Author Archives: Tom Foster

About Tom Foster

Tom Foster spends most of his time talking with managers and business owners. The conversations are about business lives and personal lives, goals, objectives and measuring performance. In short, transforming groups of people into teams working together. Sometimes we make great strides understanding this management stuff, other times it’s measured in very short inches. But in all of this conversation, there are things that we learn. This blog is that part of the conversation I can share. Often, the names are changed to protect the guilty, but this is real life inside of real companies.

How to Work Harder Without Working Longer

2 Replies

Emily’s white board had been in place for three days when I got the call. The tone in her voice was quite cheery.

“My team is absolutely amazing,” she reported. “The first day was tough because production was pretty much the same as before. The daily target was 175 units and we only managed to produce 86. I thought the team would implode, but when I got to work the next day, they were all there early and the line was already running. Instead of shutting down the line for break, they took breaks one at a time to keep things moving. We still only got 110 units, but they saw the improvement. Yesterday, they changed a couple of more things and we produced 140 units.

“What’s funny,” she continued. “All I have done, as a manager, is post the target number on the board in the morning and make comments about their improvement. All the changes, they have done on their own. It’s like everything has shifted. This is no longer my problem. They are working to fix it like it is their problem.”

“And, what about your morale problem?” I asked.

Emily’s face curled into a smile, “Oh, I don’t think the problem was morale.”

Tasks Only You Can Do

Leave a reply

“With those two purposes for delegation, time management and people development, where is the leverage, for the manager?” I asked.

It’s a lizard eye question, destined to create silence in the room. The answer to that question requires a series of more specific questions.

“If your purpose for delegation is time management and you delegate a task that saves you one hour, how much time have you saved?”

“One hour,” someone shouted out. “As long as you didn’t have to explain it. But if it took ten minutes to explain, you only saved 50 minutes.”

“You must have been a math major,” I replied. “So, the relative leverage for delegation, if your purpose is time management is 1/1, as long as you don’t have to explain much.” I stopped to survey the room. Heads were nodding in agreement.

“And if your purpose for delegation is people development and you delegate a task that saves you one hour every week, in a years’ time, how much time did you save?”

“Fifty two hours,” shouted the math major.

“And so, if it took an entire hour to explain this one task, that now saves you 52 hours over one year, what is your leverage?”

The math major was still on his game. “52/1,” he announced. “And if this delegated task saved you one hour a day, your leverage for the year would be 260/1.”

“Now we are talking leverage. If your purpose for delegation is time management, your leverage is likely closer to 1/1, but if your purpose for delegation is people development, your leverage is huge. When I work with CEOs, I am always looking for leverage, where they work for an hour and gain 500 or 1000 hours of productivity. The only way to gain that kind of leverage is through developing team members to assume responsibility for tasks and roles that you think only you can do.”

Two Purposes for Delegation, One More Powerful

1 Reply

“Be selfish. Don’t think about anyone else. If you could delegate more effectively, what would be the major benefit, to you, as a manager?” I asked.

The class was quick. We charted their responses on the board. I drew a careful red line across the page and asked the second question.

“And for your team member, what would be the major benefit for your team member if you were able to delegate more effectively?”

Again, the class responded and we filled the rest of the page thinking about the team member. I stood back. The top was all about the manager, the bottom was all about the team member. And the themes were distinctly different.

“What is the major theme when you think about yourself?” I continued.

“Time,” the class replied. They had twenty responses, but they were all connected to time.

“Indeed, delegation is your most powerful time management tool.” I stopped and surveyed the faces as I pointed to the bottom of the chart. “And what is the theme, here? When you focus on the team member, is this about time?”

Heads were shaking, eyes squinting, some sat back. “It all has to do with learning, self-confidence, growth and recognition,” they finally replied.

“Indeed, as a manager, you think about delegation as a time management tool. In fact, delegation is your most powerful people development tool.“

Negative Behaviors

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
What is an extreme negative temperament?

Response:
We all have the ability to irritate others on occasion. An extreme negative temperament would be connected to behavior that is over the top, sustained and sticks out like a sore thumb.

It is a characteristic of the fourth factor I look for in candidate selection for a role.

  1. Capability
  2. Skill (Technical Knowledge and Practiced Performance)
  3. Interest, Passion, Value for the Work
  4. Reasonable Behavior

As a part of Reasonable Behavior, I look for both positive habits (repeated behaviors that contribute to effectiveness) and the absence of an extreme negative temperament.

I see myself as pioneering, competitive, assertive and confident. However, under moderate pressure, people have described me as demanding, egotistical and aggressive. Under extreme pressure, I might be seen as abrasive, arbitrary and controlling. If I were, indeed, abrasive, arbitrary and controlling, all the time, to everyone, that would likely have an impact on my effectiveness in most roles where I had to work with others.

Most of us contain bits and pieces of traits like this and under pressure or stress, those traits tend to emerge. As we feel this pressure and become aware of our response, we can, intentionally, temper those behaviors, moving away from behaviors that decrease our effectiveness and moving toward behaviors that increase our effectiveness.

Some, few people, however, move toward those extreme negative behaviors faster, stay there longer and may not be aware of the impact of those behaviors on their effectiveness. This behavior (the underlying temperament) is typically not coachable, and working with a person like this is usually outside the bounds of prudent managerial time. As managers, we are NOT psychotherapists. Our role is to assist the organization to accomplish goals and tasks.

As managers, we deal with people problems all the time. As managers, it is our role to support our teams and coach our team members to be more effective in the work that we do together. When behaviors escalate beyond that (and you will know by the churning in your stomach) it’s time to seek assistance and counsel from your own manager. That’s what they are there for, to bring value to your decision making and problem solving.

Coachable Factors That Impact Effectiveness

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
If we cannot change a person’s natural capability, except to watch it grow through their lifetime, what can a manager do to impact a person’s effectiveness in a role?

Response:
Tons. It is a managers responsibility to bring value to a team member’s problem solving and decision making, and there are several factors that contribute to effectiveness.

The most obvious is skills training. I may have the capability to perform effectively in a role, but I may lack the skill (technical knowledge and practiced performance). It is incumbent on the manager to observe the team member, ask questions, test performance and determine if skills training could contribute to effectiveness.

I may have the capability to perform in a role and I may have mastery of the necessary skills, yet I may still underperform in a role that I am not interested in. It is incumbent on the manager to observe the team member, ask questions and test performance to determine what work I am interested in. Another word for interest is passion. So, what work am I interested in or passionate about? It is that work, on which, I place a high value. If I value the work, there is likelihood that I will be interested, but if I do not value the work, there is likelihood that I will not be interested. This has a huge impact on effectiveness and eludes most managers.

Reasonable behavior. I see two sides to this, there is a positive side and a dark side. Elliott Jaques described this as “minus T.” The “T” stands for temperament. Now, there are many psychometric assessments out there that attempt to classify behaviors connected to temperament. While there is some curiosity around these assessments, Elliott found no positive correlation of any “reasonable temperament” to success in a role. Yet, if there are behaviors connected to an extreme negative temperament, there could be significant impact on effectiveness in a role. I find these situations typically beyond managerial coaching. By the way, we do not need a psychometric assessment to find this out. Everyone already knows it, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

But there is a positive side to reasonable behavior, called habits. I find these are coachable. I may have the capability, the skills and knowledge, place a high value on the work and yet may engage in habits that are counterproductive to effectiveness. Or “not” engage in habits that contribute to effectiveness.

As a manager, I may be more effective if I arrive in the morning fully awake to get my teams cranked up for the day’s production. Yet, if I am in the habit of staying up late at night, that may have an impact on my effectiveness. And yes, habits are habits, but they can be changed.

So, we cannot change a team member’s natural capability (it is what it is), but, as managers, as coaches, we can have a profound impact on effectiveness.

Not a Matter of Counting Outputs

2 Replies

Question:
You say that American management has just about weaned managerial judgment out of the picture. I think I know what you mean. Sometime, when I look at positive results of the team’s efforts, they were just blind dumb luck. And other times, we did fifty things right and barely achieved a marginal standard. So, tell me, with all this focus on Results, how would we measure effectiveness.

Response:
Effectiveness is a matter of judgment. Effectiveness is a matter of managerial judgment. How well does Rudy perform in the achievement of the desired goal? Given all the ins and outs, the difficulties faced, the unanticipated, unplanned monkey wrenches that get in the way, how well does Rudy perform?

This is a matter of managerial judgment.

Given that:
1. Any task (or role) requires a certain capability.
2. The person assigned has the appropriate capability.

The judgment is whether the person is committing their full capability to the task (or role).

This is NOT a “matter of counting outputs, super credits for super outputs, or penalties for lateness or sub-standard quality.” * This is about bringing their full capability to the completion of the task.

It is the job of the manager to observe and account for all the surrounding circumstances and make this most important judgment. And it is precisely this judgment that most managers avoid.

*Elliott Jaques, Requisite Organization, 1989.

How Big is the Role

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
I’ve been using your interview guidelines for determining Time Span for some time. I’ve asked candidates, “Tell me a time when..” Often, the candidate picks a project and the time span is very short. I’ve even probed deeper, asking for a particularly challenging project and still I sometimes can’t get anything more than a few weeks. So I would conclude this person’s role is operating in a relatively short time span. But I worry that the candidate is picking a project that just happened to be short but has accomplished more. He or she just isn’t articulating it.

Response:
In my workshop, I share some interview guidelines, and I suggest that managers practice those questions on their own team members (the groundwork for your question). I caution managers not to be surprised at the mis-match between the managers definition of the role and the team members perception of the role. This mis-match in expectations is the source for a great deal of management angst.

Indeed, most team members in Stratum I, II and III roles rarely have conversations with their managers about the real depth and breadth of their role. They never discuss how “big” those roles are. Time Span is helpful, because we can calibrate the complexity of the task at hand and avoid the mis-match in perceptions.

For example, we can talk about the temperature, which I experience as warm and you experience as cold, based on our internal body thermostats. I say “warm” and you say “cold.” We are both right, according to our personal experience, but it will be difficult to come to an agreement. However, if we look at the thermometer on the wall, we can both agree that it is 72 degrees.

Time Span helps us calibrate expectations between a team member and a manager. Time Span helps us understand the “by when” of any goal, any task assignment. Time Span is the thermometer on the wall.

You, as a manager, with an understanding of Time Span see the team member’s role in a different way. Without those discussions, I am never surprised that the team member grossly underestimates what is really required for success in their role.

So, you may think my interview guidelines give you insight into a team member’s Applied Capability, but it is really the beginning of a rich conversation about expectations.

I Cannot Interview for Attitude

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
So, how do you interview for someone with the capability to think into the future?

Response:
Capability is like attitude. I cannot interview for attitude and I cannot interview for capability. I can only interview for behaviors connected to attitude and capability.

First, is the capability, to think into the future, a requirement for the role? Most supervisory and managerial roles require this capability, so this is a fair area for exploration.

My bias is to ask ONLY questions about the past. I do not want the candidate to speculate or make stuff up. No hypotheticals or theories. I have enough trouble deciphering real facts from the past.

  • Tell me about a time when (my favorite opening question), you worked on a project that took some time to complete, one that required several steps with a number of moving parts?
  • How long did the project take?
  • What was the purpose of the project? The goal for the project?
  • How many people were involved?
  • Step me through the planning process?
  • Was the plan written or just in your head?
  • How was the plan shared with the project team?
  • What was your role in preparing the plan?
  • As the plan was executed, what factors pushed the plan off course?
  • Tell me how the plan accounted for factors that pushed the plan off course?
  • How did the project team respond to changes in the plan?
  • How were decisions made in response to changes in the plan?
  • How did those changes impact the budget for the plan?
  • How did those changes impact the schedule for the plan?
  • How did those changes impact the overall results of the plan?

The responses to these questions will give the interviewer insight into behaviors connected with capability to think into the future, not just think, but execute into the future? These responses are fact-based and do not require interpretation, yet provide for evidence, which can be verified in a cooperative reference check.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. All I have to do, as an interviewer, is to find out how the candidate behaved in the past. There is great likelihood the candidate will behave the same way when they come to work for you.

Stop Playing Amateur Psychologist

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

For the past week, it’s been all about Hiring Talent. Watch for our new online program coming in March. Hiring Talent.

Question:
So how do you ask a question where you want to know if this person has drive? ambition? can focus on a long-term goal? Usually, that question, (Where do you see yourself in five years?) shows me, depending on how quickly they answer it, if this has been something they have thought about. If they hesitate, then I know they are making up the answer. If they rattle something off, I DO NOT CARE WHAT IT WAS, simply that they think like that and that was the purpose of the question for me. Do I still drop the question? Or can you give me a question that will assist me in knowing if they think on a long-term basis?

Response:
Whoa, pardner. You have packed a ton of questions all in the same place. So let me take them completely out of order.

“If they hesitate, then I know they are making up the answer.” STOP. You are making an interpretation. STOP interpreting. You didn’t go to school for it, you don’t have a degree in it, you are not certified to interpret. Don’t play amateur psychologist. You suck at it.

“If they rattle something off, I DO NOT CARE WHAT IT WAS, simply that they think like that.” WHAT? You are making an interpretation, again. I could, as easily, assume this person is a good bullshit artist, easily talks off the top of their head, a real empty suit. Wait, I am making an interpretation. STOP.

Let’s go back to the characteristics you are looking for. Drive, ambition, ability to focus on a long-term goal. And let’s make the assumption that these are game breakers.

I cannot interview for Drive. It is something inside a person that I cannot interview for. I can only interview for behavior. So all I have to do is ask myself the question. How does a person with Drive, behave? If I can make a short list of behaviors associated with Drive, now I can make some headway. All I have to do is interview for those behaviors.

  • Takes on a challenging project, that no one else would take.
  • Pushes a project forward in spite of adversity.
  • Takes action, self-initiates action without being told. Executes appropriately without supervision.

You see, I can interview for those behaviors. I am looking for cold, hard evidence. Evidence that would stand up under a reference check, verifiable. And most importantly, I don’t have to interpret the response.

Better Questions to Ask

2 Replies

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
You think the question is idiotic. But I find it useful. “Where do you want to be in five years?” might tell me how far the person thinks into the future. It might give me an idea about their Time Span. I can find out about their long range planning.

Response:
Idiotic still. In the interview, I am looking for specific data points. Let’s look at the three you described AND let’s also stipulate they are important, necessary in the role.

  • How far does the candidate think into the future
  • What is the Time Span capability of the candidate?
  • What are the long range planning skills of the candidate?

If these are the data points, what are the best questions I can ask to help me make a hiring decision.

Now, I’m not a psychologist, so I am not going to ask ANY question that requires me to make an interpretation. I will only ask direct questions that give me verifiable facts. And there is only one time frame that can give me those facts, and that is the past.

  • Tell me about a time when, you had to plan a large project?
  • Was this the largest, longest project you ever worked on?
  • How long was the project?
  • Tell me about the planning process you used on this project?
  • Was this a written plan, or did you keep it in your head?
  • How did you communicate the plan to the team members?
  • How did you involve customers and vendors into the design of the plan
  • What went wrong with the plan?
  • What corrective action did you take to get the plan back on track?

These are much better questions, which get me REAL facts, verifiable facts that I don’t have to interpret. You see, I am not very good at all this psychology stuff, but if I play to my strengths, as a manager, I can make a better hiring decision.