:Forest Folk

Meetings are out of control. They’ve been that way since my first job out of college when someone gave me a book called How to Make Meetings Work. When I could control it, I stuck to the following rules to ensure the meetings were effective.

Have a good reason for the meeting

Sounds obvious, but often overlooked especially where recurring meetings are concerned. Recurring meetings are taken for granted and no one bothers to revisit if there is a need to continue the meetings or to simply cancel a meeting when there is no need for it.

Franklin Roosevelt started many programs to help America recover from the depression. Some of those programs still existed many years after the fact when they’re no longer needed or fit the current economic environment. Some programs didn’t get cut until the 1980s through today.

Limit attendees

This good general management common sense. The more people you have, the longer it takes to come to a consensus on the action items, problems, and solutions.

For several years, I worked on a management team and it worked well as attendance was limited to specific managers. Then, two other groups joined our organization and we almost doubled our meeting participants. We fought to limit attendance for this specific meeting and lost. We didn’t accomplish as much as the smaller team and it took longer to get results.

I’ve seen managers and team leads attend every meeting there is known to the department even if one of their direct reports already attends. Delegate and trust. Let the direct report attend the meeting and report back. Use the freed up time for something else. It’s not a crime for a manager to attend less than 40 hours of meetings per week.

Imagine what would’ve happened to the Declaration of Independence had more than five people had sat on the committee? A committee of five drafted it with Thomas Jefferson doing most of the writing and presented to Continental Congress for approval.

Create an agenda and stick to it

Even if you have an impromptu meeting, quickly jot down the agenda so you can stay on track. It doesn’t have to be fancy or formal. Just list what you’re going to talk about and if possible, list how much time is available for each topic.

When a discussion gets lengthy, do what it takes to put an end to it otherwise the meeting runs over or the people who have the conference room reserved kick you out and your last agenda items get sacrificed. Typically lengthy discussions impact only some of the attendees. So agree to take the discussion offline (outside of the meeting). Make it an action item for them to meet and report the final decision.

Steer irrelevant discussions back on track

Enforce the previous rule and stick to the agenda. As a compromise, table the discussion for after all of the agenda items are covered. Make the last agenda item a free for all so attendees aren’t tempted to break the rhythm of the meeting with something not on the agenda.

Let’s get those meetings back in control and reclaim the extra time for other work.

Meryl K. Evans is the Content Maven behind meryl’s notes, eNewsletter Journal, and The Remediator Security Digest. She is also a PC Today columnist and a tour guide at InformIT. She is geared to tackle your editing, writing, content, and process needs. The native Texan resides in Plano, Texas, a heartbeat north of Dallas, and doesn’t wear a 10-gallon hat or cowboy boots.

Comments Off

If you manage people for any length of time, it’s likely that, at some stage, you’ll need to let one or more people go.

It might be because they aren’t performing to your expectations; because you no longer need their role performed; or because they’ve breached the law or a company policy.

Whatever the circumstances, firing or retrenching someone is a confronting and often stressful task.

Here are some suggestions to make the process easier and less traumatic — for you as well as the person you need to dismiss.

Depending on why you need to let someone go — whether it’s due to poor performance, a role that’s no longer needed, or a legal or policy breach — here’s what I suggest you do…

1. Poor Performance

Firing or relocating someone because of poor performance is often the trickiest situation because (a) it may be unclear why your employee is underperforming, and (b) depending on the

relevant labor laws, it may be difficult for you to prove that he or she is underperforming and that you’re legally justified in firing him or her.

So, if you are dissatisfied with someone, the first step is to work out why he or she has performed so poorly. Specifically, is it because of:

- You
- The organization, or
- The poor performer?

Beginning with you… are you managing the person satisfactorily?

This is important because not only may it be unnecessary to fire your staff member (i.e. you might find that his or her performance picks up simply by changing the way you manage) but you could also avoid a “wrongful dismissal” claim being thrust on you. For tips on how to manage people check out my free report, How To Be An Outstanding Manager — The 8 Vital Keys To Managing People Effectively (see below).

Alternatively, if both you and your employee work for someone else… has that “someone else” — i.e. your organization — somehow failed to provide enough resources for your employee to do his or her job properly? Is it failing to give you the support you need to carry out your management responsibilities?

If so, you may need to ask for changes or more support from the “powers that be”. And remember, if the company is to blame… firing and replacing your employee will not improve matters.

Unless… it’s your staff member — and neither you nor your company are responsible for the poor performance.

Is the employee ill suited to the role? Does he or she lack key talents, skills or knowledge?

Are their personality clashes with you or other colleagues that are interfering with his or her work? Or are there personal issues that are affecting the employee’s attitude or performance at work?

Above all, is there anything you can do about any of this?

If not — and you’ve done all you can to help your employee improve — then the writing in on the wall. You cannot afford to keep people on who don’t pull their weight!

Nevertheless, this doesn’t mean you can’t fire someone in a fair and compassionate way.

In fact, you can make it easier by giving the employee plenty of notice — at least 1 month and up to 2 months if the job market is tight and you can afford it.

And if, during this time, you don’t want the employee to continue doing his or her old job, give him or her other work to do.

Lastly, let the individual apply for jobs and attend interviews. Even better (if you can afford it), pay for him or her to attend career change training, where he or she will learn how to prepare, or update, his or her resume and apply for new jobs.

2. The Role Is No Longer Needed

If you simply don’t have enough work to go around — or it’s clear that a particular employee’s role is no longer needed — you’ll have to “retrench” him or her.

In this case, it’s important to remember that the worker is not to blame for losing his or her job.

If you can, redeploy the employee in another role. But if that’s not feasible try to be extra considerate when letting him or her go by providing plenty of notice, letting him or her apply for jobs on your dime, and paying for career change training.

3. Legal / Corporate Policy Breach

Now we come to what may appear to be the easiest situation in which to sack someone — where the employee has breached the law or a corporate policy.

Well, it can still be tough, if not tougher!

First of all, if you think someone has done something wrong, make sure you have solid proof before making any accusations or commencing the dismissal process. And comply with all corporate
and legal requirements.

Secondly, be prepared to give the employee a fair hearing… and be prepared for what he or she has to say.

If there are extenuating circumstances, you might take these into account when deciding whether and how to sack the individual, depending on your professional, corporate and legal obligations.

For example, you might decide to put the employee on some kind of “probation.”

Be very careful about taking it easy on someone who has clearly lied, stolen or breached your trust, though. While it might seem only fair to help out a person you let go because of poor
performance, or because his or her role is no longer required… when it comes to a wrongdoer…

I reckon you should cut the “dead wood” out of your team or organization before the rot starts to spread!

So there you have some general tips for firing or letting someone go. Hopefully, if you do need to use these tips, you’ll find the task of dismissing someone much easier and less stressful.

Anna Johnson is the author of the How To Manage People System, which includes her controversial new book, How To Manage People (Even If You’re A Control Freak!) (ISBN 0-9775175-0-0). For invaluable advice on managing people, claim your copy of Anna’s FREE 12-page report, How To Be An Outstanding Manager — The 8 Vital Keys To Managing People Effectively.

Comments Off

The foundation of any business transaction is the promise of fair deal. In complex organizational relationships, it is all too easy to lose sight of the existence and terms of this deal. On the surface, that employer/employee relationship, called a job, is a fair deal wherein the employer’s money is traded for the employee’s time and talent. The deeper reality, however, is that the employer is actually trading resources for a set of desirable results, which the employee is expected to deliver. The promise to faithfully deliver as agreed by both parties is the essence of accountability.

We recommend that organizations give voice to their accountability through a document called an Accountability Agreement. An Accountability Agreement clearly states the results that each member of an organization, from the most senior to the most junior, is expected to bring about [For specific examples of Accountability Agreements, please see our online tool at http://www.AlignOnline.com]. The following six principles form the foundation for negotiating and understanding accountability. Together they form a practical theory of accountability, the transforming effect it can have on an organization, and its essential role in creating significant business results.

I. Accountability is a Statement of Personal Promise

Accountability is both a promise and an obligation to deliver specific, defined results. Accountability, as we define it, does not apply in an abstract way to departments, work groups, or entire organizations. Accountability applies to individuals and their personal promise that these functions will deliver the agreed results. Accountability is first and foremost a personal commitment to the organization and to those the organization serves. It is more than just trying, doing your best, or behaving in certain ways. Accountability empowers individuals to push their circle of influence outwards in pursuit of results.

II. Accountability for Results Means Activities Aren’t Enough

Everyone in an organization, from the CEO to the janitor, has some piece of the business and a corresponding set of results which are theirs to achieve. Distinguishing results from activities requires a shift in traditional thinking built on an awareness of why we do what we do. For example, a typical supervisor’s job description includes activities such as “training,” “performance evaluations,” and “timely communication”. In contrast, a supervisor’s accountabilities should include a result such as “the success of all direct reports.” This concept addresses the common observation that everyone is busy but only some people are productive.

III. Accountability for Results Requires Room for Judgment and Decision Making

If you’re not allowed to use any judgment or discretion on the job, if you’re told to follow the rules no matter what, if no decision is up to you, then your boss can only hold you accountable for activities. You can be held accountable for doing what you’re told, but you can’t be held accountable for the outcome. Judgment and innovation can never be fully described in a job description. When employees are expected to be resourceful in the achievement of results, they are held accountable for capturing opportunities or ignoring them.

IV. Accountability is Neither Shared nor Conditional

Accountability Agreements are individual, unique, and personal strategies. No two people at the same level in an organization should have the exact same accountabilities. Separating each person’s accountabilities can be challenging, but valuable clarity results from the struggle to eliminate overlaps.

V. Accountability for the Organization as a Whole Belongs to Everyone

Every employee’s first accountability is for thinking about and acting on what is best for the organization, even if doing so means putting aside one’s individual, functional, or departmental priority. The most successful organizations expect and allow every person to be of practical assistance in realizing the organization’s goals.

VI. Accountability is Meaningless Without Consequences

In Accountability Agreements, consequences need to be negotiated. Negotiated consequences that are personally significant to the employee in question are an essential element of Accountability Agreements and are fundamental to forging a fair deal. This is a key step in forging an interdependent and mutually beneficial relationship with one’s employer.

Organizational accountability entirely subverts the tendency to make excuses and shift blame. When employees make clear and specific commitments for their own work, entire organizations become aligned and achieve specific measurable results.

Shaun Murphy, Ph.D. and Bruce Klatt, M.A. are senior partners in Murphy Klatt Consulting. This article has been adapted from a chapter of their book, Accountability: Getting a Grip on Results (2nd Ed.1997). Their other publications include Aligned Like a Laser (2004), The Encyclopedia of Leadership (2001), and The Ultimate Training Handbook (1999). They are internationally recognized experts in the field of Accountability Alignment, Organizational Effectiveness, and Project Development whose books have sold over 100,000 copies internationally.

For more information please go to http://www.murphyklatt.com or try their online Accountability Alignment tool at http://www.AlignOnline.com

Comments Off

Lack of Operations Manuals stunting your growth?

CONTENTS: 1. Do you lack functional Operations Manuals? 2. Use
a SYSTEM to write your Operations Manuals! 3. Yes, but my people
just don’t/won’t write stuff down! 4. But people WILL write
stuff down - if … 5. Call to Action.

============================================================ 1.
Do you lack functional Operations Manuals?
============================================================

Great businesses depend on systems, not people.

That’s because you can duplicate systems, but not people.

If your business can’t duplicate salable results, it won’t
survive. Duplication is Nature’s Survival Law.

If your organization lacks Operations Manuals, your growth and
success will be limited due to lack of a duplicable (documented)
system.

============================================================ 2.
You can use a SYSTEM to write your Operations Manuals!
============================================================

Extraordinary people don’t build great businesses. Ordinary
people produce extraordinary results using a duplicable system.
That’s how you build a great business.

The faster you develop good Operations Manuals the faster you
will have a great business!

============================================================ 3.
Yes, but my people just don’t/won’t write stuff down!
============================================================

You will hear many excuses and attitudes for why people don’t
write Operations Manuals.

“We just don’t have enough time.”

“It’s not my job man! You hired me to be a [manager,
programmer, accountant, engineer, whatever]. I’m not a writer!”

“I hate to write. Who needs it!”

“Whenever I feel like writing, I lie down until the feeling
goes away.”

“It’s different here. Things change too fast. The minute we
write something down, it’s obsolete…”

These are typical objections people express. But, one of the
most UNexpressed fears is:

“If I document my job in an Operations Manual, I can be
replaced! I’ll lose my job!”

No wonder so few organizations have Operations Manuals!

============================================================ 4.
But people WILL write stuff down - if …
============================================================

. and only if they can realize a benefit!

Let’s face it. You can grow your organization ONLY if you can
promote and/or replace your employees. Thus, you and your team
can MOVE UP only if you can replace yourselves.

And you can do this by documenting your positions in
well-organized Operations Manuals.

“Mike! Are you saying that by writing stuff down in Operations
Manuals we’ll receive more raises, promotions, and vacations.”

Absolutely!

These goodies are not available without your company’s growth
and prosperity!

Did you know most business start-ups fail while most franchises
succeed. Successful franchises use a documented management
system … in short … Operations Manuals!

“But Mike, our company is not a ‘franchise!’”

Neither is mine.

But SMS has a documented management system, including about
13,000 pages of Operations Manuals.

When anyone or I want to know how to do something, all we need
do is pull a manual off the shelf. What could be easier? There’s
near zero “tribal knowledge” here.

We can relocate on a moment’s notice with minimum hassle.

I know of many companies that wanted to move from California.

Suddenly, they were faced with hiring many new, inexperienced
employees in another state.

Suddenly, they were faced with writing (insufficient)
Operations Manuals literally as-they-packed!

Believe me, displaced employees were less than cooperative! And
those who moved with the company inherited enormous problems due
to poor - or no - documentation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, here’s my advice. Start now!

Develop a set of Operations Manuals where you collect
information that governs how your company’s positions function.

At SMS, we have at least one 3-ring binder for every position
on our Org Chart.

Develop your Operations Manuals in a standard format containing
at least the following information for each position.

ACCOUNTABILITY - Specify the position’s accountabilities.

STANDARDS - Specify the standards for the position. Include the
policies that define / limit the position’s authority and the
position holder’s general conduct.

WORK INSTRUCTIONS - Specify how the position’s work will be
performed.

GENERAL INFORMATION - Provide information about your
organization, your products and services, your competition, etc.
Include other material that enriches the position holder’s
understanding of the working environment.

INTERFACE - Describe how the position interfaces with:

> Its superior position. > Its subordinate positions. > Peer
position(s) with frequent contact. > Non-peer staff positions
with frequent contact. > The “Outside World” (customers,
vendors, etc.).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You can design your manuals to have five sections each as
follows.

1. POSITION SECTION

2. COMPANY/PRODUCTS SECTION

3. POLICY SECTION Company-wide policies:

4. SYSTEMS SECTION Action plans, sample forms, flowcharts,
scripts, collateral materials, etc.

5. LOGIC SECTION Explain the principles behind the position’s
work.

============================================================ 5.
Call to Action.
============================================================

To review, your Operations Manuals are collection points for
information that governs functioning of positions on your Org
Chart.

I sent you this eZine to give you an outline to ease development
of your Operations Manuals.

As you’ve probably guessed, developing Operations Manuals is a
big task. I’ve done it often for many clients. If I be of
assistance, just send me an email.

Together, we can document what you want, how you want it, and
when you want it. We will discuss various creative approaches
before the project begins.

Mike Hayden Principal/Consultant Your partner in streamlining
business.

For more information, Website:
http://www.SeniorManagementServices.com

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(c) 2003 Mike Hayden, All rights reserved. You may use material
from the Profitable Venture Tactics eZine in whole or in part,
as long as you include complete attribution, including live
website link and email link.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Comments Off

The Crippled Bird

I

And Zaneta heard the wind shifting outside

the car window, then I parked the car

We stood outside the car and talked

as if it was a birdcage.

She was a crippled bird, slow she

was to learn, as many heard, as if her mind

Was in a box utterly locked

for her mind skipped, like lifting fog,

Slow to gradually, went her childhood

she,

In her fading voice: “O why has God

made me like this?”

(I listened carefully)

“They all laugh at me, Sue, Sarah, Billy too.”

“Zaneta, Zaneta!”

Said Zaneta, her hands shaking like a thin

paper-wall, next to a moving train

(kids can be cruel).

It was like an earthquake, inside my head

“Zaneta” I said…

She moaned to see what I would say,

I felt the earth had swallowed

My little girl up. “I don’t know why God

makes things the way He does,

(Zaneta was in a trance), perhaps it’s

According to His plan, His habit,”

I said, “perhaps He has greater visions

for you, but it was not by chance.

It will have to be you who will rise above

the melted candle.”

II

O swiftness was not her beauty,

But breath of air, and bravery was in her veins.

The doctors all said she’d never read

Quite opposite, she was like granite.

She was in the dark, and chose the light

And day after day, year after year

She read bible verse, syllable by syllable

Stanza by stanza, cradled in her hands

The scriptures (hard to understand)

But she read them, found hope, and

Slid on passion to learn, all because

Of one day of counsel.

From half-scornful pity to its burial.

III

She as one, had rebuilt the bridges

The one her shame, in silent secrecy, could

Never meet in the light of a room

Now it slipped through the room of night

And wrecked everything in sight, like a storm

And some how landed on the fifth-moon,

The one only in dreams.

IV

She kept secret her perplexed fear,

Of being backwards (slow) and no

I mean no one knew the difference.

No longer a prisoner with an inescapable fate,

The root in her body was nourished:

Death had entered and left.

#1193 [2/9/2006]

Notes: this is a hard and emotional poem to read. Not hard in reading, but hard in being able to read it emotionally. It is funny, children that is: Dennis has a son who is (as he says)’Too smart for his own good,’ one that is very slow, his daughter, and one who he claims is average, like him. And he could never put these words to the poem in their proper place about his daughter who now is 27-years old, although he had the words, he did not have the style it needed. Now he does. I do believe Robinson Jeffers helped him out with the style. It is a lovely poem. Rosa

In Spanish
Translated by Nancy Penaloza

El Pajarillo Lisiado

I

Y Zaneta escuch el cambio del viento afuera

De la ventana del coche, luego yo lo estacioné
Nos paramos fuera del coche y hablamos

Como si esta fuera una jaula.
Ella era como una pajarita lisiada, lenta para

Aprender era ella, como muchos escucharon,- como si su mente
Estuviera en una caja-completamente bloqueada

Para su mente pasada por alto, como niebla disipada,
Lenta poco a poco, fue a su niez

Ella,
En su voz atenuada; “Oh, porque Dios

Me hizo como esto”?

(Yo escuche cuidadosamente)

“Todos ellos se ren de mi, Sue, Sarah, Billy también”.

“Zaneta, Zaneta”!.
Dijo Zaneta, sus manos sacudiendo como una delgada

Pared de papel, cerca de un tren en movimiento
(Los muchachos pueden ser crueles).

Fue como un terremoto, dentro de mi cabeza

“Zaneta” yo dije..
Ella gema para ver lo que yo dira,

Yo sent que la tierra se haba tragado
A mi pequea nia. “yo no se porque Dios

Hace las cosas de la forma que lo hace”,
(Zaneta estaba en un trance), talvez esto es
De acuerdo a su plan, su habito”,

Dije, “Talvez él tiene las visones mas grandes

Para ti, pero no era por casualidad.
Tendras que ser tu quien se eleve sobre

La vela fundida”.

II

Oh, La rapidez no era su belleza,
Pero el aliento de aire, y el valor estaban en sus venas.

Todos los médicos dijeron que ella nunca leera
Todo lo contrario, ella estaba como el granito.
Ella estaba en la oscuridad, y escogi la luz
Y da tras da, ao tras ao

Ella ley versos de la Biblia, slaba por slaba

Estancia por estancia, sosteniendo en sus manos

Las escrituras (Difcil para entender)

Pero ella los ley, encontr la esperanza, y

Desliz en la pasin para aprender, todo a causa
De un da del consejo.
De la compasin medio-despreciativo para su entierro.

III

Ella como uno, haba reedificado los puentes
El nico su vergenza, en silencioso secreto, jams
Encontrara en la luz de un cuarto
Ahora esto resbal por el cuarto de noche
Y destruy todo a la vista, como una tempestad
Y algo como aterrizado sobre la quinta-luna,
El nico slo en sueos.

IV

Ella mantuvo secreto su temor perplejo,
De ser al revés (floja) y ninguno
Yo creo que nadie supo la diferencia.
No ms que un preso con un destino ineludible,
La raz en su cuerpo estaba alimentada:

La Muerte haba entrado y sali.

#1193 [2/9/2006]

See Dennis’ web site: http://dennissiluk.tripod.com see his new poetry books at http://www.bn.com [Poems out of Minnesota]or http://www.amazon.com

Comments Off

I witnessed some interesting behaviour from one of our premier management schools this summer. A behaviour that I have since discovered is not uncommon.

This summer I met the PA of an emminent professor at a business school.

I had met her on several occassions before and knew her to be a bright chatty woman who always enjoyed passing the time of day.

On this occassion when I asked her how her week was going she looked at me and I could see that she wanted to smile but the muscles in her face would not work and after a few twitches she gave up trying and looked back at the ground.

I asked her what was the matter and she told me that her department was undergoing change.

I asked her what that actually meant.

She told me that a “Change Manager” had appeared in the department and everybody was waiting to see who got the sack.

This was a woman, who is normally a capable and confident administrator, had been reduced to a nervous wreck because she perceived that an anonymous arbiter had been brought in to decide her future.

This was her reaction to the presence of a “Change Manager” based on her perception that change meant people being sacked.

How close was this perception to reality?

I met my PA again a month later and the way that she and her colleagues had been treated made me spit.

She had got over her first shock and was now extremely angry with the college authorities.

30 senior PA’s were now involved.

It seems that the chancellor and his senior team had announced the changes then brought in a consultant to ratify them.

The situation for the PA’s was that they had been told that their fates would be announced in six weeks.

They had no idea how many jobs would be left after six weeks but were told that nobody would be made redundant, alternative employment would be found.

The perception of the PA’s was that their managers had already decided how many would be let go and were only spinning it out under the guise of “Managed Change” because they wanted to pretend that the decision was part of a reasoned process and not the arbitrary wielding of a financial axe by the accountant.

It was awful to watch the diabolical way a centre for excellence was treating its own staff, and still had the temerity to continue to hold itself up as an example to whom we should look for learned guidance.

“What thickness is the ivory on their tower that prevents them seeing the consequences of their actions?”

My initial question was whether this girls perception of change was shared by others.

It seems that it is.

I spoke to my PA friend again last month and they were still telling her to wait while the decision was made about her future.

She could not endure the stress any longer and started to look for alternative employment.

As she said, she loved the job that she used to have,

The authorities had through their actions caused her to lose trust in them and come to hate the job that was now causing her so much stress.

She could not consider continuing to work for them even if they announced tomorrow that her job was safe because she could not continue to work for, or trust, people who had caused her so much pain.

This behaviour from a respected university that is held up as a centre of management excellence is, in its personal effect on these individuals, appalling.

It is interesting to note that the bosses of all the PA’s affected had by this time been asked to reapply for their jobs too.

The PA that I know told me that her boss has started to look for work elsewhere for the same reasons as she had.

Last week I met the PA again and she told me that both she and her boss had found new jobs, still working together, at a neighbouring school.

It does not have the same reputation but that is a situation that neither of them thinks will last for very long.

Having spent long hours discussing how diabolical the action of the college was the PA’s had come to realise that what was apparently just another example of Crass bad management was in actual fact best practice.

As a centre of management excellence one of the techniques that was advocated to avoid making redundancy payments when you need to get rid of people is too make the workplace so stressful that they choose to leave.

The favourite technique for doing this is to make people reapply for their own jobs.

I am happy to report in this instance that the management school were well and truly stuffed.

My PA, and a number of others who had all found alternative employment, accidentally neglected to tell the college that they had found alternative employment.

The result was that the college, when nobody left voluntarily, were forced to announce the redundancies.
Every single person made redundant took their payment then walked straight into a new job that they had already accepted.

The college still had to make redundancy payments to the people it had always intended laying off but in addition it also had the expense of recruiting new staff to fill all the other posts of the people who had left because of the shoddy way the college had treated their staff.

What goes around, comes around.

Score one for the good guys.

Peter A Hunter
Author of “Breaking the Mould”
http://www.breakingthemould.co.uk

Comments Off