Learning to Lead

Our company recently set up a billiards table in our lunchroom. During lunch this afternoon, I was watching one of my direct reports, a manager, play a game against an employee from another department. I watched this manager run the table, almost effortlessly, while the employee struggled to get a shot.

But the difference between the two was not the ability to sink a shot. They both could do that almost equally well.

The difference was the manager's ability to plan the next shot. I watched his face as he studied the table before each shot, and I could actually see him track the path of the cue ball to the intended post-shot location. He would then sink the billiard, almost ignoring it as it dropped in the pocket. His attention was focused on the cue ball as it rolled into place for his next shot.

The employee, however, would take the shot and then focus intently on the ball she was trying to sink, ignoring the cue ball altogether. The cue would usually end up in a place that didn't provide her a clean follow-up shot.

 Simple billiards strategy (as I'm told...I'm not very good at billiards). Also very applicable to leadership and management.

Set yourself up for the next move. Position your resources to sink the next ball. This management technique, like the same technique as applied in a game of billiards, must be practiced until it becomes habit. Set up your current endeavor to help you succeed on the next one. Once your current project is running smooth and looks like it will easily reach the goal, allow your available resources to handle it from there. In billiards this is physics. In management this is people. Turn your focus to the future. The past cannot be changed, the present is an illusion, but the future is real and waiting for you to alter it.

Keep the cue ball in control.

Let's take a break.

You need to watch this video. Then stop by here.

You might learn something.

MJH

In a very famous management "how-to" book called The One Minute Manager, Blanchard and Johnson suggest that reprimands for unacceptable behavior be immediately followed with praising the employee's competency as a worker. The theory is that the manager is making it clear that the performance is being reprimanded, but the person is not. In doing so, the manager avoids discouraging the employee from taking risks and doing their job to the best of their ability.

However, there is some controversy out there regarding this technique. Although I have not committed one way or the other yet, I tend to agree with the theory that mixing praise with reprimand can confuse an employee and cause them to miss the point of the reprimand. I lean in this direction because I've seen some confused looks on employee's faces when using the reprimand/praise technique. "Am I being reprimanded, or did I do well?"

The manager must communicate clearly with the employee. By mixing these two polar opposites, the lines of communication can be easily crossed. I recommend keeping praise and reprimand separate, as long as you make it clear that once the reprimand is over, it is completely over (i.e. don’t hold a grudge for the day). If anyone else has comments on this subject they would be welcome here.

Remember; praise publicly, reprimand privately.

MJH

When I was recently given the honor of becoming our company's first Director of Operations, nobody in the company ever asked the important question of who would fill my previous role. It was assumed that "Mr. Jones" (that's an alias, people) would take the position. He did. I assumed my new role, and things progressed nicely.

Why didn't anybody question who would replace me? Because I planned it that way. Almost 2 years ago I began grooming Mr. Jones for my job. I reviewed the skills that he did not have which he would need to successfully fill the role I was in at the time. Then I began coaching him and guiding him towards the development of those skills. By the time I was promoted, he was ready and everybody knew it... beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I did this because I knew that one day I would either:

A. Be promoted

B. Leave the company to pursue other opportunities

C. Die

Whichever option occurred, it would leave a void where I had been. Therefore I needed to have someone ready to step in and fill that void; someone prepared and capable. Even though option "C" scared me a bit, what scared me more was the possibility that option "A" would occur and I would have nobody to take my place. This could potentially lock me into my previous role since the company might decide to hire from the outside to fill the Director's position; after all, I was doing fine in the current role and there wasn't anybody to take my place anyway.

Now I am grooming Mr. Jones to fill my current position, even though I've only been active as Director for a little over a month. I've also given him guidance on how to choose and groom his potential replacement. He's even given thought on guiding his potential replacement to groom their potential replacement.

Musical managers is a good game, as everyone tends to win... as long as they are prepared. Part of this preparation is preparing someone else, which is a time-consuming but rewarding task.

MJH

Some time ago, a manager with our company tendered their resignation and I was instructed by a high-level non-Chinese person that I should work closely with their replacement as the manager would certainly not share all their knowledge and information before leaving. I've heard this before, and found that this is generally the case here in China.

It is also the case in the US, but not as frequently (fortunately). The thinking that stimulates this poor behavior is a desire to see their replacement fail, as this would make the outgoing manager look as if they were the only one who could handle such a difficult position. (Pride causes a lot of problems, people)

Pshaw, humbug, and other expressions of dismay and disgust.

The world is JAM-PACKED with poor leaders and managers. I can throw a "How-To" book and hit a dozen right now, and I'm in a coffee house! What is rare and sorely needed is managers/leaders who don't waste valuable space, time, and oxygen. A manager who refuses to share their knowledge and wisdom upon vacating their position is a poor leader, and frankly a waste of good resources (food, water, air) that other, more valuable leaders could be consuming.

Sharing what you know with others is the key to building a stronger company. The outgoing leaders who refuse to do this are only weakening their industry and, ultimately, their nation. They are a disgrace to their profession. They are, in fact, worthless.

Mentor, people, mentor. Do it not only when you need to train a replacement, but do it daily. Find someone who shows promise and guide them towards success. Teach them by sharing your wisdom, knowledge, and stories of your failures. Build your team, your company, your nation, and your planet. Make yourself worthy of the valuable resources you consume.

Be a leader.

MJH

One important lesson I've learned was that any manager, seasoned or green, must step into a new managing situation with the assumption that they know nothing.

When I was in the (first) Gulf War, we had a new Platoon Leader (Lt.) take over our platoon. He was fresh out of the academy and immediately started barking orders like he knew exactly what was going on. This was during Operation Desert Shield, before the bullets started flying, and many of us decided that once the ground war started our first order of business was to put a round in the back of this idiot's head before he got us all killed. Fortunately we had a wise CO (Commanding Officer) who recognized that this Lt.'s life was in danger, and the officer was replaced before the ground war started.

Our new Platoon Leader (Big Mouth's replacement) was also fresh from the academy, but the first thing he did was sit down with all of us and say (nearly verbatim), "I'm Lt. Sorenson, your new Platoon Leader. I'm just out of training and I don't know a damned thing about you or soldiering except the useless crap I got out of books. Your first assignment is to teach me what I need to know to lead you out of this war alive and unscratched."

You never saw a more loyal group of followers.

Me in the Gulf in 1991, five days short.

On Monday one of my direct reports, who happens to be a department manager, recounted to me a frustrated recollection of what had occurred at the lunch table earlier that day. Apparently one of our senior managers had been asked by an employee if managing was difficult. The manager replied that "it was easy to manage people".

Of course my direct report was shocked by the answer, but as a subordinate of the senior manager at the table, she would not say anything to embarrass him in front of the employees. Rather than do that, she complained to me.

Let me make this perfectly clear; Managing is not easy, and anyone who says it is easy is doing it wrong.

The reason managing (people) is difficult is because of one key element in the mix: people. People are difficult because they are each unique and, to some degree, fairly unpredictable. You can predict some behaviors, but just when you think you've got them pinned down, they surprise you and change gears.

Everything non-organic (and even many organic things) in our universe is easily predictable. In fact, there's a lot of books, specifications, and properties data that will tell you exactly how something will behave if you apply a certain force or action to it. If you have a 10" long, 1" diameter T-60 Aluminum bar and you circular clamp it 1/2" from both ends and apply increasing force in a perpendicular direction on one of the ends (assuming the other end is secured), a metallurgist can tell you exactly when that bar will bend and exactly when it will break. He/she can even tell you precisely where it will break. Apply this same test to a human being and you'll get different results every time.

Okay, that's a little extreme, but it helps to illustrate my point. I spend a lot of time trying to determine my employee's personalities and behaviors; mainly behaviors because this is what matters to the company. Then I use this information to find the best way to motivate each of them to perform efficiently and be highly productive. No matter how close I get to perfectly predicting behavior, one day they will come in with a chip on their shoulder or a sudden change in personality (temporary or permanent) that will turn my understanding of their thinking process up on end. These are people. Managing them is akin to juggling balls of Jello, and probably messier.

Good managers spend their entire careers trying to perfect their skills, knowing that they will never perfectly manage a team. It is the curse of the profession, but it is also the blessing because it makes managing such an exciting job. Coming to work each day brings something new and challenging. Baby, if you like a challenge then you'll love managing people!

Easy, schmeasy. But oh, what wonderful challenge!

MJH

Recently one of our factories produced a sub-standard product for a customer. Our team failed to discover the problem and the product shipped. It was, of course, rejected by the customer upon arrival.

When the customer demanded 100% replacement product, my company accepted the responsibility and assured our client that this would be the case, and that we would do it as quickly as possible. When we turned to the factory, the factory began pointing fingers at us and refused (initially) to provide any replacement product at even a reduced cost.

The factory made their sale. As far as they were concerned, the minute the shipment left their dock, business was concluded. This, my friends, is what I call "Short-Term Insanity".

The factory focused on the short-term. Their profit margin on the sale was probably around $10,000 total. Short term goal accomplished. Take the money and run.

But I look at it differently. Business is about relationships, not money. Money is a consequence of those relationships. Let's replace the product at our loss (assume my company had the same margin). In the next five years we receive two orders per year, according to forecasting. That's $100,000 profit margin, less the bad shipment, which totals $90,000 profit.

Now please tell me; why would I sacrifice $80,000? There is only one possible answer; insanity. Focus on the short term and you are insane. The long term is where the relationship is going, and therefore the consequence of that relationship. Focus on the long term and you just might not end up in a loony-bin (or in a bankruptcy court).

Seth had a similar tale a few days ago that further illustrates this basic concept of keeping a customer; check it out.

MJH

Normally this blog is rather upbeat, but on ocassion I'm privy to an example of poor leadership skills that can serve as a wonderful example of what NOT to do. The British Chief of MI5 (the British national intelligence agency), Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller has today provide me with that example.

In a news story published on 11 November 2006 by The Independent (Sengupta & Bennett, 2006), Dame Eliza claimed that the Iraq war is to blame for driving British Muslims to terrorism.

Say what now?

I propose that perhaps the Iraq war is driving the British Muslims to dissonance and maybe even extreme anger. However, someone choosing to attack and kill innocent civilians is a personal choice and the responsibility for their actions belongs solely with themselves, not their external motivations.

Do British Muslims have a non-violent option concerning their frustration with their government's actions in Iraq? Surely they do have several. Protest groups have been very effective througout history. Organized petitioning of government officials (lobbying) seems to be highly effective, as well. What about a public awareness campaign wherein this group would post advertisements making their point and suggested solutions known to others?

By blaming the situation in Iraq for the actions of a few violent and selfish extremists, Dame Eliza is exhibiting her lack of ability to find the root cause of a problem. Moreover, by making such an accusatory statement without thinking through the situation to its rational roots, she has destroyed her credibility amongst many of those who depend on her for national security and probably many of those who work for her.

Taking responsibility for ones actions is not just a core aspect of good leadership, but it is a core aspect of being a good human being. Who is responsible for driving some British Muslims to terrorism? The British Muslim who commits the act of terrorism, that's who. Not the politicians, not the military, and certainly not the government employees within Iraq.

Dame Eliza - learn from her mistake.

--------------------------------

Sengupta, K. & Bennetto, J. (2006). The independent. MI5 chief says Iraq war is driving British Muslims into terrorism. Retrieved 11 November 2006 from http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article1...

Three months ago, I hired a department supervisor that I thought had a lot of promise.  As soon as she was hired on, she came to me with a concrete plan on how to improve her department and make it more efficient.  I nearly fell out of my chair with giddy joy, and prematurely chalked it up as a win.

This week, she gave her notice of intent to leave.  She cited her reason for departing as having the ability to recognize problems in her department, but the inability to do anything about it because she lacks proficiency in communication and execution.  Sadly, I don't disagree with her.  Over the last few months I've seen this behavior and documented many instances where this is the case.  Coaching has not stimulated much improvement, either. I've accepted her resignation, and we're currently looking for a replacement.

I learned something.  I'm still developing the details, but it goes something like this; a man (or woman) can have a good map, good supplies, a soft but sturdy saddle, and a good destination.  But if their horse isn't fit for the journey, they will never arrive.  This young woman's horse just isn't fit.  I don't know why I didn't see it in the interviews; none of us did.  This is the mystery that we will have to solve before we hire the next supervisor for this department.

In a very short time I'm going to have to figure out exactly what the horses of communication and execution look like.  This won't be easy, and if anybody has any advice I'd love to hear it (read it) right now.  Until then I'll be researching this like a fat man reading a menu at Sizzler.

This is a good rule in business and combat.

Recently I fired an employee who had been using company resources for inappropriate personal gain. The day I had the evidence, I called my HR manager and the department manager into my office. I informed them that I was going to terminate the employee today, and asked if there were any legal issues or other things I needed to consider. HR checked on it after the meeting and within an hour came back with a green light. The department manager was ready to rid his department of this person.

IT cancelled their access to the network and email accounts. I called them back in my office and explained to them how the situation would go. Then I called the employee in the office, presented them with the evidence, clearly stated that they were fired, and asked the HR manager to take care of the office supply handover and the department manager to escort the ex-employee out of the building once everything had been finished. I gave everyone 10 minutes from the time they left my office until the time the ex-employee's foot hit the elevator. Everything went *smoothly.

It's taken me two years to convince the GM that firing is something that is best done quickly and efficiently. Often in China, firing is taboo and it is better to just take work away from the employee or not give them raises until they leave. Wow. Talk about letting the wound fester.

Simple rule of personnel management: Hire Slow, Fire Fast. Make sure HR is with you, and get them out of the building. Rarely does it go this well, but in this case I'm glad it did as it was a good example for my department manager as he will handle any terminations in his department in the future.

MJH

*There was actually one hiccup, but it was my fault completely. While I was talking to the employee in my office, I had inadvertently left my cellphone ringer on. In the middle of the termination, "Crazy Frog" starts roaring from my pants pocket. I must admit it livened things up a bit! Thanks, Sparky!

Right now my company is going through some serious personnel issues.  It is necessary for this to happen right now in order that the company grow and survive.  Moreover, I myself am going through some personal issues that some would consider "serious".  Mix these things together with the everyday trauma of trying not to get hit by a Xiamen taxi, and you have what some might call a "stressful period in Mike's life." I know that's what I'm calling it.

I've heard that people are even talking about this behind my back; "What's going on with Mike?  He's been acting strange lately.  How come he's doing this instead of his usual that?  Why is he so darned handsome?" (Okay...I added the last one because the ego had a hunger pain and I had some extra ego-chow in my desk drawer)

I was recently told by one of my peers that I should not take personnel issues so personal.  I nearly dropped my chopsticks when I heard this.  Hey everyone; the core word in "personnel" is "person"; personnel issues are about people.  Firing or hiring or advancing someone in their career affects lives. Not only the lives of the person being fired or hired, but their family and friends.  It changes the course of lives.  Although the personnel issues must be resolved according to your professional priorities and objectives, I can't imagine how cold someone would have to be to ignore the fact that these are people.

I'm usually the last one to stress out in any given situation; immediately after my first combat situation during the Gulf War, some of my buddies remarked how calm I had appeared when the lead was flying.  I smiled coyly, reloaded my weapon, slung it over my shoulder, and promptly collapsed into a pile of blubbering flesh. In other words, I'm one of those guys who falls apart like a Jenga tower once the situation has calmed down.  This is likely because I'm too stupid to realize what's happening when it's actually in progress. Regardless, it has earned me the reputation of being the last one to stress out.

But I do stress, and when it happens I accept the stress. I just happened to take a peek at Astha's blog (just around the corner from mine) and I love the way she suggested dealing with stressful situations;

"While I've tried to negotiate with Murphy's law, an old  Indian analogy keeps popping up in my head: it's better to be a tiny blade of grass, which bends over and survives the worse storms, than be a proud tree, that's the first to be uprooted."

Lately, I've watched a few trees as they were uprooted and disappeared. I'm going to take Astha's advice and happily bend in the wind and wait the stress out. It will pass.

P.S. I was thrilled to learn that I received a cursory note in one of Lisa Haneberg's blogs. Although she was basically using me as a warning against attracting lawsuits, I'll take it. Come on...it's Lisa!

I have long been thinking about the stupidity and necessity of interviews, and after reading Seth's blog today I've decided to put my thoughts to paper (pixel?).

Yesterday I interviewed a beautiful young lady for the position of administrative assistant. Normally I wouldn't involve myself in interview on that level (its a matter of trust, people), but I'm trying to improve our company's ability to hire 'the right people' (aka "retention"). I don't ask the usual interview questions that others generally ask, partly because I'm experimenting with my interview style, and partly because I get bored after two minutes and like to spice things up ("If I started vomiting right now, what would you do?"). So I asked this girl, "If you could eat somewhere right now, where would it be?"

Yeah...what's that all about, Mike? It's interesting that you asked me that; I'm not really sure. I guess what I'm looking for is the ability to quickly shift thinking or something, or maybe I'm just hungry. At any rate, she wrinkled her eyebrows a bit and then responded, "Someplace new." Wow. Great response. I'm still trying to put the psychology together on that one (no fear of change? needs a date? hates Chinese food?) but the point is that I decided there might be another way to interview.

Many CEO's and other 'fatcats' are often interviewed over dinner or lunch. Why? Because you really get to know things about people when you eat with them. You can general personality traits from a meal in a restaurant; How do they treat the staff? Do they rush through the meal or enjoy it? Do they focus on the conversation or seem confused and distracted? Do they listen or just talk a lot? How are their communication skills (with me and the person taking their order)? What's with putting ketchup on their ice cream and should you be concerned about their obvious eating disorder or delighted at their creativity and bravery? These are all things that an interviewer can ask themselves about the interviewee during a high-powered meal-interview.

Why can't we do this for other positions? I want my Product Specialists and Product Engineers to be here for at least 10 years. That's my goal. So for that kind of return, what's the big deal if I take out 10 people to 10 meals? Seems like a great investment if it helps me hire 'the right person'.

I might develop this a bit further, but I'm concerned that the company owners will think I'm just trying to get more free meals (I'm actually a bit infamous for my love of free food). Still, I think it is worth pursuing. I'm curious what you might think, too.

MJH

Despite our media's best attempts to hide the truth in Iraq, on occasion it leaks out and explodes across the Internet. The latest one (which I've been able to confirm from several reliable sources as true information) comes in the form of a US Marine Corps First Lieutenant named Brian Chontosh.

This is a leader. He took responsibility for his subordinates, even far past the point of regard for his own life. As a Gulf War Veteran, I have a special high-regard for this leader as I understand how he had to fight fear and doubt as much as he had to fight the enemy soldiers who wanted his life. This man thought about the situation of his team, made a decision, and communicated it into action. He went further than most of us will ever be asked to go, but he did this in the true style of a leader; Think, Make Decisions, and Communicate.

Leaders don't control their people: they are responsible for them. They protect them. They LEAD them. My highest regards to a true American hero and an honorable leader, First Lieutenant Brian Chontosh.

MJH