Leadership Inspirations – Prepare, Prepare, Prepare
Boy Scout Moto:
Be Prepared.
Boy Scout Oath:
On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
Boy Scouts of America
(www.Scouting.org)
Don’t subscribe to hope for the best and plan for the worst. Instead, plan for the best, plan for the worst, and plan for the most likely… always be prepared.
Also see, StrategyDriven Strategic Planning Best Practice 12 – Planning for the Best and the Worst
Rocking the Workplace: How the Millennial Generation is Shaking Up the Way You Do Business
Recruiters at Fortune 500 C.H. Robinson recently found themselves scratching their heads. They’d weathered stormy recruiting seas when sought-after Generation Xers showed up demanding everything from work/life balance to “bring your pet to work day” to casual dress. How hard could it be to adapt to a new generation of recruits – the Millennials? After all, in a soft economy employers should have the hiring advantage. Right?
Sure. Except for a few hiccups. Millennials (born 1982-2000) aren’t behaving the same ways Generation Xers did. They have a whole new set of attitudes and expectations when it comes to the workplace, and managers and recruiters are once again being called upon to see the world through a new set of eyes to get the most out of this challenging and influential generation. Take parental involvement. Instead of bringing their pets to work, Millennials seemed to be bringing Mom and Dad. Carmen Baas, a Recruiter at C. H. Robinson, commented: “We recently had the father of a candidate call one of our sales reps to talk about his son’s job offer so he could make a decision on whether or not his son should come work for us. I’ve also had parents attend career fairs in lieu of their children who had prior engagements.”
[wcm_restrict]New generations bring with them new challenges, but also new skill sets and opportunities. In our new book, The M-Factor
- The Role of the Parents. Boomers and Gen Xers have been intensely engaged in their kids’ lives from colic to college, and their consultative role doesn’t end when Millennials transition to work. In a Michigan State University survey of employers, 26% said parents had actively promoted their son or daughter for a position, 31% said parents submitted a résumé on behalf of their offspring, and 41% said parents obtained company materials for their kids. Millennials have figured out they have free access to some of the best and brightest consultants money can buy, and they aren’t afraid to use them. Managers can be caught unprepared, however, when Mom or Dad calls to get more information on the company’s sick leave policy or to ask about a poor performance review. Smart employers are addressing the issue of parental access with policies aimed at protecting employees’ privacy, but also at getting the folks on their side. For example, to cater to the Millennials’ preference to have their folks involved in the job-search process, C.H. Robinson created packets to be mailed to parents simultaneously with their child’s offer letter. The parental information packet includes marketing material on the company so parents can learn more about the organization, as well as information about the benefits package, so parents can review it for their child. By embracing this critical shift in parent/child relationships, C.H. Robinson has created a whole new generation of allies in the war for talent. You guessed it – Mom and Dad.
- The Search for Meaning. Millennials have been told by their Boomer parents, “If you’re going to work as hard as we have, do something you care about.” They’ve also been imbued with the idea that they really can change the world, whether it was giving blood after 9-11, raising funds via the Web after Hurricane Katrina, or donating to Haitian relief on their mobile phones, Millennials believe they can make an impact. The same is true on the home front. Millennials have been involved in family decision making on everything from technology purchases to where to go on vacation. No wonder they get frustrated when they show up in the workplace and the biggest decision they get to make is egg salad or tuna for lunch. Of course, not every new hire is going to be deciding the direction of the company. But they do want to feel their voices are being heard. For The M-Factor
- The Need for Speed. The Millennials’ ability to master new technology faster than the other generations can master a new blender is legendary. But their need for speed goes far beyond the pace at which they text and tweet. Millennials want more frequent, faster feedback. And they want to progress in their careers at a rate that can make their managers’ heads spin. While the recent recession is buying employers a little time by making it tougher for employees to jump ship, that doesn’t mean Millennials are suddenly becoming the “patient generation.” According to an August 2009 Harvard Business article, a global poll by Catalyst of high-potential employees at corporations and professional firms found that 20% had switched companies of their own accord during the downturn and another 35% made lateral moves within their organizations. This is not a generation that likes to sit still and organizations will be challenged to keep them moving, or at least keep them learning. If you can’t offer a talented Millennial that next promotion right now, you might be able to offer them a new project, a connection to a special mentor, or cross-training in a new skill area. Another answer is to allow Millennials to have more control over the pace of their careers. Marie Artim, Assistant Vice President of Recruiting at the car rental company Enterprise, explained, “For the previous generations, we used to highlight that you would work hard and reap the rewards later… we found that with Millennials we had to talk more about career paths being about performance and not tenure. They seem to be interested in speed, and we tell them there is no set timeline and that it is up to them… .” Empowering Millennials to take a role in the pace and direction of their careers puts the focus more on what they achieve and less on arbitrary timelines, which seems a natural fit for this generation.
Millennials aren’t afraid to speak up and they are bound to challenge the way things have always been done. Or as Dale Till put it: “Our generation will leave its mark by being the generation that grew up with things like the Internet… We’ve gone from 28k to 56k to 128kbs dial-up modems, to DSL, LAN and fiber optics. We’re intertwined with the Web – it influences us, and we influence it – and we’re the next in line in terms of shaping the way the world communicates and does business.”
Whatever generation you’re a part of if you’re working with Millennials you’re in for an exhilarating ride.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember]
Hi there! This article is available for free. Login or register as a StrategyDriven Personal Business Advisor Self-Guided Client by:
[reveal_quick_checkout id=”25489″ checkout_text=”Subscribing to the Self Guided Program – It’s Free!”]
[/wcm_nonmember]
About the Authors
Lynne C. Lancaster and David Stillman are nationally-known generational speakers, consultants, researchers, and the authors of the best-seller When Generations Collide
Management Observation Program Best Practice 8 – Cross Organizational Trending
Management observation programs generate a wealth of individual and workgroup performance data. All too often, workgroup managers view their employees job functions as being singularly unique and so don’t consider pooling their observation results with peers. Doing so, however, creates the possibility of identifying broader organizational trends that may be culturally driven and more economical to resolve with a single integrated initiative.[wcm_restrict plans=”41928, 25542, 25653″]
How to Blend Management Observation Program Data from Dissimilar Work Groups
The first question is often: What do Human Resources, Finance, Production, Maintenance, and Engineering personnel have in common such that their performance data can be pooled? The most obvious answer may be that they are all people. And while their jobs are different, as humans they behave in ways that impact the business, both positively and negatively. Regardless of the impact, these behaviors are reflective of organizational culture; not the one written in a policy document and posted on walls but the actual living values of the people comprising the organization.
Sample Performance Measures
With this in mind, common management observation program measures for an organization striving to achieve performance excellence might include:
- Human Performance Error Rate – number of human error-related problem reports documented per 10,000 person-hours worked calculated monthly
-
Some contributing metrics may include: - Industrial Safety Error Rate
- Procedure Use and Adherence Error Rate
- Self Checking Error Rate
- Peer Checking Error Rate
- Communications Error Rate
- Procedure/Work Instruction Error Rate
- Management Observation Program Performance Index (infield) – number of infield management observations performed per month by workgroup counted monthly. Often included is a quality measure (either an average score indicated or weighting against the total number) and number of cross-functional observations performed
- Management Observation Program Performance Index (in training) – number of training observations performed by members of management per month by workgroup counted monthly. Often included is a quality measure (either an average score indicated or weighting against the total number)
Performance Measure Presentation
Management observation program performance measures should be developed and presented in a manner consistent with that of other corporate performance measures. These measures should be horizontally shared as discussed in StrategyDriven Organizational Performance Measures Best Practice 2 – Horizontally Shared and StrategyDriven Podcast Episode 9 – Horizontally Shared Organizational Performance Measures.
Performance measure construction is discussed in further detail within StrategyDriven Organizational Performance Measures Best Practice 3 – Common Construction Characteristics and StrategyDriven Organizational Performance Measures Whitepaper – Construction.
Additionally, management observation performance measure drivers should be documented as described in the StrategyDriven Organizational Performance Measures Best Practice 7 – Documenting Performance Measure Drivers.
Performance Measure Analysis
Depending on the severity of the issue, a root cause, apparent cause, or direct cause analysis should be performed to identify those actions needed to prevent recurrence. As with the measures themselves, causal analysis begins with those causes common to all persons. Examples of potential causes include:
Standards and Expectations Compliance Factors
- Were corporate performance policies/practices communicated to the individual(s)?
- Are the corporate performance policies/practices understood?
- Have the corporate performance policies/practices been reinforced?
Environmental Factors
- Were procedures/work instructions readily available?
- Were the proper tools available?
- Was the area well lit, quiet, clean, and conducive to the conduct of assigned work?
Personnel Factors
- Was the individual qualified to perform the work/task?
- Did there exist an unacceptably high workload?
- Was the individual(s) under excessive time pressure?
- Was the individual(s) distracted?
- Was the individual(s) fatigued?
Performance Factors
- Were corporate performance policies/practices followed?
- Were procedures/work instructions used?
- Was the work performed at the appropriate time (in accordance with an approved schedule)?
The analysis should then seek to identify breakdowns in corporate sponsored preventative measures. Once common causes are identified, a common, often corporate driven, solution to resolve these causes can be formulated and implemented. Both of these efforts should involve a multidiscipline team representing each of the organization’s several functional workgroups as discussed in StrategyDriven Self Assessment Program Best Practice 2 – Multidiscipline Team.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”41928, 25542, 25653″]
Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.
|
Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually). Not sure? Click here to learn more. |
Buy the Article Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Management Observation Program Best Practice 8 – Cross Organizational Trending for just $2! [reveal_quick_checkout id=”41929″ checkout_text=”Access the Article Now!”] |
[/wcm_nonmember]
StrategyDriven Editorial Perspective – Believe None of What You Hear
Ever known a politician to renege on a campaign promise, say something misleading or simply just wrong?
So many politicians lie (we don’t mince words here… if our children told such stories we’d punish them for lying) that we accept it as a part of the political game. And members of both parties are guilty as charged. These falsehoods cause harmful uncertainty that can be detrimental to businesses and the economy because they diminish business leaders’ ability to project, strategize, plan, and execute.
Some of these falsehoods can be easily recognized and dealt with reasonably. No one really expected politicians to reveal their back room deals by televising healthcare negotiations on CSPAN. Likewise, we can read a lot of lips but know that bigger government requires higher taxes. FactCheck.com aggressively identifies the factual errors politicians make; helping eliminate the uncertainty of their creative non-fiction.
Other falsehoods are not so easily dealt with. Businesses are hurt and significant uncertainty created when the government willfully breaches a contract. These are not broken campaign promises but legally binding agreements that those in power have decided not to abide by because the provisions have become politically unfavorable. Such breaches of integrity are materially harmful to businesses specifically and the economy and public in general.
Unnecessary Uncertainty in the U.S. Energy Market
Let’s briefly examine one government breach of contract in the clean energy market; a market vital to both national security and the reduction of carbon emissions.
Breach of Contract – National Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository
In 1982, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act; making the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) responsible for siting, building, and operating an underground disposal facility for high level radioactive waste, including the spent nuclear fuel from the nation’s 104 nuclear reactors.1 In 1987, Congress selected Yucca Mountain as the location where this underground repository would be built. The Yucca Mountain facility was to be constructed and to begin accepting waste by 1998. While nuclear reactor owners faithfully pay their dues to the government in support of the repository, Yucca Mountain is currently little more than an access tunnel bored into the side of a mountain.2
“I will continue to leverage my leadership position to prevent the dump from ever being built.”
Harry Reid
U.S. Senate Majority Leader
Nevada (D)
A 2007 statement on the continued pursuit of the Yucca Mountain project.3
In 2008, the DOE applied for a license to construct the Yucca Mountain repository by 2020, 22 years late.4 However, the Obama Administration announced in February 2010 that it would withdraw its application to build the repository. Energy Secretary Steven Chu emphasized that the withdrawal would be ‘with prejudice’ – a legal definition prohibiting resubmission by a post-Obama administration.5 Additionally, the Obama administration has announced that it will defund the Yucca Mountain repository project in its 2011 budget submission to Congress.6
Impact
Utilities involved have filed a total of 71 breach of contract lawsuits against the Federal Government. DOE estimates the government’s liability at $12.3 billion. Nuclear utilities estimate damages claims will total $50 billion. As of today, 51 of the 71 cases are pending in either the Claims or Federal Circuit Courts, 10 have been settled, 6 were voluntarily withdrawn and 4 have been litigated through a final non-appealable judgment.7
…there is, of course, the additional cost of litigation (courts, lawyers, etcetera).
In addition to the cost impacts, five states (Minnesota, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Kentucky) currently prohibit construction of new nuclear plants in part because of a lack of a national spent fuel repository.8 This prevents communities in these states from realizing the benefits of the estimated 1400-1800 jobs created during the 4-5 year construction period and 400-700 workers needed to operate and maintain the plant thereafter.9 These numbers don’t account for the community services and business jobs created to support these individuals.
…there is, of course, the additional non-carbon emitting power these plants would provide the region.
Regardless of the arguments for and against the suitability of locating the spent nuclear fuel repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, this case and the judgments against the Federal Government clearly illustrate a breach of contract that has created significant market uncertainty and damaged businesses.
StrategyDriven Recommended Practices
As the single largest consumer of goods and services within the U.S. economy, it would be virtually impossible, if not undesirable, to avoid doing business with the Federal Government. And even if direct business activity can be avoided, the effects of government interaction with other organizations cannot.
The politics of governing and the willingness of some politicians to renege on their campaign promises and/or government contracts require corporate leaders to take actions protecting their organization from this unnecessary risk. While not intended to be an all inclusive list, StrategyDriven recommends those contracting or subcontracting with government agencies take the following risk mitigation actions:
- validate key government project assumptions and facts (timelines, resource availability/capacity, technologies, cost, existing regulatory structures, etcetera)
- identify ‘political will’ risk drivers in government project assumptions
- adjust risk estimates and associated contingency planning and funding accordingly
- verify project popularity with the general public and the likelihood such popularity will be maintained for the term of the project
- check for bipartisan project support
- establish contingency plans for government project delays and cancellations
- review government proposals against the past performance on similar projects
- monitor progress on government projects just as you would internal projects
Final Thought…
We used the nuclear power industry example because of the already litigated breach of contract lawsuits clearly supporting our assertion that the federal government does not always fulfill its obligations. Because we don’t believe this example to be either an aberration or the last time such a breach will occur, we encourage the practices presented here to be applied in all dealings with Federal, State, and local governments.
Final Request…
The strength of our community grows with the additional insights brought by our expanding member base. Please consider voting for us on Podcast Alley by clicking here. Casting your vote for the StrategyDriven Editorial Perspective Podcast improves our ranking and helps us attract new listeners which, in turn, helps us grow our community. Thank you again for listening to the StrategyDriven Editorial Perspective Podcast!
Sources
- “The Nuclear Waste Program,” U.S. Department of Energy, http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/about/History_Of_The_Nuclear_Waste_Program.shtml
- “The Washington Post’s distorted take on Yucca Mountain,” Hugh Gusterson, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, March 27, 2009, http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/hugh-gusterson/the-washington-posts-distorted-take-yucca-mountain
- “Yucca Problems Mount For DOE: Transportation, Costs, Not To Mention Congressional Opposition From Harry Reid,” Johnny Gunn, The Nevada Observer, March 15, 2007, http://www.nevadaobserver.com/Archive/070315/Featurestory%201.htm
- “The Washington Post’s distorted take on Yucca Mountain,” Hugh Gusterson, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, March 27, 2009, http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/hugh-gusterson/the-washington-posts-distorted-take-yucca-mountain
- “Yucca Mountain’s death just a few steps away,” Lisa Mascaro and Stephanie Tavares, Las Vegas Sun, February 2, 2010, http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/feb/02/yuccas-death-just-few-steps-away/
- “Proposal would eliminate funding for Yucca Mountain,” Steve Tetreault, Las Vegas Review-Journal, February 1, 2010, http://www.lvrj.com/news/proposal-would-eliminate-funding-for-yucca-mountain-83230447.html
- “Greenberg Traurig’s Jerry Stouck Discusses Nuclear Fuel Cases,” Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association, September 25, 2009, http://wtlachannel.squarespace.com/the-wtla-blog-page/2009/9/25/greenberg-traurigs-jerry-stouck-discusses-nuclear-fuel-cases.html
- “Another Major Setback for “Nuclear Renaissance”: Industry Goes 0-6 in 2009 Efforts to Overturn State Bans on New Nuclear Reactors.,” Leslie Anderson, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, August 27, 2009, http://www.nirs.org/press/08-27-2009/1
- “Testimony for the Record [to the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources],” Carol L. Berrigan, Director, Industry Infrastructure, Nuclear Energy Institute, November 6, 2007, http://energy.senate.gov/public/_files/CBerriganTestimony110607.pdf
Decision-Making Best Practice 7 – Identify the Decision-Maker
Organizations confer varying degrees of decision-making authority to their executives, managers, and employees typically based on their positions within the organization. In many circumstances, this results in more than one individual possessing the authority to render a decision for the particular question at hand.[wcm_restrict plans=”49262, 25542, 25653″] Because there should be only one decision-making authority (see StrategyDriven Decision-Making Best Practice 1 – There Can Be Only One), it becomes necessary to identify who among the potential decision-makers is the individual on whose authority the selected course of action will be taken.
Identifying the decision-maker is critical to achieving a successful outcome. Without this designation, no one individual truly owns the decision or can be held accountable for it. Those implementing the decision lack the requisite knowledge of whom to report action status and results. Needed changes may lack the coordination needed to be effective or be counter to the decision’s goals because those authorizing such changes lack the ‘big picture’ view of the situation.
Identifying the decision-maker, especially for complex situations involving teams of people, should also include overt communication of that designation. This ensures everyone involved in the decision-making and execution process clearly understands the chain of command such that reports and change authorizations are appropriately directed.
Final Thought…
Serving as the designated decision-maker is a powerful leadership development tool. Whenever possible, senior managers should seek to confer this responsibility to high potential, junior personnel. When doing so, however, the senior manager must assume and remain in the role of coach and mentor; allowing their junior to be the decision-maker and not usurp this individual’s authority. Only then will the junior staff member truly benefit from the experience.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”49262, 25542, 25653″]
Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.
| Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library
Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually). Not sure? Click here to learn more. |
Buy the Article
Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Decision-Making Best Practice 7 – Identify the Decision-Maker for just $2! |
[/wcm_nonmember]