DON'T STEAL MY JOY!

"If a man love the labour of any trade apart from any question of success or fame, the gods have called him." ~Robert Louis Stevenson

 

"Pleasure in the job puts perfection in the work." ~Aristotle 

Continuing the theme from my previous article, I had been thinking more about how we lead those members of our team who appear to have plateaued in their roles.

I am reminded of a time earlier in my career when I was meeting with one of my Accounting Specialists (we'll call her "Sherry"). Sensing that her abilities exceeded her present role, I had been encouraging Sherry for some time to learn new tasks, go back to school for additional education, and position herself for advancement in the Organization. I valued Sherry's contributions and loyalty to the Team. During this particular meeting, I was proposing assigning Sherry some new duties with greater responsibility, and I was suggesting that I delegate some of her current duties to another Accounting Specialist to alleviate some of Sherry's work load.

I'll never forget what came next. Sherry looked at me and said calmly but firmly, "Cris, don't steal my joy!"

A bit confused by her response, I clarified further, "Sherry, I am very pleased with your work on this Team, so I want to provide you with new opportunities." I continued sincerely but naively, "This is a good thing I'm suggesting."

"I would be happy to take on these additional tasks and the project, but please don't take away my current tasks," Sherry continued. "I enjoy doing them."

Aha! So that was the rub. In my zeal to develop my Team Member with advancement opportunities, I had neglected to fully understand how and why Sherry had come into the role I had found her in. Because I had viewed her outstanding work ethic, trustworthiness, and loyalty to me (as the Leader) and to her peers through my own lens, I had failed to inquire further into Sherry's own perception of her value to the Team and to the Organization.

Taken in that new light, but cognizant that Sherry would not be able to effectively shoulder all of the new duties with all of her existing duties, we negotiated to ensure that Sherry retained those prior duties she most valued and would remain the back-up on the additional duties that she agreed she would shed. As Leaders, we must shun the gut-level assumption that "resistance to change" or "secure comfort zones" are the only reasons member of our Team might wish to perform longstanding duties. As Sherry taught me that day, some employees simply--heavens!--ENJOY THEIR WORK.

Sherry had shown longtime loyalty to the Organization. She didn't want to set the world on fire, become the CEO, or lead a Division. But, like many members of the Teams we lead daily, Sherry wanted to contribute to the Team's success, further the objectives of the Organization, and have fun doing it. Really not so bad when you view the win-win outcome against the philosophical backdrop of the likes of Aristotle and Robert Louis Stevenson.

TODAY'S QUESTION: Are YOU fully informed about the individual reasons why your Team Members gravitate to and excel at the work that they perform? If not, when will YOU schedule that conversation?

HEALTH CARE: ANGELS AND DEMONS

The current multifaceted and very visible debate surrounding the proposed health care overhaul legislation provides us an excellent opportunity to further explore our theme of PRINCIPLED COMMUNICATION. If a fiscally responsible, market-based solution that reduces cost and reduces the number of uninsured American citizens is to prevail, then we shall all have to focus more upon what the sensible individuals (and their constituencies/organizations) on each size of the issue AGREE upon. We must all appeal to our better angels and defy the demons of doom if that solution is to emerge. Put aside petty partisanship and focus upon the basics.

1) America is a Pro-Life nation. The Declaration of Independence spoke of the "the separate and equal station to which...nature's God entitle them...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life..." We would be hard-pressed to find a Christian, Jew, or Muslim who would condemn a stranger to death simply over economics. Thus, to be a pro-life nation, we must look beyond economics and recognize that access to health care is congruent with God's command many times over in the Bible to look out for the poor, the widows and the orphans.

2) Access to Health Care reduces costs associated with absenteeism. Some 85% of American citizens participate in a health care plan. Preventative care detects warning signs of early-stage disease, allowing for the timely application of lifestyle changes, medications, and medical technology to prolong life. Most employers provide access to health care plans because it is humane, but also because healthy employees show up for work more often, have higher morale, and manufacture/sell more products/services. Contrast that forethought with the obscene costs thrust upon private citizens and companies when uninsured individuals seek last-minute chronic care at America's emergency rooms. Like our grandmothers told us, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

3) America is a free-market nation whose business ingenuity can overcome any challenge. Malicious slander and venomous lies won't attract stakeholders to the table. Whether applied to putting a man on the moon in less than a decade or curing cancer, our free market economy can often provide timely solutions to critical problems when dialogue is dignified. While government can certainly be a partner with private industry through appropriate legislation (i.e. the Interstate Highway System, NASA, Medicare, the Armed Forces, university research & development), government shouldn't be running the businesses themselves.

Thus,

• Let's first acknowledge that all of God's children should have the opportunity to access health care as needed.
• Then let us stop beating up on doctors, insurance companies, and employers, and instead invite all stakeholders to brainstorm and recognize their many points of agreement.
• Finally, let the stakeholders, both public and private, work together without the venomous rhetoric to develop a market-based system that will allow (but not mandate) all American citizens to access affordable health care and the doctors/hospitals of their own choosing in a fiscally responsible manner.

Sometimes it's seems easier to digress into the demons and doomsayers, but our nation has always risen above (think Berlin Wall coming down) when all sides on an issue allowed their better angels to prevail. No one loses if the solution is God-inspired, pro-life, and market-based.

TODAY'S QUESTION: How do we reframe the dialogue surrounding a divisive issue to (1) increase consensus, and (2) to reduce non-essential cacophony, so that a majority will embrace our sensible solution?

YOU Are Responsible

I made a decision this morning. And another decision. And another. Some of my decisions resulted in favorable results. Admittedly, some of my decisions were poorly made and resulted in embarassing, ugly, and unintended results.

So have YOU. What decisions have YOU made this morning? Last evening? A week ago? A year ago?

Each of those decisions YOU made were made consciously, of your own free will. For better or for worse.

• That book you read and enjoyed.
• That class you enrolled in and developed a new skill.
• That compliment you gave your child.
• That rude gesture you made to the driver who cut you off.
• That late arrival to work.

Yes, each of those decisions were made by YOU. And YOU will likely embrace the first three as being obvious good exercises of your decision-making prowess. Yet YOU may just as quickly provide an "explanation" of why the latter two actions occurred, certainly not of your own free will:

• "The jerk wasn't looking where he was going, and he could have hurt someone!"
• "The train was running late, because of the flooding from the rains."

We have been conditioned to accept the favorable results of our decisions (even if the decision was prompted by an external suggestion, question, or request). Likewise, we have been conditioned to justify the frankly embarassing results of our decisions (the italicized portion following the initial reason).

In the five examples above, let's elaborate a little more:

• I was lent the book by a friend who shares my taste in fiction. I made the decision to read it, because I believed that my friend's past recommendations have been accurate. Result: I enjoyed reading the story that I read.
• My boss instructed me to enroll in a software class to prepare me to implement the software across our division. I made the decision to enroll in the class, because I believed that her request was aligned with my role at work and would result in greater visibility to management. Result: I mastered the skill required to lead the software implementation.
• I love my child and although he continues to struggle to earn a C in Algebra, I know that he has been applying himself with his tutor which has elevated my son's grade from the D- he initially was earning. I made the decision to acknowledge my son's effort, because I believed that it is better to highlight his progress than to deride his lack of mastery. Result: I built trust and confidence with my son.
• I was frustrated by the driver cutting me off while I was talking on my cell phone. I made the decision to lash out toward that drive, because I believed that it could absolve me from my own embarassment at my personal distraction that contributed to my diminished awareness while driving in the presence of my passenger. Result: I built up frustration and disappointment in myself that continued to distract me while I drove on that road.
• I was late to work when I failed to leave the apartment earlier than usual, despite my prior experience with how heavy rains can affect the commuter train schedule. I made the decision to blame my late arrival on the training without acknowledging my failure to catch an earlier train, because I believed that my boss would accept my "Act of God" excuse and not question my own failure to be proactive in leaving home earlier. Result: I beat myself up inside for appearing irresponsible, especially once I realized that all of my similarly-situated commuting co-workers had managed to arrive at work on time.

Bottom line is that we decide (sometimes well-reasoned, sometimes defensively) because we believe that a certain outcome will result. When we decide with forethought in an authentic manner, generally our result will reflect our belief. It is when we pervert the decision-making process that we somehow think that our result will differ from our hidden, self-protecting belief. We know that the results in the latter case do not generally please us.

Today's Question:

What decisions will YOU make differently today?