A Millennial's request, "Tear down the walls!"

The following is the original post and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

Before one of the 70+ million Millennials reaches for their favourite social media app and criticizes me for speaking on the generation's behalf, I will say that this is on behalf of one of your brethren. If a "tweet" does come my way, I should point out I have hired and worked with dozens and dozens of Millennials, as well as call some of them friends; it does offer me some "street cred" with regard to leading, managing and working with this high potential generation - This brings me to a recent lunch, and the topic at hand.

"They just don't get it... we are in these high walled cubes, I feel isolated; if I need to talk to someone I have to get up and walk all around. It's very inefficient", he said. After a bite of his burger he continued with, "They have to tear down those high walled cubes and put in smaller walls, that way we could communicate and work more effectively!"* This spurred on a much broader discussion as we finished our lunch.

Give or take a couple of years, Millennials (or Gen Y) were born between the early 1980's and the early 2000's and now represent the largest demographic in the workforce (70 Million strong in the U.S. workforce alone). Highly publicized and "profiled", they are smart, tech savvy, have a high sense of empowerment**, hold a strong sense of work life balance, a willingness to "walk" when they are dissatisfied, and are very "collaborative" in their approach to learning, working and representing themselves. 

When my Millennial friend said, "They just don't get it", he was referring to leadership's lack of understanding that collaboration and creating an environment for collaboration is a key fundamental for the Millennial Generation - "Tearing down the walls" was as much a literal statement, as it was figurative one... he literally thought this would be the only way he capture management's attention. I suggested that would be grounds for dismissal; he agreed.

As we continued to discuss the importance of a collaborative environment, it struck me that I have rarely seen "collaborative" at the top of the list of attributes when leaders are discussing Millennials; it's usually "tech savvy, high sense of empowerment**, sense of work/life balance, etc, with collaborative sometimes not even making the list.*** Developing a collaborative environment, particularly for Millennials is key to enhance productivity,  individual and team development, and retention - All things high on a leaders list.

Tear down the walls if you can: Create an environment where communication is easy and engages the larger group; smaller cube walls are better than larger cube walls as they encourage professional collaboration, instead of social collaboration that can come with a sense of isolation. Remember, every Millennial has a smartphone, and they are talking to the person three cubes down one way or another. 

Create open environments: Specifically design and designate an alternative space for a different perspective, idea sharing and problem solving; I have found an available white board is convenient for sharing messages and creative thinking. Depending on your workspace this may be difficult or be considered disruptive, but with some creativity and reinforcement of office decorum, you can solve this and increase productivity.

Management by Walking Around: A business concept tracing back to the 1970's and popularized in the 1982 book "In Search of Excellence" **** which in its simplest form is randomly (or sometimes with design) connecting with your reports by "walking" over to see them. For Millennials this is a tangible example of engagement and the collaboration that is so important for them.

Add transparency to your lexicon: There are always situations when information cannot be shared, but wherever possible be as transparent as possible. Like the physical act of "Managing by Walking Around", being transparent with information allows the Millennial to engage, develop understanding and participate in a process (if only from the sidelines) - As mentioned earlier, they are a smart group so you will get great feedback. That brings us to the last point that came out of our lunch...

Whenever possible, ask the question, "What do you think?" - they will tell you.

I hope I have done well by my Millennial's friends request... he will let me know I am sure. And for any Millennial that has read this far, I would like to offer some other thoughts on "Collaboration":

  • Collaboration, although important to the Millennial Generation is not just amongst yourselves -Collaboration is intergenerational. You know that old guy of 45 down the hall? Go talk to him, pick his brain, see if he has thoughts to help you with your project, and maybe vice versa.
  • Collaboration is a two way street and doesn't mean waiting for your manager to "bring it your way". Collaboration is working together, raising issues professionally and getting things closer to being more "right" than "wrong". Remember, we are all leaders without a title. *****
  • Collaboration doesn't mean you are correct. Collaboration means you are working together to find a better solution. 

Ok, now I think I have done well by my Millennial friend's request.

gpe

* The quote is almost verbatim, but there is a little artistic license.

** It seems people are saying Millennials "have a high sense of empowerment", where I know many Gen X-ers who would just say it's "entitlement".

*** I will admit I have not been staying up my Millennial reading, so it's quite possible "collaboration" is now high on the list when it comes to talking about what is important. 

**** In Search for Excellence was written by Tom Peters and Robert H Waterman. It's one of those business books, that although it is 30 years old, you should read.

***** A reference to the book "The leader who had not Title" by Robin Sharma. In my opinion a fun and required read.

 

 

 

Unless proven wrong, they made the right decision.

Recently I found myself sitting around a table involved in a "hardy and dramatic discussion" about a business decision that had to be made; in the end, this particular decision did not go the way I had hoped. 

Experience has shown me that the decision making process is usually a mixture of "hardy and dramatic discussion", facts and figures, risk tolerance, gut feel and a smidgen of "hope" - And must lead to making an "actual decision"! 

It is always tough being on the wrong end of a decision; at the very least, it can challenge your conviction or belief systems and at the very most, your livelihood. As I reflect back on the dynamics around the table, I thought I would share some thoughts:

  • Although decisions are made based on facts and figures (data if you will), the ability to communicate the information is key. It is with effective communication that a clear understanding is articulated, pros and cons weighed, and the risk of making the wrong decision is minimized. The phrase "being on the same page" comes to mind.
  • The decision making process is different for everyone; how they process information, the speed in which they make a decision, their risk tolerance, or the circumstances for needing to make a decision. It is important to understand the circumstances requiring a decision, as well as how the people involved make their decisions - This way you can work within their "decision making comfort zone". My experience is when a person is outside their comfort zone they will either delay the decision or default to a "no".
  • Once a decision is made you need to respect it, even when you disagree.
  • You need to support the decision to the best of your ability once it's made. If you fundamentally cannot support the decision, you need to be clear on your position... there may be consequences, but you will be respected for it.
  • Decisions need to be made to drive action; even a wrong decision is preferable to a non-decision or an endless decision making process. You can always "course correct" a wrong decision, but not much can be done with a non-decision. 

As I look back at the decision made around the table, which as I say did not go the way I had hoped, I do respect that it was made; I have also taken on an interesting perspective - "Unless proven wrong, they made the right decision".

So there you have it, I have made the decision to prove them wrong.

gpe

A "Golden Rule" for effective execution.

The following is the original and the rewrite can found by clicking here.

Recent events have reminded me of something I had learned many years ago and has made me smile at myself for such a lapse in memory. It's regarding optimizing effective execution and I am now defining it as a "Golden Rule", never to be forgotten - "Wait for two green lights and seven business days before you actually start doing anything."

The story goes something like this. -

My professional history has had me working in heavily matrixed organizations that encouraged urgency, a pro-activeness, and involvement from many corners of the organization to ensure ideas were "pressure tested appropriately". Sometimes this created a dynamic environment for getting projects off the ground, but it did increase the likelihood of overall success.

One day I was talking about a previous project with a senior leader in HR and she asked me if I had started the "new project"; I went onto say I had the green light but then it was put on hold, and it had now happened twice... I then said, "I have learned to wait for two green lights and seven business days before I actually start doing anything." To that, a director who was listening in on the conversation started to laugh and laugh; the senior leader smiled and nodded. They wished me all the best, and the project started about three weeks later... give or take.

The decision making process, particularly if the risks are high, there are competing agendas, and voices, is not a simple "go or no go".... it is more like "go, wait, no go, wait, wait, wait, maybe we will change the scope, wait, go!!!" - My experience is the larger the organization, the more true this can be.

"Wait for two green lights and seven business days before you actually start doing anything" is admittedly a little tongue in cheek, but figuratively (and sometimes literally) it rings very true as a Golden Rule to increase the effectiveness of your execution. And here is why...

  • You are reminded to actually ask the question, "Does this project have a green light and when is the start date?" If the answer isn't anything but "yes", then someone is still deciding.
  • Starting something before the project has the final green light exposes you to doing unnecessary work and the frustration that can come with wasted time and effort. Granted there can be advantage of getting ahead of the curve, but be forewarned there will be stops, starts and changes you didn't anticipate... some may make any advanced work moot.
  • The Golden Rule reminds us of patience, and as we all know, a clearer and calmer mind gets things done more effectively. 

The "two green lights" are not just to know if the project is a "go or no go", but allows you to better understand the calendar of the project and available resources; frame up your time and event schedule, and prepare for the detail... and this brings us to the "seven business days".

I have found that once a project is a go, there is always some "additional ideas and thoughts" to take advantage of what is going on. The "seven business days" allow you to work any of these last minute additions or corrections into the plan... as well as remind all the appropriate parties of the lock down date for the final execution plan. After the lock down, it's just execution, execution and more execution. 

As we know, once it's locked down, it's locked down... and only an "act of god"* can change it" - This is why this Golden Rule is never to be forgotten again... it minimizes the changes after plan lockdown that can impact execution.

gpe

*In our respective business settings, we all know who holds the "act of god" cards.