Monday, March 31, 2014

Personal Development Project - Report #4 - Generational Differences At Work


Part of the Certified Public Manager program involves the completion of a personal development project.  My selected project is to prepare a series of lectures to my fellow managers about basic managerial concepts.  These series of posts are intended to document my progress in that endeavor.  This report pertains to a presentation made on 3/31/14.


Generational Differences in the Workplace. Continuing the series of management discussions at the weekly staff meeting, I presented a discussion on the differences between the generations in the workforce.

The generations are typically classified as Traditional (born in '22-'45), Boomers ('44-'62), Gen X ('65-'80), and Gen Y ('81-00).  Interestingly, I had a member of the first three generations in the room and one person who readily put his son in the Gen Y category.

The group identified with many of the general traits of the various generations.  I was very pleased to have the conversation culminate in a statement to the effect that we all need to realize there are different styles at work and that we need to appreciate differences.

As for a presentation, I struggled the most with this topic so far.  The concept was more complex than anything I had presented before.  I wanted to keep the presentation brief and concise and that proved challenging.  Given that it is four concepts to explain, then explain how those concepts play out in the work force, and then to compare the concepts.  In all it was a bit of a challenge.

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Personal Development Project - Report #3 - Effective Recognition


Part of the Certified Public Manager program involves the completion of a personal development project.  My selected project is to prepare a series of lectures to my fellow managers about basic managerial concepts.  These series of posts are intended to document my progress in that endeavor.  This report pertains to a presentation made on 3/17/14.

Keys to Effective Recognition.

Continuing the series of management discussions at the weekly staff meeting, I presented a discussion of the keys to effective recognition.

I started the discussion by reviewing the concepts we had covered before.  These included the SMART employee assignments and Herzberg's list of Satisfiers and Dis-Satisfiers.  The one concept that is both a Satisfier and Dis-Satisfier from Herzberg's work is the concept of recognition.  This provided a great segue into how to do recognition effectively.

The three key concepts to effective recognition are:  It should be SPECIFIC.  It should be IMMEDIATE.  And it should be SINCERE.

We did have some discussion that we could do much better at this than we presently are.  Our current practice of an "employee of the month" selection at a semi-regular monthly safety meeting, is probably better than nothing, but it does not adhere to many of these concepts.

Friday, March 14, 2014

Discussion Topic #3 - Term Limited Employment


As a discussion topic, I would like to explore further the concept of term limiting employment in the public sector.  What would be the pros and cons of making employment hires under the condition that the job will last no longer than 10 years.

Certainly, some of the details would need to be refined.  Perhaps providing substantial bonuses at the 5, 8 and 10 year marks.  Retirement accounts would need to be adjusted, but probably along the lines of the current movement towards defined contribution plans.  Jobs could be staggered to avoid any single mass exodus.  And potentially, provisions could be made to give the agency an option to retain the employee for an additional 4 years.  And the transition from our current system to this model would require a thoughtful approach with all the stakeholders.

The con’s that were presented in class seem to be losing institutional knowledge and difficulty in attracting top talent.  I will attempt to address those first.

Institutional Knowledge 
Working with the understanding that an employee was term limited would create more of a focus on documenting institutional knowledge.  This was a primary incentive behind our discussion for succession planning.  And given today’s free agency mindsets, should management not always be preparing for any employee to leave at any given time?

Attraction of Talent
The second objection to the concept was the difficulty in retaining top talent with the prospect of service being limited to 10 years.  Do we, or the top talent, believe they will want to be in any one position longer than 10 years?  We need to be challenging that top talent to grow and develop.

In contrast, is a top talent that has been doing the exact same job for 10 years, really ideal?  I was just reading recently HBR's When It;s Time For the CEO To Go that identified the CEO's optimal time to be 7 years plus or minus 2 years.

Other Considerations
Additionally, how many job descriptions, written 10 years earlier are likely to still be relevant.  This would give a great way of reassessing needs periodically and also of intentionally finding talent to meet specific needs.


One running joke in our HR class was that there was no problem in the HR field that could not be cured in 30 years.  Wouldn't it be prudent to cut that by a third? 

And how many of my CPM class cohorts, instructors, or lecturers have held one single position, without significant advancement for more than 10 years.  From what I know, that number is probably pretty small.  That is just becoming less of a reality for the Gen X/Y demographic. 

Finally, this might provide a great counter balance to bureaucracies intrinsic desire for self preservation described in the first installment of this discussion series.  In this model self preservation becomes building skills and talents that are valuable for the employee in the future, not hoarding institutional knowledge so as to become irreplaceable?

Journal Reflections from Module 2.1 - Human Resources


[Editors note:  The following is a journal entry addressing specific questions provided by the CPM course instructors for module 2.1.  Suggested questions had not been provided at the time the post was published, so the author took the liberty of recounting key insights gathered from the three day instructional session and 215 pages of suggested readings.]


Character Trait Inventories
How many more character trait inventory surveys can we possibly take?  So far I recall having done the following?
1.     Poster about ourselves
2.     Growth inventory assessment
3.     Recounted our best management moment
4.     MBTI personality traits
5.     360 Feedback
6.     Values Identification Exercise
7.     Conversation styles in conflict

Fierce Conversations
The Fierce Conversations book talked about by Betsey BeMiller looked like a repackaging of the Crucial Conversations methodology.  Fierce Conversations was just not as straightforward and with more steps to remember.

During the discussion, I was able to track in parallel the alignment of the Crucial Conversations methodology in the Fierce Conversations material.  I was pleasantly pleased with how well I could remember the Crucial Conversations material.

That the author of Fierce Conversations was an executive coach, I found to be  interesting.  I had just finished listening to Marshal Goldsmith’s What Got You Here Won’t Get You There and so the topic of addressing targeted deficiencies was something that was already on my mind.

The story of the executive who came to realize that he had a alcohol problem, seemed like it could have come from either book.  Both authors noted the inability of even successful people to identify our own shortcomings.

Mental Focus
One interesting parallel between Goldsmith and Cynthia Shaffer’s presentation was the discussion about having the ability to mentally focus.  I was recalling Goldsmith’s exercise of focusing on counting to 40 with your eyes closed and seeing how far you get before your mind has wondered onto another topic.

I'm lucky to make it to the mid 20's myself and I have often heard people marvel at my ability to focus on particular tasks.


Tolerance As Not Positive
The “tolerance as bad” principle that was presented in class seemed like a theory in need of further refinement.  Sort of a first draft of a masters or doctoral thesis.  There is value in the concept that “tolerating people” is less than the optimal method of interacting with others, but it didn’t seem to have the depth or polish of a comprehensive theory.

As I understand the concept presented, when we assess the differentiation between our behaviors towards those we “appreciate”, “tolerate”, or “despise”; we clearly want to be dealing with people in the “appreciate” manner and not to simply "tolerate" them.

Pretending everyone is your best buddy seems shallow and contrived.  Similarly, it would seem logical that there is a place for reserved or guarded interactions with those for whom the “cultural competency” has been as well developed.


Cultural Competency as Political Correctness
Also within this tolerance discussion, Mike made the interesting observation of equating “Cultural Competence” as the current term for “Political Correctness.”  I thought this was a very an insightful observation. 

Political correctness has achieved a certain level of stigma associated with its emphasis on refining our choice of words allowable to use based on an approved and acceptable list.

I think we all expect “Cultural Competence” will become stigmatized too, once it becomes another means of indiscriminately imposing the philosophies of our cultural and academic elite upon the practically minded masses.


Tips for Creating Job Duty Descriptions
Moving “Other Duties as Assigned” out of a job description’s Essential Duties to the “Non-Essential Job Functions” seemed like a great tip.  The reasoning being that this might help avoiding creating a situation of permanent accommodation which would effectively invent a job, apart from what the original job was created to do.

The underlying principle is to keep clean and accurate job descriptions.  That way organizations can be intentional about what ways they are serving their customers.


Harassment Game
The key concept I took from the Harassment Game was the prerequisite condition of being able to identify the victim within a protected group as the critical component of moving a case forward under a discrimination claim. 

A tangential observations from the game was that the “Yes, it was harassment” side won much more frequently, particularly when the “judge” was emotionally interested in seeing the harassment.  Strict adherence to the letter of the law in the finding of a desperate class was not always the judges emphasis.  I suspect this is truer to life that we would hope.


Process for Conducting Investigations
The lecture about the steps to conducing an incident investigation was excellent.  Getting the slides in a readable format will be worthwhile.

Cynthia emphasized that ensuring the parties achieve "Process Satisfaction" by keeping them informed and making progress on the issue was key.  This ties in closely with Herzberg’s dis-satisfier of “poor organizational processes”.   Tangentially, it would also relate to another satisfier of demonstrating “competence of supervisors”.  Finally, the entire issue of resolving interpersonal conflicts fits with the overarching theme of Herzberg’s emphasis in the finding that the dis-satisfiers generally emphasis interpersonal relationship aspects.

Using the phrase “your account of events” rather than “Your story” or “your version” or “your side” when conducting an investigation was a good tip.  It makes it seem less confrontational or accusatory.


ADA
Making ADA accommodations on a case-by-case basis without regard to the precedent it would set for others, was troublesome but understandable.


Andrew Neiditz
Andrew Neiditz presentation about his experience working is City, County, and SouthSound911 was very interesting.  The next few thoughts relate to his presentation.


City Government Configurations
Explaining the differences between county home rule charter governments and City’s with their strong Mayor as opposed to Council/ City Manager configurations was helpful.


Effective vs Efficient
Mr. Neiditz made the point that governments tend to be oriented around Effectiveness rather than Efficiency.  This is certainly something I have seen in my limited experience. 

Two derivative challenges are probably at play in this statement. 
1.  This is not the intuitive expectation of our customers.  People expect things to strive towards efficiency and hence get frustrated when things are done with process and effectiveness rather than with economy as the key constraints. 
2.  As managers of limited resources, our ultimate function is to manage those resources for optimum benefit (efficiency and effectiveness).  At my next interview, I probably will not make the big selling point , “I don’t really care how much gets done, but I’m really good at following processes.”


“Decisions are Cumbersome”
This statement also is a great articulation of something that rings very true.  I’ve worked in private firms that had nearly the same problem, but this issue is inseparably inherent to our representative form of American government.


Employee Orientation
Moving policy presentation out of the first day orientation experience is a good idea.  This would improve the chance of this information being retained.  It would also facilitate a further continued interaction between the new employee and HR staff about a month after starting.  This then, focuses the employees first day on relaxing and enjoying the first experience.


Tips for Dealing with Difficult Situations
If employees are unwilling to proactively address problems on their own, managers would need to move into the directing mode.

Monday, March 10, 2014

Personal Development Project - Report #2 - Satisfiers and Dis-Satisfiers

Part of the Certified Public Manager program involves the completion of a personal development project.  My selected project is to prepare a series of lectures to my fellow managers about basic managerial concepts.  These series of posts are intended to document my progress in that endeavor.  This report pertains to a presentation made on 3/3/14.


Workplace Satisfiers and Dis-Satisfiers.

Continuing the series of management discussions at the weekly staff meeting, I presented a discussion of Frederick Herzberg's list of Satisfiers and Dis-Satisfiers.

These consist of the list of things that caused employees to be happy and satisfied at work:
1.  Achievement
2.  Recognition
3.  Work itself
4.  Responsibility
5.  Advancement

And the list of items that caused the most unhappiness in the workplace:
1.  Poor organizational policy and administration
2.  Technically incompetent supervisors
3.  Lack of recognition
4.  Salary perceived as unfair
5.  Poor interpersonal relations with supervisors

Things I noted about the research included:

  • Adding more of the dis-satifiers did not make people happier.  It was more of a presence/absence issue.
  • Salary and wages were only on the dis-satifier list.
  • Recognition was noted on both lists.
  • Dis-satisfiers tended to be related to how people were treated, while the satisfiers tended to be related to the work itself.


Although we did not have as thorough a discussion of the topic as the previous week, I was most encouraged that Dave Schmidt (the PW site superintendent) was interested in copying the lists I had written down after the meeting.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Journal Reflection 1.2 - Developing Yourself as Leader


[Editors note:  The following is a journal entry addressing specific questions provided by the CPM course instructors for module 1.2.]
  1.  Briefly describe what you learned from the activities, instruments, readings and discussions.  What stands out for you? 
     
    Emotional Intelligence
    For me the newest and most interesting concept from the second set of classes in the first module was the Emotional Intelligence paper  (What Makes a Leader, Daniel Goleman, Harvard Business Review 1998).  The paper identified five key skill sets of leaders:  Self Awareness, Self Regulation, Motivation, Empathy, and Social Skills as a framework of core competencies underlying leadership.  I am looking forward to reading (listening to) the book in the near future.
     
     
    The HayGroup survey that assessed those competencies was interesting more than revealing.  The value of the study would probably increase with a larger participation pool.  Taking the more extensive version of the study would also be fascinating.
     
    In analyzing the results presented to me, the first thing I noted was that my self assessment was about a half a point higher than the others surveys.
     
    After incorporating a ½ point correction, the outside survey actually aligned quite closely with my self assessment as far as relative strengths and weaknesses.  Essentially the relative pattern between the two surveys across the various areas is similar.
     
     
    Looking for particular differences, others rated me closer to average in “Inspirational Leadership” than I did, while I rated myself significantly higher in “Organizational Awareness” and “Systems Thinking” than the others.
     
    Breaking it down further only 5 questions out of the 70 really stood out as being particularly different between my assessment and that of the others.
     
    Core Values
    The values exercise was interesting.  Seeing the amount of variation in core values within a fairly homogeneous group was interesting.  I did a brief exercise with my wife and found it interesting that none of our top five matched up.
     
     
  2. What do you want to learn more about?  How might you do that? 
     
    I intend to get a copy of the Emotional Intelligence audiobook to learn more about that concept.
     
    Mrs. Rough-Mack alluded to the possibility that changing one MBTI category might be possible.  I would like to inquire if there are specific coaching guides for altering particular traits.
     
     
  3. Were there any theories that you disagreed with?  What bothered you?
     
    The book, The Leadership Challenge was a take it or leave it book.  One of those text books you sell back to the bookstore at the end of a class.
     
    One interesting thing from that book was the study showing that people’s stated desire of leaders (honest, forward looking, competent, and inspiring) had remained consistent over several years.
     
     
    Within the Vision Speech exercise, I would have liked to further explore the similarities and differences between Lisa Reeves’ and Casey Rice’s projects.  Given how similar the projects were and how completely differently the two individuals approached them, why did we not try to draw out the areas each of the respective individuals did not naturally incline themselves towards instead of simply reinforcing their current approaches?
     
     
  4. How will Emotional Intelligence be useful to you as a leader?  What will you do with the knowledge you have gained?
     
    Of the five categories listed in the Goleman article, the area of social skills is the area where I feel my shortcomings most keenly.
     
    “The leaders task is to get work done through other people, and social skill makes that possible.  A leader who cannot express her empathy may as well not have it at all.  And a leader’s motivation will be useless if he cannot communicate his passion to the organization.  Social skill allows leaders to put their emotional intelligence to work.”  Goleman
     
     
  5. Describe how the topics that were covered in this session interrelate.
     
    Sorry, nothing here…
     
  6.  What is the most important takeaway from this session?  Specifically, how will you apply that learning and translate it into intentional, observable behavior?
     
    Takeaways from this session worth recounting with the intention of better recollecting them include:
     
    Prominence of Integrity in each member of our groups top values.  In a similar vein I recall in Harvey Pennick’s Little Red Book:  Lessons and Teachings From a Lifetime of Golf, he noted that whenever he talked to people about their occupations, they always described their job as requiring some measure of courage.
     
     
    Drawing out distinctions between Management and Leadership.  Although I had always thought of these as separate concepts, perhaps the most intriguing thought was that although separate spheres, Leadership is something that can be learned and cultivated.  And that part of the role of the manager is to actively exhibit leadership.
     
     
    Values in Action Survey.
    My results from 2/25/14:  1. Creativity, 2. Judgment, 3. Forgiveness, 4. Perspective, 5. Fairness, 6. Perseverance, 7. Kindness, 8. Love of learning, 9. Gratitude, 10. Leadership, 11. Bravery, 12. Prudence, 13. Curiosity, 14. Honesty, 15. Humor, 16. Teamwork, 17. Hope, 18. Appreciation of Beauty & Excellence, 19. Spirituality, 20. Love, 21. Zest, 22. Humility, 23. Self Regulation, 24. Social Intelligence
     
     
    Principles for surviving adversity.  (I’m not sure these were copied down correctly in my notes.)

  1. Recognize risk
  2. Evolve to deal with issues
  3. Emotional intelligence.

 

 

Making Employees good at their jobs makes them happy.  Making them happy does not make them good at their jobs.  Great to remember the focus of managers is on making the individuals effective at accomplishing the task.

 

 

“Companies cannot be loyal back.”  I’m not sure about this concept.  I’m not sure weather it’s the ethics behind it or the utility of the principle.

  • Does that mean we should only be loyal based on someone’s ability to be loyal in return?
  • Is there really no place for serving the institution?  We only are serving “our” connections within the organization?  (Without individuals nothing happens, without institutions nothing lasts.)
    • This sounds like a Baby Boomer/Gen X/ Gen Y phenomenon.
    • Should we be surprised when one of my fellow course participants expresses that the legacy staff from a previous manager is not interested in performing?  My classmate gave a prominent position to a staff member from a previous job (showed loyalty to his/her people) and expressed a desire to ultimately re-staff with their own people, and then wonder why the legacy staff appears to lack integrity?  Perhaps the lack of integrity is a lack of loyalty to this individual or the larger institution?
  • Is this because managers as the agents of a company are not inclined to reward loyalty on behalf of their organization or company in a similar way to how we reward loyalty as individuals.

 

 

The threat of a lawsuit gets the attention of a private company’s CEO.  The public managers is similarly terrified of ending up on the front page of the paper.

 


I liked the chart with the various levels of delegation.  This seems like a practical tool that could be used again.

 

 

Sympathy vs Empathy video.  (TED talk by Dr. Brené Brown)  This nicely encapsulated the subject in a memorable way.

 

 

Formula for motivation for change:  D > ƒ(V, F, R) where
        D = Dissatisfaction with Present
        V = Vision for Future
        F = First Step to Improvement
        R = Resistance to Change

This is a great concept with potentially many areas of application.  In my work with my church’s Diaconate we see many individuals with apparent needs for change but unable to be motivated to make that change.  This concept provides a clearer target of areas to emphasize when encouraging people to change and also helps to understand why people do not change.

 

I would be interested in seeing the research behind this equation.

 

Both an individual’s resistance to change and ability to see the future are probably largely driven by personality types and individual preferences.

 

 

Developing Capacity Overall:

        Beware/Aware

        Ask for feedback.  Be specific, Find Trusted sources

        Be introspective, Reflective

Developing Self Management Capacity:

        Exhale! Pause

        Assume positive intent

        Choice of self control

        Allow breakthrough moments/ explore others stories

        Allow Feedback

        Intentional in identifying what goes well

Developing Social Awareness

        Empathy

        Vulnerability

        Trust

        Involvement of all

        Patterns

        Experience