I’ve been holding staff meetings in veterinary hospitals for 10 years.

That is a lot of monthly staff meetings.

It occurred to me perhaps others could use some of this information for their own meetings in the same way that I used this information from where ever I stole it from.

I’m envisioning this being an ongoing resource for those who have to come up with topics for discussion or team building.

You can find Part One on Customer Service here.

I have removed a lot of the hospital specific information and so please feel free to add, rearrange, and generally change the information to suit your practice, or business.  I’m going to try and keep similar subjects together. This week we are looking at team building exercises and games. If you end up using some of this I’d love to see your slide decks, pictures, or presentations.

12079247_10156157048585343_948857466056634856_n

Blind Trust

Separate into pairs. One of the pair is blind folded and needs to be navigated to the other side of a room full of obstacles.

The obstacles can be anything. I’ve printed out pictures of lava, snakes, poo, etc. and then taped additional sheets of paper to the pictures to make the “obstacles” interesting shapes. If you have difficulty finding blind folds elasticated headbands work really well.

Have both members of each pair stand at the same end of the room. Have one of each pair put the blind fold on. Quickly rearrange the obstacles so that the blindfolded team member done not have the benefit of having seen the layout of the course. The un-blindfolded team member instructs the blindfolded team member through the “maze” while they remain at the starting point. Then the roles are reversed. If a blindfolded team member steps on an obstacle they go back the start and they try again. If you have candy or some other kind of reward it helps get the competitive juices flowing.

This is a fun exercise that teaches the value of listening to instructions and working as a team. It does eat up a lot of time so don’t cram it into a busy meeting, particularly if you have a lot of people.

What’s That Tune?

Have a deck of index cards with the names of very recognizable tunes written on them. Split your group into two halves. Give a card to victim / volunteer and have them share the name of the tune with the rest of their group. Have the volunteer tap out the tune and see if the other group can guess that the tune is. You can then have the groups reverse their roles a couple of times. Have anyone who thinks they know the tune out their hand up rather than shout out.

The group who know what the tune is will find that it is almost impossible to believe that the other group does not recognize the tune from what is being tapped out. But then they will realize how difficult it is when it is their turn to guess.

This exercise is used to explain “the curse of knowledge.” Context and knowledge are incredibly important for communication, but they can hinder. When a person has knowledge (such as the name of a song) it can sometimes be difficult for them to understand why someone who does not have the knowledge can’t understand a less than ideal description of that knowledge. Things that are obvious to staff that deal with the subject everyday are not so obvious to clients who do not.

Song Suggestions:

Star Spangled Banner

Star Wars Theme

Jingle belles

Game of Thrones Theme

Twinkle Twinkle Little Star

Tower Building

Get whatever materials you have to hand. Straws, paper cups, paper plates, sticky tape, etc. Spilt your group into separate teams and see which team can build the highest free standing tower within five minutes.

This is a great ice breaker and team building exercise that is cheap and does not take a lot of time.

Call My Bluff

Works better with smaller groups of less experienced staff. Have everyone sit in a circle and have a small table with a selection of brochures for the products / services you sell. Use a stuffed toy or something similar to designate who’s turn it is to speak.

Pick a person to start who chooses a leaflet from the table. They read out three statements relating the product leaflet, one of them should be false. If someone in the circle guesses which statement is false they get to pick who gets the stuffed animal and picks a leaflet next. If someone in the circle incorrectly identifies a true answer as false they get the stuffed animal and have to pick a leaflet.

This exercise not only allows staff to learn about the products and services you sell it also helps pinpoint deficiencies in training programs.

The Prisoners’ Dilemma

Two players.

Each player should have no more than 25 coins. Tell both players that they can keep all the coins that they have at the end of 20 rounds as long as they play all 20 rounds.  However, warn them that you may play multiple games using the coins they have and they cannot reuse coins that they bet or win. Players can talk to each other but they need to hide their bet until both bets are revealed at the same time (behind or underneath a player’s hand is usually the easiest way to achieve this.)

Each player chooses whether to bet one, two, or three coins.  The player that bets the highest number of coins wins. If players bet the same they each get to keep the coins and they have survived another round.

A player that consistently bets three or two coins will run out of coins and therefore will not be able to complete all twenty rounds and will lose all their coins. A player that consistently bets one coin risks losing coins to the other player.

Ideally what should happen is that both players come to the realization that if they just agree to always bet one coin at the end of the 20 rounds they will both be 20 coins richer. However, there can be a temptation for one of the players to bet more at or near to the end. If this happens, then it is interesting to play another game with the same two players, or with a fresh player and the player who did not co-operate, and see how the cooperation goes this time.

The obvious goal it to show how working for the good of the group is actually in the interest of the individual as well. And while making a short-term gain can sometimes seem worth it in the long run everyone loses.

 

I’ve been holding staff meetings in veterinary hospitals for 10 years.

That is a lot of monthly staff meetings.

It occurred to me perhaps others could use some of this information for their own meetings in the same way that I used this information from where ever I stole it from.

I’m envisioning this being an ongoing resource for those who have to come up with topics for discussion or team building. I have removed a lot of the hospital specific information and so please feel free to add, rearrange, and generally change the information to suit your practice, or business.  I’m going to try and keep similar subjects together. This week we are looking at customer service. If you end up using some of this I’d love to see your slide decks or presentations.

IMG_8617 

The Client Centered Practice

Why should we care about clients?

We are here for the pets…

To help pets we have to invest in happy clients.

We are here to cater to Clients Our job is to make our clients experience exceptional and therefore to return.

1st impressions are formed in 7 secs. Be Likable: attitude, smile, eye contact, raise eyebrows, shake hands, lean in but stay 2′ away.

Ask clients why they named their pet what they named them. Open ended questions help boost engagement.

Be complimentary, thank clients for trusting you / us with their pet.

Any time you surprise clients you build customer loyalty. If you do something nice for them they will do something nice for us.

Tell clients stories about their pet. Make sure clients know what you do to make pets comfortable.

Upset clients are a chance for us to shine: “What I will do is…” “We appreciate your feedback…” “Let me see what I can do about that.”

Use the pets name in the conversation. Do not refer to he, she, or it. If you must refer to the sex… GET IT RIGHT!

Internal Customer Service

How we interact with each other is at least as important as how we interact with clients.

Every time we do not deliver excellent customer service to a co-worker there is a client, or patient, at the other end who is not getting good customer service.

Always try to view things from our client’s perspective.

A client’s reality is not ours.

Our clients should never suffer because internal issues.

Phone Based Customer Service

Every client who calls wants to come in.

Every client will call other places if we let them.

It is difficult for owners to evaluate the quality of veterinary services. They can’t use logic to evaluate services they only know how we make them feel.

55% of communication is visual.

7% of communication is content.

38% is how things are said.

On the phone we are already handicapped because of the lack of visual.

How we say things is doubly important.

The ROI of awesome customer service (15:00 minute mark to 20:25 minute mark)

 

Setting Customer Expectations

We don’t know what our clients are expecting.

Some vet hospitals do things differently than others.

Clients get upset because we do not do what they thought we should do.

A customer has a certain expectation of customer service when they visit Wal-Mart or a McDonalds.

A customer has a different expectation of the level of customer service when they visit Nordstrom or Starbucks.

A customer who goes to Nordstrom and get’s a Wal-Mart level of service…

(Give examples of online reviews and client expectation mismatch)

Zappos charge for shipping, and clients expect to be charged for shipping.

However, occasionally giving away free shipping to a client makes the client feel valued and grateful.

If we let client’s know what is going to happen and then we exceed those expectations they will love us for it.

shattered

What can we learn about leadership, and management, from an insiders account of the 2016 Presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton?

A surprising amount is the answer in the case of Jonathan Allen & Amie Parnes’ excellent “Shattered.”

Subtitled:”Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed campaign,” Shattered is a surprisingly partisan look at one of the most dramatic election campaigns in memory. As is mentioned in the book’s introduction, if you are a Hillary Clinton supporter this book can make for painful reading and a reopening of recently scabbed over wounds. It is also noted that if you are not a Hillary Clinton supporter it may reenforce your views, but may also engender some sympathy.

The story spans Clinton’s early decision-making process of whether to get into the 2016 presidential campaign all the way to the days and weeks after the election of Donald Trump. It is really the story of an organization; and the failures of leadership, management, data, and strategy.

What makes the story so compelling is that the people at the heart of the campaign to elect Hillary Clinton, and Clinton herself, are painfully aware of the mistakes of the 2008 campaign for the democratic nomination against Barack Obama. The 2008 campaign was characterized by internal power struggles, leaks, and was generally drama filled, and the candidate and her team are hell-bent on not making those same mistakes again. While for the most part they succeed, there are numerous new mistakes which once again create a dysfunctional organization.

Prizing loyalty over everything else, Clinton cannot help but create an organization of fiefdoms which allows them to get top down decisions implemented; however, is then tone-deaf to bottom up feedback. It also creates a system where staff need to get multiple people need to sign off on decisions. This in turn, creates the need for others to get involved to help fix the organizational problems, but unintentionally make things worse. As is noted mid way through the book, leaking was a symptom of the dysfunction of the 2008 campaign rather than the cause. This is a failure of leadership by getting management structure wrong.

As the book progresses, through the democratic primaries it becomes obvious that while some lessons of 2008 had been learned by the 2016 campaign, for example focusing on delegates rather than votes, it blinds them to the fact that some of their underlying assumptions are wrong. They do not realize that they are losing the votes of working class whites who had formed their base in 2008 and for whom Bill Clinton had been a champion.

Other than the organizational issues, there is also the role of big data. Every campaign decision is based on analytics and is constantly looking for the least costly route of victory. However, analytics are being used as a strategy, and a decider, rather than as a tool. The underlying assumption is that is cheaper to persuade supporters to go to the polls, and register to vote, rather than change the minds of undecided voters. This does not take account that there are voters who are actively voting against Hillary Clinton, and they were not doing anything to change the minds of those voters.

The campaign was misreading the electorate, the analytics were wrong, but it was the organization that allowed it to happen. Having said that, as the book correctly notes, no reputable pollster was predicting a Donald Trump win, so the Hillary team is hardly alone.

This is an interesting book because these are people obviously working at the top of their game, repeating the issues made famous by the World War I book “The Guns of August” by Barbara W. Tuchman. That book explores the idea that the generals of World War I were not fighting the current war but the previous one and not realizing that the world had changed and thereby dramatically adding to the misery of The Great War.

Like Weapons of Math Destruction which I reviewed here, Shattered is also a warning of the potential limits of big data and predictive models. They are a tool, and should just be one of many. There are lots to learn from Shattered; it is an excellent tool as well.

As a manager, you are never going to please everyone.

Some might even argue that if you do, you are not doing your job correctly. You will be called upon to discipline and even terminate employees, some of whom you might consider friends if you no longer had to manage them, and who may already consider you a friend. That is until you fire them – no friendship survives that.  Moreover, a portion of your job is to stick your head above the parapet wall and take the pot shots that people send your way: customers and employees alike. You may well take the wrap for decisions that other stakeholders, and even the courts, have made and the people you work with will almost certainly never know about the arguments that you have won to protect their interests.

If you are someone who values internal culture, like I am, then you have the added concern of trying to make any piece of feedback positive. Gone are the days, for the most part, of managers losing their tempers and yelling at the people the work with. I won’t say that I have never lost my temper at a member of staff but I have made sure to apologize afterwards and I have always felt that loosing one’s temper is counterproductive: If it actually hurts what I’ve trying to achieve then what is the point? Management is hard, we are all over worked, underappreciated, our hands are often tied, and the goal posts are always shifting. However, the rewards make it worth it: financial, recognition of your peers, and the sense of achievement when you see both people and businesses grow.

And then there are things like this:

“I loved the actual job here. Worked here for almost a year. If you could rise above petty back-stabbing and the fact people would be super nice to your face, and cut you down in a heartbeat behind your back, then it was a great job. Hospital chief administrator suffered from Little Big Man syndrome and needed to be avoided at all costs – unless you wanted your day ruined, as he was always incapable of saying anything nice, and preferred to berate – even if praise was his intention! Some of the doctors were difficult, but most were really great to work with. Overall, if you have thick skin, this was a good place to work – but no benefits other than an employee discount for vet services.

Ouch.

Other than the obvious of “what else would you expect a terminated employee to say?” What else can be learned from this from a management perspective? What can I learn from this since I feature so prominently?

Well yes, I am short – well spotted. Not much I can do about that. I guess you could argue that as someone of limited stature I have to be additionally careful to not appear angry so as to not play into the stereotype. As noted above, this is actually in my own interests anyway but a helpful reminder that I need to live up to my own standards.

If I am to be avoided, then that is actually pretty difficult. I try very hard to check in with every employee on both shifts every day and I am obviously sorry they felt this way. I think the comment of being “incapable of saying anything nice, and preferred to berate” is a little harsh. We, as an employer and I personally, have put a number of programs in place to improve and celebrate employee recognition. However, I will admit, that I do need to praise more in person than I currently do. Most managers do suffer from this and it is probably one of the more difficult aspects of the job. It is particularly hard when you have an employee who is not doing anything particularly wrong, but also not doing anything particularly exceptional. Since the above quote is from an anonymous post it is difficult to know for sure anything about this former employee, but as a general takeaway I think this rings true.

A “reading between the lines” insight, and backed up by some feedback from former employees who are now friends (see I’m not all bad) is that there is perhaps a lack of trust at times. A feeling that I did not have the employee’s “back.” This is probably a feature of trying to make customer service central to what we do. If a customer complains about an employee or the service they delivered, unless the claim is outrageous, I will probably try to make to client happy. This can certainly be interpreted as taking the side of the customer instead of the employee. It shouldn’t – I’m trying to protect the business and therefore indirectly the employee. If I feel there is an issue to be addressed with the employee, I will address it separately; however, it is easy to see how this issue arises and perhaps I need to do a better job of dealing with this unintended tension.    

As a final note, it is interesting that this former employee felt that discounted vet services was all the benefits that were on offer. I would take away from this that I needed to do a better job of explaining the other things that formed our benefits package.   

I don’t want a lot of reviews like this – nobody does. But the same rules apply to bad reviews about yourself as to bad reviews about your business. They are an opportunity to get feedback that you would not otherwise be able to receive. And while anonymous former employee reviews are even more unfair than anonymous customer reviews, due to the legal issues involved, a little self-examination is not a bad thing. If nothing else, it hopefully made for an interesting blog post.

(Clicking on the image above will take you to Amazon where a tiny percentage goes to help my movie and book buying habit.)

 

 Zappos, Tony Hsieh, and the Downtown Project are controversial subjects in some quarters of Las Vegas – although I have always been a supporter. In my opinion, it is hard to not give credit to Mr. Hsieh for having the courage, faith, and energy, to move his company and sink millions into the depressed center of Las Vegas, a city I love living in and call home.

That makes Aimee Groth’s tell all book about living inside, or at least partially inside, the bubble of Tony Hsieh’s circle throughout the first five years of the Downtown Project all the more difficult, and fascinating to read. With Ms. Groth becoming part, if not the driving force, of the narrative this is very much a piece of Gonzo journalism which gives some first person perspective to the stresses and confusion that many in the story recall.

To give some background, Tony Hsieh is the CEO of Zappos, an online shoe retailer which is owned by Amazon. In 2013, Zappos moved its headquarters into the former city hall building of Downtown Las Vegas. Downtown Las Vegas, and in particular the area east of Las Vegas Boulevard, had been a rundown collection of tattoo parlors, pawn shops, seedy bars, and ultra-cheap motels. With the result, it had all the problems of a depressed city center, with homelessness, prostitution, and drug dealing on most street corners. With Zappos’s move to Downtown, Mr. Hsieh created the “Downtown Project” with $350 million of his own money. Almost half the money was earmarked for the purchasing of real-estate with the rest to be invested in businesses and startups centered in Downtown Las Vegas. The stated goals of the Downtown Project was not only the creation of a new business and a technology startup environment, but to make Downtown a place with a thriving innovation culture.

The story follows Ms. Groth’s intial conversations with Mr. Hsieh and other invited guests to the Downtown Project, through partying and becoming part of Mr. Hsiehs entourage, the first cracks appearing in the startup culture, to the major reorganization of the Downtown Project, and the internal strife at Zappos due to the move downtown and Holacracy. Holacracy is a new management system and communication tool that was adopted by Zappos. I reviewed Brian J. Robertson’s book on Holacracy here.

However, the main thrust of “The Kingdom of Happiness” is on Mr. Hsieh’s, and those around him’s, response to these events and to their motives in the first place. As the story is told there is almost a willful lack of support, and management, given to the early entrepreneurs, lured to Las Vegas with promises of financing to follow their dreams and the expectation of mentoring. With the result that many were essentially setup to fail, or at the very least felt that way.

“…the young entrepreneurs who didn’t naturally seek out assistance or know how to navigate an ecosystem like this were left to fend for themselves.” – From The Kingdom of Happiness.

There is also a darker undercurrent that flows through the book, and that is the potential conflict of interest in the due roles of the Downtown Project as both landlord and investor to various new and startup businesses. At one point in the book an entrepreneur wonders at the oddness of trying to avoid their investor and business partner, because they are also their landlord. There are numerous mentions throughout the book by those in the Downtown Project, that a source of profits for the Downtown Project is the real estate rather than in the businesses they have investments in. An uncharitable reading might question the ethics, or morality, of this arrangement.

 What I feel is the main takeaway from the book, and makes it of particular interest to business people,  is the balance between Vision, Leadership, and Management, and how this seems to have gone awry at both Zappos and the Downtown Project. At one point Mr. Hsieh snaps at Ms. Groth that he is not a leader but a visionary and it is hard to argue with him. But if Mr. Hsieh is not leading then who is?

The move to Holacracy, a system that dispenses with traditional management structures, through the lens of Ms. Groth’s book, seems to be an imperfect answer to some difficult questions. There has been plenty of vision at Downtown Project and Zappos. There is also some merit in the argument that there has also been leadership at Zappos (you don’t undertake something like Holacracy without leadership pointing the way). But the cult of personality surrounding Mr. Tsieh, and Zappos’s focus on its non- traditional internal culture, maybe filling in for actual leadership.

What is clear, particularly at the Downtown Project, is that there has been a failure of leadership through a lack of management. In a drive to be different, focus on making things “happen,” and create a self-sustaining entrepreneurial culture, the basic structures and support networks have never been put in place that would seem to be a prerequisite for this type of project.

I, for one, am a supporter of the Downtown Project and Zappos – particularly for Zappos’s focus on internal culture. One only has to walk through downtown to see the enormous impact that Downtown Project and Zappos have had. However, there have been significant costs, and without examining the issues that The Kingdom of Happiness raises we are doomed to repeat them. In business, but particularly in the startup culture, there is a focus on leadership to the expense of everything else and an almost dismissal of management. What the story that Ms. Groth tells us is that visionaries abandon management at their peril and that leadership, while the key ingredient in all successful companies, cannot survive without good management.

 

(Clicking on the image above will take you to Amazon where a tiny percentage goes to help my movie and book buying habit.)

 

Please don’t buy this book.

I’ve seen Jay speak a couple of times and the most recent time I was intrigued by the study he conducted with Edison Research that forms the back bone of “Hug your Haters.” The study asked two basic, yet fundament, questions in this new age of online reviews and online customer service:

1: How has the proliferation of social media, review sites, and other online forms changed the customer expectations of what good customer service really means.

2: When interactions between brands and humans are played out on the public stage, how must brands perform to in order to satisfy not only the customer, but the customer’s audience.

Hug your haters is a guidebook, informed by real data, on how to best handle complaints in this age of onstage public complaining. When I read a new business book it will sometimes take me down a particular intellectual path, other times it will provide nuggets of useful information that I can use, and sometimes I will disagree with it to such an extent, that I cannot wait to be done.

Hug your haters is different.

Hug Your Haters, for me, is validation of what I have come to believe over the last few years. Negative reviews are a chance to shine. Upset clients can be loyal clients if you can turn them around. Onstage interactions with upset clients is chance to show all those watching that you care enough to listen, empathize, apologize, and try to fix individual complaints.

It is amazing to read a book and have the author focus on a point of technique, where Jay talks about shock and awe was my favorite moment for this to happen, and realize “hey I love to do that – nice to know I’m not the only one!” Although the book primarily focuses on online strategies for customer resolution, is does deal with offline issues and really provides a blueprint, with real world examples, of how to provide customer service in almost any sized business. The basic philosophy is simple – answer every negative complaint, every time, in every channel. By doing this the author, and I agree, believes that customer service can become marketing.  This is because, more often than not, these interactions are conducted in public with an audience.  

If I have to have a complaint about the book it is that Jay lets Yelp off the hook far too easily. My own personal feelings about Yelp have evolved over the years; from outright despising them for their failure to engage with their clients and critics which you can read here, to acceptance with a few reservations which you can read here. However, the issue that Yelp arbitrarily filters out reviews from real paying clients, but does not seem to have the same scruples when it comes to negative reviews from people you do not recognize, and refuses to engage about what has happened, still stands.

However, this really is a minor quibble about what is without doubt the bible of how handle customer service in the modern age. It is not for the faint of heart. Following Jay’s playbook, you will encounter managers, owners, and employees, who feel that you are opening the company to being taken advantage or creating a culture where customers are rewarded for complaining. And there are some merits to these fears; however, these are far out-weighed by the rewards.

For me this book is validation – thank you Jay.

For others, it is heresy.

For most it will be revelatory.

But I like my competitive advantage, so please, don’t buy this book.

 

(Clicking on the image above will take you to Amazon where a tiny percentage goes to help my movie and book buying habit.)

 

Statistics, standardized testing, crime prediction, Google, Facebook, “Moneyballing,” insurance risk analysis, and mathematical models all have one thing in common; they can all fall into the catch all term of “big data.”

There are very few parts of modern life that are not impacted by big data; for better or for worse. The mathematical models that harness vast amounts of data are used for everything:  to determine who should receive a bank loan, which teachers should be fired, whether to hire a particular worker, where police should patrol, which colleges are the best to apply to, which students should offered a place in a college, how sports are played, and even the sentences that convicted criminals should receive.

Some of these mathematical models are transparent.  The model featured in the book and movie “Moneyball” (you can read my review of the movie here) would be an example of a transparent model. The data and the rules that lead to the model’s conclusions are open and available for everyone to see. However, more and more, the models are opaque and it is these models that Ms. O’Neil goes after with devastating logic and passion.

The fundamental issue with these opaque models, other than a lack of openness and therefore the impossibility to challenge their assumptions, is that they can suffer from a lack of feedback or create self-reinforcing feedback loops. Because the models are opaque, many people may not even realize that are in a mathematical model, or that the model is partially or wholly responsible for their circumstance.

As Ms. O’Neil states in her introduction: “Without feedback; however, a statistical engine can continue spinning out faulty and damaging analysis while never learning from its mistakes. Many of the W.M.D’s (Weapons of Math Destruction) I’ll be discussing in this book … behave like that. They define their own reality and use it to justify their results. This type of model is self-perpetuating, highly destructive, and very common.”

Ms. O’Neil does go to some great lengths to stress that a lot of these models have been built with the intention of being fairer. The idea being that removing flawed human beings from decisions that could be made by mathematical models would remove their biases and faulty logic from the progress. However, it is these same flawed humans that are creating the models and without proper feedback, monitoring, and proper understanding of statistics, the models themselves can cause far worse problems than the ones they are supposed to solve.

Written for the layperson, about a subject that would cause most peoples eyes to glaze over unless written by Ms. O’Neil, this is a great and important book and one that I feel will become only more important as mathematical models become even more entwined in our lives. This is also an important book for those is position to make use of mathematical models in their business as there can be significant pressure to accept the word of a program when we should be asking some pretty hard and detailed questions; not only to ensure that what we are getting is correct, but also to ensure that we are not contributing to the Weapons of Math Destruction problem.

Garbage in – Garbage out, has never been more apt.  

Is is just me, or is hiring getting more difficult due the bad behavior of the un (or under) employed?

I mean I get it, and employers are partly to blame, looking for a job can really suck. Employers rarely respond to applications (guilty), some employers insist on their own applications rather an accepting a resume, interviews are time consuming, and wages in some fields are stagnant.

However, none of the above explains some horrendous behaviors I have seen – in particular in the last year or so.
“Obviously you did not read the resume – good luck to you.” A message from an applicant after receiving a rejection email because they were totally unsuitable for position.

“Hi I’m very interested in the position, although I do not have any experience, could you call me back with more information?” A phone message from candidate replying to ad that clearly stated “NO PHONE CALLS.” I have 100 applications on my desk, if everyone does this I’ll do nothing else for days.

Harassing an employer with voicemails telling them that you are obviously the best person for the job and how dare they not hire you because you probably know more than they do. – Yes, this actually happened to me.

Replies to ads that directly contradict what is being asked for. – I don’t think I need to explain this.

Companies, or consultants, replying to ads for full time employees. – Please don’t assume I don’t know what I’m doing. If my ad explicitly states that telecommuting is not an option, an outside contractor is even less likely.

LinkedIn invites after an interview for an entry level position.- This is not going to get you the job and just makes things weird.

Not showing up – really! You accept an invite for an interview and then do not have the courtesy to call and cancel?

Photos on your resume. – We get it, you think you’re hot, but it really just makes most managers uncomfortable. It makes me uncomfortable.

Resumes in weird formats. – When did a PDF become so hard to create? Those of us who get a lot of email everyday are very wary of opening attachments from people we don’t know, but PDFs are a necessary evil for the most part. Word files are annoying but I guess I’ll live with it. Wps files? Google doc files? Jpegs? Screen shots from your phone? I get it you don’t have a computer, and are using your phone, but there are better ways. Just looks lazy.

Bringing a coffee or energy drink into the interview with you. – I’m sorry to get in the way of your morning routine, but I may be your future employer. Or not.

Dressing inappropriately. – It is an interview, not a nightclub, or a trip to the store on a Sunday morning, or a day at the beach.

Now a lot of managers blame the Millennial phenomenon for the above behaviors ; however, I’m not so sure. For one I’m not a big believer in the Millennials being that different from everyone else. They just happen to be young people who are not shy about saying what they want. And a lot of the above behaviors have come from people who do not fit into the generally agreed upon Millennial age bracket. I do think there are cultural things afoot, however, that transcend age. A lowering of the value of work, and generally a misunderstanding of a value of first impressions for starters.

As Tyler Durden from Fight Club might say: “you are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.”

If you want to impress an employer, try professionalism. There are so few practicing it that it will make you easily stand out

I have been reviewing books for a number of years now; however, movies have always been my passion and on occasion I have used movies in staff meetings for the accessibility of the message. I decided that it was time to share some of these.

 (Clicking on the image above will take you to Amazon where a tiny percentage goes to help my movie and book buying habit.)

 

Moneyball, based on the excellent book by Michael Lewis of the same name, follows the real life story of the Oakland A’s baseball team. In particular, Moneyball documents the Oakland A’s struggles of trying to be successful with a budget a mere fraction of their competitors. The realization of their manger, Billy Beane – played by Brad Pitt, that they either have to “adapt or die” is one that many businesses can relate to. The solution that Oakland A’s adopted was to look at the data about players, which informs hiring and firing, objectively rather than emotionally.

Looking at a problem from outside the box and understanding what a problem actually is, not what you have always thought it was, is a huge lesson for most managers. It is also one that is difficult to teach. However, the lesson of being prepared to do what others will not is one that many from the business world will be familiar with – or at least should be. Overcoming the objections, and down right obstructionist behavior, of those who have not bought into your ideas should also be familiar territory for most managers. The movie treats these issues with respect, and although there is an obvious “good guy / bad guy” dynamic, it is easy to overlook this and see the issues being discussed from both sides.

Since the publication of the book, the statistical approach to fields that have previously been lacking such analysis has become know by the colloquialism “Moneyball.” And although the initially baseball was dramatically changed by Billy Beane and the Moneyball approach, there are signs of it falling out of favor.

However, it would be a mistake to dismiss the book, or the movie, because of this change in the idea’s fortunes. Indeed it actually signals a misunderstanding of the limitations of the approach and of statistics in general. As is stated in the movie: “The first person through the wall always gets bloody.”

The movie does break some of its own rules for dramatic effect; however, these are minor sins given how excellent the movie is as a whole. Interestingly, the movie also has two of the best scenes I have ever seen about terminating an employee. New managers could do a lot worse than follow Brad Pitt’s advice on the matter that can be found in Chapter 8 at the 1:00:00 mark explaining the right and wrong ways to go about a termination. Chapter 10 at the 1:18:00 mark actually shows Jonah Hill”s character putting that advice to use and it is a highly accurate and realistic portrayal of how a termination should be done.

As a management tool, Moneyball is a great business story cloaked in a sports jacket. Both the good and the bad of analytics are on display here, as well as the difficulty of being a pioneer and trying to overcome entrenched ideas whose only validity is “that’s the way we have always done things.”

You may not like baseball, but this is a smart story, based on a smart book, about smart people. It also has the added advantage of being highly entertaining.

You could do a lot worse.

(Clicking on the image above will take you to Amazon where a tiny percentage goes to help my movie and book buying habit.)

I’ve never watched “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Private Practice,” “Scandal,” or “How to get Away with Murder.” So why read, let alone review, a book by the writer and creator of such successful, but ultimately not that interesting (to me) features of the television landscape?

Well, the recommendation by a good friend got me to read the blurb and then the audacity of the idea did the rest.
Shonda Rhimes is a busy, powerful, highly successful, African American single mother in Hollywood who realized after a conversation with her sister that she did not enjoy her life. In a bid to change her life she decided to spend a year saying yes to things she would normally say no to because she was “too busy.”Part memoir, part self help book, part treatise on creating balance between home and work lives, “Year of Yes” is a remarkable book. Funny, honest, deeply personal, and down to earth yet also intellectually satisfying Ms. Rhimes let’s the reader into her world and into her mind. It shows that success does not translate into happiness – but that it can if you’ll let it. The book also is a rallying cry for stretching one’s self and not becoming self limiting due to what scares you.

Where the book really scores for me is in figuring out how to have a successful career, and a balance that with having a fulfilling home life that works for both parent(s) and children. While this is not particularly relevant for me (I’m not a parent) it is interesting from an employer and manger perspective for those that do.

I will not attempt to distill several chapters into a paragraph but the importance of personal rules and creating boundaries is great advice for manager to give to employees struggling with the conundrum of the near mythical work life balance.
While there is plenty for the fans of Ms. Rhimes’s shows, working parents, and those interested in the world of Hollywood television production, there is also just a lot of great advice about personal heath, relationships, diversity, and dealing with stress.
This is one of the most surprising books I have read in a while and it is well worth your time – particularly if you like to say “no.”
Note on the Audio Edition: as I often do with books I listened to the audio version which is read by the author and includes actual audio recordings of speeches that she has makes as part of her journey. Shonda’s personality truly shines through with her performance and I highly recommend this version for adding an extra dimension to and already great book.

%d bloggers like this: