I may have mentioned this in an earlier post, so forgive me for repeating, but I have never really fit the leadership mold of the plant where I work, and I suspect of the entire division of the company. They like the driver-driver model, type A personality. I’m not. On the Meyers-Briggs test I am right smack dab in the middle. In many places this would be a positive boon, but where I work I am considered weak, too accommodating, and a poor delegator. I would admit to the latter as something I need to improve (and would state unequivocally that it is better than delegating everything, which some of my co-workers do). I totally disagree that I’m weak (of course I do) and I’m proud that people think I’m accommodating.
Ever since I started down the management track I have heard these complaints. I am certain that I was passed up for promotions because of these perceptions. I will freely admit that I have a naïve utopian worldview in which a for-profit company should be a meritocracy. I found out that they aren’t (my personal sample size is two, but I’m not alone, oh no). I’ve often wondered why this is so. I have noticed that butt-kissing lackeys get a disproportionate number of promotions, for obvious reasons. I’ve also noticed that butt-kissing lackeys are disproportionately susceptible to underlings who are butt-kissing lackeys. This generates a self-fulfilling butt-kissing death spiral, which has a predictable, giant-sucking-sound type demise. You show me any failed company and I bet the corporate pathologist found hickeys on the backsides of most of the senior managers. Big freaking hickeys.
I’ve also noticed that people gravitate to power. (Yeah, now there is a keen observation – good thing you are paying for the privilege of reading this.) There is a management subset, call them the juice hoarders, who are only interested in using their organizational power to gain more power. They wish to influence more areas than their true base of operations, but not for the sake of the org, hell no. It’s all about the me, myself and I with these people. They are distant cousins of the butt-kissing lackeys in that they tend to eddiehaskell those above them, but only when they are trying to finagle more juice. They will also kick their supervisors in the cojones if it helps them get their fix. There are few things more satisfying than seeing an over-reaching juice hoarder get their lunch fed to them by someone in power who understands what is going on.
There are many more species in the work-weasel phylum, and we’ll likely re-visit this again when my bile is up. Let’s go in a different direction. I assume no one reading this wants to be a juice hoarder or a butt-kissing lackey (because if you are one of those please read another blog, like maybe one from the Wall Street Journal). You’re a team player. You want to do well and help your company or organization do well. You care about the people around you. Success is a journey, not a destination. (OK sorry got way too hokey with that last one.) You want to take on the challenges of middle or even upper management. You need to ask yourself one question, punk. Do you feel lucky? Whoops, no not that one. Forget that. Try this. In the words of the great Pete Townshend (sung by Roger Daltrey), “Who the f___ are you?”
To thine own self be true, right? Polonius was no dummy (nor was Will himself). It is incredibly easy to let the folks above you influence your behaviors in a way that suits them, but not you. We all have a gut, and based on genes and environment that gut helps us with right and wrong. Whether we use logic, emotion or both in our decision-making, it’s the gut that alerts us to things that don’t jive. Which brings us to the story of the day…
One of our employees screwed up today. He did not use proper personal protective equipment, did not process his risky behavior into an internal veto, did not perceive that business goals ran counter to personal safety. When all was done, he needed stitches to close a wound. This, my friends, is what we call an OSHA recordable incident. I trust that in your organization, as it is in mine, it is a big &$%#^% deal.
This person has worked in the plant for over thirty years. In all that time his record is spotless. Yet the going rate for ignoring this particular rule is a suspension, which is up the curve on the progressive discipline scale. People one, two and three ranks above me are calling for this guy’s noggin on a copper-patina platter, and I’m seriously thinking of telling them to do something that is anatomically impossible (or so I’ve heard). My head sees the logic – discipline is for changing behaviors, and we make him an example so others won’t make the same mistake. I get that. I don’t want the behavior repeated by anyone, and I’m sure this employee would second that motion. I also understand that lesser discipline sends the message that I’m not tough on rule breakers. Recall that my rep is “weak”. Don’t you think someone has been pushing that button? Mashing it? As in…”Be tough this time and prove all those naysayers wrong…”
The gut. The gut. What does it say?
Ever since I started down the management track I have heard these complaints. I am certain that I was passed up for promotions because of these perceptions. I will freely admit that I have a naïve utopian worldview in which a for-profit company should be a meritocracy. I found out that they aren’t (my personal sample size is two, but I’m not alone, oh no). I’ve often wondered why this is so. I have noticed that butt-kissing lackeys get a disproportionate number of promotions, for obvious reasons. I’ve also noticed that butt-kissing lackeys are disproportionately susceptible to underlings who are butt-kissing lackeys. This generates a self-fulfilling butt-kissing death spiral, which has a predictable, giant-sucking-sound type demise. You show me any failed company and I bet the corporate pathologist found hickeys on the backsides of most of the senior managers. Big freaking hickeys.
I’ve also noticed that people gravitate to power. (Yeah, now there is a keen observation – good thing you are paying for the privilege of reading this.) There is a management subset, call them the juice hoarders, who are only interested in using their organizational power to gain more power. They wish to influence more areas than their true base of operations, but not for the sake of the org, hell no. It’s all about the me, myself and I with these people. They are distant cousins of the butt-kissing lackeys in that they tend to eddiehaskell those above them, but only when they are trying to finagle more juice. They will also kick their supervisors in the cojones if it helps them get their fix. There are few things more satisfying than seeing an over-reaching juice hoarder get their lunch fed to them by someone in power who understands what is going on.
There are many more species in the work-weasel phylum, and we’ll likely re-visit this again when my bile is up. Let’s go in a different direction. I assume no one reading this wants to be a juice hoarder or a butt-kissing lackey (because if you are one of those please read another blog, like maybe one from the Wall Street Journal). You’re a team player. You want to do well and help your company or organization do well. You care about the people around you. Success is a journey, not a destination. (OK sorry got way too hokey with that last one.) You want to take on the challenges of middle or even upper management. You need to ask yourself one question, punk. Do you feel lucky? Whoops, no not that one. Forget that. Try this. In the words of the great Pete Townshend (sung by Roger Daltrey), “Who the f___ are you?”
To thine own self be true, right? Polonius was no dummy (nor was Will himself). It is incredibly easy to let the folks above you influence your behaviors in a way that suits them, but not you. We all have a gut, and based on genes and environment that gut helps us with right and wrong. Whether we use logic, emotion or both in our decision-making, it’s the gut that alerts us to things that don’t jive. Which brings us to the story of the day…
One of our employees screwed up today. He did not use proper personal protective equipment, did not process his risky behavior into an internal veto, did not perceive that business goals ran counter to personal safety. When all was done, he needed stitches to close a wound. This, my friends, is what we call an OSHA recordable incident. I trust that in your organization, as it is in mine, it is a big &$%#^% deal.
This person has worked in the plant for over thirty years. In all that time his record is spotless. Yet the going rate for ignoring this particular rule is a suspension, which is up the curve on the progressive discipline scale. People one, two and three ranks above me are calling for this guy’s noggin on a copper-patina platter, and I’m seriously thinking of telling them to do something that is anatomically impossible (or so I’ve heard). My head sees the logic – discipline is for changing behaviors, and we make him an example so others won’t make the same mistake. I get that. I don’t want the behavior repeated by anyone, and I’m sure this employee would second that motion. I also understand that lesser discipline sends the message that I’m not tough on rule breakers. Recall that my rep is “weak”. Don’t you think someone has been pushing that button? Mashing it? As in…”Be tough this time and prove all those naysayers wrong…”
The gut. The gut. What does it say?
Comments
Post a Comment