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.
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.
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.
“Don’t be afraid to give up the good to go for the great.” John Rockefeller
Let’s talk today about you as a leader. You seem to be a good leader who is looking to become a great leader. You are not operating in fear. You are working to accomplish your strategic planning, but it is not going so well. We have discussed at length you have decided you need to swap out some of your people to have the work finished with excellence. Your power as a leader is about to be challenged in a way that you may not be prepared to handle. It will be challenged because you are implementing a construct to your leadership style that involves loving your followers. My friend, prepare to be soon hated by more people than you realize now.
Love, hate, power. These are big words that will take many conversations to cover appropriately. Today, let’s focus on the term power.
There are many types of power. You know this is true, or you would not be in a leadership role now. The essence of power is possessing some form of harnessed energy. We need to focus our conversation about power on the aspects of social combined with political and then economic. Let’s have a conversation today based on the power attributes of supply, demand, and outage.
You supply leadership to your followers through three components. First, whatever higher power you may have helping you do whatever it is you do to live this thing called life. Second, you possess concise, tangible, relevant skills transferable to many roles to do endless amounts of work. Finally, the enablement assigned to you by your boss is commensurate with your role in your organization. You then take these components and do your work as a leader. All components are not equal among all people, as not everyone has the benefit of the same higher power, obtained the same skills, and have the same enablement assigned to them. Therefore, all leaders are not able by this construct to be as effective. Some leaders may be more effective than others, while other leaders may be less effective.
Note I did not say you need an office, telephone, a budget, or any other tool necessary to accomplish your role as a leader. These items are conditional based on the state of your work environment. What you need is a suitable combination of skills and choices applied to your leadership role. The higher power and enablement parts are not from you, as they are delivered to you.
The doing part of your role is the manifestation of your leadership components. Doing your leading by way of humility encapsulates the power components in a manner greater than any combination I know of to accomplish leadership. There may be a more effective combination out there, but I have not found it.
How does humility fit into the power aspect of leadership? Compare the definition of humility with the definition of power. They are both nouns. A noun is accomplished through a verb. So, what verb to use to accomplish both humility and power? I recommend doing what we discussed in the verb of love. There is no prideful act of love, only a humble act of love. So, our conversation today will match power, humility, and love in accomplishing your role as a leader.
Preparing your humility to deliver love could be a larger effort than a single discussion will suffice to accomplish. You need to tell me about your humbleness for me to know how to best equip you for success. I leave it to you to tell me about your humbleness.
DEMAND
I shared a few weeks ago you are now in organization design mode as you move to replace some of the people in your organization. You will find out quickly who in your organization wants to do their work by way of the plan you have shared with them to use love to accomplish the strategic planning work, along with all of the other work performed in your organization. I make this statement based on the social and political power struggle present in many nations today. If you need me to cite some examples of this struggle, then I doubt you would be in the leadership role you fill now.
The demand for your leadership by followers could come as acceptance, rejection, or conditional acceptance. The acceptance-rejection-conditional combination is the same layout as the love-hate-ambivalence combination we discussed a few weeks back. You will find leading and loving people are an inseparable pair. Note I did not say leadership. A leader may be successful or unsuccessful in their leadership. A successful leader always leads. An unsuccessful leadership effort means the leader is not leading.
Your leadership power supply is being refused by two of these three options. Take the actions I shared with you recently to resolve any refusal by your followers. The rest of your folks want the leadership you are supplying, as they have accepted your Love Action Items list. Furthermore, they processed effectively your communications involved with you teaching your people the four definitions of love. This group is now your organization. The folks who have either rejected or accepted conditionally your new construct to your leadership style that involves loving your followers are on the way out of your organization. They are trying to usurp your leadership with their power, per their choice not to follow you any longer. This condition does not exist in a productive organization. It is at this point your hope of finding suitable applicants for the roles you wish to fill becomes larger than it was before you realized who else must leave your organization.
Sure, it is great to look for replacement people without telling anyone. This approach is both unrealistic and not advised. The power held today by text messaging, instant messaging, and social networking is greater than any individual ability to stay ahead of such communications. Do not try to overcome either of these powerful forms. I encourage you to execute the plan we covered last week.
Finally, be prepared to have healthy demands placed on your leadership that you did not expect to occur. The demands could come from either your people or people outside of your organization. Preparation for this likelihood is best accomplished by having a qualified executive leadership team ready to assist your leadership efforts. Remember, you may need to be more humble during this unexpected demand to help those needing your leadership to be sustained while you move to supply them the leadership you did not expect you would need to deliver.
OUTAGE
The loss of your leadership supply by demand for anything more than you can supply in terms of either quantity or quality results in a leadership power outage. An outage can be either intermittent or sustained. Your people during a leadership power outage are unable to work because they have no leader supplying them the power they need to do their work, all while doing it humbly through love. The means to overcome this outage is to add more power to your Love Action Items list. This outage condition could occur for several reasons. It is not a skills problem, as you acquire the skills you need before you need them to serve as a qualified leader…don’t you?
I am not saying a leadership power outage means you are bankrupt as a leader. Neither am I am saying your leadership is unequivocally a toxic debt held by your followers, your organization, or your investors. I am saying that those in demand of your leadership power are having to wait to take delivery of your leadership power supply. They may be able to work for a while in the absence of your leadership power supply, but they will not be productive for long without your leadership power supply to them. If they could last without your leadership power supply, then you are no longer needed in your leadership role.
I discussed the topic of leadership power with my strategic partner David Daniels. Dave shared judicious insight on the topic. “I have been in situations where over half of my leadership team needed to go. Now, I didn’t feel that it was prudent to let them all go at the same time, so I had to prioritize my decisions and approach. I rarely found that demotions worked, so I tried avoiding this tactic at all costs. However, I did find some people a fit for other positions if they shared my values and goals.” Dave went on to say, “I would insert strong external leaders who share my vision and values. I would not place them in any position right away, as I would want them going through a thorough onboarding process over a couple of months that would allow them access to every aspect of the business. The input that you would receive from this group will prove to be invaluable when assessing your final executive leadership team make-up.” Dave and I agree the executive leadership team is a crucial resource for any leader of an organization.
JUDGMENT
Sure, the best-case scenario is to have your leadership power supply in balance with the demand for follower leadership power consumption. We see this balance in just-in-time manufacturing, teaching, and learning. The Wall Street Journal reported recently the automotive industry has abandoned this half-century methodology due to present economic climate turbulence. However, this balancing is rare in the practice of leadership. It is best to plan for leading an organization that needs help to stay balanced due to unforeseen obstacles introduced to your organization.
The realization of fame and fortune by leadership occurs after doing the work of leadership, as do all forms of payment for accomplished work. The social and political power struggle present in many nations today not only impairs your ability to lead by adding more voices to consider, but it also makes your work much easier to accomplish. It is easier to accomplish because love delivered through humility during the practice of leadership encapsulates the three identified power attributes of supply, demand, and outage in a manner greater than any combination I know of to accomplish leadership. You now have greater clarity of your leadership work than in recent years due to this social and political power struggle.
The world is forming to a great struggle of one side versus the other for the acquisition of power for almost all aspects of humanity. Humanity has seen this before, and it will most likely see it again. This time it is a different struggle, as there is the presence of significant information technologies assisting each side. This struggle is not going to be an easy experience for anyone. Use the energy concept we covered a few weeks back to leverage the social and political struggle to your advantage. You have plenty of room in this landscape to realize success even though others around you may not be operating in either humility or love. If you are sold this combination is the best means for you to succeed, then now is the time to use them as the form of power you need to wield to realize success as a leader. Finally, since there is no reason to stop being humble or to stop loving people, this combination comprises the bulk of your leadership strategy henceforth.
I encourage you to spend time this week completing your materials summary, your Love Action Items list and schedule the first meeting with your boss based on the plan we covered last week. Also, spend some time thinking about how those both in and those working with your organization want to gain power over you as a leader. Finally, think about how you can defeat such attempts to overcome you by responding with love. Remember, there are four definitions for the term love. Use all of them as appropriate to lead with excellence.
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.
Art and Bart were college buddies at the University of Georgia (Go Dawgs!). They both graduated from the school of Landscape Architecture and went on to work at various companies to gain experience and knowledge. In 2014, they each embarked on opening their own Landscaping business, Art on the Northside of Atlanta and Bart on the Southside of Atlanta. Each started slowly, but by the end of 2018, through hard work and talent, they had each established very successful businesses with the following financials at the end of 2018:
ART’S LANDSCAPING
BART’S LANDSCAPING
Revenue 2018
$4,800,000
$4,800,000
Number of customers 2018
500
500
Revenue per customer /month
$800
$800
net adds / churn per month*
0.5%
0.5%
At the beginning of 2019, a large landscaping company, Grass R Us, established 4 new franchises in the Atlanta area with a heavy advertising campaign and an initial price offering 10% lower than Art and Bart. This resulted in a change of net adds/churn to -2.75% per month. Through the end of June, Art and Bart had each lost about 75 customers and over $60,000.
Art felt confident that he knew his business and knew the market. He had anecdotal information from some of his crew that the lower prices offered by Grass R Us was the issue. So, as of July 1, Art lowered his prices across the board by 10%. This did have an immediate effect of decreasing net adds/churn to -1.5% per month. The overall result for Art’s business at the end of the year was a loss of about 114 customers and over $90,000. He wasn’t happy about the outcome, but by swiftly lowering his prices, Art believed he had averted a much larger hit on his business.
On the other side of town, Bart was faced with the same issue. But Bart remembered another old friend from UGA, Suzanne, who was in the Master of Marketing Research (MMR) Program. Suzanne was now working for a small research agency in Atlanta. Bart called Suzanne and asked her if she could help him with his problem. Suzanne designed a marketing research study for Bart to identify the core issues causing his customers to move to Grass R Us. Although the cost of the research was $30,000 and would take 6 weeks to complete, Bart felt that having good information would help him make a better decision.
The research was executed by Suzanne’s company, and the results indicated that the most important issue was NOT cost. Bart’s customers were satisfied with Bart’s service and pricing but were drawn to Grass R Us by fancy marketing and a highly promoted 100% guarantee. Bart decided, that, unlike his friend Art, he would not lower prices, but started to promote his own written 100% guarantee in September. Not only did the loss of customers stop, but net adds soared to +4.0% per month! By the end of the year, Bart had lost only about 32 customers and just over $25,000. Including the cost of the marketing research, Bart lost about $15,000 less than his buddy Art!
Projecting out to the next year, if everything remains equal, Art will continue to lose customers at a rate of about 5 per month and will lose an additional $50,000+. Bart, on the other hand, will gain about 20 customers per month and increase revenues over the year by over $200,000!
Although this is a hypothetical example, we are left with two important lessons. First, the cost of doing marketing research is justified by the savings in cost or increases in revenue experienced through better, data-based decisions. And second, whenever possible, hire a graduate of the UGA MMR program to lead your marketing research!
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 call 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.
“Truth is like the Sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t goin’ away.” Elvis Presley
Dr. Stephen H Dawson
Ah, the search for truth. I see the term truth as a singular term. There are parts of the truth we understand, but never all of the truth. If someone understood all truth, then they would be omniscient. We covered our understanding of truth last week when we considered the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue. Today, let’s talk about how to assess the folks who have applied to work in your organization to help accomplish the strategic planning work that you need to be accomplished by your organization.
I have encouraged during our time together that appropriate research be accomplished when considering all things. I shared research is part of how I have worked for years in a research-before-action mode. I provided examples of this belief. I cautioned against analysis paralysis. I described the differences between looking and reading. You now need to read through the applications submitted by the folks who want to come work for you. Let’s go through some of the facts you face, and see how you can best identify some qualified candidates.
ROLE CONSTRUCTION
The means to define a role in your organization begins with the job analysis. Work is performed to understand what each role needs to accomplish, how each role needs to accomplish the work, and the resources used by each role. The job analysis work is then finished and termed as the job analysis asset. A subset of the job analysis asset then forms the job definition asset. A subset of the job definition asset then forms the job announcement asset. A person is then sought to fill each role in your organization to do the job required by each role.
APPLICANT TRACKING
An applicant selected for consideration to fill a role you have in your organization is then called a candidate. The applicant tracking system is valuable for keeping track of applicant information. It alone is not valuable to evaluate applicants for their match to any role. A resume or CV can be padded with loads of terms, matched with a fake cover letter, only to waste much time. I have found no resume parsing technology worth using. The screening call must occur by telephone to know with any degree of certainty if a candidate is a potential match to a role. The screening could occur in person, but it has been my experience this screening step best occurs by telephone conversation. Meaningful applicant screening cannot occur until after the screening call when a qualified subject matter expert can speak with the candidate and find out how much truth resides in their application package.
Now, all of these laws, requirements, and guidelines can be averted with ease. Person A has a job to fill. Person B applies for the job to work for Person A. Person A tells Person C to read through the many social networking options available to accomplish research on Person B. Person C then tells Person A verbally what they found out about Person B.
This plan has been around for millenniums. It provides plausible deniability to Person A that they have not violated an employment discrimination law. This plan also introduces the possibility of improper research occurring along with the possibility of incorrect interpretation of either the proper or improper research. It also furthers the possibility Person B did not maintain the necessary confidentiality of Person A. The hassles here are not worth the risks. I do not endorse this plan. My linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue would not consider this plan, but the plan is possible for anyone to perform.
THIRD-PARTY TESTING
The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator and the Strong Interest Inventory are workable options to help meet your needs to understand the personality held by each candidate. The ProfileXT assessment includes an assessment of candidate’s cognitive ability. A suitable personality assessment helps to understand a candidate, but personality testing alone is insufficient to understand the potential match between each role you need to be filled and each candidate’s ability to fill each role. This testing could be used in combination with other applicant evaluation methods. I am leery of using a third-party test alone to evaluate anyone or anything. I hold this concern because there are still too many gaps in the picture to get to the truth of an applicant’s ability to join my organization and do the work I need to be accomplished.
I look at the pile of job applications and wonder if it is possible to find a candidate suitable to meet my needs. I get tired from reading the applications. I get overwhelmed by the work I need to be accomplished by my people getting further behind. Sound familiar? I experienced this pain for years. I finally said enough to this way of working and decided to gain the help of someone who is qualified to meet my needs by paying them to fill a short-term role in my organization.
COUNSELED RESULTS INTERPRETATION
A podiatrist is someone who I do not need all of the time in my life. However, should I need work performed on my foot, then I want to talk to someone who knows how to help solve my foot problem. I also want someone qualified to work on my foot. Do you remember our discussion about heavy equipment operation? The same principles from that discussion hold true to your need for help to find suitable applicants to consider.
I do not see a straight line to finding a suitable applicant for any role in today’s world. There are too many changes occurring in global commerce, social, and political landscapes to plan for an organization to have any worker remain their entire work career with any organization. I cannot afford to endorse any candidate for a role unless I have credible research supporting my endorsement.
I do see the need for strategic foresight. I am both a scholar and practitioner of strategic foresight. Anyone can do some meaningful form of strategic foresight. Just ask a single mother who raised her kids to graduate from school, stay off alcohol and drugs, and stay out of jail. She is living proof strategic foresight can exist at all levels of society.
I do see the need for succession planning. I am both a scholar and practitioner of succession planning. Ask anyone who lived through the changes that occurred during 2020 to tell you their version of succession planning. This planning has a lot to do with contingency planning. Sometimes these planning efforts also benefit from the help of strategic foresight, should strategic foresight be accomplished before it was needed.
What you are trying to avoid is more problems coming to you. You cannot escape the truth your linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue combination must have a suitable overlap with the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue combination held by everyone you bring into your organization. Furthermore, that overlap must also be suitable for those in your organization now to have the inclusion effect occur productively across the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue found in your organization’s culture. 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.
What you are hoping for is the reality of truth helping you both find and select a suitable job applicant for each role you need to be filled in your organization. You are hoping one candidate will stand out among the rest, or at least find you have no appropriate candidates. Light helps with eliminating darkness, yes?
My recommendation to help you find some qualified candidates from the job applicants you have now is to evaluate their personality and worldview. This consideration will help to diversify your organization by walking out the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue held by everyone involved in working with each role you need to be filled by your selected job applicant. You are going to face their personality and worldview eventually. It is best to understand both of them during the assessment process.
You do not need a counselor to help you interpret the skills held by an applicant. The skills form a clear set of credentials. If applicant skills are not clear, then they are not qualified to become a candidate.
A match by personality to a role is realized by also matching skills and worldview. An espoused worldview is the most straightforward means I have found to understand more about a person. Their personality and skills may help me understand their worldview, but it is not a guarantee. Personality may be situational. Worldview is often continual. Skills are often temporal.
I urge keeping the screening call bound to a list of predefined questions prepared by you. This approach will help assure the person conducting the screening call does not attempt to interject an interview approach you do not approve of. It will also help assure all applicants are evaluated fairly.
If I were you, then I would select someone who can prove to me they can help me accomplish the candidate assessments and interpret the results of each assessment by their provable work history along with the education and certifications they hold. I would check their references. I would ask for examples of their already accomplished relevant work. I would also take their assessment of the first person they assess and run it by some other qualified professionals. I know the second person will want to do their own assessment, but it is worth an objective review by an objective person. If the second person refuses to interpret the first person’s work results, then I would not ask for any further help from the second person. I know my family doctor and podiatrist share their research and findings. So, other qualified professionals can do the same sharing of materials they are qualified to interpret.
I recommend you take time this week and consider how you desire to gain a deeper understanding of the personality and worldview of each applicant you are considering for each role you need to fill. The best means I have found to understand a person’s worldview is to ask them the following question: what is your worldview? I also recommend you select some third-party personality testing sources to use with your applicant after they pass their first interview with their potential boss.
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.
“We cannot become what we need to be by remaining what we are.” Max De Pree
Stephen H Dawson, DSL
There is only one person who matters when defining what must be done in any situation. That person is our self. The reality of our impact both now and tomorrow is the challenge of living what we believe by doing what we believe. This impact is the linear connection of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue.
We are working to resolve your delay in accomplishing your strategic planning work by swapping out some folks in your organization. You have decided to become what you need to be by not remaining what you are now. You are completing your materials summary, your Love Action Items list, and scheduling the first meeting with your boss based on the plan we covered recently. Today, let’s cover what I, in both a dignified and proper manner, call…the stuff. The stuff is the linear combination of worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue. Think of them as indispensable blocks to build your life, your organization, your society, your country, and our world.
I held off discussing the stuff with you earlier, as I did not want to overwhelm you with too much to process at one time. You are growing as a healthy leader by going through the process we are working out together. We are not late discussing the stuff, as you are now working on completing your materials summary and your Love Action Items list. Now is the time to discuss the stuff, to help round out your writing and prepare it for your first stop: your boss reviewing your written forthcoming leadership plan.
I will not bore you with the background of the Greek philosophers who became famous from their perspectives on worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue. They did not invent the terms, they do not own the terms, but they did much to help people understand the terms. I appreciate their help in my learning these terms. Yet, we do not answer to them. We answer to reasoning that can withstand scrutiny.
Here is how I see the stuff: No one cares about what I care about in life unless they are willing to pay me for what I care about in life. Their payment to me can come through countless options. I urge you to adopt a similar perspective. I will now teach you all there is to learn about the stuff in less than five minutes, holding our shared understanding that it takes a lifetime for everyone to do the stuff to prove to our self’s we know our stuff.
WORLDVIEW
What a person believes. It is a singular term. It is the list of items a person believes. The listed items do not need to be defined clearly to the person believing them. There is no mandate to one’s self to prove what that person does by self-debate. Worldview defines the subset of truth to the person but does not define truth entirely. Share on XOne does only need to believe something for it to be a part of their worldview. Worldview is nothing more than what a person believes.
ETHICS
What a person does. It is a plural term. It is the list of items a person does. The listed items do need to be defined clearly to the person doing them. Each ethic is performed both consciously and purposely. There is a mandate to one’s self to prove what that person does by self-debate. Ethics are nothing more than what a person does.
MORALS
What a person must do based only on their worldview. Morality defines right and good. It is a plural term. It is the list of items a person must do as the subset of what they could do to fulfill their worldview. The listed items do need to be defined clearly to the person doing them. Each moral is performed both consciously and purposely. There is a mandate to one’s self to prove what that person does by self-debate. Morals are nothing more than what a person believes they must do.
VIRTUES
The items at the top of a person’s morality list. It is a plural term. It is the list of items a person must do as the prioritized subset of what they could do to fulfill their worldview. The listed items do need to be defined clearly to the person doing them. Each virtue is performed both consciously and purposely. There is a mandate to one’s self to prove what that person does by self-debate. Virtues are nothing more than what a person believes they must do before doing anything else.
Congratulations. You just mastered understanding the terms worldview, ethic, morality, and virtue. I hold the worldview more folks in this world should master what you just learned.
Please understand it is not my intent to trivialize these terms. It is my intent to keep them from causing you harm. You have been doing the stuff since the moment you took your first breath. You will continue to do the stuff until the moment you take your last breath. It is best, as with all doing, one knows what they are doing after a suitable period of learning occurs. We talked about this consideration when I asked if you wanted me to use heavy equipment before I learned how to operate the heavy equipment.
A common phrase in social and political circles today is moral responsibility. I struggle to find a meaningful definition of this phrase as a term, so I do not identify this phrase as a term. A moral can only be held between two people when they perform similar ethics based on their similar worldviews. What the verbal assailant is doing with this phrase is attacking your virtues, not your morality. It is a form of intellectual cowardice, as they refuse to learn the terminology they use in their statements.
I encourage you to remember the linear relationship between worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue the next time someone tries to push you around with their demand that you supply them your morality as they see fit. Think back to our discussion on power when you hear them place such a demand on you.
CONCLUSION
I know we covered some heavy topics this week. Fear not, for indisputable facts help strengthen your leadership ability. Take the stuff for what it is: your stuff. Remember, there is only one person who matters when defining what must be done in any situation. That person is our self.
I encourage you to spend time this week completing your materials summary, your Love Action Items list and schedule the first meeting with your boss based on the plan we covered recently. Also, consider how your followers speak and act in light of what you have now learned about the stuff. Finally, consider how much of an overlap there is between each follower’s worldview and your worldview by considering what they do…their ethics. We will look at their morality and their virtues during future discussions.
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.
Standing in the spotlight can be a scary experience. The focus is on the person or persons in the spotlight, while many others view using some form of judgment. Many people in the world today are prepared to attack anyone in any spotlight. It is becoming more and more popular to be nameless and faceless while seeking fame. This combination results from group thinking, not individual thinking, leading to group identity serving as individual identity. This combination is not only silly, but it is also impossible.
Leadership is achieved by people who lead. Group leadership is a flawed concept resulting in a toxic leadership style. It is flawed because the leader-follower relationship involves specific people following a specific person serving as their leader. Team leadership is a viable means to build an organization, either small or large. The definition of team leadership is not the same as the definition of group leadership. Furthermore, both the team and group leadership constructs eradicate the power of signing paychecks. The power is lost because people work for a mysterious team or group definition, not a boss in whatever form a boss exists in the organization structure even though wages are paid every pay cycle. Neither the team nor the group leadership condition forms the employer-employee relationship. Leadership is only successful when a productive leader-follower relationship is present.
We have been working on resolving the impediments suffering the accomplishment of your strategic planning. We concluded you have a people problem, not a worker skills or workspace problem. We have covered many topics preparing for the action item necessary to resolve your most significant impediment: your need to get different people assigned to the work. We talked about the definitions of love. We considered a concept for how to harness the energy supplied to you by love so you can combine the topics we have discussed to help you form a plan to evaluate the candidates you have as you consider offering them a role in your organization where they will help complete your strategic planning work. We acted last week to capture your action items for how you will deliver love to your followers in a table called the Love Action Items list. Today, we will review your work from last week and further prepare it to be understood by those who will report to you in the operation of your organization’s future structure.
YOUR BOSS
Your Love Action Items list requires the support of your boss to be enacted successfully. You require their support and approval for the following reasons. First, you report to them. They must know what you are doing to run your organization. Second, if you hold a similar worldview as the rest of the world that values reason, then you would do well to honor your boss by coming to them for their input, support, and approval of your efforts to run your organization. Third, their role can help provide you access to more resources to develop further your Love Action Items list than the resources you had access to when you built the list you hold in your hand now. Finally, they may shut down your entire effort to run your organization by way of your Love Action Items list.
It is probable your boss will ask how each HOW item matches the organization’s objectives to accomplish the organization’s goals in pursuit of its mission statement. Have a direct match connecting each HOW item to your organization’s objectives presentable in a flow diagram. The diagram can be as simple as boxes with connecting lines and arrowheads showing flow directions. A picture states a thousand words, so use your flow diagrams to your benefit.
It is doubtful your boss will be willing to step through the detail of the materials we have covered up to this point. You will need to summarize in writing the materials we have covered for them to understand better what you are bringing to them. They will most likely need to take some time to step through your materials summary and your Love Action Items list. The best-case scenario is they meet with you a few times to cover your materials summary and your Love Action Items list.
TEST IT OUT
Take your Love Action Items list and run it by some people who are not in your organization. Take it to people who will not share the Love Action Items list with anyone in your organization at this point. This anonymity empowers both you and them to be as transparent as possible in your discussions with them. I am not saying they must agree 100% with everything you have contained in your Love Action Items list. I am saying listen to their reasoning and modify your Love Action Items list by further development as appropriate.
If your Love Action Items list does not contain wording sufficient to satisfy all cognitive levels present in your organization, then you must wordsmith your Love Action Items list to the point all members of your organization can understand clearly the message of each HOW item, understand how each HOW item matches a specific love definition, and why they will benefit by doing the items on your Love Action Items list. The items are your words stating your leadership plan. This Love Action Items list is work you must accomplish without outside writing assistance. It is understood you will use outside editorial assistance to refine your Love Action Items list after you have written it as a draft.
You testing your Love Action Items list also involves discussing your list with your organization’s general counsel and then with your organization’s human resources after you complete discussions with your general counsel. This strategy assurances all codified requirements match the construct of your Love Action Items list by those who are qualified to make this interpretation. Then, your time with human resources assures their support both to you and to any follower of your leadership who feels they are not being treated fairly by the HOW items in your Love Action Items list.
My strategic partner David Daniels shared with me his input on dealing with the people problems at this point in the process. “Every organization has an IN group and an OUT group. NO company avoids this dynamic. Diverse input, can be sidetracked by those that are perceived to be in control. Share on XOften, when this attitude prevails, many employees feel isolated and not included. The result: you get the prevailing wisdom from those who already maintain the dominant position in your organization. This critical part in the strategic process gets derailed and the CEO loses the ability to surface great ideas that could move the company forward.” David went on to say, “Engaging the GC & HR lead is important, but they may be part of the IN group and will resist giving up their power and influence. The CEO needs an extremely competent Chief Diversity Officer who reports directly to the CEO. This person can identify the IN group to guide them to a much better place demonstrating how to include all relevant voices. Please remember, Diversity is far more than race, gender, sexual preference, etc.”
David and I agree on the central point of your role in your organization. You run your organization. You are seeking the input of the general counsel and human resources. You, after gaining their input, then must make the decision to run your organization.
LIGHT IT UP
You are now ready to take your Love Action Items list and write the job announcements for each role replacement you need to be filled to help accomplish your strategic planning work. Your efforts to this point will connect all of the materials we have covered with the focus of using love to energize the light to shine on these job announcements. Plan to post the job announcements in as many ways possible that are suitable for your organization’s privacy requirements.
It is then time to accomplish communications with your organization’s members of the changes you have decided to make. The communications must include you teaching your people the four definitions of love. It is best you do not accomplish these communications before posting the job announcements. You are the leader of the organization. You are acting appropriately to resolve some people problems in your organization that impair the accomplishment of your organization’s strategic planning. There is nothing about your people replacement decision needing the approval of your followers at this point.
The best-case scenario is anyone who does not want to follow your leadership by way of your Love Action Items list will complain about you as a person, not your leadership. This complaint is a misdirection effort to hide the fact they do not want to act in accordance with the items you have listed in your Love Action Items list. The good news here is you are now able to see clearly who no longer wants to follow your leadership, you see perhaps a bit more of why your strategic planning work is not progressing as you prefer, and you have the opportunity to discuss with the complainers why your Love Action Items list is written as it is for you to lead your organization.
If this discussion, not discussions, is not successful for the complainer to understand fully the future of the organization you lead, then the complaining follower will need to leave your organization. Your single discussion, combined with the well-written contents of your Love Action Items list and associated communication materials, serves as more than enough for any adult worker to understand how your organization will now operate. The time you spent with your boss, your general counsel, and human resources sharing the material we have covered and your work to develop your Love Action Items list will pay off for you immensely. You may be a bit rattled by either the person or persons who complain, but there is no place for either you or them to stand on the same ground anymore. You made the decision for how you both need and want to run your organization. It is now time for you to fulfill your leadership decision.
This review effort may take some time to accomplish. Do not be discouraged at the time and effort necessary to accomplish the review effort. We have other actions we need to accomplish before you start interviewing applicants, so we will be working in parallel with your review effort to achieve these actions as you wait for your reviewers to step through your materials summary, your Love Action Items list, and meet with you.
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.
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.
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.
