and viewers are told to count the number of tosses only between the three wearing white t-shirts, not black. Many people correctly count fifteen tosses. Yet nearly 60 percent fail to see someone in a full gorilla suit stride in among the tossers, then walk away. In some situations with a lot of peer pressure, 90 percent of an audience has missed the gorilla.
I saw the gorilla. I'm dyslexic and knew I wouldn't be able to count tosses on the grainy, confusing video so I didn't try. And that's the lesson of attention blindness. Because I wasn't focused on counting basketballs, I saw what most of my colleagues missed.

A cognitive scientist would say the experiment demonstrates a structural limitation of the human brain. But, for me, the management takeaway is that since we all see selectively but we don't all select the same things, we can leverage the different ways we slice and dice the world. The trick, though, is we can only do this by first accepting that we each have limits: Everything we see means we're missing something else. It's that simple. And impossible to see. So we have to use lessons from the science of attention blindness to construct teams in a way that eliminates group think (where the group rallies around one idea oftentimes at the expense of others that may have been "blind") and yields innovative new ideas they might be missing if they're not actively addressing blind spots.

I see two particularly important practical lessons.

Lesson One: just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there. It was odd seeing the gorilla in a room filled with smart people who were proud of their toss-counting ability. It wasn't easy convincing them they had missed something as dramatic as a gorilla. It required rewinding the tape, disrupting their confidence in their own expertise and ability. To get the same result, a team has to structure its interactions in a way that disrupts attention blindness. One way to do this is by ensuring that outliers are assigned the task of speaking up. I'm cofounder of an organization that develops innovative learning practices and technologies. When our team meets, we put on the agenda: "What are we missing?" Someone is then randomly selected to begin the discussion of that agenda item. And it can be anyone. Don't rule out the cranky person, the intern, or the assistant who usually just takes notes, or the new guy who "doesn't get it." The puzzled person may be the only one who can see what the pros miss.

Lesson Two: I'll count — if you take care of that gorilla. This principle acknowledges that, no matter how we try, no one person ever sees the whole picture. Our brains aren't built that way. But as a group, we can select the right partners and the right tools to distribute expertise and assignments to compensate for what we lack. My organization calls this method "collaboration by difference." Or, as one member of our quirky team likes to say, difference isn't our deficit, it's our operating system.

Like most organizations, in ours we need to keep an eye on the bottom line and we need to see the big gorilla. So we also have meetings designed to see what we're missing. Each member has the floor for twenty minutes. They present a problem for others to tackle, then shut up, and it's a free-for-all, with everyone else pitching in ideas. The others might not have a clue about the progress, methods, or solutions being worked on already. We use this method whether we're talking about technical matters such as performance speed on a state-of-the-art Drupal site in development, workplace issues such as reconfiguring office space, or grant or program opportunities. The point is that each project manager proposes a topic in order to see what others not charged with counting the basketballs are seeing and what they might be missing.

The downside of these methods based on disrupting our attention blindness is they can derail you when you are speeding efficiently along. On the other hand, they can serve as an early-warning signal when you're heading fast in exactly the wrong direction.


IndustryWeek : Can You Spot the 5 Responsibility Runarounds?

Lean 'leaders' who engage in these tactics will cripple a change initiative.
By Lonnie Wilson, founder, Quality Consultants
Are you trying to implement or perpetuate a lean initiative? If you are, I can tell you with certainty that you will not succeed without great leadership. It will take great leadership to guide your company through the minefields of change.

By leadership, I do not mean management. By leadership, I mean that all-too-rare combination of abounding initiative coupled with the ability to create a vision, the ability to sell that vision and the ability to motivate the personnel to execute that vision.

True leaders have a rare combination of personal traits that include a strong personality balanced with their own sense of fallibility.

They have tremendous courage, yet are very humble.

They have an innate ability to act, yet are introspective and listen to a wide range of persons before they act.

These traits and more are required so leaders can respond both to the changing external environment and the changing internal environment.

In a phrase: To be successful, your leadership must be responsible.

In the short-term, it is often difficult to tell if your leadership is really successful -- if it is guiding the ship in the correct direction. External environmental conditions sometimes make it very easy to be profitable.

In these times it is hard to tell if the company is doing well because of the leadership or in spite of the leadership. The greatest tests of leadership are exhibited when the leadership must guide the company in times of peril and crises.


The Big Derail


However, even in the absence of peril and crises, there are always "signs" indicating that your leadership is not responding well.

For example, how does your leadership respond to failures and bad news from everyday, routine activities?

Are these smaller problems met with open, honest data-based evaluations and dialogue leading to the appropriate acceptance of responsibility and corrective actions?

Or do these issues routinely get derailed by the "Big Five Responsibility Runarounds"?

The Big 5 RRs are sometimes subtle, sometime not-so-subtle, techniques used to avoid the responsibility of facing these "failures." The Big 5 RRs, with some of their characteristic traits, are:



  • Denial. When people are in denial, you will hear such talk such as: "The upset was not really an upset at all"; "It was not really our fault"; or "It could not have been avoided." Inattentional blindness and other phenomena feed our ability to deny the existence of problems -- even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Never underestimate the power of the human ego to use denial. This is the most powerful and most pervasive technique of the Big 5.
  • Avoidance. This is used when you have a known problem that is largely ignored or grossly minimized in importance. Managers with a "current shiny halo" benefit frequently from this technique. Avoidance is the skill employed to completely dodge dealing with the elephant in the middle of the room no one wants to acknowledge. Using this technique, problems are simply swept under the rug.
  • Rationalization. When we rationalize we only create "rational lies." This occurs when the words used to explain away the problem defy logic. Yet these same words seem to sound good to those who are rationalizing. There is no end to the possibilities with rationalizations; we are limited only by our imagination in the ways we can come up with excuses to "rationally lie" our way out of accepting responsibility. I believe Benjamin Franklin said, "He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else." Such is the case with the rational liar. Frequently those with a little distance from the problem can readily spot the rationalizations.
  • Projection. This is blaming someone else for your deficiencies. It is always "them other guys." The problems are "out there," never "in here."
  • Idealization. This is the problem of being so close to a situation and so invested in it that you cannot see any of its flaws or failings -- much like the idealizations you might have of your children. Idealization is used to convince ourselves and others that "we could not possibly create this problem. Our systems are just too robust, and after all, this has never happened before."
These techniques are used for some responsibility runaround, some "lack of acceptance" of responsibility. What makes them so dangerous is that they often are unconsciously employed.
Consequently, they can be used with a high degree of passion and even a high degree of sincerity. But make no mistake about it: Being sincere and being passionate about a topic does not make it correct.

When people employ any of the Big 5 RRs, they simply are dodging their responsibilities.

The Big 5 RRs are ubiquitous. Even the most dispassionate and analytical of us uses them from time to time, sometimes consciously and sometimes unconsciously. In the hands of someone with no power, these techniques are not too damaging to others. They simply allow people who use them to "save face," sometime just with themselves but other times with their coworkers.

Unfortunately, when the Big 5 Responsibility Runarounds are used by those in power, entire organizations get completely upset and cease to function normally.

When the powerful folks (leadership and management) avoid their responsibilities, someone else must fill the insidious responsibility void that is left behind or nothing gets done. Unfortunately this, by definition, places someone with the responsibility -- but not the power -- to resolve the problem.

Responsibility without attendant power is a perfect prescription for failure. First, there will be a failure of the issue at hand; later there will be long-term failure as it becomes less and less clear who is really in charge. If this responsibility runaround persists, it becomes less and less clear how people are supposed to behave. The entire organization takes on an uncertainty both in decision-making and in action that is always damaging and possibly crippling.

What is the Remedy?

What is the antidote to this problem of responsibility runarounds?
Any problem is half solved if it is first recognized. So you, as a leader, must make yourself aware of the telltale signs of any of the Big 5.

At first, the Big 5 may be so commonplace in your culture that they don’t seem out of place. Using the guide presented earlier in the article, ask yourself if you are thinking clearly, or is the problem being displaced through denial, avoidance, rationalization, projection or idealization?

You will be surprised how effective this self-questioning can be -- if you are really honest with yourself. And as soon as one of the Big 5 is recognized, it must be shot on sight.

Second, those in the titular positions of responsibility must be ready, willing and able to respond.
They must be ready, willing and able to accept the attendant responsibilities of leadership.
They must be able to recognize when change is needed or when thoughtful lack-of-change is appropriate. (Deming would say they need to recognize normal variation from special cause-variation.)

Finally, they must initiate the actions that will appropriately guide the company through the needed changes, using the company vision to establish the direction and the company values to guide the needed decisions.
It may seem almost trite to say that responsibility is a main requirement to be a leader. But go back and critically and carefully evaluate if your leadership is ready, willing and able to always accept the responsibility inherent in good leadership. If they are, you are learning the correct way to lead. So count your blessings and model their behavior.

If, on the other hand, they are too skilled at executing the 5 Big Responsibility Runarounds, learn from that as well. You will learn what not to do. Either way, you observe, you learn and you come out stronger. You will become a more effective leader.

Pleasant leadership thoughts to all.

Lonnie Wilson has been teaching and implementing lean and other culture-changing techniques for more than 40 years. His book, "How To Implement Lean Manufacturing" was released in August 2009. His new book on "How to Lead and Manage a Lean Facility" is under construction and will go to print in the third quarter of 2011. Wilson is a frequent speaker at conferences and seminars. In addition to IndustryWeek, he has published articles in Quality Digest and is a frequent contributor to iSixSigma magazine. His manufacturing experience spans 20 years with Chevron, where he held a number of management positions. In 1990 he founded Quality Consultants, www.qc-ep.com, which teaches and applies lean and other culture-changing techniques to small entrepreneurs and Fortune 500 firms, principally in the United States, Mexico and Canada. In particular, he specializes in "lean revitalizations," assisting firms that have failed or failing lean implementations and want to "do it right." You can e-mail Lonnie Wilson at law@qc-ep.com.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Fitch: Reserves Remain Adequate, But Recent Years Unlikely to Develop Redundantly | PropertyCasualty360

Fitch: Reserves Remain Adequate, But Recent Years Unlikely to Develop Redundantly PropertyCasualty360

Setting Salary Budgets for 2012 | Business Finance

BusinessFinanceMag.Com
August 22, 2011



It's that time of year again. Over the past few weeks, the 2012 salary budget surveys have been coming out. While they show some growth compared to the past couple of years, one of the surveyors, WorldatWork, notes that most of these numbers represent increases that do not match the current inflation rate of 3.1 percent.

Looking at three separate surveys conducted by WorldatWork (2,466 companies), Towers Watson (773 companies) and Mercer (more than 1,200 companies) shows a consistent projection of about 3 percent or less in salary budgets for all positions. Each survey breaks down increases slightly differently so we've included data from each survey below.

Although all three surveyors predict few changes in salary budgeting as long as economic growth is slow and unemployment is high, market forces are still very much in play. Not surprisingly, industries that have a high demand for skilled workers are planning on higher increases. For example, the WorldatWork cited the 4.1 percent average salary increase among companies in the mining, quarrying, oil and gas extraction industries that are seeing a shortage of skilled labor.

At the same time, companies continue to differentiate among employee performance levels. According to the Towers Watson survey, employees with the highest performance ratings will see median salary increases of 4.5 percent, while those with average ratings will receive 2.5 percent and those with below-average ratings will receive 1.4 percent.


Total Salary Budget Increases, by Employee Category


Average base pay increases by employee group


Salary Increases
" src="http://businessfinancemag.com/files/misc_file/towerswatson_salary_increases_1.jpg" width=425 height=625>






Monday, August 22, 2011

Why companies are cozying up to napping at work - Fortune Management

Why companies are cozying up to napping at work - Fortune Management

Note From Jim: Looking for a new perk to offer employees? Read here:



http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/18/why-companies-are-cozying-up-to-napping-at-work/

Friday, August 19, 2011

Why employees lie (and how to get them to stop) | Sam Taute | SmartBlog on Leadership

  By Sam Taute on August 18, 2011

Almost all businesses are forced to place ethical decisions in the hands of their employees. Whether employees decide to do right or wrong in these situations is less clear-cut than employers think, suggests the results of an experiment done by researchers  from Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. Often, it takes very little to sway workers in either direction.
In the experiment, participants could either lie or tell the truth to a counterpart. Lying was likely to result in participants receiving a $10 payout, while telling the truth was likely to result in a payout of $5.

Participants were broken into three conditions where [1] they were asked to make their decision immediately, [2] contemplate their decision for 3 minutes before acting or [3] exchange an e-mail with an anonymous stranger before acting. The people who made their decision immediately and the people who had a conversation with someone who encouraged lying told the truth about half the time. The people who were given an instruction to contemplate their decisions for 3 minutes and the people who had a conversation with someone who encouraged honesty told the truth about 85% of the time.

SmartBrief recently asked the co-authors of the research, Brian C. Gunia, Long Wang, Li Huang, Jiunwen Wang and J. Keith Murnighan, some questions about what employers should should take away from their experiment. An edited version of their responses follows.

Does your research suggest that people’s initial instinct when faced with a decision is to act out of self-interest?

Several theories suggest exactly this — that people start their lives as self-interested and only through learning, or maybe evolution, acquire a willingness and a desire to think of others’ interests.  Our research suggests that right-wrong decisions naturally put people on the fence, and that a small amount of contemplation or conversation can push them onto more stable, ethical ground.
Does contemplation before making a decision and having a conversation before making a decision trigger the same psychological process, or do they simply produce similar results?


Our data cannot definitively resolve this question, since we could not “get inside” people’s heads.  However, we do believe that contemplation and conversation trigger a similar psychological process. Contemplation and conversation both lead people to weigh various considerations before acting. In a way, conversation is a public form of contemplation. Another reason that we believe the two are the same is that  people’s explanations of their actions almost uniformly supported their decisions, justifying them as natural and appropriate. This suggests that contemplation and conversation had similar long-term effects, in addition to their short-term impact on the decision itself.

Do you think that participants in your experiment were more likely to give honest answers when they were given time to think because contemplation leads to a desire act morally?  Or are there other factors that come into play, such as an increasing awareness of the potential for embarrassment if caught?

Again, it is hard to say without additional evidence. We do think embarrassment in front of others is an unlikely explanation for our results. Participants in all conditions of our study were assured that they would never see, meet or even know who their decision counterpart was — and they knew that their counterpart knew the same. They also knew that the experimenter would not learn whether they had lied. That said, it is possible that some people may have told the truth to avoid being embarrassed of themselves. This is consistent with other research that shows that people act more ethically when made aware of themselves by looking into a mirror.

Your experiment suggested that people were surprisingly influenced by a short message from an anonymous source. Why do you think people were so easily swayed?

We believe that these decisions truly put people on the fence, and it is quite easy to fall off, one way or the other. More seriously, right-wrong decisions force people to choose one of two, automatically-compelling courses of action. Decision-makers typically have several persuasive reasons to tell the truth, and several to lie. This forces them into a delicate balancing act, in which any number of small, situational factors can push them one way or the other.

What are some things that companies can do to encourage employees to make a habit of contemplating moral decisions before taking action?

Most obviously, companies should integrate contemplation into their formal training programs. Second, organizations should provide employees with clear, deliberate decision-making frameworks. Third, organizations might give employees who are likely to face many moral decisions more time to think. In other words, they could actually slow the pace of organizational life for these individuals; any loss in productivity would be balanced against freedom from moral scandal. Finally, organizations could integrate contemplation into their technology. For example, their computer systems might automatically require a “cooling-off” period for decisions above a certain dollar threshold. During this period, the screen might prompt individuals to think about and reinforce the organization’s values.

Sam Taute writes multiple SmartBrief newsletters and contributes to SmartBlogs on Restaurants and Social Media. A former intern at SmartBrief, he recently graduated from the Philip Merrill School of Journalism at the University of Maryland in College Park.



Thursday, August 18, 2011

How Leaders Can Turn Mistakes into Learning Opportunities - ThoughtLeaders, LLC

by Mike Figliuolo - Thoughtleaders, LLC


For many of us, screwing up is in our DNA. It happens. Call it Murphy if you like, but it happens. When this happens to someone on your team and you’re in a leadership role, however, the implications of a mistake can be far reaching.


The most important aspect of these kinds of events, however, isn’t the incident itself. As a leader, the most important part is your reaction to these events. Those reactions are what end up defining you in the eyes of your team. Allow me to illustrate.


In my younger days as a tank platoon leader, I was prone to take some pretty bold risks. On one occasion, I decided it was a good idea to abandon the plan my commander had written and lead my platoon down a different route. That route happened to go through what the map said was a swamp. It didn’t look like a swamp to me though.


I was wrong. It was a swamp. (Note: when the map says “swamp” it is a swamp). Imagine a 68-ton vehicle stuck in mud 3-5′ deep. Now imagine me standing atop said tank waiting to get chewed out by my commander. Can you say “awkward?”


When he showed up, he smirked and said something that caught me by surprise.


“That’s a good stuck.” It felt like he was a bear playing with a bunny before it mauls it.


“Yes sir. It is.”


“Okay. Help your crew get it out. Tell me if you need anything.” A wave of befuddlement washed over me.


“You’re not mad? Aren’t you going to rip my head off?”


“Why? It was a dumb mistake but it’s not worth ripping you. Did you learn something about your vehicle’s capabilities? Are you ever going to drive through a swamp again?”


“Yes sir. No sir.”


“Lesson learned. Get it un-stuck.” He strode off leaving me in awe of how he transformed what could have been a significant emotional event into a positive learning experience. Needless to say my (and my team’s) esteem for him rose dramatically that day. He knew we knew we made a mistake – no reason to rub it in. Instead, he taught.


Contrast that event with another one of my infamous platoon leader screw ups (I made a bunch of oopsies as a young lieutenant). At tank gunnery, we had a flash fire on my vehicle during a live fire training. The fire suppression system went off (which was loud and scary). We thought our ammunition had caught fire too. We evacuated the vehicle. Our procedure for doing so was less than textbook (Can you say “Keystone Cops?”).


Fortunately, everyone was okay. Unfortunately, a reasonably seasoned officer witnessed the event. In that moment, he chose to berate instead of teach. He ripped me for the awkward evacuation. He ripped me for some hydraulic fluid leaking from the bottom of my tank (FYI – ALL tanks leak). He did all of this in front of my soldiers and my peers.


Not once did he stop to ask if we were okay. Never did it enter his mind to find something to teach me about. Nope. His sole intent was to excoriate. Sure he got his point across but he lost exponentially more points in respect than the single point in “rightness” he scored.


Screw ups will happen. As a leader, people will judge you by your reaction to said mistakes. Don’t take it lightly. Both of these incidents happened 15 years ago and I remember them vividly. So do many of my friends who were there. Both of these men formed their image as leaders in some small part those days – one favorable, one not so much.


How will you show up as a leader during the next screw up? How will you take that opportunity to teach instead of torture? It might seem small but that event will be larger than you can imagine. Make sure you create that positive learning event.


- Mike Figliuolo at thoughtLEADERS, LLC Mike is the Founder and Managing Director of thoughtLEADERS, LLC. He is also the author of One Piece of Paper: The Simple Approach to Powerful, Personal Leadership You can reach him via email at info@thoughtleadersllc.com







Seven Reasons Your Reports Don't Trust You - BusinessWeek

Excerpts:

You think embracing falsehoods, half-truths, and evasions is part of your job as a leader? That would be a lie, too



August 16, 2011, 6:07 PM EDT


1. You withhold trust in others.

2. You ask much, yet fail to acknowledge effort.

3. You behave badly.

4. You don’t admit your mistakes.

5. You spin the truth.

6. You duck people and performance issues.

7. You don’t walk your talk.


Dennis Reina, PhD, and Michelle Reina, PhD, are co-founders of the Reina Trust Building Institute, which specializes in promoting workplace trust. They are also co-authors of Rebuilding Trust in the Workplace (Berrett-Koehler) and Trust and Betrayal in the Workplace (Berrett-Koehler).

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

The Problem with Perfection - Ron Ashkenas - Harvard Business Review

Ron Ashkenas is a managing partner of Schaffer Consulting and a co-author of The GE Work-Out and The Boundaryless Organization. His latest book is Simply Effective.

FEATURED PRODUCTS
The Science of Thinking Smarter: A Conversation with Brain Expert John J. Medina
by John Medina, Diane Coutu    $6.95    Buy it now »


The Productivity Paradox: How Sony Pictures Gets More Out of People by Demanding Less
by Tony Schwartz    $6.95    Buy it now »


If you're not familiar with the law of diminishing returns, it states that at a certain point adding more effort will not produce significantly more gains. The challenge is knowing when you've reached that point. For many managers this is an important question: How far do I keep going on a project before I declare that it's "good enough" — and that further effort will not significantly change the outcome?

Several years ago I worked with a project team charged with increasing sales to its large corporate customers. At the first meeting the team brainstormed ways to drive up sales, but before moving ahead decided to collect data about current sales and survey sales managers and customers. Since it wasn't clear which ideas might work, this seemed like a logical next step — until the data analysis work dragged on for months as the team tried to reach the perfect answer.

I've seen this pattern in many organizations where, instead of moving into action, managers insist on doing more analysis. In some cases this is part of a company-wide "paralysis by analysis" culture, while in others it is a personal tendency of the manager or team involved. Either way this oft-repeated pattern results not only in wasted effort, but significant delays in moving forward.


From my experience, there are two often-unconscious reasons for this unproductive quest for perfection. The first is the fear of failing. In many organizations, coming up with a recommendation that doesn't ultimately succeed can be career limiting. So to avoid this fate, managers put in extra effort to get the "right" answer, and back it up with as much data and justification as possible. Then, if it doesn't work, nobody can say that they didn't do their homework.

The second driver of unproductive perfection is the anxiety about taking action. Studying problems and coming up with recommendations is safe territory; while changing processes, procedures, incentives, systems, or anything else is much higher risk. Action forces managers and teams out of their comfort zones, driving them to sell ideas, deal with resistance, orchestrate work plans, and potentially disrupt work processes for colleagues and even customers. So one way to avoid dealing with these messy issues is to keep the study going as long as possible, thus delaying any action.

Because of these psychological dynamics, breaking free of unproductive perfection is not easy. But if you are a project sponsor, leader, or team member, and want to move into action more quickly, here's an approach you can try: Instead of viewing "action" as something that follows research, think about how action can occur parallel to research. In other words, rather than coming up with perfect recommendations and then flipping the switch months later, start by testing some of your initial ideas on a small scale immediately — while collecting more data. Then you can feed the lessons from these experiments into the research process, while continuing to implement and scale additional ideas.

For example, in the sales case described above, the team shifted its patterns by selecting three corporate customers where they could quickly test some of their ideas, in a low-risk way, in collaboration with the sales teams. With one customer, the sales leader experimented with selling products and services together, rather than having services as an after-sell. A second sales leader added a paid advisory service to his offering. The third worked on building relationships higher up in the C-suite. The lessons from these experiments were then incorporated into the team's recommendations, which were then tested with several more customers and so on. Within a year, most of the corporate sales teams were working differently and increasing their overall sales.


Clearly the ideas that first emerge through this iterative approach are not going to be perfect, but by sharpening them through field-testing rather than theoretical analysis they will eventually become good enough to deliver results. Working in this way also reduces the risk of recommending the "wrong" ideas and the anxiety about managing change, since small-scale tests provide rapid feedback and engage others in the organization right from the beginning.

Perfection certainly makes sense when designing an airplane or an office building. But if the search for perfection is leading you to diminishing returns and an avoidance of action, it might be worth taking a different path.




Friday, August 12, 2011

What We Need Now - Tony Schwartz - Harvard Business Review

HBR Blog Network

Tony Schwartz is the president and CEO of The Energy Project and the author of Be Excellent at Anything. Become a fan of The Energy Project on Facebook and connect with Tony at Twitter.com/TonySchwartz and Twitter.com/Energy_Project.

8:40 AM Thursday August 11, 2011 Comments ( 5)

FEATURED PRODUCTS


The Productivity Paradox: How Sony Pictures Gets More Out of People by Demanding Less
by Tony Schwartz $6.95 Buy it now »

Overloaded Circuits: Why Smart People Underperform
by Edward Hallowell $6.95 Buy it now »

I can't ever remember living through such poisonously polarized times: the left and the right, immigrants and their antagonists, warring religions, and perhaps above all, the haves, who have ever more, and the have nots, who have ever less.

As William Yeats put it, "Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world."

Doesn't it increasingly feel that way?

We each move frequently between at least two realities, unaware we're doing so. The more primitive one, fueled by the lower parts of our brain, is instinctive, reactive, survival-based and selfish.

The higher one, filtered through our pre-frontal cortex, allows us to be intentional, reflective, future-oriented, and generous. In this state, we're capable of shaping our deepest values, delaying gratification, and making sacrifices that serve the greater good, including our own.

Ask virtually anyone to tell you their mostly deeply held values, and they'll invariably describe noble ideals such as kindness, compassion, honesty, fairness, respect for others, courage, and generosity.

The challenge is that our survival instincts so often overwhelm our more virtuous ones. In fear, which so many of us understandably feel in these difficult times, we contract. We become more mistrustful, vigilant, self-protective, and righteous, which only makes the fissures between us grow wider.

So how do we learn to rise to our best selves more often?

The first answer is to acknowledge how often we fall short of the ideals to which we aspire — and how much help we need in living them more fully. We need humility in place of hubris, and even a sense of shame, where it's warranted, as a spur to behave better.

Instead, we too often use our highest intellectual capacities, after the fact, to defend, rationalize, and minimize behaviors that actually violate our professed values. Or to blame others, or circumstances beyond our control.

I see this in myself every day. I value a healthy body, but I succumb to unhealthy foods. I believe deeply in kindness, but I don't always act kindly. I am appalled at the fact that we're profligately burning down our planet's limited resources, but I live in a house that's far bigger than I need.

I'm outraged by the fact that billions of people live in abject poverty, in the midst of plenty, but I continue to live an exceptionally comfortable life, and only allocate a modest percentage of my income to helping others.

And I rationalize. I tell myself I do more than most. That my work is about helping people. Or I try not to think about my contradictions.

The second step — mine, ours — is to actively challenge our infinite capacity for self-deception. In the simplest and most personal terms, that means seeking to hold ourselves more accountable to our deepest values, through our behaviors, every day.

It dawned on me thinking about all this recently that I need to be more literal about accountability, because otherwise the relentless demands of everyday life simply take over.

I decided to start keeping track, in a daily journal, of how I'm doing. If I say my health matters, what did I do to take care of it? What did I eat, and what exercise did I do, and how much did I sleep?

If I say kindness matters, how did my behavior reflect that, or violate it? I've already begun doing more pro bono work, in an effort to better serve the value of service to others.

Each of us is either adding value to the world we live in, or spending it down, by the sum of our actions. That's true no matter how you spend your days.

As Marian Wright Edelman put it, "We must not, in trying to think about how we can make a big difference, ignore the small differences we can make which, over time, add up to the big differences that we often cannot foresee."

Some of those involve taking better care of yourself. Others involve taking better care of others. Living intentionally, and by your deepest values, requires not just awareness and intentionality, but also sacrifice.

We all instinctively and automatically move towards pleasure. It takes no effort to be impulsive or reactive. What's endlessly difficult is to challenge our comfort zone, to transcend our survival instincts, and to reach beyond ourselves.

We need each other for that. It's the next evolutionary leap, from "me" to "we." Who can you recruit to push you, and cheer you on, and hold you accountable to your commitments, while you do the same for them?

We're all in this together. Like it or not, we live in an increasingly interdependent world.

We're either growing, or we're getting weaker. There's no standing still. Whether you shared his politics or not, Eldridge Cleaver was right. We're either part of the solution, or we're part of the problem.



Access Content Source And Other Great Stuff: http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2011/08/what-we-need-now.html?referral=00563&cm_mmc=email-_-newsletter-_-daily_alert-_-alert_date&utm_source=newsletter_daily_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert_date

Thursday, August 11, 2011

What Research Says About The Perfect Gift - Inside Influence Report - Noah Goldstein Ph.D.

August 10, 2011



Wednesday, August 10, 2011

10 immutable laws of mistakes | TechRepublic

By Alan Norton
August 2, 2011, 2:11 PM PDT


Takeaway: Mistakes are inevitable. But as Allan Norton explains, certain laws govern how we deal with them, learn from them, conceal them, and even profit from them.


For something so certain, so common, and so potentially destructive, mistakes remain a mystery. Why do we make them? Why do we repeat them? These 10 laws will give you a better understanding of what mistakes are and how to best deal with them.



Law #1: Everyone makes mistakes

“Everyone makes mistakes. That’s why there is an eraser on every pencil.”Japanese proverb



This amusing yet clever Japanese proverb reminds us that there is something innately human about the mistakes we make. It also wisely implies that we have the power to correct our mistakes.


Corollary: Nobody can change law number one.



Law #2: Not all mistakes are bad mistakes

“The only man who never makes mistakes is the man who never does anything.”Theodore Roosevelt



Mistakes are going to happen, but that is not always a bad thing. The person who makes no mistakes isn’t taking any risks or living life to its fullest. By playing it safe, you may miss out on some of life’s greatest rewards. Wise men and women seek perfection but allow themselves the luxury of making mistakes.


If you still believe that all mistakes are bad, consider this question: How can a mistake be considered bad if more is gained than lost? There are many examples of serendipitous mistakes that have led to great discoveries. Penicillin, for example, was discovered by Alexander Fleming when he accidentally left a petri dish open. And how about those mistakes that are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars? My favorite, the Inverted Jenny stamp, was sold in November of 2007 for $977,500!



Law #3: Mistakes not seen by others are not mistakes

“When a tree falls in a lonely forest, and no animal is near by to hear it, does it make a sound?”Charles Riborg Mann and George Ransom Twiss



If a mistake is made and no one knows about it, is it a mistake? Okay, to you it is a mistake. But if no one else is aware of your mistake, it isn’t a mistake — assuming, of course, that you correct your error before someone else does see it. It’s not necessary to proclaim every mistake you make, especially the stupid ones. Why unnecessarily damage your image and possibly your career? But you can pass on the lessons you have learned from your mistakes and still be a hero for a day.



Law #4: Ignorance does not excuse your mistakes

“Ignorance of the law excuses no man…”John Selden



Likewise, not knowing a system feature or behavior that leads to a mistake cannot be used as an excuse. I learned VB transaction processing to speed up the loading of data into a remote database. Unfortunately, I was unaware of the consequences of processing large numbers of transactions before committing the records. The network crashed and I owned up to my mistake. It may have been an unintentional mistake, but pleading ignorance wouldn’t have changed the fact that I was responsible for crashing the network.



Law #5: Mistakes occur at the very worst time

“If there is a worse time for something to go wrong, it will happen then.” Corollary to Murphy’s Law



I have always appreciated Murphy’s Law and its corollaries, including Murphy’s computer laws. Perhaps that is because there is a certain amount of truth in them. It is no coincidence that frequently, the worst mistakes occur at the worst time. End-of-project mistakes happen due to stress, time pressures, and fatigue. A deadline often leads to mistakes in the scramble to complete a task. Less time to recognize and fix mistakes is often the genesis of what can and will go wrong.



Law #6: Mistakes beget mistakes

“Desperate people do desperate things. — Anonymous



Your heart is racing, beads of sweat are forming on your brow, and your stomach feels like it has both butterflies and moths. You have just made the kind of mistake that can be career-ending. How will you proceed? You decide to quickly fix your mistake before someone else sees it. But this is no time to make another mistake. First, take a few deep breaths and ask yourself several questions:


  • Will I take unnecessary and dangerous risks to correct my mistake?
  • Am I in over my head and need help?
  • Can I fix this problem without making it worse?


You are more prone to make bad decisions when under a large amount of stress. The last thing you want in a career-defining moment is a comedy of errors. Stay calm, remain levelheaded, and take the time you need to avoid additional mistakes.

Law #7: Mistakes made with computers propagate faster and cause more damage

“Computers have enabled people to make more mistakes faster than almost any invention in history, with the possible exception of tequila and hand guns.”Mitch Ratcliffe



Oh, the power you wield as an IT professional! You have the power to damage so much with the smallest of mistakes. Use an OR instead of an AND or put a decimal point in the wrong place, and all kinds of bad things can happen. The work you do is “supercharged” once it is run on a computer. The pressures to produce perfection are enormous. Since we all make mistakes, the only reasonable course is to take great care in the proofreading and testing of your work before turning it on to the world.



Law #8: Mistakes of inaction are mistakes nonetheless

“I never worry about action, but only about inaction.” - Winston Churchill



As you get older, you begin to realize the mistakes you have made by not asking out your high school sweetheart, not fighting for what is right, or any number of other what-if situations. Similarly, you may second-guess not getting that certification, not taking that project lead position, or other decisions of inaction you have made on the job. The tragedy is that these decisions are often life-altering. Equally tragic, whether they were mistakes or not may become obvious only in the clarity of hindsight. Other mistakes of inaction are clearer to identify as true mistakes:


  • Failing to communicate
  • Failing to research in detail
  • Failing to analyze thoroughly
  • Failing to test all possible outcomes
  • Failing to perform root cause analysis


Law #9: Failing to own up to your mistakes is a mistake



“You may make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you start blaming someone else.”Mary Pickford
If you can’t quickly fix your mistake, hiding it is almost always a bad idea. Finding the humility to admit your error ASAP will allow others to come to your aid. More knowledgeable members of your team can help determine the full scope and impact of your mistake and help in the remediation process. You compound your mistake further if you blame someone else or a peer is implicated for what you have done — and no one with a conscience wants to live with that.



Law #10: Failing to learn from your mistakes is a mistake

“The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing.”John Powell



It has been said that life is a journey, not a destination. Mistakes are part of that journey, and it is an opportunity lost if we do not learn and grow from those errors we encounter along the way. But learning is not enough. We must also put into practice what we have learned or we have learned nothing at all.



The bottom line

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.”Rita Mae Brown



If it is true that you learn more from your mistakes than your triumphs, I must be a genius. And yet I am no genius. More than once while walking along the path of life, I have failed in the learning process. I’ve caught myself making the same mistake over and over and not fully understanding why. The flowchart in Figure A helps to explain where the learning process can fail.



Figure A






The “learning from mistakes” process
When you make a mistake for the first time, you either recognize it or you don’t. If you recognize it, you fix it if you can. It’s a fairly simple process. The second time you are presented with a similar situation, you must first recognize the situation, remember the mistake you made, and then change your behavior. Fail at any of those three decision points and you will repeat the mistake. That is a more complex process and the reason why we repeat our mistakes.



My favorite mistake is the intentional one. Navajo rug makers include a small imperfection called a “spirit string” to allow the “spirit” that they have put into the work to escape and because only God is perfect. Lest we forget, this is perhaps the greatest “mistake” quote of all: “To err is human, to forgive divine.” — Alexander Pope. And the world could use a little less human and a little more divine right now.




Get IT Tips, news, and reviews delivered directly to your inbox by subscribing to TechRepublic’s free newsletters.




Alan Norton began using PCs in 1981, when they were called microcomputers. He has worked at companies like Hughes Aircraft and CSC, where he developed client/server-based applications. Alan is currently semi-retired and starting a new career as a writer for TechRepublic.







Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Autonomy Enables The Helpful To Perform | Bret L. Simmons - Positive Organizational Behavior

Autonomy Enables The Helpful To Perform Bret L. Simmons - Positive Organizational Behavior


BretLSimmons.com


Autonomy Enables The Helpful To Perform



August 8, 2011 by Bret L. Simmons


Read more: http://www.bretlsimmons.com/2011-08/autonomy-enables-the-helpful-to-perform/#ixzz1UXfkpSnw




If everyone in your organization only did what was written in their formal job descriptions, your business would be mediocre at best. For your business to excel, your workforce from top to bottom needs to be full of good organizational citizens. Good citizens at work go above and beyond their assigned duties to try to help fellow employees and the organization.


Employees help each other by offering advice, lending a hand, resolving conflicts, and celebrating each other’s achievements. Employees that receive trustworthy help from others feel an obligation to reciprocate, which strengthens work relationships. Good citizens in thriving work relationships will be motivated to find ways to perform their tasks more effectively and efficiently. Employees that help each other strengthen the bonds of trust with team members and supervisors, and we know trust has a strong effect on performance.


Unfortunately, good team relationships won’t matter much if employees aren’t given the latitude to improve their jobs. And good team relationships will struggle to develop when employees can’t help each other because they are constrained to “just worry about getting your job done.”


A study by Muammer Ozer recently published in the Journal of Applied Psychology (full citation below) showed how autonomy affected the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and job performance. This study of 266 employees, coworkers, and supervisors showed that citizenship behavior improved work team relationships, and work team relationships had a significant effect on job performance.


Those relationships between citizenship behavior, teamwork, and performance are expected. What’s new here is the importance of autonomy in enabling this virtuous chain of behaviors. The study found that the links to performance were enhanced for those with the most job autonomy. Highly autonomous workers were better citizens, had better team relationships, and were better at translating those team relationships into improved performance.


Because autonomy matters so much to most workers, it matters to your business. Constrain your employees’ ability to help each other and work together to improve their jobs and you will likely also constrain the growth of your business. Help yourself by helping your employees help each other.


What do you think? Please share your thoughts in the comment section below!


Citation: Ozer, M. (2012). A Moderated Mediation Model of the Relationship Between Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology


Related Posts:


Ten Keys To Real Responsibility


Evidence For Leading By Example


Authentic Leadership
Acess Content Source And Other Great Stuff: http://www.bretlsimmons.com/2011-08/autonomy-enables-the-helpful-to-perform/

Read more: http://www.bretlsimmons.com/2011-08/autonomy-enables-the-helpful-to-perform/#ixzz1UXfd21ZH



Nitpicking frustrates managers, employees - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

By Gannett News Service



A lot of bad things have happened as a result of the difficult economic times, but one of the worst has been the rise of the micromanager.


Faced with the stress of layoffs and the anxiety of constantly being asked to produce results, bosses with nitpicky tendencies sometimes have become full-blown micromanagers. Those who were micromanagers before the recession may have evolved into micromanaging Godzillas, wreaking havoc among the cubicles.


We often demonize such supervisors who dog our every move, making our lives a constant battle as we strive to do even the smallest of tasks without having to justify it in a 10-page memo. We long for the days when we can make one decision without have it second-guessed.


As in the movie "Horrible Bosses," we may lament our rotten micromanaging bosses to friends in the local pub, whining about our lot in life.


But what if the micromanager is you?


No one likes to admit being a micromanager. It's like saying you are an incompetent, insecure, ego-driven nincompoop.


You may say you're just a hands-on manager or that you have such a moronic staff that you must oversee everyone's work if you don't want to go down with the ship.


Those may well be convenient excuses. John Beeson, principal of Beeson Consulting Inc., says the real way to know if you've strayed to the dark side of micromanaging is to ask yourself a couple of questions about your management style:




Does the amount of time spent following up on the work of staff members get
in the way of tasks that are a better use of your time and attention?





• Do you expect that anyone who works for you should handle an issue exactly
as you would — even if your employee's solution is equally effective?



Say yes to either one, and you might be a micromanager, Beeson says.


One key for a manager is learning that micromanaging not only hurts the company's bottom line, but his or her personal career.


"If senior management sees that you can't take on extra responsibility because you micromanage, then it could impact your ability to move forward," he says. "They might decide that while you're doing a great job at your level, if they gave you more, you might be overwhelmed and they would be taking a risk in the organization."


If you realize you may be a micromanager and want to change to save your career, what should you do?


Beeson, author of "The Unwritten Rules: The Six Skills You Need to Get Promoted to the Executive Level," recommends these steps:


Get feedback. Find a mentor or approach human resources to set up a 360-degree feedback session so you can get specific ideas on where people think you interfere with their ability to do their job.




• Avoid going overboard. Beeson says some managers have an on-off switch and either micromanage or delegate and forget.


He suggests that it's more effective to spend time with a staff member outlining why an issue is important, the key players who are involved, the extent of the staffer's authority, and circumstances when you need to be consulted. By scheduling regular times to talk, you can be confident that you're delegating effectively, he says.


• Realize that sometimes you still need to micromanage. "If there is something that is critical to your corporation or perhaps something is off track, then that's when it's prudent to be more involved," he says.




• Develop good infrastructure. If you find you need to micromanage because you believe your team isn't capable, then you need to develop your staff so that they can meet new challenges.


"Not only is micromanaging a handicap to your own career success, but micromanagers tend to inhibit the development of good people," Beeson says. "And over time, they're going to lose their good people."

Access Content Source And Other Great Stuff:  http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_750393.html