Let's Get Down to Business...

How about doing something "meaningful?"

I've suggested the following trio for starting to figure out what you'll do with your "work life."

Do What You're Good At

Do It With Passion

Do It With People You Like and Respect

I think all of us want to do something that makes us feel good about what we're doing. In other words, that we're accomplishing something useful and valuable. Whether it's important or not is obviously a question that will never have the same answer twice.

Here's an interview that will give you a different perspective on being "satisfied" with what you're doing. In it, Matthew Crawford, who earned a Doctorate from the University of Chicago in Political Philosophy, discusses what he did for awhile, why he's not doing it now and what's he up to these days. You'll be surprised at how he's using his high-powered education. You may be even more surprised at who is doing the interviewing. Enjoy.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Matthew Crawford
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

Here's a Good Idea: Get Rid of Performance Reviews

If things are running smoothly, there's nothing like the dreaded "Annual Performance Review" to throw a wrench in the works.

For my money, they're a lose-lose. Managers somehow try to improve an employee's performance by pointing out all the mistakes he or she made over the past year. The employee, believing they've done nothing but great work, wants to talk about a pay-raise and a promotion.

Is it any wonder that what should be a productive discussion quickly becomes defensive and tense?

Attached is an article from the October 20, 2008 Wall Street Journal written by a UCLA Business School Professor who has the right idea: get rid of performance reviews that destroy morale and kill teamwork and replace them with ongoing dialogue where both sides learn and grow: Download get_rid_of_the_performance_review.pdf

Peter Drucker writes about what it takes to be an "Effective Executive"

Peter Drucker's contributions to understanding why businesses act the way they do are nearly boundless.

Well into his 90s, Professor Drucker was teaching, consulting and energized by how organizations were changing as we moved from the 20th Century "Age of Industry" to the 21st Century "Age of Knowledge and Globalization."

Business research is often criticized for being too theoretical and not having any practical usefulness.  No less vocal are critics of the "menu approach" where you're told that if you do this or act that way, you'll be wildly successful.

Professor Drucker legitimately had a foot in both camps.  His 65-year-long career in research produced a lengthy list of theoretical insights.  His practical experiences also showed him the right and wrong way to do things.

In the accompanying article, Professor Drucker outlines the things he thinks you should do in order to be "effective."  And he backs them up with some reasoning that is hard to argue against. 

I encourage you to look through the article for a idea or two that you could use in working more effectively in your team or organization.  Certainly Professor Drucker doesn't have the answer for everything, but there may be a nugget in here that will be useful for you.   

• Download what_makes_an_executive_effective_peter_drucker.doc

A Few Bad Apples will Ruin Everything

WHAT HARM CAN A HANDFUL OF NASTY OR INCOMPETENT EMPLOYEES DO?  A LOT MORE THAN YOU MAY THINK.

Superstars get a lot of attention from bosses. But bad apples deserve even more.

A growing body of research suggests that having just a few nasty, lazy or incompetent characters around can ruin the performance of a team or an entire organization—no matter how stellar the other employees.

Bad apples distract and drag down everyone, and their destructive behaviors, such as anger, laziness and incompetence, are remarkably contagious. Leaders who let a few bad apples in the door—perhaps in exchange for political favors—or look the other way when employees are rude or incompetent are setting the stage for even their most skilled people to fail.

It's crucial for leaders to screen out bad apples before they're hired—and if they do slip through the cracks; bosses must make every effort to reform or (if necessary) oust them.

Want to do the Right Thing? Get a Good Night's Sleep

Who said this stuff is rocket science?  Didn't we already know the answer to this question?

How can you do the right thing (or get the thing right) if you stayed up all night?  How can you expect your brain to be in top form if you didn't give it a rest? 

A recent study led by a Virginia Tech researcher told us what we already suspected:  lack of sleep is associated with unethical behavior. 

Their list of how to be at your best has all the usual suspects:  Get more sleep.  Exercise regularly.  Avoid too much caffeine and alcohol.  Set priorities.  Work more efficiently.  Plan ahead.

The research also observed something that is an important lesson for effective management.  Managers who demand results that require employees to stay up late and miss sleep may be increasing the likelihood that workers will "fudge" results and engage in other forms of cheating.

The lesson?  Managers have to find the right balance between encouraging their employees to work faster and better while not pushing them so hard that they start cutting corners. 

Are "Tough" Managers more Successful?

Defining what it takes (or what it means) to be a "good" manager flummoxes business educators and practitioners.  That's because it's a subject where "one-size-DOESN'T-fit-all!"

Teaching "soft skills" is the current rage in management education.  As you know, everything relating to teams and teamwork is at the top of the list. 

But does being a good-listener or a flexible decision-maker correlate with on-the-job success?  How do we know what it takes?

Three University of Chicago researchers recently tapped into a motherlode of real-world data that challenges a lot of contemporary management thinking.  In brief, they found that what matters is being a little "tough-minded," not soft-around-the-edges.  Sure, it helps to be respectful and a good communicator, but they found delivering results takes execution and aggressiveness.

Attached is the Wall Street Journal's story reporting on this study.  Read it and think about what it's telling you. 

Is management education getting it right?  Or are some "hard skills" a little softer than we think?  Or, and maybe here's the take-away, to be successful, do you need to have a "bag of tricks" that's full of hard, soft and "just-right" skills?

Enjoy...

• Download are_tough_ceos_most_successful.doc

It isn't an easy thing to do...

Writing well is one of those things that isn't easy, but you've got to do it. Fortunately, it's something that gets better with lots of practice.

Being able to communicate clearly is essential if you want to succeed in the business world. Your idea for a better mousetrap won’t get to first base if you can’t persuade somebody that the world will beat a path to your door if we build it.

My version of introducing you to business requires putting a pen or pencil on paper (or fingers on a keyboard) and explaining things. It’s a little time-consuming and sometimes frustrating, but worth it in the long run.

To get you started, here are a few rules I've collected that could be helpful. Look them over and try some out.  See if they help.

Does Good Governance Pay?

Below is an article from the April 26, 2010, issue of The Economist.   They must have known that our Course's Fifth and Sixth Weeks are all about Ethics and Good Governance. 

It's good reading and worth your time.  When you've finished, what's your answer to the question of whether "good governance" makes a difference.  And while you're at it, what is "good governance" anyway. 

The "Efficient Grease" Hypothesis

On the continuation page is an article from the April 29, 2010 issue of The Economist.  It asks whether there's a positive return on investing in a bribe.  Do a few dollars or euros discretely slid into the hand of a flinty-eyed bureaucrat get things done?  Or does it just open to the door to more haggling and delay?

Or does it make more sense to invest in a "good reputation?"  Is that a source of "positive" competitive advantage?  In a digitized age where anonymity is protected, how do you get and keep a good reputation?  Enjoy.

How do we do the "Right Thing?"

Maybe it's just my sensitivity to the subject, but some days it seems like no business can operate ethically and every headline exposes some "new" and more unseemly behavior.

Why can't our businesses behave the way they should?

An easy question to ask - and one that certainly should be frequently asked - but thinking about how to answer it leads to more confusion and frustration.

Who decides whether a behavior is good or bad? Who's the "they?" How do you define a "good" behavior versus a "bad" behavior? Are all "good" behaviors always "good" or are they sometimes "not-so-good?"

Our usual response is for Congress to enact a new law, regulation or rule, proclaiming, "This will fix the problem and make businesses behave the way they should."

This usually lasts just long enough for the lawyers (and business managers) to find some loopholes and ambiguities big enough for truckloads of even worse behaviors.

How do we do the "right thing?" Is the right thing following every rule or is it making wise choices? Here's a short lecture by a scholar of psychology and economics (do they go together?) about how choices get made and could get made in our modern society. Enjoy.