Jason,
Thank you for your always generous remarks, though I'm never quite sure I deserve them. In any event, military leadership was, as you might imagine, quite a different thing from corporate or educational leadership. Instant obedience to orders was the norm and anything less could be resolved using Non-Judicial Punishment and the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Thankfully neither were put to the test very often. We also had a rather unique culture that was accepting of remediation in the form of physical fitness training. There were also other forms of punishment that one might consider hazing, such as painting rocks, or making small rocks out of big rocks with a sledge hammer and that sort of thing. However, those that chose insubordination or beligerence usually got the point in just a few short hours or days and little was ever required to be recorded in a serviceman's record book.
The corporate sector, I have learned, is an altogether different animal and requires an entirely different leadership skill set. Some people are motivated by money, others by public award and praise, others by private award and praise. There are some that seem never to be motivated, and others just need to have their peacock feathers stroked as if the leader is succumbing to their greatness. It is a different scenario for me on an almost daily basis and I find that I have become a servant leader with hints of charisma and empowerment of my people. I can no longer use, nor would I want to use, fear as a tactic for a professional environment should never warrant that style. This past year has proved interesting though. With the downturn in the economy, the corporate stress level has risen significantly, and as a result the demand to perform or be gone has become quite real for a lot of people. I've always worn my low turnover as a sign of approval, but this year my regrettable employee turnover has reached nearly 40%, which is actually the industry standard, though it doesn't make me feel any better. Further, I've had to dismiss two good people because they just weren't good employees.
Bottom line, Jason, I classify or identify people into one of three categories and I am usually able to do it in relatively short order. In all walks of life we've got the Can's, the Can'ts and the Won'ts. The can's are capable of performing the job and they live up to or exceed expectation. Reward these people in every way that you are empowered to do so. The can'ts are those folks who, try as they might, are simply unsuccessful. These people are good people, they care, they want to succeed, but they either need intervention training or they simply are not cut our for the line of work they are in. Determining whether they can be salvaged or not should be among your highest priorities. Do not confuse nice for productive, or you will get buried along with them. That might not sound pleasant, but it is true, so cut your losses when the need arises. However, if you can salvage a couple then you will have won their loyalty in a big way. The last group, the won'ts, are the real tragedy here because they often have the ability to do the job, but they lack the heart, the passion, the resolve, the will, the stamina, the motivation or some other intrinsic intangible that is so key to being a good employee. The won'ts should be dismissed as soon as humanly possible because they are poison in your organization or as I say, crabgrass in my beautiful lawn! These people cannot be reasoned with, they can not be salvaged, and they undermine your organizational culture, values, morale, and mission. Get rid of them ASAP. In today's HR world, that is much easier said than done, but be sure to document meetings, coaching sessions, evaluations, review plans, etc. In time you will build your case for their exit!
Good luck, my friend.
R/Brian
No comments:
Post a Comment