Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion
From a church leadership point of view there’s an even more interesting law quoted.
The Law of Triviality
… the time spent on any item of the agenda will be in inverse proportion to the sum involved.
The idea is that people are more likely to contribute to the discussion of things they understand. A nuclear reactor will sail through the finance committee, but a bicycle shed will cause endless debate because everyone can understand it and everyone has an opinion.
On behalf of everyone who’s ever sat through a church leadership meeting… Ain’t it true!
I suspect in response to my post “Where are Our Great Leaders” Michael Osterman tweeted the following which should, in my opinion, be recorded for posterity!
As for current great leaders in politics, we could tweet the entire list and still use nowhere near 140 characters!
Derailed: Five Lessons Learned from Catastrophic Failures of Leadership Author: Tim Irwin Publisher: NelsonFree
I was genuinely excited when I saw “Derailed” on the list of books I could get from BookSneeze to read, review and blog about. Unfortunately it’s a book that produces high expectations but ultimately fails to deliver.
The concept of this book is sound. Look at the derailment of some very high profile people and draw conclusions on how derailment happens to highly competent people based on any common denominators he could find. The chapters and stories told about the derailment of Robert Nardelli, Carly Fiorina, Durk Jager, Steve Heyer, Frank Raines, and Dick Fuld were well told and very entertaining.
The problem is entertainment doesn’t make for an in-depth critique of what really went wrong. It also tends to mean that the examples are looked at with less then objective eyes. In this case it really did appear that the writer knew what he was looking for and highlighted pretty much only those things that fitted the outcome he wanted.
The second half of the book is basically about general platitudes on leadership. No one could argue with what he is saying but he takes far too many words to say it.
Michael Hyatt of Thomas Nelson, the publishers of this book has stated in a blog post that one shouldn’t be scared to stop reading a book partway through if it isn’t interesting enough. This would have happened was this book had it not been for the fact that as I promised to read it fully to write the review (ironically for Thomas Nelson’s BookSneeze).
On the positive side it did remind me, as do many books, to look at the flaws in my character that could derail me. So it certainly wasn’t a complete waste of time!
Unfortunately I can only give this one a rating of two stars.
Yesterday I had to do something I really loathe. Stand on the street and collect for The Salvation Army.
It’s not The Salvation Army I loathe. If I did I wouldn’t have committed to spend my life working for God through the army (I’m an ordained minister – Officer at The Salvation Army Johnsonville.)
It’s not the people I meet that I loathe. Although more an introvert than extrovert, I enjoy saying “Hi” and having a laugh and a joke with strangers.
What I hate is asking people for money! There always seems to be worthy charities asking for cash. When I walk past them and don’t give (I often have literally no money in my wallet anymore due to EFT-POS and other forms of electronic banking) I feel awkward and embarrassed.
I don’t like making others feel the same way.
While I was there I tweeted that I was doing something I disliked and Michael Sampson tweeted straight back:
Ahh. Gently and nicely Michael was prompting me to make an attitude adjustment.
He was so right. I’d gone in with a stink attitude and so I was doing a stink job! I forgot the collection aspect and just started giving of myself to the people who passed by.
I enjoyed it more (lots);
They seemed to enjoy the interaction; and
As a by-product a lot more people gave.
How often do I say that attitude is what I look for in people. Thanks Michael for reminding me about the plank in my eye!
Whether you are employing a paid staff member or appointing a volunteer the choice of “who” is one of the most impactful decisions you’ll make today.
Why?
Because a bad call causes:
a lot of angst and heartache, not only for you but also for that person and the team into which they’re being appointed;
pain for all concerned if it becomes necessary to part ways with them; and
an under-performing team.
What Should I Look For in a Prospect?
That’s a really good question and if you read all the books you’ll come up with as many different answers as there are books. But it seems to me there are just four things you need to get right. These are, in order of importance:
1. Relational Chemistry
They need to get on with both you and your team. Effective teams are made up of people who click.
This doesn’t mean everyone should be the same. Quite the contrary. If everyone was the same you could almost guarantee the chemistry wouldn’t work!
2. Attitude
Yes, we all want people in our teams to work in their areas of strength most of the time but you never want someone who won’t pitch in elsewhere when it’s needed.
Never, never hire someone who doesn’t have a great attitude. A good attitude is not something you can train into someone and very rarely is it mentored in.
NB: I have seen attitudinal transformation in people following an encounter with God but you can’t count on that at the time of hiring. (Note also I’ve seen far too many “Christians” who don’t appear to have allowed God to transform their attitude but that’s for another post altogether!)
3. Passion
People need a real passion for both the reason for the work they’re doing and the type of work they’re engaged in. Let me explain further.
Let’s say you’re hiring for World Vision. If you have an applicant with a passion for kids in poverty in developing countries then World Vision would be a great place for them to be working. But if they hate working with figures (even if they’re good at them) then don’t give them a job (even at World Vision) as an Accountant.
People intuitively know the type of work they like (at a desk, in the field etc) but many don’t know, or can’t articulate what their passion is in the bigger context. I’ve found the best thing to do is to ask them questions to find out what makes their blood boil. When they see injustice done to a certain sort of people or when they see a play performed badly. You’ll quickly find out where there passions lie.
4. Talents
All too often we hire almost solely on people’s abilities and talents. While these can be important (there’s no point hiring me to pitch for the RedSox even though that’s a passion etc) this is also the only area of the four that an employer can make a real contribution (by way of training).
So next time you’re hiring
or appointing I reckon you should look for these four things.
Have your say.
Do you agree or disagree. Have I left something important out.
I came back from honeymoon to a new job (OK, I admit it, this is a story from many… too vague?… 28 years ago but trust me, it’s still relevant) and a new boss. Not just a new boss, but as the company who hired me had been merged with (taken over by) another company, the new boss wasn’t even the same guy who had interviewed me and offered me the job in the first place.
So, as you can imagine, I went to my first day with some trepidation.
As it happened, Alastair became the leader I would judge all others against. Alastair was a boss I would do pretty much anything for. Alastair was the leader I always hoped to become. Alastair was a loved leader.
What made me feel like this?
He did Back Me Up
I specifically recall a time when the big bosses were in town and they complained about something that hadn’t worked quite right. They did it in such a way that meant they thought it was my fault. Alastair couldn’t have known whether I had got things right or wrong but he backed me to the hilt without blinking an eyelid when I was asked about what I had done.
He Did Hold me Accountable
After that incident and when the brass was gone, he came to me and asked for information about the situation. He left me in no doubt that if I got it wrong I would be in trouble. Not necessarily for making a mistake but if I had given wrong information to him to try to keep myself out of trouble… (Fortunately I hadn’t!)
He Did Care about Raewyn and Me
As a newly married couple Alastair seemed to know that decisions I made would impact my marriage more than I would understand. He often discussed this with me and the fact that he really did care about how we were going made a heck of a difference to me.
Are you a leader that people want to work for?
If you aren’t, it may be worth trying to find out why that is.
They are hungry for more. They want a voice. They want influence. They are a generation that isn’t content receiving a vision; they want to be part of shaping and creating the vision. My generation believes in open source influence.
and
We have ideas and dreams too. We have thoughts about how to carry the kingdom of God forward. When do our visions, dreams, and ambitions for ministry get heard?
I’ve always thought of myself as the kind of leader who does include people but when I look back over the very recent history I realise I’ve been spending more and more time casting vision during one on one discussions but less and less time listening.
A big reminder to myself that although I do need to ensure everyone knows the vision, I also need to incorporate their ideas and thought and dreams as well. It’s interesting that this hits me like a brick straight after I post about being a post-modern leader. You would have thought I would have seen it already!
I guess that’s why God gave us two ears and only one mouth…
One of the most amazing leadership traits is that of loyalty. Loyalty to your followers. Loyalty to those who depend on you.
If you want to see it in action I suggest you watch the Boston RedSox play and see what Terry Francona does when his pitcher hits a bit of a rough patch. Tito undermanages them, especially if it’s early in the game. If you follow on Twitter using #redsox you’ll often see people complaining that Tito isn’t taking action. But why doesn’t he? What is he saying to his players by not jumping in and replacing an underperforming pitcher?
Pitcher, I Trust You
By not jumping in, Tito both acknowledges that everybody is going to go through the occasional bad patch, but that he has faith that the guy will shortly come out the other side and probably be better for the experience.
Batters, I Believe in You Guys Too
Tito also shows a lot of faith in his batters. Pretty much he’s saying, “I know we’re in a 4 run hole going into the second innings, but that’s nothing for batters like you!”
So in a very real sense Tito uses adverse conditions to motivate his team.
What About You?
How did you react last time things didn’t go as planned for your team?
