Dealing With Superficial People

/ nuleadership / 2 Comments

superficial-1

Who wants to work with shallow people?  Most people want to interact with individuals who have a solid core of values. In fact, can you imagine being in an intimate relationship with a superficial individual. It’s not a good thought. 

You like that person, but the superficial nature of that person is a barrier to any genuine relationship. This situation is a case where actions speak louder than words.  You see them saying the right words and attempting to do the right things. 

However, sooner or later, their superficial disposition comes out, and you can’t believe they are that way.  If you were honest with yourself, you knew that person was pretty hollow in the beginning, but you didn’t want to accept it.  

First, there are no physical characteristics that can identify a superficial person. In many organizations, teamwork is the way to accomplish my tasks.  Richard Daft, author of Management, notes the connectedness of teams:  “When people become part of a team, their success depends on the team’s success; therefore, they must depend on how well other people perform, not just on their own individual initiative and actions.”[1] 

Consequently, the best leaders want the right folks on their teams.  Clearly, shallow people come in all shapes and sizes. They have varying backgrounds. They live in every community. However, these people all have a common characteristic: They are externally-driven. This article explores the dynamics of building relationships and the nature of superficial people. 

When an individual understands the nature of genuine relationships, they will be able to foster better relationships with family, friends, co-workers, and loved ones. 

Second, an individual’s character still counts in fostering meaningful relationships in spite of power or material wealth. Leaders set the tone in most organizations. 

Gareth Jones and Jennifer George, authors of Contemporary Management, agree with this premise: “Managers determine and shape organizational culture through the kinds of values and norms they promote in an organization.”[2]  Therefore, superficial leaders often surround themselves with superficial followers which are problematic at best.

Superficial people care little about the value of other people, so they focus on themselves, always thinking, “What is in it for me?”  Because shallow individuals are constantly trying to make the world conform to them, they focus little on building good personal content. 

England’s best-known preacher Charles Spurgeon once noted, “A good character is the best tombstone. Those who loved you and were helped by you will remember you when forget-me-nots have withered. Carve your name on hearts, not on marble.” 

Shallow people are often distracted with other things besides good character. Some chase money. Others chase power or fame. Unfortunately, these things lack much substance.  Like eating frosting on a cake, these people never get a nutritious meal to promote a healthy spirit. Yes, the frosting provides a short-term boost in life, but it is not lasting.  Therefore, superficial people spend little time on good content. 

In the frantic pace of modern living, many people are in the pursuit of the wrong possessions.  The media bombards us with the notion that “We deserve it all.”  When this philosophy is believed, it creates a generation of inwardly focused people. We become a “Me” generation.

Because this person feels he is entitled to be happy, he focuses on what can make him happy now.  Obviously, it is far easier to pursue things (money, power, right clique, etc.) in terms of happiness because they are tangible to the eyes.  However, this short path is not a road to fortune, but perhaps a highway to destruction.  

If you are in relationships with superficial person, you can be assured that your intimacy will lack any significant depth. Your relationship may feel like the real thing, but over time the truth usually will reveal itself.  How does an individual then seek to surround themselves with people of good content?  In addressing this question, here are some things to consider in any relationship:

Finally, building true relationships is dependent on the right idiosyncrasies.  An individual’s character is more important than what he or she brings in terms of assets. Sadly, some people do not have this deepness of character.

They exist on the shallow end of the spectrum; they rarely make serious relationships. Why is this factor the case? These people are more concerned with what’s on the outside of an individual than what is on the inside. Clearly, this is a mistake.  Real individuals want quality, meaningful relationships and are unwilling to settle for less. 

Discuss your experience with superficial people.

 © 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                    

 

[1]Management by Richard Daft

[2] Contemporary Management by Gareth Jones and Jennifer George

 

Interview with Dr. Richard Daft, Professor at Vanderbilt University

/ nuleadership / 9 Comments

Internationally renowned expert, Dr. Richard Daft has been an industry leader in organizational management. He has published 12 books, dozens of articles, and presented at more than 45 universities around the world. Being a former Associate Dean at Owen, Dr. Daft has also developed and managed the Center for Change Leadership, participated in more than $500,000 in research grants, and is a Fellow of the Academy of Management. Dr. Daft is currently professor at the Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University. He is the author of the textbook (10 edition), Management. He shares his insight on several management topics this week:

Discuss how you got involved studying management and becoming professor at Vanderbilt University.
During my last semester of college, I met a young professor in the business school. As I learned about his work, I was intrigued, but felt that becoming a professor was too far out of reach. A couple of years later while working in Marshalltown, Iowa, I was in the library and came across a textbook on organizational behavior. I was so interested in the subject matter that I realized in that moment that I would try to be become a professor in organization studies. I came to Vanderbilt 24 years ago when a position opened up and I was ready to make a move from a large state university to a smaller private university. I applied for the position and got it.

What do you feel are the major challenges for American businesses faced with the realities of globalization?
For me, the issue comes down to qualities of both leadership and management. Globalization makes every industry more competitive. Thus businesses have to be super efficient, which is a function of management control and accountability. Businesses also have to be forward-looking and innovative, which is about employee creativity and engagement that are awakened by leadership.

What key leadership traits will be important as the world faces an uncertainty future?
I would say a certain amount of courage, vision and/or purpose, persistence, great soft skills, and knowing oneself. By knowing oneself, I mean knowing your own strengths and weaknesses, and choosing situations that take advantage of your strengths and accommodating weaknesses through others’ strengths. By great soft skills, I mean that people who genuinely care about and get along with others seem to thrive in any environment.

There are 20 million unemployed in our country. What are the positive things for these people to look forward to in 2014 and beyond?
It is hard for me to be positive about the huge number of unemployed people in our country. The trend I am most aware of is the growth of technology that is replacing the need for workers. More businesses are creating or buying technology to do work more efficiently and for less cost than hiring employees to do the work. Hence businesses are thriving while unemployment is decreasing very slowly. I also feel a personal frustration with the legislative and executive branches of our government which seem more loyal to their respective ideologies than to solving the unemployment problem. I would like to see the government focus on designing an economic system that ranks full employment as a top priority.

Any other comments:
I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your questions. I hope the Management text is working well for your students.

Best regards,

Dick Daft
Professor
Vanderbilt MBA Program 

Please share your comments on this topic.

Richard-Daft

ABOUT THIS EXPERT

Byline

Professor Daft is among the most highly cited academics in the fields of economics and business. Richard Daft is studying high performance mental models – which include cognitive models of high performing managers – and examining high performance management systems. He has been involved in management development and consulting for companies and organizations such as the American Banking Association, Bell Canada, Bristol-Myers Squibb, J.C. Bradford & Company, Ford Motor Company, Pratt & Whitney, USAA, First American National Bank, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Central Parking Systems, Performance Food Group, the National Science Foundation, Northern Telecom, State Farm Insurance, the United States Air Force, the United States Army, and Vanderbilt Medical Center.

Education:
B.S., University of Nebraska, 1967
M.B.A., University of Chicago, 1971
Ph.D., University of Chicago, 1974

The Human Factor

/ nuleadership / 13 Comments

man-fingers-crossed

Businesses that don’t under the value of their human capital resources are in error.  In spite of the power of technology and automation, it takes people power to make business operations work.  Failing to understand this reality will leave an organization vulnerable to their competition. This week we will cover human factor buy-in, the last element in socio-technical systems.  

Organizations must shift their paradigm to viewing workers as more than mechanical parts for their organizational objectives. Gareth Jones and Jennifer George, authors of Contemporary Management, maintain that managers have a responsibility to effectively oversee their human resources which includes the people involved in the creation and distribution of goods and services. [1] Given this reality, the ability of managers to leverage their talent is crucial.  

Talent management is the process through which employers anticipate and meet the needs for human capital.[2]  Peter Cappelli, author of Talent Management, explains how mismanaging employees in organizations is problematic for an organization’s sustainable success:  “The failures in talent management includes mismatches between  supply and demand on the one hand, having too many employees, leading to layoffs and restructuring, and on the other hand, having too little talent, leading to talent shortage. [3] 

In the United States, talent management miscues fall into the following categories:  (a) Do Nothing Mode – makes no attempt to anticipate human resource needs and develops no plans for addressing them and (b) Reactive Mode – relies on outside hiring to meet human capital needs, but this approach has begun to fail now that the surplus of management talent has eroded. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTMs3hp-LFU

Trust is the cornerstone of any meaningful relationships in organizations.  Yet, many employees do not trust their organizations due to the lack of employment security in most companies.  According to a USA Today poll, nearly half of those interviewed said that corporations can be trusted only a little, or not at all, when it involves looking out for the best interest of employees.[4] 

Michael Hackman and Craig Johnson, authors of Leadership: A Communication Perspectives, argue that a leader’s credibility is directly related to the quality of his relationship with followers.[5] Marios Katsioloudes, a researcher specializing in Socio-technical analysis, explains that as profitability of mechanization increases, the importance of technology is implied while there is a devaluation of the workers. U.S. businesses cannot point to the lack of employee performance on a global front for mismanagement errors.[6]

Japan, a long-time benchmark for American companies, is being defeated by American employees; today, the average U.S. worker puts in 36 more hours per year than Japanese workers (1,825 vs. 1,789). 

Over the last two decades, balancing work and home life have been difficult since Americans have added 200 hours to their annual work schedule.[7] Employees want to be valued. 

Jeffrey Pfeffer, author of The Human Equation, acknowledges that organization success is directly related to implementation, and this capacity comes from the workers, how they are treated, their skills, and their efforts as it relates to the organization.[8] 

Leaders should see followers as more than mechanical parts for their organizational objectives. Managers assume that giving employees new technology is enough to keep them happy. Likewise, leaders should view followers as a vital component of the socio-technical system. 

Discuss the concept of human factor buy-in for today’s organizations.

 © 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                    

 

[1] Contemporary Management by Gareth Jones and Jennifer George

[2] Talent Management by Peter Cappelli

[3] Talent Management by Peter Cappelli

[4] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[5] Leadership: A Communication Perspectives by Michael Hackman and Craig Johnson

[6] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[7] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[8] The Human Equation by Jeffrey Pfeffer

 

Technology Relevancy

/ nuleadership / 5 Comments

Components of Technology

We can’t survive without technology.  Are we too dependent on it?  When the computer network is down in our office, it’s a pretty wasted day because we are paperless.  Yet, you won’t find many modern organizations that can operate when their technology malfunctions. 

This week we will focus on technology relevancy as part of the three practical applications (i.e. value modeling, technology relevancy, and human factor buy-in) in socio-technical systems.  

Organizations must understand that technology needs to be relevant as it relates to benefiting the whole socio-technical system.  Technology relates to the combination of skills and equipment that managers use in the design, production, and distribution of goods and services.[1]   

Gareth Jones and Jennifer George, authors of Contemporary Management, argue the significance of technology forces on organizations:  “Technological forces can have profound implications for managers and organizations. Technological change can make established products obsolete….”  The graveyard of many businesses is littered with numerous failed opportunities of senior executives to understand market shifts and technology opportunities.   

As an engineer myself, we are taught to use theory in order to build, design, and operate technical systems, whether mechanical, digital, or otherwise. Sometimes this creates a technical superiority over the other components of this socio-technical system. 

Organizations should obtain input from employees to ensure that the organization has not only the best technology for its operations but the right technology.[2]  This sharing of information can only come with mutual trust of leaders and followers.  Gary Yukl, author of Leadership in Organizations, notes, “Empowerment is more feasible when there is a high level of mutual trust…Leaders can affect the psychological employment of followers in many ways, and participative leadership and delegation are only two of the relevant behaviors .”[3] 

There have been numerous cases where organizations have purchased new technology to solve a problem or to become more efficient when a simple conversation with impacted employees would have produced better results at a lower cost. Therefore, organizations should invest their time in identifying the relevant technologies for their socio-technical system in a participatory manner.    

Discuss the concept of technology relevancy for today’s organizations. 

© 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                    

[1] Jones, G.  & George, J. (2009). Contemporary Management

[2] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[3]Leadership in Organizations by Gary Yukl

 

 

Value Modeling

/ nuleadership / 7 Comments

justice-symbol

Last week, we started the discussion about socio-technical systems and its impact on today’s organizations.   In the next few weeks, we will address three practical applications (i.e. value modeling, technology relevancy, and human factor buy-in).  Understanding value modeling is a critical attribute that managers need to acquire in times of uncertainty and high risks.  Effective leadership becomes the hallmark of high performing organizations. 

Organizations must model its values to both first-line supervisors and managers in a socio-technical system.  However, it won’t happen without good leadership.  Leadership is defined as the ability to influence others toward a shared objective or goal. 

Dr. Richard Daft explains that today’s employers are looking for authentic leaders who understand them, act consistent with high ethical standards, and empowers others with their openness and candor.  Dr. Daft argues, “To be authentic means being real, staying true to one’s values and beliefs, and acting based on one’s true self rather than emulating what others do.”

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2SKTP43oRQ

Yet, some organizations expect employees to understand its culture, its values, and its principles by attending new employee orientation or by reading a company brochure. This is simply not the case. Vince Adams, who has over 20 years as an environmental manager, understands delicacy of balancing a socio-technical system.

Adams has extensive experiences with both government and private organizations that are finding themselves neglecting to outline and demonstrate its value systems to employees.[1] Adams states, “Companies must build values into their employees so that employees know what the expectations are for that organization.”

James Kouzes and Barry Posner, authors of The Leadership Challenge, have researched several thousand businesses and government executives and they outline setting the example as a critical attribute of an effective leadership.[2] Kouzes and Posner argue, “Once people are clear about the leader’s values, about their own values, and about shared values, they know what’s expected of them and can better handle the conflicting demands of work and personal affairs.”  Therefore, employees expect leaders in organizations to model these values in their organizations, and this is also true for socio-technical systems. 

Discuss the concept of value modeling for today’s leaders. 

© 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                    

 

[1]“Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[2] The Leadership Challenge by James Kouzes and Barry Posner

 

Mapping Out Socio-Technical Systems

/ nuleadership / 13 Comments

human-vs-robot-09

Another problem is presented. A worker gets injured on a subcontractor’s project. We gather around the table to dish out the blame. Everyone wants to point fingers. The project manager blames inadequate funding while the safety engineer cites an ineffective preplanning process. Nothing gets resolved. The issue moves up the line for a senior management decision. There’s a meeting to discuss the matter.  

Someone leads out and says, “What can be done to prevent this problem?” Numerous technical recommendations are offered. Standing up, I state, “Why don’t we ask the workers about this problem? Let’s get them involved so that they can help find the solution.”

The room gets quiet. Finally, one senior manager suggests that we should take money away from the subcontractor, buy new technology, and fire the worker’s supervisor. Everyone agrees. After dealing with this same problem every month, I was hoping for a different answer. I was disappointed again.[1] 

Why do we see managers make the same mistakes over and over and never want the day-to-day workers involved in the process? Executives are then shocked when their employees don’t buy-in on their latest management initiative. One of the reasons organizations do not reach peak performance is because managers do not create socio-technical systems to support organizational values.

With fierce global competition and a need for a market advantage, I found it surprising that managers move toward the quick fixes like downsizing for short term gain without analyzing the organization over the long-term. I am not suggesting that this approach is easy; however, I am declaring that over the long haul, an organization will become a stronger institution in the process. [2]  

The concept of socio-technical systems is very important in a highly competitive environment. Socio-technical systems relate to the reciprocal interrelationship between humans and machines. In fact, the idea explores how both the technical and the social conditions of work interact with efficiency and the human condition.[3]

This interaction satisfies each, but does not compromise the other.  Since the industrial age, researchers have recognized that both technical and social factors impact organizational performance.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOePJH7LYZ4

Daniel Wren, author of The Evolution of Management Thought, concludes that analyzing a social system gives management an avenue to measure conflict between the “logic of efficiency” demanded  by the formal organization and  the “logic by sentiments” by the informal organization.[4]

In profit hunting, many businesses lose focus of the importance of socio-technical systems. Given precepts, the questions for most managers becomes how to use this scholarly perspective in the practitioner’s avenue where time is money and money is time.  In the following weeks, we will address three practical applications (i.e. value modeling, technology relevancy, and human factor buy-in) so that socio-technical systems within organizations can support its organizational values. 

Discuss the concept of socio-technical systems in today’s organizations.

 

© 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                                       

 

[1] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[2] “Leading others while supporting organizational values” by Daryl D. Green

[3] “Philosophy of socio-technical systems” by Gunter Ropohl

[4] The Evolution of Management Thought by Daniel Wren

 

Guest Blogger – To Walk the Global Walk, Talk the Global Talk

/ nuleadership / 15 Comments

blind-leading-blind 

The Walk  

The ‘walk’ refers to global development process that precedes communication. Leaders know how to attract followers.  It is the hope that they are able to lead effectively, especially leading those within their own organization, in their home countries.  But what happens when the boundaries expand abroad?  Does the level or type of leadership change?  Indeed it does. 

A key leadership attribute of the twenty-first century leader will be the ability to see the world and the workplaces with a global mindset[1]. There is a principle of relativity in culture; experience is something people project on the outside world as they gain it in a culturally determined form[2]. 

Leaders of organizations must learn to be global leaders when making the efforts to expand beyond the home country.  Research needs to be done; they should educate themselves about the area of interest and their cultural practices.  Having that knowledge can give a global leader the winning edge when developing staff in other areas of the world. 

With the lack of knowledge, come challenges.  Sometimes global leadership is not successful due to the minimal research and information acquired prior to organizational expansion.  It is wise for global leaders to be mindful of these potential barriers.

Acquiring personal literacy can give the global leader aggressive insight on key cultural behaviors[3]. The global leader should understand the culture to the point where he/she can almost walk in the shoes of a person who lives in the country abroad.  The global leader should: 

1)    Immerse oneself in the target culture

2)    Train future leaders as global citizens, and

3)    Involve everybody in the organization’s global strategy at the right time[4]. 

The Talk  

Culture is communication and communication is culture[5].  There are several modes of communication from which a global leader can choose and determine is most effective.  If the global leader is very familiar with the cultural practices of the partner country it may be easier for them to decide what works and what does not. 

For the global leader who is experiencing global outreach to a specific country for the first time, further research and opportunities to understand the culture may be required; additionally, learning through trial and error may become the platform from which the global leaders will acquire which communication strategies are most effective. 

The most important thing is to ensure that the message spoken is equivalent to the message received.  As mentioned previously, people of other countries can misconstrue the language of Westerners.  Global leaders must be aware of how receptive others are to active (direct) or passive (indirect) speech. 

Sometimes the direct speech Westerners often have is taken as rude and disrespectful in, for example, Asian cultures.  Global leaders must talk the same talk of the people in the country in which they plan to expand; otherwise, organizational failure is imminent. 

All of this to say, global leaders should learn effective ways to communicate with remote agencies in countries that are different from that of the home country.  When leaders are presented with organizational goals that are used to build or expand the organization, it becomes a greater challenge when achieve those goals may require remote modes of communication. 

Whether written, spoken or non-verbal, types and modes of communication are influenced by the culture in which we communicate. Global leaders must recognize the appropriate global walk or processes needed to maintain effective global leadership.  Also, they must utilize different ways to communicate to ensure that their businesses and organizational processes are running smoothly.  In order for leaders to walk the global walk, they have to also talk the global talk! 

What are some other ways organizations can be successful as they cross global boundaries?

ABOUT THE GUEST BLOGGER

JaniceArmstrong_headshot_WEB 

 Dr. Janice A. Armstrong is a leadership consultant, lifestyle coach, and owner of LiHK Consulting, LLC, based in the Washington, D.C. area. She received her Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, with a focus in Leadership Coaching, from Regent University.  Her background in counseling psychology and leadership development fostered her love for leadership and lifestyle coaching. 

Dr. Armstrong provides a wealth of personal and professional development information that has been built over 18 years of training, professional, and organizational development experience. She has shared her knowledge and experiences in her book, “From the Street to the Executive Suite: Remixing Street Smarts and Life Lessons into Leadership Success.”

 

© 2013 LiHK Consulting, LLC. All rights reserved.

[1] Marquardt, M.J. & Berger, N.O. (2000). Global Leaders for the 21st century. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, p. 19

[2] Hall, E.T. (1959), p. 187

[3] Rosen, R., Digh, P, Singer, M., Phillips, C. () Global Literacies: Lessons on Business Leadership and National Cultures. New York: Simon & Schuster, p. 61.

[4] Zweifel, T.D. (2003). Culture Clash: Managing the Global High-Performance Team. New York: SelectBooks, p. 72-73.

[5] Hall, E.T. (1959). The Silent Language. New York: Random House, p. 186

Capping Mediocre Performance

/ nuleadership / 11 Comments

Yelling-boss

Today’s organizations carry a desire to promote the concepts of high performance teams.  Yet, few managers are willing to put in the work to make this happen. According to Merriam-Webster Online, mediocre is defined as ‘of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance.’ The concept of mediocre is synonymous with being average or ordinary.  What individual worth his salt wants to be called mediocre? 

Employers know how to deal with troublemakers in the organization or poor performers.  However, how does an organization get rid of a person who is average?  Who is willing only to do enough to keep his or her job?  Perhaps, mediocre performance is generated by the lack of trust among workers.  In 2010, a Right Management study of over 4,000 employees in the U.S. showed a problem with employee trust in in their organization.

Over 57% occasionally trusted their managers to make the right decisions.  In fact, three quarters of all employees surveys had a low trust factor toward their managers.  Why should they trust their supervisors?

Today’s American workers are one of the most effective workforces across the global when the gauge is high productivity.  These workers are often greeted with deflating wages and threats of outsourcing of their jobs or company layoffs. Lee Ozley, management advisor, has been watching mediocre performance over the years as a consultant for businesses.  He has been amazed at how senior managers allow mediocre performance to continue in their organizations: “When I then get to know some of the ‘mediocre’ performers, it is not too difficult to determine what they believe to be the perception of the boss regarding their performance.”

Why don’t bosses care enough about their colleagues to ‘tell it like it is?’ Even organizations with fairly sophisticated performance appraisal systems seem to have the same problem – people simply don’t know where they stand. How can an employee be expected to continuously improve if their boss won’t level with them?” Therefore, setting expectations and having a method to ensure compliance is critical.

Richard Daft, author of Management, argues the importance of management involvement in creating higher performance: “All managers have to pay attention to costs, but severe cost cutting to improve efficiency can sometimes hurt organizational effectiveness. The ultimate responsibility of managers is to achieve high performance….” 

However, some organizations fail to understand that people are not like other resources. People can think and make different choices. Companies attempted to put their evaluations of their performance on autopilot with little regard of the individual employees. 

Yet, Gareth Jones and Jennifer George, authors of Contemporary Management, argue that any performance appraisal should include meaningful feedback to employees:  “For the appraisal and feedback component of a human resource management system to encourage and motivate high performance, managers must provide their subordinates with feedback.”  However, employees are not fool with concerns by managers.  Organizations need to build an engaging corporate culture that stimulates outstanding achievement instead of cynical employees who have mediocre performance. 

Discuss the concept of mediocre employee performance in organizations.

 © 2013 by Daryl D. Green                                    

 

Opting Out: How to Increase Worker Satisfaction

/ nuleadership / 19 Comments

baby-boomers-finances-050212

Many managers are clueless.  Some bosses think because employees have a job despite the  financial crisis, employees should be happy.  When the pressures of globalizations are upon American businesses, companies need workers to achieve high performance.

In my book, Breaking Organizational Ties: How to Have a More Fulfilled Life in Your Current Job, I researched and tracked the growing discontentment of some employees about their job situation. In fact, U.S. employee satisfaction is at a 20 year low.

Most employees do not trust their senior leadership to guide the  organization with their employees in mind.  Furthermore, cost cutting of  professional training and education and the lack of vertical advancement in organizations are creating a growing number of unhappy workers. Given these organizational constraints, employees seek to opt out by giving the organization the least amount of performance in order to keep their jobs.

Since the economic downturn, some employees are dissatisfied  with professional growth and career advancements in their jobs.  Gareth Jones and Jennifer George, authors of Contemporary Management, note that managers need to be mindful how they make decisions that affect employees.

Downsizing and outsourcing are a way of life for most organizations.  However, many times low morale in these organizations is  attributed to how employees are treated in this process.  Jones and George further suggest that managers should show compassion and empathy for layoff victims, by providing  employees with as much advance notice as possible about the layoff, and giving  clear information about severance benefits.

After the layoff, they can  also assist layoff victims in their job search efforts. These are a few of the ways in which managers can humanely manage a layoff. Richard Daft, author of Management, explains the importance of motivating employees:  “One secret for success in organizations is motivated and engaging employees. Most people begin a new job with energy and enthusiasm, but employees can lose their drive if managers fail their role as motivators.”

Therefore, managers need to inspire followers to minimize the number of individuals who ‘opt out’ in organizations.  Employees play a critical role in determining if they will ‘opt out.’ Marsha Sinetar, author of Do What You Love, The Money Will Follow, notes that the lingering consequences of employees who only work to obtain a paycheck: “Most of us think about our jobs or our careers as a means to fulfill responsibilities to families and creditors, to gain more material comforts, and to achieve status and recognition. But we pay a high price for this kind of thinking.”

Yet, if organizations are to be successful, they can’t afford their workers to be ‘opting out’ and providing less than superior performance against the backdrop of global forces. 

Discuss how managers can inspire employees toward greater job satisfaction.

© 2013 by Daryl D. Green

 

Solving the Sustainability Puzzle

/ nuleadership / 8 Comments

sustainability-boy-world

Gridlock can often derail sturdy locomotives when all the leaders are driving it in different directions.  The Federal government is no exception.  Political in-fighting is the game of the day.  President Obama delivered his State of the Union Address this month which earned mixed reviews depending on their party affiliation. 

Yet, many politicians recognize that America’s massive financial debt isn’t sustainable.   The latest crisis involves sequestration which requires automatic cuts across the government, including defense and domestic programs based on a specific deadline.

 According to a recent George Mason University study, over 2.14 million American jobs would be lost if sequestration took place.  The original concept of sequestration was to create an artificial doomsday that would force both political parties to work together.  It didn’t work!

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky made a plea for deep spending cuts and congressional term limits:  “The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of the nation.” 

If the federal government, with its massive resources, is  unable to deal with the issues of sustainability, what hope do other smaller organizations have then?  “Instead of negotiating, party leaders were busy issuing ultimatums and casting blame,” noted Washington Post columnist Lori Montgomery.

With the ever increasing chaos and complicity of business operations to achieve a profit, the concept of sustainability becomes more than an Ivy League Business School buzz word.  The speed of change and the constant bombardment of market problems continue to haunt business executives who hope to survive another crisis situation.

Organizations that do not understand this necessity soon find themselves looking at the behinds of other organizations that are in front of them. In order to survive, today’s business leaders need to understand the market environment, recognize their strengths, pursue market opportunities, and obtain continuing profitability while taking a long-view perspective of their operations to achieve sustainability.

More and more organizations recognize that sustainability is more than keeping the environment clean.  Yet, the concept of sustainability is often difficult to define. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, sustainability is defined as “everything that we need for our survival and well-being depends, either directly or indirectly, on our natural environment.” 

Consequently, one person may view sustainability simply as the ability to use resources continuously without any long-term depletion.  Andres Edwards, author of The Sustainability Revolution, breakdowns sustainability in several  key components which are  ecology/environment, economy/employment, equity/equality, and education.

Some businesses executives quietly argue that profitability supercedes many other priorities such as the environment.  Edwards disagrees: “Creating a healthy environment, free of pollution and toxic waste, and simultaneously providing the basic for a dynamic economy that will endure for an extended period are viewed as complementary rather than conflicting endeavors.”

 However, are there many things that are possible to be sustained without proper planning for them?  In order for businesses to avoid these conflicts of interest between capitalism and the sustainability model, visionary leaders must communicate their expectations to all members of their organizations and throughout their supply chain. 

Discuss the concepts of sustainability as it relates to your profession.

© 2013 by Daryl D. Green