Why Leadership Seems Sexier Than Management

There are a whole lot more people talking about leadership than there are people talking about management these days. In fact, on Twitter, my informal survey shows the numbers of Leadership Gurus to Management Gurus to be about 25-to-1, but I think that's a conservative number.

How many "leaders" are in your organization versus the number of managers? 1-to-25? Completely opposite huh?

Anyone can fashion themselves a "Leadership Guru." Here's why: there's no certification needed to become a "leadership instructor." And leadership is not about achieving quantifiable measurement. No, the leadership talk is all about character traits, magnetism and vision - all stuff that is not quantifiable in the short-term. Whereas, if a manager misses one item on the checklist today, there can be dire consequences immediately.

Management is much tougher than leadership. Managers don't have the luxury of being liked or followed or being a visionary. No, management is what is necessary when the leaders are off contemplating their navels. Someone has to run the place to make sure the doors stay open and people remain employed.

Management is hard work - not in the future but today. Maybe that's why there are so many "Leadership Gurus," because it's easier, less precise and fewer consequences if you get it wrong. But mess up the management thing and heads will roll and dollars will be lost. And it's also the manager's job to make sure employees are engaged and productive.

So before you go off and embrace the sexiness of "leadership," you'd better make sure you have the management thing down to a fine science. People's livelihoods are depending on it. Give me a solid manager over a wanna-be leader any day, and I'll show you an organization responding immediately to market changes and customer demands.
--
Social Networks

There have been a few changes in the social networking circles recently. Thought I would update you on where I am. I want you to join me wherever it's comfortable for you.

Here's where you can find me:

Facebook - The Kevin Burns Attitude Fan Page
Twitter - The Kevin Burns @attitudeburns Page
YouTube - The Kevin Burns Attitude Channel
LinkedIn - The Kevin Burns Attitude LinkedIn Page
WordPress - The Managing w/ Attitude Blog on WordPress
RSS Feed - Subscribe to Kevin Burns Blog in a Reader
--
Kevin Burns - Management Attitude/Culture Strategist
Web Site http://www.kevburns.com

Creator of Filter-Free Fridays™

How To Deal With Disappointment

Everyone gets disappointed at some point. Moms express their disappointment at the actions of their 6 year-old when they hit another boy. Fathers express their disappointment to teenage daughters in the hopes that the outward expression becomes a lesson to make better choices. Bosses express their disappointment on performance reviews in the hopes of motivating the affected employee. Teachers express their diappointment because they know the student isn't applying him or herself.

These are all expressions of outward disappointment in someone else. But what happens when disappointment is focused inward - when things don't turn out the way we had hoped?

There are some things in life that you just don't have any control over and there are other things that are within your control. Understanding which is which will help you to bounce back quicker from disappointment - to develop a resilience attitude.

Planning for months to visit the Grand Canyon only to be turned back by a snowstorm, a rained out family picnic, a power outage during your wedding reception or a cancelled flight to an important meeting are all things out of your control. You have no control over the weather, the electric company or the airlines. It's fine to feel disappointed for a short while but it isn't the end of your life. You can try again tomorrow.

However, disappointment about how much you get paid, your job-performance review, your golf score, that promotion you really want, your relationships at home and how your money is budgeted are all within your control. Only you determine how valuable you are to the company, how well you do your job, how much you practice at golf, how you self-improve to be the logical choice to be promoted, how hard you work at your relationship and how you spend your money. No one else is to blame for your results.

You have no control over other people, things or events outside of yourself. But you have complete control over your reaction to those things. You also have ALL of the control over every part of your life that involves YOU and your results.

--
Attitude w/ ATTITUDE by Kevin Burns - Corporate Attitude/Culture Strategist

Creator of the 90-Day Strategy to Greatness Culture


Subscribe to Kevin's Attitude with ATTITUDE Blog by Email
Follow Kevin on Twitter @attitudeburns
The Official Kevin Burns YouTube Channel

The Attitude Of Unfairness

There is a new Legislation being argued in the US Senate these days that would make it easier for unions to form. It’s called the Employee Free Choice Act and it is creating quite a bit of concern throughout Corporate America. And Corporate America should be concerned – but not by the threat of a union. Corporate America should be concerned with the perceptual attitude of its employees that they might even consider the notion of needing a union.

People join unions because they feel that management is treating them unfairly. Examples of patronage, promoting friends, firings without cause and poor management skills leave the employees with an Attitude of mistrust. So what are the options? The biggest option is to join or form a union. The Employee Free Choice Act being discussed in US Senate right now would make it very easy for your workplace to be unionized quickly. And all that is required is simply a feeling, a suspicion or attitude of not being treated well.

If feelings of unfairness are rampant in your organization then you are a prime target for unionization under the proposed US Legislation. But that's not to say that unionizing is bad. In fact, there are still some Neanderthal managers in the workforce today who do short-change their employees, who still belittle and intimidate their workers and who do treat them unfairly. And for those organizations, being kicked in the ass by a union is probably the right thing. If there are managers on your payroll who still operate this way, get rid of them before the legislation goes through.

There doesn’t even need to be anything wrong in your organization - no evidence is required. All there needs to be is a “feeling” of being taken advantage of – an Attitude of “Us versus Them.” There doesn’t need to be evidence of unfairness – just the perception of it. Do you see the difference?

It’s not the union that managers should be afraid of. It’s the belief that a union might be necessary at all – that’s what should scare managers. If your people “feel” that they are being mistreated or taken advantage of then your organization has a Sick-Attitude that you had better address right now. The longer you wait and hope it goes away, the more likely it is to affect employee productivity, corporate relations with customers and, in turn, profitability. When morale is low, so are profits. If profits are low, where are you going to find money for union wages?

If your people are even contemplating organizing, you have an Attitude problem you need to address right now. Your place needs an Attitude Adjustment. If you don’t address it, you will pay … one way or the other.
--

Love The Work – Hate The Job

How is it that people can love their work but hate their job? I’m going to hazard a guess that it’s not the job that they hate. It’s likely the work environment. In other words, they love their work and responsibilities but hate the commute, despise their little cubicles, simply tolerate their fellow employees, agonize through the dress-code, get annoyed by meaningless interruptions during the day, hate getting sidetracked by office chatter and overall, simply wonder in deep silence “what is his problem?” when it comes to hearing the office whiner in the next cubicle doing the exact same work.

People who love their work but hate the work environment will usually be the first to seek another job. The average cost of replacing a good worker is about 1.5 times the annual salary of the worker. Simply put, if you’re paying a good worker $50K per year, it will cost the organization about $75K to replace a worker once he or she leaves.

It’s likely that only four hours out of an eight hour work day are productive anyway (perhaps even lower depending on the number of memos flying or how crappy the photocopier is). Idle chatter, noise all around, pointless meetings, quick conversations standing in the doorways of a cubicle, gathering in the coffee room to celebrate Mary’s birthday, figuring out a place for everyone to go for lunch, fifteen minute coffee breaks that last 20-25 minutes. You get the point here. There’s a lot of clutter to struggle through before people actually get to work. And the more people you gather in one place the more distractions there will be.

As an employer, the question you have to ask yourself is: are you paying your workers for their productivity or their presence? Sometimes though, they are one in the same. For example, a house framer has to be on the job in order for the work to get done, but someone who is researching marketing trends doesn’t actually need to be in the office for that to happen. If a worker has a high-speed Internet connection, a computer, email and a phone, they can pretty much work from anywhere.

The key to productivity is to remove distractions. If a worker can work from home (spouse and kids are gone for the day), why not see what kind of productivity you can get from your workers? Offer them an opportunity to occasionally work from home while they are plugged into the office network. Remove the distractions, remove the agonizing commutes of lost productivity time, remove the reasons and excuses for not being able to concentrate on a specific task and, most of all, remove the office whiner (please, please remove the office whiner before someone staples a “Stop Whining” sign to his forehead).

People who are allowed to remove the distractions from their work are more productive. Productive workers find greater reward in their work. People who find great reward in their work rarely seek greener pastures. In other words, get rid of the distractions and productivity will rise. It has to. There’s nothing else left for people to do but work.

ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: Leadership Attitude means having a mindset that inspires your people to want to be better. Treat your people like the potential leaders that they can be and they will rise to the occasion. Treat them as rats in a maze (think of what cubicles look like from overhead), and they will simply be looking for a way out. Think about creative ways to get more out of your people while allowing them a little freedom to do it themselves. Force them punch a clock and they’ll be thinking up creative ways of punching you. Let people do the work they love but don’t force them to do it in a place they hate. Creativity is a key component of a Leadership Attitude.

The Illusion Of Being In Business

Do you earn your money or do you simply give your employer the illusion of earning your money? What I mean by that is are you actually giving your best effort to get the job done in every moment of your day or are you simply doing just enough to not get fired? Are you actually busy or just giving the illusion of being busy so people don’t end up tasking you with new work and projects?

The guy who walks around the office all day with a phone glued to his head or constantly on his Blackberry can make you think that he is busy but may, in fact, be just trying his best to look busy so no one questions his work ethic. Appearing busy is not necessarily being busy. Why is it that some people get their work done during the day and others, doing the same job, end up taking their work home with them at the end of the day? I believe it is because one is productive and one gives the illusion of being busy.

So let’s say that you are the person who is actually productive during the day. You manage to get your work done on time. You even have time to help others out by taking some of their workload when you have a little extra time in your day. At the end of the day, you managed to help a co-worker out of a jam by helping them with their project. Should you be compensated more than the person who simply gives the illusion of being busy? Of course you should. Do you get compensated that way? Not likely because when it comes right down to it, you seem as busy as the guy who gives the illusion of being busy even though being productive and being busy are two different things entirely. Most workplaces don’t bother to check the difference because why would you question someone who seems like he’s always doing something?

Being productive is the right and honorable thing to do. Giving the illusion of being busy is stealing. Some businesses give great service. Others give the illusion of service.

So, let’s say you actually earn your money – fair work for fair pay. If you’ve worked to earn your money, why would you then give up that hard-earned money to another business who doesn’t earn it? I’m speaking of businesses who don’t give you the same service you give your customers and co-workers. I’m speaking of businesses who give the illusion of being in business but fail in the “service” area. Given the option of buying the exact same item from a business who gives great service and one who simply takes your money with no real “gratitude attitude,” why would you freely give up your “earned” money to an organization that doesn’t earn it?

ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT: You need to set a standard in your life – a line that says “I will not accept service less than this.” Lay out your expectations to yourself. Prepare yourself to walk away if they fail in service that is not up to your standard. You can fire a business just like a company can fire an employee.

You vote with your dollars. A company that does not earn your business shouldn’t get your business because of convenience – because they were easier to get to.

Some grocery stores will bag your groceries for you and then walk your groceries out to your car Yet others will make you pay for the bags to put your groceries in and you will have to bag your own groceries. If the groceries are virtually the same price, wouldn’t you prefer buying from the store that gives you the bags for free, bags them for you and then loads the groceries in your car for free as well? That’s service and you deserve to be served well. It’s your money. You earned it. Or is it that you just give the illusion of earning your money and are unable to tell the difference between service and the illusion of service?