We continue to learn

It has been brought to my attention that it is very difficult to leave comments on this blogger site, so I am trialling TypePad to see if it offers more flexibility.  Sometimes, you just don't know what you don't know! Never having tried to leave myself a comment I was unaware of this problem - so my thanks to one of my Twitter followers.

So please do continue to follow my blogs on the new blog site and let me know what you think.

It never hurts to make a change!!!

I look forward to welcoming you at my new home.

Ian Perry

The most depressing jobs

My thanks to @SimonHague for tweeting the top 10 most depressing jobs as listed in the New York Daily Times:

• nursing home & care workers
• social workers
• health care workers
• artists, entertainers, writers
• teachers
• administrative staff support
• maintenance & ground workers
• financial advisors & accountants
• salespeople

When I read this I reflected on a previous blog of mine on Patrick Lecioni and how 'people don't leave companies they leave bosses'.  A recent article in People Management looks at the growing threat of 'presenteeism' and how people are turning up for work despite illness, but are not operating at full capacity.  The Sainsbury Centre for Ill Health research states that 'presenteeism' accounts for 1.5 times as much work lost as 'absenteeism', but could cost more as it is more common amongst higher paid staff.  They estimated sickness absence was costing £8.4 billion a year, whilst 'presenteeism' cost £15.1 billion, and that was before the recession!

So, back to Lencioni's comment.  I wonder if there is a different kind of risk associated with 'presenteeism'.  How many staff keep coming to work but don't want to be there?  I wonder what are the costs to the business of these demotivated people and what impact are they having on others around them?  

So, my challenge is this, let's start looking at engaging people, having some challenging conversations about why they are not performing, and maybe we should start being a bit more 'adult' if people don't want to be there.

We might well start with scrutinising ourselves.  Are we providing staff with clarity about the jobs we want them to do, are we equipping them to do the best job possible with the right tools and training and is it interesting to them?  

If that's not the answer then maybe helping them to get out of a job they find miserable might be the best thing that you could do for them.  I am not talking about redundancy, but supporting them to make some choices and motivating them to find the job they really want.

If you need some help, I can offer a range of psychometric and coaching options that could enable you to have these conversations, raise awareness and understanding of what motivates different people at work, increase engagement and ultimately drive effectiveness and profitability. 

Bonuses and why the carrot and stick don't work (in most cases)

Much has been discussed and written about the bank bonuses, the state of the economy and the recently reported growth in manufacturing.  My thoughts have turned to how we maintain momentum in what is still an unsettled economy.

So what will drive the economic engine?  In my opinion, it is PEOPLE. Ultimately, how motivated they are to work and go beyond what is required.  That will make the difference.

I wrote in a previous blog about Daniel Pink's thoughts on motivation and I would recommend his book Drive or watching the animation of one of his lectures on You-Tube.

Pink talks about motivation and that the key is providing 'autonomy', 'mastery' and 'purpose'. These are internal or INTRINSIC motivators which refers to motivation driven by interest or enjoyment in the task itself rather than relying on some external pressure.

The external motivating factors or EXTRINSIC motivators have a 'carrot & stick' approach which, in most cases, do not work.  He identifies 7 flaws of motivating people in this style of "if you do X, then you will get Y":

• they can extinguish intrinsic motivation
• they can diminish performance
• they can crush creativity
• they can crowd out good behaviour
• they can encourage cheating, shortcuts and unethical behaviour
• they can become addictive
• they can foster short term thinking

So my questions are:

Are you getting the results you want from your staff?

What methods, processes and means are you using to motivate and reward your staff?

What might you achieve with a change in approach?

Achieving your goals in 2011

Happy New Year to you!  I wonder if you have set some New Year's resolutions, personal or professional goals, or just want to make some improvements at work?

Lots of blogs, tweets and articles in the Press have been offering thoughts regarding this annual process.  I imagine for many of you, that you will not achieve what you desire and will likely be disappointed.  In fact, many might have given up already!

I thought I would add to the debate, not by discussing that we should set goals, but more about how to increase the chances of success. 

First, I want to share a story of sporting excellence.  In his book Inspired, Sir Steven Redgrave talks about the fact that "sport isn't always about the most talented.  Talent is god-given raw material, but it's what happens next that counts".  He fondly recounts the tale of John Nabers, a college kid from Illinois, USA who he believes "must go down in sporting history as the finest example of human refusal to be deterred by an apparently insurmountable goal".

John Nabers went to the 1972 Munich Olympics as a 'domestique', the college backstroke champion who would swim the heats of the medley relay allowing Mark Spitz to swim the final and win one of seven gold medals.  Nabers did his job, but made a vow that next time it would be different!

He did his homework, extrapolating and calculating that to achieve individual gold in the 100m backstroke would require a time of 55.5 secs.  At that time his personal best was 59.5 secs, which is a huge gap in swimming terms.  He nearly gave up, but instead looked at the gap in a different way.  He had 4 years of training, so that meant reducing the time by 1 sec a year!  He then broke it down again.... 

• he trained for 10 months a year, so would need to improve by 1/10th second every month
• with roughly 30 days in a month, he would need to improve by 1/300ths second every day
• training for 4 hours a day meant he calculated that he would only need to improve by 1/1200th second every hour - THAT WAS ACHIEVABLE!!

Clearly, it was harder than that for the next four years, he had to develop new strategies, tactics, changes to his technique, diet and training in order to keep on delivering those small improvements.  But he made the Montreal Olympics and with a time of 55.49 sec he was crowned Olympic and World Record holder, winning a further 3 gold medals.

So, how can this approach work for you?

Often, we use SMART objectives, but don't look at trying to break them down further into 'bite-sized chunks' or how we might actually achieve them.  Try using these as a start point:

• clarify your goals - be really clear on just what it is you are trying to achieve
• establish a measure of success - how will you know that you have achieved it?  Frame this in terms of a positive outcome.  So rather than "lose weight" think of "I will have more energy to play football with the kids".
• break the goal down into smaller steps and measures - such as Naber's 1/1200th second every hour.
• concentrate your mind on how you will actually achieve each small step - what have you got to do differently, better, start or stop doing?
• regularly review your progress and your actions - find someone whom you respect and trust that can play a variety of roles from support to challenge or, if it works for you, just plain nag!

If you would like some help in clarifying and implementing personal or business change this year, give me a call.  The benefit might well be far higher than the cost!

Resilience!

An article in November Coaching at Work magazine considered the current and future trends for coaching and commented that people are experiencing more pressure in the workplace as a result of cost cutting and restructuring, which was particularly so in the public sector.  The resulting pressure can either push people to produce amazingly high performance or it can push them to the edge, destroying performance.

I was also struck by a blog by Nick Robinson of the BBC, who said that "we all thought the Spending Review was the toughest set of decisions ever to face a modern Prime Minister.  Perhaps.  But it also blocked out the day-to-day realities of power when things beyond your control and over which you do not take decisions go wrong.. and then go wrong again.. and then again..."

Both of these made me think of a theme that I have noticed being talked about increasingly by communities on Linkedin and Twitter of Mental Toughness and Resilience.  Resilience is a characteristic I am very familiar with being an accredited practitioner of Emotional Intelligence.

The 'Resilience Factor' by Karen Reivich and Andrew Shatte talks about resilience:

everyone needs resilience, because one thing is certain, life includes adversities.  There are inevitable daily hassles - work dumped on your desk at 4.45pm, children who need to be in the same place at the same time, disagreements with others.  There are probably major setbacks too - a lost job, a failed relationship, and recent events have shown that our lives may also be touched by great trauma.  But if you increase your resilience you can overcome most of what life puts your way.

How resilient are you? Most of us would consider ourselves to be fairly resilient, but most of us are not emotionally or psychologically prepared to handle adversity, which means that instead of facing up to our problems bravely and with confidence, we risk giving up and feeling helpless.

So in the language of emotional intelligence we talk about 'Self Management', which can be described as the emotional competency to manage our energy and emotions in a restraining or energising way:

• Restraining behaviours:
• keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check
• maintaining integrity and acting congruently with our values
• flexibility in handling change

• Energising behaviours:
• striving to improve or meet a standard of excellence
• readiness to act on opportunities
• resilience in coping with setbacks and pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks.

So in these current times, I wonder if we might all benefit from exploring our ability to deal with adversity, set backs, and be more prepared and able to keep picking ourselves  and others up despite set backs and the difficulties of handling change.

If you would like to comment or would like to know more about Emotional Intelligence then do please get in touch!

People don't leave companies they leave bosses!

That was the profound statement made at a conference I attended this week in London and one that has stuck in my mind all week.

The statement was made by Patrick Lencioni, author of best-selling books including 'The Five Dysfunctions of a Team'.  There have been numerous studies in the UK that highlight the dissatisfaction that people feel with their bosses and in my coaching sessions it is often something we will focus on.  People are quick to identify with bad bosses rather than good ones!

At the conference Lencioni offered a great model to overcome people leaving through job misery, which is further explained in his book 'The Three Signs of a Miserable Job'.  He describes the three components as:

Anonymity: employees who are not known and individually appreciated by their managers will not be fulfilled in their jobs.

Irrelevance: employees who don't know how their work impacts the lives of others will not be fulfilled in their jobs.

Immeasurement: employees who cannot assess their own level of performance and success will not be fulfilled in their jobs.

So, I put this to you, are you doing your best to ensure that your teams and direct reports don't have 'miserable jobs'?  In a recent discussion with a client, they said how they feared an exodus of talent from their organisation when the economy picks up.  Make sure that doesn't happen to you! 

Should CEOs have a coach to help them reach peak performance?

This was the title of a recent discussion on Linkedin which was fascinating in the reactions and conclusions provoked.


The discussion was part of an Institute of Directors (IoD) group on Linkedin and the contributors included company CEOs, Directors as well as a range of Coaches, Mentors and Consultants.


What emerged from the discussion was:

• some cynicism regarding the need for coaching and advice for CEOs.
• a passionate defence from Coaches, Mentors and Consultants for their profession and clear 'sparring' about the differences between the methods used.
• some 'sniffyness' (on reflection, me included) about the coaching profession and people too easily entering the profession and calling themselves Coaches.
• challenge back to the CEOs that they were dismissing the need for continual learning.
• a clear confusion about what coaching is and how to make the right choices when selecting of a Coach.

As the discussion came to a natural end, there appeared to be a convergence.  Some of those who started out as cynics ended up with a greater understanding of what coaching and mentoring might offer them.  We as a coaching profession realised that we need to do a better job of helping people to buy our services.

So here are my thoughts on buying coaching:

• ask what training they have undergone and where.  Ensure it is of a good quality and from a reputable provider.
• ask which professional bodies they are a member of and what code of ethics they subscribe to.  The lead organisations are Association for Coaching (AC), European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC), International Coach Federation (ICF)
• if they use psychometric testing, are they 'Level B' accredited by the British Psychological Society to use them and which ones are valid for your needs.
• what Supervision do they receive?  All good coaches should have a Supervisor who helps them to reflect on their approach and improve their practise.
• how they propose to 'contract' with you - in other words, what are the 'rules of engagement'.
• what are they doing for their own professional development?How many days a year are they investing in their own training and development?
• insist you have a 'chemistry' session and decide whether you think you can work with them!

I would be interested in your thoughts and experiences on buying coaching services.