Have Xers Sold Out?

A lot of association bloggers have been sharing their own thoughts on this question, one posed by Maddie Grant of Social Fish. If the question gets your interest, you can read some of the responses by checking them out at The Association Blogoclump.

I don't feel I have much new thinking to add to others' great insights, but I did want to share my comment to Maddie's original post as it is a bit different than what I've seen on the other blogs. Here it is:

The “selling out” charge has a caustic sting to it as it implies we aren’t meeting some universally agreed-upon standard. But for anyone to level that accusation implies we had an agreement, a contract to act and choose a certain way and that I am now violating those terms. I don’t recall ever entering into such an agreement.

So cliche comments get lobbed our way: “You’re not the person you once were.” You’re right. I’m not and neither are you (that’s a universal you, not a Maddie grant you). I’m not the person I was a year ago, nor am I the person I will become a year from now. Our choices, like our identities, are fluid and in a state of fairly regular flux. Different strokes, different sensibilities.

Are we less edgy? Have we sold out? Who the hell knows? Edgy by whose standards? Mine? Yours? And if someone sees me as edgy, it says as much about how they see themselves and their work as it does about how I see myself and my work.

I think people spend too much energy worrying about being edgy, cool, and cutting edge. Do good work that you believe in and that represents as much of your authenticity as you are in touch with at any given moment. How the world talks about it really doesn’t matter all that much.

Driving Ideas on Your Innovation Highway

The way drivers merge from the highway on-ramp into a lane of traffic parallels how people introduce ideas into an organization's innovation pipeline:

The Coast is Clear driver waits until no cars can be seen in the first lane of traffic before even beginning to attempt a merge. The car merges safely, but often creates quite the backup at the on-ramp.

The Here I Come driver does the reverse, barreling into the lane at full speed regardless of the existing flow of traffic. Other cars often have to change lanes to avoid a collision.

The Get in the Gap driver merges at the first sign of available space, but often does so too slowly instead of quickly accelerating to the flow of traffic. As a result other cars have to slow down.

The I'm Coming Through driver flies straight from the ramp across multiple lanes of traffic instead of successfully merging into the first lane and then changing lanes one at a time.

The Fast and Focused driver accelerates on the ramp and enters the lane at relatively the same speed of other cars, merging successfully into an appropriate opening between cars.

Each of these driving approaches—whether you are trying to drive a car on the highway or an idea into your organization's menu of activity—has risks associated with it. Only the Fast and Focused approach, however, uses the time before entry to get up to speed so once in traffic you can drive without disrupting the flow of other cars or ideas.

Out of Order

Salad, entree, dessert. That's the proper order for an enjoyable meal, right?

Except in Europe where you are more likely to end with a salad.

While we treat the salad as an appetizer in North America, Europeans see it as meal-ending digestive aid with the oil and vinegar in the dressing helping to break up the fats just consumed.

A predictable order to any common activity can be comforting to some, it can quickly become an unnecessary fixed routine that is just one step away from a rut.

Periodically going "out of order" is definitely in order if you want to surprise and reengage people's attention and interest … at a meal, in a magazine or publication, during a conference general session, in a staff meeting, and in many other events.

Multiple Personalities Order

I think we all have multiple personality disorder, except that I wouldn't call it disorder. I wouldn't call it anything. It's just a characteristic of being human.

Some mornings I wake up and while singing Sondheim songs in the shower I think about stage moments from roles long past (Albert, Bud Frump, Rolf) and leading man parts I still dream of playing.

Drawing a shot of espresso with perfect crema, I envision myself as a barista in a 100-square foot coffee bar just big enough for me and 2 or 3 of the regular customers whose lives I have become intimately familiar with since most of their days involve spending time with me.

Hosting friends for brunch and doing my best Martha Stewart impersonation (presentation really does matter) the names of the many restaurants and hotels I have thought of opening run through my mind.

Musical theatre star, barista, hospitality impresario—on any given day, these are just a few of the identities (in addition to the ones I currently embody) that I know would bring me much joy and satisfaction.

We owe it to ourselves (and others) to create space in our lives for the many aspects of our "self" that we want to authentically explore and experience. Our multiple interests and personalities only become a disorder when we don't give them a home in our personal and professional lives. The opportunity (and the challenge) is to integrate and order our many part-time personalities into full-time fulfillment.

Toward a More Sustainable You

One of the new keynotes/workshops I've been presenting this year explores the beliefs and habits that will support a more sustainable you … you the person and you the professional. Note: I also have a version for organizations).

Here are some of the gentle reminders often shared in the individual version of this topic. You also can download a one-page PDF with these tips.

1. Relinquish your need for others to see things as you do.
2. Recharge you physical well-being with a new habit you can definitely keep.
3. Resign from one activity, commitment, or organization that doesn't contribute positively to your life.
4. Reflect regularly on what you are learning and can apply with rgeater intention.
   
5. Release an unproductive belief/behavior that limits our possibilities.
6. Relax your definition of what it means to live the good life.
7. Reconnect with someone whose insight and perspective you value.
8. Renew a skill or competency to gain a competitive advantage.
9. Recommit to a daily or weekly habit that strengthens you as a person.
10. Refresh your energy and passion for something you genuinely want to help create.
11. Reset your clock to reflect today's realities.
12. Realign your behaviors with a value that is important to you.
13. Reframe a challenge as an opportunity with steps to address it.
14. Reduce what you believe you need in order to live comfortably.
15. Review your aspirations and intentions and adjust your time commitments.
16. Reboot your mental operating system and refresh you curiosity and openness.
    

Is Your Decorum Just Decor?

No doubt the political chatterati will dissect Joe Wilson's outburst for another day or so, but I want to examine it from an organizational development standpoint while trying to avoid any political inferences. So let's look at the 4 major actions that occurred and some of the OD questions we might want to consider for our own organizations.

1. An organization has standing rules about decorum during particular types of events.

Having a code of conduct, guidelines for professional practices, or statement of shared values is fairly common among all types of organizations. These statements of ethics are supposed to guide individual behavior and reflect the ethos of the community. In Built to Last, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras found that the most successful companies were cult-like about their core ideology. And there's that old saying, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."

2. An individual behaves in a manner that violates those rules.

One of the challenges organizations have with codes of conduct is what enforcement mechanism, if any, is put into place for the stated standards. Guidelines are nice, but when they are violated you often find the parties affected to be seeking rules that have teeth. If you are going to plant a stake in the ground, you need to do so after giving careful consideration to how violations will be treated, who will make that determination, and what type of appeals process should be provided.

3. The individual apologizes.

I think at least two interesting questions emerge at this stage: (1) is/isn't an apology enough? and (2) to whom should the apology be directed? We are human beings who make mistakes. Acknowledging the mistake apologizing to those affected, and then realigning our behavior with the stated values is a fairly common way of making amends.

But to whom should our apology be directed? In the case of Representative Wilson, his initial apology was directed to President Obama since the President was the person Wilson had interrupted. But the actual rule/code of conduct comes not from the President, but the House. So in some respects the House—the community with the standards—is perhaps the body that should ultimately receive the apology.

Organizations have to decide when to make exceptions to a rule or else abide by rigid zero tolerance policies that often mete our extreme punishments for minor first-time offenses. Being clear about what variables could influence when exceptions are granted can increase the likelihood that decisions/responses will be seen as fair.

Individuals need to take a broader view of the other parties to whom they are accountable and who might be affected by their behavior. What one does often affects many more then might initially be determined.

4. The organization rebukes the individual for the behavioral violation.

Degrees of responses/punishments are always options and can include simple statements of reprimands (You broke a rule. We noticed. Don't do it again.) to stated fines and punishments as often occurs in professional sports. Organizations often get criticized for encoring their stated standards (couldn't you just look the other way) which I always find misplace. If we don't enforce what we say we believe, we essentially are violating are own code of conduct. Could we look the other way? Sure. Should we look the other way? Rarely in my book.

Doing so teaches others that it's possible to violate standards without consequences (remember not all responses have to be extreme punishments). When your members have that understanding you will find it often yields damaging consequences down the road.

How Too Much Help Actually Hurts

I recently attended a local volunteer meeting. Led by a very dedicated and capable volunteer, the 60-minute meeting consisted almost exclusively of him giving updates on various agenda items. Others attending then commented or responded to his questions. If someone would have been watching, but not listening, it might have appeared to be a graduate seminar in a professor's home. It was a decidedly one-sided conversation, and not one I would feel the need to participate in again.

Here's the problem, a common one in a lot of organizations, particularly at the local volunteer level. While everyone attending this meeting cares deeply and is willing to get involved, one individual drives the momentum and effort. It's not sustainable. At some point he will burn out and a leadership vacuum might emerge. And by holding too much of the responsibility for what gets done, he limits the group's productivity and impedes others' initiative. He's not being dictatorial, but his over-responsibility creates others' under-responsibility, a dynamic that Roger Martin explored in his excellent book, The Responsibility Virus.

Maintaining the right balance of responsibility between leaders and followers or contributors requires great attention and vigilance. If the leadership takes too little responsibility, others can flounder, use resources unproductively, or fail to follow-through appropriately. If the leadership takes on too much responsibility, others might think their ideas and assistance is not needed or allow the leadership to do all the work.

People with drive and commitment often find themselves promoted to (or selected for) positions of leadership. But they have a predisposition to "doer-ship." That is, their greatest gift is getting things done. Too bad they now are in a position that has helping others get things done as one of its primary responsibilities. If you find yourself in meetings where all eyes and ears are focused on one individual (maybe it's you!), it might be worth thinking about recalibrating the balance of responsibility.

What Tennis Teaches About Strategy and Innovation

My competitive sport of choice is tennis, and in honor of this week's US Open, I want to offer an observation on what tennis can teach us about strategy and innovation.

Winning points is simple: either your opponent makes an error or you hit a winner. This is true for just about any business as well: a competitor offers an inferior product or service (losing) or you innovate and deliver greater value (winning).

But not all winners are created the same in tennis (or business). The points that get the most applause during a match are often the outright winners ... the service ace, the ripping return, the overhead hit out of the court. Thrilling as those are to hit, they don't represent the majority of points won in most matches.

Instead, most points are won after longer rallies in which players use each shot hit to methodically gain a competitive advantage through court position, depth of the ball, and angle of placement. The best players stay light on their feet between strokes, hovering around an approximate center point that allows them to quickly move to their opponent's return. Players often throw in a low percentage shot simply to mix up the game and see how their opponent reacts. Doing so causes their opponent to second-guess what they might do when facing a similar shot selection in the future. Points are often won (and energy is conserved) when a player sees an opponent hit a short ball or one that will rise high above the net, and they move forward to close in on the ball and hit the winner. Finally, every player has certain strength shots that they turn to when backed into a difficult situation.

That sounds like a good strategy for anyone looking to innovate, regardless of the line of business. Stay positioned close to your center (your core mission and products or services) as you look to strike. Have sufficient patience to put into place today, the processes and people whose future efforts in the future will deliver great returns. Avoid making outright errors that result from pure carelessness as opposed to the missteps that result from strategic exploration. Remain ever-ready to move forward when opportunities for quick winners present themselves. Leverage your proven capabilities when you absolutely have to win.

The Power of the Platform

Three bags of books had been readied for Goodwill when it occurred to me that I should consider selling some of them as an Amazon Reseller. After all, I often buy used books from resellers, why wouldn't people do the same from me?

It took me about 5 minutes to open a reseller account and another 15 to list the 30 or so books (and a barely used set of Mikasa Arabella china in case you're looking) that had decent resale value. It has been only two weeks, but already 17 items have been purchased totaling $400 in revenue after Amazon's approximately 30% commission on each sale.

Amazon provided the platform and tools that turned me into an active and satisfied reseller, generating revenue for itself and allowing me to turn content gathering dust on my shelves into a value/revenue stream for myself.

Too bad our professional associations don't provide a similar simple and user-friendly platform that allows members to generate a return on investment for their ideas and knowledge while simultaneously delivering value to the association and the membership as a whole.

Leaders Don't Get Unlimited Minutes Plans

The huffing and puffing over President Obama's address to children is far too much ado about nothing (though the now-removed question from the lesson plans was an initial error in judgment).

However, it does remind us that no leader is living with an unlimited calling plan (sorry T-Mobile). The soapbox eventually gets worn down and you no longer can be seen above the crowd if your voice is always the one being heard.

Individuals in leadership need to honor the principle of limited air time, speaking only when they have a unique contribution to make or when a message will be more effectively if voice by them. Otherwise, they should allow, encourage, and amplify other voices.

As with so many other things, less again can be more.