Stuck with a Bad Performance Review—Making It Worse

A bad review can be a temporary set back or it can be the beginning of a quagmire and drag you down. There is a lot on the line here—money, prestige, future prospects, so it is important to understand the consequences of your actions in the weeks following the review.

Regardless of the reason (Dealing with a bad employee performance appraisal) ,you are stuck with this review for a year. It is not the end of the world or of your prospects for a good career with the employer. The first impulse to change employers is never the best immediate option.

Career consultants have a lot of classical advice on how to get on track; People usually ignore it or cannot use it. The opposite approach is considered here. There are three actions that will make your situation worse. Watch yourself to see if they apply to you.

Complain

No doubt about it, you got an unfair deal. The reasons that it was unfair are specific to your situation. It may be that your work was not valued, your boss was out to get you, or that they don’t like your personal style. Make sure your side of the story is told so that you can be vindicated. Take opportunities to get the story out. Some people hedge on this and only tell “trusted” friends. Complaints can be made in e-mails to a few select friends.

Negative comments have an interesting way of making their way back to the managers. This news tends to harden their position that you are an underperformer. The opposite approach is to keep your negative opinions out of the light. If possible, even send messages that things are going to improve.

Take It Personally

Ouch. A lower than expected review hurts emotionally as well as professionally Don’t see the performance evaluation for what it is–an opinion about you that serves different purposes. The real way to make the situation worse is to take it as an attack on your personal self worth. This approach allows the hurt to fester and internalize so that the pain continues to renew itself. That way there is no opportunity to put the experience behind and move on. Eventually, a negative air occupies the space around you. Your energy will decrease. Your co-workers will notice it.

If you are having trouble moving on, talk to someone outside of workplace who can help you.

Stay the Course

Make no changes and hope that the situation rights itself.

Sure, some conditions improve on their own, such as a cold that runs its course in a week. Other situations just lead to more trouble. The odd sound from the automobile engine doesn’t go away. The situation is similar here. The bad evaluation is just the first noise; Your situation will likely get worse if you just keep plugging along. Just persevere and be confident that that management will see the error of their ways and reward you.

Don’t make the effort to calmly follow-up and understand what has to change from the arbitrary and unfair perspective of the bosses. Ignore the fact that managers like to see improvement and tend to reward it significantly in the next review cycle. If your boss cannot help you, actively seek someone who can. (Looking for a Teacher, Asking for a Boss)

Getting a bad review is like finding a footprint in newly poured concrete. You can ignore it and let it harden or do some work to smooth it over, with no long term consequences. It is a matter of the right efforts at the right time to minimize the effect of the review.

Cause of Common Accidents–Story

A master gardener, famous for his skill in climbing and pruning the highest trees, examined his disciple by letting him climb a very high tree. Many people had come to watch. The master gardener stood quietly, carefully following every move but not interfering with one word. Having pruned the top, the disciple climbed down and was only ten feet from the ground when the master suddenly yelled: “Take care, take care!” When the disciple was safely down an old man asked the master gardener: “You did not let out one word when he was aloft in the most dangerous place. Why did you caution him when he was nearly down? Even if he had slipped then, he could not have greatly hurt himself.” “But isn’t it obvious?” replied the master gardener. “Right up at the top he is conscious of the danger, and of himself takes care. But near the end, when one begins to feel safe, this is when accidents occur.”

Comment: It certainly is the case that accidents tend to occur at the end of the working day when people are comfortable with their surroundings, tired, and let their attention down.

A more technical description is in the short article: Preventing Common Household Accidents

Source: Schloeal, Irmgard; The Wisdom of the Zen Masters, New Directions 1975, Pg 52

 

Additional Stories

This is a link to a Collection of Zen Stories     (usefulzenwords.com)

Using Ignorance Wisely–From Spiritual Teachers to Parents or Managers

Ta-hui Tsung-kao (1089-1163) was a leading Zen Master of the Sung Dynasty. believed that each teaching must fit the person, time, and place.  His writings remain accessible.

Consider this excerpt from Swampland Flowers (Zen Sourcebook, Addiss et al editors, Hackett, Pg 124)

In the conduct of their daily activities sentient beings have no illumination.  If you go along with their ignorance, they’re happy; if you oppose their ignorance, they become vexed.  Buddhas and bodhisattvas are not this way: they make use of the ignorance, considering this the business of buddhas.  Since sentient beings make ignorance their home, to go against it amounts to breaking up their home; going with it is adapting to where they’re at to influence and guide them.

Here, Ta-hui is addressing the use of ignorance wisely as a tool to liberate beings from their attachments and move them in the direction of direct experience of their original nature.

Rephrasing makes it immediately helpful to improve situations at other levels:

. . . . Making use of ignorance, is the business of parents and managers.  Since people are comfortable with what they know, to go against it rankles them; going with it is adapting to where they’re at to influence and help them grow.

Or:

The obvious response to inappropriate action may not be the best.  If you can first recognize what people are thinking and address that, more appropriate actions can follow.

Often teachers, parents, managers impulsively oppose the behavior or ignorance of their students, children or employees, demanding compliance without understanding the situation.   Except in an emergency, that may not be the best action.

Examples of inappropriate, impulsive behavior abound, especially when you begin to look for them. (If this were a book for sale, there would be pages of anecdote examples—but see them for yourself.)

Observing inappropriate responses in situations around you is a good way develop awareness and skillfully use ignorance.

Begin to make the effort to better understand the new situations and then respond, rather than oppose then directly.  It takes some practice, but see for yourself if the results are improved.  (If this were a book for sale, there would be pages of anecdote examples—but who has time for this.)

When this teaching is used skillfully, it is not evident; When not used– a glaring omission.

Coaching for Improving Employee Performance–Imitation, Overcoming Failure, Intuition

Supervisors are generally required develop their employees’ skills. Most supervisors don’t put much creative effort their subordinate’s growth. There are good reasons for this—supervisors are evaluated on more major visible projects and have their own careers and ambitions to consider. Challenging an employee takes effort and time, with few immediate rewards. In addition, many employees are not particularly interested in being challenged to develop skills. Finally, the development component has become so ritualized with required courses and checklists that training requirements can be satisfied with little real effort.

On occasion, by chance or design (for example: Looking for a Teacher, Asking for a Boss ), there is a match between a supervisor who has the interest and ability to challenge for growth and an employee ready to respond to it. It can be an exhilarating period for both.

The three areas outlined below are not emphasized in the standard texts. However, developing these skills can increase the employees’ performance for their entire career. You, the supervisor, can coach these skills as situations arise during the work process.

1. Imitating My Success is Failure–Work to Meet the Goals, not the Style.

If you are a great boss, others will try to match success by imitating you.

There is some basis for imitation. Children are taught to imitate role models, often their teachers and others in authority. This tendency to imitate often extends into adulthood. Also, imitation is a good strategy to follow in the first job, for a short time, to get one’s bearings and understand the work environment. But this also is a temporary situation. Further, some bosses like to be imitated and it is well known that such people reward their clones. But in the long run, a tendency to imitate will hold people back and dull performance. Imitation is black and white; originality is technicolor

Employees should be challenged to meet the goals by their own methods. You, the supervisor, have your own unique blend of intelligence (i.e. analytical or interpretive skills, style of learning), personal style (i.e. speaking and interpersonal skills, political awareness, introvert/extrovert etc), and response styles to the immediate conditions (impulsive, more considered). This blend has worked for you.

The employees each have their own mix of skills. Rather than allow them follow your example, challenge them to meet the same goal by maximizing their mix of skills. People should be pushed to understand their strengths and to maximize their effectiveness in specific work situations. They should be encouraged to shore up their weaknesses to the point that they are not a liability.

Your real contribution is to challenge and coach them to use their blend of skills, not yours, to achieve the same goals.

2. Nine Times Down, Ten Times Up

Mistakes are a part of life. People have learned to fear the consequences of making an error of commission. This approach leads to tepid responses and eventually an erosion of initiative. Also, regardless of best efforts, outcomes of events often turn on conditions well out of reasonable control. These failures can be devastating.

The employees have to expect to be knocked down by events on occasion. It is important to learn not be crushed by them, but to stand back up, and move on.

Coaching not to be attached to the defeat and the inevitable blame can be emphasized. This attitude means that no setback is ever in vain. The event changes the situation and by taking the learning from that, the future events can move in a more favorable direction.

There is always the nagging concern that a setback is a “career-ender”. A single event rarely is; time moves on and memory fades. New situations and opportunities will always arise.

3. Go Beyond Thinking–Use Intuitive Skill

People generally prefer known approaches to solve problems. A rote approach leads to a rote solution. Using intuitive skills has a mystical overtone that is not always welcomed by quantitative business. However, breakthrough results often rely to some extent on acting from an intuitive sense of the situation.

The fact is that intuition is a sense like the more familiar ones (touch, feel, thinking) and can be developed to be more effectively used. Intuitive skill provides another tool, like a turbocharger, to more effectively get the job done. Intuitive skills allow you to go beyond your rational imagination.

Intuition can be developed and strengthened over time. You can start by reminding the employee to be quiet and still immediately before making a decision. Then, encourage them to find their own way to encourage this skill. (Note that Intuitive Skill is different from the overused “Thinking Outside the Box”; intuition goes beyond thinking.)

The most effective coaching for growth comes when a real situation demands a response. As a supervisor, have Imitation, Failure, and Intuition ready for the appropriate time.

Dealing with a Bad Employee Performance Appraisal/Review

The ritual of the employee performance appraisal brings with it anxiety and surprise. Sooner or later, almost everyone receives a review that is disappointing and confusing. The immediate reaction to the situation, the accuracy of the subsequent analysis, and follow-up actions can have a major impact on your future performance, evaluations, and compensation. Just in case a bad review comes your way, consider the points below

1. Immediate actions–Getting the bad news

It is not pleasant to hear that performance and contributions have been below standard. However, the immediate reactions are crucial to both understanding and later resolving the performance issues.

First, recognize that the decisions have been made and reviewed with higher levels of management. The decisions will not be reversed, particularly at a review meeting. It is a losing strategy to argue for a change at this time.

Similarly, expressions of hostility and anger are also inappropriate. These emotions tend to make the supervisor defensive, harden negative positions, and “confirm” that the low rating was deserved. Disappointment and frustration can be appropriately expressed. Actually, it is important to inject the right amount of tension into this type of discussion. This meeting should not be easy on anyone.

Two important responses

Listen carefully to the comments of the supervisor. Do not accept vagueness or clichés. Ask detailed questions to clarify the situation. Take notes. This information will be important to really understanding the situation.

Also, take the initiative to establish a follow-up meeting to occur after you have digested the news and have developed some plan to take action.

2. Analysis–Understanding the Situation

Keep in mind that everyone in an organization has their own agenda. Particularly at a performance review meeting, comments can not be automatically taken at face value. An analysis is necessary.

Review your notes and supplement it with other input, particularly the comments of trusted co-workers. Often, the spontaneous comments made by a supervisor in response to a question provide the most revealing information. Weigh all of the information against the scenarios listed below to refine your perspective on the situation:

—7 Scenarios for a Poor Performance Review

Chronic Absolute Underperformance

This possibility for a poor evaluation is difficult to accept, but it is important to look into it fully. It is not sufficient to accept management’s comments. You need to find some trusted people with whom you have worked with and ask for their frank input.

If, in fact, the objective evidence does suggest that your work does not measure up, then it will be a downhill slide until corrective steps are taken. True underperformance is tough to own. However once it is recognized, the next step is to decide whether you are willing and able to make required changes. Sometimes it is just not possible. Alternatively, there may be some other situation you can transfer into where you can excel.

Chronic underperformance is not generally an emergency requiring a rash action; there is time to consider alternatives and take constructive action. However, over a longer time frame, it is unstable to remain in a position where your contributions do not measure up to the norm.

One-Time Project Failure

Not every major project works out according to the objective. Time and conditions have their way of disrupting the best plans and actions. If this happened in your work for the review period, accept the result and have confidence in your ability to return to a high level of performance. However, a run of bad luck begs for another explanation. This is no place to hide.

Valuing Different Activities

From the meeting discussion, there should be a good idea of what was rewarded. Compare this with what you actually accomplished. Sometimes the two are different. Of all of the things that you do in your job, the supervisor is most concerned with approximately 20% of your work. Know what that 20% is! These activities carry the most weight. Check to be sure that your crucial priorities are the same as the supervisors.

Not Trusted by Management

Performance can be fine, but if, for rational or irrational reasons, you are not trusted, the performance review may be their opportunity to send the message. In this case, working harder to improve performance will have no consequence. Once trust is lost, it is difficult to regain and then only at a great cost. The choices are either accept the situation and wait for current management to move on or to find a new situation in which this bias is not against you.

Relative Underperformance

Most organizations, whether they admit it or not, use a forced ranking system. Similar employees are grouped together, ranked from first to last, and reward appropriately. In this system, it is the relative performance that is measured. The superstars come out on top, with the star performers below them.

The argument that you a star in a group of superstars gets you nowhere. Just accept the situation as a short term loss. If you really are a star, just do good work and your light will be seen, either in this group or in a different setting.

Arbitrary Positioning

A cousin of relative underperformance. In some organizations with uniformly strong employees, misguided management may choose to rotate people to the top or bottom over a period of time in order to keep everyone relatively happy. Is it your turn? No one will confirm this to you.

Easy Mark

As noted previously, in a stack rank system, some individual have to come out at the bottom. Weak managers occasionally select the person, other things being equal, they can most easily assign it to. That is why it is important to keep some tension in the meeting. It may have happened this time, but already you need to lay the ground work so that it doesn’t happen again.

3. Strive for a Balanced Response

No matter what your analysis and conclusions are, do not do anything rash. Actions taken in anger or haste invariably lead to a poor outcome for the individual. On the other hand, a bad performance review cannot be accepted without a response. Use your resources—the information that management has stated, comments from trusted co-workers, the list of scenarios above, and your own intuitive ideas in order to do begin to change the situation.

Then, a poor evaluation is just a temporary set-back and a wake-up call to both fully understand the situation and take control of it.  Or you can make it worse.  (Stuck with a Poor Performance Review–Making It Worse.)

Others on this topic: Struggling to Give a Good Performance Review Maintaining Credibility

Employee Performance Appraisals Ranking Methods –Lessons from Arrows Paradox

Working Beyond Everyday Expectations—Learning from Rain

It is not a popular idea these days to do a task without a specific reward or compensation. There is nothing wrong with that. People need to be compensated for their effort.

The possibility for an outcome beyond imagination or expectation is often overlooked, yet experience shows that such results happens all of the time.

It is often not recognized that the approach to doing the activity can have a major effect on an unlikely positive outcome. There are many different attitudes towards performing any activity. The trick is to harness as much energy into the activity as possible. Nature is a guide here.

Nature just operates according to its own truth. Watch the rain for example. It falls from the sky, wets things, and in doing so, nourishes them, and allows them to grow. Then the rain moves to the lowest position, disappearing into the ground, just to repeat the cycle. The occurrence of the rain has effects, usually positive, but at times negative. However, the rain takes no note of these effects, does not compliment itself on the result, or wait for a reward; it simply and directly continues the cycle. There is only direct activity

Our activities can be just as direct as those of nature. This is true for all activities—projects at work, at home doing the laundry, driving, playing with children,

Actions are often not direct however–there is scheming to be done, ambitions to be achieved, goals to be met, expectations to be fulfilled, and frustrations to be vented. Scheming, ambitions, expectations, and frustrations have their place in the human activities. However, they dilute the energy available for the activity itself and dull the potential for unexpected positive results. The mind sticks, the energy is compromised, and there is a loss of creativity.

Typical of the distractions are the internal conversations that begin with questions and lead to an on-going story that runs at the same time as the activity. For example:

“Why am I doing this?

“What am I going to get out of this?”

“How will this help me?

“Will this project ever work?”

“What is for dinner?”

Instead of allowing these distractions to grow, simply acknowledge them, allow them to drop off, and return attention fully to the primary task at hand.

This approach to an activity takes discipline and an effort. It means becoming aware of and suspending the normal processes of mind activities of mind. Repetition and practice may be needed.

Then, there are the consequences of the activity. In the ordinary perspective, there are planned results to be obtained. Sometimes things work out according to our plan, but on occasion things just go in their own direction. From a different perspective, the consequences are the due to time and conditions beyond planning and rational control.

The approach of bringing full attention is simply to harness our own energy so that the effects are more likely to be creative and useful.

 

Digging Deeper for Ideas (2)–Playing with Syncretism

For people who believe their current perspective is sufficient, there is no incentive to dig deeper. Their ideas remain static. However, new ideas and insights are always arising. The simplest approach, especially when the new ideas have opposing elements to the current perspective, is to ignore the ideas or push them aside. However, something is lost and, ultimately, success will be limited.

There are several methods that use opposing ideas in order to achieve more innovative results. One is the Dialectic Method (Thesis –> Antithesis–> Synthesis), which was previously discussed (see Digging Deeper for Ideas—Stealing from Hegel).

Syncretism is another antidote to simplistic solutions. Syncretism is the attempted reconciliation of contradictory ideas or principles. The result may preserve the differences, using opposing elements as appropriate. Thus, the resolution may not be an unambiguous statement, but a fragile system that simply works better than the ones that served as the foundation.

The process holds fewer certainties, but more opportunity for innovation. Syncretic solutions are not merely looking for compromise on the common elements, but using the opposing elements and building bridges to them. Internal contradictions are permitted.

In references, the syncretic process is usually described for large issues that evolve historically over time. As a consequence, the underlying principles are not often considered for resolving conflicting ideas at work or at home.

Below, two examples of global scale syncretic issues are briefly described in order to give a flavor the applications. Then, a method to use the concepts of the syncretic approach to analyze everyday problems is outlined.

Two Classic Examples

(1) In the area of world political systems, a static idea is that the American model of democracy is the best system to be exported to other countries. This transition is “accomplished” by sending experts to teach the people about democracy and hold elections. The results of this naive belief are obvious.

The static approach neglects the fact that people in these countries have lived for centuries in different cultural conditions opposed to democracy. A new government must also reconcile the opposing elements of the cultural heritage with the principles of freedom. For example, India has a participatory democracy, but the political process is different from America since the major parties represent traditional religious faiths. It works in its own way.

(2) There are syncretic possibilities for the practice of medicine on the global scale. Western and Chinese medicine each have demonstrated strengths. However, there are significant differences. Their descriptions of the functions of the body are in non-reconcilable concepts. Also, Western medicines are relatively recent, developed in the laboratory, and evaluated in defined clinical studies. Chinese treatments, such as acupuncture and herbs, evolved over centuries by observation and experience.

Currently, the two disciplines are practiced separately. However, the current approach to medicine will change as information and expertise in both disciplines becomes more common. What form will medicine will take, particularly in developing countries, remains to be seen. From a static view, the western standards could be retroactively enforced on the Chinese methods. However a syncretic approach, which allows contradictions and preserves the differences of the two disciplines, seems to hold most benefit for patients.

Playing With Syncretism—Application to Everyday Problems

The principles can be applied to problems which routinely arise and can lead to better solutions.

One method to take advantage of these differences is to analyze the opposing ideas with a set of questions based on sycretism.

—-Why does each approach have merit?

—-What do the two approaches have in common?

—-What are the specific non-reconcilable elements of each approach?

—-Under what circumstances does each opposing element provide an advantage?

—-How can the advantages of both opposing elements be preserved, even in a fragile structure?

—-Do the new proposals preserve the advantages ?

 

Such questions are rarely asked since there is a bias to force a solution.

Working with these questions requires both a re-examination of one’s preferred approach as well as considering the problem using a different framework. However, without really much use of time or energy, a different, perhaps better, result can be obtained.

Managing Multiple Projects—A Jugglers View

“Too many balls up in the air”

People like to use the juggling analogy to convey the impression that they are not just busy but on the edge. It makes for good theater.

Jugglers do put on a good show. They also give the impression that they are on the edge of chaos, but it is also part of the performance; they are in full control.

If you want to benefit from the juggling analogy, a better place to look is in the methods that they use to develop their skill. Those lessons can be applied to managing multiple tasks or projects.

Juggling skills require:

Confident and focused attention.

A heightened sense of awareness is needed to be able to react to the immediate situation. Both the mind and the body need to be in a comfortable position. Jugglers develop these skills.

Excess tension and distraction leads to dropped balls and mismanaged projects.

Following only on the critical activity.

It is impossible for the juggler to follow the complete track of each ball. The juggler though looks through the top arc and makes the required adjustments in the movements to catch and throw based on these observations.

Similarly, in managing multiple projects, identify the key elements and put the attention on those elements, delegating the others.

Anticipating and controlling an upset.

On occasion, the juggling sequence is interrupted (perhaps by a mis-thrown ball) and the juggler sees that he will have to stop. Since he anticipates this, he can choose which balls to catch.

When an upset occurs with multiple projects, all of the projects often suffer, similar to balls being dropped and bouncing in all directions. However, if the right priorities are known, the appropriate actions can be taken to minimize the effect on the most important projects.

Systematically Developing Skills.

Anyone who has picked up three balls and tried to juggle them, finds that it doesn’t go well at first. There is a learning curve. But as their skills develop, adding one ball at a time and an impressive skill develops. There is alot of effort though just picking up balls from the ground during the practice.

Learn to do one project well, then add another.

Jugglers’ underlying skill is real, developed by practice. The frenzy of the performance is an act. That skill should also be the goal of people managing multiple tasks. Sometimes though, the manager’s frenzy is real and the underlying skill is an act. Without the developed skills, projects, like juggling balls, are dropped.

Recognizing Flawed Concepts

It was four years ago that Bush was photographed with the “Mission Accomplished” sign in the background. This photo opportunity marked the high point of the rhetoric. It was for others to suffer and continue to suffer the real consequences. However, even with politics aside, his concept was flawed from the beginning.

Incompetent conceptual planning brings failure at any scale—international, business, or personal. The flaws can initially be masked by rhetoric, emotion, or fabrication. However, sooner or later, the consequences are there for all to experience.

Even though the planners are often adept at disguising it, such incompetence is not difficult to recognize if there is an evaluation of a few key points.

Early recognition of the flaws can help to either correct the project before it gets underway or, at least, minimize the consequences to yourself and others.

These points can be used as a reality check both for politics and personal projects.

Three Points to Check

Clear Thinking

Clear thinking is missing if:

• There is little expertise or experience in understanding the situation. (Further, it is worse if those with expertise are excluded.
• There is fuzzy or deluded thinking. (One symptom of deluded thinking is that the ideas have not been tested by others.)
• The proposal is a response to emotional issues or hidden agendas.

Flexibility

Flexibility is missing if:

• New information is not considered as it becomes available.
• Key assumptions may prove to be wrong.
• Unforeseen events can not be accommodated.
• There is no provision for making changes as events unfold.

Perspective

Perspective is missing if:

• The concept is based on an individual perspective, usually viewed as superior
• The concept does not account for the resources or different sensibilities of the different groups.

The difference in perspective can be seen by example. Consultants can not just instruct people who have lived under an authoritarian rule to hold elections and become a democracy. Cultural roots are much deeper and difficult to change. Such an approach is naive and simplistic.

All of this sounds like common sense. However, in the heat of the moment, it is too easy to barrel ahead without a reality check. These considerations can be used to slow down the process, ask a few explicit questions, and then proceed. It can be used to evaluate our leader’s ideas as well as personal projects.

A related post: Recognizing Incompetence Early–Pretending to be a Manager /

Presenting Quantitative Information Well—Lessons from Playwrights

Quantitative information must be communicated accurately and clearly in order to allow the audience to understand its significance and then act appropriately. Clear information leads to better decisions, actions, and results. Conversely, misunderstood information often results in an unsuccessful project. However, in many presentations, more effort is required to communicate the content effectively.

Quantitative information–sales and marketing results, financial reports, survey data, and experimental results–are factual, but it is also open to interpretation and analysis. This article focuses on methods to sharpen the presentation and interpretation of the information. An earlier article dealt with improving the performance of the individual (Another Lousy Presentation at Work).

The principles of dramatic playwriting are a different place to look for guidance. Playwrights have similar concerns to a business speaker. In a dramatic play, there is a fixed amount to time to captivate the audience and make the points of the drama. Every dialog and action must move the play forward. If the play is successful, energy is generated. However, if the characters of play are poorly conceived, not even the most talented actors can rescue it.

The principles that dramatic writers use to shape a play can also be adapted to help guide the presentation of the quantitative information. Examples include:

Character Definition

Pacing

Formatting

Engaging

Here are some comparisons for the theater and information presentations:

Character Definition

The playwright introduces the main characters early and then works with the characters to add dimensions and interest.

Information is the main character for the presentation. It must be put on a solid foundation, so that the audience can use the information during the presentation.

Just as with the characters in the play, it is important that the information be made readily available at the outset. The presenter must clearly show the quantitative information and then assist the audience in coming to understand what the information means. Too often, the presenter reveals the information itself slowly. The talk then deteriorates into a guessing game.

—Give the information and analysis tools early.

Pacing/Formatting

Pacing—In a play, the plot has to proceed at a pace that is reasonable for the audience. A slow development leads to boredom, mental lethargy, and the loss of energy.

Pacing is also important for information transfer. For the presentation, the information should be transmitted at the customary rate that brain is used to receiving it. Matching rates allows the content to be internalized more effectively.

As an example, consider the difference between a printed page (100 characters per sq. inch) and a power point slide (5 characters/square inch). Relying on Power Point slides to transmit quantitative information is just too slow to hold the audience’s attention. One sheet of paper can replace 10-50 slides of information.

Quantitative information is best presented as individual handouts.

Formatting—Viewing a theater set, the eye takes both in the entire stage and then moves back and forth to the individual details. This movement helps to establish a context for the details to become significant.

In the case of understanding information, the eye-mind combination works effectively when all of the information data can be viewed the same time. The eye can freely travel among the details. There is benefit to formatting the content in an information rich display that can be viewed on only a page or two.

The information format must be made efficient and stripped of decoration that does not advance the understanding.

For example, when designing the handout, require that each of drop of ink contribute to the information. In this approach, many of the superfluous decorations that distract the audience disappear.

—Work from a handout designed with an information rich format.

Engage the Audience

A great play engages the audience by inviting them to compare their impressions with the author’s perspective and draw their own conclusions. This process generates the energy of the performance.

For quantitative information, reveal your view of the relationships to the audience. The relationships are revealed by methods such as comparing, contrasting, testing cause and effect, and challenging your own conclusions. The audience can mentally work and play with the relationships as they are discussed. This process leads to tested, sound conclusions. Energy will be generated, just as in a fine play.

—Reveal and test the relationships with the audience

In summary, the focus is on the content—presenting it early, pacing, formatting, and engaging the audience. When the information is in good shape for presentation, you are free to let your own style shine through, just as the actor with fine material.

 

(A useful reference for quantitative information displays is Edward Tufte)

Setting Priorities to Improve Productivity—Busy may be necessary, Complications are optional

While multitasking is the proclaimed mark of importance, multitasking is really effective only for relatively mundane tasks. More difficult projects, requiring thought and insight, benefit from focused attention. People recognize this difference, and research is beginning to confirm their observations. A recent article about productivity and multitasking (“Slow Down Brave Multitasker” NYTimes 3/25/07 Pg 1) contained two relevant examples:

In a recent study, a group of Microsoft workers took, on average, 15 minutes to return to serious mental tasks, like writing reports or computer code, after responding to incoming e-mail or instant messages “I was surprised by how easily people were distracted and how long it took them to get back to the task,” said Eric Horvitz, a Microsoft research scientist.

“Multitasking is going to slow you down, increasing the chances of mistakes. Disruptions and interruptions are a bad deal from the standpoint of our ability to process information.” (David E. Meyer, a cognitive scientist and director of the Brain, Cognition and Action Laboratory at the University of Michigan.)

The loss of productivity begins when simple tasks are allowed to interrupt the more mentally demanding projects. This intermizing of tasks adds complication and leads to inefficiency.

The outline below can help to increase productivity by clearly separating priorities and complexity:

1. Make a list of ALL the activities that you may have to work on. Be sure to include even low priority projects that you may never get to. A complete list ensures that no projects have been inadvertently forgotten. 2. Divide the activities into two categories–Complex and Straightforward. This distinction is important, especially in view of the above research. The two categories serve to separate out the items that can be “multitasked” from the more complex project tasks requiring focused attention.

Examples of straightforward tasks are: checking e-mail, completing routine paperwork, returning phone calls, instant messaging, reading standard reports. More complex projects have a longer time frame and are not clearly defined—developing a strategy, designing a product, writing a milestone report.

3. Separately rank the priority for projects in both the complex and straightforward categories.

4. Set out time for the highest priority complex project and put full attention into that project. Defer all straightforward tasks, including e-mail, until that work period is complete.

People can do one thing at a time; concentrate first on the highest priority complex project. Since it is the most important, there is no need to be concerned with the other activities during this period.

 

In summary, being busy is not enough. Avoiding the complications of mixing priorities with the difficult tasks can lead to higher productivity without more effort.

 

Recognizing Incompetence Early—Pretending to be a Manager

Acting Presidential—a term not heard much these days—gives the impression of a confident leader, using power in a bold manner with great results. Leadership is about being in charge, respected, competent.

Unfortunately for many people in responsibility, “Acting” is as far as it gets. These people crave the trappings of power– the compensation, the status, the perks–but not the difficult decisions, responsibilities or pressure. When it comes time to actually do the job, they are somewhere else.

If these people remain in their position long enough, the consequences of incompetence catch up. There is no place to hide either for them, or for the people working with them.

There is much information about with the causes of managerial incompetence (i.e. deficient skills, lack of effort, personal insecurities etc.) That information often does not help. Sometimes, it is really not about trying to address the problems of these people, but about trying to do the job as best as possible.

The first step is to recognize incompetence early. Incompetent managers have developed other skills that have allowed them to survive and prosper. This early recognition can enable people to take the next steps to minimize the effects on project as well as the effect on reputations when the consequences of incompetence hit.

Here are some behaviors to help identify these managers early:

Decisions about even minor issues are difficult to get.

Managers are paid to make decisions.  The first warning sign is if it is difficult to get a decision from the manager.   When an unpopular decision is made, passing the responsibility away from himself, is another early indication that this person is not competent.

Success is declared early and by proclamation.

Credit is taken at the first successful milestone and extrapolated to the end of the project. They then move on to a new area before the full consequences of the work unfold. Others inherit the mess later. Check with the people in these earlier projects and see what was left behind.

Alternate perspectives are not fairly considered.

Responses are dogmatic and serve to end the discussion. Criticism is often harsh. The criticism often degenerates into a personal attack, particularly when the other person is not in the room.

There is advance planning for distributing blame for set-backs.

A particularly telling clue is that other people are positioned to take the blame, even before the project fails. (This is forward looking management as viewed by the incompetent.)

Perks are disproportionately sought.

In some cases, acquiring perks take up more effort than the core business.

Speaks differently to subordinates, peers and supervisors.

The difference is in both tone and content.

Encourages secrecy, particularly with like-minded cronies.

This withholding of information allows the manager to distort the situation.

Backstabbing is not quite the same as incompetence, although some of the behaviors are similar. Related points can be found in Backstabbing 101.

Eliminating Mental Bias (Cognitive) Decision Errors

“The decision made sense at the time.

How did we get stuck with such a bad result?”

Good decisions look forward to the future in an unbiased way. However, human decision makers tend to hold to the present and their individual perspective. The unrecognized clash of these two facts often leads to a mediocre decision and poor results.

In order to increase the likelihood of making the best decision in the future, watch for this clash. The first step toward improvement is become aware of these biases. Then, deliberately make an effort to change behavior in order to compensate for them.

Here are five specific examples of mental biases followed with suggestion actions to compensate and help make a better decision.

Examples of holding to the present.

1. Giving disproportionate weight to the first information received.

The initial set of facts, by virtue of their familiarity, tend to be reassuring. Consequently when additional information is received, the new information is evaluated against a higher standard and may not be properly considered. Make the effort to fully value the new information.

2. Favoring choices that allow current conditions to continue.

The status quo also has its familiarity. There is often pressure to continue with the current path. It is important to value the current situation objectively. Question if the current situation, evaluated on its own merits, would be selected now or continued.

3. Favoring choices that justify previous decisions or actions.

There is a tendency to make choices that confirm previous actions, even if the earlier decisions or actions were flawed. This bias can lead to a compounding of errors and a deteriorating situation. It is particularly important to guard against this bias since the negative consequences can be so severe. An opinion from someone not involved in the previous actions can serve to provide objective balance.

Examples of Individual Perspectives.

4. Selecting Confirming Evidence.
It is natural to favor information that supports the individual view. It is very easy to ignore, or not fully evaluate, information that does not fit well into one’s perspective. Make the effort to ensure that all the information is being examined fairly. Allow others to fully evaluate all the facts.

5. Asking the decision question in a distorted way.

Very often, the questions leading to a decision are posed in a misleading way that emphasizes one preferred direction. Then, the discussion follows the logical consequences of the biased question. Check to see if the question has been properly formulated in a neutral way and revise if necessary.

 

It is important to keep in mind that the above five examples of mental bias are simply behavior habits. Such habits only contribute to a poor decision when people are not aware of them. Watch for these tendencies and make adjustments when possible. It is far more rewarding to catch these behaviors as they happen rather than deal with a poor result influenced by mental errors.

Other articles in this series can be found by clicking the Thinking /Perception Skills category in the right box or through the links below:

(2) Use of Working Theories

(3) Listening for Consequences

(4) Put Aside the First Idea

 

 

 

These types of decision errors can often be traced to the tendency to mentally hold on to old ideas that interfere with appropriate responses to the present situation. A different perspective to this type of attachment can be seen in the Zen story Two Monks and a Woman.

 

 

 

Managing Priority Conflicts for Productive Results

“My priorities are the most important. That’s why my way is only one that will work!”

Priority conflicts are an essential and a routine part of doing business. The key is to resolve these conflicts efficiently in order to get the most benefit. Unfortunately, the resolution is often unpleasant. However, an individual with some skill and initiative can make a huge difference in managing the resolution.

People’s perspectives are based both on their understanding and priorities. Since each person has a different role and focus in the organization, priorities conflict. Sometimes, it is difficult to resolve these conflicts so that activities can proceed. Consider the example below:

In a business, the production people must make the product efficiently. The Quality department must determine if the product is acceptable. The two groups must agree on the compromise point of production efficiency and quality.

Often, there is no obvious criteria to determine the compromise point. Frustration develops. Emotions begin to flare. Cooperation drops off. Positions harden. Supervisors are called. A big meeting to “settle” the issue is scheduled. The meeting room is filled with tension. Positions are dogmatically stated. The discussion becomes a test of wills with the strongest finally dominating. Usually, it is not the best solution. Further, there are winners, losers, and payback at a later time.

These scenarios play out every day. However, a skilled individual can make a dramatic difference in both the outcome and the way that people work together. There are three steps:

1. Understand and Defuse the Situation

2. Build an Outline of the Resolution in Stages

3. Confirm Agreement

 

1. Understand and Defuse the Situation

The most critical step is to dispassionately understand the situation from all perspectives. The best way to understand the situation is to speak individually with each of the key people in an understated way.

Listen to positions contrary to your own opinion without comment or criticism. (This is a real skill!)

If possible, the conversation should be held in their office. People respect that someone else made the effort to visit them.

Avoid e-mail exchanges. Complex problems do not get resolved by e-mail.

Set the tone. Most people can not focus on listening to others until after they have spoken. Accommodate this. On occasions where emotions have festered, time to vent these emotions may be needed. Again, this is approached in a listening mode which does not feed into the negative energy being released. After people calm down and have an element of trust, you can get a better understanding of what is essential and what is negotiable

Find areas of agreement. In such conflicts, the disagreements are of such high visibility that they completely dominate the view. By identifying areas of agreement, perspectives are clarified. The conflicting areas appear more manageable. When people see that there is general agreement in many other areas, there is more confidence that the remaining problems can be resolved.

Emphasize that this is an exploratory conversation. Positions are open to explore what is really essential, without concern that these are actual proposals. It is important that opinions do not harden at this time.

Listen for consequences. In order to understand what they are communicating, it is necessary to use the content and be aware of the consequences of what they are saying. (Reference Post: Listening for Consequences

2. Build an Outline of the Resolution in Stages.

The solution will not be one of the original suggestions, but must be teased out of the understanding obtained in the first step. This is a process involving thinking, making proposals, obtaining feedback, and making revisions.

First, there are bits and pieces information from the earlier discussions to be reviewed. Look at the edges where people expressed positions that were more flexible to begin to craft a proposal. Start with what is negotiable for each group and build what you can. Put aside your first ideas to stretch the thinking and keep the ideas from hardening too soon.

Take an outline of a proposed solution back to a key individual for discussion. Emphasize that it is a hypothesis to be developed. It is essential to have their input at several stages during the construction of the solution.
Test the elements with questions such as:

Will this approach work?

What changes in your position be made to become acceptable?

Encourage suggestions.

Once people realize that they are not going to be railroaded, positions soften and possibilities for concessions and compromises increase rather surprisingly.

Incorporate appropriate revisions, especially concessions and take the new information to another individual to continue building an acceptable approach.

The objective is an informal general agreement for addressing the conflict of the key areas. Hold discussion on details for the next step.

3. Confirm Agreement.

After an informal agreement has been obtained with the individuals, schedule a meeting the different individuals or groups represented. The meeting is essentially to obtain an informal consensus that the proposed solution is acceptable. A group discussion is needed to confirm that the approach is understood and accepted by the group.

This meeting is significantly different from the meeting in the above production/quality example that was called to try to solve the problem–without having spent the effort to develop a foundation.

(A written agenda is useful as a tool to focus the discussion on the important points. Reference Post: Disrupting the Cycle of Inefficient Meetings)

An informal consensus is all that is needed by the group. Details, which are important but do not change the decision, can be worked out by selected individuals as follow-up actions. Participants will generally be satisfied with both the resolution of the priorities and the process to settle the conflict.

 

In summary, priority conflicts are a normal part of business. Conflicts often lead to disruption. However, taking the time to understand and build a consensus with the individuals can lead to a productive resolution.

Minimizing the Frustration of Working for an Indecisive Manager

Indecisive managers survive, even prosper. They have a good job. It’s working for them, so there is no motivation to change.

Although there is plenty of advice offered to understand or encourage these managers to change, the effort of an employee to change them is usually pretty futile.

If you are working for an indecisive, it is important to take care of yourself. The loss of positive energy shows itself in frustration, less effort, reduced creativity, and an erosion of skills. These factors ultimately reduce your effectiveness and the ability to contribute and be rewarded. The focus should be on maintaining energy and effectiveness in a frustrating situation.

You may not be able to get a decision from the boss, but there are a number of actions you can try in order to maintain your effectiveness and mental well being.

Simplify the situation.

Frame the decision situation for the supervisor in relatively clear terms so a path is obvious. Propose the direction. Make it as simple and straightforward as possible—even to a yes or no response.

Understand the decision schedule.

There is a misconception, often embraced by the indecisives, that decisions should be made at the deadline. The question “When is this due?” seems to be their first response.

There is a myth that the passage of time somehow leads to better outcomes, even if nothing is done during the interval. This myth provides a rationale for not making a timely decision. In reality, the earlier that the decision can be made, the better chance for a good outcome:

(i) Decisions should be made as soon as there is agreement that all of the critical information or experience is at hand. Work to get an agreement that the all the information is available. Filter out secondary information that would be reassuring to have, but is not critical to determine the direction.

(ii) A decision, even if not the “best” decision, that permits action is more effective than waiting for a decision.

(iii) The earlier the decision is made, the more time there is to change it if the initial actions indicate it is not correct.

Ask no more than twice, then move in a different direction.

In general, when requesting action from someone, it is a good policy to ask a second time if there is no activity after the initial request. It is always possible that the person did not understand fully the significance of the first request. Consequently, during the second follow-up conversation, take care to ensure that the details and significance are understood. (One method: Listening for Consequences).

Then, if no action is taken after the second conversation, it is clear that the request is consciously being put aside. Further requests are not likely to improve the situation. There is little to be gained by pestering. Continued ignored requests lead to frustration.

It is a more productive approach to consider other directions for action. Finding them takes some creativity. Usually, people are focused on the first idea. Alternatives exist, but are not apparent at first. It takes some real thinking to identify them. Make the effort. (Example: Reject the First Idea)

Act, than apologize if necessary.

Some indecisives prefer it when the action is around them. Things get done and they do not have accountability. If the direction is clear and the decision reasonably within your competence or responsibility, start the activity in the selected direction, then check back.

Channel your energy in other productive directions.

Look out for yourself. Think about how to constructively release the energy that builds up under the frustrating condition of a boss who will not do his job. Rather than knocking your head against the wall about this situation, see what alternative actions can be taken. It is better than stewing or complaining. Put the energy into exploring areas that you can do something constructive.

It is never fun working for people who cannot make a clean decision. Sometimes, it is like being in quicksand. Some, but not all, are clever enough to find their way out.

 

Manager’s Performance Appraisals—Assessing Contributions to Subordinates’ Professional Growth

The strong leader makes his mark, puts his vision into action, and then moves on. It is the expectation that the vision continues to grow in the future. Often though, when the leader moves on, there is no successor who can continue and expand the implementation. This break in leadership is a consequence insufficient effort to the development of the next generation. As the example below shows, this is an old problem.

Genghis Khan spent almost forty years in constant warfare to build his Asian empire. In his 60’s, he was at the height of power, without competition either from within his tribe or from an external enemy. He realized that he had a problem—there was no clear successor. He had not devoted enough attention to developing the leadership skills in his four sons. These four men did not get along, did they have the vision of his leadership principles, and were resistant to change. Genghis Khan, ruler of most of Asia, tried many methods to develop his sons, but it was too late. The succession plan was a compromise. Even in the first several years after Genghis Khan’s death, the battle campaigns were less effective and the resources began to be looted internally. The Mongol empire did endure, for a long while, but it was a shadow of Genghis Khan’s vision.

Similarly in a modern organization, when a visionary manager is replaced by a person who cannot meet the increased responsibility, the direction is lost. The performance of the organization suffers.

Strong managers are often not seriously evaluated for employee development. Their ambition and energy are elsewhere and they may not appreciate the importance to the organization. Lesser caliber managers may take the view that, as they individually move upward, they will not be accountable for what they leave behind. Both approaches lead to inadequate training of the next generation. Some starting points for assessments are needed.

An individual responsible for evaluating the manager’s contributions to subordinates’ growth can observe a number of different actions to gauge the performance. Looking in specific directions is the key.

Actions to Observe

Does the manager map out the projects, set the directions, and then assign small pieces to the subordinates?

Do the subordinates actually make decisions comparable to their abilities?

At meetings, do subordinates express their opinions or confirm agreement?

Comment: Managers who do not delegate may achieve results, but do not develop competence in their subordinates.

Which type of questions do the subordinates tend to ask?

“What does (the manager) want?” or “What does this situation require?”

Comment: Subordinates, who are trained to look to the manager for direction, are not gaining the skills required for leadership.

Does the manager rely on a small inner circle, excluding others from responsibility?

Comment: Favoritism certainly has advantages, but staff development is not one of them.

For subordinates who have been reporting to the manager for at least one year, can you, independently, observe unusual skill growth in the subordinates?

Comment: If the change is observed independently, then query about the manager’s role in the skill growth.

Does the manager encourage or criticize individuals who have opposing positions?

Comment: Criticizing legitimate dissent stifles others.

Observing actions such as the above examples provide a starting point for assessing the manager’s contributions to the subordinate’s skill growth. It also provides a real foundation for a discussion during the appraisal interview. Most importantly, the crucial issue of leadership development can be addressed.

Related Posts on Evaluations:  Dealing with a Bad Employee Performance Appraisal

Struggling to Give A Good Performance Appraisal

Creative Procrastination—Less Work, Less Worry

“Procrastination is the thief of time”

That whimper has been heard too often to goad children and adults into action.

Habitual procrastination with every activity does have negative consequences. Also, there is the nagging worry of having projects hanging over your head.

However, procrastination, used as a selective tool, can really be used to benefit. It just requires a clear understanding of when procrastination adds value. The trick is to spend a few minutes and see what the consequences for procrastination are for the activity at hand. The activities tend to fall into groups. Some examples are shown below:

Procrastinate based on the Effect of Time on Consequences

Progressive—The negative consequences of not acting increase with time. There is no benefit to delay.

Example: A young patient has cataracts and the eye doctor reports that they will require surgery within the next year

Comment: This is a progressive problem as there is continued decrease in vision until the operation. In progressive cases, there is greater benefit in acting soon (in order to restore better eyesight) rather than later to have the same result.

Self-limiting—The consequences do not change with time, but there is a deadline.

Example: A child’s birthday party has space for 10 people, but 12 or 13 have accepted.

Comment: This is a self limiting problem, since the consequences are known and reasonable. It is also, the experience that cancellations of known acceptances to parties, weddings etc. are generally about 10%. There are always ways to handle an extra person. Consequently, no advance action is required for self-limiting projects.

Schedule dependent—At a known time, an event occurs and time for action is over.

Example: A progress report is due in two weeks.

Comment: This is fully schedule dependent. The important point is to begin work at the right time. If you start too early, the effort drags on and consumes additional work. Habitual procrastinators begin work too late and end up in a crush. Schedule dependent projects are best handled by initially making a reasonable estimate of the amount of work required and then putting the work on hold until the appropriate time.

Chronic–Minimal negative consequences, no end date. If the consequences are acceptable, there is no reason to devote energy to it.

Chronic projects, such as cleaning the house, tend not to happen. Life can go on without them.
However, other chronic projects, such as contacting an old friend, also fall into the chronic category. However in these cases, the consequences of regaining contact with a friend are fully positive. Activities without deadlines that have positive consequences tend to be undervalued. Additional emphasis on the value of positive consequences may be needed to determine whether procrastination is of use.

In summary, the approach is to estimate the effect of elapsed time on the consequences and take the appropriate action. The nagging worries of an undone project have been addressed.

Two perspectives of worry

1.Write down the pressing concerns on a sheet of paper. Put the list aside for a week, and then look at it again. Note how many have disappeared on their own. Work on those that remain.

2. “If you have fear of some pain or suffering, you should examine whether there is anything you can do about it. If you can, there is no need to worry; if you cannot do anything, then there is also no need to worry.” (His Holiness the Dalai Lama)

Project Reality Checks—Keeping Perspective or Heading in the Wrong Direction

At the beginning of a vacation trip, there is always something exhilarating about getting on a clear Interstate knowing that you are finally on the way. When that first highway sign marking direction appears, a doubt can creep in—is this the right direction?

A new project at work has a similar feel. There is always energy and excitement in the early phases. People have ideas, good energy, and build on each others ideas. There is some support from management and project direction is beginning to take shape. People are anxious to move down the path and get things done at a good pace.

The difference between the vacation trip and the work project is that there are no road signs to remind people to check the direction. People have to build their own markers. This step is often not taken, with the risk that, over time, the project can go off track as conditions change.

One approach is to have selected individual, who are so inclined, to explicitly take the responsibility to check the perspective in a more dispassionate way and probe the larger project group with their doubts as needed. This probing can be done by Listening for Consequences during the discussion or considering the project through nagging background questions.

Examples:

What flaws in the basic assumptions have come to light since the project started?
New information always becomes available. The check is to determine if this has an affect on the work.

What is known, but not being discussed?
There are sometimes concerns that people would just prefer to avoid. The direction is to address them before they become major problems.

What is being missed here? What is being overlooked?
These questions are the most challenging and creative of all. It takes some insight and effort to bring to light things that have not yet been on the table for discussion.

What other ways can this work be done?
Once people have momentum, it becomes more difficult to consider a course correction. This question raises this possibility

Does this level of detailed effort matter to the project?
Sooner or later, work creeps in that really has little effect on the goals. This question forces consideration of this possibility

There is a tendency to make perspective checking a group responsibility. Often this approach simply doesn’t work. Generally, the group should be pushing forward. Otherwise, there will be a tendency to just planning and fretting and frozen into paralysis. Also, by diffusing the activity, no one is responsible for the analysis. Finally, many individuals do not have the temperament to change mental directions so quickly and hence it is inefficient to ask them to do this.

It’s really not much more effort, but occasionally asking a few nagging questions are effective to keep the project going in the best direction.

Asking Good Quick Questions

It happens every day: The mind blanks as the talk ends and the speaker closes with: “Any questions?” The room quiets and it seems that nothing can be recalled from the just concluded talk. It is particularly awkward when no one at all responds. What happened? Better, what can be done to get the discussion going.

There is a skill to being ready for these questions. For some, it’s second nature. If it isn’t though, a little preparation can make the questions come to mind much easier.

Three Steps for Quick Questions–Finding, Keeping, Asking

Find the topics that raise questions.

For some people, the topics appear to be completely covered by the speaker and there is to be added. The trick is to listen more critically to identify areas of further interest. Here, it may be appropriate to listen for consequences.

The premise of Listening for Consequences is that in order to understand what someone is saying, the consequences must also be considered. This technique allows questions to surface and adds another dimension to understanding the subject. The above link describes this method with examples.

Keep the hooks for the questions.

Most talks proceed so fast that topics come and go before the listeners can fully consider them. Some points do raise questions, but, in a flash, the speaker is on to the next topic. For those points that do raise questions, though, make a mental or written note (one or two words will do), so that it can be used to bring it back to mind when the question period begins

Ask without judging the question.

Prejudging the quality of the question is the major deterrent to actually putting it forward. No need to wait and let the pressures mount.

The fact is that most questions are fine. This fact can help to defuse the inhibition of the naturally occurring doubt. The only questions that are not well received are those with long introductions that serve primarily to demonstrate the questioner’s expertise. Long winded questions are not asked by people concerned with the quality of their own question.

Just as in tennis, the asking the question is like the serve that puts the ball into play. Then, it is the speaker’s responsibility to do what he wishes with it.

Asking quick questions is related to the short article: Getting Ideas into the Discussion.

Struggling to Give a Good Employee Performance Review—Maintaining Credibility

The tension during an employee performance review can be so high that even under the best of circumstances (good relationship with the employee, good results), it is difficult to maintain credibility. Under less favorable circumstances, particularly when the news is not good, your credibility and the working relationship can be seriously damaged.

There is a lot of advice from consultants and on the web about how to structure these meetings. It’s not quite enough though. The key to maintaining credibility during these meetings is to have clarity and focus on the details. During the discussion, vague discussion undermines the trust. A few changes can have a big impact. Here are some specific examples:

If you can’t own it, don’t say it.

Example: “I tried for a higher rating for you, but the others did not agree.”

In an organization, individual appraisals are often decided by group consensus. Compromises about individual employees are often made to accommodate the overall requirements of the organization. You may personally disagree with the performance rating given to one of your employees, but once you allow it to be accepted, it is your responsibility. An attempt to deflect the responsibility will not be believed.

Eliminate vague platitudes.

Example: “It was a tough year for the organization

“Others had ‘career years’”

“You can turn this around in the future.”

“You gained in experience.”

Generalities are typically viewed as a filler and cover. Credibility demands some supporting evidence and specificity.

Avoid Inappropriate Requests.

Example: Many organizations prefer to keep their overall ratings results confidential. This corporate preference is often translated into a request that employees not share their personal information with each other. However, the request is viewed by the employee as suggestive of having something to hide. The employees will and should do with it as they choose.

Inappropriate requests are viewed as self-serving and lower the overall credibility.

Don’t issue unsupportable challenges.

There is a time to challenge the employee to develop abilities and improve performance. There is a tendency to issue broad challenges to the employee at the review meeting. If these challenges are general, without a goal, plan, or supporting resources, they are seen as a sure sign of empty words.

Challenges are best issued after consideration at a project review or when setting the employee’s goals.

Avoid Boiler Plate Documentation

The evaluation form given to the employee should reflect some work and thought of the manager. For example each responsibility can be summarized in the context of accomplishment, contribution, and significance.

The pasting method of completing the forms, particularly when the text is taken from the employee’s earlier submission, cuts the employee deep. It shows clearly that no real effort or thought was put into the review.

 

In summary, performance reviews are a measure of the manager’s credibility. In some cases, it is undermined. However, with some work to strengthen the clarity and focus of the discussion, the on-going working relationship can be developed in a positive direction.

 

Related posts on performance appraisals:
Managers Performance Appraisals–Assessing Contributions to Subordinate’s Professional Growth suggests an approach evaluating managers in this area or Dealing with a Bad Employee Performance Appraisal

 

Office Backstabbing: 101

There is nothing more unsightly than watching co-workers crudely hack at each other competing for a better job. It is office politics at its lowest. The pros do this so smoothly that people view their promotions as inevitable when these individuals jump over their boss with only routine performance credentials.

It’s useful to think about the some of the underlying techniques. As a hypothetical example, consider these points if you were trying make such a move.

Maintain integrity about verifiable facts.
Apparent credibility is essential to succeed. It is important never to be caught distorting an objective fact.
A powerful tool is simply to ignore inconvenient facts that may not be known or verifiable by others. It is also acceptable to spin the facts, as every politician does.

Separate self-promotion activities from attacks.
Self-promotion is always accepted and is just getting the word out about accomplishments and abilities. Backstabbing in this case means attacking unfairly or in an underhand deceitful manner. Both activities have their place, but mixing them in the same conversation really calls attention to the attack.

Enforce corporate values to others.
These values may not apply to you, but enforcing them does provide a good image and, in fact, does hold some of the others in check. Few people want to acknowledge that those with extraordinary success have followed their own rules.

Cultivate independent relationships with the influential, especially in soft business settings.
Soft business settings are activities which do not have the core day to day objectives as their primary focus. Consequently, there are routine opportunities for informal information dissemination. Fact finding and exploratory committees are among the best since they tend to provide regular access. These peripheral activities, often passed up by the rank and file, are sought after by the pros.

Use information about targets appropriately, based on its content.
Information about targets has its own value

(i) Negative information can be disseminated in an objective manner.
If the facts speak for themselves, there is no need to risk integrity points by adding much subjective opinion.

(ii) Positive information value can be minimized.
The positive content can often be minimized by presenting it in a context that logically results in an unfavorable comparison. This technique has the advantage that it simultaneously acknowledges the others accomplishment while denigrating its significance. (Example: “Yes, they delivered ahead of schedule, but twice as many resources were used…..)

(iii) Disinformation is an art.
Disinformation should contain just enough fact so that the entire statement can be immediately accepted as true. There is an emotional negative taint that sticks even if the negative ambiguities are later corrected. Paraphrasing others, without attribution, is a very common and effective method

Timing.
Disinformation attacks are best made when the targets are separated geographically so that they do not have the opportunity to respond immediately. The additional time both allows the disinformation to morph into doubts or rumors, as well as leaves some vagueness about the originating circumstances.

A modicum of patience is needed here. The opportunities for using information present themselves if the foundation elements are in place. There is no need to force them.

Leave no traces.
It is embarrassing that otherwise cunning adults believe that e-mails and voice mails are not treated as public information.

Of the seven techniques discussed above, none are examples of particularly egregious behavior. It is the use of them together that makes the underhanded methods successful. It’s just part of the corporate landscape and important to track.

The one exception is disinformation. Ultimately tolerating, and even rewarding purveyors of disinformation, will corrupt and cripple any organization. It’s inevitable. Plan for it.

A related post:   Recognizing Incompetence Early–Pretending to be a Manager

Balancing Management and Technical Priorities- Recognizing Problems before Projects Fail

Every project that has to deliver a working product has a tension between management priorities and technical integrity. This tension can promote creativity and efficiency, but if the balance is lost, a defective product results, sometimes with severe consequences.

Late Design Change is Cited in Collapse of Tunnel Ceiling
(NY Times 11/2/06)

This past summer, there was a fatal accident in a new tunnel built as part of Boston’s Big Dig project. A section of the ceiling collapsed, killing a woman. Although the collapse was attributed to a late design change, the origins of the problem were in the imbalance between project management priorities and technical execution.

As background, the original plan was to construct the ceiling of the tunnel using metal panels coated with porcelain. The panels were to be suspended from the tunnel roof using hangers. However, due to the high cost of the porcelain, designers substituted heavier pre-cast concrete panels. These heavier concrete were suspended with a hanging system that had a smaller margin of safety that was generally accepted in other tunnels. As a further compromise, where the tunnel roof had already been finished, holes were drilled in the roof and the hangers glued into the roof. Gravity won out and these hangers failed causing the fatal accident.

The report of the National Transportation Safety Board identified late design changes as the cause.

The Big Dig project was well known for being over budget, behind schedule, and technically challenging. However, the origin of the problem was that the imbalance between the political and practical considerations. This loss of perspective had happened years earlier and ultimately led to the defective work.

Management/Technical imbalances are routinely encountered in typical projects. Recognizing these situations can help prevent projects from losing focus on the product.

Recognizing Management/Technical imbalance:

1. The project is oversold beyond reasonable expectations.
All projects should be oversold to some extent. It is the challenge to reach a difficult goal that leads to efficiency and innovation. Some proposals are made with lofty projections and minimal feasibility analysis. However, without the input of the people responsible to identify, evaluate, and accept these challenges, the balance will be lost from the beginning.

2. Poor decision-making at the first difficult situation.
Almost all projects encounter a difficult situation, often within the first third of the project. (For the tunnel example above, the assumptions about cost were found to be inaccurate.) The path charted out of this situation is a leading indicator of the future direction. Signs of an imbalance are withholding information, changes which compromise the quality, stifling discussion, and management by decree on technical direction.

3. Responsibility for the product quality taken from the experts.
In every organization, there are individuals who understand the quality of the product and the consequences of design changes. They may often not be the strongest business people, but there is a general recognition throughout the organization that they know what they are doing. If they are ignored, it is a sure sign of an imbalance.

4. Personal ambition outweighs the product.
Certainly ambition is one of the most important motivating forces. At the imbalance point, decisions become geared to what looks best for the management at the expense of the product. This situation is summarized as a declaring the project a success and moving on before the deficiencies surface, leaving others to pick up the pieces.

A key step for a successful project is keep the managerial/technical balance in the project. If the symptoms for imbalance are not recognized, there is no opportunity to take corrective action. That train is headed off the tracks.

Disrupting the Cycle of Inefficient Meetings

Certainly at least once a week, you can find yourself trapped in a poorly run meeting, wasting both time and resources. Such meetings seem to be accepted as a fact of business life. However, an unfocused meeting can be sharpened right when it is in progress. More importantly, within a business group, the cycle of inefficient meetings can be broken. It takes a planning model and some preparation.

How do these meetings continue to happen? The inefficient meetings are not due to lack of information about procedures. By this time, most organizations have provided books, web sites, instruction, or high-priced consultants to address this inefficiency. Still the meetings go on, frustrating many. One problem is that the training lacks immediacy– that is the behaviors are not evaluated and corrected at the time they occur. Further, an individual person acting alone to change things is generally not well tolerated by the peers. However, a small group can make a big difference in the quality of the meetings. One approach is described below:

Background–Planning Model based on Urban Renewal Experience

In an urban renewal method used extensively in the 1950s, the government razed tracts of inner city neighborhoods with the intent of reconstructing them. This approach failed for several different reasons– priorities changed, funding was not approved, or housing concepts were misunderstood and the residential towers constructed proved unworkable.

One current approach to urban renewal is to identify a still vibrant core within a deteriorated neighborhood and take selected actions (i.e. incentives to attract business mortgage options to attract resident, increased community services) to encourage growth outward from that center. At some tipping point, the growth becomes self-sustaining.

The key points for applying this experience to meetings are the vibrant core, grass roots empowerment, and incremental action.

Application to Business Meetings

Identify a Vibrant Core

A small group, that is both frustrated by the inefficiency and recognizes the benefits of focused meetings, has to be identified. As a starting point, this group may be just a few people in a business unit who tend to attend the same meetings. Often people join in a self-selection process. It is important that the several members of a group routinely attend the selected meetings. The informal grass roots group can empower themselves to facilitate change on their own.

Incremental Intervention

The group members identify a small number of very defined points that are considered to be crucial to have an efficient meeting. If the points are not present, or if the meeting veers from the track, straightforward questions can disrupt the inefficiency. These simple questions demand answers, not further discussion.

As an example, four points for an efficient meeting are discussed below:

1. Goals and Objectives

Very often, the opening comment is that the meeting group is getting together to talk about an issue. And that is all that happens. There are a few cases when meetings are just to talk. But seriously, there should be a cogent reason for the meeting that should result in at least a direction. If no one can articulate it, the meeting is on the wrong track.
Ask: What is the goal of this meeting? What will a successful meeting accomplish?

2. Agenda

A meeting without a road map is not likely to stay in the intended direction. Reference to the agenda during the meeting allows the group to recognize diversions and get back on course. The key word here is thoughtful. The agenda frames the discussion. When agendas are shown for review, people generally accept the basic premises and often make comments around the edges. It is one of the real ironies when the meeting leader reports that he was too busy to make an agenda. There appears to be no time for individual preparation, but the time of the group is used inefficiently.
Ask: Where is the thoughtful agenda?

3. Decisions

Sooner or later, the meeting must result in decisions or directions for action. It is important that the group has a common understanding of how these decisions will be made. There are significantly different ways: Autocratic (one person decides), Consultative (one person decides with input from others), democratic (each person has a vote) or consensus (all members support). The method of decision making affects the presentation and discussion of the information. If people are unclear as to who is responsible for the decision, it is likely that a clear decision will not be made.
Ask: How will decisions be made?

4. Accountability

Follow-up of the agreed upon action is necessary to prevent more things from going into a black hole. If the meeting adjourns without a clear idea of the follow-up actions, it is not likely that the actions will get done.
Ask: Who is accountable for the actions decided of the meeting? What are the dates?

Comments

Immediacy and Repetition

Since the group can gently affect the meeting as it takes place, and the benefits can be observed, there is a high degree of immediacy to reinforce the behavior. However, it takes repetition to change habits so that the questions may be required at different meetings in order to begin to break the cycle.

Two Cautions:
(i) Intervention style is a skill.It is important to intervene in a style that is naturally perceived as helpful. People are more receptive when they sense that a primary motivation is to improve both the situation and develop their own skills.

(ii) Some meetings are not appropriate for intervention.

Key factors are the relationships between people. The intent is to improve the situation, not to antagonize, embarrass, bruise egos, or harm yourself.

In summary, those who attend inefficient meetings can empower themselves to improve the situation without waiting for outside directives. If a small group can do this successfully, others will follow.

Employee Performance Appraisal Ranking Methods Lessons about the Flaws from “Arrow’s Paradox”

Many organizations have adopted forced ranking performance appraisal systems. Each employee is evaluated against peers and performance arranged from highest to lowest.

These end of the year performance appraisals resemble report cards for adults. There seems to be more angst though, since compensation, career direction, ego, prestige, and morale are all involved.

The crucial activity in the appraisal process is the procedure to determine the specific position of each employee relative to co-workers. The ranking methods are generally used empirically by the participants. A failure to understand and compensate for the inherent limitations of the method can limit the overall fairness of the process.

Ranked performance appraisals can be compared to ranked voting methods. Examples of a ranked votes are the college football and basketball polls published during the season. These rankings, using a method known as the Borda count, assign a different number of points for each position (i.e. 10 for the best team, 9 for the next etc.) Each voter ranks the teams according to his preference. Then, the total number of points each team received are summed for all of the voters and the overall team positions determined.

The major breakthrough in the theoretical understanding of ranked voting methods stems from the work of Nobel Price winner Kenneth Arrow, a mathematician and economist. In 1951, he published a proof of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem (also known as Arrow’s Paradox). This finding was big news at the time and initiated a large body of work in understanding the validity and limitations of different voting methods.

A simple statement of the theorem: Each ranked voting method has inherent flaws. A slightly more detailed statement is that no voting system (more than 2 voters) based on rank preferences can possibly meet a certain set of reasonable criteria when there are 3 or more options to choose from. These reasonable criteria are detailed in the reference below.

The performance appraisal ranking process is not quite the same as a single winner election, but the method is subject to the flaws identified by the theorem: (1) Strategies can be employed by a subset of the electors to lead to an outcome that is not the choice of the majority; (2) Biases can be introduced if the voting methods are simplified. These factors are briefly examined below.

Distortion Strategies:

An example of a personal strategy to distort the overall results can be encountered in the sports’ polls. In a closed voting system, a voter can grossly change the evaluation of one team (i.e. deliberately ranking it well below its performance level) to benefit another. However, for performance appraisal applications, such selective strategies are mitigated by a collaborative discussion prior to the position assignment. There is some transparency if an elector is attempting to make a significant deviation to advance a personal objective. This discussion can address the potential flaw in the method. Obviously, if there is not a free discussion or some electors are unaware of these strategies, a distorted outcome can occur.

Simplification: Voting by Pairs

A more subtle bias, however, can be encountered during the actual ranking of larger groups by subsets. Generally, the voters have a group with many members to evaluate. In practice, these evaluations are often done using subsets, usually pairs. Comparisons are made in turn until there is agreement in the employee positions.

As an example, there is a group of 15 people whose performance must be ranked. The first six names are:

Adam Don Joe John Mike Sam (and 9 more)

Rather than evaluate the entire group and vote on all 15 at once (for example, using the Borda count), the first two, Adam and Don, may be considered. If Don is evaluated as the better, Don is moved ahead of Adam, the next comparison is with Adam and Joe. The process continues until the order is agreed.

The use of pairwise comparison would appear to get around the “3 option” condition of Arrow’s Paradox. However, this is not the case:

“Another common way “around” the paradox is limiting the alternative set to two alternatives. Thus, whenever more than two alternatives should be put to the test, it seems very tempting to use a mechanism that pairs them and votes by pairs. As tempting as this mechanism seems at first glance, it is generally far from meeting (… the reasonable criteria …). The specific order by which the pairs are decided strongly influences the outcome.” (Reference below)

The counterintuitive assertion above is that there is a bias depending on the order of presentation.

In the earlier example with names, the people were listed alphabetically—Adam, Don, Joe etc. The names could be randomized. The bias still remains, it is just transferred to different individuals. Perhaps, the most common and biased case, is when an individual, drawing upon her own experience and opinion, submits the presentation list to the voter group. This approach introduces a subjective bias into the process. One person’s opinion may continue as artifact through to the final ranking.

There may be methods to minimize this flaw, but such methods are generally not known to either the participants or the human resource administrators. That expertise is held by others and is rarely sought.

Arrow’s paradox cannot be avoided. In order to obtain the fairest ranking evaluation process reasonably possible, the participants should some familiarity with the inherent strengths and weaknesses of the method in order to use it properly. The performance appraisal process is only as fair and unbiased as its weakest point.

Posts on Evaluations: Struggling to Give a Good Employee Performance Review–Maintaining Credibility

Dealing with a Bad Employee Performance Appraisal

 

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow’s_impossibility_theorem

 

 

Using Micromanagers to Sharpen Skills——- Prepare to Implement Solutions @ Lowest cost added position

“What you learn in slow times, you apply in busy times”

The unpleasant fact is that the range of your activities is limited during a period under a micromanaging supervisor. However on your own initiative, there is the opportunity to sharpen problem solving skills so that they can be used effectively when “slow times” of the servitude ends. Then, you will be able to make the most of the “busy times” when you are back in control of your own work.

There is plenty of advice out there about methods to deal with a micromanager. Recurrent points are:

(i) Avoid negative actions that can affect your long term position

(ii) Understand and modify behaviors as possible.

(iii) Explore options.

 

People make a good living prescribing advice, but like similar advice for raising children, you can listen to it, take in what makes sense for your own situation, but must act in your own way. Finding a safe way out from under a micromanager takes time. The process of freeing oneself has a way of dragging morale and performance down. It’s important for both your career and your state of mind to have a daily activity fully within your control that can improve skills. An example of one such activity is outlined below.

Recognizing Solutions @ Lowest cost added position

The thesis of the micromanager is to dictate lower level activities tasks in more detail than necessary. These activities may be resource, schedule or skill related. Micromanagers tend to present directions for a solution, implement them immediately, congratulate themselves, and move on. In the short term, the employees may have little input. The habit of simply doing the tasks as presented can develop, eroding abilities.

The antithesis of the micromanager is to perform tasks or fix problems at their lowest overall cost point. This antithesis is another example of applied common sense. However, this statement is difficult to put into practice because it is too general. The points below provide a more specific guide to consciously analyze the lowest cost solutions. This analysis skill can be honed on real problems observed during the micromanagement period and then used with increased effectiveness after you regain your freedom.

The two framing questions below can help to more focus attention on identifying more efficient solutions to the problem at hand. You may not be able to use them with your boss, but you can have a clearer idea of the efficient direction.

1. Who is the lowest level individual with the experience and skills to be responsible for the task?

When problems move up the management ladder in order to get resources or focus, the problem tends to stay at that level. This inertia can be recognized and overcome to push the activity back down to the appropriate level.

2. What are the essential elements of the solution? What elements have found their way into the solutions as safety net items that can be eliminated?

This question addresses the tendency to overdesign the solution, increasing the cost of the solution in terms of money, time, materials or human resources required. It drives unneeded resources out of the solution.

For a given task or problem, weigh the approach of the micromanager against that by your analysis from that of lowest cost added perspective. Sharpen your own conclusion as to the best approach.

In some cases, a way to integrate the two approaches may become apparent (see a related example the post on the link about: Thesis–> Antitithesis—> Synthesis). For sure however, problem resolution skills can be developed and used that can benefit you in the organization long after the current micromanager has become a distant memory.

Slacking off without consequences—Practical Risk Management

Just don’t do the task. Or more precisely, first consider not doing it. Then decide. Does anybody care? Does anybody even notice? Is there any value to the effort? Is there a time limit that affects others? The difficulties begin when people unilaterally ignore a task simply because it is unpleasant. That type of slacking off may have significant negative consequences, particularly at work. However, a few minutes of consideration may convince you that the benefits of ignoring a task really outweigh the consequences.

An example for today: At work, there are always reports to be written. Some seem to have value, but there are any number that seem to go nowhere. People recognize this and periodically have collaborative meetings to redefine the reports etc. But the reports creep back in, particularly when an insecure, micromanaging supervisor appears who seems to value having all the information available at the expense of delegation and setting direction. When such a supervisor moves on, the reports continue with a life of their own. The elimination of this type of work can be efficiently accomplished by application of the principles of Practical Risk Management.

Risk management is really a systematic way of looking at an operation, its uncertainties, the consequences of these uncertainties, and evaluating actions that can be taken to minimize the negative consequences. There have been elaborate methods worked out to apply these principles to complex systems in order to have them perform reliably. Consider for example, a commercial airplane. Components such as the engines and propulsion systems, fuel delivery, communications, pilot performance, and ground support systems must function as intended and interface with the others. Risk management techniques have been used during the design and testing to increase the reliably of the aircraft to the point where it is safer to take an airplane trip than an automobile.

The important point is that the same principles that have been used to increase the reliability of complex systems can be simplified and applied to allow you to slack off without consequences.

The risk management procedure at its simplest takes only a few minutes of thought and has only four steps:

1. Understand the facts of the task under consideration—these are the people, information, schedules etc. as well as the process to reach the stated outcome.

2.Make up ideas or scenarios of different actions that you could pursue that differ from the normal course. These scenario changes introduce uncertainty into the process and are called “risk events”

3. Logically follow out the likely consequences each idea. Remember that this is a mental exercise based on your perceptions. However, if you are dealing with a familiar situation and you have reasonable judgment, your assessment of the potential consequences will likely be in the ball park.

4. Select the most appropriate course of action. However, the actual consequence may be different from your analysis. These differences are generally not a big deal. Pay attention and monitor the actual results. Change your selected action as appropriate.

Let’s go back to the example of these reports that apparently go nowhere:

1. Fact:

Reports take resources, do not appear to have value.

2. Possible Actions

Ignore writing the report

Reduce the report substantially

Continue the status quo

Change the system

3. Briefly consider the likely consequences for each action

• Ignore it individually—If no one really cares, there will be no consequences. If someone does care, how will it be brought to your attention? If it is likely to be a friendly reminder, you have paid a small price to learn this. If it is the loss of your job, well it just is not worth it.

• Reduce it substantially—Gradually reduce the effort and content until someone notices, then make the adjustment permanent.

• Continue the status quo—Potential consequence is that you will lose the edge on your initiative and skills

• Change the system—Some people like to do this. Mostly they are bureaucrats. It’s a longer term approach.

4. Take the most appropriate action, monitor and modify if necessary based on the observed result.

So, there can be tasks not done and no consequences. The risk management principles can help you to decide which ones to let go. The evaluation takes only a few minutes to use. This method can be applied to a wide variety of tasks. I’ll pick this up at another time.

Actually, it’s really not slacking off, it’s just using you time and energy where it has better value.

Elephants, Blind Men, and the Vision of a Manager–Story

The story below, or one of its many variations, is told at many management meetings:

All of the men of the region that were born blind were gathered in one place and an elephant was brought out. Each man felt a different part of the elephant—the head, the feet, the ears, the trunk etc. When they were asked, what sort a thing is an elephant, each had his own response; the tail–a brush; the leg–a pillar, the ear– a winnowing basket and so on. An argument developed within the group and no agreement could be reached.

 

Additional Stories

This is a link to a Collection of Zen Stories     (usefulzenwords.com)

The management lesson that is often emphasized is that no one individual has a grasp of the entire picture. Each person has a piece that must be brought together to have an accurate understanding of the situation. The point that is stressed is the importance of working as a group and communicating effectively. The lesson is interesting and effective the first time. However, the repetition of message becomes a cliché and the interest is lost.

I recently came across this story again in a Buddhist Commentary. The original story and the commentary took the lesson in a different direction than the management consultants:

This story often appears in the Buddhist canon as a parable told by the Buddha. It was told in response to a question concerning scholars arguing about the nature of man and religion. The story follows the same scenario, and has a verse with these two lines describing the blind men:

For quarreling, each to his view they cling.
Such folks see only one side of a thing.

Two lines from the Commentary indicate a direction:

“If you want to do right, just avoid groping over the elephant: do not say perceptive awareness is it, yet do not say that it is not it.”

The blindness is one of obstructed perception. All of the folks are making the same error, even if their specific reports are different. Bringing all of the people together to fit the elephant together in simply leads to a composite, agreed by consensus, but that picture still contains the errors and distortions inherent in the faulty perception. Although, there may be agreement, it cannot reflect the actual situation if the perceptions are incorrect. Communication and working together are not the central issue. An appropriate, clear experience or understanding of the situation is the essential point.

A manager is often asked to put the pieces of a situation together, based on skill and experience. Managers can become adroit at figuring out the big picture. In fact, looking throughout the organization, it is obvious that individuals can succeed on this skill quite well. Yet, the picture is likely to incorporate errors of perception of groping the situation, favoring a known view and seeing, as the verse states, only one side of a thing. Based on this original intent of the parable, the responsibility of the manager is to bring the insight to the situation so that it is addressed fully and appropriately. The power of the parable is the challenge to the individual find a way to develop that level of understanding.

Is a clear understanding necessary to function in the management position. Absolutely not. Some organizations essentially built on deception can continue in that mode for some time, and clarity may not be welcomed. Thus, the challenge is directly to each individual to accept or decline as time and conditions dictate.

Another Lousy Presentation at Work

What is it that makes intelligent people sabotage their work by organizing and delivering presentations that are well below their native ability? I’m not even thinking about the quality of the PowerPoint slides; we’ll leave that for another time. Things like rushing around in front of the audience at the last minute because the copier didn’t work or the projector did not interface with the computer. Sometimes it’s not giving the audience enough perspective or spending too much time on the background. Or apologizing for busy slides, instead of fixing them. Then, there is running over the scheduled time so that those in the audience lose their interest as well as any good will toward the speaker. After having suffered through a few too many of such presentations, I’ve put together this list of a few straightforward things to keep in mind.
Show up Early
You know when the meeting begins. Be prepared and test the equipment. This preparation gives a better impression than rushing in at the last minute because you need to be seen as “busy”.

Practice at least once.
The most needed revisions quickly become obvious.

Know and respect your audience.
Think about what the audience needs to learn from the presentation, what they are likely to know, and what presentation style is the most appropriate. If you believe what you are telling them, make sure the audience knows it.

Use the first rule of rhetoric: “Render the audience docile.”
Docile, in its formal definitions, means “easily taught” or “ready to learn”. Using first rule of rhetoric is to give the provide evidence or reasons for the audience to listen and take you seriously. The reason will be specific to the talk. As examples, the evidence may be to establish your credentials or show the significance of the topic.

Don’t apologize for the slides and handouts.
Fix it if you can. If you can’t, no need to call attention to the deficiencies.

Finish early.
It is appreciated by the audience and makes the presentation more favorably remembered.

This article dealt with performance of the individual. A related post Presenting Quantitative Information Well–Lessons from Playwrights focuses on the methods to sharpen the presentation of the content

Welcome!

Please check out the “About” page to see how this thing is going to fit together. Basically, I’m going to be posting about using different thinking and organizational tools to get better results from whatever it is you want to do! First, there will be an example of an actual problem, followed by analysis, and then, a principle and its application. The principle will be further described in a longer post so that it can be used on your own problem. My hope is that you will be able to use these methods I post to get better results with less time and effort.