Month: November 2018

I read a slew of newsletters and blogs every month, Sheryl Sandberg reads just one: Adam Grant’s Granted. 

Grant is a bestselling New York Times author, the number #1 rated Wharton professor for the past several years, and a popular TED talker whose blog is read by more than 90,000 subscribers. Chock full of ideas and advice, research and book suggestions about leadership, management and inspiration, he also hosts a podcast as well as periodic videos.

We all need new ideas and creative inspiration and Grant provides just that with a quick read. He has archived past posts (as do I on my website for Workplaces That Work) so you can scan for his thoughts on topics you may have missed.

What Should You Do?

Did You Know

All our leadership and management classes provide reading lists and other sources for continuous learning.

Last week, I wrote about leading difficult people and many of you responded to that post. In addition to those suggestions, many of you wanted to know more about why difficult people do things that piss us off, annoy us and leave us frothing at the mouth. Are they just doing it to enrage us? Are they oblivious to how they come across to others? Couldn’t they stop if they really want to?

Hardwiring in the Brain.  My view – after years in the trenches coaching difficult people as well as helping leaders manage them – is that people are hardwired with certain personality characteristics, some of which can be extremely annoying. The brain is genetically loaded to a certain extent (psychologists currently estimate at least 50 percent) to be focused or distracted, gregarious or withdrawn, good at reading social cues or terrible. While good or bad parenting, cultural influences, education, spiritual work, and therapy can change and influence this, we all arrive on the planet with certain inherent tendencies, strengths, and weaknesses. Understanding how other people’s brains might be hardwired can help us cope with their seemingly bizarre (to us) behavior.

A Mental Health Epidemic. In my consulting practice, when I’m called in to mediate a group conflict, coach a problem executive, or rebuild a team, I uncover a mental health issue at least 80 percent of the time. According to Scientific American, 1 in 6 Americans is on psychiatric medications.

Most Are Not Treated.  According to the National Institute of Mental Health, only 20 percent of people with major depression, for example, get even minimally adequate treatment, and 43 percent aren’t being treated at all. The costs are staggering: Mental illness causes more disability cases than any other form of illness in adults in America and accounts for well more than $100 billion in lost productivity each year.

Most Are Also Working. Most people continue to work, even though they may be suffering and not as productive or cooperative as you would like.

Did You Know

In both our management and our leadership classes, we help our clients assess whether people can change and then help them focus on creating behavioral change with their staffs.

Even on a good day, you can name at least one difficult person at the office. On a bad day you can probably rattle off four or five without even pausing. Be they slackers, sneaks, liars, tyrants, boors, bullies, wimps, whiners, workaholics, or everyday incompetents, you’ve got your hands full with people who are making it difficult to do your job well and stay sane.

While I’ve written about this numerous times both on the Monday Memo and in my book: Stop Pissing Me Off! What to do When the People You Work With Drive You Crazy, there is one skill that stands out from all the other advice: manage differently. Give up on changing them and change YOU.

A Case Study: One of my former executive coaching clients, Bob, came to me about John, one of the junior partners in their high tech consulting firm. None of Bob’s attempts to manage John’s idiosyncrasies over the last five years had worked. A software developer, no one could match John’s relentless and creative pursuit of the most elegant computer designs, but placing him in front of a new client or other employees led to frequent disaster, John eschewed socks and shirts with collars. He worked all night or not at all, turned up the speakers on his computer to play heavy metal music, and mumbled through presentations. Although frequently late with deadlines, his work was superlative. My frustrated client confessed that John was probably one of the top two or three designers in the world.

The Change That Worked: I coached Bob to change his own management style and give up on changing John. He stopped expecting him to meet with clients, gave up on the firm’s strict dress code and softened his approach to work hours. They moved John’s office to an area where his music wouldn’t annoy anyone.

Did You Know

Our leadership and management classes all cover how to manage difficult people.

Last week, Google employees from all over the world walked out in protest over how the organization handled sexual harassment claims and especially, how they paid a $90 million exit package to executive Andy Rubin, developer of the Android phone, who left amid a cloud of sexual harassment allegations, back in 2014.

In the past, Google has not been transparent about how and why they have handled these kinds of claims. Understandably, they have instituted non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with the parties involved in these situations, most likely on their attorneys’ advice. NDAs are standard in these kinds of cases, in order to protect the privacy of all the people involved. In most situations, personnel matters are supposed to be confidential, including the circumstances of any discipline or departure, to protect the privacy rights of the accused and guard against claims of defamation.

Recently, with all the #MeToo dialogue, NDAs have come under increasing criticism, with some commentators arguing for more transparency. My prediction is that this is not likely to happen to any great extent, given most organization’s reasonable fear of litigation from the alleged harasser or discriminator. There are, however, things that leaders can do in the way of transparency to give people in their organizations some information, without violating the rights of those accused.

Below are some additional ideas for effective team rebuilding with the general work group:

• NOTE: Depending upon the issues, preliminary meetings may need to be conducted with involved leaders, corporate counsel and so on. Address any concerns about privacy and confidentiality.

• Who should attend general meeting? Any witnesses or others who were aware of the investigation.

• Explain the purpose of the meeting: i.e. to move on from the situation, make sure that everyone can work well together, answer appropriate questions.

• Provide a sanitized summary of what happened.  Example: There was a complaint of inappropriate jokes in the workplace, we conducted an investigation, the complaint was found to be substantiated and we took appropriate corrective action. Do not identify who complained, who was accused and so on. Focus on behavior.

• Review the law and your organization’s policy and values around the issues raised in the complaint.

• Explain, in a general way, how and why investigations are conducted, including confidentiality, standards of proof, witnesses, responsibility to conduct a full and fair investigation, standards for corrective action, retaliation, rights of everyone involved and so on.

• Ask how they were affected by the complaint and investigation. Allow people to vent appropriately.

• Address and quash any rumors.

• Find out what the participants need to go forward and work well together and with anyone else involved.

• Get a commitment from participants to work well together.

• Allow an opportunity to ask questions and address any other concerns.

What Do You Think?

Did You Know