It's All About People

The title of my website displays the convergence of People, Process and Technology, but nothing can occur without people.

Process and technology cannot function separate from people. People write and follow the process. People write and execute code. People communicate with people to achieve a goal. Teams cannot exist without people. Customers are comprised of people, whether internal or external of the organization. People are the key to any successful project. 

People skills should be the highest valued acumen, in any successful organization.

Start the New Year with Knowledge

In a recent conversation with a couple line associates, it came to my attention that many managers have no experience managing people. I commented about education and thought maybe they don’t teach management in college. The response I received was “they do in business school.”

Personally, I don’t have a business degree, but my very first college class was management. I have been managing people my entire career. One possibility is the proliferation of MBA graduates has caused the mindset you must have this degree to be a manager. Let me tell you here and now, managers exist in all industries! And most don’t have business degrees. Unfortunately, with or without a business degree there are many bad managers. I firmly believe management of people is an innate skill, either you have it or you don’t. People with marginal people skills can be coached. There is no dearth of management training books, seminars, or courses? 

So why are there so many poor managers? There is a plethora of answers and I can not begin to cover them all. Here are just a few I’ve learned while consulting:

• Haphazardly promoted into management, because the associate was good in their previous position (Peter Principle, of course many managers didn’t learn it)
• Education credentials in their expertise, but without people skills
• Sychophants
• Great sales people
• Age discrimination - the company wanted young managers
• Nepotism or favortism

How can this situation improve, as it is detrimental to productivity, company culture health and creates higher associate turnover? 

• Like the 12 step program, the higher level managers must recognize the problem. To do this they must have an open-door policy or mechanism to hear from the lower ranks. The 360 program is a good tool for this.
• Upper level management must be in touch with operations and human resources
• Provide management training and feedback
• Be bold enough to make manager changes
• When hiring, look for management courses, experience or people skills on the résumé
• Recognize people management skills can come from any industry

If you’re a job seeker or looking to grow in your career, look for ways to develop your management skills. I learned many of my techniques from excellent senior managers. I picked what I saw was effective and ineffective ways to motivate people. The most effective tool, I’ve experienced, is a mentor. A mentor does not have to be within your company. Stay in touch with your mentor frequently to review observed and your own people management techniques.

Start the year off with new skills and knowledge.

Work and Fun

A poor company culture can not be solved by the HR department planning and executing a bowling day or an Office Olympics picnic. Creating fun is relative to the associate’s perception of the company, and more importantly, to their job. I’m not stating these actives are not fun, but they can have little influence on associate motivation. The concept is great, as it shows the company, on a global scale, they appreciate and reward those who contribute to their success.

This blog post is about drilling down to the individual associate. I see too many times where upper and middle management are oblivious to their direct reports feelings. Yes, I used the word “feelings”. Associates are human beings and possess emotions. The greatest of these at work is appreciation and appreciation is displayed by recognition and recognition leads to motivation and motivation leads to productivity. You get the picture.

My question to today’s managers, many of whom are young and/or first time managers, is “Are you in touch with your reports feelings about their job?” This leads to further review:

• How do you communicate? If you believe knowledge is power, do you share information or believe you need to use it to protect your own position?
• Do you disseminate timely performance factors, positive or negative?
• How often do you meet with your reports, individually and collectively?
• Do you know their significant other’s name?
• Do you know their birthday, without HR reminding you? Studies show that a person’s birthday is one of their most valued days.
• Are you consistently learning to be a better manager?
• If you manage managers, are you equipping them to improve their people skills?

HR should augment a positive company culture. Managers must be tuned to individual associate motivation, which varies person-to-person. If your feel your job is not fun, then no corporate event will change it.

There are managers out there that should not be managers. Just because you are skilled at your given vocation, doesn’t mean you can manage people with or without these same skill sets. Do management schools still teach the Peter Principle? I have seen managers with only one report. Where this exists in my company structure influence, I eliminate this arrangement. Supervising one person is a poor situation. This creates a conundrum for the manager-associate relationship to either be friends or enemies. A worse case is when it’s a “working” manager scenario. You both have the same function, but one is privileged and only associate animosity can result. Unfortunately, this is more common than you may realize.

One last thought. Corporate sponsored events should take place during the workday. People have their work life and their personal life. Making an evening or weekend event, will impose “force company socialization.” It devalues the company’s goal to show appreciation. People may, and do have, work friends, but let them decide when to socialize outside the workplace. This is not the company’s role.

What are your motivation techniques?

Great Quote

"The way you organize talent has an impact on a company's ability to innovate and evolve. Executives need to design structures that amplifiy, rather than encumber remarkable talent."

~Sam Yagan, CEO, Match, Inc.

This is my motto and basis for success at The J. Frost Group. It amazes me everyday, when I see companies inhibit their own talent with poor structure, and more importantly, poor leadership. Just because you're a genius, doesn't make you a great leader. Great leaders give power to associates, not take it away.

How do you empower talent?

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.

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.

Organizational Structure

As I continue to consult on advertising agency organizational structures and interview for full -time operational positions for corporate in-house divisions, I'm learning mindsets have not changed. Business is changing at light-speed, but the way of doing business is not.

There is a certain sense of irony in the organizational structure paradigm (oh, that word), especially in the creative environment. Whatever you call it, Creative Services, Advertising, Marketing, Branding, Graphics or Sales Support, the company looks to your area for creative solutions for their lack of revenue. Your department/agency is to solve everything, by producing effective materials. Yet, with the plethora of talent, you can't seem to get a project out, on-time, on-budget. Take a deep look at your division/department structure. Who's running the show?

Most Senior managers of creative areas, and typically all levels above, think having a super creative leading the pack will result in producing the materials they seek. When the area fails to deliver to their expectations, they replace the creative lead. This cycle is repetitive. The next questions is, "why can't we find a good creative lead?"

Let's define lead. Lead what? The creative approach? The creative process? The creative area? Nine times out of ten, it's the entire area. As my pastor would shout, when he wants your attention and wants to get an important point across, "Listen".

Listen:
- Creative people are creative. That's why you hired them.
- Creative people should not manage - process or people, i.e. the area.
- Stop replacing the good ones.
- Change the structure.

There are plenty of industries that develop right/left brain people: architecture, photography, musicians. All these industries require both sides of the brain. Each involve math and vision. Our industry, is no different. Leaders can come from our different disciplines, Account Services, Production, and yes, sometimes Creative. Your job is to recruit and screen for this balance, not "get me another creative person." In the event, this person is not easily found, get two people to complete the required balance. Don't scream, "I can't hire two people for one job."

Listen:
- Change the structure.

Companies has been successful at reducing overhead, increasing creative quality and processes, when they have the right people in the right disciplines in the right structure.

Quit blaming the Creative Director for not producing their best work, when you hired them to run the entire area/department/agency. They were made to be creative, not lead large teams and crunch numbers. Our job as leaders is to give our associates the tools they need to succeed.

Listen:
If you don't know how to do this, get help.