Category Archives: Teams

Obesity

1 Reply

“Yes, luck would be easier to blame things on,” I nodded. “Luck is something outside of our control. It is popular, because it allows us to be off the hook on accountability.”

Carson chimed in. “Good luck or bad luck is a common scapegoat. Luck doesn’t require us to understand what happens when things go well, more specifically, what we did in sequence when things go well, things we might repeat. It was just luck. Luck allows my team to shrug their shoulders when things go poorly. It was just luck. It allows the team to exist as a victim, without agency that might impact the outcome one way or another.”

“And, being a victim creates a cottage industry of people, consultants, special programs to manicure external circumstances to suit the victim mental state,” I said. “We used to describe the role of a parent, and you can think the role of a manager in a similar capacity, was to prepare the child for the path of life. We now see parents, consultants, special programs preparing the path of life for the child, who now has no accountability.”

“Like lung cancer is no longer the fault of the smoker. Or obesity is no longer the fault of the overeater, or more directly, the grocery shopper. It is a matter of corporate greed and the solution is a GLP-1 drug,” Carson mused.

“So, how do we improve the situation, prevent the death spiral of victimhood?” I asked. “How do we prepare the child for the path of life. How do we prepare our team members for the path of their employment?”

Mastery and Practice

Leave a reply

“And, how does the rest of your team see Carl?” I asked.

Carson smiled. “I get it. You are right. The rest of the team sees him as a brown noser. They laugh behind his back. Maybe secretly jealous.”

“Jealous of what,” I prodded.

“Carl gets some preferential treatment. If we can only send one person to training, we pick Carl, because we know Carl will come back and share what he learned.”

“Does the team see Carl as successful?” I wanted to know.

“Yes, they do, but they think it was all about luck. Sometimes, I have to step in and mitigate some of the taunting.”

“So, having someone competent, inquisitive and curious on the team can create a problem for you?”

“Yes,” Carson nodded. “As long as people see success as luck, it can be made fun of. As the manager, I have to be vigilant and communicate success as a mastery and practice of fundamentals, enthusiasm and support of the team.”

“Of course, it doesn’t hurt to be a little lucky.”

If It’s Not Luck

1 Reply

“When you recruit a new person onto your team, what are you looking for?” I asked.

“I think we have dispensed with luck as a criteria,” Carson replied.

I smiled. “Yes, we can dispense with luck. What are you looking for in a new team member? In fact, let’s take a look at your current team. If you had to hold someone up as a model, what would I see in that person?”

Carson nodded. “Carl. It would be Carl.”

“And, what would I see in Carl?”

“Easy. Carl shows up a half-hour early, stays a half hour late, every day. In every training session, he always has his hand up asking questions. When he makes a mistake, he always owns up to it, then fixes it. I would like everybody to be like Carl.”

“So, here are four questions.

  • Do you trust him to make good decisions at his level of work?
  • Does he practice the skills required in his role, every day?
  • Do you observe commitment to the practice required in his role?
  • Does he meet the required behaviors in the work he does, for safety, for cooperation?

“It would be easier, if it was all about luck,” Carson said.

And, at the Bottom?

Leave a reply

“It still looks like a communication problem,” Nolan insisted. “They are in a meeting, they are talking. Yes, there is a checklist. That is what they are communicating about.”

“I will agree, there is communication, but that is not the problem. The problem is that there are no dumpsters on the job site to haul away the debris and your project gets delayed by a day.”

“But, they are talking about a checklist, it’s communication,” he continued to push back.

“Yes, they are talking about the items on the checklist, but I helped design that checklist,” I nodded. “What is at the bottom of the checklist?”

Nolan was trying to imagine the checklist and what checklist item was last on the list.

“Below the items on the list,” I directed.

It suddenly became clear. “You are right,” Nolan admitted. “At the bottom is a signature line for both the estimator and the project manager to sign. It’s not just a checklist, it’s a commitment list.”

“Not a communication problem,” I said. “It’s an accountability and authority issue.”

Not-So-Intelligent

Leave a reply

“That makes sense,” Luke said. “It was a little outside our normal behavior, giving nurses the authority to question a doctor about hand washing.”

“That’s the problem with normal,” I replied. “Normal is just repeated behavior regardless of the outcome. It’s the desired outcome we have to pay attention to, not what is normal.”

“I agree,” Luke nodded. “Likely, we would never make that decision without looking at mortality rates. It was only when we asked the nurses, that things became clear.”

“When you examine systems, you have to figure out how that system emerged. Was it designed to produce an outcome, or did it arrive out of repeated behaviors, ingrained as habits, without regard for the outcome?” I stopped. “A not-so-intelligent system makes even competent people (surgeons and nurses) look dumb. Eventually, competent people will overcome a not-so-intelligent system, if you give them permission, better yet, ask them.”

Is It the People or the System?

Leave a reply

“You are saying,” Luke started, “that if I see friction in the system, I should look at the system, rather than trying to fix the people?”

I nodded affirmative. “You can have intelligently designed systems, if you create them. But, most systems emerge as a set of outcomes created by random behavior. Worse. Those random behaviors get repeated and become the norm.”

“But, we have standards,” Luke protested. “This is a hospital. We have to inspect and comply with those standards.

“Tell me,” I prodded. “A few years back, you made a change at your hospital. You had a not-so-intelligent system in your operating theatre that created a problem. Mortality rates in your surgical area were statistically above the norm. Even your doctors scratched their heads trying to figure this out. So, you asked your nursing staff what could be the problem. They recommended that you change your system, to make it more intelligent.”

“I remember,” Luke nodded. “We had to change our system of authority. Often, our surgeons were not washing their hands sufficiently prior to surgery. Of course, in the hospital, the surgeon has the authority for most all decisions. We changed our system to give the nursing staff the authority to question a surgeon related to hand-washing. We brought all the nurses and all the surgeons in the same room to discuss and create this new authority for nurses.”

“What happened?” I asked, already knowing the answer.

“Mortality statistically came back in line within seven days,” Luke replied.

I nodded. “You didn’t change the people, you changed the system.”

The Friction Inside

Leave a reply

“Two people, working together, are likely very nice individuals apart from each other,” I continued. “As the manager, when you put those two people together, you place them in a system. Most often, that system is not defined and dysfunction emerges.”

“I always hope they can figure it out, the working together part,” Luke nodded. “And, most of the time, these teams get along, but there are always things that create friction.”

“As the manager, you notice these things,” I said.

“In an instant,” Luke agreed. “But even when I point things out, and get nodding agreement from everyone, the instant I leave, they go back to the friction-way of doing things.”

“It’s often a matter of telling, or rather not-telling,” I replied. “You tell, you talk, and they pretend to listen. Your team has difficulty making sense of the friction, until they discover it for themselves. Any parent, faced with the same dilemma usually tries these two things with the same result. They speak louder and with more frequency – if I told you once, I’ve told you a thousand times.”

Luke nodded. He had two children, he was familiar with the parental response of louder and more often.

“There are two things we have to define,” I smiled. “In this working relationship, who is accountable for what? And, in this working relationship, who has the authority to make what decisions? Then stand back and simply ask questions.”

“Questions?” Luke looked at me sideways.

“Questions. The best managers are not those who tell people what to do. The best managers are those who ask the best questions, to help the team make sense of the friction, to help them discover it for themselves.”

The Group I am With

Leave a reply

“And, it’s more complicated than that,” Luke explained.

“You’ve been doing some thinking about this?” I said.

“We have to define the working relationships between people, specifically related to accountability and authority, but people play roles,” he continued. “Some people play more than one role. The role both enables and constrains the person. It defines what they have the authority to do and what not to do. So, when I am working with my team, I have to pay attention not only to the working relationship, but also the role. People are different people depending on who they are with. And, sometimes those people are not physically present. If you want to understand why someone is doing something in particular, you may have to figure out which role and which group they have in their head.”

People System

Leave a reply

I nodded. “So, shifting things around inside your system requires that you be alert to the immediate proximity, but also for unintended consequences in a remote part of the system.”

Luke agreed. “It is easy to see when it is a defined step in the system. We can always move things around. But, I saw something else.”

“Pray tell?” I said.

“We have workflow systems,” he started. “In our workflow we can identify discreet steps that are contained. A step starts here, a step ends there. This step impacts that step and impacts another step way over here. But there is another, more complicated system I have to pay attention to. My people system puts players in proximity that have to work together. Working relationships are like steps in a system. If I change a person out, I change the working relationship. A new relationship emerges that starts from scratch and has to be built around these two questions. In this working relationship, what is the accountability for one person to the other person? And, in this working relationship, who has the authority to make what decisions? So, steps in a workflow are easy. People in a workflow, not so much.”

Earning Trust

1 Reply

“I want to empower my team members,” Reese explained. “I know you prefer I use the word authority instead of empower, but I can’t give my team the authority to make decisions. I am the one with the authority.”

“And, if that is the way you think, then you will be the same manager with same underperforming team until you grow old and gray,” I nodded.

“But, I don’t trust my team to make the right decision in the crunch of a problem,” Reese protested. “How do I give my team the authority to make the wrong decision when the stakes are so high?”

“Lower the stakes,” I said. “Do not empower someone by giving them a promotion. The risks may be too high, and you, as the manager have to manage the risk. Do not give them a promotion, give them a project, and manage the risk in the project. If you give someone a promotion and they fail, you have a chocolate mess on your hands. If you give someone a project and they fail, you just have a failed project, and you manage the risk in the project.”

Reese was quiet. “And, if they successfully complete a series of projects, my trust will go up. If there is a promotion, it will be an earned promotion.”