A520.4.2.RB_BorutyAlan - Motivation Beyond Money

Motivation Beyond Money

I have probably studied motivation and motivating others more than any other subject I have been taught.  For some reason, it did not click for me.  I found it complex and confusing.  Today I understand it better probably because I understand human behavior better.  Understanding what motivates workers into higher levels of performance begins with me getting to know the people I lead, talking to them regularly and observing them at work looking for subtle changes. Remember, my experience was all gained in the military, where motivation is optional.

The video The three things we work for (money isn’t one of them), was impressive.  In four minutes, Andy Mulholland covered a lot of ground not just what motivates workers, but in a veiled way he explained how an organization maintains a motivating environment.  So, what are the three things that people work for? 

1.  Interesting work: they want to be challenged and kept on their toes.  Bored workers are less motivated and less productive.

2.  To expand their skillsets: they want to keep learning and getting better; to enhance their career not stagnate in it.

3.  To be recognized for their work and valued for their contributions.  This has nothing to do with money.

In fact, if an employee is unhappy and ready to move on, you cannot overpay them to change their mind.  Money is not enough, it does not work and will not solve the problem (Mulholland, 2011).

I have always been taught that money is not a motivator.  Now I know that it depends.  If a company wants to hire a specific person for specific talent, money (and other compensation) can be a motivator to get him on the books.  Otherwise, it is not a good motivator. If used successfully, the change is usually short lived (White &White, 2015).

Mulholland suggested that HR should be viewed differently.  Aside from the administration of people and people programs, HR actually cultivates good worker attitude.  In turn, good worker attitude cultivates good leadership.  Leadership maintains the motivating environment over the long run (Mulholland, 2011). This may mean nothing to anyone else, but for me, it was an ah-ha moment.

Providing interesting work is a burn-out risk if not addressed.  Providing interesting work sounds easy enough, and it is in some professions.  Engineering and software development are examples of jobs that can be different and interesting every day based on the nature of the work.  My job as a Radar technician in the Air Force was always interesting and challenging because I rarely, if ever, saw the same failure twice.  On the other hand, assembly line workers producing thousands of the same widget every day is not as easy.  There are ways to keep those jobs interesting too.  Cross-training allows an employee to be placed in different positions and see different aspects of widget production.  Setting new goals while simultaneously doing their primary work can add enough distraction help keep the employee engaged.  For example, cashiers are sometimes challenged to sell a specified amount of candy that is displayed near the register.  Offer rewards such as gift cards for dining or shopping.to motivate the cahier to succeed.  There are many ways to do it and creativity is the key (Miksen, C., no date).

The same problem exists when trying to enhance the skill set of employees performing routine, repetitive, or boring jobs.  In this situation, I would choose cross training the employee to other tasks in production.  Establishing teams that rotate to all aspects of widget making not only enhances each team members skill set, but establishes a peer support team to answer each other’s questions and provide general support for each other. (Miksen, C., no date).

Ways to recognize people for sustained good performance, special achievements or other accolades are too numerous to list.  An effective system to recognize employee achievement should be simple, immediate, and powerfully reinforcing (Heathield, S. 2016).  To be effective, rewardable performance or contributions should be well defined using specific criteria, all employees need to be eligible, it must supply specific information documenting why the individual is being recognized, recognition should be done in a public forum, the recognition should be immediate or as close to the event as possible, and winners should be selected by their peers.  Management should use different avenues to recognize people such as personal hand-written thank you notes, etc. (Heathield, S. 2016).  

Interesting work, enhancing skill sets and recognition are all very good motivational tools that will provide lasting results.  I am an intrinsically motivated person.  Everything I do I approach as if it were the most important task I have ever done and it must be done correctly.  This keeps it interesting and challenging for me.   I do not need recognition, but I do not run from it.  It normally just embarrasses me.  I take pride in whatever I do and dedicate myself to accuracy and quality regardless of the task.  I want to make sure it is right before I call it done.  When I fall short of my expectations, I would rather start over than release the work.  As a result, I tend to be slower than the average in completing tasks, but tend to pay closer attention to detail.  Working on a team is not a problem, but I prefer teams with defined team member roles.

 

With all of that in mind, I am motivated by trust. Give me the work and explain the expectations then trust me to do the job.  Personal and mutual trust is very important to me.  If I do not trust my supervisor, it makes it difficult for me to communicate.  I have to find a way to resolve the issue before I can be productive.

Being respected as a professional motivates me to try to improve processes, techniques, tools and myself.  If I am treated with respect, it is important to me to not damage or lose that respect.  I will do everything in my ability to not disappoint.  Conversely if I do not feel that respect is present, I have nothing to lose.

Lastly, I want credit for my work.  This is not the same as recognition.  I do not want public pomp and circumstance.  If work that I am involved with is discussed, I want to know that I get credit for my contribution.  I take responsibility and hold myself accountable when I miss the mark.  Just acknowledgement for the times that I get it right, is all I want. 

Motivation is complicated.  Motivating people is one of the hardest skill sets a leader will learn.  It is also one of the most important concepts a leader must master.  Managers and leaders have to be able to motivate their people not only to get the job done, but employee happiness, performance and job satisfaction as well as organizational effectiveness, cohesiveness, and success depend on it.

References:

Mulholland, Andy. ( © 2011). The three things we work for (money isn't one of them). [Books24x7 version] Retrieved from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/toc.aspx?bookid=43753.

White D and White, (2015, June 23). Money Is nice, but it's not enough to motivate employees. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/247333 (Links to an external site.). 2016 June 25.

Miksen C., (no date) How to motivate employees who work at routine,repetitive jobs. The Houston Chronicle. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/motivate-employees-work-routine-repetitive-jobs-23644.html. (2016, June 27)-

Heathfield, S, (2016, February 7). 5 tips for effective employee recognition. About Money. Retrieved from http://humanresources.about.com/od/rewardrecognition/a/recognition_tip.htm. (2016,June 27)

A520.3.4.RB_BorutyAlan - Supportive Communication

Supportive Communication

First, I must say I am sold on this concept and was so as quickly as I read about it.  I finished my undergrad degree in 1997 and have not been back in the academic environment until now, so unfortunately, this is my first exposure to supportive communication.  I have been a proponent of honest, open, and sincere leadership/communication since my first few attempts to adapt myself to the current research trends failed miserably (in my assessment).  This is not an attempt at ‘I thought of it first’ because I did not.  What I did was purely survival, but it worked well for me.  I see supportive communication almost as the missing link to leadership research.  I do not know why anyone would choose to communicate differently.  Supportive communication brings the leader/subordinate relationship from Adult>>>Child to Adult>>>Adult.  The theory is mature, the research is vast and incredibly supportive, and it just makes since.  Supportive communication is powerful.  Its overall impact to the management/leadership field is extensive.  Yet, everyone wins.  The benefits touch everyone involved and the negatives are limited to having to be taught the skill and it requires effort do it correctly.

According to Whetten & Cameron, “supportive communication seeks to preserve or enhance a positive relationship between you and another person while still addressing a problem, giving negative feedback, or tackling a difficult issue” (p. 193).  The positive interpersonal relationship being preserved is actually leveraged to allow the open, honest, and frank discussion between the two communicators.   Based on the mutual respect of the communicators, the end result is likely a positive relationship that has been enhanced or strengthened by the experience.  Supportive communication is a deliberate, purposeful skill that must be learned and practiced to master.  It will require an investment of time and effort from the organization and the individual managers, but the potential return on that investment is far greater than just preserving positive relationships during difficult situations.  The individuals in an organization that promotes a supportive environment are less stressed, healthier, better performers, less distracted, have less conflict, fewer problems, and make better decisions.  The organization will likely be more productive, solve problems faster, see increases in quality, and have less conflicts.  The organization’s customer, in turn, benefits through on-time delivery, quality product, and more responsive customer service (Whetten & Cameron, 2016).

Supportive communication also helps individuals grow in commitment to the organization’s goals and objectives as well as form a trust in management.  Quality task-related communication helps create commitment.  On the other hand, establishing trust is dependent on the quality of non-task-related communication (de Ridder, 2004).  In other words it is not just about what you discuss, but also how deeply and detailed that discussion becomes. 

There are eight attributes of supportive communication.  I am not going to list them all here, but I will highlight the ones that the CEO of Cerna violated in a message to his company managers. 

 “We are getting less than 40 hours of work from a large number of our K.C.-based EMPLOYEES. The parking lot is sparsely used at 8:00 A.M.; likewise at 5 P.M. As managers – you either do not know what your EMPLOYEES are doing; or you do not CARE. You have created expectations on the work effort that allowed this to happen inside Cerner, creating a very unhealthy environment. In either case, you have a problem and you will fix it or I will replace you. NEVER in my career have I allowed a team that worked for me to think they had a 40-hour job. I have allowed YOU to create a culture that is permitting this. NO LONGER.”

Supportive communication is best accomplished face-to-face.  Technology such as e-mail tends to limit the communication as well as make it one sided and impersonal.  Sending an e-mail with less than complimentary content to 400 managers will serve only to insult, anger, disillusion, and embarrass them.  This type of communication also makes supportive listening impossible.  Supportive listening is the highest ranked of the skills deemed important for managers to possess.  The CEO begins the message with an assumption that is stated as fact.  This likely will make the manager argumentative.  The statement that begins “As managers…” violates several of the attributes. First, this is a global statement and not specific enough to even discuss.  Second it is evaluative and leaves no room for other possibilities.  Third, it is directly aimed at the people, not focused on the problem.  Lastly, it is a disrespectful and inflexible attack likely to cause a defensive reaction from managers.  The very next statement accuses every manager of creating an unhealthy environment is a disconfirmation statement and likely to make the managers feel small and incompetent.  “In either case, you have a problem…” fails the ownership attribute.  The problem is all the managers’ fault and the repair is the managers responsibility.  The last two lines serve only to make the managers feel less than the CEO.  It is also threatening to the managers’ flexibility to operate as they deem important (Whetten & Cameron, 2016).

There is literally nothing supportive about this communication.  It would however do two things. First it would make the CEO appear to be an immature fool.  And then, it would cause wide spread  dissent throughout the company among his managers which, depending on their maturity, could cause a serious snowball effect that temporarily brings his company to a halt.

In the organization, this short e-mail will cause much more trouble than it corrects.

References:

De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Organisational communication and supportive employees. Human Resource Management Journal, 14(3), 20-30.

Whetten, D. A., Cameron, K. S. (2016), Developing management skills (Ninth edition). Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN: 978-0-13-312747-8. (student edition)

A520.3.1.RB_BorutyAlan - Decision Making Styles

Decision Making Styles

I have never given any thought to the fact that there are different styles of decision-making, but I know it has to be true.  People are different; we think differently, react to input differently, and we are motivated by different things.  So, it only makes sense that we would recognize, analyze, and resolve issues or solve problems differently (Decision Making Strategies (Styles), 2004).  I selected the words that apply to me from the list the narrator provided in the video, but I cannot say that say that I always follow the same pattern, process or style.  The words I selected were:

Cautious over Risk-Taking

Intuitive over Logical

Influenced by Others over Self-Motivated

Rational over Emotional

Passive over Active

Quiet over Assertive

When I went back over these words and their opposites, I realized that I have used each of the styles at one point or another in my career.  We probably do fall into a comfortable style making simple day-to-day decisions, but I believe some decisions require a specific style that may or may not be in our comfort zone.  I believe it makes more sense that we would adjust our style based on the decision we are making much like we would adjust our approach to counseling based on the situation. For example, I would approach taking a loved one off life support differently than deciding what I will eat for lunch, I may take a risk at lunch and try something I have never had before.  Either way, I would certainly handle those two issues differently.

This exercise made me think about how I make decisions.  Truthfully, I am not sure.  I know what I do when faced with a decision, but it is difficult to describe.  I do not get out pencil and paper and follow a step-by-step process and I cannot say that I do it the same way every time.  First, I make sure that I fully understand the problem then I think about it until the solution comes to me.  I consider several options but the right one just seems to fit best.  Then I think about how to implement the decision.  I do not even write it down until I am ready to implement it. It is as close to a process as I can describe, but it has always served me well.  In a different video in the same series the narrator defines a very similar process as Intuitive (Decision Making Strategies (Intuitive), 2004).  I am not sure intuitive is the correct word for me to use because the answer does not just appear to me without effort.  However, when I find the answer it does feel right and I rarely second-guess it. 

When faced with a decision that I do not feel fully qualified to make, my ‘think it through’ style will not work.  If I lack the expertise to fully understand the problem or if I know the decision is larger than my scope of responsibility or will affect other work centers, working as a team member and using a mechanical, step-by-step process is more appropriate and effective.

Note: The citation is the same for both videos since they are part of the same running series.  So, I altered them slightly in the text and in the list of references for clarification.

References:

Decision-making strategies (Styles) [Video file]. (2004). In Films On Demand. Retrieved June 14, 2016, from fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=-1&xtid=34513

Decision-making strategies (Intuitive) [Video file]. (2004). In Films On Demand. Retrieved June 14, 2016, from fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=-1&xtid=34513

A520.2.3.RB_BorutyAlan - Conflict Resolution

Conflict Resolution

Sometimes I subconsciously assign a definition to a word, apply a specific usage for the word, attach a visual to it so that every time I hear the word, I get the mental picture to reinforce the assigned meaning, and then I lock it in.  There are only a handful of words in my head that are stuck like this and conflict is one of them.  I have tried, but try as I may to change it, I cannot make it good, healthy, beneficial or anything other than...well...bad.  Initially, we used the word conflict to describe the wars in Korea and Vietnam.  Another of those stuck words is donut.  Did you see a pastry, a spare tire, or a wax seal?  I knew it was not just me!

This material is not new to me.  I have been through it numerous times in training seminars, lectures, and formal courses that I attended while I was in the Air Force.  The natural assumption would be that I have some expertise on the subject or that I am comfortable with the process.  I do not and I am not.  I am the typical ‘avoider’ Whetten and Cameron describe in the text book (2016).  Seriously, like many others, I am uncomfortable with conflict and confrontation.  Unfortunately, my comfort level never changed the fact that conflict in the work place is alive and well.  I have been the mediator more times than I care to recall, but have only had an active role in the conflict once.  If it makes a difference, I was actually the initiator.  In my defense, it all started with what I thought was a simple question.  Unfortunately, this is my only defensible point.

I was a brand new Master Sergeant at the time.  I was transitioning from the Lead Radar Technician position to Production Superintendent.  I was a few weeks into the transition at the most and was still having trouble changing my perspective from specifically focused on Radar issues to generalized focus on every specialty that works on the aircraft.  (If I knew this then, I would not have admitted it to myself, much less anyone else.)  I was reviewing the aircraft forms (maintenance records) and I found an entry made by a very good friend of mine.  He was the Lead Electrical and Environmental Technician.  The problem was in the cooling system for the antenna, my antenna.  He explained that there were actually two problems in the system and to fly the mission he was going to configure the system in a way I had never seen before (and never saw again).  It contradicted my understanding of the system (again, his system) leading me to believe that if we tried to operate it would cause significant equipment damage, my equipment.  So I asked him if he was positive it was safe to fly and operate the aircraft configured the way he had it.  His confidence faltered a little at that point and I started pushing.  I asked him to show me the schematics and explain the configuration using his technical data.  When he could not find it right away, I got mad and made an entry in the forms not to turn on the Radar.  This effectively canceled the mission and infuriated the respondent.  

When I radioed maintenance control with the new aircraft status, my supervision heard and immediately came out to the aircraft find out was going on.  They found the two of us in the middle of a heated argument.  It was something so out of character for both of us they were speechless.  Then my immediate supervisor politely shut us up and ordered the two of us into his office.  My supervisor, an ill-tempered and mean spirited,  Senior Master Sergeant when he was not angry, was angry.  He made it clear he was in charge despite his boss, a not so scary Lieutenant, sitting at the desk right next to him.  He berated us badly for a minute or two.  He was upset that he came out to the flight line to find his two level-headed, example-setting Non-Commissioned Officers fighting like eight year old kids.  Once he had expressed his disappointment in us, he calmed down and asked us tell him what was going on.  He gave us both the opportunity to talk and we did.  My point was the aircraft was configured in a way not supported by technical data, equipment damage, mission abort, blah, blah, and blah.   The respondent believed he had found a way to make the evening mission, was sure his solution was not only safe but it was correct and would not cause equipment damage.  His only problem was that it was not in the technical data.  I could not prove my position with technical data either.  And there we were, at stalemate.  We were in an argument to which there was no correct answer.  My boss asked both of us if we felt that safety of flight is in question.  We both agreed that it was not.  And, then he dismissed us.  Total time in mediation, no more than five or six minutes and it was over.  A few minutes later he called us back in and told us what we needed to do, praised us both for our concerns and for standing our ground under pressure, and sent us back out to finish getting the aircraft ready for crew show.

We did fly the aircraft, they did complete the mission, and everything operated exactly as John (the respondent) said they would.  This should never have been a conflict.  I was the only reason that it did.  John and I worked together often.  He is, hands down, the best aircraft electrician I have ever known.  I had no reason to question him beyond what he was doing and when would he be done.  So why did I?  Today I know that I lacked confidence in my new job and I did not know how to handle this out of the ordinary situation, but did not want to admit it (Whetten & Cameron, 2016).  I lost focus and reverted back to what was comfortable, Radar.  Flustered, I got the Radar part wrong too.  Then I simply became defensive.  I lacked the courage and honesty to step back, admit that I was in over my head, and ask for help.  I vowed to myself that I would never let it happen again.

We were told we got it right; we made our mission and that no one was wrong.  I knew better.  Shortly after that, John and I talked about it and I tried to explain my behavior without it sounding like I was making excuses.  The respondent listened, understood, and accepted my apology.  That has been 24 years ago and I remember it like it happened yesterday, almost word for word. This is the first time since John accepted my apology that I have discussed the incident with anyone.  John and I are still good friends.

Looking back on it I believe the conflict was handled skillfully by my boss and the respondent never saw it coming; so, I do not believe they could have handled the situation any better than they did.  For me, I believe I should have done things differently, but at that time I was simply unable to do it any other way or to stop it once it started.  Hindsight, they say, is 20/20.

Reference:

Whetten, D. A., Cameron, K. S. (2016), Developing management skills (Ninth edition). Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN: 978-0-13-312747-8. (student edition)

A520.1.4.RB_BorutyAlan Self-Awareness

Self-Awareness

A520.1.4.RB

Looking back at my blog posts, I noticed that I already have an entry titled Self-Awareness. So, I read it.  It probably should have been titled 'Authentic Leadership'.  The only pertinent thing I found in it is the amount of research that has been completed and the amount still in work and the amount yet to come is mind boggling!  Self-Awareness is definitely the buzz phrase in the leadership and management disciplines right now.  All of it seems to indicate that self-awareness is significantly and directly tied to effective leadership.  Most of it makes sense to me,  almost at the common sense level.  Some of it is still a bit fuzzy but I will continue to think it through until I completely understand it because in my gut, I believe the researchers are on the mark.  Either way, I benefit from it.

I must admit coming in to this module, I thought I was more self-aware than it turns out I am.  The concept is not new to me although the definition has evolved.  What used to be a passive, thinking activity is now an active task and apparently it is required. 

After completing the self-assessment and scoring a few points over the mean, I know I have some work to do.  I am up for it.

This is my third course in the MSLD program.  The subject of self-awareness came up in the first course I took.  Critical Thinking was the subject.  It is a reflective, step by step process where one reasons through information using a set of specific elements resulting in a much deeper understanding of the information and /or better decisions made. Questioning the data using each element helps determine the concepts, point of reference, assumptions, implications, etc., associated with the data.  It also drives questioning ones self  to help avoid applying personal bias or  being judgmental over touchy subjects (Nosich, 2012).   Critical thinking is a powerful tool that uses self-evaluation and reflection to understand things clearer. In doing so, it has improved my self-awareness of personal bias, trigger subjects and preconceived notions I never knew I had.  Those no longer influence my thinking or my decisions.

This week I learned there are five core aspects of Self-Awareness:  emotional intelligence, personal values, cognitive style, attitude toward change and core self-evaluation (Whetten, D., & Cameron, K., 2016).  When I read the text on each aspect, honestly, I felt a sense of 
dread.  First I should know more about the subject or be further along than I am.  Secondly, and the real reason for the feeling, I immediately knew this is something I need to do for myself for personal and professional growth, but I also know it is going to be an uncomfortable process.  After the initial realization and my acceptance the feeling was gone. How has my self-awareness changed since starting the MSLD program?  Significantly and positively is my answer.  I take time each day for reflection, really.  I look at my day, dot the i's and cross the t's, plan any necessary do-overs, then I let it go. 

The five aspects of self-awareness are a bit more complex but not really any different.  I look at each objectively to determine the best way forward.  One bite at a time is my plan.  I will retake all of the assessments at a later date to look for changes.

Emotional Intelligence:  As with anything there is room for growth and improvement.  I believe I can correctly diagnose and manage my own emotions and my relationships with others.  I am also sensitive to emotional changes in people I know.  I don't overreact to new input nor do I respond out of emotion.  

Personal Values: This is another aspect I am comfortable with my self-awareness level. I am at the conformity level of values maturity.  I could see myself act from the principled level based on the circumstances but it would be the exception. I am very ethical. Honesty and integrity are the standard for my behavior, always.

Cognitive Style:   I have never given this aspect of self-awareness any consideration until this week.  I can say I fit snugly and comfortably into the knowing style.  I could shift into planning but not easily. The creating style is not an option.

Attitude Toward Change: I do not embrace change.  This is an area I feel I need to improve upon simply because change and a lot of it is destined to be the norm. I need to suck it up or I could find different ways to cope with change.  I also have very little tolerance for ambiguity.  Ambiguous problems and scenarios drive me to instant frustration.  Additionally, I have an internal locus of control.  I am responsible for my own actions.

Core Self-Evaluation:   My assessment put me in the 3rd quartile overall. I think that is in line with what I expected.  I feel like I have and maintain an overall positive self-regard.

I suppose I have some work to do.  It is a little daunting considering the fact that I considered myself  to be at a high level of self-awareness at the beginning of the week.  Oh well...

Seriously, I learned quite a bit about myself this week and found the subject to be very interesting if not enjoyable.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~Pete                                                            

References: 

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: Critical thinking across the curriculum. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.

Whetten, D. A., Cameron, K. S. (2016), Developing management skills (Ninth edition). Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN: 978-0-13-312747-8. (student edition)