We all want to hire people who are going to make a difference. Who will drive our businesses forward.
We want people who will remain engaged long after the honeymoon period.
The circle of engagement is pretty clear. An employee likes her job so she works hard and does well which in turn produces rewards that matter to her so she tries harder still.
But where is the on-ramp? What fuels this virtuous cycle?
photo by robotography
It’s easy to put the onus on the employee by saying you’re paying well, you have free yoga classes and M&Ms. But none of those spin the wheel. Despite what you may think those are only ‘nice to haves’ for most people. People who are intrinsically motivated to do something amazing.
You’ve spent a lot of time and money to bring the new employee on-board. So why not suck up your pride and take that first step? Do everything in your power to ensure the people you hire succeed?
Engagement is a two-way street. There is give and take on both sides, but we far too often neglect the new employee and trust them to ‘quickly get up to speed.’
Take the lead in engaging your employees and that lead will be followed.
We’re all in the same business.
We may produce different things, but that doesn’t change anything. With off-shoring and 100-years to optimize the process, production is a commodity. Everyone can tap into efficient, quality production (lead-laden toys notwithstanding).
In fact, we’ve been in this business for a half-century and we aren’t getting any better at it.
We are all in the people business, of course.
Your job is to turn brain waves into cash (hat tip). If you thought you’d misplaced your competitive advantage, you’ll find it there.
photo by gilles chiroleu
In 1957 the U.S. hit the inflection point whereby we started thinking more than producing. White-collar workers outnumbered blue-collar workers for the first time. Since then the spread has only increased, but we haven’t changed our mindset about how we work.
We are still trying to get more from less by using the same approaches we used 100-years ago. Basically, work longer then work smarter then finally give up and off-shore everything.
But we’re left with an economy and business scenario that is entirely different. The job today is to optimize people’s thoughts.
Optimizing people is far different than optimizing people operating machines.
A couple starting points to keep in mind to make the transition from acting like a production line manager to a brain wave herder.
I could go on, but then I’d have nothing left to write about. Please add your own or challenge me on any of these. My thinking is always a work in process and it’s hard to do alone.
photo by annadriel
A recent Towers Perrin post reveals a conversation the author had with former NFL coach Tony Dungy. Football is known for its gruff, abrupt, in-your-face style of ‘leadership,’ but Tony Dungy was far from that. He succinctly states his philosophy to leading and getting the best from his players three points (from the post):
- His parents were both teachers and they believed that it was their responsibility to make every student an “A” student. But not every student learns the same way, so you have to tailor your style to each individual to bring out the best in them.
- You have to make each player on the team understand that the good of the team is greater than that of any individual, and that you can only be successful as a team.
- You have to earn your players’ trust — this is foundational to the first two. They have to trust that your coaching and advice is what is best for them and for the collective team.
I like this for several reasons:
First, if your leadership style is inflexible and you see people as cogs in the wheel then you dramatically limit the field of potential individuals who could excel in the job. Finding good people is hard, why should we further constrain ourselves?
Secondly, you are limited by the boundaries of your own imagination and thought process. If you only know one way to go about things then you won’t be open-minded to new, potentially better approaches.
Further, by acknowledging that people are unique you are connecting with them on a very personal level. In order to motivate you have to know them. That connection is usually a two-way street. By taking the time to understand someone you’re proving you care about them. Reciprocation is then difficult not to grant. You wind up getting a lot more effort in return.
Finally, you don’t want your people to compete with each other too much. That devolves into a race to the bottom. It is far easier to push another down than it is to lift oneself up. Putting the team first means that you won’t reward pushing others down in order to shine.
photo by jspace3
Thanks to Lijit I can see what folks are searching for when they arrive. “What Employees Want From Their Jobs” has been hitting the top of the charts frequently lately so here goes:
It depends.
Horrible answer, but people are all working for different reasons. The best employers try to get to the bottom of what indviduals want rather than looking at their workforce as a single entity. I’d recommend you start by asking them. Ask them repeatedly and don’t accept their first few answers. Most people haven’t actually thought much about this. Press them. Then ask again.
So contrary to what I just said, I’m going to try drawing some broad generalities as a starting point.
A job is a lot more than a paycheck, a bowl of M&Ms and health insurance. Intrinsic rewards are far more meaningful and lasting. If you see your team as more than cogs in the wheel and want to build a sustainable business then focus on what those intrinsic rewards are for each individual.
I don’t like the term ‘happy’ when it comes to work. It’s too New Age Cumbaya. Though, if pressed, I would fall back on my sample of one and recall the times I’ve been most creative, effective and productive at work and it’s always been when I’m most confident in myself, when I’m most comfortable fitting into my surroundings and when I’m generally happy. Yes, it matters.
I just finished reading Johan Lehrner’s latest called How We Decide and he off-handedly plucks out a study by Mark Jung-Beeman showing that people with a positive mood (read: happy) are able to solve 20% more puzzles than unhappy people. And conversely, people with higher anxiety solved fewer problems and were slower doing so.
photo by tricky
A majority of us now work in knowledge industries. Everything we do is about solving problems, creatively improving products and processes and finding new ways to out-flank our competition. Everything requires creativity. And insofar as speed to execution and problem-solving matter to your business then it behooves you to pay attention to what your employees are feeling.
It’s not making sure they have M&Ms, on-site dry cleaning or yoga classes. But making sure that,
Just as Happy Cows make better cheese so do happy employees make better products.
[To read Jung-Beeman's full study download the PDF for the 'Positive Mood and Anxiety Modulate Anterior Cingulate Activity and Cognitive Preparation for Insight.' It's the first title.]
Copyright ©2008-2009 RoundPegg Inc.