SmartMoves! - Blog

Management Tip: See Yourself Through the Eyes of Your Employees

Posted by Aoife Gorey on Mon, Jan 23, 2012

If a stranger asks you to rank your management team on a scale of one to ten in areas such as communication, delegation, etc, what would you say? Most people would rank them unrealistically high for fear that their answers would get back to their boss. How many of you can say that you would answer 100 percent truthfully in your own opinion? management tip

Despite all the trainings and coaching that management personnel can put employees through, a true manager also knows that they themselves are not perfect and they can always improve their management skills. Most of us work with a variety of people, and all people require different levels and amounts of coaching and mentoring from their superiors.

Everybody cares about what others think of them, it’s human nature. But what if you could find out exactly how you were perceived as a manager in your organization? Think how you could use that information to motivate and engage your employees better.

Feedback programs can be a sensitive subject for all parties involved because of fear. Managers fear they are not doing a sufficient job and employees fear if they are honest, they will get in trouble for any negative feedback toward their manager.

As a manager, you may think you are an outstanding communicator, but how do you rank in the eyes of the people in which you are communicating? How are you perceived as a manager?

The Checkpoint360™ is a tool that looks at how a manager thinks he conducts work on a daily basis and how the employee perceives the work of this manager. Both parties (manager and employees) carry out the assessment and reports two important factors:

1. Strengths – The areas you and your employees consider you to have a strength. The ‘keep doing’ items.

2. Perception by others - This outlines the areas that you may not be as strong. This could be one of two things: A performance gap is when you may think you delegate work effectively on a day-to-day basis, however, your people may be unsatisfied with your method for doing so. It could also be a perception gap. You may be delegating work effectively each day, but employees perceive that you are not. With these types of results, depending on the issue, the Checkpoint360™ report will provide you with a positive direction on how to change that and raise your game.

Either way, once you know how your people are thinking, you can modify behavior, change the way you manage, work on your skills, and immediately raise your game as a superior manager. In the example of delegating work effectively, perhaps you need a weekly meeting where employees outline the work that was appointed to them so all employees can see how you are delegating the work load. The team will have a clear outline of what is required of them and possibly notice ways that they can help each other work more effectively.

The Checkpoint360™ is only focused on strengths and development areas, not weaknesses. It is not about attacking managers; it is about helping them develop skills by means of strength analysis report.

Equipping your organization with the Checkpoint360™ solution has numerous benefits, but one in particular is priceless and one that most managers will never have in their career: A view of yourself in a working environment through the eyes of the people you are trying to motivate that work for you!


Effective sales managers need to A.C.T. – Assess, Compare and Train

So you hired a new sales rep. He seems highly qualified: great resume, very personable, relevant work experience, and he nailed the interview. Now months go by and he just isn’t delivering the numbers. What’s going on? Is it time to let him go? Or can he be coached?

Recent research from CSO Insights‘ sales survey shows that coaching sales reps is the number one key to helping them rev up their sales. So, a greater emphasis on coaching is a necessity that will help your new sales hires become fully productive faster and more efficient.

Once you notice a potential problem with a sales rep, you want to be proactive about it before the problem gets worse. It’s important to coach early and coach often!

How do you go about effectively coaching an underperformer? Here are three fundamental steps managers must take to coach and develop underperforming sales reps:

  1. Assess. Before you begin coaching, you need to know and understand the individual as best as you can. You need to know their specific strengths and weaknesses, skills and attributes, and personality and behavioral traits. Most of this information isn’t found in a single job interview or resume. To fully understand them, you need to assess them! SmartMoves offers the Profiles Sales Assessment that specifically measures how well a person fits sales jobs and includes seven critical sales behaviors: prospecting, call reluctance, closing the sale, self-starting, working with a team, building and maintaining relationships, and compensation preference.
  2. Compare with Top Performers. After the underperformer takes an assessment, then you can compare their results to those of a top performer. In doing this you will be able to see the areas where the individual is struggling. The differences will show where the underperformer needs to improve to succeed.
  3. Train and develop. Once you know the areas the individual is struggling in, you can give them appropriate sales training aimed to improving those traits or behaviors. Let’s say an individual scored lower in the area of assertiveness, then the sales manager can cater training to specifically improve the sales rep’s ability to not take no for an answer.

When sales managers “A.C.T.” they can effectively coach their sales reps to improve their numbers and reach their full potential.


I thought this book review was ”right on”.  I hope you enjoy it:

In ‘The Rare Find,’ George Anders looks at how the U.S. Special Forces, Silicon Valley venture capitalists, basketball scouts and others identify and hire exceptional talent.

Originally printed in the LA Times, December 4, 2011

So much time is wasted searching for talent. So many job fairs, college recruiters and human resources staffs troll for warm bodies and fresh minds, all making the same mistakes: recruiting on credentials rather than potential, experience rather than imagination. Bad hiring is expensive, time-consuming and utterly wasteful for any business.

George Anders, a veteran business journalist, provides some help, asking questions of everyone including the U.S. Special Forces, Silicon Valley venture capitalists and basketball scouts to help us understand how to identify exceptional talent.

In Anders’ new book “The Rare Find” published by Portfolio, he writes despairingly that “executives shy away from the mavericks, the late bloomers, the overachievers with the underdog past, or the inexperienced newcomers with the amazing potential.”

“We are so afraid of making a mistake that we have lost the courage to do anything spectacularly right.”

With Western economies in their current perilous state, the old methods need to be tossed out.

Anders has assembled a wide-ranging and stimulating collection of characters and stories to make his point.

He starts out describing the “five-to-one test,” the idea that the best performers are not just a little better than the rest, but better by a factor of five. Sports teams, crack military units and technology investors are not looking just for someone ahead of the rest by a nose, but rather someone exceptionally better.

The U.S. Special Forces, for example, is not looking just for the fittest or strongest candidates. It wants candidates with cunning and resilience, problem solvers who quickly bounce back from adversity.

These qualities are all but invisible on a resume but emerge during the sadistic trials aspiring recruits must endure. Does the recruit keep himself tidy even during a long, exhausting march? Does he break the rules when he thinks no one is watching?

Anders tells the story of Albertsons, the grocery chain, deciding to hire Larry Johnston as its chief executive in 2001. Johnston had been very successful at General Electric, rising through its competitive managerial ranks. He was also good looking and 6-foot-7, a CEO from central casting.

Albertsons’ board of directors was delighted to hire him. But Johnston turned out to be hopeless at running a grocery chain. By 2006, Albertsons’ financial performance had stumbled badly and the company was broken up and sold. Johnston was out of a job.

The directors’ mistake was to assume that success in one field foretold success in another. They had forgotten management guru Peter Drucker’s key maxim when hiring: “Think through the assignment.” You don’t hire a person just because they have done well in the past. You hire someone to fill a specific job which requires the achievement of specific outcomes in a certain context.

To avoid mistakes like those at Albertsons, Anders has all sorts of recommendations. These include decoding “jagged resumes,” full of ups and downs and strange career choices, but which nonetheless may be ideal, as well as running lengthy auditions for recruits and looking outside your own field for inspiration and talent.

It is much better, he writes, to “compromise on experience” than on character. Facebook hires about 20% of its engineers via online puzzle contests. Anyone can enter, which brings all kinds of programmers into the company’s orbit, many self-taught and outside the usual educational or corporate channels.

Anders also recommends searching for the “invisible virtues” such as efficiency, curiosity, self-reliance and — above all — resilience, and then being extremely optimistic about your hires, at least at the outset.

Many recruiters hire out of fear, making safe choices, ruling out reward as well as risk. It is the HR version of the old saw about no one getting fired for hiring IBM.

To find exceptional people, he writes, one should think about what can go right, not dreading what might go wrong.

Anders does not offer easy prescriptions. Finding and nurturing exceptional talent, despite his pointers, remains difficult. But the reward to those who bother can be colossal.

Broughton is a columnist for the Financial Times of London, in which this review first appeared, and he is the author of “Ahead of the Curve: Two Years at Harvard Business School.”


10 Important Questions to Help Identify High Potential Leaders

Submitted by our colleague Dario Priolo

According to research from the Corporate Executive Board, 40% of internal job moves made by people identified by their companies as “high potentials” end in failure. Many organizations make the mistake of looking simply at ability when assessing an employee for a management job. Think of the hot-shot sales rep or the genius software engineer. It is incredible how often high producing individuals get promoted into management jobs that require a totally different mindset to be successful.

The reason these people fail often comes down to three critical factors: leadership behaviors, aspiration and engagement. Aspiration entails whether the candidate really wants the position and is willing to make the sacrifices it may require. Engagement involves the employee’s commitment to the company and its mission. In focusing on whether an employee potentially can do a job, many organizations neglect the question, “Does he want to do this?”

Defining the characteristics can be a tricky proposition, particularly with young employees. The characteristics people develop through training, experience and progress in their activity are not necessarily apparent from who they are when they start. Moreover, many managers have beliefs about leadership that look like something out of a movie — loud, aggressive, in-your-face types of guys.

Organizations should develop leadership competency models based on a set of traits and behaviors associated with success in the company and then measure employees on how well they do relative to those traits. Organizations need to be sure they are assessing employees not just for the present but for the future, looking at not only what has made people successful, but also what is likely to be important and what shortages they have.

The 10 questions below, along with an effective assessment program, will help you more effectively identify high potential managers:

  1. Does this person have a proven track record for accomplishing impressive results – not just meeting expectations?
  2. Does this person take charge and make things happen? Or sit back and let things happen before producing?
  3. Does this person inspire confidence in his or her decision making?
  4. Can this person lead through persuasion and influence? Can he or she serve as an effective sounding board to others who are struggling with complex issues?
  5. Do others trust this person to lead projects and teams, even though he or she doesn’t have a leadership title?
  6. Does this person have an understanding of how to separate “what” from “how”? An awareness that establishing the destination before deciding on the mode of transportation is essential?
  7. Can this person keep a global perspective? Are priorities apparent, or does she or he become mired in the details and tactics?
  8. Do obstacles stop this person? Or do they represent challenges, not threats?
  9. What success has this person had with multitasking?
  10. How do unexpected changes affect this person’s performance?

 

By Kyle Lagunas, HR Analyst at Software Advice.  Guest Post

Business leaders invest a lot in their organization, and expect to see a tangible return on their investments. But as organizations search for opportunities to maximize the ROI of their workforce, they one process is often overlooked: onboarding. Sadly, the onboarding experience is often reduced to little more than a checklist of tasks to be completed in the first week. But the fact that many leaders fail to leverage is that an employee that experiences a smoother onboarding process will be better trained, more connected to the organization and quicker to produce.

Your decision-makers need to know their resources are being put to good use, and with the right metrics at your disposal, you can deliver the information they’re looking for. After all, the key to making the case for future resource allocation lies in being able to illustrate the effectiveness of your onboarding process.

Establish a Baseline for Measuring Onboarding ROI

The biggest obstacle many HR departments struggle to overcome is establishing a baseline for how their organization will assess ROI. Fact: Evaluating the value of an enhanced HR process is not always a straightforward process. As such, spending time with leadership to establish a baseline for measuring ROI is invaluable.

There are a few key concepts to keep in mind when establishing your baseline to measure ROI:

  • Onboarding should be consistent. All of your fancy data gathering will be for naught unless you can roll out a universal process for onboarding new hires.
  • The onboarding process is more than a checklist. Though checklists are great for staying organized, your new hires’ success depends on your ability to get them connected to your organization and keep them connected beyond their first day.
  • The onboarding process goes beyond the first week. Though the normal probationary period for new hires is 90 days, The Wynhurst Group reports 22 percent of staff turnover occurs in the first 45 days of employment.

How to Brave the Metrics Madness

After identifying what information will be most valuable, you can implement tracking strategies. Keep in mind that some of the data you measure won’t be cold, hard facts that fit nicely into a spreadsheet. That said, there are three areas you can focus on for information: performance, experience and effectiveness. Also, broaden your scope beyond your new hires to measure the impact at various levels (team, department, organization).

Here are a few ideas of what you can measure (as well as how frequently):

  Employee(30, 60, 90, 180, 360 days) Team(Quarterly) Organization(Semi-annually)
Performance Progress milestones Change in overall productivity Headcount vs. output
Experience Employee satisfaction Impact on team morale Cultural fit vs. retention
Effectiveness New hire time to proficiency New hire time to proficiency vs. team average Impact on retention (both quits and terminations)

 

For Maximum ROI, Take Engagement Beyond Onboarding

The best metrics should be forward-thinking analytics tools. According to Dr. John Sullivan at TLNT.com, “They tell you who’s going to win the Superbowl next year, not who won last year.” Furthermore, they should provide the information you need to win the Superbowl every year.

At the end of the day, your ROI is answering one question above all: What is the value of onboarding new employees more effectively? Here’s a hint: Take a look at your metrics and note improvements in employee performance, time to proficiency and increased retention. Once you can answer that question, move onto the next question: “How can we maximize the value of a better-onboarded employee?”

One way you can maximize this value is to keep the momentum going. Many organizations leverage the tools and technology found in talent management systems to better manage the process of engaging and motivating their employees. Beyond core talent management functionality, these systems also offer reporting analytics and dashboard elements that provide the information you need to support your ROI analysis.


One of our esteemed colleagues wrote this article about how organizational alignment can empower a company to rapidly adapt to change and at the same time improve growth and profit exponentially:

Aligning Talent With Strategy

by Bob Woodcock

Like other dynamic systems, an organization performs best when all its processes, metrics and policies are functioning well, moving towards continuous improvement and aligning with the needs of the market. Organizational alignment means linking the core business functions, processes and behaviours of the people in the enterprise so they work in harmony to deliver results.

While the strategic plan may be established by the senior leadership team the execution of that plan is very much a bottom up exercise. How well the frontline individual contributors in your organization understand and execute on the strategic plan will determine the overall level of success. That puts pressure on your leadership team to not only effectively communicate the message from senior leadership to the “feet in the street” but to provide active and ongoing feedback from their direct reports to senior leadership.

When that feedback includes the element of intuition or interpretation on the part of frontline leadership the degree of misalignment can be significant from one team or business unit to another. The problem for senior leadership is to get a fix on where all of the moving parts within the organization are with respect to the strategic vision they have created.

If you want to find out where you stand you have to be prepared to ask some tough questions of everyone within the organization. Relying on the interpretation or “gut” response of your frontline leaders will provide you with as many different opinions as you have leaders. The trick is to ask the same questions of everyone and provide the level of anonymity that will spark frankness in the responses. A survey engine that contains correlation analysis, automated reports, cross tab analysis, alignment measures by workgroup, performance variation and gap analytics is the means to that end.

An intelligent diagnostics platform should be customizable and designed to allow you to capture the data that is pertinent to your organization. There is no use comparing the performance of your company to the metrics being driven in another company. If your frontline individual contributors are not able to articulate and deliver on your strategic plan you need to find out sooner rather than later. This is the difference between leading and lagging indicators of performance.

George Labovitz in his book The Power Of Alignment puts it this way, “Misaligned companies, like cars out of alignment, can develop serious problems if not corrected quickly. They are hard to steer and don’t respond well to changes in direction.” Alignment gives managers at every level of the organization the ability to:

  • Rapidly deploy a coherent business strategy
  • Be totally customer focused
  • Develop best in class people
  • Continuously improve business processes

All at the same time!


From an article in Time Magazine online
How much do Americans hate their jobs? A Gallup poll found that about 77% of Americans hate their jobs. Another found Americans hate their jobs more than in the past 20 years; fewer than half say they’re satisfied. Other surveys have found that 87% of Americans don’t like their jobs.
In the Book, Three Signs of a Miserable Job. Patrick Lencioni, a leadership consultant, speaker and author, writes this thoughtful e-mail:
I became interested in this topic because, as a kid, I watched my dad trudge off to work each day and became somewhat obsessed with the notion of job misery. Somewhere along the line, I came to the frightening realization that people spend so much time at work yet so many of them were unfulfilled and frustrated in their jobs. As I got older, I came to another realization – that job misery was having a devastating impact on individuals, and on society at large. It seemed to me that understanding the cause of the problem, and finding a solution for it, was a worthy focus for my career.
No argument there. So how does Lencioni define a miserable job?
In my view, a miserable job is not the same as a bad one. A bad job lies in the eye of the beholder. One person’s dream job might be another person’s nightmare.
But a miserable job is universal. It is one that makes a person cynical and frustrated and demoralized when they go home at night. It drains them of their energy, their enthusiasm and their self-esteem. Miserable jobs can be found in every industry and at every level. Professional athletes, CEOs and actors can be – and often are – as miserable as ditch diggers, janitors and fast food workers.
Huh. CEOs are miserable?
Attend any kind of social gathering, anywhere in the country, and talk about work. The stories and anecdotal evidence confirming job misery are overwhelming. Misery spans all income levels, ages and geography. A recent Gallup poll found that 77% of people hate their jobs. Gallup also contends that this ailing workforce is costing employers more than $350 billion dollars in lost productivity. The Conference Board has found that Americans are growing increasingly unhappy with their jobs.
Anyway, his book outlines three signs of job misery:
1.  The first is anonymity, which is the feeling that employees get when they realize that their manager has little interest in them a human being and that they know little about their lives, their aspirations and their interests.
2.  The second sign is irrelevance, which takes root when employees cannot see how their job makes a difference in the lives of others. Every employee needs to know that the work they do impacts someone’s life – a customer, a co-worker, even a supervisor – in one way or another.
3.  The third sign is something I call immeasurement, which I realize isn’t actually a word. It’s the inability of employees to assess for themselves their contribution or success. Employees ho have no means of measuring how well they are doing on a given day or in a given week, must rely on the subjective opinions of others, usually their managers, to gauge their progress or contribution.
So what do we do about all this job misery?
The primary source and the potential cure for this misery reside in the hands of one individual – the direct manager. There are countless studies confirming this statement, including both Gallup and The Blanchard Companies. Both organizations have found that an employee’s relationship with their direct manager is the most important determinant to employee satisfaction (over pay, benefits, perks, work-life balance etc).
As simple as the three signs are, the fact remains that few managers
1. take a genuine interest in their people,
2. remind them of the impact that their work has on others, and
3. help them establish creative ways to measure and assess their performance.
But surely managers want a relatively happy staff; after all, happy workers are hard workers. Besides, what jerk would want to head up an office teeming with misery? Why wouldn’t a manager take those easy-sounding steps to ensure a satisfied workforce?
First, many managers think they are too busy. Of course, the real problem is that most of those managers see themselves primarily as individual contributors who happen to have direct reports. They fail to realize that the most important part of their jobs is providing their people with what they need to be productive and fulfilled (a.k.a. not miserable) in their jobs.
The second reason that managers don’t provide their employees with the three things they need is that they simply forget what is was like when they were a little lower on the food chain. They somehow forget how important it was to them when a supervisor took an interest in them, talked to them about why their work really mattered and gave them a means for evaluating their progress.
Finally, many managers don’t do this because they are embarrassed or afraid to try. They fear that their employees will see them as being disingenuous or manipulative, or that by taking an interest in their personal lives they will be stepping into inappropriate territory. It’s almost as though they fail to understand the difference between the interview process (where no personal questions are allowed) and the actual work experience (treat people like a full human being).


Pre employment personality tests, long a staple across corporate America, are starting to become popular among the middle-sized and small US businesses as well. It’s a small wonder — they help to select the most effective employees from what is, with the current economic conditions, a vast pool of candidates.

Most such tests have questions that are easy to manipulate. Realistically, when the question is “I have a good work ethic”, why would you ever say anything other than “Strongly Agree”? It seems like such an obvious thing to say that you might wonder why they ask in the first place. The real answer is that they measure how much the applicant actually cares about getting the job — if they don’t really want it, they won’t take the time to figure out and give the correct answers. Just a few of these “obvious” questions, and the applicant pool is cut in half. Quick win for the business.

More complex are the questions like this one: “Other people see me as hardworking.” These questions serve a dual purpose: first, to measure honesty, and second, to measure social intelligence. An applicant that answers “Strongly Agree” to the statement “I am hardworking,” but answers “Maybe” to the statement “Other people see me as hardworking” is admitting that either they lied about the first answer or they simply honestly believe that they are misunderstood — which indicates poor social intelligence.

Also intended as a measure of honesty are the questions that seem like repeats of previous questions. If you answer “Strongly Agree” to the statement “I am punctual,” but then later answer “Disagree” to “I have never been reprimanded for tardiness,” your actual level of punctuality isn’t in question at all — but you can be certain that your employer won’t see you as an honest person.

As an employer, however, you should be careful of making judgments like that based on the answers of pre employment screening tests. When reviewing the answers, it should always be foremost in your head that human behavior is contextual. What that means is that people act differently in different contexts, and there are a lot of factors out there that can influence the answers real people give to these test questions.


Behavioral interviewing takes preparation and organization. Being prepared will make the interview go smoothly and get you the information you need — fail, and you’ll end up with an interview that is biased and ineffective.

The first thing you must be aware of is to avoid your ‘gut feeling’ – intuition and instinct have a powerful place in the business world, but behavioral interviewing is a strict science. Applicants come into an interview determined to project the most positive image they can regardless of their actual skills and abilities — and some people are simply gifted with the ability to ‘sell you’ on that image. The existence of these natural salesmen make the science of behavioral interviewing a very important discipline to maintain.

The first goal should always be to develop a set of bias-neutral questions that will determine if the candidate has the knowledge, skills, and abilities to complete the job. The best predictor of future behavior being past behavior, these questions should focus on relevant experiences from the applicant’s history. Focus on open-ended questions that encourage reflection, long answers, and details. Make a list of such questions.

When the interview actually starts, stick to your script. No matter how interesting or intriguing a story is, don’t allow the applicant to derail the focus of the interview. Remember the amount of preparation you put into this interview, and don’t let it go to waste by improvising or wandering off-script.

Give the applicant plenty of time to answer these questions — don’t feel the need to fill any long silences; allow them space to think. When they do answer, take lots of notes. Not only will that force your focus onto the salient details, but it will help you remember your instantaneous responses to the answers given when the time comes to review the applications later on. Fail to take notes, and you run the risk of relying on your intuition rather than an accurate memory of the answers given.

Keep strictly to this careful behavioral interviewing process, and your chances of hiring top performers expand exponentially.


employee retention, employee developmentHave you heard about the recent employee survey that shows the percent of employees planing to look for a new job in 2011 is up 60% from a year ago?  Leaders will need to take action in order to stem the tide of top performers heading for the door.   This article, posted in the Business News Daily, gives the full story:

Don’t be surprised if your company loses top workers in 2011.

A recent survey reveals 84 percent of U.S. employees plan to look for new jobs in 2011 – up from 60 percent a year ago. Only 5 percent want to stay at their current position.

 “This finding is more about employee dissatisfaction and discontent than projected turnover,” said Douglas Matthews, president of career-management agency Right Management, which conducted the poll.

“Clearly, if the job market picks up a lot next year many employees are going to take advantage of it, and organizations stand to lose some of their top contributors,” Matthews said. “So this is a wake-up call to management.”

Employees are unhappy because of the recession, job-market weakness and disruptive economic and workforce changes, he said: “Employees’ trust has been seriously shaken and there is a general lack of confidence in leaders.”

To alleviate dissatisfaction, Matthews suggests managers should:

  • Identify star performers and have open and constructive career discussions with them. “High-value employees always have opportunities available to them. Know who they are and be sure to take care of them in ways that are meaningful and aligned with the businesses goals.” 
  • Be honest and positive with employees. “Provide them with feedback on what they are doing really well and ways to help them improve. A mentoring relationship between the manager and employee will build mutual trust and hopefully limit future defections.”

Right Management surveyed 1,413 employees in October and November.

 “We view it as a barometer of their trust in management or commitment to the job,” Matthews said. “It’s a workplace equivalent to opinion polling on whether or not ‘this country is moving in the right direction.’ Just as people are questioning their elected leaders in government, so too are workers wondering if their management is up to the challenge of renewed growth or developing a sound strategy moving forward.”

Go to Business News Daily to read the original version of this article.


Older Posts »