Can leadership survive without values? How can leadership takes so many big bonuses for themselves while throwing people out of work? Why is leadership always looking out for themselves?
These are questions that are asked a regular basis on the bulletin boards, articles and blogs. Personally, I think it's just a bunch of people with titles on their business cards that are hoping to be considered leaders purely by their position but they have to lower the bar first so that it's possible for them to slide into a leadership position. They don't want to be called managers anymore. Managers are boring. Managers have to get their hands dirty doing that icky management stuff. Eeeew (yes that's the sound of a 15-year-old girl).
And no matter how many times these questions get asked, the answer is still the same: you don't get to be considered a leader by your position. Yet, so many of the so-called leadership experts are still referring to senior executives as leaders. It's muddying the waters. It's becoming a point of confusion for the average person to try to better understand what leadership really is. Leadership is not a title on a business card.
If it were simply a title on a business card, then we could call up and make appointments for morning coffee with Jeffrey Skilling of Enron, Bernard Ebbers of Worldcom, Tyco 's Dennis Kozlowski and Mark Swartz, Computer Associates International's Sanjay Kumar, Adelphia 's John and Timothy Rigas, Daewoo founder Kim Woo-choong or Dynegy's Jamie Olis. Oh, but we can't can we? I almost forgot, these guys are in PRISON. Imagine that, leaders in prison. Based on the widely accepted model of leadership, all of the above listed former CEOs would qualify as leaders because they led their organizations.
Look, if you conive, cheat and steal while you are running the place then you're not a leader. If how you run your organization is illegal, illicit and immoral can you still be considered a leader? No you can not!
These people weren't leaders. They were just greedy CEOs. It was greed and a thirst for power that caused them to let go of what they knew to be right and instead embrace what they knew to be wrong. If you are purposely letting go of your values, morals and ethics in the daily performance of your job duties can you be considered a leader? I would say no.
In fact, the vast majority of the world would agree that the CEOs listed above were not leaders but were criminals: a truth proven once they were caught. When a person knowingly engages in illegal activity in order to advance their own career then they are no longer leading but stealing. As you can see, from this list of CEOs, leader is not a title that should be afforded these criminals.
It's time to start separating the word leadership from those in positions of power. Managers are not leaders even if they have returned from a weeklong leadership course. They are still managers. Elected officials are not afforded the title of leadership simply by the number of votes cast for them. There are as many crooked politicians as there are crooked CEOs. But if you call one politician a leader you must call them all leaders. If you call one CEO a leader you must call them all leaders. There are no sort-of leaders. Leadership is an on-off switch: you either have it or you don't. And you don't get it by achieving a certain position within an organization.
If your organization, during the recession, is choosing not to grow but instead battening down the hatches and pulling in your horns, then you are by the very definition of the word not leading. You are managing. That makes you a manager. Managers manage. (You know, it really pains me to have to explain this. I would have thought that even the worst manager could figure this one out on his own but apparently not.)
It's a real insult to real leaders to have them lumped in with the list of crooked CEOs above. Besides, leader is not something you call yourself: leader is something your followers consider you to be. Leadership is an attitude. Management is a position.
If you are attempting to fleece the company for as much as you can then you're not leading, your "greeding" (I'm not sure if that's even a word but we will go with it). There is a huge difference between a manager or senior executive and a person with leadership ability. Let's not confuse the two. They are not interchangeable. So take down the Jeffrey Skilling poster in the executive washroom and get back to managing the place. We'll see over time whether or not you will be considered a leader.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Monday, August 31, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
The Secret About Secrets
Pssst. Want to know a secret? I know a secret. Do you know the secret? Did you know there are 10 secrets? In fact, there are 10 secrets to just about everything on the face of the earth. Funny enough, not one of them is a secret.Search on Amazon and you'll come up with 870,000 books with the word "Secret" in the title. How can there be 870,000 secrets? The truth is there can't be. Even the movie The Secret wasn't a secret. It was a rehash of the old adage that what you think about you bring about. The secret to abundance is not a secret. It never was. Oh, I suppose it could've been considered a secret since it was hidden inside a book -- you know, the last place most people would ever look.
Go ahead and Google "The 10 Secrets to..." and you will be met with 69 million search results. There are 10 Secrets to Better Love Life. There are 10 Secrets to Success. There are 10 Secrets to Finding Happiness. There are 10 Secrets to Marketing. Even Victoria has a secret. There are also 10 Secrets to Giving a Good Scientific Talk, Better Blogging, Social Media, Wedded Bliss and my favorite The 10 Secrets to Understanding Women (probably the only one that is a secret).
Why do we fall for headlines that feature "The Secrets to..." of anything? Are we trying to compensate for our ignorance by claiming it was a secret - which lets us off the hook for not paying attention up until now? I would hazard a guess that it's because we're just too lazy to crack open a book and find out the so-called "secrets" for ourselves.
Personally, I'm getting a little tired of marketers who treat us like idiots. I know the difference between a secret and a fact. A fact is something conclusively proven. A secret is what the marketers use to get you to look at their advertising and to force you to open your wallet to overcome your surprise, shock and wonder.
Wake up and change your attitude. Don't fall for this stuff. There are no secrets -- except the number of times you fell for someone's "secrets." And that, shall remain a secret, won't it?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Rewards Make Performance Worse
Imagine yourself standing in the middle of a large networking event. You are surrounded by hundreds of people. You reach into your pocket and pull out a handful of your own business cards. Then, with all of your might, you throw that handful of business cards straight up into the air and let them fall to the ground like snowflakes. Then, you stand back and wait for people to pick up your business card. What are the chances that people will call your phone number to place an order for your product or service using this model?
This is exactly the same sales business model that companies are using worldwide: make a cold call, throw a business card at the prospect and rush back to the office and wait for the phone to ring. Essentially it's the same as throwing a handful of business cards into a crowded room. And yet, sales managers still believe in cold call competitions: rewarding salespeople for knocking on the most doors in a day. They believe that by handing out prizes and incentives for knocking on doors that their business will increase as a result.
Dan Pink, former speechwriter for Al Gore, is now studying motivation in the workplace. What he and many other researchers and economists have found is that rewards and incentives do not work. Perhaps small incentives work a little bit but large incentives actually make performance worse. In fact the bigger the incentive, the worse the performance. As Pink says, "there is a mismatch between what science knows and what business does."
So, what does business do? The same thing it is always done: offer incentives for performance. In other words, business holds onto an attitude that says, "don't confuse me with the facts because I have already made up my mind." But now here's the strangest part, business will offer incentives for out-of-the-box thinking. Do you see the problem with this? Incentives retard thought. And the bigger the incentive the less likely someone will come up with a solution.
So now even a bigger problem exists because of the findings that incentives retard performance: there are incentive companies that have built their survival on the misconception that incentives improve performance. But science and research prove otherwise. In spite of these findings, you may still receive a telephone call from an incentives company offering their services to improve the performance of your people. Incentives companies were formed on opinion and not on fact. How many other companies do you deal with whose very business models are based on opinion and not fact?
You need to see the video for yourself. The video is from a TED conference and runs 18 minutes in length. Might I suggest that you close your office door, put your phone on voicemail, turn off your Blackberry and give your undivided attention to this video. It is important. Findings like this will change your attitude about what you believe to be true and the way business gets done. Ignore this video and its findings and you may actually be impeding the performance of your people. This is an Attitude Adjustment of monumental proportions.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
This is exactly the same sales business model that companies are using worldwide: make a cold call, throw a business card at the prospect and rush back to the office and wait for the phone to ring. Essentially it's the same as throwing a handful of business cards into a crowded room. And yet, sales managers still believe in cold call competitions: rewarding salespeople for knocking on the most doors in a day. They believe that by handing out prizes and incentives for knocking on doors that their business will increase as a result.
Dan Pink, former speechwriter for Al Gore, is now studying motivation in the workplace. What he and many other researchers and economists have found is that rewards and incentives do not work. Perhaps small incentives work a little bit but large incentives actually make performance worse. In fact the bigger the incentive, the worse the performance. As Pink says, "there is a mismatch between what science knows and what business does."
So, what does business do? The same thing it is always done: offer incentives for performance. In other words, business holds onto an attitude that says, "don't confuse me with the facts because I have already made up my mind." But now here's the strangest part, business will offer incentives for out-of-the-box thinking. Do you see the problem with this? Incentives retard thought. And the bigger the incentive the less likely someone will come up with a solution.
So now even a bigger problem exists because of the findings that incentives retard performance: there are incentive companies that have built their survival on the misconception that incentives improve performance. But science and research prove otherwise. In spite of these findings, you may still receive a telephone call from an incentives company offering their services to improve the performance of your people. Incentives companies were formed on opinion and not on fact. How many other companies do you deal with whose very business models are based on opinion and not fact?
You need to see the video for yourself. The video is from a TED conference and runs 18 minutes in length. Might I suggest that you close your office door, put your phone on voicemail, turn off your Blackberry and give your undivided attention to this video. It is important. Findings like this will change your attitude about what you believe to be true and the way business gets done. Ignore this video and its findings and you may actually be impeding the performance of your people. This is an Attitude Adjustment of monumental proportions.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Monday, August 24, 2009
Stop Leadership Training Now
A 2-3 day leadership workshop is dangerous to staff morale. The term "management" should not be allowed to be sullied by using the fancy new "leadership" buzzword and by re-branding management workshops to make people think that are going to be anything more than managers anyway. We need managers - good managers. We don't need any managers who "think" they are leaders.
Nothing is more dangerous than a barely-competent manager who fancies himself a leader (except maybe a 1st year Psych minor). It's distressing when staff have to endure the arrogant "past-manager" who now thinks that as a result of his participation at a 2-3 day leadership course, he doesn't have to actually get his hands dirty doing that icky, hands-on manager stuff. Ugh. Trust me, allowing your manager to think himself a leader is going to create big staff problems.
We need managers - good competent managers. And management skills are something you CAN learn at a 2-3 day management workshop. You can derive tremendous benefit from that - if the focus is on target: management. Training companies would do well to stop lying to corporate America. Leadership is not management. Making organizations believe that they should stop management training and start Leadership training is a deception. Leadership is a personal skill. Management is a corporate skill.
If you're really speaking of leadership, you have to define "leadership" to get any benefit. And since there are 350,000 books alone on Amazon, that means there are 350,000 differing opinions on what leadership is. No one person has it right. It is all open to interpretation.
You can not transform a barely-competent manager into a leader in 2 or 3 days. That's ridiculous. And any training company that says they can do it is seeking only your checkbook. Leadership workshops are mostly "management" workshops re-branded anyway - which is a disservice to real life-long leadership commitments and it is insulting to think that a lifelong commitment that someone has made can be taught in 2-3 days.
Leadership workshops would have to change a person's context (the way they see the world), their philosophy (how they think about the world), their personal mission (what they are here to do in the world) and their contribution (what they offer the world). In addition, things like vision, values, ethics, morals, attitudes, opinions and beliefs will all have to be challenged. Leadership operates at that level. Then there is the impossible question to answer: why do people follow some people and not others? You can not have a leadership workshop without addressing these issues and there is no way it can all be covered in-depth, findings concluded and sufficient time allowed for participants to reflect on their lives thus far and where they wish to see themselves in relation to a world contribution (the big picture) in 2 or 3 days.
If you want your managers to be better managers, then send them to management workshops. Don't pretend that you're doing leadership. You can't teach someone how to be Gandhi in 2-3 days. You can't teach someone how to be Mother Teresa or Martin Luther King or Winston Churchill in 2-3 days. The best you can do is teach someone how to imitate these leaders. But imitation is fake. It is not real. And if it is not real it is not leadership. Leadership is internal - deep in the psyche. The rest is management. Call it what it is.
In every organization, there is ONE leader - the rest are managers. Get used to it. That's the way it is. The barely-competent manager who returns from a 2-3 day leadership course believing that people will follow him now because of his learning after a couple of days training course is not only still barely-competent, but he is now borderline arrogant as well. Yep, let's all line up behind that guy.
What you want are better managers. Stop pretending it's leadership because that is a real insult to real leaders - people who have spent their lifetimes garnering the respect that makes people want to follow them. You can't teach that in 2-3 days.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Nothing is more dangerous than a barely-competent manager who fancies himself a leader (except maybe a 1st year Psych minor). It's distressing when staff have to endure the arrogant "past-manager" who now thinks that as a result of his participation at a 2-3 day leadership course, he doesn't have to actually get his hands dirty doing that icky, hands-on manager stuff. Ugh. Trust me, allowing your manager to think himself a leader is going to create big staff problems.
We need managers - good competent managers. And management skills are something you CAN learn at a 2-3 day management workshop. You can derive tremendous benefit from that - if the focus is on target: management. Training companies would do well to stop lying to corporate America. Leadership is not management. Making organizations believe that they should stop management training and start Leadership training is a deception. Leadership is a personal skill. Management is a corporate skill.
If you're really speaking of leadership, you have to define "leadership" to get any benefit. And since there are 350,000 books alone on Amazon, that means there are 350,000 differing opinions on what leadership is. No one person has it right. It is all open to interpretation.
You can not transform a barely-competent manager into a leader in 2 or 3 days. That's ridiculous. And any training company that says they can do it is seeking only your checkbook. Leadership workshops are mostly "management" workshops re-branded anyway - which is a disservice to real life-long leadership commitments and it is insulting to think that a lifelong commitment that someone has made can be taught in 2-3 days.
Leadership workshops would have to change a person's context (the way they see the world), their philosophy (how they think about the world), their personal mission (what they are here to do in the world) and their contribution (what they offer the world). In addition, things like vision, values, ethics, morals, attitudes, opinions and beliefs will all have to be challenged. Leadership operates at that level. Then there is the impossible question to answer: why do people follow some people and not others? You can not have a leadership workshop without addressing these issues and there is no way it can all be covered in-depth, findings concluded and sufficient time allowed for participants to reflect on their lives thus far and where they wish to see themselves in relation to a world contribution (the big picture) in 2 or 3 days.
If you want your managers to be better managers, then send them to management workshops. Don't pretend that you're doing leadership. You can't teach someone how to be Gandhi in 2-3 days. You can't teach someone how to be Mother Teresa or Martin Luther King or Winston Churchill in 2-3 days. The best you can do is teach someone how to imitate these leaders. But imitation is fake. It is not real. And if it is not real it is not leadership. Leadership is internal - deep in the psyche. The rest is management. Call it what it is.
In every organization, there is ONE leader - the rest are managers. Get used to it. That's the way it is. The barely-competent manager who returns from a 2-3 day leadership course believing that people will follow him now because of his learning after a couple of days training course is not only still barely-competent, but he is now borderline arrogant as well. Yep, let's all line up behind that guy.
What you want are better managers. Stop pretending it's leadership because that is a real insult to real leaders - people who have spent their lifetimes garnering the respect that makes people want to follow them. You can't teach that in 2-3 days.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Three Qualities Necessary In Hiring Managers
Behavior and personality instruments need to go out the window when picking people at the top. When choosing quality managers, don't go by a metrics checklist - you can't measure instincts or unflappability from a checklist. Use your own good instincts to select your managers. Trust your hunches and your gut. Use your head - not a computer printout. Are you buying a car or hiring a manager? You wouldn't buy a car from a brochure so why would you hire a manager that way?
Since the position involves managing people, your manager had better be adept at the "people" part of the equation. So here is my list of personal qualities that I believe are critical for the successful selection of middle or upper managers:
You might also consider my Lunch Menu Test for potential managers. It is fun and yet, incredibly revealing. It is outlined in a previous Blog post here.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Since the position involves managing people, your manager had better be adept at the "people" part of the equation. So here is my list of personal qualities that I believe are critical for the successful selection of middle or upper managers:
- Knowledge of the difference between leadership and management. Simply achieving a position does not entitle you to be called a leader. Leadership is an on/off switch - either you have it or you don't. And you can't get it in a week by going to a course. Don't kid yourself - it's a life-long commitment to self-improvement. Management skills however, can be taught in a week. Management basics are constant. Style is different. Each manager is expected to put their own personality on their management style.
- Integrity and Values. Without them, the work environment will become toxic. Attrition will rise, morale will plummet and customers will scurry. With integrity and values, everyone is treated equally and the rules apply to everyone - that includes the manager. If you have integrity and values, you know your position does not entitle you to a free pass on the rules.
- Courtesy and respect. As a manager, you will only get the respect you earn - you are not entitled to it by your position. You serve your people in the same way you expect them to serve both you and your customers. You will get what you give when dealing with your people.
You might also consider my Lunch Menu Test for potential managers. It is fun and yet, incredibly revealing. It is outlined in a previous Blog post here.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
The Three Most Important Things in Life
About a year and a half ago, I was asked what I believed to be the three most important things in life. I posted my response to my Blog at that time but some time has passed since then and I recently took another look at it to make sure I believed the same as I did back then.
This was the original question asked: "The 3 most important things in life....In Life we all encounter success, happiness, pleasure, despair, failure, suffering, frustration, the unlovingness of our own hearts and of those around us, and so on and at the end of it all we know some day we are going to die but we love struggling. The struggle of aspiration and achievements never comes to an end and throughout the journey we follow certain principles, morals and ethos. What, according to you, are the three most important things in life?"
In the original discussion that ensued, many responses from others included "happiness." If you have attended any of my keynote sessions, you already know I don't subscribe to happiness being the result of anything. So, here is the answer I wrote:
Although happiness seems to be prevalent in the other answers, I do not believe that happiness is the result of anything: it's a choice. No job, no spouse, no amount of money, no thing or person will ever deliver lasting happiness (momentary joy perhaps but not lasting happiness). Therefore, happiness is not on my list.
Here is my list of the three most important things in life:
What are your three?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
This was the original question asked: "The 3 most important things in life....In Life we all encounter success, happiness, pleasure, despair, failure, suffering, frustration, the unlovingness of our own hearts and of those around us, and so on and at the end of it all we know some day we are going to die but we love struggling. The struggle of aspiration and achievements never comes to an end and throughout the journey we follow certain principles, morals and ethos. What, according to you, are the three most important things in life?"
In the original discussion that ensued, many responses from others included "happiness." If you have attended any of my keynote sessions, you already know I don't subscribe to happiness being the result of anything. So, here is the answer I wrote:
Although happiness seems to be prevalent in the other answers, I do not believe that happiness is the result of anything: it's a choice. No job, no spouse, no amount of money, no thing or person will ever deliver lasting happiness (momentary joy perhaps but not lasting happiness). Therefore, happiness is not on my list.
Here is my list of the three most important things in life:
- Mission/Purpose - something to wake up to every day and look forward to accomplishing. Some of us do it in our work. Others do it in off-hours away from work. Having a mission for your life gives your life meaning and purpose.
- Integrity/Values - knowing the difference between right and wrong and having something to stand for. As the saying goes, if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
- Appreciation/Thankfulness - from self and others. Being able to count one's blessings daily gives you a positive perspective. Feeling appreciated for your contributions makes one want to contribute even more. I call it gr-Attitude.
What are your three?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Satisfied - Is That Enough?
What are Athos, Porthos, and Aramis? No it's not the Olympic motto. I'll help you here, d'Artagnan became the fourth. Musketeers! (Not mousketeers - that was Saturday morning when you were a kid - jeepers read a book already). And now there seems to be a fifth trying desperately to become a musketeer. His name is Mediocrity.
Apparently being satisfied with mediocrity IS enough today. People seem to be satisfied with a "good enough" performance. And you, as a customer or client, when you accept someone else's "good enough," you give their sub-par performance your stamp of approval.
Satisfied people DON'T search for more. Ignorance really is bliss. People seem to be happy not knowing that they can do better. If someone were to tell them that more was expected of them, they then wouldn't be satisfied anymore. I mean, how can you be really satisfied when you're in an argument with a client over the quality of your work and your argument is, "it's good enough."
Client: "Your work sucks!"
You: "Oh yeah? Well, ... well, ... uh ... you suck. Na na na boo-boo!"
The sad truth is that many of you, some reading this right now, don't think you need to improve. You are still out looking for new customers, new opportunities, new promotions and new accolades in spite of your knowledge that there are others who are better than you are. Regardless of that fact, you still try to offer you your sub-standard self knowing full well someone else is better, more proficient and more knowledgeable than you. Apparently you've decided that your clients, customers, bosses and co-workers aren't worthy of more from you. You won't work on yourself and instead you sit in front of the TV at night and wonder why business or the state of your career isn't better.
"Oh, but wait Big Brother is coming on. I NEED to watch this episode just in case my customers ask me about it tomorrow."
You blame the economy for your poor performance (regardless of others who are still succeeding in spite of the economy). You blame the price, the design, the color, the delivery, the opportunities, the financing, your bosses and your competitors for your "good enough" performance.
"When the economy, the price, the color, etc., gets better, then I'll get better," you say. Nothing but a load of excuses. That's like waiting for all of the traffic lights to turn green before you leave for work in the morning.
"Good enough" has become epidemic in the workplace. You should never be satisfied. "Good enough" is an awful attitude to approach your work with. Hell, any moron can achieve "good enough." It's what's beyond "good enough" that makes you special and stand out.
I believe it was Bob Dylan who said, "Just when you thought you had nothing left to give, you find out you did."
So what have you got that you haven't shown yet?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Apparently being satisfied with mediocrity IS enough today. People seem to be satisfied with a "good enough" performance. And you, as a customer or client, when you accept someone else's "good enough," you give their sub-par performance your stamp of approval.
Satisfied people DON'T search for more. Ignorance really is bliss. People seem to be happy not knowing that they can do better. If someone were to tell them that more was expected of them, they then wouldn't be satisfied anymore. I mean, how can you be really satisfied when you're in an argument with a client over the quality of your work and your argument is, "it's good enough."
Client: "Your work sucks!"
You: "Oh yeah? Well, ... well, ... uh ... you suck. Na na na boo-boo!"
The sad truth is that many of you, some reading this right now, don't think you need to improve. You are still out looking for new customers, new opportunities, new promotions and new accolades in spite of your knowledge that there are others who are better than you are. Regardless of that fact, you still try to offer you your sub-standard self knowing full well someone else is better, more proficient and more knowledgeable than you. Apparently you've decided that your clients, customers, bosses and co-workers aren't worthy of more from you. You won't work on yourself and instead you sit in front of the TV at night and wonder why business or the state of your career isn't better.
"Oh, but wait Big Brother is coming on. I NEED to watch this episode just in case my customers ask me about it tomorrow."
You blame the economy for your poor performance (regardless of others who are still succeeding in spite of the economy). You blame the price, the design, the color, the delivery, the opportunities, the financing, your bosses and your competitors for your "good enough" performance.
"When the economy, the price, the color, etc., gets better, then I'll get better," you say. Nothing but a load of excuses. That's like waiting for all of the traffic lights to turn green before you leave for work in the morning.
"Good enough" has become epidemic in the workplace. You should never be satisfied. "Good enough" is an awful attitude to approach your work with. Hell, any moron can achieve "good enough." It's what's beyond "good enough" that makes you special and stand out.
I believe it was Bob Dylan who said, "Just when you thought you had nothing left to give, you find out you did."
So what have you got that you haven't shown yet?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Monday, August 17, 2009
Bad Boss And The Attitude of Service
Maybe you find yourself just standing and staring right at your boss's office door wondering why the jerk-boss behind that door doesn't give you the praise you think you deserve. You know you have to go back to work but you find yourself struggling to come up with one good reason (other than being fired) to actually give a best-effort knowing full well you won't even get a grunt of acknowledgment for your efforts. (That's when the thoughts of lottery winnings pop into your head and you picture yourself standing on his desk, reaching down and grabbing him by that stupid yellow tie he always wears to work and saying, "You can take a long, hard" .... um ... heh heh ... sorry got a little off-track there.)
Have you ever wondered why a leader, manager or boss would not acknowledge or praise the work of his or her people? Truth is, anyone who doesn't praise his or her employees is not a leader. Stop calling him or her that. It's insulting to real leaders.
People who don't praise others are lacking in self-confidence. It takes confidence to praise someone's effort. And you don't have to be in management or in a supervisory position to offer a compliment on someone's hard work. People who choose to say nothing when it comes time to acknowledge a contribution don't wish to be outshone - that's why they say nothing. People who hold back praise do it for selfish reasons.
Problem is, if they are in management, it's worse. Managers need to get people to work for them. But people don't give a full effort and do NOT engage in their work when there is no acknowledgment or praise. This is where you need to develop an Attitude of Service. Service is not just about how you serve customers. Service is an Attitude. Customer Service is a department. Treating others how you would wish to be treated requires an Attitude of Service (one of the seven Attitudes discussed in detail in my forthcoming book, "Your Attitude Sucks - Fixing What's Wrong With Corporate America.")
Be in service to someone - offer a heartfelt compliment today and see how much better your day gets.
But if you want to make sure you're viewed as the worst boss ever then don't give people the credit they deserve. Your people will serve you only as well as you serve them.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Have you ever wondered why a leader, manager or boss would not acknowledge or praise the work of his or her people? Truth is, anyone who doesn't praise his or her employees is not a leader. Stop calling him or her that. It's insulting to real leaders.
People who don't praise others are lacking in self-confidence. It takes confidence to praise someone's effort. And you don't have to be in management or in a supervisory position to offer a compliment on someone's hard work. People who choose to say nothing when it comes time to acknowledge a contribution don't wish to be outshone - that's why they say nothing. People who hold back praise do it for selfish reasons.
Problem is, if they are in management, it's worse. Managers need to get people to work for them. But people don't give a full effort and do NOT engage in their work when there is no acknowledgment or praise. This is where you need to develop an Attitude of Service. Service is not just about how you serve customers. Service is an Attitude. Customer Service is a department. Treating others how you would wish to be treated requires an Attitude of Service (one of the seven Attitudes discussed in detail in my forthcoming book, "Your Attitude Sucks - Fixing What's Wrong With Corporate America.")
Be in service to someone - offer a heartfelt compliment today and see how much better your day gets.
But if you want to make sure you're viewed as the worst boss ever then don't give people the credit they deserve. Your people will serve you only as well as you serve them.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Sunday, August 16, 2009
New Manager - Help!
Question: I recently became the Supervisor of the Internal Audits department of my company and I am facing challenges in supervising - specifically People Management and Time Management. What do I have to do to make my department really successful?
Answer: I'm guessing that this was a sudden and surprise promotion. So, first thing right out of the gate is to apologize to your staff for your lack of People and Time Management skills. Let them know that you realize you have shortcomings and that you're not trying to hide them in order to look like you're in control (people who do try to hide it can't and end up viewed as inept by their people). Ask for their patience and suggestions to help in the short-term while you deal with the long-term strategy. They will look up to you for having the courage to be honest.
Then, get yourself into a good management course. You're feeling like you have no Time-Management skills because you're overwhelmed by having to manage people - something you're not familiar with. (Remember this though, the higher-ups wouldn't have promoted you if they didn't think you could do it.) Once you get a good handle on the managing people part, many of the Time Management issues will start to sort themselves out.
Right now, you're too busy trying to figure out what to do next that it seems like you need to organize better because you don't want to miss anything. After all, it's in your genes - you're in Audits. Stressing the details is what you do. Get that Resilience Attitude working for you. Get up and get at it. There's a challenge here in front of you but it's not insurmountable.
The truth is, your organizational skills will improve the moment you improve your management skills and build your confidence in managing your people. Relax, you can do this.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Answer: I'm guessing that this was a sudden and surprise promotion. So, first thing right out of the gate is to apologize to your staff for your lack of People and Time Management skills. Let them know that you realize you have shortcomings and that you're not trying to hide them in order to look like you're in control (people who do try to hide it can't and end up viewed as inept by their people). Ask for their patience and suggestions to help in the short-term while you deal with the long-term strategy. They will look up to you for having the courage to be honest.
Then, get yourself into a good management course. You're feeling like you have no Time-Management skills because you're overwhelmed by having to manage people - something you're not familiar with. (Remember this though, the higher-ups wouldn't have promoted you if they didn't think you could do it.) Once you get a good handle on the managing people part, many of the Time Management issues will start to sort themselves out.
Right now, you're too busy trying to figure out what to do next that it seems like you need to organize better because you don't want to miss anything. After all, it's in your genes - you're in Audits. Stressing the details is what you do. Get that Resilience Attitude working for you. Get up and get at it. There's a challenge here in front of you but it's not insurmountable.
The truth is, your organizational skills will improve the moment you improve your management skills and build your confidence in managing your people. Relax, you can do this.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Friday, August 14, 2009
What Do You Bring To The Table?
Video Blog: Every person brings something to the table in every job. What is yours? Are you real clear on what you have to offer? If not, perhaps you should follow the advice in this video - a simple idea.
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Thursday, August 13, 2009
The Annual Performance Review
Why do people have to wait until there's a performance evaluation to find out how they're doing? Why would any organization torture their own people like that? What's wrong with talking to your people informally and having conversations instead of remaining arm's length from the people who do the work? Oh that's right, the department manager recently went to a leadership course and now he's no longer a manager, he's a "leader." (You are required to make the quotations marks with your fingers when you read that word "leader." Go ahead. Try it.) Their graduation to "pretend-leader" (finger quotes again) is supposed to preclude managers from doing any of that icky, hands-on managerial stuff. They're apparently above that now.
"We're leaders, not managers," the old manager/new leader might say armed with their fresh, new (fingers) "pretend-leadership" attitude.
(Cue the harp music) "We don't have to manage anymore. All we have to do is lead our people and they will magically follow us to where we want them to go. If we lead, people follow. No really. We learned that in the course. We're leaders so people HAVE to follow us. I don't have time to give "my people" feedback. I've got people to lead. Let someone else work on that employee's performance. I'm too busy (fingers) leading."
The truth is too many employees stress over performance evaluations. When people are stressed they are not productive. When they are not productive they get poorer performance evaluations. So why not simply get rid of them - the performance evaluations not the people. Instead, open up your communications and have good two-way conversations on a regular basis. Any manager who doesn't want to do this would FAIL my performance evaluation. I don't care that he/she is a recent pretend-leadership course graduate. Get your head out of your .... er ... uh ... clouds, and get back to managing. Get over yourself. It's real people you're dealing with.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Look, the way I see it, if you can talk to your neighbors over the fence, you can talk to your people over the cubicle wall. They'll do better work for you if they don't think that every little screw-up is going to be entered into a file to be unleashed at the next performance review. All people want to know is if they're doing it right, if their work quality is OK and that their efforts are being noticed and appreciated.
Talk to them. If they're not doing a good job, they'll get the idea right away. They'll probably just move on before you have to force them to. Seriously, if you want to accurately assess an individual's performance, then daily communication is a far better way to do it than to spring the annual "surprise" on them. In fact, most managers end up scrambling to put something together for an annual performance review anyway. It's not like they've been keeping notes. So, if you haven't been keeping notes then manage them - don't scare them.
Oh, and for the recent pretend-leadership course graduates, leadership is not something you get in exchange for money. If you're a manager, manage. Now get back to work. Your own annual performance review is coming up too.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
"We're leaders, not managers," the old manager/new leader might say armed with their fresh, new (fingers) "pretend-leadership" attitude.
(Cue the harp music) "We don't have to manage anymore. All we have to do is lead our people and they will magically follow us to where we want them to go. If we lead, people follow. No really. We learned that in the course. We're leaders so people HAVE to follow us. I don't have time to give "my people" feedback. I've got people to lead. Let someone else work on that employee's performance. I'm too busy (fingers) leading."
The truth is too many employees stress over performance evaluations. When people are stressed they are not productive. When they are not productive they get poorer performance evaluations. So why not simply get rid of them - the performance evaluations not the people. Instead, open up your communications and have good two-way conversations on a regular basis. Any manager who doesn't want to do this would FAIL my performance evaluation. I don't care that he/she is a recent pretend-leadership course graduate. Get your head out of your .... er ... uh ... clouds, and get back to managing. Get over yourself. It's real people you're dealing with.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Look, the way I see it, if you can talk to your neighbors over the fence, you can talk to your people over the cubicle wall. They'll do better work for you if they don't think that every little screw-up is going to be entered into a file to be unleashed at the next performance review. All people want to know is if they're doing it right, if their work quality is OK and that their efforts are being noticed and appreciated.
Talk to them. If they're not doing a good job, they'll get the idea right away. They'll probably just move on before you have to force them to. Seriously, if you want to accurately assess an individual's performance, then daily communication is a far better way to do it than to spring the annual "surprise" on them. In fact, most managers end up scrambling to put something together for an annual performance review anyway. It's not like they've been keeping notes. So, if you haven't been keeping notes then manage them - don't scare them.
Oh, and for the recent pretend-leadership course graduates, leadership is not something you get in exchange for money. If you're a manager, manage. Now get back to work. Your own annual performance review is coming up too.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Attitude of Workplace Integrity
Question: What is the best approach if integrity in the workplace is compromised? I am preparing material to teach integrity in the workplace and one of the questions I have in my brown bag discussion is how one should respond if he/she thinks integrity is compromised. I would like to emphasize that integrity in the workplace can also be as simple as not honoring a contract or agreement with an employee with a justification that management has had a change of mind and direction; or it can be a case of reporting incomplete data to the boss so you make a good impression. What is your suggestion?
Answer: Someone with personal integrity wouldn't shortcut answers so reporting incomplete data wouldn't be an issue. Not honoring contracts or not honoring agreements, again, are all PERSONAL integrity issues.
There is NO corporate integrity since all decisions and all actions are carried out by people, ultimately it comes down to one person's decision to do the wrong thing consciously. If you work with someone like that and it goes against your integrity, then you are consciously allowing that other person's lack of integrity to be stronger than what you believe.
And you can't say that you don't have a choice. You always have a choice to do the right thing - unless your courage is less than your integrity.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: If you don't have the courage to speak up when you see something wrong, if you refuse to act or voice your concerns because you're afraid then you are allowing someone else's beliefs to dictate what you do. It means you don't have integrity of your own. Allowing unfulfilled agreements to go on means that you don't really stand for anything. That means you can't play the integrity card. Your actions would dictate your lack of it.
If you're afraid to voice your concerns on honesty, fairness, truth and respect then you really need to find a new line of work - something where "integrity" won't be an issue.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Answer: Someone with personal integrity wouldn't shortcut answers so reporting incomplete data wouldn't be an issue. Not honoring contracts or not honoring agreements, again, are all PERSONAL integrity issues.
There is NO corporate integrity since all decisions and all actions are carried out by people, ultimately it comes down to one person's decision to do the wrong thing consciously. If you work with someone like that and it goes against your integrity, then you are consciously allowing that other person's lack of integrity to be stronger than what you believe.
And you can't say that you don't have a choice. You always have a choice to do the right thing - unless your courage is less than your integrity.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: If you don't have the courage to speak up when you see something wrong, if you refuse to act or voice your concerns because you're afraid then you are allowing someone else's beliefs to dictate what you do. It means you don't have integrity of your own. Allowing unfulfilled agreements to go on means that you don't really stand for anything. That means you can't play the integrity card. Your actions would dictate your lack of it.
If you're afraid to voice your concerns on honesty, fairness, truth and respect then you really need to find a new line of work - something where "integrity" won't be an issue.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
The Attitude Of Avoiding Conflict
People keep talking about productive conflict and unproductive conflict in the workplace. When you really think about it, there is really only unproductive conflict. If it's conflict, then it's because an idea could not be discussed without escalating. Once the idea has escalated, things start to heat up. There is a real possibility that hurt feelings can come from conflict. That is unproductive. Once conflict occurs, you can't go back in time to erase it no matter how much effort is made to resolve the issue. There will always be a memory of the conflict. No matter how insignificant that memory may be it leaves a mark. That is unproductive.
And the memory of that conflict remains with both parties forever. They may be able to put their differences aside but the memory remains and may in fact, taint future discussions so as to avoid a repeat of the last discussion. That too, is unproductive.
Conflict happens when two closed minds run into each other. Both parties want to be right. And it's no surprise. People don't like to have their ideas shot down or trumped by a better idea. This is especially true of people with low self-esteem. It takes two very open minds, a good sense of self, decent confidence and a conscious willingness to work to the better end to be able to avoid conflict at all. People who have a good sense of self rarely get into arguments. People with good self-confidence are more willing to listen to ideas, especially good ideas even if that means letting go of their own ideas. This sounds like the Utopian workplace. And it probably is. But this really isn't your workplace is it?
Conflict exists in organizations because people either are unable to communicate effectively or feel they must protect themselves from people who want to take advantage of them regardless of whether those people actually exist. People who are comfortable in their own skin rarely need to be right so badly that it creates conflict. There is a difference between being right and being happy. You can't be both.
The problem is, people don't want to look like idiots. And so as to not look like an idiot, people will argue their position attempting to argue their opponent into submission. Funny thing, when this happens both sides look like idiots. If organizations would simply arm their people with soft-skills in not only communications, but emotional intelligence as well, they could probably eliminate 90% of workplace conflicts.
Having worked in both multinational corporations and a small restaurant, I can honestly say there was far more conflict in the restaurant. The people I worked with at the restaurant were less educated, less worldly and many had taken the job as a last resort. Consequently, most of the staff had fewer people skills. Which, in itself, is irony because these people dealt more with the public. There were public displays of conflict daily.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Conflict usually happens when people are talking when they should be listening. This is a big problem in not just small mom and pop restaurants but in corporate America too. There are more people talking than there are listening. Twitter is a perfect example of this. Although tweets don't end in conflict, there are more people talking than there are listening. Everyone is looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Everyone wants to be noticed. It's a crowded market place with so many people shouting their messages. And because people are so busy shouting their own messages they are not listening to what other people are saying. This has the potential to create conflict. It is indicative of what is happening in the corporate workplace today. When people stop listening they stop being respectful of other opinions and ideas. Without respect, conflict is a certainty.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
And the memory of that conflict remains with both parties forever. They may be able to put their differences aside but the memory remains and may in fact, taint future discussions so as to avoid a repeat of the last discussion. That too, is unproductive.
Conflict happens when two closed minds run into each other. Both parties want to be right. And it's no surprise. People don't like to have their ideas shot down or trumped by a better idea. This is especially true of people with low self-esteem. It takes two very open minds, a good sense of self, decent confidence and a conscious willingness to work to the better end to be able to avoid conflict at all. People who have a good sense of self rarely get into arguments. People with good self-confidence are more willing to listen to ideas, especially good ideas even if that means letting go of their own ideas. This sounds like the Utopian workplace. And it probably is. But this really isn't your workplace is it?
Conflict exists in organizations because people either are unable to communicate effectively or feel they must protect themselves from people who want to take advantage of them regardless of whether those people actually exist. People who are comfortable in their own skin rarely need to be right so badly that it creates conflict. There is a difference between being right and being happy. You can't be both.
The problem is, people don't want to look like idiots. And so as to not look like an idiot, people will argue their position attempting to argue their opponent into submission. Funny thing, when this happens both sides look like idiots. If organizations would simply arm their people with soft-skills in not only communications, but emotional intelligence as well, they could probably eliminate 90% of workplace conflicts.
Having worked in both multinational corporations and a small restaurant, I can honestly say there was far more conflict in the restaurant. The people I worked with at the restaurant were less educated, less worldly and many had taken the job as a last resort. Consequently, most of the staff had fewer people skills. Which, in itself, is irony because these people dealt more with the public. There were public displays of conflict daily.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Conflict usually happens when people are talking when they should be listening. This is a big problem in not just small mom and pop restaurants but in corporate America too. There are more people talking than there are listening. Twitter is a perfect example of this. Although tweets don't end in conflict, there are more people talking than there are listening. Everyone is looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Everyone wants to be noticed. It's a crowded market place with so many people shouting their messages. And because people are so busy shouting their own messages they are not listening to what other people are saying. This has the potential to create conflict. It is indicative of what is happening in the corporate workplace today. When people stop listening they stop being respectful of other opinions and ideas. Without respect, conflict is a certainty.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Monday, August 10, 2009
Leadership And Fake Boobs
Leadership is an Attitude. Management is a position. Leadership is NOT exclusive to the workplace. A parent is as much a leader as a CEO - perhaps better.
Stop thinking that leadership is a mere list of traits that you simply check off. A leader has only ONE responsibility: to lead. How he or she leads really doesn't matter. If a leader leads poorly, the followers will choose to follow someone else. If the leader leads well, the followers continue to follow. That's why they're called followers - because they follow. And you're only a leader if people are following. You can't force them to follow you. Authentic leaders understand that. Artificial leaders (those who think that by reading a book or attending a course that they can now call themselves leaders) don't get that.
Artificial leaders are the "fake boobs" of the corporate world. Just like some women say that implants make them feel better about themselves, getting a certificate from a leadership course makes some people feel better about themselves too. But in both cases, there is a difference between authentic and artificial. They look real but you know they're not - you just don't say anything.
Leadership is not management nor is it power, nor control, nor affluence. Who gets chosen to lead is based on the attitudes, opinions and beliefs of followers who believe that the leader they are following is the best person to lead them to where they want to go.
There are no irrefutable laws to leadership. Everything is refutable. Everything is questionable. Anyone who says different is asking you to blindly follow - which means you are not leading.
There is no explaining why some people are chosen leaders and some are not. Osama Bin Laden is a leader, as was Hitler, Charles Manson, Mother Teresa, Gandhi and Buddha. Leaders are not defined by their ability to make the world a better place necessarily. Leaders are defined by having followers - good or bad. Period.
There are 350,000 books on Amazon on "leadership." That means there are 350,000 varying opinions on what leadership is. Not much wonder you can't define it. But you so desperately want to be seen as a leader because you've been convinced that "following" is for the weak. Well maybe you are weak, too weak to acknowledge your weakness. You don't become a leader by self-anointing. Leadership is not a diploma or certificate of course completion. Leadership not something you get in exchange for money. And there is no certification necessary to offer leadership courses.
Want to be a leader? Start saying "no" to the whole idea that leadership is something that you can buy. If you have to take courses, read books and convince others you're a leader, then you're probably not.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: What's my definition of leadership? I define it as the biggest time-waster in Corporate America today. It wastes more time and money, sucks more resources and makes more people pompous in their search to be on top than any other single item in the corporate world - and only because you've been led to believe that you have to be at the front - the winner.
The truth is, people recognize authentic leadership when they see it - they just can't explain it - in the same way one hundred people would be challenged to come to consensus in describing the same sunset.
Trying to convince people that by simply following a few rules makes you a leader is perhaps the biggest thing wrong with Corporate North America today. That is not authentic leadership. That's artificial leadership - a fake, a sham, a lie. Leadership is not something you achieve - it is an Attitude.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Stop thinking that leadership is a mere list of traits that you simply check off. A leader has only ONE responsibility: to lead. How he or she leads really doesn't matter. If a leader leads poorly, the followers will choose to follow someone else. If the leader leads well, the followers continue to follow. That's why they're called followers - because they follow. And you're only a leader if people are following. You can't force them to follow you. Authentic leaders understand that. Artificial leaders (those who think that by reading a book or attending a course that they can now call themselves leaders) don't get that.
Artificial leaders are the "fake boobs" of the corporate world. Just like some women say that implants make them feel better about themselves, getting a certificate from a leadership course makes some people feel better about themselves too. But in both cases, there is a difference between authentic and artificial. They look real but you know they're not - you just don't say anything.
Leadership is not management nor is it power, nor control, nor affluence. Who gets chosen to lead is based on the attitudes, opinions and beliefs of followers who believe that the leader they are following is the best person to lead them to where they want to go.
There are no irrefutable laws to leadership. Everything is refutable. Everything is questionable. Anyone who says different is asking you to blindly follow - which means you are not leading.
There is no explaining why some people are chosen leaders and some are not. Osama Bin Laden is a leader, as was Hitler, Charles Manson, Mother Teresa, Gandhi and Buddha. Leaders are not defined by their ability to make the world a better place necessarily. Leaders are defined by having followers - good or bad. Period.
There are 350,000 books on Amazon on "leadership." That means there are 350,000 varying opinions on what leadership is. Not much wonder you can't define it. But you so desperately want to be seen as a leader because you've been convinced that "following" is for the weak. Well maybe you are weak, too weak to acknowledge your weakness. You don't become a leader by self-anointing. Leadership is not a diploma or certificate of course completion. Leadership not something you get in exchange for money. And there is no certification necessary to offer leadership courses.
Want to be a leader? Start saying "no" to the whole idea that leadership is something that you can buy. If you have to take courses, read books and convince others you're a leader, then you're probably not.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: What's my definition of leadership? I define it as the biggest time-waster in Corporate America today. It wastes more time and money, sucks more resources and makes more people pompous in their search to be on top than any other single item in the corporate world - and only because you've been led to believe that you have to be at the front - the winner.
The truth is, people recognize authentic leadership when they see it - they just can't explain it - in the same way one hundred people would be challenged to come to consensus in describing the same sunset.
Trying to convince people that by simply following a few rules makes you a leader is perhaps the biggest thing wrong with Corporate North America today. That is not authentic leadership. That's artificial leadership - a fake, a sham, a lie. Leadership is not something you achieve - it is an Attitude.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
The Attitude of Initiative
Corporate America is getting lazy. Well, let me qualify that statement. It may not necessarily be corporate America that is getting lazy (although some within corporate America are more than lazy), but some of the people entering corporate America these days sure are.
The New York Post is reporting today about a 27-year-old college student at Monroe College in New York who is now suing the college for $70,000, which is the cost of her tuition. Is she suing because she didn't get a quality education? No. She is suing the college because after spending $70,000 and achieving only a 2.7 GPA (which is a B-) she is ticked off that the college didn't find her a job to go with her new diploma.
Are you kidding me? It was just yesterday that I was reading a story in the news about the use of resumes and how new college graduates entering the workforce seem to have little comprehension for cover letters, researching the companies they are applying to and the art of deportment -- dressing up and shining shoes for interviews. Now today, I get to read a story about a B- graduate who wants to sue her college because they didn't find her a job. That makes me a little nuts.
Do we have to do everything? Yes, I realize I'm going to sound like an old fart here, but come on, there is a little thing called initiative. (This is the part where I sound like the old fart) In the old days we would graduate college or university and go out into the world armed with a CV and a diploma. We would scour newspapers, network with people who were working, do research on potential companies we would like to work for, write personalized cover letters, and then, if we were given the chance for an interview, we would dress up, look respectable, show some class and possess more than just a feigning interest in perhaps going to work.
Today the average student doesn't even have to leave the comforts of their own home and they can find a job. (Personally, I prefer the system that we have today.) As long as a student is connected to the Internet, they can find job openings, they can research companies, they can network with people who are working in those companies, they can prepare cover letters/e-mails, and they can upload their resumes all while in their pajamas. The only time that they need to dress up is if they are invited for an interview. But this is where a lot of them don't even bother dressing up. And I don't get it. Because a lot of these same students will spend hours preparing to go out to a club and just a few minutes to prepare for a job interview.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Sorry, but I'm a big believer that if you don't care about how you look, you won't care about the quality of your work. How you do one thing is how you do everything. Someone who shows up for a job interview dressed like a bum wouldn't get past the reception desk in my company. They would be told why their interview was being canceled on the spot -- because they don't care enough to make a good impression. I would think that speaks volumes about the quality of their work.
I can't for the life of me figure out how a student can maintain great grades in high school, outstanding GPA in college or university, master their final exams, do everything right to position themselves well to be one of the top choices for a job and then show up dressed like a bum. But there is always a silver lining - a giggle amongst the frustration. It happens when a student shows up for an interview dressed like a bum and they're applying for a job in marketing. Do you see the humor in that?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
The New York Post is reporting today about a 27-year-old college student at Monroe College in New York who is now suing the college for $70,000, which is the cost of her tuition. Is she suing because she didn't get a quality education? No. She is suing the college because after spending $70,000 and achieving only a 2.7 GPA (which is a B-) she is ticked off that the college didn't find her a job to go with her new diploma.
Are you kidding me? It was just yesterday that I was reading a story in the news about the use of resumes and how new college graduates entering the workforce seem to have little comprehension for cover letters, researching the companies they are applying to and the art of deportment -- dressing up and shining shoes for interviews. Now today, I get to read a story about a B- graduate who wants to sue her college because they didn't find her a job. That makes me a little nuts.
Do we have to do everything? Yes, I realize I'm going to sound like an old fart here, but come on, there is a little thing called initiative. (This is the part where I sound like the old fart) In the old days we would graduate college or university and go out into the world armed with a CV and a diploma. We would scour newspapers, network with people who were working, do research on potential companies we would like to work for, write personalized cover letters, and then, if we were given the chance for an interview, we would dress up, look respectable, show some class and possess more than just a feigning interest in perhaps going to work.
Today the average student doesn't even have to leave the comforts of their own home and they can find a job. (Personally, I prefer the system that we have today.) As long as a student is connected to the Internet, they can find job openings, they can research companies, they can network with people who are working in those companies, they can prepare cover letters/e-mails, and they can upload their resumes all while in their pajamas. The only time that they need to dress up is if they are invited for an interview. But this is where a lot of them don't even bother dressing up. And I don't get it. Because a lot of these same students will spend hours preparing to go out to a club and just a few minutes to prepare for a job interview.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Sorry, but I'm a big believer that if you don't care about how you look, you won't care about the quality of your work. How you do one thing is how you do everything. Someone who shows up for a job interview dressed like a bum wouldn't get past the reception desk in my company. They would be told why their interview was being canceled on the spot -- because they don't care enough to make a good impression. I would think that speaks volumes about the quality of their work.
I can't for the life of me figure out how a student can maintain great grades in high school, outstanding GPA in college or university, master their final exams, do everything right to position themselves well to be one of the top choices for a job and then show up dressed like a bum. But there is always a silver lining - a giggle amongst the frustration. It happens when a student shows up for an interview dressed like a bum and they're applying for a job in marketing. Do you see the humor in that?
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Sunday, August 09, 2009
Salesman Of The Year - So What
So you're salesman of the year. So what? What does it matter? Are you impressed when you see a sign reading "salesman of the year?" You see, I really don't think that a fancy title of your accomplishments really means much unless you're prepared to also divulge how you came to get that award.
What about real estate signs on front lawns that read, "Number 1 Realtor?" What is the criteria for being a number one realtor? That part of the equation has been left out.
If it's an award that you received because you made a lot of money then keep it to yourself. Your customers really don't care that you were a number one realtor or salesman of the year. All your customers care about is that you serve them well, meet their needs and make them more important than your fancy title. In fact, in our thirst to be top dog at something we will go to great lengths to prove that we are the best.
Years ago when I made my living in radio, we would scour the twice annual ratings looking for every opportunity to tout ourselves as number one in some category. Maybe one of the disc jockeys would be number one between 11 AM and noon with men 18 to 34 holding down blue-collar jobs. That demographic could be sold to a potential client who wanted to reach those very customers. But how do you go on the air and say that your number one between 11 AM and noon to 18 to 34-year-old men who hold down blue-collar jobs? What about the people who weren't 18 to 34-year-old men and the people who work holding down blue-collar jobs who just happened to be listening at the time? What about them?
You see, awards don't mean much. In fact, they're getting to mean less. When once upon a time you would celebrate the first, second or third place showing in a race, now celebrations are held for children who receive "participant" ribbons. Everyone gets a prize. Recognition is what people want at work. So employers are tasked to find creative ways to celebrate small achievements.
I don't want to be sold by the number one salesman. I don't want my house sold by the number one Realtor. I don't ask my doctor where he finished in his class. I'm just glad he finished. Besides money is a lousy way of keeping score.
And what if you are salesman of the year two years ago? What happened last year? Really, what have you done for me lately? If you're going to market yourself as the number one salesman this year are US prepared to market yourself as the number three salesman next year?
Announcing that you are number one is really self-serving -- egotistical almost. If it's not an award for service bestowed by your customers, then it really doesn't matter does it? The only thing that matters is that your customers are served well. If it's a rookie salesman who serves better than you, then I suggest allowing the rookie salesman to serve your customers. They will appreciate that he made the relationship about them and not about himself.
Let's keep our eye on the ball and the reason we're really here -- to serve to the best of our abilities.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
What about real estate signs on front lawns that read, "Number 1 Realtor?" What is the criteria for being a number one realtor? That part of the equation has been left out.
If it's an award that you received because you made a lot of money then keep it to yourself. Your customers really don't care that you were a number one realtor or salesman of the year. All your customers care about is that you serve them well, meet their needs and make them more important than your fancy title. In fact, in our thirst to be top dog at something we will go to great lengths to prove that we are the best.
Years ago when I made my living in radio, we would scour the twice annual ratings looking for every opportunity to tout ourselves as number one in some category. Maybe one of the disc jockeys would be number one between 11 AM and noon with men 18 to 34 holding down blue-collar jobs. That demographic could be sold to a potential client who wanted to reach those very customers. But how do you go on the air and say that your number one between 11 AM and noon to 18 to 34-year-old men who hold down blue-collar jobs? What about the people who weren't 18 to 34-year-old men and the people who work holding down blue-collar jobs who just happened to be listening at the time? What about them?
You see, awards don't mean much. In fact, they're getting to mean less. When once upon a time you would celebrate the first, second or third place showing in a race, now celebrations are held for children who receive "participant" ribbons. Everyone gets a prize. Recognition is what people want at work. So employers are tasked to find creative ways to celebrate small achievements.
I don't want to be sold by the number one salesman. I don't want my house sold by the number one Realtor. I don't ask my doctor where he finished in his class. I'm just glad he finished. Besides money is a lousy way of keeping score.
And what if you are salesman of the year two years ago? What happened last year? Really, what have you done for me lately? If you're going to market yourself as the number one salesman this year are US prepared to market yourself as the number three salesman next year?
Announcing that you are number one is really self-serving -- egotistical almost. If it's not an award for service bestowed by your customers, then it really doesn't matter does it? The only thing that matters is that your customers are served well. If it's a rookie salesman who serves better than you, then I suggest allowing the rookie salesman to serve your customers. They will appreciate that he made the relationship about them and not about himself.
Let's keep our eye on the ball and the reason we're really here -- to serve to the best of our abilities.
--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE
Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
Friday, August 07, 2009
The Entitlement Of Integrity
People want to fit in so badly in the workplace that they will give up their personal integrity in order to do so. Hanging out with the popular people, being liked and being just like everyone else seems the thing to do. There is a problem with that though, if all the people that you work with are doing things of questionable character, do you continue to try to fit in? Problems can range from simple communication issues to integrity issues. Anyone who gives up their personal integrity in the workplace in order to fit in really doesn't seem to stand for anything. I mean, how could you? If you are prepared to give up your personal integrity in order to be liked and in order to fit in then you really don't have anything that you stand for do you?
Ultimately, every single decision in the workplace comes down to one person. One person makes the final decision every single time. Even in a committee setting, a group of individual decisions set the direction for the committee. Perhaps at the committee level, giving up one's values in order to fit in is at its worst.
What's wrong with corporate America is the whole idea that you have to fit in in order to get ahead. You're supposed to be a team player. And in order to fit in you must have the same attitudes, opinions and beliefs as everyone else. Well, if you have the same attitudes, opinions and beliefs as everyone else then you're simply following aren't you? You aren't advancing your own career. You are simply moving wherever the pack moves. That's not getting ahead, that's simply keeping up.
Take a look at any riot event and you will see the mob mentality at work. This is exactly how committees operate. I am not saying that committees are destructive. I am simply pointing out that committees are all-inclusive and will not move forward without all of their members. It's a mob mentality. One person starts and the others follow.
Imagine this same mentality when faced with integrity issues on the job. One person's integrity becomes compromised and the others follow. Now you have a group of people who don't stand for anything. They believe in nothing. They only believe in getting ahead. And what do they do to get ahead? They give up their integrity.
Even whistle-blower policies can be questioned. Are people blowing the whistle on their bosses because it goes against the integrity of the whistle-blower? Or, is it an opportunity for the whistle-blower to get their 15 minutes of fame or to place themselves in a position for promotion? If the second answer, then there is no integrity involved. Bringing someone else down in order to raise your own stature is as wrong as the original crime. As the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: There is a dearth of integrity on the job these days. People take shortcuts. People have been raised to believe that they are special and that they can be whatever they want to be. Many in the workforce today have had everything simply handed to them. They have not earned it. There is a greater sense of entitlement than there is a sense of integrity. This raises one profound question that must be answered. If everyone is entitled, who pays? That question alone should challenge your personal integrity.
Ultimately, every single decision in the workplace comes down to one person. One person makes the final decision every single time. Even in a committee setting, a group of individual decisions set the direction for the committee. Perhaps at the committee level, giving up one's values in order to fit in is at its worst.
What's wrong with corporate America is the whole idea that you have to fit in in order to get ahead. You're supposed to be a team player. And in order to fit in you must have the same attitudes, opinions and beliefs as everyone else. Well, if you have the same attitudes, opinions and beliefs as everyone else then you're simply following aren't you? You aren't advancing your own career. You are simply moving wherever the pack moves. That's not getting ahead, that's simply keeping up.
Take a look at any riot event and you will see the mob mentality at work. This is exactly how committees operate. I am not saying that committees are destructive. I am simply pointing out that committees are all-inclusive and will not move forward without all of their members. It's a mob mentality. One person starts and the others follow.
Imagine this same mentality when faced with integrity issues on the job. One person's integrity becomes compromised and the others follow. Now you have a group of people who don't stand for anything. They believe in nothing. They only believe in getting ahead. And what do they do to get ahead? They give up their integrity.
Even whistle-blower policies can be questioned. Are people blowing the whistle on their bosses because it goes against the integrity of the whistle-blower? Or, is it an opportunity for the whistle-blower to get their 15 minutes of fame or to place themselves in a position for promotion? If the second answer, then there is no integrity involved. Bringing someone else down in order to raise your own stature is as wrong as the original crime. As the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: There is a dearth of integrity on the job these days. People take shortcuts. People have been raised to believe that they are special and that they can be whatever they want to be. Many in the workforce today have had everything simply handed to them. They have not earned it. There is a greater sense of entitlement than there is a sense of integrity. This raises one profound question that must be answered. If everyone is entitled, who pays? That question alone should challenge your personal integrity.
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
No Hope For Resilience
Since leadership is not exclusive to the workplace, let's remember that the concept of leadership starts long before anyone ever finds themselves in the workplace. If more leaders at home (parents) would inspire their followers (children) with useful life-skills instead of arming them with whining and blame (from their own example), then it wouldn't be such an onerous task for leaders to try to fix them all at work later in life.
So, what's the most important life-skill that parents can teach their kids? They can teach their kids how to be resilient. But most don't simply because they don't know how themselves. In fact, most people think that having "hope" will be enough to get them through the tough times. Sorry - wrong answer. Hope is a victim-based strategy. Hoping that something will turn out better doesn't get you off of your lazy butt to do anything about it. In fact, when you get to "hope," you've pretty much exhausted any of your other options and simply given in to your circumstances. Hoping is the same as wishing. You can cross your fingers, go to your happy-place, wave a magic wand and find a four-leafed clover and you will have accomplished as much as "hope" offers.
"I hope the economy gets better soon. I hope it's sunny tomorrow. I hope I get that promotion. I hope she likes me." Sound familiar? Nothing gets done when you "hope." Hope is for the lazy. You can't change the economy. You can't do anything about the weather. You will get the promotion only if you deserve it. You can't make anyone like you. Hoping doesn't change that. But resilience allows you to move forward in spite of these things.
Attitude Adjustment: People need to be unflappable in the face of adversity, change and upheaval. That is the single-most important thing a parent can bless a child with - resilience. Teach your little people how to be unflappable and they won't need "hope." They will realize that "hope" is the last thing you lean on when you run out of other things to do.
And don't think that "hope" is just another word for positive attitude. Hope is not a synonym for positive attitude. They are not interchangeable nor even closely related. You want to inspire people to have "resilience" - the ability to bounce back. "Resilient" people are more goal oriented, more adaptable in situations requiring change and have higher levels of energy to achieve their goals. People who rely on "hope" are not necessarily resilient. People who "hope" don't necessarily "do." Resilient people bounce back despite what has happened to them.
So if you are going to learn one skill that will get you further ahead in your life than any other, learn resilience. Resilience is what happens right after you ask yourself, "OK, now what?" Once you learn resilience, you can teach it to others. If the whole world better-understood resilience and accountability, we could do away with injury lawyers and Jerry Springer would be off of the air.
So, what's the most important life-skill that parents can teach their kids? They can teach their kids how to be resilient. But most don't simply because they don't know how themselves. In fact, most people think that having "hope" will be enough to get them through the tough times. Sorry - wrong answer. Hope is a victim-based strategy. Hoping that something will turn out better doesn't get you off of your lazy butt to do anything about it. In fact, when you get to "hope," you've pretty much exhausted any of your other options and simply given in to your circumstances. Hoping is the same as wishing. You can cross your fingers, go to your happy-place, wave a magic wand and find a four-leafed clover and you will have accomplished as much as "hope" offers.
"I hope the economy gets better soon. I hope it's sunny tomorrow. I hope I get that promotion. I hope she likes me." Sound familiar? Nothing gets done when you "hope." Hope is for the lazy. You can't change the economy. You can't do anything about the weather. You will get the promotion only if you deserve it. You can't make anyone like you. Hoping doesn't change that. But resilience allows you to move forward in spite of these things.
Attitude Adjustment: People need to be unflappable in the face of adversity, change and upheaval. That is the single-most important thing a parent can bless a child with - resilience. Teach your little people how to be unflappable and they won't need "hope." They will realize that "hope" is the last thing you lean on when you run out of other things to do.
And don't think that "hope" is just another word for positive attitude. Hope is not a synonym for positive attitude. They are not interchangeable nor even closely related. You want to inspire people to have "resilience" - the ability to bounce back. "Resilient" people are more goal oriented, more adaptable in situations requiring change and have higher levels of energy to achieve their goals. People who rely on "hope" are not necessarily resilient. People who "hope" don't necessarily "do." Resilient people bounce back despite what has happened to them.
So if you are going to learn one skill that will get you further ahead in your life than any other, learn resilience. Resilience is what happens right after you ask yourself, "OK, now what?" Once you learn resilience, you can teach it to others. If the whole world better-understood resilience and accountability, we could do away with injury lawyers and Jerry Springer would be off of the air.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Being Liked And Being Respected
How come you don't say what's on your mind? How come you hold it in? You want people to like you don't you? And you're afraid that if you deal with the stuff that's been bothering you, then you may not be liked anymore. Well get over it. You don't need to be liked anyway. Being liked is the chicken's way out. Given the choice, you should prefer to be respected far more than wanting to be liked. Being liked is the short-term approach whereas being respected is what everyone should be aiming for.
There has been much talk about how one generation seems to perhaps not hold the same amount of respect for others as another generation. It may be true but maybe not. What seems to be true is that everyone wants to be respected regardless of generational differences.
Respecting others means respecting yourself as well. Just rolling over, laying down and taking the beating it is not respectful at all. It is disrespectful to both you as well as to the other person because you are no longer offering them your very best. When you lay down and allow others to run over you, or at the very least, take advantage of you, you are not offering your best. In fact, you are offering your worst and that is terribly disrespectful.
When you hold your frustrations and irritations in, you try to convince yourself that it's not that bad. But you still end up holding a resentment towards the other person. There is no way for you to be respectful of someone else or work in a positive way with someone with whom you hold any trace of resentment.
So if the office dork (because that's what you call him - maybe worse) who leaves an empty coffee pot on a burner ticks you off because he doesn't start a new pot, then don't hold it in anymore. Take it to him and respectfully (not timidly) tell him that you expect him to offer more respect to the rest of the staff by replenishing the coffee. Maybe he just doesn't get it because he has a subservient spouse who looks after little things like this. Maybe he's forty-five years old and still lives with his mom. Either way, you need to teach him a lesson from the adult world - you know, the real adult world where you have your own place to live and you don't have someone cleaning up your mess for you.
Other employees talk about this guy don't they? How respectful is it letting other people grumble and whine about this guy behind his back? You're letting him hang himself out to dry. That's not respectful at all. Show a little class by telling him what you are all thinking. And if he doesn't like you anymore because you told him the truth, well that's OK. You didn't like him either and you harbored resentment. You are no further behind.
Deal with your squabbles and irritants before they fester into great big issues that can't be resolved. Respect yourself and others will respect you too. After all, you can't give respect if you don't have any for yourself. You can not give away that which you do not possess.
--
There has been much talk about how one generation seems to perhaps not hold the same amount of respect for others as another generation. It may be true but maybe not. What seems to be true is that everyone wants to be respected regardless of generational differences.
Respecting others means respecting yourself as well. Just rolling over, laying down and taking the beating it is not respectful at all. It is disrespectful to both you as well as to the other person because you are no longer offering them your very best. When you lay down and allow others to run over you, or at the very least, take advantage of you, you are not offering your best. In fact, you are offering your worst and that is terribly disrespectful.
When you hold your frustrations and irritations in, you try to convince yourself that it's not that bad. But you still end up holding a resentment towards the other person. There is no way for you to be respectful of someone else or work in a positive way with someone with whom you hold any trace of resentment.
So if the office dork (because that's what you call him - maybe worse) who leaves an empty coffee pot on a burner ticks you off because he doesn't start a new pot, then don't hold it in anymore. Take it to him and respectfully (not timidly) tell him that you expect him to offer more respect to the rest of the staff by replenishing the coffee. Maybe he just doesn't get it because he has a subservient spouse who looks after little things like this. Maybe he's forty-five years old and still lives with his mom. Either way, you need to teach him a lesson from the adult world - you know, the real adult world where you have your own place to live and you don't have someone cleaning up your mess for you.
Other employees talk about this guy don't they? How respectful is it letting other people grumble and whine about this guy behind his back? You're letting him hang himself out to dry. That's not respectful at all. Show a little class by telling him what you are all thinking. And if he doesn't like you anymore because you told him the truth, well that's OK. You didn't like him either and you harbored resentment. You are no further behind.
Deal with your squabbles and irritants before they fester into great big issues that can't be resolved. Respect yourself and others will respect you too. After all, you can't give respect if you don't have any for yourself. You can not give away that which you do not possess.
--
Monday, August 03, 2009
The Attitude of Accountability
Being victimized and being hurt are one in the same. Whether hard-done-by on a large scale or small scale, hurt is a part of being victimized. Being hurt is to take it personally. To be disappointed though, not so much . Disappointment only occurs when you are focused on a particular outcome.
No one ever has power over another. Every person gives up their personal choice in every single instance of being overpowered. We have the power to say no. We have the power to say yes. If we feel that we don't have a choice then we are more afraid of the consequences (of disagreeing with another person) than we are of what happens by letting someone else choose for us. In this case, someone who lets others overpower them probably has low self-esteem or a poor self-image. They NEED to be liked and will give up their power in the hopes that others will like them. Either way, it's hell.
Accountability is to simply hold the belief that everything that happens to you, you had a part in creating (decisions, choices, participation). Anything else other than believing that you had a part in what happens to you is to be victimized. You create your future - good or bad. You create your reality - good or bad. You create your results - good or bad. If you believe anything other than that, you will blame someone or something else for your circumstances and results. When you blame, you are victimized.
Going after your goals is fine. But the attainment of the goal shouldn't shut out the people in your life. If it does, you're being selfish, not accountable. Being self-absorbed is not accountable. If you have a relationship with a spouse and you ignore that relationship and it goes south and you end up divorced because you were self-absorbed with your goals - you would need to be accountable for the break-up. You attracted it. You made it happen by ignoring your spouse. That was your doing.
If you're going for the gold without thought or consideration for others, you're not going to get gold. You're going to maybe get rich - BUT LONELY. If you make agreements to be a friend, be a spouse, be a parent, be a leader and you become me-me-me focused, then you're not being accountable to the agreements you made: to be a friend, a spouse, a parent and a leader. Honestly, if you're so self-absorbed on your goals, you have no balance and I can't imagine how much fun you would be to be around.
Accountability is the "ability to account" for your actions in getting your results.
No one ever has power over another. Every person gives up their personal choice in every single instance of being overpowered. We have the power to say no. We have the power to say yes. If we feel that we don't have a choice then we are more afraid of the consequences (of disagreeing with another person) than we are of what happens by letting someone else choose for us. In this case, someone who lets others overpower them probably has low self-esteem or a poor self-image. They NEED to be liked and will give up their power in the hopes that others will like them. Either way, it's hell.
Accountability is to simply hold the belief that everything that happens to you, you had a part in creating (decisions, choices, participation). Anything else other than believing that you had a part in what happens to you is to be victimized. You create your future - good or bad. You create your reality - good or bad. You create your results - good or bad. If you believe anything other than that, you will blame someone or something else for your circumstances and results. When you blame, you are victimized.
Going after your goals is fine. But the attainment of the goal shouldn't shut out the people in your life. If it does, you're being selfish, not accountable. Being self-absorbed is not accountable. If you have a relationship with a spouse and you ignore that relationship and it goes south and you end up divorced because you were self-absorbed with your goals - you would need to be accountable for the break-up. You attracted it. You made it happen by ignoring your spouse. That was your doing.
If you're going for the gold without thought or consideration for others, you're not going to get gold. You're going to maybe get rich - BUT LONELY. If you make agreements to be a friend, be a spouse, be a parent, be a leader and you become me-me-me focused, then you're not being accountable to the agreements you made: to be a friend, a spouse, a parent and a leader. Honestly, if you're so self-absorbed on your goals, you have no balance and I can't imagine how much fun you would be to be around.
Accountability is the "ability to account" for your actions in getting your results.
The Attitude of Friendship
Why is it that you can be separated from some people for years and then reunited only to pick up where you left off? Why do others, after an absence of years, feel awkward creating a conversation with you?
The difference is in the connection initially made. Some people choose to live life on the surface (about ten miles wide and two inches deep). They care more about what you do than who you are. They care more about what value you offer to the conversation more than how you are perceived in it.
Then there are those with the attitude of friendship: those who don't care how you make your living and probably don't even ask. They are the same people who, if they didn't ask the first time, wouldn't think to ask the second time. For these people, they don't care what you do, they care about who you are.
The trick here is to follow Emerson's advice: "What you are sir, speaks so loudly that I can hardly hear what you say." The trick is to be who you are and not pretend to be something else.
If you or the people in your life consistently bring the conversation around to what you do for a living, then you may want to consider that your life isn't very deep.
If you can pick up with people right where you left off after years of time between you, then you are a person of substance: one whom others would be proud to call a friend.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: There is an attitude of friendship - to get a friend you must be one. Beyond that, everything else is acquaintances.
Some people believe that they can create friendships with business acquaintances. Perhaps some can. But if the only reason you're creating a friendship is so that you new friend will spend their money with you, then that's not friendship - that's manipulation and the friendship will die in the absence of a checkbook.
Friends are people who don't care what you do or what you're selling. Acquaintances are what you have in your life when your discussions are based on what they do and not who they are.
You can try to create friendships with acquaintances but make sure it's solid enough to survive the day when your new friend starts spending his money with someone else. A real friend will support the decision. A fairweather friend won't call anymore.
So ask yourself today in every chance meeting: friend or acquaintance? You may be surprised.
The difference is in the connection initially made. Some people choose to live life on the surface (about ten miles wide and two inches deep). They care more about what you do than who you are. They care more about what value you offer to the conversation more than how you are perceived in it.
Then there are those with the attitude of friendship: those who don't care how you make your living and probably don't even ask. They are the same people who, if they didn't ask the first time, wouldn't think to ask the second time. For these people, they don't care what you do, they care about who you are.
The trick here is to follow Emerson's advice: "What you are sir, speaks so loudly that I can hardly hear what you say." The trick is to be who you are and not pretend to be something else.
If you or the people in your life consistently bring the conversation around to what you do for a living, then you may want to consider that your life isn't very deep.
If you can pick up with people right where you left off after years of time between you, then you are a person of substance: one whom others would be proud to call a friend.
ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: There is an attitude of friendship - to get a friend you must be one. Beyond that, everything else is acquaintances.
Some people believe that they can create friendships with business acquaintances. Perhaps some can. But if the only reason you're creating a friendship is so that you new friend will spend their money with you, then that's not friendship - that's manipulation and the friendship will die in the absence of a checkbook.
Friends are people who don't care what you do or what you're selling. Acquaintances are what you have in your life when your discussions are based on what they do and not who they are.
You can try to create friendships with acquaintances but make sure it's solid enough to survive the day when your new friend starts spending his money with someone else. A real friend will support the decision. A fairweather friend won't call anymore.
So ask yourself today in every chance meeting: friend or acquaintance? You may be surprised.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)