Posts

#Leadership : You Have 15 Minutes To Respond To A Crisis: A Checklist of Do’s & Don’ts…When a Crisis Hits, How you Respond in the First 15 Minutes can Make or Break your Organization – & your Reputation.

If you Can Do the First 15 Minutes of a Crisis Right, you Are on Your Way to Finding Solutions, Fixing the Problems, & Repairing & Recovering From the Damage. Do them Wrong, & you will be Dealing with Damage Control not Only for the Crisis, but for Your Early Mistakes, for a Long, Long Time to Come.

Directions Man

 

While we all know that crisis management training is critical for leaders and boards today, much of it still tends to be shopworn, focusing on the lessons of yesterday. The new climate of ultra urgency is rarely emphasized sufficiently.

Yet I have found that in those first 15 minutes of a crisis your response must be exactly the right message, delivered in exactly the right words, to the right audiences, in just the right way – or you will have to deal with your mistakes for days, weeks, even months to come.

Immediate response and indelible accountability – that’s a tall order for any leader.

Yesterday We Had The Luxury of Time

It used to be standard to have until the end of day to get back to a press or customer inquiry about most crises. Even if the call was from a television network or local station, you could put off any interview until mid-afternoon. Then you might be able to respond by phone, or in a well-choreographed interview, in front of a backdrop of your choosing, to be aired on the nightly news.

Even in the iconic Tylenol crisis case – still considered by corporate execs as a best practice in crisis management – it took the company three days to decide to remove all bottles of Tylenol from store shelves, after several people were killed by taking cyanide-laced capsules from unsealed bottles. And that was deemed fast work.

Today Immediacy Is Key

When news is transmitted around the globe in a nanosecond over social media, featuring real-time pictures and videos, there is little to no time to position, posture, or even understand the facts before you are pressed to make a statement.

Because, if you do not speak for yourself quickly, or if you do so poorly, someone else – antagonist, police, government, competitor, or anonymous hater – will speak for you. And in the world of public perception, the first mover has the advantage.

 

Like this Article ?…Share It !    You now can easily enjoy/follow/share Today our Award Winning Articles/Blogs with Now Over 300K+ Growing  Participates Worldwide in our various Social Media formats below:

FSC LinkedIn Network:   www.linkedin.com/in/frankfsc/en

  • Twitter: Follow us @ firstsunllc

educate/collaborate/network….Look forward to your Participation !

continue of article:

What Is A Leader To Do?

Clearly the first 15 minutes after you learn of a crisis are just the beginning of what could be a very long haul. Lawyers whisper in one ear,  “Say nothing, make no comment until we evaluate all the facts, and our liability.” Crisis managers like me urge swift action, to get out ahead of the problem, or at least keep apace. And at the same time, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Reddit feeds are lighting up second-by-second with photos, interviews, information and misinformation you have never seen before.

The “First 15 Minutes” Crisis Management Checklist

The critical element turns out to be how to fit a day’s worth of activity into 15 minutes.

Following is my list for leaders of “Do’s” and “Don’ts” in the first 15 minutes of any crisis – be it predictable or black swan – from the minute you hear about a problem to the moment you make your first statement. It does not cover the crisis preparedness work you should have already done (that’s another list), nor the entire arc of crisis activities you will be engaged in starting from the 16th minute until resolution and recovery. But it’s a place for leaders to start when crisis hits:

Crisis Management Checklist

DO:

  • Resolve to become the trusted voice in this crisis – the person and organization that people turn to for the truth and solutions.
  • Stop whatever you are doing and calmly, but immediately, turn your full attention to the matter at hand. This may seem obvious, but it is surprising how many leaders cannot disengage from what they were doing when a crisis hits.
  • Pull the trigger on your crisis plan if you have one (these steps should all be in that plan, of course).
  • Alert your crisis team (assuming you have already designated one, and if not, your management team) immediately, and assemble them in person or virtually in an hour.
  • Assess what you must do yourself and what you can delegate in the specific situation. Begin to delegate with urgency.
  • Immediately designate trusted lieutenants to find out the facts – their first reports to be made in seven minutes.
  • Designate another trusted lieutenant to connect with law enforcement, or other critical parties involved in the situation.
  • Monitor in real-time what is being said on social and traditional media – sometimes Twitter tells you more in real-time than any other source. You need to know what is out there already so you can begin to set the record straight.
  • Try to understand the scope of the issue as you know it and the critical decisions that must be made immediately.
  • Draft an initial “holding statement” with the help of your head of communications, crisis manager, and/or legal counsel. This is a statement you can issue immediately. It should state what, if anything, you believe you know, with the caveat that these are early impressions that may not be totally correct. Reinforce that you are committed to finding out as much as you can immediately, and that you will stay in touch with your audiences continually, as you know more.
  • Think through every word: under stress you can say the wrong thing, your words may be misinterpreted, or you can say too little or too much.
    Depending upon the magnitude and kind of crisis, issue your holding statement to waiting print and broadcast media, over the wire, by email, and post it on your website, intranet, and social media feeds, etc.
  • Match your communications to the issue: seek to neither under- nor over-communicate.
  • Show humanity, compassion, and concern for any human toll – and mean it. Make people your first priority.
  • Make sure to correct any errors of fact that are already public. Try not to speak personally to the media or hold a press conference immediately. Get some solid facts before you do.
  • Contact your employees, board, shareholders, and other key audiences at the same time – or just before you communicate to the media – sharing with them your public statements.
    If appropriate, video a quick personal statement from the CEO or other leader that is steady, strong, compassionate, and solution-driven. It can go on your intranet, emergency communications system, and even your website.
  • Resolve to follow up on everything you have promised to do; revise your estimates as you get more knowledge.
  • Begin the process of triage, discovery, communication, solution, accountability, and recovery.

DON’T

  • Don’t lie – your first words will be long remembered, as will be your tone and intent. Scrutiny is at a peak in the first moments of a crisis, and your comments may go viral – among your employees, shareholders and regulators, as well as over social media.
  • Don’t disappear. As tempting as it might be to go underground until the storm passes, your voice, presence, and guidance are needed, especially by your workforce.
  • Don’t issue a denial until you have all the facts. If you issue a denial and are then proven to be wrong, your credibility is shot for the duration.
  • Don’t minimize the situation. Things tend to look more contained at the outset of a crisis than they do as it unfolds. Minimizing may feel like the right strategy initially, but it is not. Rather, say “We do not yet know the magnitude of the problem, but are working furiously to find out.”
  • Do NOT make a joke. You must be serious and respectful as a crisis unfolds. One of the biggest signs of respect you can give someone is to pay attention to their claims, upfront, even if they are later disproved.
  • Do not say “We are taking the matter seriously,” even though you are. No one believes this reflexive statement. In fact, it has come to mean the exact opposite. Figure out another way to phrase the sentiment.
  • Don’t repeat the problem or accusation when delivering your statement – make the statement proactive and put it in positive, but not Pollyanna-like language.
  • Don’t let your fears of liability trump your humanity. Compassion and kindness are critical.
  • Don’t speculate until you fully understand the situation.
  • Don’t get drawn into interminable series of internal meetings and think you are making progress when you are not – focus both inwardly and outwardly, simultaneously.

To Sum Up

If you can do the first 15 minutes of a crisis right, you are on your way to finding solutions, fixing the problems, and repairing and recovering from the damage. Do them wrong, and you will be dealing with damage control not only for the crisis, but for your early mistakes, for a long, long time to come.

 

Leadership & crisis expert Davia Temin, CEO of Temin & Co, helps create, enhance & save reputations at board & executive levels & coaches CEOs & leaders. Twitter: @DaviaTemin

Forbes.com | August 6, 2015 | Davia Temin

#Leadership : 5 Leadership Fallacies To Dispel… Fallacy #3: “My #Leadership Style Worked Here, So it’ll Probably Work There.”

It Never Ceases to Amaze Me the Many Different Definitions of Leadership. Working in executive coaching and leadership development affords me invaluable opportunities to meet with leaders and teams to learn about their challenges, their perspectives, their rationale for decision-making.

BossTag

There are as many interpretations for what constitutes an a “good leader” as there are ice-cream flavors because the value that leadership creates is so subjective.  At the same time, though, we all (well, many) know good leadership when we see it.

So what causes some people to have great definitions of leadership and others not? Probably the same reason for having different opinions, influences, and personal experiences.

To help identify the “good” it’s worthwhile sometimes to understand the “bad,” otherwise how will you know what “good” is? Here are five leadership fallacies to dispel: 

1. A good manager makes a good leader.

What defines effectiveness at one level will be the expectation at the next position higher, but not the responsibility. In other words, when our favorite fictitious character Joe or Sally get promoted from, say, a senior director to vice-presidential role, there’s a mental shift required to move from the tactical and operational perspective into one that is more strategic. Yet doing so isn’t easy because he or she has never been required to think strategically before. Mindy Hall, author of Leading With Intention, believes, “we still reward people for their specific expertise and then we attribute their skills to saying ‘Oh, they’ll be a great leader too.’ But just because you got great results as a marketing VP doesn’t mean you’ll get results as the a leader of an organization.”

 

Like this Article ?…Share It !    You now can easily enjoy/follow/share Today our Award Winning Articles/Blogs with Now Over 300K+ Growing  Participates Worldwide in our various Social Media formats below:

FSC LinkedIn Network:   www.linkedin.com/in/frankfsc/en

  • Twitter: Follow us @ firstsunllc

educate/collaborate/network….Look forward to your Participation !

continue of article:

2. Effective leadership is unique to the industry.

Quite the opposite. Strong leadership is strong leadership no matter where it exists. Sure, tactics certainly differ according to the field in which you work but the defining principles that wield the pursuit of excellence remain the same: performance, adaptability, leadership. Here’s a quick breakdown of each (more on these elements here):

  • Performance: the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual capacities that compose the individual, such as habits, health (i.e. stress management), focus, self-talk, emotional intelligence, decision-making, communication.
  • Adaptability: the skill and will to learn and unlearn, presented through self-renewal and self-organization.
  • Leadership: decision-making, communication, authentic self-expression that instills value in others.

It’s at the crux of these three areas where effectiveness lay:

Image credit: www.adaptabilitycoach.com

3. “My leadership style worked here, so it’ll probably work there.”

Don’t be so myopic. The dynamics of personalities involved and the internal and external factors that influencing the circumstance vary from situation to situation. A command and control style, for instance, will work when there is significant pressure (i.e. time) or urgency to get the job done; when a decision as to be made and it has to happen now. However, try to employ dictatorial rule as an everyday leadership style and you’ll soon watch your followers follow somebody else.

4. Only leaders can make decisions.

Contrary to popular belief, it’s not the role of leadership to make all the decisions. There just simply isn’t enough time in the day to do so. What their role is, however, is to set the conditions for decision-making to occur. By conditions I’m referring to the left and right boundaries that define employee decision-making space, the process of communication from top down and bottom up, meeting flow, etc…

In the military we had something called critical information requirements (CIRs) that served as a decision-making threshold. Basically, the senior leader would identify the criteria that, if triggered, would warrant a decision to be escalated to his/her level; unless those conditions were met, direct reports were free to make their own decisions based on the common purpose understood by all. Something else this CIRs served allowed was freeing up the leader to focus on the business rather than on your business.

5. Leaders have very little time for anything else.

If I could drop an expletive here I would, but we’ll have to settle for its acronym: BS. People don’t manage time they manage their priorities, so when somebody says, “I don’t have time for that” what that person is really saying is, “That’s not important to me right now.” Steve Gilliland, author of Detour, recommends leaders “decide what’s important and never take it for granted. It’s not until you’re about to die do you realize the value of 30 minutes.”

Of course, these are my interpretations of leadership fallacies. Would you agree or disagree with any? Share your comments below.

Jeff is an executive coach, author, and former Navy SEAL.

 

Forbes.com | Aug 2, 2015 | Jeff Boss

 

#Leadership : How To Make The Whole Organization Agile…The Core Principles of Agile can be Grasped Quickly, but Implementing them Can Take a Lifetime. The Challenge for Leaders is To Begin this Life-Long Journey.

In Agile, the Role of the Manager is to Enable those Doing the Work to Contribute their Full Talents & Capabilities to Generate Value for Customers & Eliminate Any Impediments that May be Getting in the Way. The manager trusts in the judgment and wisdom of those in touch with customers as to what work needs to be done

Kids with Thinking Caps

 

Surveys show that most Agile teams report tension between the way the teams operate and the way the rest of the organization is run. Is it possible to make the whole organization Agile?

In Agile, the role of the manager is to enable those doing the work to contribute their full talents and capabilities to generate value for customers and eliminate any impediments that may be getting in the way. The manager trusts in the judgment and wisdom of those in touch with customers as to what work needs to be done . The manager also trusts in the talents and capacities of those doing the work to figure out how to do the work in the right way. Agile is neither top-down nor bottom-up: it is outside-in. The focus is on delivering value to customers. The customer is the boss, not the manager.

 

Like this Article ?…Share It !    You now can easily enjoy/follow/share Today our Award Winning Articles/Blogs with Now Over 300K+ Growing  Participates Worldwide in our various Social Media formats below:

FSC LinkedIn Network:   www.linkedin.com/in/frankfsc/en

  • Twitter: Follow us @ firstsunllc

educate/collaborate/network….Look forward to your Participation !

continue of article:

The role of the manager in traditional management is the opposite. The managerial function is to identify what needs to be done, to tell the employee what to do, and then to ensure the employee completes the work according to instructions. The role of the employee is to follow the directions as given, trusting the judgment and wisdom of the manager to ensure that the right work is being done in the right way. The primary goal is to make money for the firm. The manager is the boss.

In organizations where there is a fundamental belief in the effectiveness of the top-down “the manager is the boss” approach, it’s difficult to implement Agile effectively. There is continuing friction between the different goals and approaches. As a result, when adoption of Agile is limited to the team level, it risks being incomplete and dysfunctional, producing little if any improvement for the organization.

Why partial fixes don’t stick

A partial fix to deal with the tension between Agile and management can be to redefine the role of the immediate supervisor of the Agile team in a way that is more consistent with Agile. A new job description can be developed for the supervising manager that is consistent with the enabling ideology of Agile. With luck, this job description may even be formally approved by his or her manager.

First, how robust will this formal approval be in a big organization where there may be three or more layers above the manager’s manager? In other words, the friction between the Agile team and the hierarchy has simply been moved one layer up the hierarchy. It is unlikely to stick if all the layers above haven’t also bought into the new goal and approach.

One reason why the upper layers are working at odds with Agile is that the goal of big firms is usually to make money for the shareholders and the top executives, by way of quarterly profits that can be reported to the stock market. This approach is known in management circles as, “maximizing shareholder value.” The goal has beenwidely condemned, even by Jack Welch, as “the dumbest idea in the world”, but it is still very prevalent in large organizations.

The primary goal of making money for shareholders is at odds with the values of Agile where the primary focus is on delivering value to the customer. In Agile, making money is the result, not the goal. When those two different goals are espoused in different parts or different levels of the organization, there is permanent friction. Unless this issue is resolved, the adoption of Agile at the team level is unlikely to stick.

Why don’t the upper layers like Agile?

Is it feasible to get the upper layers of a large organization to buy into Agile and the new role of managers without reaching agreement on the goal of the organization? Experience suggests not.

One reason for the adherence to top-down command-and-control approaches to management is that the goal of making money for the shareholders and the top executives is inherently uninspiring to those doing the work. Making money for the boss doesn’t put a spring in their step as they come to work.

So the top management has no choice but to use command-and-control in order to get a tight focus on producing strong quarterly profits and a rising stock price. The result is an unholy alliance between shareholder value and hierarchical bureaucracy. The alliance makes for an environment that is hostile to Agile and dispiriting for staff. In effect, the C-suite must compel employees to obey. The consequence is that, economy-wide, only one in five employees is fully engaged in his or her work, and even fewer are passionate.

Why SAFe is unsafe

Equally, some of the current efforts to “scale Agile,” such as the Scaled Agile Framework or SAFe, are counterproductive. They aim to resolve the tension between Agile and management under the guise of “aligning” teams with corporate goals. In effect, they seek to shoehorn the customer-focused practices of Agile into top-down shareholder-focused goals and structures of the organization.

One can see why such an approach will be popular with traditional managers because it saves them the trouble of making any change. The boss can go on being the boss. The approach preserves and supports the existing management top-down shareholder-focused ideology, as well as C-suite’s extravagant bonuses for maintaining it.

But in the process of “aligning” Agile teams with corporate goals such as making quarterly profits and pumping up the stock price, SAFe destroys the very essence of Agile. Like the failed management fads of the 20th Century, it degrades and undermines everything in Agile that is authentic and useful. All that remains are the empty phrases and labels of Agile, not the reality.

A better way: the Creative Economy

Some organizations, like Apple, Google and Zara, do things differently. These firms constitute what has been called the Creative Economy. They have shifted the goal of the entire organization from maximizing shareholder value to delighting the customer. These are organizations in which all the management layers adopt the philosophy of “customer-value first.” They are Agile-friendly environments. In such firms, management practices at the team level like Agile become self-evident. Making money becomes the result, not the goal of the organization. Paradoxically, as the examples of Apple and Google show, this approach can be hugely profitable.

Resolving the tensions between Agile and traditional management cannot usually be achieved by purely rational means. In part, that’s because the traditional role of management often enjoys deep emotional attachments, attitudes, values and views about how the world works, which collectively add up to a corporate culture or an ideology. Some managers like being “the boss.” Even those that don’t are pressed by the culture to act as though they do.

Experience shows that changing a corporate culture or ideology can’t be achieved by the introduction of methodologies, job descriptions and decisions or proving to the management with hard financial facts that delighting the customer is more profitable.

Instead, to persuade managers to stop acting like a boss and embrace Agile, there is a need to reach managers at a deeper emotional level through experiences and leadership storytelling that enable them to embrace a different set of attachments, attitudes, values and understanding about how the world works. The manager must in effect fall in love with the customer.

Accomplishing this is a difficult leadership challenge. That’s because the manager’s role as a boss is embedded in the organization’s culture which comprises an interlocking set of goals, roles, processes, values, communications practices, attitudes and assumptions. Even if a manager would personally like to stop acting as a boss and embrace the customer, the culture makes it difficult to change.

The elements of a culture fit together as a mutually reinforcing system and combine to prevent any attempt to change it. Single-fix changes at the team level thus may appear to make progress for a while, but eventually the interlocking elements of the organizational culture take over and the change is inexorably drawn back into the existing organizational culture.

This isn’t like fixing a car where if you fix a tire, the tire stays fixed. Instead the organization acts more like an ingeniously morphing virus that steadily adapts itself to, and ultimately defeats, intended fixes and returns to its original state, sometimes more virulent than before.

Making the transition to Agile includes 5 major shifts:

  • Instead of a goal of making money for the organization, the goal of the organization is to delight the customer.
  • Instead of those doing the work reporting as individuals to bosses, the work is done in self-organizing team: the role of management is not to check whether those doing the work have done what they were meant to do, but rather to enable those doing the work to contribute all that they can and remove any impediment that might be getting in the way.
  • Instead of work being coordinated by bureaucracy with rules, plans and reports, work is coordinated by Agile methods with iterative work cycles and direct feedback from customers or their proxy.
  • Instead of a preoccupation with efficiency and predictability, the predominant values are transparency and continuous improvement.
  • Instead of one-way top-down commands, communications tend to be in horizontal conversations.

The principles are not a random collection of improvements. Together they also form a mutually reinforcing sequence.

shift from traditional to creative
How to change an organizational culture

Completing those five shifts to implement Agile across the entire organization usually amounts to changing the corporate culture, which is a difficult and large-scale undertaking. Eventually all of the organizational tools for changing minds will need to be put in play. However the order in which they deployed has a critical impact on the likelihood of success.

In general, the most fruitful success strategy is to begin with leadership tools, including a vision or stories of the future, cement the change in place with management tools, such as role definitions, measurement and control systems, and use the pure power tools of coercion and punishments as a last resort, when all else fails.

changing org culture

The need for leadership storytelling

The inspirational aspects of the leadership needed to change a corporate culture depend heavily on leadership storytelling. As I explain in my book, The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling, storytelling is a key leadership technique because it’s quick, powerful, free, natural, refreshing, energizing, collaborative, persuasive, holistic, entertaining, moving, memorable and authentic. Stories help people make sense of deep change.

Leadership storytelling is more than a tool to get things done: it’s a way for leaders – wherever they may sit – to embody the change they seek. Rather than merely advocating change by making propositional arguments, which usually lead to more arguments, leaders can establish credibility and authenticity through telling the stories that they are living. When they believe deeply in them, their stories resonate, generating creativity, interaction and transformation.

Leadership storytelling is inherently well-adapted to handling the intractable leadership challenge of changing a corporate culture. Storytelling translates dry and abstract numbers into compelling pictures of the future. Although good business cases are developed through the use of numbers, they are typically approved on the basis of a story—that is, a narrative that links a set of events in some kind of causal sequence.

Storytelling is a crucial tool for culture change, because often, nothing else works. Charts leave listeners bemused. Prose remains unread. Dialogue is just too laborious and slow. When faced with the task of persuading a group of managers or front-line staff in a large organization to embrace a major change, storytelling is the only thing that works.

That’s because human beings think in stories, not abstractions. Storytelling is the instrument of continuing creativity, a power that inexorably propels us forward into the future, building new worlds and new selves. Storytelling is part of the creative struggle to generate a new future, as opposed to conventional communication approaches that search for virtual certainties anchored in the illusive security of the past.

Narrative draws on the active, living participation of individuals. It dwells in the experience of the people who act, think, talk, discuss, chat, joke, complain, dream, agonize and exult together, and collectively make up the organization. By contrast, conventional communication focuses on lifeless elements—–mission statements, formal strategies, programs, procedures, processes, systems, budgets, assets—the inert artifacts of the organization.

Storytelling is more than a tool. When we hear a story that touches us profoundly, our lives are suffused with meaning. As listeners, we have transmitted to us that which matters. Once we make this connection, once a sense of wonder has come upon us, it may not last long, and we inevitably fall back into our daze of everyday living, but with the difference that a radical shift in understanding may have taken place.

A story is something that comes from outside. But the meaning is something that emerges from within. When a story reaches our hearts with deep meaning, it takes hold of us. Once it does so, we can let it go, and yet it remains with us. We do not weary of this experience. Once we have had one story, we are already hungry for another. We want more, in case it too can transmit the magic of connectedness between the self and the universe.

Through narrative, we can let go the urge to control, and the fear that goes with it, learning that the world has the capacity to organize itself, recognizing that managing includes catalyzing this capacity.

The results of culture change to Agile

Firms that have made the shift to an Agile, customer-focused mode of operating generate consistently better results for their customers through continuous innovation and provide meaningful fulfilling work for those doing the work. Startups that follow these principles can grow without losing agility.

Leaders need to understand the challenge involved in the transition from the traditional management to Agile. They need to understand why small scale interventions at lower levels are unlikely to be sustainable unless and until these issues are addressed. They need to understand the new management practices are and how they can communicate them to others.

The core principles of Agile can be grasped quickly, but implementing them can take a lifetime. The challenge for leaders is to begin this life-long journey.

Forbes.com | July 22, 2015 | Steve Denning

#Leadership: 4 Things You Should Ask an #Employee Who’s Leaving… A Solid Exit Interview that will Hopefully not Only Yield Valuable Insights, but That will Leave Everyone Feeling Good about our Experience Working Together.

I wouldn’t have tried to talk her out of her decision, but there are a few questions I would have asked her if I had the chance to do it over again. (For the record, these are my questions as a #Leader & #Manager, not necessarily from a #Legal or # HR standpoint. Google is your friend if you want loads of suggestions on that front.)

Career Guidance - 4 Things You Should Ask an Employee Who's Leaving

A few months ago, one of my employees decided to leave the company. Her exit wasn’t a total surprise—we’d hired her originally as an intern, and we all knew her heart and her passion resided in the nonprofit realm. I tried to convince her that our business—employee engagement consulting—was saving the world in a different way, but alas, she wasn’t buying it.

We’re a relatively small organization, and life gets busy. On her last day, I was in client meetings and didn’t really get a chance to say a proper goodbye. I didn’t do an exit interview with her, either. (And I know what you’re thinking, by the way—so just do what I say and not what I do, OK?)

I’ve thought about her a lot over the last couple of months. I miss her presence in our office, but truthfully, I think she made the right decision. I’m a big believer in following your passion and purpose in life, and my guess is she will ultimately be much happier in a job that better fits with her life goals.

I wouldn’t have tried to talk her out of her decision, but there are a few questions I would have asked her if I had the chance to do it over again. (For the record, these are my questions as a #Leader & #Manager, not necessarily from a #Legal or # HR standpoint. Google is your friend if you want loads of suggestions on that front.)

1- How did the job match your expectations?

Our own research at Brilliant Ink tells us that creating accurate first impressions is a key driver of employee engagement, so one of the first things I’d want to know is how the day-to-day realities of the job stacked up to our description of it when she began work with us. This doesn’t necessarily change the nature of the work in the future, but it would certainly help us know how to sell the job more effectively and accurately to result in better hires (which, in my opinion, is the toughest nut of all to crack).

 

Like this Article ?…Share It !    You now can easily enjoy/follow/share Today our Award Winning Articles/Blogs with over 120K participates Worldwide in our various Social Media formats below:

FSC LinkedIn Network www.linkedin.com/in/frankfsc/en

  • Twitter: Follow us @ firstsunllc

educate/collaborate/network….Look forward to your Participation !

continue of article:

2- Did you feel that the work you were doing aligned with your personal goals and interests?

We do a goal-setting process with our employees at the beginning of the year, and we revisit these on a quarterly basis. However, these are mostly professional development goals that tie directly to our business objectives. With this question, I’d be assessing how her work fits into the bigger picture of her life—something Millennials say is more and more important to them. And our research indicates that fully engaged employees report a greater likelihood of tapping into personal and professional passions and interests at work compared to less-engaged employees.

In this case of this particular employee, I already knew the answer—she had a passion for environmental work and causes, which doesn’t really relate to our field. And I wouldn’t necessarily change the nature of the work accordingly. But again, it gives clues into the kinds of questions we should be asking at the start of the hiring process and could guide conversations between managers and employees throughout their life with our company.

3- Did you have the tools and resources you needed to effectively do your job?

This is a big one. In the early years of the company, I got pretty comfortable with bootstrapping my way to success, which means we still operate pretty lean and mean. This is a good thing in terms of conserving costs, but we also have to remember that we can’t deliver outstanding work without the right systems in place to make the magic happen. Understanding how my employee felt about the kind of support she was getting would help us know what kinds of investments we should be making in the future.

4- Would you recommend this as a great place for a friend to work?

Would I get an truthful answer to this question? I honestly don’t know, but it’s worth a shot. The employee in question was a good, solid member of our team, and I’d trust her recommendation on future hires. If the job wasn’t a great fit for her, the next best thing I could hope is that she’d be an advocate for our company and a referrer of great potential employees. Plus, with the business that we’re in, it pays to know how we can improve our own employee experience.

Here’s a final exit interview question I don’t recommend: During a wrap-up interview, I once had a former boss ask me if there was anything she could do to change my mind. I enjoyed the job but was incredibly underpaid, so I felt a faint glimmer when she asked me this question. I told her a nominal raise would do the trick. Unfortunately, she promptly replied that it wasn’t possible. The lesson: Don’t offer something you can’t deliver. There’s nothing worse than getting your hopes up—only to have them doused with ice water.

We have an amazing team in place, and I hope I won’t be saying goodbye to anyone else for a very long time. But if we do, I’ll make the time for a proper goodbye—and a solid exit interview that will hopefully not only yield valuable insights, but that will leave everyone feeling good about our experience working together.

Photo of person leaving office courtesy of Shutterstock.

About The Author

Career Guidance
Liz Kelly is the CEO and founder of Brilliant Ink, an employee communications and engagement consultancy with offices in Oakland and New York. She recently co-authored the award-winning Employee Experience Survey, a study of more than 300 Fortune 1,000 employees that correlates key moments of the employee experience to overall levels of employee engagement.

 

The Daily Muse | June 2015 | Liz Kelly 

#Leadership: Agile Leadership and the Manager/Entrepreneur…Remaining Flexible is One of the Most Important Traits a Leader can Possess–Especially Today.

Over the last number of years, the word “agile” has been tossed around in numerous ways. The most common use has roots in the programming world, where “agile” is regarded as one step forward from “waterfall” as a means of making incremental improvements, to assure that the final product grows and is adjusted through the development process to be aligned with customer demand. In recent years, agile has emerged as “agile leadership.”

IMAGE: Getty Images

Some people have a rigorous notion of agile. Others prefer to use agile as a synonym for the ability to be flexible and responsive to a particular situation. Fortunately or unfortunately, the term itself is used in a non-concrete way.

What does agile leadership mean? At its core, my approach to agile leadership is predicated on the assumption that leadership is as much about how one adjusts one’s leadership style to a situation as it is on the embedded personality characteristics of the leader. Agile leadership, in this sense, implies contingency that how one leads is dependent on how one analyzes and views a particular situation.

For example, if the situation is one of stability, minimum uncertainty, and routinized expectations, then, as a leader, you lead in one way. If the opposite is true–unstable environment, high uncertainty, and ambiguous expectations–then, as a leader, you lead in another way.

Leading a manufacturing division is one thing; leading R&D is another. Leading when customer expectations are clear demands one kind of leadership; leading when customer expectations are not clear demands another.

 

Like this Article ?…Share It !    You now can easily enjoy/follow/share Today our Award Winning Articles/Blogs with over 120K participates Worldwide in our various Social Media formats below:

FSC LinkedIn Network www.linkedin.com/in/frankfsc/en

  • Twitter: Follow us @ firstsunllc

educate/collaborate/network….Look forward to your Participation !

continue of article:

Agile leadership demands a mindful consideration of the context and an ability to adjust your leadership style appropriately. Agile leaders are able to vary their leadership style along a continuum. The question, of course, is what is this continuum?

The classic distinction is facilitative and directive leadership. The challenge for an agile leader is to balance their directive and facilitative style. Directive leadership sustains control by allocating resources, making expectations clear, defining goals, and establishing the parameters of success and failure. Facilitative leadership is based on giving individuals maximum flexibility and autonomy–giving them flexible goals, and letting them define and deal with parameters and constraints on their own.

In balancing these two leadership styles, an agile leader needs to be clear about which style is appropriate. During lean and difficult times, you may want to explicitly define goals, with the assumption that by delineating goals and specifying expectations will allow you to better control resources. In times of growth and abundance, you may want to define goals more broadly and give autonomy to be open to opportunities.

The challenge for an agile leader is to understand which style is appropriate at which type in time. The challenge is to balance leadership styles.

In these times, agile leadership is a special challenge for managers & entrepreneurs because they are caught on the horns of a dilemma. On the one had, they want to lead in such a fashion to give their organizations and teams the space to be innovative to assure the cutting edge. On the other hard, entrepreneurs have a short leash when it comes to resources and time. They have to be continuously accountable to assure a concrete ROI. The need to stimulate creativity and innovation may demand that the entrepreneur place a greater emphasis on their facilitative style while the shadow of ROI may demand that they emphasize their directive style. Agility is the capacity to juggle both styles as necessary. Entrepreneurial leaders need to get beyond blinders and personality and be aware of when one style suits the situation better than the other.

Even before “agile leadership” was in vogue, leaders of organizations of all sizes were well aware of it. The name may be a fad, but agile leadership has always been a core behavioral trait of successful managers & entrepreneurs.