Posts

One Manager is Probably Enough. Two is Likely More than Enough.

I thought “matrix management” had been ditched long ago, but I recently heard about one manager in a large organization – I’ll call her Marie – with a staff member who is “multi-managed”, i.e., working for two bosses. I guess matrix management is not dead!

A matrix organizational structure does give some employees two or more managers. One manager directs an employee’s primary “functional” duties as defined by their department’s specialty area and responsibilities. The second oversees a more specific project that may be part of the employee’s department while also linking to other groups or sub-units.

So, since Marie is a friend, I looked for information on the problems that may be created by this model of work structure in hope that she would be able to communicate them up the ladder, maybe getting some help in reducing the difficulties this multi-management situation is creating for her now over-stressed staff member.

Managers jockey for power in many organizations, but a matrix design often encourages competition rather than cooperation. Conflicting interests can also lead to confusion about policies and procedures, just as infighting can lead to inefficiencies for both individual workers and business processes. In a “politicized environment”, line managers sometimes say problems that arise are the fault of other departments, or, as one manager told me, “Blame the culture – when something goes wrong, point to the other guys.”

There are four major types of problems reported by multi-managed employees. Marie is probably dealing with more than one of these:

  1. Time Constraints: When an employee reports into two different sub-organizations, s/he has to consult with twice the number of interested parties. Decision-making takes longer. Inadequate time may prevent the right people from contributing to a problem’s solution. The multi-managed employee is likely to experience overload: with more than one person assigning work, one of the greatest risks is simply having too much to do.
  2. Conflicting Messages: The more bosses you have, the more conflicting messages you get. Different bosses have different expectations: an employee may not only need to participate in multiple staff meetings, but also receive requests to attend other events for other purposes. Information conveyed by the “functional manager” may differ from – or even contradict – that conveyed by a second boss, leading to confusion, delay or procrastination whenever directives are not clear or associated with specific objectives.
  3. Individual Goals Mess: A multi-managed employee has one or more goals or job descriptions as defined by each manager. With two different managers, individual workers may not be able to align with the team goals of either one, nor see their role in an effective context for working and interacting with others. There is often no clear line of command, authority or responsibility in the boss-subordinate relationships, and worker dissatisfaction and employee turnover may result.
  4. Psychological Stress – Multi-managed work roles and relationships often lack stability or continuity. Some employees report experiencing a state of constant change and confusion, unclear about which “boss” they should feel most responsible to work with. Some managers want to be sure that they are the first priority, so it’s easy to get caught in the middle. An employee may be expected to keep secrets, or even deceive others about what they are doing or their knowledge of objectives, operations or problems. Conflicting interests between managers can make life difficult for the multi-managed employee.

I’m wishing the best for Marie, and also for her multi-managed staff member. Any employee with two managers can expect some of the time constraints, conflicting messages, goals-mess and/or psychological stresses. But how to deal with it?

The only answer I have seen work well is to first identify which elements of those four types of issues causes the most distress. Then choose someone to speak with – someone who could do something about the situation, and whom you are confident will support and assist you. “Talk straight”, without drama, to that person about the costs to the employee, to others and to overall performance. Finally, work with that person (and others as available and appropriate) to create a path that allows for less stress and more clarity, integrity and effectiveness for all.

I’m sure you can iron out those wrinkles!

It’s Not About Resolutions, It’s About Management

Between the pandemic and the holiday season, my issues of The Economist have gotten backlogged. I received the December 12th issue 3 weeks late! There was a good article in it, though, about what it takes to be more productive – exactly the ideas I needed to set up my own 2021 work structures in a way that would support a little “productivity growth”, as they called it.

More staff or better technology is not necessarily the solution. What’s important is to find better ways to make use of the resources we have – not just to “get things done” but to discover new ways of producing the results – products and services – that we want to generate.

One thing I discovered when I looked at my workplace and my “Results Wanted” list was to clear out some of the things that were pulling my attention away from what I most wanted to focus on. Who knew that having those 4 things posted on my bulletin board, for example, were cluttering up my perspective and my ability to see what was important to me? I hadn’t noticed that as a distraction before, and will likely find many more in my search for better ways to use my resources to produce the results I want.

What I learned from this article was that upgrading technology or revising workplace processes and habits can bring benefits – but only when those things are put into practice with time and experimentation. I see that I have been too impatient, looking for miraculous breakthroughs in productivity immediately upon making a change I’m sure will be beneficial. Silly me.

This time of year is always useful for a reappraisal of habitual management practices. Looking at my notes for an upcoming conference presentation, I reviewed the basic elements of good management:

  1. Clear statements of goals for the year, i.e., what to produce or deliver, by when, and for what purpose,
  2. Which people are most critical to talk or work with for the accomplishment of each of those goals, and
  3. Tracking progress on a regular schedule – preferably with those people identified above.

These aren’t just useful to a manager or team leader overseeing a group of people. Individuals can put them to use as well, stating their personal objectives and tracking progress. I’ve got a little “tracker” I will be using this first quarter of 2021 as an experiment – it’s simple and I’ll let you know what I learn:

GOAL: What, When, Why

PLAYERS: Who

TRACKING (Dates)

That last column is where I write the dates I will be checking my progress, and noting how much progress – 20%, 50%, DONE – there has been as of that date. I have this chart on my computer because it will adapt the size of each box to the amount of space needed.

Happy New Year, and I hope you’re all off to a good start. Just a few goals can give your life a boost of energy. Just remember, though: it’s an experiment, so play with it and make changes as you see the need. Bon voyage!

The Future of Work – It’s Not All Bad News

I love seeing ideas about how to make the workplace a better place to spend our 40 hours a week. Lately, there has been much hand-wringing about how automation is taking away jobs and creating a two-sided workforce: one side a technology-skilled elite and the other a bunch of low-skill unsecure jobs. So I was happy to see a recent article titled “Free the Workers” – good title, good idea – in the Oct 10th 2020 edition of The Economist.

The article summarized the premise of a new book, “Humanocracy”, by Gary Hamel (a favorite author of mine) and Michele Zanini. They are both management consultants, which means that they test their ideas before they offer them to the public.

Best idea? “All employees should be encouraged to think like businesspeople, be organized into small teams with their own profit-and-loss accounts (and appropriate incentives) and be allowed to experiment.” That’s a good blend of “team focus” and “autonomy” that’s worth implementing, if only to see how it works and what needs to be tweaked for better results.

It is part of a wave of new thinking about work, but two companies – Toyota and Netflix – are already using those ideas in different ways. As a result, their managers have shifted from the usual corporate structure of “layers and centralization” to a model more like a network of teams and business units. Gotta love the network model!

These smaller groups have been given more power to organize their work and make changes in the way they operate, which will improve what are usually seen as low-level jobs. People in those jobs will be able to get out of the rut of routine and use their own initiative for taking on new tasks and problems. That, in turn will allow them to expand their capabilities and develop themselves both personally and professionally, plus being more satisfied and energized in their jobs. So maybe the world of work is not doomed after all.

These ideas also relate to an earlier perspective on improving the workplace: a 2017 article in the Harvard Business Review on the role of trust in organizations. That research showed giving people more power over the ways they do their work, and allowing them to choose the projects they work on, fostered trust and learning for everyone.

The two strongest trust-builders were “recognizing excellence”, i.e., letting people know when they were doing a good job, and keeping workers informed on the company’s goals, strategies and tactics. These practices promoted worker “engagement”, which they defined as “having a strong connection with one’s work and colleagues, feeling like a real contributor and enjoying ample chances to learn.”

Both articles point to the benefits of paying attention to all levels of workers by giving them more opportunities to use their judgment. And both approaches increase the motivation and satisfaction of workers – as well as productivity, quality products and profitability. Finally, both articles agree that having people be accountable – without micromanagement – is important.

The HBR article spoke for both, concluding with the statement that we can: “treat people like responsible adults”. What a radical thought! Automation may create a technological elite but treating people like responsible adults will develop workers in new directions and new ideas.

The Economist article ended with the good news of my week: “The future of work needn’t be gloomy after all. Let’s give it a try, shall we? Trust all levels of workers, let them organize their work and use their own judgment more often. Maybe in a very few years we could celebrate the end of micromanagement?

Management for Accomplishment, 1-2-3: Here is Step Two

Two weeks ago (https://usingthefourconversations.com/blog, Sept. 15, 2020) I mentioned three examples of projects I consulted on where managers wanted to implement a change in their organization. For the most part, they did not know how to set the project up in a way that everybody could win and accomplish the goal. One of those projects will serve as an example for Step Two in Managing for Accomplishment.

A city government’s Department of Electricity had five Units related to their project: Electricity Distribution, the Meter Shop, Engineering, Customer Service, and Purchasing & Stores. These groups worked well together – except for the Engineering and the Distribution Units, who rarely interacted except to argue about equipment and supply requirements.

The diagram below has 6 circles, representing the 5 Units in the project + the electricity Customer. It also has 11 arrows, representing the primary “communication relationship” between the groups, i.e., the most important products, services and/or communications that moved between each pair of circles and what they talked about most.

Notice in the diagram that installation equipment and supplies were determined by the relationship between the Engineering Unit and Purchasing & Stores. The Distribution Unit, which was made up of teams that handled construction, installation and repairs of electrical wires and stations, were the primary users of that equipment, yet were left out of the decisions on what equipment was outdated or needed to be changed for new kinds of projects.

One member of the Distribution team told me, “We aren’t able to satisfy our Department’s mission to ‘provide energy, street lighting and related services reliably with competitive pricing’. We can’t always pay for the city’s need for streetlights.” He was discouraged that they had no voice in improving construction and installation for electricity distribution.

The administrator of the Electricity Department wanted the Engineering and Distribution Units to find a way that they could both have a say in the selection and purchase of electricity installation equipment and supplies, to ensure that Distribution teams would have the equipment they needed to solve the engineering and maintenance problems in the field. He told them to work together and come up with a solution, but the Engineers had little respect for the Installers – and vice versa – so they made no progress.

This administrator did not know that “management for accomplishment” begins with creating a “team”, i.e., getting people aligned on the basics of working well together. Management for Alignment is Step One, and once Team members are clear on the intention of the project, have identified a responsibility structure for the Team, and agree to recognize the relevant rules and regulations for working together, they are ready for Step Two: “Management for Production”.

Getting people ready lay the foundation for productivity requires Team collaboration to define three Step Two elements: (a) the metrics of success; (b) the Team’s performance network of agreements for goal-relevant communications etc. (that’s where their diagram came into existence, even though this version does not spell out all the deliverables); and (c) the production and delivery systems, and standards and practices, to coordinate work and agreements within the Team and with others, including for processes, quality, schedules and costs.

The idea of a “performance network” of deliverables and receivables is sometimes hard to grasp for people who haven’t thought of projects in terms of “deliverables”. We tend to think of “doing” a project and we look forward to when it’s “done”. But we don’t often think of what needs to be “delivered” between Team members and others in order to get the project completed successfully. There’s a big difference in what happens when you focus your attention on Doing vs. Done vs. Delivered.  Tip: Go with “delivered” – get the results (products, services and/or communications) produced into the hands of the people who will put them to work. And get the resources you need delivered to you.

Ultimately, this city Electricity project involved discussions with Purchasing & Stores and the Meter Shop, which produced changes in the way installation equipment and supplies were ordered. Meter equipment was then ordered using the same computer system that Distribution and Engineering would use, which included updated reporting formats that would go to Customer Service from all of the groups.

Production is not a matter of “doing”, nor of getting something “done”. Production requires looking at what needs to be produced and by whom, and to whom it is delivered. All 11 arrows in this performance network diagram were altered – with many added specifics and new agreements – as the Engineering and Distribution Units invented out a way to make more effective purchasing decisions. Note: The Engineering Unit also collaborated with the IT Unit for this project.

As with Step One, the elements of Step Two require the ability to ask 6 questions and to work together to develop the answers. And again, none of these elements involve managing the people (we manage agreements here).

Step Two: Management for Production

WHAT-WHEN-WHY – Spell out the metrics for each key goal: What are the success metrics for budget and cost goals; What are the key performance indicators for production processes, product quality, and service quality. When are the key due dates and milestones. Why these metrics and timelines are important for fulfilling the overall purpose of the work.

WHO-WHERE – Identify the project’s performance network and establish agreements for sending and receiving goal-relevant products, services and communications: Who & Where are the non-Team players who are important for the Team to send and receive goal-relevant products, services and communications (e.g., funding, HR, maintenance, operations, product and service delivery, legal obligations, etc.). Assign responsibilities to the Team members to “own” one or more of these relationships and establish and honor agreements with external non-Team players for goal-relevant delivery content, quality, timing and costs between the Team and external players.

HOW – Spell out production and delivery systems, standards and practices for the project: How all aspects of the work and its deliverable products, services and communications will be produced, coordinated and delivered among Team members, and with players in the performance network, to satisfy goal-relevant requirements, e.g., content quality, schedules and costs, for key functions including: Budget, Operations, Product and Service quality and delivery, IT, Marketing, and Public communication.

Sounds like a lot, doesn’t it? But managing for production requires structures to accommodate the velocity of production and the partnerships in the Team’s external environment. Especially: (a) The metrics that will let everyone see progress and success (or failure) in meeting targets; (b) The relationships with other individuals and groups outside the Team who have resources and ideas that can support success and integrate the project’s results into the larger work environment; and (c) The Team’s organization and coordination of its work and its products, services and communications within its performance network and with other key functions.

A team of people aligned on working productively with goal-relevant partners, using its own custom-designed goal-relevant structures of (a) success metrics, (b) a functional performance network and (c) agreements for coordination and communication, will be ready to manage itself – for accomplishment. I’ll tell you that story in 2 weeks!

We All Need Deadlines

“I don’t need time. What I need is a deadline.” -Duke Ellington, jazz pianist, composer, and conductor 

Although we resist, protest, and sometimes miss deadlines, they provide a structure time alone does not. “Deadlines are one of the most powerful tools for accomplishment you can use,” writes Jeffrey Ford. Deadlines let us know what is needed by when and, when added to a request, create an agreement that can be managed. Without a deadline, projects or tasks exist in limbo, their importance undetermined and their necessity questioned. 

No matter whether the task is for personal satisfaction or a critical business action, a deadline arranges time so you can measure success. So, the next time you are given a new assignment, take the first step to achieving success by asking, “by when do you need it?” If you don’t, getting it done on time suggests “It Don’t Mean a Thing”. 

Photo by Kevin Ku on Unsplash

Getting Things Done. Or Not.

Did anyone ever tell you something that startled you into a new reality? Our publisher (of “The Four Conversations” book) startled me with what turned out to be a great awakening. Two recent news items reminded me of that truth.

We – my husband-coauthor Jeffrey and the publisher – were discussing possible subtitles for our book. I argued for using the phrase, “A Practical Way for Getting Things Done”. After I’d proposed it 3 times, the publisher said, ever so gently, “Laurie, not everybody is interested in getting things done.”

I remember how stunned I was. Really? There are people who don’t want to get things done? What are they doing with their lives? But since then, I’ve noticed how many people can ignore their ever-growing pile of unfinished tasks, or the things they should throw out or give away, or situations that are dangerous and need to be faced promptly. I hadn’t noticed all that before.

Those recent news items? One, a report on Bob Woodward’s book “Fear”, was about Trump’s anger over South Korea’s trade surplus with America. Trump wanted to withdraw from a trade deal with them, but his attorney swiped the paperwork off his desk so he wouldn’t sign it. He knew that Trump “seemed not to remember his own decision because he did not ask about it. He had no list – in his mind or anywhere else – of tasks to complete.”

The other item was in last Sunday’s New York Times about Japan’s nuclear waste. They’ve been building a nuclear waste recycling plant for the last 30 years and it’s still not done. But they can’t give up the project, because the community hosting the facility doesn’t want to face the real problem: recycling the waste is not going to solve over 47 metric tons of plutonium that needs to be safely stored and/or permanently disposed. The community doesn’t want to host a storage site, and disposition is surely impossible in Japan.

Does anybody want to get things done? Apparently, Trump does not keep a list of Things to Do – not on paper or in his head. And Japan is going around in circles to avoid making a permanent plan for solving their nuclear waste problem (so is the U.S.).

It’s simple to make a “To-Do” or a “Results Wanted” list of unfinished things, but it’s hard to face how much we’ve got lying around waiting to be done. I guess we’d rather lie around. But even one completion can give us energy and relief – and it’s usually worth the effort.

If you aren’t getting things done at the rate you’d like, you can always try communication. Propose a task or project to someone else (Initiative conversation). Talk with them about how that task or project might be accomplished (Understanding conversation). Make a request that the other person do some or all of what is required to get it done by a certain time, or even just agree to be a support for you as you take it on yourself (Performance conversation). Follow up on how it’s going by whatever due date(s) you’ve set (Closure conversation).

PS – The subtitle we finally agreed on for our book was “Daily Communication that Gets Results”. Don’t read it unless you want some ideas on getting things done.

The Manager’s Golden Rule: Make Production Goals Visible

Carrie is a longtime friend who has one persistent delusion: she thinks the people in her work group are all committed to producing the results she mentioned in the weekly staff meeting. But the truth is that she is the only one who really focuses on Getting Things Done.

Poor Carrie is astounded – at least once a week – to discover (for the millionth time) that not everyone is dedicated to Getting Things Done. “What’s the matter with them?” she asks me. “Do they forget what we’re doing here? Or are they just not organized for getting their work done?”

And, for the millionth time, I remind her that if you don’t have a visible “scoreboard” of the results you want, most people will focus on their own preoccupations. As I learned in a recent Landmark Worldwide program, most of us are going through life on auto-pilot, at least most of the time.

I remember when I learned that some people are not interested in Getting Things Done. Our publisher broke the news to me (ever so gently) as we were all trying to come up with a subtitle for our book, “The Four Conversations”. Me: “What? Some people don’t care about Getting Things Done? What are they doing with their lives?” OK, I gave up my subtitle idea and bowed to their expertise, eventually settling on the subtitle “Daily Communication that Gets Results” .

In case you, like Carrie, are interested in Getting Things Done – both for yourself and with other people – it helps to know all three parts of the Manager’s Golden Rule:

  1. Spell out the results you want to see.
  2. Specify when you want to see those results: what day, and what time. And, if you have other people who need to produce or deliver something, make note of that too.
  3. Then display that simple chart in a place where you (and everybody else) can see them at least twice a day.

A sample of items from Carrie’s chart looks like this:

Get It DONE! When Who Does It?
Newsletter out Noon – every 3rd Friday Arnie
Training materials updated & printed Friday 3 PM before every training program delivery Training-IT-Marketing Committee
Subscriber Report Before Tuesday staff meetings (9:15 am) Marketing Team
Budget plans & projections For the mid-month Tuesday staff meeting Kelsey’s Money Team

Carrie posted it on the door outside the meeting room, in a hallway between people’s offices and the coffee pot, where everyone would see it. One member of the Marketing Team told me, “It gives me a little boost every time I go by it, just to see how we’re all working together to make something happen.” Carrie rolled her eyes when she heard about that, and said, “They should know their jobs.” (Sometimes she’s crabby.)

Yes, maybe. Or maybe it’s just nice to be reminded that there IS a “big picture” purpose for the team, and not just a bunch of humans running around being busy. I know I keep my own list on the wall in my study. It helps me manage this rogue brain.

Even if We Aren’t “Managers”, Most of Us Need to Manage THIS

Chuck, a maintenance guy, did some work for us the other day and we got talking about how he scheduled his job appointments. Since he was both friendly and skilled at his work, he had a few spare minutes to let me know the secrets of managing a contractor’s calendar. “It’s all about how I keep my job plans in existence,” he said. “Not just the jobs, but also the supplies I need for each one, and checking that my equipment is ready and working. I look at my schedule every evening so I know what to pack up for the next day.”

This reminded me of a question Jeffrey (my professor-emeritus-husband) gives to his MBA students:  “When you are asked to do something – or tell someone you will do something – how do you record it so you don’t forget it?”  We don’t always think of these things as “making promises”, but that’s what they are – and we need to keep track of them somewhere.

Chuck and I talked about keeping promises, agreements, and plans “in existence“, and came up with a list of ways to do it.  I added a few other thoughts from those MBA students too – here is the result:

  1. Write your promise on your schedule. This is really obvious, and probably the best thing to do, but many people don’t use their schedule as a living document in that way. If you promise to research a product, or write up a survey analysis for a colleague, where do you put that task on your calendar? Just writing it into a blank space on Tuesday afternoon and hoping it works out is not always reliable.
  2. Schedule a time to schedule your promises. Another way to use your calendar to increase your reliability is by scheduling a regular time – every day or every few days – to look at your “To-Be-Scheduled” items (see items #3, #4, and #5, listed below this one). Say, at 4:15 every afternoon, you have on your calendar that you’ll check all your (#3) temporary holding places, (#4) delegations, and (#5) the back seat. That’s when you collect all your promises into one place, then put the time(s) you’re going to do the work of fulfilling them on your calendar.
  3. Put your promise in a temporary holding place. Putting an agreement to do something into a queue for later scheduling can prevent us from feeling guilty about postponing the scheduling task. Sometimes that works well, sometimes not. In order of decreasing reliability:
    1. A To-Do List. This is a useful catch-all, sometimes called a “Do-Due List” to remind us to include a due-date on every action item. NOTE: It says, “A To-Do List”, not multiple ones – using multiples decreases reliability.
    2. Pieces of paper. A favorite is writing something on a Post-It note (I love those things!) and sticking it to your computer, file cabinet, refrigerator, or bathroom mirror. But other candidates include writing on the backs of envelopes or on napkins, and one person even mentioned a “rolodex” (does Staples still sell those things?).
    3. Emails or voicemails to yourself. Your email in-box or phone can serve as a holding bin, a form of reminder for things to do. (Recommended: keep an eye on how many are in there!)
    4. A display on the wall. Bulletin boards can be a great way to keep things visible. They can also get messy.
    5. File folders, physical or electronic. Your office filing system or computer can also provide a holding bin for things to do. (I suspect that’s what’s really inside most computers!)
    6. Stacks of stuff, set out where you can see them. Piles of project resources on your bookshelf. Magazines and articles on a side table. Folders of things-to-do propped up against a lamp. These can get Ugh-Ugly and contribute to a sense of overwhelm.
    7. A collection of two or more of the above. If you have multiple Do-Lists; Post-Its on your desk, phone, and computer; more than 25 emails in your in-box; a bulletin board with layers of notes, cards, and papers… well, you get the idea. The problem : You’re not always going to deliver on the most important ones, and you might not even know which ones are the most important.
  4. Delegate your promise. This can be risky, as different people have different habits for reliable completion. But there are several ways to delegate your promises. In decreasing reliability:
    1. Assign a secretary or staff assistant to perform the tasks(s) and/or bring the item to a meeting for discussion and resolution.
    2. Send a memo, email, or leave a voicemail telling someone what action or result you want from them.
    3. Tell someone to remind you about doing that thing, or calling that person.
  5. Throw it in the back seat. This is how to put a “promise” – or something that you and somebody else agreed would be a good idea – into a quiet resting place if you know you’re not likely to get to it in this lifetime:
    1. Put it into a file folder or a notebook, which you then put back in the file cabinet or on a shelf.
    2. Trust that you’ll bump into that person in the hall or at a meeting, and will take a more structured action at that time.
    3. Trust it to memory.

Of course, if you don’t rely on a calendar to help you schedule your days, weeks, and months as a way to help yourself reliably fulfill your promises, then none of this is useful (in which case, I offer my apologies for the time it took you to read the above).

But if you’re interested in a reputation as someone who can be counted on, maybe this gives you some ideas to update your “existence system”. I hereby promise to keep my Do-Due List up to date with a thorough weekly review plus a rendezvous with my calendar.

What is a “Needs Assessment”?

Almost every HR initiative begins with a Needs Assessment. One HR training specialist announced to a group of manufacturing Operations Managers, “Our most important deliverable to you is the Needs Assessment.” The Operations Managers hooted. “We don’t need your needs assessment! We just need you to train our operators to use the equipment without breaking anything.” Sandra, the HR lady, burst into tears.

In the jargon, a “need” is a discrepancy between “what is” and “what should be.” That’s a big playing field on which a consultant can build an assessment investigation. And there are plenty of methods for doing that (just Google “needs assessment”). That’s a good thing, because HR – and consultants, both internal and external – need some way to determine what and where the organization’s problems are.

One tool we use – the Workplace Communication Assessment – is a survey that asks people about the issues they see daily in their organization. It’s quick – 56 questions – and lets each employee say what causes the biggest headaches in doing their jobs. The tool then tallies the answers by categories and prescribes a few ideas to include in a training program, based on the kinds of communication that will reduce or eliminate the problem.

Example: A recent client’s survey scores revealed that 3 types of workplace issues (out of 8 possible categories) were the most frequent barriers to their job effectiveness:

  • Poor planning and workload overwhelm – Too much work to do in too little time;
  • Lack of teamwork – People not working together or helping each other; and
  • Lack of accountability – People not “owning” their jobs or honoring their agreements.

We used the diagnostics that came back with the survey results to add four elements to our training programs for this client, putting each of “The Four Conversations” to work:

  1. Drafting a brief statement of each Department’s current goals and objectives that would go on the top of each Departmental staff meeting agenda.
  2. Getting the staff into Department discussion groups to make a list of ideas for improvements in (a) having clearer job results and schedules, and (b) interactions with one another and with other groups.
  3. Making specific agreements to adopt several of these ideas right away, and to review the progress at each Department meeting.
  4. Reviewing and updating the goals, ideas for improvements, and agreements at each Department meeting.

All of their “top 3” workplace issues began improving in just 1 month after implementing the ideas they developed in the training. The biggest surprise? They had not been having regular or standardized Department meetings at all – only meetings to solve problems or announce changes. They used the results of the Workplace Communication Assessment to invent their own staff meetings. One group leader for Development emailed me saying, “Now Staff Meetings are a thing! We have an agenda, we really talk, and we don’t get bogged down in side conversations that waste some people’s time.”

They put their “Needs Assessment” to work. Sandra would be pleased.

 

Lost Productivity: Is the Culprit Social Media or Sloppy Communication?

Productivity is a big deal – the idea is to produce good hourly output at work, especially if you want to get a raise. An article (Why Your Facebook Habit At Work Makes Economists Worry) says that some people want to blame employees who are using social media for the recent drop in productivity. Another theory is that employers aren’t investing in better tools for their personnel. The reason for this is that “there aren’t any game-changing innovations to invest in”.

Seriously? Has anybody noticed that people don’t communicate productively? Recent examples in organizations I’ve been working with:

  • A company policy makes it clear that performance reviews must be updated annually. But in a brief survey of managers asked about performance evaluations, over 60% of them said, “We don’t really do many performance reviews here.” So, you don’t pay regular attention to productivity?
  • Sharon, a new manager, used a long weekend to map out the job responsibilities of her 14 staff members. She spelled out the details, put each “assignment” into a separate document, and emailed it to her people. When they arrived at work on Monday morning, they saw their updated job descriptions in their in-boxes. One of them said to me, “She didn’t even talk to us about this. Some of these tasks are outdated, and she left out other really important things we need to do. This is just stupid.” A lost weekend, and probably some lost trust too.
  • Robin asked Ted to pull together an RFP to get people who will help integrate and upgrade their auditing software. Five days later, Robin asks Ted if it’s done yet. Ted says, “You never said when you wanted it, so I haven’t even started. What is your deadline?” Five days misspent?

Communications that lack follow-through, or don’t include a dialogue with relevant parties, or fail to include timelines for assignments, will be ineffective. It impaired productivity in all three of these cases, and over a long career I have seen many more instances of such bumbling.

What about helping employees learn to communicate more effectively? Like, how to follow through on policy implementation to support people keeping up with corporate commitments. Or how to have a dialogue with other human beings about what is wanted and needed to update their job descriptions.Or how to practice adding “by when” to your requests.

The article ends with something that makes a lot of sense. A long-term answer to boosting productivity is (…drum roll please) better educated workers. I couldn’t agree more.