AnnMaria's Blog

You are a mean, bitter, little man - and I don't even know you

Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:26:08 -0500

My youngest daughter and I don't have a lot in common, probably because she's 12 and I'll be 52 in a couple of weeks. (When I told my mother I was pregnant, her first reaction was, "Don't you know better than that at your age?" )

So .... my daughter and I were pleased when a new TV show came out that we both liked. It's called Huge and is about a summer camp for teenagers who want to lose weight. It's based on a book for teenagers and has a lot of the usual teenage things - a boy likes a girl and doesn't know how to tell her. A girl thinks her parents don't love her because she doesn't fit the image they want. A woman's father left when she was young and she hasn't ever been able to talk to her parents about it.

One of the actors in the show is over 300 pounds. When he was interviewed for a New York Times article, (http://abcfamily.go.com/shows/huge ) he said that he had always been overweight, and he did go to a weight loss camp once. He said,

"... the problem doesn't go away but you can open up and be a teenager instead of a fat teenager."

That's probably what I like about the show - the lesson that people are more than the stereotypes we have about them. What my daughter likes is mostly the stories about girls who like boys but can't get their attention, girls who are trying to stand up for themselves. The writing on the show is good.

So, you might imagine my surprise the day after the first episode when one of the comments on Twitter was

"this show is about some fat-### teens trying to get it on."

This is the sort of comment you see on-line all of the time. A thousand times a day, if you you had time to look. It's the sort of comment people make to one another and, more often, about one another behind their back.

Why? Why do we have to tear down successful people? Why do we have to point out the faults in others?

Regardless of the reasons, I wonder if people who do that realize how it makes THEM look. Maybe some people laughed with the person who wrote that remark. My first thought was,

"You must be a mean, bitter, little man that you feel the need to put down some people who are trying to produce something good for families."

Seriously, what was that man trying to accomplish? My guess is he's a teenager, too. He's not a successful actor like these people (hey, at least they have a series), he's not a writer for a TV show. Not having accomplished anything like the people on this show he tries to make himself appear better by tearing them down, "Ha, ha you're fat."

Not only does his behavior show a "huge" lack of generosity, but when I got to thinking about the people I respect and admire in life, very seldom are they engaged in cheap shots like this. They're the type of people who want to build others up, not tear them down. When they have a criticism it is the constructive kind, they sincerely intend to set you right.

As for twitter-man and the rest like him, his lack of generosity doesn't make him seem bigger, cooler, tougher.

Instead, he just looks like a loser.

The best boss ever

Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:43:15 -0500

The best person I ever worked for was a woman named Yolanda Venegas. I've worked with some very nice people over the years, and she is certainly one of them. Every time the phone would ring and her name would pop up on the caller ID, I would smile, just out of reflex.

In my experience, that's a pretty rare reaction to any boss. Tonight I got to puzzling about what it is that made working for Yolanda so different.

1. She had gotten to be the boss honestly. I thought of her today in contrast to another person's name that came up. (Yes, I was gossiping!) My friend and I can't decide whether the person we were talking about (the gossippee! ), let's call her Joanne, had actually gotten her new promotion by sleeping with the boss or just by kissing up so much. Yolanda was competent, very knowledgable about her work. It was clear to everyone that she deserved her position and so we all respected her. Because she was very competent, her staff didn't have to waste time explaining things she didn't know. Because she was confident in her knowledge, it didn't bother her to admit that she didn't know something, and, of course, we had no problem filling her in on whatever it was.

2. She encouraged honesty in other people. Going back to my incident of gossipping today (which I know Erich says is a bad thing but I guess he hasn't been a good enough influence on me yet), my friend and I were saying that we did not envy Joanne her promotion because how much must that suck to be following around pretending to worship some old man. Joanne knows what her skills are compared to the people around her, and it's obvious she's a deeply insecure person. As for the man that promoted her, we had a lot of contempt for him. What does it say about you as a manager if you are so insecure you need to promote people just to feed your ego? No matter how generally honest you are, it's nearly impossible to be completely unaffected by flatterers, but Dr. Venegas seemed to be immune. She must have had a pill she took or something. It was kind of uncanny. Because Yolanda rewarded hard work and skill and ignored sycophants she always had really good people working for her.

3. She had the courage to fire people. I know this was one of my biggest flaws early in my career. I always wanted to give people a second or third or fourth chance. As one of my employees told me, "You have to learn to draw the line between being generous and being a sucker." There were a few times over the years I knew Yolanda when someone just had to go, they were not doing the job. Yolanda wasn't mean about it, but she made the hard choices and that was at. To quote another co-worker of mine.

"Have a nice life. Don't have it here."

4. She had the courage to stand up for her employees. I've known too many managers who had the courage to discipline employees but not the courage to stand up for them. That makes you look like a bully and loses their respect. Years ago, I was looking for another job and some of the university "powers that be" really wanted me to stay. I liked my job fine but I had four kids and one was starting college so I really wanted a lot more money than a university job normally pays. Well, right after I got that job, one of those "powers" charged up to Yolanda and demanded, "Did you give AnnMaria a reference?" and she replied calmly, "Yes, yes I did,"

This is interesting, too, because it is an example of what I have seen so often - people are held back from doing the right thing by fear, and yet, when they overcome those fears and DO the right thing, generally, nothing much happens as a result and you have to wonder what they were afraid of in the first place. Not being invited to the Annual People Who Don't Rock the Boat Party?

5. Generosity. I have had the great fortune to work for really good people most of my career, but here is where Yolanda really stands out. When I met her, she wasn't my boss. In fact, I was a graduate student with three very young children. I was walking down the hallway carrying one baby with two little ones toddling behind me and this professor passing in the other direction stops and says,

"Hey, you, mija! Come here a minute. I want to talk to you."

(At the time there were a whole TWO doctoral students in programs on the University of California campus in the school where I was enrolled, so I did stand out.)

She wanted to know where I was in my program, and when I told her I was working on my dissertation she said,

"Next time I see you, I want to hear what you have done."

For the next two years, every time I saw her, she would ask me about my dissertation, what articles I was working on, job applications. She knew how easy it would be to just let things slide with three babies. There were some Sunday nights when I would tell my husband,

"I need to do SOMETHING on my dissertation. I know if I run into Dr. Venegas on campus tomorrow, she is going to ask me what I've gotten done and I don't have the nerve to tell her I didn't do anything this week!"

Of course, years later, I ended up running into her when I was visiting on campus and becoming the evaluator for two of her grants.

Yolanda was a mentor for EVERYBODY who ever worked for her. Her first assistant, Alicia, went back to school, got her teaching credential and has been teaching for years. Her next assistant, Patricia, is now part of the TRIO programs in Corona. Over the years she has had her employees attend graduate school at Harvard, the University of California, twice had students who were Rockefeller scholars. When other bosses try to keep their good employees, Yolanda has the generosity to kick them out on to bigger and better things.

Recently, I was at a conference having lunch with Yolanda and several successful professionals she had mentored, and one of her former students stopped by. Immediately, Yolanda started asking her about her career and told her she should be in graduate school. The young woman started to give excuses about time, money and Patricia interrupted her,

"Girlfriend, give it up. You are going to graduate school!"

Several of us at the table laughed because we KNEW that was so true.

My point is, by the end of this story now haven't you forgotten about the two sad people we were gossiping about in the beginning?

Those are two kinds of bosses. You can choose which kind you want to be.

Why You Should be a Good Person

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:01:25 -0500

I've heard people argue that it's wrong to say ethics is good business because:

A. It isn't always. Sometimes whistle blowers get fired. We've all seen it happen. Companies like Wal-Mart that pay their employees minimum wage and don't offer health care can sell at lower prices and take business away from companies that do, and

B. You should do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. Something ISN'T the right thing because it's good business. What if slavery was good business? Maybe it was for the slave owner but not such a good deal for the slave. Jonathan Swift, in an article entitled "A modest proposal" suggested that the best solution from an economist's point of view for the great poverty in Ireland was for the Irish to sell their babies to the British to eat. In one simple plan you help Irish families who can't support all of their children and help the trade deficit as the British would be shelling out a lot of money.

I can't argue with either of those points, and I'm certainly not in favor of babies as "the other white meat". Still, I think ethics IS good business.

Tom Peters, one of the best business writers around, points out that the world is no longer about factories, it's really You,Inc. The greatest assets workers have now is not a set of tools or a shop. For most people, their greatest asset is themselves. Most of us work for a wage and you are only going to get that wage if people who are hiring want to hire you.

Obvious, right? Think about this. Saturday I mentioned that I had a proposal worth over a million dollars that needed to be delivered by Monday morning and I could only think of five people I know who, with absolute certainty, I could give it to them and it would get delivered. Now, how many of those five people do you think I would hire if I had the chance? All five? Damn right. Not coincidentally, I have worked with all of them on projects in the past and hope to again.

It's not just being honest, although that is a heck of a good start. There is being competent, Every one one of those people I mentioned has SKILLS. One is a journalist, one is an MD, one has a doctorate, the other two are both outstanding at their professions as well. How did they get that way? I think they put that same responsibility that makes me trust them so much into their work. They are always reading books, on the Internet - and no not on youtube or Facebook, but learning about their profession. Every one of those people did work that genuinely interested them. Probably all of them could be making more money doing something else - does that mean that ethics is bad business?

No.

Each person I mentioned has ALWAYS found a job as soon as leaving the old one. People who are good people - honest, ethical, hard-working, passionate about their profession - are always in short supply. Try outsourcing THAT to China!

Do You Trust Me?

Sun, 20 Jun 2010 02:05:00 -0500

How do you want people to know you? As someone who can't get to work on time, sleeps until noon, can't be relied upon to show up because he doesn't have money for gas? Or, as a hard worker, a person who keeps his word, someone who is able to help others?

Erich asks this question in his ethics course and his point is that it's not about "fighting the system" or being a victim of racism, it's about deciding what kind of person you want to be.

Virtue is its own reward. That's not just because you get a good feeling by being virtuous, but also because you get benefits inside and out.

One of those outside benefits is trust. I have a proposal I have been working on until the wee hours of the morning for the past six weeks. It needs to be delivered in Washington by noon on Monday. If it isn't finished before Friday evening I may need to have someone fly to D.C. and deliver it. Here is where the trust comes in.

If you had a proposal worth a couple of million dollars, how many people are there who you would trust would not let you down? I could think of five.

I called one, who unfortunately happens to be out of town on a business trip. Otherwise, she said, sure, she would have done it.

The other four people I did not ask for various reasons. Two I know are extremely busy, one it would just be physically difficult for him to travel and the fifth person I just thought would rather not do it, and I don't mind going if necessary.

What makes you trust one person and not another? Why do people trust Federal Express with proposals worth millions of dollars, when it "absolutely, positively has to be there overnight?" Isn't it funny how many people trust some Fed Ex delivery guy they have never met over their own friends and relatives.

It's because of their reputation, isn't it?

I thought of several other people I know, some of whom would not mind at all traveling across country, staying in a hotel - but I could imagine each one of them making excuses,

"Oh, gee, I tried to get there but the subway system was so confusing!'

Another person I know would call sobbing, genuinely sad to have let me down,

"I tried, I really did, but traffic was just so bad!"

A third would be angry,

"I got there at 1 o'clock and they wouldn't take it. I mean, it was only an hour late and you put so much time into it and they didn't care at all. It's our government. I really told them off for you!"

To be trusted you need two things, competence and integrity. In this case, you need to be able to figure out plane schedules, subway systems, how to print a document at your local Kinko's or Staples AND get up early enough to get to where you need to be. You have to have a fall back plan in case you can't make it by subway, to take a cab.

You also need the integrity that if you have given your word to someone to do something, you make it happen.

Absolutely, positively.

When Will You Be Able to Afford Generosity?

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 01:57:37 -0500

This weekend, I asked my husband did he ever think about how fortunate he was in life and he answered,

"Yes, all the time, because you always remind me because you mention it every day."

Receiving the Emmy for best picture a while back, the producer of It's a Beautiful Life, an Italian film, thanked his parents for the advantage of raising him in poverty. A few of the Hollywood commentators, well commented on that, wondering how anyone can appreciate growing up in poverty.

I can. I didn't see a dentist until I was 19 years old, when my mother got dental insurance as part of her job. Since I was still in college, I was covered under her insurance and went to the dentist many times because, after 19 years of no dental care, you can imagine that I had a lot that needed to be done.

I was flossing my teeth this morning and a couple of thoughts crossed my mind. First, when I was younger we didn't have dental floss because it wasn't needed and we only had money for what was absolutely necessary. Second, throughout most of history, and today in most of the parts of the world, a great many women my age don't have all of their teeth because they haven't had the dental care I've had in the last thirty years.

Like everyone, I have bills to pay. I have to buy my daughter school clothes, pay for the older daughter's college education and all of those other necessities of life. When I see charities that deserve help, I always tell myself I will send them a check when I get more money. I don't have a very extravagant lifestyle, or so I tell myself. The picture above is from our vacation last year in Palm Springs. It's close and I had never been, so we drove there and did things like showing my youngest daughter how you can skip a flat rock across the water.

And that is when it hit me, not for the first time - I am an idiot.

I've read many articles that say no matter how much money people have, when you ask them how much they would need to be happy and satisfied, the average person always names a figure more than they have now. People who make $10,000 a year would be happy with $25,000, people who make $100,000 would be happy if they made $200,000 and so on.

I am always going to give more later. Later, when I have this proposal finished I will spend time with my daughter. Later, when all of the bills are paid I will send a check to that charity.

And I realized that I could not afford dental floss, much less a dentist to tell me to use it, when I was young and now I take my whole family on vacation to a resort in Palm Springs. I got on line, found that charity website and gave them a donation on the spot.

Thirty-five years ago, I was working as a waitress in an all-night restaurant for under $2 an hour while working my way through school. Now, I have had so many proposals funded over the years, I can't keep track. Maybe this one will get funded. I really hope so. If not, there will be another one. When my daughter asked me to take her to Universal Studios, I did not say "Later". I told her to invite her friends and off we went to Whoville.

Because I did not start out life with much, I have the advantage of appreciating what I have now, of realizing that I can afford to be generous now, both with my money and with my time.

That, I think, is a true advantage of growing up in poverty, of realizing later in life of how fortunate we truly are and that we CAN afford to be generous, now.

Finding our way to ethics

Fri, 28 May 2010 01:11:15 -0500

I am working on getting the course, Orientation for Work and Personal Ethics for Tribal Workers up on the web and I am very frustrated by how well it is going.

That probably sounds strange, so let me explain. My frustration is that this is something I would really like to share with everyone who is interested, BUT, Erich and I have to pay our bills, feed our kids (well, I do, his kids are grown). My point is, we can't give away our work for free but I want to !

Of course, most organizations have a training budget and can afford to pay for training. With Erich, Willie and other Spirit Lake employees living on the reservations where training is offered, it is certainly more affordable than flying in a consultant from Washington, or flying a group of employees to San Diego. (Whether the employees would rather be flown to San Diego, that's a whole different story.)

Here is a short example from the beginning the section, "Your Family"

"Several years ago, I was an "Even Start" Director. The Even Start Program helps families in the following areas: early childhood education, adult literacy, parenting education, and interactive parent and child literacy activities. As the director, I was responsible for orientation of families into the program. I started with the premise that all parents love their children. Following this premise, I said most parents will not continue to act in a harmful manner if they TRULY understand how their behavior and/or lifestyle is harming their children. After all, I reasoned, what parent would deliberately harm their child? For example, if I could show parents the negative impacts sleeping until noon could have on their children, I figured they would change. Right? Next, is the orientation I did with Even Start parents:.... "

So ... now you know my goal for the next year, trying to find a way to make our ethics training accessible to as many people as possible.

Walking the Ethics Walk

Tue, 04 May 2010 18:43:32 -0500

The following excerpt comes from the Tribal Leaders' Institute course, "Introduction to Ethics on American Indian Reservations"...

In her book "The Seven Signs of Ethical Collapse", Marianne Jennings discusses

Myth #1: There Is Nothing To It

Those who fall victim to this misconception believe that changing ethical performance is easy. They are seriously mistaken. Acting normal can be a tough task, as you've probably discovered when you tried to do the right thing in the face of peer pressure or were punished for telling the truth. At times, you will be called upon to put aside your self-interest to meet the needs of others, to stand alone, and to endure criticism. You could risk losing your job because you "aren't a team player" or because you have to bring organizational wrongdoing to the attention of outside authorities. (Johnson, 2007)

I can think of examples on two different reservations. Both of these individuals tried to take a stand against unethical behavior, enforce policies and procedures. In one instance, a tribal judge stood up against attempts by the tribal council to interfere in court cases. In the other, a school administrator tried to enforce policies and procedures. Teachers who came late or were unprepared for their classes were reprimanded. Students who skipped class and swore at their teachers were warned and then suspended. Both of these people ended up losing their jobs. There were no accusations against them of being incompetent or unethical. Simply, people went to the tribal council or others over their heads and complained that they had lost a court case, been fired or their child been suspended. When the time came for renewal of these two individuals' contracts, they were out of a job.

===================================================================

I had not worked on that course in over a year and had not given this story much thought until I came across it today. The first time I read it, it was merely a story.

Well, a few weeks ago, I resigned as a board president. There had been no accusations of me being incompetent or unethical. Simply, a number of people wanted positions for which I did not believe they were qualified and I refused to appoint them to those positions or give them promotions I truly did not believe they deserved. When people threatened and attempted to bully me, I refused to back down. Our versions of "Joe the Tribal Worker" and "John the Board Member" made deals with enough people to have me removed as president. Rather than agree to work with them, I resigned.

So, is the moral of the story here that ethics doesn't pay? No, I think that the moral is, as the title of that section of the Introductory course states it is a myth that there is "nothing to" ethical change.

I had a great many well-wishers call or email and tell me what a great job I had done as board president and how disgusted they were with the actions of "Joe" and his comrades. I also had several call to "cheer me up". While I appreciated their efforts, the truth is, I did not need any cheering up at all.

I know that I acted as ethically as I could throughout the situation. Some people suggested that I could have compromised more and kept the position. This is true and it was my decision NOT to compromise. Those people who argued that I did the wrong thing, that I let down the organization by refusing to compromise my principles so I could stay "in power", I respectfully disagree. I think those kinds of arguments, although they may be truly well-meaning, are how people justify unethical behavior.

It is like Erich says in another part of the course,

"Lying and stealing is wrong. It isn't that complicated."

Promoting people who are unqualified is wrong. Putting people in positions they did not earn over other people who DO have the qualifications is wrong.

My choice was to be president of a board the majority of whose members were dishonest, self-serving and cowardly or to walk away.

So I walked.

And it feels great.

Looking for a Few Good Men (& Women)

Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:08:51 -0500

I don't know .....

I am reading the newest course, Courageous and Ethical Governing Boards, and there is a lot of useful information, if you wanted to really be an ethical governing board.

I remember a story I learned back in grade school about Diogenes, a Greek philosopher who is reputed to have gone around in the day time with a lantern, claiming to be looking for an honest man. He apparently never found one.

In the Introduction to Ethics on American Indian reservations course there is a discussion on "myths of ethical change"and one of them is "There's nothing to it."

Yes, in this boards course there is discussion of the need to be ethical and honest, not using executive sessions because you are too cowardly to hold a public discussion, not using Robert's Rules of Order to keep opinions you don't like from being heard.

Still, I cannot shake the feeling I have that most board problems are ethical ones, not knowledge ones. Yes, we could probably all do with more information on how to set an agenda, run a meeting so it doesn't go on for five hours and fairly evaluate the CEO.

However ... I still wonder if the root of most problems isn't that many board members are not courageous enough to take a stand they know is right if it might mean someone will holler at them in a meeting or not give support in the next election, that too many board members are really in it for personal reasons, not community service. Like John, the Tribal Board Member, their motivation to be on the board is to get jobs for their relatives and get perks like board trips to Hawaii for themselves and that's just what they intend to do. They don't know about policies, procedures and Robert's Rules because they don't want to know as they have no intention of following them.

As someone said to me yesterday,

"Why would I ask about the rules or how things are being done? If I don't know it's unethical, if nobody can prove I knew about it then they can't do anything to me. Your problem is you want to know too much."

What really bugged me about that comment is that it came from someone who I thought of as a good, ethical board member. One thing that proves, I guess, is no one is perfect. What we were discussing wasn't any major policy violation, just moving someone else's paperwork to the front of the line and taking care of them first. Still, it showed an attitude I have seen on far too many boards, a feeling that there is nothing wrong with making up whatever rules benefit the board members and totally ignoring those that don't.

Another myth of ethical change discussed in the introductory course is that "nothing can be done" about ethical problems. Erich and I were discussing this yesterday and he agreed that yes, it was completely unreasonable to expect that someone would take a course and immediately become a more ethical person.

BUT ... people do change. We've all seen it happen. So, the courses on courageous and ethical board members, managers, workers and community members are all a beginning, the start to a discussion. After you have had a thought - whether it is that you need to be more honest, drink less or be less judgmental - you can't "un-think" it. That's the beginning of change - recognizing the need for it, thinking about it.

Obviously, I'm doing a lot of the thinking part these days, and maybe, in the end, that will be the big impact this course has on everyone. I sure hope so.

Heroic Leadership is Harder than It Looks

Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:39:07 -0500

Dr. Erich Longie over the years has been sometimes my boss, always my friend and today he is my hero. After many years of battling against it, the Fighting Sioux nickname has finally been retired.

Now, I am not Sioux, I haven't lived in North Dakota for over a decade and I don't even really follow football (yet, I call myself an American, yes, pathetic, I know). So, why do I care so much about the Sioux nickname. To be completely honest, I don't care about the Sioux nickname all that much, although I do agree that a race is not at all an appropriate mascot for a team. It is disrespectful and offensive to me, personally, if I think about it, which I rarely do.

Erich is my hero because he showed such perseverance standing up for something he believed passionately. In an article in one issue of the Miniwakan News, Erich made the comment that, because he was against racism and determined to show the moral courage to speak out against it, "I was against the logo before I even knew the logo existed."

It's been a long battle. If you read Erich's blog, Dakota Hoksina, you know that he has written a lot about his struggles against the logo issue, his revulsion for what he perceived as the "divide and conquer" tactics taken by those trying to win tribal support for the logo, his views on the connection between the logo and racism and much more.

Erich's views on the logo issue have cost him friendships with some logo supporters who could not forgive him for publicly disagreeing with them. Some of his relatives have disagreed with him and t has caused some hard feelings. Complete strangers have criticized Erich in print and in person. Some of these comments have been particularly racist and vicious. Through it all, Erich has persevered.

We were talking a couple of days ago about perseverance. On the logo issue and other topics, Erich said, sure constant criticism, even if unfair, sometimes impacts his self-esteem. Certainly when the losses, whether it is the loss in an election or the loss of a referendum of the logo issue, certainly, those hurt at the time. However, he says, that makes those time when "good wins out" all the happier.

Erich should be pretty happy now.

Even in those times when he wasn't winning, Erich was more hero. In fact, I think more so in those times. It is easy to persevere when you have momentum on your side and things are going your way. It is not so easy when the odds are against you, when you are being publicly attacked. Heroic leadership is hard. That is why we call them heros.

Nine True Lines for Board Members

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:02:09 -0500

My grandmother used to call them "dichos", that is sayings that you use to teach your children. The most famous "dicho" of all is no doubt the Golden Rule, to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

The sad truth is that, as a board member, you will often find that people will do unto you things it never would have crossed your mind to have done unto them. It can be a tough world out there. Here are some proverbs that you might want to repeat to yourself often as a board member.

1. You can't please everybody. No matter what you do, how hard working you are, some people will be unhappy with you. We want everyone to love us, or at least like us, or at the very least not hate us. Aint gonna happen. Deal with it.

2. I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
Bill Cosby

Not only can you not please everybody, you shouldn't even try.

{Check out this blog on seven reasons why trying to please everyone ends in failure. }

3. You may have to fight a battle more than once to win it. - Margaret Thatcher

I used to think that the most important virtues were courage and honesty. The longer I have been a board member, the more I am convinced of the need for perseverance. Maybe Dr. Longie is right in this podcast, maybe the most important virtue depends on the situation.

4. Don't take anything personally.

Currently, I am president of a board and there are some people who are constantly criticizing everything I do. These same people criticized the last four or five presidents as well, all of whom were very different from me and very different from one another.

5. Not every difference of opinion is a difference of principle.

Just because someone disagrees with you on an issue doesn't make that person a bad person or your enemy. There probably are some people who are both evil and your enemy, but it certainly isn't everyone who disagrees with you.

6. Do it for the cause, not the applause.

Willie Davis, Spirit Lake Consulting consultant uses this line often to encourage volunteerism. Remember why you are on this board in the first place. You believe in the mission of this organization, that education is important, that this program helps people with disabilities find jobs, or whatever it is that you're doing.

7. Focus on the positive.

While this may sound a bit like something out of a Disney children's movie, it is good advice. With all of the criticism you will get it is sometimes easy to get discouraged. Remind yourself of the good you have done, of the people who are helped by your organization, of the caring volunteers and competent staff members. There is probably a lot of that to focus on. If there really isn't, maybe you are in the wrong organization.

8. Accept failure

I was reading a book today, The Geography of Bliss, by Eric Weiner who was searching for the happiest places in the world. One of them, he says, is Iceland, where some people attribute their happiness to "the willingness to fail". Dysfunctional boards are often comprised of factions looking for the slightest failure to trumpet as proof that their faction should be in charge. If the dominant group changes, there is no real improvement, just a different faction complaining bitterly. Don't let that affect you. Do your best and accept the fact that there will be failures. Try to learn from those and not beat yourself up.

9. When someone is mean to you the real reason is usually envy

A friend of mine told me this was a saying he heard from an excellent pool player but that it turned out to be true 90% of the time whether it was business, boards or billiards. So, see the naysayers what they are, do your best and focus on why you are there in the first place.

The Not-So-Ethical By-stander

Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:12:20 -0500

In the course, Introduction to Ethics on American Indian Reservations, there is a lot of discussion of "Joe the Tribal Worker". The course is subscription only (which means you can't see the web pages unless you pay), but here is a brief description by Dr. Erich Longie from the (free) Tribal Leaders Forum,

"Let me introduce you to your Joe. Joe appears to have super natural powers. He seems to be working at several jobs at the same time, and I know I met him at each reservation I visited. Joe, as well as being unemployed for an extended length of time, has held a variety of jobs. He was a dishwasher and bus driver at the school, employed by a grant, worked at the college and for the tribe, at one time was program manager, board member, and even served a term as tribal council member. In short, Joe has held almost every tribal job there is.

Joe, the Tribal Worker, is a very dangerous man. Why do I say Joe is dangerous? Because of the irreparable harm, he does to his reservation community while serving his own self-interest, because self-serving individuals who strive for power are most likely to abuse it. They do not have the virtues, integrity, and wisdom to use power and influence fairly and correctly. Joe will not hesitate to rig elections by swaying mass opinion about ethical candidates; he is not above blackmail, bribery, or intimidation to further his needs. For example, when Joe was employed as an administrator at the school, he did not care if his actions hurt the education of children (even his own). He looked at the school as an employment agency for his relatives and fought very hard to get them hired."

People taking the ethics course were given several stories about Joe and then asked four questions:

1. How much is Joe responsible for his own unethical behavior?
2. Is Joe's supervisor responsible for his behavior? If so, how?
3. Is the tribal council responsible for his behavior? If so, how?
4. Are we, as co-workers or fellow community members responsible for his behavior? If so, how?

I was particularly interested in the last question, where respondents were asked their PERSONAL responsibility.

Erich and I interpreted this chart very differently. He thought that since only 10% of those who answered said that co-workers, community members and other by-standers were not responsible that tribal members recognized they were a part of the problem. I disagreed.

Only 3% of those questioned said part of the responsibility was to co-workers and others who were bad role models, for example,

"The other workers are late as well."

Over 70% gave very vague responses such as,

"We are responsible by not doing anything."
"No courage to talk up."

Only 15% gave specific actions, like this tribal employee did,

"We have a duty to confront Joe and to report Joe to his supervisor and/or the tribal council. Ethical people do not let unethical behavior to continue unchecked."

or this one;

"We are responsible for writing formal complaints and grieving Joe's behavior using policies and procedures to describe what is taking place. We are also responsible for modeling good work standards. When new employees, especially young people, come into an organization, we should reward good work habits and model a strong work ethic."

So, if I disagree with Dr. Longie, what do I think about this? I am glad you asked me that question!

In teaching for many years, I have found that when people give general answers to a question on a test they usually don't understand it all that well. Take these two examples:

"Some kinds of mental retardation you are born with."

"Down syndrome is caused by an extra chromosome, specifically three of the 21st chromosome instead of the usual two. "

The very general answers most people gave to this ethics question makes me think that this is an area they haven't studied or thought about very much. However, simply by taking these courses, I believe that is changing, and it will be a permanent change, because you can't unthink a thought.

Ethics isn't a technique, damn it !

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 01:40:37 -0500

Steven Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People is a good book with some pretty good advice. However, I think some people have missed the point.

One story in particular stuck with me, it was about a man who complained that no matter what he said, his wife was always worried that he was cheating on her when he was out of town. His job required travel and he wanted Dr. Covey to tell him what he could say to his wife. In their discussion, it turned out that he had met his wife while on a business trip when he was married to his first wife. They had an affair, he divorced and married his current wife. Covey's advice was priceless. He said,

"You can't talk yourself out of problems you behave your way into."

I know a manager who has read all the books. She does all of the things that Dr. Longie talks about in his ethics course. She makes sure that her new employees get an orientation when different co-workers are assigned to take the new person to lunch, explain different parts of the organization. Each person has a written job description and a semi-annual evaluation. She makes it a point to stop and speak to each of her employees on a regular basis.

However ... it is all a complete fraud. The first time or two the employee might be fooled into having a conversation, but after a few minutes, the manager is visibly impatient to be on her way. Soon, they learn to just say hello and make a comment about the weather or the local sports team, and then she is on her way to "talk" to the next employee.

The evaluation forms are designed exactly like Dr. Longie recommends, with measurable goals, a meeting with the supervisor to discuss these, regular meetings for 'monitoring' with written follow-up. The problem is that those employees who meet their goals and those who consistently fail at them receive the exact same response - none. No one loses their job. Everyone gets the same raise each year. Promotions are given to whoever the manager feels most comfortable working with, regardless of performance.

On paper, this manager looks like the most ethical, competent person around, but she is just going through the motions.

It reminded me of a saying an old coach of mine used to have,

"It's all about the want-to ."

He said you could give an athlete all the skills in the world, you could train until the cows came home but in the end of a match, it all came down to did that athlete really want to win badly enough to pour heart and soul into it.

This manager has good technique, but the truth is that she doesn't really care about her employees. She cares about herself getting ahead and has down pat all the techniques to appear to be an ethical manager, but it isn't working for her.

Because you can't talk yourself out of problems you behave yourself into.

Does Anyone Believe in Honesty ?

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:40:53 -0500

"Commitment from the top is very important on this because this is what sets the tone of the company." Furthermore, he warns that if the commitment by top management isn't genuine, then an ethics program will not succeed. "If there's the slightest indication of cynicism on the part of top management," he cautions, "then it's all over."

This extremely true statement can be found about two-thirds of the way through the page from the Center for Ethics and Business at Loyola Marymount University, then the author goes on to another topic. Points for Dr. White for bringing this issue up, he is one of the few. However, he joins everyone else in the world in not giving this crucial fact nearly as much attention as it deserves.

If honest commitment to an ethics program is such a key point, and I agree that it is, why doesn't every consultant, every book, begin with that? My guess is that if they did that they would get a lot fewer payments from upper management. Almost everyone seems to want to believe that he or she is the most ethical person in the room, so no consultant wants to risk a large fee telling the director that if an ethics program fails it is probably his or her fault. In fact. while I hear managers and board members say that, as the people in charge, they take full responsibility, I am pretty sure they are thinking to themselves,

"I am smart and ethical and if the people working under me were not such bozos none of this bad stuff would have happened."

It's very interesting that the exact company mentioned in the case study by Dr. White is General Dynamics, which, in 1985 was found guilty of some not just unethical but criminal practices which resulted in members of senior management being indicted and the company suspended from federal contracting, not once, but twice. It's interesting because I used to work for General Dynamics and I left there in 1985.

I'd be very curious to know how this whole wonderful ethics program supposedly worked out with all of the same people there. I left, just coincidentally, because I was getting married, moving to another city and starting graduate school. There was no mass exodus of people from the company. So, although the studies I read, written by consultants and professors at universities that would like to get donations suggest that the program has been successful, I remain skeptical.

A handful of senior managers did not defraud the government of hundreds of millions of dollars all by themselves. Hundreds of people knew about it, or at least suspected it. I was just a new, young engineer and I heard people voicing their suspicions. Many of the older managers joked about the over-charging and charging to the wrong contract. I am pretty good with computers (remember this was before Excel existed) and when I ran through some numbers and mentioned what I had discovered to management (what you're supposed to do, right?) only one person was shocked and surprised. He took it to his boss, he told him to drop it. He quit the company on the spot. I ended up married to that man, by the way.

So, now, all of a sudden a new "Vice-president for Ethics" is appointed and all of those people who looked the other way are now completely honest and ethical.

Excuse me for being skeptical.

Don't Throw the Tribal Baby Out with the Bathwater

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:55:11 -0500

I have worked on reservations since 1990 - that's twenty years of teaching, consulting, working as an evaluator, grantwriter. That certainly doesn't make me an Indian but it means that I can see b.s. most of the time - as in some people may have been discriminated against but other people didn't get their grant renewed because they wrote a terrible proposal, putting in half the time that would have been required and ignoring the instructions. (Hint: The federal government is pretty anal-retentive about people following instructions.)

It also means I have seen both the good and the bad. Over the past couple of decades I have seen more and more people getting higher education, including graduate degrees, and that is good. There seem to be more people getting professional jobs off the reservation, and then coming back home to work, bringing their skills with them. That is good, too.

Lately, a lot of "management expertise" is being promoted in the workplace and that can be both good and bad. Understanding balance sheets, standard accounting principles, all of that is not only good but it keeps you out of federal prison for misuse of funds.

HOWEVER, some of the latest management gurus I think just are not worth listening to. On this score, I may differ from Dr. Longie.

I get really fed up with those articles about delegation, for example, that tell managers they need to delegate repetitive tasks, detail work, information gathering and attending meetings because they need to save their valuable time. Native Americans of a great many tribes are rightfully known for their generosity. There are over 400 federally recognized tribes so there may be some known for their stinginess. I can only say that I haven't encountered them.

This generosity takes many forms. One is giving of attention, treating each person's opinion as worthy of notice. As Erich has pointed out many times in his courses, a major difference between Sitting Bull and Custer styles of leadership is equal treatment. While Sitting Bull definitely led the Battle of Little Big Horn there is nothing to suggest that he believed he was superior to his people. Quite the opposite, he slept where they slept, ate what they ate. This lack of a rigid hierarchy is another quality I consider positive in many tribal organizations and why I have enjoyed working with them.

In keeping with these traditions, I would suggest that really effective delegation should help your employees as much as you. Tasks which are repetitive to you may be completely new to a less experienced employee. Being trained on something with a set procedure may allow that person to learn new skills, succeed and gain confidence. Sending an employee to a meeting in your place should also give that person a chance to meet other managers and get recognized for his or her knowledge, get experience running a meeting or in public speaking.

I am starting to think this more and more - management strategies without ethics like generosity and honesty are not effective. More often, employees will see right through you, no matter how many management books you cite.

What Kind of Furniture was in Sitting Bull's Office?

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:58:51 -0500

Too many managers act as if they and their workers aren't the same species. They employ expensive consultants (hey, that's us!) to tell them how to motivate their employees - praise, support, involvement, autonomy. What makes them think that the people who work for them are so different from themselves?

In the book, The Genius of Sitting Bull, the authors point to one of Sitting Bull's strengths as a leader, that he lived among his people. He knew exactly how ready his troops were to attack. He ate what they ate, slept where they slept. Living among them, he also had the same information they had. Custer, apart from his men and disdaining to listen to information from scouts was fatally uninformed.

Today, I walked through a building where the managers all have offices while their workers are in cubicles, some of them no more than a desk with a few inches of "wall" on each side. The managers have nice oak or cherry furniture while their workers have prison-grey steel desks and bookcases. I am sure this saved the organization a lot of money. Everyone is expected to work exactly eight hours a day and the lowest level employees are even required to ask their supervisors if they want to use the restroom. I asked someone, who was a very competent worker who had been there for years, to help me. As we passed his boss, he stopped briefly to explain why he was away from his desk helping me, a client !

In the tribal managers course, Dr. Longie quotes management researchers who stress the importance of "autonomy, support, recognition" in motivating employees. The managers I walked past today would argue they do all of those things. In fact, the very employee who was helping me had a certificate in his cubicle recognizing him as a "team player" or something.

As my children would say - I call bull shit on you.

Honestly, if you are a manager, you have designer furniture in your office while your staff are working with no privacy and you give them a ten-cent piece of paper you printed out on your printer as "recognition" and email them "atta-boy" three times a month - are you any different than Custer who referred to his men as "cattle"?

If you are a manager, take this quick quiz:
1. Name three people who work for you.
2. Now name three people who work for THEM who are doing a good job.
3. For each of those people list what is important to that person. What does he or she really like about the job? What does that person dislike the most?

I know a person who is head of an organization of about 300 people and very proud of the fact that he knows the name of every person working for him. What the hell difference does that make? This same person doesn't have a clue about the problems his employees face because he seldom leaves his office unless it is to meet with others at "his level", accompanied by one or two of his favorite employees who are constantly gushing about his brilliance and hands on approach. As you might guess, he has a very big, very nice office.

If you have an open door policy, how many people who are two or more levels below you in the organization ever actually walked through your door, sat down and talked to you about anything? Why not?

My first suggestion is to throw away half of your management books and look at what motivates you. If you have a great deal that your employees do not, you might ask yourself why you expect them to be so motivated.

My second suggestion is to quit reading management books and ASK your employees from time to time what concerns them. Don't do this in a carefully scripted public relations approach where the president meets with a large group of employees who "can ask me anything". Rather, invite workers to meet with you one on one and really listen to them.

After all, isn't that what you would want?