To serve whom?

Even if you are just a casual fan of the original Twilight Zone series, you are probably familiar with the 1962 episode titled, "To Serve Man."

Considered one of the classics of this seminal series, it tells the story of a visit to our small planet by an alien race that offers to eradicate strife and enrich the lives of earth's inhabitants.  The payback for consequences of this largesse, are, for the earthlings, unappetizing.

The show came to mind following a conversation I had this week with Sam Silverstein, author, lecturer and expert on building cultures of accountability.

I am a big fan of Sam and his concepts and have enrolled in his "Accountability Academy," as  have several of the companies with whom I work. However, despite the absence of accountability being a frequent lament,  an affinity for accountability is not universal. That's what Sam and I chatted about: where accountability cultures thrive, where they don't and why.

Two nuggets emerged from our talk:

• Many individuals and organizations confuse responsibility and accountability.  "Responsibility is about things; accountability is about people," Silverstein believes.  Ironically, though, when you have a culture where individuals accept responsibility for helping others, accountability is the result.
• Not surprisingly, organizations and individuals that practice servant leadership, are generally more successful because the concept of personal responsibility and accountability is ingrained and/or embraced.

Servant leadership is not about training a staff of business butlers, or a boss who makes sure that coffee is brewed and hot when the staff arrives.  It is a management philosophy that is people-centric, where leaders accept responsibility for enabling team performance through their own actions.



As author Bill Treasurer says:  Leaders Open Doors.

In the Washington Post, Professor Edward Hess of the University of Virginia recently noted:

"Many people think that you cannot be people-centric and maintain high standards, because employees will take advantage. That’s another leadership myth.

These high-performance organizations show that people-centric environments and high performance are not mutually exclusive. Employees in these companies have high emotional engagement, loyalty and productivity, and outperform the competition on a daily basis over long periods of time. In fact, the relationship between high performance, high employee engagement and how you treat employees is compelling. My research clearly demonstrates that employee satisfaction drives customer satisfaction and loyalty."

The lesson?  If you can't grow beyond yourself, you have a job, not a business.  In a small business especially, the ability to motivate and manage your team to achieve a consistent high level of performance is the critical factor of growth -- and survival.

In a review of the new book, Give and Take, Harvard Business School Professor James Heskett writes that research "suggests that servant leaders are not only more highly regarded than others by their employees and not only feel better about themselves at the end of the day but are more productive as well."

Like the ironic ending in the To Serve Man Twilight Zone episode, there's also a surprising twist to the familiar servant/teacher cliche:  it seems that those that can do, teach.  And those that can't teach, are toast.

Pokes and provocations

I was meeting with a CEO client this week and the conversation turned to productivity and time management.  Well, sort of.

What he said was:  "I'd get a hell of a lot more done if my staff didn't drive me crazy."

Owners and employees.  Managers and staff.  CEOs and mangers. Why can't they just get along?

The CEO's lament reminded me of a phrase I had heard earlier, which also related to managing relationships:  "Don't poke the crazy."  I wasn't familiar with that one, but I was with its ursine iteration: "Don't poke the bear," which is similar to "gets your goat."

Whether you anthropomorphize your anger or not, losing your cool, or vice versa, is counterproductive to effective management.  Just ask Rutgers University basketball coach Mike Rice.  The fallout from both the bad behavior, and the condoning of it, will leave a mark.

What drives you crazy and how do you deal with provocative behavior?   Understanding personalities -- yours as well as others -- is critical to successful leadership and motivation.   

Would you believe?

Do you thrive on order or disorder? Into Ccontrol or Kaos chaos?

Are you a connect-the-dots kind of manager, taking comfort in plans and processes, trusting in systems that provide structure to move your organization forward step-by-step?

Or do you prefer a more freewheeling environment, believing that adaptability and improvisation is a litmus test that allows one's mettle to come shining through.

It's probably not a question that business owners ponder very often, but it came up in conversation a number of times this week, speaking with prospective TAB Board members about their approaches to managing their companies.

Some of those I met with professed to love the challenge of dealing with constant change, navigating a stormy environment and choosing the correct tack to keep forward progress going.  Others, well, not so much. They preferred a more grounded and gradual approach.

I'm sure you know successful executives in both camps. Today's entrepreneurial zeitgeist certainly reflects more of the swashbuckling, freewheeling, disruptive business type. And, while the it may be a more sexy story, would you believe that this approach yields worse outcomes than the old-school methodical, follow-the-plan approach?


As Jim Collins illustrated in his book Great By Choice, a discipline he calls "20-Mile March" behavior is a leadership trait that gives organizations "the ability to impose order upon disorder, consistency amid swirling controversy" but only when it is combined with a near obsessive focus on making continued progress against the objective.

According to Collins:

"Some people believe that a world characterized by radical change and disruptive forces no longer favors those who engage in consistent 20-Mile Marching. Yet the great irony is that when we examined just this type of out-of-control, fast-paced environment, we found that every (successful) company -- unlike their less-successful peers -- exemplified the 20-Mile March principle during the era we studied."

Collins relays the expeditions of Roald Amundsen and Robert Scott, two well-matched teams racing for the South Pole.

"For one team, it would be a race to victory and a safe return home. For the second team, it would be a devastating defeat, reaching the Pole only to find the wind-whipped flags of their rivals planted 34 days earlier, followed by a race for their lives -- a race that they lost in the end.... One leader led his team to victory and safety. The other led his team to defeat and death....What separated these two men? Why did one achieve spectacular success in such an extreme set of conditions, while the other failed even to survive?"

Find Collins' answer here.

The difference between success and failure is often small, with progress sometimes barely measurable and perceptible only in hindsight. Most often it is the result of a series of incremental actions and decisions rather than any single event.  Having a well-drawn plan, combined with the temperament and leadership skills to implement it consistently, even in the face of adversity, gives your organization a demonstrable edge over more flamboyant but less dependable competition.

Missing by that much may make for comedic gold, but it is often not so amusing in life or in business.  Believe it.

Chances are...

The 1974 film Blazing Saddles is considered one of the great American comedies.  A satire not only of movie westerns, but also of American popular culture, many of the movie's scenes have become classic.

One of those highlights was the late Madeline Kahn's performance of "I'm Tired" a comic lament to over-abundant but largely unfulfilling opportunities:  "I'm tired of being admired..."  We should all have such problems.

The song came to mind this week during discussions with business leaders about coping with the endless series of decisions they must make to keep their organizations moving forward.  Being fatigued was a common complaint.

Indeed.  We've all had those days where we have felt so bombarded by incoming requests that by day's end we feel paralyzed or simply unable to process even a simple request like: "Honey, what do you want for dinner?" without risking a domestic violence charge.

Who loves ya, baby?

Dear John,

I know that we’ve never paid much attention to the Valentine’s Day thing – it’s not like it’s a legal holiday and all – but I couldn’t let it pass without saying how much better things are between us. What a difference a year makes!

Last winter, I thought we were on the rocks, heading towards being done. You weren't yourself and it seemed like you were just going through the motions. 

You had been caring, upbeat, positive, full of ideas.  We were a hot item. Everyone talked about us. You were proud. You loved every aspect of running your business.

I know that the never-ending "recession" wore you down. I could see it in the little things, those small gestures that showed that you cared: studying the day’s orders to get a feel for what who was buying what: you could spot changes before they became a trend; “buddying” up with a new employee to get them up to speed, then staying late to catch up on your own work; going to Chamber events and coming back with orders, not just a few business cards that you threw into a pile.  I was worried, and I know you were too, though you didn't speak about it.

Going for it

In baseball, there's a saying, "You can't hit a five run homer."  It's an admonition to players that a deficit has to be overcome one batter at a time, and to focus in the moment, rather than project forward.  Contribute your part; let the next guy do his.  Some call it "small ball." Or deride it as incrementalism. One of the most memorable moments in American sports was built on such small steps. (Relax, Red Sox Nation, you had your moment.)

The debate over "big play" versus "march down the field" has raged for eons...in and out of sporting arenas.  Think tortoise v. hare, a fable from Aesop and ancient Greece.

It's true that sluggers are traditionally more revered by fans and big-armed quarterbacks capture more imagination than a great cover corner back.  We have home run derbies at the All Star game, not doubles up the gap contests.

But do the bombers win more?  Do they contribute more to success than well-rounded excellence?  Not according to some.  The book and film Moneyball, which is about management as much as it is about baseball, is a recent contributor to this debate.  In the world of big business, the go-for-broke and grind-it-out camps each have visible success stories.

The path you choose

The word entrepreneur is not of modern vintage.  It is about about three centuries or so old, and not of English origin.  According to Wikipedia:

"Entrepreneur is a loanword from French and was first defined by the Irish-French economist Richard Cantillon as the person who pays a certain price for a product to resell it at an uncertain price, thereby making decisions about obtaining and using the resources while consequently admitting the risk of enterprise. The term first appeared in the French Dictionary "Dictionnaire Universel de Commerce" of Jacques des Bruslons published in 1723."

In the original definition -- a reseller or middleman -- the word entrepreneur hardly conjures up the glamor and symbolism that are associated with it today: a world of Valleys, Alleys, start-ups, venture capital, IPOs and potential riches.

Despite the pop culture mythology attached to modern entrepreneurs, life for most business owners is more mundane than commonly portrayed. They are a practical lot, more concerned with making payroll than the size of their bankroll.

And even though Americans like to think we are the masters of commercial risk-taking, we aren't even the most entrepreneurial society.  Be that as it may, both the uncertainly and the "risk of the enterprise" surely remain the same as it ever was.

For many, the difference between success and failure comes down to how well they "make decisions about obtaining and using resources." In other words, the path they choose to get what's in their head (vision) into operation (execution) in their business in a way that allows them sufficient sustained profitability to endure.

Crossroads

In last week's post, I wrote:  "In the weeks ahead, I'll outline ...  an "Owner's Manual" for 21st century small business leaders."

That wasn't entirely accurate.  What's follows over the next few weeks is not a manual, in the truest sense of the word:

Manual [ˈmænjʊəl] adj 
[via Old French from Latin manuālis, from manus hand]

1. of or relating to a hand or hands

2. operated or done by hand manual controls

3. physical, as opposed to mental or mechanical manual labour

4. by human labor rather than automatic or computer-aided means

5. of, relating to, or resembling a manual

n

1. a book, esp of instructions or information a car manual

2. (Music, other) Music one of the keyboards played by hand on an organ

3. (Military) Military the prescribed drill with small arms

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins

The problem with manuals is that they are so, well, hands-on, in a more or less literal sense, AND they are very basic (find key, put it in ignition, turn on car...) Manuals tell, rather than teach.

What I have found from working with business owners, CEOs and organizational leaders for over 30 years is that the best seek not a how-to, but a map, a compass, a guide to help them navigate.  They are constantly trolling for new experience and expertise and they want guidance on better managing themselves and their businesses.

Your aim, please?

"In the long run, men only hit what they aim at."- Henry David Thoreau.


I bet you didn't think of old Hank Thoreau as a management guru.  Perhaps you know him better as  "author, poet, philosopher, abolitionist, naturalist, tax resister, development critic, surveyor, historian, and leading transcendentalist."

The sentiment above is a nice thought on focus. And that's how the quote is often used, including by yours truly.  We love focus.  Focus is important; you can't hit your targets without being able to sight them.

But focus is only half the story and quote (literally.)  Thoreau's coda is "...therefore, though they should fail immediately, they had better aim at something high."

A romantic sentiment, beautifully expressed.  But is Thoreau's quote espousing a good business principle?  Is it the big picture that matters? Is vision is more important than accomplishment?

We've looked at the both the "vision thing" and "failure is the best path to success" before, and found a fixation on either, to the exclusion of the other, somewhat problematic.

Thine own self

"This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!"
- Polonius, Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 3.

The meaning of the words above, written 400 years ago, have been studied, debated and written about almost from the time they were penned.  Here's one take that I find satisfying:

By "false" Polonius seems to mean "disadvantageous" or "detrimental to your image"; by "true" he means "loyal to your own best interests." Take care of yourself first, he counsels, and that way you'll be in a position to take care of others.

For business owners, to be honest in your dealings with others is fairly intrinsic:  you won't get far in deceiving your business' stakeholders.

Take care of yourself first, now there's the rub.  As we have written about before, many business owners choose to do without, to sacrifice for the greater good of their businesses, often at their own expense.  Right or wrong, I don't know too many business owners who are in it solely for the money. 

Is that wise?  From a financial standpoint, no it is not.  As my colleague John Dini eloquently and correctly argues, businesses owners have a right to (all of the) profits.  Profits are a result, not a goal, however.

When financial considerations alone drive decisions, poor choices and outcomes often follow.

Breaking away

It's the back half of August.  Have you taken your summer vacation?

According to Wikipedia, vacation is a fairly modern invention, and has evolved over the past 200 years.  This makes sense, as it coincides with the rise of a modern industrialized economy.

"In the Puritan culture of early America, taking a break from work for reasons other than weekly observance of the Sabbath, was frowned upon. However, the modern concept of vacation was led by a later religious movement encouraging spiritual retreat and recreation. The notion of breaking from work periodically took root among the middle and working class."

The origins of the word date back to late 14th century France, meaning "freedom from obligations, leisure, release," and is derived from the Latin vacationem "leisure, a being free from duty," and vacare "be empty, free, or at leisure."

The operative word in the history of vacation is being "free."  Did you feel free during your interregnum?  Or were you worried about palace coups or other more mundane business concerns?  I know business owners who rarely take more than a long weekend, and I know others who take weeks off regularly, in addition to other time away from the business, and run successful, growing businesses.

Go Team!

In last week's post, I noted that the phrase "An Army of One" is an oxymoron for small business owners. As it turns out, the Army also apparently felt that it was antithetical to the ethos of teamwork, and phased the phrase out.

Ah, teamwork...who doesn't want a "team player?"  Businesses spend millions, if not billions, of dollars in pursuit of talented teammates.

• We advertise for them in our recruitment ads (who wants to hire a boat-rocker?)
• We read books about building good teams (millions of them)
• We listen to motivational speeches by successful sports team coaches.

We spend much time and energy thinking about teams.  But it also seems that a similar amount of time is spent moaning about our recruits' lack of individual initiative and how to motivate them.  How do we square this circle?

About time

"Everybody's talking at me.  I can't hear a word they're saying." - Harry Nilsson.

 

Do you practice management by tuning out?  

There's the tuning out that Harry Nilsson sang about:  unhappy with your current situation, you shut out the world because you just can't handle one more request from yet another needy person.  You long for more control, a better situation, a clearer path, but aren't sure where that place may be or how to get there.  You are stuck in neutral; you know that there's a road not taken for you, but you can't find your keys.

There's also the productive kind of tuning out, one that's sadly not immortalized in song.  It's where you actively limit your distractions, focus on your priorities and feel a tangible sense of accomplishment.  You are in control, in balance, working on your business rather than in your business.  You make some progress every day, and hit your goals over time.

We all live in the same age of distraction.  It affects us all, and especially for those of a certain age, time seems to be accelerating away from us.  There's too much to do and realistically, not enough time available to do it all.  We are constantly running to catch up to our to-do lists and not making progress.  I call it the one head, many hats syndrome.

Who are you?

Third in a series...

In 1978, The Who asked the musical question, "Who are You?" While the song and album were an exploration of conflicting progressive and punk rock attitudes, nearly 35 years later their query could be the anthem for current sales and marketing angst.

Gathering meaningful information on customers is one of the most important tasks for small businesses.  It is also one of the most difficult, and therefore, among the most neglected by small business owners. 

At its most basic level, any operating business has two target audiences:  current customers and potential customers.  Most proprietors I meet and/or work with operate under a "build it and they will come" approach of one form or another.  And for most, it works well in getting a business through its formative stages:  establishing a customer base and following, and building a revenue stream.

But to scale an enterprise takes more focus.  After all, your target market is not everyone.

Punish the monkey

You may not have noticed, but this week our government became more accountable.  Is that a good thing?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines accountability thusly:

...the quality or state of being accountable, liable or answerable; especially : an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions <public officials lacking accountability>...

Not bad objectives for public institutions, but if you are a human being, specifically an employee, these are not terribly positive, empowering or motivating definitions.  All of the responsibility devolves to them.

Perhaps that's why the "A" word has employees rolling their eyes, running for cover, or heading for the exit:  many view accountability as just another modern, Newspeak business term for blaming, finger-pointing and butt-covering.  Punishment, in other words.

Is it safe?

Growth is always a hot topic at the monthly TAB meetings I facilitate:  strategies, plans, tactics, obstacles, wins, losses, etc.

Most of our businesses are doing well, but some have seen their top lines flatten and a very few have experienced sales declines.

Bottom line-wise, our business owners have seen their operating costs escalate.  The cost of goods, taxes, health care, energy, professional services have all been rising. Most have been very good at maintaining their margins by controlling their variable expenses.

But nipping and tucking only gets you so far, as we are finding out in the debate over growth versus austerity at the national and international level.  You can't cut your way to growth over the long term.

Beneath the waterline

-->

As you may have heard if you weren't stranded on an ice floe, the supposedly unsinkable Titanic went down in the North Atlantic exactly 100 years ago this weekend.

It remains an epochal event; one of the greatest catastrophes of the 20^th century.  At the time, it was “unthinkable,” "impossible."  A black swan. 

Until the details emerged.  With the benefit of hindsight, it all seemed inevitable:  corners cut, disbelief suspended, expert opinions ignored.  This is partly why Titanic has transcended the literal and become metaphor for commercial hubris, institutional blindness and human fallibility (and more, to some.) 

Empowering thoughts

-->

People start their own business for a number of reasons -- some to follow a passion, some always dreamed of being their own boss, while others were in search of flexibility that they didn’t find in larger organizations. Those who grow beyond solo entrepreneurship will quickly find out that getting the right people on the bus is even more important when you’re driving a small scale version. When on-boarding a new employee, consider this:

“If you hire people just because they can do a job, they’ll work for your money. But if you hire people who believe what you believe, they’ll work for you with blood and sweat and tears.” (Simon Sinek, author of Start with Why.)

Ensuring that you find people who believe what you believe requires that you have a clearly defined vision [see this earlier post]. You also need to choose those who are able to multi-task and not worry so much about staying in the confines of their role, and to “jump out of their seat” when needed. To see what a fully-engaged employee looks like, check out Jeff Haden's 8 Qualities of Remarkable Employees.

Haircuts, Lipstick and Yogi

-->

One day recently I dashed into a local haircut shop shortly after it opened, hoping to beat the rush and get a quick trim before a meeting.  It had been a while and I was looking and feeling shaggy.

The store is one of those national franchise chains that have grown, weed-like, to seemingly inhabit every local shopping center.  It has been hawking its franchises on CNBC, LinkedIn, and other media.

There was no one in the store when I entered…no customers and no employees up front.  After a couple of minutes, a young woman (I'll call her Abby) came up from the back and apologized for my wait, saying, “it takes us a little longer to open up because we are short-staffed these days.” 

My family and I patronize this store frequently.  The staff is attentive, friendly and professional.  The cost of its services are reasonable, the cuts competent and the customer loyalty program keeps us, well, loyal.  The store has been popular and can get crowded at peak times, hence my early morning visit.

You say you want an evolution

Change:  there are few words in the human lexicon that evoke more angst than this, both good and bad.

Strange, that.

Change is a constant in our lives.  As constant as the dawn or the sunset.  Every day is different and change is an ever-present aspect of living.

Change is feared because often we are not in control of it, especially in business. Key employees leave, new competitors emerge, customers disappear.  (These changes are in your control, but that's the subject of another post.)

It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. Charles Darwin

Change forces us out of our habits.  And habits are a basic human mechanism for dealing with the  complexities of everyday life.

In a recent book, The Power of Habit, NY Times business writer Charles Duhigg explores the science behind why we do what we do (and how.)