Leadership | GROW GREAT

It's Never Too Late (Or Too Soon) To Focus - HIGHER HUMAN PERFORMANCE Episode 247

247 It’s Never Too Late (Or Too Soon) To Focus

Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS | More

Skilled photographers prefer manual focus over auto-focus. It’s because they trust their eyes more than they trust a microchip. It’s also because they have better control over the quality of the picture, or the outcome.

The thing about focus is that it changes with even the slightest movement. Move one inch in any direction and the focus needs to be adjusted. You’ve got to be constantly monitoring things with your eyes. It demands careful attention.

Focus isn’t merely an art for photographers. Or creatives. Or business people. We all need it.

Back in July 2014 Greg McKeown published an article over at Linkedin entitled, “The One-Word Answer to Why Bill Gates and Warren Buffett Have Been So Successful.” Greg posted this four quadrant chart…

focus chart

McKeown wrote the book, Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less. Here’s what the jacket cover on the book says about the subject of essentialism:

The Way of the Essentialist isn’t about getting more done in less time. It’s about getting only the right things done. It is not a time management strategy, or a productivity technique. It is a systematic discipline for discerning what is absolutely essential, then eliminating everything that is not, so we can make the highest possible contribution towards the things that really matter.

It’s about focusing on the things that really matter. It’s like this photograph of a pile of screws. The focus is primarily on just a few screws in the pile. They’re in clear focus. The others are out of focus. Some are more out of focus than others. That’s the price paid for focusing on just a few.

I’m sitting with an executive the other day and repeating advice that I distilled years ago when I found myself with an organization confused about the priorities. If employees had been asked, “What’s important?” they’d have answered, “Everything.” We think that may be the correct answer, but it’s not. It’s terribly wrong. And impossible.

If Everything Is Important, Then Nothing Is Important

If there are two pieces of wisdom I have sought to pass onto others this is right at the top. The other one is, “The quality of our questions determines the quality of our work.” Admittedly, that last one presupposes that we’re not just asking the questions, but we’re answering them. And with equal or superior quality. But today it’s about focus and figuring out what really matters. That second piece of wisdom enters into it because I don’t know how we can do that without asking questions. Tough questions.

When I consult or coach an executive or business owner I often find myself asking them, “Which of the 5 W’s and 1 H best describe your organization?”

Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?

I’ll ask them to just pick one. Usually, they quickly make their selection. I’m prone to only ask this question once I feel I’ve gained enough insight to think I know the answer.

The answer is important. If the leader sees things for how they really are, then the answer in my head usually matches the one they give. If the leader is trying to give the “right” answer and not being fully honest, then it shows. Either way, I gain some insight that may be useful in our work moving forward. I’d say mostly I hear the truth. Most leaders that I work with are honest, truthful and not deluded. It’s why they’ve engaged me. I don’t find deluded leaders often reaching out for any assistance. So I doubt my sampling is very scientific, but even so it’s helpful when we’re working on focus issues.

Organizations tend to concentrate more on one of these one word questions than the others. Top leadership determines which is most important. And they can change over time, but mostly I think a culture gravitates to whatever the CEO or top leader pushes hardest. In spite of all the talk about “anybody can be a leader” I’ve not found it to be the case in a practical matter when it comes to an organization’s culture. Not all leaders are created equally. The person at the top has far more to do with organizational focus than anybody else.

However, there is a practical daily routine that each of us can lead. To a point. It’s answered by the question, “What are going to work on today? Right now?”

The senior vice-president may answer with some things the CEO has mandated. The COO may answer with some things the board has mandated. The shift supervisor may answer with some things the plant manager has ordained. So it goes. We all answer to somebody. Even the CEO/founder of a privately held company must answer to financial partners, suppliers and others. None of us are in full command of our agenda or focus.

But let’s drive this down to where we all live and see if we can’t learn some things, or at the very least, get the wheels turning so we can elevate our own performance (and hopefully the people around us).

The One-Word Question That Trumps All The Others

I confess that I’m naturally wired to ask one question more than all the rest, “Why?” The reason or outcome of a thing has always been my natural focus. Not everybody sees the world that way and I’ve learned to appreciate that. It wasn’t easy, but I worked at it.

In my mind the “Why?” connects quite easily to helping answer the others. For example, I enter a company steeped in paperwork forms. As I assemble the stack of these I’m asking, “Why?” all along the way. An explanation is given on some. For others, nobody remembers why that form was created in the beginning, but it’s been in use for so long everybody assumed somebody needed it. Turns out there’s a lot of crossover work being done, meaning there’s a ridiculous amount of redundancy in the work. Rather than capturing information once, in some centralized location, the company is making multiple people gather the same information at multiple points along the way. The why answers the who, what, when, where and how. Who is gathering this information? Who benefits from this information? What are we doing with this information? When is this information being gathered and when is it being put to use? Where in the process are we gathering this and where does this information end up? How is this useful?

So while I admit my own inclination toward, “Why?” that’s not why I suggest it trumps all others when we’re talking about focus…I think it trumps the others because more than any of the others, it direct connects all of the others. It’s the reason for things. And isn’t that what focus is about. Isn’t that the reason for the lens being focused on just a few screws in that photograph instead of being focused on all of them? The photographer seemed to be focusing on the rusty screw and the head of the top screw. By doing that, a couple of other screws got some focus, too. But the others just didn’t matter as much. We see them. We know they’re screws. They’re just not as important as the ones getting most of the focus. Just a few screws were the reason for the focus.

What’s your reason? Simon Sinek wrote the book, Start With Why. Simon is a lot smarter than me so I’m happy to know somebody who confirms what I’ve long practiced.

Why is focus so hard? I guess there are millions of reasons but today I’m focused (see what I did there?) on one, distraction. Distraction isn’t merely the kind you think about when you consider texting while driving (watch this video and urge your kids to watch it, too). Distraction happens when we try to do too many things at one time because they’re all important. Again, if everything is important then nothing is important. That is, if we’re focused on everything and everything is vying for equal attention, then we’re going to end up disjointed and focused on nothing.

Career Application

No matter what your career path, focus is important, if not urgent. We all need to be able to answer the one-word question about our own career. What one-word question best describes your career and your approach to your career?

Much of my work involves helping executives learn who they serve. Particularly lower level executives who wear titles like “deputy” or “vice” or “assistant.” Often these people are in the trenches, albeit at a higher level. They’re more involved in the daily grind than their bosses. As a result they can tend to view things from a much lower altitude, and they must. But as they’re flying close to the ground they’re often unable to appreciate the higher view held by their boss and sometimes they can resent things they don’t clearly see. It’s just one reason some lower level executives struggle with second guessing their bosses instructions, or why they may find it difficult to salute the mandates they get from their boss.

It’s all about knowing who your number one customer is. Answer: It’s always your boss.

Sometimes the biggest career benefit I can give somebody is helping them better understand the value proposition of their career. Provide value for your boss and you’ll benefit. Provide higher value for your boss and you’ll greatly benefit. I see it everywhere I go. The person who can properly read and correctly anticipate the needs of their boss is the superstar. The person who can’t or won’t do those things is a burden and will soon be displaced. I can’t offer many guarantees, but I’ve seen this one play out many time through the years. I guarantee it.

It’s hard to focus on the needs or wants of your boss when you don’t agree though. That’s where you have to decide what you want to do, and what you can do. If you can’t do it where you are, then my best advice is to get somewhere working for somebody where you can. Because things will eventually disintegrate if you keep resenting the mandates from above.

Focus on yourself by focusing on your number one customer, your boss. It’s a concentration will demand you avoid the distractions of the office gossip parties and all the other noise that happens as organizations second guess the boss.

Business Application

In a recent episode of CNBC’s The Profit, Marcus Lemonis walked into a beauty salon and found all manner of merchandise. There were hair care products, knick knacks, jewelry and even apparel for sale in the first few feet of the store. He told the owner of his confusion when he first walked in. As is often the case on that show, Marcus hones in on the focus of the business. Turns out this salon owner had her own line of hair care products. The margins on those were in excess of 70% while all that other stuff had a margin, at best, of about 30%. From a business perspective it was a no-brainer. Devote more space to your own products, which are congruent with the salon business, and get rid of the rest. That speaks to how many people are distracted though. And the phrase leaps to my mind, “It seemed like a good idea at the time.” So does texting while we’re driving, but it’s dangerous.

Once again, I’m drawn to ask, “Why?” Marcus asks the salon owner that question. She didn’t have a good answer. It’s likely that somebody suggested, or came by selling their wares, and she made an emotional decision without thinking it through. Now here’s Marcus walking into her struggling business and it’s apparent to the most novice business among us. But she can’t see it because like all those forms I talked about, it’s been this way for so long she long ago forget why she did it.

Lack of focus in business – or any organization – happens when we get up today and repeat what we did yesterday. And we know tomorrow won’t be much different. We’re just pushing to keep our feet moving. But in what direction? Movement doesn’t equal meaningful, or positive action. Hamsters move quickly on a wheel, but they’re going nowhere. That’s exactly where some of our businesses and organizations are going, too.

Right Now Is The Time

Whether it’s your personal life, your career or your business…now is the time to focus. Or re-focus. When the slightest movement can put a camera out of focus what makes us think that all the movement happening in our lives won’t do the same for us? This isn’t a set-it-and-forget-it kind of a thing. And our lives don’t have an autofocus setting. We’ve got to keep our hand on the focus ring of our own lives and make sure we’re concentrating on the things that matter most.

Like that picture of the screws, we don’t have to focus on just one, but we can’t focus on everything either. Focus on your family. Focus on your career. Focus on your friends. There’s 3…and maybe your three look very differently. Mine are pretty simple to state, but crazy hard to remain true to with the intensity they deserve: faith, family and career. Like my favorite one-word question, “Why?” it’s likely because for me all 3 are so closely intertwined. I find that a loss of focus on one can quickly lead to a loss of focus on the others, too.

Randy

247 It’s Never Too Late (Or Too Soon) To Focus Read More »

What Can You Learn From Bill Parcells’ 11 Quarterback Commandments?

Leadership, Personal Development / By Randy Cantrell

Bill Parcells once coached the Dallas Cowboys. Around here it was a pretty fun time. I enjoyed the coach’s press conferences. Here in Dallas talk about the Cowboys is a year-round sport.

During Bill Parcells’ time here there was much discussion about the commandments that Parcells’ created for the quarterback position. Tony Romo struggled with many of these commandments for most of Bill’s tenure here. Tony seems (at least to me) to have rounded the corner, but now he’s got injury problems. They’ve lost their last 2 games and now Cowboy fans are seeing the prospect of another 8-8 season.

Parcells has a new book out and that got me thinking about his commandments. He talked openly about them when he was here in Dallas. I was looking at these commandments recently and wondering how applicable they are to other areas of life. You decide if any of them have value in your pursuits. I think you can apply them without much effort really.

Here’s the list:

1. Ignore other opinions – Press or TV, agents or advisors, family or wives, friends or relatives, fans or hangers on – ignore them on matters of football, they don’t know what’s happening here.

2. Clowns can’t run a huddle – don’t forget to have fun but don’t be the class clown. Clowns and leaders don’t mix. Clowns can’t run a huddle.

3. Fat QBs can’t avoid the rush – A quarterback throws with his legs more than his arm. Squat and run.

4. Know your job cold – this is not a game without errors. Keep yours to a minimum. Study.

5. Know your own players – Who’s fast? Who can catch? Who needs encouragement? Be precise. Know your opponent.

6. Be the same guy every day – in condition. Preparing to lead. Studying your plan. A coach can’t prepare you for every eventuality. Prepare yourself and remember, impulse decisions usually equal mistakes.

7. Throwing the ball away is a good play – sacks, interceptions and fumbles are bad plays. Protect against those.

8. Learn to manage the game – personnel, play call, motions, ball handling, proper reads, accurate throws, play fakes. Clock. Clock. Clock. Don’t you ever lose track of the clock.

9. Get your team in the end zone – passing stats and TD passes are not how you’re going to be judged. Your job is to get your team in the end zone and that is how you will be judged.

10. Don’t panic – when all around you is in chaos, you must be the hand that steers the ship. If you have a panic button so will everyone else. Our ship can’t have a panic button.

11. Don’t be a celebrity QB – we don’t need any of those. We need battlefield commanders that are willing to fight it out, every day, every week and every season and lead their team to win after win after win.

Have fun quarterbacking your own life.

What Can You Learn From Bill Parcells’ 11 Quarterback Commandments? Read More »

241 Why Plus-Minus Works In Business (Maybe Better Than It Does In Hockey)

Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Podcast / By Randy Cantrell

Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS | More

Hockey folks argue like any other sports fanatics. They second guess coaches and general managers. They fuss about who deserves to be called “the best” at any position. Even though they’re not as stat driven as baseball people, they do enjoy a good conversation about how some stats are determined. Plus-minus is one of the most hotly debated stats in professional hockey circles. Even though today’s show isn’t about hockey, I should help you better understand what plus-minus is and give you some sense of the debate.

Here’s how the NHL looks at it…

A player is awarded a “plus” each time he is on the ice when his Club scores an even-strength or shorthanded goal. He receives a “minus” if he is on the ice for an even-strength or shorthanded goal scored by the opposing Club. The difference in these numbers is considered the player’s “plus-minus” statistic.

Here’s the simple way to view it. If you’re on the ice when the other team scores, you’re minus 1. If you’re on the ice when your team scores, you’re plus 1. There are some other details, but they’re unimportant for our discussion.

Ice hockey players who have a poor plus-minus rating hate the stat. Understandably. At best it makes them look unimpressive. At worst, it makes them look detrimental. Is it fair? I suppose it depends on how much weight you give it. It’s just one barometer among many.

Players and even general managers in the NHL argue that line mates (the team mates you play with) have an enormous impact on that stat. A weak player surrounded by better players can have a higher plus-minus than a great player surrounded by lesser talent. North of the border (and I’m not talking about Oklahoma), the debate can grow quite intense. Stat freaks point out the problem with it and some have even suggested better alternatives.

Why I Like It In Business

Ice hockey isn’t played in a vacuum argue the opponents of the plus-minus stat. Neither is business, but it may be a better stat in business than hockey.

Hockey makes the assumption that if a player is on the ice when his team scores then he’s doing better than if he’s on the ice when the opponent scores. So far so good. But hockey isn’t an individual sport. A hockey player has teammates playing along side him. And a crucial element of the game resides on the shoulders of a single player, the goaltender. If my goalie is a stud and your goalie can’t stop a beach ball…I’m gonna beat you in plus-minus every time.

Business is a team sport, too. But different.

Like hockey players you have individual responsibilities. Your performance may be affected – positively or negatively – by teammates. Tell that to your boss. Just make sure you’ve got a written resignation in your hand when you do. 😉

Almost 20 years ago I began thinking about how sales performance is measured for individual salespeople. It began with commission-based retail sales.

Since the late 70’s and early 80’s I had been accustomed to using a variety of meaningful measurements to lead sales teams. In retail there have long existed some telling stats.

Closing ratios may be among the most looked at stat among salespeople. It simply mean, how many prospects out of 10 did you sell? If you talked with 10 people and sold 3, then you’re closing ratio is 30%. Today you mostly hear people call it conversion. How many prospects did you convert into paying customers? In web terms, how many visitors to a website did you convert to take whatever action you wanted them to take?

Eyeballs on a web page matter, but not if we’re unable to convert them into something more meaningful – subscribers, email opt-in’s, buyers, or whatever else you’re trying to get them to do. In the television world, producers want to attract as many eyeballs as possible so they can sell advertising. The more eyeballs on a TV show, the higher premium they can charge for 30 second spots. The advertisers want more eyeballs on their ads so they can drive business. Maybe they want more diners to their restaurant, or more drinkers of their beverage, or more shoppers into their showrooms. Whatever it is, you can bet it being measured 8 ways to Sunday.

Conversion is king. We all need to convert shoppers into buyers. When we focus merely on attracting more prospects and we neglect looking closely at conversion, it’s like working to catch more fish when our holding tank as a hole in it causing us to lose the fish we’ve already caught. Conversion is a middle-of-the-funnel problem, not a top-of-funnel one.

Average ticket is another common retail stat. If we sell to 10 people and total their invoices, then divide by 10…we’ve got our average ticket amount. The higher the better. Sorta.

A higher average ticket assumes customers are buying more, or buying higher end stuff. It also assumes that profits will go up as ticket prices do. Of course, some assumptions can prove wrong. For example, I’ve seen some salespeople who had a high average tickets, but they weren’t making as many sales as their teammates because they were cherry picking shoppers. If a shopper was interested in something that wasn’t high end, they’d abandon them. Pathetic customer service resulted in a higher average ticket. All that glitters ain’t gold. Things aren’t always as they appear.

I like plus-minus in some situations because it assumes an equal opportunity for everybody. Leaders should do everything to make sure people have the best opportunity for success. They don’t always do that because they let their preference for some people override their sensibilities.

Since I started out using sales as the example, let’s stick with that. In selling not all opportunities are equal. Talk to any outside sales force and you’ll quickly hear about Joe and his luck in having the best territory in the company. “He wins every year. I would too if I had his territory,” cry all his co-workers. And they may be right. But maybe Joe built the territory. Or maybe Bill retired 3 years ago after creating the number 1 territory in the company and Joe inherited it. Would plus-minus help in looking at Joe versus his co-workers? Not likely.

But there are lots of sales situations where it might work wonderfully. Ten guys are working in a car dealership’s new car sales department. They’re all working 6 days a week. They all put in about 50 hours a week. They’re all selling the same inventory. They’re all at the same location. But they have different experience, different skills and different client bases.

Plus-minus helps us examine and put the attention on contributions. That’s why I like it. On the downside (for the salesperson), it can also focus attention on deficiencies.

We can judge all 10 car salespeople equally with a plus-minus measurement. You can argue about whether we should judge them all equally if you’d like. I don’t like it because then we start getting into all that subjective nonsense. “I think you can do better,” a sales manager may say. If I’m the salesperson, I’m saying to myself, “You THINK…based on what?”

On the flip side, a less experienced car salesperson may argue, “Man, I’ve only been selling cars for 8 months. The top guy has been selling them for over a decade. I shouldn’t be measured by his standard.” My response would be, “Then how should you be judged?”

Maybe there are no perfect measurements or stats. In anything. But some clearly are more meaningful than others.

Sales organizations are notorious for establishing indiscriminate quotas based on feelings or thoughts. I’ve sat in too many meetings where leaders wanted to give one guy a higher quota because of his experience or skills. At the same meeting they want to give a lower quota to a person they feel is less capable, but may have been on the job just as long. Is that fair?

I don’t think so. I think it over burdens the more skillful and under burdens the less skilled.

Remember the old curve grading in school?

If you were on the bottom of the curve, you hated it. If you were on the top, you loved it. Of course, some brainiac would get a 100 and the rest of us suffered. If only we’d been assigned to a class of morons we could have had higher grades. It didn’t have anything to do with our lack of study or preparation. We were simply outmatched by geniuses. Story of my life!

Here’s what I think matters in our companies when it comes to measuring performance…who is performing above average and who is performing below average?

I’m not suggesting we focus solely on averages, however, we have to have some way of examining “typical.”

Suppose we’ve got 15 salespeople. Our total monthly sales are $2.43 million. If our sales team is performing identically, then each salesperson will have produced $162,000 in gross sales for the month. But no sales team is identical. Including ours.

We take a closer look at our 15 people and discover that 4 of them have brought in just under $2 million, leaving the other 11 to bring in only $440,000. It’s a disparity that blows our mind, but these things happen all the time in the world of selling.

The average (the total sales divided by the total number of salespeople) may not tell us the whole story, but the story it does tell is compelling…because 4 of our people are blowing the average away while the bulk of our team are performing dreadfully below the average. If $162,000 is the average, we’ve got 11 players who appear to be averaging only $40,000 ($440,000 total brought in by 11 of our 15 salespeople). They’re performing only at 25% of the average.

Four people on our team are producing $1,990,000. They’re averaging almost $500,000 each. That’s over 3 times the average. That’s about 210% over the average or over 8 times the productivity of the other 11.

Lots of costs associated with those 11. We’re probably not supporting the 4 superstars as well as we should because we’re carrying too much cost with those 11. But we’re not finished.

We really have to examine each player. Of the 11 we’ve got 1 who is performing better than the rest. Mary’s still not hitting the average, but she’s far and away doing better than her 10 other bottom feeder peers. She’s still a minus player, but she’s not as minus as most. On top of that, she’s the person with the least amount of experience or seniority. We think with a bit of help she could climb out of that pit so we invest in her. We pair her up with a mentor from among the top 4. We challenge her to learn all she can.

Another of the 11 was historically an above average performer, but recently he’s slipped. Luke was never top tier, but he was more consistently above the average line. We sense that he’s got it in him to do better, but we don’t know what’s happened to him over the last 60 days or so. We set out to find out.

Turns out he’s had some personal issues with aging parents. He’s had to devote more time to caring for a father whose health is failing. He and his wife took in his parents three months ago. Since then, life has drastically changed for him. It shows in his work.

Over time it becomes clear to us that we need to support the people with higher performance more. We decide it’s time to divide territory responsibility and get a better grasp of our own commitment to our customers.

The company decides to restructure responsibilities and assign accounts. And to design a new way of working. Luke is promoted to a new position inside the company. He’ll be off the road now and he’s going to spearhead over 80% of the accounts previously handled by all 11 of the poorer performers. These are accounts that range from small to potentially large. There’s no arguing the history though and the company feels Luke may be able to provide better service and support virtually than a larger team wasting time and resources in travel. Besides, he’ll have 2 assistants and together this team of 3 will be able to really concentrate on helping develop these accounts (in some cases on getting these accounts built back up to a prior status). The two assistants are among some of the 11. They happily accept their new roles because their bonuses are going to be team based and they too are no longer on the road. Four of the 11 are now situated. Seven are on the block to be cut from the team or reassigned.

Now 5 superstars (4 really, plus 1 in training) are on the road responsible for the bulk of the monthly revenues. The accounts that have historically been bringing in the bulk of the revenue are divided among this team.

Three others are going to be at HQ handling the rest of the accounts.

We check in 6 months later and here’s what we see…

The 5 road warriors have found a new level of success. The company has poured resources into them fostering a greater degree of unparalleled service and support. Customers are responding very positively. Sales are up over 30%. This group of 5 are now responsible for monthly sales exceeding $2.7 million. The differences between the 5 fluctuates month to month as one person gets top honors one month, then somebody else the next. There’s no more than 15% difference among them, from top to bottom.

The inside team of 3, led by Luke, are doing exceptionally well. Luke has even hired a 4th person to join the team due to the success. Part of the 30% increase of the road warriors is due to Luke’s hard work to develop 2 critical accounts that had slipped in recent months. Luke nursed them back to a state where they were assigned to the road warrior team. His team was compensated for their success, not penalized. The company paid the entire team a nice quarterly bonus when it moved those 2 accounts. That fuels Luke and his team to see if they can do more of that in the future.

Last month the company gathered all the people in sales – Luke with his 3 employees and the five road warriors. Nine now in total. Nine doing more than 15 were doing before. The company is working out a plan to fairly compensate the entire team for the sales success. Luke drafted a plan to not just serve the accounts not being handled by the road team, but to support all the accounts. It’s in the 3rd stage of revisions, but everybody is excited about the prospect of more growth (and higher paychecks all the way around).

No, it doesn’t always go this way. And I’ve not talked about the bad news of 7 people whose jobs were at risk because they were performing woefully below average. But the truth is, people are either contributing to the success of an enterprise or they’re a negative influence, detracting from the enterprise’s ability to succeed. I’d argue that anybody who is neutral – they’re not draining nor contributing – is a drain. I’m not arguing that we should terminate all the players who are below average, but we’d better we figuring out why they’re not even average.

Soar with your strengths. It’s a philosophy I have led by for decades because it works. And I believe in it.

Give me those top tier performers. Let me pour resources to help them achieve 5% more per person and I’ll conquer the market.

Plus minus let’s us determine who is helping and who is costing us. But better than that it gives us a measurement we can use to manage the performance of our work. People want to contribute. People want to excel. Too often sales management is about arbitrary quotas that frustrate salespeople.

“You’re not supposed to hit it,” he said to me. I was a young road warrior busting my tail to hit quotas that seemed impossible because they were. The company had made sure of it. When the VP told me that I wasn’t supposed to hit them, you’d have thought relief would have come over me. It didn’t. Instead, I felt lost. Stupid and lost. Here I had been working feverishly to accomplish a goal I thought somebody smarter than me had devised. Surely they know something I don’t. So I went for it. And failed.

Now, I no longer trusted my employer. I found it difficult to work so hard for them any more. I had been betrayed by a company playing a game they never let me in on. They lied to me.

Had I been allowed to see where I stood relative something measurable and fair, I’d have continued to bust my backside. But the truth was, in my circumstance there was only one way to know if you were doing a good job – contributing – or not. That was whether or not the VP told you you were. It was all far too subjective for me.

Plus Minus May Look Different For You. That’s Okay.

Don’t get too hung up in the details of all this. Rather, I’d encourage you to find ways to analyze the performance of your sales team so you can be certain about the contributions. My main point years ago in coming up with this and other tools, was so I could move away from the “I think you’re doing a good job” kind of leadership, which is really NO leadership at all. My innate belief that people want to contribute led me to devise tools and plans that would foster people to perform at higher levels than they might otherwise. We all need feedback. We all need positive reinforcement that what we’re doing is working, or is the right thing.

Leaders and managers who neglect to come up with or embrace anything available to accomplish that are letting their people down. Your people deserve to know if they’re making a positive difference. And they deserve to be supported so they can make an even bigger positive difference in the future.

241 Why Plus-Minus Works In Business (Maybe Better Than It Does In Hockey) Read More »

237 Those Who Help Leaders Lead

Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Podcast / By Randy Cantrell

Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS | More

The Lone Ranger had Tonto. Johnny had Ed. Tom Petty has Mike Campbell.

Leaders need supporters to help them lead. I’m not talking about followers. I’m talking about the #1 follower. That someone special who the leader can’t do without. That person whose identity is so joined to the leader that they’re considered more like a team.

Inseparable really. The Lone Ranger needed Tonto. Johnny needed Ed and I’m a rabid Heartbreakers’ fan, unable to imagine Tom Petty without Mike. These are special partnerships where the two people aren’t equal – one is clearly in a position of leadership – but their work together excels in ways neither of them would otherwise realize. They both know they need each other. And they serve and support each other.

Effective leaders need a right-hand person who will provide superior support and feedback. It’s not a role just anybody can fill. It takes a special breed of person to give of themselves in a way to help somebody else.

Ego and envy usually get in the way. People can find it difficult to give of themselves so fully as to support somebody else’s success. But that’s exactly what must happen if you’re going to be a remarkable #2.

“I’m not gonna invest my career in him,” he tells me. The conversation had centered around taking responsibility for one’s career, something I think we should all do. But I’m sitting here wondering if I’ve been misunderstood.

“You have to invest in people though,” I exclaim. “Do you disagree?”

“Depends on how you define invest, I suppose,” he says.

What ensues is a long discussion about the limits of service and how that may impact our lives and our careers. We talk about rebellion, going your own way, carving out a path all your own and hoards of other idyllic philosophies. So I try to bring things back to the real world of figuring out who we are, what we are and how we can make the most of it.

My conversation partner is not a #1 guy. He’s a #2 guy, but he’s not a very good #2 guy. I know he’s not highly regarded by some in the organization. He doesn’t lack self-esteem. He lacks self-awareness.

I’ve encountered considerable self-absorption through the years. Plenty of people are delusional about their work, their careers and how others perceive them.

So I aim the discussion toward reputation management, something my conversation partner isn’t too keen on. He doesn’t think it’s necessary. He thinks it’s so much drivel that isn’t his problem, but somebody else’s.

I ask, “Do think I’m invested in you?” He looks at me, then peers around the room. Now I’ve spent hours with this guy. I’ve had more private conversations with his superiors than he’s even aware of. This isn’t my first rodeo and I can easily spot a person who brings value to the organization. This guy brings value. Unfortunately, he doesn’t bring enough. Yet. He can. He’s just resisting jumping higher to be part of the solutions. Too often he’s part of the problem and my job is to help him see it, explore ways to find solutions and to persuade him that he’s serving himself best when he’s serving those above him.

“I’m not sure,” he finally answers. I tell him that I think that’s fair, but I try to reassure him (I’ve assured him every single time we’ve talked) that I’m only here to serve him by helping him.

The conversation continues with much advancement. I leave feeling empty and sad. His bravado and outward confidence isn’t serving him well. I see the future and it’s not wonderful. So I leave wondering if I can do anything to convince him that his aspirations for top dog leadership are being stymied by his own arrogance. Early on I knew he was one of those “I’m the smartest guy in the room” people. He still is, even when his boss is in the room. Maybe especially when his boss is in the room.

Days later the boss wants to know, “How did you meeting with _________ go?”

I’m not going to lie. Or fluff it up. “Not very well,” I report. “I’m sorry that I’m not yet able to reach him because I know the value he can bring, but I also know the hurdles he presents. What are you seeing?”

The boss answers me. “I”m seeing some subtle things change. I suspect he’s learning more than you may think.”

He continues, “Don’t sweat it. He’s gonna have to decide for himself what he’s going to do.”

The boss sounds resigned. And I get it. He’s been looking for a solid #2 for a few years. He’s invested a lot of time and effort into this guy. Hoping he’d be the one. The guy’s got all the skills necessary, but he’s just more trouble than he’s worth on more days than not. And I knew the boss was tired of it when I first arrived. It’s what brought me the party. My job was to a) find out if the guy could adjust and adapt, b) provide him the tools necessary to be a capable #2 and c) help the boss learn some techniques to help the process. Along the way we’ve accomplished some pretty important stuff. The boss is pleased with my efforts. I knew he would be. I work hard. Nobody is going to try harder. I’m going to make sure of it. But I’m empty. Lost in how to help a person see what the rest of us think should be obvious.

“I just don’t care any more. I know what I’ve got to do,” says the boss. “I’m sorry,” I say.

“Don’t be. You’ve said it yourself. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. Maybe we’ve got a jackass on our hands anyway.” He laughs. So do I.

“You know I’m not going to try to embed myself ’cause that’s not how I roll, but I’m perfectly willing to try whatever you feel might help.” I’m tough minded and I hate to lose. But I know I’m not in control of how somebody else lives their life.

“Let’s keep our work going,” he says. “What we’re doing together is important, but I don’t want you wasting any more time on him. I’d rather benefit from your insight myself.”

helping leaders lead And so it goes. A man with an opportunity to be a dynamite #2 is sooner or later going to be somebody somewhere else. He won’t likely be a #2. Or #3. All for the lack of seeing how his own career might benefit from hoisting up his boss with superior support and service. He just can’t bring himself to be Tonto, or Ed or Mike Campbell.

Lately I’ve been listening to the new Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers‘ record, Hypnotic Eye. I’ve seen this band live a few times. I bought the first record in 1976. Almost 40 years ago. Mike Campbell has been there every step of the way. And I wonder how differently thing might have turned out had Tom and Mike not stuck together. I wonder what might have happened if Mike couldn’t have withstood Tom being in the spotlight. Thankfully, for fans like me, the two of them realized they had something special and significant together that neither of them would have alone.

Could Tom have succeeded without Mike? Vice versa. Sure. They’re both talented guys. But we wouldn’t have Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers. What a loss!

The band returned to their hometown of Gainsville, Florida back on October 28, 2008. It was their famous 30th anniversary show which was part of a documentary about them done by Peter Bogdanovich. During that show Tom introduced Mike as “the co-captain.” I bought the DVD when it came out and remember thinking when I heard Tom say that, “I’m sure glad Mike is cool with that.” And why shouldn’t he be? What a terrific musical career they’ve had together. Something remarkable!

Can you imagine the Rolling Stones without Mick and Keith together? Me neither. That’s how these things can go when people put something bigger ahead of themselves. Easier said than done for some. Maybe most even.

We can’t all be #1. Nor can we all be #2. Those are special situations.

For the past few years I’ve concentrated considerable effort in helping people with a strong #2 opportunity see that role and fulfill it. These are the people who can most help leaders lead. It’s an awesome responsibility and gift.

Leaders need a strong #2. The great leaders have them. The mediocre ones don’t. That’s just how it is. Steve Jobs needed Woz. Gates had Ballmer, Microsoft’s first business manager. You can see examples of it everywhere. A leader propelled to higher climes by having the push of a strong c0hort willing to do what must to be done so together they can be remarkable. It’s us. Together. Without concern for who gets the lion share of limelight. Because the work matters. The accomplishment is the thing.

Business. Music. Art. I don’t care what the endeavor is, leaders need those who help them lead. No leader has enough brilliance or anything else to go it alone. Besides, if you’re going it alone you’re not a leader. People follow leaders, not loners.

Maybe the guy or gal who would be a great #2 is born to it like a leader often seems to be. Maybe they emerge instead of being created, or encouraged. Still I try…especially when a leader so desperately wants to help a person reach #2 status.

There are a few qualities that I’m sure can be developed though. So if you’re interested in being a great #2 or in finding one, these tips may help.

1. The respect and admiration for the leader have to be genuine.

Anybody who thinks they can be a strong #2 and constantly criticize or argue with the boss or leader (#1) has already proven themselves unworthy to the task. In every case of successful collaboration between a #1 and #2 there is mutual respect and admiration that runs deep and true. It’s not contrived or fake.

Don’t try to fake it. You’re better off looking for somebody worthy of your true respect and admiration. If you’ve been looking for awhile unsuccessfully, then quit trying to be a good #2. Go ahead and join the herd who thinks they know everything. The masses who will live with discontentment, dissatisfied in being part of a team.

Find a cave. Enter. Stay there. Die there for all I care, but leave the rest of us alone ’cause you don’t contribute to our good effort.

2. The leader is the #1 customer.

We all serve somebody. Most of us serve a lot of people. We have to.

The strong #2 knows the person he serves most in the endeavor. It’s the boss, the leader. If the boss ain’t happy, the #2 works hard to change that. It’s their mission in life.

Like respect and admiration, it’s just an automatic sort of response. There’s no resentment about it. There’s no whining or complaining. It’s just the mission – to remedy the problem for the leader. To contribute. To be part of the solution, never part of the problem.

3. The strong #2 earns inner circle status and knows how to manage that responsibly.

There’s a time for debate and a time to salute an order. The strong #2 knows the difference instinctively. Sometimes the leader needs candid feedback that only the #2 can provide. But other times, the leader needs the #2 to lead the parade in supporting the mission so the troops see the commitment to advance.

Strong #2’s don’t cause the leader any public grief or conflict. They value their inner circle responsibility and remain true to it.

4. Envy and jealousy are replaced by joint participation and joy.

The strong #2 finds joy in the art of serving the highly respected #1. Mike Campbell can’t likely imagine playing lead guitar for anybody other than Tom Petty. And why would he? He’s got a very special relationship with Tom. There’s a joy he can get from playing music with Tom that he couldn’t find anywhere else. It’s not about Tom being the best. It’s about them being the best together!

I’m not bold enough to think strong #2’s never feel any emotions of envy or jealousy, but I know they don’t feel them long enough to act on them. Rather, they deem the work more important. Their sense of accomplishment and joy override any negative emotions that might damage the relationship.

Conclusion

There’s something quite special about being a leader, but there’s also something remarkable about the responsibility and opportunity to be among the top ones who help propel them lead. The entire team is benefited not just by the leader, but the #2. Together, they form a tandem of leadership that drives the success of the enterprise. It’s like double the horsepower to reach an objective that otherwise might be out of reach.

Sometimes the #2 must push. Other times, they have to pull. Whatever it takes to get the job done. It’s about as opposite of the remark I heard, “I’m not going to invest my career in him.” Then find somebody you can invest in because we’ve all got to serve somebody.

Randy

Photo of Mike Campbell used with permission of Debi Delgrande

237 Those Who Help Leaders Lead Read More »

Coaching The Disagreeable Employee

Leadership / By Randy Cantrell

Braxton Bragg was an Army guy. Career Army. He was also a Confederate General responsible for the western campaign of the American Civil War. But he was mostly a sour puss who easily blamed others.

Ulysses S. Grant‘s memoirs tell a story about Bragg as a company commander at a frontier post where he also served as quartermaster. Bragg submitted a requisition for supplies for his company, then as quartermaster he declined to fill it. As company commander, he resubmitted the requisition a second time, giving additional reasons for his requirements, but as the quartermaster he denied the request again. Facing a personal impasse, he referred the matter to the post commander, who exclaimed, “My God, Mr. Bragg, you have quarreled with every officer in the army, and now you are quarreling with yourself!”

It takes a special kind of disagreeableness to disagree with yourself. Bragg was a world-class disagreeable fellow though.

Even Bragg’s staunchest supporters admonished him for his quick temper, general irritability, and tendency to wound innocent men with barbs thrown during his frequent fits of anger. His reluctance to praise or flatter was exceeded, we are told, only by the tenacity with which, once formed, he clung to an adverse impression of a subordinate. For such officers—and they were many in the Army of the Mississippi—Bragg’s removal or their transfer were the only alternatives to an unbearable existence.

— Peter Cozzens, No Better Place to Die: The Battle of Stones River

History shows that Jefferson Davis couldn’t get along with him. It seemed nobody could get along with Bragg. He remained in positions of responsibility due to the shallow depth of talent to replace him. After the Civil War he jumped from one endeavor to another. Each one seemed to end with a common refrain. Bragg would get into a disagreement with others and that would end the endeavor.

He dropped dead in Galveston, Texas at the age of 59. I wonder how many people were pleased at the news.

Surliness isn’t the exclusive domain of Generals or big bosses. Their tyranny can be especially disconcerting because of their power. But what about the disagreeable employee? Can anything be done to help them? Should anything – short of termination – be done?

The reason for being disagreeable is moot. Nobody cares. Whatever burr that may have caused Bragg’s saddle soreness was of no concern to anybody. The truth is, the man was a class A felon when it came to being disagreeable. Why is anybody’s guess. His own men tried to kill him. I doubt they sat around the campfire wondering why their leader behaved so poorly. They simply wanted it to stop. Ditto for the disagreeable employee.

I’m not talking about a person who is having a bad day. I’m talking about the chronic disagreeable employee. The employee who will argue about most anything. All the time. I’m talking about the employee who will behave poorly toward their boss and toward the team.

Some disagreeable employees have been that way for as long as anybody can remember. People up and down the organization know them by their earned reputation. Like Bragg they’ve littered the trail of their career with disagreements. Can you help an employee like that? Maybe.

Other employees turn disagreeable. Maybe they were overlooked for a promotion. Maybe they got a promotion. Something happened and now they’re disagreeable, or more disagreeable than ever before. What about them? Can they be helped? Again, maybe.

Battling the disagreeable employee is easy when the employee is a marginal contributor. Most leaders will take swift action to rid themselves of the cantankerous employee who isn’t performing in the top tier. These are rather easy decisions.

But what about the person who is skilled at their work and mostly performing at a high level? These are the employees who vex good leaders. But I’m going to encourage you to not remain vexed for too long because you’ve got to consider the negative impact of the disagreeable employee. So let’s start with why you must avoid giving way to the disagreeable employee.

1. The disagreeable employee will undermine your leadership.

Your ability to properly lead your team hinges on one central behavior, willingness. This is the non-negotiable standard that must be maintained by any organization that expects to foster high performance.

When you suffer the disagreeable employee, you’re telling your team that willingness isn’t mandatory. You demonstrate your own willingness to accept debate, controversy and confrontation on your decisions.

One bad apple and all that. Order, decorum and performance will fail if the disagreeable employee remains…or if they remain disagreeable.

2. The disagreeable employee will wreck the performance of the team.

Every employee needs to feel special in some way. That’s not possible in the presence of the disagreeable employee because they’re always hogging the spotlight. All eyes and ears are on them as people just wait to see how they’ll respond to your latest decision as a leader.

Rarely will the disagreeable employee confess to being a glory hog, but they are the most selfish people on your team. Their opinion and their judgment matter more than anybody else’s. Including yours.

The grind of dealing with the disagreeable employee will take a heavy toll on the rest of the team as they constantly work under duress of their own bad feelings toward their disagreeable teammate. Increasingly, they’ll feel as though they must meet a higher standard. Fairness will be lost, along with morale.

3. The disagreeable employee will eventually cost the leader.

A leader will pay a heavy price for tolerating the disagreeable employee without attempting and succeeding in finding a remedy. It can come at the hands of consistently poor performance, resulting from a leader’s refusal to hold every employee accountable. It can come at the hands of superiors who tire of conflict not being properly handled. It can come at the resignation of valuable employees who simply can no longer tolerate the atmosphere and culture influenced by the disagreeable employee. Lots of things can go wrong when leaders refuse to deal with disagreeable employees.

So what can you do? What should you do?

Circumstances can differ, but these general guidelines should serve to give you some sort of direction.

a. Accept and assume responsibility.

It may seem counter-intuitive for the leader to take on the responsibility for why the disagreeable employee is behaving poorly, but that’s where it must start. The truth is, the leader is tolerating it. Nothing can be improved until the leader refuses to let poor behavior continue.

The parent who allows their teenager to talk back without any consequence has only themselves to blame. So it is with a boss who allows an employee to be chronically disagreeable.

b. What’s done is done, but today it’s a new day.

Just because a leader failed yesterday doesn’t mean she’s going to today. She can’t afford to keep failing so at some point a new day dawns.

Some bosses feel it won’t work if they just show up tomorrow morning behaving differently. Here’s the key to it. If you’re the leader and you want to improve, then make up your mind that you’re going to start handling things better – including how you deal with the disagreeable employee. Stick with it. You’ll go wrong every time if you dive in, begin to deal with things, then slack off and revert back to your old ways. Avoid that.

It’s not only possible, but it’s advisable that you draw a line in the dirt and take your stand sooner than later. Who cares what you tolerated yesterday? Who cares how you handled things yesterday? Today ain’t yesterday. You can stake your claim at any time anywhere. I’m encouraging you to do it today, right where you’re at.

c. Sit down privately with the disagreeable employee to communicate your “new day” accountability.

Apologize to them for failing to hold them accountable for their poor behavior. Reiterate to them the role you play to help them perform at their very best. Explain to them that their ongoing disagreeableness is destroying not only their performance, but it’s also impacting the performance of others.

Tell them plainly, “This must stop.” Provide a couple (no more) of specific examples. Do not let them interrupt. Stay on course because these people are skilled at disagreeing. They will be true to their habit and nature. You can’t be sucked into an argument. This isn’t an argument. It’s a statement of fact based on their poor behavior and you’re the leader responsible to help them fix it by holding them accountable for it from now on.

When you’re finished clearly tell them, “Starting today I’m going to expect you to demonstrate a high level of cooperation. Once I’ve made a decision, I expect the debate to stop. [insert any specific problem behavior they’re guilty of here].”

End this part of the conversation with, “Do you understand?” Don’t accept some rambling defensive arguing. Only a “yes” will do here.

d. Let them out of the corner.

I’m a father of two grown kids. I believe in spanking kids. No, not beating them. Spanking them. It’s not about inflicting physical pain. It’s about inflicting appropriate guilt so they’ll correct their poor behavior.

One big reason I’m opposed – as a parent and grandparent – to “time out” is because it drags out the process and keeps kids in the corner literally. Through the years I’ve found that employees who feel they can’t get out of the doghouse with their boss, or they feel trapped in a corner of disapproval from which there’s no escape…well, they lose heart very quickly.

A spanking demonstrates we’re not going to tolerate the poor behavior. It’s not harsh, but it’s timely. Quick even. Then it’s over.

Corrective discipline has to end. It can’t go on and on else people will fail to recover and respond with appropriate higher performance.

Encourage the disagreeable employee to correct their poor behavior. Let them know you believe in them and in their ability to do better. Assure them you’re going to serve them better by helping them.

e. Start leading and managing better.

Leaders don’t have to announce, “Things are gonna be different from now on.” I’m not a fan of that approach. Better to just start doing what you should. Begin it now and people will notice. You don’t need to write a memo or give a speech.

Be prompt to correct all the poor behaviors. Let your actions speak louder than your words.

Conclusion

There are no guarantees that this, or any other approach, will work with the disagreeable employee. Sometimes you just have to give them repeated opportunities and deal with their response to your correction.

Avoid putting yourself in the position Bragg’s superiors often found themselves. Because they had no suitable replacement, they frequently tolerated his poor behavior. Find options and alternatives to the disagreeable employee in case they decide they’re going to remain unwilling to follow your leadership.

Randy

Coaching The Disagreeable Employee Read More »

232 Free Form Friday, July 25, 2014 (and part 2 of the big bang podcast rebranding, too)

Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Personal Development, Podcast / By Randy Cantrell

Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS | More

July 25, 2014 Free Form Friday

Oh, the serious issues of the day are indeed becoming less troublesome. Or I’m just losing interest.

Today is the last Friday of the month. That means it’s Free Form Friday. Well, actually many days are free form days ’cause that’s how I roll. Somebody sent me to a website that gives you a personality test, iPersonic Personality Test. I promptly went over there, took the test and broke it I think. It’s actually a pretty good sales ploy because if you want to see the career advice based on your test, it’ll cost you $19. Not bad if you need a new career and you’ve got $19. But if you’re unemployed and don’t have $19…maybe not.

Podcast Re-Branding

I’m making progress in the rebranding effort of the podcast. No, I still haven’t settled on a name, but the topic or niche is pretty well sealed I think. Mainly because I want the podcast here to be congruent with my work. So it’s about the stuff I do every single day.

Higher human performance is about diving in, doing the work and sticking with it.

And that’s what the podcast will be about. So, now I need a great, super-terrific name for the podcast. Do you want to help? I’d love it. Just use the Contact page to send me your suggestions.

I know I’m going to stick with a weekly schedule, but I’m still uncertain about length or release days. A few people – VERY few really – have suggested I go back to some video stuff, too – namely, my Word-Of-The-Day stuff. Here’s where I did the word, chase. If you want to help me include any suggestions about day of the week, how often to release an episode and how long to make the episodes (QuickSprout.com proves long form content can work) when you throw name suggestions out to me.

Helping People See Some Of What A Leader Sees

I’m always looking for ways to help people see and appreciate a bit more what their leaders see. So many of us have our head down, looking at only our perspective. We can go about our business unaware of the bigger picture.

The photo below went viral a long time ago, but it illustrates the point. Can you see the words in the picture? Until you see what it says, it’s hard. But the moment you see what it says, you can’t un-see it. It’s plain as day once you’re able to see it.

sleep

I’m wondering if I can figure out a way to help direct reports see more clearly the influences exerted on their leader. I may be chasing something that’s impossible, but I’ve been able to do it with some frequency. I just haven’t gone to the trouble to systematize it.

Yes, I Often Miss Being Part Of An Organization

Consulting and coaching can sometimes be lonely work. When the day ends, I get in my car and go home mostly leaving the work for others to do. My work at Bula Network, LLC has morphed a bit over time. Increasingly, executive coaching has been front and center. That suits me fine.

There are days where I long to be part of something bigger. Helping grow a business or organization has been my lifelong drive. I have fueled that drive by mostly running another man’s business. I’ve spent most of my career in the proverbial corner office making the day-to-day decisions to run and operate a business.

Everything is not on the Internet. Some people are steeped in careers doing things in the “real world.” They don’t know who the Internet rock stars are. They’ve never heard of all the people you may follow in social media. We can sometimes get so deep into the online world that we think that’s where all of life happens. It’s not.

Happy Friday!

Brace yourself, kids. August is almost here. Before you know it the kids will be back in school (I can hear moms all over America cheering), the trees will be turning (hopefully a color other than brown due to the draught) and the weather will be cooler (hooray!).

Now, hit that Contact tab at the top and send me an email to help me with this re-branding effort. Talk to you later.

Randy

a_shirt_id_wear

232 Free Form Friday, July 25, 2014 (and part 2 of the big bang podcast rebranding, too) Read More »