‘Goals’ Articles

Little Evidence of Talent in the Winter Olympics: Business should take a lesson

wb051353I watched a lot of the Olympics over the past two weeks and the skill levels were amazing.  There were not just a few skilled performers, there were many.  Often the difference between Gold Medal Performance and Bronze was a second or less.  I said skilled rather than talented because in post event interviews when asked how they medaled, I never once heard an athlete say, “I guess it was just God-given talent.”  They all said the reason they won was because they had trained very hard for the last four or more years.

I think the problem is that they made their performance look incredibly easy, almost as if they were born doing it.  When people see someone execute a complex task easily, they want to attribute it to “talent.”  When people say someone is talented, they usually don’t realize that it devalues the accomplishment.  If God did it, what role did the individual play?  It diminishes the sacrifices the athlete made to pursue his or her dream.  They could have been relaxing, partying or hanging-out with friends.  It devalues the discipline required to practice in uncomfortable and occasionally miserable weather conditions, not to mention a schedule that requires rising to practice before school or work and again later that day before bed.

I define “talent” as unrecognized practice.  There was no one who won who did not practice, and most often practice more than the ones that didn’t win.  You can’t see the practice when they perform.  Maybe they should post the number of hours practiced on the TV screen to put their performance in a perspective that would allow viewers to better value the accomplishment.

While it is not worth the ink to argue the fact that we all come into this world with different behavioral predispositions (if you want to see it, go to a hospital nursery and watch the newborn), but the evidence shows that it is more about good coaching and practice than it is what you start with.

Business should take a lesson. 

From Enron to AIG, we’ve seen that an organization’s success is not assured by having smart and talented people.

I think business should stop focusing solely on talent and begin to look instead at evidence that the perspective employee has a history of discipline and hard work.  Talent management people should admit that they are selecting people for increased coaching and practice, not because they have some God-given ability.  I believe that we should always select the best candidate for the job, however, the problem is in how we determine “best candidate.”  If it is determined by intelligence, we are looking at the wrong thing.  Look for accomplishments that reflect behavior patterns that have value for the corporation.

This is an important lesson for all managers as their actions or lack there of impacts whether or not an employee reaches his or her highest potential.  Managers don’t teach someone to the limit of the employee’s ability, but rather to the limit of the managers’ ability.  Managers should focus on the following:

  1. Aggressively train and promote people: As a manager, it is your job to retain and develop people. A part of any reward system for managers and supervisors should be the number of employees they keep and promote within the organization.
  2. Spend the time and money to train people to fluency: One of the most costly mistakes companies make is to put people in jobs before they are fluent in the critical aspects of the job.  The amount of repetition required for fluency is far more than the average trainer understands, but the extra time pays off in happier customers and more confident and competent employees.
  3. Have a way of positively reinforcing and rewarding employees who put in extra time and effort: This requires observing behavior to make sure that htose people who put in the extra effort are not overlooked or ignored.  It has been proven that people who are rewarded for extra effort not only work harder on assigned tasks but also work harder on other tasks as well.

The business that understands that outstanding accomplishments come from good coaching and lots of practice rather than native talent and intelligence, open up an unlimited pool of potentially outstanding performers.

How The Mighty Fall

42-16673940With 1:55 left in the game and with the Minnesota Vikings leading the Dallas Cowboys 27 to 3, the Cowboys had no real chance of winning. Surprisingly to many, Viking’s quarterback Brett Favre completed a pass in the end zone to Visanthe Shiancoe for the final score. There was conversation in the announcer’s booth about “running up the score” and Terry Bradshaw, my movie double, was indignant. He said that when he was playing, he called his own plays and he would never do what Favre did. In other words, it was unsportsmanlike to score that late in the game when the game was won. Only one of his fellow sports announcers disagreed.

Is it unsportsmanlike to run up the score? Think of it this way, if a team plays in a way not to score, is it fair to the fans? If the game is won, why not just stop playing? Why doesn’t the losing team declare the game over? There is no point to further play.

Can you imagine a coach saying to his/her team before playing a clearly inferior team, “Good news, you don’t have to do your best to win today.” Most sports fans would think that absurd. What about saying in the last two minutes of a game, “Looks like we have this one in the bag, so just go through the motions till the game is over.” How patronizing is that? Do we play just good enough to win and then lay back? Is that enough? Any team or company for that matter that plays only good enough to win will ultimately lose.

Corporations should take heed. Too many companies that once dominated their industry and business sector no longer exist. I would suggest that one of the main contributors to their demise was the fact that when you are on top, there is a period of time when employees no longer have to do their best to stay on top. During that time bad habits can develop. When you are on top the acceptable margin of error is very small and taking your eye off the ball for an instant can cause major problems. Even mighty Toyota is learning that lesson with the current recall of millions of vehicles. The problem affects a very small number of cars, but it has shaken the confidence of many Toyota owners and perspective buyers. Unfortunately, many companies only realize habits have changed when it is too late because you cannot talk yourself out of a bad habit or into a new one. Mark Twain said it best, “Habit is habit and not to be flung out of the window by any man, but coaxed downstairs a step at a time.”

Years ago in the textile industry, there were companies that could actually sell off-quality goods for a higher price than first quality – a perverse situation, to say the least. In the mid-seventies demand for their products was so high, many textile companies were “sold out.” The only way that new customers could get product was to buy “second quality goods.”

In the five years between 1974 and 1980, the inflation rate was 49.33%. Because the first-quality prices were locked-in by long term contracts, some companies were actually losing money due to what the high rate of inflation had done to their costs. Price increases were possible only for off-quality goods. Unfortunately, the natural consequences favored producing poor quality, and lots of it.

The problem came when a recession hit the textile business in the early ‘80s. Over night the demand for off-quality goods was zero. Now customers were looking very carefully for the slightest defect as a reason to reject a shipment and get out of a high-priced contract. Habits that had been developed when quality was not important could not be turned around on a dime and some companies failed to adjust in time and went out of business.

The lesson for business and sports is this, play every play as though it will be the determining factor between success and failure. This is the only way that you can stay on top of your game. Just one play where a player gives a half-hearted effort weakens habits and the drive to excel on the next play. The seduction for managers and coaches alike is that the change in a habit after one play is imperceptible but the effect is cumulative over time and eventually shows itself in inattention to detail and a lackadaisical approach to the task.

There is an old saying, “Every success sows its seeds of destruction.” For teams that are good enough to win easily, each easy victory has the potential of undermining motivation. It is the best coaches who understand that fact and create positive reinforcers for players and employees to give their all on every play. The score should be of no concern to the players. The already legendary basketball coach, John Wooden, said he never told players to win– only to play their competitive best. He said that if the players played their competitive best and the team lost, that was a reflection of his behavior, not the players.

I hope no one who reads this will assume that I am saying that we live in a “dog eat dog” world in which you should attempt to win at all costs. Lack of civility is all too common in the world today and it is of great concern to me. Doing your best in sports and at work should in no way refer to aggressive, mean, unfair, illegal, unethical or immoral behavior. It simply means playing to your competitive best within the context of what society expects from its heroes.

When your mother told you to always do your best, she knew what she was talking about. Follow her advice and you will always be on the top of your game.

Did McChrystal get what he wanted? I think so!

Obama.McChrystal

 When I was in the Army there was a saying about budgets, “Ask for three, expect two and get one.” 

 I was reminded of this when watching President Obama’s speech at West Point last night. When General McCrystal asked for 40,000 troops for the Afghan War, how many did he really expect to get? According to the formula above it would be about 26,680. So with the 30,000 approved by the President, he actually got about 3,320 more troops than he expected.

Even though The General may be satisfied, the President has been put in a difficult position. Because he did not give The General the 40,000 troops he asked for, if the strategy fails, the responsibility now falls squarely on President Obama. General McChrystal can always come back and say, “I told you I needed 40,000.”

This situation is replicated many thousands of times every year in organizations across the country. Most leaders consider goal setting to be a primary performance improvement /motivational tool and yet it is the thing that is most often poorly done. I have written extensively about goal setting elsewhere and won’t reiterate that now, but the real problem with the way goals are set is that everybody knows that they are usually padded and everybody knows that they will be cut by the boss. It is a game that everybody plays and everybody knows everybody is playing it.

I think the result of this game playing is bloated, inefficient organizations. This continues to exist because incentives are pegged directly or indirectly around large budgets and large numbers of employees. Most organizations would not increase pay in any significant way for someone who was able to reduce the budget by half or reduce manpower requirements by half. Until major changes are made in contingencies of reinforcement in the management of organizations, the goal setting game will continue and managers will continue to find ways to justify doing less with more. 


Additional Resouces in OOPS! 13 Management Practices that Waste Time & Monday (and what to do instead). 

Photo Credit:

Oops #5: Rewarding Things a Dead Man Can Do

 What do having no accidents, making no errors and handing out a bonus across the board have in common?  They all reward things a dead man can do!  Listen now.
 

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Oops!: The Biggest Mistakes Made By TV’s Top Bosses

From Mary Tyler Moore to Mad Men, the workplace has served as the setting for many of television’s most acclaimed and beloved series. It’s no wonder. The office provides the ultimate backdrop for observing human behavior in all its glory, moving us to laugh, cry, and, all too often, cringe and cover our eyes. 

In my latest book, OOPS! 13 Management Practices that Waste Time and Money (and what to do instead), I look at 13 time-honored management practices that actually reward bad habits and punish good behavior, often with devastating results.

With the new season of Mad Men about to premiere and the fall season on the horizon, I thought it would be both fun and revealing to look at how five of our favorite television bosses stack up against the 13 common management mistakes highlighted in Oops! 

Over the coming weeks, I’ll be adding to the list with other management mistakes from TV land and I invite you to share your own favorites. We’ll give away five copies of Oops! to the best suggestions we receive. Send your submissions to http://www.aubreydanielsblog.com/ask-aubrey/.

steve-carrell

Michael Scott (Steve Carrell) – The Office

Made OOPS Mistake #1 - Employee of the Month

What went wrong:

Michael created the Dundies, an annual awards show in which he presented awards to various members of the office based on their job performances.

While his goal was to motivate all employees to deliver superior performance, the Dundies, like other “employee of the month”-type programs, ended up angering or humiliating the majority of the office staff. The problem is that only one employee can earn the accolade while the others are left with performance that goes unrecognized – violating every known principle of effective positive reinforcement.

What to do instead:

Michael can make his efforts more effective by setting measurable criteria and rewarding and recognizing everyone who meets or exceeds the goals. In order to make recognition effective, Michael must create a culture of positive reinforcement that provides ongoing positive reinforcement for everyone who goes above and beyond their daily activities.

Liz Lemon

Liz Lemon (Tina Fey) – 30 Rock

Made OOPS Mistake #12 – Downsizing 

What went wrong:

When Liz must reduce staff by 10 percent, the entire staff tries to please her to avoid being laid off and Liz ultimately bases her decisions on irrelevant factors, such as firing a romantic rival. By indiscriminately firing employees, the remaining employees will likely wonder if they are next and develop a distrust of management. There will also now be more work for fewer people, potentially leading to lower office morale and productivity.

What to do instead:

Rather than allowing employees to try to sway her firing decision, Liz should have gotten all employees involved in a solution as a first step to avoiding a layoff, such as eliminating wasteful expenses or taking salary cuts or furlough days.

If layoffs must happen, Liz should treat those being terminated fairly and generously in order to demonstrate to those remaining that she cares for her employees. Most importantly, Liz must make sure that she increases positive reinforcement for those who remain as they take on additional work.

simoncowell

Simon Cowell / American Idol

Made OOPS! Rule #7 - “You did a good job, but…”

What went wrong:

While Cowell’s primary goal is to entertain, like all bosses he should also want inspire contestants to improve upon each of their performances. However, his critiques sometimes combine both positive and negative comments as in “Although it was good, I don’t see it as an American Idol-winning performance” or his critique of Idol winner Taylor Hicks: “You’re like every dad who’s ever got drunk at a wedding … got on stage and sang. The difference is, you can sing.” The effect of such statements is to cause people to ignore the positive comments and obsess on the negative comments. It is a prodding, nagging style of management that does not motivate and is more often a punisher.

What to do instead

Always separate complements from negative criticisms.  Give the good first and at a later time deliver the corrective feedback.  That way the good will be valued and the employee will be more responsive to the corrective feedback.

wilhemina-slater

Wilhemina Slater (Vanessa Williams) – Ugly Betty

Made OOPS! Rule #11 – Promoting People No One Likes

What went wrong:

There is a perception in leadership that managers who are well-liked are not effective at producing results.  It is understandable given that most managers believe that hard-nosed, negative practices are the most effective.  They are not.  Case in point: Wilhemina Slater.  Backstabbing, cruel, and vindictive, Slater may strike fear in her employees, but she is ultimately only able to hold onto her position through scheming rather than inspiring great work among her team. Bully bosses also create toxic workplaces. The only thing her two assistants seemed to have learned from Slater is how to scheme and backstab just like her.

What to do instead:

The first test in promoting someone to management is whether people would want to be around this person.  If the person does not have good social skills, look for someone else.  Look for those managers and leaders that get results the right way; those that understand behavior from a scientific perspective and can design systems, policies and procedures that bring out the best in people everyday.   These people are always well-liked.

ari-gold1

Ari Gold (Jeremy Piven) / Entourage

Made OOPS! Rule #2 – Stretch Goals 

What went wrong:

Like Slater, Hollywood agent Ari Gold is the epitome of the “bully boss,” crass, offensive, and constantly disparaging his assistant Lloyd. In this instance, however, Gold turns to a time-honored business practice – stretch goals – which ultimately backfires on him. When the career of Gold’s client, Vince Chase, is at an all-time low, Gold puts pressure on his staff to develop a presentation and strategy that will put Chase’s brand on par with Microsoft and McDonald’s. The presentation comes off as rushed, thoughtless, and unsympathetic, ultimately pushing Chase farther away.

What to do instead:

The problem with stretch goals is they are typically set too high and people fail to reach them 90% of the time.  With a 90% fail rate, efforts to reach these goals diminish over time and discretionary effort toward all goals is eventually extinguished. To get Chase’s career back on track, Gold should have set many mini-goals instead.  Managers need to ensure that positive reinforcement is delivered for the many small achievements along the way to reaching some final goal.

Don’t Be A Wasteful Executive

aubrey-on-abc-news-now

Enjoyable interview this morning with Jackie Hyland of ABC News Now’s Money Matters.

Take a look

 

 

 

 

 

Oops #2: Stretch Goals

The 2nd Management Practice That Wastes Time & Money:
Stretch Goals.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.