The Perfect Team

There are many articles on Millennials in the workforce, with some comparing them to Baby Boomers.  To be fair, I read these articles as generalization. People must be viewed for their individual merits, experience, education, most of all, skill sets and company/position fit.

So, what does this have to do with teams? It might be obvious - diversity. Currently, I’m using my decades of project management experience, including managing project managers, from multiple industries, to online banking software. I am teamed with a Millennial. When our team was first formed we were literally inverse ages. Our diversity does not stop with age, we are different ethnicities and gender.

The Perfect Team - Millennial and Baby Boomer. We work extremely well together, which like any team, is based on respect. One of the main differences is our problem solving approach. Having different approaches, which at times is exhausting, augments a collaborative environment providing a sound solution. Our collaboration does not stop with problem solving, but extends to process, customer focus, all facets related to our responsibilities.

This blog post is specific to our skill sets, but I hope to illustrate how diversity can benefit any company, by blending Millennials with Baby Boomers.

Does Your Manager Help or Hinder You?

Over the past month, I’ve been contacted by two individuals complaining about their direct supervisor hindering their work. In one case, to the point of seemingly sabotaging them. Let me include, these are high level positions with C-Level managers. During this time period, I have received two articles on workplace antics, that validate this situation is more prevalent than most realize.

Company cultures are rapidly changing, as the economy improves and hiring is on an upswing. Qualified leaders will be required for success.

Here’s a litmus test to answer the headline question:

Traits of a supportive manager.

• Freedom to perform your duties
• Open to new suggestions for improvement
• Communicates on timely matters
• Gives you the tools you need to succeed
• Gives clear direction

Traits of a non-supportive manager (besides the obvious reversal of the above bullets).

• Critical of your performance without some form of validation
• Interferes or overrides your decisions (applicable to your responsibilities)
• Clearly undermines your tasks
• Evasive or aloof

Consulting on this matter is precarious for me. I end up asking more questions regarding the company culture, than directly applying any advice. Here are my thoughts:

• Job descriptions are becoming more defined with technology maturation. Be sure to understand your deliverables. This applies to an interviewee or a current associate.
• Know your net worth to the company. What would happen if you were not there? Be careful in this review, as everyone can be replaced. Be honest in your assessment.
• What is your impact of error on the company?
• Can you detect a company culture shift? Good or bad? Does it give you hope or is it time to move on?
• Is your performance accurately represented in your reviews?
• If you do not have written reviews, start/demand them immediately.
• Can you compare your performance to others in the company? Again, be careful, stick to performance not personalities.

In conclusion, mentors, inside or outside the company, will help you air your thoughts. Stay informed of your industry trends. Read blogs and articles on this subject to stay current, as times change faster than ever.

How Do You Define "Above and Beyond?"

Your answer may not be as simple as you may think. I heard four out of five people answer the question with this response, "I will do whatever it takes to complete the project on time."

Sounds like a great answer, doesn't it? One we would most likely say ourselves. But is it the best response? Ponder this just for a moment. Isn't this what we get paid to do? Deliver our projects on time?

How do you perform, or your associates, depending on your position, that seems truly "above and beyond?" In our industry of marketing, branding and advertising, working overtime, "doing what it takes" are common workplace norms. There is nothing exceptional about it.

By now you're waiting for my answer, so here it is: doing something that is not in your job description or an industry expectation. I hate to give examples, because to define it any deeper only limits the answer, but here are some guidelines: doing someone else's job, that is not the same as yours; presenting an observation or recommendation that benefits the company that is outside your position's scope; exemplifying personal latent skill sets applicable to your department or company.

If you're a hiring manager, ask this question and carefully consider the correct response. If you're a job seeker, carefully consider your response. If you're actively employed, start working above and beyond.

Smart Hiring (Somebody Gets It)

This was the title of one of my posts in April 2009, without the parenthetical addition shown today. That blog emphasized the job role (blending) and leadership to build an effective structure and team. I followed up with "Hire the Best", identifying over-qualified candidates as a hiring benefit.

After four years, the world of hiring is finally showing improvements. I have just signed onto a company providing production, process and business expertise. Their selection process involved a panel interview; five candidates and seven company members. I entered the foray at the last minute, due to overcoming the initial over-qualified perception.

Sidebar: 

There are several articles touting the benefits of hiring older people, including Entrepreneur, Huffington Post, Inc. A Forbes article last fall compares young verse old(er) entrepreneur's advantages.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/08/ageism_n_1881619.html

http://www.inc.com/eric-v-holtzclaw/5-ways-older-workers-benefit-a-business.html

http://bostinno.com/2013/02/18/age-discrimination-startups-why-older-employees-deserve-a-chance/#ss__298652_227579_0__ss

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cherylsnappconner/2012/09/03/do-older-or-younger-entrepreneurs-have-the-greater-advantage/

This selection format was new to me, but I liked it. You get a brief brain break to formulate the question's answer, as the other candidates respond, except when you're first on the rotation. This beats the rapid fire questions one-on-one (of course, this style is appropriate, if the position requires quick thinking and response skill sets). You also know the interview ends, when the last person on the panel asks their question.

After the panel interview, the company team immediately meets to select those worthy of returning for individual interviews and a screening test.

Two days later, I received a call to have lunch with the company president. During lunch, we discussed my motives, intentions and deliverables. He offered me the position on the spot, without further steps in the process.

Why this works:

• The playing field was level between candidates
• The playing field was level on the company side
• Time was efficient -  no long hours with individuals or return trips (see "Are You Smart Enough Not to be Stupid, my last blog post)
• The company gave me the opportunity one-on-one with the president to clarify my goals and motives, rather than be dismissed

Most importantly, they recognized the value, abilities and contributions beyond their current needs.

The question today - Where do you stand in your best hiring practices? You might be missing out on the best candidate, using preconceived, or worse, antiquated beliefs.

Are You Smart Enough Not to be Stupid?

Seriously, ponder this question, just don't think it may sound silly.

I spent enough hours with a company to equal a full day's work. They touted a company culture of promoting from within and being listed as one of the Best Companies to Work for. I don't know who comes up with these awards, what criteria is used or who even cares, but here's what I learned after meeting with seven mid-level managers.

1. Two of the seven openly admitted to have been given responsibilities they have no background or skill sets to perform – at all.
2. A different pair of managers conveyed through the conversation, they hated their jobs. Even for an outsider meeting with them, they made me uncomfortable.
3. Five of the managers had the same job title and I can only presume the same responsibilities.
4. The company has a horizontal structure, when most successful companies today have gone vertical. This causes job position redundancies.
5. They shared how the company was reducing workforce and had a travel freeze to contain costs.
6. None of these managers were empowered decision makers, compounding all the previous points.
7. The managers were all women. Before you judge me as a sexist, I mention it only as a statistic. It seemed an odd ratio: 0 men to 7 women. Those who read my blog and/or know me, know I believe a successful structure/organization requires diversity of all types.

Are you smart enough not to be stupid? By these managers own revelation, the company is in trouble, despite being a "Best Company to work for". Their culture and structure doesn't work. I believe the company is clueless to the reality of their own workforce culture, an antiquated organizational structure and resting on their awards and derived maxims, i.e. we only promote from within the company. Pride in any part of human culture is fatal. Replace pride with stupidity and the result is the same.

Author's note: This is a very large national company, with offices in every major and medium-size U.S. city.

Smart Hiring

This blog post is a partial addendum to my last post Organizational Structure and to offer some direction.

The job postings I recently viewed, have exacerbated the job blending phenomenon. They expanded the Operations/Creative/Sales singular position to include IT. I realize IT is a vital function in all agency or department efforts, but blend them with all the other functions? Where does one get this background?

The new MBA program will have to include, i.e. blend, all these functions to satisfy many companies' expectations. What I believe will suffer is leadership. MBA already eludes to "My Best Achievement", emphasizing the latest CEO's compensation greed.

Leadership is comprised of three main qualities:

• Experience
• Vision
• Risk

A leader can possess any singular or duplicity of the functional capacities, but it would be rare to possess anymore. Otherwise, the three main qualities become diluted. The agency or department head should have a "working" knowledge of all the functional areas, in order to best communicate with these leaders.

At the turn of the Millennium, a popular trend to flatten organizational structures took hold. I believe this is a good corporate posture. It allows strong functional leaders to specialize in their trade and it forms a forum for the diversity of ideas in a leadership meeting. With a strong meeting facilitation role, the agency or department head can create an effective problem solving environment. I have conducted and witnessed this successful meeting climate.

How do you implement this strategy?

• Take a hard look at your current structure and leader's skill sets. Do they align with my blog posts?
• Are you blending functions? Where? Does this make sense?
• Take a hard look at your leader(s) compensation. Is their parity? This is a critical step, especially with the current compensation scrutiny, driving economic correction. I will devote my next blog on the parity subject.

Building an effective team is still key to success.

Job blending is contrary to building an effective team, brainstorming, creativity and problem solving.

Defining the Team Leader's qualities, ensures this success.