Reciprocity – “The practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit,especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.” From Google’s English Dictionary provided by Oxford Languages.
Last week I wrote on the importance of conversation, especially for networking success. The genesis of that article was the recent dialog I had about networking. Many of the folks participating in those discussions were frustrated by their lack of success. They complained that their conversations were not leading to follow-up meetings. Some confessed that their conversational skills might be the problem. In my post, I spoke to the need to respect the other person in the conversation. I recommended that you listen intently and show interest in the other. I explained how to make a connection. The other issue was the need for an effective networking strategy. I inferred that they did not understand the foundation principles of networking. I will address that issue now.
So, why network? Because it works! Reciprocity is the foundational principle for networking. Most human beings are hardwired to repay a gift or kindness with something of similar value. It is a powerful concept that resides deep in the human psyche. It is fundamental to the development and maintenance of long-term relationships. Networking employs the concept of reciprocity to building new relationships. It is essential to expand the number of people whom you know and who know you. People you can help and who can help you, your network. Humans build their careers, businesses, and social circle by networking.
If networking is such a powerful concept, why do many people find it difficult and unfulfilling? My experience leads me to believe that these folks engage in networking activities only when they have an immediate need. They begin networking when they are under pressure to find another job. When they find their next job, they stop networking. Their mission is to find another job. Their orientation is on themselves.
Your network is among your most valuable assets, but many don’t make that connection. Like most investments, it requires maintenance. One proven way to enhance the value of your network is to become an active member of a relevant group or organization. Many professionals benefit from membership in a professional association based on their job functions. These associations help you maintain your professional credentials while increasing your network. Organizations more generally focused on a specific industry segment can serve the same purpose while providing current information on the state of that segment. Memberships in extracurricular interest groups can be helpful too. Also, consider groups like college and university alumni associations, those supporting a particular hobby, or charitable organizations. College alumni associations are beneficial to young professionals working to build their careers. If you have the time and inclination, take a leadership role in one of your interest groups. It will enhance your reputation while generating new opportunities.
Taking full advantage of the resources available through LinkedIn is another powerful way to enhance your professional status.
Make sure that your profile is complete.
Post your material and comment on those of your connections.
Make endorsements and recommendations.
Participate in interest group(s).
Acknowledge Birthdays.
Summary and Conclusion
Networking is the process of generating new mutually beneficial relationships. Based on the principle of reciprocity, it is the primary method people employ to find new business opportunities and build their careers. The point is to talk with people willing to connect you to other people, eventually to a hiring manager seeking someone with your skills. The more people you speak with, the better. Those folks can amplify your activity, but you prepare them properly. Make it easy for them to introduce you. Remember, networking is a give-and-take process. If you are not helping others, they will not be motivated to help you.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
Last week I moderated two separate networking group meetings. That is not particularly interesting or noteworthy, except that they shared the same topic and presenter. The subject was “Freelancing and the Fractional Executive as a Career Option.” One group was primarily job seekers, whereas the other was composed of independent consultants and small business owners. I found it interesting that a major topic of conversation in both meetings was how to become a more effective networker. It is a fundamental issue worth further exploration. Relationships develop by expanding your network. It is how people find jobs and new customers. The ability to initiate and maintain a conversation is an essential skill in this regard. Even so, many demonstrate insecurity about their ability to have a meaningful discussion. If one cannot master this skill, your networking efforts will be frustrating. Share on X
If you spend your time watching national news broadcasts by the major networks or on cable news channels, you could easily conclude that the art of conversation is dead. Regrettably, much of what we see are professional propagandists talking over one another. It’s not much in the way of conversation. Those programs are challenging, even painful to watch, unless you are into train wrecks. They should never be confused with a thoughtful conversation or an exchange of ideas. Instead, we should seek out healthy conversations. It’s how we humans learn, transact business, and build relationships. It is fundamental to our survival and our ability to thrive. Even so, it is mysterious and intimidating for many. It seems like a lost art from our distant past. I have good news, however. Effective conversation is a relatively simple skill that anyone can master.
I spend most of my day in conversation, at work, and off, as you might imagine. Much of that time is helping professionals improve their networking skills. It is the one area that generates the most interest. Job seekers and business people trying to expand the reach of their brand know that they need help in this area. My contribution is devoted to asking questions and listening carefully.
So what makes for a compelling conversation, especially with people you don’t know and have recently met? An effective conversation is an exchange of information where both parties benefit. On a deeper level, it is a dialogue that develops and strengthens a relationship. The best way to establish a relationship is to show interest in the other person in the conversation. Ask relevant questions and listen carefully to their response. By showing interest in another, you begin to build a bond that can lead to a relationship. Wait patiently for an invitation to discuss your interests. Waiting to talk is difficult for many people as they are anxious to present their background. Networking Pros understand that they must help others first. All good conversations develop by a respectful exchange. Create goodwill with the other by asking thoughtful questions. Practice active listening techniques. Understand their motivation for the meeting so you can establish common ground and offer your help.
Key Factors for Effective Conversations
Demonstrate a genuine interest in the other person
Be respectful, don’t interrupt or overtalk
Use your active listening skills, verbal and non-verbal, to understand nuances.
Make the other comfortable; mirror, maintain eye contact,
Ask an open-ended question to understand and keep the conversation going
Ensure that the time, place, and situation is optimal
Use non-verbal communication to convey interest and understanding
I am sure that these points are familiar to you. You have heard this before. So why is it that you are still apprehensive about your ability to hold a conversation? I suspect it is because you have avoided practicing these items.
If you want to become more effective as a networker, work on your conversation skills. A good conversationalist is considered exciting and sincere. You will experience greater success in building relationships that further your career and social life. Fortunately, like most things in life, the skills required to initiate and maintain an interesting conversation are easy to master.
For further reading in this connection, check out these articles.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
This week I had an interesting conversation with a senior executive recently released from a major brand. Let’s call him John. He has the benefit of an Outplacement Program, which will be helpful as he has not had to look for a new job in a very long time. He reconnected with me to discuss his situation and to seek my help. John was interested in my opinion of his goals relative to the current market for his skill set.
John gave me the background on his separation, saying that it related primarily to the COVID-19 pandemic. His former company is restructuring to better adapt to the competitive situation, eliminating his position. He went on to say that their culture has deteriorated. He said it had reached a point where he no longer felt comfortable working there. He was upbeat about his prospects, however.
John’s recap surprised me as his company has executed a successful re-positioning program. It has been rocking the market. I was disappointed to hear about their current situation. I had thought their culture was far stronger given their recent success.
When I ask job seekers to describe the ideal situation they seek, I usually hear the same response. People are looking for a growing brand with products they respect. They want to join a company that is a good corporate citizen with a healthy culture that rewards excellence. You know, utopia. More precisely, a major brand like the one they just left, only better. John was not an exception. He is looking for the same thing. However, he will soon learn that his opportunity is with emerging brands, not established companies.
The demand for people like John is with companies that can only aspire to his ideal at some future date. Even before the effects of the pandemic, employers were more focused on maintaining their competitive position and profitability than building a culture for long-term success. These companies are struggling to remain relevant.
I do not mean to say that no one is trying to create a great work environment. I have several clients, albeit mostly startups and emerging brands, that are making an effort to build distinctive cultures. They are following established models that support standard management practices. I applaud their wisdom and enjoy helping them staff their team.
Other clients have become spectacular failures, in part because they did not make it a priority to create a culture supportive of their ambitions. In some cases, the culture was rotten at the very top of the organization. In one situation, the Executive Team was so out of sync regarding strategy and execution that they inadvertently created a chaotic environment. The result was Chapter 11 reorganization and, ultimately, liquidation of the business. I could write a book about that situation, but the short story is an excellent concept destroyed by incompetent leadership.
Maintaining a culture to support success through each stage of a company’s life cycle is not easy. Share on XOften, the people who helped you through startup, for example, are not viable as you move into rapid growth employing professional managers. Some people will be able to adapt to the challenge, but others won’t. How do you tell an employee that helped the brand achieve the initial success that they cannot go to the promised land? All you can do is make their separation as positive as possible, recognizing them for their contribution to the company.
Having completed a bit of research, I found a rich bibliography for your consideration. Much of what I found describes how to build a culture of excellence. I have provided links at the end of this article if you are interested in further reading.
Healthy cultures do not just happen. It requires a concerted effort. I have seen the powerful effect of a rigorous focus in this regard. Companies that build their cultures enjoy the benefits of sustained success, including a definite recruiting advantage. If you believe you have a competitive product and an effective strategy, ensure success by focusing on your culture. This effort will probably require the help of outside resources. There are many firms to consider that will enrich your process with credibility and expertise. Their experience will help you proceed at a quicker pace while avoiding common mistakes. If you want to build a culture of excellence, I suggest you get started immediately and reach out to professionals for help and guidance.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
Human Resources (HR) is constantly stereotyped as the bad guy reporting to the company, and not in support of the workers. Dissimilar management teams view the role of HR very differently. The typical role carved out for HR ranges from administrative only to overseeing the employee lifecycle, outlining company policies, talent acquisition, payroll, and on up to strategic partner. This said employee interface is inherent in HR’s role.
As a strategic partner, HR provides input on what actions are taken that will impact employees, and how those actions are implemented. Both roles are important. The “what” needs to be a business decision. The “how” needs to be heavily weighted by HR best practices and in the best interests of all employees.
When HR plays an administrative only role, the only way for HR to ingratiate itself to employees is to emphasize empathy and caring in all that they do. The what and sometimes the how are given to HR to execute, so the only variable is the demeanor of the HR representative while performing their assigned duties.
Where the HR role has strategic content, the opportunity to impact employee perceptions of HR increases from just empathy and caring in the following ways:
Ensuring that short- and long-term people factors are considered during the decision-making process. The solution must ultimately be driven by business factors; therefore, HR must be able to make its case for the “how” in full consideration of the “why” and “what”.
Once the decision is made, HR’s role shifts to the “how”. Precedent from prior similar actions needs to be considered. If this review differs, HR needs to ensure that those differences are clearly articulated and communicated to employees effectively. No matter what the action, effective communications include written communications, team meetings, and most important of all, interactions with direct supervisors. Special consideration needs to be placed on ensuring that all supervisors are fully briefed on the “why” behind the actions being taken. The supervisor is the most important link in the communications chain, so their understanding and support are vital.
HR works with leadership to establish the “people goals” of the action being taken. These goals need to be verbalized and reinforced as important outcomes of the actions being taken. These goals need to be measurable so at the end of the day, you can determine if the goal was achieved or not.
HR oversees the operational decisions being made as it impacts employees. All legal considerations need to be factored into the actions taken, and all steps must be legally compliant.
HR ensures that each individual employee affected is treated fairly with dignity and respect. To accomplish this task, HR needs to have relationships with employees throughout the organization, particularly with the influencers among the employee population. The influencers will know and can communicate to HR (directly or through their supervisors) any activities or individual behaviors that are not consistent with the employee relations goals established by management with the advice of HR.
And finally, HR leads a post-mortem on the change actions to document lessons learned to ensure that future actions are informed by lessons learned from earlier actions.
Actions that negatively impact employees are never easy. But a strong HR team, grounded in strategy, can lessen the impact on the business and its employees. Where this is the case, the view of leadership and employees of HR can be dramatically improved.
Philip A. Davis
Senior Vice President
Flex HR
About FlexHR
Flex HR is an Administrative Services Organization (ASO) that provides leadership to deliver customized, scalable, and cost-effective HR outsourcing solutions. Flex HR offers a highly collaborative approach to consulting and outsourcing by aligning core human resources competencies needed to achieve the value expected from your company’s most important assets: your people.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
The band Missing Persons released a tune in 1982 called Words. The tune considered the value of talking when no one is listening. The music video craze was starting then, and the audio aspect of the music video was almost unheard by many viewers. The point made by Missing Persons is valid. Society sometimes reaches a place where doing nearly anything without listening occurs by the majority of people. It is this condition where the world now finds itself.
Today, the biggest party in decades is in full swing. It has been in motion for a few months and looks like it will go on for at least another year. The party is about feeling human again. Those alive now endured 2020 by dealing with COVID-19, loss of income, and perhaps the loss of loved ones. The party is epic in scale. Those attending this party do not want to hear any more bad news for a long time. They are happy to have whatever they have now, but they want more consumerism. They want their version of the truth and not much else going into their hearts and minds. The Summer of Love is the closest example I can provide for what we are witnessing in 2021.
This non-listening-to-truth party is perhaps the most dangerous scenario a leader could experience. Life has a way of bringing reality to us all, as COVID-19 did in 2020. A leader who has closed their ears, eyes, and mind to truth will find they are deficient as a leader when truth shows up as it does from time to time. Today, let’s look at how you can avoid the pain of this dangerous experience by remembering the pain the world went through for several years after the carefree summer of 1967. Ever notice how these big parties seem to occur after a war concludes?
Let’s look at some research. Then, let’s look at some of the societal and political pressures compressing folks today. Then, let’s look at what can help you to avoid the dangers associated with the impending decompressing. Finally, some considerations of how we can best advance forward together as we say goodbye to one another for now.
I know, there is a lot of material presented today. However, I am not sure when we will meet again. It is best to equip you now with the material we need to address to keep you going forward as a growing leader until we meet again. I will use several examples of imagery during our discussion today to help stitch together the bigger picture. Take your time reading this material so that it will soak into you as deep as possible.
Now, another way to consider this spring is a trampoline. Imagine the trampoline in this video which set a world record for size. The trampoline looks fun until something crucial to the equations shifts and injuries occur. So, take a moment and ask yourself how interested you are in leading your people for a ride on this trampoline.
RESEARCH
Molly Baker shared research on what entrepreneurs have learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, plan to stay out of danger. Jeremy Howell shared research from the CEO perspective on the same topic, finding the same results. The nonprofit association called Business Roundtable is working the approach to see what is coming in the world of business. They found planning is a valuable contributor to success, as declared in their statement of purpose.
Ron Carucci performed research comprising a 15-year longitudinal study of more than 3,200 leaders on organizational honesty. Carucci found the success factors for building a reputation as a trustworthy leader included making values clear, living up to those values, treating others and their work with dignity, determining when to be open and when to protect confidences, and cultivating a sense of unity across the organization. Remember our discussion about trust? The Carucci findings are supported as credible by this writer.
Harry Dempsey shared the present microprocessor shortage is expected to last until the middle of 2022. Reshma Kapadia stated that Taiwan Semiconductor is the world’s most important chip maker, even though its stock share price is down 15% since mid-February. Remember our discussion on the topic of microprocessors? The 47th G7 Summit is positioned to establish a global minimum tax rate on company profits for businesses that operate internationally. Paul Hannon, Richard Rubin, and Sam Schechner reported that member nations have agreed on global minimum corporate-tax rate rules. John Lyons and Frances Yoon considered the bigger picture of companies choosing to leave Hong Kong, finding the perceived need to be in Hong Kong is decreasing by the day for many individuals and companies. Angela Tan shared the G7’s global minimum tax deal may nullify any tax advantage Singapore offers. Singapore Financial Secretary Paul Chan shared, “The proposed changes to the global tax regime may affect some of the tax concessions the Hong Kong government offers to various industries.”
The action in play now by global governments is to grab big piles of money by way of taxes while the world is having its party. The trend I see playing out is to take money from Asia where the economies are doing great and bring it to the United States and European Union. Things have been down, up, and then down again since 2008 for the US and mostly down for the EU since 2008.
COMPRESSION
I said recently, “Trust is the connector of evidence and faith.” I maintain this position. The trust within society is falling apart by the pressure applied to it from the political position combined with a societal position shifting from national to global in many nations, but not all nations. Nationalism is still a pervasive consideration in the majority of nations.
The pattern occurring over history for a constructive society is society does whatever it does, then the politics align with the actions of society’s majority. This turn of events does not last forever. Germany rebuilt powerfully after World War I, then met its demise at the end of World War II after an incredible comeback from defeat just under three decades earlier. This societal-political flow is like a river. The water flows downstream from society to politics. Today, the politics are trying to drive society to do what political positions want to have happen without widespread support from society. The result is the river is trying to flow upstream. This reversed flow is another form of compression, as gravity is pushing against the backward flow.
We are talking much more than who won the 2020 elections in this country or that country, the origins of COVID-19, or when will be the next cyber attack on a company or country. We are also talking about jobs, kids, schools, and the ability to see loved ones both when and as preferred. These topics are timeless and cross all societal and economic levels. These topics are where things get personal for everyone, where the rubber meets the road, where trust in leaders had better be in place if leaders expect followers to be with them willingly.
The release of this compressed spring device has only one assured outcome: determining who collaborated with those that caused the pain during spring decompression. The spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. We have seen this scenario play out many times in history. The most recent vivid example of these events playing out occurred in 1944.
Germany was losing the war after the invasion at Normandy, arguably earlier. We discussed this topic when we considered evil. Essentially, some of the folks in oppressor-occupied nations collaborated with their enemy. Most notably, the horizontal collaboration events. The people of those occupied nations knew who was collaborating with their enemy. When their enemy ran in fear, those harmed by the collaboration paid retribution to those collaborators. They did so in part by shaving their heads, marking their skin with symbols, and casting them out of their society. The message was simple and clear: you made your irrevocable choice, now you are no larger a part of us. The images and video of this payback experience also occurred in the nations where the Japanese and Italians fell in defeat.
The civil aspect of this retaliation occurred by civilian hands. The military aspect is even more strict. The Uniform Code of Military Justice, UCMJ, is regulated by the United States Congress. UCMJ articles 77-134 define punitive punishment. UCMJ article 103b is the law covering aiding the enemy. The penalty for aiding the enemy is death, much worse than a bad haircut. Many developed nations have similar military laws in place.
Things get worse for society as a whole in terms of payback over the past two decades. The effort comprising institutionalized support of non-heterosexuality by the observance of LGBT Pride Month provides no assurance women will be protected from any form of retaliation repercussions from any topic in the future. The lack of assurance comes from the LGBT premise disregarding assigned sex without ambiguity in favor of gender identity by using the personal sense of one’s own gender. The disregard of gender eliminates almost all protection for women from an assault during retribution of collaboration or any other payback reason because there is no female to protect. However, there are still valid reasons for hope.
The LGBT topic is the most significant conflict point between traditional and postmodern culture-based societies. It is the most significant conflict point because of the force applied by each group for acceptance of each worldview through religion, legislation, and commerce to form clear rights. A more concise example of these LGBT events playing out is a storm surge on the boundary of the social groups who hold the propensity for the continuance of the human race versus those who desire to reshape the human race into a form that defies reason for both its survivability and thrive-ability.
The cancel culture phenomenon is not new, but it is unique to our time. It, combined with separation for those who refuse to receive the COVID-19 immunization, are examples of forming distinct groups. The spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. Those targeted by the cancel culture efforts and those who refuse to receive the COVID-19 immunization are further examples of targeted groups receiving retribution.
You see, the spring is more than a single reason. It is any reason that justifies retribution in the minds of the majority who has the power to want their form of justice delivered to them. It is at this point where the rulings of espoused morality occur, rendering whatever judgments they find valid. The members comprising the group named “they,” are those who suffered either perceived or actual harm.
Remember our discussion about love and diplomacy? I made the statement, “Diplomacy without reasoning is lunacy. If there is no room for reason, then there is no likelihood of success in any engagement with people regardless of either using or not using diplomacy.” I maintain this position. Remember our discussion about how ambivalence does not help anyone accomplish love? The reasoning I presented in these discussions about loving people being the only viable answer serves to help resolve the conflict between those who disagree with and those who support LGBT rights. Neither hatred nor ambivalence ever did anything productive in life. So, the only thing we can do is love one another as we work together to try and find the means that will somehow help the disagreeing groups live in peace and not attempt to destroy one another.
If the conflict of cultures present today arises to the form of war, then the struggle between person versus person will structure to a clear espoused worldview found in group versus group. There will be little doubt which side, camp, group, or team a person stands with during this conflict. Neutrality by either person, company, or country will not be an option as those who take a side will be the majority of the population, and they will refuse to allow bystanders not to make a choice. We are witnessing this premise play out today in the growing number of calls for resolving supposed injustice to an aggrieved group of either gender, skin color, religion, ethnicity, or some combination of these demographic and psychographic elements. The attributes of conflict, persecution, and payback are again headed to harmful consequences. Just ask those who lived between World War I and II about life during those years. They will tell anyone who will listen to the signs of the times then and how they match up to what we are witnessing today.
My heart breaks considering the events of collaboration with an enemy, as the payback occurs based on long-held anger. Those who collaborate with an enemy make irrevocable choices. Those who provide retribution also make irrevocable choices. The spring pops, and people are harmed.
I am an optimist, but I am also a realist. If love does not take hold of our hearts on a global basis, then I cannot help but believe the conflict we will force on one another will be quite harmful. Again, there is hope. Another spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. However, their justice will be peace and not continued conflict. We have also seen this scenario play out many times in history.
The societal and political pressures compressing this spring device each cry out for qualified leadership. Together, they demonstrate the clear need for qualified leadership. The qualified attribute is the key to this calling. Not everyone will lead, wants to lead, or is even capable of leading. We are in a watershed moment of history now. The future of the next century is being shaped before our eyes, as the traditional and postmodern culture-based societies decide what they will and will not concede for their beliefs. Whatever the answers are from each of these societies will determine how much overlap there is between them. Then, things will be more definite for how they will either coexist or live apart.
Anyone willing to serve in a leadership role at this point has their work cut out for them. How about you? Are you up for serving in a leadership role? Do you need further leadership development? Leadership is not easy, but I never said it was easy.
TRUTH
I shared last week the most controversial topic I handle in my work is the concept of truth. I also said last week, “Truth is realized by reason. Reason is manifested in process.” The majority of my work involves helping people see and embrace truth. This understanding of truth is the basis of our work going forward.
I have learned, painfully, there are three states of reality for awareness of truth. I use the term reality as the part of truth that a person realizes, not whatever is or is not true but has no bearing in their life. Remember our discussion on the topic of assessing? Truth is a singular term.
The first reality state is the worst for everyone involved. The second reality state of truth is the scariest for everyone involved. The last reality state of truth is the most difficult for anyone to do, but it is also the most beneficial.
The first reality state of truth awareness is avoiding truth. This condition is practiced by both the ignorant and the sophisticated. The ignorant are unaware of what they do not know. They grab the hot clothes iron with the hope they can learn why the iron makes the fabric flat. The sophisticated is a thespian who practices their avoidance of truth with polished eloquence. This reality state brings those who attempt to lead by way of reason nothing but pain. It is best to not be with anyone in the first reality state, as they are dangerous to all they encounter both directly and indirectly.
The second reality state of truth awareness is indifference to truth. This person is not sure what they feel, think, or believe about a topic. So, they are unable to arrive at understanding the truth of the topic. They are like the animal standing in the road that is killed by the oncoming vehicle. They do not move. They do not do anything. They are scared at the moment before their death. Their fear causes you to be in danger. It is best to put this person to the side of you in a safe spot, if they will go there and stay there, while they hopefully figure out whatever it is they feel, think, and believe about truth.
The final reality state of truth awareness is wanting to know truth. This person has been harmed by both the first and second reality state. They have no desire to live in any condition that will prevent them from holding reason to know truth. This reality state is difficult for them as they work tirelessly to know truth.
Now, it does not matter what the topic is or is not, the aspect of the topic, or the truth about the topic. It does not matter if the topic is understood completely or even at all. What matters is the harm and benefit combination you experience from the topic. Remember our discussions about looking and reading? Those points were made early in our time together to help you mature those skills so you can use them as soon as possible.
AVOIDANCE
I do not broker in sensationalism. I refuse to listen to fearmongering. I spoke against fear several weeks back. My intention now is to help develop you as a leader to avoid the spring device underneath the global society now decompressing as an outcome of musical chairs, considering no one knows either when the spring will decompress or who will be harmed by their not having a chair.
We would be wise to cover many more topics to develop you as a leader further, regardless of your mastery of each topic now. The need for this additional work on our part is formed by your need for more power as a leader. Remember our discussion on power sourced by servitude? Remember our discussion on power sourced by humility? I will now share a list containing some of the items we need to cover to further develop you as a leader and address each item briefly. There are many more items on the list, but here is a glimpse of what we have for the work ahead of us.
The quest for any status is an example of evil. Remember our discussion about the excusability of evil? Remember the story of Michael Hingson from last week? The way to overcome the need for a particular status is to serve humbly. Your actions will assign you the status you need for the moment.
There is endless preparation work involved in any aspect of leadership. A plan may hold a good idea, but it is not a plan without a schedule. A plan is matched with a schedule. All talk without supporting evidence is cheap, and so is a plan without an executable schedule.
There is endless work involved in data management. Remember our discussion several weeks back about leaders not having sufficient data analysis skills? The ability to understand the lifecycle of data in your organization is paramount for any leader, particularly those at the executive level. Understanding and accomplishing calculations by hand, spreadsheet, or any other mathematical tool is non-negotiable for a successful leader.
Truth is absolute, not relative. Remember our discussion a few weeks back on The Stuff? I can spend several hundred pages addressing the topic of truth alone. The topic of truth was a part of my doctoral dissertation work. There is no process, no strategy, no plan, or anything else defined as accurate apart from truth.
We have only scratched the surface of succession planning during our time together. Anyone who holds thoughts of impunity as they believe they are a sheep of your shepherding is not a person you need in your organization. Remember our discussion about organization antibodies? Our effort to find new people for your organization applies directly to the work of succession planning. It involves moving people up in your organization, not out. The need to evaluate people during the succession process must be based on reason to avoid the appearance of impropriety through favoritism bias to maintain your credibility as a leader.
CLOSURE
We started off our time together discussing a destination that was unknown. We knew that people at the time were mad enough to fight about how things were going for them. I shared several weeks later how “I both have fought and will fight tooth-and-nail to defend those who I love.” We then went on to discuss love in a deep study. We have accomplished much together. We are off to a great start. You are in much better shape now than before we started our work.
I am going to take some time and rest before I begin work for some new customers. I urge you to contact me by email when you are ready to pick up our effort to develop you as a leader. I have enjoyed our time together. My sales pitch includes the line, “Applying my consulting and educational knowledge to an organization is a unique experience for both myself and the organization.” Our time together has been unique for me. I hope it has also been unique for you.
I trust we will talk again, soon. I look forward to hearing from you. Take care of yourself until then. I will do the same.
The sky above us, the unknown.
Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL Executive Strategy Consultant
Dr. Stephen H Dawson
Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia.
Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.
Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
You plan a tower that will pierce the clouds? Lay first the foundation of humility.” Saint Augustine
Stephen H Dawson, DSL
You have found the person you need to serve in the role you need to be filled. They have agreed to serve in the role. You have solved your strategic planning problem by resolving your people problem. You have realized success. I congratulate you on your achievement.
We have covered much ground in this commentary series. It is the ground from day one, not only the assessing, matching, and interviewing work. Today, we need to review some of what you could have done as you made your decisions over the past several months. It is not my position to either criticize, condemn or complain about your actions. It is my intent to further develop you as a leader by considering where you stand after your recent events of dealing with the people problems in your organization.
I shared several weeks back we still need to discuss physical impairments resulting in a disability when you consider selecting members for your organization. I held off on discussing this topic with you until after you made your hiring decision for a reason. I maintain the position the first requirement for any applicant is for them to hold the skills necessary to fill the role where they would like to serve. Let’s talk now about the risk you incur by being blinded from reason. Think about all we have covered in our time together to help you with your strategic planning problem and how it developed you as a leader.
SUCCESS
The concept of success means many different things to everyone. You had a specific objective. We walked out on how to accomplish your objective. You made your decisions. You took action. You met the requirements you assigned to your objective. This combination is what I call a clear success.
What we cannot prove is if you were humble enough during your work to locate a replacement member of your organization. We discussed the power of humility several weeks back. What I can tell you is my heart knows when I have not been humble enough toward others. I know it by my being uncomfortable to be around them after I take action. How about you? Are you feeling good about how you acted recently around your people?
BLINDNESS
I discussed several weeks back how you need to leverage general counsel and human resources. Their work is outside of your expertise. You need their input, but you run the business. It is reasonable to feel as though you would like to have more and less of their input at the same time. This feeling results from the combination of your staffing choice having a significant impact on your organization, the new member, and the impact of using their skills to your maximum benefit.
How about unconscious bias? Did you make your staffing selection based on an affinity for a group of similarities? Are you feeling good about how you acted recently around your people?
I intend to use the following story to connect as much, if not all, of the material we have covered in this commentary series. I hope the story hits you square in your chest as it did for me when I first read it. I hold this hope for you as the chest is where we seem to measure how we know right from wrong.
Hingson and Flory tell the story of Michael Hingson. Hingson went to work on September 11, 2001, as he had for a long time. He worked on the seventy-eighth floor of the World Trade Center in New York City. A plane crashed into the building fifteen stories below him that day. His thoughts after the crash were to call his wife and inform her he was alive, then see to the safety of his coworkers as part of a building evacuation process. Hingson shared many people he worked with, along with people he did not work with on the same floor, were scared to the point they could not evacuate. Evacuation meant overcoming the obstacle of the horrific damage on the sixty-third floor. Hingson did what needed to be done at the moment. He started walking to the stairwell, asking those around him to follow him onto the stairs. The people, one by one, moved to follow him. They crawled over demolished concrete, beside raging fires, and around those who died during the plane crash. Hingson led several, then dozens, then hundreds of people out of the World Trade Center, gaining new followers floor by floor before the building collapsed less than five minutes after he exited the building.
Now, the context. Hingson is blind. He lost his eyesight years before this 2001 event. Hingson accomplished crisis communications, succession planning, agile project management, phased project management, and the preservation of life that day. Hingson did have his guide dog with him. Hingson is what I call a leader, a servant, a hero.
I urge you to contextualize your efforts to lead given Hingson and evaluate if your executive leadership abilities, your willingness to serve your followers, your commitment to do what I called right during our many discussions of morality matches what your organization needs to accomplish. What I do not know is what you call right. Your organization may need to accomplish in the next few minutes something it did not plan to accomplish. Our discussion of market sector stability, along with the acquisitions and mergers listed daily in the newspapers over the past several years, means your organization is most likely going to face something they need to accomplish outside of your planning. The need may not be a crisis, but it will probably be a substantial turn of events for you and those you lead. My intent is not to scare you. My intent is to focus you on the importance of not leading from an isolated perspective. Hingson had no perspective of eyesight, but he had the perspective to lead followers regardless of the nature of the circumstances by contextualizing the circumstances. This combination is called strategic vision.
The message of the Hingson story is simple. Do not let your leadership work be outside of your organization but an integral part of your organization. Otherwise, you probably would do well not to pursue either your project or serve as a leader. The more profound point here is your organization is not static in construct.
I first read the story of Michael Hingson in the newspaper on September 14, 2001, during breakfast. I was living in the Washington, D.C. area at the time. I was trying to make sense of what happened over the past few days. The part of the building where I used to work did not exist anymore. I reflected on the choices I had made over the past 72-hours. It was a difficult week for me.
The events I experienced 20 years ago are similar to the effort you are trying to achieve now: make more sense of how you solved your strategic planning problem by resolving your people problem. The context is different, but the needs and objectives are the same. You are trying to know if you did what you needed to do to the best of your ability at the time.
A close look at things when they happen is a sound approach to getting a good perspective on things. Then, stepping back and reviewing events later to see how things look after the dust settles. If it helps you understand things now, I still have the Michael Hingson story article I tore out of the newspaper after breakfast that morning.
NEXT
This commentary series on the topic of strategic planning will conclude next week. I will share with you next week some guidance on the next steps you would do well to consider in your leadership development journey. I hold the position development is a journey, not a single destination known as destiny. Development is a series of destinations comprising the journey.
We will discuss next week the most controversial topic I handle in my work. It is the concept of truth. The truth scares people. Truth moves people. Truth is not discussed much in public circles today. If you desire to serve as a leader and realize anything close to the concept of success, then you cannot avoid the truth. Truth is realized by reason. Reason is manifested in process. Needless to say, my work has me helping people who are struggling to gain a good grip on truth. This understanding of truth is the basis of our work going forward. Our basis has been prepared by the foundation we have established together.
So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.
I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.
Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.
Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.
Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
Industry leaders continually invest in refining and evolving their current product/service assortment through new product development. They do this to remain competitive as well as to generate measurable new top-line revenue for their organizations. Yet, the failure rate for new product introductions remains frighteningly high. Ask anyone what percentage of new products fail. The usual answer is somewhere between 70-90 percent.
Market Research can help reduce the failure rate considerably when applied relevantly and conducted correctly. But, there are five pitfalls that need to be avoided;
Test What You Intend to Launch
The features, benefits, and attributes that you use to describe and evaluate the product in research MUST match the product that you will bring to the market as closely as possible. Testing attributes that aren’t possible or too expensive may lead to unrealistic demand forecasts. For example, in testing a new online video game service, the research described the product as including hundreds of games from the top game publishers and a seamless interface and game-playing experience. Target consumer response to this concept was highly positive. However, when it was time to launch the product, many of the top game publishers were not included and the product required advanced drivers and high-powered PCs with very large RAM capacity to perform optimally. As a result, consumer expectations were never reached, and the product ultimately failed.
Don’t Depend on Qualitative Research Alone
Qualitative Research (focus groups, depth interviews, ethnography) utilize small, non-projectable samples. Qualitative research is very effective in providing guidance, hypotheses development, and disaster prevention. However, because the samples are small and not representative of the entire target market, the detailed findings developed solely on the insights from qualitative research may be wildly different from the reality of the marketplace. Always follow up with quantitative, projectable research to confirm hypotheses!
Respondents Will Often Overstate Their Intentions
Overstatement of intent bias is always an issue when measuring constructs such as “likelihood to buy” or “overall interest”. Respondents just can’t predict exactly what they intend to buy, especially if it’s a highly innovative product. There are a few ways to handle overstatement. First, when using scales, it helps that all of the data points are labeled or anchored so that there is no ambiguity of how to answer the question. Second, you may also want to consider using a down weighting scheme using historical empirical data to verify actual product take rates to survey results.Or, third, you may consider a hybrid approach, and instead of directly asking people for their own likelihood to buy, you ask them to project their forecast of what others would likely buy. In this way, you can overcome their personal… Share on XBut one of the best ways to overcome overstatement is to measure the likelihood to buy using a trade-off technique such as Discrete Choice or Conjoint Testing or MaxDiff. These techniques “force” respondents to make trade-offs and distinct choices of one product over the other, thus mitigating bias of direct questioning.
Evaluate Features, Benefits, and Attributes of the New Product In Bundles, Rather Than In Isolation
The most famous case illustrating this caveat is the Edsel. When developing the Ford Edsel, researchers tested various components of the car in isolation. They identified the preferred bumper, the preferred grill, the preferred dashboard configuration, and so on. When all the research was completed, they combined the top tested components together. But the car that resulted did not look or operate optimally. Utilizing one or more trade-off testing approaches such as Discrete Choice, Conjoint, or Max-Diff mentioned above will help to avoid this problem.
5.Remain Objective! You May Have to Declare that the “Baby” Is Ugly.
As a researcher, it is your duty to remain objective, to base conclusions and insights only on the data. The person or team developing the new project has a special interest in the success of the new product. But, for the good of the organization, if the research identifies flaws or inconsistencies, or simply disinterest, then it is important to clearly communicate this to the product team so that either adjustment can be made to improve the product or that the launch can be canceled. I once conducted a pricing test for a new product that indicated that the target price that consumers were willing to pay was about $100. However, the cost to make and sell the product was about $200. Unfortunately, despite the obvious discrepancy, the client decided to launch the product at a price of $285. Suffice it to say, the product was a flop. So, not only do you need to tell the client bad news, they need to believe you and act accordingly.
Following these guidelines will greatly increase your odds of success. But remember, ask the right questions, of the right people, at the right time.
Carl Fusco
Carl Fusco is an accomplished Marketing Research Consultant who helps businesses more effectively solve problems by applying research techniques and data-based insights. For more information email him at carl_fusco@yahoo.com or phone him at 770-364-7160.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
I work with many startups and emerging brands. They have become the core of my business. It gives me great satisfaction in helping them with their recruiting needs. When my colleagues and I created ITB Partners, our strategy was to focus on this sector. Companies in this phase of their life cycle face decisions that carry significant risk. One or two bad choices can sink an otherwise viable company, even if they have proof of concept. We believed we could help emerging companies achieve success by avoiding business-killing mistakes. Recruiting new employees is one of those high-risk activities.
A growing company will eventually need to increase its staffing level. They must approach this high potential risk with caution. For many of my clients, i.e., emerging brands, the first consideration is to find an outsourced solution. Many job functions can be outsourced, including accounting and human resources. A recent client had even outsourced most of their marketing function. However, a viable outsourcing strategy requires a strategic-level employee on staff to manage the outsourced function.
A good example is to hire a Controller or CFO to manage the outsourced accounting function and interface with the financial community and investors. Mission-critical job functions probably cannot and should not be outsourced. Early on, outsourcing non-mission-critical job functions may be a better use of a company’s resources. It is also a valuable way to reduce the risk associated with an expanding workforce.
Some Pitfalls.
Adding too much staff too soon.
Failure to use outsourced solutions
Lack of prioritization of positions to fill
Lack of processes for recruiting and selection
Lack of training for interviewing and selection
Lack of a coherent reason why someone should join your company
Recruiting for startups is different from hiring for a going concern. As I say, the risk is more significant. The costs for hiring a non-competent employee or someone whose behavioral issues negatively impact the culture may significantly affect a small company. Established companies have less difficulty attracting good employees. They have people, processes, and systems to ensure an effective recruiting and selection process and lower risk profile. They have an established culture and look to fill positions with people who reflect their mission.
Small, emerging companies have fewer resources, are less political, and have a bias for action. Speed rules! Entrepreneurs often have unconventional management styles. They can be chaotic. Employees working in these environments must demonstrate a high degree of flexibility and adaptability. Job roles have a wider scope, requiring employees to have a broader experience. It requires employees with greater self-confidence who are comfortable in an ambiguous, less-structured work environment. Many entrepreneurs lack training in recruiting, selection, onboarding, and retention. Job descriptions are challenging to create as ideal candidate profiles, and behavioral components may be more important than skills and experience. Finally, an emerging company may have more difficulty selling employment opportunities as their brands are unknown.
What to Do?
Begin with a plan!
Set staffing priorities w/timeline for hires
Can function/position be outsourced?
Establish processes for recruiting, selection, and onboarding.
Determine training needs of key managers and decision-makers.
Determine selection criteria (skills, experience, cultural fit)
Determine employer’s Unique Selling Proposition – Why should I join this company?
Let’s assume that you have a process in place to determine if a function should be covered by a contractor, an outside resource provider, or to hire W-2 employees. You have determined that you need a significant addition to staff in one or more mission-critical areas. Your solution is to hire employees to meet this need. How should you proceed?
As with any initiative in business or life generally, a successful outcome usually begins with a plan. Actionable data is required to develop an effective plan. So, what is the information you need? First, understand the work to be done and the importance of that work to the current year P&L. In other words, a cost-benefit analysis for each position you need to fill. This information provides the priority for filling each position.
To summarize, you have determined that increasing your company’s employment base is necessary for growth. But adding employees carries risk. You understand that minimizing this risk is critical to your company’s survival. Fortunately, you can mitigate this risk by improving the skills of those responsible for recruiting and selection. The solution is to find a consultant or a program that will give your managers the training and development they need. The cost of failure in this regard cannot be understated.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
I first stood at the Lincoln Memorial the day of Live Aid. It was my first trip to Washington, D.C. I almost kept going to Philadelphia to stand outside the concert event and hear the music. I decided to stay in D.C. and watch the concert from a new technology called jumbotrons staged on the National Mall. I realized I was experiencing history and that it was best I stop and take in the events.
I shared previously about Lincoln. I wondered what would be the outcome of the Live Aid effort that day in D.C. I wondered if Abraham Lincoln realized in 1858 when he explained how a divided house could not stand he would be dead in less than seven years by assassination. I stood at his memorial in 1985 and wondered why he was not buried in D.C. I concluded it did not matter where he is buried. Death is death. The best that can be done going forward is to honor the memories, the actions, and the contributions of the dead.
You, as the leader of your organization, have selected job applicants to be candidates for each role you need to be filled in your organization. You do not need to spend any more time considering the end of the tenure for those you need to move out of your organization. You have stepped through assessing each applicant’s application package, identified what seems to be a match between their application package and your role opportunity, had the screening call conducted by way of your direction, read the call outcomes, and have decided to speak with a candidate yourself. You now must decide how much freedom you will give your candidate to accomplish their work in your organization through the role they serve. You are considering death and life simultaneously as you move to care for the organization. This decision is similar to a shepherd and the flock they supervise.
A sheep has no fangs or claws. They are dependent on the shepherd to protect them by leading, guiding, and directing them. They lead by being out front of them. They guide by being beside them. They direct by being behind them. The shepherd leads them to grass to eat. The shepherd does not mandate which tuft of grass a sheep must eat. Each sheep has some degree of freedom in its relationship with its shepherd.
Let’s look at a formula I have studied for years to help me evaluate the possibility someone would want to purchase something from me as a means to guide your interview conversations. A buyer may want to purchase a product I am selling or my labor in the form of services. The formula has three parts to it. Each part must have enough value in the eye of the buyer to purchase whatever it is I am selling. You also need these three parts to have enough value in both your eyes and in the eyes of the candidate to proceed through your evaluation process.
INTEREST
You are selling a job by way of a compensation package. There may be fame as an outcome of the job, but no one can guarantee fame. The exchange of money in your labor budget for the total services delivered from a worker is the deal. Is this deal interesting to you as the service buyer? Is this deal interesting to the candidate as the service seller?
Now, the candidate has the same thoughts in mind but is reserved in their perspective. They see you are selling your compensation package, and they are the buyer through their services currency. How do I know this is true? Because they would be talking to a better deal for their services currency than talking to you about your compensation package. You have the best offer that has come to them. They most likely are always looking for a better deal. You most likely are always looking for a better deal. A better offer could come at any time. So, the offer from you has a boundary to it called time.
Here are some clear indications of interest on both your part and on the part of the candidate. Are they looking you in your eyes to listen to what you are telling them? Are you looking into their eyes? Are they taking notes during your discussion with them? Are you taking notes about their discussion performance? Are they able to repeat back to you any of the statements or points you make to them? Are you able to repeat back to them anything they shared during the conversation that is new to you? Are they able to provide a meaningful answer to a question you ask them about the information you have shared with them? Are you able to provide a meaningful answer to a question they ask you about the information you have shared with them? Are they involved with social networking during your conversation with them? Are you multitasking during the conversation with them?
TRUST
A buyer may want what is sold, but they do not trust the seller. If a buyer does not trust what is being sold, then they have no interest in what is being sold. Trust is the connector of evidence and faith. Evidence is clear proof. An example of evidence is the paycheck arriving to the worker every pay cycle. Faith is the assurance the evidence will arrive. An example of faith is the time between paydays. An example of trust is the inability to prove the paycheck will be delivered to the worker on payday but convinced the paycheck will come as agreed.
You, as the interviewer, may conclude the candidate has the skills, but you do not trust they will deliver those skills to you for the compensation you deliver to them. You also may conclude they are interested in doing the work you want them to do for you, but they also have an interest to go and fix parts of your organization they believe need fixing beyond the work you want them to do.
They, as the candidate, may realize you are not a person they want to walk with now. You can protect, lead, guide, and direct them, but they do not want to eat the grass you have provided for them. They may have a worldview that does not overlap suitably with yours or the organization.
Any of these reasons and more cause the candidate to stop being a candidate. You are unable to provide them the trust necessary to do their role in a manner they prefer that is also acceptable to you. Their candidacy is dead. Move on without remorse. Do not be concerned with what may occur with them tomorrow as a future applicant to another role you need to be filled.
MONEY
You have what you define as a great job opening. You do not have enough money to pay someone to do the work. Stop what you are doing. You do not need to interview anyone. You need to find a budget to spend.
Asking anyone to work for less than what the work is worth demonstrates poor judgment. Your trust as a leader would be damaged by such a choice, perhaps beyond repair. It is not worth the hassles of asking anyone to take work that is not funded fairly.
Now, what is fair? That answer is between you and the service supplier. If you are convinced you have a fair compensation package, then this is all you need to know for fairness. If your candidate does not agree that what comprises your compensation package is fair to them, then you are still at a stopping point with their candidacy.
What you are seeing at this point in your evaluation process is the concept of equal pay for equal work in terms of economic equity. You do not have a pay gap, as the candidate is not being paid because they are not a member of your organization. Your best and final offer is what it is. I am not talking about job promotions, pay raises, or any other role modification. I am only discussing bringing a new person into your organization. What happens to them after they are brought into your organization is an altogether different thought construct based on the linear connection of your worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue. My hope for you is you walk out the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue with those you lead in a fair and clear manner. I hold this hope as I prefer you to be a credible leader.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend you take time this week to practice your interview methodology and cadence. Go so far as to prepare the meal menu you will eat before the interview to have all parts of yourself ready to hold the discussion.
I also recommend you do not multitask during the interview discussion. There is nothing good that comes from multitasking during a crucial discussion. All that is demonstrated by multitasking during a crucial discussion is chaos is present in your organization. If you need to communicate to the candidate you have chaos in your organization, then you can do so effectively by way of a single sentence, either verbally or in writing. Then, stop multitasking and focus on having a productive conversation.
Finally, gain a commitment from the candidate during the conversation. See how interested they are in joining your organization by putting actions to their words. Ask them to write something and email it to you. Write, in the form of a researched-based effort. This action is a great way to learn quickly how interested a candidate is in joining your organization based on all they have learned to this point about you, the role, and the organization.
So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.
I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.
Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.
Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.
Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
“But pattern-matching doesn’t equal comprehension.” Peter Watts
Stephen H Dawson, DSL
The thought of finding a perfect job applicant to fill any role in any organization seems impossible. It seems impossible because it is impossible. It is impossible because people are imperfect. They are imperfect as they tend to change over time.
The matching work at hand involves much more than only considering a suitable match between the job applicant and each role you have to fill. It also involves considering the match between the job applicant and the organization. Remember, your organization includes any matrix-supplied folks involved in doing work with your people, your customers, your strategic partners, and your supply chain network. The job analysis we discussed last week may not have included these attributes. However, they need to be in there. If they are not, then the job analysis must be revised to include them as applicable.
OK, let’s proceed from the point of having a satisfactory job analysis as we consider job applicants to see if you have a viable candidate for each role you need to fill. We need to first look at some terms before looking at applicants. These facts may seem harsh, but they are a crucial part of your assessment work.
ORGANIZATION ANTIBODIES
An antibody does the work to neutralize either a pathogenic bacteria or virus. The intent of the pathogenic is to help, but it instead causes harm. An organization antibody is a person who does not want to follow your leadership. They resist your leadership either passively or actively.
Nicholas Evans described how an antibody could suffer the pursuit of innovation. Evans cited an article by Mitra Best, who described antibodies in a corporate setting. Both Evans and Best provided recommendations about how to remediate each antibody form. What they did not do address in their writings is why an organization antibody has so much power over their boss.
Think about the folks in your organization who have been there a long time. They have not been promoted to a senior role because they have either a character deficiency, a skills deficiency, or both. They hold the belief they know it all and tell anyone who will listen to them they know it all. This person is an example of an organization antibody. Deep down, they believe they are running the organization. They believe they are doing what is best for the organization. They refuse to listen to reason. Therefore, they have no ability to have cognitive awareness to know they are causing harm. They are as cancer is to the body.
CANCER
Cancer is a disease defined by abnormal cell growth. It is possible cancer could be misinterpreted as a nodule, a small bump. A small bump could occur due to one of several conditions. The indication of a cancer being present does not appear until cancer grows to be a problem. Untreated cancer spreads in a condition known as metastasis. Early testing for cancer helps to overcome cancer unawareness. The value of proper testing here is beyond measure.
I shared several weeks back, “I cannot say a person is evil, as I do not believe it is possible. I can say their actions are or are not evil.” I maintain this position. I shared a few weeks later about evil. The attributes of organization antibodies and cancer have considerable overlap with one another. They both have no ability to have cognitive awareness to know they are causing harm. They both consume a massive amount of resources as they spread. They both spread through the host, either the body or the organization, in a progressive manner. The rate of spreading is inconsistent, so not relative to objective analysis. They both have a high mortality rate, both literally and figuratively.
An organization member allowed to mature into an organization antibody is an event that does not occur overnight. It is without question the presence of an organization antibody is the result of a failure by leadership, human resources, and learning & development. Note I do not identify either a manager or a team leader as responsible here. I hold this position because their roles are not able to have an overarching view of the organization. The reasons for such failures are endless, but the leadership, human resources, and learning & development staff hold collective responsibility for the damages caused by an organization antibody.
I hold the position the only way to treat an organization’s antibody is to remove them from the organization and place their leader on a rapid performance improvement plan. If I do not see substantial adherence to the performance improvement plan by their no-longer leader in my eyes, then their no-longer leader is no longer a part of my organization. The corrective action to address the human resources poor performance is to replace the human resources business partner serving my organization immediately. The corrective action to address the learning & development staff performance is to replace their leader serving my organization and place all learning & development staff on a rapid performance improvement plan. All activities and I mean all activities, performed by the learning & development staff for my organization cease until there is credible evidence they are each qualified to perform learning & development work. The support necessary for the human resources and learning & development staff corrective actions may require support from your boss. You should be able to get it without difficulty since you have credible proof of the harm caused to the organization by their respective failures to deliver quality work.
SKILLS
The term credential is the combination of work experience, education, degrees, certifications, and licenses earned and held by an individual that each has relevance to each role you need to fill in your organization. These individual credentials then feed into forming organization credentials. All aspects of any credential must be validated during the job application process by your organization. You must hold, without a doubt, a clear understanding of the abilities each job applicant holds today. What credentials they held in the past may be nice to know, but that was then. You are evaluating now.
Gaining credentials from a source that is not accredited is possible, but the validation process becomes much more costly to accomplish. It may not be possible to validate a credential that is not from an accredited source. A non-validated credential is termed as hope but not a credential.
PERSONALITY
We discussed last week the value of third-party testing. The cost of testing each applicant may not be worth the expense. The need is still present to know the personality of each applicant. If you do not have the ability to fund personality testing a job applicant you advance to candidate status to know if they are a viable candidate, then your ability to advance applicants through your evaluation process is reduced. How much of a risk can you afford to take at this point in the assessing-to-matching process?
You have rooted out those job applicants who do not hold the skills necessary to fill each role you need to be filled in your organization. You know you cannot afford to interject harm to your organization by bringing in an organization antibody. You are wondering if you can afford to measure a personality without an objective third-party test. The answer is you cannot. You will have to bear the risk of going forward without measuring personality should you chose not to use third-party personality testing. This risk will have to be managed as any other risk.
WORLDVIEW
We discussed worldview a few weeks back. You are wondering how the applicant’s worldview matches both your worldview and the worldview held by those in your organization. You can get this information from the screening call. I addressed last week how to go about this action during the interview you conduct with them. Specifically, you are looking for their position on social and political matters. You must follow fair employment laws to be a credible leader. So, how do you get this information?
You get this information by asking three questions. One question focused on a social aspect. One question focused on a political aspect. Then, one question overlapping both a social and political aspect. Use three different aspects in these three questions. Write the questions to be as figurative as possible. Look for timeless topics common across all cultures, present in all points of history, having reasonable belief they will be present in the future. These answers will provide you enough information to know if you have an applicant that can advance to a candidate.
RECOMMENDATIONS
If you are matching applicants without a third-party personality evaluation, then you must accomplish this evaluation in the next step of your interviewing process. You cannot experience success in finding a suitable candidate without performing a clear personality evaluation. Prepare for the costs of third-party personality evaluations.
Record all screening calls. Have the calls transcribed. Read the entire transcript. Listen to the parts of the audio recording you find interesting by way of the transcript.
Match the notes of the person conducting the screening call to the call transcript. Identify any mismatch in what the caller observed in comparison to the response of the applicant. This mismatch will help you understand if there is a personality or worldview mismatch with your organization. It will also help you qualify the work of the person conducting the screening call. This collective understanding will arrive because you have a satisfactory job analysis, you wrote the questions for the screening call, and you placed boundaries on the screening call. This reasoning is found in the plan we discussed last week.
I recommend you take time this week to consider the impact of an organization antibody in your organization. Prepare your screening call questions based on the material we covered this week. Finally, look for providers of counseled results interpretation to assist you in selecting applicants to become candidates based on the plan we discussed last week.
So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.
I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.
Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.
Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.
Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.
I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox. Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.
Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read. Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.
Last week I wrote on the importance of conversation, especially for networking success. The genesis of that article was the recent dialog I had about networking. Many of the folks participating in those discussions were frustrated by their lack of success. They complained that their conversations were not leading to follow-up meetings. Some confessed that their conversational skills might be the problem. In my post, I spoke to the need to respect the other person in the conversation. I recommended that you listen intently and show interest in the other. I explained how to make a connection. The other issue was the need for an effective networking strategy. I inferred that they did not understand the foundation principles of networking. I will address that issue now.
Taking full advantage of the resources available through LinkedIn is another powerful way to enhance your professional status. 
This week I had an interesting conversation with a senior executive recently released from a major brand. Let’s call him John. He has the benefit of an Outplacement Program, which will be helpful as he has not had to look for a new job in a very long time. He reconnected with me to discuss his situation and to seek my help. John was interested in my opinion of his goals relative to the current market for his skill set.
The features, benefits, and attributes that you use to describe and evaluate the product in research MUST match the product that you will bring to the market as closely as possible. Testing attributes that aren’t possible or too expensive may lead to unrealistic demand forecasts. For example, in testing a new online video game service, the research described the product as including hundreds of games from the top game publishers and a seamless interface and game-playing experience. Target consumer response to this concept was highly positive. However, when it was time to launch the product, many of the top game publishers were not included and the product required advanced drivers and high-powered PCs with very large RAM capacity to perform optimally. As a result, consumer expectations were never reached, and the product ultimately failed.
Qualitative Research (focus groups, depth interviews, ethnography) utilize small, non-projectable samples. Qualitative research is very effective in providing guidance, hypotheses development, and disaster prevention. However, because the samples are small and not representative of the entire target market, the detailed findings developed solely on the insights from qualitative research may be wildly different from the reality of the marketplace. Always follow up with quantitative, projectable research to confirm hypotheses!
consider using a down weighting scheme using historical empirical data to verify actual product take rates to survey results.
The most famous case illustrating this caveat is the Edsel. When developing the Ford Edsel, researchers tested various components of the car in isolation. They identified the preferred bumper, the preferred grill, the preferred dashboard configuration, and so on. When all the research was completed, they combined the top tested components together. But the car that resulted did not look or operate optimally. Utilizing one or more trade-off testing approaches such as Discrete Choice, Conjoint, or Max-Diff mentioned above will help to avoid this problem.
team so that either adjustment can be made to improve the product or that the launch can be canceled. I once conducted a pricing test for a new product that indicated that the target price that consumers were willing to pay was about $100. However, the cost to make and sell the product was about $200. Unfortunately, despite the obvious discrepancy, the client decided to launch the product at a price of $285. Suffice it to say, the product was a flop. So, not only do you need to tell the client bad news, they need to believe you and act accordingly.
I work with many startups and emerging brands. They have become the core of my business. It gives me great satisfaction in helping them with their recruiting needs. When my colleagues and I created ITB Partners, our strategy was to focus on this sector. Companies in this phase of their life cycle face decisions that carry significant risk. One or two bad choices can sink an otherwise viable company, even if they have proof of concept. We believed we could help emerging companies achieve success by avoiding business-killing mistakes. Recruiting new employees is one of those high-risk activities.
