Washington Politics and the Office – Beware the Similarities

I recently had lunch with a Congressman from the US House of Representatives and a friend; it was just the three of us.  And while the Congressman was careful in what he said, the relaxed atmosphere allowed us to explore a wide range of political and personal topics.  He lamented how the current climate in Washington DC is so toxic there is little chance to pass legislation even when members of both parties can agree.  The similarities to office politics are striking.

The party affiliation of the Congressman is irrelevant.  His comments remind me of situations found in companies with polarized positions where people dismiss good ideas coming from someone they dislike or disagree with.  While many of us are disgusted with a broken political system, we should look closer to home – where we work.  How often have you seen seemingly good ideas tossed aside because one group dislikes another or because of personality conflicts between individuals?  Unfortunately, I believe it happens all too often.

Groups within companies can become as polarized as politicians.  When this happens, people loose touch with their common purpose and discard opportunity because they dislike the idea’s originator.  While political issues play out in the open press, entrenched positions in companies often take a more passive-aggressive path.  New ideas are undermined in hallways and offices behind people’s backs.  The focus becomes the individual instead of the idea; people attack the person and question their motivation or reputation.  Who loses when this happens?

Instead of embracing the positive elements in an idea, people focus on why it won’t work.  Rather than being builders, they resort to demolition.  Innovations and new ideas die before being evaluated when people or groups become entrenched in personal politics.  I’ve been in meetings where someone is ignored entirely as if they were invisible simply because they aren’t liked.  You can watch it happen in real time as people roll their eyes, start speaking to someone else, or begin fiddling with their phone.  In the end, everyone loses as the potential is lost and relationships are further damaged.  This negative cycle can persist indefinitely and doom an organization to mediocrity – or worse.

To break the cycle, move beyond personal feelings and character attacks.  When someone suggests a new idea, separate the person from the idea, especially if you dislike the individual.  Evaluate the idea on face value and work to uncover its strengths.  One way to do this is to imagine the idea came from another source.  Resist the temptation to dismiss an idea just because you dislike who offered it.  Acknowledge the potential benefits, and then move to collaborate toward common understanding.  Remember you are all on the same team.  Remind yourself and others why you’re there: to build a better organization where new opportunity lifts everyone.  Be a builder, not the wrecking crew. 

For leaders, don’t allow your team to fall into a destructive cycle.  Stop the cycle before it gets started.  It’s your responsibility to guide your team toward solutions and to pull yourself and others above the fray.  Focus people on the idea regardless of who offered it.  In addition, be humble and encourage people to find ways to improve upon the idea.  In the end, you’ll build bridges and move your organization forward. 

If you dislike Washington politics as much as I do, remember the same thing can happen in your organization.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

Is Your Employee Engagement Being Led by Captains or Coaches?

In an earlier article, I suggested that employee engagement is a full-contact sport where manager and employee collaborate together as an integrated team.  Sticking with that theme, I submit there is a big difference between managers who function as coaches and those who are team captains.  If you want an engaged team, be a captain!

Captains are frequently (if not continuously) on the playing field.  Their perspective enables them to not only clearly see what’s happening, but personally experience conditions.  They can see when certain tactics aren’t working and have a unique perspective on why.  Great team captains earn the respect of their teammates, are incredible motivators, and are relatable.  After all, they’re getting hit every bit as much as the other players are.

In order to develop a high performing engaged team, managers need to have a first-hand view of the landscape.  Coaches lead their teams from the sidelines where it’s difficult to appreciate what employees are experiencing. That may work in some instances, but only if a manager is using feedback from players on the field.

Employee engagement happens on the front line where the game is played.  Management can create conditions for success, equip their team with the right tools, and lend considerable experience when crafting the game plan.  But at the end of the day, it’s the captains on the field that are executing the plan.  They are in the best position to know what is working and what isn’t. 

Ever heard someone say ‘just stick to the game plan’ when things aren’t working?  I have seen this first-hand when a new employee engagement effort is rolled out and quickly falls apart.  It’s the age-old definition of insanity – doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.  If your game plan isn’t working, it’s time to find out why and adjust.  Players (employees) give feedback on field conditions, team captains (front-line leaders) lend their experience and first-hand reports, then coaches (company leadership) incorporate that into a revised plan.

Executives should enable first-line leaders (captains) to make real-time adjustments versus waiting for plays to be called in from the sidelines.  

How does this work in practice?  The US military for example trains its platoon leaders and personnel to read conditions on the ground and adjust their tactics as necessary.  Once the mission and strategy have been established and communicated, those with ‘boots on the ground’ have the freedom to maneuver and shift as things unfold.  This in no way compromises the mission.  Instead, it fosters creativity, critical thinking, and dynamic decision-making.

To develop a truly engaged organization, senior leaders must either function as team captains or delegate a degree of freedom to those in the field of play.  I’m not suggesting the C-suite micromanage.  Instead, select leaders who are effective team captains, empower and equip them with tools, then give them authority to shift as conditions warrant. 

Employee engagement is really not very different from team sports.  The best sports teams are those where everyone is working in synch focused on the same goal and executing the same game plan (strategy).  Each individual has a function, knows their position, and is aware of how their actions affect their teammates.  It’s really not that complicated. 

So ask yourself.  Are my employee engagement efforts being led by coaches or captains?  If you’re relying on coaches, you have no leader on the field and you’re likely going to lose the game.  Find yourself some great captains then trust them enough to lead you to victory.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, an employee engagement specialist, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate growth.  He provides front-line leadership development and helps clients improve operational alignment.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

Wasting Money on Employee Engagement?

In my last post, I made the point that many employee engagement (EE) initiatives are a hoax.  In this article, I will elaborate on that point and assert that most investments in EE are a waste of time and money.  This may be offensive for those of you who are EE professionals.  In fact, when I discussed these points with a close colleague who does EE for a living, his response was “Are you out of your mind!”  So at the risk of alienating or angering the EE community, let me make my point.

First, if you’ve been involved in EE efforts for some length of time, you will relate to the following scenario:

A senior executive decides the organization needs to improve its employee engagement.  A small team is formed and they buy the services of a reputable EE consulting company.  The effort is rolled out with great fanfare, employees are strongly encouraged to have their voices heard, and there is a corresponding flurry of effort to respond to the survey results.  However, after 3-6 months, the energy level is down and the topic is rarely discussed in leadership meetings.  One executive expresses dissatisfaction with the consulting firm hired to do the survey and assist in implementation.  At this point, the initiative goes on the trash heap with other “failed” projects and is soon forgotten.

What went wrong?

Nearly every EE professional I’ve worked with has a similar story to tell.  You see, the effort was initiated on the false premise that the company could do something to “make” the employees more engaged.  Therefore, after the pixie dust settled and the consultant took their magic wand to their next project, the effort died (in some cases quickly).  The point of my previous article was that the decision to be engaged or disengaged is a personal choice that can be influenced by the company but never coerced.  When companies invest money to bring the latest consultant or guru in to “fix” their engagement problem, they are building on a false foundation and once the hard work begins and positive results haven’t started pouring in, leadership can lose patience and confidence.  As an EE professional, you can relate to the frustration of working with an executive team that demands fast results, wants visible progress, and then blames you or the whole notion of EE for having been a waste of time and money.

Don’t get me wrong – the executive suite has a lot to do with creating the environment for engagement.  But if you’re looking for employees to embrace their work and support the company, engagement starts with first-line leaders and supervisors.  Policies, culture, and resources can be improved to enable the engagement process to unfold, but if first-line leaders lack the training and support to be effective, employees on those teams will decide not to engage.  Any initiative pushed from the top down is doomed to fail from the beginning if not accompanied by an equally strong or stronger focus on first-line leaders.

Consider a different approach.  First review company policies, culture, and environmental factors to ensure consistency with the values and objectives of the organization.  Address areas of misalignment where necessary and enable employees to perform at their best under all circumstances.  For example, if your vision or policies state that you value innovation, yet managers routinely discipline employees for bringing forward new ideas, the disconnect will create disengagement.  Enabling performance is what the executive team can do best, not trying to force engagement to happen.  Second, start working closely with first-line leaders.  Make sure they have the training and support they need to be world-class leaders that employees admire and want to work with.  While this might not be considered “engagement” in the purist sense, the net result is the same.  Something as simple as communication training and coaching can go a long way to improving the effectiveness of a new leader.  Companies frequently invest in this type of support for their senior executives, but often, habits and poor leadership styles are already ingrained at that point and more difficult to change.  Start early and avoid the potential issues later.  Also help your first-line supervisors connect the dots between their teams and your bigger picture.  Give them tools and resources to have that dialog on a regular basis.  You might consider some illustrations or frameworks that allow these supervisors to speak to the company’s vision and strategy in simple, practical terms easily translated to a range of work activities.  If supervisors begin feeling connected with the company’s strategy, it will positively affect the teams they lead.

So next time you’re tempted to spend a lot of money to roll out a new EE initiative, take a moment and think carefully about your objectives.  Is your organization prepared to capitalize on an employee engagement effort?  Are your policies, procedures, and culture aligned and consistent?  Are you doing everything you can to support your first-line leaders?  If you can answer yes to all or most of these questions, then the added investment of a survey and some outside assistance may be a good investment.  If not, I would recommend you wait and work to address these issues first.  Save your money until you’re better prepared.  The types of things I’m recommending are usually within the capabilities and resources of the company – you don’t need to pay an “expert” to tell you what should be common sense. 

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

The Hoax of Employee Engagement

Why does a Gallup study show “employee engagement” across US industries has been stuck around 30%?   It’s because employers believe they can force engagement to happen.  It’s as if a program or initiative will magically produce better results.  In the hope for a special button companies can push to deliver engaged employees, companies are investing millions in consultants, surveys, and projects that focus on elevating engagement.  What a waste!  Most of what is peddled as employee engagement is nothing more than an elaborate hoax.

Employee engagement has become the latest business trick to increase productivity, retain talent, and grow profits.  An entire industry has emerged offering surveys, tools, and consulting that are focused on improving engagement.  These efforts fail to deliver on their promises and some have the opposite effect.  I suggest the majority of these investments have been misplaced – employee engagement is nothing more than a gimmick designed to give companies a quick fix or boost.

So, what exactly is engagement?  Engagement is an emotional choice, not  something you can do to someone.  While “to engage” someone or something is an action, engagement requires an emotional response.  Can a company “engage” its employees and ultimately expect positive results?  The cliché “happiness is an inside job” is also true for engagement - engagement is an inside job.  At the end of the day, whether an employee feels engaged is a personal choice, not something a company can impose on its people.  It all comes down personal choice.

I suggest that enablement is preferable to engagement.  When you enable someone, you empower them.  It’s not what you “do” to improve engagement, but how you behave.  When you look at companies reporting higher levels of engagement you find culture, policies, and values that encourage individual achievement aligned and synchronized with the company’s strategy.  Employees choose to be more engaged in the success of the organization because they feel connected and valued.  This isn’t a subtle difference in language -- it runs deeper into the soul of the organization and how that organization views its human resources. 

While well intentioned, engagement programs and initiatives miss this vital element.  If employees lack empowerment, they are demotivated from making the effort.  Without enablement, these efforts by the company are hollow.  Employees ultimately feel manipulated instead of valued.  Most of us have seen cases where surveys are used to gauge the level of engagement.  Yet when months pass and no fundamental change is noted, employees conclude it was just another show.  A year passes, another survey, and employees ignore it.  Why waste the time responding when the last survey produced nothing of value? 

To improve engagement, start with enabling employees to perform at their best.  Equip them with tools and provide an environment that values contribution, creativity, and connection.  Company-wide, one-size-fits-all initiatives fail to address the fundamental issue of how an individual’s efforts contribute to the greater whole.  Engagement requires a more personal, one-on-one approach that no project or initiative can provide; it is a full contact sport.  Standing up at a company all-hands and espousing how much employees are valued is impersonal, insufficient, and lacks specificity.

If engagement is what you’re looking for, start at the bottom with individuals, not groups.  Work with line-managers and help them connect the dots clearly between what their teams do and how their efforts contributes to and are valued in the greater whole.  This requires a personal level of interaction that is usually absent from organizations. 

Employees don’t leave companies, they leave managers.  Improving engagement happens one employee at a time. 

More on employee enablement in the coming weeks.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.

Anatomy of a Commitment

What is a commitment?  How serious do you take a commitment?  How do you feel when a commitment is broken or not honored?

Commitments are the bedrock of trust.  As I work with organizations, it is often a lack of commitment at the root cause of issues.  Employees expect their leaders to honor their promises, to respect assurances – to deliver on their commitments

The real test of leadership comes down to how well you keep your word.  Broken promises destroy organizations.  As a leader, your commitments are the working capital that determines if you succeed or fail.  Commitments are a serious matter!  Don’t take them lightly.

 A commitment is a contract.  It represents an assurance to follow through and deliver.  Long before written contracts were used to conduct business, it was a verbal commitment often sealed with a handshake that constituted a warrant to deliver.  When you preface something with “I promise …” you are making a commitment.  If you don’t intend on delivering or believe there may be impediments to following through, don’t state it as a promise.  Broken promises are the high-speed route to failed leadership.

Another aspect of commitment is clarity.  I have found organizations that obfuscate or bury commitments under a cloud of caveats and provisions that create escape paths.  In contracts you can often find so many terms and conditions they nullify commitments to the point of absurdity.  Clarity demands that promises leave little or no wiggle room for interpretation.  It should be obvious what you have committed to and when delivered, closure is assured.

The final component of commitment is accountability.  Broken promises have consequences and you must be prepared to accept responsibility when you don’t deliver.  That doesn’t mean playing the blame game or clouding the situation with excuses.  When you make a commitment, you are taking responsibility for the outcome regardless of what it is.  Step up and lead!

Want to test how solid you are at keeping commitments?

How well do you keep commitments made to yourself?  The real test of how sincere you are about commitments lies within.  Most of us have made personal resolutions at one point or another.  They may have been New Year’s resolutions or just a simple decision to change something.  What’s your personal track record?  If you have broken commitments to yourself, you’re more likely to break them with others.  Sound harsh?  Take a few moments and reflect on this point.  Consider that you can’t give what you don’t already possess.  Your determination to honor promises you’ve made to yourself is the foundation on which you draw strength to do so for others.

The true test of leadership is commitment.  There are many other attributes that contribute to great leadership, but it all rests on one simple thing – are you good for your word?  Trust is built or destroyed on this one element.  You can possess many of the other attributes often associated with leaders, but if you fail the commitment test, you fail as a leader.  Next time you’re called to make a commitment, consider the implications should you break your promise.  When you chose to walk away from a commitment, the effects can be deep and long-lasting.  Take the commitment test. 

• Can and will you deliver?
• Is it clear what you have committed to?
• Are you ready to take complete responsibility for the outcome?

Finally, reflect on the commitments you’ve made to yourself over the last several years.  If you have failed to keep your own promises, has that in any way affected commitments made to others?  Be honest with yourself.  Start by honoring the promises you make to yourself and build commitment muscle.  You’ll find delivering to others becomes easier when you respect yourself enough to do so when no one else is looking.

Duane Grove is founder of Connect2Action, a strategy execution specialist at the intersection of employee engagement and executive leadership, igniting innovation as a lever to accelerate your growth.  Follow Duane on Twitter @connect2action and connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google+.  Learn more by visiting www.connect2action.com.