The Power of Inspiring Words

Posted on December 12, 2006 by Toby Lucich

I’m not a fan of the inspirational posters that hang on the walls of so many offices and companies these days. They are well intended, but too often feel like window-dressing – there to send a message but without conviction.

You are not here merely to make a living. You are here in order to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. -Woodrow Wilson.

I never gave Woodrow a second thought, but he (or his speech writer) set some lofty aspirations for existence.

  • Help the world live more amply. Add to the abundance.
  • Enlarge the vision. Challenge the bounds and help restake the boundary of what is known, what is achieved, and what is sought.
  • A finer spirit of hope and achievement. Optimism. Celebration of a job well done.

I think a well-lived professional life is as much about doing important work as helping those around you feel that their contributions are important too.

Posted in Accountability, Creativity, Inspiration | Leave a comment

Disrespect : Burnout :: Gasoline : Fire

Posted on December 11, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

While it doesn’t come as a shocker that disrespect in the work place is a leading cause for burnout, it does seem interesting that it may be the primary cause for burnout.

Usually, folks point to “over work,” “poor work life balance,” and “unrealistic expectations” as the keys to burnout. But the respect of the organization for the employee? Often an also ran.

Until now.

According to Lakshmi Ramarajan and Sigal G. Barsade of Wharton, lack of respect could be the primary contributor for burnout. To wit:

Employee perceptions of respect, in terms of how the organization treats its employees in general, and how employees treat each other, will be an important influence on employees’ work experience and feelings of burnout.

Right. I know. Not a shocker. But isn’t it nice to see it codified? Isn’t it nice to see that what you’ve been feeling has actually been validated?

I agree, so get to reading:

(Hat tips to LifeHacker and BlogHer)

Posted in Burnout, Career, Respect | Leave a comment

Miscommunicating on money versus meaning

Posted on December 8, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

This really did start out as a comment to John Moore’s Brand Autopsy entry entitled Is it Making Money or Making Meaning? But I just kept writing and writing and writing. So I thought I’d move it over here.

In the post, John argues that employees join a company to make meaning but stay with a company because of money.

And from that experience, I found that making meaning is more important when hiring employees and making money is more important when retaining employees.

I agree: employees join companies to make meaning. My perspective differs on the latter part of the statement, but in a very specific way.

(Now, bear in mind that John is arguing this stance from his perspective at Starbucks and Whole Foods. Not exactly your run of the mill companies as far as attention, concern, and respect for employees go.)

Starbucks attracted lots of candidates interested in working for a company they could believe in. That desire led many candidates to accept a lower salary in exchange for being happier on the job…. [O]nce these new Starbucks’ hires became weathered and tenured employees, the aspect of making meaning and being a part of a company they believed in became less important.

As always, thought-inspiring insight. But, as I said, I have a slightly different take on what might be occurring:

Money only becomes an issue after the employee has entrusted the company to continue delivering meaning.

And bear in mind, this can go either way. With Starbucks and Whole Foods, I’d say they’ve taken one path; I have taken another.

I say this because I’ve always believed in what my company was doing when I started a job, no matter how mundane. I’ve always seen meaning in what I choose to do. And (here’s the clincher) I’ve always ascribed my assumption of meaning to the company to uphold, regardless of whether the company has the ability to support that meaning or not.

In the Starbucks and Whole Foods examples, it is highly likely that the employees and organization share a similar view of meaning. It is highly likely that they are all working toward common, agreed-upon meaning. It is highly likely that they have actually communicated this to one another.

That’s why money becomes an issue. Because the discussion on meaning is moot. It’s all taken care of.

However, this is not the case with 99.9% of the rest of the organizations in the world. And that’s the problem.

You see, most other companies are dysfunctional (well, all companies are dysfunctional, so let’s say “more dysfunctional”). They don’t communicate. You assume the company is doing one thing. And the company assumes it is doing another. And you never really get together to talk it through. You just continue to assume that “everything will work out.”

And much like any relationship in this situation, dysfunction gives way to disillusionment.

So, I always become disillusioned when I realize that the company is not interested in making my meaning. They are not at all accepting of the meaning with which I had embodied them. That is not their pursuit. And, as such, their concept of their function and my concept of their function were at odds.

Because we never clearly communicated with each other in the first place. It was all based on assumption.

Once that disillusionment takes hold, no amount of money will correct it. Because I no longer trust the company. We are at odds. And money won’t fix it.

So at healthy communicative organizations, John, maybe that’s how it works. But with the majority of the dysfunctional business world, it’s a far cry from your experience.

And for that, I envy you.

But I thank you for providing a glimpse that it does exist.

Posted in Meaning, Money, Motivation | 3 Comments

Same board, different game

Posted on December 8, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

Having kids, I tend to play a lot of board games. A lot.

And not different board games, mind you. The same board game over and over and over and over and, well, you get the picture. Kids like repetition. I get it.

Add to that the lovely damp weather of the Pacific Northwest, and you can easily guess where a great deal of my time is spent.

But here’s the thing: there are time when–even for the kids–the board game becomes a bored game. And what happens then is very interesting indeed.

They begin to improvise. They take the same components and recombine them in different ways. They add new rules that govern the movement of the characters. They introduce new characters. They let some of the old characters go. They change management techniques to ensure favorable outcomes. They recombine and reassess and create entirely new offerings.

All with the same pieces. All with the same board. Kids do this. Kids.

Let’s take a classic, Chutes & Ladders, and some of the “modes” in which we play:

  • Traditional
  • Chutes up, ladders down
  • Start at the top
  • Start at the top, chutes up, ladders down
  • Using other toys as the game pieces

Now, that is not exhaustive, by any means. But I think you see where I’m going.

Thinking along those lines, why can’t we do this with work? Why can’t we use this concept as a management technique?

Why can’t we think creatively about how we apply the (seemingly) same-old same-old in new ways that not only bring a breath of fresh air to a stagnant environment but also introduce some new ways of getting the job done?

For example, did you know that if you play chutes-up-ladders-down, that you are assured of winning at a much earlier time? (Top row is no longer fraught with the peril of multiple chutes.)

Using that same old board that has been around forever, an entirely new path is created.

Interesting.

Posted in Creativity, Experience, Skill | 4 Comments

Job titles draw additional ire

Posted on December 7, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

Toby and I have had our recent rants on job titles and their ever increasing irrelevance. We’re a cranky lot. We like to criticize a great deal. And I’ll let you in on a little something. Keep this a secret, but… we may be a little picky. Shh. I’m only telling you because I like you.

But, see here’s the thing: we may be on to something with the whole job titles thing. We’re not the only ones who see it. And I only say this because the inimitable Lisa Haneberg has a brilliant post about Defining Job Fit Criteria that, although more eloquent than our attempts here at More than a living, was right in line with our gripes.

To wit:

How do I write this politely and with some level of political correctness? Oh, forget about it, I’ll just type what I am thinking – most job descriptions suck. They suck for a few reasons.

It’s well worth the read, so please head on over to Management Craft to partake. And, if you’re so inclined, drop back by More than a living to give us your opinion on job titles.

UPDATE (December 8, 2006): Stumbled upon another riff on the job title/job posting problem. This time it’s a brief, but insightful, missive from Marketing Headhunter entitled Job Descriptions are Marketing Documents.

Posted in Corporate Culture, Employment, Tips, Wrong | 2 Comments

Purpose

Posted on December 6, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

Does this capture it?

I believe that Purpose—not money, not status—is what people most want from work. Make no mistake: they want compensation; some want an ego-affirming title. Even more, though, they want their lives to mean something, they want their lives to have a reason.

While a tad heavy handed at times, Nikos Mourkogiannis’ purpose manifesto was enough to make me want to buy his book.

Posted in Career, Inspiration, Purpose | Leave a comment

Graphing despair, fulfillment, success, and failure

Posted on December 6, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

As Kathy Sierra has taught me time and time again, a solid visual can really drive home your point.

I’m sorry? A picture is worth a thousand words? Hmm. That sounds like an interesting quote. You should consider maybe shopping that one around. Me? I’ll stick with the claim that Kathy taught me about visuals and communicating your concept.

I’m sorry, where was I? Ah yes.

A hat tip to 37 signals for pointing to this little gem: Success and Fulfillment. In this installment, Human Being Curious takes us through the all-too-familiar quadrant. Only this time, it’s a bit more fresh than the latest mumbo-jumbo technology quadrant, because it’s describing the balance of success and fulfillment.

Ah ha. I knew that would get your attention. Success and fulfillment? Oh my. The holy grail.

How does one lead a truly great life? What is the formula? I’ve spent quite a bit of time thinking about and researching this, starting many years ago when I noticed that people kept telling me that I was one of those people that was always smiling, always in a good mood, and always had really great and interesting things going on in my life. I was always being asked why that was so, and frankly I didn’t have an answer. I thought that if I wanted to stay this way, I should probably find out why I was this way now so I could continue consciously behaving the same way in the future.

And while I’m still kinda stuck on “failure” being the opposite of “success” (I disagree; I think it’s more like stasis versus growth), I think it’s well worth your time spending some time considering this little ditty.

He even puts in a little plug for spending even more time at More than a living:

If you’re surrounding yourself with people that you believe are “better”, people that you aspire to be, it’s more likely that you will become more like them.

Remember, we believe in you.

Posted in Fulfillment, Performance, Success, Value | Leave a comment

How do You Add Up?

Posted on December 6, 2006 by Toby Lucich

Reading and commenting on Rick’s run on cross-functional collaboration got me thinking, what the heck would be on my professional card if biz people had baseball cards?

My rookie card was near worthless. I was a moderately interested student at State U (read: didn’t flunk out my freshman year, and got my grades up by senior year), and didn’t have high asperations right out of the gates. I took a Job-job that provided a paycheck and company car, and was off and running.

But my first few years were poorly measured efforts. I was a negotiating, customer service fool working in insurance adjusting. I worked my estimation and statement-taking skills to the bone, was extra nice to VIP clients, and did my best to make the company and sales agents look good.

But nothing got measured. Management didn’t track (annual reviews didn’t consult anyone), and I didn’t do a very good job either. My card would have had a young, happy picture on front and a long list of “tbd” metrics on the back. (Nice effort right out of the gates, right?)

I’ve since gotten lucky, made some luck, and wised up about measuring performance even when the company doesn’t (imagine, taking ownership for your own outcomes; I know how bizarre this is, because it still seems strange at times to me). What has become really clear to me is that, regardless of the role you are playing, you need to know what the metrics of performance will be. Not the tasks on the job description, but how I will know if I’m really deliverying what my manager had hoped I would bring to the table.

I’m hoping that you are thinking about not the first job, but the next job you gain access to by hiring into the company. And the next.

  • How are you going to tell your success story in this initial role?
  • How will you gain the exposure and track record you need for your next big jump?
  • How do you evidence that you are more valuable than your years of experience and education would suggest?

I’m still working on it, but wonder – what would I like to see on my baseball card? What would make managers in my business eager to swap me next season, or trade two-for-one? Am I doing what it takes to land an A-Rod contract?

Posted in Branding, Career, Measure, Performance | 1 Comment

Include the people who aren't normally included

Posted on December 6, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

As usual, Seth Godin managed to get my brain percolating with his homage to Lenny Levine, the “greatest kindergarten teacher ever,” entitled “You can’t say you can’t play.” Genius, Lenny. Catchy and insightful. Simple and poignant.

Lenny’s concept “You can’t say you can’t play” was a guideline to ensure that everyone got to participate, that everyone got a chance.

And it got me to thinking.

One of our recurring undercurrents here at More than a living is complaining. Oh and complaining about job titles, specifically. And this little concept from Lenny via Seth got me all welled up to beat that horse again.

I can’t think of any place that provides a more stringent antithesis to Lenny’s “You can’t say you can’t play” concept than the modern workplace. Nowhere.

When was the last time you asked someone outside of your department for their opinion? When was the last time you sat in on a meeting in another department?

“I’ve got enough to do. Why would I do that? They don’t even know what I do.”

Exactly.

You see, here’s the thing: I didn’t spend my entire life hoping and dreaming that I would become the employee I am today. No one sits around gathering player cards and trading stats on the middle management heroes they hope to emulate. I didn’t have a brilliant epiphany one morning and decide that marketing was my calling.

It just sort of happened.

And I’m pretty sure that Toby didn’t intentionally begin a quest to become a manager in finance. Pretty sure. I mean, half the time I’m not listening to him, but I swear that I would have remembered that.

Now, some folks do have that vision. And bully for them. I laud their stick-to-it-ive-ness. Just as I laud my ability to work nonsense phrases like stick-to-it-ive-ness into my posts.

But that’s not my point. My point is that the majority of us had no ulterior motive in getting where we are today. We just got there.

But today’s corporate world would have you believe something completely different. The corporate world would have you believe that we are genetically disposed to our calling. Quite entirely different species, peacefully coexisting on the corporate savanna and milling about the common Starbucks watering holes. Wary but intermingled. And largely incapable of crossing the boundary or even understanding the unique mixture of clicks and whistles this other species uses to communicate with its kind.

The corporate world exacerbates that division. Shoving folks into silos. Forming rudimentary cliques. Stay with your own. Each of us has a similar context for discussion. Our path of growth and education has made us completely different from those folks over there. Oh sure, it’s okay to talk to Bob because he’s in your department, but don’t–under any circumstances–move beyond a social context with the folks outside of your department.

They might actually give you an opinion. And it might actually force you to think.

So the next time you’re wrestling with a concept, why not tap Toby over in Finance or Jill over in Engineering or Billy over in Marketing. Why not get their opinion? Because, had things been different, they might have very well been in your shoes, struggling with the exact same concept. And wouldn’t you have liked to help them?

Sure, sure. You may get completely inane crap. Who cares? I’m willing to bet that oh-so-important thing you’re currently pursuing is completely inane crap to someone. (And I’m positive that’s the case for some of the stuff I’m pursuing.)

Danger. That different perspective may spark a thought or concept that really solves the problem.

Like someone in marketing listening to a kindergarten teacher.

Posted in Career, Corporate Culture, Growth | 2 Comments

Unlimited vacation for everyone

Posted on December 5, 2006 by Rick Turoczy

When I first headed out on my own, one of the common responses I would get to my incessant bragging was “Wow. Getting to work on your own schedule. That’s like having unlimited vacation.”

Yes, that’s true. It is like having unlimited vacation. But if I don’t get my work done, I don’t get paid.

Which got me to thinking…

Why should vacation at any job be a benefit? Shouldn’t we all have unlimited vacation, no matter where we work?

I can feel your eyebrow raising. Lower the eyebrow for a second. And let’s step back a moment.

First, let be completely open: I’m not much of a vacation guy. I like the vacations when I’m on them. I’m just not so good at taking the vacation. I tend to blame this on my being the descendant of a long genealogy of coal miners.

That said, I’ve always been impressed with my close acquaintances who take full advantage of vacation. Every last minute. I don’t hold it against them that I’m not taking mine. I’m impressed that they can figure out how to do it. Not me. I don’t do so well.

But even those folks who take every last minute could probably use some more. And maybe they would be even better workers if they got some more.

You see, here’s the thing: Vacation is not a benefit.

Everyone needs vacations or they will go insane. This was established not-so-long ago, coming on the heels of the 5-day work week and the 8-hour day. All recent constructs.

But, today, vacation is something that has been co-opted by the business as a means of controlling its employees. And it has been spun into a promotional vehicle for attracting talent.

But don’t fool yourself. Vacation is a control established by the business.

Vacation is no more a benefit than crack is a medicine. Vacation is a construct that allows the business to hire sub-par employees who may try to take advantage of the company should they not be controlled by a requirement to be at the company for a certain amount of time. It also allows the company to pay less for a given position, because of the existence of said vacation benefit.

(The workday is a similar co-opted construct, but I digress.)

“But I get more than vacation. I get flex time. My business gives me 4 weeks of flex time per year. So there!”

Blah blah blah. No, brainwashee, that is not what you get. What you get is your company obligating you to work for them 48 weeks out of the year. It’s not about how much time you get. It’s about how much time they require you to work to give them the effort that equates to your yearly take-home.

Ah, effort. Hold that thought while I address another whine.

“But with unlimited vacation, Billy will just slack off and take off for three-weeks at a time!”

Will he? Then maybe Billy shouldn’t be working for your company. Maybe it’s time for Billy to go. Maybe we’ve just given Billy enough rope with which to hang himself. Billy is now accountable. Not for spending his vacation days, but for delivering a result.

Better yet, maybe you should be asking the question about the work Billy is completing. If Billy is able to do his job–his entire job, his full-time job–at part-time, maybe it’s not a full-time job. Maybe Billy needs more challenges. Maybe something is rotten in Denmark.

Again, effort. The true gauge should be the following somewhat rudely contrived syllogism:

  1. A certain result has a certain amount of value to the business.
  2. Billy is capable of achieving said result.
  3. Billy is worth a certain amount of value to the business.

That’s it.

So how do you get there?

  1. Establish a goal, a result.
  2. Place a value on the achievement of that goal.
  3. Find an employee who wants to achieve that goal for that value.

Seems pretty straightforward. But it’s not. It’s hard.

Whoa, Nelly. Let me see if I can wend my way back along the tangential path I’ve taken to get back to my point.

Vacation is a control. Taking the control out of the company’s hands and putting it in the employee’s hands results in a drastic change of perspective. It’s no longer, “Have I used all of my vacation?” Instead, it becomes, “Am I getting my work done to a level that satisfies both me and the company?”

And that is a far more interesting, challenging, and passionate question.

Come work for my company, and I’ll give you unlimited vacation. Or just disagree with me. Either way.

Posted in Accountability, Career, Corporate Culture, Value | 1 Comment