Michael N. Dundas

Seth Godin was interviewed by Nora Young on Spark.  The interview can be found here.  The part of the talk where Seth describes how many of us were never trained to take initiative but to follow instructions and how that impacts us in our work made a lot of sense to me.  My favourite part was the section on emotional labour, the act of connecting to another human being and making a change even if it is not easy for you to do it in that moment.

A good talk for anyone in a leadership position.

The picture on the right is taken from a Canadian television series called “The Border“.  It follows a team of Canadian customs agents saving Canada from threats.  In this particular episode called “Kiss and Cry“, Slade who is their technical wizard agent discovers that the Chinese secret service has installed a trojan in their system allowing them to monitor their activities.  Upon investigation, discovery of the trojan, and a quick assessment of the risk, he immediately initiates a system wide shutdown of all services.  Given the sensitivity of data they have in their systems, the type of data their systems have access to,  and the nature of their business it was the right call, however I found it interesting that Slade made it.

Although this is a fictional television series, this scene got me thinking about my clients.  I can not think of any client large or small that is prepared for or has a single staff member onsite that could authorize a system wide shutdown quickly.  As an example, let’s take a large financial institution.  One of the technical staff is doing some routine system checks and discovers that every time a customer logs into their bank accounts, the customers login and password information along with other helpful data such as birth date and postal code is transmitted externally to a range of servers.  Being a large financial institution there is presently a new customer login average of one per second.  What should she do?  Should she shutdown all customer access immediately?  Should she investigate?  If she investigates, how long should she investigate for?  Can she get hold of someone who can authorize the shutdown?  What if that person is unavailable?  Can she make the call to shutdown services then?  It is obviously critical.  Should she keep trying others?  If so for how long?  If from discovery through investigation to authorization it takes 10 minutes, that is 600 client compromises in this scenario.

What is important is that the staff clearly understand what they can and can not do in any situation.  They need to feel comfortable they have done the right thing and will not be punished for doing what they ‘perceive’ as the right thing.  In the scenario above, if you asked your employees what they would do in this scenario, do you know what they would answer?  Would they be comfortable answering the questions above and more importantly would the business be comfortable with the answers and the risks associated with those responses?

I know many business people that would indicate this is fictional or ‘far fetched’.  While I would have agreed to some degree a few years ago, I wouldn’t today.  What I would suggest is that they go to a recent technical (not business) security conference or ask your technical team or consultants about latest research into threats and vulnerabilities and their availability.  Don’t ask the vendors (or at least be careful), they are trying to sell you results and are never as advanced as the bad guys.  Also keep in mind that even research is behind.  There are many malicious pieces of software that are ‘underground’, but you don’t need to look there.  Just look at some of the available off the shelf tools available for purchase.

Is your business realistically aware of the current threats to its data?  Are the risk assessments accurate?  Do you have the appropriately qualified staff and procedures in place to deal with current threats and do they have the appropriate authorization to make the necessary calls in the event of an emergency or unexpected event?  Is the business comfortable and accepting of the risk exposure associated with these decisions?

Seth Godin put together eBook entitled “What Matters Now”.  So far I have only read the first 30 pages.  He contacted a bunch of individuals and asked them to write a page expressing their thoughts and feelings on the future.  Several of the individuals are people I follow on a regular basis.  So far it has been a great read, especially this time of year.   If you are still interested, I’d suggest reading Seth’s blog entry or Michael Hyatt’s posts.  Both are much better writers than I and will do it the justice it deserves.  You can also download the eBook from links in their posts.

I was recently given via Michael Hyatt at Thomas Nelson Publishing a copy of the book Derailed.  The book was written by Tim Irwin.  In the book, Tim discusses what he feels are the reasons why leaders fail as leaders and gives insight into how to avoid these situations.

The first part of the book profiles 6 CEOs of major companies that failed as leaders.   Each leader is analyzed and what Tim feels are their weaknesses and the reasons why they were asked to resign from their position.  While one can argue that the opinions are subjective (and they are), I found his rational to be sounds and made sense.  Regardless of the subjectivity, anyone can learn from the mistakes of these profiled individuals and help themselves be a better leader.  I found myself identifying with the character flaws of these individuals.  I have seen them in many people I have worked with and even myself at times.

The rest of the book discusses the derailment process.  Finally, based on the profiles and the derailment process, Tim Irwin identifies and discusses five lessons that can be learned by anyone in a leadership role and ways to implement these lessons and keep yourself ‘in check’ as a leader.

I found Derailed extremely valuable for myself.  It was well worth the time to read and would suggest it to really anyone that interacts with other people at work.  Although the book profiles CEOs of large organizations, it is very applicable to anyone, even those not in an ‘official’ leadership position.

A great leadership post by Marshall Goldsmith in Harvard business blog.  It is a very simple concept, but one that many leaders and companies forget.

Great TED presentation on leadership using music conducting of orchestras as examples of what to do and what not to do.  Itay Talgam is excellent, funny and entertaining.

A post I really enjoyed by Michael Hyatt.  In it he discusses the necessity of humility as a leader and how too much information can be a bad thing which is completely opposite of how I function.

Overconfidence is “the disease of experts.” They think think they know more than they actually do know. In fact, they make mistakes precisely because they have knowledge. This is what happened on Wall Street. This is what also happened with Hooker.”

http://www.flickr.com/photos/magandafille/287193330/

I took a course on conducting effective performance evaluations yesterday that was being offered.  While I have done performance evaluations in the past, and am comfortable doing them, I find I always learn something new or someway I can improve.

There were two discussion points that surprised me. The first was the concept that a performance evaluation is completely separate from an employees career goals and aspirations.  The second was that your pay increase or financial incentives were not tied to your performance evaluation.

While both were interesting, I want to focus on the first, the separation of performance evaluation from career goals.    While I agree they are different to some extent, the positioning that they are not connected seems wrong.  On the template we use for performance evaluations there is an entire section on objectives.  These objectives are suppose to be measurable in some way and ideally if you are handling the performance evaluation correctly, the measurement is agreed upon by both the manager and the employee.  If your performance evaluation has nothing to do with your career, then these objectives are just objectives the company wants you to accomplish and have nothing to do with your own aspirations or career goals.  I think this devalues the performance evaluation for the employee as it only benefits the employer or is more sided to achieving the goals of the  company with no consideration of the employees aspirations or goals.

For myself, I feel I have a relationship with the company and that relationship is dynamic, constantly changing and adjusting to the environment, goals and situations of the company, goals and situations of the individual.  Like all relationships, there has to be some mutual agreed upon benefit for all parties for the relationship to work.  Over the last two years, I have specifically managed my own objectives to improve my career.  If someone is looking to improve their career in someway, get a promotion, obtain a opportunity in a new area, it makes sense to align your performance objectives with that goal.  When you apply for a new opportunity, at some point in an interview, they will probably ask you what you have done that you feel makes you a good candidate for the position you are applying for.  They will be selecting you partially based on this criteria.  I know people in my company and outside my company that have used their performance evaluation to do exactly this and it was effective.

While I logically understand how your evaluation of the past year or 6 months has nothing to do with your career goals or aspirations, I find it difficult to accept that setting measurable objectives for the next 6 months to a year has nothing to do with an employees career goals.  If that is true, then I guess companies don’t consider your past performance evaluations when you apply for a new position, as they are not connected?

I am no expert in this field of human resources, but I need to research more on this concept.  I want to understand if this is limited to my company, certain types of companies, or is some general human resources concept I have just never been aware of.  Regardless, if this separation is true, then I think companies have an obligation to have an avenue for career development that is as accountable and measurable in the same manner as performance evaluations are.  I do not understand the complete separation of performance evaluations and career goals.  To me, they are related.  When I have conducted performance reviews, the career goals of the employee usually come up.  It is natural and makes complete sense to me they would come up.  As an effective manager I feel you have to address this if you hope to have a good relationship with your employees.

I took a bit of time this busy weekend to listen to an interview with Michael Hyatt, CEO of Thomas Nelson.  I personally try to limit the number of blogs I read and I am constantly culling my list.  His blog is the best leadership blog of the ones I follow.   I find him to be an excellent source of advice on leadership and management.  His posts are reasonable and just makes sense to me.  I pay attention to him because amongst other things what he says and his reasoning behind what he says is very similar to leaders I have worked for in the past.  These are people I respect and who have helped me become a better leader and person.  My leadership skills have improved immensely over the last years because of these individuals.  But I am not great at it, not even close to his level.  As with all things, there is always room for improvement and change for the better.

I found the entire interview with Michael interesting and useful.  Some key statements that stood out for me were:

I think I am pretty successful at delegation.  Really figure out what I am good at, what I am not good at, where do I add the most value, where don’t I add value and stay out of the stuff where I don’t add value.  And that is tough I think particularly as a young leader because you want to look like you are good at everything and you are nervous about your weaknesses showing.  But the truth is I am not good at everything, I am good at a few things.

But there is absolutely nothing in my view more annoying than sitting with a person you are trying to have a conversation with while they keep checking their email or their Twitter account.  And honestly in meetings like that I just stop.

Idea that the content has to be vetted to the delivery format particularly the format that we’ve grown very accustomed to … I love books, I love the smell of them, I love the tactile feel of them.  You know I like candles too.  I love burning candles, I love the smell of them, I love the ambiance they create, but I light my home with electricity.

One of the things you have to do as a leader is create an environment that is safe for creativity and the only way you do that is create an environment where it is safe for dissent.  People got to feel like they can disagree with a leader, they can have their own ideas, that they can fight and collaborate and struggle and wrestle.  Because it is out of that process that you are going to get the best ideas.  I think as a leader you have to invite people into that process.

For anyone interested with 30 minutes to spare, the interview can be found here.

Good article forwarded to me by a colleague. It was written by Harvey Schachter. It highlights some quick ways to differentiate between between good and bad managers. The article is here, but I’m copying it here in case it ‘disappears’ for some reason in the future.

———————————————-

Some managers are competent while others are not. Here are 10 ways that serial entrepreneur Margaret Heffernan says she spots the incompetents. If a manager displays any one of these behaviours, she writes on FastCompany.com, it should ring a warning bell and more than two means you should sound the alarm:

Bias against actions

There are always many reasons not to take a decision. Real leaders display a constant bias for action while the incompetents wait for more information, more options and more opinions.

Secrecy

Beware of a manager who always fights against telling staff about what’s happening, worrying it will distract or confuse employees. Very few matters in business must remain confidential and good managers can identify those easily.

Oversensitivity

Managers must see a problem, address it head on, and move on. If the manager is afraid to raise issues with employees because it might hurt their feelings, problems won’t be resolved.

Love of procedure

Managers who cling to the rulebook have forgotten that rules and processes are meant to expedite business not ritualize it. “Love of procedure often masks a fatal inability to prioritize – a tendency to polish the silver while the house is burning,” she says.

Preference for weak candidates

When a choice has to be made between candidates, an incompetent manager will often avoid super-competent recruits in favour of junior or weaker alternatives. Good managers know you must hire people smarter than yourself but weak managers can feel threatened by such folk.

Focus on small tasks

Unable to handle their actual job, they get lost in preparing perfect spreadsheets and making sure data is completely up-to-date.

Allergy to deadlines

A deadline is a commitment, but some managers cannot set and stick to deadlines or honour commitments.

Inability to hire former employees

If you hire a new manager who doesn’t attract new recruits from the previous company, it’s a sign that manager hasn’t mentored others or won their respect.

Addiction to consultants

A good way to put off making decisions is to hire consultants, and so often this is a route a weak manager will take. When the consultant’s report comes in, it also can chew up time.

Long hours

Bad managers work long hours. “They think this is a brand of heroism but it is probably the single biggest hallmark of incompetence. To work effectively, you must prioritize and you must pace yourself. The manager who boasts of late nights and no time off cannot manage himself so you’d better not let him manage anyone else,” she writes.