Adaptability Linked to Staff Retention

Posted on 2013/02/222013/02/22 by Jason Hensel

Interests change over the course of a career. What you’re passionate about now, you may hate a year later. This change of focus shouldn’t be viewed negatively, though. It’s actually a sign of adaptability, and it should be considered in job evaluations, according to a study from the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management and published in Human Performance.

The study looked at statistics from professional basketball players for its data and conclusions.

Researchers assessed data on more than 700 members of the NBA to see how players shifted their focus on different on-court skills and tasks over several years. A player displaying high performance scoring baskets in one season might show a shift in focus towards rebounding missed shots in another season. That could be because they were responding to a shift in their team’s needs and/or a change in their coach’s instructions.

Researchers found that about 10 percent of players refocused their efforts over time and were more likely to play again for the league in the next season. The findings support the idea that refocusing among job tasks is an important component of employee adaptability and should be a part of overall performance assessments. As well, they suggest that adaptability is linked to staff retention.

“Our paper is drawing attention to the measurement of performance, that refocusing is something that’s important in the workplace, exists in the workplace, and for organizations to think about it as part of the job, ” said Maria Rotundo, a professor at the Rotman School.

Rotundo is aware of the differences between sports and workplaces.

But “there are parallels,” too, she says, including the fact that NBA athletes are focused on a goal and must work together as a team to achieve it as they confront the different opponents. In the same way, employees in a company must work together to face market competitors and achieve their company’s goals. And just like basketball players who go through changes in their team’s make-up, many workplace staff must adapt to changes brought on by restructuring or the adoption of new technologies, requiring a refocus in their job’s tasks.

How easily do you adapt to changes in the workplace? Does your focus change year over year?

(Story materials from University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management. Image via Flickr: Keith Allison / Creative Commons.)

Send to Kindle

Are You a But Leader?

Posted on 2013/01/212013/01/23 by Jason Hensel

The first rule of improv is “yes and.” There are other rules, or rather guidelines, however “yes and” is the one and only rule that truly matters. Without agreeing to the reality presented to you, progress trips over itself, and you and your co-performer are left staring at each other.

Much like improv performers, company leaders and managers should learn the “yes and” rule and stick it in their hearts. I’m flabbergasted at the number of times over the years I’ve experienced a “yes but” manager. Maybe there’s a “yes but” class at MBA schools, or maybe mentors train managers in the art of “yes but.”

Stop the “yes but” cycle of abuse, I say!

No one likes to have an idea agreed to with conditions. When you do that, you stop progress. The employee starts immediately placing restrictions on ideas. It’s more fruitful to agree and add to the proposal.

Of the following examples, tell me which is better:

Employee: “I plan to recycle all the aluminum cans in the break room.”
Manager: “Great, but that’s a lot of cans and you’ll have to do it all yourself.”

Employee: “I plan to recycle all the aluminum cans in the break room.”
Manager: “Great, and I know a place you can take them that offers the most money.”

If you’re truly a leader, or want to be one, you’ll see the benefit of contributing to an idea and moving forward rather than holding back and letting fear, doubt, or pessimism dictate your decisions.

The great improv teacher Del Close once said to “follow the fear.” What he meant by that is you should go toward what makes you uncomfortable, do things that scare you. For a lot of leaders, agreeing to an idea wholeheartedly scares the snot out of them. That’s exactly what they should do, though. Agreement isn’t the endgame, however. You have to add to the conversation, move it forward.

Do me a favor. This week, with everyone you interact with, make “yes and” a part of every conversation. It will seem uncomfortable and forced at first. Over time, though, it will become instinctual. After the week is over, reflect and let me know if you feel happier with your decisions and that life is moving forward.

If you’re creating an atmosphere of agreement, I can guarantee that your employees will agree to follow you. If you’re a but leader, though, employees will find any excuse to counter your decisions. Don’t be a “yes but” leader. Be a “yes and” leader.

(Image via Flickr: visualpun.ch / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

Why Ask Why?

Posted on 2012/11/052012/11/06 by Jason Hensel

I once had a boss that said we should always ask why three times. I never took up the recommendation to her face, but the advice has stuck with me for many years.

When you ask why questions, as opposed to how questions, you open people up to a more abstract way of thinking.

“‘Why’ questions make people think more in terms of the big picture, more in terms of intentions and goals, whereas more concrete ‘how’ questions are focused on something very specific, something right in front of you, basically,” said University of Illinois psychology professor Jesse Preston.

Preston, along with two other researchers, recently conducted a study to test abstract thinking’s influence on political beliefs. They used the Islamic community center and mosque in New York because it’s a strong polarizing issue.

The first study showed that after viewing a plane fly into the World Trade Center, conservatives and liberals held opposing views of the mosque at ground zero.

The second study, however, had participants answer three why questions or three how questions in a row on an unrelated subject before offering their views about the mosque.

Preston says the why questions (not the how questions) brought liberals and conservatives closer together.

“We observed that liberals and conservatives became more moderate in their attitudes,” Preston said. “After this very brief task that just put them in this abstract mindset, they were more willing to consider the point of view of the opposition.

“We tend to think that liberals and conservatives are on opposite sides of the spectrum from each other and there’s no way we can get them to compromise, but this suggests that we can find ways of compromising,” Preston continued. “It doesn’t mean people are going to completely change their attitudes, because these are based on pervasive beliefs and world views. But it does mean that you can get people to come together on issues where it’s really important or perhaps where compromise is necessary.”

Asking why questions isn’t limited to politics. It can be used in the workplace, too, granted that you have a supervisor who is open to other viewpoints. The best ones are open and will have good answers for all three of your why questions.

And if they don’t, continue asking why.

BONUS: Here’s a clip from Lucky Louie showing that by asking why one can really get to the true reason behind something.

(Story quotes from the University of Illinois. Image via Flickr: Brendio / Creative Commons.)

Send to Kindle

Good Credit Scores and Rudeness

Posted on 2011/11/08 by Jason Hensel

One of the most ridiculous parts of the job hiring process is letting a company conduct a credit check to determine if you are financially responsible. Yes, I can see how this might be a good process for a job at a bank, for example. But just because you have a good or bad credit score shouldn’t qualify or disqualify you for most jobs.

Now, there’s some research to back up my belief. In fact, people who have good credit scores are more likely rude.

In a study to be published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, researchers from Louisiana State University, Texas Tech University and Northern Illinois University focused on links between credit ratings and personalities.

“With regards to personality and credit–it makes sense that conscientiousness is related to good credit, but what was really interesting was that agreeableness was negatively related to your credit score,” said Jeremy Bernerth, assistant professor in LSU’s E. J. Ourso College of Business Rucks Department of Management. “That suggests easy-going individuals actually have worse credit scores than disagreeable and rude individuals. This suggests that agreeable individuals might get themselves in trouble by co-signing loans for friends or family or taking out additional credit cards at the suggestion of store clerks.”

The researchers also found that there’s no correlation between poor scores and bad behavior on the job.

“It was telling that poor credit scores were not correlated to theft and other deviant types of work behaviors,” said Bernerth. “Most companies attempt to justify the use of credit scores because they think such employees will end up stealing, but our research suggests that might not be the case.”

I shared this study with an HR professional. She suggested that those who score poorly could also be more naive, which is something you don’t want in the workplace.

Interesting. Would you rather have a nice and naive or disagreeable and rude employee working for or with you?

(Photo via Flickr: Richard Lemarchand / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

Why Engagement Matters

Posted on 2011/11/012011/11/02 by Jason Hensel

National Novel Writing Month is in November. I tried it once. I didn’t succeed. Writing more than 1,666 words a day is hard, especially if you have an editing and writing job. After a day’s work, I just want to come home and do anything but write or read for a few hours. Then by the time I want to write, it’s time for The Daily Show. Can’t miss that! Then it’s The Colbert Report. Have to watch that, too! Oh, look, it’s 11 p.m. What’s on Facebook? A few hours later, it’s time for bed. National Novel Writing Month, I hardly knew you.

There’s another national writing project that happens each month, though. It’s National Blog Posting Month. Writing a blog post a day seems totally doable, primarily because there’s no word count requirement or need for a complete story. If I want to write about banshees one day and then write about the dangers of electricity the next, as Bobby Brown would say, that’s my prerogative. It just takes engagement on my end.

Engagement, however, is difficult. A recent Gallup poll found that 71 percent of U.S. workers were “‘not engaged’ or ‘actively disengaged’ in their work, meaning they are emotionally disconnected from their workplaces and are less likely to be productive.”

And who are these less engaged workers that are bringing down production? They’re primarily college educated, men, and between the ages of 30 and 64. Oh dear, I’m in my prime disengagement period.

A perceived lack of progress or the fear of layoffs are two of the main reasons employees are less engaged in their work. Leaders, though, can mitigate the lack of engagement, according to Gallup:

Every manager can play a role in engaging workers by clarifying expectations, getting employees what they need to do their work, giving workers recognition when they do good work, encouraging employee development, helping workers connect to the broader purpose of the organization, and frequently measuring and discussing progress. The managers and departments within organizations that do these things are more likely to produce high-quality work and help their organizations grow and improve the wellbeing of their workforce.

Now while I believe a lot of workplace issues are due to mismanagement and poor communication from leaders, they shouldn’t solely take the blame. Employees should communicate with their employers about what’s bothering them. They should have honest conversations, without fear of retribution, about an organization’s direction and their role in that direction. Unfortunately, there’s usually a huge highway between employers and employees.

The Gallup poll says that employees younger than 30 or older than 65 are more engaged. That raises the question: Are these age groups just happily employed due to economic conditions?

Increasing engaged workers could spur job growth, according to the Gallup report. But maybe people don’t care about things such as job growth, seats at the table, and money anymore. Maybe 30- to 64-year-old, non-engaged worker concerns are about other things, such as time, family, and spiritual matters. Maybe to them, work is just work, so why be engaged in it? Get in, get enough money, and get out as soon as you can in time to enjoy the rest of your life. If that is your plan, then maybe being more engaged will get you there sooner. Or maybe not. Maybe you’re more engaged in throwing a Frisbee with friends every afternoon.

What I’m saying is choose your focus. Figure out what you ultimately want in life and do it. Maybe it’s working hard every day. Maybe it’s writing a daily blog post. Whatever it is, figure it out for yourself and be engaged in it, because there’s nothing worse in this world than a life half lived.

(Photo via Flickr: drinksmachine / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle